November-December BR - Out now

The November-December Brandsma Review is now in circulation. Leading with the abortion issue, Dr Joe McCarroll (Pro Life Campaign) calls on us to stop the rush to legalise abortion; David Manly (Family & Life) profiles the Halappanavar case as re-educating a backward people about killing; Nick Lowry gives his reminiscences of the 1983 pro life amendment referendum; Keith Francis asks if Alan Shatter's proposal to amend the Equality Act is another nail in the coffin for Catholic schools; Fr Brendan Purcell's sermon for Advent gives practical advice on the need for watchfulness; Peadar Laighléis argues there is more to St Matthew's genealogy than a list of names; Brian Ó hIcídhe reviews Peter Hitchens' book on the war on drugs which was never fought; Joe Aston and Jim Allen give contrasting views on dialogue; the Editor reflects on the Children's Rights vote and the situation regarding abortion; The Hurler on the Ditch gives some ideas on pro lifers in Fine Gael and slams the European Parliament over the treatment of Dr Tonio Borg; Strammentarius describes conflict between the pro-bestiality lobby and the animals' rights people and the use of almost Nazi caricatures by left wing opponents of Israel; and there is another list from Francis Book Sales. Available in Veritas in Dublin and Benedictus Book Shop in Cork or via www.brandsmareview.ie

The September-October Brandsma Review has editorials by Peadar Laighléis on the Year of Faith and the Children's Rights Referendum; and by Jim Lothian on the US Presidential election. David Manly elaborates on Marie Stopes assault on abortion law in Northern Ireland; Liz Holmes and Éilís Ní Shiocfhradha give different takes on the Children's Rights referendum; Peadar Laighléis profiles the German trade unionist Blessed Nikolaus Groß; Hibernicus gives the second part of his two-part article on Blessed Frédéric Ozanam; Nick Lowry reviews Frank O'Farrell's autobiography; the Hurler on the Ditch and Strammentarius are at their usual antics; there are letters from Louis Hemmings (the most ecumenical Protestant fundamentalist I know), Nick Lowry and Daphne McLeod; and another list from Francis Book Sales. The Brandsma Review is available in Veritas in Dublin; Benedictus Book Shop in Cork; St Kevin's Church, Harrington St, Dublin; Guardian Angels Church, Newtownpark Avenue, Blackrock, Co Dublin; and Ss Peters and Pauls, Paul St, Cork. Otherwise, e-mail brandsmareview@gmail.com for info.

BR article on Children's Rights Referendum.

WELFARE STATE GOING FOR FULL PARENTHOOD? By LIZ HOLMES

However, the new clause will not state what these rights are. It will be up to the courts to identify them as they arise in specific cases. In doing so the courts are likely to be guided by previous judgments and by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Ireland has signed.

