On 10 September 2026, the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Andy Burnham, made the following written Statement on Church Appointments.
Statement
I am making this statement to bring to the House’s attention steps the Government is taking regarding Church appointments.
Restrictions set out in the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and the Jews Relief Act 1858 prevent persons professing the Roman Catholic and Jewish faiths only from advising the Sovereign on appointments to the Church of England and Church of Scotland. I have therefore transferred my constitutional responsibility to advise the Sovereign on Church appointments to the Lord Chancellor.
It is, however, unacceptable for there to be a legislative bar against people of any faith performing all the functions of my office. The Government will therefore introduce a Bill at the earliest possible opportunity to correct this antiquated and archaic anomaly.
This is obviously a good thing, especially as we have had a Presbyterian and a Hindu in No.10 so the restrictions against Catholics and Jews are blatantly discriminatory.
There is a helpful House of Commons library briefing on this available here https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10924/
With regards to the reference to the Church of Scotland, I share the view that this reform will probably not have any practical relevance, “as appointments within the Kirk are made independently of the Monarch. Lay patronage, which previously gave landowners (including, where relevant, the Sovereign) a say in ecclesiastical appointments, was abolished by the Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1874.” – though of course there are obvious parallels with the Lord High Commissioner Act which had to be rushed through last year.
Thank you for the link to HoC Library briefing – interesting read.
As a former member of the General Synod of the Church of England on balance I have no problem with the PM’s proposal. This is mainly because detailed advice is given to the PM from people involved with the CofE before the PM advises the Sovereign.
The present situation is totally illogical.
As a Catholic I have totally no problem with this bar.
I find it outrageous that a supposed catholic like the Prime Minister should think that a Catholic or Jew (indeed the bar should be extended to include those who are not in communion with the Church of England) advising on this matter.
This seems a strange step to take. More to the point, the proposed delegation to the Lord Chancellor will, one assumes, in itself require removal of the bar to a Roman Catholic holding that office (s.12 of the 1829 Act). I recall that in the early years of the last century the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Russell of Killowen, a practising Roman Catholic, investigated the possibility of becoming Lord Chancellor and took counsel’s opinion which, inevitably, advised that such was not possible.
Has been since 1974.
Section 1 of the Lord Chancellor (Tenure of Office and Discharge of Ecclesiastical Functions) Act 1974 declared for the “avoidance of doubt” that the office of Lord Chancellor “is and shall be tenable by an adherent of the Roman Catholic faith”.
Thank you. A misreading on my part and over-reliance on distant memory of a footnote in (I think) Wade & Phillips ‘Constitutional Law’ which I probably last read in its 1950 fourth edition.
Thank you. A misreading on my part and over-reliance on distant memory of a footnote in (I think) Wade & Phillips ‘Constitutional Law’ which I probably last read in its 1950 fourth edition.
Thank you. A misreading of section 12 on my part. I still find it an odd and unnecessary step on the prime minister’s part.
Church appointments should be a matter for the Church and its elders alone, not the PM and not the Monarch.
As a member of the Church of Scotland, I totally agree!
It is about time that the Nomination went straight from the Crown Nominations Commission to the Crown and the Prime Minister’s Office played no part in this. That would be a better change.
The only people advising on Anglican church appointments should be Anglicans. Perhaps the law should be redrafted to say only those in full communion with Canterbury should be permitted to advise.
Would it not be more appropriate to sever the connection between government and Church rather than to address the occasions when the responsible minister is a Catholic or a Jew?