3. Constitutional - The Act of Settlement safeguards the British throne from being Catholic again. This Act was passed in 1701 at the end of the reign of King William III when his successor to the throne Anne had lost her only surviving child.
It was then felt expedient to bring in a law that only Protestants in communion with the Church of England should be allowed to sit on the throne. One of the consequences of the Act was to bring the house of Hanover into the line of accession in front of fifty-seven other people under the normal rules of inheritance. This eventually led to George I coming to the throne in 1714. In effect it brought to Stuart dynasty to an end.
Clause 9 of the Acts of Settlement reads:
Whereas it has been found by experience that is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant Kingdom to be governed by a Popish Prince or by any King or Queen marrying a Papist.
Our forefathers learned by bitter experience that freedom and liberty are in danger when Romanism is in the ascendency. It is essential that we understand the underlying motivation in this Constitutional settlement. The title is it gives us the key. It is an Act:
… declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and settling the Succession of the Crown.
The Act of Settlement is there to protect the liberties of the citizens.
Rome has a long history of terror in our nation. There were hundreds of Protestant martyrs who lost their lives at the hand of popish rulers in this United Kingdom. There are scores of martyrs sites all over England marking this sad legacy.
The most barbaric period was the during the reign of bloody Queen Mary 1553 -1558. During her reign, she repaired the severed relationship with Rome and returned England to Catholicism. Many Protestants who opposed Mary’s actions were exiled, and nearly 300 dissenters were burned at the stake, earning her the nickname ‘Bloody Mary’.
The memory of the Reformers and the martyrs would compel us to resist the papal visit. This is the institution that put those martyrs to death. Rome hasn’t changed one iota, therefore we resist the pope’s claims and say no Pope here.
4 comments:
In my opinion, he should be free to come if he likes. He isn't a threat to us. As an ex-roman catholic, turned Biblical Christian, I find the Roman Church wrong on so many things.
I don't agree that we should have to fund his visit. The money could be far better used. But if the RCC want to dip into their enormously funded bank account and come over, then by all means.
It is disappointing that the C of E and others are getting involved in eccemy on this level. We should live in peace with one another, but to compromise doctrine and the memory of people that were murdered for sticking to their Church's confessions (that are based on God's word) is just saddening.
I have to disagree with you Mike about whether he should be allowed to come.
Like Ahab of old the Pope is an idolator and therefore a troubler of Israel.
I have uploaded some other reasons for objecting to his visit including our primary grounds of objection which are spiritual.
Is the monarch a Christian, I know she likes a wee dubonnet & Gin and a bet or two on the GG's,
And if she is not a Christian what is the point of her being a protestant, surely she is headed to the same hell as the papists
Anonymous
I have my doubts whether she is a 'Christian' as defined by the Bible. However God is her judge and not me!
Whatever her spiritual state my political/national allegiance is to the revolution settlement as set out in the Act of Settlement. It is to a Protestant monarchy and not so much a person.
The Act of Settlement states that if the monarch ceases to be a Protestant then British citizens are under no compulsion to show her any loyalty, which emphasises my point in previous paragraph.
It is very true that presently the monarchy is Protestant only in name. I pray for another Reformation of religion in this realm that will bring the nation back to God and the Bible as happened in generations past.
Brian McClung
Post a Comment