 |
|

01-20-2008, 10:43 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,056
|
|
I think the antedote about Prince Philip appeared in one of Ingrid Seward's books, uncertain which. The Prince Edward article was in the News of the World in the 1980's - the name of the article's headline was something like "too posh to Party" or something like that. Sorry it is not available online.
It was actually Mark Philips who said that Anne sees religious observation as a waste of time. But he is not much of a character witness. Andrew apparently liked sleeping in upon ship, it was his crew mates that gathered that he was really not that concerned about religious matters. Mind you, of course you can not equate church attendence with religious convection.
|

01-24-2008, 04:22 PM
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 156
|
|
This Roman Catholic ban - what happens if the Roman Catholic in question subsequently converts to Greek Orthodox, or Protestantism - is the person who married a Catholic reinstated in the Order of Succession? For instance Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia married a Catholic - and was thus debarred. Princess Katherine is now a member of the Serbian Orthodox Church - so why has Prince Alexander not been reinstated?
|

01-24-2008, 10:50 PM
|
 |
Former Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,892
|
|
Because there's legally no such thing as the line of succession, so there's no "debarring" or "reinstatement." There's no legal body out there that determines whether or not someone is capable to come to the throne, it's just done by ordinary citizens who make their best judgment as to what the law says. The only way we would know for certain would be if that happened to someone who then became the heir apparent, and then there would be legal decisions, etc.
|

01-25-2008, 07:33 PM
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 156
|
|
and I know Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia is very unlikely to make it to the throne (his son was 95th in line on 1st January 2008), but it might be an important consideration if Autumn Kelly converts to Church of England - or even Church of Scotland - after she marries Peter Phillips.
Surely the legal basis is set out in the Act of Succession ....
|

01-25-2008, 11:27 PM
|
 |
Former Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,892
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camsterlaird
and I know Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia is very unlikely to make it to the throne (his son was 95th in line on 1st January 2008), but it might be an important consideration if Autumn Kelly converts to Church of England - or even Church of Scotland - after she marries Peter Phillips.
|
The only way the possibility of converting back and forth will be considered by legal experts (as opposed to the people who decide such things right now) is if it happens to someone very senior. As I said, there's no such thing, legally, as a "line of succession," so nobody official has a reason to care. That's also why there's no grounds for EU human rights cases, etc. Nobody can have something taken away that they never had to begin with.
The people that determine someone's legal suitability for the throne, except for in the cases of people very close, are not legal officials but just enthusiasts. The British government probably doesn't even keep a record of religion way "down the line" so to speak.
|

01-26-2008, 02:21 AM
|
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,872
|
|
I think the feeling is that as long as the Act bars a person from the succession for marrying a Catholic, that person is barred from the succession for life regardless of what the Catholic partner subsequently does with his or her religion.
The Duke of Kent remains in the line of succession regardless of the conversion of his wife; it seems to be the religion at the time of marriage that's the issue.
Now, if a royal married a Catholic and then divorced, I'm not sure if s/he would still appear in the line of succession.
|

03-18-2008, 10:08 PM
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Longueuil, Canada
Posts: 120
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
HM does indeed go to Church every Sunday. She spends every weekend at Windsor and so every Sunday, it's down to St George's Chapel for the service. The Dean is allowed to speak about what he likes but the Duke of Edinburgh has set a limit on the time his sermon can last as he apparantly can abide long clergy talks. A few years ago I believe a Roman Catholic priest led the service.
|
Does she really attend church at St. George's Chapel? I heard that she attended church at All Saints Chapel near Royal Lodge.
Also, when Her Majesty attends church, does the rest of the Windsor Castle community allowed to attend church at the same place where she is?
__________________
SirMax
|

03-19-2008, 08:18 AM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 342
|
|
Have I posted this before? If so, I apologize for reposting.
I recall a news item from the Queen's visit to the Western United States sometime around the 70s or early 80s. She was cruising on Britannia up the coast. On Sunday she attended an Episcopal (Anglican) service in San Diego. It was pointed out that the Queen does not take Communion outside of England. So the parish did something interesting: they inverted the service and had the Communion Liturgy before the Liturgy of the Word. Between the two portions there was a pause and the Queen came in and sat for the rest of the service.
|

