Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly Engaged: July 30, 2007


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter Phillips is not a commoner--he is the grandson of the Queen. I hope she offers him a title that he can pass onto his children--and that he accepts it!
 
jcbcode99 said:
Peter Phillips is not a commoner--he is the grandson of the Queen. I hope she offers him a title that he can pass onto his children--and that he accepts it!
Click to expand...

I agree with you! A Viscount Something-or-another would be nice!
 
I don't think that it's likely, after all these years. If he wanted a title, as an adult, he could have asked his grandmother and I'm sure that she would have obliged him, despite what the Princess Royal allegedly wanted. He's the first-born grandchild, after all, and from all I've read he's immensely popular with both his granny and his grandfather. I read a quote from Prince Philip saying about Peter, 'he's a winner! an absolute winner! the best grandson anyone could wish for.' Mind you, William was a mere tot at the time, so no disparagement or favouritism was implied.

Actually, I'm rather impressed that Anne's children do not have titles and apparently don't seek them. In their positions, however, their social standing and security is unassailable, so good for them!

I wish Peter and his Canadian bride every good thing and much happiness.
 
Polly said:
I don't think that it's likely, after all these years. If he wanted a title, as an adult, he could have asked his grandmother and I'm sure that she would have obliged him, despite what the Princess Royal allegedly wanted. He's the first-born grandchild, after all, and from all I've read he's immensely popular with both his granny and his grandfather. I read a quote from Prince Philip saying about Peter, 'he's a winner! an absolute winner! the best grandson anyone could wish for.' Mind you, William was a mere tot at the time, so no disparagement or favouritism was implied.

Actually, I'm rather impressed that Anne's children do not have titles and apparently don't seek them. In their positions, however, their social standing and security is unassailable, so good for them!

I wish Peter and his Canadian bride every good thing and much happiness.
Click to expand...

Didn't Prince Andrew become the Duke of York on his wedding day, I would think a title would be appropriate for a wedding. Personally, I don't think Peter himself needs one, but I think that it would be a nice thing to pass on to your children. As Grandson to the Queen, a title would have only been an annoyance and he has tons of privileges as it is... But well his children and grandchildren, they are going to be further down the line, and won't get that much attention anyways. So why not give them a reminder of their heritage? By getting the title after he's married to, he'll draw a lot less attention as well than if the title happened before he was married. That is if he wants them. Someone said that Peter actually is the favorite grandson...
 
Yes, since he's in the line of succession, he would have had to ask the Queen's permission to marry. Since he's over 25, there would have been a way round it if she'd refused consent, but I think he still had to ask.
 
Official confirmation:

ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ENGAGEMENT OF PETER PHILLIPS
30 July 2007

THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ISSUED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY TO THE QUEEN

The Princess Royal and Captain Mark Phillips are pleased to announce the engagement of their son Peter Phillips to Autumn, daughter of Mr Brian and Mrs Kitty Kelly.

Buckingham Palace press releases > The engagement of Peter Phillips, 30 July 2007
 
Well, I for one am thrilled that we will soon see a British wedding! As for granting Peter a title? No, I don't believe he will ever receive one, just because he is perfectly happy with the way he is living his life. His parents never wanted him or his sister to have one, so I think out of respect, he will not ask for one. Congrats to the happpy couple!
 
ZandraRae said:
Well, I for one am thrilled that we will soon see a British wedding! As for granting Peter a title? No, I don't believe he will ever receive one, just because he is perfectly happy with the way he is living his life. His parents never wanted him or his sister to have one, so I think out of respect, he will not ask for one. Congrats to the happpy couple!
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be disrespectful for Peter to want a title.. His parents made their choices when he was a baby, and under different circumstances than what Peter will be now.. They wanted Peter to grow up in normalcy as he did, and perhaps wanted him to be able to make his own choices... (Quite frankly) But now that he's older, I don't think his parents would be that upset if he gets a title (if that's what he wants.) Besides Peter's children if they have titles won't get nearly that much attention. They will merely being Great Niece and Nephew to the King.. And then second cousins to the King, there's a big difference there.

Personally, I think it would be a nice PR coop if the wedding was held in Canada, and all of the royal family attended. Queen Elizabeth II is Queen of Canada, and sometimes I think that Canada, and Australia, get a little bit of the shaft.. in regards to royal attention. Why not let Canada have a big fancy wedding.
 
The reason I don't think Peter will get a title is that a title is somewhat obliging - Peter would have to be more in the spotlight, carry on Royal duties, and Peter has already shown he wants a private life.What a year for British Royal Family - a Royal wedding, and 3 baby joys (Sophie, and both children of the Duchess of Cornwall). :)
 
He's not a Royal Highness, so I don't think being created an Earl is an additional obligation to carry out royal duties. If The Queen chooses to elevate him to the peerage upon marriage, it would be more a personal honour since Peter is her eldest grandchild.
 
