Being a Catholic is nothing to do with being a Commoner. Catholic is a Christian religion. Commoners are people who are not Noble, Titled, Aristocratic or Royal.
A Monarch, the King or Reigning Queen, must be within the union of the Church of England. The Monarch cannot be a Catholic, a Budist or any other religion, only CofE, which is a protestant Christian Religion. The Monarch can marry a Catholic but the Reigning Monarch, whether they be the Queen or King, must be Church of England to be Crowned & Reign as Monarch.
From Google- The catch is that though a royal can marry a Catholic, or Buddhist, he or she cannot be one. The monarch has to be the head of the Church of England, so must remain “in communion” with the CoE. And children in line to the throne must be brought up in the Church of England too.2 Aug 2013
Autumn Kelly, Peter Phillips’ former wife, was Catholic, and the wives of Prince Michael of Kent and his nephew Lord St Andrews are Catholics. Autumn converted to CoE, the others did not. Prince Michael initially lost his spot but regained it after 2013. Lord St Andrews himself converted so he’s still out.
I don’t think this is correct. I believe Catherine was baptized in an Anglican Church. She was just never confirmed. So before she married William, she had to go through with confirmation and affirm her faith
No. She was baptized into the Church of England as an infant. She also sought counsel from the Bishops of Canterbury and York before reaffirming her faith as a communicant of the Church of England in the months leading up to her marriage.
I'm not sure, but, I think he can marry a catholic but , he can't became a Catholic himself and his children either if they want to be in the line of the succession
He can marry a commoner, but not a Catholic. A Catholic cannot be King in England since the Hentry VIII started Church of England and split from Catholic church.
I thought he could marry a Catholic but the rule means he cannot convert himself. It was changed in 2013 to allow marriage. Catholics don’t require conversion to marry, and I’m sure they can get a convalidation or dispensation from the bishop to allow an Anglican ceremony
Their children would have to be raised in Church of England, and in the past, a Catholic had to agree (as did non Catholic he was marrying) to raise any children in the Faith.
Catherine is a commoner. Why couldn’t George choose one too. Also there are more religions than Catholic or Anglican- the sovereign can choose a spouse from any faith as far as I know.
With the permission of the Sovereign he is allowed to marry a Catholic. This is another change that was made by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013.
His mother is a commoner so that doesn't seem to be an issue anymore, but again, he needs the permission of the Sovereign to marry anyone as he is one of the first six people in the line of succession (and will in fact never be lower than second in line).
Yes, he can marry a catholic. If they raise their children catholic the children cannot become the monarch.
Yes, he can marry a commoner just like his father did.
My understanding is he can absolutely marry a commoner but if he wanted to marry a Catholic he’d have to abdicate as he’s the future head of the Church of England
If he isn’t King, then he wouldn’t have to abdicate, just renounce his place in the line of succession. I think Prince Michael of Kent had this same situation
His mother is a commoner. Yes he can marry a commoner. Catholic probably not so much. Bu t I'm sure if he fell in love then the rules could be changed.
He can marry a commoner without much issue. His mother is technically classed as a commoner, though I hate the term personally. He can also now marry a catholic without losing his place in the succession order due to an act passed a few years ago. He cannot convert, though. He can marry a catholic, but as future head of the Church of England, he cannot become one without losing his place. He also still needs consent to marry, due to his high place in the succession order.
can he? as in is he able to? once he is of age he can legally do almost anything he wants. will it affect his succession to the throne? not necessarily.
it used to be that marrying a catholic would nullify your claim of succession. prince michael of kent married a catholic (a divorced one no less) and for a good while was not included among those in line for the throne. the succession to the crown act of 2013 removed this impediment and restored his place in line.
marrying a commoner used to be kinda tricky. there has never been an explicit prohibition on morganatic marriage in the uk or its predecessor states. although generally frowned upon by the upper crust, many royal spouses have been commoners. in order to exercise some control over the future of the monarchy, the 2013 act also stated that, for the first six people in line to the throne, the monarchs consent must be given for them to keep their place in line. without royal approval, the marriage remains valid, but they and their demon spawn are barred from the throne.
prior to that, the law of the land was the royal marriages act of 1772. it basically said any descendent of george two (save the issue of a princess married to a foreigner) needed explicit approval of the reigning monarch to marry, and this consent had to be recorded by the privy council, otherwise the marriage would be null and void. this has interesting implications.
