MASS IN CHURCH OF THE NATIVITY OF OUR LADY
KEADUE, CO. ROSCOMMON
FOR OPENING OF O’CAROLAN HARP FESTIVAL
Sunday, 5th August, 2007
(Eighteenth Sunday of Year C)

“Take things easy, eat, drink, have a good time”. The words are familiar. They could serve as a good description of a mind-set and a life-style embraced by many in today’s world. Our Lord puts these words in the mouth of a wealthy man in his time, in the parable recounted in today’s gospel. The words are very like what fills pages upon pages of our daily newspapers, Sunday papers, perhaps, even more than weekday papers. Newspapers claim to reflect the views of the people who buy and read them, and they also hope to bring others round to share those same views, because this helps them to sell more newspapers. The contrast between these views and that life-style and today’s gospel is very obvious.

St. Paul, who knew the mind of Our Lord better than any other person – except Mary, his Mother – asks us instead to “look for the things that are in heaven where Christ is, sitting at God’s right hand”. This is vastly different from the vista of beautiful bodies on sun-drenched beaches, with cheap airline tickets to take us there, with abundance of good food and fine wines to match, all that makes for “taking it easy, eat and drink, have a good time”. All this, and much more, challenges our faith at this time. All this confronts us with choices: which way of life shall we choose? By whose standards shall we live?

If, in today’s newspapers, there are references to the Catholic Church and to our Christian faith, if there are any at all, these will almost certainly be all negative. The Church will be presented as out-of-date, out-of-touch with modern life and modern thinking, out of touch with modern science and with progressive and tolerant values. Faith is often presented as being a form of superstition, belonging to a time when people were uneducated and backward and poor and ready to believe whatever they were told. Incidentally, people who live in the country, as distinct from their sophisticated fellow-citizens who live in cities or towns, are often presented as being uneducated and backward – and therefore more prone to be religious believers!

The Bible is often presented as being a collection of myths and “fairytales”. The gospels are claimed to have been written a long time after the events they describe, when the so-called events have become legends, with no historical content. The story of Jesus as God made man is later invention, and not divine revelation. The Creeds of the Church are merely human speculations, with no historical credibility.

I wish to take only one example to show that such attacks on our faith are the real mythology of our time, while the truths of faith are solidly based also on historical truths. I refer to the very heart of our Mass, the words of consecration. They are very familiar to you:
“This is my body
which will be given up for you.

This is the cup of my blood,
the  blood of the new and everlasting covenant.
It will be shed for you and for all
so that sins may be forgiven.
Do this in memory of me”.
These words are reported with minor variations in the gospels of Mark and Matthew and Luke. The earliest of these gospels, Mark, was written about 30 years after the death of Jesus Christ. Matthew and Luke were probably about 10 years later. The very same words are found in St. Paul, who wrote some years earlier than any of the Gospels and who wrote what he had been told directly by Jesus himself about three years after the resurrection of Jesus. We must remember, also, that the gospels were spoken before they were written. They represent the preaching by the Apostles of the life-story and the teaching of Jesus, and this preaching began just after the resurrection of Christ and was widely spread before that preaching was written down in the form in which we have it in the gospels.

We in Ireland should be more familiar than most with how memories can be accurately preserved in oral tradition, long before they are put into writing. Our archives of folk tradition have many examples of the same story, repeated with substantially the same content but with minor variations in language, in different parts of Ireland, as widely separated as Kerry and Donegal, or Waterford and Tyrone, and over long periods of time. The stories were told and retold from generation to generation, long before they were written down. The stories remain substantially unchanged from generation to generation and from locality to locality, even though travel between the different areas was very limited. A remarkable feature of oral cultures is the accuracy of memory retention of stories told by story-tellers or ‘shanachies’ in such cultures. This was particularly the case if the words were in verse, like poems, or if they were set to music and sung. The great Glens of Antrim folklorist Seamus O’DeLargy, and the musical genius, Sean O’Riada, saved much of this from extinction.

What I have said about the accuracy of oral recall was particularly true of prayers and religious formulas, which were frequently repeated. I stress the power of oral cultures to record memories with an accuracy at least as great as the written records. Written records, therefore, are not the only records that count where historical facts are concerned. Furthermore, the New Testament writings were not as late in date as is often claimed; eye-witnesses of the life and teaching of Jesus were still alive when they were written; indeed, some of these writers were themselves either witnesses or had contact with eye-witnesses.

I have said that accuracy of recall is particularly true of religious formulas which were regularly and frequently repeated. No words were so regularly and so frequently repeated as the words of consecration at Mass. Since the resurrection of Christ, Mass was celebrated by Christians every day, or at least every Sunday. These words are our earliest record of the life and teaching of Jesus. Research has shown that these words go right back to the living voice of Jesus himself. The striking fact is that these words contain, in a concentrated form, the central doctrines of the teaching of Jesus, which are in fact the central doctrines of our Christian faith.

