King Charles and Queen Camilla

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee King Charles and Queen Camilla

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • Author
  • #596593

    If you thought the pageantry of the Royal Wedding last week was elaborate, you ought to wait for when HRH Prince Charles, Prince of Wales and HRH Camilla, Princess of Wales ascend to the throne of England and her Commonwealths as King Charles and Queen Camilla!

    Who else is looking forward to when the Princess of Wales, Camilla, becomes Her Majesty, Queen Camilla?


    I’ll be barfing. Two unattractive home-wreckers.


    NOT ME!!


    two words— who cares


    Apparently Charlie is getting impatient with Elizabeth hanging around so long. So he gets Covid and quickly infects his mother, in a not so apparently attempt to bring about his elevation to King and his wife’s coronation as Queen Camilla.

    All this shortly after Lizzie announced she wants Camilla to utilize the title of Queen Consort rather than deferring to use merely Princess Consort, as previously announced upon her marriage (when sensitivities to the immoral Diana were still raw enough not to want to offend the British press with the idea that Camilla will be Queen, something Diana was [rightfully] denied.)


    ujm, I suspects the same. Very Shakespearean drama: risking his own life for the throne …
    Note that paranoid Putin is more careful than the Queen – he meets people at a 6 meter-long table. Hope, she is healthier, though.


    He’ll be king and she’ll be queen, it’s as simple as that.




    TheGoq’s comment from 2011 is still on point.



    It is an opportunity.(Berachos 58A)
    אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לְעוֹלָם יִשְׁתַּדֵּל אָדָם לָרוּץ לִקְרַאת מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְלֹא לִקְרַאת מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ לִקְרַאת מַלְכֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁאִם יִזְכֶּה — יַבְחִין בֵּין מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַלְכֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם.
    Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One should always strive to run toward kings of Israel to greet them. And not only should he run toward kings of Israel, but also toward kings of the nations of the world, so that if he will be privileged to witnesses the glory of the Messiah (Rashi) and the World-to-Come, he will distinguish between the kings of Israel and the kings of the nations of the world.

    Are you looking forward to the pomp and circumstance of Queen Elizabeth’s funeral first?


    R Yohanan says when dying “be afraid of King of Kings (at least ?) as the mortal Kings”. Given lack of power for the current monarchs, we should observe carefully remaining dictators – Hu, Putim, Kim, to appreciate what yerat shamayim is.


    Dictators are not [i]melachim[/i], who rule by the will of their people,
    but [i]moshlim[/i], who rule against the will of their people.


    <i>(It’s been a while.)</i>



    whatcha sighing about?


    Not getting it right the first 2 times.


    Random, a good point on melachim. This would exclude Kims, while Hu and Putin exist by some quiet agreement of their countries who did not come to rebel against them. Not different from melachim of the past who did not have frequent elections. The idea of democracy was considered unworkable for most of history between Athens and modernity – and, for me at least, it is still unclear whether it works and clearly pure democracies are bound to fail.


    ( “Direct democracy or pure democracy is a form of democracy in which the electorate decides on policy initiatives without legislative representatives as proxies. This differs from the majority of currently established democracies, which are representative democracies.” – Wikipedia )


    Random, thanks for looking up wiki for me…


    Sorry, I shouldn’t have assumed you were using “pure democracy” carelessly.
    (At least it’s useful to anyone unaware of the meaning of the term.)

    Regarding the “quiet agreement” of the Russian people…

    DICTATOR PUTIN CRACKDOWN: Hundreds Arrested As Russians Protest Ukraine Attack


    Random, hundreds in the country of hundred million… Kol hakavod to them, of course, and understanding the risks others are afraid to take, but still… Check out Putin’s popularity, even if you can’t fully believe those surveys


    “He’ll be king and she’ll be queen, it’s as simple as that.”

    Incorrect, as has already been pointed out. He will become King, she will be the Queen Consort, not “the Queen.” There is a difference, Hohum, that you have failed to grasp.


    Hey, what’s all the rudeness about the Brittish melucha? Where’s the basic respect and kibbud melochim?

    What happened to לעולם יתפלל אדם בשלומה של מלכות


    Non-British subjects (which constitutes the vast majority of the participants here as well as the world) need not respect or pray for the British royals.


    I think the halakha is that you say a brocha seeing a monarch even when you are not a subject. You run to see him/her to appreciate a glimpse of power that is a small reflection of Hashem’s power.

    Not sure about Americans. Maybe it is not appropriate of the colonies are still considered to be in rebellion. Not sure of treaty of Paris closed that chapter.

    But to RR44, they are not reigning yet, so we should put it on record what we think of them now.


    There’s no mitzvah or reason for anyone to respect or honor the kings of Swaziland, Ghana or of Nigeria.


    What happened to לעולם יתפלל אדם בשלומה של מלכות

    Well, this brings up an interesting question in the modern age. What is meant by “malchus?” It is the pagentry, pomp, dignity and history of the institution of the monarchy as personified in its current occupant? Or is it the actual governing power and the ability to change matters for the Jews favorably or unfavorably? If the former, the “malchus” in the UK is clearly the Queen. If the latter, it could easily be argued that it’s Parliament, who not only holds the everyday legislative power, but even has the power to remove the monarch or even abolish the monarchy altogether.

    The Wolf


    Wolf: The British Parliament lacks unilateral power to remove the monarch or abolish the monarchy since the monarch can deny such an act royal assent, which would effectively ensure such an act doesn’t become legally effective.


    Wolf: The British Parliament lacks unilateral power to remove the monarch or abolish the monarchy since the monarch can deny such an act royal assent, which would effectively ensure such an act doesn’t become legally effective.

    While that may be technically true, it isn’t on a practical level. I’m pretty sure James II did not assent to the ruling of Parliament that he had abdicated the throne, and yet, at least in England, it was considered effective.

    The Wolf


    Wolf: That’s absolutely incorrect. Great Britain is a Constitutional Monarchy (even though the United Kingdom lacks a written constitution) and a strict adherent to the rule of law. Indeed, the rule of law is one of the longest established common law fundamental principles of the governance of the United Kingdom, dating to Magna Carta of 1215. Britain could not and would not in the modern era discard the rule of law and its own constitutional principles to allegedly effect an act or law that is constitutionally void and legally invalid, such as purporting to extra-constitutionally effect an act that lacks legal legitimacy under the rule of law due to a lack of royal assent.


    Wolf: Awaiting your rejoinder or concession.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.