Prince Andrew

[Milkfloat]

It may simply be an elderly mother showing publicly her love for her son despite his failings.
Maybe something only a parent understands....
She has little time left to do this.

It could also be two fingers up at victims of trafficking, I guess we will never know, but I don't think it sends a good message about the monarchy when it is already getting a kicking.

 

[matticus]

Then you're arguing from a position of ignorance rather than knowledge.
If I haven't heard of something, I generally at least look it up before dismissing it as piffle.

I've never heard about squirrels with AK47s taking over my shed - but if you suggested that was happening, I'd be happy to dismiss it as piffle.
Now: why shouldn't the Queen forgive members of her family? Anything to say about that?

 

[Rusty Nails]

The bit about forgiveness. I've never heard any pre-requisites.

More importantly, I'm quite happy for Queenie to forgive HER son if SHE wants to.

It is almost certain that after the disgrace that he has brought upon himself and by extension, his family that this will be the last we see Andrew in any "ceremonial" role.
This was supposed to be a day for the Queen to attend a ceremony honouring her husband of 70 years, to us a ceremonial day but to her a very personal day. If she wanted to have her son help her walk to take her place and at the same time indicate some sort of maternal forgiveness of his actions then that is perfectly understandable, even to my Republican eye.
I fear that some people will again use this another opportunity to have a go at the monarchy, forgetting what is at the heart of yesterday's ceremony.

Andrew is rightly pushed out of mainstream events but he is still part of a family. He will always be subject to public opprobrium, but imo the criticism of QE over this episode is opportunist and unjustified.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I've never heard about squirrels with AK47s taking over my shed - but if you suggested that was happening, I'd be happy to dismiss it as piffle.

Not falling for that avoidance, try harder.

Contrition before forgiveness is a central tenet in Christianity.

 

[matticus]

Bizarre.

 

[Fab Foodie]

It could also be two fingers up at victims of trafficking, I guess we will never know, but I don't think it sends a good message about the monarchy when it is already getting a kicking.

I'd need some convincing that that is Queenies way of thinking....and am no Royalist...

 

[Rusty Nails]

Not falling for that avoidance, try harder.

Contrition before forgiveness is a central tenet in Christianity.

From my little knowledge of Christianity I believe this is true, but is contrition defined in the bible? Is it enough to feel contrite and recognise your sins or does it have to involve public declaration of such? Afaiui in the Catholic church the contrition and forgiveness occurs in the privacy of the confessional and details do not have to be pinned to the church notice board. I am not sure if the CofE has rules on public declarations of contrition.

No one knows what has been said by Andrew to his mother and maternal forgiveness is a very private matter between them not an opportunity for others to get their pound of flesh. As far as the law is concerned contrition and forgiveness are not an issue in this case, and there is only one other person whose opinion matters and that is Virginia Guiffre's, and I am not sure if she has commented on the ceremony.

 

[Milkfloat]

I'd need some convincing that that is Queenies way of thinking....and am no Royalist...

In my view the Queen does very little without thinking about the message she is sending. This was a very clear message, there was no reason to make this day about Andrew when it should have been about Philip, unless she wanted to send us plebs a message. I am not really suggesting she is meaning it to be two fingers to victims, but she knows that will be a message that some will take from that. She chose to accept that as the price to pay for sticking up for her favourite child.

 

[Xipe Totec]

If the Queen did not think it was perfectly appropriate for her bought-off (alleged) rapist son to be paraded before the world at a high-profile event, then he would not have been.

The message is - we are your betters, keep your opinions to yourselves, get back on your knees and stay on your knees, peasants.

 

[matticus]

If the Queen did not think it was perfectly appropriate for her bought-off (alleged) rapist son to be paraded before the world at a high-profile event, then he would not have been.

The message is - we are your betters, keep your opinions to yourselves, get back on your knees and stay on your knees, peasants.

Bloody royals, think they can commemorate their dead without consulting us. How arrogant!

