´óÏó´«Ã½

« Previous | Main | Next »

Anti-Catholic laws to be repealed

Post categories: ,Ìý

William Crawley | 20:12 UK time, Thursday, 25 September 2008

Gordon Brown is planning to remove the constitutional ban on Catholics becoming monarch. Chris Bryant MP, a former Anglican priest, has been reviewing anti-Catholic legislation, and the laws will be repealed early in a fourth term. The key laws that will be revised or repealed are the 1688 Bill of Rights, the 1701 Act of Settlement and the 1707 Act of Union. The current UK constitution also prohibits accession to the throne anyone from a non-Protestant faith background.

Plainly, the ramifications for this consitutional revision -- should it be enacted -- for the established Church of England will need to be examined. The monarch is currently ex officio Supreme Governor of the Church of England. That is a role that could not be filled by a future monarch who is not Anglican. I wonder if Chris Bryant is also proposing that the be repealed. The repeal of an Act granting titular headship of the established church to the monarch would seem to follow as a matter of logic should other reforms make way for a non-Anglican sovereign. In other words, Chris Bryant's plans pave the way for the disestablishment of the Church of England.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    It seems to me that in post-Christian Britain the writing is on the wall for these laws. It will be interesting to watch the reaction of the various "loyal" orders if this ever comes to pass. Will a professedly Protestant organisation encourage its members to pledge allegiance to an RC monarch?
    I suspect they will fudge the issue.

    www.theevangelists.blogspot.com

  • Comment number 2.

    RevIan Hall


    And how does this involve Australia?

    Oh, and I'd like to accuse you of idolatry. Will you respond on this site, or will you retreat to your own benign dictatorship?

    Grham Veale

  • Comment number 3.

    Graham you may not have noticed but Elizabeth Windsor is Australia's head of state.
    I think that answers your second question as well.
    By the way Graham no-one likes a smart alec.

  • Comment number 4.

    My wife doesn't mind me.

    No-one likes bigots either. Just saying.

    So the future of Christianity in Britain depends on rejecting this legislation, does it? Or it'sa sign of secularisation? The Australian's are in an uproar as the lodges may swear loyalty to a Catholic monarch?

    If I have misread your concerns, and you welcome the move to tolerance (nearly half a millenium too late, mind) please correct me.

    Otherwise, perhaps you'll clarify your despair. Perhaps you'll also finally tell me if I'm a liberal. Perhaps you'll also apologise for that awful article about the banana.

    I'll be back Monday, either with an apology for the accusation or with more questions about the crown and the cross. Because I would be sick to the pit of my stomach if anyone claiming to follow Christ felt that the latter needed the former.

    Graham Veale

  • Comment number 5.

    The key to this is a 4h term for Gordon Brown. Which I very much doubt will happen.

  • Comment number 6.

    Australia has the world's biggest rock. Ayres Rock looks like a mountain but geologists assure us it is only a rock. That's what I'd want on my money if I were Australian. Might make a good symbol of the state, better than Gibraltar. Certainly better than some King or Queen. Will last a lot longer too, probably a few billion years.

    Reverend, I'm curious about something. How do you think kangaroos, wombats, and koalas got from Noah's where it landed on Mount Ararat in Turkey to Austrialia, do you think they swam for it? And what about those Tasmanian devils? Maybe they all floated there on flotsam and jetsam.

  • Comment number 7.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 8.

    Graham - you're being a bit stupid over this. Straight into the attack with Rev Ian - bit too personal and not related to anything the guy said in his post. And it is an interesting and important question. It would represent the end of a specifically protestant monarchy (even if the monarch were still a protestant in pratice). But I doubt it will happen - even if Brown get's back. He'll find a way to leave it alone. I suspect it's just being floated to try and capture a few Catholic voters in Scotland before the next bi-election.

    And Marcus - biggest rock is Mt Augustus. It is two and a half times the size of Uluru/Ayers Rock.

  • Comment number 9.

    Regarding the disestablishment of the Church of England - about time too! In a truly secular state religions should be treated like any other large businesses or corporations. They have their property, their full-time staff, their income flow and their expenditure. Cynics would say that they produce very little, but on the basis that they provide comforting rituals, short-lived euphorias and community sing-songs, they should be surely be grouped with the drinks trade. Granting Distillers a special role in the functioning of Parliament would be contrary to anti-monopolies legislation, so the same should apply to the CoE.

    Of course, whether the Catholic empire will reciprocate by allowing a Humanist to become its monarch is a separate issue altogether. Humanists are advised to defer getting their gold lamee dresses dry-cleaned for the time being.

Ìý

´óÏó´«Ã½ iD

´óÏó´«Ã½ navigation

´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.