Breda O'Brien“Now that being a Christian is neither popular nor profitable, our cultural leaders veer just as markedly in the other direction”, writes Breda O’Brien
The period around Christmas and New Year are traditionally times of reflection on the year that has just gone by. Thinking about events and trends in 2016, I found two words recurring in my mind: alienation and hope.
Evidence of alienation was clear in many parts of the world. Elites were out of touch with much of the population in both the United States and Britain. No-one believed that the boorish billionaire, Donald Trump could possibly succeed in being elected, because powerful elements of mainstream media kept treating him like some kind of bad joke.
However, American voters’ degree of alienation from the mainstream media’s worldview was astonishing. No matter what the revelations about Trump, many of the US electorate assumed that the media were lying, or exaggerating. Trump bypassed traditional media almost completely through his use of social media, and continues to do so as president-elect.
Trump was fortunate that his opponent was someone who was almost uniquely talented at alienating even those who really wanted to like her. But for many people, he represented hope for change.
Elites
In a similar way, the degree of alienation from the European Union was completely underestimated in Britain, too. Again, the cultural elites were so busy talking to each other that they were out of touch with the reality of life for many in the UK.
The triumph of Trump and the success of the Brexit movement are not identical phenomena, but they have something in common. People chose their own view of reality, and accessed media that accorded with that view.
The internet makes that more and more possible. In fact, algorithms employed by Facebook make it almost inevitable, because they filter news items in ways that make it easier and easier to live in a bubble. For the first time, social media is the place where most people receive their news.
Is there a similar degree of alienation in our own country? I don’t think so, even though there are groups who feel alienated from the mainstream, including the poor and those for whom religious faith is central.
For example, for the latter group, in a year of 1916 Commemorations, one of the more annoying aspects of the national discussion was the near air-brushing out, or even distortion, of the religious faith of the original participants.
This was to some extent remedied by an excellent exhibition by the Dublin Archdiocese on 1916, and by The Irish Catholic’s own publication on the Rising. But it was indicative of a kind of embarrassment with religious faith that is associated with a very Irish tendency to want to fit in.
When Catholicism was in the ascendant, we were devoutly religious. Now that being a Christian is neither popular nor profitable, our cultural leaders veer just as markedly in the other direction.
It comes very close to groupthink. However, I wonder whether the more intelligent and balanced journalists are beginning to feel uneasy about how homogenous their views are. For example, the media absolutely accepted that symphysiotomy was a barbaric procedure akin to torture, carried out on women because medics were in thrall to the Catholic Church.
Justice Maureen Harding Clarke’s report on compensation for symphysiotomy this year showed that in fact, at a time when Caesarean section was far more dangerous than it is today, symphysiotomy was a life-saving procedure that allowed women to go on and have other much-wanted babies.
Some of the applicants claimed that they had symphysiotomies in hospitals that were not yet built, or had it carried out by doctors who were not there, and “in several statements the applicant claimed being held down by nuns (in hospitals where there were no nuns) while she was being ‘assaulted’.”
But the fact that some 30% of those who applied for compensation had not had symphysiotomies at all, including some very vocal campaigners, led to some of the more ethical and balanced journalists to wonder if reflexive anti-Catholicism is damaging their profession.
Human rights
The same might be said about reflexive pro-choice views among the media. Abortion is a human rights issue, and most people would feel as strongly about it whether they were believers or atheists.
Most Irish people regard abortion as at best a necessary evil, not a value-free choice. The average Irish person would be much more open, for example, to the wonderful message of Sally Phillip’s documentary, A World Without Down Syndrome? than British audiences were. Philips debates whether screening to eliminate Down syndrome really leads to a better world.
You would never know from media coverage that most people continue with their pregnancies even if the diagnosis is far more devastating than Down Syndrome. I remain hopeful that eventually, those stories will be heard.
Similarly, there has been a quiet grassroots movement building among committed laypeople to ensure that the message of faith does not become drowned out.
Faith believes that even when we do not have all the answers, there is One who does have the answers. In that lies our hope. As Leonard Cohen (one of the many talented people who died this year and who remained hugely influenced by his Judaism) said about one of his most famous songs, Hallelujah: “This world is full of conflicts and full of things that cannot be reconciled but there are moments when we can transcend the dualistic system and reconcile and embrace the whole mess, and that’s what I mean by ‘Hallelujah’.”
The preparations for the World Meeting of Families are a great sign of hope. This important event, which will take place in August 2018, has become a rallying point for those who believe.
The hope that Pope Francis will visit is galvanising many. It will not be like 1979, but don’t underestimate the turnout, either. Just because those living in the media bubble do not know anyone who is interested, does not mean that hundreds of thousands of people are not very interested indeed.