Sunday, July 16, 2006

The hypocrisy of Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor

According to The Times, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor is refusing to sack an aide accused of having a series of affairs, one of which led to his girlfriend having an abortion. The Roman Catholic Church has been consistently and vociferously opposed (with good reason) to this infanticide, and participation in the process is considered a grave sin. Yet Austen Ivereigh, a former Jesuit novice and presently the Cardinal’s director for public affairs, is accused of ‘heinous hypocrisy’ after paying a girlfriend to have an abortion. He is one of the Cardinal’s most trusted advisors, readily leaps to the defence of the Catholic faith, and has recently been at the forefront of demands in the UK for tougher abortion laws.

Yet the hypocrisy is not only with Ivereigh. The Cardinal previously sacked his press secretary for no other reason than that he was gay. Stephen Noon was abruptly told that his sexuality was ‘incompatible’ with his position in the Church, and he therefore had to go. Since he was an official spokesman for the Cardinal, it was considered that there was no alternative because homosexual acts are regarded by the Church as a sin. It would be difficult to have a press secretary explaining that teaching, while at the same time violating it.

So, it seems that one may be involved in fornication, adultery and abortion, all against the teachings of the Church, and remain a spokesman for the Cardinal, but one may not be involved in homosexuality, against the teachings of the Church, and remain a spokesman. If the Cardinal would care to explain this to Cranmer, he would be appreciative.


Anonymous Rick said...

Yes Ivereigh should be removed from any position connected with The Church he is serially amoral.............and there is no role for anyone known to be gay in an official capacity in the Church.

16 July 2006 at 10:56  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

As much as I agree with various Catholic bishops that Austen Ivereigh should be sacked, I think the disparity between O'Connor's clinging onto him, and yet instantly sacking his gay press secretary, shows his clear bias. Homosexuality, it seems, is utterly intolerable, while other sexual sins and abortion are somehow 'less of a sin', and certainly don't merit instant dismissal. Is there a Catholic in the house who can explain this? Is one a 'cardinal sin', and the other 'venial'? I've never been sure of the difference.

16 July 2006 at 11:25  
Anonymous person said...

I agree with both Rick and ulster man, it just comes to show how much reform christianity needs, and had you adhered to the true teachings of Prophet Isa, you would not have had to face so much upheaval in your religion.

16 July 2006 at 13:00  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

Where did Prophet Isa teach about homosexuality?

16 July 2006 at 14:25  
Anonymous Rick said...

and had you adhered to the true teachings of Prophet Isa, you would not have had to face so much upheaval in your religion.

Jesus was a Jew, a follower of Hillel, a man well-versed in both Torah and in rabbinical oral tradition. His cousin John The Baptist was born into a Levite family.

It is clear that Jesus like Saul of Tarsus was a Jew, that Christianity is Judaic................that tends to leave Islam as out in the left field.

16 July 2006 at 18:50  
Blogger phone cam foolery said...

Cranmer where you are sooooooooo
wrong on this is the fact that the person in question did all this a long time ago, way before he landed this job.
He sincerely regrets his actions.
Surely you understand the concept of forgiveness?
He who>>> etc etc
The diffrence between this mess and the previous is that the other chap was continuing behaviour that is against the teachings of the Church.

17 July 2006 at 15:40  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Phone Cam Foolery,

Cranmer is only 'sooooo wrong' insofar as The Times reports. 'Sincere regret' is either heart-felt and sincere, or it's a couple of words one spurts out to keep one's job. I suspect the latter of Ivereigh. Also, I believe the Pope is not only opposed to practising homosexuals, but also those who have ever felt the inclination. Aspirants to the priesthood are required to declare such.

If we're talking about the conduct of the Catholic Church here, according to the link for the Noon dismissal, he was not approached for moral correction, there was no compassionate counselling, there was no opportunity for repentance. That is what the gospel of forgiveness demands. The Cardinal simply sacked him.

17 July 2006 at 16:01  
Blogger Jilted Tony said...

Meanwhile f16's and Apaches pound the Lebanon, children lie dead , all because a group of eastern europeans pitched up in palestine claiming God said the land is theirs.
Somehow I dont think Christ would approve.

17 July 2006 at 16:28  
Anonymous Cyrus said...

what a pathetic Muslim apologia for fanatical Muslim terrorists firing rockets at villagers and urban centres.

