Cardinal Brady's comments on secular EU rejected
Nov 25, 2008
THE SUGGESTION by Cardinal Seán Brady that the European Union is aggressively secularist and has excluded religion from public life is remarkable and wrong, the Institute of International and European Affairs has been told.
Speaking on Christian Values and the EU, Ronan McCrea, barrister and researcher at the London School of Economics, said the EU neither threatened nor excluded religion from public life.
The cardinal had made his comments during a speech to the Humbert Summer School last August.
He had said the experience of many Christians within the EU was that they were "being denied the right to intervene in public debates or at least were having their contribution dismissed as an attempt to protect unjustified privileges, such as, for example, the right to employ people who support the ethos of a Christian institution".
Mr McCrea said Cardinal Brady had used the case of Italian politician Rocco Buttiglione as an example of Christians' exclusion from public life.
Mr Buttiglione had been nominated to the European Commission and was to be given the justice portfolio, which included anti-discrimination. He was rejected by the European Parliament on the grounds that his views were sexist and anti-gay.
"What occurred in this instance was not the exclusion of religion from public life but the treating of religious beliefs in the same manner in which all other kinds of beliefs are treated," Mr McCrea said. "A failure to do so would involve a serious failure in democracy."
He said the EU had privileged religious bodies with the establishment of "A Soul for Europe" programme, which aimed to encourage religious input into law and policymaking. It received official status in the Lisbon Treaty, he said.
"In these circumstances, to assert, as Cardinal Brady did, that religion is in some way excluded from public debate in the EU, is really rather remarkable," he said.
Mr McCrea said the EU had also been at pains to steer clear of hot button social issues. It had never sought to require member states to permit abortion or recognise gay marriage.
"The EU has been very deferential to religion's cultural and institutional role in the member states, and the cardinal's critique is not supported by the facts," he said.
Article by Cardinal Seán Brady on the Northern Ireland Peace Process
Nov 20, 2008
"Those who actively target members of the PSNI in an attempt to destroy the progress made in recent years, challenge the very principles of a just and a free society.”
“The current political impasse, with the failure of the Executive to meet in recent months, is damaging…. It is undermining those who believe Northern Ireland has a brighter future.”
Earlier this year I visited a small Catholic parish in the middle of Gaza City. It was one of the most memorable experiences of my life. In the midst of desolation brought about by years of conflict I was inspired by young and old alike who spoke of hope for the future. What moved me most was the number of people who looked to Northern Ireland as a reason for their hope. The same experience has been repeated many times over as I meet people from across the world. They look to Northern Ireland as a sign that when people are determined to search for peace it can be achieved.
Here at home it is easier to lose sight of how much has been achieved in recent years. Despite the obstacles and detours along the way, we really do enjoy a better present and a more hopeful future than was imaginable just a few years ago. As a society we have made enormous steps on the journey to a brighter, more peaceful future. This is something to celebrate, something I believe everyone with the good of society at heart will want to build on and secure.
The challenge today is to remain committed to that journey. The Bible speaks of peace as a ‘way’, something we strive towards and work for step by step. Each step on that journey is a challenge. It is seldom easy. It can even demand some personal or political cost. As we have discovered in Northern Ireland, it is not always easy to choose compromise over stalemate, to choose generosity over self-interest, or forgiveness over revenge, the common good over party-political good. Yet these are profoundly Christian values. They are the steps which when taken with courage have allowed all of us to move to a more stable future. The challenge now, I believe, is to continue that momentum, to continue to show the generosity, mutual understanding and commitment to a future based on fairness and co-operation which has brought us to the better present we now enjoy.
Let’s be clear absolutely clear about one thing. The current political impasse, with the failure of the Executive to meet in recent months, is damaging this hope. It is undermining those who believe Northern Ireland has a brighter future, especially the young who want to stay and build their lives here. It also encourages those who want to promote the failed ideologies of the past. It gives space to those who promote the lie that violence has something to offer our future. The current impasse encourages those who believe the future can be based on something other than power-sharing and institutions which give due recognition to the two main political aspirations which have been at the heart of the conflict here for centuries.
One of the most important steps on the journey we have made so far has been the creation of a representative police service for Northern Ireland, a police service with independent oversight and the prospect of direct accountability to a locally elected administration. Everyone in our society, irrespective of their political or religious affiliation, has benefited immensely from a Police Service which is now more representative, accepted and supported. Policing is an essential part of any society. When provided with integrity and impartiality it is a service to the common good. It is part of a Christian vision of society. Those who have taken up the vocation of policing, from whichever section of the community they come, deserve our complete encouragement and support. They deserve our support in ensuring their actions and attitudes meet the high ideals and standards which all traditions in our society rightly expect of them. Those who actively target members of the PSNI in an attempt to destroy the progress made in recent years, challenge the very principles of a just and a free society. When the people of Ireland, north and south, voted in such overwhelming numbers to support the Good Friday Agreement ten years ago, they repudiated once and for all any resort to violence for political ends. Those who have the interests of a just and peaceful future for all the people of this island at heart must reject these evil and deliberate attacks on members of the PSNI. They are immoral and a direct challenge to the overwhelming and freely expressed will of the people of Ireland. Anyone with information about those involved in such attacks has a clear moral duty to give that information to An Garda Síochána or the PSNI.
There is a real danger that as the years go on in Northern Ireland, we will forget the futility, destruction and misery wrought by the violence of the past. This is especially true for the young. It is critical that we never allow the violence of the past to be glamorised. It brought nothing but despair. It set back the prospects of justice, peace and freedom with every violent word and action. This means that the issue of state-sponsored violence and the continued presence of armed loyalist paramilitaries also have to be addressed. The seeming patience of those with political responsibility and influence on loyalist paramilitaries in terms of decommissioning stands in stark contrast to their approach to other paramilitary groups. Continued suspicions within the Catholic community about the relationship between certain sections of the security services and loyalist paramilitaries also undermine the efforts of all to build a more just and stable future. Both these issues need to be addressed urgently and comprehensively.
Two Sundays from now Christians around the world will celebrate the First Sunday of Advent, the period of preparation for the feast of Christmas. On that Sunday they will hear the Prophet Isaiah tell of a time when people will beat their swords into ploughshares, their weapons of war into instruments of a great harvest of peace for all the people. My prayer as Christmas approaches is that all those with an interest in the greater good of our society, will find the way and have the courage to take the next step on the road to peace. It may be the one that matters most. It will certainly give people in Gaza, the Holy Land and other places around the world another reason to hope.
Nordirland: Kardinal Brady ruft dazu auf, den Weg des Friedens weiterzugehen
Nov 20, 2008
„Wir laufen Gefahr, all die Gewalt und Zerstörung der Vergangenheit zu vergessen“
ARMAGH, 18. November 2008 (ZENIT.org).- In einem Brief an die Gläubigen betonte Kardinal Séan Brady, Erzbischof von Armagh, welch großen Einfluss Nordirlands Weg zum Frieden auf den Rest der Welt gehabt habe, und er weist auf das heutzutage bestehende Risiko hin, die Akte von Gewalt und Verzweiflung der vergangenen Jahrzehnte zu „vergessen“.
„Wir leben in einer Zeit und haben eine Zukunft vor uns, die uns eine Hoffnung geben, von der wir vor einigen Jahren nichts geahnt haben. Die Herausforderung heute ist es, auch weiterhin auf diesem Weg zu bleiben“, so der Kardinal in Bezug auf die derzeitige politische Krise im Land.
Eben diese Situation sei es, „die jene verunsichert, die in eine bessere Zukunft für Nordirland erhofft haben, vor allem die Jugendlichen. Sie ermutigt wiederum jene, die in der Vergangenheit mit ihren Ideologien versagt haben, und gibt jenen Raum, die die Lüge verbreiten, man könne zukünftig mit Gewalt etwas erreichen.“
Kardinal Brady erinnerte daran, dass die Bibel „vom Frieden als ‚einem Weg’ spricht, der Schritt für Schritt begangen werden muss. Jeder Schritt auf diesem Weg ist eine Herausforderung. Nur selten fällt etwas leicht. Es fordert nach wie vor persönliche und politische Anstrengung.“
Am Beispiel Nordirlands habe man sehen können, „dass es nicht immer einfach ist, den Kompromiss und die Großzügigkeit anstelle der persönlichen Interessen zu wählen, oder das Verzeihen anstelle der Rache, das Gemeinwohl anstatt der Parteipolitik. All dies sind zutiefst christliche Werte.“ Laut Brady besteht „ein wirkliches Risiko, dass mit den Jahren die Unnötigkeit, die Zerstörung und die Armut, die von der Gewalt verursacht wurden, vergessen werden“ - einer Gewalt, die „nichts anderes als Verzweiflung gebracht hat“. Auf jeden Fall, so fügte er hinzu, sei der Friedensprozess in Nordirland „eine Quelle der Hoffnung für die Welt“ gewesen. Das müsse er auch weiterhin bleiben.