03-19-2008, 05:41 PM
|
 |
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
|
|
That's interesting. I would have thought she would take communion at any church in communion with the CoE, as Canterbury is the worldwide head of all Anglican churches.
|

03-19-2008, 10:17 PM
|
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,323
|
|
So she wouldnt take Communion in my Baptist Church
|

03-20-2008, 12:22 AM
|
 |
Former Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,892
|
|
I remember reading somewhere that she rarely even takes communion in England.
|

03-20-2008, 11:30 AM
|
 |
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Fan
So she wouldnt take Communion in my Baptist Church
|
Of course not. She's the Supreme Governor of the CoE. It would be visually (as well as theologically, probably) inappropriate for her to take communion in a church which is not at least in communion with the CoE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson
I remember reading somewhere that she rarely even takes communion in England.
|
Now that I find very peculiar, given how devout she is.
|

07-31-2008, 02:54 PM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Nottingham, United Kingdom
Posts: 699
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
An intimate setting with restricted public access. members of the staff and some of the villagers are allowed in. Tiny as opposed to the size of a normal town church.
|
Tiny & intimate yes - restricted no. My friend & I arrived about 30 minutes before the service began, had never been before, are not local and were not even expecting to go to the service (so not even in our "Sunday best" clothes) There were none of the Queen's staff apart from the one Lady In Waiting who arrived & left in the Queen's vehicle. The two ladies (to clarify - The Queen and her lady in Waiting) sat together in the side pews, which were otherwise empty. Even security waited outside, not inside the church.
When we found we would be welcome to join in, we simply walked up to the door, had our bags checked by the Security, and were allowed to pick our own seats, although the front 5 or 6 rows were being saved for known parishioners. No-one asked who we were or where we came from - all they needed to know was that we wanted to take part in the service. The Church was about half empty during the service, simply because no-one else came to take part.
At the end, the Queen went out to her car first but then everyone else began to leave immediately after she moved. Outside, the security chap waved us to the best spot to stand, and then a few seconds later the car crawled past us and because just us two were standing there we got a personal smile & wave from HM. So you see any visitor is apparently very welcome to go to Crathie to share the services.
|

07-31-2008, 07:06 PM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,910
|
|
I am amazed that this was the case as normally at the services at Crathie, if the RF are in attendance, names are checked very carefully and full bag searches are also the order of the day. Having attended Crathie in the past and will do so again, I am astonished to hear that security has been dispensed with on your visit when HM was expected to attend.
Although the service may have been read from a sheet of paper, the blessing for the royal family is always said.
|

07-31-2008, 07:27 PM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,649
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress
So did she even go to church on a regular basis? Even when she was married?
|
why? would it make a difference? does god love a person less if they don't go to church?
__________________
Duchess
|

07-31-2008, 07:32 PM
|
 |
Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
|
|
You're absolutely right. Presbyterians (in this case, Church of Scotland)don't pray for the dead. I expect that William and Harry's grief was included with the usual pastoral prayer for "those who mourn." My husband, a Presbyterian minister, prayed that awful Sunday morning for "those who mourn, whether they live in hovels or in palaces."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
I'm not an expert on church doctrine - far from it - but adding her to that prayer would be asking God to bless a dead person, and I'm not sure that that's sanctioned by the church.
|
|

07-31-2008, 07:33 PM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,649
|
|
wow GillW...what a great coincidence. or did you know that she'd be there? a great store to share though.
__________________
Duchess
|

07-31-2008, 07:41 PM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,910
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess
wow GillW...what a great coincidence. or did you know that she'd be there? a great store to share though.
|
The Queen attends every Sunday during the time she spends at Balmoral, the only exceptions are if she is unwell. It was well publicised that HM had vacated BP for the summer, as it was opened to the public on the Tuesday.
|

08-01-2008, 09:20 AM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Nottingham, United Kingdom
Posts: 699
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess
wow GillW...what a great coincidence. or did you know that she'd be there? a great store to share though.
|
Although my friend had mentioned that HM had moved up to Scotland before the closure of Balmoral for visitors, we had no idea until we arrived in the car park that she would be at Church that day. Pure serendipity!!
|

08-01-2008, 09:26 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
|
|
It was almost a miracle...I never have such luck!
|
 |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|