Monday, February 21, 2005

Who's castle is it anyway?

The British monarchy, has got itself into a bit of a mess over the forthcoming, arguably unconstitutional, wedding between divorcee Camilla Parker Bowles and Philip Arthur George Charles Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg (don't try to say that after a few pints), Prince of Wales, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Baron of Renfrew, Earl of Carrick, Lord of the Isles, Great Steward of Scotland.

Slight hiccup is that because they are both adulterers, they cannot get married in the Church of England. Lots of questions arise from this. Isn't it a bit hypocritical for the Archbishop of Canterbury to give a post-wedding blessing? Also, if he can't be married in the C of E, surely he has no right to become the head of the C of E ?

Anyway, the wedding was supposed to be held in Windsor castle, but that would mean, rightly, that anyone could get married there. Why not? The tax payer paid millions of pounds doing the place up after the insides were burnt out.

They are now getting married in a normal registry office:

"Thames Valley Police, which is responsible for Windsor castle, will now have to make more elaborate security arrangements. A wedding in Windsor Castle, with about 700 guests, would cause minimal security concerns. Now, the police will have man the entire route between the castle and the Guildhall, and scan it for possible explosives. Police snipers will have to be positioned on rooftops and helicopters will provide aerial security. The cost, of course, will have to be borne by the local council taxpayers." Source.

They do not say whether the tax payers support it anyway or whether they think that council tax bills are high enough already.


Phill said...

Sorry to be pedantic, but it should be "Whose castle is it anyway?" ;-)

Anonymous said...

I find it peculiar that a church, founded by a womanizer and adulterer king in the form of Henry VIII, has concluded that they cannot marry two royals who are themselves adulterers. Somethings more than a little wrong here...and it's not the monarchy in this case.

Sharon J said...

Well one way around the problem of Charles becoming head of the CofE is to abolish it rather than the monarchy. ~Sharon