Free Speech Vs Anti-Racism Rallies and My Response to Department of Justice

Protest against new Hate Speech Law and Counter-Demonstration by Anti-Racism groups

On Saturday 14 December I attended a protest rally against a proposed new "hate speech" law that had been planned weeks ago, to take place outside the Dail on that date. In the meantime a counter-demonstration was organised by unions, "anti-racism" groups and NGOs including Trocaire - the Catholic Church's overseas development agency! The "anti-racism" groups included some protesters dressed in black and masked who chanted slogans like "Nazi scum" at us. (Will this qualify as "hate speech" under the new legislation?). They also launched an attack at one stage that was held back by the Gardai and their own rally stewards.  I presume these are the Irish equivalent of AntiFa who have made such a name for themselves in the USA and elsewhere. (According to the Irish Times, three people were arrested by Gardai following minor scuffles; very one-sided scuffles!)

 I am the white haired guy at the back right in the above photo. On 12th and 13th December I had engaged with the the Department of Justice by sending two Emails in reply to their requests for comments from the public on the proposed new legislation.

Rory Connor

17 December 2019

Hate Speech Public Consultation - Follow Up to 5 Question Survey [2]

13 December 2019

Department of Justice and Equality
51 St Stephens Green
Dublin 2

I sent a submission regarding the above yesterday night. It included a copy of my previous online response to the 5 Question Survey.

 I mentioned that about 2003/04 I made two complaints to the Gardai under the Prevention of Incitement to Hatred Act regarding false allegations of child murder, one published by the Irish Times, the other broadcast by TV3. They are items 1 and 2 in my Blog article
Blood Libel in Ireland - directed against Catholics not Jews!

I could have made a third complaint to Gardai when Alan Shatter (and the late Gerry Ryan and others) made similar claims against the Church in 2009 but it was obviously futile. I also refer to that case (the murder of Bernadette Connolly) in the above article.

As to my motives - and qualifications - to comment on proposed Hate Speech legislation. I was a De La Salle Brother from 1966 to 1969 and details of my background are in the "About Me" section of my old website IrishSalem.com [see PS at end of letter]

I believe that nearly every one of my former colleagues who worked in an Industrial School or similar institution was accused of child abuse and if I had done so myself, I'm sure I would have been accused also. Hate Speech from the media plus the almost evidence-free payouts from the Redress Board, encouraged people to lie. The media Hate Speech is especially relevant to the allegations of child murder against the Christian Brothers - at times when no boy died of ANY cause! (I refer to these as "Murder of the Undead" and "Victimless Murders" and I went to the Gardai about two such cases.) Presumably the so-called victim accusers didn't get "compensation" for claiming that someone else was murdered so this type of claim was caused by media Hate Speech and not greed!

I corresponded for years with the late UK cultural historian Richard Webster and two fruits of that collaboration are his essays 
"States of Fear, the Redress Board and Ireland's Folly"

AND "The Christmas Spirit" in Ireland"

I also have an article on my current Blog IrishSalem.Blogspot.com regarding Richard Webster
"Richard Webster, the Idea of Evil and Operation Midland"

Finally I gave evidence to the Ryan Commission on my own behalf and as a member of the group "Let Our Voices Emerge" that represented victims of false allegations. I had a letter in the Irish Examiner on 7 November 2011
"Ryan Report Did Not Deal with False Allegations"
that summarizes our experience.

Regards


Rory Connor
11 Lohunda Grove
Clonsilla
Dublin 15

Hate Speech Public Consultation - Follow Up to 5 Question Survey [1]

12 December 2019

Department of Justice and Equality
51 St Stephens Green
Dublin 2

A few weeks ago I submitted an online reply to the quick "5 Question Survey on Hate Speech". I am including a copy of my original submission below. I added 2 links to the very end which relate directly to Minister Charlie Flanagan - I think I forgot to include them with my original reply.  I will now answer the 5 other questions contained in the Public Consultation Document

Question 1.  Are there other groups in society with shared identity characteristics, for example disability, gender identity, or others, who are vulnerable to having hatred stirred up against them and should be included in the list of protected characteristics?

I think the main problem with the existing situation is that bogus allegations of child rape and murder are not counted as Hate Speech when directed against Catholic clergy or religious. The few prosecutions seem to be for wasting Garda time not hate speech. The main priority should be to enforce the existing law against Incitement to Hatred  rather than add more protected groups. 

Question 2. Do you think the term “hatred” is the correct term to use in the Act? If not what should it be replaced with? Would there be implications for freedom of expression?

Indeed. I got the impression that the two cases I referred to the Gardai (regarding Irish Times and TV3 claiming the Christian Brothers murdered boys) were turned down by the DPP because these false murder claims did NOT prove that the Irish Times and TV3 personnel were motivated by hatred. From that point of view, it might be best to substitute "Hostility" or "Prejudice" for "Hatred". HOWEVER I am very conscious of the danger that vicious and dishonest politicians could misuse such a change in order to target their own ideological enemies. For example when the Sunday Times fired Kevin Myers on a bogus charge of anti-Semitism, this decision was loudly applauded by Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and then Tanaiste Frances Fitzgerald. I wrote about this in a blog article:
"Kevin Myers and the Age of De Valera and McQuaid"

I think the term "Hatred" is OK as I would not wish to make things easier for dishonest or bigoted politicians!

Question 3. Bearing in mind that the Act is designed only to deal with hate speech which is sufficiently serious to be dealt with as a criminal matter (rather than by other measures), do you think the wording of the Act should be changed to make prosecutions under for incitement to hatred online more effective? What, in your view, should those changes be?

Regarding application of the law to online speech, I think the law already gives enough power to the State and I would be dubious about giving the State more power to silence online speech than it already has. For example would the State have used this power to prevent the obscene online attacks on Kevin Myers OR - more likely - to silence anyone who tried to defend him (e.g. by accusing his defenders of anti-Semitism)??

Questions 4. In your view, does the requirement that an offence must be intended or likely to stir up hatred make the legislation less effective? AND
Question 5.  If so, what changes would you suggest to this element of the 1989 Act (without broadening the scope of the Act beyond incitement)?

