The New Aggression, A New Evangelisation

Yesterday members of the pro-life groups of Ireland gathered in Dublin for their annual pro-life rally. Organizers estimate that about 30,000 attended, though Irish media have reported that there were only 10,000 - you can decide for yourself which figure is correct, bearing in mind the Irish media's rather fluid relationship with the truth when it comes to such matters

As expected there was a counter-demonstration by pro-abortion advocates, but this year they were even more aggressive than usual. I have taken part in many pro-life demonstrations and usually the pro-abortion protesters will hold up signs, chant and there would be a few who would be aggressive. However this year there seems to have been a escalation in the aggression, a serious escalation. Civility has gone, and has been replaced by anger, intolerance and verbal violence. All of this found expression not just on the streets with swearing, insults, offensive signs and explicit gestures - all in front of children, but also on Twitter (no surprise there) and with the hacking of pro-life websites. Nor, it seems, is any of this spur of the moment reactions to pro-lifers, it has all the hallmarks of an organised campaign - one centred on the campaign to repeal Constitutional protection for unborn children.

I believe the gay marriage referendum was a watershed in Ireland in terms of protest and demonstration. The ugliness and sheer brutality of a certain quarter has left us with a legacy which we may well find very difficult to exorcise from Irish society. Empowered with their victory it seems social progressives feel that they can do and say anything to their opponents to order to quash them. This does not augur well for the future here, not for the stability of Irish society. It may well be that the Nietzschean "might is right" principle will become the dominant philosophy in our brave new society and that will not be good.

I have often noticed that when a Christian society abandons its faith and Christian culture, it turns bad very quickly. The void produced by the expulsion of faith is filled with a primitive brutality, it loses not only civility but also its very civilisation as its citizens crawl back into the caves puffed up with the delusion that they are making progress. If you need examples of this just look to revolutionary France, or to Russia, Mexico, Germany and Spain in the last century.

When this happens, there is an onus on us Christians to get cracking and do what we can to resist this process and work towards the re-Christianisation of society, to move from the primitive back to civility. For us in these times that will be the work of the New Evangelisation proclaimed by St John Paul II and prepared for by the Second Vatican Council in which the Church sought to renew to meet the challenges ahead. 

I believe a seminal document in this process is St John Paul's Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Inuente in which the saintly Pontiff urged us, the disciples of Jesus Christ, to push out into the deep to proclaim the Gospel. Beginning with our lives and families, we move out into the parishes (many of which need serious renewal), our dioceses, the universal Church and then the secular world. If I may use martial imagery, we are in the middle of a war and we must wake up and prepare for battle. The weapons we use are not those of the world, they are not violence and aggression, but virtue and holiness. However we must not be naive, as many tend to be. We need to be wise, strategic and resourceful - that is what Jesus meant when he told us to be as innocent as doves and as wise as serpents. Piety is good, fasting is necessary, but so is engagement in society.

In this process we aim to make our enemies our friends, either through bringing them to embrace the Gospel or failing that, at least bringing them to mutual respect and the vision of the sanctity of human life and a recognition of what is ultimately good for true human flourishing. We will have an uphill battle but we must remember first of all that God is in charge, it is his work and we must be attentive to him and his will: every effort we make must be immersed in prayer and openness to the Holy Spirit. That said we must also make ourselves useful instruments, we must be informed and trained to have the knowledge and skills so God can use us as his apostles and agents in the war. I believe this is what Vatican II was urging when it spoke of the laity and their role in the Church - it was not empowering them to make the Church a democracy, to decide the doctrine of the Church by means of a vote, but rather empowering them through the faith and history of the Church to make the Church more missionary by sending them out into the world to evangelise. 

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

Some Reflections On The Ashers Case

The judgement in the Ashers bakery case is disappointing if not surprising. Many of us expected that they would lose the case given the political and legal climate which is developing in the UK (and Ireland) towards men and women of conscience. The McArthur family, who own Ashers, are facing what many other Christian business men and women have been facing for a few years now, including a business in Dublin - a paper shop that was forced to close, and a printing firm in Drogheda which is expecting to hauled before the courts in the not too distant future, all because they seek to reserve the right to conscience in their businesses.

Ms Justice Brownlie, the presiding judge in the Ashers case, revealed in her judgment that while people are allowed to believe what they wish and manifest that belief as they see fit, their faith and its manifestation must be accordance with the law. Now on one hand we see resonances of the tyranny of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I outlawing Catholicism and forcing their subjects to conform to their new religion;  in extremis this may well be the case. However, on one level what the judge says makes some sense. For example if there is a cult out there that believes human sacrifice is a necessary tenet of their religion and worship, as did the Aztecs, it stands to reason that a civilised society cannot permit such practices to be carried out. The law will prevent that and if this cult is to remain in the country it must respect the law and refrain from sacrificing human beings within the jurisdiction. 

On the other hand, for example, Muslims require animals to be slaughtered in a manner consistent with Quranic teaching - Halal. While these methods offend laws concerning cruelty to animals, the State permits them provided the animals are not subject to extreme suffering.  There is, then, a tension between some laws in the State and religious practices, but also a leniency, an understanding. Usually this is no problem. Given that religion has a role in society be to a leaven, though there are many out there who reject this, tension can be healthy and, with mutual respect, can be fruitful. The principle of the common good is usually invoked. But where does the Ashers judgment come in to all this?  

The judgement is the Ashers case is one which offends the common good rather than protects it. The case is specific and concerns freedom of conscience, not the slaughter of animals nor human sacrifice. Freedom of conscience is one of those values a civilised and rational society cherishes and seeks to protect for many reasons including the common good. Freedom of conscience allows for the development of a mature and respectful society and is a guarantee against the growth of tyranny which is always a possibility even within the most democratic of states, as we saw in Germany in the 1930s.  

Embracing this value will mean that there may be certain things a society may have to tolerate, even a blurring of the lines around laws in order to preserve a greater good. The toleration of pacifism within a society is a good case. There are those who refuse to join the army or fight, not because they are cowards or disloyal to the State, but because they seek to remain true to their pacifist principles. A wise government will not force them into the army or into battle, but rather will respect their position and give them other duties to assist the war effort - care of the sick and wounded etc. This may offend some laws regarding a citizen's duty to protect the nation, but respecting freedom of conscience the state is creative and will understand that duty in a broader context.

In the Ashers case we have people of conscience who cannot, in good faith, support gay marriage. They were asked to decorate a cake with a slogan promoting gay marriage - which is not legal in Northern Ireland by the way, using images, Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street, which are in fact copyright. (Ironically, Ashers are prosecuted for refusing to ice a cake with these images and if they had done so they would have been in breach of copyright and open to legal action! No word about that.) For refusing they are sued and lose. They are sued for not adhering to something that is not in force in Northern Ireland. Yes, they are said to have broken the law on discrimination, but strictly speaking one has to ask if a position is illegal in a State (gay marriage in Northern Ireland) and citizens refuse to support that position, can that properly be called discrimination?  In other words, if I can use the Aztec example blunt and all as it is: human sacrifice is not permitted in Ireland, an Aztec arrives to order a cake with the slogan "Support Human Sacrifice" on it and I refuse, can I be prosecuted for refusing to do so? I presume the answer to that question is: no, because human sacrifice is not permitted within the State. So if gay marriage is not permitted within Northern Ireland, why were Ashers convicted of discrimination?

