In the latest (and possibly last) of the Reverend Mullen updates, the vicar apologises again over at his, no doubt more popular than usual, column in the Northern Echo. Some extracts:

• “I do believe The Evening Standard took my words out of context”

• “I number many homosexual men and women among my dearest friends”

• “What I do oppose – on the authority of the Christian faith – is the corrupting influence of the promotional parades of homosexuality by such as Gay Pride demonstrations.”

• “I was delighted to be so warmly welcomed at church last Sunday by the many homosexual people in my congregation.”

He quotes Sandy Toksvig as making the London Stock Exchange / buggery quip on the Radio 4 News Quiz, which I yesterday attributed to Rod Liddle in the Sunday Times… Maybe Liddle thought of it at exactly the same time as she did.

Similar Posts:

• The dangers of automated subbing…
• BBC head of religion and ethics disputes Sunday Telegraph article
• Why the Northern Echo will carry on employing Reverend Mullen
• Holy Mail: Village church will now supply local newspaper
• Le Carre-d away: has the author’s alleged desire to defect become fact?

Today the editor of the Northern Echo, Peter Barron, again addresses the issue of his controversial columnist the Reverend Peter Mullen.

Barron writes that he told Mullen that his comments on Mullen’s personal blog, which were extremely derogatory towards gay people, were ‘not funny’ and had placed Barron in a ‘difficult position’.

Today Barron writes:

“Should I go on employing someone as a columnist who had written such comments, albeit on a private blog which has nothing to do with The Northern Echo? I know there will be those who believe that the answer should be a resounding “no”.

The Northern Echo is a broad church, with columnists representing all shades of opinion.

Their views do not necessarily coincide with the views of the paper.

I do not always share Peter Mullen’s views.

But I regard him as a high quality, thought-provoking writer. His decision to remove the offending remarks from his website, and to issue an unreserved apology for causing offence, were essential steps if he were to continue writing for The Northern Echo. His column tomorrow will be an expression of regret.”

So Mullen keeps his column. But Mullen’s most notable position is not as a regional newspaper columnist. As Rod Liddle pointed out in yesterday’s Sunday Times, Mullen is also chaplain of the London Stock Exchange. Liddle wrote:

“Mullen’s principal worry is about the act of buggery – although he seems censorious about it only when it takes place between two consenting adults, rather than when it is applied without consent to the entire country.”

Similar Posts:

• Priest who wrote offensive comments about gay people on blog keeps newspaper column
• Reverend Peter Mullen’s apology: ‘Homosexual men and women among my dearest friends’
• Darlington Councillor: Council newspapers and a ‘one-eyed’ local press
• Paperhouse: The Telegraph’s ‘financially contrary’ newsroom
• Mail Online confirms withdrawal of ads on Moir article; defends free speech

This, in Saturday’s Guardian, in Hari Kunzru’s review of John Le Carré’s latest book, ‘A Most Wanted Man’:

In a recent interview Le Carré was asked if he ever considered defecting. “Well, I wasn’t tempted ideologically … but when you spy intensively and you get closer and closer to the border … it seems such a small step to jump … and, you know, find out the rest.” Though this has been reported as some sort of tabloid confession (“I was tempted to defect, says spy novelist Le Carré”), it seems primarily interesting as a key to his fiction, whose central concern is the exploration of the metaphorical borderland occupied by the proponents of any polarised conflict.

The Guardian, September 27 2008

Perhaps surprisingly, no mention of the fact that Le Carré says that his quotes were out of context, as this lengthy letter to the Sunday Times pointed out. Le Carré writes that his interviewer, Rod Liddle, chose not to use a tape recorder and  subsequently misrepresented him that he was misrepresented in the interview and this article:

… he [Liddle] failed to encompass or indeed record the general point I was making about the temptations of defection.

Lord Annan, I ventured in our conversation, had declared that four years of Intelligence work were as much as any sane man could stand. I painted for Mr Liddle the plight of professional eavesdroppers who identify so closely with the people they are listening to that they start to share their lives.

It was in this context that I made the point that, in common with other intelligence officers who lived at close quarters with their adversaries, I had from time to time placed myself intellectually in the shoes of those on one side of the Curtain who took the short walk to the other; and that rationally and imaginatively I had understood the magnetic pull of such a step, and empathised with it.

John Le Carré, Times Online, September 20 2008.

Presumably the Guardian Review’s editors and the writer, Hari Kunzru, were aware of Le Carré’s problem with Liddle’s interview and chose not to mention it, although Kunzru does refer to the tabloid-like sensationalisation of the interview.

A Google search for John Le Carré brings back reviews for his latest book, but if you search “john le carre + defect” it’s possible to see how far the Sunday Times reports have spread… The AP reported it as the Sunday Times did, and then it went far and wide of course.

Will Le Carré’s consideration of defection go down in the history books, with no reference to his complaint?

Similar Posts:

• Update: Le Carré’s past – as told on the web
• Reverend Peter Mullen’s apology: ‘Homosexual men and women among my dearest friends’
• MediaGuardian: No integration for Times and Sunday Times, says John Witherow
• BBC head of religion and ethics disputes Sunday Telegraph article
• Guardian America