The Royal Succession

October 22nd, 2011 at 11:12 am by David Farrar

Reuters reports:

A plan to overturn a 300-year-old ban on heirs to the throne marrying Roman Catholics and end discrimination against royal daughters is likely to be approved at a summit of leaders of Commonwealth nations next week, the government has said.

Both these changes are welcome steps forward. It means the oldest child of William and Catherine will be the Monarch after William, regardless of gender.

However while a Royal can now marry a Catholic, they can not themselves be Catholic.

This means that so long as NZ remains a monarchy, our head of state by law can only be Anglican. I think such religious discrimination has no place in the 21st century.

Tags: ,

54 Responses to “The Royal Succession”

  1. Brian Smaller (3,992 comments) says:

    Errrr….they have to be an Anglican because they are the Defender of the Faith. Symbolic head of the Anglican Church and all that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. thedavincimode (6,539 comments) says:

    Woops. Too quick on the trigger – saw the headline and thought it was about the fuckwit Goff.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Longknives (4,464 comments) says:

    I’d like to hear from My Name is Jack regarding these issues- He brings such balance and dignified perspective to such discussions…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. gump (1,488 comments) says:

    Religious discrimination?

    Don’t be ridiculous. The Catholic Church disallows Anglicans from becoming Pope – is that also religious discrimination?

    The British Monarch is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. It isn’t possible for a Catholic to hold this position.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. David Farrar (1,855 comments) says:

    The point is our head of state shouldn’t be the head of a religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. tas (596 comments) says:

    I agree, church and state should be kept separate.

    I thought the law only prevented catholics from becoming king or queen. So an atheist could still be king/queen. (I think enough of the Church of England is de facto atheist that it wouldn’t really matter.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    Interestingly, Sir Anand Satyanand was the is first Roman Catholic Governor-General.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Thank Gaia Helen Clark isn’t a Catholic.

    Of course she will probably have to become a Taniwha to realise her desire to become our first republican Head of State. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Francis_X (149 comments) says:

    Now if the Reuters article stated,

    “A plan to overturn a 300-year-old ban on heirs to the throne marrying Gays and Lesbians and end discrimination against all women is likely to be approved at a summit of leaders of Commonwealth nations next week, the government has said.”

    Now THAT would be a real story!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Trevor Mallard (245 comments) says:

    You may have been correct in the past David but NZ can in fact pass legislation with different succession arrangements to England. Unlikely but possible.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Francis_X (149 comments) says:

    # David Farrar (1,516) Says: “The point is our head of state shouldn’t be the head of a religion.”

    Careful, DPF – that sounds perilously close to leftist doctrine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. tvb (4,208 comments) says:

    I assume David Cameron will discuss this when he comes to NZ and will have meetings with other party leaders on this issue. I have no problem with this. Interestingly it will bump Princess Anne up the succession list. Most people regard her as the best of the Queen’s children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Can nasty little adulterers with airbrushed election posters ever become heads of state Trev? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    David Farrar (1,516) Says:

    October 22nd, 2011 at 11:37 am
    The point is our head of state shouldn’t be the head of a religion.

    And the best way to do that is dump the crown and become a Republic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Don the Kiwi (1,593 comments) says:

    Anglicanism is the state religion of England since QE I. Fortunately, at the Treaty of Waitangi, the Roman Catholic Bishop Pompalier insisted on freedom of religion in NZ, thus preventing Anglicanism being the state religion of NZ.
    Church and state should be separate – too many times throughout history, one or the other has had too much influence in the others affairs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. PaulL (5,873 comments) says:

    Sorry DPF, this is a bit pointless.

    The problem that you have is that our head of state is always one of the royal family. Since they’re all Anglicans, it makes little difference whether we in theory could have a catholic as head of state – there’s currently no real way that could happen. You’re making an inane point, you’d have been better to say “nice tidy up of the succession law, but really, why do we have a royal family at all” than dig out this pointless problem.

    As for me, in theory I’d like a NZ head of state, preferably an elected dictatorship with me as the dictator. Failing my preference, I find it very unlikely we’ll get a head of state in arrangements that I think are useful, so I have no real interest in changing from our current head of state, who is effectively the governor general, and whom is quite inexpensive to run (in the scheme of things).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. kowtow (7,634 comments) says:

    Trying to apply notions of “equality” to monarchy is ridiculous.

    Just accept that it has served us well in the past and can do in the future.

