Princess Diana: the immense consequences



The death under any circumstances of a member of the Royal Family would be a cause for sadness. Had anyone made a list of those whose death might have been anticipated, Princess Diana's name would have been last on it, hence the worldwide shock and outpouring of grief: disbelief, anger, analysis, sadness and perhaps the reluctant beginnings of acceptance. Strong emotions would have been triggered had any Royal been even slightly injured in an accident. The sudden, total loss of Diana, Princess of Wales in a violent car crash is one of the greatest national tragedies to befall Britain since the Second World War.

The memory of August 31, 1997 will long remain in people's minds: first we saw the gruesome wreckage of the Mercedes after hitting an underpass wall at high speed following a reckless chase through Paris from the Place Vendome to the Pont De L'Alma. By strange twists of fate, the crash occurred beneath the elegant Avenue George V, named after Prince Charles' great-grandfather. Diana was traveling with Dodi Fayed, her film producer friend, to his Bois De Boulogne home, which is opposite the former home of the Duke of Windsor, Prince Charles' great-uncle, now owned by Mr. Fayed's father.

After initial reports of a broken arm, concussion and other minor injuries to the Princess, the world waited for news. For more than three hours there came only an ominous silence. Then, just before 6:00 am in Paris, near midnight in Washington, the awful moment arrived. It fell to the experienced but obviously shocked BBC Television presenter, Nik Gowing, to be the first to utter the unutterable words, and thus break the horrific news to the watching world: "Buckingham Palace has just confirmed that Diana, Princess of Wales has died."

Moments later, the BBC merged its domestic and international networks, having already been joined by ABC in the United States and other networks worldwide. By now, tens of millions were watching, except, ironically, in Britain where it was not yet dawn. On came Martyn Lewis, the popular BBC presenter, a sensitive and reassuring born-again Christian who possesses gravitas, compassion and authority, wrapped in his soft welsh accent. "This is BBC Television from London", he intoned with a solemn sense of occasion. After he repeated the dreadful announcement, the screen filled with an upside-down Union Jack as 'God Save The Queen' was played.

At that moment there began a global convulsion of grief. In many ways, this is the first televised royal death. Such dreaded images had never previously been seen so universally. The murder of Earl Mountbatten in 1979 at the age of 79 was equally shocking, but he was not such a senior member of the Royal Family. At the time of the last major royal death, that of King George VI in February 1952, television was a feature of very few homes, and the real comparison - the shock, the young charisma suddenly terminated - is with the death of John F. Kennedy 34 years ago.

Across Britain, some were awoken by telephone calls from Australia or America, others by the cries of grief-stricken family members who had switched on the radio. In the countryside, the traditional muffled church bells alerted a waking nation to a royal death. Just like November 22, 1963, everyone will always remember exactly where they were when they heard the news. Lord Blake, the historian and constitutional advisor to Buckingham Palace, whose criticism of the Princess we mentioned last week, told The Times he was listening to music on the radio having been unable to sleep, when the program was interrupted with the news. "It was a dreadful feeling. I was absolutely stunned. I lay staring ahead of me. Sleep would have been impossible. I still feel numb."

Richard Branson, head of Virgin Airlines, was flying from Los Angeles to London when the pilot woke him with the news, and he personally went on the public address system to tell the passengers. Lord Archer, the novelist and politician Jeffrey Archer, was awoken with the news by a telephone call. "I woke Mary. Her first words were: 'Those poor boys'. It was one of the darkest moments of my life." So it was for every British person.

So what went wrong and what are the consequences? First, what went wrong? Quite simply, everything. It was all so preventable. In a desperate quest for the happiness that had eluded her in childhood and in her marriage, the Princess shrugged off the need for proper safety precautions. Concern had long been expressed in official circles that she was jeopardizing her safety by refusing to allow Scotland Yard bodyguards to accompany her at all times. She was adamant that she wanted no protection despite fears of kidnap, terrorist attack or the kind of avoidable accident that killed her.

Things were different when her sons traveled with her because of their royal status, but she apparently regarded herself as less important. We must now ask whether that decision was hers to make. The Royal Family, having removed her "Royal Highness" status, were content to distance themselves from her, came up with the flimsy justification that as the ex-wife of the Prince of Wales, she was no longer really a genuine part of the Royal Family and, presumably with mixed feelings, acceded to her unwise request. Assuming her death to have been an accident, all these were grave errors of judgment, whose tragic results we now know.

Of course she was still part of the Royal Family, and as the mother of the future King she would always be a very important member, especially after her son was crowned, and that is another reason why the British public are so very upset and angry. First, she was going to be their next Queen. Then, having lost that opportunity through her husband's infidelity, she was still the mother of the next-but-one King and might later have been given a title like the Queen Mother. Perhaps the Royal Family's error of judgment was acknowledged when her casket was draped with the Royal Standard rather than the Union Jack.

Nobody as essential to Britain's future as the Princess of Wales should ever have been allowed to ride in a car without a seat belt, driven by anyone other than a trained royal driver, much less a drunken security guard. Underlying this tragedy is a complex tapestry of sin. Put plainly, she would never have been there in the first place had she and Prince Charles kept their wedding vows. All have sinned, but few have paid so completely. In this case, it is Princes William and Harry who are paying the price of their parents' sin.

An examination of Princess Diana's relationships reveals some contemporary friends but a paucity of mentors. Her parents were divorced acrimoniously. Soon before she was pushed into the world spotlight and her need of a trusted mentor became paramount, her father was almost incapacitated by a stroke; he died in 1992. Her mother, Frances Shand Kydd, remarried and after living for some years in Argentina, became a recluse on the Isle of Seil, off the west coast of Scotland. Her brother moved to South Africa. Though she remained close to her sisters, she felt virtually abandoned by her family of origin.

When she turned for comfort and affection to her husband, he was embarrassed and unsure how to react. He turned away, preferring to attend to his public engagements and his mistress. Later, he publicly confessed that he had never loved her in the first place, which must have been devastating for Diana to hear. He then divorced her. Though Queen Elizabeth continued to show her kindness, she was largely abandoned by the Royal Family and left to her own judgments, which in many ways were colored by her low self-image and, consequently, were often less than astute.

Few have yet appreciated the long-term consequences of her death, but it is a profound tragedy for so many reasons. First, it is the loss of a beloved national and international figure who, despite her adultery and romantic affairs, was held with great affection deep in the hearts of the British people and of millions around the world. She once said she thought people needed to be shown love and affection, and of course she was right. In many ways, Diana redefined the role and image of the Royal Family, and by her example demonstrated for them what she believed and hoped they could become, and above all, what she wanted Prince William to become as King: regal yet compassionate, formal yet affectionate.

Indeed, much of her popularity stemmed from the enormous affection she showed to children, the sick, the dying, the old, the poor, the marginalized and the unloved, people who might never otherwise have expected to encounter a royal personage. She was the Royal Family, Hollywood and Mother Teresa rolled into one and she became more than the sum of those parts. Her devotion to such causes stemmed from an altruism as close to genuine Christian conduct as the world has recently seen. Her personal life was just the opposite. Some might condemn it as sleazy and sinful, but that lacks mercy. In her vulnerability, she sought solace from a sequence of men, and quite naturally, she faced the same temptations as everyone else, not always successfully. In the end, it was her vulnerability to those temptations that took her life.

Of equal importance, her sudden passing is also the loss of the future King's mother. Diana was a direct descendant three times over of King Charles II, and actually had more British royal blood in her than does Prince Charles. In terms of lineage, therefore, Prince William is the most royal heir to the throne for hundreds of years. He might reasonably expect to become King in his thirties, by which time his mother would have been in her fifties. He may well have imagined her as his loving, wise and supportive guiding light who would have enabled him to bear the burdens of one of the greatest responsibilities on earth.

Suddenly, the young Prince's dream has been fragmented into a horrific nightmare from which he cannot awaken. There are so many different tragedies with which he and his brother have to deal, the most central of which is that they have just lost their mother in the most unspeakable circumstances at the ages of 15 and 12. They could have nightmares for years just thinking about it. All death is sad. The sudden death of any mother is a devastating blow to any child, but the loss of this particular mother, a beautiful, warm and vivacious woman they both adored, is very much more than that: it is an assault on the natural order of things, a brutal abrogation of their sense of right and wrong. It is the worst possible catastrophe for Prince William who, as we reported last week, is already being trained for his future duties.

The Princess of Wales understood better than most how Britain works and how ordinary people really feel. She invested so much time in helping to form Prince William's character not only because she was a loving mother but because, while voicing the need for Royal Family reform, she understood the unique place of the British monarch in reinforcing the stability, success and character of the nation and of the world beyond. She was teaching William to balance, as she attempted to do, royal formality with an almost Marian compassion, deference with honesty, propriety with warmth, self-care with service to others, all of which the Royal Family has often commended but rarely practiced in public. Their culture, heritage, milieu and generational differences have proscribed such familiar conduct.

Until last weekend, William was spared the abandonment his mother knew so well. He may yet grow up to become a bridge between the two roles of the Royal Family, just as he and his brother are unique biological bridges between its two branches. Camille Paglia said that Diana resembled the Mater Dolorosa. Her imperfections will be forgotten but her role as the Mother of Sorrows will be remembered, especially by her sons. What will be the effect of this devastating tragedy and awful suffering on their characters?

They cannot even retreat from the world to grieve in peace. A few hours after being awoken to learn that they must live the rest of their lives without their mother's love, the Princes dutifully accompanied the Queen and other members of the Royal Family to Morning Service in Crathie Parish Church near their Balmoral estate on the River Dee in Scotland. The Queen even smiled and waved to onlookers, as if nothing had happened. Inside the church, they remained somber but composed while parishioners wept as the normal prayers for the Royal Family were adapted: "We remember all those who at this time need to know Your presence, all those whose lives are darkened by tragedy and grief who need to know more than human comfort and friendship. We pray for our Queen and her family, the Prince of Wales, Prince William and Prince Harry."

Eventually, Prince William's shock may give way to a dialectic between his parents' different visions of royalty. If he is mentored correctly, William may inherit and use to great international benefit his mother's ability to comfort the disadvantaged while upholding cherished traditions. The most important question is whether this awful tragedy will produce a future Governor of the Church of England who is closer to Jesus. Paul said: "Suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out His love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit." (Romans 5: 3-5). We must pray that these scriptural truths will be proven in William, whose need for good mentors is urgent. Paul also said: "Bad company corrupts good character." (1 Corinthians 15:33)

Diana's reforms are essential if the monarchy is to be transformed into the positive influence the world so badly needs. That is why her loss is so tragic in personal and national terms and because she alone stood for those reforms. It is too early to say whether her death will bring to an end in the Royal Family the idea of sharing affection and warmth, a role that will always be her epitaph. History is often shaped by huge, tragic events like this; the dead can sometimes exert more influence than the living. Much will depend on how well Prince William is able to overcome the tragedy, how well he is helped by those around him, and how effectively people pray for him and his brother. Much can be achieved through intercessory prayer.

At present, we believe the death of the Princess was a tragic accident despite contrary rumors. Nonetheless, there are questions. Was there a gunshot before the crash, as one witness told the police? If so, and the shot hit the front right tire, would that explain why the driver, an off-duty security guard, lost control of the car as it entered the underpass? The driver drank massive quantities of alcohol before being asked to drive the Princess and Mr. Fayed. Knowing his intoxicated condition, he declined. So why was he forced to drive anyway? As Washington well knows, dead men make useful scapegoats. Unless the car was sabotaged, why was the driver not instructed to slow down when the car reached excessive speed? Why did rescuers take two hours to extract Diana from the car when equipment was readily available? Why were those who tried to give First Aid shooed away? How could photos of the victims be sold to the German tabloid 'Bild' if the police apprehended the paparazzi and confiscated their film? Well, was this crash deliberate?

It is inconceivable. Could something of that nature really be done without the Prime Minister's approval? There was no doubting the shock on Tony Blair's face when he learned the news. However, the death is not totally inconvenient: first, the Royal establishment now has exclusive access to William and will determine those who can influence his future without being concerned about his mother's opinion; secondly, an Egyptian Muslim playboy has been prevented from becoming stepfather to the future King, as was about to happen, which would have produced an untenable situation given the Monarch's role as "Defender of the [Christian] Faith"; thirdly, the Royal Family has been bathed in a worldwide outpouring of affection and sympathy while the paparazzi and the deceased driver receive the blame; and fourthly, almost all the Princess's $27 million divorce settlement and millions of dollars in jewelry will now be returned to the Royal Family.

If there was foul play, a further observation must be made. There are certain parameters within which the people of the West are permitted to live, work and prosper freely, both in Britain and in America. When one challenges the system, as Princess Diana undoubtedly did, an invisible line is crossed and death in one form or another often seems to follow.

Almost ten years after Diana's passing, the cause of death has still not been established. And no British official seems to want the task of revealing what we already know: that Diana was certianly murdered, and an abortion performed on her in the ambulance, during the hour and three-quarter ride to the hospital, a distance of only two miles.

On a personal note, I recall seeing the Princess on many mornings when she took her boys to kindergarten opposite my London home. Those happy days as a young mother provided one of her few oases of joy. Her legacy will be the love felt for her by so many, as we hope she knew. We pray that the Lord will forgive her, and grant His peace to her and to those who grieve her passing. (For more about Princess Diana's funeral, please see All you need is love). Steve Myers © 1997, 2006