Sir, - Like many others I was appalled to read Prof James McEvoy's attribution to the President of a "two fingers up to the bishops" agenda. To use the language of the gutter when speaking of the President would be reprehensible, even if it came from the most illiterate and underprivileged of citizens. To encounter it in a public letter from the pen of a priest and professor of philosophy at Ireland's major seminary leaves one at a loss for words. Surely, on reflection, Fr McEvoy will want to issue an unqualified public apology for such an offensive remark.
The whole tone of his letter to the Irish News seemed, sadly, to be one of offended superiority, heralded by the significant opening phrase, "the moment comes when the worm turns." He accused the President of trying to "earn plaudits" by "flouting the authority of the Catholic Church" and "employing religious ceremonies in order to widen her popular appeal" and of using the office of the Presidency to "pursue her private religious agenda." The attribution of unverified and damning motivations to others is, regrettably, not infrequent in the sphere of politics, but ought there to be any place for such a practice in the conduct of debate between Christians?
What exactly is this censurable act, a repeat of which Fr McEvoy would find "repugnant", a "scandal to Catholics"? "Receiving Communion in a Protestant Church." As a Catholic Christian I do not consider this a scandal. I believe the real scandal is the sin of disunity among Christians. I believe that God's heart is pained over the divisions in the body of His son. Is Jesus Christ any less Lord of the people in the Church of Ireland than He is Lord of the people in the Catholic Church?
Is He really offended by one of His followers from the Catholic Church accepting an invitation from one of His ministers in the Church of Ireland to share at His table there? Is it not really His table? Are they not really His ministers? What are we Catholics afraid of - that we might give credence to the validity of the Lord's presence and action in and through the ministry of another Christian Church?
Our Lord prayed, precisely in the context of the first Eucharistic meal, that through the witness of unity and love of all those who would believe in Him the world would come to faith in Him. Which, then, must cause the Lord the greater sorrow? That we cross denominational divides to share together at His table, or that we reinforce a spiritual apartheid at His table? What a tragedy that this meal, showing forth the total generosity and sacrificial giving of the Lord of all Christians, can still be an occasion of division and exclusion.
The root sin in all of this is that Christians are divided among themselves. The consequent sin is that we, as churches and as individuals, have not yet accepted in practice the urgency of dealing with the situation. As long as we fail to do this, we are subverting the mission of the Church. By our disunity and lack of love, the world is being prevented from knowing Jesus, a stark fact which must be concluded from His prayer in John 17: "I pray . . . that they might be one . . . so the world might believe."
Just as in inter-church marriage the problem is not the marriage but the divided state of the churches, so it is the same here. The only solution to the "problem" of whether or not inter-communion is possible is to face urgently, and humbly, the tragic and harmful divisions that exist. May President McAleese's action in following her informed conscience hasten the day when we seriously address the scandal of disunity among Christians. In the meantime let us practise charity and tolerance of the honestly held views of our fellow Christians, be they Catholic or Protestant. - Yours, etc.,
From Paddy Monaghan
Secretary, Evangelical Catholic Initiative, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.