Meghan Markle: Citizenship and Religious Conversion

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Has Meghan been baptised and confirmed yet?

Anyone can attend an Anglican service. It's not forbidden to non-Anglicans. Meghan can participate, sing a few hymns, carols. She just won't take Communion, and I think the Queen takes that in the earlier morning service anyway.

[Gaudete]

I can’t find the post again to quote it but for those who asked as to whether Meghan has been baptised and confirmed yet, this probably won’t happen until Easter. That’s the traditional time (where possible) for such events to take place. As Easter Sunday falls on the 1st April this year, that gives plenty of time before the wedding so that’s the most likely date. I’m not sure if Anglicans baptise/confirm on Easter Sunday or at the vigil on the Saturday as Roman Catholics do.

Not exactly for this thread but the question was raised here so thought I would reply in this one rather than the religious conversion one.

[jacqui24]

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby on the couple's profound sense of commitment. It seems that Meghan has been busy. I didn't get the sense he's met Meghan when the engagement was announced.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are 'Profoundly Committed' | PEOPLE.com

[Rudolph]

The article doesn’t actually say he’s met Meghan. He’s not even sure if he’ll be the one to conduct the service.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

The article doesn’t actually say he’s met Meghan. He’s not even sure if he’ll be the one to conduct the service.

I'm not sure how anyone can get a profound sense of commitment they have for each other and faith without talking to them? The wedding clearly have been discussed with the Archbishop of Canterbury, but it's very likely that they haven't asked as they are just beginning to plan the wedding now.

[Rudolph]

Why would the wedding have to be discussed with the Archbishop of Canterbury?

As for the comments that’s just seems like generic talk to me. The article does say he’s met Harry so maybe that’s where it comes.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Why would the wedding have to be discussed with the Archbishop of Canterbury?

As for the comments that’s just seems like generic talk to me. The article does say he’s met Harry so maybe that’s where it comes.

I'm not sure who is the person with the power to grant a church wedding at St. Geroge's. But clearly, he's talked about the wedding and their desire to have a church wedding as he clearly states that it's not just out of tradition that they are marrying in church. I'm not sure how anyone would know that unless it's been specifically talked about.

And I'm not sure how is talking about a specific couple's profound commitment you noticed after saying you've had conversations mean it's generic. I'm happy for them is generic. But of course, I don't always follow the Archbishop of Canterbury's comments on every couple. So maybe if you can show him to say this about a lot of couples, then you'd be right it's generic.

[Rudolph]

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s permission isn’t required. It’s up to individual clergy to decide although this particular AoC is very liberal when it comes to marriage. He’s the first AoC to perform a wedding ceremony involving a divorced person.

No doubt he’s happy for them but it is doubtful whether he’ll be involved with the wedding. That will probably be The Queen’s decision

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s permission isn’t required. It’s up to individual clergy to decide although this particular AoC is very liberal when it comes to marriage. He’s the first AoC to perform a wedding ceremony involving a divorced person.

No doubt he’s happy for them but it is doubtful whether he’ll be involved with the wedding. That will probably be The Queen’s decision

I think this AOC is sympathetic to divorced persons marrying in church, but he does have some criteria. Based on what we've heard, it's not anything that Meghan and Harry would've violated. The Queen, as head of Church of England, has already given her permission for a religious ceremony in the church, I don't see her breaking a long tradition of having the AOC perform the ceremony unless he has a problem with or the couple wants someone else specifically to do it, so I don't know if that'd be doubtful.

And really, for whatever reason the couple decided to have conversations about marrying in church with AOC. I don't see there has to be a reason other than they wanted to and AOC had time.

[Rudolph]

When Edward and Sophie married at St Georges, The Bishop of Norwich conducted the wedding ceremony.

The is no particular reason for The Archbishop of Canterbury to marry them.

[Curryong]

There's no particular reason for the Archbishop not to marry them either. He was involved in the rededication of Diana's grave at Althorp a while ago and met Harry then. And to me it reads as if he's met both Harry and Meghan.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

When Edward and Sophie married at St Georges, The Bishop of Norwich conducted the wedding ceremony.

The is no particular reason for The Archbishop of Canterbury to marry them.

Hmm, I thought it was AOC, but maybe I'm confusing it with the religious blessing of PoW and DoC at St. George's. Although conversations about it with the AOC makes him quite likely. I don't think the Queen would be against it.

