A Note on British Monarchy

Hehe, Prince Charles married Camilla Parker-Bowles. People are asking if this is the end of Monarchy. What I think (although of course, the Brits don't give a dingdong about what I think) is that they don't have to end -- they just have to change. Would it ever come to the point that Prince William could marry a woman with not a smudge of royal blood in her genes and not belonging to the Church of England? If that happens, guess who'd be on the first flight to London? =D Just another improbability, that idea. The monarchy just really depends on keeping their traditions because that's where they get the respect of the people. They don't really have much authority anymore, and except for being the Guardians of History and Guardians of their Faith (sounds lovely doesn't it?), people hardly rely on their decisions anymore. They give importance to the monarchy's decisions, but it would have to be backed by Parliament as well. Oh well, I don't know. I'm not a scholar on the British Monarchy or any kind of royalty for that matter.

Just a note on successions:
Succession is regulated by the Act of Settlement, defining that only Protestant descendants of Princess Sophia - the Electress of Hanover and and granddaughter of King James I - are eligible to succeed. Roman Catholics or those married to Roman Catholics are automatically excluded.

There are actually five successors to the throne that have excluded themselves from succeeding the throne by becoming or marrying a Roman Catholic. Huh.

And here's a very good article why there needs to be a monarchy, at least in Britain: see http://www.etoile.co.uk/Columns/Paul/050130.html