The Portal April 2019 | Page 23

THE P RTAL April 2019 Page 23 Letters to the Editor From Andrew Bowyer I always read Fr Ashley Beck’s articles on Catholic social teaching with interest. However, one thing we converts from Anglicanism have brought with us - one of the valuable, if more intangible elements of Anglican patrimony, perhaps - is a healthy scepticism of clerics who seek to dress their personal opinions as doctrinal truths. Put simply: Brexit is not contrary to Catholic teaching. What the Catechism does acknowledge is the right of nations to self-determination. It is right and good that nations co-operate; but co-operation presupposes the wherewithal sovereignty to do so. It is not clear to me how an exclusive, self-serving, rich white men’s club such as the EU fulfils this part of the cardinal commandment to love one another. Brexit is an opportunity for horizons to be widened. Historically, the idolatrous worship of the state has been a problem of empires as much as of individual nations - arguably more so in the former case, because checks are fewer and power more remote. One has only to think of the Roman Imperium, the German Reich or the Soviet Union. The EU is similar in that it is essentially a techno-bureaucratic empire, with a huge democratic deficit at its heart. If we don’t like Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn, we can vote them out; we cannot do anything about Jean-Claude Juncker. Fr Beck acknowledges that the EU is not without fault. Well, yes, and an array of contenders of all nationalities and shades of political opinion will vouch for that - the bullying, the corruption and the lack of accountability (both political and financial) - plus the EU’s propensity for breaking its own rules when it suits.. It should be remembered that, if the referendum had been conducted on a constituency basis, there would have been a very comfortable pro-Brexit parliamentary majority of 168. This is because the Remain vote was concentrated in relatively few areas, whereas the Leave vote was far more widespread. What does this say? Fr Beck alludes to a racist appeal among benighted northern voters. Yet the elephant in the room - the upsurge in vile anti-Semitism - has not been among Brexit-supporting groups, and some of the concern about the free movement of Romanian criminal gangs has been among our law-abiding communities of Pakistani heritage. In sum: it is patronising nonsense to “explain” how the majority voted by ruling out principled decision. Imagine explaining the Remain vote as due to a concern for a continued supply of cheap labour, or one’s holiday home in the Dordogne. Condescending, isn’t it? I would not wish to be so dismissive - though, as the artist Grayson Perry has shown in his one-man show: the Remain map is very similar to that of areas boasting a Prêt à Manger! Andrew Bowyer Manchester Group Address supplied From Nicolas Olivant Is it possible with a good conscience to try to overthrow the result of the Brexit Referendum? As Catholics, we have to engage in the democratic process with care and thought. Making decisions based on misinformation and propaganda is clearly not consistent with our responsibilities as Catholics. In the matter of Brexit, there are clearly many contradictory opinions about the economic aspects of the process. This is no different from choosing governments in the course of a General Election. Each person has to vote according to his or her conscience. However, the other aspect of Brexit relates to the European Union and its policies, the so-called European Project. It is clear that the EU is a secular project totally divorced from any connection with the Catholic Church. The promotion of abortion and euthanasia, especially in Belgium and the Netherlands, is contrary to all teaching of the Catholic Church. In general, the EU promotes a social agenda which is almost always in conflict with the teachings of the Church. The negative social effects of very high youth unemployment in Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece cannot be said to be in any way in accordance with Catholic teaching. Of course, the British Government cannot be described as anything but secular in the most fundamental way. However, that does not seem to me to a good argument for supporting the aggressively secular aims of the European Project. Nicolas Olivant (By e-mail) The views expressed in these letters are not necessarily those of the Editors Letters for publication should be sent to: The Editors, T he P ortal , 56 Woodlands Farm Road, Birmingham B24 0PG [email protected]