Shattering that sense of Entitlement

By AM Friday, July 20, 2012

Share Tweet Share Share Email

The slow demise and relevance of the Catholic Church in Ireland has the religious right clutching their rosary beads praying for a return to the good old days - Harvey Walnut

The Irish Defence Minister Alan Shatter has been the subject of some criticism this week over his decision to respect the republican principle of secularism by refusing to approve a request for the Irish Army to provide a guard of honour for a religious parade during last month’s Eucharistic Congress in Dublin.

The Iona Institute in its commentary was considerably more measured than the other strident voices from the Catholic right but still appeared to hanker after the good old days when both peasants and Protestants knew their place, and where ignorance of their lowly status could be brought back into their minds by a whack of the crozier:

The last time that the Eucharistic Congress was held in Dublin, in 1932, members of the then Free State army were central to the event. Since then, members of the Defence Forces have provided honour guards at numerous religious events ... The move ... raised concerns that military personnel will be forbidden from taking part in such events again.

It does no such thing. It raises hopes that the military as an institution shall not be lending its standing to private bodies in civil society, religious or otherwise. It does nothing to prevent soldiers attending such events in a personal capacity, just like other citizens.

Shatter was criticised in more acerbic terms by Willie O’Dea who, no matter how he scrubs up, always manages to appear as the perfect role model for those eager to follow the skanky and shady. A former holder of the defence portfolio, O’Dea accused Minister Shatter of bigotry:

It demonstrates a strange petty-mindedness by Mr Shatter, which I must say does not surprise me. His response to the request seems like one of blind prejudice and his reaction is totally inappropriate.

Just how Shatter is visually challenged, O’Dea’s listeners are left to guess. It is much more likely that the Defence Minister’s vision is not blinkered by some clerical cataract in the way that O’Dea’s would appear to suffer.  Willie O’Dea, like the IONA Institute, might hanker after the halcyon days of clerical might and power, and might see frugal joy in the ‘frenchie’ free zone of 1950s Ireland when Archbishop John Charles McQuaid of Dublin could brandish the crozier and government ministers would rush to indulge the old bully.  But it is now 2012, not 1932. Irish society has cast the crozier to the side. Ireland, as Shatter outlined in his brush off:

is a more inclusive and tolerant place ... it is no longer considered appropriate that an important institution of the State such as the Defence Forces participate in a Eucharistic procession. It seems that the wind of change has bypassed Deputy O’Dea. It is sad that a former government minister and a member of the Fianna Fáil frontbench can demonstrate such poor judgement in his pursuit of personal publicity.

The Irish Catholic was reportedly told by an army spokesperson that: 'The department was not in a position to approve such involvement as military participation (in the parade) was not considered appropriate.' Proper order: It isn’t appropriate. The army that Shatter is responsible for is the army of the state and not the Catholic Church. It would be a deeply partisan act on behalf of a government were it to permit the Irish Army to provide a guard of honour no matter how often it succumbed to Church pressure in similar circumstances in the past. For the Church to seek to clothe itself in the legitimacy of state endorsement during its religious shenanigans was little more than PR, a subterfuge aimed at forging a perception that the Church can with military pomp march with a moral authority long since gone.

The Irish Catholic unhappy with the military's explanation wrote:

The unprecedented move has raised fears that religious events around the country, where members of the Defence Forces have traditionally played an important role, will become 'no-go' events for military personnel. It will also increase suspicion among people of faith that the Coalition is increasingly hostile towards Catholics.

Wanton rubbish. The Coalition should be neither for nor against Catholics although as a government it must ensure that Catholics are denied the ability to infringe on the rights of others or impose their religious opinion upon them.  The Irish Catholic chagrin is little other than venting spleen the way of the Taoiseach Enda Kenny for firmly having slapped down the arrogant men of the Vatican last year when, sick to the teeth with their endless covering up of clerical abuse of children, he told them where to go.

Unlike the days of  Francoist Spain, the Church has no claim to the allegiance of a state institution such as the army over and above a similar claim from any other institution or private club. As Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said:

Why should the armed forces be seen as being at the beck and call of the Catholic Church? It is important for all public servants to be seen as neutral in religious matters, and that is particularly so for the army. Ireland is a multicultural society now and must no longer be seen as a 'Catholic' country where everyone who is not a Catholic is less important. Having released the stranglehold of the Church, the Irish people should continue with the process of secularising the country.

The army should no more give a guard of honour to Catholic religious processions that it should to dedicated Jewish, Islamic or Protestant ones, or to the Swords Satanic Society, for that matter.  This is Ireland not Iran. Secular not clerical rule prevails here.

Any particular religion should be a no go area for institutions of the state which are meant to reflect society as a whole rather than one section of it. In religious matters the army should be neutral, refraining from dispensing preferential treatment to any religious institution. Individual military personnel are free to go to these things. It is not a no go area for them. Just as they are free to go to football matches or cinemas without bringing their martial aura to bear on such venues and events.

This whining of O’Dea and others while tiresome enough just has to be considered as something that goes with the turf. It should be allowed ... to go in one ear and out the other.

Even more sinister than O’Dea’s posturing was one news agency website running with the headline ‘Jewish Irish minister accused of being prejudiced against Catholics.’

What has being Jewish got to do with the decision unless the implication is that Shatter’s Jewishness in some way influenced his decision? Alan Shatter could easily have been described by Irish Central as a Trinity College graduate, former president of the Irish Council against Blood Sports, or a member of the International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. All three affiliations might be as material to his decision in this case as his Jewishness. If indeed his Jewishness was highlighted by the report for effect there would appear to be more blind prejudice in this than in the actions of Shatter. As a minister of the State he merely protected the secular role of the State within society. That he is Jewish is neither here nor there.

If Catholics want a guard of honour they can provide it themselves instead of trying to have the imprimatur of the state franked on their religious opinion. Willie O’Dea, the IONA and the Irish Catholic between them surely could have mustered up sufficient numbers of the faithful who could readily have provided a guard of honour. But they sought more than that: they wanted the authority of the state and its legitimacy. Their sense of entitlement is bruised.

In what should be a laissez-faire marketplace of ideas religion has the irksome task of competing with other opinions and schools of thought. No special pleading. State intervention here in aid of an ailing theology would be a retrograde step.