Any Questions?... Any Answers?....22nd/23rd October 2021

Zero made the suggestion just over a week ago that we might go along to a broadcast of BBC Radio 4's Any Questions? The broadcast on 22nd October was coming from Sydney Russell School, very near to us. 

The students who helped to host the event and were the main source of the questions asked during the programme were excellent. I suspect they had a very exciting experience - they were certainly very keen to meet the Education Secretary, Nadhim Zahawi, at the end of the broadcast (I think this encounter had been pre-arranged).

The full broadcast can be heard at BBC Sounds for at least the next 12 months from the date of this post. If you listen from 32:40 onwards you will hear the answers given by the panel to a question about assisted dying, which had been the subject of a debate in the House of Lords that same day.

I reacted with considerable sadness when Nadhim Zahawi and Dr Rosena Allin-Khan, unsure of exactly what they felt about the legalisation of assisted dying, both included in their remarks an expression of concern as to how they would feel if they were to become a burden to their loved ones. I found it sad that two very capable individuals, in good health and contributing significantly to public life, should have this sense that, at some point in the future, they might feel that they were a burden to others.

I was able at the end of the broadcast to catch a brief word with Nadhim Zahawi, to say to him how sad I found it that he felt the way he did. I shared with him that I have been able to see some quite special moments as a volunteer visiting with patients in my local hospital trust who are nearing the end of their lives. I ended by expressing my hope that, as he nears that point, he might not feel as he does now.  Unfortunately, I was unable to catch Dr Allin-Khan to share the same thoughts.

Though the discussion of assisted dying in Any Questions? was only a short part of the programme as a whole, the topic was the only topic in the corresponding Any Answers? broadcast on 23rd October. That programme can also be found on BBC Sounds here, though it only appears to be available for the next 29 days from the date of this post.

I made two mistakes in my attempt to contribute to Any Answers? (I wasn't able to phone in at the time of the programme as I was involved in an all day Teams meeting at the time). I sent in an email, when I should have sent in a text or tweet at the time of the programme itself; and I also tried to respond to things said during the Any Questions? programme. If you listen to the Any Answers? programme you will very readily recognise my tactical errors.

The text of my emailed comment is below:

After attending Any Questions this evening at Sydney Russell School in Dagenham, I would like to submit the following comment to Any Answers:

SUBJECT:  assisted dying

In their remarks about assisted dying, both Nadhim Zahawi and Dr Rosena Allin-Khan were torn as to whether or not they supported proposals to legalise assisted dying.

What saddened me greatly, however, was that both of them expressed a real concern that they might, at the end of their lives, feel that they had become a burden to their family and friends.

In a volunteer role at my local NHS hospital trust I am able to visit with patients and their loved ones as a patient approaches the end of their life; and I see some lovely moments that friends and family are able to spend with a patient at this time in their lives.

Perhaps as a society we need to re-frame the conversation so that it is one about how we love and care for those who are seriously ill; and how we recognise what they in turn have to offer to those who love them and care for them. We need to abolish the language of burden from our discourse.

I hope, at a personal level, that both Mr Zahawi and Dr Allin-Khan will be able, as they grow older, to feel that the experience of illness is not one of being a burden to others but instead an experience of a shared love and care between them and their loved ones.

There was one suggestion made in the Any Answers? programme that, on a considered reflection, has a more unfortunate implication than, clearly, was intended by the contributor making the suggestion, and it passed without challenge in the programme. The comparison was made between how we allow that animals suffering can be put down but we insist on humans in similar conditions having to continue in their suffering. The suggestion that our treatment of animals can provide a model for how we treat human persons has a chilling implication for how we actually understand the dignity of human persons, an implication that is in need of challenge.

Apart from all this, it really is a quite fascinating experience to go along to a programme like Any Questions? in order to see how the programme works and to watch how its presenters and producers go about their jobs - and how other attendees conduct themselves! Even if you just sit and watch what is going on around you, there is a valuable experience to be had. It is also possible to get a more personal feel for political figures who, when interviewed on radio or television, can appear distant and remote.

Zero had done her homework before we went along .... so she was the only person in the room who, during the warm up discussion before the broadcast itself, was able to correctly answer the question about when Any Questions? had first been broadcast .... in 1948.

The Synodal Journey

The BBC are reporting the opening by Pope Francis of the journey towards the Synod of Bishops meeting on synodality under the headline: Pope Franics launches mass consultation on Church reform. That is of course, a gross mis-representation of the intention of the Synodal journey. The BBC reports' citation of a "progessive" and a "conservative" voices demonstrates this mis-understanding:

Some Catholics hope it will lead to change on issues such as women's ordination, married priests and same-sex relationships.

Others fear it will undermine the principles of the Church.

I do recommend reading, instead of the BBC report, the two addresses by Pope Francis in relation to the Synodal journey.

The first is a "moment of reflection" for the opening of the Synodal journey, held in the New Synod Hall on Saturday 9th October. Here Pope Francis speaks about each of the three key words that express more concretely the notion of synodality: communion, participation and mission.

The second is Pope Francis' homily at Mass celebrating the opening of the Synodal journey.

You need to read these in their entirety, if you are to gain a true sense of Pope Francis' intentions with regard to the Synodal process. The BBC report could be covering an event on a different planet! 

The following quotations are only part of the story, though they are the parts that have caught my attention on a quick reading.

How Pope Francis understands the idea of a "listening Church" - prayer and adoration:

The Synod then offers us the opportunity to become a listening Church, to break out of our routine and pause from our pastoral concerns in order to stop and listen.  To listen to the Spirit in adoration and prayer.  Today how much we miss the prayer of adoration; so many people have lost not only the habit but also the very notion of what it means to worship God!  To listen to our brothers and sisters speak of their hopes and of the crises of faith present in different parts of the world, of the need for a renewed pastoral life and of the signals we are receiving from those on the ground.....

As we initiate this process, we too are called to become experts in the art of encounter.  Not so much by organizing events or theorizing about problems, as in taking time to encounter the Lord and one another.  Time to devote to prayer and to adoration – that form of prayer that we so often neglect – devoting time to adoration, and to hearing what the Spirit wants to say to the Church.  Time to look others in the eye and listen to what they have to say, to build rapport, to be sensitive to the questions of our sisters and brothers, to let ourselves be enriched by the variety of charisms, vocations and ministries.  Every encounter – as we know – calls for openness, courage and a willingness to let ourselves be challenged by the presence and the stories of others. 

How Pope Francis understands the idea of "discernment" - adoration, prayer and the word of God:

The Synod is a process of spiritual discernment, of ecclesial discernment, that unfolds in adoration, in prayer and in dialogue with the word of God.  Today’s second reading tells us that God’s word is “living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Heb 4:12).  That word summons us to discernment and it brings light to that process.  It guides the Synod, preventing it from becoming a Church convention, a study group or a political gathering, a parliament, but rather a grace-filled event, a process of healing guided by the Spirit.  In these days, Jesus calls us, as he did the rich man in the Gospel, to empty ourselves, to free ourselves from all that is worldly, including our inward-looking and outworn pastoral models; and to ask ourselves what it is that God wants to say to us in this time.  And the direction in which he wants to lead us.

Soul Music - two episodes from BBC Radio 4

More by accident than intention, I listened to two episodes of the BBC Radio 4 programme "Soul Music" this week. Each programme in a series of "Soul Music" takes a piece of music and allows the contributors to give an account of the impact that that piece of music has had on their lives. It also usually offers some insight into the music itself. There have now been some 31 series

The first programme I listened to was devoted to John Denver's Take Me Home, Country Roads. You can listen to the programme here (I think it will be available for some time after my posting), and it can be downloaded from that page as an .mp3 file. It is particularly moving to listen to Alison Wells speaking about her sister Elizabeth, who lived with Downs Syndrome, and about how her mother cared for Elizabeth. This section occurs at 09:25 - 13.44 in the programme. Elizabeth died in January, after contracting COVID-19.

I caught the second programme on BBC Radio 4 Extra, which presents programmes from the (sometimes distant) past. This programme, dedicated to Beethoven's violin concerto, is from a series first broadcast in 2012. You can listen to it here; it appears to be permanently available, and there is an option to download it as an .mp3 file. I recommend to you the first section, up to 07:24, where Robert Gupta describes how the violin concerto played apart in a key moment of his friendship with Nathanial Ayers, who suffered from mental illness. You could also listen to the final section, starting at 17:44, in which Joe Quigley describes how a recording of the concerto came to be played in his monastery and explains the impact it had on him.

BBC Radio 2: Gerard Manley Hopkins cited on the Folk Show

Wednesday evening on Radio 2 is the regular slot for Mark Radcliffe's The Folk Show. Often there is a live guest band on the show, and this week it was  band called Mishaped Pearls. They released an album earlier this year entitled Shivelight.

You can listen again for a further 29 days to the programme, but you will need to have BBC account in order to sign in to the iPlayer to do so. If you do listen again, go to this link and then to 36:50. At his point Mishaped Pearls perform the track "Queen May", and then discuss the origins of the title of the album.

They have taken it from Gerard Manley Hopkins use of the word in the poem "That Nature is a Heraclitian Fire", to indicate the shaft of light that can be seen shining through the canopy of a forest. It is an appropriate choice of title, as many of the songs on the album do reflect on nature in a way with which Gerard Manley Hopkins might be familiar.

What is very striking in the programme, though, is Mark Radcliffe's familiarity with and enthusiasm for Gerard Manley Hopkins. He is able to quote the first lines of "The Windhover", adding the comment that it is "stunning stuff". Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised at the connection between folk music and an interest in Hopkins' poetry ...

Do listen if you can ….

The question that is not being asked about the Tom Daley baby news

"Tom and Dustin are thrilled to share that they are expecting their first child in 2018".

No mention of the mother who is expecting to give birth to the child. One might expect, just as a matter of honesty in language, that coverage would report that a mother is expecting a child conceived on behalf of the all male couple.

Agree or disagree, it should be noted that our society accepts without question a world in which women can be used to give birth.... having been airbrushed out of the equation for the sake of promoting in the media a couple whose marriage was described by Daley only in December as "far from perfect".