I believe it was the issue of proving "intention" to stir up hatred that caused the DPP to refuse to prosecute the Irish Times or TV3 for stirring up hatred against the Christian Brothers when both accused the Brothers of murdering children. From that point of view, I should welcome an extension of the Act to include circumstances where politicians, journalists,  broadcasters etc are reckless as to whether their actions stir up hatred. BUT again I'm dubious of giving too much power to politicians who may use this to silence their own ideological enemies. Maybe it would be sufficient to list certain actions  where the intention to stir up hatred is assumed  e.g false allegations of Rape, Paedophilia or Child Murder directed against a religious (or other) group?

There  is a copy of my previous answers to the "quick" online survey below. I may send additional material tomorrow Friday regarding my background and qualifications to comment on this issue but this is a sufficient response in itself.


Rory Connor
11 Lohunda Grove
Clonsilla
Dublin 15

5 Question Survey - Copy of Answers Previously Submitted

Hate Speech Consultation
Introduction
The Minister for Justice and Equality is reviewing Ireland’s law on criminal hate speech. The existing law, the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, is being revised and updated to ensure it meets the needs of a modern, democratic society......

You can share your views by completing the text boxes below, or by sending a written submission to HateSpeechConsultation@justice.ie before the closing date of 13th December 2019.


1. In your opinion, what groups or communities of people in Ireland are targeted by hate speech?

The Catholic Church especially priests, brothers and nuns. I was a De La Salle Brother myself. I have never disclosed my name in religion, or any place I was (apart from the Castletown novitiate) because I suspect I could attract a false allegation of child abuse.

2. Please describe the kinds of hate speech that you think are (or are not) serious enough to be a criminal offence.

Making false allegations of child rape and child murder. Many of the latter claims relate to periods when no child died of ANY cause, so I coined the phrases "Murder of the Undead" and "Victimless Murders" (try Googling them). 
 I have an online article on this subject "Blood Libel in Ireland - directed against Catholics not Jews!" 

3. Is it necessary or right to place limits on freedom of expression by making some forms of hate speech a crime? If so, what protections do you think the law on incitement to hatred should offer?

About 2003/04 I made official complaints to Gardai under the Prevention of Incitement to Hatred Act concerning numbers (1) and (2) in my article "Blood Libel in Ireland". I believe Gardai DID take them seriously but Director of Public Prosecutions declined to prosecute. They don't tell you why, but my understanding is that falsely accusing Catholic Religious of murdering children does not PROVE that the accuser is motivated by religious hatred. I think that new legislation should ASSUME that the motive for Blood Libel is religious hatred unless the accuser can prove otherwise!

4. Do you think those who are actively involved in publishing, spreading or distributing hate speech should be subject to criminal prosecution?

Yes. For tactical reasons I only targeted journalists and broadcasters, when I made my two complaints under the existing Prevention of Incitement to Hatred Act. I believe that fake "victims" should be jailed as well - ESPECIALLY those who lead "Victims" organisations which are or were, funded by the Government. (Note that Carl Beech in UK got 18 years in jail. He was not the only accuser in "Operation Midland" but he was the most prominent. He also accused Tory MPs of murdering non-existent boys which is UK equivalent of Irish "Murder of the Undead" claims!) See Wikipedia article on "Operation Midland"


5. Is there anything else important we should take into account as part of this review?

(A) I have a separate online article 
"Eight Falsely Accused Bishops (and Archbishops) in Ireland"

One of the false accusers is Pat Rabbitte who in 1994 used Dail Privilege to slander Cardinal Daly and Harry Whelehan and now leads child protection agency TUSLA. I think this is wrong.

(B) Finally I have an article on current Minister for Justice and Equality Charlie Flanagan. I think that Minister Flanagan should request the Gardai to investigate the allegations he made in the Dail in 2009 against former Sister of Mercy Nora Wall (and those previously made by current EU Commissioner Phil Hogan who was Chair of FG Parliamentary Party at the time).
Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan and Former FG Chair Phil Hogan Vs George Hook and Nora Wall

I may have forgotten to include the above link with my online submission. Please note I have another article on Charlie Flanagan alone.
Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan, George Hook and Nora Wall [1]

END OF SUBMISSION TO DEPT. OF JUSTICE

CONCLUSION

I also contributed to Hermann Kelly's 2007 book "Kathy's Real Story: A Culture of False Allegations Exposed" which deals mainly with fake abuse "survivor" Kathy O'Beirne but also goes into the culture of hysteria that made her own book "Kathy's Story: A Childhood Hell Inside the Magdalen Laundries" into a best-seller in 2005. I contributed to the second part of Mr. Kelly's book and especially to the section he which he discusses claims that the Christian Brothers had been responsible for the deaths of boys in their care. Because many of these claims refer to periods when no boy died of ANY cause(!), I coined the phrase "Murder of the Undead". Since Hermann Kelly is more moderate than I, he uses the subheading "Funerals of the Undead"   in his discussion of this issue! 

NOTE: There is a 2010 article by Mark Smith (currently Professor of Social Work at University of Dundee) "Two book Reviews:  Kathy’s Real Story by Hermann Kelly and The Secret of Bryn Estyn by Richard Webster" 
The above-mentioned article "States of Fear, the Redress Board and Ireland's Folly" is an extract from Webster's book "The Secret of Bryn Estyn"

The Reason Why?
As to the overall meaning of all of this, Arnold J. Tonybee was a British historian and philosopher of history who is best known for his 12 volume work A Study of History (published 1934-1961) that "examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges under the leadership of creative minorities composed of elite leaders". Challenges and responses were physical, as when the Sumerians exploited the intractable swamps of southern Iraq by organizing the Neolithic inhabitants into a society capable of carrying out large-scale irrigation projects; or social, as when the Catholic Church resolved the chaos of post-Roman Europe by enrolling the new Germanic kingdoms in a single religious community.

Tonybee saw the growth and decline of civilizations as a spiritual process, writing that "Man achieves civilization, not as a result of superior biological endowment or geographical environment, but as a response to a challenge in a situation of special difficulty which rouses him to make a hitherto unprecedented effort."

According to an Editor's Note in an edition of  A Study of History, Toynbee believed that societies always die from suicide or murder rather than from natural causes, and nearly always from suicide.  And I believe that is the stage our society has now reached!

Gay Byrne, Annie Murphy AND Bishop Brendan Comiskey

RTE Archives and THAT Interview with Annie Murphy 2 April 1993:

According to an article in RTE Archives regarding episode of the Late Late Show broadcast on 2 April 1993.
Revelations About Eamonn Casey 1993

In 1993 Annie Murphy, mother of Peter who was fathered by Eamonn Casey, spoke to Gay Byrne on the Late Late Show about her affair with the then Bishop of Kerry.

In 1992 it was revealed that Bishop Eamonn Casey had fathered a child with an American woman Annie Murphy. The child named Peter was born in 1973 when Casey was Bishop of Kerry. Bishop Eamonn Casey resigned [as Bishop of Galway] as a result of the revelations. The following year in 1993, Annie Murphy published a book ‘Forbidden Fruit: The True Story of My Secret Love for the Bishop of Galway’, and made an appearance on the Late Late Show.

In this excerpt from the interview Gay Byrne remarks that
"If your son is half as good a man as his father, he won’t be doing too badly."
Annie Murphy responds by stating
"I’m not so bad either."
Annie Murphy promptly thanked Gay Byrne for the interview and left the set.

There was a furious reaction from Irish "liberals" to this exchange that occurred at the end of the interview. It was claimed Gay had insulted Annie Murphy in the course of defending his friend Bishop Casey. In fact the negative reaction continued for decades and this exchange was still being quoted in the mass media and social media as a black mark against Gay up to the time of his recent death  (4 November 2019). I think it gave Gay Byrne a nasty shock. He used to say that he was not pushing any political party or ideology and this is likely true BUT he certainly liked to be popular - especially in the eyes of "progressives". I suspect that this is the reason why Gay decided that the next time, a Bishop was being denounced in the media, he would take the side of the witch-hunters. Thus he betrayed his friend Bishop Brendan Comiskey in 1995. See article "Bishop Brendan Comiskey and False Allegations of Child Abuse" This is an extract:

Bishop Comiskey
Take the following from a sneering article by Declan Lynch in the Sunday Independent on 8 October 1995. It is headed "Gaybo Speaks and the Catholic Faithful Tremble":

"I personally would rate myself a friend and admirer of Brendan Comiskey [said Gay Byrne on his radio programme], and indeed I was looking for him on the telephone recently, and he didn't make contact with me which would have been kind of unusual, a little bit unusual.

"So much so that I don't believe now that Brendan Comiskey has gone to America because of stress, nor do I believe he's gone because of alcohol, nor do I believe he's gone because of his alleged protection of a priest who's up on charges.

"I think there is something other. I haven't the faintest idea of what it is, but I think there is something else, and I think it is something dreadful, and I.m almost afraid of what it might be. That's my personal reaction."

A second article in the same paper commented that "although the remarks appeared to be 'off the cuff' it is known that Gay scripts his shows with extreme care and attention."

So what was Gay Byrne suggesting? When Father Sean Fortune committed suicide he left a note claiming that he had been sexually assaulted by Bishop Comiskey! Is that what Gay had in mind?  ENDOFQUOTE

I rather think that paedophilia was what Gay was implying! But he was never questioned by our liberal journalists who - like Declan Lynch - didn't actually believe the libel but were pleased that it was published!

Gay never apologised publicly for his vile suggestion but may have done so privately to Bishop Comiskey. An article in the Irish Catholic  (7 November 2019) by Mary Kenny is entitled Gay retained the Catholicism  his Mother Brought to Him and it's possible he made his private peace with God and the Bishop. If so it wasn't enough, but liberal Ireland was not going to bring him to book over this issue. They were content to denounce him over his supposed mistreatment of Annie Murphy!

Rory Connor
5 December 2019

Background: The story of Eamonn Casey and Annie Murphy

Annie Murphy arrived in Ireland to stay with Eamonn Casey  in April 1973. She was 25, and recovering from the traumatic breakup of a two-year marriage.

Her mother was Eamonn Casey's cousin; her father, John Murphy, and Casey had become friends. Casey had offered to put Annie Murphy up at his residence in Inch, Kerry, while she got over her recent traumas.

Casey was four years into his tenure as bishop of Kerry, a dynamic and colourful figure who combined a gregarious personality and habit of fast driving with an impressive track record in social advocacy and fundraising. His appointment as bishop in 1969 – at the age of 42 – was a recognition of his great success agitating and organising against homelessness in Britain, most notably as founding chairman of the housing charity Shelter. He didn't have the academic theological pedigree normally associated with Irish bishops, but neither was he in any way radical on doctrinal issues.

Soon after Annie Murphy arrived, she and Eamonn Casey began a relationship. By November 1973, she was pregnant. Casey pressed her to have the child adopted. She gave birth to Peter Eamonn at the Rotunda on 31 July 1974. Casey visited the mother and child in hospital, and they argued about her refusal to put the child up for adoption. She refused to go back to Inch, instead electing to stay in a Daughters of Charity home for single mothers, St Joseph's, Dublin. Casey visited, and they argued again. She was deeply unhappy, had medical complications after her pregnancy, and also became paranoid about Casey's intentions. Shortly afterwards, Annie Murphy left, with her baby, Peter, to go home to Connecticut.

Annie Murphy: The Question of Cash - and Libel

In an article in the Irish Independent on 3 August 2013, Nicola Anderson wrote
Annie Murphy: 'I regret he had to leave the church'
TRACKED down by the Irish Independent last year, Annie Murphy is currently living with her partner, artist Thaddeus Heinchon, in a trailer park in a town east of Los Angeles in California.

She admitted then that she has since regretted her devastating exposure of Eamon Casey, saying: "I took justice into my own hands and I regret that because two wrongs don't make a right." And she also regretted that he had to leave the Catholic Church after details that he had fathered a son emerged, saying: "The Catholic Church was Eamon's cornerstone and that was taken away from him."

Although she is thought to have made close to €300,000 from the publication of her book revealing details of the affair, Ms Murphy said: "When you get money like that, it makes you feel dirty, you want to get rid of it." She said she had given a lot of it to her son and some to her then partner, Arthur Pennell, – who had pressurised her to go public with her story – and said she had kept less than half of it herself, adding: "I didn't do anything useful with it, I didn't buy a home with it or anything."

