The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Prince William and Prince Harry

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 07-27-2004, 08:15 PM
CathyEarnshaw
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by grecka@Jul 27th, 2004 - 4:54 pm
That will last about as long as Bush on Jeopardy. As soon as Queenie kicks the bucket, the royals will have to resign from being the heads of the Church of England.
Grecka,

the royals are not head of the Church - the QUeen is. If she dies tomorrow, CHarles will be king and the head of the church. He cannot resign from either position.

It would take an act of parliament to change the position of the Church of England as a state church - and there are no plans to offer legislation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 07-27-2004, 08:18 PM
CathyEarnshaw
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by sara1981@Jul 17th, 2004 - 1:02 am
you know British Royal Families cant married with Catholic! HM Queen Elizabeth 2 told kids and grandchildren dont allowed to married woman and man who are catholic makes more sinner! but my step-father is catholic also! but i cant married with catholic! but my family is Baptist but im allowed to married no matters for me but if i become Crown Princess I will half with Baptist with church of England its examples for me! but not now! because im with Baptist and christian since i was baptism years ago i have approve it!

i think church of England can allowed married with christian or Baptist no matters which religions are you? but im been grew-up as Baptist since i was childhood girl i went church lots in my hometown i went baptist church im really positives for me to have rights!

Sara Boyce
Sara, I realize you live in the US, but is English your native language? It must not be.

Queen Elizabeth 2 is a ship. The head of state of the UK is Queen Elizabeth II - and she has probably never said anything to her kids about marrying a Catholic - or not marrying one .. Anne dated Andrew Parker Bowles for several years before her first marriage, but that relationship ended because Parker Bowles is Catholic.

It would be a complicated procedure to change to the Act of Settlement because it involves several laws - and law bodies (ie other countries in the Commonwealth where the head of state is the QUeen.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 07-27-2004, 08:20 PM
CathyEarnshaw
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by A.C.C.@Jul 25th, 2004 - 4:04 pm


Well, unless Parliament decides to change the law banning British Royals who marry Catholics to keep their place in the line of succession,
It is much more complicated than Parliament changing the law because the Act of Settlement involves several laws and several other countries.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 08-01-2004, 12:41 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,899
The Act of Settlement happened before there was a Commonwealth; it was easy enough to put in place. The fact that it now applies to more than one country and would be complicated to repeal is not that good an excuse to not do it, given the implied religion-based prejudice that it involves. It isn't just an anachronism, it's downright offensive in this day and age that a person who has trained for years to become Head of State would have to give it up to marry someone of a different branch of the same religion. Either the consort should have to be CofE, or the consort should be able to be any religion he or she wanted to be; allowing Judaism, Islam, Wicca, Santeria, Buddhism, and goodness knows what else while prohibiting Catholicism is an affront. And no, I'm not Catholic. I think this is a matter of principle.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 08-01-2004, 02:10 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 127
Since Catholics in the United Kingdom have had to put up with the Act of Settlement since its inception, I hardly see why some choose to pontificate on about something like this at this point in time when they have nothing to say about other forms of prejudice that affect far more than one family. Perhaps the only possible motive is that it's just because it's a purported favorite cause of Jug Ears to be "Defender of Faiths" ("whatever that is") that some people go on whinging about it, imagining they're taking up yet another pathetic banner of one of his inconsequential causes. The fact is, he's not wanted even as Defender of the Faith by many a C of E member much less Catholics. His version of marriage and fidelity doesn't quite square in Rome when it comes down to it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 08-01-2004, 03:14 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,899
Quote:
Since Catholics in the United Kingdom have had to put up with the Act of Settlement since its inception, I hardly see why some choose to pontificate on about something like this at this point in time when they have nothing to say about other forms of prejudice that affect far more than one family.
People are talking about it here because somebody started a thread. People are talking about issues that affect the royal family because this is a message board about royalty. I have no idea how you know whether those same people have nothing to say about prejudice in general since you don't know what they're saying in places other than here and since that discussion would be off-topic here. As I said, I think this is a matter of principle, and it's being discussed in the particular context of what would happen if Prince William wanted to marry a Catholic; it has nothing to do with Prince Charles's feelings about which faiths he'd like to be defender of.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 08-01-2004, 04:43 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 127
Quote:
People are talking about it here because somebody started a thread.
People talk about a lot of things, it doesn't automatically qualify it as important and furthermore if you raise an issue, be prepared for other points of view regarding that issue to be raised. Including the point of view that the issue is one of not much consequence compared to many other issues in this world.


Quote:
I have no idea how you know whether those same people have nothing to say about prejudice in general since you don't know what they're saying in places other than here and since that discussion would be off-topic here.
Was I even addressing you personally to begin with? I can tell you not. Therefore I have no idea how you would know what I know about other people's concern with other issues, many of which do in fact enter discussions on other topics.

