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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
these two love the attention don't they? if they really wished to keep private, making such drama of every single ocasion is actually having the opposite effect. make the baptism public (like W&K), make the godparents know, release a few pictures and in two days things go back to normal again. make a fuss (as they are doing) and you get criticism, drama, and spotlight (wait, i thought they wanted to keep private?!)

if you asked me, i think they want everything but privacy, harry perhaps because of complex of being number two in line (further down since the arrival of W&K's kids) and meghan has always seeked the spotlight and got it via marriage (let's face it, no one aside from suits fans knew who she was beforehand).

i think this is all getting a bit much. they did not worry about privacy when they had a grand wedding in windsor or considered their royal role when UK's taxpayers paid for their new house upgrade.

marrying into the RF means you get the positives of living a privileged lifestyle, but you need to play game and offer something in return. someone who always lived in the RF and someone who consciously married into it should know this well.

i am honestly surprised no one is stepping up to stop all this nonsense - the queen, charles??? also, let's not talk about the poor job that their PR and comms teams do. piss poor since the birth of archie.

these two have put up more drama in the year since they married than W&K have in 8 years.


------

the BBC's article on today's christening:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48891808

even if they are the most formal of UK media, even they are putting up some snarky remarks on the subject:

'Coming so swiftly after the revelation that almost £2.5m of tax payers money was spent renovating a property for harry and Meghan - it has raised questions about visibility.

The previous understandings about public access to royal events appear to have been abandoned by a couple determined to do things their own way.'
 
Last edited:
carlota said:
these two love the attention don't they? if they really wished to keep private, making such drama of every single ocasion is actually having the opposite effect. make the baptism public (like W&K), make the godparents know, release a few pictures and in two days things go back to normal again. make a fuss (as they are doing) and you get criticism, drama, and spotlight (wait, i thought they wanted to keep private?!)

if you asked me, i think they want everything but privacy, harry perhaps because of complex of being number two in line (further down since the arrival of W&K's kids) and meghan has always seeked the spotlight and got it via marriage (let's face it, no one aside from suits fans knew who she was beforehand).

i think this is all getting a bit much. they did not worry about privacy when they had a grand wedding in windsor or considered their royal role when UK's taxpayers paid for their new house upgrade.

marrying into the RF means you get the positives of living a privileged lifestyle, but you need to play game and offer something in return. someone who always lived in the RF and someone who consciously married into it should know this well.

i am honestly surprised no one is stepping up to stop all this nonsense - the queen, charles???

also, let's not talk about the poor job that their PR and comms teams do. piss poor since the birth of archie.
Click to expand...



This is everything i’ve wanted to say since reading this thread. Agree with it all!
 
Harry & Meghan "creating a drama" would be deciding not to baptise Archie at all or announcing that the Godparents were all drag queens. It's not H&M who are whipping up a hissy fit about nothing.
 
The poll done by Survation for the DM and posted here earlier has some interesting results IMO.

Do the Sussexes have the right to keep Godparents names secret?

Yes 35%
No 22%
Neither/don't know 43%

Are Harry and Meghan entitled to ban TV cameras from the Christening?
Yes 47%
No 22%
Neither/Don't know 31%

So, although the British media, especially the tabloids, are up in arms, and happy to wrap the Sussexes hard over the knuckles, along with some posters in Royal forums, it appears that the great British public that participated in this survey aren't quite so bothered. Indeed, this shows a mildly favourable view.
 
It makes for amusing reading, all this about attention seeking and needless drama and losing goodwill given the results of the poll.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carlota said:
these two love the attention don't they? if they really wished to keep private, making such drama of every single ocasion is actually having the opposite effect. make the baptism public (like W&K), make the godparents know, release a few pictures and in two days things go back to normal again. make a fuss (as they are doing) and you get criticism, drama, and spotlight (wait, i thought they wanted to keep private?!)

if you asked me, i think they want everything but privacy, harry perhaps because of complex of being number two in line (further down since the arrival of W&K's kids) and meghan has always seeked the spotlight and got it via marriage (let's face it, no one aside from suits fans knew who she was beforehand).

i think this is all getting a bit much. they did not worry about privacy when they had a grand wedding in windsor or considered their royal role when UK's taxpayers paid for their new house upgrade.

marrying into the RF means you get the positives of living a privileged lifestyle, but you need to play game and offer something in return. someone who always lived in the RF and someone who consciously married into it should know this well.

i am honestly surprised no one is stepping up to stop all this nonsense - the queen, charles??? also, let's not talk about the poor job that their PR and comms teams do. piss poor since the birth of archie.

these two have put up more drama in the year since they married than W&K have in 8 years.
Click to expand...


