Political implications of Johnson's Catholicisim

Chewbacca

Was Kali2 actually being serious though when she suggested a church tax? I took it that she was being funny and just joking! It's too ridiculous a suggestion to be taken seriously.

it is the reality in most countries. My cousin was an Anglican Vicar in the USA, and all the Congregation paid tithes in proportion to income. Call it tithe or Church Tax, it adds to the same. Same for Muslims, of course.

Our local Vicar always thought it would be fabulous if people did, so he didn't have to spend a huge part of his time begging for money to pay for repairs, etc.

It seems ridiculous to you, but it is the case in very many places- and, as said, certainly does concentrate the mind, the conscience and one's beliefs. Huge proportions of those who call themselves Christian, be it CofE or Catholic, or one of the large number of denominations - would vote with their feet sharpish if they had to pay a proportion of income. Do you not hink so?

Nannan2
I’m afraid you are wrong. There is no law that makes children illegitimate. The Family Law Reform Act 1987 makes it quite clear that whatever the circumstances of a child’s birth, to married or unmarried parents, the child’s status is legitimate. The child, born to either married or unmarried parents, can legitimately use his/her father’s surname, and can legitimately inherit any titles from it’s father. He/she can also inherit monies or properties from the father in exactly the same way as any children born within marriage. The only stipulation is that the father must be named on the birth certificate. The purpose of the Family Law Reform Act 1987 was to ensure that there would not any longer be any illegitimate children in Britain. There is no distinction legally between children born in or out of marriage. Therefore Boris Johnson’s children from previous marriages or relationships are all legitimate. They can use his name and inherit from him. The church cannot make children illegitimate ie illegal, only the law can legitimise the circumstances of children, which it did in 1987. Anyone who claims that Boris Johnson’s older children are illegitimate, are quite simply wrong.

Many years ago, obviously, the Young Wives group I belonged to was held in a Methodist church hall. The congregation paid tithes which was the first time I’d heard of it apart from biblical references. They also did a lot of excellent work in the community in general.

Talullah

I'm being very petty now but it's Register Office, not Registry.

That aside, there has been umpteen posts explaining how Boris was able to marry in church.

Perhaps we're behind the times in Wales:

Registry office in Rhadyr, Wales. Closed
Abergavenny Registry Office
Civil Registration Office for Births, Deaths & Marriages

Who cares they are married now so she will be running No 10

Talullah

welbeck

well it used to be
Registrar's Office,
but who knows now.

GRO

General Register Office

Worked there for years

yes but we were not talking about the GRO;
one doesn't get married there.

Oh, I didn't realise!
I took it at face value.

Sorry, Kali.

The C of E is worth a bob or or two anyway so no need for compulsory church taxes. Some of their investment history was not very sound and some was decidedly non- environmentally friendly but they have sold the investments in oil companies.

welbeck

well it used to be
Registrar's Office,
but who knows now.

GRO

General Register Office

Worked there for years

Was Kali2 actually being serious though when she suggested a church tax? I took it that she was being funny and just joking! It's too ridiculous a suggestion to be taken seriously.

if you live in uk then you must be well aware that a church tax would never be introduced here.

I don't think it would either.
There are, however, some ancient legal clauses in some house deeds where the householder could find themselves liable to pay for the upkeep of the parish church and other buildings. It happened to a friend of ours.
Many years ago our local C of E vicar decided that members of the congregation should tithe part of their salary (one tenth) to the church funds instead of putting money into the collection. I think they wanted to build a new vicarage. The existing vicarage was not large enough apparently. That was when my DF, a recent convert to the C of E, decided he just might not attend any more.

Kali, it was mentioned somewhere that you live in switzerland, so i assumed that you did.
i can't see how that is bullying.
a simple error/ misinformation.
if you live in uk then you must be well aware that a church tax would never be introduced here.
i still can't quite understand what is the main thrust of your argument.

PippaZ

GandT

Boris is NOT a Catholic. He was once but converted to become an Anglican awhile back.

Couldn't he have changed his mind again?

A baby can't choose its religion; the parents may choose for it.

I assume Boris is still a member of the C of E.

Where on earth did I state that I don't live in the UK? Where? This is becoming an obsession bordering on bullying.

You comment is interesting- on the one hand, you state that British history is very different to that of other countries, from Tudor/Elizabethan times. Then that it does not matter. So does it matter, or does it not?

I am fully aware there is no Church Tax in the UK, doh! But what I said, is that if it was introduced- it would very quickly sort out those who are truly religious, and those for whom it is just a word linked to tradition and no more- apart from the odd wedding, funeral and access to some schools.

Kali, what is the point you are trying to make with your oft-repeated assertion about the role and influence of the Church of England on the governance/constitution of the Uk.
as for your idea of church tax, that is a complete non-starter. we are not germany or other countries ?switzerland where this applies, basically because we have a completely different history.
it would be unthinkable here. not just because few people are religious. it is more fundamental than that; related to the elizabethan settlement.
it is similar to why we do not have ID cards, and why traditionally the idea has been unacceptable.
but why are you so energised about all this, church and state, if you do not live in uk, and are not religious. ?

well it used to be
Registrar's Office,
but who knows now.