„Am Anfang des Jahres haben ich eine kleine katholische Pfarrei im Gazastreifen besucht. Dies war eine der eindrucksreichsten Erfahrungen in meinem Leben. In einer von Jahren des Konflikts verursachten Entmutigung bat man mich damals, von der Hoffnung der Zukunft zu sprechen. Was mich am allermeisten beeindruckte, war es zu sehen, wie viele dieser Menschen gerade in Nordirland einen Grund für ihre Hoffnung sahen: als Beweis dafür, dass, wenn die Menschen gewillt sind, den Frieden zu suchen, sie diesen auch finden.“
Kardinal Brady verwies abschließend mit Blick auf die bevorstehende Adventszeit besonders an die Texte der Propheten zum bald eintreffenden Frieden. „Ich bete dafür, dass die Verantwortlichen für das Gemeinwohl in unserer Gesellschaft den Weg zum Frieden finden und den Mut aufbringen mögen, den nächsten Schritt tun.“
Cardinal warns against marital rights for cohabiting couples
Nov 12, 2008
The head of the Catholic Church in Ireland warned the Irish Government on Tuesday not to pass legislation giving the same rights to cohabiting couples as married couples.
Cardinal Sean Brady told delegates at the 11th annual Ceifin Conference in Co Clare that the legislation had the potential to “undermine God’s will for marriage and the family”.
The Word of God was, he reminded delegates, “pro-love, pro-marriage, pro-family, pro-life and pro-society”.
He added that Ireland would be repeating the mistakes of Britain and the US if it introduced legislation giving equal status to cohabiting and married couples.
The Cardinal pointed to research which suggests that children born outside of marriage are more likely to do worse at school, suffer poorer health and face problems of unemployment, drugs and crime, than the children of a married couple.
“All the more remarkable then that Ireland looks set to repeat the mistakes of societies like Britain and the US by introducing legislation which will promote cohabitation, remove most incentives to marry and grant same-sex couples the same rights as marriage in all but adoption,” he said.
Cardinal Brady argued that marriage and the family were “fundamental to the public good” and therefore “entitled to special consideration and care from the state”.
“Other relationships whether they are sexual or not, are the result of private interest. They do not have the same fundamental relationship to the good of society and to the bringing up of children as the family based on marriage,” he said.
Cardinal Brady called for more support for traditional marriage between a man and a woman, including positive incentives to encourage couples to marry.
Marriage has become an issue of contention in Ireland since the Government published legislation in June on the registration of same-sex and cohabiting couples.
The Cardinal warned that supporters of traditional marriage “may have to pursue all avenues of legal and democratic challenge to the published legislation”.
Full text of Cardinal Seán Brady address
Nov 09, 2008
The Family as the Foundation of Society”: Address by Cardinal Seán Brady, Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland at the Céifin Conference, Ennis, Co Clare.
Welcome
Thank you Fr Harry.
It is a particular privilege to be asked to address the Céifin Conference and, since 1997, it has become one of the best known and highly respected annual events in the country. It has generated lively debate and made a very significant contribution to the important topics discussed over those eleven years. I take this opportunity to congratulate you Fr Harry and the others involved in founding the Céifin Conference. I salute your initiative and creativity in establishing a much needed forum for debate during this critical period in our country’s history. Long may it continue.
Introduction
You have asked me to address the theme of ‘The Family as the Foundation of Society’. I am pleased to do so. There are few institutions more important to the future of our society than the family. There are few that have been subject to such rapid and fundamental change in our lifetime.
This morning I would like to explore some of the contours of that change. In particular I would like to set out the basis for the Church’s conviction that marriage, the family and the general good of society are so interdependent that one cannot flourish without the other. I will examine some of the recent trends associated with marriage and the family. I will argue that legislation and policies that promote commitment in marriage are, in fact, more socially progressive and beneficial to society than those which endorse, simply because they have become more widespread, attitudes and trends which undermine that commitment. I will also comment on the question of a proposed equivalence between cohabitation and marriage as well as same-sex unions and marriage. This as you know has been the subject of considerable public debate in light of the Government’s intention to introduce new legislation in this area.
Let me share with you the contents of a letter which may express more adequately than I ever could the link essential link between faith, family and society. It is offered through the eyes and perhaps with the wisdom of an older generation. It captures something of the scale of change which has occurred in Ireland in recent years, what the title of your conference describes as a ‘revolution’. It was sent to me by a 77 year old Clare woman, now living in Kilkenny, wishing me well for my visit to her native county. She decided to write to me when she heard that I was going to talk on the family and to suggest a few ideas for my talk. When I am asked to talk, such help is always welcome!
She said: “When I grew up we never knew what money looked like, we were never hungry, we had a family life, we always said the Rosary and had time to talk with our neighbours”.
‘Today we have so much money that people have no time for anything, most of all God. There is no word about sin or the Ten Commandments. There is nothing wrong today. What good is money and big houses? Do they bring happiness? All those things only last for a while. This is the only thing that lasts, God.”
“Please tell the people about what matters most, their souls, not their bodies. Bring back family life, family prayer and read the Bible”.
Marriage and the Word of God
I was struck by this last sentence in particular. It bore a remarkable resemblance to something that was said at the recent Synod of Bishops in Rome, the theme of which was: ‘The Word of God in the life of the Church’. Proposition 20 of the Synod spoke specifically of the link between marriage, family and the Word of God. It said: The Word of God stands at the origins of marriage (Gen 2:24). Jesus himself inserted marriage among the institutions of his Reign (Mt 19:4-8), giving it a sacramental status. In the sacramental celebration, man and woman pronounce a prophetic word of reciprocal donation of self, they become “one flesh,” a sign of the mystery of the union of Christ and the Church. (Eph5:32) Through the fidelity and the unity of the life as a family, the spouses are the first announcers of the Word of God to their children. It’s necessary to sustain them and to help them develop within the family, modes of domestic celebration of the Word such as reading the Bible, and other forms of prayer. Spouses should recall that the Word of God is a precious source of support amid difficulties in conjugal life and in the family.
And this brings me to my first point; the family based on marriage as the foundation of society is a truth revealed by God in the Scriptures: it also one of the most precious human values. We should not be surprised then that when people become
less concerned with what God has to say generally, or when the popularity of an idea replaces objective human values as the basis of morality, commitment to marriage as the basis of the family also diminishes. As the letter I have just read suggests, what we are involved with here is a wider ‘revolution’ about how we approach morality and values generally.
So how should we respond to this revolution? How might we invite people to rediscover the importance of the family based on marriage as the basis of society?
Changes in Attitudes to Marriage
Part of that response, I would suggest, is to acknowledge that some aspects of this so-called ‘revolution’ have been good for marriage and the family. While the letter I read reflects a concern that we have lost something valuable from the past, I am sure no-one would want to say that everything about marriage and the family in the past was good. We should be glad for example that there is more equality between men and women in marriage and in society generally. There is a greater awareness that both parents have a mutual responsibility in bringing up children and in sharing domestic tasks. We have learnt so much about the importance of responding to the emotional and practical needs of children, about how to support the development of children in constructive ways. As I will mention again later, we are also learning just how important a stable family home is to the happiness and long-term well-being of children.
All of this is good. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the prospect of a married couple establishing a happy, loving and stable family home in Ireland today has never been greater. Our challenge is to help women and men rediscover the joy of marriage, the life-long fulfilment it can offer, especially those who are reluctant to make a long-term commitment.
And this brings me to my second point. While some aspects of the ‘revolution’ in our approach to marriage and the family have been good, is it possible that something good from the past has been lost? I think this is what my friend from Clare was saying in her letter. I note it was a theme considered in the first Céifin Conference entitled, ‘Are we forgetting something?’
My letter from the woman in Clare suggests that part of what is needed is to help people rediscover the good that comes from faith and prayer. She mentioned the Bible in particular.
This coincides with a key proposal of the recent Synod. In making people more familiar with the Word of God, in an informed and formative way, we can act in support of marriage, the family and the good of society itself.
This is because, as it explains in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, ‘the importance and centrality of the family with regard to the person and society is repeatedly underlined by Sacred Scripture’ (n.209). The family is presented from the very opening pages of the Word of God as ‘the primary place of humanisation for the person and society and the cradle of life and love’ (n.209)
Church Teaching on the Family based on Marriage as the Fundamental Unity of Society
The family is also the natural community in which human social nature is experienced. It makes a unique and irreplaceable contribution to the good of society. The family unit is born from the stable and committed communion of persons which marriage provides. ‘Communion’ has to do with the personal relationship between the ‘I’ and the ‘thou’. ‘Community’ on the other hand transcends the ‘I’ and ‘thou’ and moves towards a ‘society’, a ‘we’. The family, therefore, as a community of persons, is the first human ‘society’. It is at the very heart of the common good.
The common good “is the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily” (Gaudium et Spes, n. 26)
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it in this way: ‘The family is the original cell of social life. It is the natural society in which husband and wife are called to give themselves in love and in the gift of life. Authority, stability, and a life of relationships within the family constitute the foundations for freedom, security, and fraternity within society. The family is the community in which, from childhood, one can learn moral values, begin to honour God, and make good use of freedom. Family life is an initiation into life in society.‘ (n.2207)
The Catechism goes on to say: ‘A man and a woman united in marriage, together with their children, form a family. This institution is prior to any recognition by public authority, which has an obligation to recognize it. It should be considered the normal reference point by which the different forms of family relationship are to be evaluated’ (n. 2202).
Marriage and the family therefore are of public interest. They are fundamental to the public good and entitled to special consideration and care from the State. Other relationships whether they are sexual or not, are the result of private interest.
They do not have the same fundamental relationship to the good of society and to the bringing up of children as the family based on marriage. At the heart of this understanding of marriage is a truth taught by Scripture and confirmed by human reason. It is the truth that the ‘Physical... difference and complementarity’ of a woman and man are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life’ (CCC n.2333). Being a man or woman is not accidental to who we are or to God’s plan for the family and society. It is essential to it.
This is why the Church holds that the good of persons and the proper functioning of society are closely connected with the healthy state of marriage and family life. In the words of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, ‘without families that are strong in their communion and stable in their commitment’ societies grow weak. This is also why ‘relegating the family to a subordinate or secondary role, excluding it from its rightful position in society, would be to inflict great harm on the authentic growth of society as a whole.‘
The Positive State of Marriage in Irish Life Some will argue that this presents an idealised view of marriage and family life. They will point out that the concept of a nuclear family of father and mother, united by marriage and bringing up children in a stable and loving environment does not capture the reality or the ideal of an increasing number of people. They will point to the existence of an increasingly diverse range of family units in Irish society, to an increase in long term cohabitation, to increasing breakdown in marriage and to the prospect of radically new forms of legally recognised relationship as evidence that the model of family revealed by the Scriptures is increasingly irrelevant.
Yet it is worth asking whether these popular assumptions about the state of marriage as the basis of the family life in Ireland are actually true? The fact is that life-long marriage remains the preferred choice of the vast majority of men and women in Ireland. Recent research by the Catholic Marriage Care Service, Accord, for example, confirmed that the marriage rate in Ireland has ‘actually increased in the past 10 years — suggesting something of a “revival” in marriage relative to the mid and late 1990’s when the rate fell to historically low levels.‘\[1]
The survey also found that ‘Marriage is a sufficiently rewarding experience such that 9 out of 10 would recommend it to others’. In contrast to the view that the traditional family unit revealed in the Word of God is no longer relevant, the report concluded that ‘the traditional family arrangement of children being raised by both their natural parents is the one preferred by almost all married couples in our survey.‘
This is a far cry from any sense of crisis in the family based on marriage sometimes portrayed in public debate. While some 12% of couples in Ireland chose long term cohabitation instead of marriage, the family based on marriage is still the fundamental unit of our society by a substantial margin. It continues to play an essential part in the well-being and stability of Irish life. In the words of the Accord report: in Ireland ‘healthy, happy marriages \[still] make for strong family life; and strong families contribute to the economy and demand little in return from the taxpayer. In other words, “family capital” is at the core of “social capital”, upon which we build the future for our country.‘
It is this essential link between ‘family capital’ and ‘social capital’ which in part explains the special place afforded to marriage in the Irish Constitution. Article 40.1.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann recognises the family ‘as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.‘
It is not accurate to suggest that this is merely a remnant of Catholic influence on the formulation of the Constitution and therefore to be rejected as anachronistic or sectarian. Similar recognition and terminology can be found in the Constitutions of many other countries around the world which have them. The Greek Constitution for example describes the family as ‘the foundation of the conservation and progress of the nation.‘ Such values are also consistent with Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights when it states: ‘The family is the natural and fundamental unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.‘ Article 16 of the Social Charter of Europe (1961), Article 23 of the International Treaty on Civil Rights, Article 10 of the International Charter on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as well as many other national and international instruments affirm and develop this basic insight that the family is the nucleus of society, and for that reason, deserving of special status, development and care.
Proposed Changes to Legislation and Policy
It is on this basis too that Article 41.3.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann places an obligation on the Government to guard the institution of marriage with special care. This brings me to the sensitive and complex issue of the Government’s stated intention to legislate for a variety of relationships other than marriage, notably for cohabiting and same-sex couples.
In its submission to the Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution on this issue, the Committee on the Family of the Irish Bishops’ Conference in February 2005 acknowledged, and I quote, that ‘a diversity of family forms support the fundamental human activities of care, intimacy and belongingness to varying degrees, yet it is appropriate that the Constitution should guard with special care the institution of marriage. \[However] such a commitment to special care of the family based on marriage ought not, nor does it, prevent the State from seeking to offer appropriate support to individuals in other forms of family units.‘ (p.6)
The issue then is not whether it is appropriate to introduce policies and legislation which provide some level of protection for people in relationships of long term dependency. In many circumstances this will be totally appropriate and just. The question is at what point such legislation or policy begins to undermine the family based on marriage as the fundamental unit of society and thereby undermine the common good?
In this regard the publication by Government of the General Scheme of Civil Partnership Bill in June of this year gives cause for concern. Obviously we must await the publication of the actual legislation arising from the scheme to make a complete assessment. It is clear however that the General Scheme envisages the possibility that Government will grant to cohabiting and same-sex couples the status of marriage in all but name. Some restrictions will apply to adoption by same sex couples.
Apart from this however and given reports that the Department of Justice has confirmed that “social welfare and tax entitlements on a par with those of spouses will be provided through the finance and social welfare Bills”, it is difficult to see how anything other than the introduction of de facto ‘marriage’ for cohabiting and same-sex couples is envisaged.
If this is the case, those who are committed to the probity of the Constitution, to the moral integrity of the Word of God, and, to the precious human value of marriage between a man and a woman as the foundation of society, may have to pursue all avenues of legal and democratic challenge to the published legislation.
The intention is not to penalise those who have chosen or find themselves in different family forms or relationships. It is rather to uphold the principle that the family based on marriage between a man and woman is so intimately connected to the good of society that it is deserving of special care and protection. The value of the Constitutional guarantees given in this area cannot be limited to the wording of the Constitution about marriage and the family remaining unchanged. The relevant Articles of the Constitution are more than a statement of aspiration. They imply that the State will maintain a qualitative difference between the level of support and entitlements provided by the State to the family based on marriage and that afforded to other forms of dependent relationship.
This makes the stated intention of Government to remove the category ‘Marital Status’ and to replace it with ‘Civil Status’ through the Equal Status Act particularly worrying. Some might argue that it is in fact a breach of the Government’s Constitutional duty to protect the institution of marriage. Those who believe in the values espoused by the Constitution are entitled to ask why such a profound and unnecessary change is envisaged along with others which may yet emerge.
Marriage, and with it the common good, is directly undermined when legislation and policy reduce marriage to simply one more form of relationship among others. It is worth noting in this regard that the definition of marriage for the purposes of the Constitution has been judicially interpreted “as the voluntary union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others for life”.
The Issue of Equality
Some have argued that what is at stake here is the principle of equality. This is to argue that what are being compared are two things which are qualitatively the same. This is manifestly not the case. The link between a public commitment to life-long marriage, and the stability of the family unit, as well as the distinct role of a mother and father in the generation and education of children, gives marriage a unique and qualitatively different relationship to society than any other form of relationship.
In the words of the Pontifical Council for the Family in 2000: ‘Equality before the law must respect the principle of justice which means treating equals equally, and what is different differently: i.e., to give each one his due in justice. This principle of justice would be violated if de facto unions were given a juridical treatment similar or equivalent to the family based on marriage. If the family based on marriage and de facto unions are neither similar nor equivalent in their duties, functions and services in society, then they cannot be similar or equivalent in their juridical status.‘
This qualitative difference between the family based on marriage and other forms of relationship is increasingly recognised in research. For example, one of the largest surveys on family life to date, the British Millennium Cohort Study (2008) has found that one in four children of cohabiting parents suffer family breakdown before they start school at the age of five, compared to just 1 in 10 children of married parents. Other studies in Britain and the US suggest that children born outside of marriage are more likely to do worse at school, suffer poorer health and are more likely to face problems of unemployment, drugs and crime. In the words of one commentator, “The strong implication for governments is that they should be doing more to support marriages.”
All the more remarkable then that Ireland looks set to repeat the mistakes of societies like Britain and the US by introducing legislation which will promote cohabitation, remove most incentives to marry and grant same-sex couples the same rights as marriage in all but adoption. This will effectively dissolve the special status of marriage between a man and woman enshrined in the Constitution. This would indeed be a revolution, perhaps the greatest revolution in the history of the Irish family — as the title of Conference suggests! But will it be a revolution which promotes the common good of our society? Will it really help children and married couples or will it further erode marriage at a time when research and experience point to the value of marriage for children and society?
Whether what is envisaged will breach the Constitution remains to be seen once the legislation is published. But no one should underestimate how radical and far reaching the legislation arising from the General Scheme published by the Government could be. My key message today is thus: The priority of the family over society and over the State has to be reaffirmed. The family does not exist for society or the State, but society and the State exist for the family.
What is being proposed by the Government undermines the very principle of equality it claims to uphold. It limits the provision of support in the General Scheme to relationships which are presumed to be sexual. This is unjust to those in established relationship of dependency which are not sexual. It confirms that what is driving the change in legislation and policy in this area is not a concern for equality at all. The provision of just, reasonable and much needed support to those in established and dependent relationships which are not sexual in nature has been ignored in the General Scheme. Anyone in a caring, dependent relationship, whether sexual or not, should be given certain protections such as hospital visitation rights and a stability of residence in the event of that relationship ending. Why should people in such relationships be discriminated against because their relationship is not sexual? There is a need to address important issues of fairness to people in established relationships of dependency. This is possible without undermining the unique role of marriage in society and its contribution to the common good.
More Support for Marriage: A Benefit to Society
Marriage deserves to be supported by society. It is so fundamental to the common good that the State acts in the interests of society when it supports marriage through benefits in taxation, social welfare and social policy.
If we have the good of children and of society at heart then it is also clear that we need to try and maximise the number of children being raised by a married mother and father. We can do this through providing positive incentives and the formation of positive social attitudes to marriage. We also need to provide greater support for married couples themselves as they live out their life long commitment to each other and their children. This includes providing more adequate preparation for marriage. Accord is involved in outstanding work in this regard for which they deserve to be applauded. Two of the greatest obstacles Accord encounters however, is the difficulty in acquiring a sufficient number of volunteer counsellors and a general resistance on the part of couples to attending a marriage preparation course. In other countries, for example in Italy, the pre-marriage courses consist of a least 9 weekend sessions. Here it is much less. In spite of this priests often comment to me on how couples will spend any amount of time with the florist, the photographer, the hotel manager in preparation for their wedding. These arrangements are important but the time given to them can be in strong contrast to the willingness of engaged couples to take time out together to reflect on the importance and meaning of what they are about to do.
Conclusion
During my thirteen years on the staff of the Irish College in Rome, it was my privilege to marry a great number of couples, hundreds, maybe thousands. As an aside I have to say that some of the best people in all those couples came from Clare. I am not saying that because I am here in Clare but because I believe it and have believed it for many years. My abiding impression is one of people who had high hopes and earnest dreams for a happy and fulfilling life together. No-one I know ever entered marriage with the expectation or desire that it would fail. The Church offers the compassion of Christ for all those who suffer in this way. It invites all of us to have compassion and to offer practical support for those whose marriages have broken down.
And it is here that we come back to our starting point: ‘The Word of God in the life and mission of the Church’! Jesus was born and lived in a family, with all its characteristic features. At the wedding feast in Cana he conferred on marriage the highest dignity of a sacrament. Jesus could have produced the wine without the help of the stewards but he decided to involve them and Mary also becomes involved. I see this as an indication that in God’s design the community, particularly the immediate family, have a part to play in supporting marriage. There may be a lot of comedy about prying in-laws but the extended family have a vital role to play in supporting marriage.
In the story of Cana we also observe how Mary was sensitive to the needs of the newly married couple. Instead of wringing her hands when the wine ran out, an obvious cause of embarrassment and possibly of conflict for the couple, she gets involved telling the stewards ‘Do whatever he tells you’. In this she points all newly married couples to the true source of their happiness and success in marriage — seeking the will of God in all things together.
It was this which was identified as a particular virtue in the life and marriage of Blessed Louis and Zelie Martin, the parents of the Little Flower, St Therese of Lisieux. They were beatified on 19 October past by Pope Benedict. It was Mission Sunday. They are only the second spouses in history declared blessed as a couple.
How appropriate then, that as Ireland prepares to consider legislation with the potential to undermine God’s will for marriage and the family, we turn to the example and inspiration of this married couple and draw strength and direction from it. How well we remember the wonderful welcome given by the faithful in Ireland to the relics of their daughter, St Therese of Lisieux, some years ago. The Martin family of nine children and parents who were fully engaged in business, social and Church life are a timely source of encouragement for all those who promote the value of the family based on marriage in our society.
The Word of God is pro-love, pro-marriage, pro-family, pro-life and pro-society. My prayer is that, through the intercession of Blessed Louis and Zelie Martin, more and more people will rediscover this revolutionary message of the Word of God, for the sake of our society and its future.
Thank you
Primate on Politics
Nov 08, 2008
Quizzed by a parliamentary panel in Dublin yesterday on why he didn't lead an ecclesiastical charge in support of the EU-strengthening Lisbon Treaty -- which was handily defeated in a June referendum -- the cardinal-primate of All Ireland said such a push would've been "counterproductive," citing the prospect of repudiation:
Whispers in the Loggia, Thursday, November 06, 2008
Primate on Politics
Quizzed by a parliamentary panel in Dublin yesterday on why he didn't lead an ecclesiastical charge in support of the EU-strengthening Lisbon Treaty -- which was handily defeated in a June referendum -- the cardinal-primate of All Ireland said such a push would've been "counterproductive," citing the prospect of repudiation:
"A 100 per cent resounding call for a Yes vote, I think, would have got people's backs up," [Sean Brady] said.
While the church remains a significant force in the 90% Catholic country, its bishops had their "Blue Tuesday" in 1995, when a referendum to legalize divorce narrowly passed in defiance of the hierarchy's strenuous opposition.
About to mark a year since his elevation to the Pope's Senate, earlier this week the 115th successor of St Patrick -- also the president of the Isle's bishops -- began his archdiocese's movement toward a significant clustering of parishes in the 210,000-member Armagh church amid a falling number of priests.
Among other changes in the offing: a renewed emphasis on the lay vocation in the mission of the church and -- in a seismic first for the historically priest-centric Irish church -- the institution of the permanent diaconate.
Cardinal Seán Brady delivers Bishop Stock Address at Humbert Summer School
Nov 07, 2008
Ireland owes a lot to the European Union. It is difficult to believe we would enjoy the political stability in the North or the economic progress in the South we do today without it. This should give us pause for thought when we reflect on Ireland ’s place within the EU and our responsibility towards it.” – Cardinal Seán Brady
In an address today on the relationship between Ireland and the European Union, Cardinal Seán Brady tells participants at the Humbert Summer School in Ballina, Co. Mayo that:
Ø “It is not surprising that we might speak of a European continent that is losing confidence in its future”;
Ø “It may be important for the EU to look again at a prevailing pragmatic attitude that compromises on essential human, moral and social values on the basis of the lowest common denominator”;
Ø “Without respect for its Christian memory and soul… it is possible to anticipate continuing difficulties for the European project”.
In his address Cardinal Brady also:
Ø Makes a personal appeal to those who planted the Omagh bomb saying “Before the innocent children, women and men you massacred I appeal to you to do the right thing before God. I appeal to your hearts and human dignity. Give yourselves up to justice in this world before you face judgement in the next”;
Ø Commends the Orange Order for “its sincere and convincing efforts to promote dialogue and understanding” saying “these should be acknowledged and reciprocated”.
Ø Suggests that “Ten years after the Belfast Agreement it may be appropriate to ask what price we have paid for the moral ambiguity in the Peace Process by way of encouraging a more general culture of aggression and violence”.
Concluding Cardinal Brady says:
Ø “It may be that a growing number of people are questioning the prevailing orthodoxies of the ‘new’ Ireland , that they are reconsidering the value of faith, community and more traditional moral values. It may be that the still small voice of God is emerging with new appeal in Irish cultural and political debate, albeit it as a whisper!”
Thank you Dean (Susan) Patterson for your very generous words. Thank you too for your warm welcome to this Cathedral Church of St. Patrick of the combined Dioceses of Tuam, Killala and Achonry. Please convey my good wishes and appreciation to Bishop Richard Henderson for his permission to occupy this historic pulpit. I realise that it links us directly to the remarkable events of 1798 and to his predecessor Bishop Joseph Stock. In a recent article in the Western People, John Cooney remarked that today I would be stepping into ‘the cathedral pulpit once adorned by the sagacious Bishop Stock.’ I do so very warily indeed!
The pulpit was not always a clerical preserve. It was originally a platform for public shows, speeches or disputations. It was only later that it referred to the raised structure from which the preacher delivered a sermon. As the following verse from 1695 reminds us however, the pulpit has rarely been the only source of dogmatic proclamation in society. I quote:
The Bar, the Pulpit and the Press nefariously combine,
To cry up an usurped power,
And stamp it right divine!
The Bar, the Pulpit and the Press have power. Each with their own autonomy, they represent the key determinants of opinion and policy in all but a few democratic societies – the Legislature, communities of faith and the media. The precise relationship between the three has varied historically. The balance of their influence and power variously shifted. When working at their best each respects the autonomy of the other and the space which the other is due in a free and flourishing society. When motivated by their highest ideals they are united by a common search for the truth and the promotion of justice.
It is in this context that I want to pay particular tribute to John Cooney, founder and director of the General Humbert Summer School. This school and others like it provide a vital forum for the dialogue between these three tributaries of influence which is essential to a vibrant and pluralist culture. Under John’s determined direction the Humbert Summer School has become one of the best known and influential events of the social and cultural calendar. I want to thank John and Chair of the school, Mr Tony McGarry for inviting me to give this Address. As John knows, I don’t always agree with him or with what I sometimes regard as his ‘colourful’ analysis of ecclesiastical events. Yet I am immensely grateful to him and to the other religious affairs correspondents for giving space to the religious view in Irish life. It is the view, after all, of the majority of people on the island.
John also had the foresight to frame this annual address around the memory of Bishop Joseph Stock. Bishop Stock was Church of Ireland Bishop of Killala from 1798 – 1810. His life was probably no more remarkable than many other Bishops of his time but for his famous ‘Narrative of what passed in Killala’. This was a diary of the dramatic events of the ‘98’ rebellion as they occurred here in Co. Mayo.
One of the most noted aspects of this Narrative is Bishop Stock’s repeated reference to the lack of sectarian violence in the towns and villages around Mayo during the 98 rebellion, in contrast to other parts of Ireland . In his own words, Mayo had ‘caught no portion of that malignant spirit of disloyalty and religious intolerance’ which had infected so many other parts of the country. The Narrative also communicates a disdain for violence, other than in the strict conduct of war.
The obligation to maintain a decency and courtesy towards each other in the midst of conflict was taken as a given between Stock and Humbert on the basis of their shared humanity. It is clear from the text that each had a respect for the inherent human dignity of the other.
And it is this which I suggest makes the Narrative of Bishop Stock a narrative of hope for our time. It draws us immediately into three issues which I would like to consider briefly this afternoon:
The peace process in Ireland ;
The loss of Christian memory and values in Europe ;
The impact of this loss on the culture of aggression and violence in Ireland .
In light of theme of this year’s school, I will give more detailed consideration to the second of these, the loss of Christian memory and values in Europe . But first let me say a word about the Peace Process in Ireland .
The Peace Process
It is remarkable how often the history of Northern Ireland is used to argue that religion is an inevitable source of conflict in society. It is an easy argument for those who wish to see religion relegated to all but the most private sphere.
Yet, as we all know the conflict here, especially in its later years, had relatively little to do with issues of religious dogma. In fact, I think it is increasingly recognised that the main Churches had a largely moderating influence on the levels of violence which might otherwise have emerged.
Europe was another moderating influence. The ideological vision of unity in diversity, the erosion of borders and the reconciliation of a continent marred by centuries of conflict of culture and history, this provided a new canvas for the future resolution of the ‘Northern’ problem. It was a brighter canvas, a wider and more assuaging one. While its influence was only one among many, it was a critical one. Just as people point to the rapid economic transformation of Ireland as an example of the success of the European economic project, so it is right to hold up Northern Ireland as an example of the success of the European social project.
Ireland owes a lot to the European Union. It is difficult to believe we would enjoy the political stability in the North or the economic progress in the South we do today without it. This should give us pause for thought when we reflect on Ireland ’s place within the EU and our responsibility towards it.
Thanks in no small part to the EU the peace process in Northern Ireland is now rightly lauded across the world as a sign of hope that age-old conflicts can be resolved. By any standard it was and continues to be a remarkable achievement. Yet it remains a process. I believe it continues to be a robust and secure process. My confidence in it is strengthened by growing signs of maturity around formerly intractable issues such as parades.
In this regard the Orange Order deserves credit for what I believe are sincere and convincing efforts to promote dialogue and understanding. These should be acknowledged and reciprocated. Attacks on Orange Halls, such as those which took place last week around Armagh , deserve to be unequivocally condemned. They are symptomatic of a sectarian pathology which is evil and has to be continually challenged in our selves and every aspect of social, religious and political life.
Efforts to deal with the past are also important and may give deeper roots to the stability we now enjoy. The sensitivities around the commemorations of the tenth anniversary of the Omagh bombing, however, remind us just how difficult a task this will be. Let me take this opportunity to appeal directly to those who were responsible for the Omagh bombing. Before the innocent children, women and men you massacred I appeal to you to do the right thing before God. I appeal to your hearts and human dignity. Give yourselves up to justice in this world before you face judgement in the next. I also appeal to those who have information which could lead to the arrest and conviction of those who made or planted the Omagh bomb. You also have a duty before God to give that information immediately to the police. The families of those killed and the surviving victims have suffered enough. Help them to receive justice. If you have any humanity left in your heart at all, do all that you can to ease at least a little of their pain.
The pain which hovers below the surface of so much of life in Northern Ireland is a constant reminder of another important dimension of the European project – the power of memory.
Both personally and collectively, memory shapes who we are and how we act in the present. If we live apart from our memory and the influences which shape it, we detach ourselves from our deepest roots. Positive memories can encourage and sustain us. They are a source of wisdom and strength in the face of new and challenging situations. Negative memories can haunt us and hold us back. They can make us fearful and vulnerable in the face of new and challenging situations. With help and support we can hope to be healed of these memories. To suppress memory, on the other hand, is perhaps the most dangerous route of all. It leaves us rudderless with neither root nor hope. We have little wisdom to draw on, no experience or tested values to guide us, especially when challenges come.
