King Charles and Queen Camilla

[Saragli]

Does anybody have pics of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth at the State Opening of Parliment or at their coronations. Its hard for me to imagine a guy wearing a crown and I want to see how it will be like with Charles and Camilla.

 

[ysbel]

Does anybody have pics of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth at the State Opening of Parliment or at their coronations. Its hard for me to imagine a guy wearing a crown and I want to see how it will be like with Charles and Camilla.

Here's a post with a picture of King George V and Queen Mary in their coronation robes. It should give you an idea, Princejohnny.

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/king-george-v-queen-mary-5985.html?highlight=mary+george+coronation#post215805

 

[ksenia]

I totally agree that he should be the Defender of ALL faiths

I dont think it makes since for him to be defender of all faiths. For me, by choosing the faith you are living your life according to you are basically saying that you beleive the others to be wrong. You may respect anothers choice to follow their beleifs but it is not correct. As the head of the Anglican church it wouldn't make sense for him to defend all faiths. Leave that to parlaiment and law.

 

[Elspeth]

I don't like the idea of him becoming defender of faith in general because that means he's excluding a significant proportion of his subjects who aren't people of faith. While we have an established church, it's appropriate for the head of state to be affiliated with it. If the church is disestablished, there's no reason for the head of state to take up cudgels on behalf of faith in a spiritually diverse country.

 

[ysbel]

But isn't it normal for a monarch to be associated with one church, Elspeth?

Over in the Denmark forum, there is a discussion about Margrethe's role in the Lutheran church and it turns out she's the head of the church in Denmark as Elizabeth is head of the church in England.

 

[Elspeth]

Well, I assume Charles would be associated with a particular church; he was confirmed in the CofE when he was a youngster. But he sounds as if these days he's more interested in some sort of freelance spirituality, and I don't know quite how that would play out if there weren't an established church.

 

[ysbel]

Well, I assume Charles would be associated with a particular church; he was confirmed in the CofE when he was a youngster. But he sounds as if these days he's more interested in some sort of freelance spirituality, and I don't know quite how that would play out if there weren't an established church.

I totally agree Elspeth. the King of all Religions just doesn't sound right.

 

[ksenia]

Well, I assume Charles would be associated with a particular church; he was confirmed in the CofE when he was a youngster. But he sounds as if these days he's more interested in some sort of freelance spirituality, and I don't know quite how that would play out if there weren't an established church.

this might explain why he wants to change the coronation ceremony. He may not take the religious context of it as seriously as his mother

 

[Iluvbertie]

What I always interpreted his statement about being Defender of Faith to mean was that he wanted to ensure that everyone had a right to have their faith protected by law regardless of what that faith was (or even if they had no faith then that non-faith had a right to be protected).


Isn't it interesting the way we all hear the same comment and yet we can interpret it differently??

 

[Idriel]

What I always interpreted his statement about being Defender of Faith to mean was that he wanted to ensure that everyone had a right to have their faith protected by law regardless of what that faith was (or even if they had no faith then that non-faith had a right to be protected).
Isn't it interesting the way we all hear the same comment and yet we can interpret it differently??

I believe the title Defender of Faith originaly means defender of an unique faith, the Catholic one to be precise as that title was first granted by the pope to Henry VIII (???). Then of course the C of E was created but if the defended faith has changed, I don't think the meaning of the title did.

 

[Skydragon]

What I always interpreted his statement about being Defender of Faith to mean was that he wanted to ensure that everyone had a right to have their faith protected by law regardless of what that faith was (or even if they had no faith then that non-faith had a right to be protected).

Isn't it interesting the way we all hear the same comment and yet we can interpret it differently??

I agree with your interpretation chrissy57, in this day and age Charles is very aware of the many faiths and non faiths.

 

[ksenia]

leave it alone

I agree with your interpretation chrissy57, in this day and age Charles is very aware of the many faiths and non faiths.

leave it to the government. He doesnt have to serve that function especially since he has no "real" political power in matters like that

 

[Saragli]

yes but I dont think the goverment has a say in that title or the church for that matter. The pope offered it to the soverign as a personal title but when Henry severed ties with rome the title lost its original meaning and changed to mean the church of england. I think the soverign has all power in changing or reliunquishing that title.

