Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 37   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Godparents to Baby Sussex  (Read 152748 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
SouthernBelle

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 687

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2185


With my thumbs I like to think I'm probably useful




Ignore
« Reply #300 on: July 04, 2019, 11:52:42 PM »

A quick internet search suggests that one of the gals lives in London and while the other one lives in the states she work's for her family's company so within reason vacation time isn't a problem.  Raises yet more eyebrows about the choice of weekend.

Well, there goes my theory. I guess they just didn't want Liz there.
Logged

SvenskaSarah

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 864

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3929





Ignore
« Reply #301 on: July 04, 2019, 11:58:47 PM »

I'm hoping that the privacy/secrecy of the christening is down to Queenie putting her foot down a little in the sense that she's trying to reign the megster in on the whole fame-whoring. It's been her decision (doubt it was Meghan or Harry) that the child did not receive a title, and ultimately, it is probably the Queen trying to ensure that this christening is as private as can be. I hope this is to spite Meghan, but also I imagine the Queen wants to send out the image of the BRF as a streamlined family, with only the most senior royals getting the press attention.
But, this is all wishful hoping as Id love to see Meghan taken down a peg or two by HM. And as for her not attending, it is very sad and rude to hold the date when she would not be there, but maybe the Queen didn't want to attend? She didn't attend Louis' christening, as well as other great grandchildren, so maybe she only attends if the child has an important role to play, or is the child of a favourite, like Zara. For instance Charlotte is currently the heir to George...
Logged
periwinkle

Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1823

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 7050





Ignore
« Reply #302 on: July 05, 2019, 12:20:58 AM »

Well the queen is having her Scotland time this is Holyrood Week and all her children are up there with her so this is weird timing. You can't ask a 93 year old monarch to skip annual work obligations. Maybe they are trying to set up victim arguments or maybe the queen comes with certain PR rules that don't apply when she's not around.
Logged
ralf103

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1913

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 6471





Ignore
« Reply #303 on: July 05, 2019, 12:37:51 AM »

Recent articles suggest they wanted to get the christening done quickly, thats the excuse for picking a week / weekend when HM was never going to be available. I mean, why pick a week that Charles was in Wales and HM in Scotland, yes it may be a long weekend for her American friends but surely you would put family before friends.

I really do wonder if HM just doesn't want to attend, the latest reports suggest that as it will be on Saturday HM will have done her duties in Scotland and be spending the weekend privately with Philip at Sandringham. A part of me can't help but think if she really wanted to be there she would have flown straight to London/Windsor for the christening. Maybe HM and her staff are trying to distance her from the latest PR crash.

On the keeping godparents private, no camera side of it,  I do find that odd. Why pick Windsor for the christening and have the Archbishop i you want to guard your child's privacy and treat him as "any other child"? I mean Zara and Peter have had their children christening privately and done so in their local church without announcing it before hand in a pretty regular seeming service and if H&M had done that I would understand the privacy call a little more. Personally I find the idea of a christening being private quite odd as its usually declared as a public welcome of the child into their religion and usually done in front of the regular attendees of the church where it takes place, i.e most christenings are public events if they take place in a church.
Logged
NAOTMAA

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 333

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 816





Ignore
« Reply #304 on: July 05, 2019, 01:38:36 AM »

I suppose with parents like Meghan and Harry it was expected but its sad to see the little guy get this treatment. He really feels like he's getting the shaft and the privacy excuse just feels as lame and phony as all the other stories they're putting out there. I imagine decades down the road future generations will learn the truth of all this crap  No

Logged
Oh_Caroline

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1693

Offline Offline

Posts: 6380





Ignore
« Reply #305 on: July 05, 2019, 01:56:17 AM »

As this continue several things are becoming clear to me...1. Harry needs a lot more therapy to deal with his "the media killed my mother" and "I only want the perks not the responsibilities of being royal" issues; 2. neither thought out anything to do with being married (besides the wedding ceremony) or with having a child (besides just the notion); and 3. The Queen, Charles, and the grey men are either passive AF or in the case of the grey men a complete myth.

They don't understand that the only effect that taking a traditional approach to the birth and christening would have had would have been to endear them and Archie to the public.  That Archie's title has nothing to do with how he turns out...how they raise him does.  Look at Louise and James; their births and christenings had a wonderful balance for non HRH children of HRH parents, and since then their parents have taken wonderful steps to balance the fact that they are raising their kids to make their own way while also raising grandchildren of a sovereign.  They also haven't been harmed by being a Lady and a Viscount.  Heck look at the Phillips and Tindall families, we see more of their kids than we do the Cambridge kids because they're just living their lives and going to family events and things like RWHS without a care.

Harry and Meghan haven't thought out that they can't pick and choose when he's private and when he's royal.  The press/public deserve consistency now and as Archie becomes aware of the world around him he will also deserve consistency.  If he's private stop the damn PR games and if he's a royal then do the bare minimum all the time not just when it suits you.
Logged
Booklover

Warned
Large Member
******

Reputation: 381

Online Online

Canada Canada

Posts: 1415





Ignore
« Reply #306 on: July 05, 2019, 02:37:14 AM »

As this continue several things are becoming clear to me...1. Harry needs a lot more therapy to deal with his "the media killed my mother" and "I only want the perks not the responsibilities of being royal" issues; 2. neither thought out anything to do with being married (besides the wedding ceremony) or with having a child (besides just the notion); and 3. The Queen, Charles, and the grey men are either passive AF or in the case of the grey men a complete myth.

They don't understand that the only effect that taking a traditional approach to the birth and christening would have had would have been to endear them and Archie to the public.  That Archie's title has nothing to do with how he turns out...how they raise him does.  Look at Louise and James; their births and christenings had a wonderful balance for non HRH children of HRH parents, and since then their parents have taken wonderful steps to balance the fact that they are raising their kids to make their own way while also raising grandchildren of a sovereign.  They also haven't been harmed by being a Lady and a Viscount.  Heck look at the Phillips and Tindall families, we see more of their kids than we do the Cambridge kids because they're just living their lives and going to family events and things like RWHS without a care.

Harry and Meghan haven't thought out that they can't pick and choose when he's private and when he's royal.  The press/public deserve consistency now and as Archie becomes aware of the world around him he will also deserve consistency.  If he's private stop the damn PR games and if he's a royal then do the bare minimum all the time not just when it suits you.


You are so right. The problem is that Meghan and Harry don't think, period!   Thumb down

I'm starting to think that there will be no baptism, I mean the Queen is not attending, the archbishop is in York, there are no godparents, the supposed event is taking place in some chapel, well away from public view,  no press, some photos released at a later date.
If they are playing a PR game, they are playing it very badly. It will all end in tears, I'm afraid.  Nono
Logged
gildinwen

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 57

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 307





Ignore
« Reply #307 on: July 05, 2019, 02:47:46 AM »

As this continue several things are becoming clear to me...1. Harry needs a lot more therapy to deal with his "the media killed my mother" and "I only want the perks not the responsibilities of being royal" issues; 2. neither thought out anything to do with being married (besides the wedding ceremony) or with having a child (besides just the notion); and 3. The Queen, Charles, and the grey men are either passive AF or in the case of the grey men a complete myth.

They don't understand that the only effect that taking a traditional approach to the birth and christening would have had would have been to endear them and Archie to the public.  That Archie's title has nothing to do with how he turns out...how they raise him does.  Look at Louise and James; their births and christenings had a wonderful balance for non HRH children of HRH parents, and since then their parents have taken wonderful steps to balance the fact that they are raising their kids to make their own way while also raising grandchildren of a sovereign.  They also haven't been harmed by being a Lady and a Viscount.  Heck look at the Phillips and Tindall families, we see more of their kids than we do the Cambridge kids because they're just living their lives and going to family events and things like RWHS without a care.

Harry and Meghan haven't thought out that they can't pick and choose when he's private and when he's royal.  The press/public deserve consistency now and as Archie becomes aware of the world around him he will also deserve consistency.  If he's private stop the damn PR games and if he's a royal then do the bare minimum all the time not just when it suits you.


You are so right. The problem is that Meghan and Harry don't think, period!   Thumb down

I'm starting to think that there will be no baptism, I mean the Queen is not attending, the archbishop is in York, there are no godparents, the supposed event is taking place in some chapel, well away from public view,  no press, some photos released at a later date.
If they are playing a PR game, they are playing it very badly. It will all end in tears, I'm afraid.  Nono

 Thumb up Thumb up Thumb up
Logged
lilyrose

Small Member
****

Reputation: 183

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 420





Ignore
« Reply #308 on: July 05, 2019, 03:08:08 AM »

Q. Has Meghan asked you to be godmother on Saturday and are you going?

SERENA WILLIAMS: No, I'm working on Saturday (smiling).