He doesn't WANT a title

But honestly, I don't think Peter wants that "honor". The younger generations (royal families and 'commoners' alike) don't really go for all the pomp and circumstance and crap associated with the old days. The younger royals want to be normal young people. You can tell by the way they dress and behave, both of which are very 'normal'. If he wanted a title, he would have certainly had one by now, and most certainly wouldn't want one for his own children, plus his canadian girlfriend doesn't seem the least bit interested in all the fuss and whoopela of the royal family anyways.... it's all a thing of the past...
 
Last edited:
The Telegraph is also reporting that she's been baptised Catholic.

Peter Phillips may renounce succession - Telegraph

It also quotes her mother as saying that she's very proud of her religion, so it seems that she won't be giving it up simply so that her husband can stay in the line of succession, but we'll have to wait and see what happens.
 
Here in the U.S. the newspaper THE NEW YORK SUN ran an article today titled, "Queen's Grandson Stirs up Scandal with Catholic Fiancee." It goes on to say that, "Peter Phillips, the queen's eldest grandson, may have to give up his place in the line of succession to the throne after it emerged that his bride-to-be is a Roman Catholic. The engagement between the 29-year-old son of the Princess Royal and Autumn Kelly, a Canadian management consultant, was announced by Buckingham Palace last week. But no mention was made that Ms. Kelly, 31, had been baptized as a Catholic, a fact that could prove embarrassing to the royal family and the government."

There is a great picture of Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly. She is quite pretty and he is very good looking. In fact, at first glance, I thought he was Prince William.
 
CarolMR said:
Here in the U.S. the newspaper THE NEW YORK SUN ran an article today titled, "Queen's Grandson Stirs up Scandal with Catholic Fiancee." It goes on to say that, "Peter Phillips, the queen's eldest grandson, may have to give up his place in the line of succession to the throne after it emerged that his bride-to-be is a Roman Catholic. The engagement between the 29-year-old son of the Princess Royal and Autumn Kelly, a Canadian management consultant, was announced by Buckingham Palace last week. But no mention was made that Ms. Kelly, 31, had been baptized as a Catholic, a fact that could prove embarrassing to the royal family and the government."

There is a great picture of Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly. She is quite pretty and he is very good looking. In fact, at first glance, I thought he was Prince William.
Click to expand...

Good heavens, you would think that the New York Times would have better editorial judgment than to use the word "scandal" in a headline to describe this sitaution? He's 10th in line to the throne ... this isn't a constitutional crisis! And, by the way, the step-children of the heir to throne are Catholic. Someone please bring these people into the 21st century!:bang:
 
So again US press/media knows better than British what happen inside BRF...
 
It's the New York Sun, not the New York Times.
 
I wonder if she convert? Why: because they didn't give a date and maybe they want time for her conversion. But if she didin't do that than what would happen? Probably nothing only Peter "renouncing" the succession and his children will be raised as Anglicans.
 
Last edited:
The published reports that used the word "renounce" are inaccurate and misleading. He won't have to do any renouncing. If he marries a Catholic he just simply won't be eligible for the throne...no fomal renouncing required...it just happens.
 
suztav said:
Good heavens, you would think that the New York Times would have better editorial judgment than to use the word "scandal" in a headline to describe this sitaution? He's 10th in line to the throne ... this isn't a constitutional crisis! And, by the way, the step-children of the heir to throne are Catholic. Someone please bring these people into the 21st century!:bang:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but it is scandalize. Replace the term Catholic for Jew, and everyone would be in uproar.

But well prejudice against Catholics is the last acceptable prejudice. And what's sickening about it is well that for centuries England was ruled by Catholic kings and queens. Until one man, literally by the sword, decided to change everything. And the fact that Henry changed it all by the sword is a fact. People weren't given a vote, and Catholics were cruelly persecuted.
 
Disqualification from the line of succession for those who marry Roman Catholics has been a parliamentary law since 1701.
Further discussion of this topic is more appropriate in the Act of Settlement thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NotAPretender
Autumn Kelly Converts: Peter Phillips Keeps Place in Succession - May 2008
3 4 5
Replies
148
Views
39K
Ish
Ish
PrincessofEurope
  • Locked
Autumn Phillips's Fashion and Style Part 1: February 2008 - January 2018
6 7 8
Replies
232
Views
45K
iceflower
iceflower
HMTLove23
  • Locked
Upcoming Royal Weddings: March 2008 - December 2010
2 3
Replies
72
Views
61K
Stefan
Stefan
EliseLadyofLancaster
  • Locked
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession 1: Ending 2022
30 31 32
Replies
943
Views
140K
Marengo
Marengo

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom