The Act of Settlement and the Line of Succession

[MAfan]

If Prince and Pincess Michael would divorce, would he get his place in the Line of Succession back?

[Al_bina]

I do not think it is important for Prince Michael to have a place in the succession line. What special meaning does the place in the succession line have for Prince Michael at this point in time? His children have got the above mentioned place. That is all.

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by MAfan

If Prince and Pincess Michael would divorce, would he get his place in the Line of Succession back?

In a nutshell- No

[MAfan]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

I do not think it is important for Prince Michael to have a place in the succession line. What special meaning does the place in the succession line have for Prince Michael at this point in time? His children have got the above mentioned place. That is all.

Yes, I agree with you, but if hypotethically he would be the next family member after the Sovereign, would he get his place in the succession line back if he would divorce from his catholic wife?

If I remember correctly, he has lost his place in the succession only because of his wedding to a catholic woman...

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by MAfan

If I remember correctly, he has lost his place in the succession only because of his wedding to a catholic woman...

Yes you're right but it's not reversable once cut out that's it

[RoyalProtocol]

Here's what some of today's Times letters had to say on the issue of a Catholic on the Throne

Catholic could govern supreme -Times Online

[Incas]

Could Gordon’s plans for royals lead to a dis-United Kingdom? - Eric Waugh, Columnists - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Various theories are abroad as to why, in the midst of the worst economic crisis in 80 years, the Prime Minister has chosen to launch himself on the reef-strewn shoals of religion, Catholics and the Crown.

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by Incas

Could Gordon’s plans for royals lead to a dis-United Kingdom? - Eric Waugh, Columnists - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Various theories are abroad as to why, in the midst of the worst economic crisis in 80 years, the Prime Minister has chosen to launch himself on the reef-strewn shoals of religion, Catholics and the Crown.

IMHO HM Govt. is using this as a very nice distraction from the economic doom and gloom and don't have any real desire to see changes to the succession laws

[Incas]

It was a curious timing for Downing Street to make a point of it. Awhile back, when the european royal houses were changing their succession laws with birth of girls as first borns, there were talk about the same for Britain. I wonder why that wasn't followed through then.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Incas

It was a curious timing for Downing Street to make a point of it. Awhile back, when the european royal houses were changing their succession laws with birth of girls as first borns, there were talk about the same for Britain. I wonder why that wasn't followed through then.

It was discussed in 1982 when Diana was pregnant with William and simply died when he was born.

It may very well take a new pregnancy, and even birth of a daughter, followed by a son, to change things. Otherwise it is simply a distraction from matters that need more urgent consideration IMHO.

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by Incas

It was a curious timing for Downing Street to make a point of it. Awhile back, when the european royal houses were changing their succession laws with birth of girls as first borns, there were talk about the same for Britain. I wonder why that wasn't followed through then.

I doubt it'll be followed through with now either, number 10 just want a bucket of water to quell the flames of the recession and other media muckups and this was a handy bucket to grab. I believe, IMVHO, that The Queen will never allow it, so any changes will have to waith until the next reign, and hopefully our future sovereigns will see sense and say NO

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by RoyalProtocol

I doubt it'll be followed through with now either, number 10 just want a bucket of water to quell the flames of the recession and other media muckups and this was a handy bucket to grab. I believe, IMVHO, that The Queen will never allow it, so any changes will have to waith until the next reign, and hopefully our future sovereigns will see sense and say NO

The monarch can't actually say 'No'.

If it passes both Houses of Parliament the monarch has to give it the Royal Assent.

[wbenson]

I could see her being a little more forceful (all behind the scenes, of course), if it was a unilateral move by the UK to change succession, but if all or most of her governments advise her to approve of such a change, I really don't see how she could refuse.

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

The monarch can't actually say 'No'.

If it passes both Houses of Parliament the monarch has to give it the Royal Assent.

I know she can't say no outright- but she could advise her opinion to her Prime Minister, and since the Crown is a matter for the Commonwealth I'm sure they would at least listen to what Her Majesty had to say.

When they tried to remove The Queen from postage stamps in the early 1970s she said No firmly but in her ever gracious manner and she's still on the stamps today!

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by RoyalProtocol

---- IMVHO, that The Queen will never allow it, so any changes will have to waith until the next reign, and hopefully our future sovereigns will see sense and say NO

I don't feel that HM is against it, otherwise it simply wouldn't have made the papers. HM's talks with the PM are private, afterall. They do have to look at the logistics of a change and I would hope that HM can see that it is wrong to discriminate on the basis of faith.

[RoyalProtocol]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I don't feel that HM is against it, otherwise it simply wouldn't have made the papers. HM's talks with the PM are private, afterall. They do have to look at the logistics of a change and I would hope that HM can see that it is wrong to discriminate on the basis of faith.

Well on the point of confidences, I think the PM just can't hold his water and leaked this one. While it may have been meantioned I doubt it got as much attention as he is making out, and I think The Queen will not see this as a matter of discrimination but a principal in which she belives. She obviously has no problem with Catholics (and very rightly so) she has met The Pope on several occasions and has a cathloic Earl Marshall and many "loyal Catholic subjects). I just think HM is a traditionalist and likes to keep things like this the way they are. She has been a wonderful Queen and on this issue of Primogeniture I think there may be some movement, but not in the current reign.

[sthreats]

But how would it work in real life if the Act were changed? The monarch is also the 'head' of the Anglican Church. When a Catholic and non Catholic marry the non Catholic has to agree to respect and support the teachings of the Church and (when I married in the late 80s) to raise the kids Catholic. This is a solemn written agreement that must be done prior to be married in the Catholic Church by a priest. So if the royal is the Anglican and the future spouse is serious about her/his faith it seems to me that future generations of royal kids could be Catholic (or Muslim, Hindu etc). Is the real issue being raised here the link between the monarch and the Anglican Church? Is Brown looking to a secular monarchy in the future?FYI The weekend edition of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL had a half page story on Brown attempting to change the Act. The journal also raised the issue of why now? with the economy, summit etc.

[Skydragon]

Disestablishment has been talked about many times before, I believe it will happen eventually.
Debate on disestablishment | UK news | The Guardian
Commons call to disestablish church is number 666 -Times Online

[sthreats]

Diestablishment. This is what I thought. Then BROWN should be honest about what the goal is. Isn't this something for the people of the Commonwealth/United Kingdom to both initiate the debate and decide?What does he think--I'll save some money by closing the state sponsored churches and the monarchy? Sorry for the early am sarcasm but this economic meltdown is really showing me how pitiful most politicians are both here in the U.S. and abroad.Pray and PeaceOut.