Catholic kings and protestant people?

The English are neither protestant or catholic. What suits the average Englishman is a very fluid relationship with God. Some have it so fluid as to forget He's there! Most would not like to talk about religion, be questioned about it or to give any in depth interview about it. It's a private matter and that's that.

Currently most English people give the Established Church a wide berth. Even the latest innovations like female clergy, tambourine-type services and a revised liturgy have failed to attract the unchurched in their masses. In essence, the English are in a state of secular serenity tolerating the eccentricities of the Anglican hierachy and are bemused by constitutional niceties.

So, as the Prime minister galivants around the globe, getting lessons in white blue-eyed banking from the Brazilian president (has he any cure for cloth-eared syndrome?), we are given a parliamentary debate on the successon of the monarchy.

Now we all know that Roman Catholics can't marry the monarch. But it isn't as sweetly simple as all that. If Evan Harris succeeds with his bill, does it just stop at marriage. How about raising the children of such a marriage as Roman Catholics? Can a Roman Catholic swear to uphold the "Protestant Religion" which is what the Coronation Oath requires? The answer is probably no. This is just about marriage. So the monarch is not allowed to be a Roman Catholic. It is perfectly lawful to be an Anglican Papalist professing catholic doctrine and attending mass regularly, although it would need to be a particularly Anglican approach to defending "protestantism" at the coronation. Prince Charles has professed a few varied understandings of the Faith, from use of the Prayer Book to being defender of faith. That could mean his own version. I have heard he is not opposed to incense, rather like his aunt Margaret. His mother is not taken with it. Would he be censured for having catholic tendencies rather than papal obedience? It is a problematic minefield, for sure.

So this bill does not end discrimination for the monarch, just the spouse. Odd kind of logic!

Evan Harris is all about equality. His bill talks about "gender" when he actually means sex. The sex of the person in line matters. Females cannot queue jump at the moment. But is this a matter of the system being hereditary as it is or being that the first born gets the title? It could be that those who were born second or third may feel they could be a better heir to the throne.

Personally, I think it best to leave well alone. There is no public clamouring for this change, and even if it were changed according to this bill, the monarch still ends up as a protestant and the younger siblings still get the booby prizes!