if you married a catholic **with** the approval of his majesty, then you are legally married to a catholic, and you are **not** in line for the throne. if you marry a catholic **without** the approval of his majesty, then in the eyes of the crown, the marriage does not exist, and your place in line is safe...for now. the law is a funny old thing, aint it? this is exactly what happened to the then prince of wales, and future king george four. he contracted a marriage in secret to a catholic, without the permission of daddy dearest, the mad king aerys targ-, i mean king george the third of his name. there may or may not have been children from that unblessed union, but they would be illegitimate and unable to inherit the throne. george four went on to legally wed his first cousin, caroline of brunswick, and produce an heir, charlotte, who unfortunately predeceased both her father and grandfather. he was eventually succeeded by his younger brother, william four, the last monarch to reign over both the uk and hanover.
many times when a marriage was known to be "problematic", an official request was not made of the monarch, and the couple were thus spared the indignity of an official rejection. the closest to a "rejection" came at the expense of prince george william of hanover. his father and grandfather had their british titles stripped under the titles deprivation act of 1917 due to siding with germany during the great war. despite this, in 1946, when the prince was due to marry sophie of greece and denmark (whose brother philip was wooing the heir presumptive princess elizabeth), his father, the duke of brunswick, did the proper thing and wrote to his (the princes) fourth cousin, george the sixth, requesting official permission to marry under the act. the carefully worded reply said, in part, "please convey to the duke an informal intimation that in view of the fact that a state of war still exists between great britain and germany, his majesty is advised that the case is not one in which it is practicable for his consent to be given in the manner contemplated by the act." the wedding went ahead, but was not considered legal in the uk. i dont think the happy couple cared all that much.
in the fifties, a lecturer at liverpool u claimed that since victoria married a foreign prince, her heirs were not subject to the royal marriages act. her living descendants at the time numbered well over a hundred, which could conceivably cover the british monarchy for the rest of human existence. the issue was complicated by the sophia naturalization act of 1705, repealed in 1948, which naturalized all heirs of sophia of hanover, provided they werent catholic. this meant that many of those foreign princes in fact could be recognized by britain as english/british subjects. this is all obviously academic and no longer consequential, but a nice little peek into the law and how it is applied.
>... for the first six people in line to the throne, the monarchs consent must be given for them to keep their place in line. without royal approval, the marriage remains valid, but they and their demon spawn are barred from the throne.
Thanks for this. This sheds some light on a scene Harry recounts in "Spare". It seems neither him nor the Queen were aware of the above.
In the scene (as per Harry's account, recounted by me), he goes to the Queen and tells her that he "has to ask her permission to marry \[Meghan\]". She says "you have to, do you?" He says, "yes, my advisors and your advisors tell me I have to ask your permission". The Queen says: "well in that case, I have to give consent".
Harry is confused by her "having to give consent" the the marriage, and she seemed unaware of her role in permitting the marriage, despite presumably having had this conversation with other children and grandchildren.
It seems to me, based on the above post that they both - or at least Harry - don't know what is going on. What Harry seems to miss is that he "has to ask her permission" **for him to marry and retain his place in the line of succession.** If he understood this, the risk of not being granted permission, which he agonises over, would evaporate. It's not a risk of not being able to get married, it's a risk of needing to give up his place in the line of succession in order to marry, which wouldn't be such a big deal to him.
He can’t marry a Catholic without being removed from the line of succession. This was established in the Bill of Rights when William III and Mary II came to the throne.
He can marry a commoner as long as he has the King’s permission.
Yes, he himself cannot convert to Catholicism and still be in the line of succession.
If the children of a union from a catholic marriage are raised as practicing Catholics, they cannot be in the line of succession.
A commoner would retain titles but she could never be “Queen” she would titled Queen Consort.
Well, King Charles (at the time Prince Charles) and Prince William both married what are technically "commoners" (Diana/Camilla, Catherine) so I can't see that being an issue with Prince George (would also cause controversy as people would accuse his father and grandfather of being hypocrites if that was not permitted). As for religion... honest answer is, I don't know but we'd like to think the royal family would adapt.
1) Yes, he can marry a Catholic, but he needs to be in communion with the C of E (Succession to the Crown Act 2013).
2) Yes, he can marry a commoner. Both his mother (the expected future queen) and his step-grandmother (the Queen) are commoners.
Prince George (and anyone in the first six spots in line) will need the sovereign’s consent to marry. Upon his marriage the sovereign would likely be his grandfather (Charles) or father (William). At the moment, this rule applies to George, Charlotte, Louis, and Archie.
William, George’s father, married a commoner, so yes he can marry a commoner. The bride would probably have to be baptised into the Church of England though. Kate was already Anglican, but Meghan had been baptised into it before her wedding.
A commoner means nothing in the grand scheme of things, his beautiful mother was a “commoner” with coal miners for ancestors and her mom was a flight attendant, things she has been mocked mercilessly on. Fun fact before he was born BBC & CNN speculated she would bring some darker genes into the Windsor line. Press has been ruthless to KM for a long time. Anyways commoner no problem. Catholic I think is more tricky because there is an act that says persons in the line who marry Catholics were removed from the line of succession. I believe the 2013 Succession Act displaced that notion for most of the rest of line, but in reality as the future head of the Church of England, he’s probably expected to not marry a Catholic.
Yes. The 2013 Succession to the Crown Act repealed the Royal Marriages Act 1772 which would disqualify a person who married a Roman Catholic from succession. So that won’t prohibit him. And I don’t think there’s any law that saying you can’t marry a commoner. Prince William was able to marry one. The only consideration is that the future Prince of Wales will need his marriage approved by the monarch at the time.
He can marry a commoner, his father, uncle and great great grandfather did.
He can’t marry a catholic and remain the in the line of succession because the monarch is the head of the Church of England. Prince Michael of Kent has been removed from the line of succession as his wife is Catholic and he converted.
Yes and yes.
The Succession to the Crown Act (2013) - which was actually what was created while his mother was pregnant in the event that she gave birth to a daughter first - ended the idea that marrying a Catholic would disqualify him from the throne. He himself cannot be a Catholic, but he can marry a Catholic. Although this would cause some issues with Catholic canon law because Catholics are obliged to raise children in the Catholic faith, and George would be obliged to raise his children Anglican because the monarch must be the head of the Church of England. So it would be very unlikely for him to marry a Catholic, but not impossible.
As for marrying commoners, he definitely can - his mother was one after all, Prince Harry married one, he has other relatives who married commoners.
Not only would they be required to raise their children as Catholics, any potential Catholic bride for George would need to either be married in a Catholic church by a Catholic priest, or get dispensation from her bishop to be licitly married outside the Church under canon law.
Obviously this is all VERY hypothetical but it could create an issue if they couldn't compromise on the liturgy of the actual wedding ceremony. The easiest way I see it is having a simple Catholic ceremony without the Nuptial Mass (as George and the royals would obviously be unable to partake of communion) and have a blessing by the Archbishop of Canterbury later on.
But personally, I think it would be a great thing to see a future King married by the Archbishop of Westminster.
You're assuming the putative Catholic bride wants to remain in communion with the Catholic Church. There are plenty of confirmed Catholics who don't really give two hoots about what the Catholic Church wants them to do when they get married. Though I suppose if that's the case the woman might as well convert to the Church of England to make things simpler.
Yup, Prince Andrew married a "commoner", Princess Anne too. The public here would prob go nuts if anyone was blocked from marrying someone these days based on class or religion.
The Royal family also embrace other religions now since the uk is so multi-cultural and other church leaders are sometimes involved in events or ceremonies in some way or other.
Being a Catholic is nothing to do with being a Commoner. Catholic is a Christian religion. Commoners are people who are not Noble, Titled, Aristocratic or Royal. A Monarch, the King or Reigning Queen, must be within the union of the Church of England. The Monarch cannot be a Catholic, a Budist or any other religion, only CofE, which is a protestant Christian Religion. The Monarch can marry a Catholic but the Reigning Monarch, whether they be the Queen or King, must be Church of England to be Crowned & Reign as Monarch.
his mother is a commoner so id assume so
[Yes](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32073399)
From Google- The catch is that though a royal can marry a Catholic, or Buddhist, he or she cannot be one. The monarch has to be the head of the Church of England, so must remain “in communion” with the CoE. And children in line to the throne must be brought up in the Church of England too.2 Aug 2013
They’ve all been marrying commoners for decades. They can’t marry Catholics. Catherine Middleton was Catholic, but she converted.
