I’m so very sad. She was the reigning Queen when I entered this world and I am in my 8th decade of life. She was a devoted monarch.
However, as Queen, she was Supreme Head of the Church of England. In her reign, she gave Royal Assent to the Abortion Act in 1967. From there, the Church of England has gone on to embrace the post-Christian legitimacy of homosexuality.
I will pray for her soul.
She had as much control over the archbishop of Canterbury as Henry II did Becket... i.e: none.
It was not within her power to refuse to grant Royal Assent.
Unlike America, the British head of state is NON-EXECUTIVE. Royal Assent isn’t done solely by the reigning monarch’s own hand - for decades it’s been little more than a rubber stamp that Privy Councillors can sign in the monarch’s stead.
The last time Royal Assent was refused by a reigning monarch was in 1708 when the government had passed the Scottish Militia bill all the way through Parliament. Its passing would’ve allow Scotland to set up militias. Its route to rubber-stamping was impeded by Queen Anne’s own hand, but because the government asked her to veto it!
(At the last minute by reports that the French were about to invade so the government bill, if given Royal Assent, would’ve endangered the realm - but by then the only thing preventing the bill from coming into effect was the lack of Royal Assent).
The only time since that a monarch has even been tempted to invoke the perogative to refuse assent, was resolved again through Parliamentary advice.
So, the Queen didn’t have the unilateral power to refuse assent without a darned good OBJECTIVE reason to deny it. Also, CofE powers are with the General Synod, so AGAIN the monarch serves a non-executive role. For all we know, she DID express stong objections to abortion - but even if she had, she couldn’t override the Synod and couldn’t veto the Bill.
So I don’t see why anyone need to pray for her soul or Britain’s.
Rather, us Brits should be praying for America’s soul.
Talk to us about a better model for a head of state when you’ve figured out a way of electing a POTUS that doesn’t result in half the country’s voting age population thinking the election was rigged, the wrong guy won, or the politics are all wrong...
Our system ain’t perfect here in Blighty, but we look at the “Lilliput versus Blefescu” setup you have in the UK, and thank the stars that we ended up with a setup that rarely provokes more than a good-humored pub argument.
When’s the last time America had a head of state who united the nation across the political divides for more than four weeks let alone four years? No matter who ends up the President, half the country loathes them. That defeats the object of even having a head of state.