Prince William refused to allow the Sussexes to christen Lilibet Diana in Windsor?

archie1

One of the things we talk about in this week’s Gossip With Celebitchy podcast is all of the royal fan-fiction crap about when Prince Harry and Madame Duchess Meghan will return to the UK for a visit. There seems to be a lot of energy in the British papers about how the Sussexes will likely return before Christmas. In the pod, I said that one of the few stories I believed was that Harry told his grandmother that he would like to have Lilibet Diana christened in Windsor, like Archie was. As far as we know, Lilibet has not been christened in California, and it does feel like the Sussexes are waiting to do it in the UK. So… funny story, this random royal commentator claims that Prince William shut down the possibility of his niece Lili Diana being christened in Windsor. Hm.

Lilibet Diana, the youngest child of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, has yet to make her debut on UK soil after her birth in Santa Barbara, California, in June. With no picture of the child available publicly, speculation about what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning for her christening has been rife. NBC royal correspondent Neil Sean claimed it is unlikely Lilibet Diana will have her day at St George’s Chapel in Windsor because of the alleged intervention of a senior Royal Family member.

Mr Sean claimed: “One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie. But that came to a grinding halt. Both Harry and Meghan were very keen to make that return and make sure that christening happened, particularly in front of Her Majesty The Queen.

“Some people may say they’re just capitalising on their royal connection and why not? It’s how they make money now. But moving forward there was one person who basically decided there wasn’t an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother.”

He further claimed: “According to a very good source, Prince William was the one who basically said ‘no, we don’t think this is going to work,’ it wasn’t a particularly good idea.”

Kensington Palace has declined to comment.

[From The Daily Express]

First off, I’m increasingly disgusted with these oh-so-casual asides about “Meghan and Harry are desperate to capitalize on their royal connection.” Harry is a “blood prince.” He IS royal, he is the royal connection, and even if he was striped of every title, he would still be the most charismatic and attention-grabbing person in that sad-sack family. Plus, it’s clear that despite Harry and Meghan’s general reticence when it comes to the deplorable royal family, Harry still has a soft spot (and a blind spot) for his grandmother. HE wanted to come back and introduce his children to the Queen. That was the request. It wasn’t Meghan. And it wasn’t about Charles and William either.

As for King Baldingham shutting down the possibility of a Windsor christening… well, I’m sure William tried. I’m sure William threw a tantrum about it. I’m sure William wants to keep the charismatic Sussexes far, far away. We’ll see if William gets what he wants.

Diana's 60th birthday

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrate Anzac Day in London

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Related stories

return home

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

164 Responses to “Prince William refused to allow the Sussexes to christen Lilibet Diana in Windsor?”

  1. Nemo says:

    William can’t even hide his hatred anymore SMH.

    • Pao says:

      William has no power over anything. If harry wants lili to be christened in windsor, so it will be. Its not up to william to decide whether it will or will not happen. I still don’t think harry is actually planning on bringing lili to the UK soon. I think this was simply coutiers running to the tabs with their fantasies. It wouldn’t have been the first time they did that.

      • Jodie says:

        @ PAO Totally true just another made up s**t stirring story. Plus cą change…..

      • Mac says:

        I agree this is fan fiction, but I’m trying to figure out its purpose. Do the tabs think this makes William look powerful and manly?

    • Nina says:

      He is a sad sad little man

    • PinkestSlip says:

      William can’t “keep the Sussexes out,” he doesn’t own the airlines, freedom of movement, the country, access to the Queen, NONE of it. It’s all smoke and mirrors. Harry & Meghan will go to the UK as and when they please, end of!

    • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

      It is my most fervent wish that the bitter one loses the remaining tufts of what was once a mane of hair, and Harry keeps his ginger curls. That, in addition to M&H living well, would really burn PWT.

  2. Abby says:

    Is this supposed to be flattering toward William? A story about how petty and vengeful he is? Because it makes him look really bad.

    I highly doubt Meghan was pushing for the christening at Windsor. If this is true, it would have to be Harry.

    • ModeratelyWealthy says:

      It is supposed to paint William as this manly man who tells the evil brother off when all the family is just too scared to do anything…

      the same energy Trumpsters interpreted his antics on twitter as ” he tells it as it is”- it is just making William into a surrogate for Harry/Meghan haters not satisfied with the perceived softness of the Queen.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes, this is about William being the “strong one” who is not afraid to stand up to Harry and Meghan and say NO when they want to “capitalize on their royal connections.” *eye roll*

      • HeyJude says:

        It’s due to a delusion here too. You see William thinks he’s Bertie, the upstanding and moral King. And that Harry is Edward the “danger” who William is saving the nation from.

        William has zero clue he’s really Edward to a T. He’s just Edward if Edward had never abdicated. A bigoted, right-wing zealot who will happily gallivant around with tyrants for his own vanity and power. A man who cares about nothing but his own selfish wishes, is hopelessly hedonistic and a philanderer, and who has very little use for his reign but to feed his ego. And partnered with an insufferable wife.

        Harry’s the beloved Bertie. He overcame childhood dyslexia struggles like Bertie did his stammer. He was always put down and marginalized by his brother the future King. He grew up to serve valiantly in war time where he began to find confidence, he was hesitant about the whole royalty thing but served nobly anyways, and went on to marry a wife he was perfectly suited for and have a family he truly loves very much.

        I really can’t say this enough, you can even tell how William named George after him, William fancies himself the good guy and historic like Bertie. But he’s clearly the Edward and Harry’s the Bertie.

    • STRIPE says:

      I think it makes him look good to the articles intended audience: monarchists who don’t like H&M. That’s just not us on this blog.

    • Layla says:

      @abby more than anything it makes you want to punch The novelty-painted egg (thanks Mic Wright) in the face so badly.
      Like honestly, Britain has enough problems to deal with already. No one cares about whiny William and his incandescent temper tantrums.

    • Liz version 700 says:

      Abby right?! The FF King of England being evil to a 3 month old does not sound as baldass as he probably thinks it does.

  3. Amelie says:

    He is such a vile vile vile human being.

    • Hell Nah! says:

      Agreed Amelie. Will I Am is the nastiest piece of s**t to darken the palace halls.

      I wait patiently for the day he gets what he truly deserves for all he’s done to his brother and his wife.

  4. Annaloo. says:

    With a brother like William, who needs enemies?

  5. Jen says:

    The best part is watching the Sussex haters spin to justify this. I do believe it though. Not that the Queen should be taking marching orders from William, but she tends to just go with the flow way too often.

  6. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    Right now, even away, The RR constantly brings up Harry and Meghan as ways to hide the Cambridges petty, selfish and lazy nature, but I wonder how long this trick will work? Even when they go and try to rewrite history, the fact is the Sussexes are doing their own thing. I get their audience is comprised of racist bigots that hate Meghan and Harry, but this will not make the Cambridges any more popular with the younger generations, you know, the ones they actually NEED?

    How long will they be able to keep the charade?

  7. Merricat says:

    William would cut off his nose to spite his face. That’s why he looks like that, a face full of spite.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Merricat, it’s incredible how ugliness and hatred spews out onto the face of the hater, doesn’t it!!! As for Wil-I-Am-Not, he can throw all the tempers he wants. If TQ allows it, it will happen. Now go cry in some rose bushes….

  8. Amy Bee says:

    Who’s Neil Sean? All this talk about christening in Windsor is irritating to me. I’m not sure how keen Harry is about it because it would have to involve the Royal courtiers. He has done everything possible to ensure they’re cut out of his life and that they don’t have any info about him. It’s why the Palace was so angry when he didn’t give them the opportunity to announce Lili’s birth. So especially after that debacle I’m not sure Harry and Meghan want put their children in that toxic environment under any circumstances. Not to mention the grief they got for Archie’s christening. I don’t see them wanting a repeat of that. And given that the Queen wasn’t there for Archie’s christening, I’m not sure how important is it for her to be at Lili’s. Apparently she’s insulted that the baby has her nickname anyway.

    • Noki says:

      Excactly !!! Why would H & M want such a sweet occassion for their little girl be filled with tension and fakery. Especially after Mike Tindall made it slip they all sit around and bitch about them.

    • swirlmamad says:

      All of this. I can buy that Harry wants his grandmother to see/meet his children in person while she’s still here to do so, but I can’t imagine they are pushing for a christening in the UK so they can go through the same hell they did with Archie’s, because you know it will be the same debacle amped up to 1,000. And you’re right, TQ didn’t even attend Archie’s, so what’s the big deal anyway? (The haters need to be reminded she didn’t attend Louis’ either, so it’s nothing against the Sussexes specifically, she probably just doesn’t like those things, lol.)

    • Harper says:

      My thoughts exactly regarding Neal Sean, NBC Royal Correspondent reporting in Marie Claire. Marie Claire? This looks to me like another lame attempt to infiltrate the US market with negative H&M stories using new sources. However, the choice of Marie Claire is so odd it’s almost a giveaway. I read they no longer have a print edition and are online only. They must be one of the sites where Kate watches the online makeup videos we were told about or, more likely, an attempt to match Omid’s reporting in Harper’s Bazaar.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Hearst sold Marie Claire to British Media Company.
        https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/finance/news/hearst-sells-marie-claire-british-164346068.html

        Neal Sean, who? NBC’s Royal Correspondents really are bad. Looked him up and he does stuff with the Daily Mail, Hello and US Weekly. He also has a youtube channel. Watched one of his recent ones and he’s making claims Harry “flipped out” at the recent private jet pictures and is concerned there is a leak in their camp. I haven’t seen a statement from them about it. Neil Sean went on to say something about how else would the paparazzi know if they weren’t tipped off by a leak…as if paparazzi aren’t known to stake out airports? A new royal correspondent seems to be born every day.

        I don’t see H & M wanting to have a christening there now. The place that worked very hard to run Meghan out. Sentimental thoughts aside, some things you just can’t forget.

      • AmB says:

        I can see Harry wanting Lili to have the same treatment given to her older brother. He understandably may be sensitive on this point.

      • Jaded says:

        Marie Claire has turned into a Sussex-bashing rag. It’s been showing up on my FB feed here in Canada for some reason so I blocked it. There are some serious tentacles reaching out from the Fail and other British gutter tabloids into the North American market. It’s nothing more than distraction from the real issues like Andrew’s crimes and misdemeanors for which mummy is footing the legal bills, the state of Mean and Keen’s marriage, Charles’s pay-for-access schemes and the generally disreputable state of the whole monarchy right now. At a time when the country is crumbling, and they’re swanning around in untold luxury, it’s REALLY bad optics.

    • Eurydice says:

      From what I’ve been able to find – Neil Sean used to be a singer, comedian and vocal coach. Somehow he started a chat show and somehow he ended up being a royal reporter writing for the Daily Mail and then royal correspondent for NBC. There’s nothing to indicate why he should know more than anyone else about the RF, but maybe they’re feeding him stories?

  9. Sofia says:

    I know he’s the future future King but I don’t buy that William has the power to say no. I’m sure he threw a tantrum and complained but again, I don’t think the decision making power for this is in William’s hand.

    • Pao says:

      Exactly @Sofia. William doesn’t have that power although i’m sure he wishes he did. I simply don’t think harry is even thinking about christening Lili in windsor. I don’t think he’s thinking about the christening at all to be honest. I think this is simply the courtiers desperate to feed the press something

    • Charm says:

      Ever since H threw a spanner in the works of this 1000 yr old anachronistic institution and was received with wide open arms on the global stage, the little men bk on struggle island who run the institution have been trying every-which-way to embiggen BudgetValdemort. And rebranding him in the image of a wannabe strongman king is the path theyve chosen. It is to laugh, as the saying goes.

    • Aud says:

      He doesn’t but he can throw a fit and try.

      But TQ wants it and the media definitely want the kids and Meghan back for a visit (for bad reasons but they want it). May come down to Charles who is really the one calling most of the shots.

  10. Snuffles says:

    I dunno. While I do agree that Harry wants to eventually bring his kids to meet the Queen WHEN ITS SAFE to do so, I still doubt he’s pressed about getting Lili christened at Windsor. I think he and Meghan will be perfectly fine christening Lili in California.

    • Still_Sarah says:

      @ Snuffles : I agree a CA christening would be much easier and a great symbol of H&M’s new life there but it’s been almost 5 months and they haven’t done it yet. So I’m wondering if it’s because they do want to have it done at Windsor?

      • Izzy says:

        Or maybe because there’s still a pandemic going on and Lili is a vulnerable newborn?

      • Sofia says:

        We don’t know that they haven’t done it yet. Just cause we don’t know, doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened yet. Tabloids are guessing just like we are.

      • Snuffles says:

        Just because nothing has been announced, doesn’t mean it hasn’t been done. That’s what the RRs are assuming and running with. They still firmly believe this is something that Harry and Meghan would announce and share photos of, because they can’t fathom that they wouldn’t. They also couldn’t fathom Harry would leave The Firm either but he did, didn’t he?

      • STRIPE says:

        I wonder if they’ll do one at all? Neither strikes me as devoutly religious…now they they’re out of the horse snd pony show that is the BRF, maybe they don’t feel the need?

      • Charm says:

        What? How do you know they hvnt done it yet? Wow. For all we know baby Lili has been christened since August…or September. Sometime between or on or near either of her parents’ birthdays. Perhaps we’ll see an image (maybe in watercolor, painted by Christian. Or a computerized rendition done by Queen Doria.) at Christmas.

    • Fortuona says:

      Where do you think a High Church Anglican Baptism would take place ?

      • GuestWho says:

        At an Episcopal church…

      • iconoclast59 says:

        All Saints by the Sea Episcopal Church in Montecito would be perfect. It’s a lovely little church!

      • Allyn says:

        Just have Dame Karen Pierce, current Ambassador to the United States, fly out to California to represent the UK and do it in Montecito.

      • Kkat says:

        They are right by an Episcopal Church.
        My boys were baptized in the Episcopal Church, their God parents couldn’t make it from England so that part was done by proxy

  11. Marivic says:

    William The Other Brother is a jealous and vindictive brother. I am not surprised if this were true. It has been reported that he couldn’t move on from the Sussex exit and the Oprah interview. He will do everything to get even with Prince Harry and Meghan and exact revenge. He and Kate, together with the influence of the British media, are besmirching and smearing non-stop the name of the Sussexes in the US and the world. He’s an evil brother who’s incandescent with rage he wants to draw blood. Everyday he’s proving to the world what a truly bully brother he is.

  12. Becks1 says:

    I can believe that Harry and Meghan want Lilibet christened in Windsor. They were married there and Archie was christened there. It makes sense to want their daughter christened there as well.

    My guess is that William thus far has NOT been able to shut down the talk about the christening at Windsor so he’s the one leaking to the press about it hoping it will cause enough of a public pushback so the queen has to say no. But I imagine most of the public don’t really care.

    At any rate – would william really have any say over this? Wouldn’t it be the Queen, and then maybe Charles? William needs to keep his mouth shut.

    • lanne says:

      Heck, couldn’t Harry just call the Archbishop of Canterbury? They could sneak in, have the baby christened, sneak the baby over to Windsor to see the Queen, take a picture, and be home before anyone knew about it. They wouldn’t even have to release a picture.

      I don’t think either William or Charles has any authority over the chapel. It’s the Queen’s turf, right?

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Becks: I can’t, unless Harry and Meghan are gluttons for punishment. The little we know about what happened behind the scenes does not fill me with confidence that Harry and Meghan had many happy moments at Windsor. There is no doubt that there were tensions at the wedding and the christening. Is Meghan really eager to go back there and does she want her children in that toxic stew? I don’t know. Does Meghan have any agency in this marriage?

      • Becks1 says:

        @Amy – I think its clear that Harry still has a great deal of affection and respect for his grandmother, and the chances are better of her attending if lili is christened in Windsor (not 100%, but better.) Neither Harry nor meghan strike me as particularly religious so I think the christening would be more about the traditions so having it in the UK makes more sense.

        But I also think it will be like the first christening, only more locked down. No pictures released at all.

      • swirlmamad says:

        I think Meghan has plenty of agency in their marriage — from everything we’ve witnessed thus far, Harry and Meghan have mutual respect and love for one another, and a true partnership. I think we see these made-up rota stories and start to think the worst — exactly what they want. Nothing has happened to show they are truly planning this christening in the UK and throwing themselves and their children back into the lion’s den. This is all wishful thinking and a money grab by the rota and they are clearly the ones frothing at the mouth for the Sussexes to return to the UK, no matter how much they lie that they are “unwelcome”.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Becks: They would be able to get a private christening in California. Are they that tied to tradition that they would subject themselves to more insults and press intrusion in the UK?As I said a christening in Windsor would necessitate the involvement of the courtiers and for that reason alone, I’m not sure that Harry and Meghan are so eager for Lili to be christened in Windsor. The Queen didn’t think it was important for her to be at Archie’s christening so why would she want to be at Lili’s?

      • Becks1 says:

        @AmyBee – yes, Harry might feel that tied to the traditions, especially since Archie was christened there, he may want the same thing for Lili.

        none of us know they are actually planning, if anything, but I don’t think the idea that H&M would want Lili christened at Windsor is that far fetched or that it means Meghan doesn’t have “agency.” Families are complicated.

      • Charm says:

        @Amy Bee
        O.M.F.G. This is what brainwashing looks like: based on the feverish desires of palace sycophants’ pantings in the shitrags, we have seemingly intelligent folks coming on the internet to question a woman’s agency in her marriage. F*@ck me! LMFAO.

    • FancyPants says:

      Yes, I can slightly believe H&M would have wanted it done there (only because of their wedding and their son’s christening sharing the same site) and that William would not want it done there (because pure spite is all he has left), but is it really up to William? I mean, maybe he gets an opinion but isn’t it ultimately a church and the church officials would give/deny the approval? And if not the church officials, wouldn’t it be the Queen or even Prince Charles before William? Side note: I have no idea how church business works.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Becks1, we already know that when TQ wants to shut down any form of nipping at the heels, she certainly placed a kabosh on medals worn during PP funeral. TQ isn’t one to shy away from putting into place an element of equality, just when it suits her.

      As for the christening, we are all riding in the same boat of speculation, including this new mouth piece for the Lamebridges! Except, he is spewing the actions and words of Wil-I-Am-Not for all to see, and ride on his hill of hatred and jealousy.
      But what will KKWeen do without more opportunities to kkkopy Meghan? What will she do….

  13. Noki says:

    Can you just imagine if Willian was a King a hundred years ago? I bet he would rule like the King in The Man in the Iron Mask.

    • SarahCS says:

      I love ancient history and the stories about Rome, the emperors, etc. I always try to take the tales of the ‘bad’ emperors with a pinch of salt but at the same time remember that the likes of Hitler gained power so maybe they were really that bad. William gives me those vibes, he would have been atrocious if he’d reigned when the crown had real power over the country (not just taking the £££ and changing our laws behind closed doors).

      • Amy T says:

        @Noki & SarahCS: Spot on. I just finished Hilary Mantel’s Cromwell trilogy, and even though there’s no biological tie between Henry Tudor & William, the similarities are disturbing, to say the least.

      • Snuffles says:

        @amytoo

        Well, if you believe the theory that Henry VIII fathered one or both of Mary Boleyn’s children, then he does. I believe the Queen Mum is a descendant of the Boleyn family through Mary. And the Spencer side is also descendant from Mary.

      • Amy T says:

        Interesting, @Snuffles! I knew Henry & Mary were a “thing,” but didn’t realize he’d fathered any of her offspring. (I’m not overly literate in English history, royal or otherwise.) Sadly, there are enough despots on this planet who are not related to Henry VIII that it’s clearly not exclusively a genetic trait.

      • SnoodleDumpling says:

        @Amy T TLDR; William and Harry are descended from the Tudors a couple times over, on both sides. If you like excruciating detail then please continue, but I warn you that I get confused by the King James’s and King Charles’s and those four are the primary focus of this genealogical inspection.

        Through Diana they are descended from Stuart Kings James VII and II and Charles II via some of their respective illegitimate kids they gave titles to (also Edward III, a Plantagenet King known as Edward of Windsor before he took the throne and the father of The Black Prince). The Stuarts themselves were descended from the Tudors through James V of Scotland, father of Mary, Queen of Scots and grandfather of James VI and I (first Stuart King of England). James V of Scotland was the first child that survived to adulthood of James IV, King of Scotland, and Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland (and also Henry VIII’s older sister). For simplicity: Henry VII->Margaret Tudor->James IV of Scotland->James V of Scotland->Mary, Queen of Scots->James VI and I->Charles I->Charles II AND James VII and II both (they were brothers and both sons of Charles I)->recognized illegitimate kids->squillions of generations of aristos->Diana.

