Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 27 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill.
Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill
I have already said that no one could argue with the principle—and no one has done so today, not even the hon. Member for Shipley (Philip Davies), who entertained us by declaring that he is against discrimination, especially positive discrimination, which is a means of ending discrimination. He also managed to get his apparent wish for us to leave the European Union into the debate. Please do not worry, Madam Deputy Speaker, as I shall now immediately return to the subject of the Bill. My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Andrew Mackinlay) talked about complexity. The complexity is to do with not the drafting of the measures—that will be lengthy and detailed—but with their potential implications and inadvertent consequences. My hon. Friend said we could have a disaster if we do not address this issue. I do not think that is likely. I accept that we need to resolve this, but we can do so steadily, given who is actually in the line of succession and the fact that, at most, we might face the very distant eventuality of a crisis. I apologise to the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) for having heard only the opening part of his speech, but I have been given a good note of what he said. [Interruption.] I am sure it was a very good speech—the note is certainly very good, and I shall read the speech in Hansard tomorrow. I understand that he said that the Roman Catholic Church requirement for families to be brought up as Catholic in marriages between someone of the Catholic faith and someone not of that denomination had been much relaxed in recent decades. [Interruption.] My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock says, "Totally." That is one necessary consideration, but there are others, and although none of them are insuperable, they must be thought through. It is still the case, for instance, that those who are in the Catholic Church are told that they are not in communion with the Anglican Church—although I have seen that. The reverse is also the case: according to the Catholic Church, it is not possible for me as an Anglican to take holy communion in a Catholic church. That would also need to be sorted out. In 1972, there was a change in the arrangements inside the Church of England: the Church of England's admission to holy communion measures allow baptised persons who are communicant members of other Churches, and who are of good standing in their own Church, to be admitted to holy communion in Church of England churches. That means, to my certain witness, that Methodists and Congregationalists, and Church of Scotland and Baptist members, can take holy communion, and there is no direct prohibition within the Church of England of members of the Roman Church taking holy communion, but that is not directly reciprocated. I understand why; it is a matter of profound history for both Churches, but that is something we would have to talk about.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 490 c625-6
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Commonwealth Church of England Catholicism Church and state Women Equality Discrimination Marriage Monarchy Religion Succession Religious freedom Royal family
- Legislation
- Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:58:50 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544401
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544401
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544401