The British Government want to change the rules regarding succession to the throne...which is a bit odd, and all in the name of equal opportunities...its harmless really...who cares if you make it so the first born irrespective of Gender takes the throne, vs first born male over first born female.
But the British Government have slipped something else into the same Act that they are trying to rush through the Parliament before the Birth of the next Heir, about 8 months time...which is more problematic.
They want to allow the Monarch to marry Roman Catholics...something Banned by a document called "The Act of Settlement" which was the legal end of the Reformation....the Historic Vote passed under Elizabeth I who locked up half the Roman Lords Spiritual moments before the Vote so they wouldnt looose it
Now...Unlike America...England doesnt have a Defined, Written, Single document it calls a Constitution...but...a Number of Documents are considered the basis for what is called the consitutional Monarchy.
The First Document is The Magna Carta Libertatum, The Major Document of Liberty, which was Signed under King John, when his Barons bartered for their Rights in the 1200s...when you look at their list of greviances, and place it next to the American Declaration of Independance...its shocking that more then half the points on the American List, are the same as the points on the list drawn up from the Barons, half a millenia before. The Magna Carta outlines what a GOOD Monarch should be like in dealing with their Subjects.
The Second Document is called The Act of Settlement. When King Henry broke from Rome and Established a Church all seemed to be well, until he died. The problem with an established church is that the Monarch MUST be a member, so the next set of Monarchs were Roman Catholics, and they obviously tried to reverse King Henry, but then the third wave were Anglican again. its THIS that inspired the American Settlers to avoid an Established Church
The Third Document is Called The Declaration of Breda, which kicked off loads of laws about the Restoration of The Monarchy after the Civil War and the Protectorate failure. This ensures a Monarchy exists, and prevents a Sole Republic
The Fourth Document is Called The Declaration of Right, which underpinned the Glorious Revolution, this constricted the Monarchy and outlawed the Crown from acting without Parliamentary consent. It listed what the Monarch couldnt do on their own.
The Fifth Document was the Coronational Oath
If The Magna Carta Libertatum, The Act of Settlement, The Declaration of Right and The Coronation Oath Act are the agreed basis of the British Constitution, Why is it alright for the Government to mess with the bits pertaining to the Crown, but NOT okay for the Crown to mess with the bits pertaining to the Government??
The British Government are planning on reversing half of The Act of Settlement, which, in short, was the Legal end result of the Reformation, the basis of an Established Protestant Church, and the Basis of Joint Church and State through the Crown. It states very clearly that if the Monarch is the head of State, the Monarch must therefore be the Head of the Established Church also. Being that the Established Church CAN NOT be Roman Catholic, as it is a Counter Culture, Obviousy the Monarch and their Family CAN NOT be Roman Catholic. To do so disqualifies you from being an Heir. The British Government believe its fine however for a Protestant Monarch to marry a Roman Catholic Consort. Which is fine until the couple then has offspring who are bought up eccumenical at best. How then can they be expected to be Defenders of the Anglican Church Specifically, which is NOT in communion with Rome. The result either leads to the dis-establishment of the Church, OR, it leads to the same problems encountered in the Tudor Generations Between Henry and Elizabeth. Its considered within the Governments power to alter this point...and yet, classed at the same level, is a document that forbids various actions the Monarch Can do without Government Consensus that would be seen by many as really bad if they were so easily changed. Supposing we just tweak that bit in the Declaration of Right that says the Monarch CAN NOT assume and exercise the dispensation of direct power, or "Violate" the Ellective process of MPs....its fine for an Ellected Dictatorship to "Violate" both the people and the Crown? To change the fundemental basis of the entire political structure is the VERY THING that in each case brought about the four mentioned documents designed to stop unilateralism. They havent saved us from Dictatorial Governance....They've just stolen absolute power for themselves
The Queen, who didnt have any choice, basically said that the entire commonwealth would have to give their consent as well as both chambers of the Government. This has now happened. But to become law, the Document must be passed by the House of Lords.
In the House of Lords are a remenant of whats known as "The Lords Spiritual" The heirachy of the Church of England...and today, they basically said that the Convocation of Bishops were thinking of voting against this measure.