Dear Editor, The article by Fr Martin Delaney ‘Is it really unacceptable to label suicide as ‘wrong’?’ (IC 27/9/2018) is both sensitive and honest. It reveals the pain and bewilderment of individuals, families, the community and the local priest, in the aftermath of three suicides. It raises a really important question on whether it is unacceptable to label suicide as ‘wrong’.
On the cusp of adulthood, I lost a loved one through suicide and I have also counselled people similarly bereaved. My experience dates back to a time when suicide was rare and virtually unheard of among young people. Nobody spoke about suicide and there was no support for the bereaved. I moved away and did not deal with the loss until many years later which made the process more difficult. I had never spoken about it. I availed of help provided by my diocese and elsewhere.
I share Fr Delaney’s discomfort that suicide might become normal in our society and I too had a scary moment when I heard a group of primary school children singing the praises of a pop star who took his own life and admiring his ‘courage’.
I believe there is a crying need for education of Catholics, especially young people, on distinctions. We love the person and we never judge them, leaving that to God in his mercy. But we don’t condone their actions that are wrong and sometimes we need to state this. Just as it is wrong to kill another person it is wrong to take one’s own life. Our approach towards the bereaved does not exclude sensitivity, empathy and compassion – the literal and true meaning of the word being ‘to suffer with’, walk with, or as Pope Francis says to ‘accompany’.
Yours etc.,
Eileen Gaughan,
Strandhill,
Sligo.
Blame inadequate catechesis and poor homiletics
Dear Editor, Permit me to comment on Pat Seaver’s letter ‘Old Testament readings don’t help us celebrate the Covenant’ ( IC 20/9/18 ).
The Bible recounts history, prophecy and prayer and is puzzling without explanation. The Israelites knew God only as Father because the Trinity was not revealed until Jesus came.The New Testament fulfills the Old.
The Old Testament texts in the Mass help us to understand the roots of Christianity, who Jesus is and why He came. As a Jew Jesus celebrated all the traditional rituals. The last of these was The Passover after which he instituted the Eucharist, the New Covenant.
To understand the expiatory or atonement aspect of Christ’s death as in Jewish tradition we must appreciate original sin and its consequences which necessitated expiation by an appropriate sacrificial victim – the Incarnate Son of God.
Old testament sacrifices demonstrate the darkened intellectual understanding of the consequences of The Fall and the insufficiency of animal sacrifices. Though Israelites understood God’s attributes as fatherly they emphasised justice over love because of their lived experience of fulfilled prophecies of war, exile and oppression.
Through Jesus’ revelation to St Faustina we know that God’s mercy is His greatest attribute. Confusing mercy with justice causes difficulty in accepting the “traditional piacular sacrifice”. God’s unconditional love does not mean that He is not just! The proper understanding of His unconditional love is first annunciated in the Old Testament where He says that no matter how he sins God will never withdraw His love from David. Our legal system is based on justice i.e. crime warrants punishment and reparation.
The Holy Sacrifice of The Mass renews in an unbloody way the sacrifice of Christ. Current difficulties with appreciating the Mass stem from inadequate catechesis and poor homiletics.
Yours etc.,
Loretto Browne,
Ashbourne, Co. Meath.
History may judge us harshly
Dear Editor, Regarding the forthcoming legislation on repealing the Eighth Amendment – an amendment which protected both Mother and Child – abortion is only a fancy word for the killing of the most vulnerable of all human beings – the unborn child. How anyone could condone the murder of any human being, in particular the most defenceless, is beyond my comprehension.
In 50 years’ time will our descendants be shocked at how we, in Ireland in 2018, approved of the destruction of human life?
Only time will tell!
All human life is sacred.
Yours etc.,
Helen O’Brien,
Bishopstown, Co. Cork.
We must become clever and creative
Dear Editor, Apropos your correspondent, Mary Stewart on September 27, ‘pro-abortion campaign was based on lies’, might I just say a few words by way of clarification?
Writing to our parishioners on the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima on October 13, I said: “My friends, I respectfully urge you not to align yourself with the culture of death. Vote No. In voting ‘no’ you stand with Jesus, the Lord of Life.”
In acknowledging a campaign that was clever, well-orchestrated and of course very successful, I remain utterly opposed to abortion but seek to reach out to the nearly 70% of our sisters and brothers who took a different view to us.
In post-referendum Ireland if all we can do is rehash the debate and hector our sisters and brothers as to how terrible they are then I feel we should get off the stage. If all we have in our missionary arsenal is “thou shalt not” no wonder we lost. We are better than this and if we are to have any success in the re-evangelisation of this country we need to get clever and creative – and quickly.
Yours etc.,
Fr Joe McDonald,
St Matthews,
Ballyfermot, Dublin.
Will Constitutional change make us ‘better’?
Dear Editor, The offence of blasphemy consists of uttering material “grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion”, when the intent and result is “outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion”.
How does removing this offence from our Constitution, whether uttered or printed, make us a better or more progressive nation? Any kind of sacrilege is abhorrent to any, and all religions, and should certainly be banned. The use of blasphemy is not an authentic forum for ‘freedom of speech’ and therefore such an offence should I believe, remain in the Constitution. Let us reflect deeply before taking such a regressive step if we are to pass on respect for the sacred to this and future generations.
Yours etc.,
Aisling Bastible,
Clontarf, Dublin 3.
Referendum ‘losers’ are far from that
Dear Editor, It has come to a sad pass when, as reported (IC 20/9/2018), a priest of the Catholic Church commended the success of those who obtained the legal right to kill babies.
The referendum was not just a contest between two sides; it was about the preservation or destruction of human life. For those who wanted to retain the Eighth Amendment it was about an ardent desire to conserve the safety of the lives of mothers and babies already pledged in our Constitution.
Those who sought to retain that protection for both mothers and babies are the heroes not the “losers”. No, the losers are the innocent victims, the babies – who have no choice – and the mothers who may well regret taking the irreversible action was all to readily on offer.
Yours etc.,
Aoibheann Ni Ruaidhrí,
Drumcondra, Dublin 9.
People are people, Brexit or no Brexit
Dear Editor, Greg Daly’s article about fears violence will emerge on account of border and structures being erected between the North and South as a result of Brexit was very thought-provoking, and I’m sure it struck a chord with many readers. This is a real and worrying concern for Irish citizens and I’m glad someone is speaking about it. Addressing the issue, Archbishop Eamon Martin said it’s important to put a “human face” on these high-level negotiations, so that people are not viewed as statistics but actually people. The peace process was long-run and hard-fought, so the idea of this being dismantled because of an uniformed vote and deceiving politicians is a disheartening and disturbing prospect.
Yours etc.,
John O’Hagan,
Newry,
Co. Down.