Posted by manuel on 18/5/2008, 19:02:46, in reply to "Re: Oops = the above post is by Marlene"
83.45.97.223
For the RC Church, Caroline was a married woman (Junot's wife) when her children were born. So, actually, she was being adulterous with Stefano.
But, AFAIK, the Pope declared them legitimate, in the eyes of the RC Church, after the annulment sentence.
--Previous Message--
: Adultry can only happen if either of the
: parents was married. According to the
: Catholic Church Andrea, Charlotte and Pierre
: are not the result of adultry as neither
: Caroline nor Stefano were married at the
: time of their conception.
: They are however the result of sin as their
: parents weren't married to each other when
: they were born (or so the church sees it).
:
:
: --Previous Message--
:
:
: --Previous Message--
: I was allready stunned how Rico could answer
: his own question in that way.
:
: Btw didn't the annullment of the Catholic
: marriage change the status of the children
: in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church?
: Something like no longer the product of
: adultry?
:
: No, because their parents were never
: married in the Church ( and unfortunately
: couldn't do that anymore ).
:
:
: --Previous Message--
:
: Sorry, Rico ... didn't mean to put your name
: in the name box.
: --Previous Message--
: Rico,
:
: Caroline's children were in the line of
: succession from birth. Caroline was legally
: married to Stefano as the civil ceremony is
: the only legal wedding in Monaco. The
: children were legitimate according to
: Monagesque law. Caroline has only been
: married once in the Catholic church to
: JUnot. This marriage was annulled some
: years after the divorce. She was married in
: civil ceremonies to Stefano and to Ernst
: August. which are the legal and binding
: ceremonies. Jean-Raymond Gottlieb is the
: acknowledged father of Camille (and she has
: his last name). Camille, however, is not in
: line to the throne.
:
: --Previous Message--
: Surely this would now also apply to the
: birth
: of a child to a Swedish Princess now that
: they have succesional rights.
:
: As for Monagasque succession, as far as I'm
: aware it is naming the father that gave the
: Drucet children their succesional rights
: (Cammiles father is listed as unknown).
: Also, the marriage of the parents must have
: been legal in the eyes of the catholic
: church for the children to be deemed
: legitiamte, hence the Cassaragi children
: were not in line to the throne until after
: Philipe Junot gave Caroline the annulment.
: Alexandra of Hannover would not have been in
: line to the throne either if he (Philipe)
: had not agreed to the annulment eventhough
: Caroline was widowed when she married Ernst
: August.
:
: --Previous Message--
:
:
: --Previous Message--
: Is Great Britain the only reigning European
: dynasty which excludes, from the succession,
: all persons born out of wedlock (and in
: addition their descendants, even if they
: themselves be born in lawful wedlock) --
: even if legitimized afterward by the
: marriages of their parents?
:
: I know that in Monaco, it's theoretically
: possible to be born out of wedlock, and
: hence not initially in the princely
: succession -- but retroactively inserted
: into the line to the throne through
: legitimization (meaning that the parents
: eventually marry). After all, this was
: precisely what happened to the children of
: Princess Stephanie by Daniel Ducruet.
:
: I'm wondering about the other houses ...
:
:
: If a Swedish Princes fathers a son out of
: wedlock, such a child could never have
: successional rights to the throne, even if
: its parents marries later. Successional
: rights in Sweden can never be regained.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Message Thread:
« Back to thread