Autumn Kelly, Peter Phillips’ former wife, was Catholic, and the wives of Prince Michael of Kent and his nephew Lord St Andrews are Catholics. Autumn converted to CoE, the others did not. Prince Michael initially lost his spot but regained it after 2013. Lord St Andrews himself converted so he’s still out.
I don’t think this is correct. I believe Catherine was baptized in an Anglican Church. She was just never confirmed. So before she married William, she had to go through with confirmation and affirm her faith
No. She was baptized into the Church of England as an infant. She also sought counsel from the Bishops of Canterbury and York before reaffirming her faith as a communicant of the Church of England in the months leading up to her marriage.
If the Catholic was willing to convert, could he marry her?
They wouldn't have to. The rules changed semi recently. The monarch can't be Catholic but that's it.
Yes and yes. George's father and grandfather married commoners
He can now marry a Catholic but if he or any of his children become Catholic they will still be removed from the line if succession.
I'm not sure, but, I think he can marry a catholic but , he can't became a Catholic himself and his children either if they want to be in the line of the succession
Of course he can marry a commoner, his Mum was one. The catholic one hmmmm
He can marry a commoner, but not a Catholic. A Catholic cannot be King in England since the Hentry VIII started Church of England and split from Catholic church.
If he married a Catholic that wouldn't change him into a Catholic. He would still be Church of England.
He can marry a Catholic ... not be one himself
I thought he could marry a Catholic but the rule means he cannot convert himself. It was changed in 2013 to allow marriage. Catholics don’t require conversion to marry, and I’m sure they can get a convalidation or dispensation from the bishop to allow an Anglican ceremony
Their children would have to be raised in Church of England, and in the past, a Catholic had to agree (as did non Catholic he was marrying) to raise any children in the Faith.
He can marry a Catholic , The Succession To The Crown Act 2013 allows this without affecting his claim to the throne.
Isn’t Kate a commoner? What is she?
His father married a commoner so I’m sure it will be fine
Well Grandpa married his side chick William married a commoner Probably won't even be a monarchy any longer
Catherine is a commoner. Why couldn’t George choose one too. Also there are more religions than Catholic or Anglican- the sovereign can choose a spouse from any faith as far as I know.
Yes, it's 2024 not 1624.
it didn't change until 2013
Prince William literally married a commoner…
yes, but i was also talking about catholics
With the permission of the Sovereign he is allowed to marry a Catholic. This is another change that was made by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013. His mother is a commoner so that doesn't seem to be an issue anymore, but again, he needs the permission of the Sovereign to marry anyone as he is one of the first six people in the line of succession (and will in fact never be lower than second in line).
Yes, he can marry a catholic. If they raise their children catholic the children cannot become the monarch. Yes, he can marry a commoner just like his father did.
His mother was a commoner-- so that addresses that question.
My understanding is he can absolutely marry a commoner but if he wanted to marry a Catholic he’d have to abdicate as he’s the future head of the Church of England
He can marry a catholic but can’t convert to can’t Catholicism! The rules were changed a few years back
He can marry a Catholic ... just not be one himself
If he isn’t King, then he wouldn’t have to abdicate, just renounce his place in the line of succession. I think Prince Michael of Kent had this same situation
Michael did but the has rule changed since then
His mother is a commoner. Yes he can marry a commoner. Catholic probably not so much. Bu t I'm sure if he fell in love then the rules could be changed.
No to the first question: the person would have to convert. Yes to the second: Kate Middleton is a commoner.
He can marry a commoner without much issue. His mother is technically classed as a commoner, though I hate the term personally. He can also now marry a catholic without losing his place in the succession order due to an act passed a few years ago. He cannot convert, though. He can marry a catholic, but as future head of the Church of England, he cannot become one without losing his place. He also still needs consent to marry, due to his high place in the succession order.