You seem to have no understanding of the life Harry and Maghan live. While it is true their doings make headlines and boohoo, this doesn't happen to you once you don't read the papers. And we heard that they don't. While making the christening public they would have to put up their public masks and play out their public personas and this way, they are just the private Harry and Meghan who let their son christen. As it should be, IMHO. The taxpayer does not pay for them, just for their being part of the Royal family (housing, protection). So why should they open up their life to the public more than they do? I can completely understand this!
 
I hope they have a beautiful, serene and memorable Service and each person attending feels the depth and joy of the occasion. As for me? I can't wait to see the photos they release.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I also can't wait to see the official photos, the position of the grandparents, etc. The clothes hound in me is also excited to see what Meghan will wear today.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
it is a clear testament of the interest they have been generating.
Click to expand...

Clashes of opinion are always 'of interest'...
 
Originally Posted by Frelinghighness: And all of this, and the labor announcement has really turned my opinion and interest in them
Click to expand...

muriel said:
And you are not the only one! ?
Click to expand...

There is a saying- "you can't please all the people all the time". At the end of the day they are a family and Archie's parents first and need to make decisions in the best interest of them, everything else is second even if some don't like it.

I hope that the Sussex family has a wonderful time with family and friends as they officially bring Archie into the house of God.
 
I have not commented often on the couple before, preferring to give the couple the benefit of doubt. Some missteps were to be forgiven as the press attention can be difficult to navigate. In some cases I found the criticism out of proportion or even mean spirited. But this decision plus the decision not to enclose the location of birth of their son seems very odd and a lack of respect for their public and for the institution of the monarchy.

The monarchy survives by the grace of the UK public. They are expected to line the streets at public events, waving flags etc. They rejoice with the family in moments of joy, they mourn with them in times of sorrow. They also ultimately fund the very privileged lifestyle and perks that members of the family get.

In return the family has shown the decency to allow the public some access to their private lives. Nobody is asking them to make their lives a reality soap. But releasing some rather basic details seem to be a matter of respect. Not releasing the location of birth, not releasing the godparents… I do not see the point of it.

That the couple wants to protect their private lives is their good right. But one could argue that highly visible 'glamour' occasions such as the lavish baby shower or even attending a match at Wimbledon with friends will do more to sustain the level of attention with the couple than disclosing fairly basic information such as the names of godparents or the location of birth.

This instagramification of the RF is a path that I do not think is fruitful. They are not normal celebrities but members of the most prestigious royal family of the world. Some common courtesy to the public would be the minimal thing they can do to show some respect to the people that they are supposed to represent. Instead they treat them the way normal celebrities treat their fans. If this is the future of the monarchy one wonders why we bother having one at all.
 
Last edited:
An Ard Ri said:
Finally something nice ;)

That was a nice gesture by them I wondered if it will be used at Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor Christening or would it be totally out of place at a traditional Anglican service?
Click to expand...

I don't know, probably not. I think there were reports of the choir of St. George's singing at the christening. Don't now how true that is yet.
 
Lilyflo said:
Harry & Meghan "creating a drama" would be deciding not to baptise Archie at all or announcing that the Godparents were all drag queens. It's not H&M who are whipping up a hissy fit about nothing.
Click to expand...

Not baptizing Archie at all could raise constitutional issues as members of the RF have to be Protestant Christians to be in the line of succession.

Not revealing the names of the godparents doesn’t quite rise to a constitutional issue, but it fuels speculation about there being something off about the godparents that they are trying to hide . In the best case scenario, it will probably attract more digging into the private lives of Meghan’s friends rather than protecting their privacy , which is the alleged reason not to reveal the godparents’ names.

