Queen Camilla

[Cheburashka]

Christopher Hitchens had some spot on views on Diana's devotion to various causes.

How much of Christopher Hitchens's time has been devoted to helping the needy?

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I think William has forgiven his father and Camilla decades ago. Harry I am not to sure about.

https://www.theroyalobserver.com/p/duchess-camilla-stepmother-relationship-prince-william-harry

 

[Marrila]

https://www.theroyalobserver.com/p/duchess-camilla-stepmother-relationship-prince-william-harry

Many (most?) children aren't thrilled with a stepmother. Time helps in many cases. I think William's kids call Camilla Gaga, just as her grandchildren do.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Many (most?) children aren't thrilled with a stepmother. Time helps in many cases. I think William's kids call Camilla Gaga, just as her grandchildren do.

That seems like an appropriate name.

 

[Marrila]

That seems like an appropriate name.

Her grandchildren chose it. As many grandchildren do.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Her grandchildren chose it. As many grandchildren do.

Yes. I think it’s fitting.

 

[Buzz Rules]

I wonder what the founders would say today about some of its citizens caring about the royals of Europe?

 

[Her Dotness]

From what I've read about Camilla as a mother and grandmother, she's said to be affectionate, supportive, lively and great fun.

Perhaps those qualities appealed to Charles as undemonstrative as his parents reportedly always were toward him.

 

[Marrila]

From what I've read about Camilla as a mother and grandmother, she's said to be affectionate, supportive, lively and great fun.

Perhaps those qualities appealed to Charles as undemonstrative as his parents reportedly always were toward him.

I think she frequently exhibits the same qualities you describe. I particularly have admired her kind and caring work with a children's hospice over the years.

 

[ronandannette]

Every summer at the local National Park I see the huge floral ERII and wonder how easy it will be to change it to CRIII. Assuming that’s the name he choses to use. Probably not too hard - change the E to C and sod around it.
Also wonder if the school will take down the picture of ERII and not bother replacing it.

Just popping in with another fun fact about British Royal titular traditions.

Luckily, your idea would work just fine since the letter "R" will be the same for both of them. In the case of the Queen, the "R" stands for Elizabeth Regina (meaning Queen) and in Charles' case it will stand for Charles Rex (meaning King). Neither Regina or Rex are their respective middle names.

 

[CdnCarrie]

Just popping in with another fun fact about British Royal titular traditions.

Luckily, your idea would work just fine since the letter "R" will be the same for both of them. In the case of the Queen, the "R" stands for Elizabeth Regina (meaning Queen) and in Charles' case it will stand for Charles Rex (meaning King). Neither Regina or Rex are their respective middle names.

Exactly ! But he could choose to use Philip, Arthur or George instead of Charles.
I just don’t see him doing that,
I think it will be King Charles III.

 

[ronandannette]

Exactly ! But he could choose to use Philip, Arthur or George instead of Charles.
I just don’t see him doing that,
I think it will be King Charles III.

Yes, he could. I agree with you completely though - that's a rather antiquated thing to do and I don't think he will, just as his mother chose not to.

 

[Her Dotness]

Charles = King Arthur?

Naaawww

 

[tcufrog]

Christopher Hitchens had some spot on views on Diana's devotion to various causes.

He pointed out that she seemed to gravitate to the splashy ones that would gather publicity whereas Princess Anne quietly did an enormous amount of charitable work and never sought out the spotlight for it. Actively avoided press coverage of herself oftentimes, in fact.

I have no idea why Diana did what she did regarding her charitable work. I will say that she brought a lot of needed attention to some worthy and neglected causes. Her public caring treatment of people who were suffering from AIDs really helped. Many people forget how people suffering from AIDs at the time were usually treated. It was heartbreaking and horrifying. I don't have a strong opinion WRT the British monarchy but I really respect Diana for that. I don't remember seeing other members of the royal family doing that during the 80s when Diana was.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I have no idea why Diana did what she did regarding her charitable work. I will say that she brought a lot of needed attention to some worthy and neglected causes. Her public caring treatment of people who were suffering from AIDs really helped. Many people forget how people suffering from AIDs at the time were usually treated. It was heartbreaking and horrifying. I don't have a strong opinion WRT the British monarchy but I really respect Diana for that. I don't remember seeing other members of the royal family doing that during the 80s when Diana was.

How Princess Diana Changed Attitudes to AIDS



Princess Diana’s Charity Work, Explained - 9 Reasons She Was So Much More Than A Style Icon

 

[Lisa_lvspplmvr]

They need to skip Charles and Camilla and go straight to William and Kate . Camilla will never be considered a real queen , consort or not .

 

[Her Dotness]

The issue for me in this comparison, not that it matters, is that Charles will also be considered head of the church, a church based on scriptures that say to remarry after divorce is adultery....

...In my eyes, being the head of the church makes it hypocritical, and places both of them in a ”do as I say, not as I do” position. Most heads of state are not considered leaders or heads of a particular religion, and while I may find their morality lacking on occasion, I don’t get the hypocrisy vibe I get in this case, and I lose respect for them both as a result.

Weeell, a couple of points render this dubiously relevant, IMO.

First, whenever the crown passes to Charles, there's not much point in his abdicating in favor of William who's hardly in a better position by this criterion.

William and Kate openly lived together for some time before marrying, rendering them just as tainted in scriptural terms, the very devout would argue.

Should this occur within the next year or so (sadly), they could both abdicate in favor of Prince George who presumably wouldn't be so precocious as to be ineligible at age 9 or 10.

Perhaps it is time to consider separating the monarch from that particular responsibility.

Second, we might actually consider adultery a traditional qualification for the monarch as head of the Church of England. (No, I'm not so crass as to speculate about the current Queen's status. I have a few scruples--too few, many would say.)

Remember who the very first one was? Henry VIII, who declared himself such in order to divorce his devoutly Catholic first wife, Catherine of Aragon, so as to marry his pregnant mistress, Anne Boleyn.

William may not be thoroughly qualified, if we look at the matter in that light. <sly wink & grin>

 

[ronandannette]

Weeell, a couple of points render this dubiously relevant, IMO.

First, whenever the crown passes to Charles, there's not much point in his abdicating in favor of William who's hardly in a better position by this criterion.

William and Kate openly lived together for some time before marrying, rendering them just as tainted in scriptural terms, the very devout would argue.

Should this occur within the next year or so (sadly), they could both abdicate in favor of Prince George who presumably wouldn't be so precocious as to be ineligible at age 9 or 10.



Second, we might actually consider adultery a traditional qualification for the monarch as head of the Church of England. (No, I'm not so crass as to speculate about the current Queen's status. I have a few scruples--too few, many would say.)

Remember who the very first one was? Henry VIII, who declared himself such in order to divorce his devoutly Catholic first wife, Catherine of Aragon, so as to marry his pregnant mistress, Anne Boleyn.

William may not be thoroughly qualified, if we look at the matter in that light. <sly wink & grin>

Yes, just so. And from the perspective of a person of faith, albeit not an Anglican, it would seem the current problem is really one of an ecclesiastical nature. The Church of England should do away with having persons clearly not committed to the denomination or it's doctrines as it's Head, whether in name only or not. Charles has openly flirted with Buddhism; fine if he wants that but NOT fine for the ascending "Defender" of Protestantism's bulwark denomination.

 

[CdnCarrie]

They need to skip Charles and Camilla and go straight to William and Kate . Camilla will never be considered a real queen , consort or not .

I disagree. Charles is well educated with years of both military and public service under his belt.
As a commonwealth citizen i will be okay with him as our head of state.
Just curious what reasons are that you don’t want him as your head of state/king? The marital affair?
There are other heads of states in other countries that have had known affairs, why is this particular position judged more?

king Edward VII was known to have many many affairs including Camilla’s ancestor Alice Keppler.
Edward VIII slept with only married women.

 

[Her Dotness]

king Edward VII was known to have many many affairs including Camilla’s ancestor Alice Keppler.

THAT'S who the ancestors were! Thanks for supplying the info.

Edward VII was Charles's great-grandfather and Alice Keppel (slight correction) Camilla's great-grandmother.

Belatedly ETA to correct: Edward VII was Charles's great-great grandfather. Edward VII to George V to George VI then QE2 is the line of descent. I've omitted Edward VIII, who preceded Geo VI and abdicated, for any who notice that wasn't the exact order.