Position Papers - March 2015 by Position Papers

The world at a watershed

A review of Catholic affairs

God and suffering Better is the enemy of the good Reflecting on RTÉ To go deeper into the life of Christ Holy purity surpasses continence Film review: Selma

Number 487 March 2015

€3 £2.50 $4

If you would like to subscribe or donate to Position Papers (10 issues per year) just fill in the form below and return it to:

Subscription (One year, please tick the relevant box):

Number 487 - March 2015

Editorial

In Passing: The world at a watershed Michael Kirke

God and suffering Rev. Eugene O’Neill

Better is the enemy of the good Siobhan Scullion

Reflecting on RTÉ Tim O’Sullivan

To go deeper into the life of Christ Rev. John McCloskey

Holy purity surpasses continence Dr Kevin Majeres

Film review: Selma Steven D. Greydanus

Editor: Assistant editors: Subscription manager: Secretary: Design:

Rev. Gavan Jennings Michael Kirke, Pat Hanratty, Brenda McGann Liam Ó hAlmhain Dick Kearns Víctor Díaz

The editor, Position Papers, P.O. Box 4948, Rathmines, Dublin 6  email: editor@positionpapers.ie; website: www.positionpapers.ie Tel.+ 353 86065 2313  For new or renewed subscriptions contact: info@positionpapers.ie Articles ©Position Papers, who normally will on application give permission to reproduce gratis subject only to a credit in this form: ‘Reprinted, with permission from Position Papers, Dublin’. Please note: the opinions expressed in articles do not necessarily reflect those of the editor nor of the Opus Dei Prelature of which he is a priest. Printed by Gemini Printers, Plato Business Park, Dublin 15.

Recently I came across a few words of wisdom from a saint which almost appear as if they were written to guide us in the face of a world-wide campaign to redefine traditional marriage out of existence: The task for a Christian is to drown evil in an abundance of good. It is not a question of negative campaigns, or of being anti anything. On the contrary, we should live positively, full of optimism, with youthfulness, joy and peace. We should be understanding with everybody, with the followers of Christ and with those who abandon him, or do not know him at all. But understanding does not mean holding back, or remaining indifferent, but being active. (St Josemaria Escrivá, Furrow, no. 864). This beguilingly simple advice points out the Scylla and Charybdis of those of us who are so disturbed by this world-wide campaign against marriage: on the one hand there is the danger of bitter zeal and on the other there is the danger of passivity. The latter danger is clear enough, often summed up in the adage: “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” In the face of virulent secularism, we rightfully lament how so many good people, whether out of fear or out of simple ignorance, allow themselves to lead by the nose into what St John Paul II dubbed, without exaggeration, a “culture of death”.

Editorial

Those who, to their credit, don’t suffer from passivity or indifference are in danger, however, of falling into a bitter zeal which may be every bit as bad in the long run. They, understandably perhaps, grow embittered in the face of the relentless and powerful campaigns to engineer society in ways which will no doubt destroy many lives before they run their nefarious course. And yet when all is said and done responding to such campaigns with negative, bitter counter-campaigns may be no more productive than passivity and indifference, and this because such bitterness belies the fundamental proposition of goodness they claim to stand for. Those, therefore, who wish to defend traditional marriage against the proposed legalisation of same-sex marriage simply don’t need to campaign against same-sex marriage, but to campaign in favour of (traditional) marriage – in the same way as universally the pro-life movement is not known – at least by those on the side of the angels – as the “anti-abortion movement”. The pro-life movement isn’t focussed on abortion per se, but on the human life, and for this reason it is much of a muchness whether a human life is threatened by abortion, infanticide or euthanasia. Similarly, the promarriage movement extols marriage in the face of whatever it is which seeks to debase it, whether that be same-sex ‘marriage’, polygamy or legalised incest.

Populations around the world – and the Irish in May – are being asked whether we are “pro-same sex marriage’” Well, my answer is that I am not “anti-same sex marriage” in the same way as I am not “anti-abortion”. I am pro-life, and equally I am pro-marriage. It is very telling how the proponents of the culture of death begrudge the title “pro-life” to those who seek to defend the life of the unborn child; they prefer the title “anti-abortion” or at least “anti-choice”. I refuse to be repackaged in this way; what I value is human life, and the “choice” to kill a human being debases free-choice. Likewise in the forthcoming referendum I will refuse to be “packaged” as “anti-same sex marriage”. I am pro-marriage; I consider it one of the greatest marvels of God’s creation, and a “same-sex marriage” debases marriage as much as the choice to abort debases free-choice. To be pro-marriage is to defend the “gold standard” of marriage from debasement; and, incidentally, the debasement of coinage provides a good analogy for what is being proposed around the Western world. The Tudor kings were the first to engage in a systematic debasement of their silver coinage, diluting – debasing – it with copper. This happened repeatedly throughout the reigns of Henry VIII’ and Edward VI to pay for the expensive wars in France and Scotland. By 1551 the heavily debased “silver” coinage was worth between a quarter to a sixth of its face value. Eventually the layer of silver had become so thin that it would wear off revealing the copper below. This happened particularly on coin bearing Henry VIII’s image, typically on his nose, giving him the nickname “Old Coppernose”. What is being proposed is to treat the silver of marriage as of the same value as the copper of homosexual relationships. What the pro-marriage position says is that copper (with all due respect to copper – or whatever metal is involved) is not silver. To pass copper off as silver is a fraud – a fraud which sooner or later must wear thin, exposing that “copper nose” for all to see.

Editorial

So there is no need for us to be “anti” anything, but “pro” – positively, and full of optimism – the precious silver of marriage.

In Passing:  The world at a watershed by Michael Kirke

A friend of mine rejects any suggestion that our present discontents on the geopolitical front today are a fulfilment in any way of the late Samuel Huntington's predictions of a clash of civilisations. It would be consoling to be able to agree with him – but it would also be naive and dangerous.

seldom pass a group of young children these days – or a mother with a newborn infant in her arms – but I ask myself a rhetorical question. What kind of civilisation will that little child grow up in or inhabit as an adult? I was not preoccupied with that question thirty years ago. I was confident then, despite the Cold War, despite the tribal troubles of my country, that changes were for the better. Our progress at worst seemed to be a matter of two steps forward, one step backward. But the trend was forward. Is it no longer possible to have that confidence?

Know your enemy is one of the most basic principles of self-defence. If we fail to understand the true nature of the enemy confronting us both in and from the Middle East and within our own culture, we will make a terrible mistake.

Question: If the international community could put the clock back would it not now do everything in its power to stop the Rwandan genocide; if it had a choice now would it stand aside as Pol Pot systematically murders millions of his own people in the name of an ideology; does the world not now recognise that the Munich Agreement with Adolf Hitler was one of the greatest blunders recorded in history?

world. That element was no longer going to be the dynastic interests of the distant past, nor the national interests of the recent past, nor, in any major way, the material resources necessary for our way of life in our own time. These might be elements in the mix of the major conflicts of our times but they are not the root cause – because reason and negotiation are now accepted by the powerbrokers as a better means of resolving our conflicting interests in these matters. The current Ukrainian impasse is an ethnic conflict with nationalist undertones. But is is unlikely to get catastrophically out of hand as it might have done in the days when the dynamics of the European Balance of Power was so crucial to states. It will eventually be resolved by negotiation and agreement. It is not a clash of two civilisations, nor will it become one. Vladimir Putin's posturing does not threaten the common good of the world we would like to see our generation's children inherit. The jihadis of the Middle East do – and the nihilistic libertarianism

The Charlie Hebdo murders have been characterised as a vicious attack on one of the most fundamental values of Western civilisation – freedom of speech and expression. They were that, but this is only part of the story. That massacre is just another flashpoint in a greater war. Indeed it is a flashpoint in which can be seen the basic elements of the lethal clash which Huntington foresaw. Huntington may be faulted for identifying too many potential clashing elements in his global analysis – but he was correct in identifying the essential element in the fault lines which were going to disturb the peace of the

represented by the likes of Charlie Hebdo do.

human condition founded on both reason and faith. It is not a war between secular atheists and the rest because the majority in the secularist camp still profess an allegiance to some personal interpretation of Christianity – as one of its leading generals, Barack Obama, does. This is the war spoken of by Cardinal Francis George of Chicago when he predicted that he would die in his bed, that his successor would die in prison, but that his successor's successor would be a martyr.

There is a three-way clash of civilisations threatening the peace of the world today. Two kinds of war are being waged – a hot war and a cold war. The hot war has multiple fronts. It is the war of the jihadis. Rather than Islamic, one protagonist in this war is Wahhabist or Salafist. This jihad is waged against two enemies. Its primary enemy is the internal Islamic one – Muslims of any and every denomination who are not of its own pure brand. This is a war within Islam and its outcome is as crucial to non Muslims as it is to the happiness of ordinary Muslims around the world. The jihadist’s secondary target is a dual enemy – Christian civilisation and the culture of the secularist West, two cultures under one umbrella which are themselves engaged in the cold war now in progress within what we call Western civilisation.

Side by side in the West there now exist Christian and the post-Christian civilisation with the same mother, adhered to by one, rejected, more or less, by the other. They have not formally declared war on each other – but, don't doubt it, they are at war. The battlegrounds are on two fronts: using constitutional and legal weapons on one front; using the media of social communication on the other. The ground being contested? The heritage of Christendom.

This cold war is between militant secularists and those whose conscience is guided by principles rooted in a reading of the

There have been victories and defeats on both sides. Who can

deny that the witness to the world given by seven million Asians in the Philippines in January was not a resounding victory for Christian culture, or the Humanum Conference in Rome last year for its resounding affirmation of the values of the Judeo-Christian vision of humanity, its nature, dignity and destiny. There are others.

umph of that vision of our destiny which embraces more than the simply material, a perishable clump of cells. Charlie Hebdo is just one more manifestation of post-Christian culture. But the Christian way, the Christian weapon, of dealing with all this will never be violence or the suppression of freedom. It can only ever be, should only ever be, by the proclamation of the Truth, the eternal Truth. This, by virtue of its own power and its own promise, will ultimately triumph. How that triumph will be effected in the world is another matter, full of uncertainty. But are those who should be the protagonists in this triumph asleep or awake?

But how are we to read a question like this? Have one million Brits signed up for an adultery website? American dating network Ashley Madison, which specialises in setting up extramarital affairs, says it has signed up that many British members. The “success” comes despite the fact that the website — which signs on with the tag “Life is short. Have an affair” — has been prevented from advertising on UK television.

The tragedy of this cold war has many dimensions but one of its immediate and potentially lethal consequences is its weakening effect on those who should be confronting the violent and inhumane salafists, whose Christian victims President Obama did not even think were worthy of a sympathetic mention in his recent national prayer breakfast address.

Or how are we to read the phenomenon of Fifty Shades of Grey? These and many more are signs of battles lost by those who have been fighting for the dignity of mankind and the tri-

The campaign of the salafists â&#x20AC;&#x201C; whether under the agency of Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, or other manifestations of the jihad â&#x20AC;&#x201C; cannot be separated from the spread of Muslim culture into the West. Islam by its very definition has the entire world in it sights. Salafism is not about territory. It is about souls. It is about converting, by fair means or foul, minds and hearts to Islam.

document criticises the "strange studies" of Western education. Under pure Islam: "From ages seven to nine, there will be three lessons: fiqh (understanding) and religion, Quranic Arabic (written and read) and science (accounting and natural sciences)." "From ten to twelve, there will be more religious studies, especially fiqh, focusing more on fiqh related to women and the rulings on marriage and divorce. This is in addition to the other two subjects. Skills like textiles and knitting, basic cooking will also be taught."

For all the centuries of its existence Islam spread by conquest and by migration. When it gained territory it then consolidated its captive populations and maintained them in the faith by the rigours of Sharia law. Foreigners were an evil influence to be controlled or kept at bay â&#x20AC;&#x201C; as the Wahhabists of modern Saudi Arabia seek to do today.

"From thirteen to fifteen, there will be more of a focus on Sharia, as well as more manual skills (especially those related to raising children) and less of the science, the basics of which will already have been taught. In addition, they will be taught about Islamic history, the life of the Prophet and his followers." The document, we are told, is designed to "clarify the role of Muslim women and the life which is desired for them".

A sample of this civilisation's vision for our race can be seen in the manifesto on women's life under the Islamic State published by female jihadis recently. It states that girls can marry from age nine and labels Western education as "strange". The

The guide is thought to be aimed at Arab women, rather than a Western audience. References to Saudi Arabia suggest that Saudi women are the main targets. But no one should doubt that the ultimate goal of all Islam in principle – and its Wahhabist manifestation in deadly practice – is the entire world.

fact, irreconcilable – this would certainly be the case for Saudifunded mosques and those inspired by Deobandism, with its roots in South Asia. Indeed, they have been singularly hostile to being part of a British identity and integrating into mainstream society. We know that the meaning of the name of the Nigerian jihadi group Boko Haram is “Western education is sinful”. In a similar manner for many mosque leaders, Western lifestyle is sinful.

A telling letter to the London Independent recently noted that the initiative by the Muslim Council of Britain to open the doors of some mosques to the public appears to be positive in the present climate. But, its author, Dr. Rumy Hasan of the University of Sussex, pointed out, “It is mere symbolism, whereas what is needed are policy shifts of substance.” These are few and far between.

“What would be of substance and positive is a commitment to values that embrace freedom of expression and the adherence to universal laws, rather than demanding separate rights and exemptions to the law of the land that has hitherto been the case by Muslim leaders.”

The British Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, in a recent and controversial letter to one thousand mosque leaders, asked them to consider how faith in Islam can be part of British identity. The likelihood is that for a majority of imams, Hasan says, “The two are, in

But it is here that we come to the intractable conflict within Islam. Many ordinary Muslim people want to get on with their lives. The imams will not let them. There is no place for freedom in the militant strain of Islam now dictating the pace in

much of the Islamic world because there is no place for reason. Not until there is victory for a moderate Islamic culture can there be any semblance of what Eric Pickles is hoping to see. After centuries of deadlock on the bloody borders shared between Christian civilisation and Islamic civilisation eventually these frontiers became porous as Islam controlled territories slipped hopelessly behind in development. The eventual consequence of this was the migration of Muslims into the states of Western Europe. In the Islamic homeland of Arabia this was a disaster. For them it meant the sinful contamination of their people and with this arose the sense of mission to save them, to bring them back to the rigorous practice of their faith. This is the mission now in progress among the Muslims settled in the West. The dream of the Wahhabists is that what happened in Anatolia (now Turkey) in the eleventh century will be repeated again. As Bernard Lewis points out in his History of the Middle East, the Islamic transformation of that country

was accomplished by migrating tribes rather than by any military action on the part of the Great Seljuks, the Muslim conquerors of that age. After that migration the Islamic forces moved in to organise the province which had been handed to them on a plate by a process of ethnic migration. By the end of the twelfth century a Turkish Muslim monarchy was firmly in place and Anatolia became a Turkish land. Masses of Turkish immigrants then entered from further east and a Turkish Muslim civilisation replaced Greek Christianity. With old Europe now threatening to degenerate itself out of existence and with its growing Muslim population now a target for zealous Wahhabist imams, who can predict what will happen? The outcome of the Westâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own internal cultural conflict â&#x20AC;&#x201C; between its Christians and its secularists is crucial. The latter is the primary force behind its plunging demographics. This suicidal trend is the product of the rampant hedonistic individualism embedded in modern secularism. It can only be arrested within the context of a

truly Christian culture of life. If not, then the fate of Europe can only be the fate of Anatolia. It is hard not to conclude that the world is now facing into an era of momentous change of the deepest kind. Not to recognise the nature of this conflict, or the character of the forces now at war with each other, is to bury our heads in the sand and to render ourselves impotent when we need to be effective protagonists in the struggle to shape this world in every way necessary to serve the common good of humanity for centuries to come.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Michael Kirke is a freelance writer, a regular contributor to Position Papers, and a widely read blogger at Garvan Hill (www.garvan.wordpress. com). His views can be responded to at mjgkirke@gmail.com.

God and suffering by Rev. Eugene O’Neill

Am I the only priest who wasn’t upset by Stephen Fry’s rant against God in answer to Gay Byrne recently? I imagine not; and, like many, I think he did us all a favour in bringing out into the open the reason, I believe, why so many Catholics – and not just Catholics, all shades of believer – quietly detach at some stage from active, motivating faith in God: when they rub up against suffering in their own life, or in the life of those they know. This, not same-sex marriage, or the place of women in the Church, or Holy Communion for

those in second unions is the real reason for much lapsing – either formal departure, or the quiet retreat from faith that passes for practice in many Catholic hearts. He did us a favour because he named it. Now we can talk about it. I think it’s been somewhat churlish of some commentators to suggest that Mr Fry is just a publicity seeker: why would one of the English speaking world’s most famous men need more publicity? Or to express irritation with him that he spoke as if he personally had hit upon this

problem for the first time. Yes, that suffering and what is sometimes called “the problem of evil” has been a major preoccupation of the Scriptures since Genesis – not to mention The Book of Job – and a feature of almost every theologian and Christian intellectual’s exertion in the last two millennia, was not adverted to by him. But he is – as are our parishioners – a busy man and an intelligent one. It is too easy to shout back: read a book – even one!

I’m no different much of the time. One of the things I personally find difficult in the aftermath of any human suffering or major disaster are the instant pundits who try to explain its meaning to bolster their point of view. I recall my feelings of distaste when Professor Richard Dawkins opined on a radio programme at the time of the Asian Tsunami that the Tsunami was more proof that there is no God, and lavished moral outcry on those who believe in God.

It has also been less than charitable for some to point out that Mr Fry is an immensely wealthy man and that even a fraction of his wealth or the political power which goes hand in hand with access to the media, could make a huge difference in the lives of many. How does anyone know what he gives in charity? Or the good he does in private? I think that it is a mistake to play the man here; it is certainly not the right response of a Christian. We Christians can get so cross when we should get thinking.

But I also recall cringing at some of the responses by people of faith. I think of the woman at a wedding who had been “born again” who felt impelled to tell me that the tsunami was because God was angry at sins, and asked, didn’t I agree? When I told her I didn’t, she spent the rest of the time talking to the woman beside her.

In the face of such shocking human devastation as the Asian Tsunami, the Haitian earthquake, the Ebola plague or the suffering of so many in the wounded places of our world, I think the only real response has

to be human compassion, solidarity and action to help. That must come first. And maybe silence for a while … about explanation. Because all the instant explanations offered are almost certainly the wrong ones. When the Tsunami struck ten years ago, I was glad that our Catholic Bishops in Ireland set aside a day of fasting and prayer for the people of South East Asia – a day to feel solidarity – and on the following weekend mandated a national collection throughout the country as a practical expression of our solidarity with the suffering. In my parish in Belfast, it came to over one hundred thousand pounds sterling – on a single Sunday. That is the fundamental response of the Church in the face of any adversity or pain: to pray for the suffering, to pray with the suffering, and to help them practically. It must be ours as members of the Church. Now there are, of course big questions thrown up by any such human devastation and individual affliction, and those questions need responses.

We believe in a God who is intimately involved in the lives of every human being. Yet in the Asian Tsunami, in the Haitian earthquake, in the Ebola plague, how did God let these things happen to so many, so swiftly? Though ultimately the numbers didn’t really matter. The random death of even a single human being poses just as great a problem to faith – as Stephen Fry so rightly pointed out. I used to think that when it came to evil pain and human suffering, it was enough to distinguish between human evil and natural evil. Human evil includes every individual act of cruelty or evil to the horrors of Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And, as it is sometimes called, natural evil includes earthquakes, accidents and plane crashes. And to argue that human evil happens because humans do evil things. They do such things because they have free will. The only way to stop human evil is to cut out free will since freedom and free will make us human. To do that would make us into robots not humans. Evil is the one possible downside of freedom. It’s not

about God; it’s about us and how we use our freedom. That’s true, isn’t it? Natural evil – well, that just happens: it’s nothing to do with God. In fact most things we think of as natural evils are largely of human making when you examine the causes. In Asia, if more money had been spent on earthquake warning systems then the Ts u n a m i m i g h t n o t h a v e wrecked such devastation. Most famines are the result of wars. Now that’s a necessarily superficial summary of two complex situations and responses; but the distinction can be helpful in thinking clearly. Yet, I’m not humanly satisfied with either explanation because in each, God seems cold and distant: like a father letting the baby touch the hot coal to teach him not to do it again. Or a watchmaker, who has set up the mechanism and isn’t willing to intervene later. So how are we to think? Well in my life – when it comes to evil people, evil things, human suffering, my human struggle with evil, I try to make a dis-

