Wednesday 8 March 2023

A California Christening for Princess Lilibet Diana

Hello dear readers!

A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex told People today: "I can confirm that Princess Lilibet Diana was christened on Friday, March 3 by the Archbishop of Los Angeles, the Rev John Taylor." Lilibet, who celebrates her second birthday in June, was baptised at the Sussexes' home.

There was a splash over the weekend as cameras tracked Tyler Parry landing in his private jet to visit Montecito, which likely tipped off news outlets the occasion was happening over the weekend. Tyler has been an incredibly kind and supportive figure in Harry and Meghan's life since they left the UK. Speaking about being asked to be Lili's godfather in their Netflix docu-series he recalled the moment Harry and Meghan asked him: "I thought, 'I'd be honored. I'd absolutely be honored.'" Perry quickly phoned the couple back saying: "I called them back and go, 'Uh, hold on a second — does this mean we gotta go over [to the U.K.] and do all of that in church with the Royal family and figure all that out?' Cause I don't wanna do that. Maybe we can do a little private ceremony here in the U.S. and let that be that, and if you have to do it there, then that's okay."

Let's just say Tyler takes his godfather duties quite seriously and came prepared to add memorable musical memories to the christening. People reports:

'An insider tells PEOPLE there were between 20-30 guests at Friday's intimate gathering, including Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland, Lilibet's godfather, Tyler Perry, and an unnamed godmother. Following the ceremony, attendees were treated to an afternoon of food and dancing — with Archie enjoying a dance with his little sister!

Perry was spotted arriving in Montecito last week ahead of the christening. He flew in for the ceremony from his home in Atlanta with a 10-person gospel choir that sang "Oh Happy Day" and "This Little Light of Mine" — a song that was played at Meghan and Harry's wedding".'

People confirmed King Charles, the Queen Consort and the Prince and Princess of Wales were invited, but did not attend. The precarious nature of the state of relationships within the family came to the fore again in recent weeks over the King's decision to vacate Frogmore Cottage. People reports the couple were made aware of this intention before the release of Spare. Those close to Harry and Meghan have told People and other outlets the news is "unfortunate" but they are "OK" and "matter-of-fact" about it. It comes as a merry-go-round of royal residences unfolds on the Windsor estate with the Duke of York reportedly offered Frogmore Cottage by King, and the Prince and Princess of Wales said to be seriously eying up Andrew's mansion Royal Lodge. The key questions relating to this now pertain to the £2.4 million the Sussexes repaid for renovations and recompense for those costs which were incurred in the understanding the option to rent would be a long-term one. Below, an official portrait from Archie's Windsor christening.

Most importantly, not having a residence in the UK on a royal estate further exacerbates security concerns. It's been suggested the use of a Buckingham Palace apartment will be offered when the family are in the UK. I suspect whatever arrangements are in place will not be known until Harry and Meghan visit. The couple's office confirmed they have been in contact with the Palace about the Coronation, but have not yet revealed if they plan to attend or not. Not only is the Coronation taking place in May; it has just been confirmed Harry's lawsuit against the Mirror publisher MGN will begin the same month, following a High Court ruling today.

Now we've caught up on the recent news, our final point takes us back to the beginning of the post and something many of you will be wondering about. For the very first time, Harry and Meghan have used 'Princess' for their daughter. It is now understood the couple have decided to use Archie and Lilibet's titles as Prince and Princess "in formal settings, but not in everyday conversational use". The Telegraph notes: "The couple are said to be keen to not deny their children their birthright, but to allow them the chance to decide for themselves when older whether to drop or keep using the titles." As children of the King's son, they are automatically a prince and princess.

When approached for comment, Buckingham Palace told the royal rota they will update the official royal website now Harry and Meghan have expressed their preference. The Mirror reports the King was made aware of the intention to use the titles in formal settings before the christening.