        And since the throne of England has passed through a few different houses based on biological inheritance in the female line a few times (the Stuarts being one such instance), yes, all the Windsors are biologically related to Henry VIII through one or another of his sisters descendants. I think technically it went from the Stuarts to the House of Orange when James VII and II was deposed in favor of his daughter Queen Mary II and her husband William II, Prince of Orange, and DEFINITELY should have been the house of Orange when their son William III of Orange took the throne, but then it went back to the Stuarts when they died with no heirs and it went to Queen Anne, daughter of James VII and II. The Stuarts then passed it on to the Hanovers by virtue of Sophia of Hanover, who was the daughter of Elizabeth Stuart, Queen of Bohemia, who was herself the daughter of James VI and I. The Hanovers changed to Saxe-Coburg-Gotha when Hanoverian Queen Victoria married Prince Albert, and the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha’s changed to the Windsors when Queenie’s grandfather George V got concerned about being in The War To End All Wars against the German Empire when they themselves had an exceptionally German name. It should have changed to Mountbatten when Queenie married Phil, but the courtiers freaked about being perceived as ‘too German’ in the aftermath of WWII.

        On a related sideways note, born-in royals descended from Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, a.k.a. the Queen Mother are also descended from the Tudor King Henry VII through her via Henry VIII’s OTHER sister Mary Tudor, so Elizabeth, Margaret, and everybody descended from those two including Charles, William, and Harry.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      It would have been really hard to act like an absolutist 17th century French monarch in the 1920s. ;-) A hundred years ago is not that long ago, not really. Though I do think that William would have loved the wild party scene among the aristos of the 1920s.

      • lanne says:

        Well, Nicholas 2 was an absolutist monarch in the 1910s, so I think the point still stands. I think William would have been just as intransigent as Nicholas 2 was. The only difference is that Nicholas 2 was actually charming and friendly with people outside of his work and William really isn’t.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Yes, and Russia and Britain were vastly different cultures – even a century ago.

        William is very likely an entitled twit who has never heard the word no in his life – but it is absurdly histronic to claim that he’d go full murderous tyrant if he could.

        It is a cheap and ahistorical rhetorical ploy that comes off as ludicrous.

      • lanne says:

        Whoa there, Art Historian!! I usually love your takes, by the way. I don’t think it’s cheap nor ahistorical to question what William would do. I think anyone who never hears the word no has the potential to go tyrant on people, and maybe even murderous tyrant.

        In the US, we have Trumpers who I wouldn’t doubt at all would murder liberals if Trump told them too. And they have the guns to do it. I’m of the opinion that there’s a thin veneer of civility on people that can be rubbed off quite easily with the right pressure at the right time. I believe that most people will stand by and watch as their fellow citizens get dragged off to camps. I believe that there’s a small percentage of people who will act on their worst instincts if they are allowed to, and I believe that William is one of those people. That could be slander on my part, but I sure as hell don’t think I’ve seen anything from him to rebut that. Someone in the royal family thought it was okay to leak Harry and Meghan’s whereabouts in Canada and expose them to potential danger.

        I think you’re Danish, Art Historian? I envy you your position, living in a country where people have a much stronger sense of civility, a sense of belonging to a functional society where they have a role to play. I have spent very little time in Denmark, but I have spent time in Norway, and I got the impression that Scandivanian countries (and I know you have problems too) have a stronger social fabric than we have in the militantly individualistic USA. Living in the USA right now, actually for the last 5 years, has left me feeling vulnerable in a way that I never have before. I know that my fellow citizens could turn on me in an instant (I’m a black woman living in the South). I’m planning an escape plan if I will ever need it. I honestly see in William the same animus that I see in Trumpers around me. Yes, I believe the Trumpers have more immediate opportunity than William does to do harm. But I also think the veil of politeness over William is paper thin, and a person who cannot regulate his emotions, and who has a lot of power, could do harm. I think it’s naive to think otherwise.

        The aristos he would have partied with in the 1920s and 30s were mostly fascists after all. I’m pretty sure that’s where his politics lay.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ lanne, you have every right to be concerned, especially the climate of the country. There is an assault on our right to choose, the ability to vote and still a defiance against vaccinations.
        A Houston couple were ambushed in Houston due to their political stance to support Biden. The MAGAT supporter killed the wife and shot the husband 3 times, including the head, but luckily survived.

        Please forgive me regarding the length but I am still angels by these thugs.
        On another note, given my previous history of proudly promoting Democrat candidate’s, my husband was verbally threatened, including my daughter, during the last presidential campaign. The threat was presented and worthy for concern. Our city is small, in the sense of small town gossip, including that everyone knows where we live. My husband is the retina specialist, only one for 100+ miles, to which these MAGAt’s/thugs are willing to threaten. Their unfounded sense of superior standing and beliefs, with rights to enforce them onto everyone else, have created a dangerous position for all of us. Add to the fact that Texas has removed the restrictions for a right to carry, anyone nut job in this state can now carry a gun, much like the Wild West we have only read about.

    • Surly Gale says:

      I think he’d be more like King John, and Harry would become Robin Hood in his effort to help the people…….

  14. RoyalBlue says:

    Why does William get to call the shots, why not Charles? Unless it was Charles who said no, but is letting William take the blame for it. His eye is on the crown and nothing else, and he needs any negative thoughts of his to be passed on to William to keep the heat off of him at this point. I believe Charles also doesn’t want anything to do with Harry for a while and is being his nasty self as usual. Charles was likely the one who asked about the skin color, and in fact they all probably whispered it.

  15. Meghan says:

    I can’t imagine being the kind of person who would put up a fight to stop my niece from being christened where her brother was christened but also to be so proud about it that I wanted it put out into the world.

  16. MsIam says:

    I wouldn’t bring my kids over there to be part of some toxic mess. This talk of christening is all about the press getting photos and the royal experts having something new to go on and on about. Nothing to do with family let alone Christ. I get Harry wants his grandmother to see the kids before its too late but any christening should be done at home where they can have true privacy. The queen wasn’t at Archie’s christening and we know Charles and William don’t give a damn so no need to fly over there just for that.

  17. booboocita says:

    I’m not sure I believe any of this. The Queen wasn’t at Archie’s christening; why would she be at Lilibet’s? She skipped Louis’s christening, too, and AFAIK, wasn’t at the christenings of Zara’s kids. Have the York princesses’ babies been christened yet? Was she there for those?

    On too of that, it’s been amply demonstrated that the RR know nothing about the Sussexes’ moves: neither their professional plans, nor their personal. They knew H&M would be in NYC because Global Citizen announced it. They didn’t know ahead of time about the visit to the UN or the meet-n-greet with de Blasio. I don’t believe that Baldimort stopped Lili’s christening from happening at Windsor — although it’d be like him — because no such plan was extant.

    It’s not as if H & M needed to go to the UK to have Lili christened. Last I looked, there were Anglican/Episcopal churches in the USA. Some of them are in southern California, even.

    • Becks1 says:

      She attended Lena’s christening (Zara’s second daughter.) I’m not sure about Mia’s. My take on the Queen and christenings is she goes if she’s available and its convenient. I think she could always make herself available but if its not especially convenient she doesn’t chose to. Archie’s christening was scheduled for a time when the Queen is usually in Scotland (I think thats Holyrood Week) which H&M knew when scheduling, I think she missed Louis’ for the same reason but am not sure. That’s something harder for her to get out of.

      Neither York baby has been christened yet. August’s was scheduled and then canceled (I think someone tested positive for COVID.)

    • Yami says:

      I agree with your take. Megan & Harry know anything they ask of the royal family is likely to be leaked. There’s no way they’d approach them knowing what they know about William’s attitude and as a by-product, his staff. Unless, they wanted to highlight the fact that William is terrible, which well, we already know there isn’t a depth to which William won’t sink.

  18. Jan says:

    Archie was christened at the small private chapel inside the castle, while they were married at Windsor, St George’s chapel. Meghan and Harry should just christen their child in the US, how many times do you have to get kicked to prove your are not not wanted.
    Cain, do seem to have a lot of time to worry about the Sussexes do. Fuel shortages and empty supermarkets shelves, should be the top of the BM concerns.
    BM still trying to act like the BRF have any control over the Sussexes do or how they earn their money.
    Heard UK was trying to recruit Lorry drivers from Australia and the pay was less than what they earn at home. Video of a Polish lorry driver laughing at an offer of a 3 month visa ending on Xmas eve.

    • SarahCS says:

      Isn’t that the whole point of all these stories? Distracting people with shiny things from the grim reality of Brexit and the pandemic. All the conservative press is essentially dancing to the tune of the tories and the BRF, they’re all in it together at this point.

    • Harper says:

      @Jan that small little detail regarding the private chapel inside Windsor castle where Archie was christened vs. St George’s where the wedding took place is the dead giveaway that this is made up malarkey. Next time, Burger King should hire a reporter who can do some research before he writes his hit pieces.

      Also, this sentence: “One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later.”
      It’s “of late.” From the Cambridge English Dictionary: of late meaning: 1. recently: We haven’t spoken of late.

    • 809Matriarch says:

      I agree. I think Lili should have a lovely custom made christening gown of her very own & be christened in California. To add insult to injury, I hope H&M let an American outlet have exclusive photos after the ceremony. That would burn those dinosaur RRs up!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ 809Matriarch, that’s brilliant!!! I love it!! Plus we should include the Queen of Interviews as the one to bestow the blessings to Lili!! Give Tina Brown something to write about!!

  19. Cessily says:

    So they need Williams approval to have their daughter christened in the church were they had their son christened? There is something seriously wrong a society that buys into this crap especially with all the criminal and crisis issues facing Britain and the remaining Royals. How does anyone in there right mind justify turning an infant being welcomed into the Church and Christian faith to be what people should be up in arms about.. it is beyond sick, and there is no excuse for a future head of the Church to be so vile. So glad my grandmother left this church otherwise I would.

  20. Nyro says:

    I don’t think there was a request for a royals christening at all. I think it was offered to them by the the firm, who desperately need them to come back so they can hold up their end of the invisible contract with the media with all the interest and $$$ the Sussexes will bring in. And I think harry and Meghan said “thanks, but no thanks”. I think William knows they aren’t coming so he decided to hop on that and spin it to make it look like they were begging and that he totally shut that shit down like the big boss man future king that he is.🙄 Hard and Meghan don’t care about those trappings. That baby has probably already been baptised. His Spencer aunties probably showed up and everything and we’ll never know.

    • swirlmamad says:

      Now this, I can believe.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        As well as I!! I wouldn’t put it past that nasty piece of hatred and jealousy taking the prize and running with it!!

    • Snuffles says:

      Nailed it! 100%

    • lanne says:

      a very plausible take! As great as it would probably be for Harry to have his beloved Granny meet his baby, traveling with an infant in a pandemic is not a good idea, and they have already met the baby over Zoom, just like other families all over the world. The ratchets need to sell the story that H and M want to come back and need to come back to keep the tabloids happy. Come to think of it, they could have already christened the baby over Zoom with the queen in attendance and the archbishop of canterbury.

    • Becks1 says:

      This actually makes a lot of sense – so this spin is more of “you can’t fire me, I QUIT” kind of thing or something. Like Harry can’t say no to the Windsor christening because he’s not allowed to have the Windsor christening, but he’s already been offered it and has said no and that is sending some into a panic.

  21. Catherine says:

    Harry is not making any decisions about christening Lilibet without Meghan’s input/approval. So all these stories that center Harry’s feelings only are just a way of dismissing/excluding Meghan. Given the pandemic I doubt the Sussexes have made any plans with regard to the children traveling. Eugenie had to cancel her christening because of a Covid scare. It’s the British media that is acting like the christening has to happen soon when it actually doesn’t. I think this story came out because the media had to cover its a** because they were all predicting some sort of September return and we now have seen that tje Sussexes has extensive plans for September in the US. So now they want to claim that the christening was going to happen but was blocked by William. I think there is a chance that Harry will come in November because there are some Invictus training event planned. I think Meghan and the children will come if she also wants to get some work with her charities done in the UK done. But I don’t believe that the Sussexes are going to travel just for a christening that can take place anytime. The fact they have moved on to Christmas predictions is a sign that they really don’t know.

    • Charm says:

      Harry wont be returning to struggle island in November. All over the world, Invictus teams are training. Why would he go to uk team’s training. He’s not their trainer.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Harry has an event in November to do with veterans here in the states, then Thanksgiving is coming up. Why would he go to the UK then? I just find it strange this particular christening keeps coming up. Haven’t heard anything of Eugenie’s and Zara babies christenings, even from big-mouth Mike. This sounds like William once again being a control freak and inserting himself into something that’s not really his business. I keep thinking that he knows both Sussexes returning to the UK would be a big deal and he does not want that to happen. He does not want any pictures of Harry and Meghan with Elizabeth or Charles because it would look like they are still part of the family, and that does not suit William’s agenda, and he definitely has an agenda.

    • Nyro says:

      Exactly. This is coming straight from the courtiers and William. They need Harry to come back in order to feed the British tabloid beast. They literally lied and said that there was going to be a second Diana statue unveiling in September and that both Harry and Meghan would have to come. We see that certainly didn’t happen so now they’ve moved on to other lies about when they’re coming back.

  22. Seraphina says:

    So imagine how bad it will be once Willy has the power as KoE. H&M made the most excellent of decisions to leave the island. All these antics solidify what most of us already know.

  23. Catherine says:

    Harry is not making any decisions about christening Lilibet without Meghan’s input/approval. So all these stories that center Harry’s feelings only are just a way of dismissing/excluding Meghan. Also, William had zero power over who gets christened when and where. The chapel where Archie was christened is the Queen’s private chapel. Given the pandemic I doubt the Sussexes have made any plans with regard to the children traveling. Eugenie had to cancel her christening because of a Covid scare. It’s the British media that is acting like the christening has to happen soon when it actually doesn’t. I think this story came out because the media had to cover its a** because they were all predicting some sort of September return and we now have seen that the Sussexes had extensive plans for September in the US. So now they want to claim that the christening was going to happen but was blocked by William. I think there is a chance that Harry will come in November because there are some Invictus training event planned. I think Meghan and the children will come if she also wants to get some work with her charities done in the UK done. But I don’t believe that the Sussexes are going to travel just for a christening that can take place anytime. The fact they have moved on to Christmas predictions is a sign that they really don’t know.

  24. Vera says:

    it’s the daily express, less reliable than the Sun and the Daily Hate, despite how impossible that sounds. So I call bullshit on the whole thing.
    The express has a creepy obsession with Diana, which is a long running joke in the UK.

  25. Amy Bee says:

    The Palace’s and press reaction to the pregnancy and Lili’s birth would have put me off the idea of christening Lili at Windsor but I’m not Harry and Meghan. Everything that they have said since leaving gave me the impression that Royal life was hell and that they needed to get away from that to survive. The notion that Harry wants to participate in that life in anyway and that he would want put Lili put in that environment after all the Palace has done to them is unthinkable to me.

  26. Amy Too says:

    What is this “Meghan was married alongside Harry”? That seems like such a weird way to say it just to avoid saying Meghan was married “to Harry” or “Meghan and Harry were married.” “Married alongside” almost makes it seem like they were both there but getting married to other people. Or Meghan was there getting married but Harry was just there as like her groomsman or something. Children who go to the same church and all have their first communion on the same day are having their first communion “alongside” each other. It designates something that two people are doing at the same time but not necessarily together as a unit. I have never heard the phrase “wife was married alongside husband” in my life.

    And of course Lilibet and Archie are only Meghan’s children, not Harry’s, not their children. “…Meghan… wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.” They got out of their way to blame Meghan for absolutely everything and act as if she’s making all these decisions on her own as a single woman. The cruelty in the wording is palpable and the point.

    • Merricat says:

      Yes, they’re explicitly racist jackholes. I hope every so-called expert and/or “journalist” goes broke on their hate.

      • Over it says:

        Agree,But what this comes down to is no one has seen Lili.Hence they can’t make money off her so they are all suffering in the media. I like to entertain the fantasy that only Eugine, petty Betty and Diana sisters from Harry family has seen the kids and I will happily die believing that. You know if the keenbridges had seen her it would be another fluff piece to make Kate look good

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Amy Too, I didn’t pick up on that, but you are right!! The incessant need to find any sliver of the blame/decisions on Meghan rivals many countries regarding their imminent access to vaccines. Truly a batch of delusional whack-a-do’s!!!

    • ABritGuest says:

      Amy Too they do that quite a lot with Meghan. I remember before Archie was born the express had an awful headline about who will pay for Meghan’s child. The media like to write about black/mixed race women like they are all single mothers. It’s why Michelle Obama was referred to as Barack’s baby mama on at least one occasion.

      This is fan fiction same as the story about the second Diana memorial statute event that was meant to happen in September. The press are desperate for the Sussexes to be back in UK for new content etc. It’s funny how they aren’t speculating about the christenings for other non taxpayer funded royals kids who were born this year (August, Lucas etc).

      After the row about the baby’s name when she was less than a week old, not sure reports about restricting a christening is the best look for the “very much not racist” royal family’s image outside of the royals’ white supremacist fans.

  27. MellyMel says:

    This all sounds like fan-fiction to me. I wouldn’t be surprised if baby Lili has already been christened in Cali. However if this is real, I feel like it’s Harry wanting this more so than Meghan (which still doesn’t make sense based off everything he’s said in interviews). I don’t think she cares about ever going back or taking her children there. Especially since nothing has changed in regards to William or the press.

    • Fortuona says:

      Where do you think a High Church baptism took place in California

      • GuestWho says:

        How many times are you going to ask this question today? At an Episcopal church – we got lots of ‘em. The baby doesn’t have to be baptized into any particular religion btw to be in the line of succession – they would just have to convert if they ever, dog forbid, became monarch. There are plenty of people in line for the throne that haven’t been baptized in your vaunted “High Church.”

      • Sofia says:

        @GuestWho: You’re not in the line of succession if you’re baptised into the Catholic Church but H&M aren’t going to do that.

      • Legalese says:

        There are Anglican churches in the US. And being Catholic, I can tell you that you don’t need to be in England to hold High Mass/High Church. We have organs and plenty of incense in the US too. Your comment is honestly just really confusing… have you never seen a cathedral in the US? Do you think Catholic Cardinals and Archbishops celebrate mass in like schoolhouses?

      • GuestWho says:

        @Sofia – yeah, I was being too broad. My point to the overly concerned Foruona was that the “High Church” baptism doesn’t matter.

      • iconoclast59 says:

        The Church of England says only that the baptism take place in (an Anglican) church: https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/christenings/christening-faqs#na. There is no specification that it be the Church of England. The Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Communion: https://www.episcopalchurch.org/who-we-are/anglican-communion/provinces/

      • lanne says:

        My parents are AME and they have been attending church over Zoom. They go to the church to pick up communion once a month. I’m sure Catholics have been doing carryout communion during the pandemic as well. Anglican high church can do carry out bells and smells if needed? A little bell in a package with some incense?

        And concern-troll, ever heard of the National cathedral in Washington? They have been doing great organ recitals during the pandemic. I’ve been watching them over Zoom. They can high church it away–even get Bishop Curry over Zoom if they’d like. I’m sure he’d make room in his calendar for them.

      • Fortuona says:

        I am not an Anglican ,but if it does not stick to the Book Of Common Prayer is is then a Low Church and a whole bunch of Episcopal Churches all over the world are now counted as Low. But the couple themselves are High Church and have been baptized in that way

      • Jaded says:

        @Fortuona – I am Anglican so I think I have the religious high ground on this comment. The Episcopal church includes high church, Anglo-Catholic, low church or evangelical, and variations. The various churches of the Anglican Communion, though autonomous, are bound together by a common heritage and common doctrinal and liturgical concerns, and there has always been a considerable amount of interchange of ecclesiastical personnel.

        The Book of Common Prayer is the short title of a number of related prayer books used in the Anglican Communion, as well as by other Christian churches historically related to Anglicanism, so no it’s not considered “low church”.

  28. Eurydice says:

    “With no picture of the child available publicly, speculation about what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning for her christening has been rife.” Why would not seeing a picture of Lili lead to speculation about her christening? It wouldn’t, that’s why. It leads to speculation about what color she is.

    • Amy Too says:

      This guy just seems like he has no idea how to write or speak. I think what he’s trying to say here is that since no one has seen lili, they’re speculating about her christening because they imagine pictures will be released of it, so they want it to happen soon so they can see pictures soon. But it was worded stupidly. And then this whole paragraph: “One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.”

      “Problems encountered of later”?
      “Married alongside”?
      “Wanted…Lilibet to be christened in the place she was married…. And then the christening of her firstborn son, Archie.”? Those sentences *technically* convey what he’s trying to say—that this is the place where two important things happened—but the way he’s structured it and worded it sounds so off. The grammar is wrong, the second sentence is a fragment sentence.
      And: “…there was one person who basically decided there wasn’t an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother.” Again, this sentence sort of conveys what he wants to say, but it technically doesn’t make sense. It’s missing words. The grammar is off.

      • SnoodleDumpling says:

        Are the Daily Express outsourcing to foreign, non-native English speaking ghostwriters as a cost saving measure? Or is this just the standard quality that they are willing to pay for now? Or are they making unpaid interns write this stuff now?

        Just looked at the writers’ bio, her name is Aurora Bosotti. Critical information: “After a brief stint working in governmental institutions, she began her career in digital journalism in 2017, focussing on UK and EU political news – especially in relation to Italy, France and Meghan Markle.” I’m not sure if this is just another screw up in writing, but it seems to suggest that Meghan Markle is considered by the Daily Express to be a political issue that relates to UK politics and possibly also EU politics…which is f@$%ing weird.

  29. Merricat says:

    Lol, the rota still desperately want us to believe that they control the narrative. They have no clue to what the Sussexes are doing, going to do, or are thinking about doing. No one close to them talks to the rota, or to the rest of the royal family.

    • LL says:

      This is what it boils down to! They have no access or leaks so all they can do is speculate. The same why they speculated at Harry coming back to the UK a million times or about why/why not the Sussexes would come to Christmas last year before it was canceled etc etc.
      I mean who is this newly formed Royal Reporter. His well placed source could be another RR or a magazine he’s read. It’s all repeat of what we’ve read before. No new information.
      It’s like how the media had everyone believe that Andrew was running from being served when he had already been served 2 weeks before even though he didn’t want to accept it.
      They need sussex stories so they’ll keep churning they “sources” to create them. Like Meghan said they don’t report they create.

  30. OR says:

    What about the christening robe? Lili is still a royal child so tradition would mean she would wear the robe. For all that is said and screamed about Meghan and Harry do follow traditions that are actual traditions so this would be one that I think they still would partake in. Whether that means the robe is sent to California or the possible discussions of them coming over to the UK for it. I also think the talk of Windsor is for both the Queen (because they do, especially harry, seem to still want to interact with her while she’s still alive) and also because Windsor has that Private Chapel – that would mean they wouldn’t need to release or share any details they didn’t want to like the godparents and such. This time they wouldn’t have to share anything at all unlike for Archie’s christening(pics, or details of the ceremony).

    • lanne says:

      They can have the robe sent to California. UPS, Fedex, DHL. Heck, they could even send the robe with one of the baby’s great aunts. The challenge would be getting it sent without anyone leaking it.

      • Surly Gale says:

        Especially if the queen’s dresser (who is in charge of jewels etc, apparently) Angela Kelly was involved in any way. The screeching would be heard across oceans….

    • Jegede says:

      It’s very likely Lili, like Eugenie & Zara’s sons, will outgrow the robe soon enough.

      Alternative plans can be made. Lili can ever wear a Spencer christening gown.😉😉

  31. aquarius64 says:

    How does this make Willie or the Windsors look good in any way? First if the christening happens in the US the AMERICAN media would get the photos should the Sussexes choose to release them. Then questions will be asked why not the UK. Do they really want Harry go to Gayle King or other prominent US media to confirm the Neil Sean hit piece? Most people will see it as taking Sussex issues out on an innocent baby. Can’t fix stupid I see.

  32. TheOriginalMia says:

    Wishful thinking on Baldingham and the couriers’ parts. He can object but ultimately it isn’t his decision to make. If Harry wanted Lili christened in Windsor, Queen Elizabeth would grant his request. But…there’s no indication whatsoever that Harry or Meghan are thinking of bringing their children to the UK for anything this year.

    • Fortuona says:

      That would be down to the A of Canterbury

      • Jaded says:

        The Queen holds the title ‘Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England’. It is the Queen who appoints Archbishops, Bishops, etc. of the Church of England, so she would direct the Archbishop of Canterbury on any royal christening.

      • Nick G says:

        The Queen is the head of the church. So, it’s up to the Queen.

        Edit: Sorry @Jaded, I hadn’t renewed and only now see your comment 😄

      • Jaded says:

        @Nick G – no worries, the more we can correct misinformation the better :)

  33. Over it says:

    Does William the incandescent now own the church and who can and can’t be allowed in it.? This is a baby a baby and they are treating her like she is a rodent, not fit for anything good or decent. Furthermore it’s his niece. One day Archie and lili will grow up and read and hear about all that family did to them and their parents and boy , there is no rock big enough for that family to hide under to escape what’s coming their way.And for f sake, Meghan and Harry are both lili parents, stop blaming her for everything, especially decisions that involve Harry family and his background. I hate these people. If I were Harry and Meghan, none of them would ever see my children. They can all go f themselves

  34. Charm says:

    I’m looking forward to the meltdown on struggle island when the Sussexes Christmas card is a family pic (backs turned and in black and white) taken at the christening of Lili and we all find out that it was done in August. Or another computerized-artisitc rendition done by Queen Doria. Or a watercolor image done by Christian. LMFAO

  35. thaisajs says:

    Is this really surprising, however? Harry has written a book and the Royal Family is absolutely losing it worried about what he’s going to say. The idea that you can write a book trashing your family (which I don’t think he’ll do, but they’ll only pull out the even mildly critical bits and obsess over them), and then trot home for a family christening is silly. That’s just not going to happen.

    • lanne says:

      Um, both Diana and Charles contibuted to books that were highly critical of the royal family. Brooch Bitch writes books for a living. Ratchets write books about royals they have spent 15 minutes speaking to. Why should Harry have the right to tell his own story, when everyone else has the rright to talk about him with impugnity?

    • MsIam says:

      Is it as “silly” @thaisajs as your family expecting you to come trotting home for said christening after they have spent the past FOUR years trashing you and your wife? Inquiring minds want know. I don’t know how Harry can even want to breathe the same air as these people, let alone have them involved with a momentous occasion involving his child. If it was me, they could all take a turn kissing my @ss after that.

  36. Zut Alors says:

    Archie and Lili have the same percentage of “royal blood” as George, Charlotte and Louis from their respective fathers. The rota and others can bitch and moan all the live long day and it won’t change the facts.

  37. Dee says:

    I can imagine their heads would explode if Lilli is already christened and they are just writing fan fiction at this point.

    • Lala44 says:

      Trust they’re all writing fan fiction. They know nothing about Harry and Meghan; there have been no leaks since leaving Buckingham and Kensington Palace. They all are just guessing and hoping for a response from Harry and Meghan’s spokesperson to deny or confirm the litany of ridiculous christening stories.

  38. Ted Weather Tiger says:

    When Lili gets christened at Windsor, it will be because “William the peacemaler graciously allowed it.”

    Roll my eyes and prepare to puke.

  39. Jodie says:

    Sorry to call B/S but it wouldn’t be down to him Sorry to disappoint.

  40. AmelieOriginal says:

    Even if this is true (which I don’t believe), the fact is William remains a vindictive and mean person and wants everyone to be as miserable as him.

    • Truthiness says:

      I agree 1000% that William is a vindictive mean person who wants everyone to be as miserable as he is. YET THE SUSSEXES KEEP SHOWING THE WORLD THE VISUAL DEFINITION OF “LOVED UP!” Plus Harry has gone back to happy dedication with moments of pure mirth. Will comes off as some stupid arch villain cartoon trying to blow them up, and he ends up detonating himself every time. Curses, foiled again!

  41. Athena says:

    The media in running these stories casually forget that we are in a pandemic. If there are people in the UK Harry wanted as godparents to Lili they couldn’t come over to the US. This rule changes as of November for fully vaccinated Brits.

    There’s no “all royal babies are baptized at Windsor” rule, so this on going narrative about Lili being baptized atWindsor is made up stuff by the press. I can see someone saying something about Lili being baptized in Windsor and William responding, over my dead body and the press running with it.

  42. Edith Bolton says:

    All they have are these royal reporters who just speculate. It’s clear they (the media) desperately want to see the baby and they want to see Harry and Megan – if only to use them to sell advertising. They just feel more comfortable using “threats” and negative aspersions against a Black woman to get her to comply. It happens all the time.

    Nothing will go down as these “reporters” say.

  43. Lala44 says:

    Oh, Good Grief! Harry and Meghan most likely have already taken steps to have Lili Diana christened a long time ago. The baby is four months old and was born during a global pandemic. I don’t think her parents are in a rush to place a newborn and a toddler on a seven-hour flight to the UK. All to baptist her at the convince of royal in-laws that despise her parents. Plus, the average age now for a christening is between three and six months.

  44. tamsin says:

    Here’s a dumb question: Because of the pandemic, is it possible to be baptized on zoom? In that case, Lili could be baptized by the the Archbishop of Canterbury (with whom Harry and Meghan seem to have a close relationship). There could be a proxy so that Lili would actually get holy water sprinkled. They could even use water from the River Jordan or wherever the Royal Family gets its baptismal water from. It’s a lot of organizing, but Harry and Meghan might want their child baptized by someone who is Church of England because granny is Defender of the faith. I can imagine that some family traditions are important to Harry.

    • Eurydice says:

      An Episcopal church here was giving communion through Zoom – they sent everyone a DIY Communion Kit. I’ll admit, people thought it was strange, but that’s Covid for you.

  45. Mel says:

    I don’t believe that they asked or are even slightly interested in dragging their kids over their for a Christening. For all anyone knows they might have christened her already and just kept it private.

  46. candy says:

    I doubt any of this is true. First of all, the Queen wasn’t at Archie’s christening, so why would they be hellbent on doing Lilibet’s christening with her? I doubt they are eager to go back to Windsor. Are they even that religious? Come on.

  47. Well Wisher says:

    The reportage around the birth of Lili Diana, the great-granddaughter of Queen Elizabeth II, the reigning monarch, is appalling. Why?
    Bill’s hatred towards her parents, and more inportantly, the total disregard for proper social and ethical boundaries for certain individuals whom are regarded, in a particular social structure, as the Other.
    (On an aside, in trying to “put certain humans in their place”: it would be remiss to wonder out loud what the larger world has lost in human capital in terms of potential,raw talent and uplifting ideas that would have shown real progress and betterment for the human experience.)
    Lili Diana is a beautiful child born to loving parents during a pandemic that is evolving in an unequal economic planet.
    Her safety and well being will be of paramont importance to all the people who genuinely loves her.
    The rest can kiss her tiny ass.
    It is not far fetched that a vacciniated minister of the same religious faith as her parents, went to their home and perform the baptismal rites while the Queen looked on from Zoom.
    It would negate the influence of that individual and as in the recent times, no one will be the wiser.
    Simply put , snitches are just not popular.

  48. Robin Samuels says:

    Deep sigh. Lili was born in America. What prevents her from being Christened in an Anglican church in America? I predict designers are waiting for the contract to create the christening gown, which will become a significant item for years to come. Not to mention it will be beautiful. Christenings in America can be celebratory; godparents, family, friends, and delicious tapas. Imagine an heir to the British throne born and christened in America to exiled parents. No Royal Family member is required to attend. The witnesses needed on the certificate are the officiating, the parents and, godparents. No moldy, mean royals required.

    The UK Conservative movement projects Burger King ( I LOVE THIS) as the immediate heir to the throne. In their mind, Charles has surrendered; he will never serve the crown. He is in their pocket. The Queen is determined to reign and not to allow Camilla to become Queen consort.
    In the meantime, the Sussex family is in Montecito, CA, living their life like it’s golden! They’re working on projects and getting ready for the holidays. Zara, Eugenie, and Beatrice have yet to announce the christening date for their newborn, although I don’t think the British tabloids are interested.
    Is this new journalist Jason Knauf’s new pen name? He’s leaving at the end of the year, so they say. Who will replace him?
    Another deep sigh. Thank you, Kaiser.

  49. Keri says:

    Looking at these photos now, knowing what we know sure hits differently . wheeeew 😓

  50. canichangemyname? says:

    I guess I’m not religious enough to even understand why they would WANT their daughter christened there? If any of this is even true – and that’s why I take the majority of royal tea with a boulder of salt, it always comes from someone else. No doubt some is true, but also no doubt some is false. But if the rift is as deep as it sadly seems to be, I can’t see why Meghan would be in a hurry to return to the UK to have her daughter christened amongst a bunch of people who never made her feel welcome or comfortable? But again, this is me talking out of my arse, I don’t know anything from anything royal. Babies don’t just “fix” things. If this rift is this deep, maybe some time apart is what’s best. Clearly Meghan was very hurt and I just don’t see anything good coming from her going back into that environment for a christening.

  51. MMadison says:

    Seriously…..They will never get over that Prince Harry married a WOC from the USA. They are going to deny Prince Harry/Meghan everything they can possibly deny them. William is a POS…..PERIOD!

  52. Tessa says:

    I don’t think he will treat his children well, especially the spares.

  53. Haylie says:

    If this story is true, it was definitely Peen (and Keen too) who expressed “concerns” about Archie’s skin tone.

  54. February-Pisces says:

    William is heartless he has no affection for his niece or nephew whatsoever. To me those are the signs of a narcissistic sociopath. I’m sure even after everything William has done, harry still loves his niece and nephew and is sad he hasn’t seen them.

  55. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    Every time I see that group photo, it’s remarkable (and unsurprising) that H&M are the only ones with a genuine smile. Doria is revolted because she knew exactly what her daughter would go through and looks like she can barely hold her peace., The remaining racists all have an expression that ranges from discomfort to disdain, to barely concealed disgust.

    What a disgraceful group.

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment