Boris Johnson in marrying as a "Catholic" has annulled his previous marriages and delegitimesed his children - these are the ethics of our current prime minister

[stumbledin]

On one level I dont care either way about this but thought it strange who could get married in a Catholic ceremony. But as ever our resourceful PM has "negotiated" a path that suits him - and insults his formes wives and their children. As someone on facebook said, this is how Etonians learn to rule the world! What an utter w*er!!

" ... Catholic canon law does not permit the marriage of a divorcee whose former spouse is still alive.

However, the church confirmed that as neither his six-year first marriage to Allegra Mostyn-Owen, nor his second 27-year marriage to Marina Wheeler were Catholic ceremonies they are not recognised in the eyes of the church.

... In order to marry in a Catholic church, Mr Johnson could have had his two previous marriages recognised as annulled.

(or) ... his previous marriages, for which he would have required special dispensation from the Catholic church, those marriages would have "had a lack of canonical form" and could therefore be considered invalid. ... "

Interestingly these comments are from a Telegraph article late yesterday www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/29/boris-wedding-did-prime-minister-marry-carrie-symonds-catholic/ which has now disappeared and been replaced with this much less questioning article www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/30/boris-johnson-carrie-symonds-catholic-church-wedding-married/

Wonder if some Telegraph Tory leaders got in touch and said dont be so mean!

As they say, one rule for the rich, one rule for the poor.

If Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds are Catholics they're pretty shit at it.

Constance, it respects all marriages as being similar to its own in the sense that the people marrying, whether Hindu, Christian or in a civil ceremony mean their vows sincerely.

If however, you are a Catholic and have therefore promised to God that you will marry in the Catholic Church and you then marry elsewhere, your marriage is invalid.

‘Omg, I give up. Because the respect is one way only. One Christian church recognises anothers marriage ceremony but the respect is one way and not reciprocated.’
If you can't see why that is unchristian I give up.’

The Anglican Church also doesn’t make a distinction between Catholic and Hindu marriages. I don’t know why you think it does. There isn’t some special level of ‘Christian marriage’ held by any denomination as far as I know.

The Anglican Church came into existence because it didn’t agree with Catholicism anyway. It is perfectly courteous to recognise that disagreement exists.

Carrie and her ‘faith’, she seems to forget it when she was shagging a married man and producing his 5th? 6th child 🤷🏼‍♀️
Pair of self centred selfish gets.

I am no fan of his but, from a Catholic point of view:

Why would Anglicans want the Roman Catholic Church to co-opt Anglican marriage as an RC sacrament, when the two churches have authority to make their own, different rules about marriage?

Is he being treated any differently from any other baptised Roman Catholic who hasn't previously been married in that church?

Are people really suggesting that the church should take his previous behaviour into account - womanising, adultery etc? Because that doesn't happen to anyone else. Marriage isn't conditional on a moral record. If it was a RC mass as well as a wedding, and he received communion, he'd be expected to be in good standing with the church.

But it's up to him to make that judgement if he's a baptised Catholic (and I had no idea he was!) If he is, the sacrament (from RC perspective) of confession is available to him like anyone else. And no-one but him should know for sure whether he has availed of it or how sincerely.

Yes, Belleager, I agree and found it all a bit confusing.

It feels a bit like people are saying ‘how dare the Catholic Church go around telling people their sins are forgiven’ as if it is a complete surprise that the church is in the business of forgiving sins (albeit as a conduit).

I also don’t get the schroedingers Catholic thing, where people want to simultaneously reject and demand that they be under the authority of the Catholic Church. If you want to be under the authority of the Catholic Church, convert.

But it also pisses me off that the Catholic Church don’t recognise my Anglican communion too. The Catholic Church is so against anyone who is not Catholic, it’s not a welcoming space

Please tell me you're joking. Yes, the Catholic Church isn't interested in what people do in other religions. It's not ~inclusive that way. Amazing.

@C0nstance

Hindus aren't Christians though. Why would the Catholic church not respect another Christian religion's ceremonies as being similar to its own? It seems deliberately offensive.Especially when the lack of respect is one way. Anglican churches recognise catholic marriages because they are Christian.

One possibility is that the Catholic Church recognises marriage as a sacrament, and I don't believe Protestant religions do.

The Anglicans do recognise marriage as a sacrament, although many other Protestant churches don’t.

But as a previous poster said, why would Anglicans want their sacraments to be co-opted by the Catholics anyway? The Anglican Church wants to make its own rules about marriage.

I dont know why some of those posting keep missing the point.

This isn't about the law of the land, or our personal opinions.

This is about somebody who says they have reverted to the Catholic faith and is then allowed to break the guidelines of that faith.

Assuming he is genuine in his re found belief (caugh) it means has has consciously annulled his marriages to two other women and delegitimised the children of those marriages.

We all know he lied about solving the border in Ireland (or maybe someof you think is it okay to lie about your political committments to get elected as prime minister?)

This is about a man with no conscious.

But this is about so called parts of the establishment bending the rules for an "important" person.

And there is obviously some concerns about how this will be viewed by those who still think principles matter, that the Telegraph has deleted the original article and the new one is less critical.

Though it is clear from other papers that many who actually believe in their Catholic teachings are shocked, and as one priest is reported as saying, it makes the Church look like there is one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor. (Never thought in my life I would be in agreements with a Catholic priest.)

The whole point is he is a sly self serving hypocrite.

@Precipice

But it also pisses me off that the Catholic Church don’t recognise my Anglican communion too. The Catholic Church is so against anyone who is not Catholic, it’s not a welcoming space

Please tell me you're joking. Yes, the Catholic Church isn't interested in what people do in other religions. It's not ~inclusive that way. Amazing.

Except it isn't another religion. Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism are branches of Christianity. You'd hope there might be some common ground. 'Love one another' eh?

What rules of Catholicism has he broken since reverting?

My main interest in this is that I plan to have my marriage deemed invalid by the Catholic Church under the same part of canon law.

It seems completely straightforward and watertight to me.

Catholics aren’t required to love Anglicans more than Hindus, or indeed love other Catholics more than Hindus.

The Anglicans wanted the authority to make their own rules about marriage.

campion, they might have the same base religion, but are two separate sects.
Seeing as the Church of England was literally founded when the Catholic Church wouldn't grant Henry VIII a divorce, it's not surprising that their marriage laws differ and that the Catholic Church doesn't recognise the Anglican marriages as valid in the eyes of God/The Catholic Church.

And there is common ground between Anglicans and Catholics. Baptism for a start is considered universal by both.

What rules of Catholicism has he broken since reverting?

No doubt time will tell...

Is he saying that he has reverted to the Catholic faith? (Not sure he would have to. He could declare himself an atheist / agnostic and agree to have Wilf raised a Catholic)

If he is saying that, should the Church be demanding proof that they wouldn't want from anyone else, because the Great British public will be reasonably sceptical?

To marry in a Catholic church, you don't need to be

A Catholic
A believer
A decent human being

You have to be on your first recognised Catholic marriage, agreeing to raise children of the marriage Catholic if practicable (this isn't a rigid standard)

One partner has to be a Catholic. Not necessarily practising. That's all.

But this is about so called parts of the establishment bending the rules for an "important" person. Except that annulment proceedings are not that difficult and do not require you to be an important person.

If Johnson's having Communion, presumably he'll have confessed and been absolved, hence from a religious perspective he can participate in Mass and also marry (since the Catholic Church does not accept his previous marriage as valid). It's also possible, though it apparently isn't the case here, that a Catholic marriage can be celebrated between one Catholic and one non-Catholic (this classification is not based on personal faith, but whether you are counted as a member of the Church by the Church, i.e. whether you have been baptised into it). Then the sacrament of marriage is theoretically given only to the Catholic, in terms of that the other is like a 'witness' to it. You do have to agree that children of this mixed couple will be Catholic. This was the case for my relatives: the wife was Catholic and the husband was not a Christian.

Belleager, you can’t get married in the Catholic Church if you have already had an Anglican, Hindu, civil, Jewish etc marriage...

Unless you are a Catholic.

Johnson was a Catholic. The church doesn’t believe people can decide to stop being a Catholic.

Therefore his prior marriages are invalid.

Yes, that's an extra layer to this. You're right.

I think the point stands, though. Marrying Boris and Carrie wasn't a declaration that he was in good standing as a Catholic. It may have been based on his historic status as a baptised Catholic - but that's not a claim that he is a practising / believing / well-behaved Catholic now. That's just not required.

Surely all he has claimed is to understand the requirement to see to Wilf's Catholic upbringing? That's between him and Carrie, if she wants it.

Yes, I don’t know that he is required to shown himself to be any kind of good Catholic, unless they also had a nuptial mass.

The time for "delegitimisation" has long passed - Johnson is not Henry Tudor!

This.

All children are legitimate, FGS.

This is really strange, archaic stuff to dress up as a feminist concern. It’s pointless canon law, nothing to do with the law of the land or women’s legal rights.

it makes the Church look like there is one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor.

You saying this over and over doesn't make it true. The rules are the same for all catholics.

I love all the non-catholics who suddenly give a shit about how cannon law works because it gives them a reason to slag off BJ.

There are worse things to judge him on.

Bullshit post OP

DH is catholic but married his CofE wife in CofE church

When they divorced and we got married 5 years later it was fine in RC church as CofE isn't recognised by them

Dh wasn’t annulled

It’s normal and not special treatment at all