    Brian Smaller: Defender of the Faith is a Papal title given to Henry VIII for his anti Luther treatise.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. BlairM (2,287 comments) says:

    The King or Queen can be a Scientologist for all I care, as long as NZ has an elected Governor General and a proper constitution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. gump (1,488 comments) says:

    @kowtow

    The Papal title given to Henry VIII was revoked by the Catholic church after he broke away to form the Church of England.

    It was reintroduced as a Protestant title in the late 1600s (following the restoration) and has been in use ever since.

    If you’re interested in reading more, the wiki article on this topic is surprisingly good.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidei_defensor

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Lucia Maria (2,208 comments) says:

    There have been three Catholic monarchs since Henry VIII; Mary I, Charles I, James II.

    Charles was executed and James was deposed. Could be that being Catholic and an English King is dangerous for the health.

    But, that aside, it seems strange that during the reigns of these three, the Anglican Church survived. It would probably survive a Catholic king or queen now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Lucia comes to call.


    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. reid (15,954 comments) says:

    The inconvenient truth for the Republican Movement is that Westminster democracy isn’t broken, just like the Privy Council wasn’t.

    The fact is, NZ gets tremendous value for money out of an extremely wise, mature, well-tried, true and trusted form of governance.

    Any Republic becomes our sole financial responsibility and the only thing the Republicans can say as to why this should be a good thing, ultimately boils down to the same thing lefties always use: “cause it gives us a weally warm tummy.”

    Sorry, but since Westminster democracy isn’t broken, this isn’t a very persuasive argument.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Lucia Maria (2,208 comments) says:

    Johnboy,

    I wouldn’t be saying that cold is God’s way of telling us to burn more Catholics!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Scott Chris (5,881 comments) says:

    reid stoically proclaims:- “since Westminster democracy isn’t broken, this isn’t a very persuasive argument”

    I admire your traditionalist mettle reid. Shows you have a sentimental streak, albeit a tad misplaced. An institution doesn’t have to be broken to have become redundant and anachronistic.

    I know you’re vewry vewry attached to Lizzie the second, but when she dies, she will become Lizzie the Last.

    My old man was very fond of his 1926 Austin 12/4 Windsor Saloon, enjoyed polishing it and tinkering with it and finding parts for it, but one day he just asked, “what’s the point” and flogged it off.

    Now drives a rather smart Aston Martin V8 Vantage. Makes him feel relevant, rather than antiquated, though still faithful to his English heritage.

    FORWARD THE REPUBLIC OF ZELANDIA!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Michael (896 comments) says:

    Never picked you as a disestablishmentarian monarchist, David.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Have you moved with the times and installed a heatpump Lucia?

    Do you wear crosses? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    The accession of Charles the Third and the Duchess of Cornhole could perhaps revive your old mans interest in vintage Pom Scotty.

    He may trade his Vantage for a Morrie 1100 if he can find one in good nick. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    When big ears becomes our king the monarchy will die.
    Do we really want a building hugging alt med nut case as our leader?

    Long live the Pacific republic of New Zealand. New flag anthem and all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Be careful what you wish for Griff.

    You might get Auntie Helen as your new cheerleader after her little junket at the UN is over.

    I’d take Wingnut any day given the choice! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    Helen kack
    Why do people have to bring up the revolting harpy all the time

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    DPF

    The Queen is also head of the armed forces and a whole lot of other stuff, you are just being a tad sad singling out the religion side of it pushing your desire to be a republic.

    Just cost alone should preclude any thought of republicanism. General elections , presidential elections. For us humans there are more things to life than politicians

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Scott Chris (5,881 comments) says:

    Johnboy

    He has wedding footage of him and Mum disappearing off into the sunset in a 1953 Morris Minor series 2 with the split screen.

    Not so keen on the 1100. Back in the 70s as kids, the one Mum was driving’s horn got stuck.

    Man we got some dirty looks.

    Traumatized the fuck outa me.

    Only now gettin over it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Cause it is what you get if you depose the pommy inbreeds Griff.

    An A1 genuine NZ inbreed as head of state with all the associated expense.

    Me. I’ll take Queenie and her inbreeds anytime.

    The bloody poms pay for them.

    The least the bastards could do for saddling us with the treaty! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Know what you are saying Scotty.

    Last time I got my horn stuck in something that moved it was all I could do to avoid a criminal record.

    But Gay marriage is OK!

    Sheesh! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. reid (15,954 comments) says:

    So pray tell then Scott precisely how is Westminster democracy broken and why does the extent to which it apparently in your view is, make it worth the hundreds of millions and over time, billions, which it will cost to setup an Executive Branch, which is what you silly Republicans want, isn’t it?

    In other words give us a rational and compelling Business Case for Republicanism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    I have a dream were we dump the poms and the treaty in the trash.
    To bad its only a dream.

    Yes if we go to a republic it will cost way to much some idiots will want all the trappings of a president at great cost and no benefit. Probably end up being held by a PC Kiwifruit from a certain minority.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. reid (15,954 comments) says:

    Further to 4:44

    Warning: warm tummy arguments don’t normally comprise a rational and compelling business case. So no “mouse that roared” bollocks, just straight, hard-nosed evidence of:

    a) the reasons why Westminster democracy is fundamentally broken and cannot be continued and
    b) just exactly what over and above a warm tummy, Republicanism is going to give us, in terms of “profits” which can be interpreted in any way you wish, not just monetary but patriotism, social well being, democratic fairness, international cache, anyway you want. It just has to be an evident, logical outcome of becoming a Republic which we wouldn’t otherwise gain or don’t already have, through being what we currently are.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    We will never dump the treaty Griff.

    It is the Murris passport to a bright new future where they get to lord it over all the rest of us and we pick up the tab.

    The only way it will go is when the Chinese foreclose on our mortgage and start calling the shots. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. tvb (4,208 comments) says:

    I have been watching the coverage of her trip to Australia. Why is Sydney missing out I wonder. But really there she is speaking in platitudes saying nothing meaningful wearing those old fashioned clothes -gloves hats. But she is deeply respected even if the institution is pure bunk.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Scott Chris (5,881 comments) says:

    reid says:- “how is Westminster democracy broken?”

    I didn’t say it was broken, only that it is sorely in need of an overhaul. Whilst I’m constantly dismayed by the behaviour of politicians in the debating chamber, it seems that we would have to use the Westminster system as a template and in doing so, replace the Queen as head of state with a President.

    How much power s/he will have is dependent on the constitution, which is the real problem IMO.

    Like the British constitution, our constitution is a patchwork quilt consisting of a collection of statutes, Treaties, Orders in Council and a few other bits and pieces.

    There is no one supreme document.

    The New Zealand constitution is not formally entrenched.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Hell tvb. If you were picking a HOS would you go for say Julia/Helen or stick with Queenie? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Scott Chris (5,881 comments) says:

    Johnboy says:- “Last time I got my horn stuck in something”

    Perhaps you have a dog’s penis Johnboy.

    Did know that a dog’s penis has a bone in it? Thing is, when he first mounts the bitch, the penis isn’t really erect, so the bone gives it rigidity.

    Once inside, the head of the penis expands locking the dogs horn inside.

    That is why you should never separate dogs fucking, cause it can damage the bitch’s vagina.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canine_reproduction

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Good grief Scotty you really are a handy font for us dumb fucks to gain knowledge.

    I shall carefully inspect my penis and if I can’t decide what species it belongs to I shall get my bitch to sniff it.

    I’ll get back to you later. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    The Royal Succession and a dog penis Gee tangential thinking is such fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Johnboy (14,998 comments) says:

    Only on KB Griff.

    They would have banned us all years ago on the Stranded. :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. reid (15,954 comments) says:

    I didn’t say it was broken, only that it is sorely in need of an overhaul. Whilst I’m constantly dismayed by the behaviour of politicians in the debating chamber, it seems that we would have to use the Westminster system as a template and in doing so, replace the Queen as head of state with a President.

    Scott I’m extremely disappointed. There is a profound difference between a system and the way that system is operated by the incumbents. Just cos the incumbents operate it badly doesn’t mean it’s the system’s fault.

    Contrast as a mere example for there are thousands of examples: Hunt/Wilson vs Smith. What a difference. But same system.

    So sorry mate, can’t see anything systemically wrong there personally. Apart from the fact the incumbents are flawed. The fundamental flaw in Westminster democracy IMO is that it lets people like Liarbore anywhere near it. If it could find a way to avoid that, it would be perfect.

    Secondly, as a matter of fact, our Constitution is made up of a number of Statutes and Conventions both ancient and modern starting with the Magna Carta and going from there. The fact it’s not codified into single documents such as the US Declaration of Independence, does not make it any the less known or enforceable, as a constitution. Just ask any Constitutional Lawyer, such as Mai Chen, for example. Apparently, she manages to make a rather tidy living out of doing mostly, just that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Scott Chris (5,881 comments) says:

    reid says:- “our Constitution is made up of a number of Statutes and Conventions both ancient and modern starting with the Magna Carta”

    That is the point I’m making. Something that grew out of assumptions and ideas that are completely alien to modern society surely needs a thorough assessment to see what remains relevant.

    But first, I suggest we start again from first principles, defining:

    Who are we?
    What is morality?
    What do we want to achieve?
    What is society?
    What is government?
    What is freedom?
    What is justice?
    How do we best achieve our aspirations?

    Then we have the basis from which a new constitution can be written, and for the new law that springs from that brand new constitution. It will bear many similarities what had gone before, but would be *one cohesive entity* rather than an accumulation of detritus.

    In this way, we can design a system from the ground up that is unencumbered by erroneous and anachronistic assumptions, that were relevant only to the unenlightened societies that originally built them.

    I’ll use this analogy. London is an ancient city, with many beautiful buildings and parks and shops and museums.

    But some parts are run down, the streets are too narrow and the infrastructure is old and crumbling. In effect, it is extremely inefficient.

    If London were merely pieces of paper, you could keep the good bits and reorganize them so they work better, with wider streets, a brand new infrastructure, a state of the art mass transit system etc…

    Suddenly, the whole thing would work much better.

    You want to hang on to the old London reid, because you love it the way it is.

    I want to keep what is good about London, but make it work more efficiently.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. davidp (3,540 comments) says:

    The Queen is a citizen of Europe, and therefore subject to the rulings of the ECHR in Strasbourg. I don’t see how NZ law can even attempt to legislate succession when a ruling in a court based in France can over turn NZ law in practice.

    And that is another reason to get rid of the monarchy, as if democracy wasn’t a good enough reason on its own. Why should our head of state and constitution be subject to a court populated with Greeks, Estonians, and Albanians.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Gulag1917 (659 comments) says:

    [Very good] Address to a Reception for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Parliament House by Tony Abbott in Canberra
    http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/LatestNews/Speeches/tabid/88/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/8406/Address-to-a-Reception-for-Her-Majesty-Queen-Elizabeth-II-Parliament-House.aspx

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    There are several interesting comments above.

    ANY MALE can be voted to be Pope (yes – they would have to convert to Catholicism immediately – but technically one does not have to be a catholic to be eligible to be Pope) Its not likely to happen in the near future(I think it has happened in the past though – in fact the first Pope wasnt a Catholic.) However the only things that are cast in stone about being Pope is that you have to be male and speak Italian (or is it Latin).

    However I happen to think that the system we currently have work pretty well and I cant see any reason to try and fix something that isnt broken. Im a Catholic but I dont have strong feelings about the requirments of being King or Queen – the system works, its cheap (for NZ) and actually the Head of State for NZ is the Governor General – a New Zealander (admittedly opperating under Royalty rules) But thats better than operating under UN rules….. Much of our system is now subject the various stupid and dumb UN rules and agreements. Even Free Trade agreements force more controls on us that does the Head of State system.

    So- all you Republican lovers – target something far more onerous – the UN.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    We could have Queen Elizabeth II, who is the most traveled and most experienced head of state in the history of humanity. Or we could have a greasy politician whose sense of duty will be, more-often-than-not, to himself and his political party. What would you chose?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. BlairM (2,287 comments) says:

    …or we could have both. The King or Queen as our titular Head of State who assumes those duties when in New Zealand, and an elected Governor General who is independent and doesn’t have to kowtow to whatever the Prime Minister says. I have enough faith in New Zealanders to know that they will not elect anyone greasy to the role.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    I think such religious discrimination has no place in the 21st century.

    Spoken like a true liberal.

    The modern world is a toilet. Time to move on and ditch latte liberal notions of “discrimination”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    We could have Queen Elizabeth II, who is the most traveled and most experienced head of state in the history of humanity. Or we could have a greasy politician whose sense of duty will be, more-often-than-not, to himself and his political party. What would you chose?

    Exactly. The British Crown is an irreplaceable part of our cultural and political heritage, and a vital and independent constitutional limit to the tyranny of the state and simplistic majoritarianism, and must be preserved. Republicanism will only lead to more state power, more government bureaucracy, and more political interference in peoples lives. It makes not a shred of sense for a National supporter to want to ditch the Crown.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.