–Carol Coulter, The Irish Times, October 17, 2012 SINCE 1998 there has been sustained and consistent pressure on the Irish government reporting to the UN to meet obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).1 The UN is demanding that children be recognised as separate rights holders. The pressure is enormous. During these confrontations, which take place in the UN’s Geneva Palais des Nations, both the Irish delegation and the UN Monitoring Compliance Committee state that the Irish Constitution is an obstacle in the way of meeting this demand.2 The Irish delegation in 1998 has reassured the Monitoring Committee that the necessary change to clear this constitutional obstacle is underway. Throughout these detailed proceedings the Irish government gave ample evidence of its willingness to be fully compliant with the Monitoring Committee’s demands. Having read the proposal for the 31st amendment from a sociological as distinct from a legal background, my concern is that to separate the child thuswill fragment the unity of the family as the primary cell of society. For fathers and mothers like us—and we are many—the care and protection of children are our life’s work and its fulfillment. The provisions of the Irish Constitution ensure recognition of that calling while, as Justice O’Flaherty (retired) affirms, providing protection for those children who are tragically failed by their parents. More background is necessary to account for the concern this amendment provokes. Revolutionary ethos The establishment of the autonomy of the child is affirmed as the objective in the summary records of the UN Monitoring Committee. Up to now Irish parents and the law limit children’s autonomy in the short run in order to maximize their development of actual autonomy in the long run but now the UN wants the child to be an active participant in the formulation of policies affecting them. This ethos that sees the child as an autonomous rights holder is both innovatory and revolutionary. The Monitoring Committee is adamant that both our attitudes towards children and our policies and services are to be brought into line with its “holistic spirit”. Now the amendment to incorporate Article 42A does not specifically mention the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. You will however find reference to it in the Ombudsman for Children Act 3 , a piece of legislation, among others, put in place as a direct response to Monitoring Committee’s pressure. Emily Logan, current holder of that office, assured the recent UN Periodic Review that it is statutorily mandated to promote the principles and provisions of the CRC and that it aims to ensure that Ireland complies in full with its international human rights obligations. 4 The Ombudsman’s office (OCO) tells children, “The government has a responsibility to make sure your rights are protected.” 5 Reading what is said there about Articles 4 and 5, the UN seems to be redefining the role of parents as merely their children’s helpers in exercising their rights. Look at the CRC’s Articles 13-17 6 and ask yourself honestly how can we steer our children safely through adolescence and yet observe their UN social rights. Emily Logan warns us that, “Building a new culture of respect for children in Ireland will take time and effort.” But is it as reassuring as she thinks to be told that holding this referendum “provides Ireland with the chance to be a leader on [UN] children’s rights internationally”?7 The Alliance for Children, Barnardos, ISPCC and the Campaign for Children are among her collaborators working to achieve this cultural shift. What role do these groups play in so changing our culture, our way of life? Such associations/organizations/politicized charities are generally referred to as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) despite being largely funded as service providers by both government and by philanthropies. (Chuck Feeney’s Atlantic Philanthropies, in this case) Establishing new needs, such as the child’s for UN rights, they are then funded to service these needs while promoting their acceptance at the level of social rights. Here in Ireland, selected NGOs are incorporated into the Community Pillar of the Social Partnership, as is now the voice of children, where programmes for government are agreed. There is a strong tendency in such organizations, infused as they are with a utopian vision of equality, to see the family as an obstacle to “gender” equality and autonomy. Utopian vision of equality Within the forums of the UN and EU these local NGOs are gathered under umbrella organizations which are presented in an effort to offset the democratic deficit as representatives of the “voice of the people”. There they enjoy privileged access to decision-makers and to the bureaucracies that channel funding directed to community development/combat poverty programmes. The CRC was actually drawn up by NGOs and it expressly gives them the monitoring role in its implementation.8 Their published reports like “Small Voice, Vital Rights” are written to alert the Monitoring Committee to where we are not meeting our obligations under the CRC. That Committee has classified Irish government reports as exemplary in their adherence to UN guidelines; such professionalized NGOs may have helped in the drafting; they may even be included in government delegations. Yet in all these proceedings the family is an outsider. Even if its numbers are large, the family has no voice in relation to such access to power and resources. Constitutional preference diluted Mr Justice Hardiman of the Supreme Court has acknowledged how the rights of children have to be vindicated through adults. The risk of turning children into autonomous rights holders is that the intervention of third parties, such as these NGOs will dilute the constitutional preference for parents as guardians/enablers of such rights. Childline’s phones are lifelines for some children but we have all met the exasperated parents of children who respond to their admonitions by threatening to contact the ISPCC. Leaf through “Citizen Child”, its manifesto used in its countrywide counselling centres and here we find children’s UN rights spelt out in detail.9 In response to asking, “What Needs to be Done?”, ISPCC proposes a Constitutional amendment. The specific acknowledgement of the independent rightsof children would, they say, clear the way for legislating to allow children to seek medical help or counselling without parental consent. 10 A focus of the 1998 Monitoring Committee’s concern was how do our under-16 year olds fare on this issue. How will the case for children’s confidential access to medical advice and services be strengthened by the proposed amendment? By 2006 the UN Committee is concerned that adolescents have insufficient access to necessary information on “reproductive health”, noting that Health/Sex education (SPHE) is optional, and that Irish parents can exempt their children. It recommends strengthening efforts to enhance adolescent access to “adolescent-specific reproductive and sexual health information and services”.11 Will the proposed re-wording of current (to be deleted) Article 42.5 and its repositioning facilitate removal of the Constitutional obstacle to allowing a legal framework for making Social Health (Re-) Education Programmes compulsory for Irish children in line with the Monitoring Committee’s recommendation? Once this amendment is in place, the Minister is to announce an ambitious programme including the development of “legislation, policies or procedures to extend this ‘voice of the child’ approach to other spheres of decision-making. Similar to ‘best interests’ this principle is already recognised in existing child care and family law and will be included in further legislation in these areas affecting children. The UN sells the CRC as invaluable for human rights activists to promote “this new concept of separate rights for children with the Government accepting responsibility of protecting the child from the power of parents...” 12 Acceptance of this amendment may not only deprive parents of the power to protect their children but may also facilitate the separating out and politicization of the voice of our children. Their voice will then be added as another category of NGOs lobbing for an equality agenda in which the family is an outsider or even an obstacle to its achievement. Liz Holmes lectures on the role of the UN/EU in changing our culture. In addition to The Brandsma Review her work has been published in Studies, The Irish Times and the prestigious US journal Catholic Social Science Review. NOTES 1 In the CRC children refers to all those under the age of 18. 2 See item 35 where it is noted that in 1997 the Minister who had introduced the Children’s Bill said that he been advised by the Attorney-General that potential constitutional difficultes existed in relation to the provision relating specifically to the rights of the child, which had therefore been reworded. CRC/C/SR.436 3 See Ombudsman for Children Act (2002), Chapter 3, Part 2, S.7 “ d) promote awareness among members of the public (including children of such age or ages as he or she considers appropriate) of matters (including the principles and provisions of the Convention) relating to the rights and welfare of children and how those rights can be enforced,.” And (6) In this section ‘‘the Convention’’ means the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child done at New York on 20 November 1989, as amended by any protocol thereto that is for the time being in force in the State. 4 Ombudsman for Children’s Office (OCO) Ireland Submission to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review Twelfth session of the Working Group on the UPR, Human Rights Council 6th October 2011. 5 See OCO website for UNICEF’s summary of the CRC. 6 Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm 7 Ombudsman for Children Website, Opinion Piece 18th Sept. 2012 8 Article 5 (a). 9 ISPCC (undated) Citizen Child: A Handbook of Children’s Rights and Entitlements and Adult Responsibilities for Parents and Those who Work with Children, Dublin. 10 Ibid.,p. 30 11 CRC/C/IRL/CO/2 p. 11, paras. 52, 53 12 UN 1994/95 Publications Catalogue at p. 64