Ashers's right to freedom of conscience should have been respected for the sake of the common good, for one thing their position is in agreement with the Judeo-Christian moral code upon which European and British/Irish society and legal codes are based. Ashers's honest declining to ice the cake (not bake it, by the way - they were willing to provide the cake just not ice what they saw as an offensive slogan on it), did not mean the customer was bereft of a service - there were many others happy to bake and ice the cake. Given the service would have been provided elsewhere and not too far away from Ashers means that the company should have been permitted to remain true to their principles. A wise judgement would have decreed that while Ashers position was unfortunate for the customer, they were entitled to freedom of conscience and the service should have been sought elsewhere. That is the position of most right-thinking individuals: common sense as much as respect for the differing views of others. Of course there is now the question of whether the law allowed space for this respect, or were the judge's hands tied: thatshe had no choice but to implement unyielding legislation?

There will be those who hammer home equality laws and the necessity to enforce them rigidly in order to prevent discrimination. Well, look at the bigger picture then and see where this case will bring us. It is no exaggeration to say that Jewish baking companies can be forced to produce cakes which call for the downfall of Israel or mock Moses; Muslim printers can be forced to print cartoons mocking Mohammed; gay magazines can be forced to run ads for gay reversion therapy; Presbyterians can be forced to advertise novenas to Our Lady in their papers; Sinn Fein can be forced to carry ads in their publications calling for oaths of allegiance to the crown. No one will escape, what is judged to be enforced for one group - Christians, will have to be enforced on all: everyone will have to renounce their beliefs and principles to satisfy this rigid law, there is no room for respect, or diversity! Such laws will not end discrimination, but rather create even greater discrimination, and perhaps attitudes and situations that are even worse.

This enforcement will produce (and I honestly believed it is designed to produce) a monolithic society where diversity and difference are hammered out in the name of a particular ideology.  Today it is the Christians in Ashers bakery, it will be someone else tomorrow, and some will say that's fine because it's only the Christian bigots that will be targeted. But some day soon it will be those who put these rigid laws in place who will fall too. Remember what Martin Niemoller wisely wrote. These harsh equality laws which dispense with conscience, indeed seek to quash it, will one day devour us all, and it seems few have the sense to see it. Today Ashers are the victims, tomorrow the common good, the day after that the very society generations have struggled to build.

UPDATE:  Word is coming through that Tesco is now being targeted by gay activists in an attempt to force the supermarket to cancel its order with Ashers bakery. Though they won in the courts, equality militants want to destroy Ashers completely. This comes as no surprise, it is the pattern we have seen emerge in other cases.

A Novena For Ireland

Could I please ask you to pray for Ireland in these coming weeks? 

As many of you know on the 22nd May the Irish will vote on the issue of same sex marriage, making it equal in every respect to true marriage including placing an obligation on the State and government to protect gay marriage. The consequences of a yes vote on this will be enormous and will effect freedom of religion and freedom of speech, it may also result in the liquidation of Catholic marriage agencies and even our schools - the government has already said that our schools will be forced to defile their Catholic ethos to present same sex marriage as being equal to true marriage. It may be no exaggeration to say that the amendment to the Constitution, if passed, may well be used by some within Irish society to try and instigate a new Penal era here. 

I am asking you to please join us in a novena of prayer from feast of Our Lady of Fatima, the 13th May, to the eve of polling day, the 21st May.  The novena is addressed to the Holy Family, here is the link to the novena prayer in my pages section of the blog, but I will include the prayer at the end of this post.

Could I ask you to offer the Novena prayer each day, perhaps even a number a times each day if possible?

Could I ask you, if at all possible to offer a day's fasting during the novena - for prayer and fasting are needed?

Could I ask priests willing to join in the novena to offer a Mass for the intention of the novena?

Could I ask you to spread news of this novena far and wide, all around the world? There is no copyright on the prayer and you can print it off, have it printed on cards, published on websites, blogs etc, copied and promoted just as long as it is used to bring more and more people to offer the novena for Ireland.

Of course we must also include the movement in the US and other countries in our prayers. Let us support each other in this task.

Thank you for your prayer, support and help. Please spread the word far and wide.

Novena to the Holy Family

For the cause of marriage and the family

Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
Holy Family of Nazareth,
we bless and venerate you.

We commend to your care and protection
the cause of marriage and family life.
May the peace which reigned in your home
take possession of all hearts and abide in all families.

Confirm all men and women in the truth
so we may recognise what is good and right
and reject all that hinders life
and the true flourishing of humanity.

Guide the hearts of all citizens
that we may witness to the truth
in forming the laws governing our society.
Bless those who work for the protection
of marriage, family and life.

O Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
Holy Family of Nazareth,
We entrust our hearts and our lives to you.

Amen

Patrick Speaks

His Grace, Archbishop Eamon Martin, Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland, has issued a message concerning the same sex marriage referendum which will take place here in Ireland on the 22nd May. As successor of St Patrick, he speaks for the Church here in Ireland. Here is his message in full.

Care for the Covenant of Marriage

On 22nd May 2015 people are being asked to vote in a referendum which will change the meaning of marriage in the Constitution of Ireland.

In recent weeks and months I have received many letters and messages asking me, as a Bishop, to explain clearly the Church’s teaching on marriage in the context of the forthcoming referendum. The Irish bishops have already said that we cannot support an amendment to the Constitution which redefines marriage and effectively places the union of two men, or two women, on a par with the marriage relationship between a husband and wife which is open to the procreation of children.

The Church’s vision for marriage and the family is based on faith and reason and it is shared by many people of all faith traditions and none. Since time immemorial, Church and State have recognised marriage to be of fundamental importance for children, mothers and fathers, and society. To interfere with the definition of marriage is not a simple or a trivial matter.

The teaching of the Catholic Church on the issue of same-sex unions was reiterated at the Extraordinary Synod on the Family in Rome, 2014: “There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.” (Synod Report n55). At the same time, the Church emphasizes that gay people ought always to be treated with respect and sensitivity.

The ‘dignity of difference’ between male and female

As people of faith, we believe that the union of a man and a woman in marriage, open to the procreation of children, is a gift from God who created us ‘male and female’. But we are also people of reason, who hold to the truth about human sexuality, grounded in the natural law, that the relationship between a man and a woman is unique.

How have we got ourselves into the situation that when people stand up to guard the dignity of difference between a man and woman, and speak for the traditional definition of marriage, they are often portrayed as being against freedom, or against equality? How is it that many people won’t even raise these issues in their families and workplaces for fear of being ridiculed or condemned as homophobic? Could we not expect at least some of our legislators to engage in public discussion on both sides of this debate?

Until now, Ireland has accepted that it is in the best interests of children and of society to promote and protect the model of children being born and raised in a family with their biological parents. The proposed amendment to the Constitution will remove the unique and privileged status in society for the marriage between a man and a woman. It is worth noting what Pope Francis has said recently: ‘When the stable and fruitful covenant between a man and a woman is devalued by society, it is a loss for everyone, especially the young (General Audience 22nd April 2015)’.

Care for the Covenant of Marriage – Pope Francis

We read in the Book of Genesis that from the beginning, God created human beings in His own image – ‘male and female’ – and commissioned them to ‘be fruitful’. Marriage is willed by God, and instituted and sanctified by God, to be the way in which God’s work of creation continues in the world. The gift of life, which flows from the intimate union of a man and woman in marriage, is a gift from God Himself.

Catholics give marriage the dignity of a ‘sacrament’ because it mirrors the mystery of God’s love for humans and of Christ’s love for His Church. Pope St John Paul II, who is remembered as the ‘Pope of the Family’ described marriage as the ‘primordial sacrament’ – in the sense that it is the original and most ancient sacrament which belongs to creation itself. In April, Pope Francis reminded us that marriage is a ‘noble vocation’ and he urged all of us to care for the ‘covenant’ of marriage between man and woman.

A misunderstanding of ‘equality’

What makes marriage unique among other types of relationship is the distinctiveness of the union between a man and a woman which is open to life. To remove this specific difference is not, as some would argue, a development or evolution of our understanding of marriage; it is, rather, a very definite break with human history and with the natural institution of marriage. We end up using the term ‘marriage’ for something that it is not. Many of the arguments being made for the proposed amendment appear to be based on a misunderstanding of ‘equality’. It is a fact of nature that same-sex unions are fundamentally and objectively different from the complementary sexual union of a woman and a man which is, of itself, naturally open to life.

During the current debate we are conscious of same-sex partners who love each other and wish to share their life together. ‘Marriage’ is about much more than a loving relationship between consenting adults. Marriage has another essential element – the openness to children who are born of the love and sexual relationship of their mother and father. This is why, as Article 41:3:1 of the Constitution puts it: “The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack”. The State encourages and favours the marriage of a man and a woman, open to children, because it is for the common good. It not only satisfies individual love and needs, but it also ensures the future of society and forms the ideal environment for the development of children.

We know, of course, that, as Pope Francis put it recently: ‘A perfect family does not exist’. Many families experience great trials, and struggle with wounded relationships and disappointments. Tensions and loneliness can build up within the home. The marriage relationship does not always ‘work out’ as hoped for. Sadly, and despite their best intentions, many married couples separate, often for the good of their children and for their own well-being. We also know that many parents are generously and successfully raising children on their own, and many others are giving great love and joy to children through adoption and fostering. This does not mean, however, that we should not continue to hold up the example of a faithful, life-long and committed marriage relationship between a man and a woman as something beautiful and special. Society should do everything in its power to support and encourage this unique union so that as many children as possible can have a father and a mother who live together in a relationship marked by stability and love.

Freedom of conscience

Some commentators have said that ‘sacramental’ or ‘religious’ marriage is not affected by the proposed amendment. It is important to remember that religious freedom means much more than simply the freedom to worship or have ceremonies of a particular type. Freedom of religion is linked very closely to freedom of conscience and freedom to express publicly our values and beliefs in daily life.

If society adopts and imposes a ‘new orthodoxy’ of ‘gender-neutral’ marriage, being defined simply as a union between any two persons – including a man and a man, or a woman and woman – then it will become increasingly difficult to speak or teach in public about marriage as being between a man and a woman. Will there be lawsuits against individuals and groups who do not share this vision? What will we be expected to teach children in school about marriage or about homosexual acts? Will those who continue to sincerely believe that marriage is between a man and a woman be forced to act against their faith and conscience?

Reflect and Pray before you Vote

I encourage everyone to reflect and pray carefully about these issues before voting on May 22nd. It is very important to vote. Do not be afraid to speak up courageously for the union of a man and a woman in marriage.

Pope Francis reminds us: ‘While a noble vocation, marriage is not an easy one: it must constantly be strengthened by a living relationship with the Lord through prayer: mornings and evenings, at meals, in the recitation of the Rosary, and above all through the Sunday Eucharist’.

I invite you, especially in May, the month of Mary, to pray the Rosary for all the families of Ireland, remembering those who are especially in need of prayer at this time. May our families be models of faith, love and generous service.

+ Eamon, 

Archbishop of Armagh,

Primate of All Ireland

Please keep Archbishop Eamon in your prayers, he will be attacked for his clear teaching. Things are very bad here in Ireland. Yes campaigners are extremely aggressive and have the full support of the government, media, business and it seems also the police force here. Before his appointment I prayed that Ireland be given another St Oliver Plunkett, a brave and courageous shepherd and Primate to lead the Church in what could be a time of persecution. So far in his ministry, Archbishop Eamon has certainly proved himself a worthy successor of St Patrick and St Oliver, and those two other great Archbishop Primates, St Malachy and St Celsus. As the "first of the Irish" (as St Oliver referred to the office of Primate of All Ireland) Archbishop Eamon must stand firm, teach and encourage. May the Lord give him every grace to do so. 

If You're Not In Kansas Anymore, Then....

The media are starting to make a thing of the Irish Bishops's suggestion that should the gay marriage referendum be passed, the Catholic Church here may no longer carry out the civil aspects of weddings, The reason for this, as stated by the Bishops in 2013, will simply be the differing views of marriage held by Church and the State. The Irish Times refers to it as a threat, no doubt trying to paint the Church as the bad guy holding a gun over the heads of those in favour of the referendum. It is not a threat, it is an honest recognition of a serious rift and an abyss that cannot be bridged and so instead of limping along in denial, the Church will conduct her own affairs and let the State conduct theirs. Nor is it a matter of signing a form, as the Irish Times inaccurately suggests: it is about a priest serving as a solemniser of a civil marriage. This cannot continue should things change. If I may remodel a famous quote: If you're not in Kansas anymore, then do not expect things to stay the same... All will be changed utterly, as Yeats wisely wrote.... 

Of course should this happen you can expect the media to launch an attack on the Church. We will hear of lots of poor couples in a quandary, put out, having to spend more money and make arrangements in now over-crowded registry offices to solemnise a civil marriage on top of a religious one. We will probably not hear about how many countries in Europe already have separation of religious and civil weddings and no one gets upset, they just accept it and get on with it: they have the civil wedding first and then head straight to the Church for the sacramental wedding. That's what will happen in Ireland should the Bishops stick to their proposal if the referendum is passed. 

This decision by the Bishops might also stave off attempts by some to force the Church to conduct gay marriages. I can see some sort of challenge emerging if the referendum is passed, a priest or minister who refuses to carry out a gay wedding being sued under equality legislation and the new position of the Constitution. In a conversation yesterday with friends it was suggested this would never happen since we have freedom of religion, however as we have seen equality legislation tends to overrule all other rights and freedoms nowadays, including religious freedom, so I would not be so optimistic. If we no longer carry out the civil aspects of marriage, the State may well no longer recognise Catholic marriages and so a case against the Church may not be able to proceed. But we shall see.

That said, it all depends on the outcome of the referendum, and given the serious issues which will arise should it be passed - not only for the Church, but for families and children, a no vote is not only prudent but better. 

A Martyr For Truth

After Holy Week and the Easter Octave the feasts begin again, and what a wonderful feast today for us in these times: the martyr, Pope St Martin I. Pope St Martin died in exile in the Crimea in the year 655, the last pope (to date) to be martyred.  St Martin died from the harsh treatment that was meted out to him by officials of the Roman state which, though it considered itself Christian, had embrace the Monothelite heresy. As the defender of orthodoxy, Pope Martin fell foul of the emperor, Constans II, and because he refused to change Church teaching to accommodate the heresy he was arrested and exiled. It is also interesting to note that St Martin's election was not approved by the emperor.

There are many lessons to be drawn from St Martin's life and suffering - endurance being one of the most important. But there is also another which is of relevance today and it concerns the unwelcome interference of the State in matters of doctrine and moral teaching. Martin suffered because he would not allow the secular state to redefine who Jesus Christ was. The Monothelite heresy emerged out of a disbelief in the fullness of Christ's humanity, the State approved of that and so sought to coerce the Church to adopt it as official teaching. Martin stood firm. 

Today the state often interferes in matters beyond its competence, the recent push to redefine marriage, family and gender, not just theological issues, but issues of natural law and biology, being a case in point. I have no doubt that if the state is successful in this it will bring untold suffering - not just to Christians who remain true to God and nature (I have no doubt that certain lobby groups will use the full force of the law to persecute orthodox Christians to annihilate all opposition), but also children and even the very people who are pushing for these changes.  While God is forgiving, nature isn't - mess with nature and it will come back at you with devastating results.

The great theologian St Maximus the Confessor was arrested with Pope St Martin and shared many of his trials and sufferings.  As is always the case those who are most articulate, the great defenders of truth and orthodoxy, tend to be taken out, silenced so they cannot speak - Maximus had his tongue cut off. Again we are seeing that today. In Ireland, for example, in the campaign for the gay marriage referendum the articulate defenders of the family, nature and truth are being rounded on by proponents of the change and the media in attempt to silence and demonise any opposition. We are in a very bad place at the moment, the pillars which hold up society are being pummeled by ideologues, if they keep at it, they will crack and collapse and fall down on us all. 

Let us ask Pope St Martin and St Maximus to pray for us in these times.

Pushing The Experiment Through

Breda O'Brien has an interesting article this week in the Irish Times concerning the Children and Family Relationships Bill which the government is pushing through with astonishing haste. The legislation has to be in place before the same sex marriage referendum in May so those opposed to same sex marriage cannot bring up the issue of gay adoption and perhaps win a few votes in favour of natural marriage. Breda, as usual, is direct and hits the nail on the head. I would recommend you read what she has to say, and as you do so say a prayer for her, she is subject to much abuse, attack and even death threats.

This bill is yet another step in the social experiment which is taking place in the West, one which plays around with relationships that nature has already defined. This experiment will eventually fail, Lord knows what the consequences will be, but we can be sure that, as always it will be the vulnerable and voiceless who will suffer - children. In the early decades of the 20th century we had the eugenics movement which allied itself with the sexual revolution and fought to have "reproductive rights" for women enshrined in law. For those rights read abortion, and in enshrining these rights, children suffered - in the name of choice innocent children are killed every day in their tens of thousands. Now they are redefining marriage and relationships, and children will also suffer as the one stable institution in society which protects them - marriage and natural parenthood, is dissolved. As always, all of this is to satisfy adults and their desires, but it is wrapped up in the lie that it is to provide a better life for children.

Looking at the legislation in terms of egg and sperm donation I see we are laying the foundation for a very serious problem in the future: the real possibility of brothers and sisters marrying each other. Apart from the issue of incest, there are the difficulties genetics create when siblings procreate. How can we prevent two people from different parents, but siblings, born of gamete donation from the same donor, and possibly ignorant of their genetic relationship, from marrying? We have to have a way of ensuring that two people seeking to marry are not closely related. I was talking with a priest friend about this and we both concluded that the Church in the not too distant future may need to insist on DNA testing for couples preparing for marriage to make sure they are not siblings. Sound strange? Yes, it does, but we will need to address this problem sooner rather than later. What a tangled web our society is weaving, God help us all.

"Same Sex Marriage" Referendum: The Wording

The government has published the wording of the amendment to the Constitution which will be the subject of May's referendum on "same sex marriage". The wording:

Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.

The government aims to insert it into Article 41.3.1 which speaks of guarding marriage as a means of protecting the family. The article is as follows:

The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

The amendment will be placed at the end of the article to read as follows:

The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack. Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.

As is obvious this referendum will have consequences far beyond what we are being told by the government, the media and the various interest groups pushing it. One of these may well be freedom of religion. If this view of marriage is enshrined in the Constitution can citizens legitimately oppose it, and can Churches defy it, refusing to "marry" same sex couples who come looking for a Church "wedding"? I think the answer to that would be no.  I also think many of those supporting the referendum know that as well - they won't admit it now, but later, when the court cases begin they will try to ensure Churches will forced to comply. And I think some of our esteemed judges will be only to happy to agree with them.

I notice the government will also push through legislation in the Dail - before the referendum, permitting gay couples to adopt children, this is to neutralize the arguments of the proponents of natural marriage concerning children.

We're not in Kansas anymore!

Pope Defends Catholic Teaching, Media Shocked?

Pope Francis has certainly raised a hornet's nest, again. His interview on board the flight back from Manila dealing with, among other things, issues of sexual morality has stunned members of the media. The media and others who share the ideological bent of the left tend to ignore Christian teaching on many other areas, they tend to focus on sex all the time. 

Anyway, Francis revealed, once again, that he supports Blessed Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae which simply reiterates Church teaching on marriage, procreation and life issues, indeed Francis has said that Humanae Vitae is a prophetic document, as indeed it is. The Holy Father's veneration for the work and its author was thoroughly revealed when he beatified Pope Paul last year. The media are not pleased.

The Holy Father's words on so-called "gay marriage", which he has spoken about before, has led to the media here in Ireland going nuts, assuming that this is Francis's (unwelcome) contribution to the debate on the same sex marriage referendum that is due to take place here in May. For all the talk about free speech, here in Ireland we see, and will see with greater intensity, efforts by the usual suspects to prevent reasoned objections to the referendum getting out. As one journalist said recently: the right to free speech does not imply the right to a platform to express it.

Is this the beginning of the end of the liberal media's honeymoon with Francis? Or will they ignore his orthodox teaching and use the ambiguous stuff to push their own agenda. I may be getting cynical in my old age, but I think the latter is more likely. That said, it falls to us, the faithful, to continue to proclaim the Gospel as given. We are at war, people. We didn't start it, but I'm afraid we have to fight it. Our chief weapon is the witness of our lives, then our carefully considered words. And don't forget prayer and fasting, necessary practices when we are facing the evil one and his work.

Here is the full text of the Pope's interview. Caroline Farrow offers some thoughts on one reaction to it.

In The Name Of Tolerance

Please excuse my silence for the last couple of weeks. When I got back from Rome I hit the ground running and there has been little time to blog. Whenever I did have some spare moments I was either too tired to sit at the computer or decided to get some reading done.  So much has happened, particularly in the Church and there was so much one could say, but given the times we are now in great prudence and charity are needed and these come after the passion has passed, reason has had its say and ideas and feelings have percolated. 

Outside the Church there have also been a number of events which deserve reflection. Here in Ireland there is war over water charges. For my readers outside Ireland who are used to paying for your water it seem sound strange that the Irish should have an issue with it, but with the exception of businesses and farmers, few Irish citizens have had to pay for water, there being so much of it here. This is another tax on the backs of people who are already broken financially. There are arguments on both sides which I will not go into here, but suffice to say the government has handled it badly.

One of the more interesting developments in the water tax row is the resignation or threatened resignation of members of Fine Gael, the main government party, over the charge. The cynical are saying these guys are concerned for their seats in parliament and are deserting the ship before it sinks at the next election, hoping they'll get to keep their deckchairs. What I find interesting is that they resign over these water charges, but last year when their government was passing legislation to kill children in the womb these same public representatives had nothing to say, they went along with it, no problems at all, no resignations just excuses. I can only conclude that for them money is more important than human life.

Another issue which is featuring in the media is that of Ashers Bakery in Belfast. As you may know the owners of the Bakery are devout Christians and they refused an order for a cake which was to celebrate same sex marriage and the gay agenda. Those who ordered the cake complained to the Equality Commission and now the Bakery has been told they have to pay compensation or face legal action. Regardless of one's political or religious position, I think this situation is intolerable. For all the talk of tolerance, none is being shown to these Christians who genuinely believed that to make this cake would violate their consciences. 

Some have said that if they have a business, then they cannot refuse someone looking for their services. If that is the case then retail outlets and other businesses cannot put up signs saying they reserve the right to refuse admittance, these signs are pretty common yet no one complains about them. Given such arguments being put forward against Ashers, I wonder, then, would a gay magazine run an advertisement for homosexual conversion therapy? Would an atheist owner of a bookshop be happy to sell bibles and pious Christian books in his store? Would avid Republicans like Sinn Fein stock hagiographical biographies of British monarchs in their shops? By choice none of these would, and they don't: but should they be forced to?  Well, if we are to be consistent then yes they should and the Equality Commission, if it is to be fair, must ensure that they do or take legal action against them. If Ashers are not allowed to remain true to what they believe, then no one should, and that includes advocates of same sex marriage and the gay agenda. 

Our tolerance is measured on how much respect we give to those who disagree with us. It is obvious in this situation that tolerance is one way street and that is no tolerance at all. So up to Belfast everyone and pop into Ashers for a cup of coffee and a slice of cake, time to stand in solidarity with them. 

The Archbishop Responds

As you may know Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco has been under pressure from pro-same sex marriage groups and their supporters not to attend a pro-marriage rally. Among them is Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Minority Leader in the US House of Representatives, a Catholic well known for public support and activism in favour of abortion and other issues which are contrary to Christian teaching. Pelosi rebukes the Archbishop for his decision to go to the rally. In essence the Archbishop is being bullied, a modus operandi which is commonplace among militant advocates for gay rights.

Well the archbishop has responded with a well written letter (link here) in which he openly states a number of facts Pelosi and her colleagues like to ignore, among them the very bullying pro-marriage people and organisations have had to endure these past few years. 

The Archbishop is no stranger to attack. Friends in San Francisco tell me that he is constantly under pressure from civil authorities, organisations and individuals both within and outside the Church, who try to force him to abandon Christian teaching on life and sexuality. There is a great deal of opposition to his governance of the Archdiocese even among the clergy, some of whom would identify more with the Church enemies than her friends. While he is aptly called Cordileone - lion heart, he needs our prayers, as do all faithful bishops who struggle and often suffer to proclaim the Gospel and guide the flock along the right road.

That said, I wonder when the Church is going to deal with prominent Catholics who have spent their lives publicly defying Catholic teaching, bullying faithful bishops, priests and people and faithful organisations, and yet proclaim they are Catholics in good standing and march up to receive the Eucharist every chance they get. Whether some in authority in the Church would like to admit it or not there is now a serious case of scandal, quite apart from desecration, which needs to be addressed. So far few in authority have dealt with it. Charity and unity are often cited, but I sometimes wonder is it more a case of cowardice and convenience?

Next Item On The Agenda: Gay Marriage

 

As expected the Irish government has announced that it will hold a referendum on gay marriage, but will wait until the Spring of 2015 for the poll.   Given the government's bruising result in the Senate referendum and the uneasy feeling among many Irish citizens over the issue of gay marriage, I imagine they are holding off to build up support and work on the electorate.  It will also allow the media to get its campaign up and running.  So I presume over the next year or so we will be exposed to lots of pro-gay stories and media pieces, hear a lot about equality and no doubt Pope Francis's remarks on the plane back from World Youth Day will be rehearsed time and again to convince the "devout Irish" that the Pope backs gay marriage.  I guess we should also expect outright, vicious attacks on those who oppose the referendum and I'm sure the media will be digging deep to get some scandal to undermine the Catholic Church again. 

 

Yesterday evening Bishop Denis Nulty issued a statement with regard to the referendum.  It is very clear and indicates that the Church will be actively opposing the proposal.  Here is the statement in full:

Bishop Denis Nulty statement on the decision by Cabinet today to hold a referendum on same sex ‘marriage’ in 2015

The debate at the heart of the referendum announced today by the Government is not about equality or about the false separation of a religious view of marriage from the civil view of marriage. It is about the very nature of marriage itself and the importance society places on the role of mothers and fathers in bringing up children. With others, the Catholic Church will continue to hold that the differences between a man and woman are not accidental to marriage but fundamental to it and that children have a natural right to a mother and a father and that this is the best environment for them where possible.

Married love is a unique form of love between a man and woman which has a special benefit for the whole of society. With others of no particular religious view, the Church regards the family based on marriage between a woman and a man as the single most important institution in any society. To change the nature of marriage would be to undermine it as the fundamental building block of our society. The Church will therefore participate fully in the democratic debate leading up to the referendum and will seek with others to reaffirm the rational basis for holding that marriage should be reserved for the unique and complimentary relationship between a woman and a man from which the generation and upbringing of children is uniquely possible.

As Christians our primary commandment is to love. Love always demands that we respect the dignity of every human person. That is why the Catholic Church clearly teaches that people who are homosexual must always be treated with sensitivity, compassion and respect. It is not lacking in sensitivity or respect for people who are homosexual however to point out that same-sex relationships are fundamentally different from opposite sex relationships and that society values the complementary roles of mothers and fathers in the generation and up-bringing of children.

ENDS



 

I presume the Catholic Church will be the only Christian Church to argue against gay marriage.  Seeing as the Church of Ireland and other Christian ecclesial communities backed the abortion bill they will also back this proposed change to marriage.  In such matters the Church tends to be the only voice proclaiming the truth.

 

Another battle has begun, and the crucial skirmish in this battle is that of getting the truth out.  Proponents of the change will try and paint the Church as homophobic, preaching a message of hate.  They will ignore the Church's pastoral concern for same sex attracted people and her condemnation of discrimination against them, they will also ignore the Church's often hidden ministry to those homosexuals dying of AIDS: men often abandoned who have nowhere to turn but find attentive care and a dignified death in Catholic hospitals, hospices and institutions.   The message the Church teaches is clear - we must love those with a homosexual orientation and show true compassion, but it is not compassionate to change the fundamental block of society in order to facilitate people's desires. This change to marriage will have devastating consequences for our society and our children in the years and generations to come.

 

Here is a piece from the Iona Institute on the referendum.   With regards to marriage in general, here is a very good piece on what marriage is and isn't: for one thing marriage isn't about "me".

Shroud Authentic?

 

One of the last things Pope Emeritus Benedict did before abdicating was to order a brief exposition of the Shroud of Turin for Holy Saturday.  Although it will not be a major public event, I think only a selected number of people will actually view it - groups of sick people and the young among them, Benedict's order includes live transmission of the exposition and a visual recording so the whole world can join in. 

 

This comes at an appropriate time, not only because it is the Triduum, but a new investigation by scientists at the University of Padua has revealed that the Shroud dates from a period between 300 BC and 400 AD, increasing the chances of its being authentic.   This overturns the carbon dating tests which dated the cloth to the Middle Ages.  This is good news.  While our faith does not depend on the authenticity of any relic, the Shroud offers us a profound meditation on the passion and death of the Lord.  It is also a frontier where science and faith work together, undermining the secularist myth that the two are incompatible an that the Church rejects scientific research. 

 

In other news: there was an extraordinary statement from the Irish Bishops in response to the government's plans to introduce gay marriage in Ireland.  The Bishops in their submission to the Constitutional Convention (a group of people who have been empowered by the government to look at the Constitution and see what needs updating, scrapping or rewriting) they have indicated that if marriage is redefined and gay marriage introduced, the Catholic Church will no longer assist or facilitate the civil aspect of Catholic weddings. 

 

At the moment we priests conduct the civil aspects for those couples we marry in Catholic ceremonies - that will cease if the government goes ahead with its plans.  Apart from a taking a stance, it will inconvenience the State: we save the government money as we cover most weddings.   If the Church withdraws the State will have to provide more registrars as Catholic couples will have to attend a separate civil ceremony as well as the Catholic one.

 

I note the media, as ever, stretch to present the story in as negative a light as possible for the Church - I note the Independent describes the action as a "boycott".  It is not boycotting, it is no longer extending a favour to the State, one which, given the growing call for complete separation of Church and State, may well be long overdue.  

 

Despite its aggressive attitude towards the Church in recent years, the State actually depends on the Catholic Church in many areas of life.  For one thing, it depends on our charitable works to help the poor.   Working with a Catholic charity I often come across government officials sending poor people to us to supplement their income when government benefits fall short of the needs of individuals and families.   You don't hear about that in parliament.

Eight Hundred And Two New Saints On The Way!

Pope Benedict is calling a consistory to vote on the Causes of eight hundred and two Beati which will see the way clear for their canonisation later this year.  Two of the Beati are nuns, but for once the holy nuns are outnumbered with the advancing of the Cause of Blessed Antonio Primaldo and his 799 companions, the Martyrs of Otranto.  

Blessed Antonio was a tailor, a man advanced in years we are told, when the city was invaded by Muslims in 1480.   The men of the city were promised their lives if they converted to Islam, but encouraged by Blessed Antonio, they remained firm.  After the fall of the city following a brutal siege, they barricaded themselves into the cathedral and prepared for martyrdom.  The siege and this further inconvenience for the Muslims actually helped save Italy as news of the invasion had time to get out and armies could prepare for battle as the Turks tried to ferret out the men.  In the end, the cathedral was breached, and the men taken to the Hill of Minerva where they were all beheaded.  According to one account a Catholic priest helped the Turks and tried to persuade the men to abandon their Christian faith. 

A contemporary document reports what happened, singling Blessed Antonio out for his heroism.  Here is an extract:

And turning to the Christians, Primaldo spoke these words: ‘My brothers, until today we have fought in defence of our homeland, to save our lives, and for our earthly governors; now it is time for us to fight to save our souls for our Lord. And since he died on the cross for us, it is fitting that we should die for him, remaining firm and constant in the faith, and with this earthly death we will earn eternal life and the glory of martyrdom.’ At these words, all began to shout with one voice and with great fervour that they wanted to die a thousand times, by any sort of death, rather than renounce Christ.

Antonio, for his obstinacy was the first to die, but accounts say his headless body refused to fall to the ground and remained standing until the last person had been martyred despite attempts by Muslim soldiers to pull it to the ground.  As another account relates:

All of them repeated their profession of the faith and the generous response they had given at first, so the tyrant commanded that the decapitation should proceed, and, before the others, the head of the elderly Primaldo should be cut off. Primaldo was hateful to him, because he never stopped acting as an apostle toward his fellows. And before placing his head upon the stone, he told his companions that he saw heaven opened and the comforting angels; that they should be strong in the faith and look to heaven, already open to receive them. He bowed his head and it was cut off, but his corpse stood back up on its feet, and despite the efforts of the butchers, it remained erect and unmoving, until all were decapitated. The marvelous and astonishing event would have been a lesson of salvation for those infidels, if they had not been rebels against the light that enlightens every man who lives in the world. Only one of the butchers, named Berlabei, believed courageously in the miracle and, declaring himself a Christian in a loud voice, was condemned to be impaled.

The relics of the 800 martyrs are enshrined in the cathedral in Ortanto.  We do not know the names of the other martyrs so the cult will probably be centred on Antonio as the main representative of the group.   I see Wikipedia offers names for a few others: Archbishop Stefano Agricoli who was the Archbishop of Otranto, Bishop Stefano Pendinelli, and Count Francesco Zurlo who was the commander of the garrison.

During his visit to Otranto, as he honoured the martyrs on the site of their deaths, now renamed the “Hill of Martyrs”, Blessed John Paul II, reflecting on their sacrifice, remarked: “Let us not forget the martyrs of our times. Let us not behave as if they did not exist.”

In news today.  I am constantly amazed at coincidences when it comes to the government and controversial legislation.  In the past few years the various reports on child abuse have an uncanny knack of being released at inopportune moments for the Church. Take the release of the report on the infamous Magdalen Laundries –which is due to be released tomorrow, and you’ll never guess what is also happening tomorrow – according to the Irish Independent, the proposed changes to the abortion laws goes before the Cabinet!  Isn’t that just amazing?  Now I would never presume to think that all this is planned, after all those who govern our country are paradigms of virtue and integrity, they keep their promises and there is not an opportunistic bone in any other their bodies.  As they would no doubt confirm, this is all just one big coincidence. 

Interesting news from the UK: the bones found beneath a car park in Leicester are indeed the remains of King Richard III.  His physical handicap, denied by some historians, has been confirmed.  One question has been solved: Where was his grave?  However others remain unanswered – did he kill the princes in the tower?  Was he as bad as he is painted? 

Some are also asking: will he be given a funeral according to his faith?  Richard was a Roman Catholic, but he will be buried in an Anglican cathedral probably with an Anglican service: is this appropriate?  Some think not – they believe he should be given a Catholic Requiem Mass and burial according to Catholic Rites. I would be inclined to agree with them.  We cannot alter history – just as we could not give Martin Luther a Catholic reburial, since he was a Lutheran at this death, Catholic Richard should not be given a Protestant reburial.   No offence intended to the Church of England, but it would be best to respect the beliefs of the deceased.  

Finally, it seems David Cameron’s days may well be numbered.  The forthcoming vote on gay marriage may well see the majority of his party (180 MPs including four members of his cabinet) vote against it, and perhaps may lead to another vote on his leadership.  William Oddie has an interesting article on this issue here.   We should commend the courage of the members of the Conservative Party for their steadfast position on marriage.  It would be great if members of the Fine Gael party here, both elected representatives and grassroots members, took such a stand against Enda Kenny as he seeks to legalise the killing of the unborn.  We can but pray and hope.

Saintly Master, Master of Saints

Oh to be in Turin today!   The festivities at the Basilica of Mary, Help of Christians will, no doubt, be wonderful as the Salesians celebrate the feast of St John Bosco.  I remember with fondness the Fraternity pilgrimage to Turin for the Exposition of the Holy Shroud a few years ago when we also had the joy of visiting the Basilica and venerating the sacred remains of Don Bosco and of celebrating Holy Mass in the crypt - it was wonderful.  Anyone who has visited the Basilica can testify to its air of prayerfulness and beauty. 

Don Bosco was a most remarkable man as you all know.  He was a fervent apostolic figure, founding the Salesians, writing and serving the young, but he was also a mystic, experiencing various visions and dreams many of which proved to be prophetic and of great assistance to many, particularly today.   He must be one of the first saints to be photographed so much - we have lots of photos and these appear to reveal a hearty soul in love with life. 

There was something extraordinary about him and many who knew him acknowledged it.  But are we surprised?  He was surrounded by Saints and he helped produce Saints.  His mother is on the path to beatification, priest friends who formed him have already been canonised - St Joseph Cafasso being one.  His next door neighbour in Turin is a Saint - St Joseph Cottolengo.  Two of his students have been canonised: St Dominic Savio and St Luigi Orione.  His co-foundress is also canonised, St Mary Mazzarello, and some of his companions in the Society are on the way to canonisation, Blessed Michael Rua being one. So Don Bosco and sanctity seem to go hand in hand: he lived in a community of holiness - surely that is the best example for all of us since we are all called to live in a community of holiness where each is to be sanctified.

There is a wonderful story about Don Bosco and St Joseph Cottolengo which shows the holy trust in God of the latter and the holy resourcefulness of the former.  St Joseph founded the Little House of Divine Providence where he cared for the poor of Turin.  In his deep trust, he resolved to end the day penniless and allow divine providence provide for the next.  So each night before he went to bed he took what was left of the finances, put them in a bag and threw it out the window for some poor soul who might be passing.  Of course there was a poor soul passing, and he passed every evening at that particular time waiting for the bag of money to be tossed out - Don Bosco!   St Joseph's "excess" was put to good use for the boys, and each morning the Little House of Divine Providence found enough money to get it through the day with a little left over for its holy founder to toss out the window later that night.

At the moment relics of Don Bosco are circling the globe as part of the preparations for the bicentenary of his birth which will take place in 2015.  That will be some year as it is also the 500th anniversary of our foundress's birth.    The relics will visit our diocese in March, so we look forward to that.

In other news.  Mary O'Regan has an excellent article on the struggle for life here in Ireland: she reflects on Enda Kenny and the difficulties he is creating not only within Irish society, but also within his party.  Yet, he has done the pro-life movement a service in uniting them.  For years there were tensions between the groups which was sad because there are wonderful, committed and gifted people in each of the pro-life organisations.  Now they see we have a common enemy and they have decided to work together and, I hope, they are reconciled and their differences will be overcome.   The fruit of their reconciliation is the powerful campaign which is emerging from their working together. 

We have a long, hard struggle ahead of us so strong bonds must be formed between the various groups to create a powerful pro-life movement in Ireland, one which is so strong that it will be able to face any challenge that comes.  There is another important thing - they also need to listen to each other - they all have something to learn from each other.  Between them they have huge experience be it legal, social, medical, in terms of lobbying and indeed in terms of dealing with persecution as some pro-life people have been arrested.  Public order Acts have been used against pro-life protesters in the past and we can be sure they may well be used again - pro-abortion Taoiseachs, ministers, TDs and senators may well try to quash opposition as they attempt to impose an "Elizabethan settlement" following the passing of legislation. 

Here is a very good article on how the Archbishop of Trieste coped when he was confined to his house when it was surrounded by pro-gay marriage supporters - he took the opportunity to sit back, relax and read a good book!   There is a lesson for all of us there.  The protesters accused him of homophobia and racism because he upholds the universal truth that marriage is between a man and woman.  Now could someone please tell me where the racism comes in.  How is it racist?  I thought we defined maleness and femaleness in terms of gender/sex not race.  But it all just goes to show you that logic and common sense have been eradicated in these gender wars.  In related news, it seems as things get hotter in the US Bishops have said that they are prepared to go to prison rather than accept Obama's Mandate.   It's like the early days of the Church again as Christians are being persecuted by secular authorities because they will not violate their consciences. 

And finally, in these days Germany is reflecting on Hitler's rise to power which took place eighty years ago this year with his appointment as Chancellor in 1933.  The present Chancellor, Angela Merkel spoke of how the ordinary German people permitted this rise if not by actual support, certainly by their tolerance.  Of course not all remained silent: many voices rose in opposition to Hitler and a number of them were Catholic.  The great Lion of Munster, Blessed Clemens von Galen preached against the Nazis and suffered for it.  Many Catholic priests and religious were interned in concentration camps and murdered because they would not cooperate with the regime and defied it.  Simple actions like hanging a crucifix was enough to raise the wrath of the Nazis and bring a death sentence on your head as Blessed Restituta Kafka found out.  There are many lessons to be learned from this period of history and unfortunately we see history repeating itself now in our modern society and few take any notice.  I sometimes wonder if human beings are not just a little bit thick - it seems so difficult for us, and particularly those in power, to learn from the mistakes of the past.  I suppose we can put that down to Original Sin. 

The Question Of Civil Disobedience

Fr Ray Blake has a very interesting post on his blog today: on the issue of civil disobedience. I note with interest one person is horrified that a priest should be discussing such issues and left a comment to express their disgust.  However, it is a legitimate topic for discussion, and as the secular/pro-abortion/pro-gay lobbies begin to squeeze Christians out of the public square (and into prisons?), the question of civil disobedience is one we need to look at, not merely from a practical point of view, but from a Christian/theological  point of view.

Can we as Christians participate in non-violent civil disobedience?  We know we cannot get involved in violence, nor stir it up, nor condone it; but civil disobedience is bigger than raw violence.

Fr Blake offers us some interesting examples of what were, at various times, examples of such disobedience: St Edmund Campion printing and distributing copies of his "Brag"; St Laurence defying the emperor when he ordered the Church to hand over its valuables.   Some might say these examples are not really civil disobedience, so I have another, more contemporary example: Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat to a white person when she broke the law and sat in the whites only section of a bus.  Surely if she was a Christian she would have turned the other cheek, relinquished the seat and worked for equality through less aggressive means?  In fact the whole civil rights movement in the US offers us interesting examples of Christians, black and white, engaged in civil disobedience as they fought American apartheid.

I am only asking questions and reflecting, and it is something we need to do, not to plan such actions, but to recognise the limits - where we as Christians must not go.  There are some who believe we should not march or attend rallies, but instead just pray and trust in God.  Yes, prayer and trusting in God is vital, but there is the danger of falling into quietism there: God also expects us to act, to witness. The question is: how shall we do that? 

This is a question for us now as we in Ireland face the stark reality of the introduction of abortion into our country.  And there is the forthcoming issue of gay marriage and the real possibility that Churches may well be forced to conduct them.   A new civil rights issue is now emerging: that of religious freedom and we are now challenged with a simple question: how shall we respond?  Let us not forget that one day adherence to Rome may well constitute an act of civil disobedience; and the preaching of the unedited Gospel may well be such an act too.  As it is priests are under severe pressure not to speak on certain issues for fear of offending people - we are advised to sanitise, dilute or excise some of Christ's teachings.  Given the challenges we now face I do think we need to look Stateside to see how pro-life groups work there, but we also need to look at our own political situation here. 

Thanks to Fr Blake for raising such interesting questions.

Our Brave New Ireland

Last year Britain faced one of its most serious challenges to public order in a generation (or two) when riots broke out all over England.  Supposedly the response to an alleged racist incident, it was quickly seen to be an anarchic melee where people took the opportunity to commit acts of vandalism, break into shops and steal whatever they could lay their hands on.  People died as human beings turned to brutes and savaged anyone who got in their way.

Last Saturday at a concert in the Phoenix Park in Dublin, young people ran amok high on drugs and alcohol, having sex in public and attacking each other.  Three people are dead, nine were stabbed, a number had bottles broken over their heads and numerous others had to be treated for a variety of injuries, including one young man who was so badly beaten he cannot now recall whether he was punched or kicked by a crowd of rowdies. A young woman is also missing.

In Britain, the political elite stood on their perches and scratched their heads, our lot here will do the same.  "What happened?" we'll hear concerned parties ask, the same people who helped create the very anarchy that broke out on the streets and in the park.  What happened?  Their permissive political, sexual and societal agenda with its emphasis on untrammeled individual freedom and attempts to distort the natural law and morality - the very "social revolution" that has been so dear to the hearts of the 60's generation and their ideological offspring - that's what happened.  A generation of naive, anti-Christian ideologues who ignored the reality of God and the existence of original sin, now have had the door swung back in their faces and they are clueless as to why it has happened.

Compare all this with an interview that took place on Pat Kenny's radio show this morning (Donum Vitae has a post with a link to the discussion).  The topic was gay marriage and Kenny had our friend David Quinn of the Iona Institute debating with Senator Ivana Bacik.  Bacik is perhaps one of our most liberal and anti-Christian public representatives.    Bacik, taking the cue from her party leader, Eamonn Gilmore who said that the issue of gay marriage was the civil rights issue of our time, was calling for gay marriage to become a reality in Ireland.  David Quinn was pointing out the damage such a measure would cause, not merely to society, but to the children of our country.  As always David quoted statistics as evidence to support his argument and, as always, Bacik ignored them and made her demands.

When asked by David and then Kenny, was it not the ideal that a child should grow up with their father and mother, Bacik's response just dismissed it - as long as children had "access" to adults of both sexes they would be fine.    Here is the very attitude which is leading to the collapse of our society - an ideological position which creates unstable relationships which benefit only adults in search of fulfilment and pleasure and says: "The kids will be OK". 

Well, the kids are not OK, the kids are miserable, unsocialised, looking for love and finding only confusion.  The kids see adults making gods of their individual freedom and desires and so they aim to do the same.  Accepting no responsibility, they do what they want to do and will not allow anyone stand in their way, after all isn't that what the adults to whom they have "access" teach them by their own behaviour?  Permissive secular individualism is a failure and it is creating a dangerous society.  What started with the coupling of free love of the sixties and the ideological ranting of the left, will end in the birth of a monster.

As serious students of history will tell you, history repeats itself, and those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.  Civilisations rose and they fell.  Rome, once a great empire, politically and culturally, fell to the barbarian which overran it.  Decadent Rome was, by then, no match for the hordes when they came bashing their tree trucks at the city gates.  It is a lesson for every civilization.  In conversations with history buffs over the years I have asked, when this civilisation falls, who will be the conquering barbarian?  Some suggested it would be the Muslims: a new Islamic empire would rise where the West once had been.  I'm not so sure.  I think the barbarian is within - we saw them in the UK last August and in the park on Saturday.  Our decadent civilisation need not fear the hordes outside the West, they are being created from within by a dangerous social experiment.

And one might ask, where is the Church in all of this?  Well, as we see from history the Church converted the barbarian and this gave rise to a new flowering of civilisation symbolised most potently by Charlemagne.  Can the Church convert the new barbarian?  Well, we might have a chance.  After all these barbarians have had little or no exposure to Christianity - the last two generations have been badly catechised, and the ideology of these times tells them they don't need God or religion, but yet deep in their hearts they are starving for something - for meaning, for the spiritual.  That hunger will grow when drugs, alcohol and sex lose their effects, when they start asking questions and the adults they have access to will not be able to answer them.   If this civilisation ends in ruins, can the Church like Our Lord walk through the broken tombs and tame the demoniacs?

I think that is what Blessed John XXIII may have seen in his calling the Second Vatican Council, what Blessed John Paul II saw as he promulgated the New Evangelisation - what Pope Benedict XVI sees as he teaches from the Chair of Peter.  The Church must be ready and full of evangelical zeal, not to waste time on fighting with the ideologues, but to present the vision of Jesus Christ and the salvation he offers humanity - to present the vision of a restored humanity at one with God in the communion of the Church - the family of faith, to the generations that are coming.  

I'm not saying we don't challenge the establishment or resign our position in the public square: we do not, we should continue to be a thorn in the side of those who try to silence us.  But we need also to stand back, take stock, and begin to plan our campaign.  We have not heard it in a long time, but, pushing all the nonsense language to one side, the Church is in the business of saving souls, and that's what she should be planning to do.  This is not heaven down here, but we need to start rebuilding a civilisation of faith and love here and now - a place, a community to capture the attention and hearts of the barbarians.