Furthermore, it creates a legal problem for the RF. Let’s assume that someone from the DM or any other media outlet files a form with the appropriate CoE office next week requesting to see Archie’s baptism certificate under the Parochial Registers and Records Measure 1978. Church lawyers have already told Richard Palmer that private royal chapels are not exempt from the measure , but that records from royal baptisms are kept separately by the RF in a private registry. Presumably, the request to produce the certificate will be forwarded to the Palace then and, if the Palace says no, the RF will be in the very uncomfortable position of being accused of flouting the law. It s irrelevant at this point whether the Crown can be taken to court or not over that issue because the PR and political damage will have already been done.

In other words, H&M are putting the RF in a situation of potential jeopardy just to accommodate their overblown sensitivities ( and those of their American friends) or , as some posters have suggested here, to play an inappropriate Hollywood-style PR game. I don’t see how that can be defensible.
 
Last edited:
Curryong said:
So, although the British media, especially the tabloids, are up in arms, and happy to wrap the Sussexes hard over the knuckles, along with some posters in Royal forums, it appears that the great British public that participated in this survey aren't quite so bothered. Indeed, this shows a mildly favourable view.
Click to expand...

And we all know just how reliable polls aren't! :whistling:


Brexit?
US election 2016?
Scottish independence?


Just sayin….
 
Last edited:
I think the whole thing is ridiculous , why does the public need to know who the god parents are ? It is simply nosiness so people can pick them a part and invade their lives especially the paps. As for the privacy all the christenings have been private you don't see the ceremony you see them enter and leave nothing more. They could have simply not announced the christening done it and released the pictures. They are being honest and open and people are still not satisfied.They have every right to handle this their way, it is their child no one else's.
People seem to forget Archie is not technically royal unlike Williams kids. He is not as important in the line as the others and his parent's know that and to me are acting accordingly.

I also think if what they were doing was such a big deal the Queen would have stepped in. I don't believe for a minute she sits silent when something that could cause them a lot of trouble is taking place . She has seen and knows how this whole thing works.
 
Last edited:
Harry and Meghan are a relatively young modern royal couple intent on doing things their way.
Photo's will be released as they always are. I don't have a problem with the way they are handling things at all.
The need to know of every detail these days can have adverse consequences vis a vis social media trolls etc. The simple facts are we don't need to know every single detail.
And I still don't have a problem with that.
 
carlota said:
these two love the attention don't they? if they really wished to keep private, making such drama of every single ocasion is actually having the opposite effect. make the baptism public (like W&K), make the godparents know, release a few pictures and in two days things go back to normal again. make a fuss (as they are doing) and you get criticism, drama, and spotlight (wait, i thought they wanted to keep private?!)

if you asked me, i think they want everything but privacy, harry perhaps because of complex of being number two in line (further down since the arrival of W&K's kids) and meghan has always seeked the spotlight and got it via marriage (let's face it, no one aside from suits fans knew who she was beforehand).

i think this is all getting a bit much. they did not worry about privacy when they had a grand wedding in windsor or considered their royal role when UK's taxpayers paid for their new house upgrade.

marrying into the RF means you get the positives of living a privileged lifestyle, but you need to play game and offer something in return. someone who always lived in the RF and someone who consciously married into it should know this well.

i am honestly surprised no one is stepping up to stop all this nonsense - the queen, charles??? also, let's not talk about the poor job that their PR and comms teams do. piss poor since the birth of archie.
Click to expand...


Well, I can only see "drama" on the public and media side (the media obviously snubbed because they are denied their photographs they make a lot of money with and the "royal watchers" because their curiosity won´t be satisfied this time...).
I am far from being a huge Meghan and Harry Fan, although I always liked the Prince a lot, though. But it is beyond me why people do not realise that a man with the specific biography he has is far from being keen about much public display, especially when it comes to his child who is still a vulnarable infant!
Obviously either The Queen and the Pr o Wales respect Harry as a grown-up man making his own decisions together with his wife when it comes to THEIR own little family. When I read some posts on the internet some people consider themselves as being entitled to tell an adult couple what to do and what not... It´s hilarious!:ohmy:
 
Sorry Princess Carmen, I was typing when you posted and my thoughts are very similiar to yours.
 