At last...the July-August Brandsma...

The July-August Brandsma Review contains an editorial on Bl John XXIII's letter 'Veterum Sapientia' by Peadar Laighléis; articles by Dr Éanna Johnson on RE Syllabi; Professor Jim Lothian on the fiftieth anniversary of the Second Vatican Council, complete with statistical data; Nick Lowry on the Brandsma Review's patron, Bl Titus Brandsma; Peadar Laighléis on the Brandsma Review's founder, Nick Lowry; Joe Aston on Europe at the present time; David Manly on the Minister for Health, Dr James Reilly; and Hibernicus' first of two part on the Society of St Vincent de Paul founder, Bl Frédéric Ozanam. Hurling Shots from the Ditch covers the Phoenix' portrayal of the new Papal Nuncio and some of the Minister for Justice and Defence's policies; Stramentarius covers Australian ethicists' support for infanticide and Archbishop Martin's speech in Glenties, Co Donegal. And there is a letter from Eric Conway.

Brandsma May-June in Veritas

The two editorials are Peadar Laighléis' reflection on Paul VI and the Credo of the People of God and David Manly's 'Dangerous Canards are a threat to unborn children' The articles include Paul Fournier's Allez, la Paroisse est Finie (about the Quiet Revolution in Quebec - and don't worry, it's in English), Ralf Siebenbürger's 'Mgr Schüller and the Insurrection of the Dead' (about the Austrian Catholic Priests' Association), Fr Brendan Purcell's 'Dialogue with Atheist's Down Under',Hibernicus and Nick Lowry team up to produce 'Are Orthodox Catholics Pharisees?', Fr John Ogilvie SJ's 'Low Sunday: Salvation and the Mercy of God', Fr Bernard McGuckian SJ's 'Why the Pioneers?' and Fr Roland Colhoun's 'Sermon for Pentecost'. Also the Straws column, the Hurler on the Ditch and a letter from Dom Philip Scot OCSO.

