Tony Blair Converts To Catholicism
December 23rd, 2007 by ThunderDragon
To be honest, I couldn’t give two hoots. Religion is a private thing. I don’t care that Blair has become a Catholic and how “moving” the service was or whether Clegg is an atheist. Whatever anyone’s religious beliefs are are simply their own and no-one else’s. It matters not one jot to anyone else. So can we move on please?
This entry is filed under Religion, Tony Blair. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Any religion worth its salt is a public thing as well as private. It might be sustained in private, but it’s worked out in public, whether for good (Desmond Tutu, William Wilberforce), or evil (Sept 11th).
If politicians have got convictions (religious or otherwise), then it matters a lot. Either they’ll pursue those convictions in action, or they won’t. It helps for us voters to know a) what convictions a politician is operating from or b) that they profess 1 set of values and live by another (I think the technical term is hypocrisy).
I disagree David - I don’t think that religion IS or should be a public thing. As far as I am concerned, religion is a private matter. Being religious does not make someone a better or more moral person.
I don’t however, have any problem with people having religious beliefs, so long as they don’t try to preach at me.
I agree that people should stick to what they’re there for - we expect our politicians to do politics, rather than preaching, but we expect church leaders to do the kind of thing Sentamu has been doing recently.
What I’m saying is that if people sincerely pursue their religion, it can’t help but have an effect on how they are in public. Someone who becomes a Christian is faced with the challenge to forgive enemies, flee violence, be generous, tell the truth, care for the poor and pursue justice. Those are actions in the public sphere.
Yes there are lots of bad Christians and good atheists, and it probably depends whether you’re measuring objective attainment or value added! There are folk on both sides to whom it doesn’t make much difference, others who are radically changed.
I’m not saying that religion shouldn’t matter or effect them, but that we have no need to know about their religious beliefs.
Also, personal religion should be secondary to democratic policies - so religious leaders must acknowledge that they have no authority over elected officials.
I’m sure I had something else planned this morning….
I think I would like to know about someones religious beliefs, because it will affect them, and I’m more concerned about what makes a politician tick than how well they present a public face.
As a ‘religious leader’ I don’t even have authority over some of the core members of our church, never mind local councillors, MP’s etc.! There’s a question of structure here: the Catholic church would put more authority into what it’s leaders say, most Protestant churches would say that the leader helps people to interpret their faith, but that they don’t have authority to tell people what to do or not do (just ask Rowan Williams…..).
Jesus’ ‘authority’ came from the integrity of a life well lived, and teachings which made sense, and I think that’s still a good model for his followers.
[...] religion are regarded by the public as “nutters“, and then made a massive hoohah over converting to Catholicism is now going to devote his life to [...]