Choose Christ, Or, Give The People What They Want?

Our feast today, St John Fisher and St Thomas More seems to grow in relevance every year. After our battle for marriage these last few months their stand for the integrity of marriage and fidelity to Christ in the face of the Henry VIII's tyranny certainly resonates and shines out as a beacon of hope and encouragement. 

The feast hits home more forcefully today after an experience I had this morning, one many many young priests have these days, particularly in Ireland. I had a lady on the phone ringing to buy a burial plot, she had rung the wrong parish but when she realised she was talking to me she started to rebuke me for my ministry and preaching.  She believes that I am driving people away because I am preaching a Gospel she does not agree with. She wants the Church to be more like the Protestants, she said: "If the Church was more like the Anglicans and the other Protestants I would be going and so would many other people". Reality and experience show otherwise as many an Anglican minister will tell you. I told her I had to preach what Christ preached and she asked me when I was going to cop myself on and get sense. "You going to stop it, now, do you hear me? You're going to stop it!" (she actually said that).

As her recriminations grew I decided to asked her to answer one question: which was more important: to choose Christ or to give people what they wanted? She said she would go for the people; it was apparent in the conversation that, sadly, the Gospel means nothing to her. As I tried to explain what Our Lord said about that she hung up. Her attitude is not uncommon in Ireland today, particularly among people of her age group, the middle aged to elderly. Whatever has happened that generation! I could try and surmise why this lady and many like her are the way they are, but I have said it before: the Church in Ireland has failed to preach the Gospel for last half century or so, and for many Irish Catholics the faith is nothing more than a social thing, a sentimental relic useful only to make people happy or when they need a little boost. Part of me feels like concluding that it will be almost impossible to bring these people back, they are so far gone and so resistant to change, and indeed many of them, like the lady today, so bitter. But such a conclusion defies hope, and we must always hope.

The martyrs today speak of a different approach to faith. They realized that we must choose Christ, the faith is about him and the redemption he offers and the Gospel he preached. It is not about keeping people happy or giving them what they want, if it was Henry would have been able to marry and divorce at will without any moral teaching to stir his conscience. The faith is not about being popular, it is about truth, mercy and salvation and people coming to embrace all of that. Many in the Church in Ireland today live under the delusion that if we are popular (bishops and priests) we will bring people back in: but Christ's experience teaches us otherwise. In an age which rejects truth and morality, to remain popular we would have to abandon them to keep in with the people, and then we lose faith ourselves; sadly many priests in Ireland do that and they are now doing great damage as we saw with the "media priests" during the referendum.

If only Jesus had been more careful, more pastoral, turned a blind eye, say nice things to keep people in, he would never have been crucified, he would have lived a long life with lots of nice people around him listening to him and having the craic.....and none of us would have been saved.  If only John Fisher had gone with the rest of the bishops of England and assented, he would have lived his last years in comfort and ease. If only Thomas More had consented, he would have had great success and honour in the kingdom, perhaps become an Earl or Marquis or even a Duke! But they didn't; they chose Christ rather than keep Henry happy because they knew what was right and what was wrong, what Christ required, and if that meant they stood alone, were attacked, faced ignominy, then so be it.

Pope Benedict wisely taught us during his pontificate that it is not numbers that matter, but fidelity to Christ. We priests and faithful should not dilute the Word of God to get people in, if we do, in the end, we will have nothing to offer and we lose everything. There may be fewer people going to Mass, but at least they want to be there, they are committed and trying to live Christ-centred lives, and we can begin working with them to reignite a new evangelisation. 

Yes it is hard to see people go, and those attached to the faith may well go to other priests and parishes where the Gospel has been replaced with the doctrine of nice so their comfort is not disturbed. Yes, we may be laughed at, rebuked, told to cop ourselves on, be blamed for the collapse of the Church (it seems it is adherence to the Gospel that has led to the decline of the Church in Ireland, or so I am told). Our brother priests may look at us sadly and say we really don't get it, we are ruining it for everyone. But in the end if we cannot remain true to Christ and what he requires of us, then there is no reason to remain in the ministry we would be better off out of it for ourselves and for the Church. John Fisher and Thomas More understood that, and even though it was not the popular thing they chose Christ because that is what being Christian really means.

Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith has a good article on the two martyrs in the Catholic Herald. 

When Aspirations Collide With Hard Reality?

This article appeared in the The Independent, today I think, concerning the Irish Bishops's remarks on solemnising marriages in Ireland following the referendum result. The article is interesting and the journalist does have something legitimate to say about the Church's confidence and credibility today. However I do think she is being little unfair, the Bishops have to be prudent and need to wait and see what the Marriage Act will contain before making any decisions. They may well be waiting to see if Church ministers will be given an exemption or will be protected. 

However, and I am open to correction, given the way the amendment to the Constitution is framed any legislation that limits citizens's access to marriage may well be unconstitutional. If the State is to protect marriage, gay marriage included, then it cannot tolerate organisations, religious or otherwise, which dissent from that. We shall see.

The real test will come after the publication of the Marriage Act and any Constitutional challenge which may follow, then the aspirations of the Bishops will face hard reality and decisions will have to made. Courage will be needed then. I hope and pray we may well find the witness and strength of Oliver Plunkett and John Fisher among them then.

That said, even if Catholic priests are protected, Catholics and other Christians who provide wedding services are not. Those who choose to stand with Christ's teaching will face prosecution and civil suits as we see with Ashers in Belfast and Bulah Print in Drogheda. The Church cannot abandon them. It is interesting to note that those two cases above concern evangelicals, Catholics, as far as I can see, have not featured in acts of resistance to the new laws. What does that say about the Church here in Ireland?

A Martyr For The Dispossessed

As the votes were being counted in the same sex marriage referendum here, its outcome already certain at an early stage, Archbishop Oscar Romero was beatified in El Salvador. There are many delighted by this event and many appalled. This division is a political one and one, I believe, quite out of sync with who the Archbishop really was. I wrote some posts on him before trying to show that Blessed Oscar was not a communist, nor a Marxist, but a Catholic (see here and here). 

His concern for poor was not motivated by those atheistic materialist movements, but rather by Christ's own love for the poor and dispossessed. Blessed Oscar did seek a revolution, but not one in which arms are taken up, rather a revolution of love. He called on right wing leaders who maintained they were Catholic to do what was expected of Catholic leaders - to be just towards their people and assist those most in need. That's not communism or Marxism, that's Catholicism. As some have been saying in the last few days, some of those who were suspicious of Blessed Oscar were perhaps too rooted in the establishment, they did not want to rock the boat, they may have preferred to use old diplomatic, quiet ways of effecting change. There are times when that is useful and times when it useless, a barrier. Given the situation in El Salvador the Church was too close to the ruling class, Blessed Oscar gradually realised that and pulled himself away to be free to preach the Gospel. In a sense his position was like St John Paul II's with regard to realpolitik.

Some have problems with Blessed Oscar's relationship with Liberation Theology. I think at this stage it is obvious he was not a supporter of Liberation Theology in its Marxist dimensions. I believe a Liberation Theologian came out a few days ago to say the Archbishop was not a member of the movement, but rather the movement was influenced by him. Again, that is not to say he was a Marxist. Liberation Theology is a multifaceted movement, to dismiss all of it would not be wise. There are dangerous elements in it, and these were addressed by the then Cardinal Ratzinger in his Instruction on Certain Aspects of the "Theology of Liberation" - I draw your attention to two important words in that title: "Certain Aspects". Now I am not an apologist for those aspects which are contrary to the faith (how often I have been accused by certain people of being a leftie, as I have often been accused of being right wing!), but we need to look beyond politics and be open to the fact that the Gospel of Christ is more radical that we envision it: it is not a right wing manifesto, no more than it is a left wing charter.

Blessed Oscar's stance and martyrdom comes into clearer focus as we believers in Ireland come to terms with what has happened here today. The Church will have a lot to reflect on, and I hope our Bishops and faithful will finally wake up and see the social revolution which has been occurring around us for years, a revolution that has been underestimated. The Church has played a part in that revolution in her failure to communicate the Gospel as it is in favour of  a lightweight pastoral strategy which has all but excised sound teaching in the name of being open, kind and compassionate. My issue with the Church, for the whole of my lifetime, is that it has been part of the Establishment here in Ireland, and it still thinks it is. This has come at a price, a high price, and that has been a dilution of the Gospel and the failure to form disciples. A dismal catechetical programme stands as a potent symbol of this. 

One of the good things which will come out of this referendum and its results is the undeniable fact now that the Church is not part of the Establishment, she is very much a minority - even if a majority of Irish men and women still identity as "Catholic", that identification does not translate into discipleship (and that is not a value judgement, it is a simple and undeniable observation). The wisdom of Blessed Oscar should now become clear to us all, we must begin to think in a new way, and part of that new thinking must be evangelical. We must now look to the failures of the Church in Ireland - not just the horrendous abuse, but her failure to inculcate in her members an understanding of the faith. People in Ireland use Christian words and concepts like charity, compassion, being Christian etc, but they do not understand what they really mean, the meaning has changed and they are now being used to construct a new society which as far from the actual teaching of Christ as you can get.

Blessed Oscar, a martyr for the dispossessed may well have many lessons to teach us now; we may need to heed him, and take courage from his heroic stance in the face of opposition. I would also suggest we begin to listen to those voices within Ireland who have been saying for years that there is something wrong in the Church. I am not talking about the liberals, many of whom, priests and sisters among them, who came out in favour of the referendum: they are false prophets, members of the new Establishment in Ireland. I would recommend a reading of Fr Vincent Twomey's work, a priest who is very much outside the Establishment here in Ireland (Church Establishment as much as state). His book The End of Irish Catholicism? contains an objective diagnosis of what was wrong with the Church in Ireland - one major issue being the failure to think the faith. As I know personally, there is a certain anti-intellectualism in the Church in Ireland, it is indicative of a uncomfortable attitude towards thinking and discussion. If the faith is to be passed on people must think, think their way through what Christ teaches, they need to talk about it and explore it in order to understand it and live it.

Other books I would recommend at this time to help us understand where we are and where we need to go: Fr Benedict Groeschel, The Reform of Renewal, a manifesto, I suppose, for a revitalization of faith and discipleship. Fr Goeschel was much admired in the US, though he was also divisive figure for many. I remember when in seminary speaking about him with a member of the theology staff, the lecturer dimissed Fr Groeschel "He's a most dangerous man!". Indeed he was, as was Christ whose teachings Fr Groeschel sought to live. Finally, a book to help us understand where we are now: Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue, a work of moral theology which suggests we are on the edge of another collapse of western civilisation. He sees the Church as having a role in the preservation of culture, learning etc, as she did at the last collapse. MacIntyre also reiterates the fact that being Christian is not about following rules, but rather living virtue in the context of the Gospel. Our social revolutionaries have been so successful here because for most people in Ireland Christianity is about rules, not virtue and certainly not holiness - that is potently revealed in the poor state of Postulation in this country.

A few thoughts, my readers will have read them before on this blog. But now I need to restate them not to condemn anyone, but in the hope that we may see where we really are and begin in earnest what St John Paul instituted in his ministry: a New Evangelisation. That is the future and it is a radical one. We Christians in Ireland, who continue to believe and will not accept the new definition of marriage now to be Constitutionally enforced here, will now have to be witnesses, to go against the tide and that will be difficult. Only true disciples will be able to do that, and it is for that reason we have to move beyond forming social Catholics and keeping numbers up (nurturing the delusion) to nurturing and forming authentic followers of Christ: men and women who will not be afraid to lose everything rather than renounce Christ or his Gospel (as he taught it!). 

The relics of Blessed Oscar are carried to the altar: the bloodstained shirt worn on the day of the martyrdom

To Your Heart, Holy Mother, Queen Of Ireland

Today, the Solemnity of the Assumption of Our Lady, the Bishops of Ireland will consecrate Ireland to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, at the National Shrine in Knock.   It is an important spiritual event for us here, and hopefully the consecration will yield fruit for us in our struggle for religious freedom and in the struggle for life. 

That said I cannot help but think of it being a little too late, like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.  But at least it is being done now.  

 

Here is the prayer which will be used for the consecration: it will be prayed at the Apparition Gable, where Our Lady appeared with St Joseph, St John with the Lamb of God, in 1879.

 

 

Prayer for the Act of Consecration

Most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Refuge of Sinners, we entrust and consecrate ourselves, our family, our home and our Dioceses to Jesus through your Immaculate Heart. As your children, we promise to follow your example in our lives by doing at all times the will of God.

O Mary, Spouse of the Holy Spirit, we renew today the promises of our Baptism and Confirmation. Intercede for us with the Holy Spirit that we may be always faithful to your Divine Son, to his Mystical Body, the Catholic Church, and to the teachings of his Vicar on earth, our Holy Father the Pope.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Queen and our Mother, we promise to uphold the sanctity of marriage and the welfare of the family. Watch over our minds and hearts and preserve our youth from dangers to the faith and the many temptations that threaten them in the world today.

We ask you, Mary our Advocate to intercede with your divine Son. Obtain for our country the grace to uphold the uniqueness of every human life, from the first moment of conception to natural death.

O Blessed Mother, Our Life, our Sweetness and Our Hope, we wish that this Consecration be for the great glory of God and that it lead us safely to Jesus your Son.

A Naomh-Mhuire, a Mháthair Dé, guigh orainn na peacaigh, anois agus ar uair ár mbáis.

Amen.

An Opportunity?

It has been announced by the government that they must hold a referendum on the EU Fiscal Compact Treaty which is being drafted to help ease the Euro crisis.  This is the treaty Britain has refused to enter into.

It will be most interesting to see how the government handles this one.  In Ireland we tend to have issues with EU treaties and we usually reject them until the government orders a second vote and threatens us, and so the referendums are passed second time round, usually out of fear.  That, my friends, is Irish democracy - not quite the Syrian model, but sometimes not too far off it.

Reading some of the news articles and the comments under them, I think the government may have a lot to fear.  Now for the treaty to be passed the consent of only twelve countries is required, so the Irish cannot hold the EU to ransom, so there is not as much fear.  However, it would be important for it to be passed here given the state of Ireland's economy and the fact that our begging bowl is well and truly planted in Germany.

Some are saying that we may have an opportunity here: if the government wants us to vote yes, then we might bargain for the vote.  It might also be possible to get the Troika to sit down and have another look at the austerity measures and some of the debt to unsecured investors which we are being forced to honour, giving these investors huge profits on their original investments.   Any chance of reopening the embassy to the Holy See?  Many Catholics are very angry and "yes" may not be a word they would be inclined to utter in the government's favour. 

We will watch this one carefully.  We will need to examine the treaty carefully - it may not be in Ireland's best interests in the long run - Britain has serious issues with it, and I think it might be a good idea to listen to what they have to say.

Every Blessing On St Brigid's Day

Before I head out for another day's filming, I would like to wish you all a very happy St Brigid's Day.  May the holy Patroness of Ireland watch over us and our country in these difficult times.

We need her prayers and motherly protection.  My colleague, Caroline over at the St Genesius Blog has alerted me to the Labour Party's next move against Catholic citizens: they are, for all intents and purposes, to be banned from certain positions within the civil service if they cannot put their faith to one side and put the state first.  Here's what is being said:

"All senior officials in state bodies which are likely to have to deal with the Catholic Church should be screened to ensure that they will not show inappropriate deference to the Catholic Church. Those who feel they are 'Catholic first and Irish second' should seek promotion in other organs of the State."

Sounds like something out of Communist Russia or Nazi Germany, or even England at the height of the persecution following the Reformation.  Newspaper report here.  I presume, then, as Labour likes to present itself as an equal opportunities organisation, the following statements are also true:

"All senior officials in state bodies which are likely to have to deal with Muslims should be screened to ensure that they will not show inappropriate deference to Islam. Those who feel they are 'Muslim first and Irish second' should seek promotion in other organs of the State."

"All senior officials in state bodies which are likely to have to deal with women should be screened to ensure that they will not show inappropriate deference to women. Those who feel they are 'women first and Irish second' should seek promotion in other organs of the State."

"All senior officials in state bodies which are likely to have to deal with homosexuals should be screened to ensure that they will not show inappropriate deference to the gay movement. Those who feel they are 'gay first and Irish second' should seek promotion in other organs of the State."

Well?  Not on your nellie.  Labour is, once again, revealing the hatred it has for Catholicism.  In my opinion (and it has always been my voting pattern), in conscience a Catholic cannot vote for Labour, not even when a relation is standing for election.   I think, at times, we have a duty to vote against Labour and against those who seek to form partnership with them.  I think at the next election, faithful Catholics should get together and start to weigh up who we can vote for: perhaps it is time for the formation of a particular "Catholic vote" in Ireland.

Seeing as this lot are in government for the next four years, we had better get ready for more.  As with all tyrannies, they will soon be drunk with power and God help us all then.

Holy St Brigid,

Mary of the Gael,

dear mother of the Irish people,

come to our help!

The Most Fundamental Of All Rights

Last night I was watching ITV 1's broadcasting of the 2002 movie, Bloody Sunday which deals with the massacre by British Army forces of fourteen Civil Rights demonstrators during a peaceful rally in Derry, Northern Ireland, on the 30th January 1972 - we are coming up to the 40th anniversary of the killings.  I had never seen it, so I took the opportunity.

As an Irishman it was difficult to watch, particularly when you know that for most of those forty years those who died were branded as terrorists by the British government, and that following a travesty of an enquiry - the Widgery Tribunal, the soldiers were not only exonerated, but some of them actually decorated by Queen Elizabeth.   It was particularly hard to watch as men who went to the assistance of the wounded waving white hankies in a gesture of peace, were shot in the back by the soldiers.  I found myself wondering last night, if the Queen should not have been a bit more forceful and explicit in her speech in Dublin Castle last May.  The things she regretted perhaps merited something stronger than a general statement, particularly in the light of the fact that she bestowed her honours on men who gunned down innocent civilians. 

But we must leave the past and move on - at the end of the day not even a queen dressed in sackcloth and ashes kneeling outside the Guildhall in Derry will bring those people back, and as Christians we must forgive.  That day sparked a conflict which cost the lives of thousands of innocent men and women on both sides, and there was no excuse for that: there are many others who should don the sackcloth and ashes and make serious reparation for their deeds.  In the wake of  a murder spree that lasted over thirty years, there are many who must come to forgive and get on with their lives, difficult as that can be.

In the light of all this, at this time of year, our thoughts go overseas to the US as the Church and various organisations mark another attack on human life - the legalisation of abortion in 1973.  Over these days people mark the anniversary all over the US with numerous events and rallies, reaching a climax when hundreds of thousands will travel to Washington DC for the commemorative ceremonies on the 22nd and 23rd January: the annual March for Life.  The highlights of these events in Washington will be Holy Mass and a Vigil in the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, and the rally down the Mall to the Capitol building. 

The March for Life is one of the biggest, if not the biggest rally in Washington in each year and, as always, completed ignored by the media.  A few pro-abortion protesters will turn out, so if there is a news report they will get most of the limelight - the usual media "objectivity". 

What I find most interesting is that like the relatives of those gunned down in the streets of Derry who were trying for years to bring the full truth of Bloody Sunday out into the open, the pro-life cause has been struggling for a similar time to bring the full truth about abortion into the open.   In recent years those involved in the pro-life cause see themselves as part of another Civil Rights movement - and that is exactly what they are, though there are those who dispute it.

There is no more fundamental civil right than the right to life.  Indeed, if the right to life is denied to any one person, that in effect nullifies every other right, and we give to our legislators the power to strip away any or all of our rights should they see the need to do so - whenever they want.  

Those who support abortion are blind to this and are so because those who legislate for abortion are of the same mind set, and they have little to fear - for now.  But the tide could turn - indeed it is already turning and the monster is beginning to devour its young.  When you look at abortion figures you see this.  For example, in many parts of the world, most of the victims of abortion are girls - aborted because their parents want a boy.  What does the radical feminist movement say to that? Nothing.  They are happy to allow, and indeed ignore, a holocaust of girls in order to preserve "a woman's right to choose".   Imagine a world without women: it won't happen, but we could see, in many parts of the world, a serious reduction in the number of women and what will that do for women's rights? 

Another possibility: some scientists, financed by the homosexual lobby, are looking for a gay gene which would prove that homosexuals are born with their orientation, and so this discovery would further enhance their arguments.  If a gay gene were found (it hasn't by the way, no evidence at all so far), it may, in places, lead to a holocaust of children who had this gene to prevent the birth of "gay children".  I think that is very likely, and we may see the homosexual issue resolved, not by means of conversion or normalisation, but by extermination.  I believe someone once referred to such as methodology as the "Final Solution".

Other cases: the disabled are disappearing, but not through the eradication of conditions, but the eradication of those with them.  The number of children with Downs Syndrome is dropping considerably - that can only be through abortion.  And abortion is used as the handmaid of inhuman scientific processes like IVF.  The recent case in Australia where a healthy twin was aborted in place of its sick sibling is a fine example of that (the media called it "tragic" - that's rich!).  Every day somewhere in the world babies are being aborted because, thanks to IVF, there are too many children in the womb - space needs to be created.  Who dies? The one nearest the scalpel.

In Scripture we hear of the crime that cries to heaven for vengeance - surely abortion is one of these, and the blood of the innocent cries out to God.    Revenge is not something Christians, or any pro-life people should even consider: God will deal with those who are guilty of this massacre - those  who carry out and promote abortion (legislators too, by the way).  We must pray for these people for, if they do not repent, their souls may well be lost.   As Christians and members of the pro-life movement, like the victims of violence in Northern Ireland, we must forgive, but also work for justice and try to bring an end to this senseless and meaningless murder of the innocent.

As for us in Ireland, as I said before, I think abortion is coming.  At least one of the two parties in government favours the introduction of abortion: the other party has many members who are also pro-abortion, so the time is right for the pro-abortion movement in Ireland.  The Church is weak, and as the late journalist Mary Raftery (the one who broke some of the abuse stories) said: now is the time to bring in abortion when the Catholic Church is so weak it will not be able to object. 

That is true: if abortion came in tomorrow there might not even be a whimper from the Church in Ireland - the media would just rehearse some of the abuse reports again and silence her.  This is a situation which needs to be dealt with quickly - if the government is planning legislation, we must be ready to oppose it, and use whatever we have to meet the challenge, including the excommunication of Catholic legislators who vote for any such bill.  

This is the time to start building alliances both within and outside the country to prepare for this struggle.  Our good pro-life friends in the US can be of assistance here.   If abortion is not legalised, well and good, but we must be ready.  Perhaps if the government sees a strong pro-life movement ready for battle (and many voters in their ranks), they might think twice, after all, legislators do not live on bread alone, but on every vote that is cast in their favour in the ballot box, and most of them live under the perpetual fear of famine.  Time to remind them that the next time they skip over to the larder, they may find it empty.

And now, a prayer for all victims of violence - those who died in conflicts, those who were abused, and the millions of innocent children killed in the womb or destroyed in labs; and let us not forget the millions of children enslaved in suspended animation in the freezers of IVF clinics around the world.

O Mary,
bright dawn of the new world,
Mother of the living,
to you do we entrust the cause of life
Look down, O Mother,
upon the vast numbers
of babies not allowed to be born,
of the poor whose lives are made difficult,
of men and women
who are victims of brutal violence,
of the elderly and the sick killed
by indifference or out of misguided mercy.

Grant that all who believe in your Son
may proclaim the Gospel of life
with honesty and love
to the people of our time.

Obtain for them the grace
to accept that Gospel
as a gift ever new,
the joy of celebrating it with gratitude
throughout their lives
and the courage to bear witness to it
resolutely, in order to build,
together with all people of good will,
the civilization of truth and love,
to the praise and glory of God,
the Creator and lover of life.

(Blessed John Paul II)

No Smooching Here

Here's an interesting story - the Vatican has taken exception to an image Benetton clothing company was using for its advertising campaign - the photo shows the Holy Father and Muslim Sheikh Ahmed Mohamed El-Tayeb kissing, one of a number of photoshopped images of political leaders in passionate embraces.  Benetton has pulled the photo, thank God.  The Vatican tends to be very tolerate of offensive images, but this was one step too far.

I am delighted that the Vatican has decided to raise its voice - I think it tends to let too many things go, as does the Church in general, so much so that people think they can say what they like and offend Christians in any way possible in the sure knowledge that we will not raise a whimper in protest. 

Sometimes I think those who attack us rationalise their abuse by saying "Christians have to forgive, so if they object, we can throw the accusation of hypocrisy in their faces".  It reminds me of a incident when I was teaching: one of my students had misbehaved badly in class, and when I brought him out to check him, he said with a smirk "You're a priest, you have to forgive me and let me off."  I told him I did forgive him - from the bottom of my heart, but he was still being punished - for his own good".  That wiped the smile off his face: he got extra homework and a "blue card" (a demerit card). 

I am all in favour of forgiveness and putting up with bad behaviour and attacks with patience and prayer, but that tolerance has to be mitigated in each situation by assessing the effect of our tolerance.  Will our silence confirm and reinforce injustice, bad behaviour and indeed sin?   We also have to gauge the reaction to our objection - will we do more harm than good?    Looking at the Holy See's response to Enda Kenny's attack, for example, we see that it was measured, diplomatic but yet firm - the government did not like it and tried to make hay by insinuating that it was another example of now entrenched the Holy See was and unable to admit her mistakes.  But that was an anti-Catholic government's view - the interpretation of other nations was different: they saw the Holy See setting the record straight.  

In the interest of fairness we have to give Benetton their due, when the Vatican raised its objection, it took down the image - perhaps they thought to themselves "If the Catholics are objecting so strongly, the Muslims will be really peeved" - no one dares offend Muslims for fear of the consequences.   But they have apologised for offending the faithful, let's hope others will be as respectful in future.

I note another story this morning - from The Irish Catholic.  According to the paper the four Archbishops of Ireland are resisting attempts by the Vatican to reform the structure of Irish dioceses.  A number of people have suggested that our dioceses need to be reduced in number, a suggestion I agree with.  It appears Rome may well agree also, and so is considering changes which will form new dioceses with a Catholic population of 300,000 on average.  The story in The Irish Catholic says that the Archbishops want dioceses with an average population of 100,000.  

To be honest I do not think that would effect too many changes at all.  If this story is true, then I would advise that we cooperate with the Vatican - the time for resistance is over.  With an anti-Catholic government in place, a group of dissident priests doing everything they can to undermine the faith of the people in the communion of the Church universal, this is not the time for haggling with the Holy Father.   Time for us to die to self and realise that perhaps we may not be the right people to sort out the mess the Church in Ireland is in.  Yes, we can help and cooperate, but perhaps it is time to follow Peter.

UPDATE:   It seems the Vatican is actually going to take legal proceedings against Benetton.  Is this a first?  In another legal story: Irish priest, Fr Kevin Reynolds who sued RTE for their false accusations of his having raped and impregnated a young Kenyan girl has been vindicated in the courts.  RTE reached a settlement with him paying not only his costs and compensation, but being order also to pay aggravated damages - a punitive measure imposed by courts on guilty defendants.  While the amount RTE has to pay will not be revealed, it is reckoned to be at least in seven figures.  Here's RTE news' report on the settlement.  That should teach RTE - but will they learn the lesson??  We will see. 

Our New Nuncio?

....and the Republic of Ireland

How will the Holy See respond to this new development? At the moment we do not have a nuncio: will the Holy Father appoint a new resident nuncio, or will he give the brief to another nuncio?  If the latter, the most likely choice may be the present nuncio to the Court of St James i.e. to Great Britain, HE Archbishop Antonio Mennini.  If so, it will be remarkable - history will have gone full circle, and all in the space of less than a century.

A brief biography.  Antonio Mennini was born in Rome in 1947.   He was ordained priest in 1974, and after obtaining a doctorate in theology, he joined the Holy See's diplomatic service in 1981.  First posted to Uganda, he was attache in Turkey and then back to the Secretariat of State in the Vatican.  He was ordained Archbishop in 2000, and liaison with Bulgaria until 2002 when he was posted to Russia, and then in 2008 sent to Uzbekistan.  He has played an important role in improving the Holy See's relationship with the Orthodox churches.  In December 2010 he was appointed nuncio to Great Britain, presenting his credentials to Queen Elizabeth on the 2nd March of this year.  He may well be presenting his credentials and change of address for the nunciature to President Higgins in the coming months.

Archbishop Mennini has a distinguished career and has established himself as an impressive figure well able to deal with difficulties.  Orthodox Catholics in Britain hailed his appointment.  Perhaps he may be a good man to cover Ireland and help the renewal here.  An interesting fact from his life: he was the priest who heard the last confession of the murdered Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro.  His brother, Pietro, is a prosecutor in Chieti.  So he has contacts and links which may prove useful.

All that said, this is just speculation.  The Holy Father might appoint a resident, and send a right tough nuncio, built like a wrestler with a black belt in karate and as much humour as Chewbacca to sort out the Church here. 

Still Chipping Away...

The Villa Spada, the (soon to be former) Irish embassy to the Holy See

Ireland is to close its embassy to the Holy See. I suppose many of us saw this coming considering what happened during the summer and Enda Kenny's remarks in the Dail.  The Minister for Foreign Affairs has said the decision is purely economic - since the embassy to the Holy See produces no economic benefits, then it is being liquidated: it has nothing to do with the row over the child abuse scandals.   I'm afraid I find that hard to believe, to be honest.  If they are closing down embassies because they are not economically beneficial then there are a few others that need to go, delegations which are not as important or as useful as that to the Holy See. 

First of all there are the three embassies in Brussels - yes people, Ireland has three embassies, three ambassadors with three sets of staff in Brussels.  One embassy to Belgium, one embassy to the EU and a third to NATO - we are not even a member of NATO but we still have a formal delegation to the organisation.  If you want to talk about saving money, close down two of those embassies and get the one ambassador to cover all three: that would save more money than the closing of the embassy to the Holy See.    There are also other embassies and representations that could have been cut back.  After all, do we really need embassies in the countries of the EU?  After all, are we not all one now, so why have embassies?

Some may ask, why bother having an embassy to the Church?  Well actually a posting to the Holy See has always been considered important, and many countries send senior ambassadors to their delegations in the Vatican.  Why?  Because the Holy See is a diplomatic melting pot: if you know how to play the game it is one of the most useful fact-finding postings.  The Holy See is neutral and a place where diplomats can meet and talk in a non-threatening atmosphere - they don't need to be watching their backs.  For this reason, and many others, the Holy See enjoys real respect in diplomatic circles.  It seems the present government, and indeed people in the Department of Foreign Affairs, do not understand that. 

Historically, the embassy to the Holy See was the first embassy the new Irish State established, and with it our country declared itself a free, sovereign nation.  So our representation there was important symbolically.

I am wondering what will happen now.  I notice the government announce this in the aftermath of criticism for their bailing out junior bondholders of Anglo-Irish Bank.   Just a few days ago €750 million was paid to these bondholders by the taxpayers of Ireland, most of these bondholders making a profit of about 70% on their initial investment.  The country is in trouble; the IMF and EU have imposed measures which are crucifying our citizens financially, and the government pays out a profit to speculators.   So, is this move on the embassy another distraction, just as Enda Kenny's speech in the Dail was the means to distracting criticism for his conflicting controversial utterances to the people of Roscommon and the Dail over the issue of Roscommon hospital?  Is it possible that the government, when in trouble, starts to kick the Church in the hope the anti-Catholics will join in on the fun and forget the mess the government has created?

Watch this space. I sense another row brewing.  You see I do not think the Vatican permits ambassadors to Italy double up as ambassadors to the Holy See - it is a mechanism designed to respect the Vatican's sovereignty (I don't think Italy allows the doubling up either). I can see the government complaining that they are not allowed double up and use it as another stick to beat the Church.  Maybe not, but I could see something like that happen.  People in Ireland have such a low opinion of the Church, they are not open to look at things objectively.  The government might see another opportunity to win points, and they need those points; after all the Minister for Education wants the Catholic schools, and the way has to be cleared for the introduction of abortion - any chance of objections from the Church has to be neutralised.  On that last point, the way the Church and bishops are at the moment, there would be little or no opposition to the introduction of abortion.

Another issue is that of constitutional reform - the government is, I think, looking to write a new constitution for Ireland, and so certain matters like freedom of religion may well be limited, again a silent Church with no credibility is required while that is going on. 

Do I sound like a madman?  I hope so.  But at this stage anything is possible.  I think in five years time, when we look back, we will see a very different Ireland.  Perhaps the downgrading of the representation to the Holy See is a symbolic salvo.   For these reasons I think the Holy See had better get its act together.  I think we need a good nuncio, be it here in Dublin or doubled up with London.  We need a nuncio who will be able to resist the charm of the Irish and be intent on sorting out the problems in the Church in Ireland.  We need a man who can play the game well and be tough.  We also need a new sort of bishop in the new appointments as they come up.  We now need men who are able to deal with a hostile government while being on fire with zeal for a new evangelisation.  

By the way, did you notice that the government have also announced that they are closing the embassy to Iran in the same breath as that of the Vatican?  I think we get the message there, a not too subtle insult.  That's where Ireland is now.

We must pray. 

"Trust Us..."

Worrying developments here in Ireland.  As the Presidential election is capturing most of our attention, voters in Ireland will also vote on two referendums which seek to give parliament/government more control over the Judiciary.  One seeks the citizens' permission to reduce judges' pay - thereby undermining the mechanism within the Constitution preventing a sitting government from holding the judiciary to ransom. 

The second referendum wants to give the parliament more powers to hold enquiries into matters of "public concern".  The politicians will decide what is of public concern, they will appoint an investigator with almost "super powers" to seize materials, the politicians will judge the case, and the politicians themselves will oversee whether or not they are working within the parameters of the new legislation.  Consoling, isn't it?

Well, today eight former Attorneys General have come out against these referendums describing them as going too far and seriously weakens the rights of citizens.  The minister in charge of the referendums has dismissed the criticisms calling them "nonsense" and then engaged in an "ad hominum" attack on the individual former Attorneys General.   That in itself reveals a great deal. 

The main arguments the government is making in support of the changes are, first, they will reduce the cost of lengthy enquiries and tribunals; they will be able to get offenders who have so far escaped justice, ie bankers; the legislation will not be abused.  So they are asking us to trust them - they will not misuse the powers that have been given them. 

The Irish Constitution, while not perfect, is a finely balanced document written in the 1930's as tyranny and fascism was growing in Europe.  Hitler has siezed power in Germany and was on his way to creating an empire.   Communism was controlling every aspect of people's lives in Russia, and there were many other threats to democracy.  Eamon de Valera who wrote the Constitution did not want the same to happen in Ireland, and so he divided power, and ensured that the judiciary could not be controlled by the government.  This was a wise move on his part, and it is for this reason our Constitution is much admired among democrats - indeed India adopted our Consttitution, with some minor changes, as their own following independence.  

What these two referendums are doing is diluting those safeguards which prevent anyone from taking total control of the Republic.  Of course politicians tend not to like such finely balanced safeguards and I believe that even de Valera would later find the restrictions he had put into the Constitution troublesome.  

I think we Irish need to think very carefully about how we vote on this one.  While times are financially hard, we must be careful not to sign away our freedom in order to save money - see what happened Esau when he was hungry - he sold his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of soup.   According to the polls it seems these referendums will be passed - is it possible that this generation will take the soup and with the stroke of pen wipe away the liberty our fathers and mothers fought hard to win for us? 

PS:  Lest anyone accuse me, a priest, of interferring in State matters, I draw their attention to the present criticisms of the Catholic Church which, it is said, remained silent in Germany as the Nazis diluted the rights of its citizens and the Jews.  Should this be one of the first steps towards a tyranny in Ireland, well then let history record that some in the Church were not silent when human rights were being threatened. 

All Of A Flutter.....

It seems our MEPs and others are getting themselves in a dreadful flutter, literally, following the remarks made by an EU commissioner concerning the Irish flag.  German Gunter Oettinger has suggested that the Irish tricolour, and the flags of other indebted nations, should be flown at half-mast to symbolise the financial state of their economies and as a deterrent.  Some are calling for his resignation.

I have to smile.  Our MEPs are irate at the insult to our flag and, I presume, the sovereignty it symbolises.  Well, friends, we have no sovereignty - we are owned by the EU and the IMF.  And why so angry?  Our Taoiseach defamed the Pope and misrepresented the Holy See in the Dail: surely if we can hand it out, we can take it too?  It seems not.  Interesting that the suggestion has come from a German: my sources tell me the Germans are not impressed with what the Irish have said about "their Pope".  As regards resignations, why should Herr Oettinger  resign when people who have said and done worse in Ireland are allowed stay where they are? 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was told that the Americans, in their committment to democracy and free speech, allow the burning of the Stars and Stripes in legitimate protest - could be something we might consider here. 

A Very Modern Martyrdom

In his homily for today, contained in the Office of Readings, St Bede tells us that John the Baptist was not being asked to deny Christ, but rather to stay silent: silent about the truth.   Herod and Herodias in, what we would call today, an "irregular relationship", were not to be challenged nor reminded about the sinfulness of their situation, but rather they were to be respected and not offended and in a gesture of tolerance, understanding and compassion, embraced and included.   Silence, then, is the best approach.  Of course telling John the Baptist to stay silent about a sinful situation was a non-runner from the start.   Given the challenges facing the Church today, this feast is very relevant and we might say St John's beheading is pretty much a very modern martyrdom.

I am reminded of an encounter I had once following a homily I gave in my last parish.  The Gospel of that day, which had been a Sunday, presented us with Jesus speaking about his Father.  So, taking the cue from the Gospel, I used the opportunity to give a catechesis on God the Father.  When I came in from Mass I was greeted with an irate woman who laid into me for offending "every woman in the Church" by my homily.  "How dare you", she said.  I tried to explain that what I had given was the Church's teaching on the nature of God the Father.  This lady was doing a theology course in one of the institutes in Dublin, so she felt she could respond to what I had said.  "No, it's not the Church's teaching!"  she retorted.  "Father is only an image - he is not a Father."  I bit my lip at that moment because I was tempted to tell her to look for her money back because if this was what she was getting for theology in a Catholic theological institute she was being sold a pup.  Then came the rebuke in earnest: "You can't say that!"

Those words have become the mantra for many in the Church today: "you can't say that", "you can't preach that"; "that" referring to the teaching of the Church, most often her moral teachings - in the words of St Bede - stay silent about the truth.  In Ireland today the Church has fallen into silence, thanks to the abuse crisis, few feel they can preach the teaching of the Church, they stick to what is politically correct and what will not raise shackles.  That is why people can stand up in public and condemn the Church, tell lies about her, knowing they will get away with it because no one is prepared to stand up and challenge them.  Indeed it has got to the stage that attacking the Church has become a spectator sport and a way for young bucks to make a reputation for themselves or get themselves noticed as one unknown politician did last week.  With the Church chained up every half wit in the country knows it is safe to ponce around, strike at her and taunt: no lie or misinterpretation will be contradicted - it's just shooting fish in a barrel.  Indeed the press has known for many years that it can libel the Church because they know they will not be sued.

The question we might ask today is simple: do we remain silent?  The example of John the Baptist urges us not to, but then why do we remain silent?  Why was Enda Kenny's attack on the person of the Pope in the Dail, a Pope who more than anyone else has tried to exorcise the evil of child abuse and deal with the abusers, greeted with absolute silence by the leaders of the Church in Ireland?  Why was there no attempt to clarify issues - to point out the truth, to challenge the "misunderstanding" the Taoiseach was labouring under?   What does that silence now say about the Church in Ireland?   Is there no Clemens von Galen in Ireland?  I know the answer to that, as do all of you, dear readers.  That is why our confidence in our leaders is gone, and here I speak for many priests and laity who have told me how they feel.  I see a confused and suffering people: those who were most faithful, who in charity supported their leaders though appalled by the revelations of evil done by members of the Church, now confronted with that damning silence in July do not know where to turn.   Is it possible that that silence was the last straw for many of the faithful, the moment when our leaders lost the battle for the hearts of the faithful? 

St John the Baptist, pray for us, help us!

By the way the lady mentioned above got her degree and is now teaching RE in a Catholic school.

______________________

Regarding the Seal of Confession, Adam Shaw has an excellent article here.