William & Kate 10 year wedding anniversary video

[Crimsonripple]

Has anyone else seen this on Instagram? It's so lovely and natural. Their PR camp are hitting the right buttons! The Oprah interview now just seems so trashy in comparison!

They are advertising them so much as the future of the monarchy, I am quite convinced Charles will be skipped over or abdicate quite quickly.

motherloaded

I'm just wondering what experiences you have had that has caused this extreme case of opinionatedness...

Which is arrogance of a kind.

@KarmaNoMore

They are advertising them so much as the future of the monarchy, I am quite convinced Charles will be skipped over or abdicate quite quickly.

Equally, I am cast-iron certain he categorically will not. Neither be skipped over, nor abdicate.

Why would he be ‘skipped over’?? Because he’s not as popular as William? It just doesn’t work like that.

@KarmaNoMore

They are advertising them so much as the future of the monarchy, I am quite convinced Charles will be skipped over or abdicate quite quickly.

I’ve been thinking along the same lines.

@motherloaded

Imagine having been told from birth that you will be King of England, with courtiers bowing to everything you say and want! See what success has done to celebs who became famous too young, it's not always pretty.

Wiliam is VERY certain of his own importance and always make it really clear and doesn't take anyone who dares expressing a different opinion very kindly.

Spoilt as the royals might be, I honestly think he would be marginally less arrogant if he had been treated differently from birth.

I don’t think he’s arrogant at all. I think he thinks very carefully and keeps his own counsel. That can come across as arrogance when it’s simply being very guarded.

If Charles was skipped over then it would solve the problem of Archies title. Then he wouldn't be a Prince because he wouldn't be the grandson of the monarch. Surely they wouldn't be so devious. No I think Charles will want to be King. He's waited long enough.

I think he will want to be King too, but sadly an ageing , rather dull man who many people remember as a cheating, selfish husband will not excite the nation. I think the RF are well aware that they need to scrabble around to promote themselves and win public favour in the current climate. There is going to be a massive economic recession following Brexit and Covid. Especially if Scotland gets independence. The cost/benefits analysis in having a RF is going to be an increasingly crucial factor. If Charles become King in his late seventies, we all know it’s not going to be a very relevant reign. Therefore the light is being shone on the Cambridges since they have a lot more appeal.

There is also the issue of Charles becoming head of the Anglican Church when he spent so many years in an open adulterous relationship (not so strange for a monarch) and but is now married to her (not seen since Henry VIII). As much as people are happy to turn a blind eye to it, it presents some philosophical problems from the theological point of view.

I think he will try to preserve the monarchy by stepping out of the way before he causes a real crisis.

There is also the issue of Charles becoming head of the Anglican Church when he spent so many years in an open adulterous relationship (not so strange for a monarch) and but is now married to her (not seen since Henry VIII). As much as people are happy to turn a blind eye to it, it presents some philosophical problems from the theological point of view.

That’s exactly it, isn’t it?

A church that was founded to enable divorce and the formalisation of an adulterous relationship - and for a King- has no business engaging in theological handwringing about a similar situation.

I think our society has moved beyond those kind of concerns.

Maybe the relationship between State and Church needs adjusting to accommodate that, though. It does anyway, TBH.

@KarmaNoMore

There is also the issue of Charles becoming head of the Anglican Church when he spent so many years in an open adulterous relationship (not so strange for a monarch) and but is now married to her (not seen since Henry VIII). As much as people are happy to turn a blind eye to it, it presents some philosophical problems from the theological point of view.

I think he will try to preserve the monarchy by stepping out of the way before he causes a real crisis.

No one is expected to be sinless. Not even the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Pope. Repentant will do.

No, and certainly most monarchs have not been sinless and will never be. There has always been another women or a “queen’s favourite” on the side, but they didn’t go and divorce the rightful wife to marry the other woman for a few hundred years now, so it is difficult to have the church teaching against infidelity when the head of the church is having his cake and eating it.

Obviously, for me and many of you, this is no problem, we couldn’t care less about Charles take on relationships and his actions may have been justified, love triumphing above protocol and religion and all that, pretty much as with Harry and Meghan, Wallis Simpson and the Duke of Windsor, etc but still incongruous to the teachings of the church.

