Pope's ruling bars Blair from taking Communion with family

The London Times ^ | April 17, 2003 | Richard Owen in Rome and Tom Baldwin

[Willie Green]

For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.

ANY hope that Tony Blair had of enjoying a happy, Catholic Easter with his family will be crushed today by the Pope.

John Paul II is issuing a new encyclical that The Times has learnt will explicitly forbid Protestants like the Prime Minister taking Communion with Catholics such as Cherie Blair and their children.

The 83-year-old Pope has chosen Holy Week to stamp on what he sees as dangerously “liberal” interpretations of the Roman Catholic doctrine that only those “in full communion with Rome” can take part in the Eucharist.

Mr Blair, who remains a committed, if ecumenical, member of the Church of England, regularly attends Catholic Mass with his family. He also used to take Communion with them at the St Joan of Arc church in Islington.

But in 1996, he received a letter from Cardinal Basil Hume asking him to desist. In his reply, Mr Blair did not conceal his dismay at such theological conservatism. Saying that he merely wished to worship with his family but had not realised his behaviour was causing offence, he promised he would not do so again. The letter added: “I wonder what Jesus would have made of it?”

Since then Mr Blair, who admits he is strongly drawn to Catholicism, has more than once explored the limits of this doctrine. Britain has never had a Catholic prime minister and in 1998 he had to deny reports he had converted after being spotted going to Westminster Cathedral for Mass unaccompanied by his family. Suggestions that he had received the Eucharist on this occasion were never confirmed.

There have also been rumours that when Mr Blair is on holiday abroad he has taken Communion with his family.

The Pope´s fourteenth encyclical slams the door on the many Catholics and Protestants who currently take Communion together and represents a setback for Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is a firm advocate of ecumenism. When Mr Blair visited the Pope at the Vatican last month, he may have got a hint of what was to come. While his family went to take Communion with the Pope, the Prime Minister only received a blessing. The Pope also made it clear that he disagreed with Mr Blair about war in Iraq.

[Campion]

You have just told us all that it is okay to eat flesh as long as it is disguised as bread. Is that really what you believe the Bible teaches us?

Reread John 6.

[lugsoul]

Such a Catholic reply. My dear, telling someone "you may not come down to the alter, but the rest of you may" is by its very nature ostracism.

[Iowegian]

This particular Catholic doctrine comes straight out of 1 Corinthians 11:23-30.

Then it is improperly enforced by the RC church, for it says clearly "every man should examine himself before he eats the bread and drinks of the cup", not a priest should decide or some other church authority.

[AnalogReigns]

The Episcopal Church "split" with the Church of England at the time of the American Revolution. However Episcopaleans and various other similar churches outside the authority of the United Kingdom are all part of the "Anglican Communion," headed up by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Interestingly it's the African and other 3rd world Anglican churches that have put the brakes on wacky liberal (de)evolution in the whole Anglican Communion. The religious far left in Anglicanism who formerly "loved" 3rd world empowerment, now despise it for its biblical conservatism.

[Salvation]

**We should note that there is an "Anglican Use" rite within the Latin Church that greases the skids for any Anglican communities that wish to return home. They can continue to use their familiar Rite with just a few modifications.**

Thanks for that reminder for all.

[lugsoul]

"It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life."

[ellery]

But isn't there anyone who would be expected not to take communion at your church? Say, a non-Christian?

[Northern Yankee]

I really do think that half the statements coming out of the Vatican are not from the Pope.

As a man who fought the Nazis in Poland during the second World War, I believe things being said by him, are not from him.

A gut feeling...

This is a man who treasures Freedom, and understands the costs that it takes to liberate an oppressed people.

[surelyclintonsbaddream]

I take my faith very seriously also. Thank you very much. I think that is what irritates me and others. It sounds as if you are putting yourself higher up the ladder then the rest of us. I happen to have some Catholic friends in a Bible group that are very gracious. They are wonderful witnesses for Jesus and would never insult me. They respect me & I respect them. They would never make me think their relationship with Christ is more important than mine.
I am not "reading" someone's heart, I WILL let Jesus do that. These were people I have known for years and know how they feel spiritually because they have told me. They partake because it is expected. There is no fruit. I actually thought I was being nice. I am sorry you felt you had to go on the attack. I have been told personally by friends that the church has told them they are automatically in heaven because of being Catholic. They weren't too happy about being told that because they wept for those who believe it.

from your mouth
It's coincidental, I'm sure, that those most "assured" of their own salvation are also the most judgmental of others.

This sounds Clintonise or Robbinsise. You sir, are most certainly judging me.
AND that is all I have to say on this subject.

[Mr. Lucky]

Could you explain the difference to me?

[ellery]

I don't get the animosity. Isn't all of this ultimately between each of us and God? It's a fascinating discussion, but I don't understand the insults to the Pope or anyone else.

[crz]

Bless you! Still #116 is stuck in my thoughts.

[lugsoul]

Yes - but I am sure that nothing in the Church hierarchy would undertake to decide which among professed Christians believed the proper interpretation of the proper passages to qualify them as a "real" Christian. I've gotta agree with Iowegian on this - it is a matter for self-examination.

[lugsoul]

Well, it seems simple - my Church, and AFAIK most Churches, believe in the spiritual presence of Christ at the sacrament. This is somewhat different than requiring the belief that the bread and wine undergoes an invisible, odorless, colorless transformation into flesh and blood in order to establish this presence.

[TheBattman]

Careful - Last time i got into a theology debate here with a Catholic (which there are quite a few here) I thought I was never going to hear the end of it.

[gcruse]

The Pope also made it clear that he disagreed with Mr Blair about war in Iraq.

Yeah, all those children released from prison and not a Catholic among them.

[ellery]

It almost seems like there are interesting federalist parallels here -- that the RC and Orthodox churches are organized based on strong, central governance, and other Christian denominations are more decentralized. It's Adams vs. Jefferson! (no offense meant to anyone...not trying to minimize theological differences)

[AnalogReigns]

One of unadressed issues in this debate is the difference between "closed communion" and "open communion" churches. The vast majority of Protestant or non-denominational churches are open communion, meaning that anyone who professes faith in Jesus is invited to partake.

Roman and Orthodox churches, following the older pattern, are closed communion churches however. Only members in good standing are supposed to be allowed to take communion. To not be a member of that communion in good standing....and take communion is considered a damning offense. Even Roman Catholics (take your typical New England politician...) who are NOT in good standing (confession, etc.) are not supposed to be allowed to take communion, or risk automatic excommunication.

It used to be most Protestant churches were "closed communion." The famous colonial preacher & theologian Jonathan Edwards was fired from his church since he was of the "closed communion" opinion, and the church elders were of an "open communion" opinion. To be fair the closed communion idea is quite supportable from the New Testament, which warns in very stern terms that those who haven't examined their hearts, recognizing the body and blood of Jesus should definitely NOT partake. American individualism though, I think interceded and lets the potential dire consequences of irreverently taking communion fall on the individual--not of the church's responsibility.

[surelyclintonsbaddream]

And all these years, I thought he died for all of us. I didn't realize Catholics were more precious to him.

[Salvation]

But you will be invited to come forward for a blessing. Please, I am pleading for your wife and daughter, possibly because I have lived their walk.

I fully realize, that neither they nor I, can change your mind however. You are the one who can wield your presence at this Easter Mass as a blessing or a burden for them. Only you can make that decision. And the way you are sounding right now it would be a burden.

I tried to point out the positives. I don't understand why you can not see them. (Giving up a little personal pride to honor Christ and to honor your wife and daughter.)