Letters To The Editor 2005-04-15
The Pope
Village failed to portray the true pope
We all pull our punches, out of (misguided?) politeness, when confronted with deeply held religious belief, but has not Village gone overboard a little and abdicated its responsibilities as a serious journal in recent weeks? A fortnight ago your issue (2 April) contained a glowing tribute to the old Pope, a tribute to the Born-again Bono and rounded off with a full page in praise of the Church of Scientology! Then last week's (8 April) edition contained a nine-page article on John Paul II which managed to completely ignore his wartime passivity, while asserting that philosophically he was an existentialist!
Those tempted to wade through the late Pope's works in search of meaning, might be better served by reading The Roads to Freedom by that other Jean-Paul, the truly great existentialist thinker, Sartre. Admirers of Karol Wojtyla think that the attacks on his war record are mere rhetorical point-scoring. If any of them read Sartre's great homage to the Resistance, they might begin to understand that there is no more important question mark over the life of John Paul II (and over the Catholic church in general).
Probably most of us would have just kept our heads down and got on with life under a Nazi occupation, as the late Pope did. But hopefully, most of us would feel a little shame, and would certainly give up all pretensions to the future moral leadership of mankind. Hopefully most of us would have the humility to concede that any one of the anonymous partisan and resistance fighters would forever after (if they lived), have a better right to speak of ethics and morality, even if they were illiterate peasants or workers.
History will judge Karol Wojtyla for what he was, a decent but wrong-headed and limited man who was stuck in a time-warp of the pre-war Poland of his childhood. Whether you think he was right in his views or not, he could only be "Great" if the great moral issues of the 20th century revolved around his obsession, sexual politics. Sexual politics may seem important now, but how can anyone dispute that the great moral challenge of the 20th century was actually the rise of fascism?
We can indulge ourselves in culture wars over life-style choices, only because a previous generation confronted and defeated fascism. Karol Wojtyla, Professor of Ethics and Pope, never seemed to grasp that. John XXIII realised (without any leadership from then Pope Pius) just how evil fascism was. He was actively anti-fascist throughout the war. He attempted to set up a Church that could not be led astray by one misguided man, as Pope Pius had led the church astray under fascism.
The church that John XXIII attempted to build could have provided a powerful bulwark against the return of fascism. John Paul II undid all that work because he had not the vision to understand it.
The adulation accorded to the Pope after his death is just meaningless, more post-modern nonsense. I say this because I believe that in no other age could an opinion leader be so valued for everything except his opinions.
It was up to Village to question the lightweight consensus that dominated the Irish media's treatment of Karol Wojtyla's death, and in my view, it failed.
Tim O'Halloran
Dublin 11
Gerry Adams statement
End to criminality needed to believe in IRA disbandment
The recent announcements by the President of Sinn Féin, Gerry Adams, asking for the disbandment of the IRA, must be treated with a degree of caution. Until such time as the issue of criminality, i.e. robberies, tax scams, protection rackets, are finished with can we take this seriously.
I know many people who have given long hard lives to the service of a United Ireland and they are disgusted of what has happened since and well before 1994 on these issues.
Paul Doran
Dublin 22
Hospitals
Religious conversion in our hospitals
As last bastions go, it could be said that our hospitals are up there with the best of them, as far as Irish Catholic Church power is concerned, anyway. Far be it from me to criticise Catholicism per se, but why does there appear to be that olde world deference to mother church in those wards and corridors where we wait on trolleys and hope not to die before getting treated? And she tends to get in the way a bit, too.
Case in point. Last year we accompanied a young person to Dublin where the patient had to undergo an intensive series of crucial tests over a five-hour period. On arrival at the fine hospital early in the morning after a long journey the evening before, and with a degree of trepidation as to what was being faced by our young charge, I was immediately put off by the sight, right inside the door, of a huge emaciated figure of a Christ nailed to a cross, hanging on the wall.
The phrase "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter here" flashed through my mind. All down along that corridor there were different Catholic icons of varying sizes to admire, or be repulsed by. I went to buy a newspaper in the hospital shop after seeing the patient put to bed, and was again assailed by an in-your-face giant statue of a 7ft saint I think, by the shop, and outside of what appeared to be a chapel/church.
A lot of hospital space taken up already on the religious front and I'd not even yet seen the principals who were to be involved in the morning's proceedings.
Back to the ward and everything began. The doctors/specialists and nurses were brilliant and our part was to keep the patient awake as we were told there would be times when the urge to sleep would become overpowering because of injections and low sugar count etc. We were intent on our tasks when in waltzes someone, uninvited, who was all smiles as if we were all having a ball, and announces:
"Oh, I'm the 'pastor' and my job is to make sure everyone is doing fine!" Still the smile, fixed on the face like part of the smart semi-uniform this person was wearing.
It was as if our participation in the youngster's welfare was secondary to the interests of a stranger who patently wished to take over and tell us how good we were all feeling at this very private and important time in our lives.
The 'pastor' was wearing an attractive solid button with a black crucifix on a white background. Fine quality workmanship. It reminded me of the button worn by Liam Neeson in Schindler's List. That too, in spite of what it represented, was a superbly made piece of jewellery. I've an eye for that sort of thing.
Back to the story. I/we remained calm, and on our best behaviour, said nothing, and just stared back. This worked well, because after about a minute of self-conscious shuffling about, not being used to being ignored, the person departed, quietly this time. We got through that day, and later results showed the young person was going to be OK. We are eternally grateful to the doctors and staff of the hospital who put our minds at rest after a very worrying time. The holy stuff we could have done without.
I had occasion to be rushed to my local hospital late last summer with appendicitis, and where I'd previously, years ago, objected to an admissions question regarding "what religion are you?" But that's another story.
This time I was being wheeled to surgery, and a young woman, who told me it was her first week on the job, asked me the same question. We had a laugh about it and I said: "Put down 'atheist', and she retorted with a chuckle: "How do you spell that?" I replied bravely, through the pain: " I before E except after C, but consider the exceptions to the rule."
"You're a caution, boy," she whispered, as we crashed through the flaps of the operating theatre. When I came to later, and this is true, I swear, there stood a priest in the middle of my ward, dressed in full regalia, shaking holy water at us generally, and I'm convinced, at me specifically. We had brief eye-contact, and I saw a look of horror cross his handsome face.
We've never met but we know each other in that uniquely Irish way which has us well clued in to the shortcomings of others. A great trick. He must have thought the anti-christ had awoken. I think I croaked: "Don't you splash yer stuff on me!"
Well, I was doped up to the gills, and there may or not have been a word or two said which I'm uncertain of, but you get the gist. There's no getting away from 'em, is there, when the need to attend a hospital is paramount? If only there was some other way....
Robert O'Sullivan,
Bantry
Giuliana Sgrena
RTÉ's journalists failed to report on two other Italian stories
I welcome the article (2 April), by your columnist 'Meejit', expressing deep concern for his fellow journalist Italian Giuliana Sgrena, who was attacked and shot leaving Iraq after being held hostage for several weeks. I wish to express my concern for the RTÉ brigade of journalists who jumped on the gravy train to Rome recently, and only reported on one major story – the death of Pope John Paul II.
In the newspapers there were brief references to the grave upset by the Italian public at the shooting of this journalist and her rescuer Mr Calipari. Also in the last two weeks Mr Berlisconi's party lost power in 11 out of 13 centres in Italy.
Mr Berlisconi had supported the coalition of the willing by sending troops to Iraq. For RTÉ'S battalion of journalists to miss these two stories is shocking. However, for them to report on these stories would mean having to accept that over 85 per cent of Italians were against the war in Iraq.
We also had to wait for the Madrid train bombings to be told that over 95 per cent of Spaniards were against the Iraq war, supported by AZNAR by sending troops.
The reporting of these two events would mean some RTÉ journalists taking risks. Since the jailing of Kevin O' Kelly for defending his sources of information, the fear that stalks RTÉ News and Current Affairs Division is awesome!!
Peter Kennedy
Dublin 13
Green Party
The Invisible Green Party
I've just discovered something in Irish politics which nobody else seems to know about. Village has name for investigative pieces, so I thought it the perfect outlet to break this story. Prepare yourself.
Thanks to intensive use of the Freedom of Information Act I can reveal that there exists a group of elected individuals in Dáil Eireann (I believe six, but details are sketchy) who form a secret sect. This political sect rarely speaks of itself and its members operate in the style of the ninja – stealthy and unnoticed. This group is known only as "The Green Party".
This "Green Party" has been covertly contesting elections as far back as 1982. Evidently, they detest the limelight, actively shunning publicity. I believe they have at least one public relations officer whose sole purpose is to ensure the party receives no media coverage whatsoever.
Their methods and policies are well hidden, but tales of dendrophilic practices are widespread. Please, the truth must be made public. The people must know that the rumours are true – there is a Green Party!
Michael Pidgeon
Co Dublin
1916 Rising
Bonar Law backed the civil war
While I think that both Colm Mc Aongusa and Pat Muldowney (Village 8 April) are a bit extreme in their denunciation of Pierce Martin's ideas on 1916 (2 April), I agree with the core of both their positions. Home Rule was not delivered by what Pierce Martin calls a "developed democratic system". Pat Muldowney is nearer to the truth when he says that "Home Rule was rendered meaningless by the Ulster Unionist's mutiny against parliament". The Unionist threat of civil war would not have succeeded, however, but for the backing of Bonar Law leader of the Conservative Party in 1912.
In 1912 nearly half a million Ulster Unionists signed a covenant to use "all means necessary", including civil war, to resist an act of parliament giving limited home rule to Ireland. This threat of civil war was explicitly backed by Bonar Law leader of the Conservative opposition in parliament. Bonar Law showed his contempt for the democratic institutions he was elected to uphold by declaring that "there are things stronger than parliamentary majorities". In addition he said that "Unionists would be justified in resisting by all means in their power including force" and that he could "imagine no length of resistance to which Ulster will go in which I will not be ready to support them".
In response to this the Asquith's Liberal government failed to defend its own act of parliament. One of the Liberal government's own backbenchers declared in exasperation at the time that he could not understand "how a government could look on at the organised and open preparations for civil war (by Ulster Unionists) without making an attempt to put them down".
After that many nationalists came to the conclusion that force and threats of force were more effective than constitutional means in achieving results. The price of Bonar Law's indefensible and unconstitutional recklessness in backing civil war and Asquith's failure to defend an act of parliament has been paid by everyone on this island ever since and is still being paid today.
It is arguable if the Home Rule project was ever going to evolve into a united and independent Ireland. I'm sure Colm McAongusa and Pat Muldowney would contest the idea that it ever would. However, I would remind them that even Patrick Pearse spoke from Home Rule platforms in 1912. Nationalist good faith in playing by democratic rules was, however, not reciprocated.
The failure of Home Rule, however it would have evolved, was not due to Irish political failure as is implied by Pierce Martin. The blame for plunging Ireland into violence and for the sectarian division of this island rests primarily with one of the most powerful politicians in the world at the time - Bonar Law leader of the conservative opposition in 1912.
Even Sir Ian Gilmour, a late 20th century Tory politician, admitted that "under Bonar Law ... the conservative party ... betrayed itself and came close to betraying its country". I would have left out the "came close".
A Leavy
Dublin 13
Growing up
Why is growing up so God damn hard ?
Some of us become independent from day one…others take a little bit longer and then there are the rest of us who just don't get it and plod along hoping that somewhere along the way life will all work out and somehow come together. I am the latter part of this equation. The outward part of me conveys this 24-year --old, God no almost 25-year-old woman who thought that being a 24-year/ 25- year-old woman would be a lot different from what it is. The person I thought I would grow into is not the person standing looking back at me. Life it seems is bloody scary!
And so the inner child seeks constant approval, is afraid of negativity and criticism, is a dreamer, longs for the good things in life and is willing to work for them but just can't seem to get it together. The outer woman has a Masters Degree in Political Science and an Honours Degree in Social Science and somehow finds herself unemployed with 42 rejection letters from employers, and with no success from the ten recruitment agencies that she's been to. And the outer woman has no idea why? I mean she's ready to accept anything in terms of a job… waitressing, reception work, administration, whatever is out there… at the moment I don't feel like I'm a participant of any Celtic Tiger age.
When I was younger and I thought of mid-twenties and contemplating being a lot older than I am, I envisioned myself in a suit, a nice car and a brief-case so I worked hard at my studies and strove on, believing that one day when I finished college that I could have whatever I wanted. Because let's face it, society encourages further education.
We are sold the idea that if we go to college, life will be a lot easier. But no one told me that by doing an Arts degree, or as in my case a Social Science degree that I would be marginalised because it is apparent that Ireland does not necessarily need Arts graduates. Ireland needs more IT people, engineering graduates, more accountants and solicitors.
I am not complaining, far from it, I am grateful for my education and I am grateful for living in Ireland. I suppose I just wish someone had told me all this information before I embarked on my degree choice. I just want to know where do I go from here? I am aware of people who have had to go back to college to do another course because they could not get employment with their existing degree.
This has resulted in them spending a total of five to six years in college in order to have a "required societal profession". This is almost as long as it takes to do a degree in medicine. What I'm asking is what happens to those of us who are creative? How can we contribute to our society? How can we compete with this "sales and targets" mentality? Or can we compete at all?
Growing up and living in Pearse Street all my life, getting a Masters Degree and a Social Science Degree, I thought that I was doing something better with my life. Now I'm looking at people who are the same age as I am driving around in their 2005 new cars, buying houses, all of whom finished their education with the leaving certificate.
I do not begrudge these people in any way they deserve everything in life, but I'm just wondering have I missed something? Am I missing the bigger picture? I know that you always have to start at the bottom of every job and work your way up to bigger and better roles. I would love an opportunity to be able to do this.
I have no connections and have suddenly realised that to make your way in life you need plenty of them. No one ever told me this common knowledge revelation either! I've now resorted to removing my Masters Degree from my Curriculum Vitae in the hope of gaining employment. The fact that I have had to do this makes all of my hard work a mockery!
Maybe I do feel closer to Boston than Berlin, because I feel if I were living in America all of us Arts graduates would be snapped up! I'm wondering if I am the only one out here feeling like this?
Dublin 2