It is clear that Jilted Tony is nothing more than another Islamic Troll defending the Mad Mullahs of Teheran

17 July 2006 at 17:04  
Blogger Jilted Tony said...

Im no muslim
I just have a viscerla dislike of children being murdered

17 July 2006 at 17:23  
Anonymous Rick said...

I just have a viscerla dislike of children being murdered

Emotive must address your concerns to Al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya

17 July 2006 at 18:04  
Blogger Cranmer said...


We appear to have deviated off topic. The Cardinal's hypocrisy, please, on this thread. Islam and ensuing conflicts are dealt with elsewhere.

17 July 2006 at 18:21  
Blogger phone cam foolery said...

Just left my iraqi corner shop and they are delighted with the situation in the middle east
"Isreali frightened to die Arabs not"
Gives you some idea of how serious the situation is, they were in a party mood

17 July 2006 at 18:37  
Anonymous Kaila said...

Cranmer I do apoligise, but I must say the following to phoney:

Quite frankly it would not bother me at all if Israel was wiped off the map tomorrow.

Can you imagine if the Jews of today's world are causing this much havoc, what would the world+ 6million would do. I have begun to see Hitler in a very good light!!!!!!!!!!!! Not such a bad man after all.

18 July 2006 at 21:05  
Blogger Croydonian said...

If Israel was 'wiped off the map', that would include well over 1.1 million muslims too.

18 July 2006 at 21:42  
Anonymous Rick said...

I have begun to see Hitler in a very good light!!!!!!!!!!!! Not such a bad man after all.

Somehow I thought you might say that - you neo-Nazis tend to shout such inanities from the rooftops.

19 July 2006 at 07:20  
Anonymous Kaila said...

I'll make myself much clearer. What I meant is that the Jews of Israel should be removed.

When you are contsantly targeting civilians, is it a wonder why people want to shout such vicious commnents. Called me brainwashed but hey, the world is still spinning!!

19 July 2006 at 11:25  
Anonymous Gorge said...

Whoever you are, it does not matter. Seeing children and civilians being caught up in the crossfire is unpleasant. You would not want to wish that upon anyone.

No child should have to go through the pain and see horrific events like some do across the world.

19 July 2006 at 11:55  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Which would involve the descendants of the circa 800 000 Jews resident in Arab countries in the mid-forties returning, or was that not what you had in mind?

19 July 2006 at 12:00  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah Kaila when will you return to Pakistan ? Sorry - Pakistan does not exist - it is a fake creation of the British from 1947 and should be rerturned to India.

19 July 2006 at 12:02  
Anonymous Old Red Socks said...

Well, Austen Ivereigh has now resigned.

And if this report is to be believed...,,2-2276273,00.html

...Cranmer might perhaps consider a moment of reflection about his own Christian charity.

19 July 2006 at 20:00  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Old Red Socks,

Cranmer takes no pleasure in anyone's pain, but this man is a hypocrite. If he is resigning 'as a result of persistent and untrue reports about (his) private life', he might himself reflect on those who have been victims of his own cruel words and actions.

Cranmer rather inclines to the view that Ivereigh has suffered as he has inflicted suffering on others. It is not so much karma, as the exposing of sin and corruption. Even if the abortion preceded his conversion, his serial fornication and adultery (both in contravention of the Church's teaching) occurred while he was in communion with the Church. That is quite simply hypocrisy. A period of enforced humility will do him good.

19 July 2006 at 21:26  
Anonymous Rick said...

Sinners must repent..........has he done so ? The Church does not add to its glory or moral standing by such persons

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do,
Show me the steep and thorny way to heaven,
Whilst like a puffed and reckless libertine
Himself the primrose path of dalliance treads,
And recks not his own rede."

Hamlet Act 1 Scene 3

20 July 2006 at 20:54  
Blogger alecto said...

"Serial fornication" sums it up: did Cranmer spot the posting on the Times Educational Supplement chatroom in which a former student of his at Leeds Universty in the 1990s claims he had an affair with a friend of hers? Here's the link:

27 July 2006 at 17:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since Austen Ivereigh went on to get another woman pregnant & discussed abortion with her too, I can't think that there was very much 'repentance' shown either in his actions or his thought processes. Or am I just being too cynical?

23 February 2008 at 17:39  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older