Madam, – I found Alan French’s comments(April 7th) interesting and timely. I was raised as a Northern Irish Catholic of what was termed “mixed” parentage. I was taught simple ethics, such as “doing the right thing”, giving honour where honour was due, that cheating and lying were morally indefensible.
I also knew that, paradoxically, it was possible to commit sin and, having confessed it, have the slate wiped clean. I do not wish to devalue the psychological or, for those who believe, the vital sacramental value of confession. But how many times over the past years have we heard the Republic’s politicians saying that we shouldn’t play “the blame game”, or that, one of their number having “confessed” to some ethical wrong-doing, the issue is closed and one must “move on”? With respect, it is difficult not to perceive similarities between this behaviour and the notion of having one’s sins erased in a confessional.
The fundamental idea that one is responsible for one’s actions is somewhat diluted by the notion that dubious actions can be excused by “confessing” them to the Dáil or to one’s party leader. In extreme cases, a penance of exile is imposed, after which one may return, cleansed, to one’s political confraternity. In such a revolving-door moral world, why should one be afraid to sin against ethical or moral standards?
Part of the Protestant ethic comprises the socially sensible notion of doing good works. The concept of “doing” implies personal responsibility. Thus if one does something unethical, it seems obvious that one should take responsibility and act to put things right. It is not merely a question of admission, but of action and restitution.
I am no theologian. But it seems to me that some aspects of politics in the Republic may have unconsciously adapted and corrupted some admirable and even vital tenets of Catholicism to produce quite slippery notions of ethics and responsibility. – Yours, etc,