It peeved me that some Filipino broadcast journalist kept on referring to William as the "Crown Prince". He is not even though he is second in line to the throne. His father, Prince Charles, is. Why it peeved me? Remember that most of these broadcast journalists are a bunch of know it all especially that one with a nasty cauliflower on his face who keeps on fumbling and mumbling his news copy.
Putting that aside...
Did you know that, the British Monarchy, most especially on matters governing the accession to the throne are ruled by the Act of Settlement of 1701.
Here is one provision of the Act that is of most interest to us Catholics:
The Persons inheritable by this Act, holding Communion with the Church of Rome, incapacitated as by the former Act; to take the Oath at their Coronation, according to Stat. 1 W. &; M. c. 6.
Provided always and it is hereby enacted That all and every Person and Persons who shall or may take or inherit the said Crown by vertue of the Limitation of this present Act and is are or shall be reconciled to or shall hold Communion with the See or Church of Rome or shall profess the Popish Religion or shall marry a Papist shall be subject to such Incapacities as in such Case or Cases are by the said recited Act provided enacted and established And that every King and Queen of this Realm who shall come to and succeed in the Imperiall Crown of this Kingdom by vertue of this Act shall have the Coronation Oath administred to him her or them at their respective Coronations according to the Act of Parliament made in the First Year of the Reign of His Majesty and the said late Queen Mary intituled An Act for establishing the Coronation Oath and shall make subscribe and repeat the Declaration in the Act first above recited mentioned or referred to in the Manner and Form thereby prescribed
In simple English...
Those who are Roman Catholic, and those who married a Roman Catholic, were barred from ascending the throne "for ever".
Other provisions of the Act also mentions that the monarch "must join the Church of England." This means a believer of another religion, other than Roman Catholicism can ascend the throne but must convert to Anglicanism later.
And this provision applies to any member of the royal family who is in succession line.
You can read the interesting article about the Act of Settlement here.
***
As I have mentioned before...
It is unthinkable to be against blacks, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims...
But all is ok if you are prejudiced towards Catholics.
You won't be called "bigot, racial and all that jazz!"
Now you know folks what the early Roman Christians felt.
Well, Mr. Pinoy Catholic, I am not surprised at all that many people attack the Catholic Church...Nowadays it's also hard to be a faithful Catholic because you can be subject to criticism. But if you are from other religions you are not...
ReplyDeleteThe Church has gone through so many persecutions and yet she still gains the upper hand...proof that the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against Her...
The secularists in the Parliament want the Act of Settlement abrogated and Nick Clegg the deputy PM pushed it through Parliament until the Queen herself indicated through the Archbishop of Canterbury that she wasn't amused.
ReplyDeleteThe Catholic bishops of England do not want the Act to be repealed. Why? It's because the Monarchy and the Anglican Church are the only institutions that are keeping England's Christian identity alive. But the Anglican Church is quickly sliding into heterodoxy that the Queen has made known what she thinks about it. She wasn't amused at all! We can be sure that the Monarchy will be the only Christian institution of State in Britain.
Pope Benedict XVI in his visit to England last year understood this so well and so the Vatican is not thrilled about repealing the Act. This is one thing the Holy See and the Queen are in agreement about. The Queen is not happy about the Anglican Ordinariates in the Catholic Church but she understands very well why there is a need for that.
The worry is that will Britain's Christian identity survive Elizabeth II? And that is why all eyes and ears were on the wedding liturgy which is so permeated by Catholic teaching (even if this was in its Anglican expression). The service was traditional, orthodox and so magnificently Anglican! The choice of hymns was so great. All pay tribute to Christian England!
So let us not be cross when the Queen takes her oath to maintain the "Protestant religion" in England. When she defends classical Anglicanism, she is defending too the liberties of Catholics and other Christians in Britain. There is so much at stake that if consents to religious disestablishment, we can expect the liberties of England so much based on Gospel values as the Holy Father told the English last September, to be lost.
I think you got it all wrong Doc Ben.
ReplyDeleteThe Catholic bishops of England and Wales and even Scotland want to repeal ONLY the anti-Catholic clause not the Act itself. They wanted to retain the Act and keep the Christian character the Sovereign of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms.
If Parliament takes out the anti-Catholic clause in the Act, then the Established church becomes disestablished. I believe this is not in the interest of Christians and even non Christian faith communities in Britain.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that those who advocate repealing the Act are the "progressives" (read as agnostics and atheists). They want to kick out God from public arena. The first step is to get the Anglican bishops out from the Lords so they can push through the anti-faith agenda. The Lord bishops opposed the making civil partnerships between same sex partners as equivalent to marriage. If it were, then a Catholic priest may be forced to solemnize a wedding between two men or two women!
If the Act is repealed, the Monarch (as supreme governor of the Church of England) would become an anachronism for she took her coronation oath to God. And since she is bound by convention to give assents to acts of Parliament if she refuses, this would be a constitutional crisis.
Repealing the Act may really unravel the constitution and threaten liberty of worship. Thank God Rowan of Canterbury came to his senses!
The Catholic faith is no longer proscribed in England and the Queen has attended Catholic services and had a Cardinal preach to her. Thus we should not be overtly troubled about the Protestant ascendancy. The Catholic bishops realize this and the Holy Father knows very well what is at stake. These really are the liberties of the English people which are the same liberties granted by our Pinoy constitution to us. If we kick our God from our public life, expect that we lose our liberties which comes really from Him. The Queen knows this so well when she took her coronation oath. I just hope our Presidents understand this when they take their own oaths of office.
There are a lot of things that are wrong in your response Doc Ben.
ReplyDeleteFirst, "If Parliament takes out the anti-Catholic clause in the Act, then the Established church becomes disestablished. I believe this is not in the interest of Christians and even non Christian faith communities in Britain." - Then you are saying that the Church of England and de facto Anglicanism itself revolves around the Monarch as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England?
There is a simple solution to this problem. Repeal the papist clause and the Act says that only a Christian can become Sovereign of the Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms.
The fear about secularists taking over Kingdom is not a far fetched reality. In fact, it was there many years ago.
As I said, I back the calls of the Roman Catholic bishops for the repeal of the anti-Catholic clause and not the Act itself. Nowhere in my post did I mention repealing the Act.
And lastly, you wrote:
"The Catholic faith is no longer proscribed in England and the Queen has attended Catholic services and had a Cardinal preach to her. Thus we should not be overtly troubled about the Protestant ascendancy."
The Catholic faith not proscribed? Isn't that an oxymoron since we are talking about a anti-Catholic bias in the Act.
I am not hoping to see in my lifetime a Roman Catholic British monarch. Not a chance. What do I care? I am a Pinoy in the Philippines. Would it matter who becomes king or queen of Englad?
What I care about is to see anti-Catholic bias out in that Act. Just that. Not the Act itself.
The Anglican establishment is an Erastian idea. No Monarchy = No Anglicanism vice versa. Even in the USA, the Episcopal Church was "established" since the ruling elite were Episcopalians. Now that the whole idea is passe, look what has happened? Nonetheless one reason why Catholicism is vigorous everywhere is that we have the Pope which we know as Catholics, has no temporal sovereignty over us but has spiritual care. Protestants don't realize this at all.
ReplyDeleteIt would be good if the Parliament will require the monarch to be a Christian. But this is unlikely to happen. The Prince of Wales wants to defend faith NOT defend the Faith! When that happens look at what the secularists will do!
My concern for England is like that of Benedict XVI. God and the Faith must not be sidelined in any public sphere. In England the Monarch is a symbol that that has not yet happened.
Our local "freethinkers" take their cue from their English counterparts. And this is why this whole issue is relevant to us. If it were not relevant to all people of faith, why should the Pope be overtly concerned?
Faithful Anglicans, Roman Catholics and Her Majesty know that the enemy is non-humanistic secularism!
Hmmmm.... I guess you have missed a part of history here. The Church of England separated from the Catholic Church only in administration because King Henry VIII don't want the Pope to intervene with his affairs of marrying Anne Boleyn just to have a successor for the throne. You should watch the movie "Elizabeth". It is a little bit accurate on its details.
ReplyDeleteBut generally, the beliefs, ways, faith, except for the Die hard fan of the popes, Church of England are just the same with the Roman Catholic Church.
Thanks for commenting Vince. Now here are my comments to your comments.
ReplyDeleteHmmmm.... I guess you have missed a part of history here. The Church of England separated from the Catholic Church only in administration because King Henry VIII don't want the Pope to intervene with his affairs of marrying Anne Boleyn just to have a successor for the throne. You should watch the movie "Elizabeth". It is a little bit accurate on its details. [I guess you missed history here my friend. Henry wanted an annulment for the wrong reasons, theologically. He coerced the English bishops to support him. He got all of them, save for one who died being a "die hard fan of the Pope". His name is St. John Fisher. That is how the Church of England started as a national church. It is in schism during the time of Henry, who refused Protestant innovation in the liturgy.]
But generally, the beliefs, ways, faith, except for the Die hard fan of the popes, Church of England are just the same with the Roman Catholic Church. [Yeah, during Henry's time but not now. Women ordination, homosexual "marriage". Nope, not Catholic, not even Christian or Jewish. And the orders, according to Apostolicae Curae, are invalid.]