Divorce and the royal crown - does anyone understand this?

Question

Why is it that Edward, only a few generations ago, was made to abdicate so that he could marry Wallis Simpson (and we know she couldn't be queen because she was divorced, not because she was American. . . ) but Camilla, who is also divorced, can marry Charles, he can still inherit the throne? Why does he get away with it? Can Camilla be queen? Are the British insane?

Answer 1

Simpson had been divorced twice...I think any woman who had been divorced twice, even today, would be considered less than suitable.    You have to remember that the royal family had experienced a great deal of anti-German sentiment around the time of World War I for being from a German royal house.  Wallis Simpson was not deemed suitable for the additional reason that she would have brought controversy to the royal family and destabilized its finally secure position with the British public(because it was preferred that the prince marry a British woman).  From what I have read Camilla will assume the throne next to her husband because she cannot legally be deprived of it.  The British aren't insane...they just have this really vast history that has so many applicable traditions and laws when it comes to succession.  It stands to reason that when the time comes people will embrace Charles as their king and tolerate her as his queen.

Answer 2

Times change. Wallis Simpson had two living ex-husbands and was definitely a social climber. Divorce is no longer teh stigma it once was.

Camilla is a long-time friend of the Royal Family and being divorced is no longer the stigma it once was. There is also the fact that if Edward VIII had been allowed to marry Wallis Simpson their children would have been in line for the throne. Charles already has two sons and Camilla is long past the point where she could have more children.

Answer 3

The world has changed significantly since Edward's time. In his day a divorced person couldn't be presented at court, let alone be married in church. h**l, in those days g*y people could be put in prison for having s*x. So there are lots of changes.

Society now is much more accepting of divorce. Charles, for example, did have a previous marriage, unlike Edward. So if he can become king, there is no reason his wife can't also have been married. Plus, Charles had produced heirs. Edward hadn't and Mrs Simpson was not about to become a mother so that was one more issue - aside from the two previous living husbands.

Answer 4

Times have changed and the royals have to change as well in order to survive.Divorce has become quite common now;this is an unfortunate but sad fact. When Edward took up with Mrs. Simpson,who was a TWO-TIME divorcee,divorce was a very rare occurrence.The palace authorities also believed that Wallis Warfield Simpson was not going to stay married to the King,considering her marital history.They were quite worried that she would take her royal title,divorce the king,marry some slob and produce royally-titled children with that slob. This wouldn't do for the

palace authorities.

Today,divorce is common. Not only in the common world,but in the Queen's family.Prince Michael of Kent married a divorcee.Her sister, Margaret,forced to give up her true love,who was a divorcee,married,and eventually ended up getting a divorce. Anne,the Princess Royal, divorced and remarried. Andrew had to end his marriage  to Sarah. And,of course, Charles and Diana ended their marriage.

The British are not insane.

Camilla will be Queen-Consort although she says she wants to be known as Princess Consort.

Times have changed. Life is different in many ways,and the acceptance of divorce is one of them.It is sad that many people enter into marriage without understanding what "commitment" means.

Try to be more compassionate and understanding.It isn't good to be too judgmental.Life isn't perfect;it's filled with good and bad and there is no way to separate the good from the bad.

Answer 5

Times change.  And I hope Camilla doesn't become a Queen.

Answer 6

Quite simply attitudes change.

In the days of Edward and Wallis Simpson there was still a stigma about divorce.That is not the case nowadays.

Technically yes Camilla could become Queen but it has already been stated that she will instead take the title of Princess Consort when Charles becomes King.

Answer 7

Wallis being an American divorce was not the reason Edward gave up the throne. She was a n**i sympathizer and actively worked for the n**i victory. Edward just got involved with a politically unacceptable woman who had more then an interesting history, especially in China

Answer 8

I don't get it either.  Henery VIII created the Church of England specificaly for royals to get divorces.

Answer 9

Although legally Edward could have married Mrs. Wallis Simpson and remained king, his various prime ministers opposed the marriage, arguing that the people would never accept her as queen. Edward knew that the ministry of British Prime Minister would resign if the marriage went ahead; this could have dragged the King into a general election thus ruining irreparably his status as a politically neutral constitutional monarch. Rather than give up Mrs. Simpson, Edward chose to abdicate, making him the only monarch of Britain, and indeed any Commonwealth Realm, to have voluntarily relinquished the throne. He is one of the shortest-reigning monarchs in British history, and was never crowned.

Marriage between Prince Charles and Camilla remained elusive, with two main issues requiring resolution and acceptance. As future Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the prospect of his marrying Camilla, with whom he had had a relationship while both were married, was seen as controversial by some. Both the Prince and Camilla had divorced their spouses, but as her former husband was still alive (although re-married to his long-time mistress), her remarriage was likely to be problematic. Over time, opinion — both public and within the Church — shifted somewhat to a point where a civil marriage would be acceptable. Church of England guidelines allow divorcees to remarry in church at the discretion of their priests.

Note: Clarence House has indicated that when Charles ascends the throne it is intended that she will use the title HRH The Princess Consort. Commentators have pointed out that unless a specific Act of Parliament is passed to the contrary, she will, as a King's wife, legally be Queen, regardless of whether she uses that title or not.

Answer 10

a) Social pressure was much stronger back then. Edward abdicated because he was fed up with the pressure of being head of state without any of the real perquisites of being monarch, more than because of any legalities.

b)You'll notice that Camilla is Duchess of Cornwall, but not Princess of Wales

c) Odds are Charles will skip being king and abdicate in favor of William as soon as Elizabeth stops being Queen.

Answer 11

One major reason seems to be that the Church of England, of which the monarch is the titular head,  has eased its stand on divorce in recent years.  I believe that seventy years ago, a divorced person wishing to remarry in England had to be content with a civil marriage.  Even as recently as when Princess Anne remarried, she had to do so in the Chuch of Scotland (Presbyterian) rather than the Church of England.  Now that the C of E allows divorced people to remarry within the church, Prince Charles and Camilla were able to do so.  (Nevertheless, it's easy to imagine the shade of the Duke of Windsor thinking  "Having his cake eating it, too.")

Insane?  No way!  Eccentric, yes, but by and large the British are the sanest people in the world.

Answer 12

Times change, cultures grow up.

  Also Wallis Simpson was not British.   And she was married 2x before.  Edward was king when they contemplated marrying, not prince...AND Edward had no heirs, his brother had to inherit.