Page 9 | Harry and Meghan want a royal summit — and an apology

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:15

Good points, @skilpadde
I think some people misunderstand the role of the constitutional monarch.

Inspecto · 18/12/2022 10:19

skilpadde · 18/12/2022 10:09

If numbers were falling you’d think it was her job as head of the church to try and do something about it like hiring a Recruitment Officer for the Faith or something to try. The late Queen was very popular and that means she was in a position to defend the faith well. But clearly, she did not defend well and therefore didn’t do her god-given job properly or to the best of her potential.

No monarch, regardless of their popularity, was going to hold back the 21st century, or the increased atheism that accompanies the passage of time.

Those with faith should have the freedom to practise their faith. This is defence of the faith.

Those without faith are also free to live their lives as they see fit.

How this can be seen as a personal failing of the late Queen, I have not the foggiest clue.

The late Queen didn’t even try.

“increased atheism that accompanies the passage of time”
and also accompanied by a defender of the faith who wasn’t doing any defending.

Why do you think atheism is by de facto going to increase with the passage of time? Do you think faith is like entropy? If so, Faith needs a defender - they even created a title for it.

The Queen clearly defended her family, the firm and the monarchy. But she didn’t defend the faith. I just think we need to be honest about that.

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:22

The Glorious Revolution of 1688 and subsequent laws changed the relationship of monarch and church.

smilesy · 18/12/2022 10:22

Inspecto · 18/12/2022 10:19

The late Queen didn’t even try.

“increased atheism that accompanies the passage of time”
and also accompanied by a defender of the faith who wasn’t doing any defending.

Why do you think atheism is by de facto going to increase with the passage of time? Do you think faith is like entropy? If so, Faith needs a defender - they even created a title for it.

The Queen clearly defended her family, the firm and the monarchy. But she didn’t defend the faith. I just think we need to be honest about that.

Show quote history

You are clearly trying to shoehorn your opinion of the Queen into this thread 😂

limoncello23 · 18/12/2022 10:26

I'm not sure they could have married in the CofE if she hadn't been baptised as some kind of Christian.

In England, you are legally entitled to have your first wedding in a C of E church regardless of your own beliefs or religion (as long as it's an opposite sex wedding). So, neither of them needed to be baptised to be married in the C of E. They could literally have been Muslim or Jewish or Hindu or Sikh or atheist or anything or nothing. She was divorced, so it was at the discretion of the vicar. Nowadays most vicars will normally carry out weddings for most divorced people, and there was nothing scandalous about her divorce.

thecatsthecats · 18/12/2022 10:27

FrenchFancie · 18/12/2022 09:55

I find it hard to believe that W shouting at H scared him - I mean, Harry was an army officer, he got through sandhurst where they don’t wrap you up in cotton wool, and he fought in wars where he was at risk of being shot / killed so I do find it a stretch to believe that a raised voice or two caused him significant psychological harm.

fact is, in the US (which is now their primary target) H&M are seen in a favourable light - that won’t care what we in Britain are saying, overly much, unless they can use it to feed into their ‘victim’ persona and script that sells so well in the USA.

(and as an aside, where a newspaper quotes ‘a source’ without giving a name, that source exists - failure to have a source on record would leave the newspaper open to a libel action so the lawyers working for the paper would be all over this story like a rash, checking the sources do actually exist)

I must say, I find it astonishing that people keep trotting out this line as if PTSD isn't a thing.
Or changing mental health.

Last year I was harassed for a while. I ended up being like those cliche movie scenes where you wake up in the middle of the night bolt upright, sweating, heart pounding. Just over a text. A text that I would have previously handled no problem.

It's a very nasty angle of attack to suggest that men can't be afraid, ESPECIALLY on the grounds that they've previously been in the army.

NimrodNimroy · 18/12/2022 10:30

limoncello23 · 18/12/2022 10:26

I'm not sure they could have married in the CofE if she hadn't been baptised as some kind of Christian.

In England, you are legally entitled to have your first wedding in a C of E church regardless of your own beliefs or religion (as long as it's an opposite sex wedding). So, neither of them needed to be baptised to be married in the C of E. They could literally have been Muslim or Jewish or Hindu or Sikh or atheist or anything or nothing. She was divorced, so it was at the discretion of the vicar. Nowadays most vicars will normally carry out weddings for most divorced people, and there was nothing scandalous about her divorce.

Out of interest is it only your first wedding?

Harry is Meghan's second.

NimrodNimroy · 18/12/2022 10:32

Sorry Ignore me - I've read your full post. Blame it on my lack of caffeine this morning

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:33

If Harry has PTSD he really shouldn't be doing public engagements until he has it managed, as he said himself every click and flash of a camera triggered him (the South African interview).
Maybe a quieter life would have been better.

JRHartley72 · 18/12/2022 10:35

Inspecto · 18/12/2022 10:19

The late Queen didn’t even try.

“increased atheism that accompanies the passage of time”
and also accompanied by a defender of the faith who wasn’t doing any defending.

Why do you think atheism is by de facto going to increase with the passage of time? Do you think faith is like entropy? If so, Faith needs a defender - they even created a title for it.

The Queen clearly defended her family, the firm and the monarchy. But she didn’t defend the faith. I just think we need to be honest about that.

Show quote history

If the Queen had come out all guns blazing as defender of the Christian faith in the way you wanted, she'd have alienated and upset all her subjects who practise different faiths – there are currently an estimated nine or ten faiths worshipped across the four nations.