A fact which has become clear in recent weeks is an evident line of communication between the Palace and Harry and Meghan's team. The titles issue surrounding Archie and Lili has been a thorny and oft-discussed one, particularly since Queen Elizabeth II's passing. It has long been thought when Charles became king he would issue Letters Patent to remove titles. Has it been decided they will retain their titles while foregoing the use of HRH like their parents? A palace source told The Times: “The use of the style HRH would come through their father and the Duke of Sussex’s HRH is in abeyance.” With just two months to go until the Coronation, it very much appears a decision regarding the titles has been agreed. 

Back in 2020, Meghan told Oprah: "I have a lot of clarity on what comes with the titles, good and bad, and, from my experience, a lot of pain, I wouldn’t wish pain on my child, but that is their birthright to then make a choice about."

44 comments:

  1. This was such happy news, as it indicated that the christening was a joyous event. And I will restrict my post to only happy comments! I tried to imagine what was served and what Meghan wore, and decided it would be in line with California chic. A friend of mine from Maryland has relocated to Hilton Head Island and plans to redo her house in "grandmother coastal living" style, so I assume M&H went with their locale and there wasn't a hat in the room. I would not expect photos but it would be delightful to see one of just the little princess or her and her immediate family. I'm glad they used "Princess" for the formal announcement -- they can forgo the use in the future but it's good to establish her birthright. I read in Marie Claire that now Eugenie and Jack with live in Frogmore; if so, that sounds like a good plan to allow H&M to stay with them. But of course who knows when they will go to the UK next. Not going to even mention the coronation in this happy post.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As an Episcopalian from her own christening, I should point out that John Taylor is Episcopal Bishop of the diocese of Los Angeles, not an archbishop. We don't have archbishops in the Episcopal Church. Even the leader of the Church is a bishop. He is Michael Curry, who preached at the Sussexes' wedding. His title is "Presiding Bishop".

    Since Lilibet was christened in the Episcopal Church, which is the American arm of the Anglican Communion to which the Church of England also belongs, she need not be re-christened in the C of E.

    I'm not surprised by the title situation. Had Charles already decided to alter the title protocol issued by his great-grandfather in 1917 and to have that alteration apply to the Sussex children, I think we would have heard about it before now. As for a flat in Buckingham Palace, it is my understanding that BP is notoriously uncomfortable, and someone once told me that the flats don't have their own kitchens. You have to order food from the main kitchen. Perhaps the flats have been updated, but if not, so much for preparing cozy dinners for two.

    I saw a picture of the Duchess wearing a very attractive beige scarf coat recently. Anyone know who designed it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Vittoria, I believe it's Carolina Herrera :)

      https://chcarolinaherrera.com/gb/en/item/double-faced-wool-oversized-cape-beige-m020105071-1002

      Delete
    2. Thank you Vittoria for the clarification. The news of the start of use of the kids' titles caught me by surprise as I haven't anticipated that the Sussexes would like to associate the kids with the institution they feel failed them badly and would like them to be raised as regular kids with no birthrights or privileges.
      Ella

      Delete
    3. That scarf coat looked wonderful -- the sleeves and hemline were very attractive.

      Delete
    4. I think everyone knows they are "Prince Harry's children." I doubt the titles will be used in school, etc. -- probably only used in the UK for official documents. Right now the children probably have to deal with what children of other well-known people have to face.

      Delete
    5. Lilibet wouldn't/shouldn't be rechristened/rebaptised anywhere, no matter what denomination she was received into. Baptism is a once and for all. It's what we say in the Nicene Creed - "We believe in ONE baptism..."

      Delete
    6. Happy to hear Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet’s rightful titles have been duly acknowledged on the BRF Website. By not updating it when QEII died led to only more hurt and speculation. More work to be done to mend fences but glad to see outreach from the BRF even if it comes late.

      Delete
    7. Cath, the Anglican Communion accepts christening/baptism in pretty much any Christian denomination. For reasons it would be too complicated to explain, my two siblings were christened in the Presbyterian Church. They are considered fully baptized by the Anglican Communion.