Daley and Black are not the first high profile couple to do this.... 

But questions should be raised about babies becoming commodities, the result of transactions. 

Do read the full comment at Christian Today.

I have not followed it fully, but The Archers has a story line about a lady acting as a surrogate for a same sex couple. It will be interesting to see how far this story line explores the issues surrounding surrogacy.

Abortion: a tragic anniversary [UPDATED]

On Friday, which marks the 50th anniversary of the Abortion Act in Britain, I will be away from home at an all day meeting and then travelling home. This will prevent me from taking part in the prayer vigil to which we are being called by our bishops on that day (though I expect I may be able to join in spirit during my train journey home).

After fifty years of legalised abortion, few in our countries have not had some experience of abortion. This is something that makes it a difficult topic to discuss in a public arena, particularly for a man, as the articulation of an objective ethical view is all to easily read by members of an audience as an individually directed comment on their personal choices in a situation whose complexity may be unknown to the writer/speaker. It is also the case that legalised abortion has impacted on the lives of Catholics, again, in a variety of ways.

The provision of Canon Law (Canon 1398) for a latae sententiae excommunication of the person who actually procures an abortion is intended to teach how seriously the Catholic Church views the offence of abortion. The joint statement of bishops describes every abortion as a "tragedy"; the Second Vatican Council, taking place at a time before abortion was legally available in many of the western democracies, described abortion as an "unspeakable crime" (Gaudium et Spes n.51). This teaching is balanced by the provisions of charity towards those who have experienced abortion. The absolution from the penalty of excommunication can now be offered by any priest and is no longer reserved to the bishop (earlier special provisions for the Year of Mercy and for participants in World Youth days are now permanent); and the bishops statement indicates a similar approach of mercy:

When abortion is the choice made by a woman, the unfailing mercy of God and the promise of forgiveness through the Sacrament of Reconciliation are always available. There is always a way home to a deeper relationship with God and the Church, as recent Popes have emphasised, which can heal and bring peace.

A particular challenge of conscience that faces a Catholic is that of how, given the prevalence of abortion in the culture and practice of life in our countries, we indicate our own "no" to abortion and thereby avoid feeling that, however distantly, we are complicit in the culture of abortion. One way of doing this is to join with those initiatives that seek to help women facing a choice for abortion. Peaceful prayer vigils at abortion clinics are one way of doing this, and the work of one such vigil in Ealing has been in the news recently. Coverage can be seen here, here, here and here.  Radio 4's World at One has an interesting clip here of an interview with a lady which indicates a value for the practical help offered by these vigils (you might need to register at the site to hear the clip).

From time to time I am stunned by the "economy with the truth" that I encounter on the subject of abortion. British law, for example, does not recognise in any way that access to abortion is a human right. On the contrary, it is framed to establish exemption from prosecution under other legislative provisions if certain conditions are met; and it is difficult to reconcile the availability of abortion in our countries with the right of life of Article 3 of the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights. And an interview on the World at One with a woman who had travelled from Northern Ireland to Manchester for an abortion describes the woman waiting for her return flight in pain and with bleeding .... and yet she had been discharged from the abortion clinic, something that did not cause comment. (I can't trace the clip, but I am quite confident of my memory). The allegations of "harassment" at abortion clinic vigils, including the one at Ealing, are utterly unfounded as I have good reason to know.

UPDATE: The BBC News website is carrying this report of three women's experience of abortion. The reactions of boyfriends that occur in two of these stories appears to me very striking, with implications not only for the education of men in terms of understanding and taking responsibility for their sexual activity but also for the authenticity/character of their love for the girlfriends involved. Two phrases stand out to me: "I felt pressured into having an abortion" and "I didn't have much choice". So much for "choice" in the real experience of abortion.

Reflecting on Gay Britannia

The BBC is currently in the middle of broadcasting a wide range of programmes, on both television and radio, under the branding "Gay Britannia". The programming marks the 50th anniversary of the Sexual Offences Act of 1967 "which partially decriminalised gay sex" according to the web page just linked or, as a trailer I heard on Radio 2 yesterday expressed it, "legalised gay sex". The distinction is not trivial, as an observation below will show.

I am struck by the willingness of the BBC's web page to use the terms "gay" and "queer" in their titles/strap lines for programmes. That they have not been more consistent in the use of what, so far as I can tell, is the current more "correct" terminology of LGBT (or LGBTQ+) suggests some recognition of the unusual in the subject matter of their programming.

The strap line for the two Radio 2 programmes Born this Way reads as follows:

Andrew Scott presents the remarkable story of how gay people transformed pop culture.

Which is interesting in its recognition of something implicit in the whole of the Gay Britannia programming: that the movement in favour of LGBTQ+ equality represents a wholesale alteration of our public culture, and not just a movement in favour of equality. This creates a bit of a catch-22 for Catholics who, on the one hand would wish to defend the rights of LGBTQ+ persons precisely as persons (and not because of their LGBTQ+ characteristics) who therefore have the same inalienable human rights as each and every other person, but on the other hand would wish to oppose a transformation of culture that embeds the LGBTQ+ characteristic as normative.