https://twitter.com/wta_i.../1146851269358817280?s=21
Logged
Booklover

Warned
Large Member
******

Reputation: 381

Online Online

Canada Canada

Posts: 1415





Ignore
« Reply #309 on: July 05, 2019, 03:22:06 AM »

Q. Has Meghan asked you to be godmother on Saturday and are you going?

SERENA WILLIAMS: No, I'm working on Saturday (smiling).

https://twitter.com/wta_i.../1146851269358817280?s=21


 Banana Laughing Laugh bounce Supercontent
Logged
JaneAir

Mini Member
***

Reputation: 61

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 218





Ignore
« Reply #310 on: July 05, 2019, 07:14:57 AM »

Question: do royal babies *have* to be Christened by an Archbishop?  If not—and if they truly want it to be private—then why not have a local Church of England officiant (vicar, yes?) do it while they’re visiting the Queen at Balmoral later this summer?  Or perhaps invite an Archbishop up to Scotland to do it?  After all, the royals invite many VIPs and friends to Balmoral; it’s entirely possible that, with a little coordination, the ceremony could be finished and pictures posted on Instagram before the press hears a word about it.

Of course, people who want to do things privately don’t publicly announce how private they are.  I swear, these two are like little kids banging pots and pans together while demanding that everyone ignores them.   Roll Eyes
Logged
tudorfan

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 364

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1819





Ignore
« Reply #311 on: July 05, 2019, 07:15:32 AM »

I suspect the one of the godparents is the person that introduced them.  They refused to ever reveal who that was, but it’s got to be a mutual friend of both of them.
Logged

"I was the one who was always pitched out front, whether it was my clothes, what I said, what my hair was doing, everything - which was a pretty dull subject, actually, and it's been exhausted over the years." - Diana
Ellie

Muted
Ginormous Member
***********

Reputation: 1949

Offline Offline

Posts: 7201


proud moron thx Scooby Doo




Ignore
« Reply #312 on: July 05, 2019, 07:31:51 AM »

Didn't they meet in Toronto at a dinner party Meghan attended because her boyfriend at the time was the chef? It was to promote Invictus 2017 and the Trudeaus were there and some others.

They say they met in London but that wasn't the original story, and there have been some slip ups...
Logged

writing angry fauxminist letters in the Lesbaru
getafix

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 4079

Offline Offline

Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, British

Posts: 23868


Bye-Bye MEDiana Who!!!!




Ignore
« Reply #313 on: July 05, 2019, 09:02:12 AM »

Didn't they meet in Toronto at a dinner party Meghan attended because her boyfriend at the time was the chef? It was to promote Invictus 2017 and the Trudeaus were there and some others.

They say they met in London but that wasn't the original story, and there have been some slip ups...

ummm one story...a rumour if you will... says that they met when Hazard called up room service fora yatch girl, and up popped Chookie to service.

but, like I said...just a rumour

G Smiley
Logged

ANDREW DENTON: Yes. What did... When you first met, what did you see in each other? CROWN PRINCE FREDERIK: What did we see in each other? We saw... Well, it's a bit hard. It's a bit blurry, in a way, because it was just after the Olympics had started and it was one of those evenings where...
Oh_Caroline

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1693

Offline Offline

Posts: 6380





Ignore
« Reply #314 on: July 05, 2019, 11:59:30 AM »

Question: do royal babies *have* to be Christened by an Archbishop?  If not—and if they truly want it to be private—then why not have a local Church of England officiant (vicar, yes?) do it while they’re visiting the Queen at Balmoral later this summer?  Or perhaps invite an Archbishop up to Scotland to do it?  After all, the royals invite many VIPs and friends to Balmoral; it’s entirely possible that, with a little coordination, the ceremony could be finished and pictures posted on Instagram before the press hears a word about it.

Of course, people who want to do things privately don’t publicly announce how private they are.  I swear, these two are like little kids banging pots and pans together while demanding that everyone ignores them.   Roll Eyes

No the Archbishop is not required.  If the Queen’s grandchildren only Peter, William, and Harry got Canterbury.

I’m split on doing it in Scotland so won’t comment on that but it is very clear that the planning was done very poorly.  Even waiting until next weekend would have solved a few issues...or just consulting the Queen’s calendar first. 

It’s funny to see the Stan’s reaction to the announcement followed by Wimbledon.  Honestly how did they think people would react when one day their all about privacy and the next she’s at Wimbledon with two college friends?  Lord help them.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 37   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: