Should Charles allowed to be King?

Question

He broke the marriage vows he made before God and millions of people after he married Diana. What is to say he will not break his Coronation vows? This is not a question about divorce or the right of divorcees to remarry or love/forgiveness or whether Camilla should be queen.

It's about the integrity that a nation has to demand of the individual chosen to be their Sovereign.

It seems we are confusing personal and public morality. I am all for liberal morality for Charles as an individual, but not as a head of State that we would have trouble removing.

in response to some of the comments below... I think it quite incorrect to assume the People have no say in who is monarch. Tell that to Charles I, James II or Edward VIII. In the UK constitution sovereignty comes from the people through parliament, not through God. It' just that nobody in parliament is seriously considering this issue.

Sorry Monkeyface. He did not vow to be faithful to her before the vow ...only after. But thanks otherwise for the vote of confidence.

Answer 1

Here it is...the Official "who is who" in the line for the English Throne....Enjoy

Bp. David
===============================================
The basis for the succession was determined in the constitutional developments of the seventeenth century, which culminated in the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701).

When James II fled the country in 1688, Parliament held that he had 'abdicated the government' and that the throne was vacant. The throne was then offered, not to James's young son, but to his daughter Mary and her husband William of Orange, as joint rulers.

It therefore came to be established not only that the Sovereign rules through Parliament, but that the succession to the throne can be regulated by Parliament, and that a Sovereign can be deprived of his title through misgovernment.

The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by statute; the Act of Settlement confirmed that it was for Parliament to determine the title to the throne.

The Act laid down that only Protestant descendants of Princess Sophia - the Electress of Hanover and granddaughter of James I - are eligible to succeed. Subsequent Acts have confirmed this.

Parliament, under the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement, also laid down various conditions which the Sovereign must meet. A Roman Catholic is specifically excluded from succession to the throne; nor may the Sovereign marry a Roman Catholic.

The Sovereign must, in addition, be in communion with the Church of England and must swear to preserve the established Church of England and the established Church of Scotland. The Sovereign must also promise to uphold the Protestant succession.

Sovereign
1. The Prince of Wales
2. Prince William of Wales
3. Prince Henry of Wales
4. The Duke of York
5. Princess Beatrice of York
6. Princess Eugenie of York
7. The Earl of Wessex
8. The Lady Louise Windsor
9. The Princess Royal
10. Mr. Peter Phillips
11. Miss Zara Phillips
12. Viscount Linley
13. The Hon. Charles Armstrong-Jones
14. The Hon. Margarita Armstrong-Jones
15. The Lady Sarah Chatto
16. Master Samuel Chatto
17. Master Arthur Chatto
18. The Duke of Gloucester
19. Earl of Ulster
20. The Lady Davina Windsor
21. The Lady Rose Windsor
22. The Duke of Kent
23. The Lady Marina-Charlotte Windsor
24. The Lady Amelia Windsor
25. The Lady Helen Taylor
26. Master Columbus Taylor
27. Master Cassius Taylor
28. Miss Eloise Taylor
29. Miss Estella Taylor
30. The Lord Frederick Windsor
31. The Lady Gabriella Windsor
32. Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy
33. Mr. James Ogilvy
34. Master Alexander Ogilvy
35. Miss Flora Ogilvy
36. Mrs. Paul Mowatt
37. Master Christian Mowatt
38. Miss Zenouska Mowatt
39. The Earl of Harewood

Answer 2

Why shouldn't he become King? After all, the Church of England was set up so that a King (Henry VIII) could divorce and remarry! I have always found it difficult to understand why the CofE does not recognise divorcees when this is the reason they were set up!

Just wondering what Coronation vows you think he might break?

Were you aware that one of the tenets of the Christian philosophy is forgiveness? Or does that not work for Royals who make mistakes? Had you also thought that now Prince Charles has married someone he loves, who married him for who he is and can be relied on to support him

People say that Edward VIII abdicated because he wanted to marry a divorcee - in fact, the problem was that Mrs. Simpson was a Catholic.

I have often wondered why it was not okay for Charles to cheat, but it was fine for Lady Diana (who was not a princess. She was Lady Diana, Princess of Wales). And I have also never understood people who said she did not know what she was taking on when marrying into the Royal Family - she had been involved with them for years through her family.

Just wondering if you have made a mistake in your life and hoped people would forgive you? After all, the royal family are just mortals, not super-beings, who make errors just like the rest of us. Do you know someone who is divorced? Someone who has cheated on their partner? Did that mean they could not do their job properly? Did the company they worked for sack them or say they were incompetent? Why should the royal family be any different? People also learn from their mistakes.

By the way, I am a supporter of the royal family because I think a President would cost an awful lot more to the Country than the royal family do. People seem to forget that the Queen pays the expenses for junior royals, not the taxpayer.

I have a much greater problem with politicians who work on the 'do as I say, not as I do' rule. Look at Prescott - he slates others for cheating on their partners, but he should be left alone 'because it is a private matter' - and he is just the latest example! And we cannot remove him from his job!

Answer 3

I think people should give the guy a break. I really didn't like Charles, but that was because I didn't know anything about him. The guy really has had a shite life. Plus the media does not portray him very well, Diana was always their favourite. You can say what you want about the way she died, but us as the normal public will never know exactly what happened. (Plus I wouldn't have wanted my future king, the king of England to have had a muslim step father!)

Every body deserves to be happy, and if that means him being happy with Camila then so be it. Just because he is divorced, and re married does not make him a bad monarch. The monarchy doesn't really have any control over what happens in Britain anyway. It just means that when we go to the offy we hand over a picture of Charlie.

Answer 4

It is not a question of "allowed." Just because he broke his marriage vows has nothing to do with the monarch's duties. If you read your history, many monarchs have kept mistresses on the side. Charles IS next in line to the throne. If he is still alive when his Mom dies, the Crown will go to him. That's the way it is. I just don't like the idea of Camilla queening it--she will probably get a lesser title. On the other hand, she looks as old as the present Queen, so she may not be there, either.

Answer 5

The first part of the question is incorrect. He did not break the vow after he got married - it waas well & truly broken before, during & after. He even spent the night before his wedding with Camilla. No wonder Diana was a troubled young woman - who woulnd't be with that information at hand.
No - he should not be king. I believe that if it were put to a democratic vote like in an election that the british public would wish him by-passed in favour of William.

Answer 6

If you had read the history of many of the kings and queens,you would have discovered that very few of them were faithful to their marriage vows.Edward VII had a string of mistresses including Lily Langtry,Sarah Bernhardt,and Camilla's relative,Alice Keppel. Just because the marriage vows are broken,does not necessarily mean that Coronation vows will be broken.Face it,people just are not perfect. Too many people break their marriage vows;they have absolutely no intentions of keeping them.Why they bother to even get married,in the first place,is puzzling. Now,if Charles were to do something to endanger the people that he served,he would be removed from the throne.But as long as EVERYONE isn't perfect,isn't as morally or ethically sound as they ideally could be,there will be leaders who are not as morally or ethically sound as THEY ideally could be.The world is filled with imperfect people and imperfect world leaders.

Answer 7

the ordinary people have no say anyway, parliament is formed from preselected teams so you only get what you're given anyway, only proportional representation will give you a democracy, the world is so full of unhappiness I think charles should naturally progress onto the throne if the queen doesn't outlive him, his main problem as it was with margaret the queens sister, they are told who they can marry, apart from all the radical stories surrounding Diana at last hes made a stand and married the person he has always loved what is so wrong with that, hes stopped being told what to do which created his problems in the first place.

Answer 8

No! Definitely not. Hes broke every rule in the book. His latter treatment of Diana was, is and shall always remain atrocious to all Brits and many, many millions of others throughout this world.

However, it runs in the family and who, at the end of the day, wants the House of Windsor to remain any longer on the throne? The House of Windsor, 2 world wars, millions dead the world over. Inept Monarchs too timid to stop it. Forbade displays of grief, loss, mourning of the public. Windsor wallies dressed in uniforms, displaying unearned chest fulls of medals, Ann the biggest offender.

All divorced, all useless, all live by different rules, do / get away with everything. Parasites to boot!

When Elizabeth finally goes, so should the crown. She lives in a totally enclosed world of her own. U / me, the ordinary people of the UK - what does she do / give to us? Wheres my night hood for the years of manifest work I and thousands of other expats have done. The billions of pounds expats have brought in invisible earnings to the UK.

The expat community have never ever been so honoured - not once.

Answer 9

I'm not sure where you are, but most places where I live, especially places where food is being prepared, don't allow any dogs inside unless they're guide/service dogs. Now some little old ladies tend to sneak little Gigi in inside a purse, but the general rule is, no dogs. I've heard of no special treatment for a Cavalier. Edit: This of course doesn't include Petco, Petsmart and other pet stores.

Answer 10

as we are a constitutional monarchy and not a republic we don't get to vote on this. so it's upto the Royal Family with consent of government to resolve this. being a monarch isn't a popularity contest and some of the most progressive and active monarchs have had bad press. i think charles is ok for king because i just don't care really and think that the CofE needs more reform anyway.