The BBC Gay Britannia programming indicates how much the culture of media and entertainment has been the subject of this cultural transformation. But that transformation now reaches into many other areas of society via an assimilation of a genuine concern for the rights of LGBTQ+ persons to a cultural transformation that, on the part of most people, is quite inadvertent and unrecognised.

It would be naïve to think that this does not have its effect on Catholics, who, in the workplace and elsewhere, will find it difficult to maintain a resistance to a cultural transformation they do not support whilst at the same time acknowledging the rights as persons of those who live according to a lifestyle that is different than their own.

In this context, it is worthwhile for Catholics to recall some considerations of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and to measure our current experience against them. The considerations refer to an earlier letter from the Congregation on the pastoral care of homosexual persons. The considerations are limited to considerations of sexual orientation (they were published as long ago as 1992), though they nevertheless do have some application to the wider LGBTQ+ context.

6. “She (the Church) is also aware that the view that homosexual activity is equivalent to or as acceptable as the sexual expression of conjugal love has a direct impact on society's understanding of the nature and rights of the family and puts them in jeopardy” (no. 9).

7. “It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.

13. Including “homosexual orientation” among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homo-sexuality (cf. no. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims. The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality. A person's homosexuality would be invoked in opposition to alleged discrimination, and thus the exercise of rights would be defended precisely via the affirmation of the homosexual condition instead of in terms of a violation of basic human rights.

14. ...Homosexual persons who assert their homosexuality tend to be precisely those who judge homosexual behavior or lifestyle to be “either completely harmless, if not an entirely good thing” (cf. no. 3), and hence worthy of public approval. It is from this quarter that one is more likely to find those who seek to “manipulate the Church by gaining the often well-intentioned support of her pastors with a view to changing civil statutes and laws” (cf. no. 5), those who use the tactic of protesting that “any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people... are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination” (cf. no. 9). 

[The observation at n.13 is pertinent to the distinction between "partially decriminalising" and "legalising" noted at the top of this post.]

To update these considerations, we should make reference to Pope Francis' repeated condemnations of "gender theory", which he has termed an "ideological colonisation of the family". That we are made as persons who are either male or female in their physiology is a matter of the creative wisdom of God, and to promote the notion that it is we who can decide our own gender and change it if we wish - this Pope Francis identifies as being opposed to God's creative act. It is an ideology because it wishes to alter reality, rather than to recognise and explore reality. The abolition of the word "sex" to refer to male or female persons, and its almost universal replacement by the word "gender", is a sign of just how much, under the label of equality, an ideology of gender has already contributed to an alteration of culture.

World Youth Day 2016: ..on the BBC

Video diaries from three pilgrims:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36890521

BBC Radio 4: "The Pope's Letters"

I did not see the Panorama programme broadcast on Monday, but I have just listened to the 45 minute Radio 4 broadcast "The Pope's Letters". As I understand it, this programme contained more substantial extracts from the letters themselves - having 15 minutes more than the Panorama broadcast. The comments below relate to the radio programme - I am unable to say how much they might also apply or not apply to the television broadcast.

The programme is available to listen to at the BBC website: here. I do strongly recommend it. It is not clear how long it will be available here, but I would expect a week or a month. Hopefully it will be available as a podcast at some point for download.

I do strongly recommend the programme. It is, as I suggested at the end of my previous post about these letters, a story of a friendship. The extracts from John Paul II's letters chosen in the programme portray this friendship wonderfully and, particularly in connection with Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka's reaction to the shooting in St Peter's Square, very movingly. The programme provides a testimony to a friendship of a profoundly Christian character. Interestingly, both Ed Stourton and Carl Bernstein recognise the friendship as being one that does not fit readily into any category - in Carl Bernstein's phrase it is "sui generis". There is a model of friendship here - and, indeed, of love, in its truest sense - for both Christians and for others.

The suggestion that there was a degree of romantic engagement of Anna-Teresa towards Karol Wojytla is made in the programme by Bill and Jadwiga Smith, the executors of Anna-Teresa's estate. In the programme, and in comparison to the extracts from the letters read in the programme, this comes over as somewhat speculative on their part. Likewise speculative is some of the comment on the attitude of "the Vatican" towards Anna-Teresa's contact with Pope John Paul II. But together, these two elements make up less than two minutes of a 45 minute programme.

It would be fascinating to be able to read the discussion in the correspondence, from both sides, about Pope John Paul II's Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem. This is referred to in the programme, but not cited. Their discussion is reportedly quite extensive.

The programme does full justice to the origin of the friendship between Anna-Teresa and Karol Wojtyla in their shared philosophical interests. The inter-relation of matters of philosophy and of personal life in the correspondence are apparent in the programme. Those familiar with the letters of Edith Stein to Roman Ingarden will recognise this in their correspondence, too. There is a real sense of a community of both ideas and life within the particular phenomenological school to which these writers belong.

As I say, highly recommended.

Poppies@theTower

Yesterday evening I was able to visit the display of ceramic poppies at the Tower of London. They form an evolving installation called Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red. There is an interview with the ceramic artist responsible for making the poppies embedded in this BBC news report of the large number of visitors to the Tower of London, drawn by the installation. It is worth watching the interview to gain some sense of what is going in to the making of the installation.

 

Even at 8 pm there were significant numbers of people visiting. It was very thought provoking and, whilst to an extent ordinary Saturday night life continued, there was a certain sense of the dignified among those who were looking at the poppies. It was certainly possible to find quiet places to stop and reflect.

This installation has captured the public imagination in quite a surprising way - as the artist says in his interview, it isn't really his work any more, but rather a work that belongs to everyone. Part of that capturing of the imagination arises, I think, from the way in which an iconic London landmark - the Tower of London - provides a unique backdrop to the sea of red.

Fr Brian D'Arcy on BBC Radio 2

I have just listened to part of an interview of Fr Brian D'Arcy on Radio 2's Sunday morning programme. The presenter was Clare Balding.

In part - and in a way that would be reflected by many other Catholics from the kind of background from which Fr D'Arcy comes - Fr D'Arcy spoke about the impact of Pope Francis' election for him. The way in which he spoke about the resignation of Pope Benedict and the subsequent election of Pope Francis as a miracle for him in his own situation at first sight seems somewhat hostile to Pope Benedict, but it was combined with a tribute to the greatness of an act of someone who stepped aside as he realised that another was needed to do what was needed for the good of the Church. Perhaps we should not be mean in recognising the disposition of divine providence for Fr D'Arcy in this regard.

Two particular points, though.

Fr D'Arcy attributed his being the subject of disciplinary provisions from the Congregation for Doctrine to his being outspoken in his criticism of the way in which superiors in the Catholic Church had responded to the child sex abuse scandal in Ireland, and he insisted that, though progress has been made by the Church in this area, he would still be just as outspoken today. However, I suspect that the reasons for the intervention of the Congregation for Doctrine are actually other than this. This BBC News report refers to other issues in Fr D'Arcy's work, as well as to those around sexual abuse:

Fr D'Arcy has spoken out against mandatory celibacy for priests, church teaching on contraception and has been a vocal critic of the handling of clerical sexual abuse. In the wake of the Murphy Report into clerical abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin Fr D'Arcy called for reformation of church structures and accused the Holy See of using legal procedures to shield itself from criticism over its handling of abuse.

The second point is that, in his interview, Fr D'Arcy spoke in a way that contrasted the institutional in the Church to the living of the Christian life by its people in, for example, action in favour of those suffering in the Philippines at the moment.  Though Fr D'Arcy was presenting himself as being very much encouraged by Pope Francis action in the Church (though with an aside qualification that "strangely enough, he hasn't changed any rules or regulations yet" - memory quote, not exact), he appeared to me to be very much off-Pope-Francis-message here. Pope Francis has repeatedly spoken to the effect that to know Christ is to know the Church, to be one with Christ is to be one with the Church. The following is from a General Audience address earlier this year, but in other addresses Pope Francis has made the point more systematically (I will post those links when I have time):

Still today some say: “Christ yes, the Church no”. Like those who say “I believe in God but not in priests”. But it is the Church herself which brings Christ to us and which brings us to God. The Church is the great family of God’s children. Of course, she also has human aspects. In those who make up the Church, pastors and faithful, there are shortcomings, imperfections and sins. The Pope has these too — and many of them; but what is beautiful is that when we realize we are sinners we encounter the mercy of God who always forgives.

This having been said, it was interesting to hear Fr D'Arcy speaking in a way that acknowledged the difficulty of the situation in which he found himself as a result of the intervention of the Holy See - he observed that he had come to a position where he felt he was going to assert his own freedom and that you could not go on feeling that you are being hounded for what you are doing. The way in which he spoke, however, seemed to me to lack any edge of bitterness, and this was something I found encouraging.

Mis-reporting the survey ...

How does this, from the Vatican Information Service, with my italics added:

Finally, Archbishop Bruno Forte recalled that the approach for addressing the challenges of contemporary family life should be that which Blessed John XXIII noted in his diary shortly before the opening of Vatican Council II: “All is to be seen in the light of pastoral ministry: that is, in terms of souls to save and to edify”. He added, “It is not, therefore, a matter of debating doctrinal questions, which have in any case been clarified by the Magisterium recently … the invitation deriving from this for all the Church is to listen to the problems and expectations of many families today, manifesting her closeness and credibly proposing God's mercy and the beauty of responding to His call”.

become this, from the BBC:

The Vatican has launched a worldwide survey to find out what Catholics really think about its teaching on marriage and family life.

I have only quickly perused the questions contained in the Lineamenta for next October's Extraordinary Synod. But I do not believe there is a single question which asks for what the respondent thinks about Church teaching, or about whether or not they believe it should be changed. Some questions do ask about the extent of acceptance of teaching and about difficulties with putting it in to practice; some others ask about the attitudes and practice in local Churches.  But there is no suggestion anywhere in the Lineamenta of debating the truth or otherwise of the teaching itself...

UPDATE 2: If you saw the earlier update referring to how my own Diocese of Brentwood was presenting the "survey" (it isn't a survey in any conventional sense) on its website, I have now deleted that update. The wording on the Brentwood Diocese website is now significantly different: Calling for Responses.

Five Prophets on the BBC

Since The World at One was extended to 13.45, BBC Radio 4 have been broadcasting 15 minute programmes in the 13.45-14.00 pm time slot.  These vary considerably in subject matter, but are often a series of programmes that run over a week. I sometimes catch these programmes by accident. The current five part series is entitled The Prophets, and I caught the third episode - devoted to the prophet Elijah - this lunch time.

I enjoyed the programme, and found it interesting to listen to. I felt it was sympathetic to the figure of Elijah rather than hostile. It was sufficiently wide in its study of the significance to Elijah to include an account of the founding of the Carmelite's and a snippet from a female rabbi indicating a softening of Elijah's character that might be offered by liberal Judaism.

The five figues being covered in the series are Jonah, Isaiah, Elijah, Miriam and Samuel. As I post, the episodes on Jonah and Isaiah can be listened to by following links from the programme home page: The Prophets. I expect that Elijah will appear shortly, and that the final two episodes will be added as they are broadcast.

Do go and listen yourself. And remember, the pictures are much better on the radio ....

If ....

The rights expressed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights are, according to its preamble, to be considered applicable to everyone and they are to be considered as "inalienable". This latter descriptor means that the rights enshrined in the Declaration are not to be taken away from anyone for any reason. Political opinion is explicitly referred to as one of the distinctions that do not allow for derogation from the rights expressed in the Declaration (cf Article 2).

Article 12

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

It seems to me that, rather than being a question of freedom of expression (cf Article 19), the debate about the playing of a certain song by the BBC is a question relating to Article 12. That is, it is  question about attacking the honour and reputation of an individual. The question facing the BBC is not one of restricting or not restricting freedom of expression, but one of whether or not they wish to make themselves party to a breach of Article 12. Freedom of expression can be adequately achieved by observations of political difference from Mrs Thatcher.

However, both during her own political career and since, it has been socially/culturally acceptable to attack her reputation. Now, if, instead of being Mrs Thatcher, the person being subjected to such attack were ..[substitute here your own particular favoured figure] .. or if that person today, say, were to be well known in the LGBT community, then outrage might follow. Why not for Mrs Thatcher?

The right at stake is universal and inalienable - so Mrs T is entitled to it as much as anyone else.

Linked from the BBC Chris Evans show

For the first time in quite a long time I have just explored the Sitemeter statistics for Catholic Commentary. I am not important enough to be one of the blogs that the Vatican spokesman, Fr Lomabardi, reads each morning since there are no .va referrals.

There were some referrals from the BBC, though: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00p2d9w.

Try the link in the Buzz About This Programme box at the right hand side of the page to: God is always faithful to his promises. I don't know how long it will be there...

Archbishop Sentamu comments on the Ordinariate

During an appearance on Radio 2's Good Morning Sunday programme on Easter Sunday, Archbishop Sentamu, the Anglican Archbishop of York was asked about his response to the numbers leaving the Church of England to join the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham. He was asked if this was a cause for concern. For the next six days, the programme can be heard again on the BBC's i-player: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010g9j3. The relevant section of the programme occurs shortly after the 1:46:00 point.

At one level, Archbishop Sentamu's comment is welcome in that it did not display antagonism towards those who are leaving the Church of England for the Roman Catholic Church. Indeed, it displayed a generous appreciation of the contribution made to the Church of England by those who are now joining the Roman Catholic Church.

At a deeper level, though, his response becomes more problematical. There were two or three different strands in his reponse, each of which raises its own problem. Fundamentally, though, I felt that it indicated a real indifference as to whether or not one belonged to one Christian denomination or another. That indifferentism is problematical to those leaving the Church of England for the Roman Catholic Church - for them it really does matter to be in communion with the Holy See and so denomination does matter - and problematical for ecumenical dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church - indifference to denominational affiliation is an inadequate basis for any realistic dialogue.

One strand is reflected in Archbishop Sentamu's suggestion that those leaving the Church of England could be compared to children who have grown up and are now leaving their family, and finding a better home elsewhere. Another strand is also reflected in his observation that if those leaving were to know Jesus more and know him as their Lord and Saviour in the Roman Catholic Church then it didn't really matter: "good luck to them, and God bless them". This strand indicates a lack of any real ecclesial sense, which feeds the indifference to denominational affiliation.

Archbishop Sentamu also referred to people leaving the Catholic Church to join the Church of England, and to seek ordination in the Church of England, something that the Church of England does not publicise. "I have baptised and confirmed people coming the other way who were never baptised in their own churches. And occasionally you get people wanting to join the ordained ministry of the Church of England". The question this raises from the Catholic point of view is whether there really is an equivalence of moving "one way" to moving "the other way". For Archbishop Sentamu, it is easy to see an equivalence in the two directions of movement. But will Roman Catholics see an equivalence? There is not a symmetry of understanding. There seems to me a real difference between non-practicing Catholics joining the Church of England and very much practicing Anglicans joining the Roman Catholic Church.

At the end of his interview, Archbishop Sentamu observes in effect that the Church of England is still part of the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church". I am not sure how comfortably this fits with his evangelical notion of closeness to Jesus Christ and indifference to denominational affiliation expressed earlier in the interview.

But the saddest points arising from my reflection on this interview are that (1) it suggests there is no real possibility of a genuine ecumenical dialogue between the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church and (2) there is a real sense that the highest authorities in the Church of England do not feel that they have anything to pause and reflect upon in terms of ecclesiastical polity as a result of the establishing of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.

Pictures from Protest

Some unions can arrange a very civilized start to a protest march! Coffee, biscuits and "rest rooms".

Though I am not sure what to make of the view across a rather glum looking River Thames at the Millennium Bridge and Tate.

Setting off along the Embankment - we actually joined the later part of the march, so we were over three hours behind the first marchers and about one hour ahead of the last marchers.

I think this counts as my most iconic image of the day.

Another iconic image.

Approaching Parliament - and remember that the front of the march moved off at about 11.45 am!

Approaching Piccadilly. There had clearly been some trouble along Piccadilly earlier, with a few broken windows evident, but we were able to pass along Piccadilly quite peacefully.

Part way along Piccadilly.

Approaching Hyde Park.

I had subscribed to the Metropolitan Police's text update service for the day - and also received news updates from my sister - so we were aware in general terms of some of the difficulties that had occurred during the afternoon. This BBC report covers events of the whole day. However, our experience was one of a peaceful and well-ordered march. This was the case despite the fact that the numbers marching - well over 250 000, I would guess - meant that the streets were quite congested at some points of the route. We did not see any of the violent scenes shown in the BBC report which it is fair to say had absolutely nothing to do with the TUC march.

The nearest we got to a problem was passing Fortnum and Mason, where a small crowd was beginning to gather as we passed. Subsequent Met Police texts:

Fortnum and Mason's is surrounded by police as this is a crime scene.

and

The Met Police thank those outside Fortnum and Mason for their patience. They will not be held any longer than necessary.

Out of context, the texts are quite amusing. We did, of course, speculate as to whether or not Fortnum and Mason were providing refreshments to those who had occupied their premises.

By heading towards Kensington High Street for something to eat before returning home we kept very clear of trouble spots.

Branch theory

According to the BBC news website, in a piece entitled Dissident Anglicans leave Church of England:

A first wave of about 600 Anglicans are officially leaving the Church of England in protest at the decision to ordain women as bishops.

They will be enrolled as candidates to join a new branch of the Catholic Church - the Ordinariate - which has been specially created for them.

If I have understood aright, those joining the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham are not leaving the Church of England "in protest". The prospect of women bishops in the Church of England is I expect part of their story, but the fundamental question is one of which women bishops is only a symptom. The question is one of unity with the Catholic faith, and therefore of unity with the Holy See.

More inaccurate than the report's reference to "in protest" is its reference to the Ordinariate as a "new branch of the Catholic Church"! This suggests that the Ordinariate is a kind of "Church of England" within the Catholic Church ... but it is precisely the notion of the Church of England as a "branch" of the universal Catholic Church that has now become untenable for those who are leaving. To speak of the Ordinariate in that same language is not only inaccurate but mis-represents both the intentions of those joining the Ordinariate and the reality of the juridical structure erected by Pope Benedict XVI.

An apology (of sorts) from the BBC

A BBC Radio 4 programme called "Quote ... Unquote" used to be a favourite of mine. It was (past tense) a quiz about different quotations and who said them. A feature of the programme was the anecdotes that the participants contributed, anecdotes that were not infrequently humorous but were (past tense) not offensive in any way. Both the questions asked in the quiz, and the participants anecdotes, were (past tense) very informative. The series that was running last July represented a significant change in the style of the programme, both with regard to the style of the questions and the style of the anecdotes.

I last listened to an episode - well, actually, I switched to another radio station after only a few minutes - on 12th July last. I made an initial mistake in submitting my complaint via the BBC website. With hindsight, I should have written and therefore had access to a copy of exactly what I had said in my complaint and a certificate of posting to verify exactly when I posted my letter. The reply came back by e-mail, on 27th August 2010, and I wasn't happy with its contents. I got round to writing back again on 28th September. The BBC's reply to me was then dated 6th December 2010.

My complaint was about a rather crude joke contained in an anecdote told by one the contributors, Toby Young, a contributor who was not familiar to me from previous series of "Quote ... Unquote". The essential part of the initial reply was that the BBC had to provide a range of programmes to cater for different tastes in humour, and that there is "no single set of standards in this area on which the whole of society can agree".

Along with some other points, my letter of 28th September contained the following:

.... you state that “there is no single set of standards in this area on which the whole of society can agree”. Should the joke about which I complained have been transmitted via the e-mail system at my place of work it would have been clearly and unambiguously a breach of my employers IT systems acceptable use policy. A colleague forwarding that joke would have been open to disciplinary processes by the employer. Since the policy which my employer uses is quite typical in its expectations of colleagues, I believe that it indicates a standard for behaviour that is widely accepted.

I think there are three significant points in the following paragraph of the reply that I received to that letter:

I've now liaised with the comedy department at BBC Radio 4 who are sorry you were offended by the "Sloane Ranger's" joke. They've asked me to explain that "Quote ... Unquote" is a long-running celebrity panel game with a tradition of including amusing quotations and quips from the panellists. While Toby Young's joke was certainly crude, we don't believe it went beyond the expectations of the audience for a grown-up BBC Radio 4 panel show. We stand by the point Philip made in the initial response that humour is a subjective area and we are guided by the BBC's Editorial Guidelines in deciding what is appropriate for inclusion in the programme. We received no significant reaction to suggest that listeners found the joke particularly objectionable, but again, we're sorry you were personally offended.

The first significant point is the recognition of the crude nature of the joke about which I had complained. The second significant point is that an apology is offered to me. This apology joins the one that I received some years ago from Television Licensing (after they had sent me some very threatening letters about buying a TV license when I do not own or use a TV) in the archive of MY BEST ACHIEVEMENTS. I do think there is some credit to be given to an organisation like the BBC when it recognises a need for apology at an individual level, even though it defends its action as being quite acceptable.

The third significant point in the paragraph is the continued denial that an objective standard exists in terms of the judgement of what is and what is not acceptable in the field of humour. This qualifies the apology to some extent. I would like to put this in the context of something that Pope Benedict XVI said when he spoke in Westminster Hall last September. This was a meeting between the Holy Father and representatives of public life in Britain. I am sure someone was there from the BBC! The Holy Father's words were spoken in the specific context of political discourse, but have a wider application to culture in general, since culture forms a part of the fabric of a democratic society:

By appeal to what authority can moral dilemmas be resolved? These questions take us directly to the ethical foundations of civil discourse. If the moral principles underpinning the democratic process are themselves determined by nothing more solid than social consensus, then the fragility of the process becomes all too evident - herein lies the real challenge for democracy.

In Westminster Hall, Pope Benedict called for those in public office to look for something ethically objective to form the basis of their decision making. That an organisation like the BBC is not responding to this call in any way is an indication that the dialogue proposed by Pope Benedict's Westminster Hall address is not being taken up. Whilst we might not expect the BBC to follow Catholic teaching in all things, I do think we could expect them to take seriously a call such as that proposed in Pope Benedict's address, to engage in a search for an objective ethical basis to their programming.

God is always faithful to his promises

God is always faithful to his promises, but he often surprises us in the way he fulfils them.

I missed Pope Benedict's "Thought for the Day"  this morning - I didn't wake up in time. [ZENIT have the text of the transcript here, in case the BBC page is not permanent.]I did catch Archbishop Nichols speaking on Radio 2's "Pause for thought" just after 9 am. As Archbishop Nichols referred to Pope Benedict's earlier address, citing the strap line - "God is always faithful to his promises, but he often surprises us in the way he fulfils them" - I was struck by the number of different situations I have been involved in over the last year or so to which those words could be applied.

Pope Benedict's address is a straightforward and confident teaching of the event of the birth of Jesus Christ and of its significance for the world. Archbishop Nichols' remarks, the influence of Blessed John Henry Newman very apparent in them, asked those who do not share Christian faith to be open to the intuition, to the instinct, that underlies the Christmas story. That trust in our intution is completely in accord with reason, and not contrary to it.

The full text of Archbishop Nichols remarks is below, and available (but not, I suspect, permanently) on the BBC Radio 2 website:

"Last night I kicked off my shoes and watched the last episode of ‘The Nativity’ on BBC One. I hope you did too. It was such a beautiful portrayal of the birth of Jesus.

Then, this morning, I was all ears as broadcasting history was made over on Radio 4: Pope Benedict giving his lovely thought for this day, Christmas Eve. He reminded us of his gracious and encouraging visit to the UK in September and he promised to remember us in his prayers.

He also said this: ‘God is always faithful to his promises, but he often surprises us in the way he fulfils them.’

These words were dramatically illustrated in the TV Nativity.

We followed the story of Thomas, a young hot-headed shepherd, brimming with anger and resentment at the tough circumstances he faced. He found peace beyond his dreams as he kissed the tiny foot of the baby Jesus.

The three wise men came, searching for the ‘Light of the World’, astonished to find him in a stable. They bowed low to honour him, presenting their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, no doubt prepared for a palace!

And Joseph, too, finding love at Mary’s side, precisely where he thought he had been betrayed. God fulfils his promises in surprising ways!

Of course, some want to mock this story, insisting that faith in God is an illusion, offensive to our reasoning minds. But is love an illusion, or beauty, even if we can’t explain them in terms of reason alone? Certainly not! Christmas is a time to learn again to trust these instincts of ours, to recognise in these intuitions a way of knowing which is neither an illusion nor unreasonable. Then we can come to God-made-man, when he comes to us in poverty and vulnerability for our sake. From him, surprisingly, we too can receive peace, light and love.

Happy Christmas everyone!"

This last paragraph goes very well with Pope Benedict's own words.