Christening of Prince George of Cambridge: October 23, 2013


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
From the Times - it includes a lot of the info from the Sunday Times

Prince George’s godparents will not include a single member of the Royal Family or the Middleton family, according to sources close to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

Three godparents were named yesterday, all close friends of the couple rather than the royal grandees chosen as godparents for heirs to the throne in previous generations.
Those named are Fergus Boyd, a friend since the University of St Andrews; Emilia d’Erlanger, a long-term friend of William who has known the Duchess since their days at Marlborough College; and Hugh van Cutsem, one of the Duke’s oldest childhood pals. By going for trusted friends rather than trawling through the ranks of royalty — both home-grown and foreign — and the aristocracy, the Cambridges appear yet again to be striking out on their own rather than adhering to tradition.

Assuming that Prince George will have six godparents when he is christened on October 23 at the Chapel Royal, St James’s Palace — and given the couple’s track record, perhaps nothing can be assumed — three are yet to be named.

However, it is understood that a number of people once considered possible contenders can now be ruled out. They include Thomas van Straubenzee and James Meade, who jointly delivered a speech at William and Kate’s wedding, his former principal private secretary Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton and his former nanny, Tiggy Pettifer.

Prince Harry is not on the list, and neither are either of the Duchess’s siblings, Pippa and James Middleton. No immediate relations of the late Diana, Princess of Wales, have been chosen.
Another close friend now thought to be out of the frame is Catriona Foyle, a friend of Kate’s from Marlborough College who has a young son and was photographed walking in Kensington Gardens with the Duchess during her pregnancy.

The list appears to be quite different from godparents chosen in the past. Prince William’s godparents included ex-King Constantine of Greece, Princess Alexandra, the Queen’s cousin, and the Duchess of Westminster.

The three names to have emerged thus far were reported by The Sunday Times.
Hugh van Cutsem, a co-founder of Kepler Partners LLP, which provides consultancy and marketingfor hedge funds, is likely to be a popular choice with the Royal Family. His family were neighbours of the Queen for many years when they leased Anmer Hall on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, now earmarked as the Cambridges’s country home.

His father, also called Hugh, was a close friend of the Prince of Wales, who attended his funeral last month with William and Harry. Mr van Cutsem’s wife, Rose, runs Maggie & Rose, a children’s club close to Kensington Palace where Prince George is likely to have his first play dates.
Mr Boyd, 31, famous for sitting next to William when he said “Wow, Kate’s hot” as they watched the Prince’s future wife walk down the catwalk at a St Andrews fashion show, has been a friend of William since Eton.

Ms d’Erlanger, 31, the co-founder of d’Erlanger and Sloan, an interior design company, is understood to have advised the Duchess on the renovation of the couple’s Kensington Palace home.

Possible names for the remaining godparents include Oliver Baker, who lived with the couple at Balgove House on the Strathtyrum Estate while at university, and Alasdair Coutts-Wood, another friend from Balgove House, who played rugby with William.
Also in the frame is Alicia Fox-Pitt, a friend of Kate’s since Marlborough College, who tried in 2007 to recruit Kate to the first all-female crew to cross the Channel in a dragon boat.

Lady Virginia Fraser, the daughter of Lord Strathalmond, and Olivia Bleasdale, are both friends from St Andrews.
 
These Godparent reports are ridiculous particularly the sense of "normality" they are supposed to give. George isn't going to have a "normal" life and being surrounded by exceedingly rich, land-owning people won't give it either. Lack of a title does not mean normal. It's rather "let's pretend". I really would like the remaining godparents (if there are any) to reflect reality and royal, protected, protocol-led life he is going to lead.

How much influence in George's life will these godparents have? Obviously it differs from family to family and, in times past, it was a significant role. But does anyone really think the Duchess of Westminster or King Constantine has had a greater influence on the person William has become than, say Tiggy Pettifer or any of his schoolteachers, nannies or even protection officers?

I'd say Michael and Carol (not to mention the Royal Family) will have a far greater influence in George's life than any godparent even if, heaven forbid, anything were to happen to William and Kate.
 
How much influence in George's life will these godparents have? Obviously it differs from family to family and, in times past, it was a significant role. But does anyone really think the Duchess of Westminster or King Constantine has had a greater influence on the person William has become than, say Tiggy Pettifer or any of his schoolteachers, nannies or even protection officers? I'd say Michael and Carol (not to mention the Royal Family) will have a far greater influence in George's life than any godparent even if, heaven forbid, anything were to happen to William and Kate.

I think you ( and se people's Ion here) are getting 'God Parent' and 'Guardian' mix up as they are two different things.
 
I think you ( and se people's Ion here) are getting 'God Parent' and 'Guardian' mix up as they are two different things.

No I'm not.

The article from the Daily Mail spoke about the choice of Godparents as reflecting a wish to give George a sense of normality as he grows up. That implies influence of some desciption.
 
No I'm not.

The article from the Daily Mail spoke about the choice of Godparents as reflecting a wish to give George a sense of normality as he grows up. That implies influence of some desciption.

You are right. However, there has been no official announcement (although there is something due from KP prior to the christening). This at best is a leak of information. We don't know why the godparents are chosen or what their role is expected to be by William and Catherine.

It's speculation
 
In practice, I don't think Godparents have much influence or input into the lives of their Godchildren - mine certainly didn't and frankly it's just an excuse on the parents' part to obligate people to send money and presents every birthday, Easter and Christmas and make them attend birthday parties.
I'm quite sure being a member of the royal family, Prince George will have his spiritual well-being taken care of with or without Godparents so I don't think it matters who they will be.
It will be a shame if none of the foreign royal cousins will be a Godparent and I fear as the generations continue the distance will grow.
 
One would hope that the future Defender of the Faith, when choosing the godparents for his little future Defender of the Faith would take that matter of godparent as less someone who'll give a spiffy birthday present, and more someone who would help see to George's upbringing as future Defender of Faith. This IS the true symbolism of the godparent, is it not? In my family (you know, a normal family that Will craves) this honor is bestowed on the person who is most likely to help the child should the unthinkable occur.

I'm sure Fergus Boyd is a smashing fellow, but doesn't anyone think that Prince Harry is a far better choice to assume the role of godparent in the manner in which it was intended? Or Peter Phillips perhaps? Or Pippa, who is part of the close knit Middletons? Perhaps a member of the Fellowes family?

If Will did not take any of these considerations into mind, then he sees certain aspects of his future role and George's future role as meaningless.
 
I doubt the names had anything to do with William's Spencer cousins; any perusal of the names currently prevalent among the British aristocracy shows all three- George, Alexander, and Louis- are heavily used by William and Kate's contemporaries.

Really, if they wanted a regnal name, George was the obvious choice; just about everything else was in use by a current family member.
 
Godparents are chosen as spiritual and moral guides, or should be. Even though you may enjoy let's say, Uncle Gary at a party, you may not want him to be your child's mentor or guide.
To not include the obvious aunt or uncle, is just a way to get more people in the loop, not a bad idea, if it is true of course.
 
I think the best judges of who the godparents should be, are the parents themselves, since they are the ones who know these people well.
 
One would hope that the future Defender of the Faith, when choosing the godparents for his little future Defender of the Faith would take that matter of godparent as less someone who'll give a spiffy birthday present, and more someone who would help see to George's upbringing as future Defender of Faith. This IS the true symbolism of the godparent, is it not? In my family (you know, a normal family that Will craves) this honor is bestowed on the person who is most likely to help the child should the unthinkable occur.

I'm sure Fergus Boyd is a smashing fellow, but doesn't anyone think that Prince Harry is a far better choice to assume the role of godparent in the manner in which it was intended? Or Peter Phillips perhaps? Or Pippa, who is part of the close knit Middletons? Perhaps a member of the Fellowes family?

If Will did not take any of these considerations into mind, then he sees certain aspects of his future role and George's future role as meaningless.

Lets not forget that close members of William and Catherine's family will continue to always play an important part in George's life - quite like the Queen and perhaps, Princess Anne and Jane Fellowes play in Prince Williams. IMO, those relationships do not need to be further "formalised". It is relationships with others that William and Catherine feel can have an important impact on George's upbringing that the proposed selection of god parents probably reflect.

I have seen this in many English families where siblings and close relatives of the parents of the child are excluded from the list of God-parents.
 
One would hope that the future Defender of the Faith, when choosing the godparents for his little future Defender of the Faith would take that matter of godparent as less someone who'll give a spiffy birthday present, and more someone who would help see to George's upbringing as future Defender of Faith. This IS the true symbolism of the godparent, is it not? In my family (you know, a normal family that Will craves) this honor is bestowed on the person who is most likely to help the child should the unthinkable occur.

I'm sure Fergus Boyd is a smashing fellow, but doesn't anyone think that Prince Harry is a far better choice to assume the role of godparent in the manner in which it was intended? Or Peter Phillips perhaps? Or Pippa, who is part of the close knit Middletons? Perhaps a member of the Fellowes family?

If Will did not take any of these considerations into mind, then he sees certain aspects of his future role and George's future role as meaningless.

On what basis can you say this? I couldn't answer your question because I don't know anything about Fergus Boyd apart from the fact that he is obviously a close, loyal and trusted friend in Catherine and William's opinion. And that is good enough for me.

Family will always be there. Catherine and William must think that the godparents will add something extra to George's life.

