Charles & Camilla

[aimee]

walstan:

Dear, dear Aimee, you forget, the world is divided into two halves…Britain, and her colonies.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_21.gif

not to compare Français

 

[walstan]

Libero:

Ooooh, this is something we discussed in my history class, soldiers of the armed forces make a pledge to serve the queen, however they are paid by the government. Before using the forces the primeminister is supposed to consult the monarch, and they decide if the primeminister can. My teacher said that the monarch would virtually never object, as this could even lead to something as serious as the scraping of the monarchy. I think the only thing that the monarch would do in objecting is affect the troops themselves, they may get all patriotic and choose to listen to HRH …
Who would you side with, the person you swore to serve, or the person who pays you?

I think your teacher needs to read up on what a constitutional monarchy actually is before pronouncing judgement.

 

[Della]

Philip, on the other hand, has often said unfortunately ill-advised things. As I have said before, Charles seems certainly to have taken after his father much more so than his mother. For me, Charles showed his colours long before Diana came on the scene. At his investiture as the Duke of Wales, worries about him started to emerge.

The Queen too had troubles with her marriage. But we didn’t hear her bring out the violins and weep the crocodile tears. Nor did we see her play the blame-game. She has a discretion, a nobility, a grasp of the big picture which I believe elude Charles.

I agree! HRH told Charles in the middle of his adultery and troubles with Diana that they’d better straighten out the whole thing or they might be seeing the end of the monarchy. She told them she didn’t want to go down in history as “Elizabeth the Last!”

I do hope William shows more sense than his father, especially since he may inherit the throne after Elizabeth for the simple reason that she may outlive Charles. Her mother lived to be 101, after all, so there’s a good chance it will be William, not Charles who will be the next King of England. We’ll just have to wait and see about that, though, won’t we?

 

[MikeWM]

Della:

I do hope William shows more sense than his father, especially since he may inherit the throne after Elizabeth for the simple reason that she may outlive Charles. Her mother lived to be 101, after all, so there’s a good chance it will be William, not Charles who will be the next King of England. We’ll just have to wait and see about that, though, won’t we?

Indeed. I don’t understand the people who want the monarchy to ‘skip a generation’ and pass over Charles to William, they seem to have missed the point of a hereditary monarchy. Either we have one or we don’t! Of course the scenario you describe isn’t that.

Mike

 

[BLB_Oregon]

walstan:

Mike, she does have the power to disolve parliament, remember, she did exactly this a few years ago with the Australians by using the Royal Perogative. Not a common move by any stretch of the imagination but, constitutionally possible. Again it’s the denial of power system, she can’t overide parliament but she can disolve it and force a general election.

And yet, were she to do so foolishly, her position might be the first thing the new parliament sought to eliminate.

Still, it sounds as if the Queen certainly has more pull than, say, a former President of the United States. Even that is nothing to sneeze at, if the person plays their cards right. From a political standpoint, Charles would do well to learn this game from his mother. She knows the game and what it takes to play it… the rounds before you gain the Crown are not freebies.

In any case, if HRH gives him that much leash, the Prince is in a position to make his case to the President. What the President decides to do with that or whether he puts the Prince in a position to say anything to him directly is political… that is, it has a bearing on US-UK relations. Like it or not, Prince Charles is not just any Briton and cannot be treated as such. Like it or not, that also means that the sentiment of US voters on his first marriage is going to indirectly enter into the equation of the British monarchy. As it is a monarchy on the brink, these little things have to be taken into consideration by the Crown.

 

[MikeWM]

BLB_Oregon:

As it is a monarchy on the brink, these little things have to be taken into consideration by the Crown.

I’m not sure it is on the brink, at least not in the UK, at least not anymore. 10 years ago perhaps, but now the Republican movement seems to have lost the drive to care as much.

Mike

 

[Libero]

I think your teacher needs to read up on what a constitutional monarchy actually is before pronouncing judgement.

Please let edit my post here, the words I would now choose to use are: This could lead to a significant change to what authority the Queen has, and how she can choose to assert it.

I can assure you that my history teacher is extremely competent, and definetley knows about the constiutional monarchy. This conversation happened over a year ago, thus I cannot remember the exact words.

Either way, to support my previous post, I have found this about constiutional monarchies:

In most constitutional monarchies today, the monarchy exists only at the pleasure of the elected parliament. In many cases, a simple majority vote in parliament is considered sufficient to abolish the monarchy and replace it with some form of republican alternative. With the exception of post-war Italy, no modern, democratic constitutional monarchy has voted to abolish itself. Most have ended as a result of complications following the aftermath of war or invasion (such as Austria or Germany) or because of a violent anti-monarchial revolution (such as in Russia or Greece).

 

[MikeWM]

Libero:

Either way, to support my previous post, I have found this about constiutional monarchies:

Britain’s situation is far more complex though, as the Queen isn’t just the Queen of the UK. She is also Queen of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, 12 other smaller countries, and also head of the established Church. The Monarchy is tightly tied into the whole of our ‘unwritten constitution’.

