King Charles

Casdon

Glorianny

Casdon

MissInterpreted

Anniebach

Harry told the world male members of his family married to suit the mould but he married for love

I'm no fan of Harry (or any of the RF, if I'm being totally honest) but I think there's more than a degree of truth in that particular statement.

I don’t think there is. If that were true why did Charles marry Camilla?

Because the first wife proved more difficult to shape to the mould than was expected.

Your logic defeats me as ever. So Charles married Camilla, a divorced and independent woman, who still now retains her own home, and who had two children, against the wishes of many, because he had failed to mould Diana to conform.

Casdon
😂😂😂

Anniebach

Glorianny obviously you are not a member of the Anglican Church

Or perhaps you don't know the rules of the Cof E as well as you imagine
Advice to clergy about permitting a second marriage in church
Would permitting the new marriage be tantamount to consecrating an old infidelity?
‰ ^While it would be unreasonable to expect that the couple should not even have known each other during the former marriage(s), was the relationship between the applicants – so
far as you can tell from the information made available to you - a direct cause of the breakdown of the former marriage?^
www.facultyoffice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Divorce-HoB-Advice.pdf

I have no need to Google , you are not a member of the Anglican Church so suppose you need to

Well I know threads digress, but.....lol.

The Queen , during a public engagement today as said,
The King is doing extremely well under the circumstances.

Allsorts

People are entitled to have their own opinions on things without getting personal.
I think H and M have behaved shamelessly in most things, no doubt both grandfathers will never see their gc.

I don’t see any of the clear differences of opinion here as ‘getting personal’. Disagreements happen, posters express their views - and don’t fall out (usually)

Anniebach

I have no need to Google , you are not a member of the Anglican Church so suppose you need to

Actually I was brought up as C of E. And because of family circumstances I have explored both C of E and RC practices.
It doesn't change anything anyway. Advice to C of E clergy is to question previous involvement and the effect on the first marriage.
Why else do you think Charles and Camilla were married in a registry office?

Well, I agree with Annie. My mother remarried in 1947 in church, ( she was a widow) and wore a suit , can't remember the colour and only have black and white photos to look at. Virginal white would have been inappropriate to say the least, especially with her 4 year old two pews back. My daughter, divorced, married again in church, but wore a very pretty blue dress with flowers in her hair. Again, pure white? Err, No. She most certainly was not asked anything about the relationship with her new husband by our Anglican Priest beforehand. Why would a Priest do this when the people concerned could easily lie?.something he couldn't possibly know. A Priest can use his/her discretion, but not for anything specific.

Glorianny

Anniebach

I have no need to Google , you are not a member of the Anglican Church so suppose you need to

Actually I was brought up as C of E. And because of family circumstances I have explored both C of E and RC practices.
It doesn't change anything anyway. Advice to C of E clergy is to question previous involvement and the effect on the first marriage.
Why else do you think Charles and Camilla were married in a registry office?

Well, obviously because his mother was Supreme Head of the Church of England so, whatever the relaxing of the rules and rights or wrongs of the situation, it was felt perspicacious that he and Camilla marry in a small civil ceremony.
No doubt this was discussed in depth with the Archbishop of Canterbury too and a blessing followed.

I've been to at least three weddings in church where one or both of the people getting married had been divorced. (One twice.)

Jaberwok

Well, I agree with Annie. My mother remarried in 1947 in church, ( she was a widow) and wore a suit , can't remember the colour and only have black and white photos to look at. Virginal white would have been inappropriate to say the least, especially with her 4 year old two pews back. My daughter, divorced, married again in church, but wore a very pretty blue dress with flowers in her hair. Again, pure white? Err, No. She most certainly was not asked anything about the relationship with her new husband by our Anglican Priest beforehand. Why would a Priest do this when the people concerned could easily lie?.something he couldn't possibly know. A Priest can use his/her discretion, but not for anything specific.

I posted the link with the relevant information.
If you choose to believe inaccuracies that is up to you.
Of course a priest doesn't have to ask. Of course people will lie.
But C&Cs relationship was public knowledge.
Some priests in the Church have stricter views than others.
It is up to them if they choose to undertake these ceremonies.
If C&C had married in church there could well have been a split in the church. So they married in a registry office and had a blessing.

Jaberwok

Well, I agree with Annie. My mother remarried in 1947 in church, ( she was a widow) and wore a suit , can't remember the colour and only have black and white photos to look at. Virginal white would have been inappropriate to say the least, especially with her 4 year old two pews back. My daughter, divorced, married again in church, but wore a very pretty blue dress with flowers in her hair. Again, pure white? Err, No. She most certainly was not asked anything about the relationship with her new husband by our Anglican Priest beforehand. Why would a Priest do this when the people concerned could easily lie?.something he couldn't possibly know. A Priest can use his/her discretion, but not for anything specific.

At one of the weddings I mentioned in my above post, the bride wore a flouncy white dress and veil, it was a wonderful wedding, both of them had been divorced.
They divorced later as well.

It just occurred to me. How can people not telling the truth or a priest not asking be a denial of the ruling?
And of course divorced people get married in church. Adultery is not the only cause of divorce.

Callistemon21. I think you add right about HM's second marriage. Of course a church wedding could, and probably would, have caused controversy for obvious reasons, so far better to have a civil marriage a church blessing later. Princess Anne married again in Scotland at Crathie Kirk well away from prying eyes, but obviously HM couldn't do that.

Of course, men are not subject to the same sexual standards as women. It is accepted that they can sow-their-wild-oats all over the place (including with married women - or even men), and appear, suited and booted at the alter in clothing that doesn't give their game away.

It's archaic.

But - if you choose to marry into the RF, you either accept the tradition(s) or flout them. And, if you flout them, you can't pick and choose which suit and which don't. If you want the privileges and benefits you have to abide with the rules. However, these will change over time but if you are one of the 'modernisers', you are going to get some flack. Not everyone is happy with Charles' modernising of the RF, nor his passion for environmental matters - and he's been criticised for his 'taste' in architecture. Considering his background, I feel a sneaking admiration for him.

Jaberwok

Callistemon21. I think you add right about HM's second marriage. Of course a church wedding could, and probably would, have caused controversy for obvious reasons, so far better to have a civil marriage a church blessing later. Princess Anne married again in Scotland at Crathie Kirk well away from prying eyes, but obviously HM couldn't do that.

Also because when she remarried the C of E did not perform ceremonies for divorcees
The Church of England has allowed divorced people to remarry in church, subject to a priest’s discretion, since 2002. At the General Synod meeting of that year, 269 members voted in favour of allowing Christian remarriage compared to 83 against
She was married in 1992.

Could it not be Charles and Camilla chose not to have a church
wedding.

Women who marry into the royal family, George 6th etc, wives
were chosen, things moved on, Sarah lived with a chap before she married Andrew, Edward and Sophie lived together for several years, Catherine lived with William, Megan lived with a
celebrity chef between two marriages.

When I spotted the headline "Queen says king is coping well ......" or words to that effect, I thought it was crazy, as the queen is dead.

I do not think I will ever get my head round Camilla being queen .....

The Prince and Camilla had planned to get married in a room inside Windsor Castle, apparently not realising that under the terms of the 1994 Marriage Act it would have had to be licensed and would thereby allow any commoner to tie the knot in the Queen’s Windsor home in future.
So instead they went to Windsor Guildhall, already licensed for civil ceremonies, and had a blessing afterwards at Windsor Castle.

Luckygirl3

When I spotted the headline "Queen says king is coping well ......" or words to that effect, I thought it was crazy, as the queen is dead.

I do not think I will ever get my head round Camilla being queen .....

Well, after 70 years and 142 days (I think) - it's hardly surprising you instinctively thought "eh, what?!"

The late Queen has been the backdrop to our lives for the major part of them - second longest reigning monarch in history.

I think, also, because Queen Elizabeth was 'old-school', and we've seen the end of that era, it takes some getting used to - this new 'order' of things?

Things have definitely moved on regarding who can marry in a church and their circumstances before the marriage. It's time we moved on about the colour "white" too.

I was remarried in a church in 1996 without any questions about why both my husband were divorced. I know of people in similar circumstances who were married before then too. Glorianny Charles and Camilla were married in 2005 and most certainly able to marry in Church as divorcees (although the adultery might have scuppered it). I suspect they took the path of least resistance because the public were not quite as enamoured of Camilla back then. I think Diana was still too popular for them to have had a Church Wedding.

icanhandthemback

Things have definitely moved on regarding who can marry in a church and their circumstances before the marriage. It's time we moved on about the colour "white" too.

I was remarried in a church in 1996 without any questions about why both my husband were divorced. I know of people in similar circumstances who were married before then too. Glorianny Charles and Camilla were married in 2005 and most certainly able to marry in Church as divorcees (although the adultery might have scuppered it). I suspect they took the path of least resistance because the public were not quite as enamoured of Camilla back then. I think Diana was still too popular for them to have had a Church Wedding.

If they had had a church wedding there is a good chance it would have split the C of E. Although most clergy in the UK are fairly liberal the church does have some members who are very "traditional "and much closer to the RC view of marriage.

I doubt in their mid 50’s they considered a church wedding, not every divorcee does

Marriage of divorcees was not carried out in Anglican churches
untill 2002

Anniebach

I doubt in their mid 50’s they considered a church wedding, not every divorcee does

You'd think the head of the CofE might! Still, it's done and dusted. They were presumably happy with their choice.

The late Queen was married