That wasn't the only money Annie Murphy had received from Bishop Casey. According to an article in Magill Magazine Eamon Casey: Opening the floodgates of scandal  (Colin Murphy, 25 January 2006):

In March 1975, Annie Murphy's father, John Murphy, came back to Dublin to meet Casey. They agreed that Casey would send Annie Murphy $175 per month in maintenance, increasing over time to $300 per month. ...... In 1990, Annie Murphy and her partner, Arthur Penell, were in financial difficulties themselves, and they and Casey began to negotiate a settlement. In July 1990, Casey paid them a cheque of £70,669.20 ($117,000), plus a further $8,000 (a total of $125,000).

Murphy and Pennell then sought further monies to pay for Peter's college education. Annie Murphy was also concerned that Casey acknowledge his son. She decided to go public, and in January 1992, contacted the Irish Times. The newspaper gradually confirmed various aspects of the story, but didn't publish it. Murphy and Pennell meanwhile continued in negotiations with Casey, through his intermediary, an Irish priest in Brooklyn, Jim Kelly. These negotiations arrived at a figure of $150,000 to be paid by Casey for Peter's education, but weren't finalised.

On Thursday 1 May 1992, Phoenix magazine ran a short story on an unnamed leading cleric about to be involved in a scandal. This Irish Times still didn't publish, but the story was by then an open secret amongst the media.........

Casey Affair Book Publishers Settle Libel Action with £100,000 Payout
An article by Stephen O'Brien in the Irish Independent on 30 November 1998 confirmed that a major libel action linked to the book by Annie Murphy, was settled out of court for a sum reported to be in the region of £100,000. The Irish Independent confirmed that a settlement was agreed by publishers Little Brown, the company which brought out Forbidden Fruit written by Annie Murphy and Peter de Rosa.

The case was settled without any retraction or apology, or any question of the book being withdrawn from sale. The News of the World quoted people close to Dympna Kilbane  saying she was "overjoyed'' at the outcome. ``She has gone through a lot in order to clear her name and has emerged victorious,'' the source said.

An article in The Herald (Scotland)  on 13 April 1993 "Woman Steps into Bishop Tape Row" gives some background information. Dympna Kilbane said she shared a flat with Annie Murphy, when Ms Murphy was pregnant in 1974 as the result of her affair with the bishop. Ms Kilbane confirmed she was taking legal action against Ms Murphy for references made about her in the book, Forbidden Fruit.  She said she had provided the Sunday Independent with a tape recording of a conversation he had with Bishop Casey in which he called Annie Murphy ''an evil woman''.

As per an article in the National Catholic Reporter on 30 April 1993:  "Kilbane has also raised questions about the paternity of Peter Murphy, the son Annie Murphy claims was fathered by Casey."

Society's Attitude to "Kiss and Tell"

In point of fact, Annie Murphy got off pretty lightly during the 1993 Late Late Show interview with Gay Byrne. (It also emerged during the interview that she was hoping for a film deal - or TV mini-series - based on her book.) In general the women - and occasionally men - who try to make money out of sharing their sexual activities with the public are regarded with contempt by society - sometimes amused contempt. By its nature "Kiss and Tell" involves a comparative nonentity trying to exploit his/her sexual relationship with a much more important personality. Even when the public are titillated, this doesn't do anything to create respect for the person who is betraying confidences. TWO EXAMPLES

(1) When Terry Keane died in June 2008, RTE described her as "well known columnist and fashion journalist" and "principal contributor of The Sunday Independent's long-running gossip column The Keane Edge". It was also mentioned that she studied medicine at Trinity College but dropped out without taking a degree and that she had married a young barrister Ronan Keane but separated from him, after which he went on to become Chief Justice. A slightly more substantial figure than Annie Murphy then but she is chiefly "well known" for being the long time mistress of Taoiseach (Irish PM) Charlie Haughey and for announcing this during an interview on the Late Late Show in May 1999! This was some years after Haughey had been forced to resign as Taoiseach and during a period when he was under intense pressure from the McCracken and Moriarty Tribunals regarding his irregular financial affairs. Keane also gave the story of their affair as an exclusive to rival newspaper The Sunday Times, although she was still employed by Independent News and Media, and abruptly left the Sunday Independent.

Terry Keane was subjected to considerable criticism in the media- far more so than Annie Murphy. According to the RTE obituary: In later years, in an RTÉ documentary, Terry Keane said she regretted the pain that she had caused by speaking about her 27-year-long affair. 
Given her cynical betrayal of Haughey (they never spoke again before his death in June 2006), it is likely that the main pain she regretted, was that suffered by herself!

(2) Captain James Hewitt  a former British cavalry officer, who came to prominence in the mid 1990s when he disclosed he had a love affair with Princess Diana from 1986 to 1991 at a time when she was still married to Prince Charles. He was a major source for the book Princess in Love by Anna Pasternak published in 1994. His Wikipedia article has a very interesting link (unfortunately broken) to an article in the new York Times on 5 October 1994 entitled "'Kiss and Tell' Officer Draws Heaps of Scorn". However this proved to be only the opening installment of the ridicule and opprobrium heaped on Hewitt. 

Princess Diana was killed in a car crash in August 1997 and In 2003, Hewitt tried to sell his 64 personal letters from Diana for £10 million. The act of selling the letters was considered to be a betrayal of trust, and Sarah, Duchess of York, condemned his action. She was reported to have said, "Betrayal, I think, is the most horrible, horrible, disloyal thing you can do to anyone".

Wikipedia mentions that in In 1991, Hewitt served as a Challenger tank commander in the Gulf War and was mentioned in dispatches.  However he failed the exam for promotion to major three times. Again he is a more substantial figure than Annie Murphy whose sole lifetime achievement seems to have been as a Kiss and Tell artiste!

Compared to the others, Annie Murphy got off very lightly indeed. Hewitt was furiously denounced for an action that could not have harmed a deceased person. Terry Keane betrayed Haughey after he had been forced out of politics and was under pressure because of his irregular financial dealings. She added to his troubles but didn't create them. Annie Murphy was solely responsible for forcing Bishop Casey to resign. Gay Byrne and his audience treated her respectfully during that infamous Late Late Show interview. It is not insulting to point out that there are discrepancies in the story being told by a Kiss and Tell artiste!

Father Michael Sweetman SJ [2] His Story

Dublin Housing Action Committee Vs Gardai c 1968

This is a follow up to my article "Father Michael Sweetman SJ - declining to Baptise the Spirit of the Age"

Father Sweetman, Dad and the Dublin Housing Action Committee

During the early 1960s my father was a Garda Sergeant and Inspector based in Store Street Garda Station near Dublin City Centre. It was a period of agitation and protests and my father told me about a couple of baton charges that he led to clear the streets. At some stage he also mentioned the Dublin Housing Action Committee   - probably in connection with its links to Sinn Fein. At some stage I also realised that Fr Michael Sweetman had been a prominent member of the DHAC. After both had died (my father in 1994 and Fr Sweetman 2 years later) I put two and two together and jokingly told people (including  a local historian) that my father might have baton-charged Father Sweetman. I never actually believed that, because I understood that it would have made the headlines. BUT I certainly thought that my father had baton-charged the DHAC! In fact I see from the Wikipedia article that the group was set up by Sinn Fein in May 1967 - by which time Dad had been promoted to Garda Superintendent and transferred to County Clare. A nice illustration of the fallibility of human memory and the way we construct stories in order to make sense of our lives - or just to make events appear more dramatic than they actually were! 

[ Dad also told me about a struggle with a Sinn Fein member when he was Garda Inspector and policing a meeting outside the GPO c1964. The SF guy grabbed Dad's cane and tried to break it over his knee BUT it was a presentation stick made of walnut and wouldn't break! This may have contributed to my false memory regarding the DHAC ] 

According to a file made public by the National Archives in 2000,  Department of Justice mandarins viewed the Dublin Housing Action Committee as "an IRA offshoot"  Judging by the list of prominent members given in the Wikipedia article on DHAC, this judgement seems to be more or less correct. Secretary Dennis Dennehy was a member of the Irish Communist Organisation; Sean Mac Stiofain joined "Provisional" Sinn Fein after its 1970 split; Sean O'Cionnaith, Mairin de Burca and Prionsias de Rossa joined the Official Sinn Fein faction and the latter later broke away to form Democratic Left; Michael O'Riordan was founder of the Communist Party of Ireland - one of the smallest and also one of the most Stalinist in Europe! However much these people disagreed among themselves, their  bigotry and extremism remained constant. (Members of the relatively "moderate" Democratic Left brought down the Irish Government in 1994 by peddling fantasies about a supposed conspiracy between a Cardinal and a Catholic Attorney General to protect a paedophile priest.)

The decency and desire for social justice exhibited by Fr Sweetman and his Dominican colleague Fr Austin Flannery were exploited by people whose hatred of the existing social order far exceeded their concern for human rights.  To the accusation of being a communist, [Fr Flannery] would retort that sitting down with Michael O'Riordan no more made him a communist than sitting down with Michael Sweetman made him a Jesuit. I think they were both wrong on this issue, but I honour their memory in any event!

THE LIFE OF FATHER MICHAEL J SWEETMAN SJ

The main part of what follows is an article by Father Sweetman on the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the launching of the Jesuit Quarterly Review Studies in 1912. Fr Sweetman himself was born in 1914 and so observes "I am almost the same age as Studies and so should be in a good position to write of our three-quarter century.". I preface his article with the Irish Times obituary dated 24 October 1996. Fr Sweetman was born the year the Great War broke out, joined the Jesuits in 1931, two years before Hitler came to power in Germany and was ordained a priest in 1945 the year World War 2 ended. He died in 1996 a few months after my mother and two years after my father so I lost a lot around that time, but I was 46 myself. 

I have highlighted in blue some striking passages from Fr Sweetman's article and undoubtedly the most relevant to this Blog is the following where he compares his own educational experiences with those of boys who were committed to Industrial Schools:
As a boy I experienced boarding school in Mount St. Benedict's, Gorey, and Clongowes Wood College. Later, as a priest, I had many contacts with boys who were in Daingean Reformatory or one of the Industrial Schools. When I described some of my experiences, and they turned out to be quite similar to theirs, I remember the astonishment with which they would say: 'And you paid to go there!' 

Another passage seems more innocuous but it bears comparison with former President Mary McAleese's thuggish comments on Catholic traditionalists - and her latest diatribe against Pope John Paul II:
Conservative people, and I do not use this term in a belittling sense, tended in the last couple of generations to lose creativity and seemed to think it enough to pass on the faith and its practice in exactly the same form as they had received it.

Father Sweetman was a bridge - between various social classes, generations and religious traditions. He has few successors in today's world!

(A) Irish Times Obituary of Fr Michael Sweetman (24 October 1996)

Social reformer Father Michael Sweetman dies at 82
  
The death has occurred of the Rev Michael Joseph Sweetman S.J.

Father Sweetman, who was 82, was prominently associated with social reform and the concept of a "just society". He was a member of the Dublin Housing Aid Society and CARE and wrote many articles on social and moral problems. His main ambition, he once said, was to see bad housing conditions eliminated.

He was born in Dublin on March 20th, 1914, and was the seventh child of Roger M. Sweetman , a member of the first Dail, and Katherine Sweetman. He was educated at Mount St. Benedict's, Gorey, Co Wexford, at Clongowes Wood College, Co Kildare, and at University College, Dublin. He studied philosophy and theology at Milltown Park, Dublin.

He joined the Jesuits in 1931 and was ordained a priest in 1945.

Father Sweetman did pastoral and social work up to 1972 and was the prime mover behind the establishment of the Los Angeles Homes, which were set up to house homeless boys. He also gave readily of his time to delinquent boys, often giving them legal advice and helping them with their financial problems.

He lived for a number of years in Dublin's inner city, where he operated an "open house" policy for anybody who needed help, and he also worked in Ballymun's Centre for Faith and Justice.

Father Sweetman was identified with the liberal wing of the Catholic Church and made many pronouncements on controversial issues of the day. He consistently rejected the hierarchical view that the use of contraception was against natural law.

He also argued that many of the problems affecting the disadvantaged were economic as well as religious or moral. He was, on more than one occasion, described as a priest who was "ahead of his time".

(B) A Personal Experience of Christianity: 1912-1987 Michael Sweetman, S.J. 

Michael Sweetman works in a deprived area of Dublin 
Source: Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, Vol. 75, No. 300 (Winter, 1986)

I am almost the same age as Studies, and so should be in a good position to write of our three-quarter century. But it must be admitted that for the first' twenty years of its existence we were not aware of each other. After that I have been a fairly consistent reader. I certainly have changed a great deal during that period of rapid change. Usually I have zigzaged along merrily with the trends of the time, occasionally anticipating them, usually lagging far behind. A few times I have gone into sharp reverse, now and again I seem to have come full circle, and I have taken, also, an odd excursion down unapproved roads, where, I must say the view of the surrounding country was quite exciting. It is, I suppose, inevitable that in old age one discovers the truth of the cliche that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

Religion 

Yet some of the changes I have experienced are substantial, most of all in the area where I should be competent-  religion. I have been a Jesuit for fifty-five years and a priest for forty-one. The main purpose of religion is to guide and change life - one's own and other people's, in accordance with what you believe God to want. The full and perfect life is to find and do the will of God. The drive of religion, then, is to produce whole or holy people. It is precisely in the concept or image of the holy person, and specifically the Christian holy person or saint, that some of the greatest changes have taken place. The ideal most common among Christians when I was young was of a loving and totally unselfish person. This, I take it, remains the ultimate desideratum. But the qualities that implied and the methods by which it is to be attained have changed quite radically. While courage, sincerity and service were always held in high esteem, in the beginning of the century they were conceived of rather negatively: the perfect man, the saint, did not enjoy himself much, denied himself totally, was detached and passionless. He acted from supernatural motives and was hard on, if not contemptuous of, the flesh. This was true of her as well as him! Physical asceticism was much admired, and practised. Even when it was not fully achieved and only spasmodically acknowledged, the ascetic ideal at least produced its own peculiar brand of all-pervasive guilt. Conformity to a pre-conceived model was important, and dumb obedience to Ecclesiastical Authority advisable. The will of God was handed down along clear and rigid lines; adherence to this will was the essence of perfection. Some great-hearted and original men and women reached effective Christian perfection within these confines, or burst out of them with such unmistakable Spirit that no one could catch them; but lesser spirits were cramped and even warped by restriction and narrowness. 

The effort in the earlier years was to find God through strictly religious ways; later people seem to need to find Him in all things, everywhere. Staunch efforts were made to break through into the supernatural world; we extended ourselves, pushed ourselves, drove ourselves onward. The present tendency relies much more on being discovered by God, on starting from where we are, in our bodies, and looking inward rather than upward for direction.

Conservative people, and I do not use this term in a belittling sense, tended in the last couple of generations to lose creativity and seemed to think it enough to pass on the faith and its practice in exactly the same form as they had received it. There was a danger of dead formalism. This was inclined to put the next generation completely off. So they rejected everything, without giving consideration to the possibility of putting fresh life into the old substance. At worst the old forms were imposed in an authoritarian way, or worse still, perhaps, presented in an unconvinced and diffident way. 

Clergy 

There has been a deep and remarkable change in clerical style. It was an avowed'aim in former times to mould and produce a clerical type. Suitability for the vocation to priestly or religious life was essentially dependent on ability to conform, or at least to appear to conform, to a pre-ordained model. There is now much more respect for the freedom of the Spirit to blow where it wills. Within limits, there is tolerance for the unexpected, and room is allowed for making mistakes. Of course even in the old days genius did break out, and eccentricity established itself, but the hope remained that it would be eliminated in the next generation. This hope still holds; but the criteria of eccentricity have changed. 

Clergy felt bound to conform to certain standards of speech decorum, dress etc... and were expected by most of the laity to conform. This naturally led to a vein of hypocrisy on the one hand, and the elevating of people on to pedestals on the other. All this has largely gone, together with the top hats and frock coats. The humanity of the clergy is readily, admitted now; the wish to be superior, or even different, has been abandoned by many clergy. 

The only disadvantage I see in this change is that clergy may appear now to have nothing special to offer, because they demand nothing exceptional of themselves. Formerly priests and religious of both sexes were easily considered extraordinary, because they led such different lives. They got up at 5.30 a.m., meditated, observed silence, fasted and undertook ascetic exercises. They were witnesses to an ideal for which they were seen to be willing to sacrifice much else. Jean Genet admired St. Vincent de Paul for identifying himself with the galley slaves, the scum of that time: but he pushed it a bit far by saying: 'if he wanted really to be one of us, he should have committed our crimes. The modern religious person is more ready to admit that he or she does commit the crimes as well. But then where are we? All in the same boat? Who is to do the saving? A mystic might answer to that: well, Christ truly identified himself with sinners, and may still be willing to enter into the sleazy lives and the perverted sufferings of the down-trodden, more so than we give him credit for. Modern holy men and women are ready to risk getting muddied and having' their fingers burned, and yet hope that Christ will be with them through it all. 

Certainly it is no longer considered acceptable to edify people by putting on, or keeping up, a show. Personally I have a far deeper understanding now than I had in my more conventional phase, of what Christ really meant when he said that the harlots and sinners would go into the Kingdom of Heaven before the Pharisees and approved people of his time. I have, I think, recognized in some of them the special qualities that always merited His warmest commendation: impulsive generosity and humility. Religious persons are, necessarily, often in a dilemma, caught between the desire not to think themselves better, or be thought better than others, and yet to fulfil the injunction to be a light to the world, and salt to the earth. They may have to set a standard which puts people on edge. They are a challenge in non-Christian places. Perhaps they have become afraid of being an affront to the style accepted as normal in much of the Western world, and so they become counter signs to people who do not worship at the shrines of the idols of that world. With a bit of a groan we may have to admit to the wisdom of St. Thomas More in Utopia when he said 'Priests shall be of exceeding holiness, and therefore very few'. 

Missions

 I came to manhood in the papacy of Pius XI, the pope of the Missions, and was affected very much by the missionary urge. This was-to spread the faith, essential to the eternal salvation of souls. There was unquestioned confidence that this preaching would confer undiluted benefits on the converted people. Given a wise evangelization I still have no doubt about those benefits. Even in the days of more naive faith there was always a caring, healing aspect to the ideals of the missionaries. What we have gained now is a vastly increased respect for the cultures, customs and beliefs of other peoples and a more realistic skepticism about the advantages of bringing European civilization to 'primitive' cultures. The motivation involved in the belief that you would be removing the danger, or indeed the certainty, of eternal damnation from the people who were unbaptized, has gone. This has lessened the urgency, and so vocations have decieased. But I see now an equally urgent love taking shape in the mute demand that we save people from starvation, exile, exploitation and degradation or rather help them to save themselves. In this respect hell has shifted its base in time and space; vocations will perhaps begin to increase again. 