And this brings me to my second point, the future of Christian memory and values in Europe .
Christian memory and values in Europe
In 1999 I attended the second Synod of Bishops on Europe . It had as its theme Jesus Christ Alive in His Church – the Source of Hope for Europe. One of the propositions of the Synod Fathers asked the European Institutions and the States of Europe to recognise that a proper ordering of society must be rooted in authentic, ethical and civic values, shared as widely as possible by its citizens. In the final message, the Synod Fathers called upon the Leaders of Europe to do a number of things;
to protest against the violation of human rights of individuals, minorities and peoples;
to pay utmost attention to everything that concerns human life from the moment of its conception to natural death and;
to pay attention to protect the family based on marriage, for these are the foundations on which our common European home rests.
The Synod Fathers also asked European Leaders to care for migrants and to give the young people of Europe reasons to hope in the future.
In 2003, in his subsequent reflection on the Synod, Pope John Paul II acknowledged that the institutions of Europe promoted the unity of the continent and were at the service of humanity. He noted with approval the aim of the EU at that time to propose a model of integration which would be supported by the adoption of a common fundamental Charter. This objective continues today in the form of the Lisbon Treaty and the associated Charter of Fundamental Freedoms.
Pope John Paul II, while noting his respect for the secular nature of the European Institutions, went on to ask that any such Treaty would include a reference to the Religious and Christian Heritage of Europe . He also asked that three things would be recognised:
1. The right of Churches and Religious Communities to organise themselves freely in conformity with their proper convictions;
2. That the Union respect the specific identity of the different religious confessions and make provision for a structured dialogue between the European Union and those confessions;
3. That the union would have respect for the juridical status already enjoyed by Churches and Religious Institutions within the States of the Union .
Much progress has been made in these areas. Ireland , as you know, was among the first countries in Europe to initiate the proposed ‘structured dialogue’, which is now legislated for in the Lisbon Treaty. This has been a very positive and welcome development. It is only one of the many reasons why the Catholic Church, as indicated by various Papal and Synodal reflections, is generally positive towards the European project and its founding ideals.
But this is a qualified support. As the recent referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland suggests, at least some of those who were previously enthusiastic about the founding aims of the EU, both social and economic are now expressing unease. The reasons for this are complex. But one reason influencing some Christians may be what Pope John Paul II described as the ‘loss of Christian memory’ in European institutions and policy. Successive decisions which have undermined the family based on marriage, the right to life from the moment of conception to natural death, the sacredness of the Sabbath, the right of Christian institutions to maintain and promote their ethos, including schools, these and other decisions have made it more difficult for committed Christians to maintain their instinctive commitment to the European project.
This coincides with a fairly widespread culture in European affairs which relegates manifestations of one’s own religious convictions to the private and subjective sphere. It has not been unknown, for example, for individuals to have to defend their right to hold political, public or legislative office within EU institutions while professing a public commitment to their Christian faith, sometimes against very public and hostile challenge.
Ignoring this trend within the EU and its impact on people of faith has inevitable political and social consequences, not least on levels of support for the project itself. On the one hand, as Pope Benedict asked recently, ‘if the governments of the Union want to be “closer” to their citizens, how can they exclude from Europe’s identity an essential element like Christianity with which a vast majority continues to identify themselves?’. On the other hand, ‘A community that is built without respect for the authentic dignity of human beings, that forgets that each person is created in God’s image, ends up not doing any one any good.’
This is why it may be important for the EU to look again at a prevailing pragmatic attitude that compromises on essential human, moral and social values on the basis of the lowest common denominator. The experience of many Christians within the EU is that this lowest common denominator invariably coincides with the secular and relativist tradition within Europe – that which denies moral absolutes with an objective basis - rather than the religious view. In the words of Pope Benedict, ‘We end up this way spreading the view that “judging the goods” [of Europe ] is the only way for moral judgement and that having a common good is synonymous with compromise. In reality, if reaching compromises is a legitimate act of balancing interests, it becomes a common evil every time it involves agreements that are harmful to man’s nature.’
Such an approach ends up with Christians as such being denied the right to intervene in public debates or at least having their contribution dismissed as an attempt to protect unjustified privileges, such as, for example the right to employ people who support the ethos of a Christian institution.
The same might be said of positions taken over stem-cell research, the status of same-sex unions, the primacy of the family based on marriage, the culture of life – the prevailing culture and social agenda within the EU, would at least appear to be driven by the secular tradition rather than by the Christian memory and heritage of the vast majority of member states.
This is in stark contrast to the prevailing political and social culture of the United States of America , a culture which prides itself on the separation of Church and State and on its diversity. Is it possible that the US has actually been more successful in balancing diversity with respect for religious freedom and conviction than the EU?
I was intrigued to discover last weekend that it was quite natural to expect the US presidential candidates to answer direct questions about their commitment to faith, their willingness to support faith based organisations, their position on moral issues and how it would affect their appointment of public officials. I look forward to the day we have the same level of openness and choice in our own elections here in Ireland and in Europe . Maybe then more people will be convinced that we are living in a democracy which is confident about diversity and respects the freedoms of all.
As it is, in Ireland, as in much of the EU, the prevailing political correctness and dominant media culture is one of relegation of the search for truth and the value of religion in society in favour of a political environment without God.
In this context, it is not surprising that we might speak of a European continent that is losing confidence in its future. From its foundation the EU is an historical, cultural and moral identity even before it is a geographic, economic or political objective. In the words of Pope Benedict ‘it is unthinkable that we can build an authentic common European house by disregarding the identities of the peoples of this continent of ours…. It is an identity built on a set of universal values in which Christianity played a role in moulding them, which gives it a role that is not only historical but also foundational vis-à-vis Europe. Such values, which constitute the continent’s soul,’ Pope Benedict continues, ‘must continue in the third millennium as a “spark” of civilisation.’
Without respect for its Christian memory and soul, I believe it is possible to anticipate continuing difficulties for the European project. These will emerge not only in economic terms but in terms of social cohesion and the continued growth of a dangerous individualism that does not care about God or about what the future might have in store.
And this brings me to my final and very brief point.
Culture of Violence and Aggression
The question of values cannot be detached from the culture of aggression and violence which is now giving rise to so much concern in our own country and further a field. We need a much more honest, respectful and constructive dialogue between the Bar, the Pulpit and the Press in Ireland and elsewhere about values in our society. Like the debate within the European Union, is it fair, is it representative of the views and convictions of the majority of people here in Ireland, that the media is so dominated by a secular view hostile to or disposed to relegate the value of religion? Is it possible to dream dreams and to imagine an approach to each other built on our shared humanism? Is it possible to agree that there are objective values for which we should have serious regard because of their implications for the good of society?
Could we agree for example, that peace is built on truth, including the stark truth that violence is ugly, demeaning and evil and therefore something never to glamorised, romanticised or trivialised?
Where is the honesty, for example, in arguing on the one hand that violence, promiscuity and lack of respect in the media has no influence on the attitude, values and behaviour of the young when billions is spent on advertising through the media precisely because of its power to influence attitudes and behaviour?
A great campaign has been launched recently which seeks to raise the awareness of the extent to which violence is being used, without question, as entertainment on TV, DVD, the internet and films. It asks that on the 2nd October, which is the UN World Day of Non-violence, Gandhi’s birthday, channels refrain from showing films containing violent scenes. This is a campaign which I wholeheartedly support. It poses important questions for the media which I hope they will not be afraid to ask.
Conclusion
The point at issue here is that we all share a responsibility to build the ‘ecology of peace’. We all have a role to play in influencing the social fabric and moral cohesion of a peaceful and what General Humbert often referred to as a ‘happy’ society in Ireland and the EU.
Violence dehumanises us all. Ten years after the Belfast Agreement it may be appropriate for Bar, Pulpit and Press to ask what price we have paid for the moral ambiguity in the peace process by way of encouraging a more general culture of aggression and violence. As it is there is danger that we will forget its evil and horror, that we will allow those with an interest in doing so to suggest it was justified or excusable. It was not. To fail to call it the evil that it was will undermine the ‘ecology’ of peace in the longer term.
