Will Charles Ever Reign?

[Alison20]

Of course he will. That is the system. Unless, of course, he dies before the Queen.

 

[surfrosa]

I am a new member. I have read part of thread three. How old is the Archbishop of Canterbusy RT Revd Rowan Williams? Is he young enough to be Archbishop at the time of the possible coranation? I do agreee that Prince William needs more time. However I think people do not care if Charles becomes King. I think they are not prepared for Camilla to be Queen. The way the Royal Family has went about keeping her under wraps is working. If She takes Princess Consort and is not crowned Queen at the coranation then everything will be fine. I do not think she is the one who needs to be told this. Prince Charles is the one who is Jealous. He is tring to Erase Princess Diana with his new wife not her totally. I thik in teh beginning she had a hand in all the spitfullness but not so much now. I am a devoted Princess Diana Fan. But I also feel that by gones should be by gones if the proper service and apology is made.

 

[Olishka]

I think he will, if only to give William's child(ren) a chance to have some semblance of normalcy before having to cope with the additional pressure of being the heir and spare(s). For some unexplained reason, I don't see William having children before his thirtieth birthday.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Prince Charles is the one who is Jealous.

Jealous of what exactly? Being the future King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and 16 other countries? Yeah, he's soooo jealous.

 

[branchg]

Charles has no choice in becoming King nor does William. Under the Act of Settlement, they are automatically in-line to succeed The Queen when she dies as The Sovereign and heir to the throne, respectively. It does not matter if the "people" oppose it or not or whether people "like" Camilla as Queen or not. Britain is a constitutional monarchy with a hereditary Sovereign from the descendants of The Electress Sophia.

Whether Britain becomes a republic or not is an open question, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon (a century or more).

 

[surfrosa]

Jealous of what exactly? Being the future King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and 16 other countries? Yeah, he's soooo jealous.

Anyother person who can or does out shine him

 

[branchg]

Anyother person who can or does out shine him

I don't believe Charles cares whether "someone" outshines him or not. He is The Prince of Wales and the future King. The notion that he was, for example, "jealous" of Diana's public acclaim or resented her success in carrying out duties was debunked many times. If anything, he was very proud and supportive of her. The trouble started later as their respective advisors and staff created "camps" between them and Diana began to resent his relationship with Camilla, even though she too sought comfort outside her marriage.

There have also been reports of "jealousy" with Camilla in the tabloids and among Diana supporters like Richard Kay. I don't believe it, however, it certainly is true he is a difficult man at times.

 

[BeatrixFan]

And your proof for that statement? I don't think Charles was ever jealous of the popularity of Diana, I think he was angry (as alot of people were) that she chose to upstage not only Charles, but the Queen and other members of the Royal Family. It was unprofessional and it did damage the Royal Family because it portrayed the rest of them as surplus to requirements which was extremely wrong. I can't see how Charles could be jealous of Camilla when what she does is quite the opposite and actually supports and works with the Royal Family rather than against it.

 

[branchg]

And your proof for that statement? I don't think Charles was ever jealous of the popularity of Diana, I think he was angry (as alot of people were) that she chose to upstage not only Charles, but the Queen and other members of the Royal Family. It was unprofessional and it did damage the Royal Family because it portrayed the rest of them as surplus to requirements which was extremely wrong. I can't see how Charles could be jealous of Camilla when what she does is quite the opposite and actually supports and works with the Royal Family rather than against it.

Exactly. Once Diana's anger and resentment towards the Camilla factor overwhelmed her, even though she was also not faithful, her negative side came out more and more. She became manipulative, spiteful and delusional in her belief that her popularity was a tool to be used in the media to diminish not only Charles, but The Queen herself.

Eventually, this was her fatal mistake that destroyed any chance of a reconciliation with Charles and resulted in the end of her marriage.

 

[surfrosa]

Eventually, this was her fatal mistake that destroyed any chance of a reconciliation with Charles and resulted in the end of her marriage.

Is this the only thing that destroyed their Marriage? I am asking for other things than the Affair! I would like a United Kingdoms persons point of view. We have obviously been told different things in America even though I have read in excess of 20 books on the Royal Family.

 

[BeatrixFan]

We're not saying it destroyed the marriage, we're saying it destroyed any future she had within the Royal Family as a working member.

 

[surfrosa]

Eventually, this was her fatal mistake that destroyed any chance of a reconciliation with Charles and resulted in the end of her marriage.

What else had a hand in the end of the marriage? I would like a UK point of view. Information is different here in America.

 

[Al_bina]

I would not like to see Prince Charles as King of United Kingdom, because: 1) he might be characterized as weak for not marrying LOVE OF HIS LIFE and 2) ruining the other person's life. I hope some divine intervention will prevent him from ascending the throne.

 

[BeatrixFan]

How lovely. Tell me, anyone else you'd like to wish death upon or are we done for today?

 

[surfrosa]

Back to the subject, Charles Should, Can and Will be King. That is the Law and The law is right. We Can Not live without Laws

 

[Al_bina]

to BeatrixFan

Dear BeatrixFan,
As you know, good deeds never go unpunished...
Well ... I did not mean such extreme manifestation of the intervention.
In my humble view, the concept of divine intervention is open to a wide range of interpretations. For example, changes in the legal system of the UK, abolishment of monarchy ...

 

[Iluvbertie]

As the law currently is stated Charles will be King when his mother dies.

Anyone who wishes to prevent this man, who has served his country so well for all of his adult life, from becoming king, just because he married the wrong woman, is, to my mind, a rather nasty individual.

Charles made one mistake - he married a completely unsuitable woman - unsuitable in the sense that they had nothing in common before they were married. They had totally different interests - e.g. he was a country man at heart and she lied and told him that she enjoyed being in the country when she preferred the city life, he was a very serious man and she was a flighty woman, he preferred classical music to her love of the modern rubbish (1980s music doesn't even qualify as music in my opinion - nor does 90s music either), he had a degree while she didn't even have one 'O' level. I could go on with the incredible differences between them that made a marriage between them doomed from the beginning in my opinion - and I said it to my friends at the time.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Dear BeatrixFan,
As you know, good deeds never go unpunished...
Well ... I did not mean such extreme manifestation of the intervention.
In my humble view, the concept of divine intervention is open to a wide range of interpretations. For example, changes in the legal system of the UK, abolishment of monarchy ...

Well, so far Charles is healthy, he was able to marry Camilla and it looks as if he will live happily ever after with a crown in his future. When this future comes to fruition, will you then believe that someone divine holds his hand over Charles but did not over Diana? Just interested in your way of thinking.

 

[Al_bina]

To Jo of Palatine

Dear Jo of Palatine,
I do not like Prince Charles as a person because he was not a man enough to insist on marrying a lady he truly loved and loves. He used the approach “both the wolves have eaten much and the sheep have not been touched”. This proved fatal for his marriage.
I may seem naïve, but believe that fate of each human being is governed by something supernatural to a certain degree. Apart from various theories related to the tragic accident that took Princess Diana’s life, it still amazes me that she passed away before Prince Charles married LOVE OF HIS LIFE.
So it might be fair to say that there is a probability that he will not become a King.
Sometimes even the wildest dreams may come true….

 

[Al_bina]

To Chrissy57

Dear Chrissy57,
No one is going to prevent him from ascending the throne. He will be just another symbol of traditions.
As for your opinion about Princess Diana, de mortius nil nisi bene which means "Say nothing but good about the dead" (to please Elspeth).....

 

[Elspeth]

Al bina, on this forum we don't require that people speak only good things about dead people (or live people); criticism is acceptable as long as it's expressed thoughtfully and considerately. We don't, however, allow posts in languages other than English.

 

[cde]

Dear Chrissy57,
As for your opinion about Princess Diana, de mortius nil nisi bene which means "Say nothing but good about the dead" (to please Elspeth).....

Why are you afraid to hold her up to scrutiny? If Diana was so wonderful then it shouldn't be a problem should it?

 

[Al_bina]

to cde...

Dear cde,
I am not a fan of Princess Diana, I like her fashion style to a certain extent. I do apologize to those members of this forum from the Northern America and certain European countries, who consider my words as reluctance to accept flaws of the Princess. However, it is viewed as ill-bred in my country and my house to subject the dead to critisism, even if "it is expressed thoughtfully and considerately" (Elspeth, 2007).
It felt that my request to tone down opinions about Princess Diana bespeaks lack of my upbringing...
Summing the said up, I would like to close these debates as they have nothing to do with whether Prince Charles will reign or not.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Dear Chrissy57,
No one is going to prevent him from ascending the throne. He will be just another symbol of traditions.
As for your opinion about Princess Diana, de mortius nil nisi bene which means "Say nothing but good about the dead" (to please Elspeth).....

I actually believe that we should always tell the truth.

That can mean saying bad things about the dead because the dead person did bad things.

If we only say good things about the dead then we often can't speak the truth and surely you don't advocate that we can't tell the truth do you?

Diana did many good things but she also did many bad things. According to your beliefs we can only talk about her charity work and her role as a mother and not about her adultery, her lies, her manipulation of the press etc

That would make for a whitewash of a very human person and it is her human qualities that have made people admire, love, dislike and even hate her throughout the last 26 years.

 

[Al_bina]

To Chrissy 57

Dear Chrissy57,
I have already expressed my final opinion about this sujbect.
When hurt and anguished, ladies tend to do strange things. For example, Medea killed her own children in revenge. So the bottom line is that almost nothing can stop Prince Charles to be a King of the UK... Let him be the King , who can not make real decisions and/or influence anything at the state level ...

 

[Iluvbertie]

Dear Chrissy57,
I have already expressed my final opinion about this sujbect.
When hurt and anguished, ladies tend to do strange things. For example, Medea killed her own children in revenge. So the bottom line is that almost nothing can stop Prince Charles to be a King of the UK... Let him be the King , who can not make real decisions and/or influence anything at the state level ...

I would have liked to know your answer to the question I asked you - do you believe that we should tell the truth about people or only tell the truth when that person is alive?

Charles has made real decisions throughout his life.

He has influenced things at state level (I assume you mean the government and/or official policy) already so why would that change when he becomes king.

The British monarch works quietly and not in your face anyway and Charles has shown himself able to do that.

He made one wrong decision - a 'real' decision at that mind you - to marry the wrong woman.

Why do you believe that making one wrong 'real' decision should cost a man the job for which he has been trained all his life by a person many people describe as one of the best at the job?

It seems rather tough to me to deny someone something because of one wrong decision - I have made many more than that - maybe I should do my job as I make wrong decisions in my job but noone has suggested that I shouldn't be able to continue with my job but you are saying that Charles shouldn't be able to do the job he was born to do and has been trained to do because of one bad decision to do with the job - choosing the right wife (which fortunately he now has by his side).

 

[Al_bina]

To Chrissy57

Chrissy57,
I strongly believe that the dead should be left alone. The truth, whatever you have meant by this concept, should be told to those who are still in this world. I think our opinions reflect difference in the cultural backgrounds.
I wish I lived in the UK and knew better about influence Prince Charles or any other member of the British Royal family has got at the state level. From my standpoint, the British king/queen “is holding the now largely ceremonial position of head of state” (Wikipedia, n.d.). How will the life of usual inhabitants of the British Isles change, if the royalty disappears tomorrow due to some magic, let us say?
I like the British Royal family for their speech accent and the Ascot race.
I hope I have adequately replied to your questions.

 

[Skydragon]

I strongly believe that the dead should be left alone. The truth, whatever you have meant by this concept, should be told to those who are still in this world. I think such our opinions might reflect difference in the cultural backgrounds.
I wish I lived in the UK and knew better about influence Prince Charles or any other member of the British Royal family has got at the state level. From my standpoint, the British king/queen “is holding the now largely ceremonial position of head of state” (Wikipedia, n.d.). How will the life of usual inhabitants of the British Isles change, if the royalty disappears tomorrow due to some magic, let us say?
I like the British Royal family for their speech accent and the Ascot race.
I hope I have adequately replied to your questions.

Hi Al_bina, for me the truth is the truth and as the 'bad' things are revealed, it would be wrong to try to cover them up, whether the person concerned is alive or dead. It would be wrong, IMO, to present someone as having done no wrong when all the evidence says they had.

How would lives change in the UK, I don't know, I have never even considered it, but as our traditions and ideals are destroyed, it feels as if a piece of Britain is being murdered, a little at a time. I believe many would mourn the loss of our monarchy. Some of course would revel in it, but I think they are only a very small minority. Part of what makes many of us feel British would be lost forever, lets hope it never happens.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Chrissy57,
I strongly believe that the dead should be left alone. The truth, whatever you have meant by this concept, should be told to those who are still in this world. I think our opinions reflect difference in the cultural backgrounds.
I wish I lived in the UK and knew better about influence Prince Charles or any other member of the British Royal family has got at the state level. From my standpoint, the British king/queen “is holding the now largely ceremonial position of head of state” (Wikipedia, n.d.). How will the life of usual inhabitants of the British Isles change, if the royalty disappears tomorrow due to some magic, let us say?
I like the British Royal family for their speech accent and the Ascot race.
I hope I have adequately replied to your questions.

As I am a History teacher I certainly can't leave the dead alone. I would be out of a job, as would the many thousands of people who are historians and archaeologists as we deal with the dead as the essential part of our working lives. In the history courses that I teach for the HSC here in NSW (the end of schooling exam similar to the A-levels in England) I have to spend 25% of the course teaching about a specific personality. At some time in the future I would expect Diana to actually be on that syllabus - many students actually research her life in either the Year 11 course or the Year 12 Extension course as it is - but you would have us not teach any of these people as they are all dead. Please justify your reasons for wanting us to not study history.

At least now I understand your viewpoint. Hopefully you can see mine, as it relates very much to what I find important and worthwhile - the study of events, people etc from the past and the different interpretations of these events and people's actions - the very essence of history and therefore the very essence of my job.

 

[Al_bina]

To Chrissy57

Chrissy 57,
I have been delighted to learn that we have understood each other. You have a very noble and difficult profession of teaching others to discern reasons/ causes that underlie any historical event, scrutinize facts, and deduce an inference.
I wish you every success in such challenging job.