Madam, - Some people have referred to the new Pope as God's Rottweiler.
I prefer German Shepherd. - Is mise,
BREANDÁN Ó LOINGSIGH, Wyattville Park, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.
Madam, -I cannot speak for feminists, but I believe that John Waters (Opinion, April 25th) misses the whole point of why most people object to the sort of rhetoric on women used by Popes John Paul and Benedict. It is, quite simply, the assumption that women are disqualified form holding Priestly office by virtue of their being different.
You can argue for the differences between men and women all you like; indeed you can praise women to the skies if you wish. But the fact is that all men and all women do not conform to any one stereotype of supposed masculine or feminine virtues. We have much in common, and we are all different; but why are half of us excluded from full participation on an equal basis because of some arbitrarily ascribed "virtues"? - Yours, etc.,
FRANK SCHNITTGER, Red Lane, Blessington, Co Wicklow.
Madam, - Isn't it wonderful that so many people, without training or experience, feel qualified to tell the Pope how to do his job? - Yours, etc.,
MARGARET BUTLER, St Helen's Road, Booterstown, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Although this generation knows that homosexual people do not choose their sexual orientation, it is unrealistic to expect Catholic teaching on homosexuality to change overnight. But this will happen - sooner rather than later, one hopes. What Pope Benedict XVI could do immediately is to apologise for the pain caused by insensitive language in Church documents.
The last major document on homosexuality, published in 1986, was signed by him as Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. It contains offensive statements that were unnecessary in explicating the teaching.
Most people are aware of the reference to homosexuality as "intrinsically evil". "Intrinsically evil" is a technical phrase used in relation to sexual acts which are non-reproductive. Masturbation and artificial methods of birth control are also spoken of as "intrinsically evil".
But how many people know this and how often is the phrase simply latched on to in order to justify homophobic tendencies? Apart from the theological unsoundness of the concept of intrinsically evil acts, to refrain in future from using such language and to apologise for hurt already caused would go some way towards healing deep wounds inflicted by those who are the representatives of Jesus Christ. - Yours, etc.,
ÁILÍN DOYLE, Balkill Road, Howth, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Regarding Pope Benedict XVI and the subject of homosexuality, in the then Cardinal Ratzinger's "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons", published in 1986, he wrote as follows:
"It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the subject of violent malice in speech or action".
There is no evidence to suggest that at any time he ever held a different view. - Yours, etc.,
BRENDA O'HANRAHAN, Park Lane, Sandymount, Dublin 4.
Madam, - On reading Mary Raftery's column (Opinion, April 21st) I was astounded that the cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church should have met and recklessly chosen a leader, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, without calling upon the undoubted infallibility of Ms Raftery.
Indeed it beggars belief that the collective infallibility of the Irish Times Hierarchy was totally ignored. Surely somebody must be held accountable for this glaring omission. - Yours, etc.,
DECLAN MORIARTY, Wheatfield Close, Rowlagh, Dublin 22.
Madam, - It should come as no surprise to us that the new Pope is a conservative hard-liner. After all, the Roman Catholic church is the most conservative institution you could imagine. My guess would be that most Catholics, in this country at any rate, will continue to practise what many of them have been practising for years - "à la carte Catholicism".
This practice, which is decried by their church, essentially means being a Catholic by name but in practical terms living the life of a liberal Protestant. I suppose it's another Irish solution to an Irish problem: call yourself a Catholic but don't go to Mass too often, don't bother about confession, practice contraception, agree with divorce and so on.
What puzzles me is why more people don't simply chose another religion that fits their philosophy more comfortably. It could be argued that the new Pope will do an excellent job in swelling the numbers in other churches.
Alternatively, if people are non-religious and want to be part of an organisation which promotes an ethical life-stance that places human values at the centre of its philosophy, they should consider becoming a Humanist. - Yours, etc.,
BRIAN WHITESIDE, Adelaide Road, Glenageary, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Gina Menzies is described (Opinion and Analysis, April 22nd) as "a theologian and a critic". She is certainly no historian. Her claim that the "last century was the first time the church...condemned the death penalty" is wrong by a margin of 800 years. The death penalty was roundly condemned by canon 18 of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215.
Moreover, the inspiration for the Church's long-standing antipathy to all forms of blood punishment, including the death penalty, did not come from the human sciences, as Ms Menzies supposes, but from her own discipline of theology. The decisive argument had to do with the risk to the immortal soul believed to be associated with the shedding of human blood. Although this was a theological argument developed by the Latin fathers of late antiquity, it was taken up by the canon lawyers of the 12th and 13th centuries, who made it the cornerstone of the new concept of voluntary homicide.
Because the medieval canonists defined the mortal sin of homicide as including all forms of negligent and unjustified killing (as well as otherwise lawful killings done with an improper motive), Pope Innocent III, who convened the Fourth Lateran Council, decided that the only safe course was to ban priestly involvement in any procedure, whether judicial or surgical, which entailed the risk of wrongful killing thus defined, thereby effectively bringing to an end the centuries-old practice of trial by fire and water and inaugurating the Church's long and honourable association with an enlightened penology of rehabilitation.
With all due respect to Ms Menzies, it is depressing, if sadly predictable, to learn that theological studies in the modern age do not appear to include an appreciation of the enduring contribution to legal civilisation made by the Catholic theologians and canon lawyers of the medieval period.
Is it any wonder that the new pontiff, himself a distinguished theologian, seems to view the blinding certainties of its practitioners with modified rapture? - Yours etc.,
Prof FINBARR McAULEY, Faculty of Law, UCD, Dublin 4.