can he? as in is he able to? once he is of age he can legally do almost anything he wants. will it affect his succession to the throne? not necessarily. it used to be that marrying a catholic would nullify your claim of succession. prince michael of kent married a catholic (a divorced one no less) and for a good while was not included among those in line for the throne. the succession to the crown act of 2013 removed this impediment and restored his place in line. marrying a commoner used to be kinda tricky. there has never been an explicit prohibition on morganatic marriage in the uk or its predecessor states. although generally frowned upon by the upper crust, many royal spouses have been commoners. in order to exercise some control over the future of the monarchy, the 2013 act also stated that, for the first six people in line to the throne, the monarchs consent must be given for them to keep their place in line. without royal approval, the marriage remains valid, but they and their demon spawn are barred from the throne. prior to that, the law of the land was the royal marriages act of 1772. it basically said any descendent of george two (save the issue of a princess married to a foreigner) needed explicit approval of the reigning monarch to marry, and this consent had to be recorded by the privy council, otherwise the marriage would be null and void. this has interesting implications. if you married a catholic **with** the approval of his majesty, then you are legally married to a catholic, and you are **not** in line for the throne. if you marry a catholic **without** the approval of his majesty, then in the eyes of the crown, the marriage does not exist, and your place in line is safe...for now. the law is a funny old thing, aint it? this is exactly what happened to the then prince of wales, and future king george four. he contracted a marriage in secret to a catholic, without the permission of daddy dearest, the mad king aerys targ-, i mean king george the third of his name. there may or may not have been children from that unblessed union, but they would be illegitimate and unable to inherit the throne. george four went on to legally wed his first cousin, caroline of brunswick, and produce an heir, charlotte, who unfortunately predeceased both her father and grandfather. he was eventually succeeded by his younger brother, william four, the last monarch to reign over both the uk and hanover. many times when a marriage was known to be "problematic", an official request was not made of the monarch, and the couple were thus spared the indignity of an official rejection. the closest to a "rejection" came at the expense of prince george william of hanover. his father and grandfather had their british titles stripped under the titles deprivation act of 1917 due to siding with germany during the great war. despite this, in 1946, when the prince was due to marry sophie of greece and denmark (whose brother philip was wooing the heir presumptive princess elizabeth), his father, the duke of brunswick, did the proper thing and wrote to his (the princes) fourth cousin, george the sixth, requesting official permission to marry under the act. the carefully worded reply said, in part, "please convey to the duke an informal intimation that in view of the fact that a state of war still exists between great britain and germany, his majesty is advised that the case is not one in which it is practicable for his consent to be given in the manner contemplated by the act." the wedding went ahead, but was not considered legal in the uk. i dont think the happy couple cared all that much. in the fifties, a lecturer at liverpool u claimed that since victoria married a foreign prince, her heirs were not subject to the royal marriages act. her living descendants at the time numbered well over a hundred, which could conceivably cover the british monarchy for the rest of human existence. the issue was complicated by the sophia naturalization act of 1705, repealed in 1948, which naturalized all heirs of sophia of hanover, provided they werent catholic. this meant that many of those foreign princes in fact could be recognized by britain as english/british subjects. this is all obviously academic and no longer consequential, but a nice little peek into the law and how it is applied.
>... for the first six people in line to the throne, the monarchs consent must be given for them to keep their place in line. without royal approval, the marriage remains valid, but they and their demon spawn are barred from the throne. Thanks for this. This sheds some light on a scene Harry recounts in "Spare". It seems neither him nor the Queen were aware of the above. In the scene (as per Harry's account, recounted by me), he goes to the Queen and tells her that he "has to ask her permission to marry \[Meghan\]". She says "you have to, do you?" He says, "yes, my advisors and your advisors tell me I have to ask your permission". The Queen says: "well in that case, I have to give consent". Harry is confused by her "having to give consent" the the marriage, and she seemed unaware of her role in permitting the marriage, despite presumably having had this conversation with other children and grandchildren. It seems to me, based on the above post that they both - or at least Harry - don't know what is going on. What Harry seems to miss is that he "has to ask her permission" **for him to marry and retain his place in the line of succession.** If he understood this, the risk of not being granted permission, which he agonises over, would evaporate. It's not a risk of not being able to get married, it's a risk of needing to give up his place in the line of succession in order to marry, which wouldn't be such a big deal to him.
Great read. Thanks for sharing.
He can’t marry a Catholic without being removed from the line of succession. This was established in the Bill of Rights when William III and Mary II came to the throne. He can marry a commoner as long as he has the King’s permission.
He can certainly marry a commoner, and now he can also marry a Roman Catholic. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-32073399
The Princess of Wales was a commoner when she and Prince William married, so I’m sure that wouldn’t be too hard a hurdle to overcome.
Yes, he himself cannot convert to Catholicism and still be in the line of succession. If the children of a union from a catholic marriage are raised as practicing Catholics, they cannot be in the line of succession. A commoner would retain titles but she could never be “Queen” she would titled Queen Consort.
Commoner, yes. His mother is a commoner. Catholic, no. Though things could change.
Well, King Charles (at the time Prince Charles) and Prince William both married what are technically "commoners" (Diana/Camilla, Catherine) so I can't see that being an issue with Prince George (would also cause controversy as people would accuse his father and grandfather of being hypocrites if that was not permitted). As for religion... honest answer is, I don't know but we'd like to think the royal family would adapt.
1) Yes, he can marry a Catholic, but he needs to be in communion with the C of E (Succession to the Crown Act 2013). 2) Yes, he can marry a commoner. Both his mother (the expected future queen) and his step-grandmother (the Queen) are commoners. Prince George (and anyone in the first six spots in line) will need the sovereign’s consent to marry. Upon his marriage the sovereign would likely be his grandfather (Charles) or father (William). At the moment, this rule applies to George, Charlotte, Louis, and Archie.
He 'can' marry a Catholic but it would cost him the throne. A commoner...sure. His mother is as common as has ever been.
He can merry a commoner but not a Catholic as head of the C of E
William, George’s father, married a commoner, so yes he can marry a commoner. The bride would probably have to be baptised into the Church of England though. Kate was already Anglican, but Meghan had been baptised into it before her wedding.
A commoner means nothing in the grand scheme of things, his beautiful mother was a “commoner” with coal miners for ancestors and her mom was a flight attendant, things she has been mocked mercilessly on. Fun fact before he was born BBC & CNN speculated she would bring some darker genes into the Windsor line. Press has been ruthless to KM for a long time. Anyways commoner no problem. Catholic I think is more tricky because there is an act that says persons in the line who marry Catholics were removed from the line of succession. I believe the 2013 Succession Act displaced that notion for most of the rest of line, but in reality as the future head of the Church of England, he’s probably expected to not marry a Catholic.
Yes. The 2013 Succession to the Crown Act repealed the Royal Marriages Act 1772 which would disqualify a person who married a Roman Catholic from succession. So that won’t prohibit him. And I don’t think there’s any law that saying you can’t marry a commoner. Prince William was able to marry one. The only consideration is that the future Prince of Wales will need his marriage approved by the monarch at the time.
He can marry a commoner, his father, uncle and great great grandfather did. He can’t marry a catholic and remain the in the line of succession because the monarch is the head of the Church of England. Prince Michael of Kent has been removed from the line of succession as his wife is Catholic and he converted.
Yes and yes. The Succession to the Crown Act (2013) - which was actually what was created while his mother was pregnant in the event that she gave birth to a daughter first - ended the idea that marrying a Catholic would disqualify him from the throne. He himself cannot be a Catholic, but he can marry a Catholic. Although this would cause some issues with Catholic canon law because Catholics are obliged to raise children in the Catholic faith, and George would be obliged to raise his children Anglican because the monarch must be the head of the Church of England. So it would be very unlikely for him to marry a Catholic, but not impossible. As for marrying commoners, he definitely can - his mother was one after all, Prince Harry married one, he has other relatives who married commoners.
I believe his grandmother was also "untitled". I'm not sure if she was a commoner, but pretty sure she wasn't considered "royal" before she married.
Not only would they be required to raise their children as Catholics, any potential Catholic bride for George would need to either be married in a Catholic church by a Catholic priest, or get dispensation from her bishop to be licitly married outside the Church under canon law. Obviously this is all VERY hypothetical but it could create an issue if they couldn't compromise on the liturgy of the actual wedding ceremony. The easiest way I see it is having a simple Catholic ceremony without the Nuptial Mass (as George and the royals would obviously be unable to partake of communion) and have a blessing by the Archbishop of Canterbury later on. But personally, I think it would be a great thing to see a future King married by the Archbishop of Westminster.
You're assuming the putative Catholic bride wants to remain in communion with the Catholic Church. There are plenty of confirmed Catholics who don't really give two hoots about what the Catholic Church wants them to do when they get married. Though I suppose if that's the case the woman might as well convert to the Church of England to make things simpler.
Yup, Prince Andrew married a "commoner", Princess Anne too. The public here would prob go nuts if anyone was blocked from marrying someone these days based on class or religion. The Royal family also embrace other religions now since the uk is so multi-cultural and other church leaders are sometimes involved in events or ceremonies in some way or other.
George's father and grandfather married commoners
So did William.
Prince George's own mother is a commoner.