Dear Editor, I must point out to your readers that in my article about 1916 (IC 17/12/2015) I did not set out to justify the Rising from the point of view of the just war theory. You do not use the just war theory to justify a rebellion. It’s almost like asking the government for permission to have an insurrection. It is ludicrous. The 1916 Rising might be assessed from a just rebellion point of view if there was such a theology – but there is no such theology, to my knowledge.
It can be assessed morally only in the historical and political context and from what is known of the motives of the leaders – which is what I tried to do. To try to assess the morality of any rebellion by citizens against a government will depend on where your sympathies lie and on your own experience of life and repression. You are either with the oppressed or with the oppressor and you cannot take the moral high ground and condemn the oppressed who, as a last resort to stop the repression, use force to defeat political and military oppression which greatly affects the poor.
Of course, the loss of life is terrible as I know all too well, but the brunt of responsibility for lives lost lies with the oppressor. I would claim to be a pacifist because I do not believe that you can apply the just war theory in a world where nuclear weapons are in the hands of governments. This theory is obsolete. As a pacifist I understand why some people in situations of extreme provocation resort to the use of arms. I would prefer they did not, but I understand why they do.
The responsibility for such a reaction lies with the oppressor. It is then the responsibility of all in positions of leadership and influence to bring about an honourable settlement that will lead to the ending of the repression and torture of the poor.
In my opinion, the leaders after 1916 did not hold out for an honourable settlement with the British with disastrous consequences for the majority of Irish people – especially for the poor and working class. The cause of justice and freedom was weakened by the execution of most of the leaders of the rebellion. That is why it is incumbent on political and religious leaders and the media, now and into the future, to pursue justice and equality in Ireland by all the peaceful political means at their disposal.
Yours etc.,
Fr Joe McVeigh,
Lisbellaw,
Co. Fermanagh.
Applause is out of place during Mass
Dear Editor, Fr Rolheiser quotes Belgian writer Bieke Vanderkerckhove as criticising the “seduction of exterior background noises” and saying that some people “prefer to have the noise just wash over them”. (‘The secrets that silence has to teach us’, IC 07/01/2016)
Could she be referring to the majority of Irish churches? When a person tries to pray quietly (particularly before or after Mass), he or she is met with a veritable wall of babble and chatter and even mobile phones ringing. Why? There was a time when churches were sacred places, and chatter took place outside.
And while we’re on the subject of silence, how about clapping? Applause is generally out of place during Mass. The Mass is not about the choir, the altar servers or the priest’s performance. These people will get their just rewards in the next life.
Rome could not be clearer on this topic. Cardinal Francis Arinze, the former prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship, said in 2003: “When we come to Mass we don’t come to clap. We don’t come to watch people, to admire people. We want to adore God, to thank him, to ask him pardon for our sins, and to ask him for what we need.” Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy: “Whenever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment.” Saint John XXIII criticised clapping, even for the Pope, saying: “Templum Dei, templum Dei.” (The temple of God is the temple of God.) And his predecessor, Pope Pius X, said: “It is not fitting to applaud the servant in the house of his Master.”
After all, there was no clapping at Calvary.
Yours etc.,
Kieron Wood,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin.
Hook is right about teaching faith
Dear Editor, I read with interest Cathal Barry’s interview with George Hook (IC 31/12/2015) in which the broadcaster encouraged lapsed Catholics to return to the fold.
Whatever his thoughts on adults returning to the practise of faith, which were extremely welcome, his belief that there is no better way to bring up children than in the Faith really resonated with me.
At a time when everybody appears to be out to demonise Catholic schools, George also seems to maintain they have an important role to play in society.
I agree with his assentation that schools need to find a new way to teach the message of the Gospel and that responsibility can’t be left to teachers.
Now I’m unsure whether schools may take up George’s offer to “preach the message to young kids” but it certainly was an interesting proposal!
The real solution lies in something else George said, faith “actually comes from parents rather than schools” and parents “should teach their children about faith”.
Yours etc.,
May O’Reilly,
Ballina,
Co. Mayo.
Looking for divine guidance on climate change
Dear Editor, Imagine the raised eyebrows, if one of our ‘great world leaders’ at the recent climate summit, had proposed that we ask the owner of our distressed planet for His help and guidance, as we grapple with climate change.
Mind you, would that have been an admission, that we are not the owners of this beautiful world after all, and that we have made a total mess not only of looking after it, but of one another as well?
Yours etc.,
Brendan Daly,
Longford, Co. Longford.
Intensely dislike ‘academic rubbish’ of new English missal
Dear Editor, I do not agree with taking any seats out of a church just because it is not always full. There is no extra cost to leaving the seats there and sometimes there are large funerals etc. when the seats could be needed.
Secondly, I dislike intensely the academic rubbish of the new English Missal. What was doctrinally or theologically wrong with the 1974 English Missal? I was able to understand “We come to you Father with praise and thanksgiving” etc. It would be great if priests were allowed to say the old (1974) English again.
Yours etc.,
Colm O’Connor,
Goatstown, Dublin 14.
Nice to hear some good vocations news
Dear Editor, I was quite frankly bemused at the news in last week’s The Irish Catholic (07/01/2016) that a foundation set up by hotel billionaire Conrad Hilton has made a substantial donation to Vocations Ireland.
Don’t get me wrong – it’s fantastic to see such foundations supporting worthy causes – but it is nonetheless surprising when many other similar foundations seem to support causes at odds with the Catholic faith.
Nevertheless, this cash will undoubtedly provide a boost to Vocations Ireland, an organisation which its director admitted had been “struggling” for some time.
If spent wisely, this money could provide a much needed boost to vocations in Ireland in the coming years.
It’s nice to hear some good vocations news for once!
Yours etc.,
John D’Arcy,
Gort,
Co. Galway.
Just war theory nothing to do with Rebellion
Dear Editor, Thank you for publishing the excellent article by Fr Joe McVeigh about the 1916 Rising (17/12/2015). It is a valuable antidote to the nonsense that the just war teaching has anything to do with the matter. Imagine having to get permission from a government or a majority vote in an election for a revolution!
Catholic moral theology has to be based upon reason, not sentiment or politics.
Yours etc.,
Fr Desmond Wilson,
Belfast, Co. Antrim