Topic: Elizabeth Windsor's husband hospitalized

[Irish Hermit]

FYI:
The position of Head of State is purely ceremonial.

So it makes no difference what so ever if the King or Queen is the Head of State, none what so ever,

Hmm... tell that to Gough Whitlam, the Prime Minister of Australia.  Removed from office.


Also the bishops of the Church of England...... appointed when approved by Her Majesty.

[James2]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

[biro]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

[primuspilus]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

The real king of England:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz,_Duke_of_Bavaria

[Irish Hermit]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

Good question!   By an act of rebellion the American settlers usurped the authority of the monarchy.   Who is now the legitimate authority?

[primuspilus]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

The real king of England:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz,_Duke_of_Bavaria

Sry, could not edit. He is the heir of Stuart....no im not a jacobite.

PP

[James2]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

The real king of England:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz,_Duke_of_Bavaria

Sry, could not edit. He is the heir of Stuart....no im not a jacobite.

PP

Well, if one wants to have hereditary succession and let God "choose" the king, then there should be no Parliamentary interference in the succession.  When the Act of Settlement was passed in 1701, there were about 50 people excluded due to their adherence to Roman Catholicism.  Their descendants must number in the hundreds by now, and they all have a better claim than Elizabeth Wettin.  The irony is that Parliament has recently decreed that Catholicism is no longer an impediment to the succession, but there ain't no grandfather clause for those who have been passed over.

[GiC]

I prefer to refer to her as Elizabeth Wettin, descendant of Hanoverian usurpers.

Interesting... who, then, is the legitimate royal family?

Good question!   By an act of rebellion the American settlers usurped the authority of the monarchy.   Who is now the legitimate authority?

Well those who usurped it, of course, namely the people. That's kinda how authority works, you only have it so long as you can exercise it.

[LBK]

Hmm... tell that to Gough Whitlam, the Prime Minister of Australia.  Removed from office.

A clarification: Gough Whitlam was Prime Minister from 1972-75. He and his government were indeed dismissed from office on the orders of the Governor-General (the Queen's representative/viceroy) on November 11, 1975.

http://whitlamdismissal.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis

[Shanghaiski]

With regard to Stewarts, Prince William, through his mother, is the first heir to the throne to have succession from them. He also has succession from the early Anglo-Saxons and several Byzantine royal families as well as St. Vladimir of Kiev, IIRC.

[LBK]

With regard to Stewarts,

The Scottish royal house you refer to are the Stuarts. 

As to Russian and Byzantine lines to the House of Windsor, Queen Victoria and Kaiser Wilhelm were known in their day as the Grandmother and Grandfather of Europe, by virtue of the many children they produced (not together, of course!) being married off to practically every royal house in existence at the time. They were, themselves, carrying on a long historic tradition. Look at any European/Scandinavian/Russian/Slavic blueblood's ancestry, and it's almost incestuous, because of the imperative that noble blood does not marry outside its parameters. At last, these days, there are far more instances of royals marrying commoners, with the imprimatur of their families, notably Crown Prince Frederick and Mary Donaldson, and HRH William and Catherine Middleton.

The post-independence Greek royal lineage started off as Bavarian, then Danish. These strands, in essence, explain how Prince Philip got his nickname of Phil the Greek, which he hates.

[Shanghaiski]

With regard to Stewarts,

The Scottish royal house you refer to are the Stuarts. 

As to Russian and Byzantine lines to the House of Windsor, Queen Victoria and Kaiser Wilhelm were known in their day as the Grandmother and Grandfather of Europe, by virtue of the many children they produced (not together, of course!) being married off to practically every royal house in existence at the time. They were, themselves, carrying on a long historic tradition. Look at any European/Scandinavian/Russian/Slavic blueblood's ancestry, and it's almost incestuous, because of the imperative that noble blood does not marry outside its parameters. At last, these days, there are far more instances of royals marrying commoners, with the imprimatur of their families, notably Crown Prince Frederick and Mary Donaldson, and HRH William and Catherine Middleton.