Quote:
As I said, I think this is a matter of principle, and it's being discussed in the particular context of what would happen if Prince William wanted to marry a Catholic; it has nothing to do with Prince Charles's feelings about which faiths he'd like to be defender of.
And as I said, the principle isn't a huge or important one, which is probably part of why the Act of Settlement isn't going anywhere soon. The government has far more important things to take care of. It does have to do with Prince Charles's feeling about which faiths he'd like to be defender of because chances are he'll be king before his son. He's postured on this issue by making noises about being "defender" of faiths, William's "feelings" have not been expressed afaik. Were it anything more than posturing, then perhaps William wouldn't have to worry about losing his dynastic rights if he married a Catholic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 08-01-2004, 03:32 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,899
Quote:
People talk about a lot of things, it doesn't automatically qualify it as important and furthermore if you raise an issue, be prepared for other points of view regarding that issue to be raised. Including the point of view that the issue is one of not much consequence compared to many other issues in this world.
Most issues relating to constitutional monarchies are less important than other issues going on in the world. That doesn't stop people talking abou them on boards dedicated to discussions about royalty.

Quote:
Was I even addressing you personally to begin with? I can tell you not. Therefore I have no idea how you would know what I know about other people's concern with other issues, many of which do in fact enter discussions on other topics.
I didn't say you were addressing me personally. You said

"Since Catholics in the United Kingdom have had to put up with the Act of Settlement since its inception, I hardly see why some choose to pontificate on about something like this at this point in time when they have nothing to say about other forms of prejudice that affect far more than one family."

I'm asking why you're so sure that people talking about this subject have nothing to say about other forms of prejudice that affect far more than one family. The fact that they aren't saying it here, since it would be off-topic, doesn't mean they have nothing to say about it.

Quote:
And as I said, the principle isn't a huge or important one, which is probably part of why the Act of Settlement isn't going anywhere soon.
Well, I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I think religious discrimination is an important issue, and this is a high-profile example. If it comes to the point where a monarch or an heir to the throne is insisting on marrying a Catholic, there's probably going to be negative responses among the public about having to quickly change a law in order to suit the personal wishes of the heir. As long as this law is an anachronism based on prejudice with an ugly history, it should be dealt with. IMO, at any rate.

Quote:
The government has far more important things to take care of. It does have to do with Prince Charles's feeling about which faiths he'd like to be defender of because chances are he'll be king before his son. He's postured on this issue by making noises about being "defender" of faiths, William's "feelings" have not been expressed afaik.
This is a different issue from the faiths which Charles feels comfortable defending or not. That affects the whole issue of whether to have an Established Church. As long as CofE is the Established Church, he'll be Defender of the Faith whether he wants to be or not. If the senior representatives of the church feel that his marital antics prevent him from being recognised as such, the Archbishop of Canterbury is (as far as I know, at any rate) at liberty to refuse to crown him. This business about Catholicism and the line of succession is a specific case where one particular branch of Christianity is being discriminated against, unlike all the other branches of Christianity and all the other religions. Even with the CofE as the Established Church, the monarch could marry someone of any other religion, including non-Christian religions and including atheism, but not a Catholic. I can see an argument for requiring that the consort be a member of the CofE; I can't see any argument for the consort being able to be anything s/he wants to be, but not a Roman Catholic.

Quote:
Were it anything more than posturing, then perhaps William wouldn't have to worry about losing his dynastic rights if he married a Catholic.
I don't see how it could be avoided with the current law in place and the precedent of removing the Earl of St Andrews, Lord Downpatrick (and I think Lord Nicholas Windsor), as well as Prince Michael, from the line of succession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-01-2004, 02:58 PM
Josefine's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: , Sweden
Posts: 9,139
what year did this law come about that the royal family can´t marry chatlics
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-01-2004, 03:05 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josefine
what year did this law come about that the royal family can´t marry chatlics
I think this law has been in effect since the 1700s. P. Michael of Kent had to remove himself from succession for marrying his catholic bride, "Princess Pushy".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 12-01-2004, 08:07 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
I think it's one of those laws that won't be repealed until it actually happens. If William found a catholic girl whom he really loved I can't see the government of the day objecting. There would be such an uproar in today's multicultural society and if anyone tried to stand in his way I think he is the last person who would allow anyone to do so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 12-01-2004, 11:15 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,899
Quote:
what year did this law come about that the royal family can´t marry chatlics
The Act of Settlement dates from 1701.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 12-02-2004, 09:17 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
That may be so but the Royal Family are hardly in a bargaining position these days.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 12-03-2004, 12:00 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: East of the sun and west of the moon, United States
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by kinneret5764
I think this law has been in effect since the 1700s. P. Michael of Kent had to remove himself from succession for marrying his catholic bride, "Princess Pushy".
"Princess Pushy?" Surely, you´re not referring to Princess Marie Christine otherwise known as the "People´s Princess"?:)
__________________
WYAO
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 12-11-2004, 02:22 AM
MoonlightRhapsody's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Garden Grove, United States
Posts: 935
There;s hope for us Catholic girls!!

Bill challenges 'outdated' royal succession rules

Thursday December 9, 2004

The rule of male primogeniture, by which the eldest son of a monarch becomes king even if he has an elder sister, will end if a bill published today is passed.



The succession to the crown bill, sponsored by the Labour peer and former minister Lord Dubs, would allow Prince William's eldest child to succeed him regardless of gender.

"Anachronistic rules of succession risk preventing the monarchy being acceptable to a full range of 21st-century British society," Lord Dubs warns.

"Support for changes that would reflect modern Britain's values on gender and religious discrimination would be all but universal."

The bill also seeks to remove the ban on a monarch marrying a Roman Catholic by excising from the Union with Scotland and Union with England acts of 1706 and 1707 the objection to "persons marrying papists".

Finally, it would abolish the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, which requires that descendants of George II - except princesses marrying into a foreign family - obtain the monarch's consent in order for their marriages to be valid.

On male primogeniture, Lord Dubs says: "The idea that a female first-born heir should be passed over in favour of a younger brother is surely offensive to the vast majority of Britons, given the great social revolution that has occurred in the position of women over the three decades since the Sex Discrimination Act was passed in 1975. "Supporters of the monarchy constantly pay tribute to the great dedication of the Queen over her 50-year reign, and it is surely better to make this change at a time when the princes, William and Harry, are first and second in line to the throne rather than wait until the moment when it would change the line of succession."



Lord Dubs describes the ban on a monarch marrying a Catholic as "an outdated piece of religious bigotry ... Prince William could live with a Catholic girlfriend without forfeiting the right to be king, but the moment they were married he would be instantly disqualified," he says.

He calls the 1772 act "the Dangerous Dogs Act of its day", saying it was "passed in haste owing to George III's chagrin that his relatives were getting married without consulting him".

But Lord Dubs warns that some traditional monarchists "treat the institution like a Ming vase and are afraid to disturb it at all for fear of destroying it, while some convinced republicans fear that reform would prevent the monarchy rotting to a slow death".

As a member of the Fabian Society Executive, Lord Dubs contributed to the society's Monarchy Commission report. The palace had welcomed the document as "a useful contribution to the debate", he said.

The last attempt to remove male primogeniture came in a 1998 bill sponsored by Lord Archer. At that time, the government said it did not oppose equality but wanted to bring in its own legislation. The bill was withdrawn, but no legislation has since been introduced. Downing Street today declined to comment on the latest bill, which received its formal first reading in the House of Lords yesterday and is due for its second reading on January 14.




http://politics.guardian.co.uk/const...370194,00.html



There might be hope for us after all!
__________________
*~* In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock. *~*
*~* Judge not those who try and fail. Judge those who fail to try. *~*
Sweden's Picture of the Month Represenative
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 12-11-2004, 02:56 AM
bad_barbarella's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ..., Canada
Posts: 710
hey isnt william supposed to marry an australian?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 12-12-2004, 09:14 AM
cute_girl's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 994
what raised my eyebrows was that he can marry a girl with a religion out of christionary,if he marries a jewesh girl he cant marry in church and he'd have illigitimate children who cannot succeed the throne
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 12-12-2004, 04:28 PM
MoonlightRhapsody's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Garden Grove, United States
Posts: 935
I don't know about that. I think the only stipulation about religion was that he couldn't marry a Catholic. That was due to the political climate centuries ago, but maybe they never though of the posibility that future kings could marry women that weren't Protestant nor Catholic.
__________________
*~* In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock. *~*
*~* Judge not those who try and fail. Judge those who fail to try. *~*
Sweden's Picture of the Month Represenative
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 12-14-2004, 08:31 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by cute_girl
what raised my eyebrows was that he can marry a girl with a religion out of christionary,if he marries a jewesh girl he cant marry in church and he'd have illigitimate children who cannot succeed the throne
what do you mean? He can marry someone from anyother religoin except a Jew? Sorry, I didn;t understand.:)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 12-14-2004, 09:37 AM
cute_girl's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 994
he can marry a girl with any religion like jewesh,muslem,athiest and etc,the limitation is that he cannot marry a catholic
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
act of settlement, catholicism, church of england, line of succession, prince william


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Catholic Royals BeatrixFan Royalty Past, Present, and Future 193 02-26-2014 05:41 PM
Would the Lux. princes be allowed to marry a non-catholic bad_barbarella Prince Felix, Princess Claire, Princess Alexandra, Prince Sebastien & Prince Louis with Family 140 10-24-2009 08:01 AM
Is Camilla a Catholic? sm1939 The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 88 09-14-2007 02:35 PM
Siblings love crisiñaki Royal Chit Chat 26 08-13-2006 05:58 PM
Is it true love? Again! Ennyllorac Prince and Princess of Asturias and Family 25 01-19-2005 11:45 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess christina of the netherlands princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess marilene princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:19 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]