Sir, - Is there to be no respite from the outpourings of the two O'Hanlons (Rory and David)? When I hear them on RTE or read their letters in The Irish Times, I feel grateful that they have no power. If they had power, I suspect that the ordinary, decent, honest, good-living people of Dublin would be shouting: "Come back, John Charles, all is forgiven".
As I recall, the subject of Rory's last letter to The Irish Times was the dimensions of our President's head-dress when she visited the Pope; stimulating stuff indeed. In his letter of March 16th, he revisits the issue of President Robinson's attire when she met the Pope. But surely this is David O'Hanlon's forte: I recall him pontificating ad nauseam on this subject. I think the colour of President Robinson's coat was his particular speciality. He also made some insulting remarks about her unsuitability for the position of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
As Rory is revisiting issues which have long been put to bed, I feel free to do likewise. One of my enduring recollections of the said Rory during the divorce referendum was his statement on television that "what God has joined together let no man put asunder". I have no doubt that when Rory O'Hanlon was practising his craft in the Four Courts, he was well capable of distinguishing between apparently similar but unidentical facts. Why, then, is he unable to distinguish between the sacrament of matrimony and a civil marriage? When Christ used the words quoted by Mr O'Hanlon, he was surely referring to what God has joined together in the sacrament of matrimony. The divorce referendum and subsequent legislation obviously dealt with civil marriages and were certainly not interfering with the sacrament. If two people have been joined together by the sacrament of marriage and subsequently obtain a State divorce, they are still bound in a religious context to their sacramental vows. So, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's.
But I mustn't forget David. During his recent performance on the Late Late Show, he displayed an arrogance and superciliousness towards his neighbour which is very difficult to square with the message of love towards one's neighbour preached by Christ. Indeed, he, as a curate, revealed excessive pride in dismissing the 11 senior churchmen who voted for a change in the Catholic Church's teaching on contraception during the Pontificate of Pope Paul VI. Surely they also read Genesis.
While I resolutely disagree with the two O'Hanlons, I, like Voltaire, would defend to the death their right to hold and express their views. It is the "hard sell" and intolerance I object to. - Yours, etc., Patrick A. McDonald,
Glenageary, Co Dublin.