Fireweaver
Courtier
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2003
- Messages
- 717
Pictures aren't necessarily good sources. Changing a name doesn't necessarily mean anything. King Olav of Norway's birth name wasn't Olav.
There is a conversion involved. As I've said before he did not convert and he remained a life long member of the Lutheran church. This was okay by the Greeks, providing that his progeny were Orthodox. This is why he married an Orthodox Grand Duchess. Moreover, one can respect the tenets of another denomination/faith without actually converting. This was the case with William/Georg I.Originally posted by laskaris
I think the word 'converted' is wrong
Jewelry is also passed down from mother to sons (especially eldest son) in royal and noble families for their consorts. It this way, it's assured that the jewels, a valuable family asset, stays within the family.Jewelery,is something personal that passes from mother to daughter....I dont know who is wilhem/George....I only know King Georgios A' maybe he was' poor 'from a' poor 'family but rich enough to buy 10 Tatoi Estates of that era!!So the dowery was not invested on that!!
As for things you dont want to understand let me be clear and loud!!!Queen's Olgas Grand Children and Grand Grand Children {thus succetion line} AL have rights on the Russian Throne!!!
I think the word 'converted'is wrong!Someone is converted to Inddooism to Islam,but He is not 'converted" from Christian to Christian as Loutherans and Orthodox!!He simply "JOINED" the Orthodoxs after the Archbishop and the Patriarch gaved Him a Bless
There is a conversion involved. As I've said before he did not convert and he remained a life long member of the Lutheran church.
How very sad. I didn't realize that Queen Amalia suffered from Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome, which -- in addition to the dynastic implications -- can be so psychologically devastating for a woman.
My impression is that the memory of King Othon and Queen Amalia is still beloved in Greece.... I once worked with a Greek young man whose parents named him Othon, and his only sister was Amalia!
You're both right in a sense, and wrong in a sense. The word "conversion" is usually reserved for a change from one religion to another, and not for a change in Christian denominations. In that case, a person would be "received" into the new denomination. However, a "reception" presupposes that the baptism and confirmation in the original denomination (in this case, Lutheran) are recognized as valid by the second denomination (in this case, Orthodox).
For Roman Catholics and the Orthodox (and, to some extent, for Anglicans) the central question is one of Apostolic Succession -- whether a denomination's bishops can trace their consecration back to the 12 apostles in an unbroken line. The concept is very much like a geneaology... a priestly lineage, if you will.
As it turns out, the Orthodox would not have recognized a Lutheran baptism (because most Lutheran ministers do not claim apostolic succession), so the King would have indeed been required to be baptized again according to the Orthodox rite if he were joining that denomination. Although I don't have first-hand knowledge of this case, it's very hard to imagine that a record of this baptism would not have been kept, if it had taken place.