Mike

 

[aimee]

MikeWM:

Britain’s situation is far more complex though, as the Queen isn’t just the Queen of the UK. She is also Queen of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, 12 other smaller countries, and also head of the established Church. The Monarchy is tightly tied into the whole of our ‘unwritten constitution’.

Mike

Here here…you fellows are off subject…

I feel a bit sorry for Prince Charles myself…he should have a Femme française

 

[Eileen_T]

walstan:

He also said we should learn forgiveness and not to judge.

I am guessing that you are referring to my comment about adultery. We are able to judge actions, not people, because only God knows what is in another person’s heart.

“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector." Matt 18:15-17

Before anyone points out that it refers to one individual sinning against another individual, I would like to point out that sin disrupts an individual’s relationship with the Body of Christ as well as with God. As the Body of Christ (the Church) we are called to counsel the doubtful, instruct the ignorant and rebuke sinners as spiritual works of mercy.

Calling one to repentance and change, and praying for the salvation of souls is not judgment or condemnation.

 

[MikeWM]

aimee:

Here here…you fellows are off subject…

I think we’ve been mostly off subject for 70 posts or so. I assume because this has been a friendly chatty thread that we’ve all not worried about it as much as on more contentious issues.

Still - I don’t seem to have weighed in on C&C so…

They seem happy together. The marriage between Charles and Diana may have seemed a ‘fairytale’ but it was all an pre-organised mess. I think they probably should have got together in the first place, if they are happy, I’m happy for them.

Mike

 

[estesbob]

MikeWM:

I
They seem happy together. The marriage between Charles and Diana may have seemed a ‘fairytale’ but it was all an pre-organised mess. I think they probably should have got together in the first place, if they are happy, I’m happy for them.

Mike

Agreed!

 

[aimee]

At least Prince Charles waited a acceptable time after Diana’s death before he went public and eventually married Madame Camilla. Looking back Diana had moved on and accepted what has happened.

So I’ll say I’m in agreement with Mike

I am a big Diana fan and have collected all types of memorabilia …from a porcelain doll to first day cover stamps of Charles and Diana’s wedding…It felt like she was Americas Princess as well…very sad loss…

 

[Ani_Ibi]

aimee:

I feel a bit sorry for Prince Charles myself…he should have a Femme française

Mais biensur! Madame Defarge, peut-etre?

 

[Libero]

Hey Mike (and any others…) there is a program on about Diana and one of her rare interviews on tonight on the BBC.

 

[MikeWM]

Libero:

Hey Mike (and any others…) there is a program on about Diana and one of her rare interviews on tonight on the BBC.

Yeah - it’s a repeat of the Bashir interview. Apparently it has been 10 years. I was still at school then (well, sixth-form).

Mike

 

[Steph700]

MikeWM:

I was still at school then (well, sixth-form).

Mike

Would you like to explain what that is? Sixth-form? Sixth grade?

 

[estesbob]

aimee:

At least Prince Charles waited a acceptable time after Diana’s death before he went public and eventually married Madame Camilla. Looking back Diana had moved on and accepted what has happened.

So I’ll say I’m in agreement with Mike

I am a big Diana fan and have collected all types of memorabilia …from a porcelain doll to first day cover stamps of Charles and Diana’s wedding…It felt like she was Americas Princess as well…very sad loss…

I never did buy into all the hullabaloo aboput Diana. Regardless of how we try to cannoinize her you have a women who was unfaithful to her Husband on numerous occasions and was shacked up with a man not her husband at the time of her death. Not a very good role model and a terrible example to her children.

I, BTW, feel the same way about Jackie Kennedy . Another woman who lived an immoral life(she likewise was shacked up with a man not her husband at the time of her death) and yet was lionized by many.

 

[MikeWM]

Steph700:

Would you like to explain what that is? Sixth-form? Sixth grade?

Tertiary education, 16-18 years.

Years 12 and 13 in the new British lingo (I recall going from ‘year 2’ to ‘year 9’ when I was 13

In the US, 11th and 12th grade.

Mike

 

[Eileen_T]

estesbob:

I never did buy into all the hullabaloo aboput Diana. Regardless of how we try to cannoinize her you have a women who was unfaithful to her Husband on numerous occasions and was shacked up with a man not her husband at the time of her death. Not a very good role model and a terrible example to her children.

I, BTW, feel the same way about Jackie Kennedy . Another woman who lived an immoral life(she likewise was shacked up with a man not her husband at the time of her death) and yet was lionized by many.

Totally agree. When she died I remember thinking she would be cannonized by popular opinion before Blessed Mother Theresa.

I don’t buy magazines now because they are mostly just gossip about prominent people and celebrities who are cheating on each other. I find it distasteful. We may be able to feel pity for people in difficult circumstances but we can never make excuses for sin.