EU: A senior Roman Catholic churchman in Ireland has said the church feels "let down" by recent developments in the European Union.
They include controversy over the appointment of European Commissioner-designate Mr Rocco Buttiglione because of his views on homosexuality and the role of women, and the absence of a reference to God in the proposed EU Constitution.
The chairman of the Irish Bishops' Conference Committee on European Affairs, Dr Joseph Duffy, said yesterday there was now a question as to whether the Christian faith was seen "as a liability or impediment in the new Europe".
Dr Duffy, the Bishop of Clogher, said the church was feeling "a bit let down by the new Europe", which it had for so long supported and to which Christianity had contributed so much.
"A certain shortfall in the acceptance of religion and religious values" was taking place, he said. These values were "being eroded and ignored," he added.
Speaking to The Irish Times last night, he said this "sense of disappointment" could be traced to failed attempts to have a reference to God in the new EU Constitution and an acknowledgement there of Europe's Christian roots.
He felt that "realities were not accepted", and recalled the Christian sources from which EU founders drew inspiration.
Bishop Duffy was speaking of the controversy over attempts by members of the European Parliament to block the appointment of Mr Rocco Buttiglione as EU Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs.
He believed Mr Buttiglione's remarks to an EU Parliament committee vetting nominee commissioners had been misunderstood.
Expressing his private views as a Roman Catholic, Mr Buttiglione had said he believed homosexuality was a sin and expressed a traditional view on women and marriage.
Bishop Duffy pointed out that Mr Buttiglione had also pledged to uphold and defend the EU Constitution and that he was prepared to follow on, on that.
The bishop repeated his belief that Mr Buttiglione was experiencing "pure intolerance".
He did not feel his language or that of other church figures, who had spoken of a "new Inquisition" and "discrimination" in this context, was inappropriate.
It might be "strong language" but was justified "because of a feeling that the EU is getting rid of core issues of a values system needed for the survival of Europe, particularly as regards a commitment to the family".
It is understood Maps' anxiety about Mr Buttiglione's views are rooted in a direction to Catholic politicians published by the Vatican in July 2003.
In a document approved by the Pope, entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons, Roman Catholic politicians were advised strongly to vote against any legislation recognising same sex unions.
Published by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a department of the Vatican, it said "all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are obliged to do so in a particular way, in keeping with their responsibility as politicians."
And the Vatican document continued that "when legislation in favour of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it."
Letter of regret: Buttiligone to Barroso
Dear Mr President,
I deeply regret the difficulties and the problems that have arisen as a consequence of my hearing in front of the [ European Parliament] Liberties Committee. I did not in any way intend to offend the feelings of anybody and in particular of women and homosexuals. Words so emotionally charged as "sin" should perhaps not be introduced in the political debate.
In politics the only relevant issue is "Are you in favour of or against discrimination?" To this question my answer is clear: "I am against any kind of discrimination and I fully subscribe to the Charter of Fundamental Rights and to the Constitution of the Union."
Non-discrimination defends those who hold views different from yours. It would be too easy not to discriminate against those who hold your same views and with whom one stands in full agreement. I do not discriminate against anybody and I would like not to be discriminated against by anybody because of my religious or philosophical beliefs.
I recognise that the implementations of the non-discrimination principle, as provided for in Article 13 of the Treaty, and the related issue of human rights could not fall within the sphere competency of any single Commissioner. They fall within the collegial responsibility of the whole Commission, and I accept that they should be directly supervised and guaranteed by the President.
I do not accept that a conflict might arise between my conscience and my duty as a Commissioner, but if this should ever be the case during my mandate, I am ready to formally ask you to be exonerated from the execution of a particular act and to be replaced in it. The only thing I cannot do is change my principles against my conscience for a political convenience.
Yours truly,
Rocco
Buttiligone
What he said that offended
On homosexuality: "Many things may be considered immoral which should not be prohibited. . . I may think that homosexuality is a sin. This has no effect on politics unless I say that homosexuality is a crime." And: "The state has no right to stick its nose into these things and nobody can be discriminated [ against] on the basis of sexual orientation . . . This stands in the Charter of Human Rights, this stands in the Constitution and I have pledged to defend this constitution."
On marriage: "Marriage exists to enable women to have children and to have the protection of a man."