Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Nunh-huh (talk | contribs)
Line 59: Line 59:
Why does this kept getting brought up? The Duchess of Cambridge was baptised as an infant and confirmed as a communicant of the Church of England shortly before her marriage. To whatever troll who keeps bringing this up enough is enough. She is a confirmed, professed and practicing Anglican; otherwise the Duke of Cambridge would have been removed from the line of succession. Stop bringing this up or I will report you. [[Special:Contributions/74.69.11.229|74.69.11.229]] ([[User talk:74.69.11.229|talk]]) 11:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Why does this kept getting brought up? The Duchess of Cambridge was baptised as an infant and confirmed as a communicant of the Church of England shortly before her marriage. To whatever troll who keeps bringing this up enough is enough. She is a confirmed, professed and practicing Anglican; otherwise the Duke of Cambridge would have been removed from the line of succession. Stop bringing this up or I will report you. [[Special:Contributions/74.69.11.229|74.69.11.229]] ([[User talk:74.69.11.229|talk]]) 11:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
:She's not Jewish, but if she were, it would have no effect on the line of succession. It's not as if she's Catholic! - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 15:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
:She's not Jewish, but if she were, it would have no effect on the line of succession. It's not as if she's Catholic! - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 15:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm well aware of that, but I've read a number of sources that say many older members of the Royal Family are not very hospitable to Jews; it is also clearly mentioned on the Monarchy website that anyone who marries someone who does not convert to Anglicanism and/or is not Protestant at the time of succession to the throne shall be disbarred. This is very clearly stated on the Monarchy's website and in any reliable book on British constitutional law. Even if it were not, the Establishment in Britain has always been anti-Semitic and the marriage of a Jewish girl to the next heir-apparent to the British throne would NOT be looked favorably upon in those quarters, no matter what Convention on "Human Rights" may have been entered in to. Respectfully please don't tell me you are so niave. [[Special:Contributions/74.69.11.229|74.69.11.229]] ([[User talk:74.69.11.229|talk]]) 20:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:09, 31 March 2013


The Bullock connection

I have removed the paragraph on the Bullock connection as it is a connection by marriage, not a blood connection. Lady Bullock (Catherine's second cousin) is a blood relation, Sir Christopher Bullock (who is descended from the aristocracy) is not a blood relation, but is a relation by marriage and given the distance between Lady Bullock and Catherine, Sir Christopher's descent is not particularly relevant. Moreover the blood versus marriage connection was not made clear in the article, so if somebody reinstates the sentence, please make the blood/marriage connection clear. Martinvl (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good work to get this bit a bit clearer - I will endeavour to make the blood relationship between Caterine and Lady Bullock clearer ( as pointed out by the Sunday Telerapah / Times of India etc and then put in. Cheers Harro]
I have again removed the references to Lady Bullock for the reasons given above. Martinvl (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also see section "Gentry" below. Martinvl (talk) 14:16, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

Is she really a member of the church of england? I've read she was jewish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.216.133.208 (talk) 09:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know but I haven't heard that. I'm sure it's easy to reference, because at the moment it isn't so really should be removed per WP:BLP! –anemoneprojectors– 14:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
She was baptised as a Christian (Protestant - Church of England) as an infant and confirmed by the Bishop of London shortly before she was married. I have added a citation to theat effect. Martinvl (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's really helpful! –anemoneprojectors– 16:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gentry

I have removed the word "gentry" as it is nebullous. Insterad, I have expanded the sentence about the role of the Lupton family, leaving it to the reader to decide the social class of the family. Of course, if someone want to write an article "Ancerty of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge", fell free to do so, but this article should make only the briefest mention. Martinvl (talk) 14:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is she jewish?

Is she jewish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.103.138.192 (talk) 01:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC) Why does this kept getting brought up? The Duchess of Cambridge was baptised as an infant and confirmed as a communicant of the Church of England shortly before her marriage. To whatever troll who keeps bringing this up enough is enough. She is a confirmed, professed and practicing Anglican; otherwise the Duke of Cambridge would have been removed from the line of succession. Stop bringing this up or I will report you. 74.69.11.229 (talk) 11:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She's not Jewish, but if she were, it would have no effect on the line of succession. It's not as if she's Catholic! - Nunh-huh 15:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of that, but I've read a number of sources that say many older members of the Royal Family are not very hospitable to Jews; it is also clearly mentioned on the Monarchy website that anyone who marries someone who does not convert to Anglicanism and/or is not Protestant at the time of succession to the throne shall be disbarred. This is very clearly stated on the Monarchy's website and in any reliable book on British constitutional law. Even if it were not, the Establishment in Britain has always been anti-Semitic and the marriage of a Jewish girl to the next heir-apparent to the British throne would NOT be looked favorably upon in those quarters, no matter what Convention on "Human Rights" may have been entered in to. Respectfully please don't tell me you are so niave. 74.69.11.229 (talk) 20:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]