As for your 2nd statement about future life being meaningless - that's an astounding statement if it is based on William's selection of godparents.
 
I personally think the idea of godparents is kind of silly and archaic, but I understand that not all people share my opinion on things, so they do what makes them happy. If William and Catherine think these people are important and trusted enough to make sure George turns into a good little Christian should they suddenly die or something, I think that's really the only say on the matter that counts, don't you? I don't think by not choosing members of their immediate families, they're somehow saying the Royal Family or the Middletons aren't capable of it. Don't look for an offense where there is none.
 
No I'm not. The article from the Daily Mail spoke about the choice of Godparents as reflecting a wish to give George a sense of normality as he grows up. That implies influence of some desciption.

I have always heard they are different.
 
I have always heard they are different.

They are different and, I agree, I think the DM has the two confused. My comment was about the Mail's interpretation of what these godparents will do.

According the the Church of England the godparent is there to assist in the child being raised in the Christian faith. Very appropriate for many people but this particular child and his parents are going to be surrounded by a flock of Bishops, Archbishops and Chaplains. Even if William and Kate were to choose as godparents 6 of the most un-Christian persons they could find, I somehow think little George's spiritual well-being is assured.
 
I'm sure Fergus Boyd is a smashing fellow, but doesn't anyone think that Prince Harry is a far better choice to assume the role of godparent in the manner in which it was intended? Or Peter Phillips perhaps? Or Pippa, who is part of the close knit Middletons? Perhaps a member of the Fellowes family?

If Will did not take any of these considerations into mind, then he sees certain aspects of his future role and George's future role as meaningless.

See I don't think aunts and uncles should be godparents as being an aunt or uncle is already a special role in the child's life. I don't mind great aunts or uncles (Lady Sarah, Diana's sister for example), but not aunts or uncles. I can kind of see Pippa and Harry being chosen though, but I will be a bit disappointed.
 
As for your 2nd statement about future life being meaningless - that's an astounding statement if it is based on William's selection of godparents.

I think Gracie's statement related to the possibility that in making his choice he had not taken into consideration the important matters raised in her first paragraph, rather than his actual choice.

I really don't think it matters who William and Kate select as godparents. I don't see godparents as important, especially in this case. Godparents have no legal status and in the event of the unthinkable occurring the godparents are not going to get custody of him merely by dint of being godparents. As I understand it, the monarch automatically has legal custody of minors in his particular circumstances. And if George needs spiritual guidance to prepare him for his future role in the Church of England, there are hoards of archbishops and bishops and miscellaneous other church folk who would be ready, willing, and able, to help.
 
We will never know just what role the godparents play in George's life. It will all be private.
 
The Queen has given her approval. If these individuals are acceptable to her to serve as god-parents to her heir, then I have don't have a problem.
 
Mandrake in the Telegraph is whining that George's christening isn't in the Queen's diary. It wouldn't be. It is not a public event but a private one.
 
Photos of some of the christening souvenirs that are already on sale:

http://www.noblesseetroyautes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/palte.jpg
http://www.noblesseetroyautes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/untitled-1_3.jpg
http://www.noblesseetroyautes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/mini_loving_cup_1.jpg

I wonder if the letters on the cup and plate are Prince George's monogram? They look very monogram like to me. Or it could just be a design the potter who made them thought of as I haven't seen it before/there haven't been any announcements of George receiving a monogram.
 
It's a sweet design for crockery.
I hope there are more than one or two photos released of Prince George's Christening on the 23rd.
 
Paul Harrison ‏@SkyNewsRoyal 6m
#royal Kensington Palace confirms Prince #George's christening will start at 1500hrs and will last approximately 45 minutes.
 
So afternoon time. Interesting, I would have thought morning time but thats o.k. I just hope there are pictures or even a video. Would be great if we all got to see the ceremony, just like little Estelle. Cant hurt to dream. :)
 
I'm wondering if the couple will release any official pictures of just the three of them again?
 
I get the feeling we will get one or two photos on Wednesday and then will probably have to wait until next July to maybe get a first birthday photo.
 
There will be photos from the christening. At the minimum: George with his parents and godparents, George with his parents and immediate family on both sides and the queen holding George with Charles and William. Probably also a shot of William, Kate and George. There will be video of the photo shoot.
 
It would be nice if they released pics on a regular basis like Victoria and Daniel do with Estelle.
 
It would be nice if they released pics on a regular basis like Victoria and Daniel do with Estelle.

I'm sure there would be people complaining about that. There are people here who feel that Victoria uses Estelle for her own popularity.
 
I would hope William & Catherine will follow the same path of Victoria & Daniel, Frederik & Mary and even Haakon & Mette-Marit. I think releasing official pictures of the family is the best way to go. Even Charles & Diana did it.
 
Back
Top Bottom