Seeking an audience with the Pope

Rivere

Joke or not I think if such comments/suggestions were made about a visiting Iman or any Islamic cleric the consequences and implications would be a lot more serious. I can't say I am a Catholic but I can say I find the entire situation extremely dangerous in that it clearly set double standards in foreign policy.

Vulture

The FO has long been a nest of malignant traitors. Its the living proof that an Oxbridge degree does not prevent someone from also being a prize arse.

Speaking as someone who regards the Catholic Church with repugnance, I hope this will prove to all Catholics in Britain that the Liebore political establishment regards their Faith with (at best) amused contempt, and that they will return that feeling with interest on polling day.

The only Faith that Liebore represents today is Islam.

The Laughing Cavalier

The offence/offense wasn’t so much that some puerile affirmative action junior dreamt up the idiotic document, but that it was circulated. The first senior desk for the memo to land on should have been the last.

alexsandr

maybe the catholic churches daft views on contraception need airing. But not sure this is the best way to do it.

Chuck Unsworth

Mulvain is a symptom. He's also a fall-guy. He's not the root problem - which is the all-pervasive spin culture which has been inculcated over the past decade. But note that he's not been fired - no one has.

You see, in the FCO no one is interested really in what benefits the Pope's visit may bring to the UK (if any). No one is in the slightest concerned about this country's best interests. The sole interest of the Foreign Office is the PR value of this visit to its Ministers and to the Government.

That is the measure of their (lack of) personal integrity. These 'public servants' and 'diplomats' are shallow, politicised, incompetent, third-rate, opportunist scum.

JR

Erm. I imagine the source for that story also leaked the document. It was obviously a joke.

The fact that one of the ideas "Susan Boyle to introduce the Pope" is actually now proposed by the Scottish Catholic Church suggests that some of the humour was bang on the money.

Michael Booth

The man should be sacked, not just for the offence caused to a foreigh nead of state but because he has brought the reputation of the FO into disrepute. Rivere and Vulture are quite right to observe that if it were an insult to Islam then heads would roll.

Rex Mottram

The Papal authorities will not cancel the visit, and nor should they. It is not a matter of forgiveness. I cannot imagine a member of the Church being genuinely offended by this trivial incident. The young man in question was after all only following the twerpish and impudent example of his current Foreign Secretary, and his equally ludicrous predecessor. This incident illustrates the juvenile attitudes that inform the offices of state. But any one of a number of supposedly significant British politicians could accuse the Holy Father of himself being a paedo, and it would make not a jot of difference. A cat may look at a king, and a foolish young man can insult the Pope. It will have no impact upon the Church and its work.

The more central point is that to cancel the visit would drag the Church down to the junior common room level which is now the expected standard of conduct for the temporal powers in the UK, and penalise only those faithful in Britain who look forward with great excitement to the visit.

Interesting disclaimer, by the way. Any I cannot think of any respectable or worthwhile institution that is *not* out of step with prevailing British public opinion.

RKing

Being an atheist I really do not like to see religion brought into politics in any way shape or form.

David Blackburn

Rivere and Vulture,

My point is that they would never had said it about an Iman. But the double standard is the same.

Nicholas Hallam

I'm trying to understand the idea: the suggestion that, for example, the Pope open an abortion clinic was not intended as a joke, but was meant seriously. The contempt for the man and what he represents is so total that he needs to be humiliated rather than merely ridiculed. If this reading is correct then the cultural revolution is much further advanced than I realised.

Jean Monnet

David Blackburn: please leave Bowie's wife out of this! (Imam...)

Nicholas

RKing who gives a shit what you like to see and do not like to see - or that you are an atheist. So what.

Norman Dee

Faith is an addiction, as bad as any other, and as usual only the dealers get rich. These dealers whilst as evil and corrupt as any cocaine Baron, are treated like demi-gods and have their own moralities for themselves whilst preaching against ours.

Fox in a box

Andy,

what you fail to appreciate is that this is an insult to the majority of the Catholic faith across the UK. I'm Catholic myself (converted from CofE), but not offended by this other than, as previously pointed out, the fact that no other religious leader would have had such opprobrium poured on them.

If this had been an Islamic figurehead there would be hell to pay.

My (Irish) wife on the other hand was f*cking apoplectic!!

RKing

Nicolas
Have you ever seen any benefits by mixing the two or do you just like making silly comments?

AlanL

Surely "Infallible" would be a far better brand name for Papal condoms?

TomTom

So just who was the senior who authorised Emails to be sent to Downing Street WITHOUT the Foreign Secretary seeing them ?

Why is a council flat in Bradford the butt of jokes and why is Alex Salmond's name spelled incorrectly ?

The Foreign Office should be slashed in public spending cuts, it is no longer necessary now Baroness Ashley loks after our interests.

Mulvain should be transferred to the Home Office

Percy

Clearly the Foreign Office employ some pretty sad types if any of them thought this crap was worth forwarding to anybody else.

AndyinBrum

Fox you fail to appreciate I don't care that someone who helped paedophiles for so long's been made fun of.

And I'm happy to rip the piss out of any religion due to the fact they're all based on fiction

Snowman

Nicholas Hallam @ 5.07:

your contempt for the man and what he stands for may be complete, but the billion plus of the creed followers don’t see it that way. Your stance reminds me of the behaviour of the Red Menace thugs who ridiculed hundreds of thousands of ordinary people for no other reason than their faith, killing thousands in the process. Weird as it may seem, the thugs’re gone, the faith keeps going.

You proposing another thugs’ onslaught?

Tanuki

Anything that draws attention to the hypocrisy of the 'faith communities' is to me a Good Thing. We should all turn our backs towards the pope (if he visits the UK). I'm supporting "Draw mohammed day" on May 10th too - it's truly time for all free-thinking people to call time on religion.

Edward Sutherland

As an English Catholic and Conservative, the episode demonstrates to me the utter contempt my church is held in by this government and its minions, plus,it appears, a considerably wider segment of the population. I just wish the Holy Father would cancel the visit, but he's a better man than me and he'll do what he sees as his duty. Whether people like it or not, the Holy See has had diplomatic recognition for centuries. If we as a country can't afford an invited visiting dignitary respect- no one's asking you to agree with him- then we shouldn't proffer invitations.

Kennybhoy

Tanuki wrote:

"..it's truly time for all free-thinking people to call time on religion."

Genuine talent for the oxymoronic you have there! LOL!

I will remember you in my prayers.

Kennybhoy

plus,it appears, a considerably wider segment of the population.

RichieP

@Michael Booth
"The man should be sacked, not just for the offence caused to a foreigh nead of state but because he has brought the reputation of the FO into disrepute."

This last is a standard disciplinary offence in almost any institution. I've worked in higher education for years and a document written in this way would have attracted almost immediate disciplinary action, up to dismissal. And not after it got out but the moment it was seen by anyone else with any judgement or common-sense at all (perhaps i am making a jump too far here with my assumptions about the FO though).
Competition to join the FO used to be intense and entry difficult for even very sound candidates, with attitude and maturity being absolutely central. Quite how a puerile teenager like this could get through such a process is baffling. So one has to assume that the qualifications for entry are now just like almost anywhere else within government, shoddy, inefficient, based on standards that have nothing to do with diplomacy or even basic political intelligence. God help our international relations in the future.

THX1138

And to think we have to pay £13 million so that this evil Nazi apologist for child rape and torture should be protected when he comes to the UK. Yuck!

The Hitch gets to the heart of the matter as always , in Newsweek..

"Bring the Pope to Justice"

http://www.newsweek.com/id/236934

"The case for bringing the head of the Catholic hierarchy within the orbit of law is easily enough made. All it involves is the ability to look at a naked emperor and ask the question "Why?" Mentally remove his papal vestments and imagine him in a suit, and Joseph Ratzinger becomes just a Bavarian bureaucrat who has failed in the only task he was ever set—that of damage control"

romano44@btinternet.com

Thanks Edward Sullivan for a point well made.

It is depressing to think also of low our standing now is i9n eyes of people in other countries.

David Bouvier

Well - given that Ratzinger has a determined wish to undermine the state church, headed by the Queen, and is unashamed of saying so I think the correct response is: "suck it up - we believe in regulated abortion, free availability of contraception, and by the way have a pretty good record in routing out child-abusers that you should give some respect to.". If Ratzso wants "respect" who should earn it by giving it.

And not daring to say this about an Imam is a reason to tackle Islamic bully boys not to let Ratzinger off.

Noa Zrk

David Bouvier April 27th, 2010 12:05am

"we believe in regulated abortion, free availability of contraception.."

You presume! You may, many don't.
If contraception was effective 200,000+ abortions on the NHS would not be required. So, by my reckoning you liberals have just about now caught up with the numbers murdered under Hitler's extermination policies.

Just think, those 5 million you've so cheerfully flushed down the pan could not only have reduced your tax bill, they could have obviated the perceived nu-lab 'need' for mass third world immigration and, by making up the labour shortfall, contributed to your pension shortfall.

As to child abusers, perhaps you should start to concern yourself with the governments potential grooming of school children for pederasts by its promotion of homosexual behaviour as normal. This will no doubt be a fruitful source of revelation, scandal and litigation in future years, easily surpassing the present catholophobia you advocate.
,

aidan

it does seem the norm to insult jesus and his associates. and most brits laugh. but they need to understand there is a line that can be crossed. if they think there only danger is insulting islam they will get a wake up call. you dont think there is catholic jihadists??????

AndyinBrum

Noa if that's the best counter you can drag up, thechurch is in worse shape than I thought. Which is nice

David Bouvier

Noa Zrk - it is the settled view of the UK government for many years.

Even serious campaigners who actually wish to ban abortion in all circumstances (which logically you would if you believe it is murder) dare not campaign on that basis - instead they have to use emotive 3D scans and discuss pushing back time limits a bit.

Which is the best proof that - aside from extremists - it is the settled view of the UK as a society that regulated abortion is the way to go.

PS - do you actually oppose the sale of contraceptives? Wow. Given the number of Catholics who actually use them, even they don't agree with you.

David Bouvier

Oh - and "Cathlophobia" - don't make me laugh. "Give as good as you get, and don't be a stuck up prig" is my policy.

I am certainly not AFRAID of Catholics. I don't even hate them. But don't expect Ratzinger to have immunity from fair comment.

John Mounsey

This whole sorry business simply underlines what I have always felt about the arrogant, smug, we're-so-clever bastards who inhabit the FO: if I were PM I would always listen very carefully to what the current Sir Humphrey and his minions had to say and I would then do the precise opposite, knowing - beyond peradventure - that I had thus made the right decision.

Fox in a box

Andy,

with respect my previous comment implied that I agree with your position on the child abuse scandal and only sought to expand beyond the narrow scope of your previous post (which appears to have gone now?).

For the record the church finds itself, rightly, under extreme pressure and scrutiny for the terrible acts of its priests and the complicity of its establishment.

My point was however, for many Catholics, at a time when they already feel under attack, this kind of bullshit from the FO, is beyond the pale.

Whatever your position on religion, you should respect those who have faith, and Catholics in the UK feel that this wouldn't have happened to another faith group.

Best regards,
Fox in a box

Noa

AndyinBrum

I will not defend the indefensible, which child abuse, is in any way shape or form.

Equally, I enjoy a laugh as much as the next man at the absurd in its infinite manifestations; religion in all forms, politics and politicians, brummies, Glaswegians, prats, the list is endless.

The ins & outs of the great Foreign Office cockup of April 2010 have been debated ad nauseoum here and in Rod's blog.

The point here is different; you may share David Bouviers views in arguing that institutiuonalised murder, in the form of abortion, is a reasonable and logical justification for criticising the Catholic church, I don't.

To have both contraception and abortion freely available at taxpayers expense is ridiculous. Make the former effective to render the latter unnecessary.

Just a thought, you have escaped the first hurdle of being flushed into a stainless steel bucket and incinerated, but the next one lies ahead, old age or geriatric care on the NHS, where withdrawal of food and medical treatment is common practice.

So, as Hitler funded genocide through taxation so we fund disturbingly similar population control activities.

Catholics, in protesting such practices, provide a moral conscience not fashionable with many secular sources, or the Church of England.

You may be grateful for it in the future.

So please remember that when you are robustly exercising your right to freedom of speech and criticising catholics following the incompetent release of an email containing the inane rumblings of some drunken little turd of an office junior.

Noa

David Bouvier
April 27th, 2010 9:41am

"...don't expect Ratzinger to have immunity from fair comment".

That was really my point, David, wasn't it? That not everyone shares our personal views and assumptions?

Norman Dee

I would say to Edward Southerland and others of the same mind that you recognise your addiction for what it is and start self treatment by the most simple method, ask yourself why, question your dealer, how did you get to this position was it childhood indoctrination ?
While you are doing this think on the fact that you are lucky to have a dealer who won't have you killed for asking questions, as some dealers would.

Rex Mottram

@Norman Dee: What a strange post. One might just as easily suggest that atheists and secularists are 'addicted', that they have been 'indoctrinated' by post-enlightenment fallacies and modern society. What is gained by such a, rather circular, rhetorical device?

Disregarding that, presumably you would like to see all religious 'cured' of their addiction. This is a big task and I wish you well. But what is the likelihood that a blog comment such as yours would succeed where the collective forces of secular modern life could not? If Christians are prepared even today in such places as Baghdad and Afghanistan to face murder and mutilation to practice their faith, to say nothing of the historically more violent forces that similarly failed to destroy their spirit, why do you suppose you might prevail?

Unless of course your comment was a first step, to advertise your wisdom - to lay out your manifesto, to use a topical phrase - the better to take your ideas to a wider audience. In which case the Coffee House seems a curious place to begin such a work of conscience. Surely you should be explaining your theories #directly# to the masses who labour under this mistaken impression. To make your efforts somewhat easier, many of them who subscribe to the beliefs you so ingeniously refute gather every Saturday night and Sunday mrning in buildings in most towns and villages in Britain. You could picket such buildings and seek to persuade them, using your obvious eloquence, of the errors of their ways. You could even offer them the services of a good psychoanalyst.

Good luck!

Fox in a box

Norman,

stop talking crap, sunshine.

Kennybhoy

“Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words, go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet. Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town."

Matthew (10:14-15)

Edward Sutherland

Norman Dee: Sorry, you've completely lost me. Have a good day.