I think you will find most. baptismal records from royal baptisms are recorded as at Windsor. But fear not, no rules are broken. I mean really, do you not think a throne fought over for centuries has not ensured their children were well and truly baptised and recorded as such by a succession of very, very learned Archbishops and their predecessors?
 
Fijiro said:
The Cambridges did not release pictures with the godparents, so I don't expect any this time around.

A.
Click to expand...

I don't expect it either. We already know they are not even going to release names, so surely no picture of them. However, I was describing the hypothetical situation that they were more comparable to Edward and Sophie in at least releasing the names. The picture with godparents (as is customary in most other European royal houses) would be a nice added bonus.
 
William wore shades and the couple took the rear/private entrance to Windsor Castle
 
Lady Reem said:
If that were the case then it could also be argued that since “Archie is comparable to a grandchild of a monarch not to a great-grandchild” (according to you) then by that same logic the queen should’ve issued Letters patent to dignify H&M’s child with a princely hrh title the same way she did for all the Cambridge children. I seem to remember you arguing firmly against her doing any such thing for a Sussex offspring, in fact you were so adamant and kept going on about it. Now, whether or not M&H would’ve accepted a hrh title for their mixed race child if tq was benevolent enough to have offered one is beyond the point. I just wondered about the inconsistency of the logic re Archie’s godparents is all.
Click to expand...
Point taken. As I've also repeatedly tried to explain, my problem is again with the inconsistency displayed by the couple. Had Harry and Meghan gone the full 'great-grandchild' route: no announcement of christening nor pictures afterwards - that would at least be consistent with other great-grandchildren (although they are female-line great-grandchildren, so their parents aren't royals, while Archie's are; which to me makes all the difference; so, in that respect Archie is comparable to the queen's grandchildren). However, they are going the route of grandchildren with announcement and releasing pictures but withhold the names of the godparents. But I look forward to the release of this information if and when Charles becomes king :flowers: (would have been helpful if they had announced that, so we knew what to expect :whistling:).

And, I truly don't understand why you bring up that Archie is a mixed-race child. I am sure the queen would not have handled it any differently if he had any other race.
 
Last edited:
Give me a break, they aren't up setting those they love. Those who they lwant there will be there. Since it is a small event I don't think anyone that loves them will be upset or even care.
 
If the queen is not releasing the baptism certificate she is backing up the Sussexes for protection of the godparents. I think all the complaints are based on loss of money to be made for those doing the complaining.
 
William wore shades maybe, because the sun was shining and he needed them.
They entered the rear private entrance because it is private like the event.
The fail kills me trying to imply drama when there is none.
 
Somebody said:
Point taken. As I've also repeatedly tried to explain, my problem is again with the inconsistency displayed by the couple. Had Harry and Meghan gone the full 'great-grandchild' route: no announcement of christening nor pictures afterwards - that would at least be consistent with other great-grandchildren (although they are female-line great-grandchildren, so their parents aren't royals, while Archie's are; which to me makes all the difference; so, in that respect Archie is comparable to the queen's grandchildren). However, they are going the route of grandchildren with announcement and releasing pictures but withhold the names of the godparents. But I look forward to the release of this information if and when Charles becomes king :flowers: (would have been helpful if they had announced that, so we knew what to expect :whistling:).

And, I truly don't understand why you bring up that Archie is a mixed-race child. I am sure the queen would not have handled it any differently if he had any other race.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Genealogy of the Royal Family of Bulgaria
Replies
3
Views
2K
Blog Real
Blog Real
JessRulz
  • Locked
Birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor: May 6, 2019
48 49 50
Replies
1K
Views
185K
JessRulz
JessRulz
Iluvbertie
British Royal Family Engagements 2020
2 3
Replies
85
Views
16K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
ROYAL NORWAY
Princess Ingrid Alexandra's confirmation: August 31, 2019
9 10 11
Replies
300
Views
63K
Somebody
Somebody
A
Future and Popularity of the Thai Monarchy
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
12K
Tatiana Maria
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom