Skip to comments.Prince Charles 'Worried About Changing Laws of Royal Succession'
Posted on 01/08/2013 7:40:37 AM PST by marshmallow
Prince of Wales reportedly met Whitehall officials to share his concerns about fast-tracked changes to the UK's constitution
The Prince of Wales is said to have raised his fears of "unintended consequences" of the government rushing to change the laws of succession to the throne.
In a private meeting with Richard Heaton, permanent secretary of the Cabinet Office, Charles reportedly voiced concerns over what would happen if his grandchild, due next year, were to marry a Roman Catholic.
The succession to the crown bill, which will change the ancient laws governing the royal line of succession to ensure the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's first child would succeed to the throne regardless of gender, has been published and is expected to be fast-tracked through parliament at the earliest opportunity.
The planned reforms, presented by the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, would also allow the couple's first-born to marry a Catholic though not to be one, without having to renounce the right to succeed.
Sources told the Daily Mail Charles outlined to Heaton concerns that the move, which he is said to support in principle, could damage the relationship between church and state.
Echoing concerns raised previously by constitutional experts and theologians, Charles reportedly raised the issue of what would happen if his grandchild's future spouse were Catholic and insisted any children be raised as Catholics. This would either bar their child from the throne or compromise the monarch's role as supreme governor of the Church of England.
Canon law does not stipulate that children from a marriage between a non-Catholic and Catholic must be raised in the Catholic faith. But the Catholic must make a declaration "that I will sincerely undertake that I will do all that I can within the unity of our partnership to have all the children....
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Charles wants a Muslim on the throne.
I don’t care about the royals. Don’t understand the fascination with royals. I do know many people long for royalty, and that’s one reason we have king Obama.
I just dropped by to say, Charles is an example of what happens when your bloodline has significant inbreeding.
“”what would happen if his grandchild, due next year,””
That’s a mighty L O N G pregnancy!!
It takes longer with blue blood
Have they had some problems with this whole protestant catholic thing in the past?
Now, that there's funny!
I thought Camilla was a Catholic and that was one reason they couldn’t marry to begin with...............???
I enjoy reading about English history, including its monarchy, and my heritage is English. Personally I don’t see why they had to change the law of succession from first born male to first born of either gender. That’s just messing with a thousand years of history in the interest of political correctness.
Kind of ironic, since Charles doesn’t seem too concerned about ‘unintended consequences’ of much of the stupidity regarding global warming/global climate change.
Of course, the royal succession is a more personal for him, so he advocates caution.
They’ve pretty much backed themselves into a corner. I have considerable sympathy for the British royal tradition. But when Henry VIII declared that the King was the head of the Church, he set up a troubling paradox that is now coming to an unavoidable head.
The monarch today is a figurehead. Important still, as the symbol who ties the British empire or commonwealth together. But the Queen does whatever the Prime Minister says. So, the PM chooses who will be Archbishop of Canterbury. That’s how they got those gay, heretic losers into the office of Archbishop. Because that’s what Blair and his pale “conservative” imitation wanted.
Put a man who murders and divorces his wives in charge of the Church, and eventually it comes down to this.
That is how Progressives/Liberals work. A little change here, and little change there. A bit bigger change. And another. And another.
Bit by bit, they chip away at heritage.
Just like they are doing with our Founding Fathers, The Constitution, our heroes and legends, etc.
Lololol...thanks for the laugh this morning.
What does this moron care? I stopped caring whether he lives or dies when he said he would not be "Defender of the Faith" but rather "Defender of Faiths."
That’s correct, sadly.
Chocolate milk ... right through the nose.
Constantine the Great?
Charles is the answer to an expert-level trivia question.
If they’re going to do monarchy, they should do it right and go with the Jacobite line!
FWIW, Constantine may have thought he was in charge of the Church, but he wasn’t. The Emperors, and later the Holy Roman Emperors, fought it out with the Popes for centuries as to who was in charge of the Church. The Emperors lost.
Regretably, however, Henry VIII won.
I guess he’s afraid that either he won’t be around to say, or nobody will heed his plea “...to rid me of this turbulent child.”
Establishing a Republic, and disestablishing the Church of England is my proposed solution to this issue.
Gee I never would have thought that Prince Charles and I worry about the same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.