      Delete

    8. Yes thank you very much Victoria for these clarifications; it's boring and a waste of time these people whose goal is just to criticize by always reciting to us the words on the surface that interest them without associating them with the author's explanations.
      Meghan said this, Meghan did that... You will always see that these people stop at one end of Meghan's sentence and choose to ignore the explanations afterwards (for example stating that she is making fun of the royal reverence as she makes fun of herself which is very clear to those who have followed this interview and the same for this problem of titles which in a perfect world would not have caused so much controversy...For those who know Meghan well and her journey it's clear that she doesn't really care about the title, Meghan is very down to earth and true to herself (like that natural moment when she closed the car door herself instead of waiting for the driver to come and do it for her) all she wants is to protect her children from all frustrations and that we respect at least officially what her children are entitled to... is a normal and human need. It responds to the cowardly blows that are given to it and that is admirable and its right to 'Human.

      Delete
    9. Absolutely Vittoria - that's what I said. Baptism into any Christian denomination is recognised by the other Christian churches. No-one needs to be baptised more than once.

      Delete
  3. It’s nice to hear about a positive event in the Sussex family. Mr Perry is so cool, he brought a gospel choir! God Bless Lilibet Diana.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I feel as if spring has finally arrived with your post, Charlotte! Thanks for catching us up on the (mostly) good news.
    Janet from New York

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am so glad that they are referring to her as Princess Lilibet Diana. And what a cool godfather she has…the fact he is so wealthy is also important because he will be in a position to ensure she has security should she need it as she grows up. But he also seems fun… whoever heard of arriving with a gospel choir? Such happy memories of their wedding day, what a shame for all sides that things could not have been different. I hope they don’t come to the Coronation… the vile British press will be vicious. I want photos of the Christening… what did Meg wear, what did they eat, can we see the little Prince and Princess dancing as is reported. But I realise we won’t , for now, get those photos. Did Diana’s sisters go? Thank you for continuing to report on my favourite royals. LRB

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am so happy to know that this blog will continue. This is my first post here, although I’ve followed your posts from the beginning. I’ve children their ages ( so I’m in my 70s🙂) and I’m a firm believer that sending peace and light to all in a family is the best way forward. Forgiveness is such a powerful energy. I’ve seen it work in my own family in the most difficult situations. May christenings and birthdays and coronations be celebrated from the knowledge that we’re all one, in the end, and we’re here on the planet for a very short time. Thanks for being a resource for fashion and issues and reporting news about this couple and their family ( on other blogs) in an objective and compassionate manner. One of the highlights of my day to read truthful , reasonable reporting. Thanks Charlotte.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Me too .
      Thanks Charlotte for your good work.
      Blessed week-end for France.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for thèse positive news God bless thé Sussex family

      Delete
  7. And I forgot to add my name Patty from New Jersey, USA. For the 21:07 post today.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is a lovely post with lovely news about Lilibet. I am very pleased that this is the way the blog is going rather than getting in the weeds with all the other stuff. Well done!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you for keeping up with the updates.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you for the post Charlotte. Good to hear that Lilibet has been Christened. I had wondered if she would be as her parents don't seem to be particularly religious. In the minority, but am so sorry that they have chosen to use the children's titles. It is going to be hard enough for those children growing up without the added burden of titles. Imagine what Archie is going to have to deal with with Harry's book. There are just some things that should not have been shared. Teenagers can be very judgemental and harsh and there is so much of what his parents have said and written in the public domain. The titles will just add to it. No need to use the titles in the US.
    Some one commented that Buckingham Palace is awful to live in. Can't be that bad the Queen lived there most of her life and it is not as if the Sussexes are ever likely to spend more than a few days at a time in the UK. America is their home now. It seems a reasonable option -accommodation and security and London rather than out in the country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Queen actually greatly preferred Windsor Castle, which she regarded as her home, and spent much of her time there.

      As for the titles, the Sussexes will not be using them in the US. They will be used for formal occasions only, and the US offers next to no occasions on which the use of royal or aristocratic titles would be necessary or appropriate. The general idea is the children have a right both to the titles, by virtue of the title protocol of 1917, and to someday make their own decisions about using them, that this decision should not be made by adults when the children are too young to have a voice in the matter.

      Delete
    2. Hi Libby,

      I agree with you completely. I don't think they actually thought this through (all the
      complaints about the RF) and all the very personal information shared by them. Their kids will surely have to deal with the fallout someday.
      I also don't understand why MM would want titles for herself or her kids. She clearly thinks the whole concept of royalty is wrong (ie her joking about having to curtsy), so why doesn't she drop them? It just seems so hypocritical.

      Delete
    3. I disagree that the Duchess thinks the entire concept of royalty is wrong. Had she thought so, she would have been unlikely to date and marry Prince Harry in the first place. However, she clearly DOES think that the Palace machine, the way royal public relations have been handled, and British tabloid culture are wrong. I cannot blame her for that.

      In telling the curtsey story, she was making fun of herself, not royalty. She had not expected to curtsey, she'd received no warning or training, and she therefore sank into an exaggerated and theatrical curtsey that she realized probably looked rather ridiculous. That was her point.

      Evidently the Sussexes feel that it should be up to the people who hold the titles in question to decide whether to drop them, when they are old enough to make an informed and considered decision. In the meantime, they won't be using them in the US. As I said earlier, we don't really have occasions on which the use of royal and aristocratic titles and styles would be regarded as appropriate. Archie and Lili are not going to be addressed as "Your Royal Highness" by their elementary school teachers.

      Delete
    4. I consider a sign of intelligence to be able to change one's opinion with life experience. It's not being hypocritical to change or redirect your views. Evidently the titles are now important. Maybe Harry feels his children are being marginalized. In general, it should not make a difference, at least in the US. I consider Harry's title to be fun and cool; I do not consider him, as much as I adore him, to be in any way better or more important than any non-royal.

      Delete
    5. Change and redirect your views after going on international tv saying Charles didn't want to give titles to his unborn black grandchild seems strange.

      Delete
  11. Man, if I were Meghan or Harry and I found out that I had to vacate the house (that I paid to have renovated!) for an alleged pedophile...I would be furious. No wonder Harry has issues with his family!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm surprised that the Sussexes have decided to use the Prince and Princess titles for their children. If titles are important to them I wonder why they didn't use the Lord and Lady titles they could have used, as a duke's children, since birth. It would be nice to see a photograph from the Christening celebrations. Sarah UK

    ReplyDelete
  13. I was wondering how Meghan let International Women's Day go by and it seems she and Archewell members celebrated at the women's shelter Harvest Home. No photos.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm glad that Archie's and Lili's birthright established by Letters Patent in 1917, I believe, have been formally established. They became Prince and Princess the minute their grandfather became king and should retain those titles as long as there is a British monarchy and/or until they are old enough to decide for themselves whether or not to use them. It is a matter of principle. I can't imagine that they will ever use their titles except at the most formal of occasions while in the UK and their parents clearly imply that they won't use them in everyday life. Harry has said that the U.S. is their home, where they will be raised, and they will go through life as Archie and Lili Sussex, I assume, rather than Mountbatten-Windsor. At least the little tykes will be able to print their names all on one line at school. And that christening sounded like so much fun.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sheryl from Lumby BC9 March 2023 at 22:00

    Wow, after such a long delay, it was wonderful to come here and read a new post instead of more comments on the last one at Christmas. :) I'm thrilled to see that this blog is continuing. Also thrilled to see the acknowledgement of the childrens titles, as they are entitled, by law. Prince Harry will always be a Prince, his children will always be a Prince and Princess. Meghan will always be Princess Harry Windsor-Mount Batten ( I think that's how it's written out? I'm sure I will be corrected if I'm wrong, but it's similar to Princess Micheal of Kent ) And they will always be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex until such time and/or if King Charles takes that title away. He's walking a fine line already with taking away Frogmore Cottage, the Sussexes security....somehow I doubt he would be silly enough to take away the Duke of Sussex title, especially before his coronation. I'm so happy that Harry and Meghan are out of that toxic environment and able to continue their life of service in a safe place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harry and Meghan knew the lease on Frogmore was not going to be extended in February when it was due to run out. Why should they still have a home at Frogmore when they have made it well known that they do not wish to live in the UK. If they come to the UK they will stay in apartments at Buckingham Palace. I would also like you to explain what Life of service they lead?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous@13: 14
      Not my comment you are asking about, but I see Harry and Meghan as two people living a life of service- it refers to their humanitarian work and philanthropy. Looking at it on the simplest level, certainly Sentebale and the Invictus Games alone are two organizations that have helped and continue to help a significant number of people. Life of service means doing things that help others, and making that the service of your work.

