Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

King Charles and Queen Camilla

381 replies

LoveInTokyo · 16/05/2018 07:36

AIBU to wonder why so many people seem to think this will not happen?

I can understand why a lot of people abroad seem to think it’s likely that Prince Charles will just hand over the crown straight to William because he’s younger and more popular. Most countries don’t have royal families, and in some European monarchies routine abdication is something that actually happens.

But I was reading some of the completely mental royal wedding threads on here and was surprised by the number of similar comments. I particularly enjoyed one Daily Express reader’s person’s comment about how the public would never accept Camilla as queen.

I don’t think most people give a shiny shit whether Camilla is Queen or not, but those that do have an issue with it will have to get used to the idea. Prince Charles didn’t have to give up his place in the line of succession when he married her, therefore unless the Queen outlives Charles, he will be king and Camilla will be queen!

OP posts:
Queenoftheblitz · 16/05/2018 20:03

Biscuit that's a good point about the Brittania!
And yes I think he needs mothering and won't tolerate criticism, even from his wife.
But I think he was born with that self pitying trait - nothing's ever his fault.
One thing I love about him is his dancing in the 1970s. I youtube the videos when i need cheering up.

GooseberryJam · 16/05/2018 20:09

My parents are 'that generation' and they tell me they love me all the time. My dad got treated very coldly by his own mum and it made him resolve to be different. It's not generational : it's people.

SerenDippitty · 16/05/2018 20:12

*It's seen as the monarch's duty to stay on the throne for life, as they made a commitment before God.

Exactly. She was annoited as well as crowned, and she is known to be a devout Christian.*

Even Popes are permitted to retire these days.

Idrinkandiknowstuff · 16/05/2018 20:15

Charles will be head of the church. Technically he was OK to remarry as he was a widower. Camilla, not so. I am an atheist and a republican so let's ask Church of England believers: do you think that the head of the church and his spouse should follow the rules of the church?

I’m an atheist too, but I’ll think you’ll find the Church of England does allow divorcees to remarry in “exceptional circumstances”

www.yourchurchwedding.org/article/marriage-after-divorce/

SenecaFalls · 16/05/2018 20:18

I think there are a few divorced priests in the C of E. I know there are in the US Episcopal Church.

Luisa27 · 16/05/2018 20:19

What makes you think Charles “won’t tolerate criticism, even from his wife” @Queenoftheblitz?

Genuine question btw

Battleax · 16/05/2018 20:20

.

AndhowcouldIeverrefuse · 16/05/2018 20:22

Idrink as an onlooker I have no doubt that a way will be found to accommodate whatever Prince Charles wants - besides the fact that Camilla converted to Catholicism and then recanted muddles the waters. I still wonder how it all sits with those who have faith and feel that the tenets of the church are meaningful.

Luisa27 · 16/05/2018 20:23

I agree Gooseberry - don’t think it’s generational either

kooshbin · 16/05/2018 20:28

I’ve watched a few royal documentaries lately and thought that in the most recent the Queen seemed rather frail. In particular, the one about the Commonwealth forest initiative. She seemed to not know how to make small talk, though she’s been doing that for decades. In the segments with David Attenborough, it seemed like he was having to feed her lines to get just a minimal response. Yet she’s known him for decades, going back to when he was in charge of filming her Christmas broadcasts.

She won’t abdicate, but I wonder if she’ll consider a Regency if her royal duties become too much for her. Though the notion of a regency is tainted almost as much as abdication.

I can't see Charles accepting Camilla being anything other than Queen. Mostly for personal reasons; it would be a bit of an insult to him for his wife to not be Queen. But also, Camilla not being accorded the title of Her Majesty is a bit too similar to Mrs Simpson not being accorded the status of HRH.

AnneWiddecombesHandbag · 16/05/2018 20:28

I think the queen gives that cold imagine in public as she sees it that she's at work maybe?
I remember seeing William and Harry telling a story where they were playing a rough game with their cousin zara and the Queen came running over to tell them off. They were both in hysterics. Makes me think they are all a bit more normal in private.

Of course no one actually knows anything about them, it's just what the papers etc want to public to believe.

SenecaFalls · 16/05/2018 20:31

It appears that there is a bishop in the C of E who is married to a divorcee. So my guess is it's not going to be a problem for Charles.

The church's position on divorce has obviously changed. It has been fairly liberal in the US for quite some time. I was married 30 years ago in the US Episcopal Church to a divorced man. It did require permission from the bishop, but the only thing they seemed to really be interested in was whether he was current on child support payments. It was explained to us that the Church did not want to give its blessing to a man starting a new family who was not fulfilling his obligations to his existing family.

biscuitraider · 16/05/2018 20:33

What you want then weeping & wailing in public??
Why does it have to be to the extreme? Confused

Veterinari · 16/05/2018 20:33

I can't see Charles accepting Camilla being anything other than Queen. Mostly for personal reasons; it would be a bit of an insult to him for his wife to not be Queen.

Why would it? The monarch’s spouse does not normally receive the King/Queen title. Prince Philip didn’t, the queen mother didn’t, Prince Albert didn’t. It would be unusual for Camilla to be given the title queen.

At most Camilla might be Princess, but I think it much more likely that she’ll tactfully retain her Dichess status so as to avoid further Princess Di comparisons. She’s pretty sensible.

SerenDippitty · 16/05/2018 20:33

I’ve watched a few royal documentaries lately and thought that in the most recent the Queen seemed rather frail.

I’ve thought that too. It must be exhausting at that age to have to always walk without support of any kind, a stick or arm.

biscuitraider · 16/05/2018 20:35

*It's seen as the monarch's duty to stay on the throne for life, as they made a commitment before God.

Exactly. She was annoited as well as crowned, and she is known to be a devout Christian.*

Bollocks.

MrsDilber · 16/05/2018 20:35

I'm sure they've said she wouldn't be queen, but I wouldn't mind if she were.

snufflehuff · 16/05/2018 20:36

Why should he step aside for William? Charles will actually make a great king. He's got good good ethics. And anyone who hates him for having an affair, well I think you'll find Diana did too! She was no saint and shouldn't be treated as such. William needs to concentrate on bringing his kids up. They are his priority.

Queenoftheblitz · 16/05/2018 20:37

What makes you think Charles “won’t tolerate criticism, even from his wife” @Queenoftheblitz?

Genuine question btw

I would suggest some of the biographies to read. The latest one is not complimentary. What is really telling is his taped chat with Camilla - it's all very poor me. "Your greatest achievement is to love me" says Charles.
Diana was the only one to pull him up over his arrogance and that's what turned him against her. He didn't even consider she might have a point.
Diana didn't say he wasnt fit to be king out of spite. She saw him surrounded by sycophants who encouraged his self importance.

snufflehuff · 16/05/2018 20:38

As well, it would be inconceivable to abdicate. I think the queen will have made it very clear to Charles throughout his entire life that he can never abdicate and must fulfil his duty whether he likes it or not. Just like her dad did.

SenecaFalls · 16/05/2018 20:42

Bollocks

Maybe to you, but likely not to the Queen, which is one reason she probably will not abdicate. I do think it's possible that there will be an official Regency at some point.

Idrinkandiknowstuff · 16/05/2018 20:43

The monarch’s spouse does not normally receive the King/Queen title. Prince Philip didn’t, the queen mother didn’t, Prince Albert didn’t. It would be unusual for Camilla to be given the title queen.

More hogwash. I really wish people would check their facts.

Male consorts do not take the title king because it’s seen as above the Queen, as has already been pointed out on this very thread if you tried reading it. Female consorts are queen. The queen mother’s full title was Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, and when her husband was alive, she was just Queen Elizabeth.

Queenoftheblitz · 16/05/2018 20:44

Why would it? The monarch’s spouse does not normally receive the King/Queen title. Prince Philip didn’t, the queen mother didn’t, Prince Albert didn’t. It would be unusual for Camilla to be given the title queen.

At most Camilla might be Princess, but I think it much more likely that she’ll tactfully retain her Dichess status so as to avoid further Princess Di comparisons. She’s pretty sensible.

The queen mum became queen elizabeth alongside her husband. She became queen mum on being widowed. In her household staff called her queen elizabeth till the day she lived.
Camilla will have the title of queen when charles is crowned - that is automatic.
Male consorts are not given the title of king as it supercedes the queen title.

Veterinari · 16/05/2018 20:52

Thanks Queen for the correction, it’s nice that you managed to deliver it without the unnecessary rudeness of Idrink Thank you, I appreciate that.

Idrink you clearly do knowstuff but sometimes it’s nice to be nice as well.

Lizzie48 · 16/05/2018 20:58

Charles and Camilla weren't officially permitted to marry by the C of E. They were married in a Registry Office followed by a Church blessing. I've never understood that, if a marriage is worthy of a blessing surely the marriage should be permitted to take place in church in the first place??