The Duchess of Cambridge

[Ryan Shuflin]

Is the prohibition against only marring/becoming a Catholic? What if a member in the line married or became a Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, or Muslim - would that likewise disqualify them?

Nope, only Catholic, but the Sovereign themselves does have to be in communion with the Church of England.

[Jonathan Webster]

Yep; the sovereign's spouse could be a methodist, lutheran, eastern orthodox, muslim, sikh, buddhist, jain, satanist, calvinist, pagan, mormon, bahaist, hindu...anything; just not Roman Catholic. Indeed, several members of the British Royal Family have converted to several of the above religions because they married members of foreign royal families in the past.

Which rather begs the question as to why the Duke of Edinburgh converted from Eastern Orthodoy to Anglicanism when he became naturalised as a British subject.

[Chas Charles-Dunne]

Which rather begs the question as to why the Duke of Edinburgh converted from Eastern Orthodoy to Anglicanism when he became naturalised as a British subject.

Could be the lack of Eastern Orthodox churches in Sandringham village.

[JMcMillan]

Could also be that:
(a) it didn't matter all that much to him--after all, his grandfather was a Lutheran who only converted because Athens was worth a leitourgia; and
(b) public attitudes in England toward a non CofE royal consort were presumably somewhat less tolerant in 1947 than they are now.

[Jeremy Kudlick]

The proposed changes also include removing the prohibition on marrying a "papist". I don't know if this allows HRH Prince Michael of Kent to re-enter the line of succession, but all future Sovereigns will be allowed to marry someone regardless of religious affiliation.

[steven harris]

The proposed changes also include removing the prohibition on marrying a "papist". I don't know if this allows HRH Prince Michael of Kent to re-enter the line of succession, but all future Sovereigns will be allowed to marry someone regardless of religious affiliation.

Clause 2(2) would suggest that passage would remove the disqualification from living people, thus reinserting Prince Michael of Kent and his nephew George, Earl of St Andrews.

[JMcMillan]

On thinking about it, I doubt that the Church of England requires any kind of formal conversion for someone raised Greek Orthodox simply to start worshiping and communing as an Anglican. Anyone know for sure?

[Chris Green]

The Church of England isn't in full communion with the Greek Orthodox Church, but I do not believe that the CofE would require someone baptised into the Orthodox Church to be re-baptised and confirmed in order to receive Communion.

Perhaps Fr Selvester knows someone who can provide the answer ex cathedra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercommunion#Protestant_Churches

[Ryan Shuflin]

Could also be that:
(a) it didn't matter all that much to him--after all, his grandfather was a Lutheran who only converted because Athens was worth a leitourgia; and
(b) public attitudes in England toward a non CofE royal consort were presumably somewhat less tolerant in 1947 than they are now.

aslo,
His mother was Lutheran (although she eventually converted). As was his guardians, and he left Greece when he quite young. Not to mention, people often convert when marrying, Royal or common. It is easy to forget that the Royal family is a family, and its members have their own opinions. I read somewhere that the Queen Mother was not too happy with Prince Philip's German relatives.

The Church of England isn't in full communion with the Greek Orthodox Church, but I do not believe that the CofE would require someone baptised into the Orthodox Church to be re-baptised and confirmed in order to receive Communion.

Perhaps Fr Selvester knows someone who can provide the answer ex cathedra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercommunion#Protestant_Churches

Perhaps my information is a little dated, but a second baptism was considered heresy. So I don't think he would have to be re-baptized.

[steven harris]

In a curious article, today's The Telegraph reports that: "Royal baby: Duke and Duchess's child to be first Prince or Princess of Cambridge"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ridge.html

Sorry, but I understood that all children and (male-line) grandchildren of the sovereign were born as: "HRH Prince/Princess NAME of Father's Title". Isn't that why William was "HRH Prince William of Wales" and his cousin is "HRH Princess Eugenie of York"? I do not understand how this is 'news' if it is the status quo. Unless the Queen intends to create the title "P. of Cambrigde' for the tike...

Also, this isn't the first time that a royal baby will be "of Cambridge" - all three of Prince Adolphus' (tenth child and seventh son of George III) kids were born as "of Cambridge" since Adolphus was Duke of Cambridge.
• HRH Prince George of Cambridge (b.1819, so styled until he succeeded his father in 1850)
• HRH Princess Augusta of Cambridge (b.1822, so styled until marriage in 1843)
• HRH Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge (b.1833, so styled until marriage in 1866)