 

[branchg]

The Government does have a say because the Sovereign is still Head of the Church of England and any change would require Parliament's assent. There has been talk of deinstitutionalizing the Church from the State to allow the Archbishop of Canterbury (who, in reality, is the Head of the Church) to officially be so, but it never seems to go anywhere.

 

[Skydragon]

The Government does have a say because the Sovereign is still Head of the Church of England and any change would require Parliament's assent. There has been talk of deinstitutionalizing the Church from the State to allow the Archbishop of Canterbury (who, in reality, is the Head of the Church) to officially be so, but it never seems to go anywhere.

It might all change if Charles has any say.

 

[Saragli]

Yes but the title "Defender of the Faith" has no offical connections what so ever with the Church of England. The title is still technically used by the soverign at the grace of the Pope. The title is interpreted as meaning the Anglican Church but it is ment for the Roman Catholic Church. The title was a gift from the Pope to the soverign. I think it is a personal title of the soverign. The title carries no duties or meaning know. It hasnt for hundreds of years technically. It is a just a phrase that is know associated with the Anglican Church. Having said that, I believe the soverign can change the title at his will to refere to the modern era. Just as when it changed from the Catholic Church to the Anglican Church it might now change to all faiths or none at all. That is how I believe the history of the title goes but I may be wrong.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Yes but the title "Defender of the Faith" has no offical connections what so ever with the Church of England. The title is still technically used by the soverign at the grace of the Pope. The title is interpreted as meaning the Anglican Church but it is ment for the Roman Catholic Church. The title was a gift from the Pope to the soverign. I think it is a personal title of the soverign. The title carries no duties or meaning know. It hasnt for hundreds of years technically. It is a just a phrase that is know associated with the Anglican Church. Having said that, I believe the soverign can change the title at his will to refere to the modern era. Just as when it changed from the Catholic Church to the Anglican Church it might now change to all faiths or none at all. That is how I believe the history of the title goes but I may be wrong.

The title was originally given to Henry VIII after he wrote an article in defence of the Roman Catholic church at the time of the Lutheran reformation.

When he broke from Rome the title was withdrawn by the Pope, when the Pope excommunicated Henry BUT Henry then had the English Parliament confer the title on him for defending the reformed Catholic church in England.

As a result the title has been one that goes with the title of King/Queen of England. When the throne joined with that of Scotland to become the King/Queen of Great Britain the title still remained with the monarch.

Charles simply wants to acknowledge more of his subjects rather than just those who are worshippers within the Anglican Church.


The idea of disestablishing the C of E has been around for well over 100 years. There is a scene in the mini-series The Pallisers, made in the 1970s and based on Trollope's books where they politicians are discussin that very issue in the 1870s. One comment that sticks in my mind is one of the C of E politicians asking 'If we disestablish the church what will be the role of the Queen and to whom would the church ultimately be responsible?' The RC politician replied "To God"!!!!

 

[Margrethe II]

With HRH wishes & when it is time to take the place of his mother (may it be not, for many years to come) I would hope that 'Defender of the Faith' is kept in accordance with tradition, but, have something like 'Keeper of all faiths' included so as to recognise the vast display of religions practiced by many of his subjects throughout the world.

For, eg:

"By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Keeper of all Faiths."

This is of course one of many options that can be pursued.The above addition is purely and utterly my own take on the matter & it doesn't have to be 'Keeper'. It shall be whatever they feel appropriate I am most sure. Thats if they feel it appropriate at all...time shall tell.




"MII"

 

[Skydragon]

I believe the sovereign can change the title at his will to refer to the modern era. Just as when it changed from the Catholic Church to the Anglican Church it might now change to all faiths or none at all. That is how I believe the history of the title goes but I may be wrong.

I'm sure that one day all will be revealed with regard to the wishes of Prince Charles! Whatever he decides, some of the population will probably think it is wrong>

 

[Queen Mary I]

With HRH wishes & when it is time to take the place of his mother (may it be not, for many years to come) I would hope that 'Defender of the Faith' is kept in accordance with tradition, but, have something like 'Keeper of all faiths' included so as to recognise the vast display of religions practiced by many of his subjects throughout the world.
eg: "By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Keeper of all Faiths."
This is of course one of many options that can be pursued.The above addition is purely and utterly my own take on the matter & it doesn't have to be 'Keeper'. It shall be whatever they feel appropriate I am most sure. Thats if they feel it appropriate at all...time shall tell.
"MII"

I was thinking along those lines too. I want them to keep the traditional 'Defender Of The Faith' while including something along the lines of 'Keeper of all Faiths' (excellent suggestion!). And perhaps an additional 'and Beliefs' to cover those who do not believe in a next life, a Supreme Being or Deity.

 

[Avalon]

Personally I think that Prince Charles is right to choose the title of the “Defender of the faiths” because he is going to be the King of all British people, regardless of their religion and it’s only fair to give them all some sort of equality. COE is of course unique of HRH Prince Charles, for he was bought up in the religion, but I find his wish really appropriate.

 

[Toledo]

Empress, you may want to read these threads where Camilla's title was exhaustively discussed.

Title for Camilla part 1
Title for Camilla part 2
Will Charles Ever Reign

There are problems with the Princess Consort title (albeit what the BRF website says) which is more thoroughly discussed there.

Perhaps you'd like to pose your questions there.

Something came to mind just now. If Camilla become Queen Consort would Charles upgrade her kids to some kind of Lordship title just to make them a little more that his step kids? Although I've never heard of anyone being named Step-prince . I think Charles will bestow some kind of nobility to her kids, even if is only to make people that don't like him angry.

PS. three topics on Camilla is two topics too much. I mean, the woman hardly speaks a word. Time for some blender action?

 

[Elspeth]

I very much doubt that Charles would do anything about titles for Camilla's children. There's no need, and these days it isn't really all that common to hand out titles just for being related to a royal.

PS. It isn't three topics on Camilla. It's one topic in two parts and some posts in a thread about Charles reigning, which is relevant to his wife. No problem that I can see.

 

[Royal Fan]

it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[AgnesK]

it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I think it will depend on their public standing. I hope it will be high enough to let it happens

 

[LOSSEAN]

Thanks Beatrixfan for starting this thread. I find the information very, very interesting.

 

[BeatrixFan]

My pleasure

 

[iago]

The title was originally given to Henry VIII after he wrote an article in defence of the Roman Catholic church at the time of the Lutheran reformation.

When he broke from Rome the title was withdrawn by the Pope, when the Pope excommunicated Henry BUT Henry then had the English Parliament confer the title on him for defending the reformed Catholic church in England.

As a result the title has been one that goes with the title of King/Queen of England. When the throne joined with that of Scotland to become the King/Queen of Great Britain the title still remained with the monarch.

Charles simply wants to acknowledge more of his subjects rather than just those who are worshippers within the Anglican Church.

The title was in fact bestowed and later withdrawn by the Pope. Henry VIII as supreme Head of the Church in England was in no way within his rights to have Parliament bestow the title on him. In effect, he was bestowing the title on himself. In addition, there was no provision for successive sovereigns to use that title.

Since the discussion revolves around trying not to offend the sensibilities of people who are not members of the CofE (which is perfectly fine) has anyone stopped to consider that the continued use of a title bestowed and then withdrawn by the Papacy is an affront to the RC subjects of the British monarch? So, perhaps the title should be dropped altogether?

 

[BeatrixFan]

I recently was reading through some material on Orthodoxy (long story) and it mentions Prince Charles's possible conversion. It says that there is nothing to stop the future Monarch being Orthodox, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish etc - he just can't be a Catholic. The author, a Russian Orthodox Monk, says that he believes Charles will either drop the title 'Defender of the Faith' or use instead 'Defender of Faith' and convert to Orthodoxy. The way the Church of England is going, I doubt it'll be an issue when Charles becomes King.

 

[iago]

Perhaps Charles is influenced here by his father. Prince Philip re-converted back to being Greek Orthodox several years ago.