Readiness. to lay down one's life in the cause is undoubtedly at the heart of our faith. But readiness to lay down one's life so that `our side' may be victorious, because we are right and everyone else is wrong may too easily slip into readiness to kill for the cause, to repress, censor and persecute. The logic is that error has no rights. But we all surely know by now that totally logical people are always mad and usually dangerous. 

Morality, Sexuality

 In the cognate area of morality there have been two shifts of emphasis which I think have been towards the truth, but with attendant snags. In the first half of this century, and for several previous ones, it was commonly taught in seminaries, and so became the accepted doctrine in the Church, that every slightest indulgence in sexual activity, even in thought or phantasy, outside of a married relationship, was gravely wrong, and needed to be confessed before receiving the Eucharist. In the early sixties, conviction as to the tenability of this doctrine weakened,. was undermined and collapsed.

Looking back on it, it seems to me now that the fatal flaw in the teaching was the emphasis on pleasure as being the criterion of evil. The question 'did you take pleasure in it?' was seen as vital. It was a false criterion and infected the whole teaching. A period ensued which showed a great reluctance on the part of many counsellors and advisers to give any direction at all and so, it seems to me, there is too little guidance given now as to the harm that can be done to others by casually selfish, violent, deceptive and cynical exploitation of the sexual urge. The baby went out with the bath water. Pleasure became the sole criterion in many cases as to the desirability of any performance. A not altogether desirable volte-face. In literature, it might be noted, with the absence of ultimates in belief and sanctions, a good deal of the tension went out of the Catholic novel. I wonder to what extent Mauriac and Graham Greene are capable of being appreciated by the modern youth. 

Social Justice 

In matters of justice the older tradition spent almost all its time and expertise in teasing out the ways in which the Haves might be wronged, mostly by the Have Nots, and how they could succeed in getting restitution. It was acknowledged, in small print, that in extreme necessity everyone had a right to take what was required. When this principle was invoked and acted upon in the housing agitation of the late sixties some astonishment was expressed. Now justice is seen largely as the right of everyone to a decent human life. It takes no great perspicacity to see that the great idol worshipped as alternative to God is Mammon. 

The Church in its official documents has sharply and scientifically criticized and analysed this worship; but the one teaching that 'got across' universally in our country was that communism was the great enemy of the Christian ideal of social justice. Similarly in the area of sexual morality the one teaching that was universally known, even if not always accepted, was the 'evil' of contraception. Why some teachings are so successfully put across and others so ineffectively, is a mystery worth investigating. I have been impressed recently with the conviction expressed by some Catholics involved in the world of business and high finance, that their world is, as far as the influence of Christian principles goes, missionary territory. It is untouched, virginal in the worst sense of the word. 

Sacred Scripture 

A vital change in Christian understanding of its sources, and therefore of its ideal, came from the abandonment of a literal, fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible. It was really no fault of anyone that I grew up in an era which taught that the world was created about 4,000 years before Christ or at least that Adam and Eve lived and committed their happy fault around that period. In the atmosphere of the time one could take that. But I remember as a university student setting out to read the Bible through. When I came to some of the so-called historical books and read the stories which, then, one was expected to accept literally, I closed the book and said to myself ;This is too much for me, and decided to wait until I did theology to make up my mind what to do. Fortunately by that time a wiser and deeper attitude prevailed, after the publication of the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu in 1949. 

While the strain on one's credulity was eased, the rapid development in Scriptural scholarship did not always help toward a convinced practice; everything seemed open to various interpretations. Of course crude instinct told one to be wary of following every latest theory as if it were the last word. Also one came to realise that no belief could be so eccentric and disastrous that it could not find some semblance of backing in Scripture. So that even in being guided by the Holy Book one needed large draughts of the Holy Spirit (St. Paul does speak somewhere of drinking the Holy Spirit). 

One influence seems to have disappeared as a result of biblical scholarship and that is the great lives of Jesus Christ. They had a huge influence on me and I'm sure on many thousands of others: Grandmaison, Prat, Lebreton, Lagrange, Guardini, Goodier, etc. I read them all; and without ever claiming expertise in scripture, I'm sure they gave me a great basic understanding of the Gospels, and helped life to become Christ-centred. Devotion to the Sacred Heart also helped in that. 

The Laity 

In recent orgies of self-criticism clerics are inclined to blame themselves for their supposed domination of the laity in the past. This coming era is foretold as the era of the Laity, so this is a serious self-accusation. There is one important area where they did not dominate, that was in the literary field. Here the men and women of influence were, if not predominantly lay, certainly noticeably so. The present laity are not so prominent here. Think of Chesterton and Belloc, Sheed and Ward, O'Rahilly, Maritain, Guitton, Mauriac, D. Day; also C.S. Lewis, Allison-Peers, and Chambers who were not Roman Catholics, S. Undset and the Russian novelists. The list could be endless. These were all hugely effective apologists and exposers of the Christian thing (as Belloc might have described it). 

Bishops were externally deferred to, but, with exceptions they did not make a notable contribution to the witness of living faith. Their frequent denunciations and deploring of modern trends was often seen as ridiculous and impotent. Skirts rose and fell in length, quite impervious to annual comments in Lenten Pastorals. Rome itself often seemed finicky and petty, concerned with the rubrics in liturgy and life rather than with the substance. The obligation of clerical celibacy was child's play compared to the obligation of saying the Divine Office and performing the liturgy without serious fault The professional anti-clericals developed their own rigid dogmas, their own predictable cliches and conventions, and produced, surely by artificial insemination, their own smug and closed establishment. 

Sociology 

One of the social changes that I have noticed through contact with many admirable social workers and theorists is the presumption that the care of the deprived, the sick, the old, and all the disadvantaged, should be undertaken on ,principle, and by preference, by the State, rather than by individuals and groups of inspired people. The defects of this latter system, which largely held until the coming of the Welfare State, are seen to be that the poor receive benefits out of charity from those who think themselves superior, and not out of justice and of right. This was rightly seen as humiliating to the recipient, and ego-inflationary to the donor. 

That is a good reason for the shift. But it should be noted that the system more in vogue now has its own glaring defects. Recipients of their rights from the State have usually to find their way through a bewildering entanglement of red tape, and are quite often the victims of arbitrary prejudices and caprice on the part of minor officials in the bureaucracy. There is no clear reason why individual kindness and care should degenerate into condescending `charity'; nor that the dispensing of civil and human rights to people by the State should invariably involve prolonged investigation and circular passing of the buck. Here in Ireland, where no ideology is completely dominant, there remains the hope that a fair balance between voluntary and statutory aid could be maintained; and the arrogance of the professional expert and the smugness of the voluntary do-gooder could both be kept in check.

New Classes 

It was pointed out to me for the first time, by Garret FitzGerald at the Kilkenny Conference on Poverty in 1972, that when the poor cease to be the majority in a democratic society by that very fact they lose political clout. That has happened during the life time of Studies. The fundamental class division is no longer between workers and bosses, the former being usually poorly paid and more or less exploited, but still a majority in the nation, but between all who have a secure, earned income, and those who are unemployed and dependent on welfare. These are now a minority, though unfortunately a large one, and so lack clout in our society. 

Education 

Here inequality, or variety, remains. As a boy I experienced boarding school in Mount St. Benedict's, Gorey, and Clongowes Wood College. Later, as a priest, I had many contacts with boys who were in Daingean Reformatory or one of the Industrial Schools. When I described some of my experiences, and they turned out to be quite similar to theirs, I remember the astonishment with which they would say: 'And you paid to go there!' Schools of all kinds were places, largely, of authoritarian attempts to impose, or even beat, knowledge into unwilling heads, and to teach manners to wayward or resistant bodies and hearts. Now schools seem to be predominantly places of co-operation and a good deal of happiness, where, if a child is badly treated, it is usually by his or her peers and not by the teachers. This seems to me to be a development along the lines of truly Christ like respect for children and away from the Biblical, Old Testament, theory of 'spare the rod and spoil the child'. 

Hopes for the Future 

When asked would I not write reminiscences, I have said that I would entitle them 'Between Two Stools'. I feel very conscious of not being single-minded, yet not exactly indecisive. I waver constantly between desiring to be fully where I am, and hankering for another seat. If I am slightly schizophrenic that, I flatter myself, keeps me more or less sane. In this present context I sometimes hanker after the certainties and fears of the 30s, relishing the drama of the absolutes, but I am in fact far more happy with the vaguer ideals of the 80s and the wider liberties. 

What then are the peculiar hopes that I would have for Ireland in the 90s Certainly I would like to see a vast increase of the influence of the Green People. Not, obviously, in the sense of super-nationalism but in respect for nature and the environment of all our people. That way lies health and happiness and an atmosphere favourable to belief in God, in ourselves and in everything beautiful. This would. require a curb to be put on the worship of money, for it is violent greed that is nearly always responsible for the threats to the environment and even to the very existence of mankind. The people I would like to see in charge of the preservation and development of the natural beauty of our country would be the Parks Department of the Dublin Corporation I have waited all these years to pay tribute to their consistent good taste, imagination and organized hard work. 

Two groups I think need special care. I would be happy to see our authorities and residents' associations listening to and co-operating with the Travellers, to see that they are given a chance of a decent human life. Equally important is the treatment of deprived and disturbed young people. Faith might well be shown in the wisdom of two reports: The Task Force Report on Child Welfare, and the Whitaker Report on Prisons. 

Finally I would be glad to see an increase in respect for and confidence in people in public life of proven integrity and compassion and less readiness to be impressed by the chancer and the glib manipulator. 

BUT FATHER SWEETMAN THE SNOB? (1949)

This is the beginning of an article in the Jesuit publication "The Irish Monthly" March 1949. Fr Sweetman is somewhat annoyed with the less than spiritual behavior of visitors to the monastic ruins of Glendalough in the Wicklow mountains south of Dublin. It was founded by St Kevin in the 6th century and its Abbot at the time of the Norman Conquest (1169) was St Laurence O'Toole who was also the first Irish Archbishop of Dublin. His predecessors had been Norseman or English and St Laurence was a somewhat premature symbol of the union of Irish, Norman and indeed European culture. In 1949 Fr Sweetman was a very highly educated young Jesuit and perhaps a bit snobbish about the religious practices of the laity. He was to become a symbol of union - between different social classes - himself but his hopes for the future proved to be vain. Perhaps like St Laurence O'Toole, his hopes will bear fruit at some time in the future!


 Why Go To Glendalough? by Michael Sweetman, SJ. (March 1949)

THIS valley must surely be a place of pilgrimage; it is the spiritual home of Dublin's Patrons, Saints Kevin and Laurence, receptacle of their sacrifices, engraved with the seven symbols  of their love. Certainly the crowds are here, see them streaming  down the road this Sunday, Feast of Kevin, in June, a long progression of buses, cars and cyclists. Then they take to the boats, cross the lake and climb precariously to the little hole in the cliff?  St. Kevin's Bed. Is this an ancient ritual to honour the Saint? Do  they pray there? Well, perhaps under cover of the " three wishes "  you are told to have while crouching in the narrow smooth-rocked  cave, some romantic boy or girl may ask for victory or vocation, to  be a Saint like Kevin or to die a martyr for Ireland and the Faith. Maybe. All that appears is vulgarity, very close to mockery. No,  even to-day no one is thinking of Kevin; even on this one day you  will not hear the solemn intonation of the Rosary wafted from the  boats gliding quietly across the lake in the evening; nor will you find  any of the Seven Churches filled with worshippers to honour his  work or seeking inspiration in his memory.


To-day, like every other day of the tourist season, there is a kind  of dance-hall happiness in the air, restless and self-centred; this crowd  would be more at home in Bray, with concrete esplanade and  saxophone blaring nonsense from the hill. This fastidious valley  really adds nothing to their self-conscious merriment, their joy is not  in it but in themselves, so it seems to withdraw its secrets from  their unsympathetic approach, to frown resentfully on their unconscious insults and to rebuff their well-meant but undiscerning heartiness. They could enjoy themselves as well elsewhere. I wish they would.....

I recall from my days in De La Salle Novitiate that ,at Christmas 1966, the novices attended Mass in the local Church in Castletown and we - budding experts in post Vatican II liturgy - were mildly shocked to see the local farmers praying their rosary beads during Mass! Our novitiate lasted 15 months. Fr Sweetman joined the Jesuits in 1931, aged 17 and was ordained priest in 1945 after a 14 YEAR period of spiritual and intellectual formation. He can be forgiven a little snobbery vs a vs the laity in 1949!