Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Just for Fun > Community Board
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-06-2012, 01:45 PM   #196
Lintasare
Holy
Hello. My name is Inigo Peeptoya...you ate my father...prepare to die
Ok fess up...who killed the riddle?
 
Lintasare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Somewhere in Middle-Earth
Posts: 5,606

Quote:
Originally Posted by RitaE View Post
If and when Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice have children (and depending on their spouses) they will not have titles which flow through their Mothers lineage. This is similar to the children of Princess Anne. It is likely that the Queen (or Charles if he is King) would grant them some sort of of honorable title if their parents wish to go that route.

There is quite a tradition lately with the Royal parents wishing to downplay the nobility thing during their offsprings' developmental years - such as with Princess Anne and Prince Edward - and preferring that their children remain untitled.
Actually Edward's children do have titles. They are Lady Louise Windsor and Lord James Windsor, Viscount Severn. He has asked that they be styled as the children of an Earl. However they can choose at the age of majority to be known as Princess Louise of Wessex and such. But who knows if they will.
__________________
Numerous trips as a child and adult. Next Trip: 9th Annual Food and Wine Birthday trip to POP!, CP Intern Fall Advantage 2002 Hollywood Brown Derby



Lintasare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:10 PM   #197
sissy_ib
DIS Veteran
 
sissy_ib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,765

Quote:
Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah View Post
Well I do thank you for helping me to understand. I do have another question for you. When I was in high school, I visited England and one of the people we visited with was supposed to be some sort of expert on the royal family. He was talking about how things have changed since Charles married Diana and how William wasn't required to marry a virgin anymore, that she didn't have to have noble blood, and that, in fact, the only requirement as that she not be Roman Catholic. Have you heard anything like this?
I would assume that neither William or Catherine were virgins when they married as they lived together for sometime.
__________________
sissy_ib is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 12-06-2012, 02:11 PM   #198
JennaDeeDooDah
My oh my what a wonderful day!
 
JennaDeeDooDah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,363

Quote:
Originally Posted by sissy_ib View Post
I would assume that neither William or Catherine were virgins when they married as they lived together for sometime.
As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.
__________________
JennaDeeDooDah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:13 PM   #199
sissy_ib
DIS Veteran
 
sissy_ib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,765

Quote:
Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah View Post
As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.
I know she converted to the Church of England before they married. Not sure if she was Roman Catholic before or not, but she converted from something.
__________________
sissy_ib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:16 PM   #200
RitaE
DIS Veteran
 
RitaE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,033

Quote:
Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah View Post
As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.
If you read about the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholics you will get an idea of that.
RitaE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:17 PM   #201
JennaDeeDooDah
My oh my what a wonderful day!
 
JennaDeeDooDah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,363

Quote:
Originally Posted by RitaE View Post
If you read about the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholics you will get an idea of that.
But things change. I was wondering if this is one that had changed.
__________________
JennaDeeDooDah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:27 PM   #202
RitaE
DIS Veteran
 
RitaE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,033

No, it is one of the laws concerning the line of succession that is currently under scrutiny and will likely change, but as for now it stands. It is not so much that they are not allowed to marry a Roman Catholic, it is that they would abdicate their place in the line of Succession should they do so.

Quote:
The Act of Settlement (1701) laid down that only Protestant heirs of Princess Sophia, granddaughter of James I, may succeed to the British throne. Neither Roman Catholics, nor those who marry a Roman Catholic, nor those born out of wedlock, may remain in the line of succession. Under current common law the crown is passed on by male primogeniture under which younger sons succeed before their elder sisters.
RitaE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 02:58 PM   #203
A_Princess'_Daddy
DIS Veteran
 
A_Princess'_Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,173

Quote:
Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah View Post
As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.
Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.
__________________
DW Me DD DS
BWV 5/22/10-5/30/10 & 3/12/11-3/19/11, AKV 11/18/11-11/27/11, BWV 2/23/12-2/27/12, BLT 3/16/12-3/25/12, Many trips before, too many to try to count
A_Princess'_Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:14 PM   #204
CdnCarrie
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,874

Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Princess'_Daddy View Post
Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.
It's in the process of being changed right now.
CdnCarrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:17 PM   #205
JennaDeeDooDah
My oh my what a wonderful day!
 
JennaDeeDooDah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,363

Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Princess'_Daddy View Post
Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.
When I was in high school, my best friend and I had quite the argument about this. She was absolutely convinced that Queen Elizabeth was still running the country - like how you think a queen would run a country - and that the Prime Minister was head of the church. There was nothing I could say or do to convince her otherwise. We asked our history teacher. We asked our British foreign exchange student. We consulted the internet. No matter what everyone told her, she was absolutely convinced that the Queen was 100% in charge, Parliament did not exist, and that the Prime Minister got his name because he was the minister in charge.
__________________
JennaDeeDooDah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:19 PM   #206
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,033

Quote:
Originally Posted by sissy_ib View Post
I know she converted to the Church of England before they married. Not sure if she was Roman Catholic before or not, but she converted from something.
Not converted she went through the confirmation. She had been baptised church of england but not confirmed. The catholic rule was because of James II.
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:27 PM   #207
Deb in IA
Knows that KIDS are better than cats
When do we leave for that nice long Hawaii vacation?
I'm a wimp, and I don't like food that hurts to eat
 
Deb in IA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Iowa City, IA (that's IOWA, not Idaho or Ohio)
Posts: 15,217

Quote:
Originally Posted by CdnCarrie View Post
It's in the process of being changed right now.
I think the monarch can have a Roman Catholic spouse, but I don't think they themselves can be Catholic.

From Wikipedia:

Restrictions by gender and religionSee also: 2011 proposals to change the rules of royal succession in the Commonwealth realms
Succession is currently governed by male-preference cognatic primogeniture, under which sons inherit before daughters, and elder children inherit before younger ones of the same gender. However, on Friday 28 October 2011, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, announced at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth that all 16 Commonwealth realms, including the United Kingdom, had unanimously agreed to abolish the gender-preference rule.[88] They also agreed that future monarchs should no longer be prohibited from marrying a Catholic – a law which dates from the Act of Settlement 1701, following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However, since the monarch is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the law which prohibits a Roman Catholic from acceding to the throne – which originated as a result of the English and Scots' distrust of Roman Catholicism during the late 17th century – would remain.

Only individuals who are Protestants may inherit the Crown. Roman Catholics and spouses of Roman Catholics are prohibited from succeeding.[89][90][91] An individual thus disabled from inheriting the Crown is deemed "naturally dead" for succession purposes, and the disqualification does not extend to the individual's legitimate descendants.
__________________
Deb

"Children are our most valuable natural resource."
- Herbert Hoover, 31st President, native of West Branch, Iowa
Deb in IA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:32 PM   #208
crashbb
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,479

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb in IA View Post
I think the monarch can have a Roman Catholic spouse, but I don't think they themselves can be Catholic.

From Wikipedia:

Restrictions by gender and religionSee also: 2011 proposals to change the rules of royal succession in the Commonwealth realms
Succession is currently governed by male-preference cognatic primogeniture, under which sons inherit before daughters, and elder children inherit before younger ones of the same gender. However, on Friday 28 October 2011, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, announced at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth that all 16 Commonwealth realms, including the United Kingdom, had unanimously agreed to abolish the gender-preference rule.[88] They also agreed that future monarchs should no longer be prohibited from marrying a Catholic – a law which dates from the Act of Settlement 1701, following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However, since the monarch is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the law which prohibits a Roman Catholic from acceding to the throne – which originated as a result of the English and Scots' distrust of Roman Catholicism during the late 17th century – would remain.

Only individuals who are Protestants may inherit the Crown. Roman Catholics and spouses of Roman Catholics are prohibited from succeeding.[89][90][91] An individual thus disabled from inheriting the Crown is deemed "naturally dead" for succession purposes, and the disqualification does not extend to the individual's legitimate descendants.
Actually, from what you quoted, they cannot have a Roman Catholic spouse. I know that this was raised again when the male preference was raised, but it was not approved.
crashbb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:41 PM   #209
Domo
DIS Veteran
 
Domo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Domoland
Posts: 819

Quote:
Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah View Post
When I was in high school, my best friend and I had quite the argument about this. She was absolutely convinced that Queen Elizabeth was still running the country - like how you think a queen would run a country - and that the Prime Minister was head of the church. There was nothing I could say or do to convince her otherwise. We asked our history teacher. We asked our British foreign exchange student. We consulted the internet. No matter what everyone told her, she was absolutely convinced that the Queen was 100% in charge, Parliament did not exist, and that the Prime Minister got his name because he was the minister in charge.


In theory, the Queen still has constitutional powers, but they'd vanish in an instant if she tried to exercise them. At most they are safeguards. If an unsavoury person ends up as Prime Minister, we could legally get rid of them by asking the Queen to sack them. Nice and tidy.

As for the Catholic thing, laws are going through that are aimed at reforming the Monarchy. Catholics are no longer frowned upon and daughters can ascend to power as equally and easily as a son might.
__________________


No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Domo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2012, 03:44 PM   #210
CdnCarrie
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,874

They cannot have a RC spouse. That is why Prince Michael gave up his place in line. Like he was even close to the front of the line.
CdnCarrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.