Queen Beyonce I
And it’s especially pleasing to see it written about so articulately by a Jew – Our island must stop living in the Tudor past, David Aaronovitch, The Times 24th January 2013.
Having lived abroad (and lived very comfortably) I am one of those immigrants whose choice to live in England permits me a selective blindness when it comes to recognizing this country’s faults. But of course it should be obvious for all to see how particularly something like the 1701 Act of Settlement is absurd, or – as Aaronovitch puts it, “…an anachronism when anachronisms were young”.
It was the issue of Issue that led to the schism, we recall. Henry VIII, denied the right by Rome to divorce his barren wife, contrived both to assure his line and still be obedient to the Church…to a church… to his own church. By all accounts it was all done very quickly, which is at odds with the question our columnist today poses: why is Britain so slow to change? But in one context at least, this country is not slow to change…
After finding itself facing a decline in numbers, in under a generation the Church of England has embarked on a catastrophic series of ‘upgrades’, in an effort to become more popular. In a very short space of time the subjects of women priests, homosexual clergy and women bishops have been hotly debated and passed into church law (or not) in a raggle-taggle way, so that dissent is more widespread than acceptance and none of the sides of any argument is wholly satisfied.
While my own vested interest as a Papist must be declared, I wouldn’t mind a jot to see the Act of Settlement binned for the sclerotic piece of ordinance it is. But seeing what being-in-a rush has done to the Anglican Communion I can at least sympathize with those reluctant to see any changes in this Catholic question happen quickly.
Aside from causing a schism within itself due to doctrinal differences, the sheer managerial mayhem of current Church of England re-positioning is appalling. Allowing the ordination of women priests caused huge upset among traditionalists. However, as all professionals are wont to do, lady vicars would have expected the right to progress in a corporate fashion and achieve promotion to management positions (bishoprics) that seems wrong to deny. So that wasn’t thought through.
Then, having embarked on a course of craven populism, the further embracing of homosexual clergy seemed a good bet to engender further affirmation and more bums on seats of a Sunday. Now, however, through once again failing to think things through, the Church of England plans to oil the wheels of gay advancement at least by making celibacy in a same-sex relationship a condition of earning the mitre. But in so doing, it denies hapless gay clergy what should be considered a wholly fulfilled life from an emotional and sexual viewpoint. And how on earth do they propose to police this?
On balance, then, I am inclined to let any repeal of the Act of Settlement happen at a more measured and considered pace to avoid further mayhem. After all, if the Tudor Henry was able to go from being plus catholique que le pape to outright rebellion in his own interest (and in so ruthless and efficient a manner) is it not reasonable to anticipate that at such time as William and Kate’s child Beyonce I takes the throne, if her heart leads her to marry a Catholic or a Jew or Muslim, she will see that any civil or canon law that prevents her doing so will be done away with pretty damn quickly anyway?