I think the Church has moved with the times too though. Meghan was allowed to marry in Church as a divorcee after all. And gay clergy are allowed. Kings and Queens are not seen as gods anymore so why do they have to behave like gods and be perfect? Charles and Diana’s marriage was never going to work and was a bad decision on many people’s parts for them to ever get married but hindsight is a wonderful thing. If monarchs throughout history have been unfaithful, why is he being singled out for criticism? He seems to be making a success of his second marriage. Infidelity has many causes. Having been on the end of it when it was a symptom of a relationship that was no longer working, I can perhaps understand his motives.

If monarchs throughout history have been unfaithful, why is (Charles) being singled out for criticism?

If I started I'd never stop, but for now I'll just mention that he has an unfortunate habit of befriending sex offenders and even paedophiles ... like his brother, only Andrew's not going to be the future king

Since very few of us are "perfect" I see no reason to expect the RF to be either; however most of us manage to stagger through life without behaving quite as they do, even without obsessive secrecy to protect us

Since very few of us are "perfect" I see no reason to expect the RF to be either; however most of us manage to stagger through life without behaving quite as they do, even without obsessive secrecy to protect us

This is interesting because I think we know the tip of the iceberg. There will be so much more that we don't actually know. The worst bits are leaked or hacked (tampongate type of thing) so there will be so much more that is protected

@Puzzledandpissedoff I was only referring to his infidelity being singled out as pp have. Not to any other alleged bad behaviour. I’m sure we could go on all day as you say discussing other things the Royals or indeed any other celebrities are up to.

There will be so much more that we don't actually know

Quite - and considering what's crawled out when they've taken their eye off the ball, you have to wonder about the gravity of what's kept back because it's thought unfit for public consumption

smilesy You're spot on about the infidelity thing; we simply don't know the truth about some of the rumours, which is why I avoid commenting on them
However there's nothing "alleged" about Charles's friendship for at least one convicted paedophile; that was proved and he was officially criticised for it: www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/prince-charles-criticised-over-misguided-2851797

Well.... it's the sort of thing that our childrens' childrens' children will get to hear about when no one cares and/or the Monarchy doesn't exist any more.

I think we go back 250 years at the moment. But there has been campaigns to release records saying...
"The British people have a right to know their past, they have a right to properly judge this institution and the people that serve in it and you can only really do that with full access to all the official records."

The young people that I know, from work and from my children's friends, are all very keen on the younger royals.

Prince Charles is no paedophile/hebophile for goodness sakes! He loosely befriended Bishop Ball, as did many others. Even the then AofC, George Carey, who was lovely, stuck up for Ball, afterwards saying, "We were all duped". Jimmy Saville had no close friends but was 'friendly' with many people in high places, part of his cover.

I remember both being very popular and much admired. I actually attended a lecture given by Bishop Ball and he was extremely witty, you'd never have guessed in a million years. It was a shock when it all came out.

I don't know any younger people who have any time for the Royals. Not my adult DCs nor their friends. DCs and a group of their friends and me are on a 'Politics' whatsapp group and if anything they are more anti than pro. Some feel they are unnecessary in these days and times.

Prince Charles is no paedophile/hebophile for goodness sakes!

Where on earth has anyone said he is? The IICSA's report made it clear that this is an issue of judgement rather than criminality on Charles's part, since it's possibly to befriend an offender without actually sharing their loathsome practises - even to "feel desperately strongly about the wrongs which have been done", which rather gives the lie to claims of ignorance, since anyone in his position with an iota of sense would surely call for further details

BTW have you actually read that report? Quite apart from Charles's involvement it has some interesting things to say about the church's decisions too ... you know, that church which "lovely" George Carey was the head of

Meghan has written a children’s book based on Harry and Archie’s relationship. You can buy it here

“The Bench started as a poem I wrote for my husband on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born," said the Duchess. "That poem became this story. Christian layered in beautiful and ethereal watercolor illustrations that capture the warmth, joy, and comfort of the relationship between fathers and sons from all walks of life; this representation was particularly important to me, and Christian and I worked closely to depict this special bond through an inclusive lens.”

None of really know what they’re like - it’s all one big PR stunt to distract people from the fact that the royal family is a defunct archaic structure which needs dismantling. Literally, just a rich family who have benefitted over centuries from successive land grabs at the expense of working people.

Abolish the monarchy. They can still live off their estates, but it’s an irrelevance now.

Switched off at inclusive lens.

I might have put this on the wrong thread, maybe it’s better suited to the Reconciliation thread.