King Charles III

King Andrew and Fergie wouldn't be very pleasant, but they really wouldn't affect the running of the country.

Then what is the point of having a King and Queen?

Entertainment value, apparently. Across the various threads running today, I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works. We're doomed.

Normandygirl

For monarchists it seems that it's the perceived personalities of the players that matter, not whether the system itself is fair or relevant in the 21st century. I find it really strange that they favour a system that they have no choice about, especially when you consider that we could be stuck with a "wrong un" for half a century or more.
So, a serious question to all the monarchists out there.
If by accident of birth, the UK now had King Andrew and Queen Fergie to be followed by King Harry and Queen Megan would you still be monarchists?
Honest answers please.

I’d be happier with them if they’d had the grounding and education that Charles and William had from childhood - who know how differently they’d both have turned out?

icanhandthemback

^I cannot guess what your problem is with that.^

I explained what my problem is quite a way back. Try living through their sort of behaviour and then dealing with the psychological damage it causes.

Have you discussed it with your Vicar or others in authority in your church?

I don't need to discuss it with my vicar as I learned the 10 Commandments as a child. I am sure one of those covers it.

If he has no power, what is the point of him?
This!

A Titular role still needs to have someone in it worthy of the role and IMO, he isn't it no matter how nice he appears to be today.

I was going to write a very, very long answer but decided it would be uncharitable. However, it did bring me to the conclusion that you are not a member of the Anglican Church. It was the not looking to the church for guidance that did it and you really don't know your bible. Especially:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

That's the transference of the cause of your bitterness, using gossip as evidence and expecting other to be infallible. I wonder how you will do against your parameters.

So (I don't need to know these answers. They are for you.)

1) Are you baptised.
2) Are you resident in the parish where you habitually worship
3) Or, not resident in your parish but have habitually attended public worship in the parish.

Otherwise, sunshine, just declaring yourself a member of the Church of England will not get you on any Parish Register and you will not have any say in how they run their Church. The idea that sitting at home while declaring you are a member makes you one is not, actually, true.

I'm really not sure God is in to voting either.

volver

^King Andrew and Fergie wouldn't be very pleasant, but they really wouldn't affect the running of the country.^

Then what is the point of having a King and Queen?

Entertainment value, apparently. Across the various threads running today, I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works. We're doomed.

We seem to have come full circle Volver back to the question of " what is the point of"
It would appear that the only point seems to be entertainment for the masses, a real life soap opera where they choose their favourite characters and can boo and hiss at the villains.
Either that or the forelock tugging gene is too strong in the British public.
It is depressing I agree.

I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works.

Still not giving any explanations to these declarations, I see Volver.

DaisyAnne

^I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works.^

Still not giving any explanations to these declarations, I see Volver.

On various threads:

People asking if Wales gets a Prince because it's a principality.

People not understanding the difference between being declared a Prince of a whole country and being given a made-up title that entails no responsibilities.

People not knowing the purpose of a monarch.

People thinking that monarchs in this country are just titular heads with no power.

People not knowing that Heads of State in different countries can be Kings, Queens, Presidents, Emperors or Emirs. Or anything the country decides to call them.

People thinking that we shouldn't be allowed to choose our own HoS because we're all too untrustworthy.

Enough to be going on with?

Volver ^I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works. We're doomed.

You really shouldn’t be judging anyone on lack of knowledge after the appalling lack of knowledge you’ve displayed on here today.

You say your husband’s a guide at Glamis? I hope he’s much more conversant with the RF’s Scottish ancestry than you are. Wouldn’t be kosher for him to be giving tourists erroneous information now

tickingbird

^Volver I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works. We're doomed.

You really shouldn’t be judging anyone on lack of knowledge after the appalling lack of knowledge you’ve displayed on here today.

You say your husband’s a guide at Glamis? I hope he’s much more conversant with the RF’s Scottish ancestry than you are. Wouldn’t be kosher for him to be giving tourists erroneous information now

Away with you, now you're just havering.

I'm sure someone with your extensive knowledge of the aristocracy of Scotland knows, Glamis employs their own guides and are very fussy.

So what have I got wrong today, oh omniscient one?

Excuse my lack of knowledge but what does havering mean, please?

volver

DaisyAnne

I am so disappointed at the lack of knowledge about how RF works and how our country works.

Still not giving any explanations to these declarations, I see Volver.

On various threads:

People asking if Wales gets a Prince because it's a principality.

People not understanding the difference between being declared a Prince of a whole country and being given a made-up title that entails no responsibilities.

People not knowing the purpose of a monarch.

People thinking that monarchs in this country are just titular heads with no power.

People not knowing that Heads of State in different countries can be Kings, Queens, Presidents, Emperors or Emirs. Or anything the country decides to call them.

People thinking that we shouldn't be allowed to choose our own HoS because we're all too untrustworthy.

Enough to be going on with?

That's you asking others, not you giving an explanation Volver.

I was querying why you ask others rather than giving them reasons. Not what you thought of the level of other people's understanding.

Generally, no one is trying to convince you. You are part of a minority; why would they? They seem to be just saying they don't agree with you. You, on the other hand, seem to be trying to tell them they should change their mind and agree with you. Why should they?

It was lovely news to hear that Nicola Sturgeon wants to retain the monarchy in Scotland even if Scotland achieves independence.

Callistemon21

Excuse my lack of knowledge but what does havering mean, please?

Wittering. ?

See DaisyAnne's post for a good example.

Mollygo

It was lovely news to hear that Nicola Sturgeon wants to retain the monarchy in Scotland even if Scotland achieves independence.

That's been SNP policy for years.

Well done for catching up, though. ?

Callistemon21

Excuse my lack of knowledge but what does havering mean, please?

Havering does not mean "wittering". It's vacillating or indecisive behaviour Callistemon. It conjeurs up someone walking down a pavement but going first to one side and then to the other because they can't decide which side is best.

It's a lovely and descriptive word. However, it's probably not exactly what volver meant as neither I nor ticklingbird show any signs of being indecisive. That may be her problem.

conjures - all the letters but not in the right place

Thanks DaisyAnne

DaisyAnne

icanhandthemback

I cannot guess what your problem is with that.

I explained what my problem is quite a way back. Try living through their sort of behaviour and then dealing with the psychological damage it causes.

Have you discussed it with your Vicar or others in authority in your church?

I don't need to discuss it with my vicar as I learned the 10 Commandments as a child. I am sure one of those covers it.

If he has no power, what is the point of him?
This!

A Titular role still needs to have someone in it worthy of the role and IMO, he isn't it no matter how nice he appears to be today.

I was going to write a very, very long answer but decided it would be uncharitable. However, it did bring me to the conclusion that you are not a member of the Anglican Church. It was the not looking to the church for guidance that did it and you really don't know your bible. Especially:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

That's the transference of the cause of your bitterness, using gossip as evidence and expecting other to be infallible. I wonder how you will do against your parameters.

So (I don't need to know these answers. They are for you.)

1) Are you baptised.
2) Are you resident in the parish where you habitually worship
3) Or, not resident in your parish but have habitually attended public worship in the parish.

Otherwise, sunshine, just declaring yourself a member of the Church of England will not get you on any Parish Register and you will not have any say in how they run their Church. The idea that sitting at home while declaring you are a member makes you one is not, actually, true.

I'm really not sure God is in to voting either.

I am baptised, confirmed and have been on the Parish register. I went to a church school as a Primary School child, went to church every Sunday, volunteered as a Sunday school helper and 5 of my 6 children travelled to the CofE Secondary School. You are completely wrong about me sitting at home whilst declaring myself a member although in recent years I have become somewhat disenfranchised with our local Parish. You are obviously able to be uncharitable without writing a long answer.

The parents of the young Princes both publicly admitted their adultery to the whole world on tv. That is not gossip. As I said it is not the adultery per se but the damage it does to the children and the fact that this is the person who is now The Defender of the Faith and Head of the Church. That to me is hypocritical and an opinion I have every right to have. I have a good understanding why my parents acted as they have and I have forgiven them but that hasn't taken away the damage it caused me and my sister so what you would call transference to bitterness, I would say was a greater understanding of what those Princes went through.

I never claimed to be sin free or perfect so if God wants to rain damnation on me for thinking that some one who has so publicly broken one of the 10 Commandments over and over again shouldn't be the head of His church, bring it on.

I don't know what God thinks about voting but he wouldn't get a vote for Charles role either as King or Head of the Church so hardly relevant.

Anyway, I won't engage any further. You have made your view known and so have I. I doubt there will be any movement on either side so it seems rather pointless.

Ah, apologies to Volver there is a Scottish and an English meaning. Scottish one is to talk nonsense or babble. This would mean volver's "wittering" would be true for the meaning but not in relation to what tickingbird said as that was perfectly clear.

Scotland has done the Queen and the RF proud today. Fantastic service with wonderful music in beautiful St Giles. The Scottish regiments looking absolutely splendid. The Police person(?!) riding and controlling that fractious police horse deserves a medal. The Police themselves were perfect. The Scottish Parliament, brilliant especially N.S's speech. All put together inside four days. Well done Scotland and thankyou.

Oh goodness, we are getting in a tangle today with etymology and linguistics on various threads!

I really didn't need or want your history icanhandthemback

Not all children are damaged by divorce some are damaged by people staying in the marriage and it is not for you, me or anyone else to believe we know in the case of someone else's marriage.

All I was attempting to say is that you will have no say in whether Charles is head of the Church of England. Most people would not. As the head he is a useful link between Church and State. I cannot see why it should be a problem.

Disenfranchised? Blaming someone else again for how your life has gone. I see a pattern here.

I appreciated your frankness and your perspective Icanhandthemback. I for one found your posts moving and useful.

volver

Mollygo
It was lovely news to hear that Nicola Sturgeon wants to retain the monarchy in Scotland even if Scotland achieves independence.
That's been SNP policy for years.

Well done for catching up, though.

It might be the policy, but according to the expert on an interview in Scotland today, retaining the monarchy is only supported by 20% of the SNP.
Now I’m wondering who is right.
Does the SNP support policies that are so unpopular with their members, especially the republicans on GN, or was the expert not such an expert at all and guilty of inaccuracies.

Good post DaisyAnne. My child benefited enormously from my divorce and he would be the first to say that. .

You will I’m sure icanhandthemback be familiar with Jesus’s admonition ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’.

Oh, and I have been baptised and confirmed into the Church of England and attended a Church school too, fwiw.

I watched a clip of the Queen's children walking behind her coffin today. Charles looked exhausted, as well he might, given that he has been thrown headlong into a round of ceremonies, meetings, church services, walkabouts, TV appearances - all this within hours of being present at the death of his Mother. The long walk behind the hearse must have really taken it out of him, and Princess Anne, who had also witnessed her Mother's death and then sat in a car for six hours to accompany her Mother's coffin when it left Balmoral. They are in their seventies - that itinerary would have me on my knees, and it continues apace presumably for at least another week.