Similarly, the claims and influence of secularism and relativism have gone largely unchallenged in Irish culture and media. It could be argued that they enjoy an uncritical acceptance which would never be afforded to religious faith. To a large degree this is true. This afternoon however I would like to suggest that there are signs of a small but significant change.
It may be that a growing number of people are questioning the prevailing orthodoxies of the ‘new’ Ireland , that they are reconsidering the value of faith, community and more traditional moral values. It may be that the still small voice of God is emerging with new appeal in Irish cultural and political debate, albeit it as a whisper!
That these three – Bar, Pulpit and Press - should continue to engage in this debate is essential for the ecology of peace in our own land. It is essential for success of the founding ideals of the European Union which I, with so may other Christians, wholeheartedly support.
Thank you.
Irland: Katholische Kirche kämpft gegen Homo-Rechte
Nov 07, 2008
Die katholische Kirche in Irland empfiehlt, gegen die geplante Einführung von Eingetragenen Partnerschaften gerichtlich vorzugehen. Grund: Kinder müssten geschützt werden.
Kardinal Seán Brady, der Vorsitzende der irischen Bischofskonferenz, erklärte auf einer kirchlichen Veranstaltung, dass die Anerkennung von gleichgeschlechtlichen Beziehungen gegen die Verfassung verstoße. Er bezieht sich dabei auf Artikel 41, in dem der besondere Schutz der Ehe festgeschrieben ist. Brady erklärte weiter, dass schwule und lesbische Paare nicht im "öffentlichen Interesse" seien. Als Grund nannte er Studien, die angeblich zeigten, dass Kinder, die nicht in einer traditionellen Familie aufwüchsen, eher arbeitslos, kriminell und drogenabhängig werden würden. Um welche Studien es sich dabei handelte, sagte der 69-Jährige nicht.
"Diejenigen, die auf die Verfassung, die moralische Unversehrtheit und das Wort Gottes wert legen – ebenso wie auf den kostbaren menschlichen Wert einer Ehe zwischen einem Mann und einer Frau als Grundlage der Gesellschaft – müssen alle rechtlichen und demokratischen Wege nutzen, um das geplante Gesetz zu stoppen", erklärte Brady. "Wenn wir wir das Wohl der Kinder und der Gesellschaft ernst nehmen, müssen wir versuchen, die Zahl der Kinder zu erhöhen, die von einer Mutter und einem mit ihr verheirateten Vater großgezogen werden."
Die Einführung von Eingetragenen Partnerschaften seien die "vielleicht größte Revolution in der Geschichte der irischen Familie", so Brady. Als Beispiele für negative Folgen von zu viel Toleranz gegenüber Homosexuellen nannte er negative Entwicklungen in Großbritannien und den USA.
Die irische Regierung will den Gesetzentwurf über "Civil Partnerships" in Kürze ins Parlament einbringen. Meinungsumfragen zufolge unterstützen vier von fünf Iren die Einführung von Eingetragenen Partnerschaften. Gut die Hälfte spricht sich zudem für die Öffnung der Ehe aus.
Homosexualität ist in dem katholischen Land erst seit 1993 legal.
Abortion Bill goes against wishes of people
Oct 19, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady has voiced strong opposition to moves by some British MPs to impose abortion legislation on Northern Ireland, contrary to the democratic wishes of both Catholics and Protestants.
(Independent.ie, October 18 2008) In a statement co-signed by four other bishops with dioceses in the North, the Irish Primate appealed to the majority of Westminster MPs not to support a move by Labour backbencher Diane Abbot that would introduce the 1967 UK Abortion Act to Northern Ireland.
The view of the the five senior prelates was published on the eve of today's Pro-Life Rally at Parliament Buildings in Stormont against the Westminster initiative.
"This Bill has far reaching ethical implications," said Cardinal Brady. The Irish bishops' statement also called on MPs to ensure that any future debate on the law was solely the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Cardinal criticises EU attitude to Christian way of life
Sept 05, 2008
Growing unease among Christians at the direction in which the EU is headed may have been a factor in the recent rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters, the Catholic primate, Cardinal Seán Brady, has said.
(The Irish Times, August 25, 2008) Speaking at the Humbert Summer School in Co Mayo, the cardinal said the "prevailing culture and social agenda" within the EU appeared to be driven by the secular tradition "rather than by the Christian memory and heritage of the vast majority of member states".
The Catholic Church, he said, was "generally positive towards the European project and its founding ideals", but this was "a qualified support".
"As the recent referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland suggests, at least some of those who were previously enthusiastic about the founding aims of the EU, both social and economic, are now expressing unease," he said.
The cardinal made his comments while delivering the Bishop Stock address in St Patrick's Church of Ireland Cathedral in Killala, the keynote event of the Humbert school, which concluded yesterday. He spoke of "a fairly widespread culture in European affairs which relegates manifestations of one's own religious convictions to the private and subjective sphere".
To ignore "this trend within the EU and its impact on people of faith has inevitable political and social consequences, not least on levels of support for the project itself", he said.
It was "why it may be important for the EU to look again at a prevailing pragmatic attitude that compromises on essential human, moral and social values on the basis of the lowest common denominator", he said.
"The experience of many Christians within the EU is that this lowest common denominator invariably coincides with the secular and relativist tradition within Europe - that which denies moral absolutes with an objective basis - rather than the religious view."
Such an approach ended up with Christians "being denied the right to intervene in public debates or at least having their contribution dismissed as an attempt to protect unjustified privileges, such as, for example, the right to employ people who support the ethos of a Christian institution".
The cardinal said one reason influencing some Christians' view of the European project may be what Pope John Paul II described as the "loss of Christian memory" in European institutions and policy.
"Successive decisions which have undermined the family based on marriage, the right to life from the moment of conception to natural death, the sacredness of the Sabbath, the right of Christian institutions to maintain and promote their ethos, including schools - these and other decisions have made it more difficult for committed Christians to maintain their instinctive commitment to the European project," he said.
He contrasted the situation in Europe with that in the US, "a culture which prides itself on the separation of church and state and on its diversity". He was "intrigued to discover last weekend that it was quite natural to expect the US presidential candidates to answer direct questions about their commitment to faith, their willingness to support faith-based organisations, their position on moral issues and how it would affect their appointment of public officials". He looked forward "to the day we have the same level of openness and choice in our own elections here in Ireland and in Europe".
"Without respect for its Christian memory and soul, I believe it is possible to anticipate continuing difficulties for the European project. These will emerge not only in economic terms but in terms of social cohesion and the continued growth of a dangerous individualism that does not care about God or about what the future might have in store."
Cardinal's Irish cheer
Jul 25, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady returned to Ireland this week with a bagful of wonderful memories, capped by the warmth of the large Irish community in Penrith.
(penrithpress.com.au, 25 July, 2008) He said he was overwhelmed by the welcome of the Sydney residents during the recent World Youth Day (WYD) celebrations.
"I congratulate the people of Sydney and Australia for a most wonderful WYD and I am very pleased to see so many young people showing a different way to overcome self-centered ways of living," Cardinal Brady told the Penrith Press.
He visited the thriving Penrith Gaels Cultural and Sporting Club on Monday afternoon where he enjoyed the hospitality of his delighted countrymen over a lunch.
"I always have high expectations of WYD having been there for the first one 23 years ago but Sydney exceeded even my high expectations," Cardinal Brady said. Keen to meet members of the large Irish community in NSW, he was taken to the Penrith Gaels by the Rev Father Tom Devereaux, who runs a welfare centre in Bondi and was in charge of the nearly 1000 Irish WYD pilgrims.
Proving that the world is indeed a small place, Cardinal Brady was surprised to meet the Rev Father Tim McKinney, whom he had ordained three years ago in County Armagh.
"He and his mother Collette are visiting family in Penrith and it's lovely to meet them here as they are from my county," he said. "I am obviously thrilled to meet Irish descendants and immigrants in Penrith and I am surprised at their large numbers."
The Penrith Gaels boasts a membership of over 4000 members though only 10 per cent are Irish, according to a club official.
The rest come from across western Sydney and beyond.
Irish Vice-Consul Louise Kelly and Cr Karen McKeown,attended the lunch along with club officials general manager David Cunningham, directors Pat and Tina Cullen and vice-president Noel Donohoe.
