Dublin's Fair City as seen by the Cardinal-archbishop of New York

Dublin’s Fair City as seen by the Cardinal-Archbishop of New York.

I hope that Cardinal Egan of New York won’t mind my using his column of 14 August in Catholic New York in which he responded to the gentle rebuke of a member of his diocese for not having written anything about a recent visit to my native city. As a ‘Dub’ I am very encouraged by the Cardinal’s observations. I’ll highlight parts of the article and (add some notes).


A Dublin Tour



Each week I join Mr. Rob Astorino for a one-hour program on the Catholic Channel, No. 159, of Sirius Satellite Radio. Rob is the program director of the channel and acts as my interlocutor for the show, which is aired on Thursdays at 1 p.m., Saturdays at 6 a.m., Sundays at 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. and Mondays at midnight. The format of what we have come to call "A Conversation With the Cardinal" includes a different theme each week having to do with Theology, Sacred Scripture, Church History or even Canon Law; a discussion of liturgies and events in which I have been involved as Archbishop of New York; and the answering of questions that listeners pose in letters, telephone calls and especially e-mail.


Some weeks ago I reported that I had been in Rome for meetings at the Vatican and later in Dublin for some days of prayer and reflection. Shortly thereafter I received a letter from a man living in one of the upper counties of the Archdiocese with a very courteously expressed complaint. He reminded me that, when I go away from New York for whatever reason, I usually describe on "A Conversation With the Cardinal" what I have seen and heard. "You were in Rome and you told of your visit to the church where St. Paul had been held prisoner, and you told it both on Sirius Satellite Radio and in an article in Catholic New York. But not a word about your days in Dublin. How about an article about 'Dublin's Fair City' in Catholic New York? With a name like 'Egan' you have to have Irish blood in your veins."


I examined my conscience and concluded that my correspondent was 100 percent correct. Here is an effort to make amends.


The doctor who replaced my left knee some years ago told me that I should try to take a walk each day to keep the legs in shape and the knee in operation. In New York this is not easy to do because of an overcrowded calendar. In Dublin, however, I followed the doctor's orders, made my way on foot to a church or shrine each day, and came away from all of them both informed and inspired.
< /div>One Sunday, having celebrated Mass very early in the morning, I walked over to St. Mary's Pro-Cathedral for Mass there at 8 o'clock. The two historic cathedrals of Dublin—St. Patrick's and Christ Church—were taken over by the Established Anglican Church in the 1500s; and it was not until early in the 1800s that the Catholics were permitted to build another for themselves. (This was after the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 in the UK, which at the time included the whole of Ireland.) It was to be on O'Connell Street, one of the principal thoroughfares of the City. This, however, was disallowed by the Protestant establishment. Hence, it is located on Marlborough Street in a less elegant area known as "Monto." (Note: Marlborough St is just behind O’Connell St, the main thoroughfare in Dublin.)

As the Mass was about to conclude, a priest approached the podium to announce that the Pro-Cathedral's celebrated Palestrina Choir, which once included the great Irish tenor, John McCormack, was on vacation. Its place at the 10:30 Mass would be taken, he said, by the Chorus of the City of Dublin. I decided to stay for yet another liturgy.

The pews of the imposing edifice were two-thirds full for the 8 o'clock Mass and packed for the 10:30. I was deeply taken by every element of the celebration. The ceremonies were dignified, the homily was insightful and the choir was a delight. Indeed, the music was so outstanding that, at the conclusion of the final chorus, the congregation broke into applause. (I think we should try to avoid applause in church, though in this case it was when everything was over.) What impressed me most, however, was the age of the congregation. I had been led to expect only gray heads. Such, however, was not the case. Men and women in their 20s, 30s and 40s were the majority, many with children in tow. When I returned to where I was staying, the morning newspaper featured the priestly ordination of three young men in the Pro-Cathedral the day before. I could not imagine a more encouraging climax to my visit to St. Mary's.

The Carmelite Church known as Whitefriar St was another destination of my daily walks. It is immense and most deserving of a visit from anyone coming to Dublin. In the 16th century, it was seized by King Henry VIII and closed until 1827, when the Carmelite Fathers, the "Whitefriars," reopened and renovated it. I attended a noon Mass there one weekday. Well over 200 men and women were at prayer in a lovely liturgy made doubly moving by a homily that focused on St. Benedict of Norcia, the founder of Western monasticism and the saint of the day.

On the right aisle as I entered, I discovered with delight a mammoth shrine, the centerpiece of which is a tall, carved-oak statue of the Madonna that is alleged to be the only such image to have escaped the onslaughts of King Henry and his successors. As I was about to move into a pew, however, my attention was caught by another less impressive shrine on the opposite wall, the centerpiece of which is a stand into which a relic of St. Valentine given to the church by Pope Gregory XVI in 1837 has been inserted and above which one finds a brightly painted statue of the saint. (See my blog entry for 7 February.) Next to the stand is a table on which is placed a large, open book, bound in leather and accompanied by a sign inviting the faithful to write a prayer to St. Valentine in the book. There were several such prayers written on the page before me. One, however, that was printed on a scrap of paper and inserted into the book's binding was of particular note. It read: "Holy Saint, help me thank the Lord for my wonderful wife." When the Mass was over, I passed a long line of men and women waiting to go to Confession and moved out into the street. The sun was shining, the prayer to St. Valentine was still ringing in my mind's ear, and all seemed right with the world.

Trinity College is neither a church nor a shrine. It is, however, built on land once owned by Augustinian monks and in 1592 confiscated by order of Queen Elizabeth I. What no Catholic visitor to this institution of learning, whose students are now largely Catholic, will want to miss is to be found in the building known as the "Old Library." It is the "Book of Kells," one of the oldest books in the world, dated around 800 and containing the four Gospels, Prefaces for Masses and other assorted prayers—all in Latin and embellished with some of the most intricate decorations anyone could imagine. I went to see it, first and foremost, for reasons spiritual, since one cannot look at its pages without sensing that they are prayers in art and a testament to a most profound love for the Word of God. (The photo shows the opening of St John's Gospel.)

The volume is made up of 680 pages and was produced in the Monastery of St. Columcille on the Island of Iona. Early in the 800s it was taken to County Meath in Ireland, where it was stolen in 1007. Found buried three months later, it was restored and finally brought to Trinity College in 1654. Two pages were open for me to see. The most elaborately decorated was the title page of the Gospel of St. Matthew, containing three Greek letters for "Christos," that is, "Christ." They are painted in bright orange, yellow and red and are so full of details that the eye does not know where to settle. Embellished with images of angels, animals and flowers of various kinds, they powerfully proclaim an indomitable reverence for what our God has shared with us in the Scriptures and in the prayers of His Church.

Shortly before leaving Dublin, a priest friend told me that I absolutely had to visit the Kilmainham Gaol (Jail), the infamous institution in which so many Irish men and women were held and killed because of love of and loyalty to their land and their faith. "Take the tour," he said, "and at the first stop you will see why this place is a 'must' for a Catholic, and especially a Catholic priest."

He was right on target. For the first room to which our group was taken by the very articulate and very Catholic guide was a windowless chapel whose altar and other liturgical appurtenances had been fashioned out of wood by prisoners who were being ferociously mistreated and in not a few instances slowly starved to death.

Two young men from the United States in jackets announcing the university they were attending or had attended went down on their knees when the guide finished her description of the place, made the Sign of the Cross and remained kneeling with their heads bowed. Three others followed suit, as did I. In all frankness, I must confess that I listened to the rest of the tour with a certain indifference. For I did not want to lose the sense of deep-down holiness that had suddenly taken hold. Thankfully, it remained with me as we left the last stop of the tour, an exercise yard where, after the Easter Rising of 1916, a host of Ireland's most beloved heroes were executed. There was nothing in the yard apart from two black crosses, one of which marked where 12 rebel commanders were killed leaning against a pile of sacks and the second marking where the celebrated James Connolly, sick unto death, was killed while strapped to a chair. They spoke volumes about so much pain borne by so many for so long.

I left the Gaol in haste so as to visit one of the non-Catholic Cathedrals, Christ Church. The reason was my desire to say a prayer near the reliquary that is said to contain the heart of St. Lawrence O'Toole, who became the first Archbishop of Dublin in 1162, attended the Third Lateran Ecumenical Council in Rome, and gallantly defended the rights and interests of the Church against the intrusions of King Henry II. As I waited to pay for a book about the saint that I was purchasing for the pastor of St. Lawrence O'Toole parish in Brewster, New York, I caught sight of a rather large area for the sale of religious goods on my right. Hanging on the longest wall were dozens upon dozens of rosaries of all colors and sizes. I could not help but suspect that St. Lawrence was often amused by the spectacle from his place in heaven. Certainly, I was, from my place in "Dublin's Fair—and Holy—City."


Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

Thank you, Cardinal Egan!

Aechbishop of New York confronts House Speaker

The bishops of the USA seem to be finding their voice in speaking the truth about abortion. Here is a statement by Edward Cardinal Egan, Archbishop of New York Though the message is politce, 'the gloves are off'. Speaker Pelosi passes herself off as a Catholic, like the Democrat VP candidate, Senator Joseph Biden.

I've highlighted parts of the Cardinal's statement.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 26, 2008

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

The Church is often criticized as being 'anti-science' etc. It's good to see Church leaders show up the pro-abortion 'liberals' as the neanderthals that they are when it comes to knowledge of science.

Archbishop Chaput and Bishop Saltarelli on dignity of human life

This is the address of Archbishop Charles Chaput OFM Cap of Denver, Colorado, at a Pro-Life Prayer Vigil outside Planned Parenthood of Stapleton, CO, 25 August 2008, the day the Democratic Party convention began in Denver.

One of the other speakers was Dr Alveda C. King, the niece of Dr Martin Luther King.

The future of a community, a people, a Church and a nation depends on the children who will inherit it.

If we prevent our children from being born, we remove ourselves from the future. It's really that simple.

No children, no future.

Here in America, and especially here tonight, we need to remember two basic truths.

Here's the first truth. Society has an obligation - and Christians have a Gospel duty -- to provide adequate and compassionate support for unwed and abandoned mothers; women facing unintended pregnancies; and women struggling with the aftermath of an abortion. It's not enough to talk about "prolife politics." The label "prolife" demands that we work to ensure social policies that will protect young woman and families, and help them generously in their need. In the Archdiocese of Denver we try very hard to do that through the Gabriel Project and other forms of outreach and support. But much more needs to be done. And we will cooperate with anyone of good will who wants to pursue that vital work.

Here's the second truth. Killing an unborn child is never the right answer to a woman's or society's problems. Acts of violence create a culture of violence -- and abortion is the most intimate form of violence there is. It wounds the woman, it kills the unborn child and it poisons the roots of justice and charity that bind us all into one human family.

Or to put it in the words of the great Protestant pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

"Destruction of the embryo in the mother's womb is a violation of the right to live which God has
bestowed on this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent human being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder."

Planned Parenthood is the largest single provider of abortion and family suppression services in the United States. This facility in this minority neighborhood should offend every African-American and Latino family, and all of us, because every child lost to abortion here subtracts one more life, one more universe of possibilities and talent, from the future of this community. Every time Planned Parenthood provides propaganda, pills or medical procedures to teens without parental permission, it undermines the Black and Latino family. The business of Planned Parenthood is the prevention of the future – and business is good, and very profitable, at the expense of this community.

I've been a great admirer of Dr. Alveda King for many years. She does the memory and legacy of her extraordinary uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, proud -- and it's a great blessing to be with her tonight.

We're very grateful that she's willing to bring her message here to Denver at this critical moment in the life of our country. I'm also very grateful for the many African-American pastors who do such powerful work inspiring their congregations about the sacredness of human life, and anchoring their people in respect for the dignity of all life, from the unborn child to the elderly and poor.

And I'm also delighted to greet my brother in the ministry, Bishop James Conley, who also joins us tonight despite his own demanding schedule.

Finally, I want to thank you all for being here tonight despite your many other obligations. The hope of our Denver community resides in all of you, and especially your unselfish love for children and commitment to the sanctity of human life. May God bless all of you and your families.

Bishop-emeritus Michael Angelo Saltarelli of Wilmington, Delaware, the diocese of Democrat Vice-presidential candidate Senator Joseph Biden, a self-proclaimed Mass-going, rosary-carrying 'Catholic' who pushes abortion, composed the following litany four years ago in honour of St Thomas More (1478-1535), martyr and patron saint of statesmen, politicians and lawyers so that his people would pray for their politicians.

V. Lord, have mercy
R. Lord have mercy
V. Christ, have mercy
R. Christ have mercy
V. Lord, have mercy
R. Lord have mercy
V. Christ hear us
R. Christ, graciously hear us

V. St. Thomas More, Saint and Martyr,
R. Pray for us (Repeat after each invocation)

St. Thomas More, Patron of Statesmen, Politicians and Lawyers
St. Thomas More, Patron of Justices, Judges and Magistrates

St. Thomas More, Model of Integrity and Virtue in Public and Private Life
St. Thomas More, Servant of the Word of God and the Body and Blood of Christ
St. Thomas More, Model of Holiness in the Sacrament of Marriage
St. Thomas More, Teacher of his Children in the Catholic Faith
St. Thomas More, Defender of the Weak and the Poor
St. Thomas More, Promoter of Human Life and Dignity

V. Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world
R. Spare us O Lord
V. Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world
R. Graciously hear us O Lord
V. Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world
R. Have mercy on us

Let us pray:

O Glorious St. Thomas More, Patron of Statesmen, Politicians, Judges and Lawyers, your life of prayer and penance and your zeal for justice, integrity and firm principle in public and family life led you to the path of martyrdom and sainthood. Intercede for our Statesmen, Politicians, Judges and Lawyers, that they may be courageous and effective in their defense and promotion of the sanctity of human life - the foundation of all other human rights. We ask this through Christ our Lord.

R. Amen.

You can find a comprehensive interview with Bishop Saltarelli at Ignatius Insight .

Some

extracts.

IgnatiusInsight.com: Last year, you wrote a statement on Catholics in public life. You said: "No one today would accept this statement from any public servant: ‘I am personally opposed to human slavery and racism but will not impose my personal conviction in the legislative arena.’ Likewise, none of us should accept this statement from any public servant: ‘I am personally opposed to abortion but will not impose my personal conviction in the legislative arena.’"

Bishop Saltarelli: We hear that so often. It’s such an excuse; to me it’s a cop out: "I’m personally opposed, but…" If someone would say I’m personally opposed to slavery but its okay, people would laugh at the ridiculousness of that statement. And yet we tolerate, don’t we–"I’m personally opposed to abortion, but…"? That "but" is translated into the destruction, the massacre, the holocaust of millions of innocent lives in our time.

+++

[The Litany to St. Thomas More that Bishop Saltarelli composed for the conversion of pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians was first distributed to parishes last October 2004. The litany asks St. Thomas More for his intercession to make politicians "courageous and effective in their defense and promotion of the sanctity of human life."

IgnatiusInsight.com: If you send the Litany to your parishes, do the parishes automatically distribute it and talk about it?

Bishop Saltarelli: Oh yes, it is distributed. There is no doubt about that. Now, some will cast it aside, some will see (this is what we’re dealing with) it as a violation of Church and state, the fact we even dare pray for politicians. Because they get what they say is a hidden message. But, that’s okay; that doesn’t stop us. We’re still going to do it. We’re still going to ask our people to pray the Litany.

I think for too long we have been silent and our people have taken that silence as part of an acquiescence of the status quo. We are complicit in this. So we have to step forward and say, "No, this is not right–it is wrong, it is sinful"–and somebody at least has to say it. Not that I’m being the brave man. I have a magnificent team here with me and wonderful people committed to the cause of life and the Gospel of Life and we push forward together.

IgnatiusInsight.com: What advice would you give to Catholics trying to live a moral and happy life?

It is possible. And that’s not a cliché. The world tells us that we are crazy, ridiculous. The world–and not all the world–but some groups in the world tell us that we’re just fanciful people.

But we know–because of the glorious history that is ours–that in spite of crisis, the scandals, the persecutions, that the Army of Heroes (we call them saints) was there all the way. And the Lord continues. Even in the most critical of times, He sends these heroes in our midst, to announce the Good News, to proclaim the Good News.

We have a God who loves us and invites us to a special way of life and that way for us Catholics, is to follow in the footsteps of the Master who invites us to live a life that is destined to take us to the Father. You know, Jesus never promised there’d be no scandal; Jesus never promised there’d be no suffering; He never promised there’d be no persecutions–witness the two thousand years where there have been enough of those, all of them.

But He promised one thing: He promised that He’d be with us always. We hold onto that promise and we live that promise. Here in this Eucharistic year we experience that promise magnificently, in the Eucharist. And we don’t need a year to tell us about that, we have Jesus’ words that "I’ll be with you" and here it is, His own flesh and His own blood that remains with us and abides with us forever.

Archbishop Chaput's clear teaching

This week the Democratic Party convention is being held in Denver, Colorado, to confirm the candidacy of Barack Obama for the presidential election in the USA in November. Mr Obama holds extreme pro-abortion positions. He has chosen as his running mate Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, a self-described Catholic who goes to Mass on Sundays but who is also notoriously pro-abortion.

Some have seen it as an act of discourtesy to Archbishop Charles Chaput OFM Cap of Denver that he has not been invited to the Democrats’ convention, even to give an invocation. From my neutral stance I would consider it a blessing that he hasn’t. He and auxiliary Bishop James D. Conley on 25 August issued a very explicit statement on the website of the Archdiocese of Denver, ON THE SEPARATION OF SENSE AND STATE:
A CLARIFICATION FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE CHURCH IN NORTHERN COLORADO.

Archbishop Chaput is a gracious man as this extract from the message in which he refers to another Mass-going Democrat ‘Catholic’, shows:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is a gifted public servant of strong convictions and many professional skills. Regrettably, knowledge of Catholic history and teaching does not seem to be one of them.

Interviewed on Meet the Press August 24, Speaker Pelosi was asked when human life begins. She said the following:

"I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition . . . St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose."

Since Speaker Pelosi has, in her words, studied the issue "for a long time," she must know very well one of the premier works on the subject, Jesuit John Connery's Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective (Loyola, 1977). Here's how Connery concludes his study:

"The Christian tradition from the earliest days reveals a firm antiabortion attitude . . . The condemnation of abortion did not depend on and was not limited in any way by theories regarding the time of fetal animation. Even during the many centuries when Church penal and penitential practice was based on the theory of delayed animation, the condemnation of abortion was never affected by it. Whatever one would want to hold about the time of animation, or when the fetus became a human being in the strict sense of the term, abortion from the time of conception was considered wrong, and the time of animation was never looked on as a moral dividing line between permissible and impermissible abortion."


The Archbishop then quotes a martyr of World War II killed by the Nazis:

Or to put it in the blunter words of the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer:

"Destruction of the embryo in the mother's womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed on this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent human being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder."


Some comments on blogs seem to think that Archbishop Chaput speaks out of both sides of his mouth because he has elsewhere written about the dilemma that sometimes faces voters when all the candidates on offer support evil. He tackles, with some irony, ‘Catholics for Obama’ who have quoted the Archbishop in support of their cause, but who have left out part of what he said. I don’t think that Archbishop Chaput is being in anyway devious but I do find the idea of an ordained friar campaigning for a candidate, as the then Father Chaput did decades ago, rather strange.

Why do I mention this now? Earlier this spring a group called "Roman Catholics for Obama '08" quoted my own published words in the following way:

"So can a Catholic in good conscience vote for a pro-choice candidate? The answer is: I can't, and I won't. But I do know some serious Catholics -- people whom I admire -- who may. I think their reasoning is mistaken, but at least they sincerely struggle with the abortion issue, and it causes them real pain. And most important: They don't keep quiet about it; they don't give up; they keep lobbying their party and their representatives to change their pro-abortion views and protect the unborn. Catholics can vote for pro-choice candidates if they vote for them despite -- not because of – their pro-choice views."

What's interesting about this quotation - which is accurate but incomplete - is the wording that was left out. The very next sentences in the article of mine they selected, which Roman Catholics for Obama neglected to quote, run as follows:

"But [Catholics who support 'pro-choice' candidates] also need a compelling proportionate reason to justify it. What is a 'proportionate' reason when it comes to the abortion issue? It's the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the victims of abortion when we meet them face to face in the next life - which we most certainly will. If we're confident that these victims will accept our motives as something more than an alibi, then we can proceed."

On their website, Roman Catholics for Obama stress that:

"After faithful thought and prayer, we have arrived at the conclusion that Senator Obama is the candidate whose views are most compatible with the Catholic outlook, and we will vote for him because of that -- and because of his other outstanding qualities -- despite our disagreements with him in specific areas."

I'm familiar with this reasoning. It sounds a lot like me 30 years ago. And 30 years later we still have about a million abortions a year. Maybe Roman Catholics for Obama will do a better job at influencing their candidate. It could happen. And I sincerely hope it does, since Planned Parenthood of the Chicago area, as recently as February 2008, noted that Senator Barack Obama "has a 100 percent pro-choice voting record both in the U.S. Senate and the Illinois Senate."

Changing the views of "pro-choice" candidates takes a lot more than verbal gymnastics, good alibis and pious talk about "personal opposition" to killing unborn children. I'm sure Roman Catholics for Obama know that, and I wish them good luck. They'll need it.

St John Vianney Theological Seminary, Denver

+++

The current issue of The Catholic Herald (England) carries two articles that highlight the moral dilemma for many voters. One is by a former diplomat:

Obama may be the lesser evil for Catholic voters

Ex-diplomat John Pedler says that American Catholics face an agonising decision this November
22 August 2008:

America's Catholic voters may have tipped the balance ensuring George W Bush's election to the presidency in both 2000 and 2004. Of course, without the support of any one of several other groups of voters, both those Bush campaigns could have failed. Nevertheless it remains true that Catholic votes could possibly determine the outcome this November.

A news story in the same issue by Simon Caldwell begins this way:

David Cameron (leader of the Conservative Party and of the opposition) has made a highly personal defence of the controversial practice of aborting disabled babies up to birth.

The Tory leader insisted it would be wrong to prevent a mother terminating a pregnancy because her baby was handicapped.

He said he would "not want to change" existing laws that permit abortions after the 24-week limit if tests show the baby is disabled.

The Tory Party leader said his views have been shaped by becoming a father to a disabled child himself - six-year-old Ivan, who was born with cerebral palsy and suffers from severe epilepsy, needing 24-hour care.

None of the main parties in Britain have a pro-life policy, though all of the main parties have elected members who are strongly pro-life. The tradition in the British Parliament is that when what are considered ‘conscience issues’ are voted on the party whips are withdrawn, so that each member may vote freely. However, the current Labour government is trying to restrict this on certain matters.

But voters may still be faced with the dilemma of having to choose between a group of pro-abortion candidates, with no alternative. What do you do? I was in Britain from 2000 to 2002 and a registered voter there (Irish citizens have that right). I enjoyed a double ‘luxury’ during the election of 2001. The sitting Member of Parliament (MP) in my constituency had a strong pro-life voting record. Her two main opponents were pro-abortion. I couldn’t find the position of the fourth candidate, representing a minor party. But the seat was also a safe one for the MP’s party. There was no danger of her losing. Her pro-life position made no difference one way or the other to the majority of voters, I would think. My individual vote made little difference either, in one sense. So I could safely vote for the pro-life candidate. When my friends asked me which party I had voted for I simply said I had voted for ‘so-and-so’. I had voted for her, not for her party. But her pro-life voting record was decisive for me. I emailed another candidate asking her position on this matter, without revealing my own. she graciously replied, guessing my position but stating her own pro-abortion position. I thanked her for replying.

I have a close friend, an American priest, who remembers his grandmother dandling him on her knee when he was a toddler and saying to him ‘You are a Democrat’. He grew up with that conviction. But in the last few elections he has voted Republican because of the Democrats’ dogmatic pro-abortion stand, though there are Democrats for Life.

One positive thing about the US election is that abortion is seen as a major issue because it involves basic morality. Americans also see the importance of appointments to the Supreme Court. There’s no doubt in my mind that the court’s Roe v Wade decision in 1973 was a perverse one in the deepest sense of that word.

Mary, Queen of Creation

Photo taken in Fiji by Fr Gary Walker, editor, The Far East, the publication of the Columbans in Australia and New Zealand.

Today the Church observes the memorial of the Queenship of Mary. The Mass used is that of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of All Creation: In 1954 the feast of the Queenship of Mary was instituted by Pius XII, to be celebrated on 31 May. In 1969 Paul VI, promulgating the new General Roman Calendar, appropriately transferred the feast to 22 August, the octave of the Assumption. The royal dignity of our Lady is part of the mystery of her full glorification and perfect conformity with her Son, the King of all the ages. In the words of the Second Vatican Council, "the Immaculate Virgin.... when she had completed her earthly life, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven and exalted as the queen of all creation, so that she might be more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords (see Revelation 19:16) and victor over sin and death" (LG, no. 59).

Source: Excerpts from the introductory commentary to the Mass, Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Volume 1, Sacramentary, Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1992, p. 218.

On 6 August, during his recent vacation in northern Italy Pope Benedict met with the clergy and seminarians in the cathedral of the Diocese of Bolzano-Bressanone, in the seminary of which he stayed, for a Q&A session. One of the questions, and Pope Benedict’s response, can be linked to today’s celebration. I’ll highlight parts of the question and of the answer.

Fr Karl Golser: Holy Father, my name is Karl Golser, I am a professor of moral theology here in Bressanone and also director of the Institute for Justice, Peace and the Preservation of the Creation; I am also a canon. I am pleased to recall the period in which I was able to work with you at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As you know, the Catholic Church has deeply forged the history and culture of our Country. Today, however, we sometimes have the feeling that, as Church, we have somewhat retired to the sacristy. The declarations of the Papal Magisterium on the important social issues do not find the right response in parishes and ecclesial communities. Here in Alto Adige, for example, the authorities and many associations forcefully call attention to environmental problems and in particular to climate change. The principal arguments are the melting of glaciers, landslides in the mountains, the problems of the cost of energy, traffic, and the pollution of the atmosphere. There are many initiatives for safeguarding the environment. However, in the average awareness of our Christians, all this has very little to do with faith. What can we do to increase the sense of responsibility for Creation in the life of our Christian communities? What can we do in order to view Creation and Redemption as more closely united? How can we live a Christian lifestyle in an exemplary way that will endure? And how can we combine this with a quality of life that is attractive for all the people of our earth?

Pope Benedict XVI:

Thank you very much, dear Prof. Golser: you would certainly be far more able than I to answer these questions but I shall try just the same to say something. You have thus touched on the theme of Creation and Redemption and I think that this indissoluble bond should be given new prominence. In recent decades the doctrine of Creation had almost disappeared from theology, it was almost imperceptible. We are now aware of the damage that this has caused. The Redeemer is the Creator and if we do not proclaim God in his full grandeur - as Creator and as Redeemer - we also diminish the value of the Redemption. Indeed, if God has no role in Creation, if he is relegated merely to a historical context, how can he truly understand the whole of our life? How will he be able to bring salvation to man in his entirety and to the world in its totality? This is why, for me, the renewal of the doctrine of Creation and a new understanding of the inseparability of Creation and Redemption are of supreme importance. We must recognize anew: he is the Creator Spiritus, the Reason that exists in the beginning, from which all things are born and of which our own reason is but a spark. And it is he, the Creator himself, who did and can enter into history and operate in it precisely because he is the God of the whole and not only of a part. If we recognize this it will obviously follow that the Redemption, being Christian, and simply Christian faith, also means responsibility always and everywhere with regard to Creation. Twenty-three years ago Christians were accused - I do not know if this accusation is still held - of being the ones truly responsible for the destruction of Creation because the words contained in Genesis - "subdue the earth" - were said to have led to that arrogance with regard to creation whose consequences we are reaping today.

I think we must learn again to understand this accusation in all its falsity: as long as the earth was seen as God's creation, the task of "subduing" it was never intended as an order to enslave it but rather as the task of being guardians of creation and developing its gifts; of actively collaborating in God's work ourselves, in the evolution that he ordered in the world so that the gifts of Creation might be appreciated rather than trampled upon and destroyed.

If we observe what came into being around monasteries, how in those places small paradises, oases of creation were and continue to be born, it becomes evident that these were not only words. Rather, wherever the Creator's Word was properly understood, wherever life was lived with the redeeming Creator, people strove to save creation and not to destroy it. Chapter 8 of the Letter to the Romans also fits into this context. It says that the whole of Creation has been groaning in travail because of the bondage to which it has been subjected, awaiting the revelation of God's sons: it will feel liberated when creatures, men and women who are children of God, treat it according to God's perspective. I believe that we can establish exactly this as a reality today. Creation is groaning - we perceive it, we almost hear it - and awaits human beings who will preserve it in accordance with God. The brutal consumption of Creation begins where God is not, where matter is henceforth only material for us, where we ourselves are the ultimate demand, where the whole is merely our property and we consume it for ourselves alone. And the wasting of creation begins when we no longer recognize any need superior to our own, but see only ourselves. It begins when there is no longer any concept of life beyond death, where in this life we must grab hold of everything and possess life as intensely as possible, where we must possess all that is possible to possess.

I think, therefore, that true and effective initiatives to prevent the waste and destruction of Creation can be implemented and developed, understood and lived only where creation is considered as beginning with God; where life is considered as beginning with God and has greater dimensions - in responsibility before God - and one day will be given to us by God in fullness and never taken away from us: in giving life we receive it.

Thus, I believe we must strive with all the means we have to present faith in public, especially where a sensitivity for it already exists. And I think that the sensation that the world may be slipping away - because it is we ourselves who are chasing it away - and feeling oppressed by the problems of Creation, afford us a suitable opportunity in which our faith can speak publicly and make itself felt as a propositional initiative. Indeed, it is not merely a question of discovering technologies that prevent the damage, even though it is important to find alternative sources of energy, among other things. Yet, none of this will suffice unless we ourselves find a new way of living, a discipline of making sacrifices, a discipline of the recognition of others to whom creation belongs as much as it belongs to us who may more easily make use of it; a discipline of responsibility with regard to the future of others and to our own future, because it is a responsibility in the eyes of the One who is our Judge and as such is also Redeemer but, truly, also our Judge.

Consequently, I think in any case that the two dimensions - Creation and Redemption, earthly life and eternal life, responsibility for the Creation and responsibility for others and for the future - should be juxtaposed. I also think it is our task to intervene clearly and with determination on public opinion. To be heard, we must at the same time demonstrate by our own example, by our own way of life, that we are speaking of a message in which we ourselves believe and according to which it is possible to live. And let us ask the Lord to help us all to live out the faith and the responsibility of faith in such a way that our lifestyle becomes a testimony; and then to speak in such a way that our works may credibly convey faith as an orientation in our time.

+++

Pope Benedict has spoken a number of times about the importance of creation. In the homily of his inaugural Mass on 24 April 2005 he said: The pastor must be inspired by Christ’s holy zeal: for him it is not a matter of indifference that so many people are living in the desert. And there are so many kinds of desert. There is the desert of poverty, the desert of hunger and thirst, the desert of abandonment, of loneliness, of destroyed love. There is the desert of God’s darkness, the emptiness of souls no longer aware of their dignity or the goal of human life. The external deserts in the world are growing, because the internal deserts have become so vast. Therefore the earth’s treasures no longer serve to build God’s garden for all to live in, but they have been made to serve the powers of exploitation and destruction. The Church as a whole and all her Pastors, like Christ, must set out to lead people out of the desert, towards the place of life, towards friendship with the Son of God, towards the One who gives us life, and life in abundance.

In other words, there's a fundamental connection between our Christian faith and God's creation. If we violate what God has created we are unfaithful Christians. We have something fundamental to say to the world on the whole question of respect for creation. We cannot leave the initiative to 'tree-huggers' - I know that's a stereotype that is not all together fair, but there are such people - nor, more dangerously, to Green politicians who support the murder of unborn children - there are some such on the European Continent, though it's far from being a 'dogma' of Greens, as far as I'm aware.

25th Death Anniversary of Ninoy Aquino

25 years ago today, a Sunday, just after his plane landed at Manila International Airport, some soldiers escorted Benigno S. Aquino Jr, known to everyone as 'Ninoy', off the plane through a special exit. A minute or so later he was dead on the tarmac, allegedly shot by Rolly Galman, a known 'hit-man', who himself was shot by soldiers. The black joke that went around at the time was that Ninoy found Rolly waiting for him outside St Peter's office. In other words, nobody believed that Galman had killed Ninoy.

The official name of the military here is the Armed forces of the Philippines (AFP). In effect at that time it was the ARM or 'Armed Forces of Marcos'. But I am still inclined to believe that Ferdinand Marcos, still dictator at the time but quite ill, had nothing to do with the assassination. But assassination it was by people afraid that Aquino might succeed Marcos.

I happened to be in Manila the day of Ninoy Aquino's funeral. I think it was the biggest gathering ever of people in the Philippines until then, all along the route. It was my first time to experience applause as a coffin went by. But I felt it was totally appropriate. It was an expression of prayer for the repose of Ninoy's soul, of gratitude for his sacrificing his life - he certainly knew he would be in danger if he came home from the USA - and of defiance for the Marcos regime, of which the murder of Ninoy was the beginning of the end.

One of the worst features of the Marcos dictatorship - he was a legitimate president until his second term ran out in 1973, the year after he declared Martial Law - was the censorship of the media. That was the time of 'The Troubles' in Northern Ireland and people here often asked me about the situation there. The fact is that every single fatal incident in Northern Ireland was reported in the Philippine newspapers, not as big news but reported, nevertheless. However, most of the far greater violence in the Philippines itself was never reported in the local media. Our main source of reliable news was Radio Australia. Because there were so many parishes at the time in areas of conflict run by Columbans, we knew that its reports were accurate. The BBC World Service was also another reliable source of major news. During the fall of Marcos in February 1976 I followed the events through the World Service and through a local station in Cebu, where I was based at the time.

The censorship was still in force at the time of Ninoy's burial. The papers showed only close-ups of the funeral crowds, so that the huge numbers couldn't be seen. The day after the funeral one paper had a banner headline: MAN KILLED BY LIGHTNING AT LUNETA. This wasn't untrue. The Luneta is the park in the centre of Manila. The poor man in question was watching the funeral procession from the branch of a tree, rather like Zacchaeus, when he was struck by lightning.

Manila International Airport is now named 'Ninoy Aquino International Airport' or 'NAIA', pronounced 'NIGHa', for short.

Not long before he died, Ninoy Aquino said, 'The Filipino is worth dying for'. All the evidence is that during years of imprisonment, when he was sentenced to death, and during exile in the USA, Ninoy's Catholic faith was deepened. It is certainly the driving force in the life of his widow Corazon, known to everyone as 'Cory', who defeated Marcos in the 1986 election and who is now struggling with cancer. Please remember her in your prayers.

May Ninoy Aquino rest in peace.

Ronnie Drew, Blossom from the Seychelles and 'The Joy'

Ronnie Drew died in Dublin last Saturday, a few weeks short of 74. He was a folk singer with a unique voice that for me could only be compared to those of Louis Armstrong and Jimmy Durante, not that of your conventional vocalist. (Listening to an interview with Ronnie while writing this I’ve discovered that he was a great fan of Jimmy Durante.)

In a song written in his honour, The Ballad of Ronnie Drew, Bono of U2 describes it perfectly: Here's to the Ronnie, the voice we adore; / Like coals from a coal bucket scraping the floor.

Ronnie was one of the founding members of The Dubliners 1962.

Early in 2002 I was based in England and went on an overland pilgrimage to Lourdes. Most of the pilgrims were Filipinos living or working in Britain. But one very colourful, older woman with the name ‘Blossom’ was from the Seychelles. When she heard I was from Dublin she asked me if I knew where Mountjoy Prison was. I told her I passed ‘The Joy’, as it’s known to Dubliners, almost every day on my bike to and from school. Blossom was one of those persons who can make even a sad story sound funny. She told me that way back in the 1960s she went on holiday to Dublin. One night she went to a Dubliners’ ‘gig’, drank more than she should have, got involved in some kind of troublesome behaviour and ended up in ‘The Joy’. It probably wasn’t the prison itself but the Garda (police) station next door.

Somehow, The Dubliners heard about Blossom’s plight and bailed her out. So instead of recalling her time in Dublin with embarrassment she remembered it as a place where she had experienced the kindness of The Dubliners who didn’t even know her.

I wasn’t at all surprised when I heard Blossom’s story. Listening to and reading tributes to Ronnie, two words come through: ‘kindness’ and ‘gentleman’.

On 13 and 20 January this year John Bowman featured Ronnie Drew on his Bowman Sunday Morning which features archive material. I emailed the story of Blossom to John Bowman and hope that it reached Ronnie.

Here's Ronnie singing Pete St John's Dublin in the Rare Old Times. The video has photos of Dublin taken maybe 50 or 60 years ago. The awful poverty that many Dubliners experienced then is now a thing of the past, thank God.



May Ronnie Drew rest in peace.