The Duchess of Cambridge is pregnant....

[Lintasare]

Originally Posted by RitaE

If and when Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice have children (and depending on their spouses) they will not have titles which flow through their Mothers lineage. This is similar to the children of Princess Anne. It is likely that the Queen (or Charles if he is King) would grant them some sort of of honorable title if their parents wish to go that route.

There is quite a tradition lately with the Royal parents wishing to downplay the nobility thing during their offsprings' developmental years - such as with Princess Anne and Prince Edward - and preferring that their children remain untitled.

Actually Edward's children do have titles. They are Lady Louise Windsor and Lord James Windsor, Viscount Severn. He has asked that they be styled as the children of an Earl. However they can choose at the age of majority to be known as Princess Louise of Wessex and such. But who knows if they will.

[sissy_ib]

Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah

Well I do thank you for helping me to understand. I do have another question for you. When I was in high school, I visited England and one of the people we visited with was supposed to be some sort of expert on the royal family. He was talking about how things have changed since Charles married Diana and how William wasn't required to marry a virgin anymore, that she didn't have to have noble blood, and that, in fact, the only requirement as that she not be Roman Catholic. Have you heard anything like this?

I would assume that neither William or Catherine were virgins when they married as they lived together for sometime.

[JennaDeeDooDah]

Originally Posted by sissy_ib

I would assume that neither William or Catherine were virgins when they married as they lived together for sometime.

As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.

[sissy_ib]

Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah

As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.

I know she converted to the Church of England before they married. Not sure if she was Roman Catholic before or not, but she converted from something.

[RitaE]

Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah

As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.

If you read about the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholics you will get an idea of that.

[JennaDeeDooDah]

Originally Posted by RitaE

If you read about the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholics you will get an idea of that.

But things change. I was wondering if this is one that had changed.

[RitaE]

No, it is one of the laws concerning the line of succession that is currently under scrutiny and will likely change, but as for now it stands. It is not so much that they are not allowed to marry a Roman Catholic, it is that they would abdicate their place in the line of Succession should they do so.

The Act of Settlement (1701) laid down that only Protestant heirs of Princess Sophia, granddaughter of James I, may succeed to the British throne. Neither Roman Catholics, nor those who marry a Roman Catholic, nor those born out of wedlock, may remain in the line of succession. Under current common law the crown is passed on by male primogeniture under which younger sons succeed before their elder sisters.

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah

As would I. Just wondered about the Roman Catholic part.

Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.

[CdnCarrie]

Originally Posted by A_Princess'_Daddy

Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.

It's in the process of being changed right now.

[JennaDeeDooDah]

Originally Posted by A_Princess'_Daddy

Because the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and how that schism evolved, it is not likely to change any time soon.

When I was in high school, my best friend and I had quite the argument about this. She was absolutely convinced that Queen Elizabeth was still running the country - like how you think a queen would run a country - and that the Prime Minister was head of the church. There was nothing I could say or do to convince her otherwise. We asked our history teacher. We asked our British foreign exchange student. We consulted the internet. No matter what everyone told her, she was absolutely convinced that the Queen was 100% in charge, Parliament did not exist, and that the Prime Minister got his name because he was the minister in charge.

[PaulaSB12]

Originally Posted by sissy_ib

I know she converted to the Church of England before they married. Not sure if she was Roman Catholic before or not, but she converted from something.

Not converted she went through the confirmation. She had been baptised church of england but not confirmed. The catholic rule was because of James II.

[Deb in IA]

Originally Posted by CdnCarrie

It's in the process of being changed right now.

I think the monarch can have a Roman Catholic spouse, but I don't think they themselves can be Catholic.

From Wikipedia:

Restrictions by gender and religionSee also: 2011 proposals to change the rules of royal succession in the Commonwealth realms
Succession is currently governed by male-preference cognatic primogeniture, under which sons inherit before daughters, and elder children inherit before younger ones of the same gender. However, on Friday 28 October 2011, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, announced at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth that all 16 Commonwealth realms, including the United Kingdom, had unanimously agreed to abolish the gender-preference rule.[88] They also agreed that future monarchs should no longer be prohibited from marrying a Catholic – a law which dates from the Act of Settlement 1701, following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However, since the monarch is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the law which prohibits a Roman Catholic from acceding to the throne – which originated as a result of the English and Scots' distrust of Roman Catholicism during the late 17th century – would remain.

Only individuals who are Protestants may inherit the Crown. Roman Catholics and spouses of Roman Catholics are prohibited from succeeding.[89][90][91] An individual thus disabled from inheriting the Crown is deemed "naturally dead" for succession purposes, and the disqualification does not extend to the individual's legitimate descendants.

[crashbb]

Originally Posted by Deb in IA

I think the monarch can have a Roman Catholic spouse, but I don't think they themselves can be Catholic.

From Wikipedia:

Restrictions by gender and religionSee also: 2011 proposals to change the rules of royal succession in the Commonwealth realms
Succession is currently governed by male-preference cognatic primogeniture, under which sons inherit before daughters, and elder children inherit before younger ones of the same gender. However, on Friday 28 October 2011, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, announced at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth that all 16 Commonwealth realms, including the United Kingdom, had unanimously agreed to abolish the gender-preference rule.[88] They also agreed that future monarchs should no longer be prohibited from marrying a Catholic – a law which dates from the Act of Settlement 1701, following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However, since the monarch is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the law which prohibits a Roman Catholic from acceding to the throne – which originated as a result of the English and Scots' distrust of Roman Catholicism during the late 17th century – would remain.

Only individuals who are Protestants may inherit the Crown. Roman Catholics and spouses of Roman Catholics are prohibited from succeeding.[89][90][91] An individual thus disabled from inheriting the Crown is deemed "naturally dead" for succession purposes, and the disqualification does not extend to the individual's legitimate descendants.

Actually, from what you quoted, they cannot have a Roman Catholic spouse. I know that this was raised again when the male preference was raised, but it was not approved.

[Domo]

Originally Posted by JennaDeeDooDah

When I was in high school, my best friend and I had quite the argument about this. She was absolutely convinced that Queen Elizabeth was still running the country - like how you think a queen would run a country - and that the Prime Minister was head of the church. There was nothing I could say or do to convince her otherwise. We asked our history teacher. We asked our British foreign exchange student. We consulted the internet. No matter what everyone told her, she was absolutely convinced that the Queen was 100% in charge, Parliament did not exist, and that the Prime Minister got his name because he was the minister in charge.

In theory, the Queen still has constitutional powers, but they'd vanish in an instant if she tried to exercise them. At most they are safeguards. If an unsavoury person ends up as Prime Minister, we could legally get rid of them by asking the Queen to sack them. Nice and tidy.

As for the Catholic thing, laws are going through that are aimed at reforming the Monarchy. Catholics are no longer frowned upon and daughters can ascend to power as equally and easily as a son might.

[CdnCarrie]

They cannot have a RC spouse. That is why Prince Michael gave up his place in line. Like he was even close to the front of the line.