Only God can make a Covenant with mankind. God made the original covenant with the Jewish people on Mount Sinai, amid great and awesome signs and wonders. Only God could change this into a new covenant with the whole of mankind. Jesus did this at the last supper, saying:
“This cup is the New Covenant in my blood”

Jesus was thereby claiming to be God, and this claim goes right back to Jesus himself.

Only God can forgive sins. Jesus brings about the forgiveness of all the sins of all mankind, saying at the last supper: “This is my blood which is to be poured out for all”. (The Gospel account says “for many”, but “many” is used in Hebrew for “all”). These words go right back to Jesus himself.

Jesus died for our sins. Jesus said at the Last Supper:
“This is my body, given up for you”.

The words go right back to Jesus himself.

BEHOLD I STAND AT THE DOOR AT KNOCK
By Slawomir C. Biela
FOREWORD BY
CARDINAL CAHAL B. DALY
Archbishop Emeritus of Armagh
Primate Emeritus of All Ireland

2nd April 2007

Slawomir Biela has already published a number of books intended to help Christians to respond more generously and more effectively to their Christian vocation to holiness of life.  His approach is biblical throughout.  He selects passages of Holy Scripture and invites us to discover, with him, new depths of meaning in these passages and to apply them to our own lives and our relationship with God.  Among the passages so explored in this book are the words of Jesus about the whitewashed tomb, which outwardly appears beautiful but inside is full of decayed human flesh and “every kind of filth”.  Jesus applies this to the Scribes and Pharisees who appear on the outside to be models of moral and spiritual perfection, but inside are full of “hypocrisy and evil doing”.  Biela invites his readers to look beyond the pious externals and the religious routines of our own lives and honestly identify the sins and hypocrisies which fester there, but remain unnoticed until the light of God’s holiness reveals them. 

Biela brings another biblical text to bear on the whitewashed tomb: this is the text from the Book of Revelation to which the title of his book refers: “Behold I stand at the gate and knock.  If anyone opens the door to me I shall come in …”  Opening the door to admit the Lord lets light – the light of Christ – in to the dark tomb and reveals the hidden sinfulness which lurks there, but which we have carefully concealed from ourselves by keeping away from the light, by avoiding nearness to God.  The closer we come to God, the nearer we allow God to come to us, the more conscious we become of our own unworthiness, our own sinfulness. 

The root of all our sinfulness is our own pride, and the essence of our pride is that we do not admit our need of God.  To stand before God with empty hands is the beginning of our salvation.  There are many echoes of St. Thérèse of Lisieux in the writings of Slawomir Biela.  Her “little way” of humility, her search for the total truth about one’s self before God, and her total childlike trust in God’s merciful love, all these are central to Biela’s spirituality. 

The pride which lurks in the dark, closed tomb of our lives is the great enemy of holiness.  Biela points to the little-known fact that the waters of the Dead Sea have not always “dead”: more than six-and-a-half tons of life-giving water flow into the Dead Sea every day.  But this “living water” is polluted by the accumulation of salt already present in the Dead Sea, and it too becomes the enemy of all life.  Somewhat similarly, we ourselves are “deluged” by God’s life-giving grace, but the pride accumulating in our hearts obstructs the work of that grace in our lives.  Biela asks us never to forget that “at every moment somewhere in the world the Eucharist is being celebrated, …   the entire world is constantly being immersed in the Divine Sacrifice and flooded with an infinite number of graces”.  God’s merciful forgiveness, God’s revitalising grace, are constantly available to us, if only we will humbly admit our desperate need of God.   

Biela returns again and again to the place of Mary, Mother of Jesus, in our spiritual journey.  She is the servant of Jesus as Jesus is the Servant of the Lord.  She is the model of humility, seeing in the great things that happened to her and through her only reasons to glorify the Lord and to exult in Him who worked these marvels for her.  It is not accidental that Biela’s writings are in part an expression of the spirituality of the “Families of Nazareth Movement”, which, originating in Poland, has now become a world-wide Spiritual Movement. 

Biela’s writings are characterised by two complimentary insights: insight into the meaning of Holy Scripture and insight into human nature and its capacity for self-love and for self-deception.  Both these insights converge in his fourth chapter on “The pond of pride of human regard”.  He invokes the mythological figure of Narcissus: almost dead with thirst, in a parched land, Narcissus stoops down over a pond to drink.  Instead, he becomes totally absorbed with the reflection of his own face on the surface of the water, so mesmerised by the sight of himself that he forgets to drink and eventually dies of thirst.  In a similar way, we fall in love with our own talent, our success, our reputation, even our reputation for holiness, that our piety becomes less a worship of the living God and more a worship of our own pious Ego.   Conversion from the “Gospel according to Narcissus” to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, marks the beginning of our conversion; and the completion of our conversion is “to reach the bottom of our own nothingness so that God may become Everything”. 

And so we rejoin St. Paul’s hope and prayer for all of his children in faith: namely “that God may be all in us all”.   May this book by Slawomir Biela, and all his other writings, help many readers to open wide the door of their hearts and their lives to the One who stands there and knocks.

ADDRESS TO PRIEST OF ARDAGH AND CLONMACNOIS
IN POOR CLARE MONASTERY CHAPEL, DRUMSHANBO
AT MASS OF THANKSGIVING
TO MARK 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF MY
EPISCOPAL ORDINATION
1967-2007
6th August 2007

First, may I express my sincere thanks to Bishop Colm for his kindness in arranging for this Mass to mark the 40th Anniversary of my Episcopal Ordination. I am so pleased to be once more in the company of priest from Ardagh and Clonmacnois, with whom I worked in the service of the Lord for fifteen of the forty years of my episcopal ministry, and I thank the priests for coming to join with me and Bishop Colm on this day. My words today will not constitute a homily, but rather a series of reminiscences; but I am sure that you will allow me some indulgence in nostalgia on ‘the day that is in it’.

On 23rd May 1969, I had a telephone call from the Nuncio – Monsignor Sensi, later to become Cardinal Sensi – asking me to come to the Nunciature by 10.30 next day. I knew that he must have some important reason for asking me to come, and I spent a sleepless night in my home in Belfast.

Next day the Nuncio told me that the Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, had appointed me to be the new bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnois. This left me in a kind of daze. I knew very little about the diocese, except that my father was born there, in Keadue. That fact itself already constituted an important link with the diocese, and this helped greatly my settling in to the diocese as bishop, and, presumably, to my being welcomed into the diocese as bishop.

The date of the announcement of my appointment was fixed for Friday, 2nd June: it was the feast of the Sacred Heart and the First Friday of June – a very good omen for the future. Those days remain largely a blank in my memory and also in my diary: I was too dazed to record events except in the briefest terms, and often nor at all.

My first visit to the diocese, which was soon to become “my diocese”, was on Thursday 8th June. Accompanying by my younger brother, Patrick, I drove to Mohill to meet the Vicar General, Canon McLaughlin. He had a lovely lunch ready for me in the Parochial House in …, and after lunch he drove to Longford for my first view of St. Mel’s Cathedral and the Presbytery, and of the Bishop’s House, St. Michael’s, which was to be my new home. I met the Chapter in the Cathedral Presbytery and was very cordially welcomed by the Dean and Chapter. At a later date, closer to the actual ordination, I was formerly inducted into the diocese by the Chapter.

I noted in my diary that “the Cathedral is a delight, inside and out”. I noted also that I felt “happy and humble” with all that I saw and all those whom I met on that day of my first visit. Those early impressions and that first reaction were to be intensified over the next fifteen years. I felt humbled and privileged to inherit the pastoral care of a diocese where so many bishops and priests had laboured before me and had helped to form a faithful laity: in the words of the gospel, others had laboured and I had entered into their labours.

My pre-ordinational retreat was in a  convent retreat house of German and Italian nuns at Vicarello, near Lake Bracciano, in a lovely setting not far from Rome, recommended to me by Monsignor Conway, then Rector of the Irish College. On the way to Rome, I had stopped off in Paris and at Lourdes and had celebrated Mass at the Grotto. At each new stage of my life I have had the opportunity to visit Lourdes and to place the next stage of my life’s journey in the hands of Our Lady. During the retreat I read and re-read and prayed over the Gospels and the Pastoral Letters of St. Paul, as well as whatever I had been able to find in Paris bookshops about the ministry of the Bishop. There is no kind of centre and no courses available for preparation for the office of Bishop.  If there were, I suggest that the first person to apply for enrolment in such a course should first be sent for psychiatry assessment! … From my retreat at Vicarello, I still remember the cicadas chirping in the trees outside my bedroom window, and the murmur of the river which passed by the convent on its way to Lake Bracciano.

After the retreat and back in Rome, I had an audience with Pope Paul VI. He was most gracious and encouraging. And I told him that I had not pastoral experience and was apprehensive, he replied: “Don’t be afraid; Irish priests have a pastoral sense in their blood; and the priests and nuns and active laity in your diocese will help you”. I was soon to find out how true this was; I was supported by this help during my fifteen happy years in Ardagh and Clonmacnois. I mentioned my mother to the Pope and he immediately opened the draw of his desk, to find a rosary which he asked me to give to her: saying “Ask your mother to pray for me”.

The date, 16th July 1967, had been chosen for the ordination. It was the Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. The ordination liturgy was called “Consecration” at that time. A little niece of mine was coming her parents to Longford for the ceremony, and was all excited about what was going to happen. She wanted, as children do, to share her excitement with her class and her school. So she challenged her schoolmates: “Do you know where I am going next Sunday?”. The reply, of course, was ‘No’. Then, triumphantly, she replied: “I’m going to Longford for the consternation of my uncle Cahal”. She spoke more wisely than she knew! My mind and memory of that day are a blur for me. I remember meeting the priests of the diocese and speaking of how I looked forward to working with them to implement in the diocese the splendid vision of the Church as set out in the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

My first formal meeting with the priests of the dioceses was at the Clergy Conference. These were held in St. M|el’s College, Longford, in the curate’s house in Carrick-on-Shannon, in St. Mary’s Presbytery, Athlone, and in Dean O’Kane’s house in Granard. The first one that I attended was in Granard. I still remember the warmth of welcome I received on each occasion. Dean O’Kane – a formidable patriarch – was particularly generous in his words of welcome. With his endorsement, I felt somewhat less apprehensive about the future.

A few days after the ordination, I had visited Clonmacnois, with my sisters, Sheelagh and Rosaleen. I remember calling in the Church at Tang, thinking that this was in my new diocese. Clonmacnois was and remains very special in my memories of Ardagh. I always added ‘and Clonmacnois’ when I refer to my new diocese. I particularly remember the annual Masses there for the young people of the diocese. Above all, of course, I remember the visit to Clonmacnois of Pope John Paul II. That was indeed an historic occasion, and no one who was present will forget it. It had a deep impact on Pope John Paul II himself, and he referred to it more than once afterwards as one of the highlights of his visit to Ireland.

As I look back on my fifteen happy years in the diocese, which I often call the ‘golden years’ of my life, some things stand out for me amid a host of memories which find me forever to Ardagh and Clonmacnois. First, there are the last two years of my mother’s life, spent in Longford, and her death in St. Michael’s, early in the morning of 28th January, 1974, with all the family gathered round her bedside. May she rest in God’s eternal peace.  Then there is St. Mel’s Cathedral, the restoration work there and the new and reordered sanctuary and Blessed Sacrament Chapel, the tapestry depicting the Second Coming of the Lord in glory, and the Emmaus painting by Ray Carroll. Although not without pain at the time of the restoration, the Cathedral is now, even more than when I first visited it in June 1967, a place of prayer, of beauty and of peace.

There are humbling memories too. I remember one Christmas when, feeling out of sorts, I preached even longer than usual; frankly, I lost the thread of my homily but yet kept on talking! I had no defence when Father John Greene – one of the most honest men I ever met – came in to me next day and gave me a thorough dressing down. He told me that I was “killing religion in this parish with my long sermons”.

I shall nevertheless go on a little further to say that I remember the kindness and loyalty and the zeal of the clergy of this diocese, their pride in the diocese, their loyalty to their bishop, their brotherhood and camaraderie with one another. My class fellows, Tommy O’Brien and Michael Reid, have since passed on to their heavenly reward; but I sincerely felt all the clergy as my friends, and for this I thank you all.

I remember the kindnesses of all the Sisters of the diocese and the support which they gave to me in everything I tried to do.

This is the Feast of the Transfiguration, which, tradition tells us occurred on Mount Tabor. This is a conical-shaped mountain, raising steeply from the surrounding plain. A steep climb is needed to reach the top of the mountain. The road to the summit is a zig-zag one; anyone who has ever gone up that road in a Palestinian taxi will never forget the experience. It takes determination, persistence and perseverance to get to the top. At the top, exhausted and breathless from the climb, Peter and the others were rewarded by the sight of the glorified Lord and by the sense a power of the Divine Presence. Peter cried out: “Lord, it is good for us to be here”. It is good for us to be in the Lord’s presence when we pray. We bring the Church with us, we bring our own parish and diocese with us when we pray. To be men of prayer is the first condition of success in our ministry. We do need pastoral skills and pastoral planning, particularly at this difficult time in the life of the Church. But, more than any other skill, we need to be men of prayer. There is urgent need for more vocations to the priesthood; but, what the Church needs at this time is not just priests, but priests of prayer, holy priests. Let us pray, not simply:  “Lord, give us priest”, but rather: “Lord, give us holy priests and holy bishops.”

May I add also a reference to the great concern we should all have for the decline in the vocations to religious life for women. We must never forget the immense contribution which our Sisterhoods in this diocese and all over this country have made to the life of the Church and of the nation. We shall perhaps not fully appreciate their contribution until their convents are empty.

However, let us not be down-hearted. Let us remember the words which Julian of Norwich says are addressed to her by the Lord Jesus himself:
“All shall be well
and all shall be well,
and you shall learn for yourself
that all manner of things
shall be well”.

The Lord is with his Church, and therefore with our diocese, till the end of time. Let us say to him, with total trust and confidence,
“For all that has been, Lord, Thanks.
To all that will be, Lord, Yes.”

ADDRESS AT MASS OF THANKSGIVING
 IN ST. PATRICK’S CATHEDRAL, ARMAGH
ON 4Oth ANNIVERSARY OF MY EPISCOPAL ORDINATION
IN ST. MEL’S CATHEDRAL, LONGFORD
1967-2007
SUNDAY, 15th JULY 2007

I shall try to be brief, something I rarely succeeded in being during my active ministry!

On 16th July 1967 I was ordained Bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnois in St. Mel’s Cathedral, Longford. The liturgy of ordination of a Bishop at that time was called “consecration”. A little niece of mine announced proudly in school that, next Sunday, she was going to Longford for the “consternation” of her uncle Cahal! I was age 50 and had in the previous year celebrated 25 years of priesthood. My predecessor, Bishop James Joseph McNamee had been ordained Bishop at aged 50 and had served 40 years as Bishop until his death at age 90. It is time for me to pack my bags, as Pope John XXIII said near the end of his life. (Someone who wrote to me since my 40th anniversary informed me that Cardinal Logue had been 45 years a bishop when he died!)

In 1967 the Church was re-living its youth, with the Vatican Council still fresh in our memories and its programme of renewal challenging us in every aspect of the Church’s life. To adopt lines of the poet Wordsworth: “Bliss was it in those days to be alive, but to be young was very heaven”.

After fifteen very happy years in Longford, I had a heart attack, in February 1982. Before my convalescence was completed, I was asked to leave Ardagh and to go as Bishop to Down and Connor. Belfast in those years was experiencing the horrors and the torment of what we have come to call the Troubles. However, it was my native diocese, where I had lived a quarter-century of my priesthood, and I had the advantage of knowing its priests and its people. It was in Down and Connor that I felt I would be spending whatever time on earth was left to me. In the event, I spent eight years in Down and Connor.

Then, with shock and suddenness, came the sad news of the death during the diocesan pilgrimage to Lourdes, of Cardinal Tómas O’Fiaich, which occurred on 8th May, 1990. The news shocked the Archdiocese and indeed the whole nation. On the date in question I was in Glasgow, attending a meeting between the bishops in Belfast, Glasgow and Liverpool. It was there that I received the sad news by telephone.

The Cardinal’s Requiem Mass was celebrated on 15th May in this Cathedral. I had the privilege of being Chief Celebrant and preacher at this Mass. I still remember the sense of awe and the nervousness that I felt as I looked down at the packed congregation in this great Cathedral, gathered in sorrow at the death of their beloved Cardinal and in prayer for his eternal rest; nervousness also at the presence of so many distinguished public figures come to pay their tribute to the great Churchman and great Irishman who was Cardinal O’Fiaich.

The vacancy in the See of Armagh lasted for six months. There was naturally much speculation about the Cardinal’s successor. A Synod of Bishops was scheduled for the month of October 1990. I was present in Rome at the Synod.

On Sunday, 21st October that year, the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops invited me to concelebrate Mass with him in his private oratory. It was Mission Sunday. Dr. Sean Brady, then Rector of the Irish College, drove me to Cardinal Gantin’s residence. After Mass, the Cardinal told me privately that the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, had appointed me Archbishop of Armagh, though this would not be announced until 6th November 1990, Feast of All Saints of Ireland. As Dr Sean Brady drove me back to the College, I confided my secret to him, knowing that my secret would be safely kept to himself; so our present Archbishop was the first to know of my appointment. I spent the rest of that day in the College Chapel, praying as best I could after the shell-shock of the morning, praying for God’s grace for the next period of my life.

Two days after the announcement, I went to Armagh and met with the Archdiocesan Chapter. I shall never forget the warmth of the welcome I received from the late Dean MacLarnon – a long-time and dear friend of mine – and the rest of the Chapter.

My six years in Armagh were very happy for me and I formed a bond with the clergy and people of Armagh which remains as strong with me to this day as it was when I lived in Ara Coeli. The Troubles raged on apace in those years, but those working for peace and justice and reconciliation, those who believed in justice by the ways of peace, prevailed in the end. All those who prayed for peace throughout those bitter years have seen their prayers answered. We thank God for that. There is still a long way to go before the wounds of that time are healed and the bitternesses of those years are overcome, but what has already been accomplished offers good hope for the future.
Among those who worked tirelessly for peace and justice all through those years was my good friend the late Monsignor Denis Faul. May he rest in God’s eternal peace. As for my Armagh friends and classmates of seminary days, three of them had died before I came to Armagh: Father Owen Quinn, Father Andy McNally, and Father Malachy Coyle; a fourth died later, namely Canon Des Campbell. May they rest in peace after their labours in the Lord’s service. Father Michael Ward, of the same 1941 Ordination Class, is still happily with us.

High on the list of my many blessings in Armagh is the appointment in 1995 of Dr. Sean Brady as Coadjutor and his later installation as my successor. I have watched with pride and much satisfaction the progress of the Archdiocese in so many fields under his gentle guidance and wise leadership. The Archdiocese which we all love is in good hands. Above all it is in the hands of our good Lord himself. May God bless Archbishop Sean’s work, together with that of my, and now his, faithful and devoted Assistant Bishop, Bishop Gerry Clifford.

Last week I was trying to put finishing touches to a book which I have been writing on the Eucharist. Although many pages before the end of the book still remain to be written, I have composed the concluding page of the unfinished book. I want to end my words today with the last paragraphs of that coming book.

These are difficult days in the life of the Church. Remember the words which the great English mystic, Mother Julian of Norwich said were spoken to her by Our Lord in what she called her “Showings of Divine Love”:
“All shall be well,
and all shall be well,
and you will see for yourself,
that all manner of things shall be well.”

The Eucharist is God’s everlasting guarantee to us,

BISHOPS AND THE LAW 
ON PUBLIC MORALITY
Introduction
Cardinal Cahal B. Daly
July 2005

In 1997 the Irish Catholic Bishops published a collection of statements relating to constitutional and legislative change in matters of public morality, issued by them in the period 1973 to 1995. The proposal for such a collection was suggested in the first place by Jim Cantwell, who was at that time Director of the Catholic Press and Information Office; and it was he who wrote the introductory notes, giving the context in which each statement was issued.

The past quarter century has been marked by profound social change in Ireland; and this publication brought together in one cover a series of documents outlining Catholic Church teaching on some of the moral issues associated with that social change. Indeed the collection provided, for Catholics and for other interested parties, a conspectus of Church teaching  in this domain. Since Ireland had been in the past three or four decades a kind of laboratory of social change, change affecting State as well as Church and having important implications for Church and State relations, the publication had the further benefit of offering an easily accessible book of reference for historians of the period and for analysts of social change generally, Indeed, the topic has relevance, therefore, not only for Ireland but for similar situations elsewhere.

The social change occurring in Ireland in the period in question, however, has continued since 1995, and the Bishops have issued further statements on these issues since that date. The Bishops have, therefore, decided to reissue the volume, extending it so as to include episcopal statements issued between 1995 and 2005.

Having these statements in one cover so that they can be read collectively makes it easier to discern the basic principles on which Church teaching on these issues is based. It can also help the wider public to make informed judgements about the validity of the Bishops’ case, the nature and the cogency of the evidence which they advance for their conclusions, and the consistency of the bishops’ position on the various issued involved.

Wide Range of Statements
Many of the statements, like many of the proposed constitutional or legislative changes which evoked them, have to do with sexual morality. There is a danger that this could reinforce the common prejudice that the Church is unduly, if not exclusively, concerned with sexual morality. It is important, therefore, to stress (as the introduction to the 1997 edition of this collection stressed) that these texts are only part of the wide range of statements and pastoral letters issued by the bishops over the period covered by the present collection. It is timely to list some of these. From 1973 to the present, the Catholic Bishops of Ireland have issued eleven major Pastoral Letters. Seven of these were collected in a single volume, published by Veritas in 1979, with the title Justice, Love and Peace. Two of these Pastorals were devoted to social justice (The Work of Justice, 1977; and Work is the Key, 1992); three were on prayer and the family (Prayer in the Home, 1973; Handing on the Faith in the Home, 1980; Cherishing the Family, 1994): one was on Change in the Church (1972). Two extensive Pastoral Letters were devoted to marriage (Christian Marriage, 1969; and Love is for Life, 1985). One was addressed to The Young Church (1985). One Pastoral was devoted to the right to life, with  an important section on abortion and another section on violence in Northern Ireland (Human Life is Sacred, 1975). In 1998 the Bishops issued a Pastoral Document on Conscience. A further letter on the Right to Life was issued in 2001 to mark the Day of Life proclaimed by Pope John Paul for that year, and further Letters on the same theme were issued in 2002, relating to the abortion referendum of that year. A Pastoral Letter on Euthanasia was issued in 2002 to mark the next Day of Life. In 2003 the Bishops published a submission which they had made to the Government Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction. In 2004 Archbishop Sean Brady made a statement on behalf of the Episcopal Conference on Marriage and Family at a Seminar organised by IBC on Marriage and Family Life.

Two major statements were devoted to issues of world poverty and development, (Development, 1973 and 1982). One Pastoral Letter was devoted to the topic of the Church’s missionary outreach (Missions, 1978). During this same period, twelve statements were issued by the Bishops concerning Northern Ireland. Two statements addressed the question of immigration and two further statements related to economic justice (1970 and 1979), with a third statement entitled: Christian faith in a time of Economic Depression, (1983). Questions of war and peace were not overlooked: one major statement was devoted to the morality of nuclear weapons, with the title: The Storm that Threatens (1983). The question of European Unity was addressed in three statements. Two Episcopal Statements related to the abuse of alcohol. Others related to particular wars and conflicts (South Africa in 1986; Armenia in 1988; the Gulf War in 1991; Conflict in Rwanda in 1994 and in Bosnia in 1995.) Two statements were devoted to the problem of Aids (1987 and 1990). A statement was devoted to child sex abuse (1994) and this was followed by many related initiatives by the Bishops, such as the setting up of the Child Protection Office and the Child Protection Committee, the Hussey Commission, the College of Surgeons Report, the Lynott Report.  A Pastoral reflection on the issues raised by child sex abuse was issued in Lent 2005 with the title, “Towards Healing”.  One statement was directed to Charismatic Renewal (1993) and another to the New Age Phenomenon (1994). At the same time, Agencies of the Irish Episcopal Conference, such as the then Council for Social Welfare, the then Irish Commission for Justice  and Peace, the then Commission for the Laity, and Trocaire, all issued various statements related to issues within their respective remit.

Indeed, it would take a number of publications like this one to do justice to the Irish Bishops’ teaching and pastoral guidance in such areas as ‘The Bishops and Christian Faith in a Changing World’,  ‘The Bishops and the Family’,  ‘The Bishops and Respect for Life’,  ‘The Bishops and Social Justice’. 

No “State Enforcement” of Catholic Teaching
In the ongoing debate in Ireland about relations between Church and State, a number of misrepresentations about the Catholic Church’s position regularly recur. The texts of the successive statements collected here demonstrate very clearly that these are indeed misrepresentations and are without foundation. One of these is that the Catholic Church is asking the State to enforce Catholic teaching on all citizens; or differently put, that the Church is usurping the place of the legislature. The Bishops have repeatedly made it plain that this is not so. In the first statement printed here, which related to contraception, dated 1973, after stating that “no change in state law can make the use of contraceptives morally right”, the Bishops go on to say:
“It does not follow, of course, that the State is bound to prohibit the importation and sale of contraceptives. There are many things which the Catholic Church holds to be morally wrong, and no one has ever suggested, least of all the Church herself, that they should be prohibited by the State.

Those who insist on seeing the issue purely in terms of the State enforcing, or not enforcing, Catholic moral teaching are therefore missing the point”.

Statements to this effect were frequently made by the late Cardinal Conway, President of the Episcopal Conference from 1963 to 1977.

Openness and Transparency of Church-Government Relations
Cardinal Conway took steps also to correct  a further misconception regarding any dealings between Church and Government. It was sometimes suggested that these would typically take place in secret, by the “back door”, away from public notice. The Bishops, in Cardinal Conway’s time, adopted a policy whereby any meeting between a bishops’ delegation and government representatives would be announced in advance and would be conducted, so far as the Bishops were concerned, on the basis of a document prepared by them in advance and subsequently published. Thus all reasonable measures would be taken to ensure that all dealings between Church and Government were as open and transparent as possible.

Nevertheless, various misrepresentation of the Catholic Bishops position continued. In 1976, the Bishops issued another statement, “Restating the Principle”. In this, the Bishops repeated that:
“It is not the view of the Catholic hierarchy, that, in the law of the State,  the principles peculiar to our faith should be made binding on people who do not adhere to that faith”.

Instead, the Bishops emphasised, in both the 1973 and 1976 statements, that the question to be decided in matters of this kind – as far as state law is concerned – is the impact on society, which a change in the law would be likely to have.  The Bishops expressed regret that the “social dimension” of such issues is usually ignored, while
“instead the questions are discussed in the false context as to whether the State should impose Catholic moral teaching on all, irrespective of their beliefs – something which the Bishops have never suggested”.

Legislation in a Pluralist Society
The Bishops, in their statements, do not ignore or dismiss the difficulties of legislating on issues of public morality in a pluralist society. In their 1986 statement on the Divorce Referendum, for example, the Bishops stated:
“Many considerations require attention from legislators when they are enacting legislation or from voters when they are voting on constitutional change. Among other things, they have to take account of the convictions of those who do not accept the teaching of the Catholic Church. They have to aim at creating laws which favour reconciliation between citizens and communities throughout the island of Ireland. They have to try to give citizens the maximum freedom which is consistent with the common good.

Their first concern as legislators or as voters, however, is for the well-being of society as a whole: and it can scarcely be denied that the well- being of society is closely bound up with the stability of marriage and the family. In the forthcoming referendum voters must ask themselves whether other factors outweigh the damage which divorce would certainly cause to individuals, to families, to children and to the whole of society.

Family Stability
Family stability, based on monogamous marriage, is a powerful agent for the moral formation of children and young people. Legislation which weakens the family or which, however unintentionally, facilitates the separation of child-bearing from marriage and from marital fidelity, is detrimental to the welfare of society.

In their statements on divorce, the Bishops were not content simply to stress the moral wrongness of marriage following divorce and the damage that divorce and remarriage can do to the stability of the family and to the well-being of society, they also appealed for “legal reforms to strengthen the stability of marriage and lessen the risk of marriage breakdown”. The passage of time has made this appeal for ‘marriage-friendly’ legal and political policies more urgent than ever.

Abortion
In their 1992 statement on Abortion Law, following the Supreme Court Judgement on the so-called “X-case”, the Bishops inevitably condemned abortion as being in fundamental conflict with the divine commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill’, and declared that:
“No motive can justify (abortion). No court judgement, no act of legislation, can make it morally right. Abortion goes to the very well-springs of human life and touches the very foundations of morality. … The issue of abortion is a matter of justice. It involves the most basic of all human rights, the right to life.”

Turning to the questions of freedom of travel and freedom of information in relation to abortion outside the State, the Bishops emphasised that
“when an action is morally wrong the provision of information which assists a person to perform it is also morally wrong, and counselling which suggest that it is a proper or a neutral option is likewise morally wrong”.

The Bishops, however, go on to state:
“It does not follow that travel or information should be prohibited or restricted by law. Many actions which are immoral are not prohibited  by the State, because attempts to prohibit them could lead to an unacceptable infringement of the personal liberty of citizens in a free society, and could bring the law into disrepute”.

In a follow-up statement in 1992, the Bishops repeated the substance of this paragraph.

Morality, Law and Well-Being of Society
It is worth noting, however, that when the influence of Church teaching declines in society and the binding force of morality and of conscience lessens, the State seems to feel itself obliged to intervene more and more in people’s lives, in the sheer interests of public order and social peace; and we then see the growth of the “nanny State”. In other words, moral restraints and legal restrictions seem to be in inverse proportion to one another. As moral self-restraint weakens and civic virtue declines, the State attempts to enforce virtuous behaviour by legislation and by legal penalties for transgressions. The danger then is that personal freedoms begin to become imperilled by the State itself.

The Irish Bishops, do not believe that one can make people virtuous by legislation. In their 1992-1993 statements about condom legislation, the Bishops state:
“There are many things which are sinful and which the law of the land cannot reasonably be expected to prohibit.”

The State itself, however, depends for its cohesion and stability on a degree of moral consensus in society about the legitimacy of the State and of its agencies for peace-keeping and for law and order and law-enforcement, and about  the basic legitimacy of its laws. When that moral consensus is weakened, the very stability of the State itself is threatened. The State may then attempt to create and impose a new moral consensus by new legislation. Inevitably, the attempt fails. People cannot be made moral by legislation alone.

The State, however, can by its legislation further erode moral consensus and moral conviction and thus weaken its own moral foundations. The Bishops went on in their 1992-3 statements to declare:

“Neither can the law make what is morally wrong become right. Laws cannot make people morally good but they can sometimes make moral living more difficult by seeming to make immorality socially acceptable (by giving the appearance of society’s approval for acts and practices which are morally wrong)”.

In 1993, in a statement referring to the law on homosexual activity, the Bishops repeated once again the Church’s view on the relationship between morality and civil law. They declared:
“This teaching of the Church (on homosexual acts) is independent of State law. No change in State law can change the moral law. New civil laws cannot make what is wrong right. Laws relating to homosexuality, like other laws which bear on moral issues, should not be seen in terms of the State’s upholding or not upholding Church teaching. The Church does not expect that acts which are sinful should, by that very fact, be made criminal offences. All such laws bearing on moral issues must be assessed in the light of the way in which they contribute or fail to contribute to the common good of society. …

It is a matter of experience that legislative change is never neutral in its effects on society”.

In a statement in 1995 on the divorce referendum, the Bishops declared:
“It is not a question of whether or not the teaching of the Catholic Church should be removed from the Constitution. The simple fact that something is in harmony with the Church’s teaching is not in itself a reason to keep it in the Constitution, but neither is it a reason to remove it. The proposal should be evaluated in the light of the social implications of introducing divorce.”

Referring to Catholic Church provision for the annulment of marriage, the Bishops state firmly:
“But the Church has never asked or expected that the civil and canonical jurisdictions should coincide. The Bishops do not ask that Church decrees of nullity should be accepted by the Civil courts. … A Church decree of nullity is not divorce by another name”

Reason, Empirical Evidence and Morality
The Catholic Church’s teaching on morality depends ultimately on the authority of divine revelation. But the Church insists that human reason also is a source of moral truth and a channel through which God reveals His plan for human behaviour. The Church holds that rational arguments and empirical and sociological evidence reinforce Church teaching on moral issues. It is commonly assumed by the Church’s critics, however, that Church teaching depends solely on divine revelation and on supernatural authority. It is taken for granted by some that reason and empirical evidence belong to a different sphere than that of the Church, namely the sphere of rational debate; and that rational debate is the prerogative of the secularist approach to morality and law; and that this approach is the defining characteristic of a scientific and secular and pluralist society. I recall a university debate in which a spokesman for the secular humanist viewpoint professed himself indignant at my use of rational and sociological arguments for my moral position. His reaction implied that I was “cheating” by “stealing” arguments which are the exclusive “property” of the secular side of the debate!

I submit that an unbiased reader of these statements by the Irish Catholic Bishops would conclude that these are exercises of sustained moral reasoning, appealing to rational argument and to empirical evidence from ordinary human experience and from the human and social sciences. These are not “diktats” of authority coming from “another sphere”; they are reasoned and reasonable contributions to serious public debate among citizens, and thereby are a service to society as well as being a guide to the consciences of Catholics, who rightly expect moral guidance from their Bishops on issues of public morality. Indeed, as the Bishops and very many others are convinced, the balance both of reason and of evidence lies clearly with the position of the Bishops on issue after issue of public morality.

No “Confessional State”
I submit finally that these statements bear out the following claim, made on behalf of the Irish Bishops by their delegation to the New Ireland Forum on 9th February 1984: