The Sussexes say Lilibet Diana’s christening plans are still being finalized

Prince Louis christening

While it seems massively creepy for the cottage industry of uptight, racist royal commentators to focus this hard on a baby’s christening, at least they have some “cover” for doing so. That “cover” is that it’s important for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s children to be christened in the Anglican Church. It’s important for the line of succession. Of course, it’s notable that none of those royal commentators have said one damn word about how Princess Eugenie had to cancel her baby August’s christening this summer and – by all accounts?? – still hasn’t rescheduled it. Where’s the energy about that?

Anyway, there’s been an obsession about Lilibet Diana’s christening since she was born. I still believe the story that Prince Harry requested to have Lilibet christened in Windsor, the same as Archie. I also believe that Prince William threw a massive tantrum about the very idea of Harry and Meghan bringing their children back to the UK for a visit. So here we are. Still speculating about a baby’s christening.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will not christen their daughter Lilibet in the UK and are likely to opt for a ceremony in California, royal sources have claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed their second child Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, who was born in Santa Barbara, California, on June 4 this year.

It had previously been suggested the couple, who named the four-month-old after the Queen’s childhood nickname, would christen their child at Windsor Castle in front of the monarch – who is yet to meet her great granddaughter. However sources have now revealed that a christening in the UK was ‘highly unlikely’ and the pair will instead opt to christen their daughter at the Episcopal Church of the US.

The decision will now raise questions as to when the Queen will ever get to meet the great granddaughter named after her face to face. It also comes just days after it was revealed that Prince Harry would not be returning to Britain next week to join his brother Prince William at a party to honour their late mother.

A palace source told The Telegraph: ‘There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.’

Meanwhile another insider added it was ‘highly unlikely’.

A spokeswoman for the Sussexes said plans for the christening were still being finalised and claims to the contrary were “mere speculation.”

[From The Daily Mail & The Telegraph]

So Harry and Meghan’s spokesperson says nothing has been finalized and chill out. But “royal sources” are bragging to Camilla Tominey at the Telegraph that they successfully stopped a baby from being christened in Windsor. I think that’s exactly what happened – I still say Harry offered to visit, he requested to bring his children to meet the Queen, and he wanted Lili christened in Windsor. Maybe the Queen was open to it, but Charles, William and the courtiers have been in a tailspin for months about it, and they’re trying to bash Harry for having the audacity to suggest visiting, all while bashing him for not returning. Anyway, at this point, I do hope that Harry and Meghan just have a lovely christening in California.

HRH Prince Harry, Meghan Markle leaving Westminster Abbey following the Service of Commemoration and Thanksgiving.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

141 Responses to “The Sussexes say Lilibet Diana’s christening plans are still being finalized”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. lanne says:

    I’ll bet they have already had a California christening with friends and the Queen over Zoom. Or at least that’s what I hope. I hope Harry gave his grandma a burner phone and they can talk in secret. I imagine it would be fun for her to have a secret

    • Pao says:

      Unlikely since their spokesperson said the plans are still being finalized. In kther words the christening is yet to happen

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Pao: Camilla got the Meghan made Kate cry story from the Middletons and it turned out to be not credible but I believe this new story is true for the mere fact that the Palace has not been approached by Harry and Meghan for a christening in the UK.

      • Pao says:

        @amy bee: if the palace hasn’t been approached for a christening that it definitely wasn’t them that turned the sussexes down. Personally i couldn’t really make much from that quote. Just that in wasn’t happening in the UK. That could be entirely harry & meghans choice for multiple reasons. I’m sorry but william (not any courtier) does not have the power to stop harry from christening his daughter in Windsor if he wants to.

    • MMadison says:

      The Queen is the Head of the church in England and someday so will be Charles followed by William…..and they want to put out to the world that they refused the Christening of a baby that is a member of their own family….seriously these people are STUPID

      • Pao says:

        You guys…. Camilla Tominey is a notorious liar. She didn’t speak to any palace source. She got these comments of twitter probably and gave her very own palace positive spin to it.

        The only time she has any credible news is when she speaks about kate and the rest of the middleton clan. Which ia how you know she is their mouthpiece

      • JMoreno says:

        @mmadison: meanwhile she’s doing everything in her power to protect her pedophile son as head of the church…make this make sense???

      • MMadison says:

        Good point. So as Head of the church she wants her flock and the world to know that she will block the christening of a baby but fully support a pedophile. I’m with you on this one: make this make sense someone please!

      • JMoreno says:

        If this story is indeed true it doesn’t bold well for The Queen, Charles or William. It’s begs the question what exactly is their duty to Church as it’s head?

      • PrincessK says:

        The leaking of false information continues. The Sussexes have every right to come to the UK and christen their daughter wherever they wish. The Palace men in black are totally obsessed with the Sussexes, they are angry that this young family are succeeding against all the odds to destroy them.

    • MrsBump says:

      The Queen has had zero problem showing PUBLIC support for her piece of crap son Andrew despite the wishes of everyone else in the institution .
      If she supported Harry, she wouldn’t be hiding it, no need for burner phones and so far it’s been crickets. I’m sure she loves him dearly but there is clearly no overt preference for him

    • MMadison says:

      I think there is a point that is being missed here. Harry quit his job as a Senior member of the RF. He did nothing that was unethical or immoral. For The Queen to refuse the christening of her great grandchild as Head of the church questions her reasoning when she supports her son for unethical, illegal and immoral acts.

  2. Aurora says:

    I love the Sussexes but Harry’s sentimentality make him the weakest link. Why even entertain christening your child in the tradition of an institution that has soundly rejected them and your bi-racial wife?

    Just have a lovely christening in Cali with real friends.

    • Sunshine says:

      I disagree Aurora. I want it to be clear to the world and on the record that the request to christen the baby was rejected by her uncle and her grandfather.
      When we look back in history it will be public record that the first black female child was rejected by the two future kings.

      • Snuffles says:

        Strategic move by Harry?

      • GraceB says:

        It is clear though? Has anyone officially said that’s Charles & Williams stance? I know the palace said a Christening wouldn’t be happening in the UK, but wasn’t that it? I don’t know what we can and can’t believe anymore because most of this comes from the tabloids, who can’t stick to a story to save their lives. Things they’ve said have often turned out to be untrue and in the end, the public don’t know which way is up.

      • Becks1 says:

        @GraceB – we don’t even know if it was the palace, this article just cites a “palace source,” who could be anyone from William to Camilla’s inner voice.

        The only thing I’ll believe is what the Sussex spokesperson said, which is that the christening has not been finalized yet.

        (please note that I fully believe William would love to shut down any UK christening for Lilibet, but we don’t know if that happened.)

    • GraceB says:

      At this point, I don’t know whether to believe Harry is still trying to build bridges with his family or whether it’s the tabloids trying to turn everything into a story.

      The line of succession and having her christened in an Anglican church doesn’t even matter. The one thing the press are right about is that Harry’s kids won’t be on the throne, or even working royals, so why should Harry & Meghan be concerned about whether or not they’re in the line of succession? Surely even keeping up with that is maintaining the idea that the monarchy is somehow important or necessary?

      • Sunshine says:

        GraceB the telegraph is not a tabloid, it’s a paper of record. While they may lie and misquote pedestrians, they do not quote the palace unless they have official sources.

      • Becks1 says:

        Isn’t the Telegraph Camilla Tominey’s homebase? So the source of the “Meghan made Kate cry” story?

        Having a palace source doesn’t mean they have the story right.

      • Sunshine says:

        Becks1 yes – the telegraph sure is the paper where that story originated. That’s why it carried so far – it’s suppose to be credible
        I have no doubt that her source for that was a senior person, despite it being a lie. The point was whoever took it to her wanted it on the public record. Which is why it was important for M to publicly refute it. (Notice she doesn’t do that for regular tabloid stories).

      • Becks1 says:

        @Sunshine – that’s my point though. Just because Camilla has a source, doesn’t mean she actually has solid, credible information.

        So what I’m saying is just because Camilla Tominey has a “palace source” doesn’t mean a whole lot when we have the Sussex spokesperson saying the christening plans have not been finalized.

        ETA I do think its unlikely there will be a UK christening, but the story around it keeps changing which is why I can’t be that bothered by any source going to a RR.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        The Telegraph is a member of the Royal Rota. They’ve been leaning into tabloidesque stories for quite some time (especially the last 5 years). It’s suppose to be credible, time and time again it’s demonstrated it’s not. They are not getting their info from H & M. From the Sussex Royal account January 2020.
        No longer participate in the Royal Rota system.

        The core group of UK outlets with Royal Rota access remain the predominant news source through which worldwide media organisations receive content on the official engagements of members of the Royal Family. These UK media outlets are: The Daily Express, The Daily Mail, The Daily Mirror, The Evening Standard, The Telegraph, The Times, The Sun.

        It’s also why we are seeing all these other random sites “reporting” on the Sussexes-when most of the time it’s a different extension or tentacle of the BM.imo

    • Noki says:

      Even though Harry was strong enough to physicaly walk away,i can imagine they still have an emptional grip on him. I mean its his family and we can scream for him to just cut them off,but its not that simple.

      • Elaine Stritch says:

        Yeah- this. I see so many comments about how Harry is “over it” or shouldn’t care about his family, etc etc and while people may think they’re monsters and absolutely nobody is defending anything they’ve done, they’re still his family… those dynamics are deeply rooted and complicated. It would make sense that he’s trying to build or maintain SOME connection for him and his children to his roots.

    • Maria says:

      While the family is toxic, Harry still has a birthright of his status as Prince and there’s no reason he shouldn’t be able to show that to the world, if he chooses.
      I don’t really want it to be clear to the world that his family rejected Lilibet’s christening because we know they are awful. Any more drama over it will only hurt her more in the future, and ultimately is pointless to me.

      • Chica says:

        But only Harry is putting her in harms way by attempting to involve his family and members of their institution to reject her. If he knows this is the way they behave already, why even give them a Chance to openly use the press to put these kinds of stories out there?

        The media is going to do what they do. If you lie with dogs you get fleas, so if Lili is hurt by all this in the future, the fault should lie at her father’s feet.

      • Maria says:

        That’s not a fair thing to say in my opinion. Harry and Meghan have shown more than once that they know how to protect their children and they have done so. We don’t even know what Lilibet looks like. And the statue event as well as funeral is proof Harry can attend family events without the media/rota knowing anything at all beforehand, or knowing anything about his travel arrangements, etc.
        This was as much Harry’s life as theirs before he left. The family themselves may be toxic, but Harry is a Prince of Britain and a descendent of the former inhabitants of these palaces as much as any of them, and his children are too. *If* he chooses to do a christening where his son was christened and where he was, he has every right.

      • Dee Kay says:

        Lilibet Diana is a Princess by blood. It is her heritage. Harry may be thinking, She will not (have to) grow up in these palaces, in this lifestyle, but she deserves to be christened as a princess because she IS one.

      • Maria says:


      • Chica says:

        No one said he didn’t have a right Maria, I’m merely responding to your own commentary:

        “ I don’t really want it to be clear to the world that his family rejected Lilibet’s christening because we know they are awful. Any more drama over it will only hurt her more in the future, and ultimately is pointless to me.”

        Harry, I’m his attempt to give his daughter her birthright of being christened in the UK In the church her brother was and involving the institution and his family is what leads to the media stories that create the said drama that you said would hurt her.

        You can’t have it both ways. Lili should be afforded the same privileges of anyone else in that family, but if seeking to provide her with said royal privileges in spite of Harry’s family, their awfulness leads to what we’re seeing play out in the press now. The RF could easily shut down these harmful media stories if they wanted to bc A) it makes them look bad and don’t align w/anything they preach about representing (Church of England) B) it’s harmful to Lili, but they don’t and probably won’t.

        Knowing all this, then yes, the responsibility to minimize the (future) harm Lili is exposed to on this topic would lie at her father’s feet.

      • Maria says:

        I’m sorry but these comments are victim-blaming, to me. Harry is not responsible for a bunch of rabid wolves who claim to be “reporters” putting his family in danger, and he’s shown well enough how to navigate it. If he could go to the statue unveiling and funeral without them being involved, then he knows what to do to minimize any potential negativity. The idea that he is “endangering” her by even the remote possibility of wanting to do this for her (definitely with Spencer relatives in place if it happened) is a reach.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ I totally agree with Maria’s comments.

        @Chica’s claim that Harry is endangering Lili if the christening takes place in England, is definitely a reach. M&H and their children have the right to move freely anywhere in the world. Harry has the right to pass on his birthright as a blood royal to his children by continuing to honor whatever royal family traditions he and Meghan choose to honor.

        Make no mistake @Chica, that no matter where Lili is christened, she and her brother Archie will be written about and followed, and speculated about for their entire lives. This is why their parents are doing everything in their power to ensure they grow up in a safe bubble of nurturing and normalcy with as much peace and privacy as possible.

        M&H are surely protecting and preparing Archie and Lili to face and to navigate the inordinate amount of interest and scrutiny they will face over their lifetimes, both good and bad. None of us should presume to interject our perceptions and opinions onto the Sussexes’ decision-making for their children.

