When Smithwick set out his definition of collusion in his inquiry into the murders of two RUC men, Jeffrey Donaldson was happy to use the term collusion when it could be levelled at the Garda Siochana. Of course now that the same charge has been levelled at the RUC over Loughinisland, he has downgraded the offence to wrong doing.
In the same way one can imagine the unionist anger that would be on the airwaves had it emerged that guns smuggled in by a secret army organised by a nationalist political party were used to murder unionists. (I seem to remember handguns being smuggled in by the IRA after the 98 ceasefires causing explosive unionist reactions).
Yet, earlier this month, despite all the local news outlets carrying the story about Ulster Resistance (we were shown footage of Paisley, Robinson and Wilson at the creation of the organisation) and the fact that guns brought in for them by British agents had never been captured but had been used to murder 90 nationalists, not one DUP person was asked either about the connection nor about the still uncovered arsenal. We have heard very little from Mike Nesbitt. Remember his trying to force Sinn Féin out of the executive because of a link to people murdered last year?
This made me think that there could also be a link to the UUP that that party did not want exposed. Not so strangely Arlene didn’t think it worthy of a comment but she thought it was a scandal for two ex PMs to try and scare people to vote Remain.
Perhaps this is part of the ‘narrative’ that both the UUP and the DUP want redacted from our history – it doesn’t fit in with unionist victimhood.
PATRICK J DORRIAN
Belfast BT15
Partners hopeful sound they hear from Church is not silence
In his recent apostolic exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia,’ or ‘The Joy of Peace’, Pope Francis spoke in an honest and unexpected way to many Catholic families who feel that the Church has become irrelevant to their lives, but gave no clear indication to partners, divorced, or civilly remarried Catholics who believe that the Church is imperative to their lives.
Partners, the new trendy term for cohabitation, the relationship that is viewed with suspicion by every Church in the land. Partners, a relationship that was almost as notorious as Wilde’s ‘Love that dare not speak its name’. Partners come in all shapes and colours from former taoiseach Bertie Ahern and Prince Charles to the humble couple in the street. This not-so-new phenomenon appears to have replaced the most committed relationship of all – marriage.
One of the most contentious questions with which partners are confronted in their perilous non-gratis spiritual state, is the attitude of the Church. So what of partners who attend Mass every Sunday? Partners who are dedicated to each other, who are experiencing a new fullness and contentment not found in a previous married state, but whose presence at the Eucharist is not welcome.
I am of the deliberate opinion that the Eucharist is a symbol of all our religions, it is the life of man and woman and we must want it continually. The Church far from regarding partners as being beyond the pale, should bring the Spirit of Christ to bear and do everything it can, be embracing and giving spiritual guidance. In fact the whole matter is one to which the Church must bring more understanding and less condemnation, because when marriage is beyond mending, this is the only way the situation can be dealt with.
If I presume to be a bishop how do I address the ‘problem’ of partners receiving the Eucharist? I will do what I think Christ would do. I will call my priests, tell them the course of action I wish them to take. To make no judgment – moral or ethical. I want no effort made to show the world how wonderful we are, no statements about anything, just a spontaneous act of compassion to those seeking help. In this instance it is partners who are seeking an invitation to the Holy Sacrament. Some of the laity will praise us for it, some will excoriate the Church or excoriate me.
This too will be alright because the Church once again is the Body of Christ on earth. The Church must always ask and sometimes instinctively act, in accordance with what it believes to be the answer to the question – What does Christ want His Church to do? We believe it is His Church and we are not afraid of anyone’s opinion. With that I will relinquish my role as honorary bishop and go back to being a partner but I will be listening and hopeful that the sound I hear is not silence.
WILSON BURGESS
Derry city
Complicated world of car insurance
Alleged huge increases in car insurance are the subject of debate at the moment in the Republic, but I would like to draw attention to aspects of car insurance here, that drivers may not be aware of. If, for example, one has two (or indeed more) cars insured with the same company – and policy holders and named drivers are on each policy for each car, should even one of these drivers have an accident for which they are at fault, all cars and all drivers suffer an increase in insurance – on average, in this case about £90 per car for a minor accident. Moreover, should one party wish to switch to a different insurer, information is cross-referenced, and insurance still increased.
As my insurers explained: ‘The insurance follows the person... not the car.’
In addition, insurance, its brokers and its nomenclature is very complicated.
Even opting to have only one driver per car, incurs a further increase some £53 per year (no claims bonus driving notwithstanding) Legally, this may not be wrong... but is it morally right? I do not dispute that insurance companies need to make a reasonable profit, and we appreciate their courteous members of staff but where else in law is the innocent punished along with the guilty? Where is the discretion for truthful disclosure and years of loyal payment on several cars?
IA CORR
Greyabbey, Co Down
Live and let live
When I was growing up in Kilrea most people used the term ‘Derry’ when referring to the Maiden City but if the term ‘Londonderry’ was used few blinked an eye.
However when unionists began to make this a political issue the population divided: Catholics referring to ‘Derry’ and the majority of Protestants insisting on ‘Londonderry’ and so there was the great divide which still challenges advertisers today.
Will they use the term Derry, Londonderry, L/derry or, as some banks did, print cheque books with both versions to please the needs of their individual customers!
The term ‘Northern Ireland’ has been lived with and for most people they haven’t made a political issue of it, that is until Arlene Foster decided to stamp her authority on the matter by tweeting that there is no such place as ‘the North of Ireland’.
Now, just as was the case with Derry or Londonderry the population will divide thanks to the stupidity of Ms Foster’s silly tweet. From now on people will be categorised by how they refer to this piece of earth and that is a big step back into the past when much more offensive terms were used such as ‘the six counties’ or indeed ‘the occupied six counties’.
Arlene needs to understand she is only First Minister as the result of the Belfast or Good Friday Agreement and can only remain in a position of power for as long as she desists from plunging us back into a past which served no-one and failed everyone.
For me, I have checked my passport and it is Irish and my allegiance remains to the president of Ireland. That is my position but I don’t impose it on anyone else. If Arlene has a British passport and owes her allegiance to the queen that is her business and I won’t question it. Live and let live.
JOHN DALLAT
Kilrea, Co Derry
