Talk:Cormac Murphy-O'Connor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
Contents |
[edit] Richard Hill
Why is there no mention in this article of the Richard Hill affair? There are a couple of links below that reference to it and it is an extremely important event in the Cardinal's lifetime that people must know about. I am going to add a little bit on the affair.
[edit] Condoms and Moral and Ecclesiastical Law
The BBC tried questioning Primate Cormac Murphy O'Connor before his journey to demonstrate at Edinburgh recently , about the Catholic church's attitude to prevention of Aids through the greater use of Condoms His unsatisfactory , nigh evasive , answers provoke a further questioning .
Humanae Vitae states that no member of the church can possibly deny that the church is competent in her magisterium to interpret natural moral law. The encyclical further states that God has wisely ordered laws of nature . However ,as we all know , there is a new biological "law" of infectivity which states that human bodily intercourse can of itself be a death sentence . God's law previous to this new law of cause and effect might have or did appear to be wisely ordained , but the situation now is completely ovetaken by what presumably (in inversion of God ) would be classed as a 'devilish' law but which medically is recognised as being an infective human immuno-deficiency syndrome .
We know that in fact this infectivity is not limited to humans . We know that the result of the infectivity is mortal destruction , irrespective of morality or belief , or, indeed, species . We know that the church's response thus far is to solely countenance abstention from intercourse between humans as solution , whereas we know that the simplest of protective plastic film is enough to protect life ,already in existence ,from this mortal danger .
Here we have a plain contradiction in the natural law trumpeted under the aegis of the Magisterium by Humanae Vitae and ,doubtless, throughout this faith's teaching . The natural law has changed ,however a faith may wish to deny this - the mortality is present and it's virulence exceeds any inverse of God's will (such as the fallen Angel's name earlier mentioned describes-but which we should not use except in this particular theological analysis ).
The belief in Hum. V. is that each man through the exercise of his conjugality , is not the master of the sources of life but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator . Indeed so, and irrefutably , the design is subject now to AIDS (whether through God's will or not is in comparison a theological as opposed to real discourse) . The church -which has always insisted on the inverse of God -the unrepeatable name , is well-placed to therefore recognise that a duality exists now within natural law .
However it appears that the members of the church Hierarchy are in natural and hence , from the above, moral confusion . As natural law has changed and the duality has entered within the very chain of ministry that is conjugality , we see that there is a complete up-ending of the socio-moral order of society . Death is overtaking wide sections of humanity , simply because of their natural adherence to the previous natural order . Marriage is no bar to infectivity , intention is no bar . The Primate's only advice is towards abstinence by all from the most instinctual natural functions of the body , which is an equal up-ending of the natural law , and one which we see financially bankrupting the church following the human failure of its own ecclesiastic's even with their magnificent support system of the Mother Church, providing them with nourishment and care to the grave.
It is not here the intention to simply point to hypocrisy , because this will not further understanding or provide advance. Nevertheless I have to relate this central subject of world concern back to a similar moral problem , that implicated by the teachings of romans 3,8 .This is necessary because the central argument of humanae vitae rests upon the same magisterial or divine law tenets. These state that whilst a lesser evil may be tolerated to prevent a greater evil , that yet , evil shall never be chosen in order to promote a good . HV states though it is sometimes lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good ,"it is never lawful even for the gravest reasons , to do evil that good may come of it ,-in other words to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order...even though the intention is to protect ... an individual .. or society in general .
Laudable injunctions, which I note at length throughout the relevant pages , were broken by Pope Pius XII, Hitler's Pope and his predecessor Pope Pius XI . That is a subject of dispute here on wikipedia and elsewhere . It appears to many historians that indeed the Catholic Church as led at the time , chose actively (in 1932 and 1933 ) to consider Nazism a lesser evil than Communism and was therefore culpable in upending the moral order of society .
The church , in so far as it can operate to defend itself from the accusations and the historical realities (through apologists ) should now recognise that just as it chose then to avail of the lesser evil policy , now it should see the damage considered resultant upon the use of protective condoms to marital structure and promiscuity and actual conception to be clearly the lesser evil given that God (let us use the word) has now inserted the dualism of death into this conjugal ministry of life .
(Ye who would cavil at my use of these pages to raise these issues, as those who cavil at the additions to the historical pages, should deeply consider the morality of your complaints before carping at these words...) Famekeeper 7 July 2005 08:58 (UTC)
FK, those that cavil are those wikipedians that don't consider themselves above the (wiki) law. But I digress. Apart from the fact that your evaluation of the Pius XII situation is wrong, now you are also inconsistent: Only a few lines above this post you called on BXVI to go to the UN make what you call "the Law" a.k.a. as the principle "don't do evil to achieve good", to make this principle international binding law. I considered this simplistic, unrealistic and unpractical. But now, in this post, you are calling on the same BXVI to do the complete opposite, namely to declare an evil, though a lesser evil, good. Yes, I agree using condoms are a lesser evil than spreading AIDS and IMHO the late and the current Pope agree. But it's still evil, according to Catholic morality - and I hope you can muster enough tolerance to at least let us be and follow our consciences.
Very confusing is your remark that "natural law has changed" - no, natural law has not changed, it cannot change, otherwise it wouldn't be natural law. And natural law doesn't change because of the appearance or spreading of a disease. There were other STD here before anyone could spell AIDS.
However, for those you seriously consider the Pope responsible for the spreading of this pandemia, please read the following, non-Catholic articles:
http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000CA993.htm
http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/7406.shtml
Str1977 20:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed
Quote from the article: "He had, in fact, been subject to a police investigation on suspicion of having hushed up two serious cases." [1]
- What is this? Where is the citation/reference? I am disputing the accuracy of such a comment. Oliver Keenan 11:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I think the sentence should be rewritten based on reports such as the following. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1469005,00.html http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1020400,00.html – Kaihsu 15:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's now nearly a month since this section was out in and nobody has done anything with it. The existing passage was simply a series of blank assertions with no backing evidence or referencing. I've therefore removed this section and anyone who wishes may now re-write without generalistic insinuations. I think this is preferable to having the page marked as disputed when nobody is doing anywthing about it User:lawsonrob 11 June 2006
That scandal almost led to the Cardinal having to resign in 2003, and he had to appear on "Newsnight" to apologize for his "stupid" handling of the case. The article has to mention it because it has been a defining issue of his time as Archbishop of Westminster - many Catholics in England believe he now operates under a doubtful moral authority.
It's mentioned again in private eye this week. Basically when yer man found out one of his priest's was a nonce instead of calling the police he instead got him another job - where he sexually abused some more children. (i cannot sign as i cannot work out where that symbol is on my phone).
[edit] University Education
There appears to be a contradiction in the article concerning His Eminence's education: the summary credits him with an STL; the main article sates he obtained a degree in theology AND philosophy. Though a minor point, it needs to be explained. In addition to this, I wasn't aware that pontifical universities offered combined degrees - STB and PhB are the two choices.
- He holds an STL and a PhL, consistent with somebody reading on the extended programme at the VEC. As per http://www.rcdow.org.uk/cardinal/default.asp?library_ref=1&content_ref=4 Oliver Keenan 17:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. This is also clearly stated in his official Vatican biography: http://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/documentazione/documents/cardinali_biografie/cardinali_bio_murphy-oconnor_c_en.html. Great new pictures, by the way.
-
- Thanks, I uploaded them yesterday. Gavin Scott 20:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Polygot
How many languages does His Eminence speak?