[Skippy]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

Hmm, I thought it was AOC, but maybe I'm confusing it with the religious blessing of PoW and DoC at St. George's. Although conversations about it with the AOC makes him quite likely. I don't think the Queen would be against it.

Edward and Sophie were married by the Bishop of Norwich, Charles and Camilla indeed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. That is to say, he performed the religious blessing.

[Osipi]

This is the way I see it and although it may sound weird, to me it makes sense.

Its very possible that the AoC has met both Harry and Meghan (both separately and together) and has had conversations with them. Sometimes it only takes a short while to get a "feel" for a person or a couple. There are many, many beautiful souls out there that have never stepped into a church or joined any denomination but yet are very attuned to their spiritual selves. Clergy like the AoC would definitely be a person who would pick up on these kind of things.

I think he's found both Harry and Meghan to be truly dedicated to each other and that the wish to marry in the Church of England isn't an empty one just keeping up a tradition or doing it because "that's how everyone else does it". Its something this couple truly want. Meghan wouldn't be going through the process of being baptized and confirmed as its not a necessity but its something that she does really want to do.

[AlowVera]

The Archbishop speaks very positively of their union and not in a superficial way. So like alot of things involving Harry and Meg we may find out more detail at a later point. We can file it away for future reference.

[Rudolph]

There was no other choice but for Meghan to ‘find religion’. Her first wedding may have been a civil ceremony but Harry was always going to marry in a church, his grandmother wouldn’t have it any other way.

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Osipi

This is the way I see it and although it may sound weird, to me it makes sense.

Its very possible that the AoC has met both Harry and Meghan (both separately and together) and has had conversations with them. Sometimes it only takes a short while to get a "feel" for a person or a couple. There are many, many beautiful souls out there that have never stepped into a church or joined any denomination but yet are very attuned to their spiritual selves. Clergy like the AoC would definitely be a person who would pick up on these kind of things.

I think he's found both Harry and Meghan to be truly dedicated to each other and that the wish to marry in the Church of England isn't an empty one just keeping up a tradition or doing it because "that's how everyone else does it". Its something this couple truly want. Meghan wouldn't be going through the process of being baptized and confirmed as its not a necessity but its something that she does really want to do.

I agree with you on every point here Osipi, and the Archbishop is attuned I'm sure to any signs of insincerity from either Harry or Meghan.

[Gaudete]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

There was no other choice but for Meghan to ‘find religion’. Her first wedding may have been a civil ceremony but Harry was always going to marry in a church, his grandmother wouldn’t have it any other way.

Meghan could have been married in an Anglican service and not been baptised or confirmed if the celebrant of the marriage gave his permission. Usually the celebrant would set the individual requirements according to his own conscience in line with the protocols set by the General Synod in his own parish but St George’s Chapel is a royal peculiar which means that it operates slightly differently. Whilst the Dean of Windsor would officiate at most services there, on this occasion the celebrant is the Archbishop of Canterbury and so it would be his decision as to whether he would perform a ceremony for a couple with only one of them in full communion with the Anglican Church.

This means that either Meghan wanted to be baptised and confirmed before her marriage or it was indicated to her that it was the Archbishop’s preference that she should be. Or that it was the Queen’s preference. Or even Prince Harry’s. Ultimately, the final decision rests with the person who will conduct the marriage ceremony and if the AoC had declined on any grounds, they’d easily have found another senior Anglican cleric who would have celebrated the marriage without reception into the Anglican communion first.

This isn’t just for royal couples of course but for any individuals seeking to be married in an Anglican church. A cousin of mine was baptised and confirmed and wished to marry in her local Anglican church but her husband was Jewish, though not all that religious. They were married in an Anglican service with a blessing in a synagogue afterwards. Their marriage was considered legal from the moment of the church service because that’s where they signed the register. Her husband wasn’t required to change his religion before the ceremony was held.

I think this was all covered in the conversion thread a week or two ago.

[Rudolph]

How many eyebrows would have been raised not least by The Queen if Meghan didn’t get baptised.

This is a royal wedding. I know times are changing but they haven’t changed that much.

[Gaudete]

The Queen maybe but not the general public. Only 1% of Britons now attend regular worship in the Anglican communion.