    • Ginger says:

      We are just speculating. We have NO IDEA if Harry wants his child to be christened in the UK. I personally don’t believe he does. They said their plans are being finalized and it doesn’t look to be in the UK. It would be major jet lag for his two young kids to fly to the UK and then their is the pandemic. Again, just speculation. That’s all.

      • Heat says:

        @Ginger – a strong part of me believes this as well. Could it be that the British Press and “palace sources” are trying to paint a totally different picture, here?

        What if William is throwing his temper tantrum because he wanted the christening to happen at Windsor Castle, to give the appearance that everything is hunky-dory, and give “hope” that they are luring Harry back to The Firm, but it is Harry and Meghan who are saying “nope…we’re good”???

    • notasugarhere says:

      Why should their daughter not have a christening in the same chapel as her brother, wearing the same (remake of) family christening gown? Whatever they choose, they get to make the choice themselves.

      • Jais says:

        I’m gonna laugh if this info was fed to certain family members to see if they’d run to the press as usual. Now Camilla Tominey is on record as saying there will be no christening in the uk. If pictures come out months later of the christening at Windsor, I’m gonna laugh. No real idea what’s going to happen and want them to have the christening they want, either way. Just think it’d be funny.

    • Jaded says:

      I think they entertained having Lilibet christened in the UK for about a hot minute then thought better of it. This is all hyperbole and lies from the rota rats, nothing more, and to characterize Harry as “the weakest link” is just silly.

    • Truthiness says:

      One thing I won’t do is underestimate M&H’s ability to realize their dreams. They might not want Meghan on UK soil or they might want Lili christened with her namesake somehow. The entire family tried to stop these two from marrying each other and then stop them from being their authentic selves and the family lost those battles. Whatever M&H choose to do will be what they want, the men in gray have lost before.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      I agree. The christening shouldn’t be a big deal, just do it in California with Meghan’s mother present (Harry isn’t the only one who has a family). It should be enough that their daughter was named after two of Harry’s female ancestors, so let Meghan’s mom have the Christening. Or, here’s a really radical idea — wait until the baby is old enough to choose her own religion.

      • Maria says:

        There is a Lillie in Ragland family history. No, Harry isn’t the only one who has a family, but he has no family around him at all, ever. They both at least have Doria, but in terms of blood relations Harry has nobody. I think it’s not too weird that there is a slight possibility he’d want his daughter christened where her brother was with a few Spencer relatives present at least, and then they leave – if they do it in the UK at all.

    • P says:

      Who said that this is what Harry thinks? Some of you create narratives in your head. Harry and Meghan have said what they said and been clear about it anything else is speculation by tabloids. We don’t even know if they want a christening in the UK. Until they say it let’s stop this weird narrative.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Aurora, idk why it would make you think he’s a “weak link” — to me, it just shows that he’s more sensitive than the rest of them, and that’s not a bad thing, imo.

    • aftershocks says:

      @Aurora said:
      “Why even entertain christening your child in the tradition of an institution that has soundly rejected them and your bi-racial wife? Just have a lovely christening in Cali with real friends.”

      We do not have any confirmation of what preferences either Harry or Meghan desire for Lili’s christening. We may never receive full knowledge of the facts. And we may never know when or where Lili is christened, until well after the christening takes place, if then. 😉

      Much like the naming of their daughter, where and when the christening of Lili takes place, is a purely private matter totally up to her parents, and none of our business (and ‘our’ includes the rota, global media, the firm, Sussex supporters and Sussex haters).

      I do understand your comments. I am guilty too of wondering about the Sussexes’ lives and choices. I also tend to project, interpret, and presume about what should or might happen, based on known information, coupled with sketchy clickbait constantly emanating from Salty Isle!

      The Sussexes are so charismatic and of the moment, because they are down-to-earth and genuine. They are two people completely in love who fully embrace living in the moment. At the same time, their high profile status and their magnetic presence is amplified by their inspired and productive union. This is why there exists jealous, threatening forces against them.

      M&H’s courage in bucking the odds to carve out a robust and thriving existence together further elevates their profile. Thus, it is imperative for them to secure and protect their own bubble of peace and privacy, which everyone should respect.

      Still, of course, who the Sussexes are and what they have overcome makes us all have an opinion. People identify with them in some way, or are fairly neutral, or jealous, thirsty and exploitative, and/or adamantly virulent against their very existence.

      It might be best for everyone to chill about M&H’s choices.

    • aftershocks says:

      So I posted my previous comments to Aurora’s initial post, prior to reading the long line of responses. I agree with most of the replies indicating that we don’t have confirmation of anything, and that everything we’ve heard to date is speculation.

      Probably Will and KP are opposed, if indeed the Sussexes are interested in a Windsor christening for Lili. The Sussexes have the right to do whatever they wish. Personally, I think a double christening with Eugenie’s son, August, at Windsor would be nice, albeit unlikely. A private ceremony in California would be equally lovely, and perhaps more desirable.

      The Sussex spokesperson announcing that christening plans for Lili haven’t yet been finalized, is surely intended to try and shut down all the OTT speculation in the UK tabloids.

  3. Eurydice says:

    The media isn’t obsessed about the christening, they want to see what color is Lili’s skin. And William, Charles, etc., don’t want Harry back in a “Here I am with my Beautiful Family” tour, they only want him back if he’s alone and hanging his head in shame.

    • Snuffles says:

      I’ll slightly disagree. I think Harry wanted a private christening with no press and no formal family photo to be released and the futures refused because they need to feed their media masters with a photo. They said, no press, no Windsor christening. Then Harry said, fine, I’ll just do it in California.

      • Eurydice says:

        That’s an interesting take. I can see no press, but I would wonder why Harry wouldn’t want a formal family photo, since there is one for Archie. Why bother to have the christening in the UK with the RF, if there wouldn’t be at least something to officially commemorate the event?

      • Snuffles says:

        @ Eurydice

        To let the Queen meet her namesake. I think that’s the only thing Harry is willing to let happen when it comes to the family. The Queen can keep her mouth shut. The rest of the family would go running to the tabloids with every detail of the day.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Snuffles – Well, the tabloids will be there anyway, from LA all the way to Windsor. They just want any photo of Lili, it doesn’t have to be at the christening. And there’s no way Harry could have a christening without inviting his father and brother, even if they did engineer his departure. Best to have something private in California and invite the Queen to attend by Zoom. I’m sure she’s already met Lili that way.

      • JT says:

        @Snuffles I think this take holds some water. The only reason Harry showed up to the statue unveiling was because he banned the press from being there. I think he would want the same for any Christening photos as well because he wouldn’t want the rota rats to make money off of his kids. The royals, however, do not have a pot to piss in and wouldn’t dare do such a thing as deny the press those photos. Although I am of the mind that Harry put the kibosh on a royal christening from the get go (probably because of the press angle) and this is just palace spin to save face.

    • Lorelei says:

      I agree that William would love nothing more than to veto this, but does he have the power to? Yes we just heard all about how he’s a “trusted lieutenant” (🙄) but the buck still stops with the Queen. All she has to do is tell her personal secretary (or whoever) that she has ok’d the plan with Harry and to please go ahead and work with the Sussexes on the details. If she’s been marginalized to the point that she can’t even do that? Yikes.

      @JT I hope you’re correct that Harry is the one who didn’t want it there in the first place, or as @Snuffles said, only wanted it there if it could be private, and this is the palace trying to make it seem like they’re still in control of everything.

      • JT says:

        @Lorelei The palace only has one play and that is to attack. If they can’t get their way, they try to spin to control the narrative as you’ve said. It’s why I think that Harry must have said no or just didn’t care if they didn’t allow him to have the christening.

    • aftershocks says:

      @Eurydice said:
      “The media isn’t obsessed about the christening, they want to see what color is Lili’s skin. And William, Charles, etc., don’t want Harry back in a “Here I am with my Beautiful Family” tour, they only want him back if he’s alone and hanging his head in shame.”

      Your above-highlighted comments are spot on, Eurydice! +1 and thanks for perfectly summing it all up.

  4. Izzy says:

    And when the rota rats start bashing the Sussexes for not having Lilibet christened in the UK, let’s make sure we all remind them that a “palace source” flatly said a christening would not be happening in the UK. Let’s make very sure we remind them exactly who is responsible for this whole clusterwhoops.

    Those rats and the inbred racists they cape for, they piss me off so much.

    • Jegede says:

      Don’t forget that courtiers deliberately leaked this story, giving the greenlight to be published.

      The same way last November, they made a point to leak Harry’s denied request for a wreath laying. For no other cause other than to humiliate him.

      Plus of course, the ‘controversy’ over Lili’s name.🙄🙄

      I 100% believe courters spoke to Tominey and the timing is deliberate.
      This is form for them.🤐🤐

      • Sunshine says:

        I agree

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Izzy & @ Jegede, yes! The RR and the courtiers love to run their mouths based on little actual snip it’s, added with lies constructed in their little, petty brains.

        They know absolutely nothing about Harry and Meghans plans.

  5. Pao says:

    The “royal source” in question are the sussexs squad on twitter saying that lili doesn’t need to go to the UK and that they want her to have to have a christening in the US

  6. Jan says:

    Everyone seems to know what Meghan and Harry are doing before them.
    Cameltoe is running with this story to keep randy andy off the front page, and people are still falling for it.
    Mean while baby Lili in her onesies is chilling under a tree with her handlers, babbling.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She’s a known Middleton collaborator. If W&K had info about a possible Windsor christening, Kate and Carole would leak it to this person.

  7. Lizzie says:

    Face it, Harry has two Cali girls. If Lili hasn’t been christened yet she probably will be soon and no one will be aware.

  8. Bettyrose says:

    That olive colored dress is fashion goals. I mostly cringed at Meghan’s style in the early days with the firm but that particular look says challenge accepted.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    I think for once the tabloids have it right. The christening is not going to take place in the UK. I don’t believe Harry is so wedded to tradition as some people think he is and the Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Union so there will be no fears about Lili not being in the line of succession. I don’t get the impression that Archie’s christening was such a joyful event because of the actions of the Windsors and the Palace and I can’t believe that Harry and Meghan would want to go through that again. A christening at Windsor would have to involve the Palace and I don’t think they want that either. The fact that the Palace has no info on the christening tells me that it’s not happening in the UK. It’s also interesting that the press seem to be coming to the realization that Harry is done with the family. They thought they could use Diana to get him back to the UK but it didn’t work. The press is also trying to use the narrative that the Queen hasn’t seen her great grandchildren against Harry and Meghan but I don’t think it’s working because of their previous narratives that Harry and Meghan left for privacy and that the family wants nothing to do with them because of the Oprah interview. If these narratives are to believed then press can’t be talking about an expected christening in the UK.

    • Nyro says:

      It’s really going to hit the BM and the BRF when they don’t go to England for Christmas. I hope we see them having be lovely time in Aspen or Park City, far removed from Sandringham and that Victorian dreariness. Who wants to spend Christmas changing clothes all day and eating in seasoned food (well, whatever you can consume before the Queen pushes her own plate away) all while your own kids are locked away upstairs with the nanny? Anyway, they thought using Diana’s ghost for yet another statue ceremony was going to guilt them into showing up. Now they’ve been shut down about the christening. But it’s no Sussexes at Christmas that’s going to absolutely break them.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Nyro: Oh the press is definitely going to move on to Christmas but it won’t work because of those very same narratives they’ve been pushing about Harry and Meghan. When the Telegraph reported that they weren’t coming for Diana press party, it was stated that it wasn’t known when they would return to UK so I think the press is realizing that it is unlikely that they would come for Christmas. I suspect Harry and Meghan had a terrible time at the 2018 gathering and never want to repeat that. Plus going for Christmas requires that they are photographed by the press and they’re done playing that game.

      • Bettyrose says:

        @Nyro- Was that a typo for a unseasoned food? Because I’m laughing so hard at that. I’d be all don’t mind my travel sized Cholula bottle.

      • Nyro says:

        Yes, unseasoned.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Nyro, they’re more delusional than I previously thought if they still believe there’s a snowball’s chance in hell that the Sussexes will go to the UK for a Windsor Family Christmas.

      • bettyrose says:

        Just to clarify, I wasn’t laughing at the typo – it was the image of changing clothes a hundred times to sit around shoveling in unseasoned food before the queen pushes her plate away. And I’d be all “nah, brought my own seasoning, thanks.”

    • Ginger says:

      I agree with you 100% Amy Bee

    • Nick G says:

      💯@Amy Bee, I think you are exactly right about the whole thing. At the most, I would say Harry (maybe) made a sentimental stab at letting his Grandmother meet Lili, but with the stupid uproar about his returning dropped it. Thankfully and with no regrets.

  10. Nyro says:

    I have a hard time believing that Harry and Meghan would want to bring their kids into that cesspool, to be attacked by the media and the BRF, just to have some water poured on her forehead. I still think that the Sussexes were offered a Christening in order to get them back so they could be served up to the press, the Firm doing its part in the invisible contract and whatnot. The Sussexes said “no thanks” and so now Baldy and Co. are spinning a “you didn’t quit, we fired you” narrative in order to save face. Ironically, I think Camel Toe pretty much has it right. The christening was always going to happen in CA, there was never any intention to bring her there to be christened. Whenever Meghan steps foot on UK soil again, it’s going to be the media firestorm of all firestorms. No way in hell would they have that return centered around Lili.

    • swirlmamad says:

      ITA with you on this.

      • JT says:

        I agree. I think by now we should know that the palace will lie to cover their own asses. They are always two steps behind the Sussexes. It’s just like when H&M left KP because it was trash and then later Burger King spun the story that HE kicked them out. It’s pretty clear that the Diana statue was most likely going to be Harry’s last trip to the UK this year, so I don’t think he had any plans to christen Lili Diana in Windsor.

      • Nyro says:

        For me, it’s the only thing that makes sense. The Firm needs Harry and his family back on British soil badly. The press over there are starving and the BRF is getting desperate. They were all so thirsty for the Sussexes to return that they created a phony “reception” for the Diana statue donors and creatives in order to get Harry and Meghan to come back. And then they pushed that fake reception back to October just so that they could be sure travel restrictions were lifted to ensure H&M’s return. They owe the BM and are doing every and anything to stall so that they don’t start getting dragged themselves. Standby for all the leaks from the palace about the Sussexes’ supposed Sandringham Christmas plans. It’s coming.

      • JT says:

        The BM is getting very desperate for photos of the Sussexes. I mentioned this yesterday but a photographer said that a family photo of the Sussexes at Disney World or something would allow the person who took the pic to retire. Any photos of Archie, and especially Lili Diana, would practically break the internet and the RF needs that good press. Nobody in the Maga7 could generate that sort of interest and they need it desperately.

      • Lorelei says:

        @JT I wonder how long the BM is going to stay in this inane state of denial, in which they believe they “need” the Sussexes in order to survive and that there’s even the slightest chance that the Sussexes will ever so much as toss them a crumb, let alone return to the UK.

        The “magnificent 7” basically consisted of, what, one headline?, and there was that one joint engagement that the Cambridges did with Edward and Sophie. But 99.9% of their “reporting” is still dedicated to trashing the Sussexes and this is not a tenable long-term strategy! It’s as if they’re flailing around, totally clueless as to how they’re expected to go on.

      • JT says:

        @Lorelei It’s honestly taking them too long to get the picture, but I suspect that when more the Sussexes deals and projects start coming out, they’ll finally get a clue. Maybe H&M not going to the UK for Christmas will send a clear signal to them that they don’t need them. Who knows, because seems like the BM and royal family’s main setting is denial.

      • Lorelei says:

        @JT it seems like they got a little *too* used to the huge bump in income they all received from the entire Harry/Meghan saga. One of them even flat-out admitted that they hadn’t seen that much £ since Diana (which makes total sense since Diana was more interesting than the rest of them put together until Meghan came along!).

        But now that the Sussexes have left the UK permanently, there simply isn’t enough content for them to keep up with the same amount of coverage. Instead of realizing it was a temporary increase, evidently they consider that level of income their “normal” now and want to maintain it.

        But it’s impossible to keep up that rate without the Sussexes; there just isn’t enough public interest in the other royals as there was in H&M. They can’t accept that 2016-2020 was an aberration, and they need to face that whatever they were earning up until the day Harry’s relationship with Meghan was made public is the norm as far as royal reporting goes. They can consider Meghan a one-time bonus. (I know it’s gross to talk about a human being like that, but they certainly don’t consider Meghan to be a human being deserving of any care or respect.)

        Instead the British media is now desperately CREATING whatever content about Harry and Meghan that they can, by dragging out stories for-fcking-ever (Meghan made Kate cry, both christenings, TiaraGate), wheeling Thomas Markle out to spew the same repetitive BS during slow news weeks, etc. It’s so pathetic, and transparent; the demand is no longer there, but they haven’t adjusted at all, and they look like petty fools to much of the world.
        The egregious behavior of the British media has BECOME the story!!

        Their desperate greed is sickening, but at least we can take some satisfaction from the fact that they’re miserable people living miserable lives, and that all of this has highlighted how little interest there is in the Cambridges— which we *know* eats away at both William and Kate every day.

  11. fluffy_bunny says:

    Lili can have a beautiful christening in Cali in a dress of Meghan’s choosing that can go on to be a Sussex family heirloom. Does she have her wedding dress in her possession? I’ve seen some lovely dresses made from the mother’s wedding dress.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I seriously doubt Meghan would cut up her historic wedding gown for a christening dress. Rather keep it for her daughter to wear herself if anything. It may be on temporary loan to Historic Royal Palaces. They can store it properly and use it for exhibits.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Didn’t Meg pay for her gown herself? If so, she has NO obligation to LEND it to the Palaces so THEY can make money off showings. And somehow I’d think Lili would want her own dress, of her own taste, to wear down the line (as much as I liked Meg’s).

        IMO, a christening gown, made from Meg’s wedding dress (with a lace overlay) could be a stunning family heirloom to pass down.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Cutting apart that historic and beautiful gown would be a horrible idea. I’m sure the designer could secure some extra fabric to make a new baby gown if that’s what Harry and Meghan wanted.

        Diana’s dress is with HRP. Kate loaned hers there for exhibits and it is likely in storage there. Meghan can do whatever she wants with her dress. I doubt it was one of the things she felt the HAD to box up and take with her in their bid for freedom. It is her property. If it is safely in storage at HRP, that’s fine.

        Frankly, having it at HRP and on display? It is one way to prevent certain Windsors erasing Meghan from royal history. HRP is independent of the royals and they do whatever exhibits they want.

  12. Merricat says:

    This inordinate fuss and bother about the Sussexes living their lives make the royal family and the tabloid press look like amateurs who shouldn’t oversee laundry, let alone represent a nation.
    England deserves better than they’re getting, for certain.

  13. Becks1 says:

    The obsession over the christening is weird (what else is new with the RRs) because its not like a UK christening guarantees that anyone will see them. We saw nothing from Archie’s christening except for three officially released photographs – the group photo, the one of Harry and Meghan with Archie, and the one released a few months later with Archie, Harry and Charles. For Lili, I doubt we would even get one official photograph (which is completely fine and normal.)

    They keep emphasizing that Harry and Meghan are “celebrities” and “not royals” – well you know what? Here in the US, we don’t care that much about the children of our celebrities. Sure we’ll look at a picture in Us Weekly or whatever, but we don’t care who baptizes their children or who raises them Catholic or Presbyterian or Jewish. We don’t expect to see pictures of even “prominent” celeb children (thinking of the Jolie-Pitt kids, or Suri Cruise, etc) at major milestones.

    The British press keeps hammering this point about the christening and it just isn’t something that is gaining any real traction in the US. We just don’t care.

    • Nyro says:

      This. Harry and Meghan didn’t make a big deal over Archive’s christening so I seriously doubt they’re so pressed over Lili getting the exact same kind of treatment. She can have a much nicer and much more peaceful ceremony in California. The thought if them being pressed to step into the hell that is England and the BRF just to baptize their kid is nonsense.

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, that’s why I don’t think this is about the christening. It’s about getting a look at Lili.

  14. Noki says:

    These people apart from the Queen arent even real church goers,unless its festive or a wedding I doubt Charles and Will who are future heads of the church even bother.

  15. Myra says:

    Ultimately, it’s their business how, when or where they choose to baptise Lilibet. It’s disturbing how obsessed the British media are over the Sussexes’ children.

    • L says:

      Yes to this!!! They’ll keep speculating because it again anything Meghan and Harry do draws them attention. They’ll do the same for Christmas once Thanksgiving is over.

  16. Mel says:

    I don’t believe they asked to go back. I believe they always planned to have the Christening here and these people know that. By creating a story around something that wasn’t going to happen, they make themselves look like they know something. They don’t.

  17. Cessily says:

    Since they are no longer working to represent the crown, most christening are a very private ceremony usually attended by close friends and close family. I can’t see invites going out to any of the Royals except the Queen. I almost think the leftover Royals really do not want them there because they would not be invited and the Sussex’s would have full control over the planning and press releases. Publishing a guest list that leaves out one or two working royals would be something the press in the USA would run with imo.
    It truly doesn’t matter if they have it in England or California the tabloids will dissect everything and make up most content for a frenzied amount of articles where they have created an audience that is frothing at the mouth to find fault with everything Sussex. Sadly they are led by RR who are no more than a domestic abuser with a byline.
    I wish that the rags would focus on the Leftover Royals but I know that is unlikely, I just hope the Sussex’s have the Christening they wish for their daughter wherever they choose, with no official or non-official photos of either child.

  18. Cathy says:

    Is anyone suprise about this ?? Lol Windsor are weird and no family will go after each other like this without any inherited money involved.

    Ps. Few months back I correctly predicted with my tarot reading there will be big debacle about lili christening

    • L says:

      Ohhh im curious do you have any other readings for William and Kate lol..or anything else for Harry and Meghan?. I really am hoping that this family doesn’t get away with the crap they’ve pulled on Harry and Meghan

    • Jan90067 says:

      No offense Cathy, but I think Stevie Wonder could see there would be conflict about Lili’s christening lol. Anything relating to M&H and the BRF/R🐀s will be brining about shrieking, whingeing, bemoaning, and blindsiding. EVERYTHING.

      I don’t know if there’ll come a time when there WON’T be any commotion concerning ANYTHING M&H do. It will amplify as the kids get older and they get compared (unfairly) to George, Char, and the forgotten son, Louis.

    • Lorelei says:

      I hate to break it to you, Cathy, but every one of us here could have predicted that they’d make a spectacle over Lilibet’s christening! They’re as predictable as they are cruel.

  19. Liz version 700 says:

    I can’t imagine either Harry or Meghan wanting to expose their kids to the toxic cesspool that is the Windsors now that they don’t have too. At least over Zoom if someone starts ugliness you can just hang up.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Both Harry and Meghan have close friends in the UK. If half or more of the godparents are in the UK, it would be easier to have the christening in the UK. It isn’t all about the Windsors.

  20. taris says:

    i guess the RRs got tired of talking about ‘the dress’, so now we’re back to this…

  21. MaryContrary says:

    It’s crazy that no one ever mentions that we’re still in a pandemic and Meghan and Harry are probably not super keen on traveling with their unvaccinated infant and toddler?

  22. rawiya says:

    Last week, on this very site, the post was about William REFUSING to let Lili be christened in the UK. A week later, the RRs are crying that the Sussexes are SHUNNING the UK by not christening Lili there. Y’all, this would be really funny if it weren’t so pathetic.

    • Anna says:

      yea… it’s like my dear aunt bitching about how her DIL never invites her to go shopping together and in the next sentence says she neither cares or wants to talk to her anyway…. There are people who just love to create a conflict and enjoy it. BRF and RRs are pros at that.

  23. Shawna says:

    I could see Harry pushing for a Windsor christening so that everything is fair between Archie and Lili. Even though it would be awful to get the family across the ocean and face those racists again, they would always be confident Lili knows they’ve done what they can to ensure she doesn’t feel less-than Archie (on paper, anyway). But I also agree with Kaiser’s earlier argument that the newspaper/tabloid reportage is all made up to create a fake news cycle of Sussex drama.

  24. Over it says:

    Why do these people who smeared, abused and attacked this woman and her babies care so much about where and when she christen her child? You won’t be making money off them so go chase the ones you pay taxes for.
    Poor Archie and Lili will grow up and be very aware of how that media and monarchy tried to make their lives and that of their parents hell. I have had enough of all of them .

    • Chrissy says:

      The desperate tabloid press simply want the opportunity to get a photo of Lili to check out her skin tone. The “Christening” is simply a means to an end. The Queen would probably be included in the ceremony via Zoom wherever the Sussexes decide to have it.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Over It, but at least when Archie and Lilibet inevitably read about all this, they will be able to see how well their parents conducted themselves, how brave they were, and how they walked away from it all. That they took a risk and it paid off, and their success is well earned.

      The Cambridge kids, on the other hand? They’re in for a rude awakening once they start realizing the kind of people their parents are, and the way W&K treated their uncle and cousins.

      I’d love it if Charlotte and Louis turned out to be smart little rebels, packing their bags and getting on the first available flight to Montecito as soon as they’re old enough.

  25. Harper says:

    H&M wanted the names of Archie’s godparents to be private and the Burger King went incandescent over that. Kate wore a short skirt and the earrings that Diana wore at Harry’s christening to stick it to Meghan at Archie’s baptism. Why would H&M want to drag their little babies and Lilli’s godparents over to the UK in a pandemic and subject them all to the Burger King and The Nothing Burger’s anger and wardrobe shaming?

    Instead, they can have a quiet, private christening at a local California church, then a nice party back at the house with a catered lunch by the pool. Privacy and true kindness and friendship over tantrums and one upping each other is a no-brainer.

    • Jais says:

      I always forget about the earrings. How cool would it have been to loan those earrings to your SIL for the christening. Okay, yeah, that would never happen but it would’ve been sweet and such a symbol of friendship. Obv, there was no real friendship but it would have been good press for Kate, making her look generous and kind.

      • Lorelei says:

        I forgot about the earrings, too. Were they a pair that Diana had worn to one of her boys’ christenings? Either way, Kate is constantly displaying her insecurity with these little stunts.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Kate also wore a copy of a Diana outfit to the christening, one Diana wore when expecting Harry.

  26. Emmitt says:

    It doesn’t matter if Lili is christened in the Anglican Church, the Episcopal Church or the Baptist Church as long as she’s not Catholic. She does not need to be christened in the UK to remain in the line of succession or christened at all, as long as she is not Catholic.

    That’s why they made a big deal of Meghan attending a Catholic school in her younger days because they wanted to suggest she was a secret Catholic (and thus her black children could be excluded from the line of succession and they wouldn’t be accused of racism, because *Catholic*)

    I believe Harry approached the powers that be to ask for a Windsor christening, knowing they would say “no”.

    William and/or Charles said absolutely not.*

    Harry said, Ok I tried, told Meghan and they went forth with their original US christening plan. Now it’s on the family record so when William tries to bask Harry/Lili with not being christened in Windsor, Harry can remind them “I offered but you said no.” #receipts

    Harry declined to come back to the Diana party to honor the press that killed her.

    William is mad because he can’t serve Harry to the press like he’s supposed to. He reaches out to CamelToe and briefs her that they told Harry to kick rocks! when he asked to have Lili christened there. CamelToe runs to her paper to report this.

    Because it’s being reported in a “reputable” paper, the Sussex spokesperson says “plans are still being finalized about Lili’s christening and claims to the contrary are speculation.” This statement does not mean anything except they are working on their plans —we don’t know what those plans were or are.

    *If William/Charles said NO to a Windsor christening, it’s to

    a) delegitimize Lili (and Archie)
    b) punish Harry
    c) because William and/or Charles do not want to be in the same room with Meghan for not even a minute

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      “Harry declined to come back to the Diana party to honor the press that killed her.”

      @Emmit. Wow. Very powerful statement. Having that press there IS a dishonor to Diana.
      He’s not going to mingle with those f*ckers.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The laws were changed to remove most anti-Catholic prejudice before Harry and Meghan even met.

      The law re. Catholics was changed in 2013 along with the Succession to the Crown Act, ratified in 2015 again before Harry and Meghan met. They removed primogeniture in the line of succession and repealed the Royal Marriages Act (the anti-Catholic one). You still cannot be Catholic and stay in the line of succession. But –

      A person in the line of succession no longer loses their place if they marry a Catholic.

      If they themselves convert, they are out.

      If the kids convert to Catholicism, then they (the kids) are out.

      It impacted some people, like restoring a few of the Kents and King Willem-Alexander (Netherlands) who was removed from the line when he married Catholic Maxima.

    • Marie says:

      But it may be important to Harry to have her christened in the Church he grew up in. Most people don’t hop around to other religious groups even within the Protestant faith. Episcopalian and Baptist are two very different things, for example.

  27. Kelsey says:

    I’m sorry but if they have a christening in CA and we see the Queen beaming beside them I will scream.

    I wonder if the royals realize how good it would look for them if they were seen in CA enjoying their relative’s company? Not that 99% of them DESERVE to and I’m sure Harry and Meghan don’t want that energy in their oasis of peace they’ve made in the US.

    Still though…something about imagining the queen with a burner phone that she hides in her bra to call Prince Harry with makes me giggle.

  28. Alexandria says:

    A whole lot of good christening did to these royals. Give up your wealth and help the poor? Crickets.

    Sussex family will have more Christ-like compassion and empathy than this family will ever have, with or without christening.

  29. Dee says:

    Sounds like a job for Katie Keen, the Buttony Bridge Builder between Brothers! Where is she and why hasn’t she healed that rift?

    • HeatherC says:

      Too busy trying to get a documentary about her early life made because, come on, she’d be SO MUCH better than Meghan on TV, people will be tripping over themselves to say how glamorous, regal, beautiful, educated, erudite yet down to earth and one of us she is. Future Future Kween Consort of Keen has declared it. /s heavy /s

  30. Athena says:

    I thought they were waiting for travel restrictions to lift so possible UK godparents can travel to the U.S. without having to quarantine. They can ask the same reverend who presided at their wedding.
    I think Harry might want to borrow the christening dress for Lili, if all royal children are baptized in it she should be also, so maybe they’re also working out the timing with Beatrice (who will also be borrowing the dress).
    I remember the picture they released after Archie’s baptism. Doria looked angry to me, but everyone was saying how regal she looked, how lovely her hat was, all true but if you look at her expression, she was angry, and now I understand why she would have been.

  31. Likeyoucare says:

    Oo becareful rota rats and courtiers,
    When you send harry your rejection letters or email for lili’s christening plan.
    They might end up in Harry’s book.
    I hope Grandpa charles or uncle peniswithteeth sign them too.
    Keep digging your grave.

  32. Gina says:

    Honestly? I don’t believe Bill or Chuck rejected Lili’s christening in Windsor. It’s too soap opera, IMO. Drama for tabloids.
    Firstly, I’m not sure Harry asked for this. Why would he want to do this, to ressurect the feelings that were around Archie’s christening? And even if he wanted this, why he has to ask? Isn’t this his right, his birthright?
    Secondly, why these two FFK have a say about it? As we know, HMTQ is the Head of the Church, not the heirs in waiting.
    Finally, even if Harry’s father and brother have some opinion about this event being hold in Windsor, I’m sure they would never put it in writing.

  33. Anna says:

    If I were H&M I would have already christened Lili and let the rota rats go crazy for next three years until they realize sth is not right 😀 When I first read that christening might be in UK and “who do they think they are” I knew that in a couple of weeks there will be screaming “christening in USA? Snubbing the Queen!!”.

  34. Mary says:

    Again, this is crazy. Burger King let a “source” leak that he refused the request. In the article about the “alleged” rapist, William shuts down all unauthorized sources. Ergo, he rejected the request. The future of the CoE rejected his bi-racial niece’s christening. I truly believe that the delay in adding her to the line of succession was because Burger King did not want her added. His staff was looking for any loophole to do so. And because his staff is the worst, they could not find one. I will bet dollars to donuts that when his a$$ hits the throne he will remove Harry and his line.
    As for petty Betty, she denied Harry’s wreath. She is not having secret burner phone calls with them. That phone is reserved for the “alleged” rapist. Harry used the nickname to try and offer an olive branch, to remind her that she once regarded him fondly, and this treatment by Burger is toxic and is ruining her beloved monarchy. It is all a waste. None of our West Coast royals should ever go back.

  35. tamsin says:

    I can imagine that Harry might want Lili to be christened in the Church of England or at least have Archbishop Welby preside, simply because the rest of her family is Church of England. They don’t need to have it done in a royal peculiar. I think he’d want something of Lili’s christening to have something at least that might make it a part of the rest of the family’s rites. As it is, it seems like the baby won’t get to wear the family’s christening gown, and I don’t think Harry has rejected his family or the monarchy.

  36. HeatherC says:

    The problem I see is that the only mending and olive branches his family will accept is the total exclusion of Meghan and “her” kids and for Harry to go back to how things were, let’s say, six years ago, where he “knew his place” in their scheme of things.

    • SnoodleDumpling says:

      I think they would also accept a Diana solution (though I don’t see them having either the intelligence or the nerve to have such a situation engineered). But if some loony killed them they would probably see it in the same manner they saw Diana’s death – Diana was the problem, she’s gone now, the problem is gone and everything can go back to exactly how it was before *she* came along and ruined it.

      I guess the press would also spout some nonsense on their own behalf and on behalf of the Royal Family about how horrible it all is and such a tragedy, and none of us realized just how BAD it all was for them, but we’ve LEARNED sooooo much and we’re going to CHANGE! We’re going to come together as a FAMILY and change for the BETTER for the KIDS.

      You know, the same schlock they were printing after Diana died. And nothing will change. Because THEY weren’t the problem, oh no. It was *her*.

  37. Nic919 says:

    I don’t understand why they are making such a big deal about Lilibet being christened when neither of the York babies are christened and I believe August is older than Lili.

    I know the Yorks don’t sell as many papers, but it seems evident that there is a delay for a christenings going on at the moment. Not just for Lili.

    Also Camilla Tominey is pals with Andy and gets her info from the Middletons. She stirs the pot to deflect from the obvious marital woes going on with the Cambridges.

    • notasugarhere says:

      We haven’t heard of Zara’s son being christened yet, and he was born back in May.

  38. Lala44 says:

    Perhaps, the baby was already christened at a local Anglican Church. I mean, there are several Anglican Churches throughout the United States and locally in California, where baby Lili Diana can be christened privately. There’s no need for her to be flown over on a long flight, to be christened, during a pandemic into a country where the UK press harassed the child’s mother. Prince Charles and the Cambridge’s, along with other royal relatives, can fly into the US for Lili’s christening. The queen can use ZOOM or some other teleconferencing software program—the fake concern over when and if Lili has been christened is just more tabloid nonsense for clickbait.

  39. Matilde says:

    I’m not up on the ins & outs of the crown/church but as mentioned in previous posts I assume the request was so that Lillibet is officially recorded/recognised as a member of the church and the royal family. Didn’t Meghan have to convert to C of E before the wedding? The firm are still smarting from comments regarding Charles & William being trapped etc etc, so I doubt they’ll be accommodating. H&M should live their best lives in Cali and keep their children away from this damaging and antiqued institution. They are all better off out of it.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      The being trapped comment doesn’t phase them much. It’s the public finding out who made the color questions and receipts that worries them. Which is why the BRF/courtiers should play nice in the sandbox. It wouldn’t be up to either of them to be accommodating-neither are the head of the Church of England right now.

      Harry wouldn’t consider either the boss of him at this

      • Matilde says:

        I very much doubt that the queen (at 95 and having lost her husband of 73 years) is making many decisions these days. Apart from ones that protect peado Andy that is.

  40. Raquel says:

    Query what this sight would do without the Sussexes…

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Query do you ask that of the royal rota’s, “royal experts”, hater sites, manipulated youtube channels, etc.,.. I’ve wonder that anytime someone posts a similar/variation of your post. I’m pretty sure a day hasn’t gone by that the British Media and their affiliates haven’t written about the Sussexes or mentioned them-that’s where the real problem is.imo You can start with Angela Levin who never had an exclusive interview or accompanied Harry on events and pretty much lifted other’s stories for her book and Newsweek piece-which she did have to change to a profile instead of an interview.

  41. Robin Samuels says:

    Harry and Meghan are in charge of the event concerning Lillibet’s christening. I feel Harry wants his grandmother involved because it’s obvious the sun is setting for her and maybe earlier than anticipated. If the event occurs in the UK, they will bring their photographers and security, and all photos will be copyrighted. If Charles and William attend, the photographer will focus on the Sussex and their guests, including the great aunts (Spencer) and Gramma Doria. No ROTA! It will be marvelous if the event is virtual, and the gown will ship to CA. Prince William, the SPARE, has no authority over “that bloody woman and his damaged brother” at this time. Charles is a witness because he is the heir. Karma is indeed vindictive.

  42. JustJan says:

    If the spitefulness of the GB-based royals is something they plan to pass along to their children (I shudder to think) then H&M do need to christen their last child in the family’s traditional location and then be done with it. If they don’t it will always tend to further segregate The Royal We Who Were from She Who Wasn’t. She doesn’t deserve that treatment. The same goes for meeting the queen and being in a photo with her. There is a very deep schism between the brothers now and if it’s as deep as the one between a of mine friend and their brother then it could never be repaired especially if one does something to hurt the other and leave them at a disadvantage. It happens at all income levels in all types of families. All H can do is support his intelligent beautiful wife and healthy children and be open to reconciliation as long as it’s on equitable terms. I wish them the very best.

    • JustJan says:

      If you don’t mind a followup to my own comment I’d like to ask where Diana was christened? It seems that much of H&M’s activities are meant to honor her. IF because the desired location of this christening event prevents little L from being baptized at wherever the exclusive place is could it not instead be done at the same place that Diana was christened? For that matter if Meghan is to be excluded from visiting the island could the font (I don’t know what these things are called) be spirited away temporarily (or longer) and be used to christen the baby?
      It’s shocking and sickening the number of trolls posting against them. The inlaws turned out to be some real stinkers. Sorry if this sounds silly. I don’t understand all the issues involved.

  43. Anna says:

    I don’t believe any of the Windsors are religious people and their faith is performative ia Christmas church walk. I also believe that Lili might not be christened at all. They christened Archie because at that point they saw an option to participate in RF life at least part-time but now? Is Meg religious? Or is it like many young parents now – not really caring, doing it for many reasons like “it’s important to my parents”.