One thing at least is certain, the protocol section of the Department of the Taoiseach could not have made such a "misjudgment" six years ago.
The divorce referendum was in November 1995 and, considering the church's stance on the issue, there was no room then for the luxury of getting it wrong, if such was the case.
Then, in a country almost evenly divided on divorce, a Taoiseach favouring change had to be seen to be as committed to his marriage as was John Bruton.
But it is an indication of how rapidly attitudes changed that in 1997, when he became Taoiseach, Mr Ahern felt he could come clean about his failed marriage and his relationship with Ms Celia Larkin.
It is not coincidental that over that same mid-1990s period the people of Ireland first became aware of Bishop Casey's son, the Father Brendan Smith affair and a deluge of child sex abuse cases. Crucially, it was the church's handling of these matters that seemed to make most impact on public perception. A trend was accelerated, by years.
Combined with growing wealth, the comparative youth of our society, a high level of education and a growing tolerance for diverse arrangements/ relationships, the time was ripe for a "misjudgment" of the magnitude we had on Monday.
The wording of the invitation to the State reception for Cardinal Desmond Connell could also be seen as an indication of the degree to which the State no longer feels it has to indulge church sensitivities. Some will welcome this, but it was just bad manners.
It is not a sign of advance in any society when we feel free to ignore or tread on what is dear to others. Even when, especially when, we disagree with them. It is just crude to place people in positions which can only cause them embarrassment.
This is not by any means a comment on the Taoiseach or Ms Larkin. It has to be difficult enough for them. But those who made the arrangements for last Monday night's reception in Dublin Castle did nobody a service.
It should be recognised that the churches have handled the Taoiseach's extramarital relationship with great sensitivity. Not one senior church figure on the island commented publicly on it until Dean MacCarthy did so in last Monday's Irish Times.
And in many ways he and other clergy had no choice. The dean has been refusing such invitations since he took office 18 months ago. He and others would probably have maintained their discreet silence had the invitation to a State reception for the Cardinal not been seen as such an overt challenge to what they believe in.
And it placed the Cardinal himself in an impossible position. As a churchman his views on most subjects, including marriage, are well known. Despite this he has never commented on the Taoiseach's relationship with Ms Larkin. And despite reports that he was "distressed" by the wording of the invitation, he has never said so.
It is also clear he and the Taoiseach belong to something of a mutual admiration society, which makes it all the more perplexing that either should have been placed in such an uncomfortable position.
Ms Larkin was not in Rome, for whatever reason. There was no embarrassment to anyone then. Which also makes it even less clear why, on Monday night, she was placed in a position which had (the realised) potential of making her suffer unnecessary humiliation before all and sundry.
If Dr Connell was a victim, most certainly she was the one deserving of most sympathy. Surely a "misjudgment" too far?