Donal McKeown
Catholic Bishop, Northern Ireland
  

The Northern Ireland conflict has been the longest continuous period of civil strife in Europe during the 20th century. However, since the ceasefires of the mid 1990�s and the ongoing transformation of an armed struggle into a political conflict, we have had an experience of relative peace that we did not know for almost thirty years. And in a small community of little over 1.5 million people, such a conflict was not just painful but brutal and often fratricidal. Few families were not touched by what we sometimes just call the �Troubles�.

The Problem?

And what of the role of the Churches, of believers, in that conflict and during that period of conflict? Like most conflicts between humans, conflicts are hard to describe in simple terms. Many have the impression that it was primarily a struggle between Catholics and Protestants, all of whom - for some strange reason, incomprehensible in modern Europe � seem to want to fight and kill each other. That simplistic interpretation, widespread in the media (�Protestant terrorists� �Catholic gunmen� etc) may have suited the British Government � because successive governments were happy to suggest that the two communities were fighting each other in Northern Ireland, and they were trying to bring peace. Such an understanding of the Troubles is, I believe, inaccurate and unhelpful. And if the diagnosis of the problem is inaccurate, then the proposed cure will probably be of little effect.

So how do I analyse the problem?

Firstly, a friend of mine, of Presbyterian background, gave me a most useful analysis many years ago. He said that there were three �theologies� of the Troubles � and I believe that it might be useful in examining many conflict situation throughout the world.

1. The �status quo� theology. If only all those nasty terrorists could be got rid of, we could get back to the nice little country that we could have.

2. The �reconciliation� theology. If only we could get all those people from ghetto areas away somewhere where they could get to know each other, they would come home and stop fighting.

3. The �prophetic� theology. What is it about the structures of power in our little society that seems to need, thrive on, encourage conflict? Who is benefiting from division and conflict that has lasted for four centuries? It is rarely those who are involved in riots and confrontations and who have sent many years in prison.

I favour this third approach. It does not seek to label other people out there and blame them for causing us trouble. It asks how all of us, and all of our structures, are complicit in the conflict.

And secondly, I believe that while religion and religious identity have played a key role in our divided society, the core conflict is, I believe, not theological but political. I see the primary divide that runs through the heart of Northern Ireland as being between those who see themselves as British, and those who see themselves as Irish. It is primarily a question of a society that cannot agree on its relationships with the southern part of the island of Ireland, and with the big island east of us. In the context of that crisis of identity, all sorts of issues have been brought in to play. Religion, culture, language, sport � these have all been proxy weapons in the struggle between those forces that want (or fear) a united Ireland or the continuing links between Northern Ireland and Britain. And in such a conflict, the role of the British Government was not that of impartial referee, but that of a party to the conflict. If anyone doubts that, then they need only look at the Good Friday Agreement (April 1998) which sought to involve all the main political parties, and the British and Irish governments. There was no need to bring the churches into this Agreement. After all, they weren�t parties to the conflict!!

The result has been that we have had two main communities in Northern Ireland, labelled in shorthand as being Catholic or Protestant. And while religious identity has consistently been used as powerful tools to keep those two communities distinct, they have actually differed, not so much on the basis of irreconcilable theological problems, but rather on deep cultural grounds. Thus, in the 1950s, I grew up in the Catholic/Nationalist community in what was a mainly Protestant/ unionist town. Certainly, many of our neighbours were not members of that community. And, even if we went to different churches and schools we played together. But when it came to getting a passport, we invariably sought an Irish rather than a British one. I grew up with a clear interest in the Irish language and in Gaelic sports. For our holidays, we mainly went to the Republic. Yes, we also belonged to the Catholic parish, but that was simply part of our identity in what was almost a state within a state. Like every conflict, our conflict was to do with power - rather than the Bible.

So it is clear that religion did play a large part in our identities. There was a use of a language that spoke about truth and untruth, about the saved and unsaved, about boundaries that should not be crossed. As in much of Europe, we did not enter each other�s churches, even for funerals or other public functions. Mixed marriages were discouraged. Religious identity and certainties underlined and strengthened the clear divisions that existed. The Gospel was not much invoked in the service of reconciliation, understanding and bridge-building. We lived in two separate communities � even if people, especially in small towns, worked and shopped together. But there were limits to the relationships that could be considered.

Then in the late 1960s, when the Nationalist minority began to talk about civil rights, the language of religion was even more stridently used to underline the divisions, to copper-fasten belonging, to point out the �good-ies� and �bad-ies�. So much of our identity has been what has been called a �negative identity� I belong here because I don�t belong to the other crowd.

The �Troubles�

So during the period of the Troubles � as well as before them � the Churches, through their formal structures and members, played a number of roles.

Firstly, many clergy and others did heroic work in ministering to the victims of civil conflict. For, in the words of the Irish dramatist, Sean O�Casey, �it is not the gunmen who are dying for the people, but the people who are dying for the gunmen�. The areas most hard hit by the conflict were inevitably the poorest areas. In some parts of Belfast, one in eight men are now ex-convicts, mainly sentenced for crimes of violence. Those parts of the country were also the ones where most people were killed and injured. Clergy and people of faith have done tremendous work for their own communities, in terms both of ministering to the sick and articulating the concerns of theses communities. Yes, they have also been caricatured as merely chaplains to conflicting armies. Yes, churches were often non unhappy that the civil strife made for reasonably full churches and for status for clergy. Yes, some church people were happy to justify either the reasons for conflict, or even the use of violence itself. But I believe that the contribution of believers deserves to be acknowledged.

Secondly, many people of faith have also been heavily involved in seeking to bring peace where others preferred fighting. I do believe that, had it not been for the presence of real people of deep faith, and the reality of some faith dimension in most people�s lives, our conflict would have much worse. Many religious leaders repeatedly spoke about the evil of violence that solves nothing but only creates more victims and bitterness. Thus, paramilitary bodies would have sometimes used religious bodies to support their cause, but just as often they clashed with those, who because of their faith condemned violence and sought to bring reconciliation. Those who organise wars generally want victory, not reconciliation.

Thirdly, while the church leaders have be seen as working together and there have been numerous examples of local clergy meeting and praying

Fourthly, because of the conflict, many politicians refused to talk to one another. But during almost all of the troubles, church leaders and church members talked and were seen together publicly. All the main political parties got into discussions a mere six years ago. For 30 years church personnel have sought to provide channels of communication and witness when others preferred to ostracize and demonise their opponents. Many such people attended funerals and visited houses outside their own community, and often despite accusations of betrayal from those who would have preferred to use labels that kept people apart. People of prophetic theological convictions tried to bring the Bible to bear on the struggle. But they did not just speak of right and wrong � because we had enough people who loved to condemn others and justify themselves. They also tried to bring into the discussion such biblical terms as

� forgiveness, when others demanded justice

� healing, when others sought victory

� peace, when others preferred confrontation

Politicians, now that they are talking, are quite happy to push the churches aside, and claim centre stage for themselves, or even to blame religion for the conflict. But much of the groundwork for what we have called out Peace Process was laid by people of faith who kept building bridges and taking courageous steps. That should never be underestimated. It can certainly be argued that, while religion may have been part of the conflict, religious faith saved the conflict from being worse or lasting even longer. But, as churches, we have much need for reflection on our past and present role. In a much more secular age, when churches are struggling with rapidly declining membership, we need to do more than just try to defend our position and our prestige.

Fifthly, we have to face the reality that our education system is divided on a mainly denominational basis. Most schools are state schools or Catholic-managed schools. There is also a small so-called �integrated� sector with a smaller number of Irish language schools. Until now, the �integrated� sector � which educates about 5% of all pupils � has claimed pride of place as being the ay forward. But if we are to wait for these schools to change society � we will have a long wait! All types of schools have to ensure that reconciliation is an outcome of what the young people learn and experience during their education. I believe that we do need to provide far more opportunities for pupils from different backgrounds to study together. But there is more than one model of how that can be done, and all of these models are entitled to state their case! There is

� the �integrated� model, which seeks to bring people from both communities together in one school. Academic research is unclear about the actual effectiveness of this model is creating reconciliation.

� the secular model which says that all identities and religion should be kept out of schools completely. Some countries have this model.

� the denominational/faith-based/Catholic school (much sought after in many countries) which is open to people of all backgrounds. We already have a number of Catholic schools with large numbers of others, and even one with a Presbyterian principal, who is very committed to Catholic education.

I do believe that plurality of provision � and thus real choice for parents � can actually offer us a healthy set of resources to find new ways forward. Simple solutions rarely offer much!

The Future

So what role can the churches, and people of faith, play in the current situation? We are, I hope, in a post-conflict situation and we have to build some sort of shared future, whatever the relationships might be between Northern Ireland and both Britain and Ireland. For we have to remember that this identity crisis has not yet been resolved in a definitive way. There are still those who believe that only solution is in a united Ireland and that NI is unsustainable as a political entity outside of that framework. There are others who wish to copper-fasten the British identity of NI and will seek political arrangements that ensure majority rule. These two perspectives are represented by what are currently the two largest political parties � Dr Paisley�s Democratic Unionist Party, and Sinn F�in.

So I will share some thoughts that I have already, in another forum, shared with a group of senior figures from various church backgrounds.

1. In a time of comparative powerlessness, one of the temptations for religious � and not so religious - people is to seek solace in a spirituality that emphasises withdrawal from the world. We have seen an abundance of small groupings, which seek complete certainty from which nothing will budge them. However, the NT message is one that is centred on the scandal of the Incarnation � and the struggle to accept the Word made flesh, Emmanuel, God with us, born of a woman, born subject the Law (Gal 4:4) has continued through Christian history. It means engaging with the pain and fragility of the world that God loved so much that he sent his only Son (Jn 3:16). For Jesus it meant engaging with the Samaritan woman, the leper, Zacchaeus and the cross. Just as Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Amos had to make space for grace in the politics and business worlds of their day, and Paul argued on the Aeropagus (AA 17: 23-34) and with the silversmiths in Ephesus (AA 19: 23-41), so we have to engage with the reality of division, sectarianism and political horse-trading. Witnessing to the Good News is no simple business. The role of the prophet was both antithetical - critical of his contemporaries - and confident to dialogue. We have no choice in when we are called upon to proclaim it where people are. And the harder the circumstances, the more the transforming grace of Jesus is needed! The Good News has to be proclaimed to all creation. Escapism is not part of the Gospel.

2. However, though that mission may give us energy, whatever we do we do it as individuals and as Churches, we are all too aware that we are earthenware vessels holding a treasure (2 Cor 4:7). That applies to individuals and to church structures. It applies in the context of our past failures. Of course, the mystery of God�s love is that the incarnate God works through frail humans and a church that is still marked by the sin of Adam. God loved us while we were still sinners. (Rom 5:8) For that reason, we can are not scandalised when the churches are shown up as being less than perfect. We are still on the Exodus march out of slavery. After all, it is Christ who is �our wisdom, our virtue our holiness and our freedom� (1 Cor 1:30).

3. And if a core message of the NT is the mission to preach with confidence in the Spirit, the broader message of the OT contains another important refrain. That points to the reality that God�s people have constantly gone astray and need to be humbled, brought back to God�s ways. While we can lament the weakness of church language today, and react at our detractors, we also need to start with the first words that Jesus speaks in Matthew�s Gospel �Repent� (Mt 4:17) When Shimei cursed David as he fled Jerusalem during Absalom�s rebellion, the king accepted the rebuke for this may have been God�s way to humble him (cf 2 Sam 16:5-14). Only a church that knows ongoing repentance and the Lord�s transforming forgiveness is entitled to preach it. That liberating transforming repentance lies at the heart of the Easter experience for Peter, Thomas and the other disciples. God works through those who let themselves be remade by the potter (cf Jer 18), rather than by those who consider themselves invaluable Ming vases.

4. And where do we need to operate with a humbled, contrite heart (Ps 50/51:17), and with confidence? In Northern Ireland, we have to live with the reality of a divided society. We can assert, quite correctly, that the conflict is mainly political rather than religious. Deep down we are aware than the blatant sectarian confrontations are not our core problem. It is clear that the potential for sectarianism is close to the surface in any divided society, and that that potential can be readily encouraged and exploited by all sorts of power blocs � some in baseball caps, some in pinstriped suits, and some in clerical garb. The secondary tumour of naked sectarianism is a symptom of confused allegiances, rather than the primary illness. But, if want to see the world through the eyes of the Creator and the redeemer, we know that we cannot be satisfied with being comfortably divided, with a �benign apartheid�, and moan about politicians and structures. We know that �systemic sectarianism� affects us all in different ways. And that needs repentance and active work.

Of course, we know that local church communities cannot engineer major ecumenical breakthroughs. But ecumenism should not be confused with community relations. Can people of faith say that a prime priority for all Christian communities here is the building up of confidence and trust? Are we known for positive, energising gestures to lower tension and bear witness to Christian love? Are we working to lower barriers or just waiting for politicians or the grace of God to work miracles? Are we a prophetic voice that examines the causes of conflict and seeks to remove them? Or are we happy just to be conscious of our increasing weakness and blame others? After all, being in positions of power and close to the levers of power can be a hindrance, rather than a help, when we are needed to play a prophetic role. Powerlessness may rarely be pleasant, but it is not always a bad thing in the service of the Gospel. Unfortunately, I am afraid that it is precisely many of our church communities � for whatever understandable reasons - that are lacking in enthusiasm or even downright hostile when it comes to the breaking down some of our barriers, and reconciling us with God. (cf Eph 2:16-17) While we may know where people are coming from, our role as Church leaders cannot allow us to shrug our shoulders. We seek to build a society where politics are moulded by Christian values. Than means understanding justice, forgiveness, reconciliation and love in God�s terms. We may often have allowed our Christianity to be moulded by political values. That is taking the Incarnation much too far.

5. I know that churches do deserve much credit for their involvement in building social cohesion and developing community projects. That work should never be underestimated, however much the new ideology might want to sideline us and reinterpret history. I understand, too, that church people are very stretched in their dedication to serving their communities. But we also have to stop and ask an important question. Are we busy doing good things, or are we busy doing what we believe the Lord has called us to be doing? Busyness doing good things can get in the way of seeking the Lord�s priorities. As Christian bodies, we need to be constantly examining our projects in the light of the NT. If we are too busy to prioritise reconciliation, are we too busy? If we are busy but not really engaging with the half of the population that is under c.30, have we failed to transform ourselves? Only a transformed people can be agents of transformation.

Conclusion

We have a very complex society, with no agreed view of history or of the way forward. In an increasingly secular age, religion and people of faith may feel that they are the new outcasts, blamed for the past, pilloried for their failings and without a contribution to make in the future. But where we are now presents us with a challenge to bring the light of the Gospel to bear on the specific circumstances that we live in � just as people have had to do after wars on the European mainland and elsewhere.

Firstly, we have the opportunity to create a society where people are able to see difference as an enrichment for all of us rather than as a threat. Indeed, as even our little country becomes increasingly multi-cultural, with the arrival of people from different nations and religions, we have the chance to celebrate the great diversity of God�s people and God�s creation. We would be serving no purpose if we got over our own conflict but became xenophobic! Can we find ways of building up the healthy sense of identity that protects people against loneliness and against exploitation by other economic and social forces � and still ensure that we can have a shared future?

Secondly, people of faith, who believe in the God who reconciled the world to himself in Jesus, can have a key role to play in generating reconciliation. Stories need to be told and heard, people�s pain needs to be listened to � and the energy needs to be generated to move them beyond the victim status that some political forces have exploited, in order to exploit situations. We have to find way to received from the past � but forgetting the past is not part of that process. Forgiveness, healing, grace, resurrection � these are all key scriptural terms and we have to be open to how God wishes to speak to us today. The churches are there to serve the Kingdom of God and not to be served!

Thirdly, the churches are challenged to model the good relations that we seek from others in our society. We may complain that politicians have either taken over our key role in community, or have failed to engage seriously themselves. We need to ensure that our inter-church relations respect each other�s real differences � but still work to be examples of the Gospel spirit in action.

Fourthly, we face and proclaim the reality that much apparent reconciliation can be cosmetic. Thus, in an improving economic situation, successful people from whatever political, denominational or national background can work together very well. And that can benefit us all in terms of prosperity. But we also live with the reality of a society where the weaker sections of society can be forgotten or blamed in the rush to enjoy new-found economic growth. There is no value in replacing so-called religious sectarianism with social sectarianism. A society without widespread solidarity and social cohesion is an unhealthy society � and is no guarantee of a shared future.

Northern Ireland has had a unique history. But many of the core problems are to be found elsewhere. We have the opportunity to create a uniquely successful model of a reconciled and diverse society. The churches and people of faith are keen to be involved in that process. We value your ongoing support and encouragement in this work.