Sun 26th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 24th Oct 2014 at 18:39pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Ban on British monarch marrying a Catholic to be lifted

By on Monday, 31 October 2011

The Imperial State Crown, worn by the Queen during the state opening of Parliament (Photo: Mike Moore)

The Imperial State Crown, worn by the Queen during the state opening of Parliament (Photo: Mike Moore)

The law that bans a British monarch from marrying a Catholic is to be lifted after more than 300 years.

The reforms were announced following the unanimous agreement of the 16 nations that have the Queen as their constitutional head of state.

But they will not include the repeal of a Catholic becoming monarch because allegiance to the pope might conflict with the sovereign’s role as the supreme governor of the Church of England.

The changes will also see the end of the ancient tradition of male primogeniture, the rule under which boys take precedence in the line to the throne over elder sisters.

The reforms will be included in the next programme of parliamentary business to be unveiled in November, while New Zealand will lead a working group to coordinate their implementation in other Commonwealth countries.

The announcement, made on Friday at a summit of Commonwealth heads of government in Perth, was welcomed by Cardinal Keith O’Brien and Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster.

Archbishop Nichols, president of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, said: “This will eliminate a point of unjust discrimination against Catholics and will be welcomed not only by Catholics but far more widely.

“At the same time I fully recognise the importance of the position of the Established church in protecting and fostering the role of faith in our society today,” he said.

Cardinal O’Brien, president of the Scottish bishops’ conference, said he was pleased to note the process had started to repeal aspects of the laws.

“I look forward to studying the detail of the proposed reforms and their implications in due course,” the cardinal said.

In recent years there have been 11 attempts to reform the laws on royal succession, but none has made any meaningful progress, partly because of the difficulty in reforming laws across 16 jurisdictions.

But David Cameron was able to announce the changes after he won the support of the leaders of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Papua New Guinea, St Christopher and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Tuvalu, Barbados, Grenada, Solomon Islands, St Lucia and the Bahamas – who would also have to amend their laws.

Announcing the reforms, Mr Cameron said: “Let me be clear, the monarch must be in communion with the Church of England because he or she is the head of that church.

“But it is simply wrong they should be denied the chance to marry a Catholic if they wish to do so,” he said. “After all, they are already quite free to marry someone of any other faith.”

He said the idea that a younger son should become monarch instead of an elder daughter simply because he was a man was “at odds with the modern countries that we have become”.

The reforms may entail amendments to nine acts, including the 1689 Bill of Rights, the 1701 Act of Settlement and the 1772 Royal Marriages Act.

The laws brought to a close centuries of religious turmoil that began in the 1530s when King Henry VIII took the English Catholic Church into schism so he could nullify his marriage to Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn, his mistress.

They were brought into force following the deposing of openly Catholic King James II, Britain’s last Catholic monarch, in the bloodless coup of 1688, which came to be known as “the Glorious Revolution”.

After James’s Protestant sister Anne, his successor, failed to produce an heir, the throne was given to Electress Sophia of Hanover, Germany, from whom the reigning House of Windsor is descended.

The abolition of the rule of male primogeniture will apply only to the descendants of Prince Charles, but it will mean that if the first-born child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – William and Kate – is a girl, then she will ascend the throne ahead of any younger brothers.

  • Catholic with Attitude

    Whilst I was pleased initially with the move to permit British monarchs marrying Catholics, I have now a few concerns and question whether in that this is a clever move. 

    Catholics are obliged to bring up their children in the faith; so a Catholic marrying an Anglican monarch would not be able to do so as the children of that marriage would be heirs to the throne and thus potential future heads of the church of England. 

    So whilst at first it seems like a good idea and a step forward (and I do still think it is a step forward), what we really need is a reevaluation of the relationship between the monarch and the church of England so as to permit a non-Anglican ascending the throne. Though, of course, this also has it’s problems.

    ~Catholic with Attitute  

  • Catholic with Attitude

    *I have now a few concerns as to whether in fact this is a clever move.

    Mea culpa!

  • John McGann

    About time they got over their stupid bigotry. King Henry their King copied of the Catholic Religion in 1550.
    A sick stubborn indivudal. He could not get his way.

  • Anonymous

    Religion, race or sex should not be a barrier to the throne in the 20th century. It really is disgusting that it is still the case.

  • Little Black Censored

    Religion, race or sex should not be a barrier to the throne in the 20th
    century. It really is disgusting that it is still the case.

    You really need to argue your point. A bare assertion is not worth making. Who cares whether or not you are disgusted?

  • Little Black Censored

    I’m not surprised that “paulsays liked this”. Are you one and the same person?

  • Tyrone Beiron

    The idea that the British Monarch has to be in communion with the Anglican Church to be its Supreme Governor is ridiculous if that person can be a Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish, or Atheist etc. but still exclusively not Catholic is utter nonsense. The Church of England is after all in fact run by its conference of bishops and merely rubber-stamped by the monarch, and precedence shows that even with the appointment of new clergy, this is the case. There is nothing stopping a Catholic monarch from exercising this right as a matter of executive duty, as this is NOT an apostolic office. Just as the President of the US (or another other nation) may be fruitfully exercise his/her executive duties and remain personally a Catholic, there is no problem at all. As in Malta and other states where historically the local authorities influence the Anglican ecclesiastical hierarchy, those governors may still serve their function without any discrimination to their personal faith. A Muslim UK monarch then can be the Defender of the Anglican Faith then? We shall pray…

  • Anonymous

    I don’t expect an argument, because I don’t see how any rational, good human being could think otherwise.

  • Little Black Censored

    Inability to see is indeed a handicap.

  • Bellator

    The next king of the Netherlands married an Argentine Catholic women and they have brought their children up as Protestant.