Her aspirations were reported as putting her at odds with her Prime Minister in supporting both same-sex marriage and a republic, though Tony Abbott agreed that it was appropriate that Bryce should express her personal views in a graceful style as she came near to the end of her term of office. She was, of course, appointed by Kevin Rudd in 2008 and had her term extended by Julia Gillard until 2014. After her son-in-law Bill Shorten's election as Opposition Leader, Bryce had offered her resignation, which Abbott declined.

The general response to the appropriateness of her brief remarks has been divided. The majority seemingly support her right to express her view. Some critics have called for her resignation or sacking, and she has been condemned for either self-centredness or cowardice. Most but not all of these responses have come from conservatives. Those critics often relied on the argument that Bryce had broken the rule that the holder of the office of Governor-General should be above politics.

Bryce will probably say no more, at least while she remains Governor-General. We do not know whether she sought advice before agreeing to give the lectures, nor whether the lectures themselves were shown to anyone, including Buckingham Palace, before delivery. She was the first serving Governor-General to give the lectures and could, presumably, have chosen to wait until 2014 to take up the offer if she had wished. That may have satisfied some, but probably not all, of her critics. She could also have chosen to wait until after the end of her term in a few months to voice her aspirations on same-sex marriage and the republic.

Undoubtedly she will give major interviews after retirement and these will allow her another chance. The lectures may now be associated forever in the minds of some people with just these two questions. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Previous governors-general have made far stronger interventions into the republic debate after retirement. Bill Hayden (1989-96), appointed by Bob Hawke, played a leading role as a direct-election republican in the Constitutional Convention of February 1998. Sir Zelman Cowen (1977-82), appointed by Malcolm Fraser, actively supported the campaign for an Australian republic in the 1999 referendum.

Recent governors-general have spoken about other politically controversial issues. It is hard for them not to do so, when making speeches and giving talks to community organisations. Sir William Deane (1996-2001), appointed by Paul Keating, angered prime minister John Howard and many conservatives in the community for voicing his concerns on indigenous affairs. General Michael Jeffery (2003-08), appointed by Howard, made comments about the monarchy-republic question that I, as a republican, criticised for lack of even-handedness.

Most of the controversy has been about the monarchy-republic question and much less about same-sex marriage. Yet if the point of criticism of Bryce is that she should have remained above politics then surely the charge is much more relevant to the marriage question, which is much more immediate to current Australian politics. Republicans welcome another public figure declaring their support but the republic question will not be put to the people during this term of the Abbott government.

The disproportionate attention given to her republican aspirations is understandable only because the governor-general is the Queen's representative. The gist of much criticism is that this means her comments are contrary to her office and disloyal to the monarchy. This has led to debate about whether a republican should agree to be recommended to the Queen as governor-general or governor.

This is a real question but a distraction from the discussion about the office holder being above politics. The charge of hypocrisy is a furphy. At least one state governor is a declared republican. Do Australians really want half of our citizens ruled out from such appointments because they hold a personal belief in an Australian head of state? Many outstanding candidates would be lost. But campaigners for a republic who are candidates for the office, such as author Tom Keneally and former Nationals leader Tim Fischer, should probably decline any such offer.

Same-sex marriage has a different dynamic to the republic because it does not require a referendum. Yet it is much more a front-and-centre issue, which the government is in the midst of addressing. It has challenged in the High Court legislation to allow same-sex marriage. The Commonwealth case is that marriage is a federal responsibility. The Coalition policy is to oppose same-sex marriage, but there is pressure within the Coalition party room to allow a conscience vote on the issue.

Senior Liberals such as Malcolm Turnbull support same-sex marriage as does the NSW Premier, Barry O'Farrell. Legislation has just recently been narrowly defeated in the NSW Legislative Council and the Tasmanian Legislative Council (in the latter case after passing in the lower house). Same-sex marriage is a boiling issue in Australia.

Bryce voiced her aspiration that one day Australia might be a place where people are free to love and marry whom they choose in this context. She spoke out on an issue that is certainly political but, crossing party lines, is nevertheless arguably above party politics in a conventional sense.

John Warhurst is an emeritus professor of political science at the Australian National University and a former chairman of the Australian Republican Movement. John.Warhurst@anu.edu.au