tinction. First: my personal response. Second: my practical response. Between “What does it mean?” and “What do I do?” Between “How do I deal with this in my head?” and “How do I act?” More and more my personal response is that there is an ultimate mystery to suffering and pain that one can’t explain away: it’s there and it will continue to be there always as a challenge to faith – right alongside the amazing goodness and beauty within creation. When I look for understanding, more and more I find the Cross drawing me,. Think about it: the central image in every Catholic Church, the first thing you see when you come in the door, is the effigy of a man who has been tortured and bled to death in excruciating pain. We can hardly notice it. The way in sometimes we hardly notice ourselves marking the sign of the cross. The Cross: an instrument of torture designed by the Roman state to teach fear. Dress it up, add jewels, make it as artistic as you want,

but it comes down to that when you strip the jewels off. That is the central image of our Catholic faith. That is the central fact of Catholic faith: a dead man on a cross. Increasingly I find it has something to say to me when I think about faith and life, suffering and God. The cross is the icon of God. An icon is an image that is designed to reveal not the surface but the depths. This icon shows the depths of God: because it is God who was tortured and died on that cross. To me – and to those who gaze for explanation, in perplexity or confusion, it is saying: In human life on this earth, suffering will be there somewhere; you will never avoid it. Whether the poor man in the winter street frozen to death, the car crashes, the cancer, the tumours, Nazism, Holocaust, Stalin; the laws deeming some life unworthy of life and condemning to death persons not yet born. It is saying: at the heart of the world and its history – this cross is plunged; at the heart of every

life the cross – or a splinter of it – is there. It can repel you or it can speak to you. To me it speaks: “I am there, I cannot change this suffering, I cannot take it away: but I have suffered and I will not let this have the last word … because it did not have the last word with me.” It speaks and it holds out the real hope that eventually this mystery with all its confusing, mind-bothering, seeming meaningless will become clear – when you see the whole picture in the next life. So hold on. How can God allow evil? I do not know; but, when I look at the Cross, though the question of suffering is not answered, the perspective changes. The instrument of torture designed to teach fear becomes a symbol to teach hope. The Crucified Christ doesn’t answer the question of suffering but becomes, for me, proof of God’s solidarity with people in their suffering. And then the question changes; the real question for me becomes: “What is the proof of my solidarity with those who

suffer?” “What’s my practical response to real suffering?” Well, giving money – that’s what collections are about – from Trocaire’s annual Lenten campaign to the special collections in every parish in immediate response to crises that emerge. But also: there needs to be a deeper practical response. It’s not hard to give money if you have it. But what always comes more reluctantly than money or even words of outrage is recognition that in the modern world human institutions are responsible for far more suffering than so-called “acts of God”. We can rage or doubt God over catastrophic deaths but where is the rage against economic structure that condemns more than 800 million to survive on less than fifty pence a day? Why does the scientific community spend so many more of its resources developing weapons than alleviating suffering? How many of us would be willing to pay higher taxes to eradicate poverty? What are the values of our rich society in Europe, which closes its minds to the destitute

while building lavish holiday resorts in far off places where tourists spend more in a week than most residents earn in a year? Let’s be practical: much suffering could be averted if our spontaneous response to the various crises from Tsunami to earthquake to famine prompted more long term questions about the economic and political structure which have been erected not by God but by humans. If we all became convinced that most suffering could be eradicated if justice became an abiding value and a more urgent motivation to action. For me: the devastation of the major catastrophe and the suffering child is a call to question – yes. But more than words or questions, it is a call to deeper responsibility, deeper solidarity and effective actions and longterm commitment to justice. And to be honest that, in almost every case, there are more effective targets for moral outrage than God.

Finally: a glimpse that Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve never forgotten from the BBC reporting of the Haiti earthquake some years ago: a pregnant woman, sitting amidst the rubble of a ruined church, gazing at the only thing that seemed to be standing, a crucifix. She was singing. When the journalist asked her what she was singing so joyously, she replied that she was singing psalms to thank God and ask for his help.

And many, many people for whom the same affliction has brought not flight from belief but an even deeper faith.

That woman stands out for me amidst all the recent musing about the problem of the suffering of others. Often it is those who suffer for real who speak the most powerful words about suffering. They are worth holding in balance with the words of Mr Stephen Fry. Not to dismiss his views, or to reject the challenge to deeper thought and deeper faith that, perhaps ironically, they give. But to remind ourselves that there are many, many perspectives on the profound human reality that has challenged and even tormented the believer in a good God since the very beginning.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rev. Eugene Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Neill is parish priest of Killyleagh, and of Crossgar, Co.Down and is a regular contributor to A Thought for the Day on BBC Radio Ulster.

Better is the enemy of the good by Siobhan Scullion

These

past few weeks have been a little chaotic. Our house has been taken over by the usual coughs and colds that accompany children this time of year. Unfortunately these run of the mill winter ills morphed into tummy bugs and fevers and visits to doctors and all sorts. Dealing with two sick children as well as a young baby who has decided that perhaps she will decide to wake up at 3.00 am again after lulling her parents into a false sense of ‘sleep security’, has left this mother with no other choice; make-shift beds on the sofa in front of the television. Needless to say, all this television consumption has

not been my proudest parenting moment but, I had to leave them somewhere when I was washing all the sheets and blankets. It was only a matter of time before the Disney DVD stock would run low and there are only so many times you can subject your children to Winnie the Pooh, even if he is wonderfully cute. I finally gave in to the hype and let my children watch Frozen. Sure, I’m only a year behind the times so I mustn’t be that uncool. The humour mostly went over their heads but at least they were entertained by the talking snowman.

But forget about Frozen, these past few weeks have left me frazzled. I know this feeling well. I’ve been here before and I’d wager that you have too. While I have been nursing my little sick ones, beds have been left unmade, the clothes have not been clean, mealtimes have barely managed to be nutritious. To be honest, this has made me more frazzled than the lack of sleep and constant watching to make sure nobody will be sick again or need their nose wiped. I’ve been frustrated with myself that life has run on ahead of me. Didn’t it know I needed it to slow down a little so I could continue with the all the things I told myself needed to be done? Didn't it know I had sick children to look after too? Didn’t I know that trying to keep up standards which would be impossible to achieve would leave me … frazzled? Every now and then I have to tell myself, once again, that life cannot and will not be perfect. Life has that wonderful ability to make you feel just great when you’re riding along, with all going well, schedules being followed and plans being fulfilled.

When you hit an unexpected bump in the road, life will just keep on going even if you feel you’re lagging behind. No, life is not perfect. And if life is not perfect, then neither are we. We’re only human with emotions, with triggers, with hotspots, with weaknesses. We mess up – sometimes a little and sometimes a lot. There are times when we are on top of everything, and there will be times when we struggle. Sometimes we want things to be the best at all costs. There’s no harm in striving to be the very best we can be. But there are times when being the best isn’t want is needed. Perhaps we are missing the wood for the trees. Is it better to insist on an immaculate living room, completely dust and toy free by snapping at the children constantly, even for breathing? Is it better that we frustrate our work colleagues by running a little late on a project so our contribution is perfect and shows us in the best possible light? Is it better that we cut out in front of someone and give in to red mist of road rage just to make it to Church ten minutes earlier? Probably not. Better is

not always best. Sometimes we just need to be good enough. Ask yourself; is this want is wanted of me right now? Is this what I should be doing? If it is, then youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re probably on the right track. And if not, then start again. No need to worry, the best will come, but right now this is good enough.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Siobhan Scullion is an Arts graduate of Queens University Belfast and a regular contributor to Position Papers.

Reflecting on RTÉ by Tim O’Sullivan

Many Church documents going back to the Second Vatican Council and the decree on the media of social communications, Inter Mirifica, highlight the importance of the mass media in information and cultural promotion, and maintain that that information is in the service of the whole community and of the common good and urge media users to be active rather than passive. In Ireland, the state broadcaster RTÉ has a major role in Irish life and has received praise for its

cultural coverage and investigative journalism but also significant criticism for its perceived ‘liberal’ bias on issues relating to marriage and the right to life. This memoir* by former RTÉ producer, Betty Purcell, is highly topical at a time of very important social debates in which RTÉ is deeply involved. The author was a producer of significant achievement who worked from the late 1970s on wellknown programmes such as Women Today, Questions and Answers and the Late Late

Show and served on the RTÉ Authority and she describes here her experience with the national broadcaster.

ful resource to those wishing to study the recent history of, and internal debates within, the national broadcaster.

The book also provides an informative account of recent controversies (not involving the author) such as those relating to the ‘Mission to Prey’ Prime Time Investigates programme that made false allegations against an Irish missionary priest in 2011 and the Frontline programme that broadcast a seriously misleading tweet during an election debate involving all the candidates in the 2011 presidential election.

I came to this book as a citizen, licence-payer and media user: reviewers with media experience could comment more expertly on specific broadcasting issues.

Betty Purcell was a producer of strong socialist and feminist convictions, who worked hard at her job and in the service of the causes she believed in. As the book reveals, she also demonstrated courage in her battles with the Workers’ Party faction that had considerable influence in current affairs in RTÉ. She provides an honest account of her long service in RTÉ and her book will undoubtedly be a use-

A first point of note is the author’s largely negative attitude to Catholicism, even if she has words of praise for some individual nuns and priests. Looking back now, the growing gap between the Church and (parts of) a new generation, including many idealistic and able young people, is a cause of regret and was arguably poorly understood in Irish Church circles in the 1970s. Like many journalists of her generation, Betty Purcell appears to have viewed the Church as it if were a hostile army, or at least as a powerful conservative force to be combated vigorously. She thus

refers to ‘imposing clerics’ who, along with ‘suited barons’ used the airwaves ‘to continue their dominance in society ’ (p.9). Catholic ‘foot-soldiers’ – ordinary people who believed that they had a stake in the national broadcaster and who objected regularly, for example, to various items in the 1980s Women Today radio programme – are seen as interfering with broadcasting freedom and get short shrift. Their objections were an irritant to be dealt with by RTE management: ‘The Women Today experience is a good example of the management doing its utmost to protect programmes from recurring criticism, while allowing programme-makers to continue doing their work, largely untroubled’ (p. 53). Equally, Desmond Fennell’s perceptive criticism at the time of the ideological narrowness of Women Today – as compared even to its BBC equivalent – is treated superficially by the author as a point about Irish-British comparisons.

Betty Purcell’s focus is on the hierarchy, on the Church as a centre of power, and on archbishops issuing edicts (p. 15) but little or no attention is paid to the reality of a vibrant though no doubt flawed Catholic community in Ireland, to the social significance of Catholic faith in this country during her period of work or to the importance of the country’s Christian heritage. She argues that ‘what passed for the reasonable centre ground in the Ireland of the 1980s was dominated by the Church and thus was anything but, and yet it was tacitly accepted’ (p.12). Another way of putting this, however, would be to say that huge numbers of Irish people in the 1980s attached great importance to their conviction, often rooted in Christian faith, that human life is sacred and applied that conviction, for example, to respect for the unborn and to rejection of the ‘armed struggle’ in the North. In that context, and without closing off debate, it was

surely not unreasonable to expect that widespread public support for the rights of unborn babies and their mothers would be reflected in coverage of the 1980s abortion debate in the national media and in the national broadcaster. However, this was by no means the case: the media then and now, brushing aside both strong Irish support for the rights of the unborn and the 2 to 1 proamendment vote of the 1983 referendum, have consistently presented the Pro-Life Amendment Campaign of the 1980s as a political con trick. The author’s criticism of that campaign and of its ‘attendant misogyny’ (p. 206) is typical of this media consensus but actually points to a significant problem: in a context where there was a two to one vote in 1983 in favour of Constitutional legal protection of the unborn, how did it happen that so few people in the national media, and more particularly in the publicly funded broadcaster, looked positively on this pro-life initiative? In other words, how

representative at that time and on this issue were RTÉ broadcasters of the general Irish population? Not very, would seem to be the honest answer. The question of representativeness, and the related issue of recruitment to the national broadcaster, are also raised by the extraordinary influence in RTÉ current affairs in the recent past of the faction linked to the Workers’ Party – extraordinary, that is, in the light of that party’s very limited electoral support. The author’s chapter on ‘Section 31’, the broadcasting ban on supporters of political violence, documents her battles with the Workers’ Party group within RTÉ and her strong opposition to ‘censorship’ in any form. While Section 31 did become a very blunt instrument as efforts developed to arrive at solutions to the Northern conflict, it nevertheless seems to me that there was a strong case for denying the oxygen of publicity to apologists of political violence during the hugely challenging years of the ‘Troubles’.

Betty Purcell argues in a forthright way that broadcasting should be a vehicle for ‘social change’. Broadcasting for me, she writes, ‘was a continuation of politics by other means and was a route to effecting social change and exposing injustice’ (p.12). She opposes an ‘inert neutrality’ on the part of broadcasters in the face of injustice but argues that impartiality and objectivity of the media can be obtained ‘by ensuring that a range of different viewpoints are explored’ (p.11). However, this is arguably more difficult to do effectively if the broadcaster itself is not properly representative of the population it serves, including, to return to this example, those who consider that the right to life of the unborn is also a major question of justice. Politically engaged broadcasting is also in tension with public service broadcasting, which, as the author argues in her final chapter, ought to be ‘scrupulously politically independent’ (p. 255).

At a deeper level, the Catholic vision of the media as a service to the common good and to the whole community seems to me a more attractive and worthy ideal than any vision of broadcasting as ‘a continuation of politics by other means’. Catholic criticism of the media is often seen as ‘shooting the messenger’, so it is important to acknowledge that RTÉ investigations have brought to public attention many unexamined areas of Irish life, including grave scandals implicating some clergy and Church-run services, and that the period covered by this book has been one of great trauma and challenge for the Church in Ireland. On the other hand, RTÉ programmes can also be criticised for one-sided coverage of issues relating to marriage and the right to life and even at times for the ‘groupthink’ that was highlighted at the time of the ‘Mission to Prey’ controversy. With the development of new media and social media in Ire-

land, RTÉ may have a less dominant position in the future than it had in the past and greater pluralism of provision will be welcome. Nevertheless, as the author argues in her final chapter, there remains a strong argument for high quality public service broadcasting, properly funded and operating ‘without fear of commercial pressure from powerful individuals’ (p. 255). If, however, public service broadcasting is to enjoy continued public support in Ireland, it is also essential, it seems to me, that it re-connect much more deeply than in the recent past with citizens and communities of

faith in this country and with the country’s Christian heritage.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr Tim O’Sullivan has published many articles on public policy and is a regular contributor to Position Papers.

To Go Deeper into the Life of Christ by Rev. John McCloskey

Every

Catholic should spend a minimum of fifteen minutes a day engaged in spiritual reading. Normally, this should include some reading of the New Testament to identify ourselves with the words and actions of our Savior and better conform our lives to His, perhaps followed by a passage from some classic book on a spiritual theme recommended by your spiritual advisor. (You do have one, do you not? If not, take steps to remedy that situation immediately.) But far from contenting ourselves with the bare minimum, we should desire to go deeper â&#x20AC;&#x201C; much deeper â&#x20AC;&#x201C; into Christ's life. Otherwise, how can we even begin to imitate Him in our own life, so that, when the day

comes for our own private judgment after death, we will be welcomed with open arms into heaven, avoiding any pit stops in Purgatory. We know neither the day nor the hour of our death, any more than we know the time of Christ's Second Coming and the Final Judgment. Therefore we should aim to be semper paratus ("always prepared") for death, which may well arrive at a moment and in a way totally unexpected. I would wager that there have been more books written on Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ than on anyone else in history. The great majority of these are (of course) out of print. But there are a number of things that can help guide us through this im-

mense and sometimes wild literature. I speak deliberately from a Catholic perspective, considering only books that are sound and known to be faithful to the perennial tradition of the Church and its tradition down through the ages. One thing to recognize at the outset is that a great many books about Christ are theological and scholarly in character. These are good and useful in their way, but are not primarily written for an audience seeking to come into closer contact with Jesus and his life for religious and devotional purposes. So it's not hard to select a relatively few books on Jesus relevant to our purpose, which could be easily found, at least on Amazon, which, for good and not, rules the book world through its low prices and Kindle devices. Perhaps there are hidden treasures to be found in some Catholic bookstores, but I have not found them: There is lots of theology, but little of what we might call a type of sacred biography from our present perspective.

Here are some recommendations of good biographies of our Lord and Savior in no particular order:

1. The trilogy Jesus of Nazareth (Ignatius Press) by Benedict XVI. What a great gift from one of the best theologians ever, and also a heroic Roman pontiff. (And may he live long!) Despite Benedict's immense learning and keen intellect, he has produced a series that can be enjoyably and profitably absorbed by an ordinary reader.

2. Next, Romano Guardini's The Lord, a classic since it was first published in 1954, and a book that can profitably be read and reread. Guardini was one of the mentors of Joseph Ratzinger and a favorite of Pope Francis (who, at one point in his life, wanted to write a doctoral dissertation on Guardini, but was distracted by other duties).

3. Fulton Sheen's Life of Christ. Sheen needs no introduction to readers of this website, but only a final resting place when he is raised to the altars as one of the blessed someday soon.

4. Next,

convert Fulton Oursler, whose The Greatest Story Ever Told was published to huge success in 1949 (around the time Guardini and Sheen were writing their works).

5. We

can't forget the work of another convert and one of the greatest evangelizers and publicizers of the faith in the twentieth century, Frank Sheed, whose work To Know Christ Jesus is highly recommended, next to...

6. G.

K. Chesterton's classic The Everlasting Man. This book has made and continues to make many a convert to the Faith.

Of course, there are many others as well, and if you ask trusted clergy and friends, you won't ever lack for powerful readings. But besides our own personal growth in holiness via Biblical and other spiritual reading, we should aim to share our holy Faith in our work, actions, friendship, and prayer in imitation of Christ. If we strive to imitate HIS life in our own, we play our part in bringing millions of people to the one true Church,

becoming, as one saint put it, another Christ himself. Rome is our true home. As what remains of the West crumbles at what appears to be an accelerating rate, it becomes increasingly apparent that all of us are part of the answer to the longawaited New Evangelization foreseen by Pope St. John Paul the Great. Embrace that vocation. Take advantage of the many resources at your disposal to prepare yourself for this high calling. This article first appeared on The Catholic Thing in January, 2015.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Fr. C. John McCloskey is a Church historian and Research Fellow at the Faith and Reason Institute in Washington DC.â&#x20AC;¨ Website: www.frmccloskey.com.

Holy purity surpasses continence by Dr Kevin Majeres A lion chained or tamed

Continence

is the virtue in the will whereby it contains the impulse of the passions. It is a state of tension that can be compared to keeping a lion on a leash. If one has heroic continence, the leash becomes a chain of steel, which can contain the lion even when heâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s at his raging worst. One must take care, however, not to think that continence is the only form of virtue regulating the passions, in which case becoming more virtuous would simply mean that the chains are becoming stronger and stronger. In reality, we are capable of

much more than that. The ultimate goal is not for the lion to be chained, but for the lion to be tamed. When chained, its strength is useless to the master â&#x20AC;&#x201C; indeed, all the master â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strength may be used in working the chains. This state of tension, with its energies divided and lost, must be seen as only a middle ground. The goal is to have the lion seek of its own accord and with its full native strength the ends presented by the master. Chains would no longer be needed: the two would form a team. This is the state of holy purity regarding sexual desire.

This proper understanding of holy purity is uncommon in today’s culture. People typically confuse holy purity with continence – it is as if they had forgotten that the lion could be tamed. They think of purity as a burden, and see celibacy as a life spent gritting one’s teeth and repressing one’s cravings. Many despair of living purity, perhaps without even knowing it, and for this reason many fail to achieve the generosity that could have gained them the hundredfold. If only they knew that holy purity is far greater, more accessible, and less burdensome than the sad virtue they imagined. Holy purity is possible for everyone. It is not the last step a saint reaches on earth before having raptures, nor is it reserved for a few uncommon heroes. It is the ordinary state of Christians who live in response to their faith and vocation. Holy purity is a state of peace – relative peace, since there is no perfect peace on earth, for the soul here can still lose the goods it possesses – but abiding peace, nonetheless. The continent soul is at war with

itself, and thus its energies are conflicted and dispersed. In holy purity, all the strength of the soul is channeled at the good one seeks. For this reason purity is far removed from the false peace of passivity. As a handmaid to hope, purity disposes one to noble actions and high ideals. Growing in holy purity means learning to reshape our own desires until our desires are conformed to reason, and through reason, to faith, and through faith, to God.

Victory “To defend his purity, St Francis of Assisi rolled in the snow, St Benedict threw himself into a thorn bush, St Bernard plunged into an icy pond… You…, what have you done?”  “You, a doctor-apostle, write to me: ‘We all know by experience that we can be chaste, living v i g i l a n t l y, f r e q u e n t i n g t h e sacraments, and stamping out the first sparks of passion before the fire can spread.’”  (St Josemaría Escrivá, The Way, 143, 124).

The

second quotation clarifies the first: the saints knew how to stamp out the first sparks of passion before the fire spread. By doing so, they continually conquered in holy purity, to a heroic degree. The greater our love for God, the more we react to whatever could take us away from him. As said before, holy purity is not a virtue of the passive – it requires action. The first act that purity requires is to not make our wayward passions stronger by acting on them. This is obvious; the more you give the passions what they want, they more insistently they ask the next time you say No. If we persevere in not acting on our wayward passions, they will necessarily readjust themselves. This is dramatically demonstrated in the whining of a spoiled child: if you take it shopping you will witness how his or her whining grows, reaches a fevered pitch, then withdraws in despair if not satisfied. If one has had much dealings with a spoiled child, one probably knows that while it is impossible to prevent all whining,

there are definite triggers that provoke more – such as going to a toy store. Parents who are unsure of whether they can withstand more whining must take care in such occasions. They may have to pay the price! The same is true in the case of one’s own passions. With purity, we are dealing with matters of sin and eternal life. The stakes are high. We cannot foolishly expose ourselves to situations that could lead to sin, even if these situations are safe for others. Serious falls in purity are preventable, to some extent, by managing the occasions in which they typically arise. The more routine or “automatic” the sinful habit has become, the more effort it will take to remain one step ahead of it. Avoiding the occasions of sin can thus give the person some time to consolidate their struggle, especially by strengthening the resolve of the will to resist the sinful habit.

The Internet, a particular challenge

Today,

the ease of access to pornographic materials poses a particular challenge to living holy purity. In the past people were assisted somewhat by the shame pursuing this material would entail. This was for many, no doubt, a powerful deterrent. Coming across sensual or pornographic images is almost inevitable if one spends time regularly on the Internet. One can inadvertently see something by misspelling a common web address, or by clicking on an innocuous-appearing ad that takes one to a pornographic site; adware can put pornographic advertisements on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s computer. News and shopping sites often have lewd advertisements or pictures posted on them. Given the ubiquity of such material on the web, it is necessary to consider how one can use the Internet with prudence. For those who have never had difficulty with pornography, the main consideration is whether

one should install a filter. If the Internet is used regularly, this is certainly the safest option, even if it is not an absolute moral norm. A small spark of impure desire can quickly turn into a conflagration. The attraction to pornographic materials can develop rapidly, and is unpredictable. Those who have never had problems with the Internet still need caution in using it. The Internet is like an old neighborhood that has turned bad; there may be certain shops there that are high quality, and which justify making a trip there, but one wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t spend time hanging out there unnecessarily. Accordingly, the Internet should be used briefly, and always for specific purposes â&#x20AC;&#x201C; especially for necessary professional work and email. Surfing the web, or using it excessively for gathering news or information, can easily engender a frivolous attitude. Just as frivolous conversations if prolonged can easily turn impure, so unnecessary web browsing if prolonged can easily take a carnal turn. Curiosity can be a sign of a healthy mind, and can be useful when properly di-

rected, but it is similar to bodily appetites in that if it is not given a little less than it desires it turns traitor. Many difficulties are prevented by habitually using the Internet only with a specific plan in mind, and not for prolonged periods of time. The question of prudent use of the Internet changes somewhat when it has become an occasion of sin, i.e., after a person has developed an attraction to sin. Filters are more necessary in these cases, though they are not foolproof, and thus cannot be relied upon. It is extremely difficult to prevent an adult from accomplishing an evil that he is intent on accomplishing. Even so, a filter can limit the ease of access to perhaps the worst materials should a fall occur; some also have a means of informing another person, which can facilitate honesty and a greater commitment to change. Not all sins against purity are equally problematic. According to St Thomas Aquinas, the strength of a habit depends on the intensity of the acts that create it, along with their duration

or repetition (cf. ST, I-II, q52, art 3). Regarding impurity and the Internet, this suggests several factors that would be associated with more habitual, impulsive problems:

The degree of explicitness in the material viewed (e.g., sensual images, “soft porn” nudity, “hard porn” – i.e., pornography as it is defined in CCC 2354);

The time spent viewing them;

Whether it leads to further sins against purity.

Given the possible dangers involved should an attraction develop, steps should be taken to safeguard oneself beyond the use of filters. It is always advisable that the Internet be used in an open, non-secretive setting – even if there have never been problems. Ideally, this would mean using it in a public place, or, at least, having one’s door open if at home or at work. For some, this also means not using the Internet at night, or when traveling.

If problems with the Internet have occurred exclusively in a given setting, this occasion may need particular care. The more decisive a person is in giving up these unnecessary risks, the more progress they will make. Whether these restrictions will need to be permanent – or even require a change in one’s work or studies – or whether they can take effect with special care until the person has grown in their ability to resist urges, depends on each individual. Ultimately, the struggle to live holy purity cannot be confined to avoiding occasions of sin. While it is always necessary to avoid these occasions if they are unnecessary and proximate occasions of serious sin, care must be taken that the person struggling with these issues doesn’t develop a “siege” mentality. One must recognize that there are sensual images everywhere in today’s world. Acomplete avoidance of all of them is impossible. Because of this impossibility, one must learn to have dominion over one’s desires – which means learning to put out

sparks whenever they occur, before the fire can spread.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Kevin Majeres is currently on the faculty of Harvard Medical School, where he teaches a weekly class on cognitive-behavioural therapy to psychiatrists-intraining at Beth-Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Film review: Selma by Steven D. Greydanus

Selma

achieves something few historical films do: It captures a sense of events unfolding in the present tense, in a political and cultural climate as complex, multifaceted and undetermined as the times we live in. It depicts characters who share important goals but are not all on the same page in their priorities or their methods. It makes principles, expectations and choices that are taken for granted today subjects of plausible dispute and antagonism, even among those who share the same goals. We also see characters who oppose those goals without coming across as movie villains. It offers a portrait of one of the 20th century’s most iconic leaders, Martin Luther King Jr., here seen not as an icon, a saint or a prophet leading his people to divinely assured victory, but as a tactician carefully picking and choosing both his battles and

his battlegrounds, at times worrying and doubting whether he has chosen well or poorly, and aware of the terrible cost that could result either way. He is a great man, but Selma knows history is not written by great men acting alone. For that matter, great men come with baggage that may at times be an impediment to the cause. It’s no secret that King and Malcolm X (who appears briefly in the film) didn’t see eye to eye, among other things, on nonviolent resistance. It’s more surprising to see leaders of Selma’s Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC, pronounced “Snick”) not exactly welcoming King with open arms — in fact, questioning his motives and his commitment to their cause. King’s response to that challenge confirms his greatness. As brilliantly portrayed by David Oyelowo (outstanding in The Butler as one of King’s support-

ers), in Selma King is charismatic and lucid, collaborative but in charge. In a few brief, well-delivered lines, King highlights the urgency of the cause, praises the grassroots work of SNCC activists, highlights what distinguishes his own efforts on the national stage — and then asks for their input on whether conditions in Selma are right for his approach. Consider all this scene does at once: It conveys important historical context about King’s recent successes and failures. It highlights different approaches to nonviolent resistance and illuminates what made King’s approach so effective, reclaiming it from its somewhat domesticated public image today as the deliberately provocative, courageous thing it was. Finally, it showcases what makes King such an effective leader: his intelligence and eloquence, his magnetism and his ability to turn conflict into consensus. This is typical of Selma’s method. It is a talky film, but there’s always more going on than meets the eye. The film wisely focuses on one chapter in King’s long career — I love the fact that it’s called Selma rather than King — but the bigger picture is always in view. The screenplay, initially written by Paul Webb but significantly

revised by director Ava DuVernay, picks its starting and ending points shrewdly but is acutely aware that the struggle began long before the film starts, and when the film ends, it is far from over. A well-crafted series of opening scenes sets the stage. We meet King and his wife, Coretta (Carmen Ejogo), in December 1964 in a hotel room in Oslo, Norway, where King is about to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. King’s acceptance speech (paraphrased due to copyright issues involving the King estate and an unproduced film project) is presented in voice-over as the film cuts to a church stairwell, where a number of young girls in their Sunday best chatter about Coretta King’s hair. Even if you recognize that this scene, a flashback to Birmingham in 1963, illustrates King’s words about accepting the award “on behalf of our lost ones, whose deaths pave our path,” the dialogue lulls you into not expecting the horrific moment to come. The aftermath fades into a voter registration form that an older black woman, Annie Lee Cooper (Oprah Winfrey), is carefully filling out. The connection between the two scenes highlights the ongoing reality of hatred and the threat of violence hanging over the efforts of people like Cooper, who dare to exercise their

rights. Cooper’s defeat in this scene leads directly to an Oval Office meeting between King and President Lyndon Johnson (Tom Wilkinson), who supports King’s cause but doesn’t give him the answer he wants on voting-rights legislation. So — “Selma it is,” King tells his companions as they leave the White House, and the stage is set. Historical questions about the film’s depiction of Johnson and King as antagonists are somewhat overblown. Johnson is not a villain or adversary; Selma is clear that he supports civil rights and ranks the 1964 Civil Rights Act among his proudest achievements. But King, Johnson points out, has one issue; the president has many, and he considers the “War on Poverty” a more pressing priority than voting rights, which, “technically,” blacks already have. Thanks to the Cooper scene, we already know how hollow that “technically” is. Occasional scene-setting introductory titles are given an ominous twist by presenting them as surveillance logs from FBI agents working for J. Edgar Hoover, who considers King “a political and moral degenerate.” King’s relationship with Coretta is warm and affectionate, but an unspoken tension exists between them, coming to the sur-

face only once, in a scene of piercing frankness and sadness. Selma is punctuated by sickening violence — sometimes courted and not unexpected, as in the notorious attack by state troopers of the Selma marchers at the Edmund Pettus Bridge, but at other times out of the blue and without warning, either for characters or viewers. In one scene, a white character who has traveled to Selma to support King is chatting thoughtfully when he is abruptly attacked by vengeful locals. Nothing about the scene foreshadows that he is about to die. The man is a pastor (another character calls him a “priest,” though he was actually a Unitarian), and the role of religion in Selma is one of the most gratifying things about the film. Selma not only highlights the centrality of King’s own faith to his actions, it shows how the civilrights movement as a whole was animated by religious conviction, led by clergy of churches that were the backbone of the black community. Even more heartening, after the attack at the Edmund Pettus Bridge, King issues a call for solidarity from believers, and specifically clergy, of all races — and among those responding to this call are white Catholic priests, nuns and others who join King in a second march to

the bridge. An Orthodox bishop — Archbishop Iakovos, Greek Orthodox primate of the Americas — is among them; there is also a rabbi. Archival footage of the third, successful march to Montgomery, seen in the final minutes of the film, attests to the truthfulness of this portrayal of ecumenical solidarity of Catholics and Protestants, blacks and whites at this crucial moment.

two categories (best picture and best original song), a white commenter replied, “They gave 12 Years a Slave the PC prize last year. I think it’s time for black Hollywood to find a new story to tell.” Think about that amazing comment when you watch Selma, and contemplate how far we have come — and how much remains to be done. Caveat Spectator: Scenes of strong violence; references to marital infidelity and brief audio of bedroom sounds; limited profanity, crude language and some racial epithets. Teens and up.

Pope John Paul II, addressing black Catholics in New Orleans in 1987, spoke of King’s “providential role” in “contributing to the rightful human betterment of black Americans and therefore to the improvement of American society itself.” He even went so far as to call King’s liberating action “a sign and expression of Christ’s paschal mystery, which in every age is effective in helping God’s people to pass from bondage into their glorious vocation of full Christian freedom.” Selma — the first big-screen feature film to focus on King — is a vital, important cinematic tribute to this providential moment in history. It is also, in more ways than one, a pointed reminder that King’s work is far from over. Last week, when my friend and fellow film critic Jeff Overstreet posted on Facebook about the Academy Awards’ widely derided snubbing of Selma in all but

This article first appeared in the National Catholic Register.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Steven D. Greydanus is the Register’s film critic and creator of Decent Films. He is studying for the permanent diaconate for the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey.

Interdiocesan Retreats For Priests 23 Mar (9pm) - 27 Mar (10am) 2015

The retreat will be preached by a priest of Opus Dei Prelature and will also include plenty of time for silence and private prayer.

Nazareth Family Institute Pre-marriage preparation. Marriage enrichment, restoration & healing. Dates of marriage preparation weekends: Mar 20 2015 - Mar 21 2015 May 8 2015 - May 9 2015 Jul 3 2015 - Jul 4 2015 Sep 25 2015 - Sep 26 2015 Venue: Avila retreat centre, Donnybrook, Dublin. Extended course: A seven week course by arrangement with the course directors Course directors, Peter and Fiona Perrem 01-2896647 For more information see: www.nazarethfamilyinstitute.net