Ever since the reign of (I think) Charles II, Catholics have been barred from the throne of England. But the concerns about papal influence and religious conflict have long since vanished into history. The majority of Britons don't bother going to any church anymore. So suppose Charles or William decides to become Catholic. (Leave aside the question of how to deal with the issue of the monarch being the head of the Church of England. Assume to Archbish of Caterbury could exercise the authrity of chief prelate of the C of E if the monarch is a different faith.)
Should a Catholic still be barred from the succession or should that old rule be changed so that religion alone does not bar anyone from assuming the throne?
2006-10-28 16:45:40 · 14 answers · asked by Rob B 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
The Act of Settlement is a relic from troubled times and in my opinion it should be changed to reflect the modern world. It's important to remember that there are more Catholics than Anglicans in the UK these days.
2006-10-29 01:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by canucklehead1951 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you can blithely say, 'Leave aside the question of how to deal with the issue of the Monarch being the head of the Church of England' then you are missing the whole point of why a Catholic can not become the reigning monarch.
As long as the monarchy persists, the ruling monarch will be Church of England. And so will his or her immediate family. The only time a Catholic, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist or anyone else can break into the circle is if they marry into the family, but there is no possibility of them ever taking the throne, so it doesn't really matter what they are.
It's a nice egalitarian thought, to suggest that religion not control who sits on the throne, but the fact is that the ruling house is Church of England, and will remain Church of England, so the question doesn't really apply.
2006-10-29 00:16:19 · answer #2 · answered by old lady 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not likely, since Henry VIII basicly told the Pope to take a hike when the Pope wouldn't allow for the divorce from Catherine of Aragon so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. This is why the Church of England exists, and the monarch is the head of the Church of England -- "Defender of the Faith".
Charles or William will never decide to become Catholic.
Attached is a site with some info that might be of interest.
2006-10-29 00:57:58 · answer #3 · answered by SB 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a contentious issue, with experts debating it for years. But IMO it would be very difficult as the Ruling Monarch is also the Head of the Church of England which is a different denomination then Catholics and neither church recognises the supreme authority of the other, so a conflict of interest would occur.
2006-10-29 02:50:56 · answer #4 · answered by Mike J 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since Henry II, The Britain Monarch is the head of the Anglican Church, The monarch has to change his or her religion to do what you point.
2006-10-29 08:32:03 · answer #5 · answered by pelancha 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
please clear me up via personal email answer (my email addy is posted here): i thought that it was since the reign of henry VIII, who abolished catholism from england when he created the anglican church so that he could divorce one of his poor wives. but tell me about when charles II reigned (before or after henry VIII?) and why you think it was in that reign, not henry's.
britons go to church a plenty. they mostly attend anglican or episcopalian (like catholic) churches.
you can't leave aside the question of how to deal with the monarch being the head of the C of E: that IS the anglican church.
as far as i know, catholic royalty would have to conform to the C of E (anglical) because the king or queen IS, by right, head of the C of E. So this answer sort of goes around in circles.
clear me up (any member can do so, please) at my email. thannks.
2006-10-28 23:58:25 · answer #6 · answered by Louiegirl_Chicago 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My Stuart history is a little hazy. Charles II converted to Catholicism on his deathbed. He was sympathic to Catholics.
James II, Charles' brother had Catholic loyalities. In 1688 William of Orange, who was married to James's daughter Mary, was invited to England. James fled and William and Mary ruled jointly as Anglican Protestants.
2006-10-29 07:44:37 · answer #7 · answered by Thisbysghost 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if it came down to it it would be changed. And considering the church of England (not admitted of course), is a direct desendent of Catholism.
And to the mickey person, not almost all presidents have been Catholic, they have be Christians, yes. President Kennedy was the FIRST Catholic president. And Catholics are Christians.
2006-10-28 23:58:38 · answer #8 · answered by The Invisible Woman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is something only important to Britons. They would have to consider it carefully and maybe have a national vote.
Can't really see either Charles or William converting, though.
2006-10-28 23:57:13 · answer #9 · answered by loryntoo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ummm if your talking about England only Christians will be King or Queen and I think that's fare seeing as royalty stays in the family and the family is Christian. If your talking about Scotland I think they do have a catholic king/queen. If your talking about Northern Ireland then I don't know.......if you speak of Whales I don't know either.....you realize Britain isn't only England but all those kingdoms right?
2006-10-28 23:49:16 · answer #10 · answered by Scrappy Doo 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