Scottish Catholic Observer

Having to plough through acres of newsprint devoted to comment and speculation about the coming Royal Wedding before finding some relevant national and international news is proving a bit wearying. Is there anyone out there who can maintain any interest in the seemingly ceaseless chatter about it all?

By all accounts, there are many concerns these days about people keeping their jobs and managing to provide for their families and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In times like these, the public might well be forgiven for not rushing around to plan street parties for the end of April.

However, I did notice one significant comment in the midst of all the publicity about the said Royal wedding. It concerned the unguarded remark made by Prince Charles about the possibility of his wife becoming Queen Consort when he comes to the throne. In the wake of HRH’s remark, it was reported that the Church of England is ‘relaxed’ about the possibility of two divorcees being crowned, this information having been given by ‘a senior Anglican source.’ The ‘senior’ source went on to say that the Church’s priority is to preserve the Act of Settlement’ banning Catholics from the throne rather than objecting to a consort being given a particular title.

This statement wasn’t neatly packaged in euphemisms, it was outrageous in its bluntness. The ‘senior source’ was not named. To make such an offensively blunt statement on behalf of the Church of England surely warrants some identification. Does this mean that there is to be no further discussion on what is, frankly, an outrageous situation? I’d like to know the identity of the ‘senior source’ wouldn’t you? Is there to be no further discussion on this matter as far as the Church of England is concerned? Or has someone simply been talking out of turn? I’m sure you’ll agree that the situation requires immediate clarification.

And, of course, with the huge advances made in terms of communication, there should be no problems with setting the record straight very quickly. But don’t you find it strange, and tragic, in a way that these huge leaps in technology are being misused in so many ways? And why do so many people seem willing to throw the last remnants of their privacy into the public domain via internet sites? Gone are the days of the nosey neighbour’s twitching lace curtain. No need for that in these days of advanced technology. Just click on and you can be tuned into the most secret thoughts of a large section of the population. As a technophobe, I find it all very strange.

E-mails seem to have become the preferred mode of sharing snide little so-called jokes that use to be uttered sotto-voce out of the side of the mouth of the would-be humourist. I write of the very nasty sectarian jibe emanating from the offices of the Scottish Football Association in recent months.

Of course it has been the subject of several of the conversations I’ve had since the last time we’ve been in touch. The general feeling seems to be that it has shone a bright light on the sectarianism that blights this country, is constantly spoken of, but is not in any way diminished. Bigotry is a cowardly thing. If confronted and challenged by a Catholic, it slithers away into the undergrowth and awaits another opportunity. It’s a mistake to constantly associate it with the loutish behaviour of sections of the crowd at some football matches. Sectarianism can be much more subtle, and dangerous, than that.

Take institutional sectarianism—that might be the best area to tackle first, if the powers-that-be are interested in rooting out the problem. For instance, there might be hesitation in circulating an offensive and bigoted email in an organisation with a mixture of denominations making up the workforce. The SFA e-mail would seem to have resulted in rather a lot of people being disciplined, which is quite a significant fact.

Sectarianism is constantly with us and can be encountered in every stratum of society, but rarely comes out of the shadows. Recent events have shone a bright light on it. We have a rare opportunity to investigate it further and to deal with it, using the power of the law where necessary. Peter Kearney, in his piece for The Sunday Times, has spoken about this problem with conviction and clarity. He is to be congratulated. The time has come to tackle the problem and begin to rid Scotland of it once and for all.

Communication would seem to have been the ‘buzzword’ over the last month, and no mistake. Improved means of communication going wrong, that is.

Answering machines, in particular would seem to be attracting the attention of the Faithful. I’ve lost count of the number of times in recent months that this subject has come up in conversation. It would seem that it is becoming rather difficult to make direct contact with some of our priests. That’s to be expected, it might be supposed, in view of a shortage of priests and some having to take on extra parish duties. But nonetheless, it’s becoming something that parishioners over a very wide area are beginning to complain about. Is it a legitimate complaint? Who can say, but people, these days, tend to telephone a presbytery only in times of trouble, of personal crisis.

In times gone by the priest was very much at the heart of parish affairs, made visitations, was readily accessible to the people. Now, it seems, a distance has opened up—a distance emphasised by having to leave a message on an answering machine with no idea of when that message might have a response. Some have mentioned that the connection to the answering machine is made only after a dozen or more rings of the telephone, by which time, most people will have given up trying to leave a message. Six rings should be enough. Anything more is off-putting or at least, misleading.

One friend mentioned that her parish priest has incoming calls diverted to his mobile when he’s out of the presbytery. The arrangement works well. He simply responds to the call after a few minutes. If he’s urgently needed, he comes as soon as he can thereafter, but it’s plain that the people appreciate the sound of a human voice on the line. It reassures, makes them feel that their call is of some importance and if they need help, they are confident that help is forthcoming. In short, it’s a caring response and it’s certainly appreciated. After all, we live in times where there is a real need for a drawing together each one of us with the other, and our spiritual leaders with all of us.

And talking of the present time, I’ve been trawling the financial pages in an effort to understand Ireland’s money troubles and the global downturn that politicians keep talking about.

My grasp of matters financial isn’t improving much, but in doing all this reading, I stumbled on a quote that was thought provoking. It was by Sigmund Freud and I hope that you’re suitably impressed. He said that ‘the Irish, as a race, are impossible to psycho-analyse.’ The next word to be used must surely be ‘discuss.’ I’m very proud of my Irish lineage. Somehow, that quote made me even prouder.

I won’t be having another conversation with you until after Christmas and this year of peaks and troughs has ended. In the meantime, I wish you a very Holy and Happy Christmas.

— At the time of writing this, news has just emerged of a government-funded initiative to tackle ‘Sectarianism in the Workplace.’ Material on the subject of sectarianism will also be sent to schools. Encouraging news.