Tony Blair converts to Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter celticcrusader
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I understand the history, but that’s exactly what it is…history. It’s 2008, not 1508.
Their history is their culture - just as ours is ours. So - it’s already been decades since racial discrimination was outlawed in our country, so why don’t we just get over it and and not practice it any more? Because it’s part of us - and something that is going to take a very very long time to grow out of.

Anyway - to get us back on topic - Blair’s conversion is a wonderful thing for him. He now has access to the Sacraments, and can openly profess his Faith. I just think he needs to say something about his past. I hope he will do that soon.

~Liza
 
Not unless the law was overturned. What is amazing to me is the blatant religious bigotry that exists in the UK. What if the monarch wasn’t even a Christian? If William became a Buddhist would he have to renounce his right?
If the heir to the throne were to convert, this would provoke a constitutional crisis. The 1997 European Convention on Human Rights, which is incorporated into UK law because we are members of the European Union, guarantees everybody freedom of religion and freedom to marry who they want (Denmark recently had some trouble with this as a right-wing government tried to outlaw inter-racial marriages). The Act of Settlement of 1788 states that the King or heir to the throne cannot be a Catholic and cannot marry a Catholic. UK law usually recognises the more recent law as being the more correct, so the monarch probably could be a Catholic.

Of course, at the same time, it could be argued that the office of King was a job/vocation, just as someone who is a Catholic priest would cease to be a priest if they converted to Islam, and forfeit their parochial house, income, etc. likewise the country could sack the King. The question would be who would sack the King, and on what authority? Parliament? The Church of England? In reality, most people today wouldn’t give a fig whether the King was a Catholic, with the possible exception of the Northern Irish. Frankly, the personal power of the monarchy is non-existent, nobody cares, and the current heir to the throne has no interest in leading (or following) the Church of England - he is married outside the church and wants to drop the title of ‘Defender of the Faith’ and change it to ‘defender of faiths’ reflecting multi-cultural Britian.

In theory, the Prime Minister cannot be a Catholic because the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing the Archbishop of Canterbury. In reality, Tony Blair doesn’t make this decision personally, there is a commission of Anglican clergy that reports to him and he rubber-stamps their decision. During 2001-2003 the Leader of the Opposition, Iain Duncan-Smith, who would have become Prime Minister if he won a general election, was a Catholic, and he was a Conservative. I’m sure the ‘old guard’ of the Conservative party would have known if he could not legally have been PM, and would have blocked him from leading the party if that was the case.

The monarchy will continue to draw American tourists, who will continue to pay us lots of money to see some soldiers marching around in silly furry hats, irrespective of what religion the King or Queen might be. That, after all, is what they’re there for!
 
Not to derail this thread, but regarding the monarch not being able to marry a Catholic, I believe the current heir to the throne (Charles) is currently married to a Catholic (Camilla). I could have that wrong, but I thought I once heard that this is one reason that she will never been Queen.
 
Why is it so amazing to you? Read their history. Intolerance for Catholicism is as British as the Queen (no disrespect intended). It is part of their culture. Doesn’t make it right - but it is what it is. It is up to the leadership of that country to change things, and I think that is a very very long time off - if at all. I can’t imagine ever seeing the Royal Family outwardly embracing Catholicism - not to convert, just to accept as they accept other religions. It’s not going to happen - too much blood, Royal and common, has been spilled in the fight between Catholic and Protestant in the UK.

~Liza
It’s hardly part of our culture anymore.

Besides, the Queen is as German as a volkswagon filled with bratwurst:yup: .

This is the 21st century, and most people in the UK, Anglican and Catholic and people of all faiths and none, think that it’s an anachronism to have the Queen as head of the church. If the monarch were to convert to Catholicism, or Buddhism for that matter, they wouldn’t take the country with them. That meant something in the days when all Europe’s monarchs were split into two warring camps, German-centric protestants and Franco-Spanish Catholics, united by marriage alliances, it means nothing today. This is a democracy and we have minds of our own.
 
In theory, the Prime Minister cannot be a Catholic because the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing the Archbishop of Canterbury. In reality, Tony Blair doesn’t make this decision personally, there is a commission of Anglican clergy that reports to him and he rubber-stamps their decision.
I don’t think you’re quite correct on this, I seem to remember reading that Tony Blair was immersing himself in the details of various candidates prior to making a decision on the Archbishop. I couldn’t find such an article on short notice, but I did come up with this one, where an Anglican priest is complaining that the situation is not as you say, but he thinks it should be:
“I would have preferred an automatic first choice which would have been as it were simply rubber stamped by the prime minister.” - Reverend David Holloway
 
Not to derail this thread, but regarding the monarch not being able to marry a Catholic, I believe the current heir to the throne (Charles) is currently married to a Catholic (Camilla). I could have that wrong, but I thought I once heard that this is one reason that she will never been Queen.
Camilla Parker-Bowles is NOT Catholic: her (first) husband Andrew Parker Bowles is, and their two children Tom and Laura were raised Catholic. The couple divorced in the mid-nineties.
 
Camilla Parker-Bowles is NOT Catholic: her (first) husband Andrew Parker Bowles is, and their two children Tom and Laura were raised Catholic. The couple divorced in the mid-nineties.
Thank you for clarifying that.
 
Wouldn’t Prince William have to renounce his right to the succession in order to convert to Catholicism?

If a Prime Minister can’t be a Catholic, I would imagine a King, or future King, could not be Catholic either.
Not if he the future king and disposer of all law of England were to change the official religion of England.
 
Not if he the future king and disposer of all law of England were to change the official religion of England.
I wonder if anybody would notice? I expect it would be when the next royal birth/marriage/death took place and the architecture wasn’t as good.
 
Not if he the future king and disposer of all law of England were to change the official religion of England.
Ahem, that’s not quite how it works anymore.

Britain is unique in that it has a ‘constitutional’ monarchy. Ever since William of Orange became King in 1788, the monarch has to sign a contract at his/her coronation. One of the terms of this contract is to defend the Church of England.

Also, as of 1999, royal assent is no longer needed on legislation. The royal perogative hadn’t been used in over 250 years when it was finally abolished. Any King trying to change the laws agreed by parliament now would be signing away his own throne. Nobody would accept that.

I’d say most people in the UK these days think the Church of England should be separated from the state and the monarchy.
 
Ahem, that’s not quite how it works anymore.

Britain is unique in that it has a ‘constitutional’ monarchy. Ever since William of Orange became King in 1788, the monarch has to sign a contract at his/her coronation. One of the terms of this contract is to defend the Church of England.

Also, as of 1999, royal assent is no longer needed on legislation. The royal perogative hadn’t been used in over 250 years when it was finally abolished. Any King trying to change the laws agreed by parliament now would be signing away his own throne. Nobody would accept that.

I’d say most people in the UK these days think the Church of England should be separated from the state and the monarchy.
Thank you for the look into G.B. politics.

Does anyone know of a link to a Newspaper in England with comments either good or bad on Blairs conversion?
 
Yellow Belle - you are quite correct. 👍
Why is it so amazing to you? Read their history. Intolerance for Catholicism is as British as the Queen (no disrespect intended). It is part of their culture. Doesn’t make it right - but it is what it is. It is up to the leadership of that country to change things, and I think that is a very very long time off - if at all.
Liza, the vast majority of people in this country neither care nor have any interest in religion. People couldn’t care less if you’re Catholic (apart from some parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland I suppose). There isn’t some widespread, ingrained anti-Catholicism here. That died out well over a century ago.

The simple reason the succession laws haven’t been changed is that it would require all sixteen governments of the Commonwealth Realms (the countries of which Elizabeth II is Queen) to work together to do so. None of them can be bothered or have more pressing concerns.

In the event of a major royal falling in love with a Catholic, these governments may do so. Until then, there are more important things to fix. 🙂
If the heir to the throne were to convert, this would provoke a constitutional crisis. The 1997 European Convention on Human Rights, which is incorporated into UK law because we are members of the European Union, guarantees everybody freedom of religion and freedom to marry who they want (Denmark recently had some trouble with this as a right-wing government tried to outlaw inter-racial marriages). The Act of Settlement of 1788 states that the King or heir to the throne cannot be a Catholic and cannot marry a Catholic. UK law usually recognises the more recent law as being the more correct, so the monarch probably could be a Catholic.
Incorrect - the ECHR does not change the succession rights. The monarch can not marry or be a Catholic until the succession laws are changed by all the governments of the Commonwealth Realms.
In theory, the Prime Minister cannot be a Catholic because the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing the Archbishop of Canterbury. In reality, Tony Blair doesn’t make this decision personally, there is a commission of Anglican clergy that reports to him and he rubber-stamps their decision. During 2001-2003 the Leader of the Opposition, Iain Duncan-Smith, who would have become Prime Minister if he won a general election, was a Catholic, and he was a Conservative. I’m sure the ‘old guard’ of the Conservative party would have known if he could not legally have been PM, and would have blocked him from leading the party if that was the case.
The Prime Minister can be any religion. We could quite easily have a Muslim appointing the CofE bishops! 😃 It is an unfortunate anachronism that the CofE is still an established church and the vast majority would like to see it disestablished (along with the ejection of the CofE bishops from the House of Lords :mad:)
It’s hardly part of our culture anymore.

Besides, the Queen is as German as a volkswagon filled with bratwurst:yup: .
I disagree. I do think the monarchy is an important part of our culture though not the one with all the power.

And the Queen is British, just like the great-great-great-blah-blah-grand children of a common German immigrant hundreds of years ago would be British too. Besides, the Queen can trace her ancestry to Britain for at least a 1000 years.
This is the 21st century, and most people in the UK, Anglican and Catholic and people of all faiths and none, think that it’s an anachronism to have the Queen as head of the church. If the monarch were to convert to Catholicism, or Buddhism for that matter, they wouldn’t take the country with them. That meant something in the days when all Europe’s monarchs were split into two warring camps, German-centric protestants and Franco-Spanish Catholics, united by marriage alliances, it means nothing today. This is a democracy and we have minds of our own.
Completely agree!
 
Not if he the future king and disposer of all law of England were to change the official religion of England.
King of the United Kingdom - not ‘England’ 🙂

But yes the official religion of England is the Church of England and that needs to be changed ASAP!
Also, as of 1999, royal assent is no longer needed on legislation. The royal perogative hadn’t been used in over 250 years when it was finally abolished. Any King trying to change the laws agreed by parliament now would be signing away his own throne. Nobody would accept that.
Yes, the royal assent IS needed on legislation - even though it is a merely formal stage. The monarch just does not have the power to refuse it and the last monarch to do so was Queen Anne in 1707.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/82104.stm
I’d say most people in the UK these days think the Church of England should be separated from the state and the monarchy.
Bang on! 👍

Oh and on topic :o - congratulations to Mr Blair. I’m not really bothered, just like, I daresay, most of the British population. 😛
 
a couple of weeks ago I saw a news article that TONY BLAIR was converting to the Catholic religion sometime in NOV. andI haven heard any thing else lately? has anyone got any more good news on Mr. Blair? :irish2: :knight1:

**It still hasn’t happened; he’s still supporting abortion, and his bishop is as hopeless as they come. I****t’s incredible that he is so popular in the US - it’s exactly as though an anti-life Democrat were to be wildly popular in the UK. Talk about “men without chests” - C.S. Lewis could have been decribing him 😦 **​

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top