Austen IvereighMay 31, 2021
Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds pose together for a photo in the garden of 10 Downing Street after their wedding on Saturday. (Rebecca Fulton via AP)

Here is an idea for a Catholic Church crisis communications workshop in the United Kingdom:

Imagine being woken at 6am on Trinity Sunday by the BBC to be told that the prime minister, a twice-divorced nominal Anglican who has gained some notoriety for his extramarital affairs, got married the day before in front of friends and family in Westminster Cathedral—the mother church of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales.

Could you come on the main radio news program in an hour and explain?

Let us add a bit of pressure. Beyond a gnomic statement saying only that both Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds are parishioners and baptized, and that “all necessary steps were taken, in both church and civil law, and all formalities completed before the wedding,” members of the cathedral staff have gone to ground, and no one else seems to know anything. The media are citing “loopholes” in Catholic marriage law, and Twitter is imploding in fury and spluttering at the church’s double standards. How can there be one rule for the prime minister and another for everyone else?

Sacraments are not a reward for the righteous. 

Already the questions are pouring in. “Can anyone explain to me,” asked an assistant priest in Liverpool, Father Mark Drew, on Twitter, “how ‘Boris’ Johnson, who left the Catholic Church while at Eton and is twice divorced, can be married at Westminster Cathedral, while I have to tell practicing Catholics in good faith who want a second marriage in Church that it’s not possible?”

This is not, of course, just an idea for a workshop: It happened to me on Sunday morning, May 30. I used my hour of preparation to (a) drink coffee, (b) get acquainted with the facts, such as I could find them, and (c) brush up on Catholic sacramental law.

The starting point is this. Sacraments are not a reward for the righteous. Catholics have a right to them, as long as there is no impediment, they meet the requirements and they enter freely into them in full knowledge of their meaning and import.

To be wed sacramentally, both partners must be baptized Christians and one must be a Catholic. They must be free to marry, and must receive instruction in the church’s understanding of marriage: as lifelong, between a man and a woman, open to life, and so on.

In this case, both are baptized Catholics. Mr. Johnson was raised Catholic by his mother Charlotte, a portrait painter, who divorced from his father Stanley in 1979. True, at Eton, Boris chose to be confirmed in the Church of England, but in the eyes of the Catholic Church he remains a Catholic. So we can check that box.

Assuming that certain procedures above were followed, Boris Johnson has been treated exactly the same as everyone else, under the same universal law.

Mr. Johnson’s previous two marriages, it is safe to assume, “lacked canonical form”: That is, they did not fulfill the requirements of church law and therefore cannot be considered sacramental. (There are dispensations from these requirements in advance, and ex post facto “validations” that can change this, but—let’s again assume—that Mr. Johnson did not avail himself of them in the case of the first two marriages.) So all that was needed in this case was a simple declaration of the invalidity of his previous marriages by the church. Another box theoretically checked.

Mr. Johnson and Ms. Symonds reportedly received instruction over at least six months from Father Daniel Humphreys, the former administrator of Westminster Cathedral and a priest of the Diocese of Westminster, who in December 2020 baptized their infant son Wilfred, so we know he heard about the meaning of the binding vows he took on Saturday. Given his divorces and very public history of infidelity, that is a big box to check.

Conclusion: Far from Mr. Johnson getting special treatment, the point is the opposite. Assuming that certain procedures above were followed, he has been treated exactly the same as everyone else, under the same universal law. And this, it turns out, is the real stumbling block for so many.

That law says that the church will hold you to the vows you made in a sacramental marriage, but not those you made in a non-sacramental marriage because, put crudely, the church cannot be sure what those vows meant. The British tabloids like to call this a “loophole” but it is simply the working out of two different, and parallel, legal systems.

It is striking how censorious British public opinion has been of the church for witnessing this marriage. It is as if the church had a duty to reject the request to marry because of Mr. Johnson’s past, in order to “send a clear message” upholding its teaching on marriage. In other words, the public wanted him treated differently from everyone else. But as the debate in the American church over the bid by a group of U.S. bishops to blanket-ban certain politicians from the Eucharist shows, playing politics with the sacraments—even ecclesiastical politics—goes against the nature of the sacraments themselves.

Of course, there is a sense in which Mr. Johnson marrying in Westminster Cathedral is a scandal: a very Gospel type of scandal. What brings most of us up short in this story, after all, is the extraordinary latitude the church gives to the operation of God’s grace.

What brings most of us up short in this story is the extraordinary latitude the church gives to the operation of God’s grace.

Which brings us to Mr. Johnson’s own faith. Only Father Humphreys would be able to say much about that, and he won’t say anything. But others have speculated that the events of Mr. Johnson’s life in recent years—including his brush with death on a Covid-19 ward last year, his new relationship and new son, and now his entering a Catholic sacramental marriage while leading his country out of the greatest crisis since the Second World War—it would be no surprise if he had sometimes looked back to the faith of his mother and grandmother.

Another question: Might this be the “twitch upon the thread” that Father Brown spoke of in G.K. Chesterton’s stories? The announcement from the Archdiocese of Westminster said Mr. Johnson and his new wife “are both parishioners of the Westminster Cathedral parish.” Has Boris Johnson crossed the Tiber?

If so, he would not do so publicly while prime minister. There is the thorny constitutional issue of a Catholic prime minister appointing Anglican bishops in the name of the queen, the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England. But the main obstacle is one of political distraction. The aggressively adversarial British political system encourages picking away at any perceived inconsistency or hypocrisy. A Catholic prime minister would be permanently on the defensive, accused by secularists of taking his orders from Rome and by Catholics of a lack of coherence with church teaching.

Those are some of the reasons why Tony Blair received instruction to become a Catholic while still prime minister but was not received into the church until 2008, soon after he had left office.

Of course it is possible that Mr. Johnson has been already secretly received into the church, in pectore, and that after he leaves office we will discover that he was a practicing Catholic all along. That almighty constitutional explosion could be the second scenario for the church crisis communications workshop.

But it is more likely that the prime minister is on a journey, with early, fumbling steps. Whatever one thinks of him, it is good that he has stopped by Westminster Cathedral for some guidance. There is every reason to believe that Father Humphreys and the newly-married couple followed the Catholic Church’s procedures for ensuring that Mr. Johnson’s previous marriages were invalid. Given that proper attention to form, he had every right to be married in the Catholic Church.

We don’t have comments turned on everywhere anymore. We have recently relaunched the commenting experience at America and are aiming for a more focused commenting experience with better moderation by opening comments on a select number of articles each day.

But we still want your feedback. You can join the conversation about this article with us in social media on Twitter or Facebook, or in one of our Facebook discussion groups for various topics.

Or send us feedback on this article with one of the options below:

We welcome and read all letters to the editor but, due to the volume received, cannot guarantee a response.

In order to be considered for publication, letters should be brief (around 200 words or less) and include the author’s name and geographic location. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.

We open comments only on select articles so that we can provide a focused and well-moderated discussion on interesting topics. If you think this article provides the opportunity for such a discussion, please let us know what you'd like to talk about, or what interesting question you think readers might want to respond to.

If we decide to open comments on this article, we will email you to let you know.

If you have a message for the author, we will do our best to pass it along. Note that if the article is from a wire service such as Catholic News Service, Religion News Service, or the Associated Press, we will not have direct contact information for the author. We cannot guarantee a response from any author.

We welcome any information that will help us improve the factual accuracy of this piece. Thank you.

Please consult our Contact Us page for other options to reach us.

City and state/province, or if outside Canada or the U.S., city and country. 
When you click submit, this article page will reload. You should see a message at the top of the reloaded page confirming that your feedback has been received.

The latest from america

Social justice scandals play out in Netflix's newest hit "The Chair", echoing college campuses across the country. The show's empathy is remarkable, but as a recent graduate, some scenes hit too close to home.
Sarah VincentSeptember 17, 2021
Photo: Searchlight Pictures
America spoke with Jessica Chastain and Andrew Garfield about the nature of faith and the singular courage of Tammy Faye.
Ryan Di CorpoSeptember 17, 2021
I live with chronic pain, and often it seems like no one really understands what this means. Having chronic pain, especially as a young person, can often feel lonely and isolating.
Keara HanlonSeptember 17, 2021
The man who could oust Prime Minister Justin Trudeau from power became Conservative Party leader with a pledge to “take back Canada”—and almost immediately started working to modernize the party by pushing it toward the political center.