Funeral of Pope Francis
Sir, – It is rare that I agree with the opinion pieces of your columnist Justine McCarthy but she hits the nail on the head (“World leaders will make a holy show of themselves”, Opinion, April 25th) when calling out the hypocrisy of the supposed great and good burning up the air miles to attend the funeral of a man who ignored most of the trappings of his office.
The waste of taxpayers’ money involved in having our supposed socialist President, his wife, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste grates at a time of economic trouble. Surely one of them could have represented the nation and lead by example rather than indulge in ego trips? – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL FLYNN,
Bayside,
‘In Turkey, on public transport, you should be very quiet. I was shocked by the behaviour in Ireland’
Want an airport upgrade? Getting business class seats or valet parking doesn’t have to break the bank
Opinion: Warning labels will speak a plain truth: alcohol causes huge amounts of illness and death in Ireland
Look inside: Extended Peter Pan-inspired four-bed in Delgany for €1.15m
Dublin.
Sir. – Why did the RTÉ commentators spoil the Funeral Mass of Pope Francis by insisting on talking over all the wonderful music from the Vatican Choir? Thankfully, the BBC coverage was more sensitive and allowed all to hear the beautiful choral music which was an integral part of the solemn ceremony. – Yours, etc,
ROBIN HEATHER,
Wicklow Town,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – In much of the conservative and liberal commentary on Pope Francis and the papacy, many Catholics see a lack of discernment of the difference between compassion and approval. Indeed, Francis’s meeting in his last suffering with United State vice-president JD Vance, whose misinterpretation of Catholic teaching Francis had strongly contradicted, can be seen as a demonstration of his compassionate openness without approval.
In the Gospel incident of the woman caught in adultery, we are given a warning against self-righteousness and lack of compassion and also of the necessity to recognise our own faults. Those rushing to condemnation are shamed but the message is not just to them. When Jesus says to the woman “Neither do I condemn you”, he also says to her “Go and do no more harm”.
Together, these words represent Christ’s challenge to us to live a life of genuine, considered and unselfish love.
As acknowledged by Francis, both the late pope and the saint of Assisi, every one of us falls short of this ideal at some time. God asks us, also, to acknowledge our own failures but he encourages us to keep trying. – Yours, etc,
LIAM MULLIGAN,
Letterkenny,
Co Donegal.
Not naming the children’s hospital
Sir, – Please can we refrain from a series of impassioned letters making the case for the naming rights to the national children’s hospital? Paid for handsomely by the taxpayer, let’s keep the title neutral. There will be no other big children’s hospital in Dublin so the argument for a distinguishing name is unnecessary. In fact, given that there is a well-known children’s charity that incorporates the surname of Dr Kathleen Lynn, Senator Victor Boyhan’s suggestion (Letters, April 25th) is likely to cause confusion. – Yours, etc,
DAVID LOUGHLIN,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
Sir – Recently I became aware of the life and work of the late Dr Kathleen Lynn. In the article I read “St Ultans Hospital” was mentioned, which alerted me to the hospital name. It brought me back some 60 years when I attended there for my baby son’s vaccinations – it was the Dublin venue for such vaccinations at the time. I remember it as a very old building with creaky doors etc.
What now amazes me is that I did not realise at the time that I was walking in the footsteps of Dr Kathleen Lynn who had founded the hospital and was the pioneer of early paediatric care in Ireland. Paediatric care in Ireland was transformed as a result.
It is interesting to note that at the commencement of her fundraising for the project, she had £20 in the bank and two cots! I cannot think of a more appropriate name for the new children’s hospital. – Yours, etc,
MARY RIGNEY,
Dublin 18.
Degree adverbs
Sir, – Frank McNally’s comments about the social identity of words like “frightfully” and “ghastly” (Irishman’s Diary, April 25th) reminded me of a Punch cartoon of the 1920s in which, on a blazing summer’s day, two perspiring society ladies meet. One says to the other “My dear, isn’t this too too beautiful weather just too too ghastly for words”. – Yours, etc,
MILES PARKER,
Royston
England.
Teachers’ benefits
Sir, – I have read with interest your paper’s reporting from the annual teacher union conferences. I have no doubt that teaching is both a rewarding and challenging profession, with the latter discussed at length at these conferences. The public are generally empathetic and recognise the hard work and important role teachers have in society.
I note one item that does not appear to have been discussed is the generous benefits a teacher receives as part of their overall remuneration package. A permanent teacher has a good incremental salary scale, a defined benefit pension, career break options and long holidays. Teachers also have a decent sick-pay scheme, 90 days’ full pay, 90 days’ half pay over a rolling four-year period.
But what came out of the conferences this week is that teachers are not happy with the scheme and want even more paid sick pay. At a time when plans to extend sick pay for other workers has been delayed by the Government, together with a looming tariff war that would have negative consequences for people’s jobs and the country’s finances, teachers expressing dissatisfaction with their sick leave scheme just makes them appear completely out of touch with the wider economic reality this country is facing.
Why do teachers think taxpayers should pick up the tab for their sick pay beyond what they currently have? Have none of them heard of income protection? As talks of potential strikes are discussed once again this is one issue I cannot see the public supporting teachers on. – Yours, etc,
SIOBHAN McDERMOTT,
Killester,
Dublin 5.
Women and trans rights
Sir, – Admittedly I read every opinion piece by Michael McDowell with a sense of annoyed irritation, but his views on trans people as per his opinion piece on April 23rd (“There is no ‘right’ to subvert women’s freedom to have their own events and spaces”) was really objectionable.
He uses the word “trans” 10 times and on nine of those accompanies the word with either “ideological” or “activist”. Try replacing “trans” with “gay” to see why this is so aggravating. The vast majority of human beings are heterosexual, some aren’t, for some the concept of gender doesn’t work, some want to switch – so what?
Eighty-five thousand women are murdered every year around the world by men, but this, to the best of my knowledge, has never been the subject of an article in The Irish Times by the otherwise erudite Mr McDowell.
Instead, he conjures up a six-foot three trans woman who wants to play rugby with women as being somehow a more important threat.
It is important to point out that trans people are the target of horrendous violence.
Mr McDowell seems to think that gender dysphoria is a regrettable but solvable psychiatric problem – again replace trans with gay to see how offensive this is.
Of course there are spaces (domestic violence shelters for example) that should be limited in who they accept but this is an argument for more diverse facilities not a demand for exclusion.
Heterosexual people demonstrate a lack of confidence in their own identity when they demand that everyone conform. Mr McDowell’s ill-informed diatribe pushes us backward. – Yours, etc,
DAVID KAVANAGH,
Harold’s Cross,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – Des Crowley misses the point in his letter today (Women and trans rights, April 25th). The bar for women’s lives is not set at the avoidance of intimate partner violence or increased engagement in sport.
We set the bar at full participation in all walks of life, confident that our safety and dignity will be respected in our single sex spaces, whether they be public toilets, changing rooms, services, refuges or prisons; and that our rights to fair and safe participation in sport be protected through the provision of a single sex women’s category where we cannot only engage, but win.
Women are not the problem and issues faced by people who identify as trans are not to be resolved by shoehorning biological males into women’s spaces and women’s categories. – Yours, etc,
SHEENA McAFEE
Dublin 6.
