Discussion:
'Prince' Charles to wed Camilla after Diana inquest verdict (reports)
(too old to reply)
banana
2004-06-03 09:56:15 UTC
Permalink
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.

No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>

***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***

Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry

By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004

Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.

Dr Rowan Williams told Charles during secret talks that he would give
the union his blessing, senior sources have revealed.

But Charles has made it clear that he will not be "bounced" into
marriage, which he believes is a " personal decision". Sources close to
the prince say he and Mrs Parker Bowles have no definite plans to marry
until his younger son Prince Harry is at least 21, which is more than a
year away.

Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry

When they met Dr Williams, who has always spoken out against remarriage
of divorcees apart from in exceptional circumstances, he told Charles he
would support him if he chose to "formalise" his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles.

The revelation comes after the unprecedented intervention of Dr
Williams's predecessor, Lord Carey, who said Charles should make "an
honest woman" of his long-term love.

The 55-year-old prince, who has always said his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles is "non-negotiable", is understood to be "intensely
irritated" at Lord Carey's comments that it was "natural" for them to
marry.

One close source said: "He has a great disinclination to talk about the
subject."

Mrs Parker Bowles is also said to be reluctant to accept the active
public role that marriage to Charles would bring, although she likes to
be allowed to appear with him at some events as his escort.

A close friend of the prince told The Times that the couple have
discussed marriage after Dr Williams made it clear he would bless their
union.

In a further development, senior evangelicals, who take a conservative
line on sexual matters, have said they would give the marriage their
blessing if the couple, as divorcees, both admitted wrongdoing.

The view of the Church of England leadership is critical to any decision
because, once King, Charles would succeed his mother as Supreme
Governor. The only constitutional bar to the marriage would be if the
Queen refused to approve it.

The close friend of the prince, said to be authorised to speak on his
behalf, told The Times of the couple: "It would be wrong to give the
impression that they have not talked about it and are against it. That
would not be right.

"But no one will rush them into it or bounce them into it. It's a
personal decision."

The friend said any marriage would take place after Sir John Stevens,
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had concluded his inquiry into the
death of Princess Diana.

The friend said: "With the inquest and the inquiry under way, nothing
can be considered until we reached the next stage." After that, the
marriage could take place "next year at the earliest".

Clarence House said it was a private matter between the couple and
refused to comment. But most Anglican leaders want the situation to be
resolved before Charles succeeds to the throne, sources suggest. Last
year, the General Synod relaxed its rules on divorce, agreeing that in
some cases, divorcees could remarry in church while their former partner
was still living.

They would be prepared to accept a marriage more easily if Charles and
Mrs Parker Bowles were to repent for what has happened in the past,
sources say. This would be a matter between the couple and a spiritual
pastor.

The Rev Rod Thomas, priest in charge of St Mathew's, Plymouth, and
spokesman for Reform, the influential conservative evangelical
organisation, said: "Evangelicals will not speak uniformly on this
issue. But there are a number who think that if there is acknowledgement
of wrongdoing, then there is no real bar on marriage."

The Ven Michael Lawson, of the Church of England Evangelical Council,
added: "From a Christian point of view, everyone should be allowed a new
start in life."

***END ARTICLE 1***

<http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004252128,00.html>:

***BEGIN ARTICLE***

Church lets Charles wed

By JULIE MOULT

ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams yesterday dropped the
Church’s objections to Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles —
and it could happen next year.

The decision by the head of the Church of England means the heir to the
Throne could announce wedding plans within 12 months, pals revealed last
night.

A friend of Charles and Camilla told The Times: “It would be wrong to
give the impression that they have not talked about it and are against
it. That would not be right.

“But no one will rush into it or bounce them into it. It’s a personal
decision.”

It is believed any announcement will be made after the inquest and
inquiry into the 1997 death of Princess Diana who was divorced from
Charles.

The pal added: “Next year at the earliest.”

Dr Williams has always opposed Charles, 55, remarrying because his long-
time companion Camilla, 56, is divorced.

But yesterday he appeared to change his stance saying it is natural they
should marry.

Other senior church members would support the move.

It is thought a wedding could take place at a church near Charles’s home
in Highgrove, Gloucs.

A spokesman for him said: “It’s a private matter.”

***END ARTICLE***
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
Andy.III
2004-06-03 10:12:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
Lambeth Palace has denied that permission has been given:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1230325,00.html


Andy.III
"Extremism in the destruction of intolerance is NOT a vice"
Leighton Jones
2004-06-03 10:25:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
< Snip>

Personally Old Boy:
I Don't give a dam.
Cheers LJ.
banana
2004-06-03 11:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
< Snip>
I Don't give a dam.
Cheers LJ.
Then you don't have to follow the thread, Leighton.

BTW a dam is a water-restraining embankment or a female dog with
puppies.
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
Leighton Jones
2004-06-03 12:02:58 UTC
Permalink
<Snip>
Post by banana
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by banana
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
< Snip>
I Don't give a dam.
Cheers LJ.
Then you don't have to follow the thread, Leighton.
BTW a dam is a water-restraining embankment or a female dog with
puppies.
--
"God Dammit", that pesky spell checker.;-)
BTW, if everybody corrected all the; grammar, spelling, and typing mistakes
on this, or any other news group, we would all be doing little else.
I tend to be able to work out what the writer was getting at, and just leave
it at that.
Cheers LJ.
banana
2004-06-03 12:58:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leighton Jones
<Snip>
Post by banana
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by banana
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing
to
Post by banana
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by banana
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
< Snip>
I Don't give a dam.
Cheers LJ.
Then you don't have to follow the thread, Leighton.
BTW a dam is a water-restraining embankment or a female dog with
puppies.
--
"God Dammit", that pesky spell checker.;-)
Wouldn't know; I don't use one :-) Aren't they used by the same kind of
PC users who allow Microsoft Word to squiggly-underline words as soon as
they've typed them? Hell's bells! :-)
Post by Leighton Jones
BTW, if everybody corrected all the; grammar, spelling, and typing mistakes
on this, or any other news group, we would all be doing little else.
I tend to be able to work out what the writer was getting at, and just leave
it at that.
But you didn't, Leighton - you posted to say you didn't give a damn
about the subject of the thread. Which kind of left you in a weak
position for complaining against being spelling-flamed, I thought.

Anyway, the story is they're going to get married...which by the looks
of it, oanlee wunn ov uss iz interesstid inn! :)
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
Fatha -Jack
2004-06-03 10:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
Dr Rowan Williams told Charles during secret talks that he would give
the union his blessing, senior sources have revealed.
But Charles has made it clear that he will not be "bounced" into
marriage, which he believes is a " personal decision". Sources close to
the prince say he and Mrs Parker Bowles have no definite plans to marry
until his younger son Prince Harry is at least 21, which is more than a
year away.
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
When they met Dr Williams, who has always spoken out against remarriage
of divorcees apart from in exceptional circumstances, he told Charles he
would support him if he chose to "formalise" his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles.
The revelation comes after the unprecedented intervention of Dr
Williams's predecessor, Lord Carey, who said Charles should make "an
honest woman" of his long-term love.
The 55-year-old prince, who has always said his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles is "non-negotiable", is understood to be "intensely
irritated" at Lord Carey's comments that it was "natural" for them to
marry.
One close source said: "He has a great disinclination to talk about the
subject."
Mrs Parker Bowles is also said to be reluctant to accept the active
public role that marriage to Charles would bring, although she likes to
be allowed to appear with him at some events as his escort.
A close friend of the prince told The Times that the couple have
discussed marriage after Dr Williams made it clear he would bless their
union.
In a further development, senior evangelicals, who take a conservative
line on sexual matters, have said they would give the marriage their
blessing if the couple, as divorcees, both admitted wrongdoing.
The view of the Church of England leadership is critical to any decision
because, once King, Charles would succeed his mother as Supreme
Governor. The only constitutional bar to the marriage would be if the
Queen refused to approve it.
The close friend of the prince, said to be authorised to speak on his
behalf, told The Times of the couple: "It would be wrong to give the
impression that they have not talked about it and are against it. That
would not be right.
"But no one will rush them into it or bounce them into it. It's a
personal decision."
The friend said any marriage would take place after Sir John Stevens,
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had concluded his inquiry into the
death of Princess Diana.
The friend said: "With the inquest and the inquiry under way, nothing
can be considered until we reached the next stage." After that, the
marriage could take place "next year at the earliest".
Clarence House said it was a private matter between the couple and
refused to comment. But most Anglican leaders want the situation to be
resolved before Charles succeeds to the throne, sources suggest. Last
year, the General Synod relaxed its rules on divorce, agreeing that in
some cases, divorcees could remarry in church while their former partner
was still living.
They would be prepared to accept a marriage more easily if Charles and
Mrs Parker Bowles were to repent for what has happened in the past,
sources say. This would be a matter between the couple and a spiritual
pastor.
The Rev Rod Thomas, priest in charge of St Mathew's, Plymouth, and
spokesman for Reform, the influential conservative evangelical
organisation, said: "Evangelicals will not speak uniformly on this
issue. But there are a number who think that if there is acknowledgement
of wrongdoing, then there is no real bar on marriage."
The Ven Michael Lawson, of the Church of England Evangelical Council,
added: "From a Christian point of view, everyone should be allowed a new
start in life."
***END ARTICLE 1***
***BEGIN ARTICLE***
Church lets Charles wed
By JULIE MOULT
ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams yesterday dropped the
Church's objections to Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles -
and it could happen next year.
The decision by the head of the Church of England means the heir to the
Throne could announce wedding plans within 12 months, pals revealed last
night.
A friend of Charles and Camilla told The Times: "It would be wrong to
give the impression that they have not talked about it and are against
it. That would not be right.
"But no one will rush into it or bounce them into it. It's a personal
decision."
It is believed any announcement will be made after the inquest and
inquiry into the 1997 death of Princess Diana who was divorced from
Charles.
The pal added: "Next year at the earliest."
Dr Williams has always opposed Charles, 55, remarrying because his long-
time companion Camilla, 56, is divorced.
But yesterday he appeared to change his stance saying it is natural they
should marry.
Other senior church members would support the move.
It is thought a wedding could take place at a church near Charles's home
in Highgrove, Gloucs.
A spokesman for him said: "It's a private matter."
***END ARTICLE***
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
I would not shag CPB with a rancid pakis cock!!!! The foul-faced whore has
got a kite like a fuckin pork-scratchin!!!!!

FJ - OFM#20 - BNP!!!!!!!
Leighton Jones
2004-06-03 13:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fatha -Jack
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
Dr Rowan Williams told Charles during secret talks that he would give
the union his blessing, senior sources have revealed.
But Charles has made it clear that he will not be "bounced" into
marriage, which he believes is a " personal decision". Sources close to
the prince say he and Mrs Parker Bowles have no definite plans to marry
until his younger son Prince Harry is at least 21, which is more than a
year away.
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
When they met Dr Williams, who has always spoken out against remarriage
of divorcees apart from in exceptional circumstances, he told Charles he
would support him if he chose to "formalise" his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles.
The revelation comes after the unprecedented intervention of Dr
Williams's predecessor, Lord Carey, who said Charles should make "an
honest woman" of his long-term love.
The 55-year-old prince, who has always said his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles is "non-negotiable", is understood to be "intensely
irritated" at Lord Carey's comments that it was "natural" for them to
marry.
One close source said: "He has a great disinclination to talk about the
subject."
Mrs Parker Bowles is also said to be reluctant to accept the active
public role that marriage to Charles would bring, although she likes to
be allowed to appear with him at some events as his escort.
A close friend of the prince told The Times that the couple have
discussed marriage after Dr Williams made it clear he would bless their
union.
In a further development, senior evangelicals, who take a conservative
line on sexual matters, have said they would give the marriage their
blessing if the couple, as divorcees, both admitted wrongdoing.
The view of the Church of England leadership is critical to any decision
because, once King, Charles would succeed his mother as Supreme
Governor. The only constitutional bar to the marriage would be if the
Queen refused to approve it.
The close friend of the prince, said to be authorised to speak on his
behalf, told The Times of the couple: "It would be wrong to give the
impression that they have not talked about it and are against it. That
would not be right.
"But no one will rush them into it or bounce them into it. It's a
personal decision."
The friend said any marriage would take place after Sir John Stevens,
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had concluded his inquiry into the
death of Princess Diana.
The friend said: "With the inquest and the inquiry under way, nothing
can be considered until we reached the next stage." After that, the
marriage could take place "next year at the earliest".
Clarence House said it was a private matter between the couple and
refused to comment. But most Anglican leaders want the situation to be
resolved before Charles succeeds to the throne, sources suggest. Last
year, the General Synod relaxed its rules on divorce, agreeing that in
some cases, divorcees could remarry in church while their former partner
was still living.
They would be prepared to accept a marriage more easily if Charles and
Mrs Parker Bowles were to repent for what has happened in the past,
sources say. This would be a matter between the couple and a spiritual
pastor.
The Rev Rod Thomas, priest in charge of St Mathew's, Plymouth, and
spokesman for Reform, the influential conservative evangelical
organisation, said: "Evangelicals will not speak uniformly on this
issue. But there are a number who think that if there is acknowledgement
of wrongdoing, then there is no real bar on marriage."
The Ven Michael Lawson, of the Church of England Evangelical Council,
added: "From a Christian point of view, everyone should be allowed a new
start in life."
***END ARTICLE 1***
***BEGIN ARTICLE***
Church lets Charles wed
By JULIE MOULT
ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams yesterday dropped the
Church's objections to Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles -
and it could happen next year.
The decision by the head of the Church of England means the heir to the
Throne could announce wedding plans within 12 months, pals revealed last
night.
A friend of Charles and Camilla told The Times: "It would be wrong to
give the impression that they have not talked about it and are against
it. That would not be right.
"But no one will rush into it or bounce them into it. It's a personal
decision."
It is believed any announcement will be made after the inquest and
inquiry into the 1997 death of Princess Diana who was divorced from
Charles.
The pal added: "Next year at the earliest."
Dr Williams has always opposed Charles, 55, remarrying because his long-
time companion Camilla, 56, is divorced.
But yesterday he appeared to change his stance saying it is natural they
should marry.
Other senior church members would support the move.
It is thought a wedding could take place at a church near Charles's home
in Highgrove, Gloucs.
A spokesman for him said: "It's a private matter."
***END ARTICLE***
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
I would not shag CPB with a rancid pakis cock!!!! The foul-faced whore has
got a kite like a fuckin pork-scratchin!!!!!
FJ - OFM#20 - BNP!!!!!!!
That's always assuming that she would, actually give you the chance to make
that choice.
Cheers LJ.
Fatha -Jack
2004-06-03 14:01:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
Post by banana
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
Dr Rowan Williams told Charles during secret talks that he would give
the union his blessing, senior sources have revealed.
But Charles has made it clear that he will not be "bounced" into
marriage, which he believes is a " personal decision". Sources close to
the prince say he and Mrs Parker Bowles have no definite plans to marry
until his younger son Prince Harry is at least 21, which is more than a
year away.
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
When they met Dr Williams, who has always spoken out against remarriage
of divorcees apart from in exceptional circumstances, he told Charles he
would support him if he chose to "formalise" his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles.
The revelation comes after the unprecedented intervention of Dr
Williams's predecessor, Lord Carey, who said Charles should make "an
honest woman" of his long-term love.
The 55-year-old prince, who has always said his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles is "non-negotiable", is understood to be "intensely
irritated" at Lord Carey's comments that it was "natural" for them to
marry.
One close source said: "He has a great disinclination to talk about the
subject."
Mrs Parker Bowles is also said to be reluctant to accept the active
public role that marriage to Charles would bring, although she likes to
be allowed to appear with him at some events as his escort.
A close friend of the prince told The Times that the couple have
discussed marriage after Dr Williams made it clear he would bless their
union.
In a further development, senior evangelicals, who take a conservative
line on sexual matters, have said they would give the marriage their
blessing if the couple, as divorcees, both admitted wrongdoing.
The view of the Church of England leadership is critical to any decision
because, once King, Charles would succeed his mother as Supreme
Governor. The only constitutional bar to the marriage would be if the
Queen refused to approve it.
The close friend of the prince, said to be authorised to speak on his
behalf, told The Times of the couple: "It would be wrong to give the
impression that they have not talked about it and are against it. That
would not be right.
"But no one will rush them into it or bounce them into it. It's a
personal decision."
The friend said any marriage would take place after Sir John Stevens,
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had concluded his inquiry into the
death of Princess Diana.
The friend said: "With the inquest and the inquiry under way, nothing
can be considered until we reached the next stage." After that, the
marriage could take place "next year at the earliest".
Clarence House said it was a private matter between the couple and
refused to comment. But most Anglican leaders want the situation to be
resolved before Charles succeeds to the throne, sources suggest. Last
year, the General Synod relaxed its rules on divorce, agreeing that in
some cases, divorcees could remarry in church while their former partner
was still living.
They would be prepared to accept a marriage more easily if Charles and
Mrs Parker Bowles were to repent for what has happened in the past,
sources say. This would be a matter between the couple and a spiritual
pastor.
The Rev Rod Thomas, priest in charge of St Mathew's, Plymouth, and
spokesman for Reform, the influential conservative evangelical
organisation, said: "Evangelicals will not speak uniformly on this
issue. But there are a number who think that if there is
acknowledgement
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
Post by banana
of wrongdoing, then there is no real bar on marriage."
The Ven Michael Lawson, of the Church of England Evangelical Council,
added: "From a Christian point of view, everyone should be allowed a new
start in life."
***END ARTICLE 1***
***BEGIN ARTICLE***
Church lets Charles wed
By JULIE MOULT
ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams yesterday dropped the
Church's objections to Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles -
and it could happen next year.
The decision by the head of the Church of England means the heir to the
Throne could announce wedding plans within 12 months, pals revealed last
night.
A friend of Charles and Camilla told The Times: "It would be wrong to
give the impression that they have not talked about it and are against
it. That would not be right.
"But no one will rush into it or bounce them into it. It's a personal
decision."
It is believed any announcement will be made after the inquest and
inquiry into the 1997 death of Princess Diana who was divorced from
Charles.
The pal added: "Next year at the earliest."
Dr Williams has always opposed Charles, 55, remarrying because his long-
time companion Camilla, 56, is divorced.
But yesterday he appeared to change his stance saying it is natural they
should marry.
Other senior church members would support the move.
It is thought a wedding could take place at a church near Charles's home
in Highgrove, Gloucs.
A spokesman for him said: "It's a private matter."
***END ARTICLE***
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
I would not shag CPB with a rancid pakis cock!!!! The foul-faced whore
has
Post by Fatha -Jack
got a kite like a fuckin pork-scratchin!!!!!
FJ - OFM#20 - BNP!!!!!!!
That's always assuming that she would, actually give you the chance to make
that choice.
Cheers LJ.
I get women for what I am mate,,,,,,

A FUCKIN RAPIST!!!!!

FJ - OFM#20 - BNP!!!!!!!
Susan Cohen
2004-06-03 16:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
I would not shag CPB with a rancid pakis cock!!!! The foul-faced whore
has
Post by Fatha -Jack
got a kite like a fuckin pork-scratchin!!!!!
That's always assuming that she would, actually give you the chance to make
that choice.
Why do you think he's so upset?

SusanC
BTov
2004-06-04 14:07:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan Cohen
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
I would not shag CPB with a rancid pakis cock!!!! The foul-faced whore
has
Post by Leighton Jones
Post by Fatha -Jack
got a kite like a fuckin pork-scratchin!!!!!
That's always assuming that she would, actually give you the chance to
make
Post by Leighton Jones
that choice.
Why do you think he's so upset?
SusanC
why do you think your joowish susie?
b'wahahahaha!!!!!
yaffaDina
2004-06-03 13:16:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by banana
This has been reported in various UK newspapers. The following articles
from the 'Evening Standard' and the 'Sun'. The source is obviously
'royal' press officials.
No prizes for guessing what verdict might be reached at the inquest
conducted by the coroner of the 'queen's' household.
You mean you don't think Charles will be implicated and sent to jail :)
Post by banana
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/11127069?source=Evening%20St
andard
or click: <http://tinyurl.com/ywg2o>
***BEGIN ARTICLE 1***
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
By Robert Jobson, Evening Standard Royal Correspondent
3 June 2004
Prince Charles has been given the Archbishop of Canterbury's blessing to
marry Camilla Parker Bowles if he wants to, it emerged today.
Dr Rowan Williams told Charles during secret talks that he would give
the union his blessing, senior sources have revealed.
But Charles has made it clear that he will not be "bounced" into
marriage, which he believes is a " personal decision". Sources close to
the prince say he and Mrs Parker Bowles have no definite plans to marry
until his younger son Prince Harry is at least 21, which is more than a
year away.
Archbishop gives Charles 'blessing' to marry
When they met Dr Williams, who has always spoken out against remarriage
of divorcees apart from in exceptional circumstances, he told Charles he
would support him if he chose to "formalise" his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles.
The revelation comes after the unprecedented intervention of Dr
Williams's predecessor, Lord Carey, who said Charles should make "an
honest woman" of his long-term love.
Well, we know that the ex-Arch is flogging his book, but that's hardly a
reason for Dr. Williams to do a complete turnaround on the CofE's
behalf.
Post by banana
The 55-year-old prince, who has always said his relationship with Mrs
Parker Bowles is "non-negotiable", is understood to be "intensely
irritated" at Lord Carey's comments that it was "natural" for them to
marry.
Well, duh! He was pushed into marriage once, he's not going to want to
be seen doing it again.
Post by banana
One close source said: "He has a great disinclination to talk about the
subject."
Mrs Parker Bowles is also said to be reluctant to accept the active
public role that marriage to Charles would bring, although she likes to
be allowed to appear with him at some events as his escort.
Again with the duh! What're the options? Money or work & money?
Post by banana
A close friend of the prince told The Times that the couple have
discussed marriage after Dr Williams made it clear he would bless their
union.
In a further development, senior evangelicals, who take a conservative
line on sexual matters, have said they would give the marriage their
blessing if the couple, as divorcees, both admitted wrongdoing.
Well, I'll wait for *that* press release.
Post by banana
The view of the Church of England leadership is critical to any decision
because, once King, Charles would succeed his mother as Supreme
Governor. The only constitutional bar to the marriage would be if the
Queen refused to approve it.
The close friend of the prince, said to be authorised to speak on his
behalf, told The Times of the couple: "It would be wrong to give the
impression that they have not talked about it and are against it. That
would not be right.
iow they are in favor of getting married. Both of them?
Post by banana
"But no one will rush them into it or bounce them into it. It's a
personal decision."
Not for a future King it isn't.
Post by banana
The friend said any marriage would take place after Sir John Stevens,
the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, had concluded his inquiry into the
death of Princess Diana.
The friend said: "With the inquest and the inquiry under way, nothing
can be considered until we reached the next stage." After that, the
marriage could take place "next year at the earliest".
Clarence House said it was a private matter between the couple and
refused to comment. But most Anglican leaders want the situation to be
resolved before Charles succeeds to the throne, sources suggest. Last
year, the General Synod relaxed its rules on divorce, agreeing that in
some cases, divorcees could remarry in church while their former partner
was still living.
They would be prepared to accept a marriage more easily if Charles and
Mrs Parker Bowles were to repent for what has happened in the past,
sources say. This would be a matter between the couple and a spiritual
pastor.
Repent. Any such repentence imo would be in name only. There is
nothing about their relationship and how they live their lives that
*shows* repentence and that's what counts, not what they say.
Post by banana
The Rev Rod Thomas, priest in charge of St Mathew's, Plymouth, and
spokesman for Reform, the influential conservative evangelical
organisation, said: "Evangelicals will not speak uniformly on this
issue. But there are a number who think that if there is acknowledgement
of wrongdoing, then there is no real bar on marriage."
The Ven Michael Lawson, of the Church of England Evangelical Council,
added: "From a Christian point of view, everyone should be allowed a new
start in life."
With or without repentence and admissions of wrong doing? Atonement?
Anything?
yD
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt
Post by banana
***END ARTICLE 1***
***BEGIN ARTICLE***
Church lets Charles wed
By JULIE MOULT
ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams yesterday dropped the
Church’s objections to Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles —
and it could happen next year.
The decision by the head of the Church of England means the heir to the
Throne could announce wedding plans within 12 months, pals revealed last
night.
A friend of Charles and Camilla told The Times: “It would be wrong to
give the impression that they have not talked about it and are against
it. That would not be right.
“But no one will rush into it or bounce them into it. It’s a personal
decision.”
It is believed any announcement will be made after the inquest and
inquiry into the 1997 death of Princess Diana who was divorced from
Charles.
The pal added: “Next year at the earliest.”
Dr Williams has always opposed Charles, 55, remarrying because his long-
time companion Camilla, 56, is divorced.
But yesterday he appeared to change his stance saying it is natural they
should marry.
Other senior church members would support the move.
It is thought a wedding could take place at a church near Charles’s home
in Highgrove, Gloucs.
A spokesman for him said: “It’s a private matter.”
***END ARTICLE***
--
banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
Michael Rhodes
2004-06-06 23:38:52 UTC
Permalink
The Rev Chad Varah, CH, a close chum of members of the Royal Family
(he officiated at the marriage of Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones & Daniel
Chatto)in a letter to The Times says: "I believe that the precedent in
which the Prince of Wales finds himself was set by Edward VIII who,
when he wished to marry an inappropriate person, very properly
renounced the throne and became Duke of Windsor."

--
Susan Cohen
2004-06-07 00:41:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Rhodes
The Rev Chad Varah, CH, a close chum of members of the Royal Family
(he officiated at the marriage of Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones & Daniel
Chatto)in a letter to The Times says: "I believe that the precedent in
which the Prince of Wales finds himself was set by Edward VIII who,
when he wished to marry an inappropriate person, very properly
renounced the throne and became Duke of Windsor."
If Camilla is inappropriate for the PoW, then Princess Anne should also have
to "abdicate."
Times have changed, and people who were judged "inappropriate" in the 30's
are not necessarily "innappropriate" now.
The Church allows divorce, & remarriage of divorced ersons in Church (didn't
we find this out awhile ago?). So to say that Charles cannot have what his
future subjects have is hypocritical.
Yes, I know there are other problems involved, but to say that Charles has
to abdicate rather than marry Camilla is too cut & dried & definitely not
necessarily so.

SusanC
Post by Michael Rhodes
--
Michael Rhodes
2004-06-07 16:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan Cohen
Post by Michael Rhodes
The Rev Chad Varah, CH, a close chum of members of the Royal Family
(he officiated at the marriage of Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones & Daniel
Chatto)in a letter to The Times says: "I believe that the precedent in
which the Prince of Wales finds himself was set by Edward VIII who,
when he wished to marry an inappropriate person, very properly
renounced the throne and became Duke of Windsor."
If Camilla is inappropriate for the PoW, then Princess Anne should also have
to "abdicate."
Quite right.
Post by Susan Cohen
Times have changed, and people who were judged "inappropriate" in the 30's
are not necessarily "innappropriate" now.
Right again.
Post by Susan Cohen
The Church allows divorce, & remarriage of divorced ersons in Church (didn't
we find this out awhile ago?). So to say that Charles cannot have what his
future subjects have is hypocritical.
Ditto.
Post by Susan Cohen
Yes, I know there are other problems involved, but to say that Charles has
to abdicate rather than marry Camilla is too cut & dried & definitely not
necessarily so.
SusanC
Post by Michael Rhodes
--
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...