Will Charles Ever Reign?

[Avareenah]

Why would Charles abdicate in favour of William? The role of king is one Charles has been training for virtually all his life. He is said to have a strong sense of entitlement about his future role.

He has given no indication that I know about that he is unwilling to take the throne after his mother's death.

 

[Elspeth]

Well, there are still Diana supporters out there who are hoping to see William follow the Queen as monarch during Charles's lifetime. Not because of anything to do with Charles's present situation, but because they think he owes it to Diana's memory or something.

 

[Iluvbertie]

My understanding is that if Charles wanted to remove himself from the line of succession it would necessitate a special Act of Parliament and the RF want go that route because it would open up the possibility of the Act no just removing Charles but removing the RF itself.


I always wonder about these people who want William to become king in Charles' lifetime as some sort of way of honouring Diana. To me one thing that both Diana and Charles always agreed on was the the young princes were brought up to love and respect both their parents and that Diana, for one, would not want William to reign in place of his father to honour her - now if Charles didn't want to do it or felt he wasn't up to the job that's different - but just because he is Diana's son isn't right. After all he is also Charles' son and appears to love his father very much. I have read somewhere, but I don't know where, that William has indicated, via the ubiquitous friends, that he won't become king while his father is alive as he loves and respects his father too much to take away his birthright.

 

[Avareenah]

Yes, there seems to be a certain group who imagine that William will wish to come to the throne as soon as possible so that he can somehow avenge his late mother but I really think this is the last thing on his mind. I'm sure his memories of his mother are precious but that he also loves his father and lives in the present, not the past and just wants to have as normal a life as possible until his turn comes, hopefully a long way into the future.

 

[Warren]

We have digressed. This thread is "Will Charles Ever Reign?"
The thread to discuss possible future titles is King Charles and Queen Camilla.

thanks.

ETA: about 2 pages of posts discussing Camilla's position when Charles becomes King have been moved to the appropriate thread.

 

[ysbel]

The monarchy cannot afford to be turned into a 24 hour 7 day a week apology to the late Princess Diana. Once one person hijacks the purpose, majesty and history of a 1000 year old institution, then that institution is for all intents and purposes washed up and irrelevant. I sincerely hope that is not the case with the British monarchy and that the monarchy has some good years left.

I would be very disappointed if Charles caved into public opinion and abdicated to William because of the hypersensitivity of some Diana fans. That action would not show him as sensitive or caring but in my opinion would show only a monumental weakness of will and enormous insensitivity to his eldest son William to hand over the reins of responsibility to William so early (and insensitivity towards his present wife Camilla to publically acknowledge she is the cause of all of this) .

Even now William seems ambivalent about inheriting the throne so I doubt if he'd appreciate theprincess' suggestion for his future career path. I'm afraid people are going to have to find some other way of respecting Diana rather than making Charles give up the throne.

 

[BeatrixFan]

All but four of my father's rather large family were killed in the Holocaust in a country where the majority didn't seem to have any problem with killing Jews by the millions, just as has been the case in Europe for centuries. The fact that the majority of Europeans thought pogroms were just part of the scenery doesn't make it acceptable.

Who said the majority would always be right morally? But what the majority want, the majority gets. And surely it has to be that way?

In post 82 you said "why fix what ain't broke?" In the context of England having an established church, the title Defender of the Faith has both historical and actual meaning, so why change it?

I don't mind either way. If that's what he wants, it's fine by me.

 

[branchg]

What about if he choose to abicate and let William be King? I know that is unlikely, but not entirely impossible!

Not going to happen. He is King when his mother dies and is likely to have a relatively short reign due to his age. William will likely have a long reign like his grandmother.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Exactly. It is entirely impossible. Charles would never do that. Why would he? It's not like a Saturday job where you can ask a friend to cover for you.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Charles will not be abdicating. He takes his current role and his future role very seriously and I can't see him walking away from that. What if when the Queen passes and Charles becomes King....William has not yet married? Would he want to abdicate in favor of someone who is not married and has no heir yet? I would think not.

 

[ysbel]

Who said the majority would always be right morally? But what the majority want, the majority gets. And surely it has to be that way?

Why surely?

 

[sirhon11234]

I just can't see the monarchy without the Queen. I don't think Charles woud be a great monarch like his mother. He is not as tough and strong like the Queen but thats just my opinion.

 

[Elspeth]

Who said the majority would always be right morally? But what the majority want, the majority gets. And surely it has to be that way?

Not if it isn't good for society in general or has short-term benefits but causes severe long-term harm. If the majority of Britons had decided in a referendum or in a debate in Parliament that they wanted Charles to remove himself from the line of succession out of respect for Diana's memory or some other Diana-related reason, I don't suppose you'd think they should be pandered to.

 

[Avareenah]

I just can't see the monarchy without the Queen. I don't think Charles woud be a great monarch like his mother. He is not as tough and strong like the Queen but thats just my opinion.

I don't think Charles has the qualities his mother has brought to the monarchy. I don't know if it's "toughness"/"strength" but I simply believe Charles is far more self-centred than his mother and far less self-disciplined, though to be fair, I believe very few of us are blessed with that quality to the degree Queen Elizabeth has been.

On the other hand, Charles, no matter how hard he tries, cannot be expected to be a clone of his mother once he succeeds the throne. He must bring his own qualities and virtues to the role and let's hope he tries to do this, rather than turn the role around to suit himself, which is what I am a little fearful of.

 

[ysbel]

I just can't see the monarchy without the Queen. I don't think Charles woud be a great monarch like his mother. He is not as tough and strong like the Queen but thats just my opinion.

The same was said of Edward VII when Queen Victoria died and he became a very beloved monarch.

 

[ysbel]

I don't think Charles has the qualities his mother has brought to the monarchy. I don't know if it's "toughness"/"strength" but I simply believe Charles is far more self-centred than his mother and far less self-disciplined, though to be fair, I believe very few of us are blessed with that quality to the degree Queen Elizabeth has been.
.

I think our whole generation is far more self-centered than the Queen's generation. I know I am more self-centered and individualistic than my grandparents were.

For that matter, I think the Queen's children and their spouses are more self-centered than the Queen and Prince Philip. Oddly enough, I think the oldest two, Charles and Anne, are probably less self-centered and more disciplined than any of the younger generation (Andrew, Edward, Sarah, Sophie, Diana)

 

[sirhon11234]

I believe Charles was self-centered when he was young. But now he is mature.

 

[love_cc]

I think Anglo-saxon culture is more likely to be an indiviual culture than Asian cutures. And the social changes of a strong individual personaility has a great influence on baby boomer and later generations. Charles is self-centred because the way he was brought up and because he is in a society which has been "Me first "for decades.

I think Charles will be a different king from his mother. He is likely to be a beloved King as well because he is a kind, gentle, caring, warm person by his heart. He cares the world, he cares the country and the people.He is proud to be British and he will do everything possible and in his power to benefit Britain and the world. I respect his long-term and deep commitment.

 

[branchg]

Being the Sovereign is a hereditary duty and not a personality contest or moral question. Britain has survived kings and queens far worse than anything Charles III could be.

The monarchy is above all that or you might as well have a republic.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I think Anglo-saxon culture is more likely to be an indiviual culture than Asian cutures. And the social changes of a strong individual personaility has a great influence on baby boomer and later generations. Charles is self-centred because the way he was brought up and because he is in a society which has been "Me first "for decades.

I think Charles will be a different king from his mother. He is likely to be a beloved King as well because he is a kind, gentle, caring, warm person by his heart. He cares the world, he cares the country and the people.He is proud to be British and he will do everything possible and in his power to benefit Britain and the world. I respect his long-term and deep commitment.

Perfectly stated. Wish I had more to add to it than that, but this sums up anything I was going to say.

 

[sashajones]

Who really cares if Charles gets to rule or not? It does not look like mommy wants to get off the throne!

 

[branchg]

We don't know what the future will hold. Charles could predecease his mother and William could become King. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[ysbel]

Who really cares if Charles gets to rule or not? It does not look like mommy wants to get off the throne!

I'm assuming the 'mommy' you are referring to is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

Actually what Her Majesty wants or doesn't want doesn't really matter much either. She once said that she would rather live a quiet country life and she didn't get her wish. The throne is hereditary from sovereign to eldest son (or daughter if there is no son) and tradition is that the sovereign stays on the throne till death.

This is the way its always been and pretty much will always be. Whatever 'mommy' wants, 'mommy' will do her duty and so will 'sonny' when he gets on the throne, and so will grand'sonny'.

 

[Roslyn]

Who really cares if Charles gets to rule or not? It does not look like mommy wants to get off the throne!

I care.

The man's whole life has been geared towards him becoming King one day. Ever since he was a child he has been groomed for it and his education and career and matrimonial choices were governed by the expectation he would be King.

I think he'll be a very good King. I believe he is a decent man, with a strong sense of duty and compassion, and a sense of humour. I like him, and I think he deserves to be king, to finally have the chance to fulfil the role for which he has been trained his whole life - to take his natural place as successor to his mother the Queen when her reign reaches its natural conclusion in due course.

 

[Queen Marie]

Well said, Roslyn. I agree 100%.



And it's "Mummy"!

 

[milla Ca]

I think the poeple who don´t believe that Charles will be the next King are out of reality. He is born to be King and he will be!
And he will be a great King! The Queen is wonderful, i know, and he will do it in another way. But it does not mean that this way will be not a good one for the future times! Charles is very well prepared, he has a very good character....and he has a wonderful wife by his side!
I´m looking forward to see him reign!

 

[Skydragon]

Catholic monarch ban 'should end'

The ban on Catholics becoming the British monarch should be abolished, according to the incoming Church of Ireland primate

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6275011.stm

"Bishop Harper told the Irish Times that the disestablishment of the Church of England - separating church and state - was something it would "not only get over, but would be the better for it".

 

[Sister Morphine]

Catholic monarch ban 'should end'

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I think in this day and age it is silly to not allow a Catholic to be in the line of succession or to actually sit on the throne. People can still be Anglican, they can still follow the faith they've followed their whole lives without it being tied to the state.

 

[zanychick3000]

I hope Charles gets his chance, despite all what has happend in his personal life throughout the years, he has actually done some good for the UK, look at his many foundations and charity work.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I think dropping the Catholic ban would be a bit of a betrayal to those who died to make sure Catholics didn't have the right to sit on the throne. And surely it would cause problems with the Church of England and lead to it's breakdown or at least it would mean that the monarch lost their place as Defender of the Faith. I'm all for multi-faith tolerance but I just think this opens up an unwelcome can of worms.