 

[glasgowcyclist]

From my little knowledge of Christianity I believe this is true, but is contrition defined in the bible?

I'm not a theologian and don't know the answer to that. I do know that contrition is essential before forgiveness can be granted and as you say, in Catholicism this is done in the privacy of the confessional. Of the prayers to be recited as a penance there would always be the Act of Contrition where the sin is acknowledged, admitted and remorse shown for having committed it.

I accept that we don't, and probably never will, know what prince Andrew said to his mum but, at least as far as his public face is concerned, there is no evidence of the remorse that would be needed to even be considered for forgiveness by the population.

So far as I can see, the only time he used the word regret in this matter was in relation to his continued "association" (note the avoidance of the word friendship) with Epstein.

 

[Mugshot]

No one knows what has been said by Andrew to his mother and maternal forgiveness is a very private matter between them not an opportunity for others to get their pound of flesh

Well yes, I would agree with this, and she may well have forgiven him in private. But this wasn't in private, I'd say this was the biggest event that she has attended for some time, it's not that often we get the whole lot of them together for the cameras in their glad rags, certainly in the last few years of course.
She was, rightly in my opinion, lauded for leading by example and making a statement at the Dukes funeral, this time a nonce was front and centre.

 

[mudsticks]

The bit about forgiveness. I've never heard any pre-requisites.

More importantly, I'm quite happy for Queenie to forgive HER son if SHE wants to.

How can she forgive her son for (alleged) abuse of a third party??

If it was my son I wouldn't be in a position to forgive him for having hurt someone else .

It would be up to the offended against to bestow forgiveness.

I'm not saying I'd disown them or whatever, but it certainly wouldn't be my place to forgive them for sins committed against another.

 

[Rusty Nails]

How can she forgive her son for (alleged) abuse of a third party??

If it was my son I wouldn't be in a position to forgive him for having hurt someone else .

It would be up to the offended against to bestow forgiveness.

I'm not saying I'd disown them or whatever, but it certainly wouldn't be my place to forgive them for sins committed against another.

So if it was not QE's job to forgive him, and it is acceptable for her not to disown him, then the argument is not about QE at all but about how Andrew should not just suffer In the background but be seen to suffer publicly? (and I use the word suffer advisedly because he is not the victim).

No one knows the whole truth about this shameful episode other than Andrew, Guiffre and Maxwell and none of them have given any evidence in a court of law about it, or are likely to now...unless Maxwell sees something in it for her.

If Guiffre feels insulted or devalued by his appearance at the ceremony then of course that is a reason to condemn it, but otherwise I am prepared to see it as a PR mistake rather than give it any greater meaning.

Forgiveness by a public that happily continue to vote into power liars and charlatans like Johnson is not that meaningful, and even less so unless and until he does something like Profumo did by devoting his remaining years to charitable causes.

 

[mudsticks]

So if it was not QE's job to forgive him, and it is acceptable for her not to disown him, then the argument is not about QE at all but about how Andrew should not just suffer In the background but be seen to suffer publicly? (and I use the word suffer advisedly because he is not the victim).

No one knows the whole truth about this shameful episode other than Andrew, Guiffre and Maxwell and none of them have given any evidence in a court of law about it, or are likely to now...unless Maxwell sees something in it for her.

If Guiffre feels insulted or devalued by his appearance at the ceremony then of course that is a reason to condemn it, but otherwise I am prepared to see it as a PR mistake rather than give it any greater meaning.

Forgiveness by a public that happily continue to vote into power liars and charlatans like Johnson is not that meaningful, and even less so unless and until he does something like Profumo did by devoting his remaining years to charitable causes.

Well I don't see that he needs to 'suffer' in public..

But at the same time having him prominently featuring at a public event also seems a bit tone deaf on the part of Queenie.

Of course I've no idea what his (alleged-but-rather- likely- given the 11mill payout) victims feel about it - but not massively impressed I'd guess..