Should Camilla attend the memorial service for Diana?

[BeatrixFan]

What I'm going to say now can be deleted if a mod thinks it too religious but it's specifically aimed at those basing their view of adultery on religious principle;

Adultery is indeed a sin, however, if people are going to uphold that as a reason for Camilla not attending the memorial service then they have to be extremely careful. If they are basing it on religious principle then they should remember two extremely important points. Yes, Charles and Camilla committed adultery. However, speaking from a Christian point of view, we were all born in sin, we all regularly sin and no one sin is worse or better than the other. To lie is just as much a sin as to committ murder and therefore let he who is without sin cast the first stone. That is to say, as sinners ourselves who rely on the grace of God for forgiveness of our own sins, we have no right to cast Charles and Camilla out for being adulterers.

Secondly, they publicly asked God's forgiveness for their sins and as Christians, we believe that anyone who ask's to be forgiven of their sins, are indeed forgiven of those sins. It's a fundamental principle of the Christian faith that Jesus died so that we may be forgiven our sins and be free to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. He died on the cross to atone for the sins of the world both past, present and to come.

So, those who are basing this view that as adulterers they are unfit to attend the memorial service etc etc, have to make it clear what they base that on. If it's personal principle based not on religion then I'd remind them that Diana committed adultery and therefore they are at extreme risk of sounding like hypocrites. And if it's on Christian faith and the rejection therein of adultery, then they really need to read their Bibles!

 

[sirhon11234]

Of course Camilla shouldn't be barred from attending the memorial because of the affair. The Princess did have her own affairs during the marriage. But to condone adultery is wrong. Charles,Camilla, and Diana were wrong to have their affairs but honestly would we have done differently if we were in their shoes? It takes a strong person to let their spouse have their own affairs and not have one of their own.

 

[BeatrixFan]

But to condone adultery is wrong.

But at the same time, it depends on what grounds you're basing your conviction that adultery is wrong. Don't get me wrong, it is wrong IMO but my opinion is shaped by other beliefs I hold so I think it's important that when you say adultery is wrong, you let us know why you think that. Not so we can change your mind, just so we can see.

 

[sirhon11234]

I think its wrong because it causes pain not only towards the spouse but towards the children. Personally my parent's divorce was bitter and ugly they both had their own affairs. I guess that mentality of If you can sleep with someone else I can do the same destroyed their marriage.
But the spouse who finds out that their husband/wife is cheating on them might blame themself for their partner going astray. That feeling of "am I not good enough or what did I do wrong for him/her to stop loving or wanting me anymore." Its probably the worst feeling in the world to know that the person you love is in the arms of another. Which both Camilla and Diana probably felt.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I agree with you. I effectively divorced my parents and the hurt that came from it on all sides has really driven wedges between the extended family in such a way that it's turned into a Mafia feud. And I so can empathise with you in feeling the way you do but as I said, my views on adultery are mainly based on religious belief and so I feel it's generally important that I can substantiate those beliefs so I'm not being hypocritical so I was eager for you to do the same which I'm grateful to do for doing.

I think that the problem is, sometimes we hear "They're adulterers" and we immediately think "Well, it hurt me and so I dont like adultery" or "Well it hurt me and the bible says its wrong so it is" when adultery and divorce is full of so many factors that nothing is really as black and white as we'd like it to be. If it was, it'd be so much easier to deal with situations like this.

I think with Charles, Camilla and Diana, the feelings become heightened because of who they are. For example, I cheated on someone and I didn't have bread rolls thrown at me. I was seeking the approval of my own conscience and his friends rather than the approval of a whole nation. So I empathise on all sides, I really do and that's why I know how hard it must be for a) Diana's family and friends to see Camilla there and for b) Camilla to go there.

 

[Madame Royale]

BeatrixFan...

I'm somewhat saddened yet at the same time, impressed by your post

And I agree, I think given who they are/were (two of them anyway) makes things seem all the more decisive and I guess, in all actuality, it was.

 

[Roslyn]

Charles was Diana's husband If I believe correctly sleeping with another person's spouse is wrong whether you like it or not.

You are entitled to hold that belief, but in the absence of a law making it a civil or criminal wrong for a person to have sex with a person who is married to someone else, this is a moral and/or religious issue, and I do not think it is fair to seek to impose one's moral and religious beliefs upon others who don't share them.

 

[Madame Royale]

Certainly in the greater majority of Western society

I wouldn't have thought a law needs to be enforced for the wider community to fathom the immoral nature of sleeping with anothers spouse. Your are correct in that it can often be a religious issue, but I'm inclined to recognise it as more of a communal and ethical one.

Religious interests aside, it's just a disgraceful way to behave and does effect those who are victims of adultery very badly.

Certainly a lack of compassion and respect for others, and oneself which is also very unfortunate.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

You are entitled to hold that belief, but in the absence of a law making it a civil or criminal wrong for a person to have sex with a person who is married to someone else, this is a moral and/or religious issue, and I do not think it is fair to seek to impose one's moral and religious beliefs upon others who don't share them.

Well, it is actually a human ethical issue, because the bond of marriage (for most) is more than a certificate from a church. It is, in fact, an emotional promise, and it is for that reason that adultery is so hurtful. We do not have a right to impose ethical issues on each other, but we should all strive to be the best kind of ethical beings we can be, considerate and compassionate of each other.

 

[TheTruth]

Well, it is actually a human ethical issue, because the bond of marriage (for most) is more than a certificate from a church. It is, in fact, an emotional promise, and it is for that reason that adultery is so hurtful. We do not have a right to impose ethical issues on each other, but we should all strive to be the best kind of ethical beings we can be, considerate and compassionate of each other.

I agree. If you don't have the same ethical issues than your future wife/husband, you should say it right away. Not after the wedding. In our society, adultery is considered like a bad thing, maybe the worst in a couple. If you say to your loved-one : 'Don't worry if go with other woman/man. It's my way of thinking. I hope that doesn't bother you, darling ?' , I don't think the relationship will last long, at least not in countries where there's monogamy.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I agree. If you don't have the same ethical issues than your future wife/husband, you should say it right away. Not after the wedding. In our society, adultery is considered like a bad thing, maybe the worst in a couple. If you say to your loved-one : 'Don't worry if go with other woman/man. It's my way of thinking. I hope that doesn't bother you, darling ?' , I don't think the relationship will last long, at least not in countries where there's monogamy.

Yes, very true, if there is honesty beforehand, it goes along way. If a couple make clear to each other their intentions, it makes all the difference. Some couples may be getting married for mutual convenience or something else besides love, but as long as there is a clear understanding between themselves, no one else has a right to make an ethical judgement. In the case of Diana and Charles, I think Charles thought that he could "give up" Camilla just before the marriage and then he would grow to love Diana as much (if he wasn't already on his way, I don't know) and then problems with his marriage to Diana hit so many rocks, and it was just easier to go to Camilla, whom he was already in love with! Then Diana was like, well, what about me? I just stay married and you have your mistress? Ok, so, she tried to play the same game (i.e. Hewitt, rest is history) but that didn't make her happy. She wanted her husband.

 

[TheTruth]

Yes, very true, if there is honesty beforehand, it goes along way. If a couple make clear to each other their intentions, it makes all the difference. Some couples may be getting married for mutual convenience or something else besides love, but as long as there is a clear understanding between themselves, no one else has a right to make an ethical judgement. In the case of Diana and Charles, I think Charles thought that he could "give up" Camilla just before the marriage and then he would grow to love Diana as much (if he wasn't already on his way, I don't know) and then problems with his marriage to Diana hit so many rocks, and it was just easier to go to Camilla, whom he was already in love with! Then Diana was like, well, what about me? I just stay married and you have your mistress? Ok, so, she tried to play the same game (i.e. Hewitt, rest is history) but that didn't make her happy. She wanted her husband.

True, I think the toughest part was from 1993 to 1996. In that laps of time there was : Squidgygate, Princess in Love book, homewrecker reputation (started with Will Carling, rugby player and his wife's attacks on Diana) ... When the divorce was finally pronounced, she was officialy allowed to do what she wanted with her life, leave Charles behind and finally be herself.

 

[susan alicia]

What if the question here was, "Should James Hewitt attend the Memorial Service to Diana?". As inconvenient as some find it, he obviously meant something to her at some point, shouldn't he be allowed to pay his respects? And what about her other lovers? What about Raine Spencer?

Acid Raine has a royal invitation | the Daily Mail


............Princess Diana's family have set aside past differences and invited the woman they dubbed 'Acid Raine' to this month's memorial service, I can reveal.

Raine, Countess Spencer, who was married to the Princess's father for 16 years, had a turbulent relationship with his four children after she became chatelaine of the family's Althorp estate.
But I understand she has accepted an invitation to join the Royal Family and friends of the Princess at the Guards Chapel at Wellington Barracks in London on August 31 — which marks the tenth anniversary of Diana's death.
Around 500 people have received invitations, many of which were sent by recorded delivery at the end of last week. "Raine was reconciled with Diana long before her death and she is going because she wants to remember a very spirited girl to whom she had grown close," a friend tells me. "She is very happy to be going." .......

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

True, I think the toughest part was from 1993 to 1996. In that laps of time there was : Squidgygate, Princess in Love book, homewrecker reputation (started with Will Carling, rugby player and his wife's attacks on Diana) ...

all reaching a climax with the Oliver Hoare/harrassing phone calls mess, right? The divorce was definitely a drastic turning point for Diana. You could see how she changed after it, how she seemed like something had been lifted and the door had been closed, finally. Probably combined with good medical attention (the best doctors, acupuncture, even a heart surgeon to try "mending her heart" ) and maybe some good self-help reading (and some good drugs ) Diana was coming around. It was difficult work for her, but no one can say she was not doing the work. She always tried her best based on what she knew at the time and where she was, spiritually speaking.

 

[TheTruth]

Acid Raine has a royal invitation | the Daily Mail


............Princess Diana's family have set aside past differences and invited the woman they dubbed 'Acid Raine' to this month's memorial service, I can reveal.

Raine, Countess Spencer, who was married to the Princess's father for 16 years, had a turbulent relationship with his four children after she became chatelaine of the family's Althorp estate.
But I understand she has accepted an invitation to join the Royal Family and friends of the Princess at the Guards Chapel at Wellington Barracks in London on August 31 — which marks the tenth anniversary of Diana's death.
Around 500 people have received invitations, many of which were sent by recorded delivery at the end of last week. "Raine was reconciled with Diana long before her death and she is going because she wants to remember a very spirited girl to whom she had grown close," a friend tells me. "She is very happy to be going." .......

Well that's a pretty good news ! I'm happy she's going too .

 

[Madame Royale]

It is rather nice to hear, isn't it

 

[NotAPretender]

Adultery as a crime

In point of fact, there are many states in the US in which adultery is a criminal act.

In New York, it is a misdemeanor.

Ê 255.17 Adultery.
A person is guilty of adultery when he engages in sexual intercourse
with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the other
person has a living spouse.
Adultery is a class B misdemeanor.


I'm sure a little casual research on your part will show that adultery is, indeed, a criminal act - not merely morally bankrupt and thoroughly reprehensible.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

It is excellent news about Raine going to the service. She is really, I think, Diana's only living parent. Peter Shand Kydd died several years ago, didn't he?

Also, thanks for the reminder of the NY law. It's easy to forget this point of fact.

 

[susan alicia]

I doubt whether New York enforces this law with a fine.

Anyway in western europe, in countries that very often have monarchies, most of us believe that the state should stay out of the bedrooms of its citizens.

In point of fact, there are many states in the US in which adultery is a criminal act.

In New York, it is a misdemeanor.

Ê 255.17 Adultery.
A person is guilty of adultery when he engages in sexual intercourse
with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the other
person has a living spouse.
Adultery is a class B misdemeanor.


I'm sure a little casual research on your part will show that adultery is, indeed, a criminal act - not merely morally bankrupt and thoroughly reprehensible.

 

[TheTruth]

It is excellent news about Raine going to the service. She is really, I think, Diana's only living parent. Peter Shand Kydd died several years ago, didn't he?

Yes, he died on March 23, 2006. He was 80.
Peter Shand Kydd - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Frances was 11 years younger than him although she died in 2004.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

In point of fact, there are many states in the US in which adultery is a criminal act.

