Was HM The Queen validly baptized?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hoosier-Daddy said:
For one I think it’s incredibly odd to start a thread about some gossip that a non catholic figure head was not baptized properly.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t gossip, or at least it wasn’t meant that way. I thought I recalled reading this once upon a time, my quest to verify this on Google came to naught, so I posted it here wondering if anyone could corroborate this. Evidently it wasn’t true.

Then a little bit of thread drift crept in. That is fine, sometimes ideas lead to other ideas, that’s how we learn. No harm, no foul.
 
It’s not a popular stance in the United States, for obvious reasons. The “party line” — and this is a huge simplification — is that we rightly declared our independence from an evil king under whom we were not “free”, we more or less invented “freedom” (at least for some people), and we created the best country in the world.

Don’t get me wrong. In many ways, I think you can say that the United States is the best country in the world. In many ways, it is not. The treatment of blacks until the 1960s was evil and shameful. The right to abortion and gay marriage have become law. And so on. I’ll stop there. No use to allow the thread to drift any further than it already has.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
It’s not a popular stance in the United States, for obvious reasons. The “party line” — and this is a huge simplification — is that we rightly declared our independence from an evil king under whom we were not “free”, we more or less invented “freedom” (at least for some people), and we created the best country in the world.

Don’t get me wrong. In many ways, I think you can say that the United States is the best country in the world. In many ways, it is not. The treatment of blacks until the 1960s was evil and shameful. The right to abortion and gay marriage have become law. And so on. I’ll stop there. No use to allow the thread to drift any further than it already has.
Click to expand...
The Magna Carta is held in high esteem for pretty much the same reasons.

It is quite possible that it was the Magna Carta that made the US Constitution a teneable experiment–that is, the United States survived because it was born out of a colony of English subjects who were accustomed to believing that “men of the land-owning class” at least had rights and duties in the realm of government. (Remember: the US Constitution did NOT initially grant suffrage to everyone! That was a gradual development…)

Our subject, Queen Elizabeth II, is a constitutional monarch, not an absolute monarch, which is why she is a monarch at all. There are no absolute hereditary monarchies left in Europe. Those that exist in the world are either in the Middle East or are small countries.

But yes, I haven’t turned up any reason to believe that Archbishop Lang changed the baptismal rite when she was christened. I think he peformed the rite alone, that’s it, that’s all.
 
Last edited:
GabrielZacarias said:
I have heard actually of a british prince “baptized” this way. Although I don’t know if it is true, I do know it would be invalid.
Click to expand...
This is hearsay. It’s no better than gossip. It’s much better, and far safer, to deal with facts. Can you post a source? We could then look at it and evaluate it. Otherwise, this is how rumours start and they often have uncharitable outcomes.
 
PetraG said:
There are no absolute hereditary monarchies left in Europe.
Click to expand...
Incredibly, there is still one. You may not have heard of it, quite understandably. It’s a little principality that nestles between Austria and Switzerland in the Alps called Liechtenstein. Its ruling prince wanted more absolute powers and said if he didn’t get them his family would up and leave Liechtenstein and go and live in Austria. It was put to a referendum and his subjects voted in favour of him having the greater powers he wanted. So, there is an absolute monarchy left in Europe and it gained its absolute quite recently.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
I would certainly hope that the Holy See learned something from that little fiasco. (“We lost England over that one, and look what happened — let’s not make a mistake like that again!”)
Click to expand...
Somewhere I’ve read that basically Church valued Truth more than Henry and England. Really sad outcome was when France and HRE weren’t able to do anything about Henry simply because they were too scared of other side betraying them… Catholic British Empire would be so cool.
 
As a side issue, members might be interested to see the Archbishop of Canterbury discussing the significance of the baptism of Prince George.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top