Political implications of Johnson's Catholicisim

welbeck

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

GRO

General Register Office

Worked there for years

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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?

Do you not hink so?

This reminded me of the story of Jesus going into the temple and overturning the tables:
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

The C of E and the Catholic church are hardly poor.
The tithe is a form of blackmail.

Do you not hink so

No Kali2 I do not. And now that you've confirmed that your suggestion wasn't meant to be amusing but was, in fact, deadly serious, I'm even more perplexed as to precisely what it is that you're wanting to achieve with this thread. You initially started it as an outraged complaint that Boris Johnson had married in the Catholic church (even though he was born into a Catholic practising family). Then you claimed outrage that the Catholic faith was being undermined by the fact that he had subsequently changed to the C of E faith, even though other posters, with far more knowledge of the Catholic faith came on to correct you. Then you appeared to have issue with the fact that England cannot have a Catholic leader due to some ancient and long
defunct laws. So, like others, I'm completely at a loss to understand exactly what it is that's grinding your gears now. No one, apart from you it seems, cares one iota whether anyone is Catholic, Jewish, Presbyterian or Muslim. And I find it dismaying that, in 2021, you do. I thought that discrimination, on religious grounds, had long since been denounced.

Am starting to wonder if there is a lot of hostility stillto Catholics getting senior positions.
I remember Cherie Blair getting a lot of flak generally and for no good reason, and did wonder at the time if it was because she was a Catholic.
Now Carrie Symonds is getting the same treatment from some people.....

I thought that discrimination, on religious grounds, had long since been denounced.

It should have been but unfortunately, if this thread is anything to go by, it has not.

For instance:
Political implications of Johnson's Catholicisim

Marrying a Roman Catholic in a Roman Catholic place of worship does not mean a person becomes a Roman Catholic.

Being baptised a Roman Catholic as a baby does not mean you cannot renounce Catholicism at some stage in your life.

Attending a Roman Catholic church does not make you a Catholic.

It will be interesting to see what the comments will be if Sunak becomes PM. He's Hindu.

NotSpaghetti

Godparents don't all have to be Catholic Kali.

No they don't. I'm C of E but have a Catholic goddaughter. I promised to bring her up in the faith and have done my best to do so. It was a real joy to see her confirmed in the Catholic church on Easter Eve three years ago.

Kali2 Mon 31-May-21 18:42:21

Kali

There is nothing in the vows you have quoted that is incompatible with the faith of an Christian in the C of E.

welbeck

Disraeli was Anglican.
i believe his father or grandfather had joined the church.

but i agree with your general point.
i think Kali has missed upthread where someone pointed out that the role of the PM to advise the monarch on church appts was removed in 2008.
since 2013 royals inc the monarch, may marry a catholic.

I was told by my history teacher that Disraeli's parents had him baptised precisely so that he Jewish background wouldn't hold him back in life. Quite pragmatic of them, I'd say, it was the 19th century after all. Times have changed, fortunately.

Callistemon

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

Registry is becoming common parlance. It is stressful to me. It shouldn't be. We were always told to correct people. But we are fighting a losing battle. Everyone says it now. Even the BBC . It's a bit like people saying sloth with regard to the animal and pronouncing it so as to rhyme with cloth.

www.gov.uk/register-offices

And back to Boris, he's married to Carrie. And that's all there is to it.

www.registerofficenearme.com/listing/abergavenny-register-office/

I'm moving away from my keyboard now

It is Registry office here in Australia.

“As now even Amnesty International have Johnson and his vile Conservative Government on their list.''

Vile?

It will be interesting to see what the comments will be if Sunak becomes PM. He's Hindu

Indeed I think that would be very interesting- but it would be clear from the start. Sunak would not pretend to be something, and then turn coat.

I personally think it is high time for the State and CofE Church, and all religions, to be totally separated from State. It makes no sense at all.

But it is what it is, and it is important, still now.

I also think the rule in the USA that any President has to be born in the USA? Why on earth? Someone who has lived there for say, 20 years, is full integrated, etc- should be allowed to represent her or his country. But again, it is what it is. Pretending it is not, is just plain nonsense.

It’s the 21st century Kali2 why would it matter if the PM of the UK was a Hindu.

Racial or religious bigotry should have no place in politics...

Same over here. MPs have to be Australians. There was a big to do about non Australians in office a couple of years back and several MPs had to resign. You don’t have to be born here but you do have to be a citizen rather than a permanent resident and you have to be eligible for an Australian passport. I think that is right, personally.

Indeed I think that would be very interesting- but it would be clear from the start. Sunak would not pretend to be something, and then turn coat.

Perhaps you missed my post of yesterday @ 22:59, Kali2

Marrying a Roman Catholic in a Roman Catholic place of worship does not mean a person becomes a Roman Catholic.

GrannyGravy13

It’s the 21st century Kali2 why would it matter if the PM of the UK was a Hindu.

Racial or religious bigotry should have no place in politics...

Nor should imagined prejudice.
There would be no bar to a Hindu, Sikh, Muslim or Jew being PM