I'm being very petty now but it's Register Office, not Registry.

That aside, there has been umpteen posts explaining how Boris was able to marry in church.

What worries me is not the political view but the religious. I am not a Catholic but a great friend was. She was in a highly abusive marriage, and eventually fled, losing her parents and siblings in the process. 15 years later after an abusive court divorce - she met and fell in love with her soulmate. He was also a Catholic and both visited the local priest to request marriage. He was hurtful, dismissive and verbally abusive to my friend, to the point her future husband told the priest he thought little of his attitude, and that he wouldn't set foot in a Catholic church again. Even as they left the priest claimed my friend 'had distorted the mind of a GOOD Catholic'

They married in a Registry Office and had a 30 year marriage before she tragically died. So why friends and I ask is Boris Johnson, a divorcee (with no annulment), who admits multiple affairs, while refusing to number or name his children; allowed to marry in a Catholic Cathedral?

Many wonder why religion is losing its importance and following - because the rules apply to some not all, and others ride slipshod over religious belief to gain a 'church' marriage. I am actually glad my dear friend is no longer here to see the complete disregard the Catholic Church has shown to the rules which caused both my dear friends such misery.

Harmonypuss

Who really cares anyway?

There are an awful lot of people in this country who are non-believers where religion is concerned. I appreciate that 1000s of years ago everyone believed but these days kids in school are taught about the theory of evolution which actually can provide proof of how humans evolved, hence my conversion from a christened and confirmed Anglican to an uncompromising Atheist.

Less and less according to official Statistics.

There is a great way to make sure, introduce a Church Tax, where citizens who declare being of one Faith or other, have to pay 2 to 5 % of their income to said Church. That would soon sort the sincere sheep from the (hypocritical) goats.

MawBe

Kali2

Would be interesting to know what Poot, Paisley and Forster feel about this in NI ?

Whyever?

Arlene Foster no longer leads the DUP - (keep up at the back!)

Did you mean Edwin Poots ?
I am even less likely to want to hear his opinion
On the election of Poots^‘If you are gay or a woman, be worried’ – NI community worker
And Ian Paisley Jr is hardly a paragon of virtue
^MPs voted to suspend Paisley from the House of Commons for 30 sitting days, beginning on 4 September 2018, because he broke paid advocacy rules by receiving hospitality from the Sri Lankan government without declaring that to the Commons. Following his suspension, the Recall of MPs Act 2015 was invoked for the first time since it received Royal Assent^

Yes, Poots- was not able to edit. As for the blessed Arlene- she still has massive influence in the Protestant community in NI- and she is the one who 'worked' the longest with Johnson. I am sure she has an opinion on the matter. Whether Paisley is a paragon of virtue makes absolutely no difference in this instance.

I see there have been huge numbers of complaints, both from Catholics all around the country, and also from the regulars at Westminster Cathedral.

As far is Johnson is concerned, yes, as a private individual I would not give a hoot (even if I felt sorry for all those who have been denied a second marriage and who are sincere, practising Catholics who were very unlucky with their first mariage).

but because he is our PM, and because he lies constantly and has no respect for anyone or any institutions, and jumps from ship to ship as it suits him, then yes, it does matter.

Anyone who denies that the Church of England has a very special, and closely linked relationship, with the British Crown and Government- truly needs to go back to their history books.

Nannan2

Maddyone- the law that makes the child/ren legitimate is when the parents then go on to marry.It doesn't matter whether its in a church, or just by registrar.But the child then is legitimate.

that is misleading, because as Maddyone has tried to explain, there is no such thing as illegitimate children now.
the only exception, and even then that term is not used, is for inherited titles/lands among the aristocracy.
i remember seeing on tv where a countess type was v upset that their adopted child could never succeed to the title, by law.

most mainstream christian churches have no problem with evolution, eg, Anglican, RC, Methodist, Presbyterian.
so i think that is setting up a false polarity.
but if course you are free to align yourself however you choose.

Who really cares anyway?

There are an awful lot of people in this country who are non-believers where religion is concerned. I appreciate that 1000s of years ago everyone believed but these days kids in school are taught about the theory of evolution which actually can provide proof of how humans evolved, hence my conversion from a christened and confirmed Anglican to an uncompromising Atheist.

PippaZ

GandT

Boris is NOT a Catholic. He was once but converted to become an Anglican awhile back.

Couldn't he have changed his mind again?

We are all aware that Johnson will declare black is white if it suits the Johnson agenda.

GandT

Boris is NOT a Catholic. He was once but converted to become an Anglican awhile back.

Couldn't he have changed his mind again?

Boris is NOT a Catholic. He was once but converted to become an Anglican awhile back.