News0 min ago
Royal baby marrying a catholic
Could they and still remain a 'royal'?
Answers
Oh God fantastic all the above are wrong !
It is always a pleasure to see that
For the minor Royals marrying a rock cake, theusual practice is for the rock cake to convert [historical precedent for that : Onree King of France said once: Paris s'en vaut une messe- Paris is worth aMass and he had converted from Prot to RC] OR for the minor Royal to give up the...
It is always a pleasure to see that
For the minor Royals marrying a rock cake, theusual practice is for the rock cake to convert [historical precedent for that : Onree King of France said once: Paris s'en vaut une messe- Paris is worth aMass and he had converted from Prot to RC] OR for the minor Royal to give up the...
10:47 Tue 04th Dec 2012
Has he?
Over a glass of Chablis perhaps?
Well I like the *principles* of Budhism - I'm not about to start chanting!
I think whether such a marriage happened under CofE or Catholicism might be an issue - under the Catholic rite there's a promise to bring up the children as Catholic and that would be an issue obviously.
Alternatively the whole silly mess could be scrapped and we could disestablish the CofE and then they could marry who they liked or have what religion (or none - there's a scary thought) they wanted
Over a glass of Chablis perhaps?
Well I like the *principles* of Budhism - I'm not about to start chanting!
I think whether such a marriage happened under CofE or Catholicism might be an issue - under the Catholic rite there's a promise to bring up the children as Catholic and that would be an issue obviously.
Alternatively the whole silly mess could be scrapped and we could disestablish the CofE and then they could marry who they liked or have what religion (or none - there's a scary thought) they wanted
Oh God fantastic all the above are wrong !
It is always a pleasure to see that
For the minor Royals marrying a rock cake, theusual practice is for the rock cake to convert [historical precedent for that : Onree King of France said once: Paris s'en vaut une messe- Paris is worth aMass and he had converted from Prot to RC] OR for the minor Royal to give up the slight chance of succeedng as I think the Duke of Kent did when he married Princess Michael.
It does NOT depend on whether the monarch is Supreme Governor of the C of E ( Act of Supremacy 1540 as amended)
but does depend on the Act of Settlement 1701.
which is here :
http
I thought s2 said the Prince of Wales shall not marry a Roman Catholic
but I cant presently find it. Anyway that is the statement and it doesnt say what will happen to him if he does. The sharp money is on : he doesnt remain Prince of Wales.
The late Princess of Wales not a great reader by her own admission thought the provision was - "shall not be married to a Roman Catholic" and not : 'shall not marry a RC.' and sought instruction in r c doctrine from Cardinal Hume. His eminence's response was that altho the Church of Rome was a church of sinners, they were not quite ready for Princess and she would have to wait. The rest as they say is History.
You will note the P o W is allowed in law to marry a Muslim, Hindu or sun worshipper in law if he should so wish. o r a Jew. This is the last Roman Catholic disability [=law against RC religion] but I think my co-religiionists sleep easily over that one being more occupied with world peace, starvation in Africa and so on.
I hope this helps.
PP
It is always a pleasure to see that
For the minor Royals marrying a rock cake, theusual practice is for the rock cake to convert [historical precedent for that : Onree King of France said once: Paris s'en vaut une messe- Paris is worth aMass and he had converted from Prot to RC] OR for the minor Royal to give up the slight chance of succeedng as I think the Duke of Kent did when he married Princess Michael.
It does NOT depend on whether the monarch is Supreme Governor of the C of E ( Act of Supremacy 1540 as amended)
but does depend on the Act of Settlement 1701.
which is here :
http
I thought s2 said the Prince of Wales shall not marry a Roman Catholic
but I cant presently find it. Anyway that is the statement and it doesnt say what will happen to him if he does. The sharp money is on : he doesnt remain Prince of Wales.
The late Princess of Wales not a great reader by her own admission thought the provision was - "shall not be married to a Roman Catholic" and not : 'shall not marry a RC.' and sought instruction in r c doctrine from Cardinal Hume. His eminence's response was that altho the Church of Rome was a church of sinners, they were not quite ready for Princess and she would have to wait. The rest as they say is History.
You will note the P o W is allowed in law to marry a Muslim, Hindu or sun worshipper in law if he should so wish. o r a Jew. This is the last Roman Catholic disability [=law against RC religion] but I think my co-religiionists sleep easily over that one being more occupied with world peace, starvation in Africa and so on.
I hope this helps.
PP
-- answer removed --
Wouldn't have thought it would matter unless they were fairly near the top of the tree in terms of being the heir to the throne (or heiress of course).
Yet another question, really about inheritance, is what will happen if the Duchess of Cambridge or whatever it is she is called, has twins. How will they mark the first one born to differentiate between the two? So easy to become muddled here.
Yet another question, really about inheritance, is what will happen if the Duchess of Cambridge or whatever it is she is called, has twins. How will they mark the first one born to differentiate between the two? So easy to become muddled here.
The Home Secretary having to attend Royal Births to make sure bunny rabbits and so on arent substituted.
Oh God there is a piece in the Times today about that.
James II (bad King and also an RC I regret to say) had a legitimate son which really got those Prots thinking and concentrating on whether they wanted a RC monarch in perpetuity. So the first thing is to say it was a girl and a boy was smuggled in, in a bed pan.
It is all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Pretender
Hence the need for a politician to witness and say THIS is a Royal Baby ....
The last time was in 1926 when our dear monarch was born and Joynson Hicks the Home Secretary had to go and listen to The Queen Mum groaning in labour at York House Piccadilly.
according to the Times today
The only thing was, was that the labour was obstructed/ did not progress and the result was a caesarian section - not without risk in those days. - ether, no drips no blood transfusion AND at home.....
The QM was notoriously secretive about these things and the official announcment just said:
a certain course of action was successfully followed.
I agree that the amount of detail I have about thse things may be considered unhealthy.
Oh, and another thing - first on Answerbank - Marcus Setchell the Royal Gynaecologist and surgeon accoucheur who is attending Kate, got all the prizes when he was a medical student at Barts. Bright Fellow. I mean all of them
Oh God there is a piece in the Times today about that.
James II (bad King and also an RC I regret to say) had a legitimate son which really got those Prots thinking and concentrating on whether they wanted a RC monarch in perpetuity. So the first thing is to say it was a girl and a boy was smuggled in, in a bed pan.
It is all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Pretender
Hence the need for a politician to witness and say THIS is a Royal Baby ....
The last time was in 1926 when our dear monarch was born and Joynson Hicks the Home Secretary had to go and listen to The Queen Mum groaning in labour at York House Piccadilly.
according to the Times today
The only thing was, was that the labour was obstructed/ did not progress and the result was a caesarian section - not without risk in those days. - ether, no drips no blood transfusion AND at home.....
The QM was notoriously secretive about these things and the official announcment just said:
a certain course of action was successfully followed.
I agree that the amount of detail I have about thse things may be considered unhealthy.
Oh, and another thing - first on Answerbank - Marcus Setchell the Royal Gynaecologist and surgeon accoucheur who is attending Kate, got all the prizes when he was a medical student at Barts. Bright Fellow. I mean all of them
eek yes Barmaid 17 Bruton St......
17 Bruton Street
May 02 02, 10:41 AM
Senior Moments
Just to add to Hippo's answer. She was born at 2:40 am on 21 April 1926 at 17 Bruton Street, London W1 which was the London Residence of her maternal grandparents, the Earl and Countess of Strathmore. (Brewer's British Royalty)
May 02 02, 11:17 AM
billythebrit
It is worth noting that she was there only two months. The family later moved to a building on 145 Piccadilly, later destroyed by German bombers.
Ys thank
Barmaid
it is not as poetic to say that the Home Sec had to go down and listen to the QM groaning at 17 Bruton St
but history dictates he did.
17 Bruton Street
May 02 02, 10:41 AM
Senior Moments
Just to add to Hippo's answer. She was born at 2:40 am on 21 April 1926 at 17 Bruton Street, London W1 which was the London Residence of her maternal grandparents, the Earl and Countess of Strathmore. (Brewer's British Royalty)
May 02 02, 11:17 AM
billythebrit
It is worth noting that she was there only two months. The family later moved to a building on 145 Piccadilly, later destroyed by German bombers.
Ys thank
Barmaid
it is not as poetic to say that the Home Sec had to go down and listen to the QM groaning at 17 Bruton St
but history dictates he did.
Latest Posts
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank14 mins ago
Film, Media & TV18 mins ago
Twitching & Birdwatching18 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.