Well, finally someone points out the obvious!. One of Albert's people finally read the constitution which says that in order for the marriage to be legitimate she had to be Catholic. Rainier was not stupid. May be we should post that section of the constitution as proof she had too? Actually I would have found it pretty funny if they had held the marriage only to find out later, she had the kid, that he/she wasn't legitimate. JMO
I have to admit that I knew this all along and was hoping the wedding would proceed without her converting so it would be illegitimate -so I never said anything. Why help these morons any. That would have been such a big laugh on them!
It's too much discussed at the France television. Although the discussion was no great drama… (I lost link. It was on RD=Delete)
All I can say is that Barsi better watch his step. This new Pope doesn't play games. He's very strict and he does it by the book. He's already come out and announced that it's going to be much harder for Catholics to get "annulments" from now on. Watch it Albert.
Please read Monaco's constitution. There really is NO mention about the sovereign marriage at all, so of course there is no mention that a spouse has to be Catholic. Actually the word Catholic is only mention once.
Art. 9. - La religion catholique, apostolique et romaine est religion d'Etat. [Art. 9. - The Catholic religion, Apostolic and Roman is the state religion.]
I feel that Charlene's sudden conversion happened because the arrogant narcissistic idiots realized that her non-conversion was an affront to the Monegasques people and more importantly it wouldn't look right for their made-for-tv wedding photos if Albert took communion and not Charlene. These two only care about what their photos will look like.
I remember reading, what I thought was the new version of the Constitution several years ago - maybe it was something else - but what??? Anyway, whatever it was it said the marriage had to be a Catholic marriage and the children had to be Catholic - and I thought it said the spouse had to be Catholic - I may be wrong on that last part - but the rest was definite. Somewhere I have a copy of whatever it was I read. I'll try and find it.
In the meantime, I think several others read this as well which is why we seem to think it was written in the Constitution. Anybody know what I'm referring to?
CM, it could very well written some where else, but it is definitely not written in the Principalities' December 17, 1962 constitution (Amended by Law No. 1.249 of April 2, 2002), which is the latest constitution.
Monaco's fairytale love story: post-engagement
PPDA: And this was the woman whom you needed? Albert: I think... *** Reporter: "Is Charlene Wittstock your soulmate?" Albert: "I don't know if she is ...I don't know yet.
What did the document/treaty that Rainier did in the early 2000's address? I know that it allowed Caroline to inherit from Albert which before once the son took over, only his heirs could take the throne. And it tried to fix it so that none of Albert's illegitimate children could assume the throne. The children had to be from a legitimate marriage and I thought that the children had to be raised Catholic, but I never knew that the spouse had to be Catholic, too.
I think that Rainier had decided that Albert would never marry and have children, so he fixed it so Caroline's children could inherit the throne. And he probably never thought that someone would come up with the idea to use a sham wedding that would have lasting impact to the country to increase tourism numbers.
She changed her appearances completely, so converting to catholicism is nothing for her and a lot less painful. She would be happy to turn to Vudu if it meant getting the tiara. Obviously she cares little for good values like honesty and faithfulness, hanging out with Albert.
Right on the money, honey! Anything for the "kingdom"!