The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
It would pass to the next eligible child of the heir who was disqualified for marrying a Catholic, regardless of gender, if they were baptized and raised in union with The Church of England. They do not lose their succession rights unless they were Catholic as well.
 
Last edited:
Assuming of course we remember the male heir still has precedence over females.
 
What if a monarch marries a catholic? he/she renounces to the throne?

We should try to make a list like that from the Denmark's sucesion line, I know only Margrethe & Family, Benedikte and their cousin have the rights but it would still be fun:D ;)
 
But there wouldn't be a problem if the person they married converted would it? What is exactly the law in Holland?I thought it was similar, but Maxima didn't convert.
 
crisiñaki said:
What if a monarch marries a catholic? he/she renounces to the throne?
If the British Monarch marries a Roman Catholic the Act of Settlement states he or she forfeits their rights to the Crown. I guess once the clergyman said "I now pronounce you man and wife" the Monarch would have effectively abdicated and the next in line to the throne automatically becomes King or Queen. However, the Monarch requires the consent of the Government/Parliament to marry, so there would be quite a few hurdles before it reached the stage of a wedding.
 
Aussie Princess said:
But there wouldn't be a problem if the person they married converted would it? What is exactly the law in Holland?I thought it was similar, but Maxima didn't convert.

Correct. There would be no problem if the person converted to the Protestant faith prior to marriage.
 
There also wouldn't be a problem, apparently, if a Protestant spouse converted to Catholicism after the marriage. The Act talks about marrying a Catholic, not being married to one.

I have a feeling that if she'd thought it would get Charles kicked out of the line of succession, the Princess of Wales might have converted. It sounds as though she was interested in the Catholic faith, especially with her mother having converted, and she was also interested in Charles not becoming King once they were separated. Of course, the Queen would have immediately demanded a divorce, but still.
 
There was rumours of Diana converting when the Duchess of Kent did. The press badgered Cardinal Hume for weeks asking if Diana was going to convert.
 
branchg said:
Keep in mind the marriage of an heir to the throne requires the consent of the Queen and Parliament. It is highly unlikely William would be allowed to marry anyone who is not Anglican (i.e. a Muslim) or willing to convert to the Church of England prior to marriage. So, in practice, the Act of Settlement can be used in a number of ways to ensure union with the Church.

The Church of England remains within the temporal power of the Crown and anyone close to the succession must marry someone in communion with it.
HRH Prince William is allowed to marry a girl from another religion except a Muslim and a Roman Catholic.
 
Last edited:
There's no muslim ban although in the present climate, I'm not sure it would go down well. The only faith that has an explicit ban is the Roman Catholic faith but effectively, all other Christian denominations are banned too because the Sovereign must be in communion with the Anglican church.
 
srivishnu said:
The British Royal Family are Anglicans not Protestants.

The Anglican Church falls under the auspices of Protestantism. There are two branches of Christianity: Catholicism and Protestantism. Anglicans, Methodists, and Episcopalians are examples of Protestant Churches. I used to get so confused on this all the time so I just wanted to help others clarify.
 
Well, that's right Lady Marmalade but the Royal Family are Anglicans because they are in communion with the Church of England which although Protestant, is not the same as other Protestant denominations. In Britain, they'd be described as worshipping in High Church which is almost like a seperate branch of the Anglican church although not officially.
 
BeatrixFan said:
There's no muslim ban although in the present climate, I'm not sure it would go down well. The only faith that has an explicit ban is the Roman Catholic faith but effectively, all other Christian denominations are banned too because the Sovereign must be in communion with the Anglican church.
A few years ago after the death of Diana an official at Buckingham Palace on condition of annoynmity has confirmed that The Queen has issued a decree banning members' of her family from marrying a Muslim.They are allowed to marry a person from another denomination of Christianity except a Roman Catholic as long as any child produced are brought up as an Anglican.
 
Hypothetically, I wonder what would happen if one converted to the Protestant faith (from Catholicism) to marry a member of the Brit. Royal Family & they would raise the kids in the CofE, but then a few years later, went back to Catholicism?

Elspeth said:
There also wouldn't be a problem, apparently, if a Protestant spouse converted to Catholicism after the marriage. The Act talks about marrying a Catholic, not being married to one.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
The Anglican Church falls under the auspices of Protestantism. There are two branches of Christianity: Catholicism and Protestantism. Anglicans, Methodists, and Episcopalians are examples of Protestant Churches. I used to get so confused on this all the time so I just wanted to help others clarify.