In New York, it is a misdemeanor.

Ê 255.17 Adultery.
A person is guilty of adultery when he engages in sexual intercourse
with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the other
person has a living spouse.
Adultery is a class B misdemeanor.


I'm sure a little casual research on your part will show that adultery is, indeed, a criminal act - not merely morally bankrupt and thoroughly reprehensible.

And we all know that The US is the shining example for the world when it comes to law and order.... Come on, there are long lists of absurd things to be found on the net which are treated as criminal acts in the US - and I know of a lot of Europeans who decide to holiday anywhere but in the US for fear of getting into trouble there.

As for adultery: I think, too, that it's good if the state keeps out of its citizen's bedrooms.

 

[Elspeth]

In point of fact, there are many states in the US in which adultery is a criminal act.

In New York, it is a misdemeanor.

Ê 255.17 Adultery.
A person is guilty of adultery when he engages in sexual intercourse
with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the other
person has a living spouse.
Adultery is a class B misdemeanor.


I'm sure a little casual research on your part will show that adultery is, indeed, a criminal act - not merely morally bankrupt and thoroughly reprehensible.

I'm sure there are many places around the world where adultery is a criminal act, especially for the woman. However, for the sake of the discussion about Charles, Diana, and Camilla, British law is applicable, and adultery isn't a crime in Britain.

 

[Martha]

I suppose the discussion about adultery and James Hewitt is to try to justify the assistance of Camila the memorial service for Princess Diana.

However, Camila must not attend ceremony.

 

[Skydragon]

It takes a strong person to let their spouse have their own affairs and not have one of their own.

No it doesn't. If the person is a serial adulterer, divorce or separation is the answer.

Marriage does not come with a 'belongs to' sign, when you marry, you don't own your spouse and he/she doesn't own you. It is impossible to steal someone elses husband/wife, because they like you are not owned.

so, she tried to play the same game (i.e. Hewitt, rest is history) but that didn't make her happy. She wanted her husband

The majority of men that Diana became involved with were already married or had partners, it always struck me that Diana always wanted what someone else had.

Many of the people invited to the memorial service did not 'love' Diana, they knew her or worked with her.

 

[BeatrixFan]

And if we're talking vows, didn't someone promise to love, honour and obey?

 

[milla Ca]

I suppose the discussion about adultery and James Hewitt is to try to justify the assistance of Camila the memorial service for Princess Diana.

However, Camila must not attend ceremony.

There is no need to talk about James Hewitt or Diana´s other lovers to justify that Camilla will attend the service! Only one simple fact repeated again and again in this thread: Diana´s sons invited her for the service!

And to all who can´t stop talking about sin and evil adultary and being criminal of doing that...please start to read some chapters of the New Testament, you will find there the words love, forgiveness, new beginning...
And if you like to talk about Diana as an icon, maybe you should remember these words sometimes...

 

[selrahc4]

Only one simple fact repeated again and again in this thread: Diana´s sons invited her for the service!

Exactly. Instead of making this all the Duchess of Cornwall's problem, perhaps the real question underlying this thread is "Should the Princes have invited their step-mother to the service?".

 

[Skydragon]

And to all who can´t stop talking about sin and evil adultary and being criminal of doing that...please start to read some chapters of the New Testament, you will find there the words love, forgiveness, new beginning...
And if you like to talk about Diana as an icon, maybe you should remember these words sometimes...

How right you are.

 

[hornsen]

There is no need to talk about James Hewitt or Diana´s other lovers to justify that Camilla will attend the service! Only one simple fact repeated again and again in this thread: Diana´s sons invited her for the service!

And to all who can´t stop talking about sin and evil adultary and being criminal of doing that...please start to read some chapters of the New Testament, you will find there the words love, forgiveness, new beginning...
And if you like to talk about Diana as an icon, maybe you should remember these words sometimes...

One of the best postings here...

 

[Elspeth]

Exactly. Instead of making this all the Duchess of Cornwall's problem, perhaps the real question underlying this thread is "Should the Princes have invited their step-mother to the service?".

We might have received some interesting responses along the lines of why they really didn't want to but were pressured to do it (actually, haven't we already had something like that in this thread?).