Time For A Constitutional
Now Ed Miliband is leader of the Labour party, I find myself wondering what would happen if Labour got elected again.
I mean, we'll see whether he's really going to lead the party back to its core values of fairness, equality, and justice for all.
What I mean is that Britain is officially Anglican.
The monarch is both the head of state AND the head of the established church. The Prime Minister is not only supposed to lead government, s/he's also there to appoint some of the senior members of the Anglican hierarchy.
Ed Miliband's Jewish.
I don't know if he is religious, and that's a) his own business, and b) irrelevant to the law: the Roman Catholic Relief Act of 1829, section 17, and the Jews' Relief Act of 1858, section 4, says Roman Catholics or Jews may not advise the monarch on ecclesiastical matters.
Of course, in the 19th century, no-one considered the possibility of a future Non-Conformist, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, Sikh, Pagan, or [insert beliefs here] PM.
Even now, the chances are pretty slim.
There's no legal bar on being a Jewish Prime Minister. It would be constitutionally interesting, though, if a non-Church of England/Church in Scotland/Wales/Ireland PM got elected.
For those of us Republican (in the We Don't Think A Monarchy Is Morally Defensible sense, not the modern American sense) and disestablishment types, the answer is obvious.
I now return you to your scheduled programming.
I mean, we'll see whether he's really going to lead the party back to its core values of fairness, equality, and justice for all.
What I mean is that Britain is officially Anglican.
The monarch is both the head of state AND the head of the established church. The Prime Minister is not only supposed to lead government, s/he's also there to appoint some of the senior members of the Anglican hierarchy.
Ed Miliband's Jewish.
I don't know if he is religious, and that's a) his own business, and b) irrelevant to the law: the Roman Catholic Relief Act of 1829, section 17, and the Jews' Relief Act of 1858, section 4, says Roman Catholics or Jews may not advise the monarch on ecclesiastical matters.
Of course, in the 19th century, no-one considered the possibility of a future Non-Conformist, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, Sikh, Pagan, or [insert beliefs here] PM.
Even now, the chances are pretty slim.
There's no legal bar on being a Jewish Prime Minister. It would be constitutionally interesting, though, if a non-Church of England/Church in Scotland/Wales/Ireland PM got elected.
For those of us Republican (in the We Don't Think A Monarchy Is Morally Defensible sense, not the modern American sense) and disestablishment types, the answer is obvious.
I now return you to your scheduled programming.