      Delete
    3. Anon 13.14 Excellent comment, well said.

      Delete
    4. You were perfectly clear and just anonymous 10:15 p.m. On good terms, hello...

      Delete
  16. My opinion is that H&M are using the titles because they belong to the children, not to H&M. Of course, I doubt they will be used more than 1 or 2 more times. Also, it reminds the UK (and perhaps Charles) that he actually has 2 additional grandchildren.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It appears that the Sussexes have decided to claim their children’s formal titles as provided in 1917, and allow them to decide as adults how to go forward. I might mention that a Episcopalians don’t have archbishops, although the Archbishop of Canterbury kivked us out of the worldwide Anglican Communion for a few years, for permitting same sex union blessings (which C of E now allows); and that our blessed Presiding Bishop, the Right Reverend Michael Curry, preached at Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Delighted to welcome Lillibet, Princess, among us.

    ReplyDelete
  18. So glad you're back with content on this blog. You've been missed. 💖 Philly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great to see you here Philly, I've just published a new post :)

      Delete
  19. Thank you for this post, Charlotte. I don't often come to this blog, but being aware of the recent events, I thought I'd check in. These events have closed a couple loops for me. I'm happy that there is finally acknowledgment of the Prince and Princess titles. In my heart I do not believe they were being purposely withheld by Charles, but I do fault the Palace for not making these updates along with the changes to the Wales's status. The children do have a right to those titles, and that is public knowledge. Whether they use them much or not, they are a blood prince and princess.

    Since Frogmore was so recently updated, it makes sense to put Andrew there if Charles wants him to have a smaller grace-and-favor home. I don't think it's a dig at the Sussexes, and I hope that Charles or Andrew will pay them back for the refurbishment costs. I am glad the Sussexes will have a place to stay in Buckingham Palace. It seems likely that they will come for to Britain for short periods to take part in specific events, such as the Coronation or a Jubilee (down the road). This will give them a base and security.

    Finally, I do hope they come to the Coronation and it is sounding more and more like they will. They managed her late Majesty's Jubilee and Funeral pretty nicely in their role as family members and non-working royals. I am sure they can do the same for the Coronation. They may have to ignore a few boos and jabs by the media, and possibly a bit of the cold shoulder from family members, but I hope they (and the family) try to find a way to thaw the ice. I hope they bring the children. Archie and Lilli may want and value a relationship with Charles and William in the future (and vice versa for Grandpa Charles certainly).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A couple of months ago they were on Netflix criticizing the palace and royals so it seems strange that they want to take part in the most important royal event. Also, they called the CW the empire 2.0 so why they want to be associated and have their kids associated with it is difficult to understand.

      Delete
  20. Magnifique analyse anonyme 04:05 que je partage.

    ReplyDelete
  21. First of all congratulations to Princess Lilibet on her baptism!
    Secondly I want to point out that in all the noise surrounding Princess Lilibet's christening I feel like one very important detail went overlooked: since I doubt the Firm flew the traditional royal christening gown to California, Princess Lilibet is the first royal baby in a very long time not to wear that traditional gown (original or replica) which begs the question...what did she wear? I truly hope the Duke and Duchess of Sussex release a picture of this event one day because the little princess made royal history with her fashion that day.
    Lastly Mr Perry is certainly godfather goals, the gospel choir was such a beautiful thoughtful gift from him to the Duke and Duchess. Bless him!

    ReplyDelete

Welcome to Mad About Meghan! We do so look forward to reading your thoughts. Constructive, fair debate is always encouraged. Hateful, derogatory terms and insults are not welcome here. This space focuses on Harry and Meghan, not any other member of the Royal family. It's not the place to discuss politics either. Thank you for reading, we look forward to your comments :)