Page 1, 1st April 2005

1st April 2005

Page 1

Page 1, 1st April 2005 — Howard backs repeal of ban on Catholic monarch
Close

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.

Tags


Share


Related articles

Parliament Debates Monarchy Bill

Page 2 from 18th March 2005

Scrap The Act Of Settlement, Says Anglican Leader

Page 2 from 26th January 2007

Bishop Attacks Pm For Failing To Reform 1701 Act

Page 2 from 24th August 2007

Blair Rejects Scots Bid To Reform Act Of Settlement

Page 2 from 25th December 1999

Reform Of Act Of Settlement Runs Into Opposition

Page 6 from 6th May 2011

Impact On The Conservatives By Freddy Gray Conservative...

Page 3 from 2nd February 2007

Howard backs repeal of ban on Catholic monarch

BY FREDDY GRAY
MICHAEL Howard, the Conservative Party leader, is backing the abolition of centuries-old legislation that prohibits the British monarch from becoming or marrying a Catholic.
In an exclusive interview in today’s Catholic Herald, Mr Howard describes the 300year-old ban – which discriminates specifically against Catholics – as an “anachronism” and says that if the Tory Party wins the forthcoming General Election he, as Prime Minister, would “certainly consider” reforming the British constitution to remove its antiCatholic bias.
“There is no prohibition on the monarch or the monarch’s consort being members of any other religion,” he says. “So I think it is an anachronism that Catholicism should be singled out.” His words will encourage Catholics campaigning to repeal the restrictions. In February Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh, spoke out against the 17th and 18th century laws.
“The prohibition on Catholics marrying the heir to the throne or becoming head of state is discriminatory and offensive,” he said. “Apart from anything else, the existing legislation is a gross infringement of the human rights of members of the royal family.” Cardinal O’Brien’s predecessor, Cardinal Thomas Winning, famously described the bar on Catholics as “Britain’s grubby little secret.” Cardinal Cormac MurphyO’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, also opposes the ban. “If Prince William wants to marry a good Catholic woman, I don’t see why he shouldn’t,” he said.
Attempts to bring about a change are already under way in Parliament. Last month Edward Leigh, Tory MP for Gainsborough and a Catholic, introduced a Bill to “allow any member of the royal family to marry a person of any religion or none”.
Mr Leigh believes that the restrictions perpetuate the myth that Catholics are disloyal to crown and country.
He said: “In a modern western democracy it is totally unacceptable to have an Act that discriminates against one section of society — in this case specifically discriminating against ‘Papists’.” The restrictions date back to the end of the 17th century when Whig politicians established Britain as a Protestant state.
The Bill of Rights of 1689 stated that anybody “who shall profess the Popish religion, or shall marry a Papist, shall be excluded and be forever incapable to inherit, possess or enjoy the crown”. This ban was reinforced by the Act of Settlement in 1701, which insisted that the monarch must “join in communion” with the Church of England. This stipulation was further buttressed by the 1707 Treaty of Union.
Mr Leigh’s Bill will receive its second reading next Friday, the day of the wedding of Prince Charles to Camilla Parker Bowles, but it is thought that the Government will not grant sufficient parliamentary time for the Bill to be passed.
Although there is a crossparty consensus that the law is unjust the Prime Minister has said that he has “no plans” to reform the Acts. He argued that changing the laws would involve complex and timeconsuming alterations to the British constitution and those of all the countries in the Commonwealth, a concern echoed by Mr Howard.
“Amending it is quite a complicated business because you have to consult the governments of many Commonwealth countries as well,” he said. “It is certainly something I would think about, but it is not something you can make glib promises about because of the complications involved.” But Mr Leigh does not regard these difficulties as sufficient reason to halt reform. “The argument that changing would be too difficult or complicated does not add up,” he said. “The Government can no longer hide behind the fact that it is too complicated to amend the Act. It is not too complicated.” His proposal is simply to change four Acts of the British constitution in order to remove the clauses that forbid the monarch from marrying a Catholic. Critics argue that such a change harms the Monarch’s role as supreme governor of the Anglican Church. During the coronation oath the monarch swears to “defend the faith” of the Church of England. Protestant traditionalists argue that a Catholic monarch’s loyalties would lie with Rome, and not the national church.
However, not all Church of England bishops object to a Catholic becoming supreme governor of their church. The Rt Rev Peter Selby, Bishop of Worcester, told the House of Lords: “There is no reason why a Roman Catholic, advised by ministers who can be of any religious persuasion or none, could not be the supreme governor of the Church of England.” Opponents of reform also say that a change would create problems with any children from an Anglican-Catholic royal marriage, who would obviously be heirs to the throne. Catholics are encouraged to raise their offspring in the faith.
In response, Mr Leigh argues that the Catholic Church does grant special “permission” for children to be raised otherwise in certain circumstances.
Cardinal O’Brien, however, thinks royals should be entitled to raise their children in their own faith.
“It will be measures which abolish all religious restrictions on members of the Royal family which will remedy this unsatisfactory situation,” he said.
Mr Howard also tells The Catholic Herald why he wanted to remove Adrian Hilton, a strong opponent of repealing the Act of Settlement who has suggested that the European Union is a Catholic conspiracy, as the Tory candidate for Slough. He says that his party will not tolerate rhetoric against any religious group.
Mr Hilton, who denies that he is anti-Catholic, was removed from the official list of Conservative candidates after The Catholic Herald commented on two articles he wrote for the Spectator magazine in 2003.
But Mr Hilton has appealed successfully to the Slough Conservative Association against his sacking. In response, Mr Howard has suspended the Association for its refusal to accept his decision.




blog comments powered by Disqus