To only speak for Christians would've have led to even more accusations that she and the Royals are racist. The role of defender as it stands in the constitution is out of step with Modern Britain and I suspect the Queen was painfully aware of that.

Ohnonevermind · 18/12/2022 10:37

@Maireas

He’s been with clicked and flashed at
for years based on the Netflix footage so perhaps he was having exposure therapy.

MarshaMelrose · 18/12/2022 10:38

Inspecto · 18/12/2022 10:19

The late Queen didn’t even try.

“increased atheism that accompanies the passage of time”
and also accompanied by a defender of the faith who wasn’t doing any defending.

Why do you think atheism is by de facto going to increase with the passage of time? Do you think faith is like entropy? If so, Faith needs a defender - they even created a title for it.

The Queen clearly defended her family, the firm and the monarchy. But she didn’t defend the faith. I just think we need to be honest about that.

Show quote history

Faith is required when there is a lack of proof. As science gives us more answers, society feels they don't need God to rely on to make the world turn or to cure their illness.
Others have a different attitude and feel their life is enriched by having God in their life.
The Queen wasn't responsible for changing or moulding society's attitudes. She was responsible for the monarchies response abd adaptation to those changed attitudes.
Hence her statement that the CofEs role was not to defend Anglicanism to the exclusion of other religions. Instead, the Church had a duty to protect the free practice of all faiths in the country. So the monarch is more a defender of faiths in general rather than the one faith.

MarshaMelrose · 18/12/2022 10:42

It's a very nasty angle of attack to suggest that men can't be afraid, ESPECIALLY on the grounds that they've previously been in the army.

It's his brother who he's known and loved his entire life. I'm sure they've had rows about lots of things over their lifetime. He's pretty much said so in interviews. So to make a big thing out of it is just him grasping for things to moan about.

ClarathecrosseyedLioness · 18/12/2022 10:43

Yesterday was an interesting anniversary, it seems - www.tudorsociety.com/december-17-the-excommunication-of-henry-viii/

MarshaBradyo · 18/12/2022 10:44

It seems this argument is carrying the big reveal for a six episode show.

If he’d said raised his voice we’d just think oh well. They had to have more than that though.

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:47

Ohnonevermind · 18/12/2022 10:37

@Maireas

He’s been with clicked and flashed at
for years based on the Netflix footage so perhaps he was having exposure therapy.

You're right. None of it makes sense.

fartichoke · 18/12/2022 10:48

The palace are responding in the best way possible - deafening silence, excepting some witty courtier barbs to the papers. Invite to the Coronation. Keeping titles. They are apparently getting a warm mention in the King's Speech (recorded 2 days ahead of Netflix accusations being aired).

I wonder if H&M will have the balls to accept the invite and make eye contact at the Coronation?

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:57

Oh I think they'll be there, @fartichoke !

FrippEnos · 18/12/2022 11:01

fartichoke · 18/12/2022 10:48

The palace are responding in the best way possible - deafening silence, excepting some witty courtier barbs to the papers. Invite to the Coronation. Keeping titles. They are apparently getting a warm mention in the King's Speech (recorded 2 days ahead of Netflix accusations being aired).

I wonder if H&M will have the balls to accept the invite and make eye contact at the Coronation?

They can't not be there.
Pretty much their entire money stream relies on their closeness to an institution that they claim to hate.

fartichoke · 18/12/2022 11:09

Maireas · 18/12/2022 10:57

Oh I think they'll be there, @fartichoke !

Do you think they will look at ease and smiling and making eye contact with the people they've been stabbing in the back - i.e. pretty much just William and Kate at this point, book depending? As there will be a completely different, more sociable, lighter mood to the last public engagement of the funeral that they participated in. Will be an ''interesting'' acting masterclass all round

Coronateachingagain · 18/12/2022 11:11

It may be just an excuse not to go to the coronation.

upinaballoon · 18/12/2022 11:12

In her first Christmas broadcast, in 1952, before her coronation, the late Queen said, "I want to ask you all, whatever your religion may be, to pray for me....to pray that God may give me wisdom and strength to carry out the solemn promises I shall be making......"

In a speech at Lambeth Palace in February 2012 she said, "The Church has a duty to protect the free practice of all faiths in this country...."

I apologise if someone else has quoted these. I haven't time to read all through the thread.

MarshaBradyo · 18/12/2022 11:13

Silence from RF and then they can decide whether to go or not

Saying nothing is best

RF will be nice enough or polite imo and focus will be on the ‘young couple’ in the media as usual

celandiney · 18/12/2022 11:13

*Inspecto
So why excuse does the Queen have for failing to defend the faith properly?

Faith numbers dropped throughout her reign. So you’ll be hard pressed to argue she did well as ‘defender of the faith’.

Can you imagine her appraisal with God?*

Perhaps without the Queen numbers would have fallen more? Perhaps "Defending the faith" isn't all about numbers? Perhaps the Queen's support of the structure of the Church of England supported faith in general? Perhaps her own personal faith defended the faith in general?
And the Queen has been a devout,practising,public member of her church for her entire life - God may be happy with that.

JRHartley72 · 18/12/2022 11:17

FrippEnos · 18/12/2022 11:01

They can't not be there.
Pretty much their entire money stream relies on their closeness to an institution that they claim to hate.

Show quote history

Exactly. If they attend, they'll have at least another 60 minutes' worth of footage to show for it! Their entire business model now relies on them attending Royal occasions and 'sharing their truth' afterwards.

Yet it would be massively hypocritical for them to attend, seeing as they have nothing nice to say about his family. But Charles won't not ask them because he knows it will play into their 'woe is us' narrative.