Cameron wrong on the Succession to the Throne

It is not correct to say as Prime Minister Cameron said in the British House of Commons on Wednesday 12 October that Catholics specifically are barred from the throne.

The relevant law – the Act of Settlement 1701 – stipulates that British Sovereigns shall be “heirs of the body of the Electress Sophia of Hannover being Protestant”.  The Act of Settlement, which with the Bill of Rights 1689 and Magna Carta 1215, is arguably one of the most profound of British constitutional enactments, was passed to be simply that – an act of settlement after the turmoil of the seventeenth century.  It is not something that needs “sorting” as Cameron crudely puts it.  The Act of Settlement means that all non-Protestants are excluded, not just Roman Catholics – though the latter, right up to the Vatican, continually put it about that they are singled out and other faiths are not barred.

What makes Catholics exceptional is their insistence on the children of any marriage being brought up as Catholics so that  once either King or Queen were Catholic, the Crown of the United Kingdom would ever after be Catholic – which is why there is a bar on those in line of succession marrying Catholics.

The whole point of the Crown is symbolism to which Protestantism and political freedom are central.  As Pierre Chaunu, Professor of Modern History at the Sorbonne in Paris, author of some 40 books on historical and religious subjects, has pointed out (1988):

            “There is total positive correlation between the Protestant tradition and political regimes of elected representation, e.g. democratic states.  There is not a single Communist regime which has been able to insinuate itself into a country with a Protestant tradition except for East Germany in 1949 where communism was imposed by Soviet military occupation.”

While Protestant religious observance in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand is nowadays pretty vestigial, there is profound belief in its most important political product – democracy, of which the Crown in Parliament is its formal expression.  The notion that one day, as a consequence of facile notions of religious equality turned into Law, the occupant of the British throne could owe even nominal allegiance to a Catholic pope in Rome, however decent and honourable he may be, with all the symbolism of overturning 500 years of freedom from autocracy, will surely be anathema to a large majority of the Queen’s subjects, even if they themselves don’t go to Church very often.

Position of the Church of England

Besides these considerations, there is the little matter of the position of the British monarch as head (Supreme Governor) of the protestant Church of England which position dates from the Elizabeth I Act of Uniformity of  1559, even older than the Act of Settlement.  Doubtless Cameron, with his usual carelessness with facts (hardly an advertisement for his Oxford degree), regards these provisions also as “rules dating from the 17th and 18th centuries which don’t seem particularly consistent with modern values”.  In the same way Cameron’s obsession with homosexuals leads him to dismiss the definition in the Church of England prayer book of “marriage as an honourable estate, ordained by God for the joining together of one man and one woman . . .” a definition upheld throughout Christendom for 2,000 years.  Attempting to violate this most fundamental of human concepts will, it is to be hoped, lead to Cameron’s exit from the political scene.

Why doesn’t Cameron concentrate on the Economy?

With the simultaneous publication (12th October) of a huge rise in UK unemployment to over 8% of those in work or looking for work, and the economy teetering on the edge of depression, practical people will wonder why Cameron doesn’t give all his attention to fixing the economy and the related matter of reducing immigration to “tens of thousands” which he promised to do in the 2010 General Election campaign.  The answer of course is he doesn’t know what to do, nor is he about to abandon his gadfly mental habits (like Tony Blair in fact) of flitting from one subject to another as the mood takes him.  Cameron has no actual understanding of the requirements of either management or leadership.  He puts up with a complete ass, Oliver Letwin, as Minister for Policy.  Letting Liam Fox fly for months around the world on matters with little if any relation to his job as Secretary of State for Defence, responsible for over 300,000 people, which has now (14th October) culminated in his resignation, is only too indicative of Cameron’s lack of grip and concentration.

Cameron’s obsession with “equality”

There is one exception to this generalisation and that is his obsession with “equality”.  Cameron is in fact somewhere to the left of Harriet Harman, the Labour ex-minister for equality and the sponsor of the deeply damaging Equality Act 2006.  As this writer pointed out at the time in the Spectator Magazine in December 2005, when, on the day following his election as Conservative Party leader (December 6th 2005), Cameron was asked by the BBC World at One what would be his first priority as Prime Minister, he replied “getting more women MPs”.  This was just five months after the worst terrorist outrage in Britain since Lockerbie (1988), had taken the lives of 52 people in London, and injured scores of others.

As a true obsessive, he is oblivious of the hurt and outrage he will bring to millions of people, while not creating a single job.  His latest equality forays will upset millions of people in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, who while not being particularly fussed about the law of succession as it stands, will be upset that – as with the marriage laws – the historical custom and conviction of millions will be overturned just to appease narrow cliques of feminist and homosexual activists which have Cameron’s ear.

Why ever was Cameron elected Conservative leader?

The answer appears to be that as part of his leadership bid he made a conference speech without notes which greatly impressed the assembled worthies.  No matter that speeches of comparable length are made daily without notes in Shakespearean repertory around the country, indeed the world, nor that no-one can remember a single word of substance which he said, Britain is landed with a Prime Minister, who along with his equality obsession, is determined (just now) to press ahead with his “Green Economy” obsession.  This would, on present plans to double the price of energy over the next 15 years, turn Britain into an industrial wasteland.  The question is when will the Tories ditch him, before or after the next General Election?

Top| Home

Leave a Reply

Top| Home