Will Charles Ever Reign? part 3

[BeatrixFan]

I think it was Zsa Zsa Gabor who once said, "My husbands were swines. But I had the last laugh. They're all dead".

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by MARG

But Camilla was a divorcee. Was hers a Roman Catholic marriage, and if so, does it not count in view of the above?

Camilla married Andrew Parker-Bowles in the Guards Chapel, which I think is nondenominational, although reports have said that the wedding was conducted by a Roman Catholic priest according to the rites of the Catholic Church. She did not convert to Catholicism, however, and her ex-husband has remarried; regardless of what the church may or may not feel, she was legally free to remarry and that's really what counts.

[PreDoc]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

I think something that Charles may fret over is that he may not be King long enough to have made the difference's he would have wanted to have made, and, I can empathise with that.

I can't disagree with you Margrethe, in fact it almost seems unfortunate that Charles will become King instead of a successful entrepreneur or statesman because becoming king seems like a waste of his intellectual curiousites and interests. Hopefully he'll be able to make very real contributions despite the built-in obstacles attached to the position of being Britain's highest ceremonial figure.

[BeatrixFan]

As far as the Church is concerned;

Roman Catholic : Until Andrew Parker-Bowles dies, Camilla is not married in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church because divorce is not recognised. Charles however, is a widower and is free to marry. He was not whilst Diana was alive and they were divorced.

Protestant : Camilla is divorced, Charles is divorced and have legally married.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

As far as the Church is concerned;

Protestant : Camilla is divorced, Charles is divorced and have legally married.

If that was the case, then why did they have to get married in the Guild Hall?

[BeatrixFan]

Because the Protestant Church, whilst it recognises divorce, won't remarry divorcees.

[Vanesa]

Originally Posted by PreDoc

I can't disagree with you Margrethe, in fact it almost seems unfortunate that Charles will become King instead of a successful entrepreneur or statesman because becoming king seems like a waste of his intellectual curiousites and interests. Hopefully he'll be able to make very real contributions despite the built-in obstacles attached to the position of being Britain's highest ceremonial figure.

I do not see the reason for a King not being intellectually curious. I think that its better that they should be like this...Unfortunately, kings and queens nowadays seems too interested in sports or bussiness affairs than in intellectual issues. There is, of course, some exceptions. I shouldn't point them out, for I don't want to appear as a sour person. Of course, I have my favos among the royals, but I'll not said which ones I don't like awfully too much.

I think that Charles, could become a really good King. I bet it!

Vanesa.

[Aussie Princess]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Because the Protestant Church, whilst it recognises divorce, won't remarry divorcees.

Really? where did Henry the eigth get remarried? did he have civil ceremonies as well or was it different back then?

[BeatrixFan]

He married in his church. He could do pretty much as he liked. But now, things are different and everyone follows one set of rules.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Because the Protestant Church, whilst it recognises divorce, won't remarry divorcees.

The Church of England does remarry divorcees these days, but it frowns on the notion of marrying a divorcee to a person who was part of the reason the first marriage failed. I gather some clergy will perform a marriage service under those conditions, but this particular case would have caused some serious problems for the church.

[PreDoc]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

The Church of England does remarry divorcees these days, but it frowns on the notion of marrying a divorcee to a person who was part of the reason the first marriage failed.

Although your explanation was serious the way you phrased it made me laugh

[Smartie2091]

Yeah, I think Charles will rule. It may be long or may be short but he'll rule. I can see William (or harry depending on how things go in the future)
getting the throne at a good age, maybe in there early 40's.

[Royal Fan]

How soon does everyone expect Charles will become King 5 years,10,15 im not being morbid just curious I Wish the Queen more Happy years

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Royal Fan

How soon does everyone expect Charles will become King 5 years,10,15 im not being morbid just curious I Wish the Queen more Happy years

No one knows what tomorrow holds. But assuming The Queen's health holds out like her mother's did, she could be on the throne another 10-15 years and Charles' reign would be short. This is why The Queen will continue to closely oversee William's future and duties.

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by Royal Fan

How soon does everyone expect Charles will become King 5 years,10,15 im not being morbid just curious I Wish the Queen more Happy years

Absolutely not I want the Queen as my Head of State for many years to come :) hoping she lives as long as her beloved mother.

"MII"

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Some of the early deaths among the men were also at least partly due to their being heavy smokers, which isn't one of Charles's habits. The relatively peaceful society and his drive for healthy living may well mean that he'll live to a greater age than most of his predecessors.

I recall reading many years ago an article on how cancer took the lives of all the British kings between Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth because of their addiction to tobacco. Charles seems to be the healthiest crown prince ever in the House of Windsor.
But, to answer the main question on the thread, I think he has a 50-50 chance of reigning. If he does I have the feeling it will be a short period and Camilla will survive him.

[Lady Bluffton]

If the Queen lives as long as her mother, then as far as she and Prince Charles go, there will be certain parallels between Victoria and Edward VII. Long reign, short reign, long reign?

[Cynthia Victoria]

Charles may reign, but with his Muslim sympathies and title Defender of the Faith, one can only hope that ERII lives a long time. That would be a major muddle for the BRF to deal with.

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by Cynthia Victoria

Charles may reign, but with his Muslim sympathies and title Defender of the Faith, one can only hope that ERII lives a long time. That would be a major muddle for the BRF to deal with.

HRH the Prince of Wales has noted that he would like the title Defender of the Faith changed to Defender of all Faith's, which I imagine may not go down too well with the Protestant Church of England.

there will be certain parallels between Victoria and Edward VII

I have always thought this to be a very likely scenario. Of course no one knows, but the longer Her Most Gracious Majesty continues to reign (long may that be) there's an increasing likeliness that Charles' reign as King will be most short lived, in comparison.

I, personally, cant see Charles having a Silver Jubilee.

"MII"

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Cynthia Victoria

Charles may reign, but with his Muslim sympathies.. That would be a major muddle for the BRF to deal with.

Deal with what? I fail to see a problem with a Prince of Wales or a King of England having an understanding and appreciation of the Islamic world.
Surely his broadness of mind and experience should be applauded.