No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2024
Before examining Mr Allen’s particular criticisms of the CIIR Comment 19 on the Middle East, it is necessary first to dispel some of his misconceptions about the Catholic Institute. Through its regular newsbrief Comment CIIR gives the background to particular situations, usually international in character and examines them in the light of Catholic social teaching and values. In this way CIIR attempts to bring to the attention of the Catholic community in this country international issues of justice and peace which are quite properly their concern. Where the role of the Catholic Church is integral to the discussion, this is examined —for example, recent Comments on Portuguese Africa, Brazil and Chile. It is true that in Comment we do not quote extensively from official Church sources; rather we make references to these as necessary. As a Catholic body, we give a Catholic view, but it is only a Catholic view. Perhaps Mr Allen would care to specify where he feels the Comment is uncatholic or unchristian?
Quoting from an article in the Tablet of 15th June 1974, Mr Allen criticises our ‘selective approach to complex problems’. The article went on to say :
‘But the CIIR never deals in trivialities or at a superficial level, and one must expect and respect some biassed passion where big issues are at stake. Indeed we would like to see CIIR’s crusading zeal extended to all that vast area of the globe under the domination of Soviet Russia where all values that it stands for are more blatantly and brutally disregarded than anywhere else’.
It seems that CIIR is being criticised not for what it does say but rather for what it has not. Whilst some may consider it a valid criticism of the CIIR that in recent years it has not produced anything on the persecution of Christians in communist countries, such criticism in no way invalidates what it has already said on Northern Ireland, Portugal or the Middle East.