Blair is ready to convert, says Catholic priest
By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
Last Updated: 1:25am BST 15/10/2004
A priest who regularly conducts Mass for Tony Blair and his family refuelled speculation yesterday that the Prime Minister intends becoming a Roman Catholic.
Fr Timothy Russ, whose parish includes Chequers, disclosed that Mr Blair, an Anglican, had raised the question of conversion with him and said: "If you ask me do you think he wants to become a Catholic, I would say yes."
Fr Russ indicated, however, that he did not believe that Mr Blair would take such a step while Prime Minister and suggested that he had "some way to go" on important moral issues.
Mr Blair, a High Church Anglican, regularly attends Mass at Chequers with his wife Cherie and three children, who are Catholics, and he took part in a private service in the Vatican during a recent visit to Rome.
He has quelled speculation that he might become Britain's first Catholic prime minister by insisting that has no plans to convert, and has said that he only goes to Catholic services so that he and his family can worship together.
But he has worshipped on his own at Westminster Cathedral and he has been criticised for breaching Canon law, which states that except in exceptional circumstances, a non-Roman Catholic should not receive Catholic communion.
Fr Russ, the parish priest of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in nearby Missenden, Berks, told a newspaper that Mr Blair had raised the issue of conversion over lunch.
"When he asked me, it was in the abstract," the priest said. "It wasn't, 'Can I become a Catholic?' but, 'Can the Prime Minister of Britain be a Catholic?' He said Mr Blair would be "free to consider the matter" after he had left office. "But even if he resigns or whatever, I doubt he has the 'necessary' to join the Catholic Church.
"It is always a work of grace," said Fr Russ.
"He would probably have a lot going for him, but he also has to change a lot."
The Catholic Church declined to comment, but Fr Russ's disclosure of private conversations with Mr Blair will have dismayed senior churchmen as they expect priests to be discreet.
Downing Street also refused to be drawn, although a spokesman said the matter was a private one. But the disclosures are fresh evidence that Mr Blair, who is possibly the most religious holder of the post since William Gladstone, has a growing fascination with the Catholic faith.
Much of his political philosophy has been influenced by the social teachings of the Church although he is also an admirer of the maverick German theologian Hans Kung, who has repeatedly clashed with the Vatican.
Francis Beckett, one of the authors of a new biography about him, The Blairs and Their Court, claims that he is, in effect, a Roman Catholic already.
Although Britain has never had a Catholic prime minister, there is no constitutional bar to Mr Blair converting while in Downing Street.
However, constitutional historians have said that such a development could prove awkward and could affect the relationship between Church and State.
As Prime Minister, Mr Blair makes recommendations to the Queen on the appointment of Church of England bishops.
Church spokesmen insisted, however, that this was a State rather than religious duty, and the Prime Minister's religious affiliations need not be a difficulty.
That story is nearly 3 years old FFS.
Quote from: 5iveTimes on June 23, 2007, 10:22:49 AM
Quote from: Solomon Kane on June 23, 2007, 10:18:24 AM
That story is nearly 3 years old FFS.
It may be 3 years old, but it shows how untolerant the British people really are when he couldnt become a Catholic while in the job.
Exactly.Thats what i meant by posting it
Utter bullshit. For all it's faults Britain is one of the most tolerant nations in the world. It is all but nominally secular, there are openly gay cabinet members and a diverse mix of religions sitting in both houses of parliament. Even during the height of the troubles there were Irish republican marches in England and Scotland. The antiquated positions of nobility are little more than nominal now. Charles Kennedy is a practicing catholic and do you believe for one second that it was his religious beliefs that stopped him from becoming PM?
I'm not even going to compare those attitudes to those held in Northern Ireland or the Irish Republic, but bear in mind how Obama had to explain away his early years as a Muslim.
Britain is irrefutably not intolerant but anti catholic. Of course Blair should be asked why he couldn't feel comfortable in converting to the one true faith prior to leaving Downing Street. The sectarian British monarchy (the only reason unionists owe allegiance to Britain as Martin Smyth Orange Grand Master and Unionist politician explained not too long ago) is ridiculous in this day and age and should be attracting the attention now of the EU.There is a substantial section of masons and other anti catholic organisations (including the Orange Order) with their hands on some very powerful levers in Britain.
Quote from: T Fearon on June 23, 2007, 11:37:56 AM
Britain is irrefutably not intolerant but anti catholic. Of course Blair should be asked why he couldn't feel comfortable in converting to the one true faith prior to leaving Downing Street. The sectarian British monarchy (the only reason unionists owe allegiance to Britain as Martin Smyth Orange Grand Master and Unionist politician explained not too long ago) is ridiculous in this day and age and should be attracting the attention now of the EU.There is a substantial section of masons and other anti catholic organisations (including the Orange Order) with their hands on some very powerful levers in Britain.
I don't know which statement there is the most ridiculous.
None of them because they are all true, mate.
Also the abuse meted out to Cherie Blair, Ruth Kelly etc is all rooted to their religious affiliation.
How does Jonathan Petre manage to remain a religion correspondent and yet know so little about religion as to use a phrase like "conducts Mass".
I liked this bit, though:
QuoteFr Russ ... suggested that (Blair) had "some way to go" on important moral issues.
I can understand why Blair didn't convert, as Britain is unique in having a state religion and both the church and government are intertwined.
While Britain is very tolerant, (or its people too polite to show their intolerance), there is always a bit of latent anti-Catholicism.
Notice how many people are pejoratively described as being "strict Catholic", with a little hint of sneering, or the subtle suggestion that it implies weirdness. Have you have ever heard of anyone described as a "strict Anglican", even though both churches have roughly the same rules on the broader issues.
Granted the Church of England is an easy going non forceful institution, but surely (ignore the finer details) someone who is Roman Catholic would have roughly the same moral compass as an Anglican, so it could hardly be a source of subversiveness?
Again I'm sure it's one of those historical hand me downs. In a country that from the mid 1500s to the 1820s had severe anti-Catholic laws and viewed the religion as being on a par with witchcraft and Satanism, you don't expect such phobias to quickly disappear.
Quote from: T Fearon on June 23, 2007, 11:37:56 AM
There is a substantial section of masons and other anti catholic organisations (including the Orange Order) with their hands on some very powerful levers in Britain.
:D :D
And please tell me, what "very powerful levers in Britain" do the OO have their hands on? ;D
Phobias not disappearing quickly? Jaysus 200 hundred years nearly have gone since 1820...how much longer must we wait? :-\
Quote from: Bord na Mona man on June 23, 2007, 12:14:01 PM
While Britain is very tolerant, (or its people too polite to show their intolerance), there is always a bit of latent anti-Catholicism.
Notice how many people are pejoratively described as being "strict Catholic", with a little hint of sneering, or the subtle suggestion that it implies weirdness. Have you have ever heard of anyone described as a "strict Anglican", even though both churches have roughly the same rules on the broader issues.
It's funny that you've picked up on that. I always hear "I was brought up a 'good' Catholic" or "she was brought up a 'good' Catholic".
Seriously, listen out for it - I would NEVER hear "good Anglican" etc. I always took that as a sign of British TVs incessant political correctness.
Quote from: T Fearon on June 23, 2007, 11:37:56 AM
Britain is irrefutably not intolerant but anti catholic. Of course Blair should be asked why he couldn't feel comfortable in converting to the one true faith prior to leaving Downing Street. The sectarian British monarchy (the only reason unionists owe allegiance to Britain as Martin Smyth Orange Grand Master and Unionist politician explained not too long ago) is ridiculous in this day and age and should be attracting the attention now of the EU.There is a substantial section of masons and other anti catholic organisations (including the Orange Order) with their hands on some very powerful levers in Britain.
I underline your "misunderstandings" ;) then Tony
1. Smyth was referring to the Orange Order's (not unionism's) allegiance to the monarchy (not Britain) being dependant on it being protestant.
2. The EU are well aware of the constitutional situation of the UK, as well as that of other constitutional monarchys in it's membership.
3. The Orange Order don't even have their hands on "powerful levers" in Northern Ireland now, never mind the rest of the UK. If they did do you think the current political agreement in Northern Ireland would exist? Ironically Blair's grandfather was a Donegal Orange-man. As for the free-masons, perhaps it's about time we all left aside the Da Vinci Code style conspiracy theorys. UK law does not leave a lot of room for mutual back-scratching these days even with employment regulations.
4. As for Ruth Kelly and Cherie Blair, there is a hell of a lot of ammo which could be used on both of them without resorting to their religious beliefs. I find it hard to believe that Blair's Mrs worships anything beyond wealth and status. Kelly's flak that she has taken has been aimed towards her being inept at her job during scrweaming headlines about failing schools.
::)
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on June 23, 2007, 12:19:32 PM
Iain Duncan Smith is a Catholic, and when asked on the matter he said it would have been dealt with when the time for it arose if he ever became PM.
Something he knew he would never have to deal with ;)
I don't think that England or the British Government is anyway anti-catholic. The monarchy is, by it's very nature, but that isn't really relevant anymore in many people's eyes.
Quote from: Bord na Mona man on June 23, 2007, 12:14:01 PM
I can understand why Blair didn't convert, as Britain is unique in having a state religion and both the church and government are intertwined.
Hardly unique
List of state-established religions (http://lhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state-established_religions#Roman_Catholic)
Always makes me chuckle to see bastions of progress like Norway and Denmark on this list while the backward Micks have never had an official religion.
Mrs d is quite insistent that it would be a very big deal for many people in England to have a Papist as PM. The mere fact that Blair is waiting until now to talk about it in public should tell us that it is an issue.
Quote from: deiseach on June 23, 2007, 02:09:36 PM
Hardly unique
List of state-established religions (http://lhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state-established_religions#Roman_Catholic)
There's a big difference between having an official religion and having a religion that is a de-facto arm of the state itself. The governments or monarchies of Andorra, Argentina etc. have little input say in how Rome runs itself.
If Communists did religion, I reckon they would adopted England's model of nationalised religion. I wonder what the religious equivalent of Yugo, Lada, Skoda would have been in Eastern Europe. ;D
Quote from: Bord na Mona man on June 23, 2007, 02:32:31 PM
There's a big difference between having an official religion and having a religion that is a de-facto arm of the state itself. The governments or monarchies of Andorra, Argentina etc. have little input say in how Rome runs itself.
Well, according to the always-open-to-challenge source that is Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_of_Norway), the Church of Norway
Quoteis subject to legislation and budgeting passed by the Norwegian parliament, Stortinget and its central administrative functions is carried out by the Royal Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs.
Anecdotally, this describes a degree of control which far exceeds that which the British state exercises over the Church of England.
Quote from: deiseach on June 23, 2007, 02:09:36 PM
Mrs d is quite insistent that it would be a very big deal for many people in England to have a Papist as PM. The mere fact that Blair is waiting until now to talk about it in public should tell us that it is an issue.
Perhaps an issue for Blair rather than anyone else? It was argued in the press lately that Blair was holding off on his conversion because of the Northern Ireland Peace process, as a becoming a RC may have weakened his position with Paisley with whom he has a close reationship. It must be added however that in the article there were absolutely no quotations from anyone.
This is an even bigger non-story than the Kyle Lafferty to Celtic thread because it has not happened, and may not, although I suspect it will. That, and a persons religious beliefs are entirely their own matter.
Quote from: deiseach on June 23, 2007, 02:41:29 PM
Quote from: Bord na Mona man on June 23, 2007, 02:32:31 PM
There's a big difference between having an official religion and having a religion that is a de-facto arm of the state itself. The governments or monarchies of Andorra, Argentina etc. have little input say in how Rome runs itself.
Well, according to the always-open-to-challenge source that is Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_of_Norway), the Church of Norway
Quoteis subject to legislation and budgeting passed by the Norwegian parliament, Stortinget and its central administrative functions is carried out by the Royal Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs.
Anecdotally, this describes a degree of control which far exceeds that which the British state exercises over the Church of England.
There's a much better example of an equivalent state church. Though it's doubtful that the Norwegians have the same historical hang ups about any particular religion.
Britain is latently intolerant, but Catholicism is the "one true faith". ::)
Quote from: The Real Laoislad on June 23, 2007, 10:31:09 AM
Quote from: 5iveTimes on June 23, 2007, 10:22:49 AM
Quote from: Solomon Kane on June 23, 2007, 10:18:24 AM
That story is nearly 3 years old FFS.
It may be 3 years old, but it shows how untolerant the British people really are when he couldnt become a Catholic while in the job.
Exactly.Thats what i meant by posting it
What a load of bollix. The current Cabinet has people from all denominations and none, nobody gives a fcuk either way, The only reason that Blair didn't convert, while in office, was simply that as Aliistair Campbell famously said 'they don't do relegion'.
Quote from: Solomon Kane on June 23, 2007, 11:00:41 AM
Utter bullshit. For all it's faults Britain is one of the most tolerant nations in the world. It is all but nominally secular, there are openly gay cabinet members and a diverse mix of religions sitting in both houses of parliament. Even during the height of the troubles there were Irish republican marches in England and Scotland. The antiquated positions of nobility are little more than nominal now. Charles Kennedy is a practicing catholic and do you believe for one second that it was his religious beliefs that stopped him from becoming PM?
I'm not even going to compare those attitudes to those held in Northern Ireland or the Irish Republic, but bear in mind how Obama had to explain away his early years as a Muslim.
what tripe. the head of britain cannot marry outside the protestant faith but you conveniently blow over that fact in "it is all but nominally secular". while i completely agree with the fact that the british public are among the most tolerant in the world secularism is a binary thing and while the british state is institutionally tied to the protestant monarchy it cannot call itself secular..