Dear Editor, I read with interest the account of Archbishop Diarmuid Martin’s analysis of the state of the Catholic Church in modern Ireland and his many solutions that would improve the situation (IC 13/07/2017).
While many of them have been put forward in the past 40-50 years, very few of them yielded the much longed for results. Unfortunately, our churches continue to empty and religious belief and practise, especially for under 50-year-olds, has declined dramatically.
Yet the Good God has given us some basic solutions, that if put into practise would yield a ‘hundred fold’. The Church should return to the Judaeo – Christian ethos that governed Church and State law for centuries. These laws were based on the Ten Commandments, natural law and common sense. The Ten Commandments in their fullest form, should once again be preached from the pulpits. They gave a clear guidance on what is right and wrong, a guidance that is sadly lacking in the world today.
Our love of God and his love and care for us should be emphasised, if we really loved God we would have no problem putting aside one hour in the week to worship him through the Holy Mass. Respect and reverence for the real present in the Holy Eucharist should be encouraged, with the faithful being constantly reminded to receive Holy Communion always in the state of grace. Each parish should be encouraged to set aside even one hour a week or perhaps a month for Eucharistic Adoration. The Rosary should be recited before or after Mass at the weekends.
The argument against preaching to the converted, or to an aged faithful, should be discounted. Christ certainly didn’t need a crowd, nor did he put an age limit on them.
Yours etc.,
Eilis McNamara,
Glin,
Co. Limerick
Charlie Gard’s parents should have final decision
Dear Editor, Austen Ivereigh in his thoughtful piece about the Charlie Gard case (IC 13/07/2017) fails to recognise that Charlie’s parents have clearly stated that given just three months of the proposed alternative treatment for their son in the US, they would know for sure if there was to be any improvement or not in the quality of his life.
They could then accept if necessary the ending of life support mechanisms knowing at least that every last option had been tried.
This plus the fact that such treatment would come at no cost to UK taxpayers seems to render the decision of a High Court judge rather than the parents, as to whether or not Charlie Gard should be given that chance, the height of arrogance.
When we are glad to see the state step in to “impose limits in the interests of the baby”, i.e. terminate its existence – we have to be aware that such authority can also be applied to all sorts of congenital illnesses, which the state may decide must not be ‘imposed’ on a helpless patient, born or unborn.
There is indeed a fine line beyond which it is likely more humane to accept natural death, but if there is even the slightest chance of a life being improved and saved at reasonable cost, it must be the parents who have the last word, not the state. The Vatican medical services rightly also offered this baby and parents that basic parental dignity. I sincerely hope that the UK High Court will see sense.
Yours etc.,
BJ Turbett,
Strabane, Co. Tyrone.
All treatments were originally experimental
Dear Editor, Before considering any sides of a debate, it is surely necessary to research the timeline of events.
Charlie Gard was born in August 2016 and appeared to be a normal healthy baby. Over the next few weeks he gradually deteriorated, becoming listless and lethargic and in September was brought to Great Ormond Street Hospital for treatment. He was diagnosed with a progressive form of Mitochondrial DNA depletion and in December 2016 the hospital sought permission from his parents to remove his life support.
By then, his parents had discovered experimental treatment available in America which is currently being used on 18 patients with various forms of Mitochondrial disease (none exactly the same as Charlie Gard). All have shown some improvement but no-one is sure of the eventual outcome. The treatment is non-invasive and consists of administrating small amounts of liquid over a long period, the only known side effect is diarrhoea.
The parents befriended a publicist who helped establish a GoFundMe account and raise the necessary money. Initially the hospital supported the parents, but later decided a full recovery would be impossible and in February the hospital appointed a guardian for Charlie and began legal action against his parents to end his treatment.
Since then, the case has been taken to the High Court, Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court, the European Court of Human Rights, and now with global publicity following the intervention of Pope Francis and President Donald Trump, another court sitting. The legal costs for the hospital must be enormous and every month’s delay in commencing treatment is diminishing the chances of success.
All our present day treatments and vaccines were originally experimental, initially tried out on patients who were going to die and had nothing to lose.
Where small children are concerned, some parents prefer not to prolong the agony and accept death while others prefer to cling to hope. Not only can they assure themselves that they tried their best but they are consoled by knowing their child’s death was not in vain and the knowledge gained in his treatment will one day save another child’s life.
Yours etc.,
Maureen Sherlock,
Thomastown, Co. Kilkenny.
Two wrongs don’t make a right
Dear Editor, J. Anthony Gaughan’s otherwise excellent and informative review of The Irish Revolution, 1912-23: Monaghan is marred by his suggestion that burning down “big houses” was “poetic justice” in view of some of their owners’ earlier support for armed resistance to Home Rule. This tribal sentiment is unworthy of him: both sides deserve condemnation for the way politics descended into violence in those years. Two wrongs, etc.
Yours etc.,
Ian d’Alton,
Naas,
Co. Kildare.
Dublin diocese doesn’t need a diplomat but a prophet
Dear Editor, “I am not sure that what Dublin needs now is a diplomat, what Dublin needs now is a prophet.” This is what a retired Kerry parish priest sagaciously remarked when Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was appointed to the archdiocese.
The Jesus of the ecclesiastical diplomat tends to be, on occasion, not always quite the Lord Jesus of the Gospels.
Yours etc.,
Joseph Nolan (Revd), Co. Kerry.
Ban on women priests is the real insult
Dear Editor, I disagree with Bishop Michael Smith that the issue of female priests is an “insult to women” (IC 20/07/2017). I believe that banning women from being ordained priests is insulting. I have yet to hear a better argument than the fact that the 12 apostles were all men. So what? Unless Jesus actually said women can’t be ordained I don’t see why we can’t get past this.
Yours etc.,
Mary Finegan,
Ennis,
Co. Clare.
Bring back our treats!
Dear Editor, Does The Irish Catholic assume that we stop baking during summer? If not, why is it that Erin Fox’s excellent if irregular column ‘Sweet Treats’ should disappear from the newspaper’s (otherwise excellent) content? Please, re-instate our treats!
Yours etc.,
Sarah O’Leary,
Dun Laoghaire,
Co. Dublin
Inspired by Shannon Angel Sisters
Dear Editor, Your feature on the ladies in Shannon who make angel gowns for premature babies really struck a chord with me (IC 20/07/2017). What a brilliant idea!
My wedding dress has been hanging in my wardrobe since the big day, simply because I could not decide what to do with it. I love the idea of putting it to good use to help those little babies who have had to fight for their lives, whether that fight has been lost or won.
Yours etc.,
Rose Walsh,
Templeogue, Dublin 6W.
