In last week's Tablet, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor (Catholic Archbishop of Westminster) opines that a more liberal approach to immigration is a more Catholic approach (a similar stance to that of certain American cardinals in recent months).
Some commentators might view this piece as reaching out to anyone who might be interested in making the Church stronger, whether they're in the region legally or illegally.
The bigger problem with the Cardinal's approach to immigration is that, as Reverend Richard John Niehaus (editor of First Things - a magazine for intellectually inclined Christians) points out, many of the Muslim immigrants to the U. K. are "making it emphatically, even violently, clear that they have no intention of becoming British." He adds that while the Catholic Church is universal, neither the U. S. nor the U. K. can say the same.
One of the biggest problems that Catholic conservatives have with Pope John Paul II is the number of (politically and theologically) liberal cardinals he appointed (on both sides of the Atlantic). (Though it must be noted that some of the selections were more the fault of the American Papal Nuncio than the Pope.) (Those in the U. S. have been a cause of trouble in the seminaries, while some in Europe have caused even larger problems. This is one of the reasons that the election of the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger to the papacy caused such great rejoicing among certain sections of Catholicism.) It is then, no surprise that these cardinals would take stances that take theological stances opposite the Church's and political stances opposite most conservatives.