Christening of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor: July 6th, 2019

[Somebody]

I do kind of get the point of the HRH debate. Again showing that Archie is not the same as the Cambridge kids therefore the expectations of him shouldn't be either. He is a private citizen for a reason. HMQ could have easily made him HRH but she did not. In fact he has no titles at all.

I don't see anyone arguing for the same treatment as the Cambridge children (but I may have missed it) but to be treated the comparable to Edward's children (the last children of a younger son of the monarch).

We clearly shouldn't expect the same treatment as for the Cambridge children; they will (in normal circumstances) one day be children of the monarch - and they are already kind of treated as such; just like William and Harry are treated differently from Louise and James (Archie will be a grandson of the monarch and more comparable to their position).

 

[Mbruno]

So are we to infer from the DM article that the godparents flew via helicopter into the castle to avoid being seen by the reporters ?

The extravaganza just adds up.

 

[jacqui24]

So are we to infer from the DM article that the godparents flew via helicopter into the castle to avoid being seen by the reporters ?

The extravaganza just adds up.

Which article? The one I read said Charles flew in by helicopter. Let’s not go overboard just to criticize the couple.

 

[alvinking]

for all we know, they could be there since yesterday. They could have slept at windsor and/or Frogmore. Space is not lacking there

 

[Somebody]

But who says they have to go either model? Their situation isn’t exactly like either. So in that, they have discretion depending on the situation. And obviously, the Queen supports it as her aides have already said she won’t be releasing the record.

I agree they clearly have the discretion to do as they please. However, that comes of as self-serving and not so much in tune with royal tradition. Apparently, they are ok with that image (imo they are smart enough to know the effect of what they are doing; if they aren't aware, their aides should help them out) - and I am sure they don't mind us discussing their latest illogical move.

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

So are we to infer from the DM article that the godparents flew via helicopter into the castle to avoid being seen by the reporters ?

The extravaganza just adds up.

Where did you get that info? The article clearly states that Charles arrived by helicopter, not godparents since we don't know who those are.

 

[Mbruno]

Which article? The one I read said Charles flew in by helicopter. Let’s not go overboard just to criticize the couple.

The article says Charles flew in by helicopter “ with other guests” , doesn’t it ? That is why I asked if we could “ infer” from that line that the godparents flew in with him, which is a plausible assumption.

 

[princess carmen]

The fail again including the cost of their home with the christening one thing has nothing to do with the other.Since the public paid for the work on the home they have a right to know who the god parent's are and see pictures immediately.

There are people out in Windsor celebrating so it is not everyone who is upset with the event being private which they always are.

 

[princess carmen]

That is just it the inferring is how rumors and untruths get started. The most important thing is little Archie's christening. I hope it went well and everyone there enjoys the day.

 

[jacqui24]

The article says Charles flew in by helicopter “ with other guests” , doesn’t it ? That is why I asked if we could “ infer” from that line that the godparents flew in with him, which is a plausible assumption.

Where does it say that? I’m reading this

It is believed Prince Charles and Camilla were among some of the first of the 25 guests to arrive, and landed in the grounds of the castle having flown via helicopter this morning.

And unless we can see that there are other guests that are friends of the couple with Charles, which we can’t, the godparents have nothing to do with how Charles came to the christening.

 

[ACO]

Yes. Totally. The guest rode in with Charles. Imagine the conversation.

Chris Ship thinks the little Cambridges attended as well. It not long now until the pictures are released.

 

[jacqui24]

I agree they clearly have the discretion to do as they please. However, that comes of as self-serving and not so much in tune with royal tradition. Apparently, they are ok with that image (imo they are smart enough to know the effect of what they are doing; if they aren't aware, their aides should help them out) - and I am sure they don't mind us discussing their latest illogical move.

If by self-serving, you mean making decisions on how to raise a baby that is generating a lot of interest, but have no role in the monarchy, then I have no problem with it. I’m not sure what is so illogical about protecting private citizens’ identities as they wish. The only illogical thing is the entitlement by people to know.

 

[crm2317]

Where are they going to fit everyone? The picture in an article posted previously shows the chapel and it is tiny! How on earth will they fit the family, godparents and choir in?