While most of us of the Christian faith in the Western world (and former colonies like us) know of only these two divisions, there is another branch i.e. the Eastern Orthodox churches e.g. Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox. I only became aware of this line when the Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt was established in my country.
 
srivishnu said:
A few years ago after the death of Diana an official at Buckingham Palace on condition of annoynmity has confirmed that The Queen has issued a decree banning members' of her family from marrying a Muslim.They are allowed to marry a person from another denomination of Christianity except a Roman Catholic as long as any child produced are brought up as an Anglican.
I very much doubt the Queen has "issued a decree banning members of her family from marrying a Muslim". Sounds like nonsense to me. Is there a reliable source for this?
 
srivishnu said:
It would be shameful for a royal to marry a Muslim and then convert.
"Shameful" for who? How? Why?
Rather than making these pronouncements as statements of fact, it would be better to give reasons for such opinions, and preferably based on something of substance.
The relevance of this to the Line of Succession would be also be welcome.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator
 
Royal families need to represent and reflect their country. Spain is Catholic, Britain is largely Protestant. Culturally these countries reflect this fact in official ceremonies,etc, (which should, of course, not have anything to do with the individial subject's personal religion).

If something works, there is no point in rushing to change it for political correctness.

There is no law that would stop William marrying a Muslim, Hindu or Jew. But if it was likely to cause a constitutional crisis the girl would probably be asked to convert, or the Queen would refuse to give permission in line with the Royal Marriages Act.
 
A few years ago after the death of Diana an official at Buckingham Palace on condition of annoynmity has confirmed that The Queen has issued a decree banning members' of her family from marrying a Muslim.

No, that isn't correct at all I'm afraid. The Queen doesn't issue decrees. A decision like that would have to go through Parliament and the media would have had a field day. So no, it didn't happen.

Hypothetically, I wonder what would happen if one converted to the Protestant faith (from Catholicism) to marry a member of the Brit. Royal Family & they would raise the kids in the CofE, but then a few years later, went back to Catholicism?

Well Lady J, it's an interesting one. The Duchess of Kent converted and the Duke still kept his place in succession because he hadn't married a Catholic, she had converted after their marriage. The Kent's children kept their places in succession until they converted and lost their places. That does beg the question of what would happen, if the Prince of Wales married a protestant but she converted when she was Queen Consort.
 
I think that as long as the children were still raised in the Church of England (or whichever Protestant denomination they were being raised in), it wouldn't cause a problem. If the Duke of Kent remained in the line of succession it would set a precedent for a future monarch or heir, since the ban on Catholic marriage extends to the Kents and has affected both the Duke's brother and his sons.
 
BeatrixFan said:
No, that isn't correct at all I'm afraid. The Queen doesn't issue decrees. A decision like that would have to go through Parliament and the media would have had a field day. So no, it didn't happen.



Well Lady J, it's an interesting one. The Duchess of Kent converted and the Duke still kept his place in succession because he hadn't married a Catholic, she had converted after their marriage. The Kent's children kept their places in succession until they converted and lost their places. That does beg the question of what would happen, if the Prince of Wales married a protestant but she converted when she was Queen Consort.
After the wedding of Prince Charles with Camilla Parker Bowles last year,The Queen revamped the precedence order of members' of the royal family which is known as "Precedence to be Observed at Court" where HRH Princess Alexandra is listed the second most senior royal lady after The Queen and is followed by HRH Princess Anne,the Princess Royal.Isn't that known as royal decree?If it is,then no need to get the Parliament's permission as it is the internal affair of the royal family.
 
Elspeth said:
Thanks, Norwegianne! With both Taylor girls in there, this one does look up to date.

No, Prince Sverre Magnus should supercede his sister Princes Ingrid Alexander.
 
Elspeth said:
I think that as long as the children were still raised in the Church of England (or whichever Protestant denomination they were being raised in), it wouldn't cause a problem. If the Duke of Kent remained in the line of succession it would set a precedent for a future monarch or heir, since the ban on Catholic marriage extends to the Kents and has affected both the Duke's brother and his sons.

That brought to my mind two questions,
1. if the person listed in the Sucession Line marries a catholic, and later that spouse converts to the Church of England, does the person in the line of sucession gets his/her's position re-established? For example, the Prince of Kent.