Later in the week Cardinal Brady also caught up with members of the Irish-Australian Welfare Bureau in Bondi, which supports immigrants and residents.
Jérusalem: un cardinal irlandais interdit de Mur des lamentations à cause de sa croix
May 15, 2008
Le cardinal Sean Brady, archevêque d'Armagh en Irlande, s'est vu interdire jeudi de l'Ascension l'accès au Mur des lamentations à Jérusalem parce qu'il portait une croix pectorale. Malgré la permission de la sécurité israélienne, un colon juif a lancé des menaces.
(bonnenouvelle.ch, 08-05-2008) La délégation chrétienne composée des chefs des quatre principales d'Eglises d'Irlande a dû rebrousser chemin.
Le cardinal Sean Brady a déclaré avoir accepté les excuses du gouvernement israélien après l'incident du 1er mai. Le prélat était à la tête d'une délégation œcuménique composée du chef de l'Eglise anglicane d'Irlande, et des Eglises presbytérienne et méthodiste.
La délégation voulait visiter le Mur occidental après qu'un officier de sécurité israélien ait assuré que les responsables religieux irlandais pouvaient garder leur croix.
Devant les menaces d'un colon, l'évêque Younan a demandé à l'officier d'en référer à ses supérieurs. Mais après avoir attendu en vain, le groupe a décidé de s'en aller, pour éviter une confrontation avec les extrémistes.
Les prélats ont déploré l'incident, déclarant qu'ils n'avaient pas l'intention de créer des problèmes, étant en visite pastorale en Terre Sainte pour promouvoir la paix et la compréhension mutuelle.
Un porte-parole du gouvernement israélien a déclaré que les quatre responsables religieux seraient les bienvenus s'ils effectuaient une autre visite à Jérusalem.
Pas le premier incident du genre
Ce n'est pas la première fois que des responsables chrétiens doivent faire face à des marques d'intolérance religieuse en visitant le Mur occidental, lieu sacré pour les juifs.
En novembre dernier, le rabbin du Mur Shmuel Rabinovitch avait également exigé qu'un groupe d'évêques autrichiens emmené par le cardinal Christoph Schönborn, archevêque de Vienne, cachent leur croix avant de pénétrer dans l'enceinte du Mur.
Ils s'étaient alors retirés. Notons que lors de sa visite historique au Mur des lamentations, le dimanche 26 mars 2000, le pape Jean Paul II n'avait pas ôté sa croix malgré les protestations de juifs ultra-orthodoxes.
Pour la première fois dans l'histoire, un pape s'était rendu au Mur des lamentations, le lieu le plus sacré des juifs vénéré comme l'unique vestige du Temple de Salomon.
Secular Europe prompts Christian skepticism
Apr 18, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady of Armagh, Ireland, has called upon European leaders to recognize the concerns of Christian moralists, saying that hostility to the faith is threatening European unity.
Rome, Apr. 17, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Irish cardinal said that many Christians have grown skeptical about the European Union because "an expectation that a secular, relativist and utilitarian approach dominates ethical considerations." He said that efforts to change the legal definition of marriage have fueled that skepticism, draining the enthusiasm that Christians might feel for the European Union.
Saying that the unity of the continent can best be preserved through a clear commitment to shared moral principles, the cardinal suggested efforts to develop "a Europe of values."
EU should respect Church's teaching
Apr 17, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady has called for “a Europe of values” in which the European Union respects the Church’s teaching on marriage and euthanasia.
(totalcatholic.com, April 16, 2008) Speaking in Rome, he said that in an increasingly technocratic and economic-driven society, the vision and values which inspired the EU initially could be lost.
“Developing the concept of a Europe of values remains a critical but somewhat unresolved dimension of the European Union,” the cardinal said.
He said he noted that some Christians were suspicious of the EU in matters of ethics and he said it would be regrettable if people misjudged or misrepresented developments on the assumption that the EU was hostile to religious or ethical values.
“People of religious faith who may be natural enthusiasts of the concept of a European Union, increasingly approach European developments with scepticism,” he said.
“They have an expectation that a secular, relativist and utilitarian approach dominates ethical considerations,” he explained, adding that it would appear that the right to maintain a distinctive ethos in religious institutions was constantly under threat”.
Cardinal Brady said issues such as “the nature of marriage, the family or the origin and end of life have to be constantly defended against a dominant centralising and standardising tendency.”
Il cardinale Sean Brady elogia il primo ministro in via di dimettersi
Apr 05, 2008
Il cardinale Sean Brady, arcivescovo di di Armagh, ha voluto elogiare il primo ministro irlandese, Bertie Ahern, che ieri ha preannunciato la sua volontà di dimettersi il 6 di maggio.
(Radio Vaticana, 04/04/2008) DUBLINO - "Attraverso l'impegno nel cercare di mantenere una linea di continuità per quanto riguarda la pace dell'isola, coltivando e facendo aumentare il rispetto nelle relazioni che intercorrono a tutt'oggi tra Irlanda e Britannia, il legame tra Bertie Ahern e la società civile irlandese è di proporzioni enormi". Questo l’elogio del cardinale Brady. Una sorta di ringraziamento verso il primo ministro che, nel 1995, volle istituire un tavolo di dialogo stato/chiesa, intorno al quale i rappresentanti ecclesiastici si incontravano regolarmente con i ministri del governo per discutere problemi di comune preoccupazione.
Confession is now the 'forgotten sacrament'
Apr 01, 2008
Preaching at Knock Shrine in County Mayo yesterday, the Primate of All-Ireland also linked the decline in confession to a wider spiritual crisis in values in an increasingly violent and celebrity-obsessed society.
(independent.ie, March 31 2008) He called on pilgrims attending a special Divine Mercy Sunday service to pray for a renewal of the traditional practice of confessing personal sins to a priest for absolution, a central feature of Irish Catholicism until a few decades ago.
"When we cease to worship God, we can lose the sense of direction and of purpose in life," the 68-year-old Cardinal Archbishop of Armagh warned.
He observed that the consequences of today's spiritual crisis in society -- or a crisis of values -- were becoming increasingly evident.
"We are becoming a more heartless, less forgiving and a less merciful society," he said.
"You see it in an increasingly aggressive and competitive attitude, in the more frequent resort to violence, in the relentless pursuit of the vulnerabilities of celebrities and public figures, for entertainment rather than for legitimate public interest and in the merciless culture of image compliance, not least among the young."
Cardinal Brady also suggested that this crisis was probably linked to our increasing departure from the practice of the Catholic faith, and to our loss of a sense of our being created and therefore dependent on a Creator other than ourselves.
"The problem cannot be addressed by social or political initiatives alone," he said.
"Our society needs a change of heart about God, about the Church, about living, enjoying and sharing a faith which makes us more loving and human."
Referring to yesterday's Gospel reading, Cardinal Brady quoted Christ's words to his apostles after the Resurrection that 'those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven.'
"What incredible words," added the Cardinal. "What consoling words. The mercy of God is completely available to us. It is willingly and generously offered."
Cardinal points to spiritual crisis in violent society
Mar 31, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady has said there is an increasingly aggressive attitude in society leading to a more frequent resort to violence.
(Belfast Telegraph, March 30, 2008) In his homily for the Divine Mercy Sunday Mass at the Knock Shrine, the Cardinal also attacked what he said was a relentless pursuit of the vulnerabilities of celebrities and public figures, for entertainment rather than for legitimate public interest.
The Cardinal said confession has become all but a forgotten sacrament for a significant number of people and there is a spiritual crisis in our society.
Cardinal Brady calls on Catholics to go to confession during holy week
Mar 15, 2008
Cardinal Sean Brady has delivered his St Patrick's Day sermon at St Patrick's Cathedral in Armagh.
(belfasttelegraph.co.uk March 15, 2008) In it he called on all Catholics to take the opportunity to make peace with God by going to confession during Holy Week.
He also invited all Irish people who have lost their connection with the faith to rediscover it.
Cardinal Brady's comments on secular EU rejected
Nordirland: Kardinal Brady ruft dazu auf, den Weg des Friedens weiterzugehen
Jérusalem: un cardinal irlandais interdit de Mur des lamentations à cause de sa croix
Il cardinale Sean Brady elogia il primo ministro in via di dimettersi