Tea with the Queen
Latest topics
Who is online?
In total there are 3 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 3 Guests None
Most users ever online was 253 on Sat Apr 10, 2021 3:06 am
Social bookmarking
Changes to the Succession
4 posters
Page 1 of 1
Changes to the Succession
http://supremacyandsurvival.blogspot.com/2011/10/wow-glorious-revolution-partially.html?spref=fb
Yesterday, the BBC announced that the rules of succession for the UK's monarchy have been changed:
Sons and daughters of any future UK monarch will have equal right to the throne, after Commonwealth leaders agreed to change succession laws.
The leaders of the 16 Commonwealth countries where the Queen is head of state unanimously approved the changes at a summit in Perth, Australia.
It means a first-born daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would take precedence over younger brothers.
The ban on the monarch being married to a Roman Catholic was also lifted.
Re: Changes to the Succession
I am not happy about the idea of older sisters being put ahead of their younger brothers. It just seems very contrary to tradition. And if we are supposed to be so worried about equal chances and "fairness", why have a hereditary monarchy at all?
Re: Changes to the Succession
Here's a link to a news article from Her Majesty earlier this month:
http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2011/10/queen-elizabeth-ii-makes-it-known-shes.html
Quite interesting!
http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2011/10/queen-elizabeth-ii-makes-it-known-shes.html
Quite interesting!
princess garnet- Posts : 207
Join date : 2011-10-24
Location : Maryland
Re: Changes to the Succession
More on the changes to the Succession. http://onceiwasacleverboy.blogspot.com/2011/10/adjusting-succession.html To quote:
The announcement of an agreement amongst the governments of all Her Majesty's realms to amend the law regarding the Succession, as reported here and here raises several thoughts.
First of all, such an agreement, apparently arrived at quite speedily, gives the lie to the long-standing argument that the law could not be changed due to the impossibility of getting legislation through all the respective Parliaments. Given that it has still to pass, nonetheless this move indicates a willingness to move as one.
The process reflects a mood of a renewed, positive view of the Monarchy in the wake of the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and notably in some of the leading Commonwealth realms - as detailed for Canada in The Monarchist blog and it can be seen, in a slightly quirky way, in the response to Miss Gillard not curtseying to her Queen in Australia. Such a trend in opinion is good in itself.
As to the changes themselves the removal of the ban on marriage to a Catholic is good, removing a piece of discrimination, and also widening the potential marriage arena. In Canada and Australia that should help resonate with substantial sections of the population.
Retaining an insistance on the Monarch not being Catholic may be politically and ecclesially judicious at present, but given that the Sovereign's role as Supreme Governor in practical terms is fornally issuing the conge d'elire to elect Bishops and receiving their homage, and signing into law the Measures which having passed unchanged through Parliament representing the latest daft ideas of the General Syond it is no different from their position as Monarch in temporal affairs. So a Catholic could do that as well as an extension of the Monarch's duties. That is not to say that the Monarch does not have an important part to play by their personal support of Christianity - The Queen has been exemplary in this matter.
Enabling females to succeed in direct relation to their order of birth is something I am a little wary about, but that may be that I am not someone who likes the look of changes of this sort. Applying such changes to the descendants of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge means that members of the Royal Family can be prepared from birth for their likely responsibilities, not having to adjust in later life, as has been the case in some other European Monarchies that have changed their succession law recently.
In reality the last time such a legal provision would have affected the succession would have been in 1901, and we must presume that had the law been in place in the earlier nineteenth century the Princess Royal would not have married abroad....
Fortunately, and ultimately, it depends on genetics rather than on politicians, and its effective intoduction is at some hypothetical date in the future, and at least two more reigns away.
A friend and I agreed there is one other point - what about peerages? Now that, alas, they no longer carry admission as of right to a seat the House of Lords - and there is, shamefully, legislation going through to remove the remaining hereditaries - and women were admitted to seat there in 1958, could not, or should not, legislation allow such titles of honour to descend in the female line?
Re: Changes to the Succession
I'm sorry that my first post on this lovely forum is a disagreement but, as an English person, I welcome the changes to the law of succession. I am a traditionalist in many ways but, looking at our history, who have been the most successful and dedicated monarchs? I would say Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II.
One the strengths of the British monarchy is its ability to adapt to the times without losing its sense of continuity and tradition. As far back as the Magna Carta, the kings and queens have adapted to change in accordance with how times change. In recent years, Queen Elizabeth II - who is someone whom I admire tremendously for her wisdom and sense of 'what is right' and 'what is the right way to behave' - has adapted so wonderfully to the times without losing any of the mystique of royalty. Even Queen Victoria broke with tradition to smile on a photograph (and people at the time said that would undermine the monarchy!!). I think this is an excellent move and one which will strengthen rather than diminish the respect in which we hold the monarchy.
One the strengths of the British monarchy is its ability to adapt to the times without losing its sense of continuity and tradition. As far back as the Magna Carta, the kings and queens have adapted to change in accordance with how times change. In recent years, Queen Elizabeth II - who is someone whom I admire tremendously for her wisdom and sense of 'what is right' and 'what is the right way to behave' - has adapted so wonderfully to the times without losing any of the mystique of royalty. Even Queen Victoria broke with tradition to smile on a photograph (and people at the time said that would undermine the monarchy!!). I think this is an excellent move and one which will strengthen rather than diminish the respect in which we hold the monarchy.
Re: Changes to the Succession
Welcome, Christina! I am delighted that you have joined our forum! Thank you for letting us know what you think!!
Re: Changes to the Succession
Thank you, Elena :-). It's lovely to have found this place (thanks to Matterhorn - and thanks to you Elena for creating it!!) and I hope to visit and participate as often as possible. Thank you!
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Sat Jul 10, 2021 5:43 pm by Elena
» Recognition by the Church of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette
Sat Jul 10, 2021 5:38 pm by Elena
» Reposts: In Praise of Monarchy!
Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:20 pm by ViveHenriV
» Remembering Louis XVI
Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:04 am by ViveHenriV
» Mass for Louis XVI on live video
Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:10 pm by ViveHenriV
» Judges 17:6
Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:29 pm by ViveHenriV
» War in the Vendée/Guerre de Vendée
Thu Jan 09, 2020 4:37 pm by ViveHenriV
» The Comte de Chambord (Henri V)
Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:24 pm by ViveHenriV
» Reflection: Les Membres et L'Estomac
Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:35 am by ViveHenriV