2. anyone knows what is the protocol if a member of the Royal Family (extended members included) marries a Catholic, like is the catholic spouse-to-be approached in an attempt to convert to the church of England? Are they given options and made aware of the consequences?
 
Last edited:
Toledo said:
That brought to my mind two questions,
1. if the person listed in the Sucession Line marries a catholic, and later that spouse converts to the Church of England, do the person in the line of sucession gets his/her's position re-established? For example, the Prince of Kent.

Once out of the line of succession you are out forever - no going back.

This is in case the following scenario unfolded. (There were probably other reasons at the time but this is a problem that could arise)

William marries a Catholic and is excluded from the line of succession.

The Queen and Charles die.

Either William's eldest son/daughter if any or Harry inherits the throne.

Then William's wife converts to COE - who is not the monarch - the proclaimed monarch or William whose wife is now COE.


2. anyone knows what is the protocol if a member of the Royal Family (extended members included) marries a Catholic, like is the catholic spouse-to-be approached in an attempt to convert to the church of England? Are they given options and made aware of the consequences?

I would expect that if William or Harry wanted to marry a Catholic then the girl would be asked to convert but if further down the line of succession then probably no-one would bother to ask them e.g. Prince Michael of Kent.
 
srivishnu said:
After the wedding of Prince Charles with Camilla Parker Bowles last year,The Queen revamped the precedence order of members' of the royal family which is known as "Precedence to be Observed at Court" where HRH Princess Alexandra is listed the second most senior royal lady after The Queen and is followed by HRH Princess Anne,the Princess Royal.Isn't that known as royal decree?If it is,then no need to get the Parliament's permission as it is the internal affair of the royal family.

Precedence is a private affair and Her Majesty's "decree" only applies at court and not at other events. Therefore it is not in the same domain as the line of succession. Also HRH Princess Alexandra, The Hon. Lady Ogilvy is after HRH The Princess Royal in the Precedence at court, as Anne is the Daughter of The Sovereign while Alexandra is only a cousin.
 
chrissy57 said:
I would expect that if William or Harry wanted to marry a Catholic then the girl would be asked to convert but if further down the line of succession then probably no-one would bother to ask them e.g. Prince Michael of Kent.
Princess Michael was asked to convert but she refused.
 
Warren said:
"Shameful" for who? How? Why?
Rather than making these pronouncements as statements of fact, it would be better to give reasons for such opinions, and preferably based on something of substance.
The relevance of this to the Line of Succession would be also be welcome.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator
Just say,HRH Prince William marries a Muslim girl and he converts to Islam,wouldn't it embarass and disgrace the royal family?Moreover,he is the heir to the British throne.When the late Princess Diana was "flirting" with Dodi Al-Fayed (a Muslim),it did disgraced the royal family especially The Queen as Diana is the mother of the future British monarch.Do you think The Queen would tolerate to see the mother of Britain's Head of State a Muslim?
 
Last edited:
srivishnu said:
Just say,HRH Prince William marries a Muslim girl and he converts to Islam,wouldn't it embarass and disgrace the royal family?Moreover,he is the heir to the British throne.When the late Princess Diana was "flirting" with Dodi Al-Fayed (a Muslim),it did disgraced the royal family especially The Queen as Diana is the mother of the future British monarch.Do you think The Queen would tolerate to see the mother of Britain's Head of State a Muslim?

Diana dating Dodi Fayed ( he never used the 'al' unlike his father who had more social pretentions) didn't affect the royal family, negative stories are all tabloid stories originating from Mohamed al Fayed and his conspiracy theories.

Why would William convert if he married a Muslim? ( Non Muslims do marry Muslims without converting) The issue with him converting to any religion is that the monarch is also the Head of the Church of England, William would need to be of that religion. He can't really convert to another Protestant church either ( eg Lutheran) but only conversion to catholicism would get him struck off the line of succession. Converting to Islam wouldn't.

Why view Islam so negatively, that the royal family would be disgraced and embarrassed? Charles in particular is quite sympathetic to Islam and does a lot to try and present the positive aspects and understanding of Islam, also Islamic art. The Queen and Charles have visited mosques in the UK.
Charles himself has stated that he would like to be "Defender of all Faiths" thereby including all Christian and non-christian religions when he is king. Currently the monarch is "The Defender of The Faith" The Faith being the Church of England.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom