Spiritually speaking, I have a question about English royalty?

Royalty at one time did have power. After all King Henry the 8th did start the Anglican Church and was it's head when the pope refused to allow him to get a divorce from his first wife. (So he could re-marry and possibly conceive an heir.)

There's a lot of debate in Parliament in the 18th century over the power of the monarch, and the influence of the monarch, and how best to curb it ... debate which anti-Royalists, on the whole, won. (Though of course some people in the colonies just had to go completely over the top on the whole issue in 1776 ... )

It is believed that Prince Albert was probably the last member of the British royal family to attempt to assume a proactive role for the monarchy ... after he died, and Queen Victoria became a semi-recluse, the power of Parliament was essentially unchallenged, and has remained that way ever since.

There is a theory that the real reason that Edward VIII was required to abdicate in 1936 was not because of his marriage plans but because of his views on the power of the monarchy. Edward had made it clear he intended to reassert his power and parliamentary leaders, wishing to avoid the controversy, seized on his marriage as a plausible reason to oust him.

It needs to be noted, though, that much of British politics works on a cooperative, advisory model and behind the scenes. The Queen is a moderately intelligent woman with over 50 years of experience dealing with power, and it's a fool of a Prime Minister who doesn't avail himself of her experience and insight. None of what transpires at their conferences is ever made public, however, save in vague snippets well after the fact, so the extent to which she influences decisions is not well-known. One interesting point which has been documented, though, dates back to 1947, when she was still a princess and recently married. Her permission was sought to send her wedding gown in an exhibition of British fashion design to America, and she cited five good reasons why this was politically inadvisablee, convincing the minister responsible for approving the exhibition that it was a poor idea. I doubt she's lost a whole lot of insight in the years since, and has probably gained a fair amount. She is kept abreast of all her government's major decisions, and the grounds for taking them, before the fact, and no doubt speaks up, in private, when she sees a bad move about to be made.

The Monarchy is a symbolic non political representative of the country - it means that politics is always subservient to an apolitical entity. The life of a monarch is over many generations wheres the Prime Minister rarely continues for more than 10 years. It allows for a gerontological continuity of representation independent of politics.

To the best of my knowledge the Royals do not have a point over here other than to be an attraction for visitors and spending way to much of our Tax money. The do not have any real power over the running of things as it is the Queens parliament that does all the work of running this Dive of an island and they cant even do that right.

The queen is a figurehead who doesn't really have any power.. They keep royalty for the sake of tradition. And yeah, Charles becomes king whenever his mother passes. Then the line passes to William, and then to William's future children.

Here's a link to the whole line of succession to the British throne, if you're really interested.

The purpose of royalty in England (anymore) is because of tradition and for tourism. The Prime Minister is like the President and the Parliament is like the Congress, so they are actually in charge.

What is the purpose indeed? Other than a tourist lure?

They are a bunch of jug-eared inbreds who've been sponging off the rest of us for years and only play a ridiculously pointless part in the childish rituals associated with democratic process.

I would like to sell them to the US along with the drug-addled husk of Thatcher.

The Royal Family is the Family of the titular Head of the State, currently Queen Elizabeth II. She theoretically has the power to dissolve Parliament when it doesn't serve the interests of the people, and force new elections. I say 'theoretically' because the Queen has refused to do this despite successive Governments from 1970-the present (apart from Mrs Thatcher's from 1979-1991) surrendering our hard-won liberties to the EU. This demonstrates that she has been cowed by bad advisers, and threatened with 'a Constitutional crisis' by the Blair-Brown (mis)government, if she were to try and force Parliament to re-take Powers from Brussels.

The Queen is also supposedly Defender of the Faith, i.e. Christianity: that she has allowed Christians to be sacked from their jobs and lose their livelihoods BECAUSE of their faith gives lie to this. So, at a time when Britain has needed a Queen Esther, she has been more like Solomon's son Rehoboam, and leader of the breakaway Northern Kingdom of Israel (King Jeroboam); she has heeded the advice of fools, as Rehoboam did, and like Jeroboam allowed the usurpation of the national faith by false gods (in our case Islam, Hinduism, animist, and murderous atheism, with its abortion factories and and push for euthanasia, to name but four), rather than remaining faithful to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the crucified-dead-resurrected God and Saviour Jesus Christ: as such, Britain is under God's judgment. She did so, in my opinion, in order to preserve her throne.

I believe, however, that if she repents and turns to Christ for leadership, that He would preserve the throne after her, and possibly we'd see a return to Biblical Christianity in this nation. That said, I also believe the Royal Family has generally been a blessing to Britain.

Marigold Glover: '[they've] been sponging off the rest of us ...'? Really??? Actually, they attract more revenue to the country than they take: and unlike you and the rest of the trendy lefties who hate them and call them spongers, they actually serve in the Armed Forces and FIGHT for this country!

The Royal family has a very small role in the Parliament in England.

I'm sick of the news and all the Engagement stuff-BORING. I don't give a rip-we are in the U.S.-we don't care half as much as the UK.

News must be slow.

Good hearing from you friend!!

The role of Royalty is completely symbolic, as I understand it.

royalty is a show.