Spare

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Prince William and Princess Catherine were not faring well in public opinion, seen as lazy. While King Charles was recovering from cancer and going to all these engagements in the public, his son and wife were hardly seen at all.

They have the sympathy of some people, obviously, royalists, but those who are not and have to fund them (grudgingly) do not appreciate this. When others ie ordinary people are not so fortunate with their cancer treatments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Sorry they are the Cambridges. I get confused with all their different titles. We don't have these in NZ only sirs and dames. Maybe the odd lady, and a lot of people are already landlords.

Certainly no Dukes or Earls, Duchesses or Princesses.

Maori do have a King, but it's not reported in the mainstream papers. Maybe only significant for Maori, who felt they had to copy the tradition of having a King from the British royals who colonised the land. It's a bit complicated here the relationship between Maori people and the Crown. We have issues of Sovereignty.

We have a Governor General, but the most we hear about it is very little.
The Prime Minister and their cabinet gets all the press here. Sometimes they support the Royals, and pay tribute to them, but sometimes they do not and favour Republicanism. It's a democracy here, or meant to be
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Well even though it is in London, Princess Kate and Princess Anne are leading the ANZAC day commemoration, so I figured you might like this story having mentioned that the other day, praise Jesus.


 
  • Pray
Reactions: Lanolin
I kinda wish King Charles had broadcast an Easter message like the Queen did her Christmas message - she did one every year without fail.

It would have meant so much to many people in the Commonwealth. Ok maybe not the muslim Pakistanis or the Hindu Indians, but the Queen advocated for the faith, and that wasn't anathema anyone.
And muslims and Hindus (mostly cultural) would then understand why Christians celebrate Easter, or Passover as it's done in many countries.

If say King Charles gave a message for freedom and redemption in the Easter story, (like how God rescued the Israelites, or how Jesus gave his life so we could live) I can't see how that would harm unbelievers. Nobody is forced to believe.

Just as the Queen said in some of her Christmas messages how much having a Saviour means to her, and how family is important.
IDK. I can't imagine the Queen ever saying well let's all pilgrimage to Mecca and pray five times a day. And we must do this otherwise we are not good people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Lanolin said:
I kinda wish King Charles had broadcast an Easter message like the Queen did her Christmas message - she did one every year without fail.

It would have meant so much to many people in the Commonwealth. Ok maybe not the muslim Pakistanis or the Hindu Indians, but the Queen advocated for the faith, and that wasn't anathema anyone.
And muslims and Hindus (mostly cultural) would then understand why Christians celebrate Easter, or Passover as it's done in many countries.

If say King Charles gave a message for freedom and redemption in the Easter story, (like how God rescued the Israelites, or how Jesus gave his life so we could live) I can't see how that would harm unbelievers. Nobody is forced to believe.

Just as the Queen said in some of her Christmas messages how much having a Saviour means to her, and how family is important.
IDK. I can't imagine the Queen ever saying well let's all pilgrimage to Mecca and pray five times a day. And we must do this otherwise we are not good people.
Click to expand...
King Charles is a disgrace. He is supposed to be the Defender of the Christian faith, not an apologist for the Antichrist Muslim religion. William is no better. I can understand not supporting the Anglican denomination. It is barely recognisable as Christian in the UK.

Part of the problem is the financial control that Muslims have over the UK. Remember the golden rule. Whoever has the gold makes the rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Lanolin said:
I kinda wish King Charles had broadcast an Easter message like the Queen did her Christmas message - she did one every year without fail.

It would have meant so much to many people in the Commonwealth. Ok maybe not the muslim Pakistanis or the Hindu Indians, but the Queen advocated for the faith, and that wasn't anathema anyone.
And muslims and Hindus (mostly cultural) would then understand why Christians celebrate Easter, or Passover as it's done in many countries.

If say King Charles gave a message for freedom and redemption in the Easter story, (like how God rescued the Israelites, or how Jesus gave his life so we could live) I can't see how that would harm unbelievers. Nobody is forced to believe.

Just as the Queen said in some of her Christmas messages how much having a Saviour means to her, and how family is important.
IDK. I can't imagine the Queen ever saying well let's all pilgrimage to Mecca and pray five times a day. And we must do this otherwise we are not good people.
Click to expand...
I agree, I think this is also why the Easter-Ramadan scandal by Charles is so sharp, because he tried to make the excuse for insulting Christianity by saying well he's trying to be multicultural, but his mother always honored Jesus during her Christmas and Easter addresses and she managed to run a multicultural empire literally longer than anyone else in British history, so Charles' secularist excuse fails him pretty hard.

This is why really he owes Harry and Meghan one, the media cycle changed thanks to Harry and Meghan, and right before Charles did the centenary for his mother and now is going on probably his most high profile overseas trip to America here pretty soon so it takes that black cloud away from over his head for those. This is why I think he should consider this as a merit for Harry and Meghan. In the world of the royals there's always going to be scandal and gossip, so it's more of a matter of picking your battles. Letting the public wag their tongues at Harry and Meghan's valley girl antics is by far better than having the tabloids focused on the king's apostasy and the photos of Andrew hovering over teenagers right before the king has to make some major trips and speeches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gideon300
Yea Harry and Meghan never did anything outrageously reheprensible. Their only crime was Meghans's little social faux pas because she wasn't born royal, and Harry's drug use and putting his foot in his mouth sometimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Poor Princess Catherine is looking very gaunt. I hope she's alright.
Princess Anne is a stalwart. I love that she always seems to know what she's doing, and never cared too much about what others thought. Media have just left her alone to get on with it, as they should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Lanolin said:
Yea Harry and Meghan never did anything outrageously reheprensible. Their only crime was Meghans's little social faux pas because she wasn't born royal, and Harry's drug use and putting his foot in his mouth sometimes.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Though even more scrutinously not just cause she was a peasant cause actually Princess Catherine actually was controversially the first plebe princess before her, but at least British and truly single. Meghan's dirt is she's a divorcee and American, which hearkens of course back to the abdication of King Edward and Wallis Simpson. In this case since Harry's inner turmoil of being the "Spare" actually works in his favor since he can still marry a non-noble and non-Briton without having to vacate his royal positions and status and can actually use this as a strong asset as a senior royal, able to help the Crown cover more ground like the Commonwealth and other culturally similar countries like USA (the Anglosphere.)
 
Yea well he originally found her when she was in Canada, she was working in Toronto at the time. So he might not have twigged at first that she was USAsian.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Also, she was nominally Catholic, but they just say that because she went to a private Catholic school.
No heir can marry a Catholic, it's against the rules. They must be Church of England or nothing.
Diana was nothing, I don't think she ever really went to church. She only attended because well her in-laws expected this of her. She was more a New Ager, she dabbled in spiritualism, as did Fergie. It was Fergie who introduced her to horoscopes.

Divorcees...well by the time Harry married Meghan, 3/4 Queen's children had been divorced, so they couldn't really stop Harry from marrying a divorcee.

The outcry was that she was American, more so than anything else. And half African/American at that. Meghan's first marriage was something she'd prefer to erase, by the time she was seeing Harry she'd already been divorced and free to see whoever she liked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Lanolin said:
Also, she was nominally Catholic, but they just say that because she went to a private Catholic school.
No heir can marry a Catholic, it's against the rules. They must be Church of England or nothing.
Diana was nothing, I don't think she ever really went to church. She only attended because well her in-laws expected this of her. She was more a New Ager, she dabbled in spiritualism, as did Fergie. It was Fergie who introduced her to horoscopes.

Divorcees...well by the time Harry married Meghan, 3/4 Queen's children had been divorced, so they couldn't really stop Harry from marrying a divorcee.

The outcry was that she was American, more so than anything else. And half African/American at that. Meghan's first marriage was something she'd prefer to erase, by the time she was seeing Harry she'd already been divorced and free to see whoever she liked.
Click to expand...
Yea I knew that rule actually. Guess that's what happens when your fleet sinks before the feet of the greatest fire muse queen of England.

 
SonJudgment said:
Yea I knew that rule actually. Guess that's what happens when your fleet sinks before the feet of the greatest fire muse queen of England.

Click to expand...



Great movie (Elizabeth the Golden Age) and a great monarch I guess in case my reference was too slick, it's Queen Elizabeth I. Will all of Britain become Catholic and Spanish or remain Protestant and British? You'll never guess how it ends lol.
 
Catholic-lite

Or, as they say in the UK 'high church'

The peasants/plebs couldn't afford this kind of church so left and made their own instead - that's why other churches 'low church' are called 'non-conformist'. When they could, they escaped to North America to form every kind of church and sect and cult you find today cos there was no law against it in America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Then the English royals united with Scotland and took over Wales. Their invasion of Ireland was less successful, they basically decided to starve them to death.

A lot of Scotland was then taken over to provide land for the richies. It was like Lord of the Rings honestly. Or maybe Macbeth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SonJudgment
Terrorism is still celebrated in England. That is why they have Guy Fawkes day. The one day the protestants get back at the catholics by setting fire to the Guy who tried to blow up parliament.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SonJudgment
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back