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

So according to BP, photos taken by Chris Allerton should be released around sometime around 3pm today. So soon, maybe 2-3 more hours.

 

[Denville]

I predict that Archie will have a traditional Christening and that we will see photographs of the occasion, including the Godparents.
There is no reason to keep the Godparents under wraps - except to create ill will.
I suspect that they will be announced after the event.

So why all the claims that they are not going to announce he names of the godparents? or that the christening is to be totally private and the implication being that tehre wont be any photos released

 

[Somebody]

If by self-serving, you mean making decisions on how to raise a baby that is generating a lot of interest, but have no role in the monarchy, then I have no problem with it. I’m not sure what is so illogical about protecting private citizens’ identities as they wish. The only illogical thing is the entitlement by people to know.

I am sure you understood I referred to various decisions made by the couple; this is just one of them.

And you are free to blame 'us' for being entitled when we only expect them to follow some basic royal traditions as Marengo explained very well in his post. Clearly, you think they are exempt for doing so. Is that because you don't really care about royal traditions in general? Or are their certain traditions that you think they should uphold?

 

[Curryong]

^^ There has never been any implication that no photographs would be released. It was announced that photos will be taken in the Green Drawing Room after the ceremony and will be released later. Maybe in about three hours. And all christenings in the BRF are private.

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

So why all the claims that they are not going to announce he names of the godparents? or that the christening is to be totally private and the implication being that tehre wont be any photos released

The announcement from Buckingham Palace states that in keeping with the wishes of the godparents, their names will remain private. It also stated that photos will be released after the christening.

The names of the godparents will be noted for historic record, and for right now, it's not for public consumption or knowledge. I think once the furore over everything Harry and Meghan dies down, I think some historian will be granted access to it and we will find out. However, right now, there is just too much animosity for H&M in the press for any of their private friends to want to endure what is sure to be a detailed perusal of their lives splashed all across U.K tabloids.

 

[Somebody]

So why all the claims that they are not going to announce he names of the godparents? or that the christening is to be totally private and the implication being that tehre wont be any photos released

The statement from the court was clear on that pictures will be released after the christening. It was the same announcement that indicated that the christening would take place today and the names of godparents would not be released.

 

[jacqui24]

I am sure you understood I referred to various decisions made by the couple; this is just one of them.

And you are free to blame 'us' for being entitled when we only expect them to follow some basic royal traditions as Marengo explained very well in his post. Clearly, you think they are exempt for doing so. Is that because you don't really care about royal traditions in general? Or are their certain traditions that you think they should uphold?

My view on tradition doesn’t matter and isn’t up for discussion here.

And yes, I’m aware it’s multiple decisions, as I pointed out to decisions regarding how being up a baby that has appeal, but without a role in the monarchy. Frankly, I find the general conversation about expectations placed on non working royals to be odd. They are expected to find their own way, yet people still expect things from them. Odd.

Meghan and Harry have official roles, and there are expectation they announce major life events in their life and give certain access. But no one is entitled to Archie. If they want it, they should make clear he’s expected to work for the monarchy and have HRH title and all the things that come with it. Otherwise, he is allowed freedom from all of that.

 

[Somebody]

The names of the godparents will be noted for historic record, and for right now, it's not for public consumption or knowledge. I think once the furore over everything Harry and Meghan dies down, I think some historian will be granted access to it and we will find out. However, right now, there is just too much animosity for H&M in the press for any of their private friends to want to endure what is sure to be a detailed perusal of their lives splashed all across U.K tabloids.

I'd say the names of the godparents are recorded in accordance with church requirements. I hope that one day access will indeed be granted to something that should be publicly available (although it's interesting that no one in the press ever thought to request the godparents of Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena or grandchildren of the Kents and Gloucesters) - however, as you expect it to become available: what's the timeframe you are thinking about?

 

[ACO]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1147482758190632961

Harry’s old nanny Tiggy was a guest as well.

 

[jacqui24]

I'd say the names of the godparents are recorded in accordance with church requirements. I hope that one day access will indeed be granted to something that should be publicly available (although it's interesting that no one in the press ever thought to request the godparents of Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena or grandchildren of the Kents and Gloucesters) - however, as you expect it to become available: what's the timeframe you are thinking about?

Given it is a royal peculiar, it is in accordance with church requirement. As it reports to no one but the monarch. As with everything else in the royal archive, it’ll be made available when there is a need for it to be available from a historic record point of view.

 

[Mbruno]

Which article? The one I read said Charles flew in by helicopter. Let’s not go overboard just to criticize the couple.

You are right, sorry. I must have misread it while skimming over the article.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1147482758190632961

Harry’s old nanny Tiggy was a guest as well.

Possibly a godmother? I’m sure she’ll be asked that question.

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

I'd say the names of the godparents are recorded in accordance with church requirements. I hope that one day access will indeed be granted to something that should be publicly available (although it's interesting that no one in the press ever thought to request the godparents of Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena or grandchildren of the Kents and Gloucesters) - however, as you expect it to become available: what's the timeframe you are thinking about?

My timeframe would be a few years. I'm thinking of a royal historian who would do a documentary of some type. In a few years, the "hype" over H&M would have hopefully died down and people would be more focused on their work for the Crown rather than who their son's godparents are. Harry and Meghan share their public life with the world, but they don't have to share their personal which includes their close friends who want to remain out of the spotlight. We get some updates about Archie because his future role in the monarchy is uncertain at this point ( he can either be a full time working royal in the future or a completely private citizen) and I think that H&M are leaving that decision up to him to make. In the mean time, he's just Archie, a 2 month old who has been christened today and welcomed into the church family.

 

[jacqui24]

Well, I can’t wait to see pictures.

Btw, am I the only surprised there hasn’t been a fit issue with the gown yet with all the babies?

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

Well, I can’t wait to see pictures.

Btw, am I the only surprised there hasn’t been a fit issue with the gown yet with all the babies?

Me too. Looking forward to the pictures. Regarding the fit, the dress maker probably made it to fit up to a certain weight for babies. Was Lena christened in the same gown? If she was, then it's a possibility it's made to fit babies from a few months up to 48 months. Just a guess.

 

[Mbruno]

The announcement from Buckingham Palace states that in keeping with the wishes of the godparents, their names will remain private. It also stated that photos will be released after the christening.

The names of the godparents will be noted for historic record, and for right now, it's not for public consumption or knowledge. I think once the furore over everything Harry and Meghan dies down, I think some historian will be granted access to it and we will find out. However, right now, there is just too much animosity for H&M in the press for any of their private friends to want to endure what is sure to be a detailed perusal of their lives splashed all across U.K tabloids.

So,if someone makes a request to see the baptism certificate under the Parochial Registers and Records Measure and the Palace claims they are private, how will the RF defend itself from the accusation of flouting the law ? Church lawyers have already said royal peculiars are not exempt.

I trust you realize that is an unnecessary controversy that could be easily avoided . Besides , it is actually putting all the guests in jeopardy as far as their privacy is concerned. Harry’s nanny was just seen arriving the ceremony. Of course she will be asked now if she was a godmother, even if she isn’t. Nobody from the press would harass her on the other hand if the identity of the godparents were known.

 

[Somebody]

My timeframe would be a few years. I'm thinking of a royal historian who would do a documentary of some type. In a few years, the "hype" over H&M would have hopefully died down and people would be more focused on their work for the Crown rather than who their son's godparents are. Harry and Meghan share their public life with the world, but they don't have to share their personal which includes their close friends who want to remain out of the spotlight. We get some updates about Archie because his future role in the monarchy is uncertain at this point ( he can either be a full time working royal in the future or a completely private citizen) and I think that H&M are leaving that decision up to him to make. In the mean time, he's just Archie, a 2 month old who has been christened today and welcomed into the church family.

I don't think it's up to Archie to decide whether he wants to be a full-time working royal. That's up to the monarch of that time (and most likely it's already clear what wille be expected of him - however, if a tragedy were to strike that decision could be altered). He might be able to refuse to become one if that would be requested (which I don't think will happen based on the numbers that I calculated previously) but he can't require to become one just because he would want to.

It has been said that Andrew would like his daughters to be full-time royals (and they indeed seem to enjoy doing royal-charity type work, so that could very well be the case) but they aren't because the current and/or future monarch don't want them to.