I Agree with most of what you say but not all, I Think William will accept his role. I Just wonder how thext 2 Coronations are going to go ? what crown Does the King wear wonder if both Charles and William will reign under there first names?
Royal Fan said:I Agree with most of what you say but not all, I Think William will accept his role. I Just wonder how thext 2 Coronations are going to go ? what crown Does the King wear wonder if both Charles and William will reign under there first names?
BeatrixFan said:Because the Protestant Church, whilst it recognises divorce, won't remarry divorcees.
MARG said:If that was the case, then why did they have to get married in the Guild Hall?
msleiman said:I see the Queen living for a many more years. Who knows if Charles or even Camilla will still be alive. If I am not wrong Camilla is a very heavy smoker. That is not very good for your health. I wish they all well.
hornsen said:That´s a very curios post...Please notice that Camilla was a heavy smoker years ago. She and Charles are trying to live very healthy. And no one knows what the future brings. It could change everyday.
I think that in the end the current honorific will not be changed, but it it only my opinion.Avalon said:I can only be thankful that Prince Charles is such a thoughtful person. I am not a British citizen, however I think that the Head of the state (a King/Queen, President...) must be head of the state for every single citizen of his country, regardless of Religion.
With all respect to British traditions, I do think that Prince Charles's intention to be Defender of Faiths, rather then Defender of the Faith, is the right thing to do.
That's my private opinion.
orignially posted by Royal Fan
I Think William will accept his role.
I agree with you. Charles always has a strong sense of duty and he wants to be king. To be King is his only ambition and the goal of his life. He will not give up his throne for anything.Borrowing a phrase from Edward VIII,Charles will be a better king with the woman he loves by his side.ysbel said:I don't think Charles has ever contemplated stepping aside for William or for that matter William wanting to take the throne with his father still alive.
WindsorIII said:Plus I've never really go the impression Charles wanted to. I think he would be more content living out his life as he is now with Camilla and allowing for a long ruling monarchy with William and his wife and family when that happens.
It most certainly won't. I had no idea he'd said that.Margrethe II said:HRH the Prince of Wales has noted that he would like the title Defender of the Faith changed to Defender of all Faiths, which I imagine may not go down too well with the Protestant Church of England.
Yes we are- all over the world.Skydragon said:...There are many, many faiths and non faiths that are celebrated in the UK and Commonwealth Countries, contrary to what is shown on the news, we are not all out killing one another over it.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I urge you to do your research and find out why it's a very bad idea to change this tradition.Avalon said:...however I think that the Head of state...must be head of state for every single citizen of his country, regardless of religion.
With all respect to British traditions, I do think that Prince Charles' intention to be Defender of Faiths, rather than Defender of the Faith, is the right thing to do. That's my private opinion.
Queen Marie said:It most certainly won't. I had no idea he'd said that.
Yes we are- all over the world.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I urge you to do your research and find out why it's a very bad idea to change this tradition.
Why? If anyone knows the reasons for the oath he will take at some stage in the future it would be the POW. He is a very spiritual man but one of compassion and sense. To change to Defender of Faith makes sense in an extremely multicultural country like Britian where there are many people who are not COE and he is to be their king as well. He wants to move more in line with the religious make-up of his own country - something to be applauded in my opinion.On that note, it appears that HRH the Prince of Wales needs to do much research also.
If I could go into more detail I would, but I would be in breach of posting rules on religious grounds.
Queen Marie said:Yes we are- all over the world.
On that note, it appears that HRH the Prince of Wales needs to do much research also.
If I could go into more detail I would, but I would be in breach of posting rules on religious grounds.
I'm not necessarily talking about mass killings. I'm also not necessarily talking about Commonwealth countries. The fact that it's happening at all (anywhere in the world such as Indonesia, China, & Vietnam where Christians do not have the freedom to practise their faith openly, for fear of persecution, torture and execution) should be disturbing enough. The fact that it doesn't make world headlines doesn't mean it's not happening- all the time.Skydragon said:Out of a population in the UK of around 60 million (so I am told), I hear about very few killings based on faith in the UK.
The same for Australia, New Zealand, Canada and many of the other commonwealth countries, although as I am not there I cannot be definite about that. I am sure however, that mass killings in these countries, based solely on faith, would have made the international news.
PreDoc said:Charles has 30 more years of experience over William in dealing with the hostile press, the dictatorial establishment, the boring critics, the endless speeches, the soul-crushing staged events and life in a goldfish bowl. Camilla will make a satisfactory Queen Consort and Charles is finally happy.
I can't fathom why anyone would want to handcuff a man in his early twenties to the life of a king (i.e. "never stray from the following job description for the rest of your life: read out loud what we write on this paper, look interested in everybody and everything they have to say, wave and smile on cue, have sons and ensure they have sons, periodically wear theatrical costumes and preside over archaic ceremonies, and never share any point of view that could be interpreted as political").
Let William continue to find himself, get married or play the field, and enjoy the little amount of freedom he currently has.
Queen Marie said:Alrighty then, the monarch is the head of the CHRISTIAN church in England, and as such he or she is the defender of the Christian faith, and for this reason, should not be encouraging other religions in any way.
I'm not saying that other religions don't exist and shouldn't be recognised. I'm just saying that this particular tradition should not be changed on the basis that it is a Christian tradition.
Sorry, that's what I meant. I have a very romantic, old fashioned view so that's how I put it! "Church in England" being a Henry VIII thing.Elspeth said:He's the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, not of the Christian church in general.
Speaking as a born again Christian, I find the whole thing to be very, very wrong.Elspeth said:The Prince of Wales appears to believe that the role of Defender of the Faith (i.e., the Protestant Christian faith, or, more narrowly, the Church of England) is too exclusionary in a country that's become increasingly multicultural. Speaking as a nontheist, I'm not thrilled by the "Defender of Faith" or "Defender of Faiths" or whatever he wants to call himself, because the country has a large number of people without religious faith, over whom he will also be king.
Elspeth said:He's the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, not of the Christian church in general. The monarch vows during the coronation ceremony to uphold the Protestant faith.
The Prince of Wales appears to believe that the role of Defender of the Faith (i.e., the Protestant Christian faith, or, more narrowly, the Church of England) is too exclusionary in a country that's become increasingly multicultural.
ysbel said:Technically speaking, if he's the head of the Church of England, it makes sense for him to swear to defend the Anglican faith.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that he's swearing to defend the Methodist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, born-again Christian, or whatever other non-Anglican faith that's out there.
I also don't know how much relevance it has because I'm not sure how much influence the monarch has on religious debate and decisions within Great Britain.
I think it would only matter in the Coronation ceremony which is traditionally Christian and for the King of England, traditionally Anglican. I can't imagine what a Coronation for a Defender of ALL faiths would look like and I'm not sure I want to.
chrissy57 said:He never said ALL faiths but rather 'faith' as a singular term. Something of a difference - he wants to defend 'faith' for all his people not just those of one particular section of the Christian faith - note that Defender of the Faith only relates to his role of Defender the Anglican faith and other Christians even aren't covered. (I know the history behind the title so please don't tell me about Henry VIII, the Pope etc).
Queen Marie said:Speaking as a born again Christian, I find the whole thing to be very, very wrong.
chrissy57 said:As a Christian I have no problem with my future king wishing to defend faith in a general sense as I believe that the a powerful way to show true Christianity is to respect the faith, or non faith of others. This, to my interpretation of what he said and what he has done, is what Charles wants to do.