Friday, June 22, 2007
If Blair really wants to be a Catholic…
Malachi recounts some of the searching questions his Bishop is likely to ask…
Mick Fealty @ 06:04 PM
Link actually here:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/malachi_odoherty/2007/06/bluffing_or_believing.html
Might be wrong, I think there is a distinction between doctrine, like Transubstantiation or the Assumption, and teaching like not using condoms.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 07:31 PMTony, when I was born some guy in a skirt and muttering Latin pronounced me a catholic: you may have my catholicism for a little knighthood.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 07:40 PMI’m confused - like kids get made catholic within days of birth but adults have to undertake 30 years probation ? What’s that about ?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 08:16 PMI know a few people who have converted - it’s hard work for the average punter - but I reckon as with the annullment issue - fascinatng news on the Kennedy front - and with living i sin while in Public Office, corners can be cut for people with influence.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 08:26 PMThe last comment on Kensei’s link was a bit OTT! Still now that big Ian has had his near death experience and seen the light…so to speak. Perhaps that commenter could be used to fill Ian’s his boots at the speech making shenanigans on the twelth.
He seems to tick all the right boxes anyhow!
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 10:01 PMDewi
It’s just to keep the bad eggs out, call it a bit of heavenly weeding ;¬)
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 10:02 PMIt’s a bit like a group of believers in Santa Claus debating whether or not he wears a red robe. Some argue he does and some find the idea positively absurd, pointing to its Washington Irving origins in the early 19th century. None of them think it absurd to believe in Santa Claus.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 11:15 PMThe things folk do to get hold of ‘old firm’ tickets…..
Posted by on Jun 22, 2007 @ 11:35 PMMaybe Tony Bliar wants to become a Catholic so to overcome his guilt and confess to the Pope he made one big feck up taking the UK to war in Iraq.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 12:06 AMIs there an upper limit on the number of unnecessary deaths you can confess in one sitting? Or can you still stave them off till a later date with a hefty donation or a papal dispensation?
Cherie must be proud though..
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 12:16 AMWhat is sad is that he felt it necessary to wait till he relinguished his job b4 he felt it appropriate to convert.
No consitutional objections to Catholic Prime Minister so his thoughts must have been political.Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 05:50 AM>>No consitutional objections to Catholic Prime Minister so his thoughts must have been political.<<
Oh Dewi, I only wish that I was naive and carefree once again ;¬) Have you never heard of the glass ceiling? And wasn’t it strange that the only real contender to challenge the embarrassing (for the labour party) coronation of Mr. Anglo Brown was never championed. Sure we had some very low level gossip in the media regards John Reid, but why was there no back-bench name gathering, no-one whispering in corridors to gauge support. Eventually the man publicly ruled himself out, a travesty if you ask me.
I have no evidence to back up any of my theories that there is a glass ceiling, but the decision of Blair to wait (if that is what he is doing), and Reids demise speaks volumes! John Reid just happens to be a Catholic Dewi, go figure!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 07:13 AMI think that’s my point Prince - still political issues not constitutional.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 07:40 AMI find all these posts about how one becomes a Catholic, and the glass ceiling against a British Prime Minister being one hard to fathom.
In my experience, if I had wanted to become a Catholic, all I had to do was start attending mass. And if I wanted to be most proper about it, I could also start taking confession. There was no need for any declarations or an formal inquiry.
And I don’t believe that Blair was stopped from becoming an RC while at No. 10 because of any constitutional convention against it. His lackey parliamentarians would have put up with it. Just look at how they have put up with his massive war crimes without batting an eyelash.
Blair put off his ‘conversion’ because it would have ruined what little he has accomplished while as Prime Minister.
Can you imagine even a ‘converted’ Dr. Paisley being persuaded by a Catholic PM to get on board the GFA? The Doc might have declared Unilateral Independence.
And once Blair leaves office, everyone will now be taking about when he ‘converts’ rather than when he might be going to The Hague.
The guy is a spin doctor without any inhibitions. Just ask Dr. David Kelly’s ghost!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 07:45 AMNot sure, but doesn’t the Prime Minister officially appoint the Anglican Bishops ?
Might be a little awkward.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/prime_minister_british_politics.htm
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:27 AMYup - but there have been non - Anglcan Prime Ministers and ain’t been a problem.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:33 AMAs I recall, the PM has nothing to do with religious appointments. They are recommended by bodies in the Anglican Church, and approved by the Queen.
For more on the hypocrisy of it all, see the column in today’s Guardian about the closet Catholic for over 30 years.
How can he convert now? He is as Catholic as the Pope, maybe more so.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:35 AMTHF, isn’t there also a detail about baptism, in becoming a catholic? Seems they are a mite picky about who has officiated, and indeed whether it has happened at all.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:43 AMNot as far as I know, Paul.
My experience was that if I went to mass, performed the various rituals, etc., I was a Catholic - no questioned asked, or pronoucements required, though I can imagine it varies from country to country, and diocese to diocese.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:53 AMhttp://www.adherents.com/gov/adh_pm.htm
Religious affiliations of Canadian Prime Ministers…..43% Catholic - and not many from “French Speaking Community Background”
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:55 AMhttp://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html
Completely different story in USA
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 08:56 AMThe Canadian link doesn’t work Dewi.
Trow, I’m pretty certain that you have to be baptised no matter where you are. As someone not adverse to taking on the establishment Trow I’m surprised that the way John Reid went quietly into the night hasn’t rung any alarm bells.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 09:43 AMhttp://www.adherents.com/gov/adh_pm.html
Odd - looks the same this time
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 09:46 AMBut works !
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 09:47 AMThanks Dewi
Interesting that almost all the Catholic Canadians PM’s were from the 1980’s onward, maturing attitudes perhaps?
I remember when Paul Keating was standing for election in Australia as the incumbent, he had replaced Bob Hawke as the labour part leader and PM a la Brown. Anyway there were people that I am not so proud to call Scots agitating against him in my circle solely because he was a Catholic. Not that they were sectarian bigots mind you….strange that politics had never been on their radar screen previous to this election.
Keating’s opening line in his victory speech was;
“How sweet it is”
I couldn’t have agreed more!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2007 @ 10:02 AM
