The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #601  
Old 10-16-2010, 07:59 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by angela View Post
He's already married to a woman the COE couldn't marry him to because her first husband is still alive. (And that's keeping it simple!)

Actually the CoE could marry them, if the presiding minister so chose (mine would have done so with no problems at all). The issue wasn't about Andrew still being alive but how much Camilla contributed to the breakup of the first marriage of Charles and Diana.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #602  
Old 10-17-2010, 12:37 AM
HM Queen Catherine's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rendsburg, Germany
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Actually the CoE could marry them, if the presiding minister so chose (mine would have done so with no problems at all). The issue wasn't about Andrew still being alive but how much Camilla contributed to the breakup of the first marriage of Charles and Diana.
I believe the issue rather concerned the Prince of Wales as the future King, and had very little to do with Camilla's role in the breakup of his first marriage. Although Charles and Diana divorced, that was no longer an issue at all. Diana's death effectively made Charles a widower in the eyes of the Church. What did matter, though, was the fact that Camilla was divorced and Andrew Parker-Bowles is still very much alive.

The Church of England revised their position on re-marriage in the church after divorce in 2002, but it is important to realize that this change does not confer an automatic right on couples to further marriage in church.

Above all, the system now in place is designed to safeguard the Church's doctrine of marriage. While the decision rests with the officiating cleric, he/she has the option of referring cases to the bishop. The Church of England's view on marriage has not changed.

They do recognize that in the 21st century, divorce is a common practice, and they will try to accommodate their parishoners within the framework of their doctrine. They admit that there are exceptional circumstances in which a divorced person may be married in church during the lifetime of a former spouse.

In the case of a Prince of Wales, however, the situation is entirely different. He will one day be the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, and it is crucial to that position that he uphold the doctrines of the Church.

I believe that not allowing him to marry Camilla in church because of her status, was a decision made to protect his future role as Supreme Governor.

If he were an ordinary parishoner, sure.. the minister may have married them in church.. but the Prince of Wales in no ordinary parishoner.
__________________

__________________
Ś i vethed...nā i onnad. Minlū pedich nin i aur hen telitha. - Arwen & Aragorn, The Lord of the Rings
(English translation: "This is not the end... it is the beginning. You told me once, this day would come.")
Reply With Quote
  #603  
Old 10-18-2010, 08:01 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Charles was not considered a widower by the CoE. The CoE recognises civil divorce, Charles as a divorcee was unmarried when his former wife died. Since he was unmarried, he could not be a widower!

Charles and Camilla were never refused permission to marry in a CoE church, they were never refused permission because they never asked for it! The CoE's prefered method of divorcees marrying in the church is for them to have a civil marriage and then a church blessing. This is what Charles and Camilla did. The CoE do offer divorcees a chance to marry in the church but it is left to the individual minister as to whether he/she would marry the couple if one or both is a divorcee. But the preferred option is civil wedding followed by church blessing. The church's teachings on marriage are maintained, no conflict as to whether the divorced couple should be married, since by the time they approach the minister they are already married and are asking for their marriage to be blessed.

As the future Head of the CoE Charles with his second marriage followed the church's recommendations on the marriage of divorcees.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #604  
Old 10-18-2010, 11:32 PM
Duchessmary's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: San Diego, United States
Posts: 1,100
A widower in the eyes of the Church? How can this be? He was unfaithful from the beginning of his marriage to the end. I'm by no means saying Diana was a saint either. The only decent thing Charles did, IMO, was wait many years before he married Camilla after Diana's death.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #605  
Old 10-19-2010, 01:09 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchessmary View Post
A widower in the eyes of the Church? How can this be? He was unfaithful from the beginning of his marriage to the end. I'm by no means saying Diana was a saint either. The only decent thing Charles did, IMO, was wait many years before he married Camilla after Diana's death.

I love it when people here say he was unfaithful from the beginning to the end when Diana says 1986 and Charles 'when the marriage had irretrievably broken down, both of us having tried' as obviously they must be lying if you know that it was from the beginning of the marriage.

I will believe Diana on this and say 1986 - the same year she started cheating on Charles. Obviously therefore the marriage had 'irretrievably broken down' if they were both cheating in their partners and thus 1986 for me - based on their words and deeds.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #606  
Old 10-19-2010, 01:28 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,794
Oh Bertie!

I just love the fact that this is still being picked over after all these years, and in the wrong thread to boot!

I had my pointer poised over the submit button to post this link, Anglican church doors open for divorcees to remarry - smh.com.au , but decided it was the wrong place, but then I read your post and a mischievous imp led me astray.

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #607  
Old 10-19-2010, 06:02 AM
HM Queen Catherine's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rendsburg, Germany
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte1 View Post
Charles was not considered a widower by the CoE. The CoE recognises civil divorce, Charles as a divorcee was unmarried when his former wife died. Since he was unmarried, he could not be a widower!
Canon B30 of the General Synod of the Church of England
The Church of England affirms, according to our Lord's teaching, that marriage is in its nature a union permanent and lifelong, for better or worse, til death them do part, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, for the procreation and nurture of children, for the hallowing and right direction of the natural instincts and affections, and for the mutual society, help and comfort which one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity.

According to this Canon of the Church, whether Charles was divorced or not, has no bearing on the Church's belief that he was, in fact, still married to Diana until her death. Divorce is a civil action, not a religious one, and although the Church recognizes civil divorce, that does not mean that they abjugate their own doctrine. That is why, until 2002, the Church of England refused to grant remarriage to divorced persons whose former spouses were still living.

If Diana were still alive, Charles would probably have never even considered marrying Camilla because of the succession, religious and political issues it would have created for him and the monarchy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte1 View Post
Charles and Camilla were never refused permission to marry in a CoE church, they were never refused permission because they never asked for it! The CoE's prefered method of divorcees marrying in the church is for them to have a civil marriage and then a church blessing.
As the future Head of the CoE Charles with his second marriage followed the church's recommendations on the marriage of divorcees.
Since Camilla was divorced and her ex-husband is still alive, her marriage to Charles could not be sanctioned under the auspices of the Church of England. Following the death of Diana, there was no impediment to Prince Charles being married in the church - if he had married someone single, widowed or divorced whose ex-spouse was deceased.

And how can you say that Charles and Camilla never asked for permission to marry in the church? Just because it was never discussed in the press, does not mean that the question wasn't asked.. and if it was, it was settled long before the engagement was announced.

Canon B36 of the General Synod of the Church of England
1) If any persons have contracted marriage before the civil registrar under the provisions of the statute law, and shall afterwards desire to add thereto a service of Solemnization of Matrimony, a minister may, if he see fit, use such form of service, as may be approved by the General Synod under Canon B2, in the church or chapel in which he is authorized to exercise his ministry: Provided first, that the minister be duly satisfied that the civil marriage has been contracted, and secondly that in regard to this use of the said service the minister do observe the Canons and regulations of the General Synod for the time being in force.

2) In connection with such a service there shall be no publication of banns nor any license or certificate authorizing a marriage: and no record of any such service shall be entered by the minister in the register books of marriages provided by the Registrar General.

(Canon B2 deals with the approved forms of service in the CoE)

Without a civil marriage between Charles and Camilla, they would not have been allowed a church blessing, nor would they legally be married at all, since the church does not issue any license or officially record any such service. A church blessing is not a marriage ceremony.

As I said previously, the marriage was handled with a view to Charles' future position as Supreme Governor, who is charged with upholding the tenets and doctrines of the Anglican church.
__________________
Ś i vethed...nā i onnad. Minlū pedich nin i aur hen telitha. - Arwen & Aragorn, The Lord of the Rings
(English translation: "This is not the end... it is the beginning. You told me once, this day would come.")
Reply With Quote
  #608  
Old 01-06-2011, 01:15 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,378
Please note that the subject of this thread is Charles and Camilla's marriage.

Not Diana's marriage to Charles or who cheated first. In reference to Diana, the only reference that should be discussed as it relates to Diana to CC's marriage is that Charles was/is considered a widower by the Anglican Church.

Other than that we are speaking of 2005 to the present.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #609  
Old 01-26-2011, 05:05 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,324
I Just wish we could have seen inside the Guildhall was it pretty much your average service???
So basically it was " wilt thou have this man"...correct
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #610  
Old 01-26-2011, 05:14 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,794
I can only speculate, of course, and could be wrong, but I suspect the celebrant, who was the Royal Borough's Superintendant Registrar, Clair Williams, just dealt with the various matters required by the relevant legislation as she would with any civil ceremony.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #611  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:33 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brooklyn, United States
Posts: 162
It is a pity that Charles did not have the strength to stood up and demanded that he wanted Camilla as his first wife the "crown and throne could go to ........" Diana and Dody probably would be alive and Mr. Parker Bowles may have fould his soul mate.
As for who is without sin cast the first stone and
Judge for you will be judged
I daresay that while some of us sees things through rose coloured lenses there is one who sees the heart and is the greatest judge.
that's where retribution comes in.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #612  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:44 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brooklyn, United States
Posts: 162
I wonder if Prince Charles was not the heir to the throne and with lots of trimmings if Camilla would have hang around. I think Mr. Parker Bowles is quite a dishing man.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #613  
Old 05-31-2011, 10:48 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilda Thomas View Post
I wonder if Prince Charles was not the heir to the throne and with lots of trimmings if Camilla would have hang around. I think Mr. Parker Bowles is quite a dishing man.
I don't think she wanted any of it, truth to say. When you are made aware of how nervous she was on her wedding day to Charles - watching her one can almost see her shaking. Its very touching. What I would give to read this woman's memoirs! Can you imagine the convincing he had to do? Breathtaking courage on her part - and one supposes that what else had she left since all that she had ever really wanted was now shattered and no more. She took a chance - and Charles has shown what a good man he is in his own way (a man has to be taken as he is, after all - something Diana never understood) - but we will never know if Camilla has moments of reverie, wishing it were all otherwise. She took the final step for Charles - no wonder he honors her.

She loved her husband I'm sure - he was the better catch, in fact, very likely, in her eyes. Had she not had the misfortune to be-friend Diana, had she not been the good friend to Charles that she was and did as he asked regarding Diana, she would likely still be married to her first husband and happily be ensconced in the country being a granny.

She had no ambitions it does not seem. Being a great and good friend to Charles - does not mean she was 'in love' with the guy - that's the myth that keeps getting repeated but I somehow doubt it. Loving a friend is one thing, very distinct from being in love with a potential lover. It suits some to feel that it has been a life-long affair. Not likely IMO. But it went there - happily for them. I hope she's happy - she makes so many others happy - I hope she is, too, really, deep down.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #614  
Old 05-31-2011, 11:53 PM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilda Thomas View Post
I wonder if Prince Charles was not the heir to the throne and with lots of trimmings if Camilla would have hang around. I think Mr. Parker Bowles is quite a dishing man.
There are few who would dispute that Camilla fell head-over-heels in love with Andrew Parker-Bowles and yet, as often happens, they drifted apart and to all intents and purposes were living separate lives for a large part of their married life.

With the press' explosive intrusion into their lives they ended their marriage. Yet Andrew married his "longtime companion" Rosemary Pitman within a year of the divorce and he and his second wife Rose, remained lose friends of both Charles and Camilla and were guests at their wedding.

If you are suggesting that Camilla was angling to be Queen (eventually) then I believe you are way off the mark and so too do the press or they would have been heralding it on the front page for years. Although I do agree that Andrew is and was a truely debonair 'ladies man'.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #615  
Old 06-01-2011, 03:39 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilda Thomas View Post
I
I daresay that while some of us sees things through rose coloured lenses there is one who sees the heart and is the greatest judge.
that's where retribution comes in.
All this talk of retribution by God is astonishing as so far nothing bad has happened to Charles and Camilla (and I do hope it stays that way!). Seems the Lord saw the true repentence at the Service of Blessing and gave what was asked from him: his blessing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #616  
Old 06-01-2011, 10:53 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Madison, United States
Posts: 47
Quote:
All this talk of retribution by God is astonishing as so far nothing bad has happened to Charles and Camilla (and I do hope it stays that way!). Seems the Lord saw the true repentence at the Service of Blessing and gave what was asked from him: his blessing.
Amen to that! I remember right before the wedding, some members of the media made a big deal about the fact that the Service of Prayer and Dedication included a prayer of penitence (although it was said by everyone, not just the bride and groom). The thought that occurred to me was, they confessed their sins and were granted forgiveness by their church, so shouldn't everyone else forgive them, too?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #617  
Old 06-01-2011, 11:31 AM
Aliza's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabby View Post
Amen to that! I remember right before the wedding, some members of the media made a big deal about the fact that the Service of Prayer and Dedication included a prayer of penitence (although it was said by everyone, not just the bride and groom). The thought that occurred to me was, they confessed their sins and were granted forgiveness by their church, so shouldn't everyone else forgive them, too?
They also needed to secure the forgiveness of the PERSON they wronged the most: Diana. Since she was not alive, it seems some sort of gesture to the head of the Spencer Family or some direct comment made by both Charles AND Camilla about the pain they caused her and their repentance about that might have caused more people to look favourably upon their uniting in a civil service as well as the blessing that was performed to "get around" the C of E's views on remarrying while a spouse is still living, as in the case of the then Mrs. Parker-Bowles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #618  
Old 06-01-2011, 05:12 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliza View Post
They also needed to secure the forgiveness of the PERSON they wronged the most: Diana. Since she was not alive, it seems some sort of gesture to the head of the Spencer Family or some direct comment made by both Charles AND Camilla about the pain they caused her and their repentance about that might have caused more people to look favourably upon their uniting in a civil service as well as the blessing that was performed to "get around" the C of E's views on remarrying while a spouse is still living, as in the case of the then Mrs. Parker-Bowles.

And you know that they didn't have this forgiveness from Diana, the Spencers, their children, the Queen etc how? Just because they didn't beat themselves up and crawl before them on hands and knees in sackcloth and ashes in a public display to titilate the masses doesn't mean it didn't happen to the satisfaction of those concerned years before the wedding.

Just because she had died didn't mean that Diana hadn't forgiven them before she died - and that they hadn't forgiven her for the hurt she caused both of them with her lies etc.

She is on record as saying that she hoped Charles would make 'an honest woman' of Camilla at some point in the future. She was reportedly on good terms with Charles when she died. Both of these suggest that she had moved on and forgiven the hurt.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #619  
Old 06-04-2011, 02:12 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,370
Ok, so I'm not the only one who has heard the rumor that Diana hoped Charles would make good with Camilla at some time in their life? I don't know where I heard that from, but I have never forgotten it.
Didn't Andrew Parker Bowles go to Camilla*Charles' wedding? That speaks volumes to me, that not only are they still close enough to go to each other's weddings to other people; but that he would go to the wedding of the man who was sleeping with his wife.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #620  
Old 06-04-2011, 04:11 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Ok, so I'm not the only one who has heard the rumor that Diana hoped Charles would make good with Camilla at some time in their life? I don't know where I heard that from, but I have never forgotten it.
Didn't Andrew Parker Bowles go to Camilla*Charles' wedding? That speaks volumes to me, that not only are they still close enough to go to each other's weddings to other people; but that he would go to the wedding of the man who was sleeping with his wife.
You're not the only one. Rosemary and Andrew PB were both in attendance at the Charles and Camilla wedding as far as I know. Andrew, Camilla and Charles always were good friends. What I keep remembering is that in a few places I read that Camilla and Andrew had quite an open marriage but that's just a supposition. What is remarkable is that there was no animosity and they all did remain close friends. Shows what a tight knit group they were/are.

This too shows me something. It shows me that perhaps Charles and Camilla have gone through a lot of different stages together over the years and developed more of a relationship than most couple even know of. It comes with age I think.. you realize that there's many forms of love. the Greeks had it right when they had separate words for different kinds of love. There is Eros the passionate lustful love, there's Philos the brotherly, friendship type of love and there's Agape the unconditional type of love. I think Camilla and Charles have experienced all three in their relationships over the years.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales


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





Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:37 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]