Church is multi-faceted. Advertising planning applications in Irish is an old trick. Most never read them; some study them in order to act. Or so I thought reading Alan Titley's Grúptinc in The Irish Times (10 May 2012). Professor Titley headed the Irish Department in St Patrick's College, Drumcondra before taking the Modern Irish chair in University College Cork. In his column, atypical of The Irish Times, he addresses Anna Carragher's findings regarding RTÉ's 'Group Think' and Mission to Prey. Dr Titley recalls a Labour leader (Brendan Corish) stating he was Catholic first and Irish second, though his successor is a Frankfurter first who beats the Catholic Church while she is down. Criticising the Church twenty years ago was brave, but it now droves attack a Church bringing herself down. He points out these miss another Catholic Church working quietly for the poor and human rights. Labour, once singing Catholic Social Teaching, has a bad conscience from its capitalist Group Think in the Celtic Kitten years. Dr Titley then mentions media Group Think informed editorials on defeated referenda on divorce in 1986 and the first Nice and Lisbon treaties, pointing to similar uniformity for the Fiscal Compact vote. He mentions public Group Think, citing sudden shifts from severe school corporal punishment to teachers' inability to point at pupils. He concludes that RTÉ Group Think derives from wider culture. I will only address one point. Dr Titley makes a neat division between an active and ornamental Church. This is too tidy. Franco Zeffirelli's Brother Sun, Sister Moon conveys a Francis of Assisi without aspects of St Francis contradicting flower power imagery such as the saint's Crusade. The Church operates a global network of schools, hospitals and social services and is a patron of arts, largely serving those who cannot afford it. For centuries, the only access the poorest had to art was through the Church. St John Vianney worked for the Ars poor but furnished his church with the very best. The Church preaches the Gospel through many means. She sometimes fails: Dante populated Hell with priests and popes, but a Church divesting herself of ornament would not long afford her missionaries' dusty sandals. However, some conservatives and traditionalists forget the Church must serve the poor. Vladimir Solovyov tells the fable of Ss Nicholas, Cassian and the Siberian peasant. The saints saw a peasant's cart stuck in the mud. St Nicholas spoiled his vestments helping, as St Cassian watched. In Heaven, St Peter asked what happened. St Nicholas received two feasts and St Cassian got a 29 February feast-day. Solovyov thus compared Russian and Roman Churches. The Church of Russia excelled in spirituality and asceticism, but did not engage the world as the papacy did. So the glory of Rome outshone Moscow. Some Catholics can seem like western Orthodox in formal communion with the Pope. Liberals pedal this caricature, but it has some truth. It is fitting to remember St Matthew's Last Judgment (25, 31-46). Catholics must not pray at the expense of duty or charity. If we may not give to good works beyond capacity, it is on deeds rather than sin we will be judged. One should also understand the 1960s dreams following the Council. The apparent truce between Church and modernity and changed relationship between faithful and hierarchy were welcomed. The Council came soon after the Second World War and most progressive theologians came from its cockpit. It was also overshadowed by the Cold War and its resultant counter-culture. Many younger people saw the Council in this light. Few seemed concerned about the rights of traditionalists they assumed would die out. Right now, the children of the sixties are the endangered species. The 1970s Gill History of Ireland teaches as much about its young authors as Irish history. Dr Titley is of the same generation - a cohort formed in Catholic and patriotic optimistism. These identified with Christ cleansing the Temple but ignored His entry into Jerusalem underlined His authority to do so. Their guides persecuted traditionalists zealously as Pharisees; forgetful of their lack of authority to do so. But the liberal tide receded leaving some in denial and others paranoid. Let the orthodox learn from this. Progressives achieved ascendancy and remained for several decades. This happened because of the times, and much about the preconciliar Church justified rebellion. But many liberals could not help believing they could start afresh nor could abide any criticism of their dogmata. Their influence waned. But I will enter a caviat. Orthodox Catholics must learn how and why liberalism gained and sustained victories and must not repeat its mistakes. Otherwise, the same self-destructive wars will be waged sooner or later at the expense of the Church's mission

The March-April Review is now out (and I finally get around to posting about it). Contents include: Christopher Dawson on Europe's Inheritance by Rev Prof Joseph Koterski SJ; Cardinal Count's Grammar Exercises by Ralf Siebenbürger; Orthodoxy - Optional Now, Tomorrow Proscribed by David Manly; Anti-Catholicism and the National Question by Peadar Laighléis; A Multi-Layered Treatment of Creation, Evolution and the Human Person by Dr Joe McCarroll; and Sermon for the Annunciation by Rev Prof Brendan Purcell.

The advisory group to the department of Education's report

I read this on www.mccamley.org: .

There are a couple of observations. A concerted attack is being made on denominational education, for which Catholic education can be read (though the minority faiths are more vulnerable). One point made in the observations here is that the Irish language is beyond criticism, though many valid points may be made about it. I am one of the 1.66 million speakers of Irish who would willing speak the language all the time, except for the trouble I have locating any of the other 1,659,999 to use it with any frequency. But that's beside the point. Irish is about the identity of the state, so let's make a couple of points about the Irish language that is.

If you want to eliminate religion from the education system, but maintain Irish, you have a problem. Unless you want to create some sort of secularised Irish which may keep Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin happy but which has about as much to do with the national identity as Tae Kwon Do has to do with Gaelic Games. Why? Because the Irish language is so suffused with Catholicism over a millenium and a half that every greeting is a prayer. You meet somebody, you say 'Dia Dhuit' - that means God with you. The answer is 'Dia 's Muire Dhuit' or God and Mary with you. The Protestant Gaelgóirí of the late 19th Century were known to shout 'Dia Dhuit' to their Catholic colleagues at 100 yards to avoid giving the necessary answer. It is possible to have a brief litany of saints in the course of simple greetings: try 'Dia 's Muire 's Pádraig 's Iósaef 's Bríd 's Colmcille 's Iúd Dhuit' I'm not joking. To translate, that is 'God and Mary and Patrick and Joseph and Brigid and Colmcille and Jude be with you'. Most other Irish greetings bring God in in some way. Whether you say 'Dia linn' (God with us) when some sneezes or 'Bail ó Dhia ort' (God's blessing on you) to some one working or 'Beannacht Dé leat' (similar to the last).

Take this out and what you have is not the Irish language, but a tongue stripped of its culture. Call it Novus Ordo Irish if you like.

Now, the educationalists like Irish, but don't like Catholicism. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. It might work the other way round - not that this is desirable either. But kill Catholicism off in this country and overnight nearly all the literature and much of the dialects of the Irish language suddenly becomes unintelligible and may well be disregarded. What's left is a register using older Irish words, but which might well be Esperanto for all it relates to.

There are many other things the Minister for Education might address. In 1981, his predecessor, the late Deputy John Boland abolished corporal punishment in the schools. Great - the trouble is nothing was put in its place. Right now, there are big problems with discipline in Irish schools, especially in disadvantaged schools and the educational establishment have their heads in the sand. Addressing the issue would result in more equality in education and save on much expenditure. As it happens, other problems are emerging - literacy and numeracy for example. Why was this not addressed?

The central point here is the voice of a minority in Ireland - those who describe themselves as having no religion, but who have definite opinions on how the vast majority of Irish residents who have religion should educate their children. Firstly, if one profiles the Irish atheists/agnostics/non-religious, the first thing one finds is that the vast majority are men - so not a lot are family units. This means proportionately less children. It also means though they are pretty mean about parting with their taxes to, for example, provide for poorer families to pay for First Communions, they have no problem on being supported by the taxes of the children of believers when they are retired. Secondly, there is nothing to stop atheists or agnostics building schools. Religious schools are there because communities built them. Secularists want to do things the handy way - force religious schools to change their ethos to suit them. While they are at it, pull the culture to pieces just to suit them. And do this in the name of equality. There is something Orwellian about this equality.

January-February 2012

Current Issue includes:

In Defence of Catholic Schools - Dr John Murray
Church in the Public Square becomes the Church in the Crosshairs - Charles J Lowry
'Madam, Your Day is Done': Alice Glenn RIP - Iarfhlaith Manny
A Disaster in Virtually Every Respect - Professor James R Lothian
When a Crime Becomes Medical Treatment - David Manly
Sermon for Advent: We Must Respect Life - Rev Patrick Lombard

With editorials, Straws for the Camel's back and Hurling shots from the Ditch.