Wednesday, July 7, 2010

A reason not to abolish the Seanad...

Via the Irish Times:
Three Fianna Fáil senators today lost the party whip after John Hanafin, Labhras Ó Murchú and Jim Walsh relinquished it over the Civil Partnership Bill.
The three senators had have spoken out strongly against the proposed legislation. Mr Hanafin had said they hoped amendments they proposed would be accepted and would “move forward on that basis”.
At least some of our Senators have the guts to speak out for the rights of conscience and marriage.
I know that Independent Senator Rónán Mullen has also resisted the bill as it currently stands and I hope that some FG Senators will also vote against it.

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Homily - 14th Week of Ordinary Time (Year C)

I sometimes wonder what the 72 must have thought when Jesus sent them out two-by-two, with none of the usual accoutrements you’d need for a journey – no money, no back-pack, no sandals. Just go out there, stick your neck out and preach my message.

They must have been dubious… They must have worried that they’d be left sleeping in the fields or laughed out of the towns they visited. And yet, with the power of Jesus’s name and the gospel they were spreading, they went out and did it, and they did great things despite having precious little in terms of the backing you would think they needed.

The Church here in Ireland needs to look at those 72 Disciples and draw a lesson from them and their courage, because if you read the signs of the times in today’s Ireland, it’s going to become increasingly difficult to live the life of a committed Christian and to openly preach the Gospel.

Last Thursday night the Civil Partnerships Bill made its way through Dáil Éireann without a vote. If it’s approved by the Seanad and signed by the President, it’ll become the law of the land. In essence, a new form of marriage is being created in Ireland without the sort of public debate and serious consideration such a momentous step calls for.

Our Catholic Bishops opposed the Bill on two main grounds. First of all, by creating this new institution of ‘Civil Partnership’ the government is not respecting the role of the family – and in particular marriage – as the basic foundation stone of our society.

Secondly, there is no provision in the Bill permitting people who don’t believe in ‘Civil Partnership’ for whatever reason to exercise their right of conscience to not participate in them. It seems as though if you have a hall or hotel which you’re willing to hire out for weddings or if you’re a photographer or a baker who normally does wedding work, you won’t be permitted to say I have no interest in facilitating Civil Partnerships. You could find yourself open to criminal prosecution. If you took on the job of a Civil Registrar thinking that you were going to be dealing with marriages, you’ll now be forced to deal with Civil Partnerships. The basic freedom of freedom of conscience is being undermined in our State. Our basic right to say I disapprove of that, I have no interest in that, therefore I’m not going to play a part in that is being taken away from us.

Now, I’m sure that there are people here who don’t have a huge problem with the Civil Partnership Bill. All I can do this evening is to ask you to read the Bishops’ Statement Why Marriage Matters which is available on the Irish Bishops’ website and encourage you to read some solid Catholic material about the meaning of marriage. The Catholic understanding of marriage has not had many voices speaking up for it in the newspapers, on the radio or on TV for the past few decades. It’s not based on hatred, it’s not based on unjust discrimination – it’s a positive, live-giving understanding of marriage, but because it poses a challenge to people, it does not receive a fair hearing in the media.

Anyway, a number of things worry me about the passing of the Civil Partnership Bill. Minister Dermot Ahern described it as being one of the most important human rights pieces of legislation dealt with by the Dáil. And, yet there was precious little coverage of it in the media. If you were following the papers and the TV for the past couple of weeks, you’d think that the legislation about stag hunting was the big story of the week. Big, big news, but very much under-reported… You have to wonder if those who influence the media wanted this legislation about Civil Partnerships to slip through without people kicking up a fuss. Were they trying to slip it past conscientious Catholic, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and other people who would have reason to raise questions?

The second thing which worries me is the way the Bishop’s Statement Why Marriage Matters was received by our political class. It was initially released in March, and the Bishops issued a statement drawing people’s attention to it again a couple of weeks ago. When they did this, Minister John Gormley started complaining about the Church ‘interfering’. He tried to put it about that the Catholic Bishops had no democratic right to present the teaching of the Church. Every other group in society – trade unions, political parties, sporting organizations and so on, they all have a right to comment on the big issues which affect the life of our country, but when the Church says a few words on the value of marriage, then prominent politicians try to silence her. Why is that? What is it that makes some members of our political class behave so irrationally when we try to have our democratic say?

Incidentally, Archbishop Dermot Martin was speaking to the St Joseph’s Young Priests’ Society in Knock last week. He pointed out how the politicians were giving out to the Bishops last year for not telling people to vote ‘Yes’ to the Lisbon Treaty. Now, 12 months later, when the Church has something to say about marriage, there’s an attempt made by the politicians to shut the Bishops up.

Another politician who had something to say about the Bishops’ contribution was Minister Dermot Ahern. He said that he was of the opinion that politicians shouldn’t allow religion to cloud their judgement. I suspect that quite a number of politicians, public figures and journalists would say something very similar. And, yet, that kind of thought shows a huge misunderstanding of what religion is and what role it has to play in a democratic society. Now, let me be quite clear – there’s no justice in any politician trying to impose his religious beliefs or religious practice on the people he’s governing. Our Catholic faith insists that the State has no role in coercing anyone’s religious beliefs. It’s one of our fundamental human freedoms. However, this freedom which is recognised in our constitution does not mean that everyone who is elected to public office has to pretend to be a non-believer when making decisions. Religious believers can be objective and fair without being asked to switch off part of their brains or deny their fundamental values.

If you allow yourself to be formed and shaped and informed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that shouldn’t be a disadvantage to you in political life. If you love God and sincerely want to serve your neighbours in the political life then your religious faith is not clouding your judgement. If your faith gives you a strong understanding of what’s right and wrong and how the common good can best be served, then that’s not something you could or should lock away in a box when tough decisions have to be made. Dermot Ahern might just as well have said that politicians shouldn’t allow their conscience, their understanding of right and wrong to cloud their judgement.

The holy Capuchin priest Ven. Solanus Casey once referred to religion as the science of our happy relationship with God and our neighbours. That’s not something you’d ever want to set aside. However, it’s becoming clearer that many of our country’s leaders, most of whom claim to be Catholic, are tending towards an understanding of faith and religion as something totally private, something that offers a little personal consolation, a little bit of a spiritual high and some nice ceremonies, something one does in one’s spare time, but isn’t mentioned in polite society, and certainly doesn’t influence what one does with the rest of one’s life. That’s not healthy, that’s not true religion, and it ignores the great work done by literally millions of Christians in shaping society for the better because of their faith. Racial equality and an end to slavery was a proudly Christian cause in so many places. Many of our Irish missionaries fight for the dignity of the poor and downtrodden throughout the world. Would we say to them that they should set their religion aside, their strong sense of right and wrong to one side as they campaigned for the God-given rights of those who suffer? Would we dare tell them that their religion is clouding their judgement?

The third thing that worried me was that the legislation passed through the Dáil on Thursday night without a vote. One TD – a Presbyterian, by the way – did speak in favour of the sort of conscience clause which Catholic, Church of Ireland, Baptist and Presbyterian religious leaders had lobbied for. However, he got precious little support and I don’t think that one politician on Thursday night objected outright to the Bill. All the major political parties seem to have supported the Bill and I don’t think that any of the major political parties were willing to allow their TDs the right to reject the Bill. The whip was on. Does that seem right to you? That such important and controversial legislation made its final passage through the Dáil on a nod and a wink, that we didn’t see any significant opposition to it. It’s obvious that the membership of Dáil Éireann don’t adequately represent public opinion. Was there even one Catholic member of the Dáil willing to take a stand in favour of marriage and the Constitution?

Just before the last General Election in the UK, the Scottish Bishops issued a very strong statement. They said:

In urging you to let your faith count at the ballot box, we ask you to think carefully before you cast your vote. Which candidate displays values closest to yours? Which candidate will best respect and protect your religious freedom and your freedom of conscience? Which candidate do you trust most to do a good job for you and your community?
As your bishops, it is not our intention to tell you which party to vote for. It is our duty to encourage you to engage with the political process and to vote for the candidate who best represents the values we, like our parents and grandparents before us, hold dear.

Archbishop Conti of Glagow went further by pointing out that none of Britain’s mainstream political parties were willing to stand up for the right to life from conception to natural death, for the institution of marriage or for the rights of conscience.

One wonders if we could say the same about the Irish political parties. There are some members of the Seanad of various political parties and none who are lobbying for a free vote when the Civil Partnership Bill reaches them next week
. Watch that space. See what kind of support marriage and the rights of conscience get from our politicians and our media.

I’m afraid I’ve gone on at some length. But I want you to be quite clear what situation faces us in Ireland at the moment. The values of those who run our newspapers, television and radio stations do not – in the main – seem friendly to our Catholic values. Amongst our political class there seems to be a huge amount of confusion or misunderstanding or hostility to our values. The law of the land is changing in ways which will certainly be actively hostile to our positive and life-giving understanding of human life, marriage and the importance of conscience. In many ways – in terms of our own understanding of these issues, our grasp of Church teaching, our use of the media, we as Catholics are ill-equipped to deal with the challenges which the changing nature of Irish society offers us. In the medium term I see a number of battles down the road for us – a defence of the right to life for the unborn and those who are ill; a defence of the right to palliative care; a defence of the rights of parents; a defence of the rights of our Catholic schools; a defence of the rights of doctors to practice according to their consciences; a defence of the rights of our own consciences to follow Catholic teaching and to preach it publicly.

If you are sincere in your faith – if what you celebrate in this Church means something to you, you have an obligation to be ready for these battles. An obligation to study your Catholic faith, to question your political leaders, to treat the opinions you read in the newspapers with scepticism. An obligation to pray, to spend time with Christ, to ask his help in deepening your faith and your understanding of the world around you.

And yet, we have the example of the 72 Disciples before us. They were sent out – materially under-equipped and with nothing but Christ’s name. They came back rejoicing having worked great deeds in Jesus’s name. The Gospel of Christ is still the one salvation offered to us. Let us never be afraid to listen to it and proclaim it with confidence.

Sunday, June 20, 2010

English as she is spoken in Italy

I was browsing through this guide aimed at assisting Italian students with the essay-writing section of their school-leaving examinations, and was very amused to come across a list of 'English Terms in use in the Italian Language.' Amused? Yes, because some of these supposed English terms mean something quite different in Italian. Some of them I've never even heard in English.

For example, whilst studying in Rome I knew that the English word 'badge' was used to denote what we'd call an ID Card. I also knew that a Pullman was neither an atheist writer nor a a railway sleeping car, but meant a motor coach. The list on the linked document allows me to add the following:
Big mo - Short for 'big momentum' or popular enthusiasm
Big one - A $1,000 bill
Boomerang - An adult who returns home to live with parents
Boxie - A bottle blonde. (A loxie is a natural blonde, apparently.)
Buzz book - A book which has created quite a stir
Gadget - A marketing term meaning homage/tribute (Really? This seems to make very little sense)
Mooch - One susceptable to being defrauded (An easy mark?)
Muppie - A Middle-aged Urban Professinal (Older than a yuppie)
Pumpkin time - A Cinderella reference... the time when the fairytale comes to an end, and things return to normal
Shout show - The kind of chat-show where guests shout at each other
Now, maybe one or two of those terms are used occasionally by real English speakers, but most of them just make me wonder how these supposed English language terms worked their way into Italian.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Palm Sunday Homily


Could there be a greater contrast between the two gospels we hear today? In the first, Christ is welcomed joyfully into Jerusalem as Messiah; in the second, he is hauled outside the city to be crucified as a common criminal. And in that second Gospel – the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to St Luke – practically every sort of human weakness is to be seen.

We see:
  • The apostles bickering at the table of the Last Supper
  • The proud boasting of Peter
  • The drowsiness of the Apostles who would not watch with Christ
  • The traitor Judas betraying his beloved Master with a kiss.
We see:
  • The disciples strike out with violence
  • The rough treatment given by the guards
  • The three-fold denial of Christ by Peter
  • The cruel teasing of the soldiers
  • The vengeance of the Chief Priests
  • The cowardice of Pilate who passes Christ off as someone else’s problem.
We see:
  • The mockery of Herod
  • The refusal of Pilate to give an honest judgement
  • The blood-thirsty fickleness of the mob, a crowd of ordinary people like you or me
  • The callousness of the executioners as they go about their work and as they toss dice for Christ’s clothes
  • The taunting of the thief who hung alongside Jesus.
And so Christ dies.

And yet, all is not darkness. We also see the compassion of the women of Jesusalem, the repentance of the Good Thief and the conversion of the Centurion. We see the courage of Joseph of Arimathea who claims Christ’s body and the tenderness of the women who lay Him in the tomb.

In the midst of all the darkness, Christ’s will is not broken, and he inspires some few to keep following Him. As the suffering servant foretold by Isaiah, He makes no resistance, but in fidelity to the Father carries out His mission to the end. And by carrying out this mission He offers healing. Christ first heals the ear of the High Priest’s servant. Christ inspires the women of Jerusalem to compassion at a time when the public mood is still baying for His blood. His sufferings bring conversion to the Good Thief and to the Centurion and after His death, Joseph of Arimathea steps forward with courage and the women remain faithful to Him by honouring His dead body.
Christ endured all manner of darkness, all manner of punishment and violence in order to heal us of that same darkness and in order to draw some goodness out of us. We read and re-read the Gospels so that our hearts may be softened by His grace, His teaching and His example. We ask Him, by His Passion and Death, to make us humble and faithful to His saving words.

This week is the most important week of the year. During our Holy Week and Easter ceremonies we walk with Christ step-by-step, hour-by-hour through the events which bring us salvation. We enter Jerusalem with joy, we share a meal with Him at the Last Supper, we follow Him to the Cross with our own burdens and struggles and then we wait at the tomb with hope, awaiting the victory of His Resurrection.

I ask you to do this with minds and hearts fully prepared. I appeal to each and every one of you to make the most of this week by making a good confession. It doesn’t matter whether you’ve been away for a long time. It doesn’t matter whether you have something big on your conscience or if it’s just that there are lots of small things which have built up over a while. There’s no good reason to put it off Christ’s forgiveness, and every reason to make a good Holy Week. May Christ, by His Passion and Death, lead us to the Glory of His Resurrection, Amen.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Dolan on the Lord's Day

The Church Ladies publish a nice and punchy St Patrick's Day letter from Archbishop Dolan of New York about keeping the Lord's Day holy.
Many of you reading this St. Patrick’s Day message already are keeping the Lord’s Day holy. Keep it up.

How about giving this message to someone who no longer does, especially if he or she has stopped going to Sunday Mass? Get ready for the excuses:

– “Sunday is our only free time together.” (Great, what better way to spend that time than by praying together at Mass).

– “I pray my own way.” (Nice idea. But, odds are, you don’t).

– “The sermon is boring.” (You may have a point).

– “I hate all the changes at Mass.” (see below)

– “I want more changes at Mass.” (see above)

– “Until the church makes some changes in its teaching, I’m staying away.” (But, don’t we go to Mass to ask God to change us, not to tell God how we want Him and His Church to change to suit us?)

– “Everybody there is a hypocrite and always judging me.” (Who’s judging whom here?)

. . . and the list goes on.

And the simple fact remains: the Eucharist is the most beautiful, powerful prayer that we have. To miss it is to miss Jesus — His Word, His people, His presence, His Body and Blood.

Pope's Letter to the Catholics of Ireland

Full text available here.

To be quite honest, apart from welcoming it whole-heartedly and repeating the Pope's own request that Irish Catholics read it themselves, I think that too much comment is superfluous. Just let it be read prayerfully, seriously and repeatedly. It would be naive to think that the problems of the past and present can be sorted out within the space of a few short media cycles. However, that's not the impression one gets when watching the news or reading the papers. There seems to be an assumption that problems can be dealt with swiftly - a hurried resignation here, a statement of apology there, and then mission accomplished. Not so! Any meaningful kind of healing, purification or renewal is going to be a long and deliberate process, and if we claim to be Christians, then the healing process must involve a turning back to Christ and a willingness to offer penance.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Press Release from Catholic Communications Office

This useful note clarifies what happened in 1975 and the then Fr Brady's role in the investigation into the activities of Fr Brendan Smyth.
Note from the Catholic Communications Office to clarify media reporting on Cardinal Seán Brady – 16 March 2010

*

The State’s first Child Abuse Guidelines came into effect in 1987 and the Church’s first guidelines Child Sexual Abuse: Framework for a Church Response, were published in 1996.
*

In late March 1975, Fr Seán Brady was asked by his bishop, Bishop Francis McKiernan, to conduct a canonical enquiry into an allegation of child sexual abuse which was made by a boy in Dundalk, concerning a Norbertine priest, Fr Brendan Smyth.
*

Fr Brady was then a full-time teacher at St Patrick’s College, Cavan. Because he held a doctorate in Canon Law, Fr Brady was asked to conduct this canonical enquiry; however he had no decision-making powers regarding the outcome of the enquiry. Bishop McKiernan held this responsibility.
*

On 29 March 1975, Fr Brady and two other priests interviewed a boy (14) in Dundalk. Fr Brady’s role was to take notes. On 4 April 1975, Fr Brady interviewed a second boy (15) in the Parochial House in Ballyjamesduff. On this occasion Fr Brady conducted the inquiry by himself and took notes.
*

At the end of both interviews, the boys were asked to confirm by oath the truthfulness of their statements and that they would preserve the confidentiality of the interview process. The intention of this oath was to avoid potential collusion in the gathering of the inquiry’s evidence and to ensure that the process was robust enough to withstand challenge by the perpetrator, Fr Brendan Smyth.
*

A week later Fr Brady passed his findings to Bishop McKiernan for his immediate action.
*

Eight days later, on 12 April 1975, Bishop McKiernan reported the findings to Fr Smyth’s Religious Superior, the Abbot of Kilnacrott. The specific responsibility for the supervision of Fr Smith’s activities was, at all times, with his Religious Superiors. Bishop McKiernan withdrew Brendan Smyth’s priestly faculties and advised psychiatric intervention.