Prince Harry: Future Wedding

[Pranter]

Highly unlikely the will marry in a civil ceremony. I fully expect them to marry in the CoE. The CoE has changed the rules about divorced persons marrying in the Church after Charles and Camilla married. So there shouldn't be any reason for them to marry civilly.


LaRae

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Pranter

Highly unlikely the will marry in a civil ceremony. I fully expect them to marry in the CoE. The CoE has changed the rules about divorced persons marrying in the Church after Charles and Camilla married. So there shouldn't be any reason for them to marry civilly.


LaRae

The rule actually changed prior to Charles and Camilla's wedding. It left the final decision up to the individual clergy. However, there was a specific question about if the relationship contributed to the failing of the prior marriage(s), which obviously Camilla and Charles' relationship did as it began before both of their divorces. There is also the situation where he will one day be head of CoE, which does put him under more scrutiny than others.

But yes, I agree it's highly unlikely this couple wouldn't be granted a church wedding if they decide to marry. For one, Meghan didn't marry in the Church in the first place. Then there is the fact that it was a relatively short marriage without children, so it's less complicated than most divorces. If Meghan can't be granted a remarriage in the Church, I can't imagine most other people would be.

[MaiaMia_53]

Originally Posted by pooky929

I would not be surprised if Prince Harry prefers a private wedding. A destination wedding,Scotland Highlands, would be fun fun fun.

Meghan has already done the 'destination wedding.' Plus, she and Harry attended the Inskips' 3-day wedding in Jamaica. They can also choose to go on any fabulous destination honeymoon trip they desire. They've already been to Norway, Jamaica, L.A., Scotland, Berkshire for Pippa's wedding, the Cotswolds region of Britain, Botswana and Victoria Falls in Africa, and obviously Toronto -- holed up in Meghan's lovely digs on a number of occasions, and now in a luxurious hotel suite for the duration of the Invictus Games. They don't need to go away for their wedding. If Harry were not a member of the royal family, their wedding options would be unlimited. With his royal status and his high-profile closeness to the throne, Harry will likely be following in his brother's footsteps with an Abbey wedding.

[scriptgirl]

I don't think it will be a private wedding. I think it will have pomp and circumstance. I hope it does!

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

The rule actually changed prior to Charles and Camilla's wedding. It left the final decision up to the individual clergy. However, there was a specific question about if the relationship contributed to the failing of the prior marriage(s), which obviously Camilla and Charles' relationship did as it began before both of their divorces. There is also the situation where he will one day be head of CoE, which does put him under more scrutiny than others.

But yes, I agree it's highly unlikely this couple wouldn't be granted a church wedding if they decide to marry. For one, Meghan didn't marry in the Church in the first place. Then there is the fact that it was a relatively short marriage without children, so it's less complicated than most divorces. If Meghan can't be granted a remarriage in the Church, I can't imagine most other people would be.

Ah hmm I could of swore I read it changed after...thanks!



LaRae

[scriptgirl]

No, I agree the rule changed before.

[royal rob]

Will Meghan attend Church of England services etc when she's married to Harry. ?? Christmas etc

[scriptgirl]

I don't see why not?

[Iluvbertie]

The rule changed in 2002.

It is now down to the individual minister to decide if he/she will marry them and the only reason not to do so is if the minister believes that the new spouse played a part in the break-down of the former marriage.

I know a number of ministers who would have married Charles and Camilla believing that Camilla played no part in the breakdown of the marriage - based on Charles' own words - that the marriage had 'irretrievably broken down both of us having tried' before he returned to Camilla. Their interpretation of the rule is that it isn't having an affair during a marriage but what was the state of the marriage at the time of the start of the affair/s and based on Diana's own timeline of starting with Hewitt in 1986 and identifying 1986 as the year the Charles returned to Camilla they have said that is enough evidence that the marriage was over in reality when Charles returned to Camilla and so Camilla played no part in the breakdown of Charles and Diana's marriage. That means they would have married Charles and Camilla in a full CoE service.

This is NOT meant to be a starter for a discussion of the CDC triangle but simply the reasoning put to me by a number of CoE ministers (my own in 2005, his replacement after he died in 2009, my three school chaplains since 2005 and a family friend who is now a retired bishop) as to why they would have married Charles and Camilla in 2005 and not insisted on them having a Civil Marriage followed by a blessing.

Earlier in this thread a poster said that Harry and Meghan will have to have a Civil Marriage - that is not the case in the UK. It is the case throughout much of the continent largely due to Napoleon who made Civil Marriages the rule in the territories he ruled and they kept that ruling even after he was defeated. That is why many of the Europeans have both a Civil and a Church wedding - but not in the UK.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

I don't see why not?

Sorry I'm thinking along the line she's not Church of England and if she doesn't change what then. I remember something about Kate having a commitment service before she married

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by royal rob

Sorry I'm thinking along the line she's not Church of England and if she doesn't change what then. I remember something about Kate having a commitment service before she married

She can attend services even if she isn't a church member. I've often attended services with family or friends at other denominations.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

She can attend services even if she isn't a church member. I've often attended services with family or friends at other denominations.

I know she can but if she is a member of the royal family I'm wondering how that would be excepted

[Curryong]

I think Maghan will be confirmed into the Church of England during her engagement, as Kate was.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by pooky929

I would not be surprised if Prince Harry prefers a private wedding. A destination wedding,Scotland Highlands, would be fun fun fun.

That is a very interesting suggestion. Wonder if he will. And also, the bride usually has the wedding in her hometown.
Los Angeles? That would be the modernizing beyond modernizing!

[royal rob]

I'm not too sure she will wouldn't she have to be baptized etc first or has she already done that ? I'm just thinking along the lines of my church a few sacraments along the way

[Curryong]

Meghan would have to be instructed on the Anglican Church, then baptised and confirmed I would imagine. I can remember my confirmation but my christening was too far back to remember!

[royal rob]

Well that's what I think too. But not sure it's going to happen does she believe in God ? It's interesting times ahead it's not as simple as fall in love like it is for most people.

[Somebody]

As discussed in one of the other topics, Meghan might have been baptized in the Episcopalian church (aparently her father's family is Episcopalian). If she also was confirmed she will be welcomed into the Church of England without any additional ceremony as both are part of the Anglican Community.

[MaiaMia_53]

Okay, the bookies should be taking bets I suppose as to where the venue for H&M's wedding will be: St. George's Chapel, or Westminster Abbey with BP appearance after? I'm betting WA & a BP appearance.

A Meghan/Harry wedding will definitely not take place in L.A., but they will probably visit there often since it's Meghan's hometown.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

That is a very interesting suggestion. Wonder if he will. And also, the bride usually has the wedding in her hometown.
Los Angeles? That would be the modernizing beyond modernizing!

I think we can pretty much rule out a destination wedding or Los Angeles for the reason being that when picking the venue for their wedding, they are going to want to have it somewhere where it isn't a chore for Harry's grandmother and grandfather to attend.

Scotland may be possible. If they decide on Scotland, I would be my last cream puff that it'd be while the Queen is in residence there to make it easier on her to attend.

I just don't see Harry having a wedding without his grandparents there.