The post-independence Greek royal lineage started off as Bavarian, then Danish. These strands, in essence, explain how Prince Philip got his nickname of Phil the Greek, which he hates.

Stuart if the Frenchified version, I thought, and Stewart is the English/Scots version.

[Hamartolos]

I'm really surprised at the heated feelings over Elizabeth II.  Personally, I admire her personal character as well as what she has done for her nation.  Her children, however, I have no respect for and am curious to see the U.K's reaction to the day Charles becomes King.  I would never want to pay for people to live comfortably for no real reason; but the British don't seem to mind so more power to them!

[LBK]

and am curious to see the U.K's reaction to the day Charles becomes King.

IF he ever becomes King. Many say that either the British monarchy will be abolished once HM Elizabeth dies, or that its only hope for survival is if HRH Charles relinquishes his claim to the throne in favor of Prince William. Only time will tell.

[Hamartolos]

and am curious to see the U.K's reaction to the day Charles becomes King.

IF he ever becomes King. Many say that either the British monarchy will be abolished once HM Elizabeth dies, or that its only hope for survival is if HRH Charles relinquishes his claim to the throne in favor of Prince William. Only time will tell.

Agreed.  As an American, the traditions and ceremonies of the British monarchy are fascinating to both me and millions of American citizens.  It will be amazing to see a coronation since the last one was nearly 60 years ago.  People who despise the monarchy still respect Queen Elizabeth, I doubt you will see any type of respect being shown to Charles; ever.

[Irish Hermit]

Here is the Coronation Service for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

http://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/cor1953b.html

It is extremely beautiful and could easily be Orthodox.

[Hamartolos]

I've seen clips of it on youtube before but of course the picture quality is not that good being it was in 1953.  It is remarkable to see such pageantry and ceremony carried out in such manner.   

[Shanghaiski]

Here is the Coronation Service for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

http://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/cor1953b.html

It is extremely beautiful and could easily be Orthodox.

Wasn't the service of coronation for English monarchs written by St. Dunstan?

[Irish Hermit]

Here is the Coronation Service for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

http://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/cor1953b.html

It is extremely beautiful and could easily be Orthodox.

Wasn't the service of coronation for English monarchs written by St. Dunstan?

“He became Bishop of Worcester and then Bishop of London. King Edgar made Dunstan the 25th Archbishop of Canterbury in 959. The restoration of monastic life, which had fallen into disarray in the previous century, was almost wholly Dunstan’s work. He founded over forty new monasteries, including the great abbeys of Peterborough, Ely, and Thorney. The earliest complete coronation text for an English monarch was compiled by Dunstan for King Edgar and became the model for future coronations, putting emphasis on the bond between church and monarch thus making the coronation a sacred act. Dunstan’s coronation ceremony still forms the basis of royal coronations today. It is said that he also designed the royal coronation crown.

“When he died in 988, Dunstan was buried at Canterbury Cathedral next to the high altar.”

http://www.saintdunstanschurch.org/nuts-bolts/who-was-saint-dunstan-what-are-episcopalians/

[Marc1152]

FYI:
The position of Head of State is purely ceremonial.

So it makes no difference what so ever if the King or Queen is the Head of State, none what so ever,

Hmm... tell that to Gough Whitlam, the Prime Minister of Australia.  Removed from office.


Also the bishops of the Church of England...... appointed when approved by Her Majesty.

Do you really think the Monarch still makes governmental decisions or are they made for her and by Tradition they carry her name.

[Marc1152]

With regard to Stewarts, Prince William, through his mother, is the first heir to the throne to have succession from them. He also has succession from the early Anglo-Saxons and several Byzantine royal families as well as St. Vladimir of Kiev, IIRC.

My wife is a Stewart. We went to Burns Night at a local Scottish Pub ( They read Robert Burns poems and eat haggis etc.). Each table had someone stand and say which clan they belonged to, Hey, Campbell, MacGregor, MacDonald...And then she stood up and said ........."Stewart"

It was cool