What's in an apology?
David Cameron's apology for Bloody Sunday has struck a deep nerve in Northern Ireland.
Nationalists embraced it, even cheered him in their thousands as they listened to his speech.
The heartfelt nature of the apology, the fact that it came after an exhaustive investigation and Cameron's straightforward declaration that the British Army had done grievous wrong made the apology utterly acceptable.
Contrast it with the Pope Benedict's apology for the rampant child child sex abuse carried out by many Irish priests which he also delivered to the Irish people.
The response was lukewarm to say the least. Unlike Cameron who showed with both words and deed that he was serious, Pope Benedict was clearly attempting a damage limitation exercise rather than directly confronting the massive problem his church had created.
The Irish public saw through that and opinion polls revealed them as very skeptical of the pope's words.
The difference is that most Irish firmly believe that the church is still hiding much of the abuse and are refusing to hold any further inquiries.
The British government on the other hand spent $300 million on an exhaustive investigation and spent 12 years documenting every possible aspect of what happened on Bloody Sunday.
So apologies have to be accompanied by good deeds, what Aristotle called acts of good authority.
Likewise with BP, we see the apology of the chairman for the Louisiana oil spill but no acts of good authority to accept blame or put things right until they were absolutely forced to.
Like Cameron, previous British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a public apology to the Irish people, that time for the Irish Famine and Britain's shameful neglect at the time.
That too was seen as a great act , because Blair had shown with his work on the peace process that he was utterly committed to solving the Irish question.
Strange to say, but the pope and BP could learn a lot from David Cameron and Tony Blair about how to apologize and mean it.
24 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.barneyjo | Jun 26, 2010, 09:56 AM EDT
George G; not in Ireland; the land of Saints and Scholars. The Churches are both "Empty" and "Emptying", and that is only one country. If you want to talk in terms of percentages thats fine; your perception is not mine. I watched Belgian Police enter the palace of the Catholic Bishop of Brussels as part of their on-going investigation into Clerical abuse. I heard the anguish of parents in the Favellas in Brazil as they recalled the anguish of discovery that their children had been abused by priests.I heard the personal account of Marie Collins, an Irish Survivor of Abuse, and of the ultimate ruination of her life. I dont care if you talk in terms of telephone numbers in relation to how many swell the ranks of Catholocism the world over; and remember, the Dam has only recently burst. I only know what our lord said "A House divided against itself cannot stand" The Catholic Church will survive, but as a Universal Church as the very name Catholic should imply. Oh, and I do get out and about quite a lot; no blinkered vision here!!
georgeG | Jun 25, 2010, 10:41 AM EDT
BarneyJo: few faithful? Are you joking? You must try to get out more often and stop watching the television! There are over 1 Billion catholics in the world. Even if only 30% of the Billion are faithful to the teaching, that's the same as the population of the USA (300Mil) and three times the number of people who vote democrat in the USA. Don't confuse media and political power with actual numbers!
Sparklet | Jun 24, 2010, 02:43 PM EDT
DennisQ, we have more in common than I thought. :)
DennisQ | Jun 24, 2010, 03:14 AM EDT
We have terrorism because we make all-or-nothing demands on other people. To hear some Americans talk, we're the only righteous people on the planet. When we kill their civilians by the hundreds, even thousands, they should understand that we're acting in their best interests. I'm amazed at the number of Americans who are surprised when foreigners don't see things that way.
Sparklet | Jun 23, 2010, 01:47 AM EDT
I dont think the British Government is innocent inasmuch as they should have ensured that the Catholics had civila rights in the first place. I don't think they intended the army to kill indiscriminately. I could never be anti a nation based on its Government - that's why we have terrorism on such a large scale today, and it's terrifying to think where that could lead.
DennisQ | Jun 22, 2010, 07:03 PM EDT
It takes some effort to exculpate the American government for the behavior of American soldiers, especially when there's no effort to learn about atrocities and punish those who commit them. Despite the Marine Corps' best efforts to cover up the massacre at Haditha, for example, it got out anyhow. But nobody has been convicted. Even after the well-documented and unforgivable massacre at My Lai, nobody went to prison.
barneyjo | Jun 22, 2010, 03:32 PM EDT
Poor GeorgeG. He still doesnt get it. The Catholic Church is doing enough already to be consigned to oblivion on its own, without outside interference. What is stopping that from happening is the efforts of the few faithful who still see and have hope that it can be the church it was meant to be guided by the spirit and not by human frailty. The Holy Father risks becoming part of the problem rather than the solution if he doesnt see that he has to lead his Church and flock nearer to God than farther away. The apology he made was inadequate, in keeping with the inept response to Clerical abuse issues which are coming to light across the world. The Holy Father, like all of us can always learn something new.
Sparklet | Jun 22, 2010, 11:47 AM EDT
DennisQ, a lot of things were done in less enlightened times. We could be here all day going over the bad things done by all parties. There may be documented facts about atrocities 100 years ago, but let's not enter the realms of fantasy in relation to today. If your theories are ever proven, fair enough. Until then, why stir things up more than they are already with assumptions. In July 2007 American soldiers massacred Iraqi civilians - men, woman and children. Was that ordered by the US Government?
DennisQ | Jun 22, 2010, 02:11 AM EDT
We're not talking about a civilized government; we're talking about the British. And they have indeed told its troops to murder innocent civilians. You might read up on the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in the Punjab in 1919. General Dyer was forced out of the Army after killing between 400 and 1,000 civilians, depending on whose figures you believe. A sympathetic British public thought that Dyer had gotten a raw deal and contributed 26,000 pounds to provide him a comfortable retirement. He never expressed regret for the massacre.
Searlit | Jun 21, 2010, 07:14 PM EDT
He apparently did the right thing seeing that the NI people were cheering him. Yes there were 800 years of atrocities, you can't change that. This is now, and we need to be present and accept what is. That is the way to heal.
Sparklet | Jun 21, 2010, 04:28 PM EDT
DennisQ, conspiracy theories are not remotely constructive. There are plenty of people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job. I don't believe that one any more than I believe for one minute that any civilised Government would tell its troops to murder innocent civilians. It would make more sense - if we're talking conspiracy - for the Brits to have blown up their own, and made it look like the IRA did it, not to show themselves in a totally bad light by killing innocent people.
georgeG | Jun 21, 2010, 03:06 PM EDT
What the pope says will never be good enough for Niall O'Dowd, Sinead O'Connor and their ilk. They are foolishly hoping for the downfall of the Roman Catholic Church (unless of course they abandon the Gospel and embrace homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc). Well, Niall, hate to clue you in, but you will be waiting a long time. You can't bring down the church founded by Jesus Christ through dishonest and sensationalist journalism, all so you and other sinners can feel better about the mistakes of your life. The Church be around to prick peoples' consciences long after the Brisish government and BP cease to exist. Now take a deep breath and get a grip.
DennisQ | Jun 21, 2010, 02:44 PM EDT
How do we know that the paratroopers acted on their own and weren't doing exactly what they were told to do? It seems possible that the Brits weren't prepared for the outrage that followed. We now know that Abu Ghraib wasn't simply a few bad apples, and attempts to blame Lynndie England tend to absolve the criminals higher up. Did the thugs who boarded the Mavi Marmara act on their own?
Godscre | Jun 21, 2010, 02:07 PM EDT
God will clean out His Church one way or the other.
irishwxman | Jun 21, 2010, 01:33 PM EDT
Good article Niall.
glorybe1929 | Jun 21, 2010, 11:54 AM EDT
The apologizies from all these people are one thing and the Pope is another. He happens to head the largest contingency of Religious Christians since the beginning of Christianity. For this church(?) to have committed so many atrocities since it's inception in the the beginning, is what no apology can affect. It is a faux church run by man(THE DEVIL) using the Lord Jesus Christ for it's own selfish purposes. They don't wish or want to apologize to anyone, as this is their "M O". Get it? You've been had by generational brainwashing. You know now, so get out while you still have your soul. Other wise you will be convicted of "driving the get-a-way-car in these "CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY"
Sparklet | Jun 21, 2010, 10:58 AM EDT
The wrongs of the past 800 years can never be put right. So people have to move on and make sure it never happens again. Bearing grudges against a whole nation is a waste of time and energy.
Derrylass627 | Jun 21, 2010, 10:17 AM EDT
To Georgedavis & Joanhugh, yes, the pope apologised but IT WAS LUKE WARM - HE CAME ACROSS AS NOT COMPLETELY FORTHCOMING! Cameron & Blair were sincere! Don't you get it? No one is anti-Catholic - the truth will set you free, but it may piss you off. Deal with it!
barneyjo | Jun 20, 2010, 09:10 PM EDT
David Cameron could do nothing less than he did. He would have been condemned in the Court of world opinion had he not acknowledged the findings of the Saville Commission in the way he did. Equally it is correct to say also that the difference between Cameron's apology and that of the Pope is stark.The litmus test of course is that the people of Derry did accept the apology proffered by a Conservative Primeminister in respect of Bloody Sunday. The Catholic Faithful of Ireland have roundly rejected the apology from the Pope in respect of Clerical Abuse. There were no signs of thousands gathered in the streets to cheer the Pontiff that I can recall.
KathyCallahan | Jun 20, 2010, 06:33 PM EDT
Cameron broke rank and I give him credit and my respect for that...He took a big step in the right direction...I can't help wondering if Cameron is half or a 1/4 Irish like Tony Blair...I bet he has a few great...emotional Irish back stories. Track them down... 2 many usurpers and colluders hell bent on keeping the Irish udown.
JamesMurphy | Jun 20, 2010, 05:49 PM EDT
Well, while I agree that Cameron apologized, as he should have, the country he represents is still an illegal occupier of a foreign nation. Let's not go overboard in eulogising him. As for the Church and its hierarchy, they are still in denial. What's needed is a radical house-cleaning in Rome, including an end to the centuries-old nonsense of refusing to allow priests to marry.
Joanhugh | Jun 20, 2010, 11:45 AM EDT
It was not child abuse (only 4%) it was homosexual activity with teenage boys(81%)...still wrong and illegal but not child abuse. Are you Irish? One English apology in 800 years of abuse and you praise it. You certainly are VERY anti Catholic
KathyCallahan | Jun 20, 2010, 09:21 AM EDT
Words and deeds must be in synch with emotions, tone of voice, gravity of the situation and timing of the apology. The Pope and BP don't pass the apology smell test. Hayward fell on his own sword otherwise known as, I am 2 big 2 fail. Obama also suffers imperceptibly from, 2 big 2 fail in the Gulf. A key component of 2 big 2 fail is duck and pass the buck. Not the buck stops here at bp or the holy see. Hayward showed no humility and shrugged off the hard and graceful work inherent in taking full responsibility. Last week Barack Obama, proclaimed, in the oval office, as if it was enough, "Let us pray" and passed the buck to god! All along the pope's actions reveal that he passed the buck to vatican attorneys, child crime victims and the Irish catholic Church. Hayward recklessly fumbled the buck because he is a
GeorgeDavis | Jun 20, 2010, 06:38 AM EDT
Is O'Dowd totally ignorant? How come he doesn't know that the Pope has already apologized several times? Read the newspaper, O'Dowd, not just your own mediocre columns!