Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Catholic Emancipation Act
Topic Started: Friday, 18. May 2007, 17:27 (291 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Can a Catholic be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom?


Link to Press Article

Opinion appears to be divided.

According to the Daily Mail, the Catholic Emancipation Act states that no Catholic adviser to the monarch may hold civil or military office. I have yet to hear that Catholics are barred from being Field Marshals, Admirals of the Fleet, Marshall of the Royal Air Force, or heads of the Civil Service. Political parties have elected Catholics as their leaders.

Don't take everything in the papers with a pinch of salt. The Daily Mail reports that if Mr Blair is to convert formally, he will have to undergo a course of instruction, which is likely to be conducted by Father Seed, also that to be received officially into the Church, he will be expected to take part in a service of baptism, followed by confirmation and Holy Communion.

Rubbish! He is currently a member of the Church of England so presumably, he has been baptised. Convert formally? Is there another way? Received officially? Can a person be received into The Church unofficially?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
newminster
Unregistered

Quote:
 
Provided also, and be it further Enacted, That nothing herein contained shall extend or be construed to extend to enable any person or persons professing the Roman Catholic religion, to hold or exercise the office of Guardians and Justices of the United Kingdom, or of Regent of the United Kingdom, under whatever name, style or title such office may be constituted; nor to enable any person, otherwise than as he is now by law enabled, to hold or enjoy the office of Lord High Chancellor, Lord Keeper or Lord Commissioner of the Great Seal of Great Britain or Ireland; or the office of Lord Lieutenant, or Lord Deputy, or other Chief Governor or Governors of Ireland, or His Majesty’s High commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.
[Roman Catholic Relief Act (10 George IV, c. 7), 1829]

It has been a longstanding urban myth that Roman Catholics are not allowed to become Prime Minister. Whether until recent times it would have been politically acceptable is another matter.
In practical terms the only two posts which a Roman Catholic may not hold are those of Monarch and Lord Chancellor. The post of Lord Keeper of the Great Seal has been combined with that of Lord Chancellor since 1068.
It is interesting to note (for those who find it interesting to note such things) that the Duke of Norfolk, head of one of England's most prominent recusant families, the Howards or Fitzalan-Howards, holds the title of Hereditary Earl Marshal of England.
Work that one out!
Goto Top
 
Quicunque vult

I don't think any Catholic should be prepared to serve as Prime Minister unless there was a realistic prospect of Parliament repealing the Abortion Act, the civil partnerships legislation, the Sexual Orientation Regulations and prohibiting research on embryos.

QV
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
newminster
Unregistered

Sorry, old pal, that's a cop out!
How are you going to get all these things repealed without a Catholic influence at the top?
And I seem to remember the injunction was to fight the good fight; nobody said we always had to win. One thing's for sure, though. You're not going to win if you're not on the pitch.
Goto Top
 
Quicunque vult

newminster wrote:

Quote:
 
Sorry, old pal, that's a cop out!
How are you going to get all these things repealed without a Catholic influence at the top?
And I seem to remember the injunction was to fight the good fight; nobody said we always had to win. One thing's for sure, though. You're not going to win if you're not on the pitch.


Not saying we shouldn't be on the pitch, but shouldn't be captaining a team that is actively engaged in doing all these dreadful things.

QV
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
It is an insult to all Catholics, that any positions, including that of Sovereign, are not open to us. It would be interesting to know how many gallantry medals and crosses were awarded to Catholic chaplains in the Armed Forces.

If we are ready to serve our country, in a military or civil capacity, we should not have to suffer this indignity.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
newminster
Unregistered

"The honourable lady should not generate more indignation than she can contain." (I'm in Churchill mode this morning.)
Take an even strain, Rose. If there was really a head of steam over this then something would have been done before now. Or maybe now is the time. This is a Protestant country and it has demanded since the Reformation that its Head of State be a Protestant.
I can find more (and more important) things in this morning's paper to feed my Victor Meldrew tendency than the fact that I'm never going to be king. If and when Charles or William or some child as yet unborn either converts to Catholicism or wishes to marry a Catholic I'm sure we'll sort it out.
Let's face it; even Paisley's a busted flush these days. Who's going to whip up the opposition?
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Yes a Catholic can be PM and I don't think there would be much opposition these days. I think too we need to get a reality check as to just what politicians can do. A Prime Minister, even one with a good majority, cannot assume office and start to dismantle all the legislation he doesn't like without gumming up the whole Parliamentary process and being quite unable to do anything else. A good recipe for being voted out next time. For instance, any attempt to repeal the Abortion Act would lead to such widespread opposition that the Government would be completely hamstrung. And of course, whatever political persuasion he was, his party would contain many pro-Abortion Act MPs so he would have a nice little civil war on the side.

John
Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Independent Catholic News
 
LONDON - 23 May 2007 - 290 words

Lib Dems call for end to discrimination against Catholics

Today Liberal Democrat equality spokesperson, Lorely Burt, is launching a Parliamentary motion calling for an end to discrimination against Catholics.

Lorely Burt said: "There is a fundamental principle of discrimination here. It is unacceptable that in 2007 we still have ridiculous laws on our statute books that, for example, prevent a Catholic from marrying the heir to the throne.

"Before he steps down, Tony Blair should consider removing this institutional discrimination. After all, if reports are to believed, he may have a rather more personal interest in Catholic affairs when he leaves number 10; he should act whilst he still has the chance.

The Text of the motion reads:

Early Day Motion 1532 - DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CATHOLICS

That this house believes that nobody should be subject to unfair discrimination on grounds including, but not limited to race, sex, sexual orientation, disability, age, gender identity or religion; notes that the laws of this country continue to discriminate against Catholics in a completely unjustifiable manner; resolves to remove the bar on a Catholic marrying the heir to the throne; and further resolves to allow a Catholic diocese to be given the same name as an Anglican diocese and calls on the Government to include such measures in its forthcoming Single Equality Bill.

Currently the Bill of Rights 1688, Act of Settlement 1700 and the Union with Scotland Act 1706 prevent the Monarch from being a Catholic and the spouse of the Monarch from being a Catholic. These laws concerning Catholics have not been repealed. The Roman Catholic Relief Act (1926) ended punishment for naming a Catholic Diocese that same as an Anglican Diocese, but doing so still remains technically illegal.

Source: Lib Dem Office
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
newminster
Unregistered

Gesture politics.
The average Catholic in the pew doesn't care two hoots and as I said further up if and when the situation arises I believe it will get itself sorted to everyone's satisfaction except, probably, the Wee Frees, the Wee Wee Frees, and Ian Paisley.
One sure way to get people's backs up (on this as on many matters) is to start a campaign about something that's not currently a live issue. Unless and until an heir to the throne converts or wishes to marry a Catholic or until a Prime Minister wishes to appoint a Catholic as Lord Chancellor then the whole thing is totally irrelevant.
Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
newminster
May 23 2007, 05:18 PM
One sure way to get people's backs up (on this as on many matters) is to start a campaign about something that's not currently a live issue.

One never knows whether it is currently a live issue. If the second in line to the throne had felt attracted to a Catholic before he met his last girl friend, which of us would have known.

All discrimination campaigns annoy the people not affected. Some will get their backs up, whatever the timing - until it applies to THEM.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
newminster
Unregistered

Rose of York
May 23 2007, 04:33 PM
newminster
May 23 2007, 05:18 PM
One sure way to get people's backs up (on this as on many matters) is to start a campaign about something that's not currently a live issue.

One never knows whether it is currently a live issue. If the second in line to the throne had felt attracted to a Catholic before he met his last girl friend, which of us would have known.

All discrimination campaigns annoy the people not affected. Some will get their backs up, whatever the timing - until it applies to THEM.

If the second in line to the throne had been attracted to a Catholic we would have heard about it very, v-e-r-y loudly. Then we would have had a debate which, in my view, would probably have resulted in an Act of Parliament removing the bar.
As it is, he didn't. I have other things in my life to get on with but when he does I shall be in there expressing a view.
Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
newminster
May 23 2007, 06:37 PM
If the second in line to the throne had been attracted to a Catholic we would have heard about it very, v-e-r-y loudly. Then we would have had a debate which, in my view, would probably have resulted in an Act of Parliament removing the bar.
As it is, he didn't. I have other things in my life to get on with but when he does I shall be in there expressing a view.

What if unknown to us the Prince had backed off from forming a close relationship with a woman because she was Catholic? We might never have known. The issue matters to some Catholics, including me. Catholics serve this country in many capacities, and some end up with military funerals. The heir can lawfully marry a Moonie or Scientologist, but not a Catholic. I wonder why Parliament is in no hurry to repeal the relevant Act?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ANGLO-CATH

The Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 states for "Office Holders" that you cannot discriminate or refuse a position based on their religious belief.

That would cover the posts of P.M & Lord Chancellor I believe.

A future Monarch becoming or marrying someone of ANY other religion, would probably cause some head-scratching within Whitehall and the Anglican Church, but I cannot believe that this contingency hasn't been discussed before within those institutions.

Didn't Charles once go on record as saying he wanted to change the words to the coronation to " defender of faiths" ?

Quite a neat solution I thought (although I am a simpleton in these matters, I admit!

:D
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
ANGLO-CATH
May 24 2007, 01:29 PM
Didn't Charles once go on record as saying he wanted to change the words to the coronation to " defender of faiths" ?


Prince Charles was interviewed on BBC Panorama. I think he said that when he is King he would wish to be 'defender of faiths", but I do not recall him saying he wished to have the Coronation Oath amended. If, when Charles accedes to the Throne, he tries to do, his Dad might get cross.

I think Anglicans might expect him to defend the Faith of which he will be Supreme Governor.

"Defender of faiths" - does that mean defender of the civil right to choose a faith?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Locked Topic