HALF CENTURY LATER? HOW TIME FLIES!

I have been retired for several years, but I find I am often busier than I was prior to retirement.  That is what makes life so interesting.  For many people, when you retire you simply stop working - but what then?  A round of golf a couple of times a week?   Mow the lawn?  Read the papers, go to a Senior Citizen Centre?  Not for me any of that.  For me the word "retire" means just stopping doing what you have been doing for so many years, and branching out to do something completely different.

As I said above, I find I am often busier than before I retired.  I get called upon to get involved in things I would have thought would be way outside my line.   I live now in the beautiful country of Cambodia which is devoid of stress, where people smile and are not angry, where the climate is pleasant 95% of the time and where - because of its geograhical position - it is convenient for visiting almost every other Asian country.  It is also very affordable.  Because of all this I don't always have a lot of free time - not that I need it as I enjoy everything I do here.   However, during the past four or five weeks, things that were out of my control gave me plenty of time to think back over the years.  Things like several long-distance trans-ocean and trans-continental flights of maybe 11-hours to mention but few.

I seldom watch films on a plane for the simple reason they are never films I would want to watch in the first place.  I like to sit by a window and think.  It is a good time for that.

I was on a long trans-Pacific flight just a few weeks ago when suddenly something came to my mind about which I hadn't thought for the longest time and I was quite shocked when I did.   I suddenly realised that at the end of this month - 29th June 2013 (St.Peter's Day), to be exact - I will have been ordained 50-years.   But that didn't seem too bad in itself until the mind went further and I realized it meant I will have been ordained for half a century.  Now that is a different matter.  It made me feel I was all but pre-historic.  It is funny how just a change in words can make a difference.

Since that flight I have thought about that half century and how things have changed in that calling or profession over the years. 

I have been extremely blessed and fortunate in my career as a priest.  It has taken me around the world and been the cause of my meeting some of the most famous and interesting people on every continent.  I have had the honour of being nominated for bishop four times and the privilege of being able to withdraw my name from each nomination.  Being a bishop was never on my list of "must do's".   I was never, am not and never would be bishop material.  I am too outspoken for that and besides I prefer to be "among the people".  I have had the privilege of being able to get the advice and help when needed from some of the world's most notable and respected  prelates such as Archbishop Michael Ramsey of Canterbury, Bishop Riah Abu El Assal of Jerusalem, Bishop John S. Spong of Newark, Bishop K.T. Ting of China, Archbishop George Otto Simms of Armagh and Bishop Desmond Tutu of Capetown.

But things in the church world have changed drastically over those fifty years.  When I was ordained in Ireland it was mandatory for the newly ordained to remain a deacon for at least one full year before being ordained to the priesthood.  Furthermore, the newly ordained had to do a mandatory 3-year period as assistant - or curate - in a parish before being able to be appointed to a parish of his own.  I may be old fashioned but I am continually shocked these days to see bishops ordaining someone to the diaconate then within even a month ordaining them priest having already placed them in charge of a parish.  There is totally no way the newly ordained person can have the know-how to run a parish just because they have been ordained and can wear a clerical collar.  Training is necessary in every profession and Divinity Schools - as they were then called in Ireland - or Seminaries do not give complete courses in the practical side of parish ministries such as dealing with a bereaved family, handling a possible suicide situation or efficiently handling domestic disputes.

As a newly ordained, I had a strict routine to follow.  I could only preach once a month - that one did not particularly bother me.  Every Monday I had to meet with the Rector of the parish - my boss - and go over everything I had done or not done the previous week.  I would be given a list of houses where I had to make a call during the coming week.   Nowadays many clergy only make house calls if they are invited by their more wealthy parishioners to dinner.   Tuesdays and Thursdays were taken up by visiting hospitals.  I would have to be at the hospital - there were two in the parish where I worked in Northern Ireland - at 9.00am and get from the Registrar a list of all new patients who had come in since my previous visit, and they would have to be seen.   Sometimes they didn't want to see a clergy person, but on the other hand if one didn't appear there would be complaints galore.

When I moved to work in Jamaica in the West Indies, it was a different story.  In my parish I had seven churches and mission stations - all of which had to have a Eucharist every Sunday.  So I would start at the main church at 7.30am then go from church to church visiting, preaching, baptising and celebrating the eucharist at all seven before finally ending up at Evensong back at the main church again in the evening.  A long day - but I always enjoyed it.  Seven churches in the one day.  Today I hear clergy complain if they have to preach twice in the one day - even at the same church!!  Every weekday morning was taken up walking through the banana plantations taking communion to the old folk who could not get out to church.  To see the joy on the old peoples' faces when I would arrive to give them communion was a thrill I will always remember.  Today that is not a priority in most places.  I was shocked to hear a priest say one time last year to an old lady - if you can't drive so far yourself anymore, get your daughter to bring you to church.  No such thing as saying "I will bring the Eucharist to you".   Pastoral care and consideration are both fast flying out the door.

Fifty years may have past and I may not preach anymore, but I am still very much a priest and my position as such is very much respected even here in this 98% Buddhist country by every one.   I may not take part in church services and I may be considered an "inactive priest" in diocesan circles, but the work I do with students and other entities here, in Vietnam and in Laos to me is just an extension of my priestly ministry.  I feel privileged to be able to contribute to the people in this part of the world and hope the Good Lord gives me time to do so for many years to come.

NORTH KOREA - WHAT NEXT?

It is almost exactly a year and one week since I last wrote about North Korea - a country that has interested me for a very long time.   I have never been there and don't know if I ever will, but I would certainly welcome an opportunity to go there.  I like to see what is what for myself.

The last time I wrote on this subject I mentioned Kim - not his real name - a North Korean soldier, who was stationed at a border crossing between North Korea and China.  Kim had contacted me via an internet chat programme which he was occasionally able to use through the kind offices of a Chinese soldier, when Kim had to go across the border on business and no one was around.  Sometimes I wouldn't hear from him for weeks but I always checked in to see if he had written to me.  He made it plain that if ever he was caught communicating with me - even to just say "hello" - then he would be accused of treason and shot.  One time Kim mentioned that Kim Jung Il the previous Dear Leader would be going to where he was because they had just received forty new jet fighters at the nearby air base and the Dear Leader was coming to inspect them but it was all top secret.  I was not to mention anything about anything he said when I wrote just in case someone read it even though he was sending from China.  He said he felt getting these new jet fighters was very frightening.  It was never mentioned again, but exactly four weeks later, the White House in Washington announced they had just been informed that North Korea had acquired forty new fighter jets!

Kim told me many things which were released in general information weeks later.  He was always afraid that one day he would be arrested, and one day wrote and said goodbye, that he was being sent "to the front" with South Korea and would no longer be able to communicate.  I never heard from him again.

As everyone knows, North Korea has been doing and saying some crazy things these days.  I have been following things very closely, because whatever the outcome, it will affect South East Asia.

There is no doubt that North Korea is acting totally on its own in every respect.  Little is said in the western media except that some heavy talk has come from Washington but that some of what has been said is now being toned down.  When you look at media from other parts of the world, you find that it isn't only the U.S. and western countries that are concerned and telling North Korea to "cool it". 

It has not been generally reported that the official Chinese news wire  - Xinhua - published a report from its Pyongyang-based reporter which said life in the city of Pyongyang is "business as usual".  According to the report 100,000 Pyongyang residents are preparing for North Korea's most important holiday - Kim Il-Sung's birthday - on April 15th by planting trees throughout the city.  It also said that in the mountainous Chinese region of Kaundian County that borders North Korea, local residents there are accustomed to an influx of troops any time tensions flare up on the Korean Peninsular just in case things spin out of control.  However, this time there are so many soldiers and equipment there the media reports even the most hardened villagers are nervous.  The news agency also reports the Chinese authorities using much tougher language against the North Korean regime than has been reported in the west.

Mr. Fidel Castro is not a person much beloved by many in the west so many may be surprised by a letter he wrote in Cuban State Media this week.   I certainly haven't seen it reported on any of the main western media channels or papers.  Mr. Castro wrote that North Korea had shown the world its technical prowess and now it is time to remember its duty to others.  Words that will surprise many I am sure.

"Now that it has demonstrated its technical and scientific advances," Mr. Castro wrote, "we remind it of its duty to other countries who have been great friends and that it would not be just to forget that such a war would affect 70-per cent of the world's population".  Mr. Castro called the present situation on the Korean Peninsular "incredible and absurd", but said "it has to do with one of the gravest risks of nuclear war since the (Cuban Missile) crisis 50 years ago."

Now that I have seen and read comments by and from countries like China and Cuba who everyone knows have been allies if not supporters of North Korea, it makes me realize even more the total isolation that country must feel.  When I realize that - then my mind starts working and wondering - although I know some will not agree with what I think.

Until now North Korea has relied for support on its very few allies - such as China and Cuba.  Now one can see that even they are "turning off" and not being nearly as supportive as they have been.   The North feels "caged in", and so is getting desperate.   That is what is so dangerous.   If you "cage in" anyone or any animal or bird to the point it feels it is totally trapped, then it will use whatever it has at its disposal to get out of that cage.

I love Korea and Koreans and I go to South Korea a lot - I will be there next month again. I was interested this week when some of my friends there were a little dismayed by the fact that the U.S. made a very public point of telling the world it had deployed F2 stealth fighters to South Korea, and that it had also flown B-22 bombers and stealth bombers over the peninsular to show what power it had.  My friends in Seoul said this upset them as they feared that was "pushing the button" too far.

I suppose I am a pacifist - I have seen and been in too much fighting around the world.  Tough talk is not having any effect now with North Korea - nor are sanctions other than annoying them.  Maybe that is why the Pentagon CNN correspondent Barbara Starr said yesterday that Washington was "dialing down" its rhetoric.   

I am all for talk, talk, talk.  I was told that was the best way many years ago by that great Irish Prime Minister Mr. Sean Lemass.   Why not try that seriously this time?  Mr. Jimmy Carter, Mr. Wen Jaibao, Mr. Bill Clinton and also Mrs. Hilary Clinton and Mrs. Madeleine Albright are all known to be much respected by the leaders of North Korea.   Why not ask them to go to Pyongyang and meet with the leaders there.  I am sure they would get a much better response than flying B-22's around does.  I maybe naive but I am sure a delegation of any combination of any of above would be well worth while.

TWO NEW CHURCH LEADERS

These days the media has a field day saying "this is a first..." whatever may be the subject under discussion.  Well - as I write this, I might as well join the throng and suggest that "this is a first".  I am referring to the fact that within a period of just barely over three months,  two great Christian denominations saw the resignations of their leaders and the election of new leaders.  I am of course referring to the resignation of Archbishop Rowan Williams from the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury and Head of the Anglican Communion and then the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI as Head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Archbishop Justin Welby

Archbishops of Canterbury usually resign rather than staying on the job until they die and at any one time - including now - there are former Archbishops of Canterbury very much still around.  Nevertheless it was unexpected when Archbishop Williams announced his retirement and said he was returning to the academic field.  This caused a flurry within the Anglican Communion worldwide, and speculation as to who would be his successor went wild - or as the popular term now is "went viral".

Pope Francis

With Pope Benedict XVI it was a different matter.  A Pope is elected to the See of Rome as the successor to St. Peter and therefore is supposed to be elected for life.  It is roughly seven hundred years, I believe, since the resignation of a Pope.  Pope St.  Celestine resigned on December 13th 1294, so when Pope Benedict XVI announced his retirement in February it caused more than a little stir.  People didn't know what to do, what to call him or what his future role - if any - would be.  But somehow things worked out and he was given the title of Pope Emeritus.

But then the speculation began as to who would succeed him.   It seems everyone had an idea that they decided was the right one, and so as the Cardinals filed into the Vatican Conclave to elect the new Pope the media went wild with speculation.  Or to use the term again - speculation "went viral".

On both occasions - the election of the new Archbishop of Canterbury and the election of the new Pope - I was out of the country and in a place where I did not have access to news or internet, so on each occasion I had to wait until I got back to Phnom Penh to find out who had been elected.

The Bishop of Durham, The Right Reverend  Justin Welby was elected to the See of Canterbury, and Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Archbishop of Buenos Aires to the See of Rome and according to reports, both not "front-runners" for those jobs.

I have never met either of these men and these days I am not well up in church affairs but as I read about them I find interesting similarities apart from the fact that they will both be installed in their new roles next week.  The Pope on Tuesday 19th March and the Archbishop of Canterbury on Thursday 21st March.

Both men have been described throughout their careers as humble, accessible and concerned about the poor and those in need.  Yet both are said to be on the conservative side though both have said they are "inclusive" in their thinking,

Pope Francis apparently lived relatively simply, staying in a fairly small apartment in Buenos Aires (where he cooked for himself) instead of the grandiose official residence of the Archbishop.  He travelled to work each day by bus rather than by the official diocesan limousine and flew economy in spite of the fact the Vatican sent First Class tickets. The difference in fare was donated to charities.  Since becoming Pope he discarded some of the elaborate clothing of the Pope in favour of just a white cassock.  He went on an unofficial and on the spur of the moment trip outside of the Vatican to the hotel where he had been staying to collect his luggage, talk to the staff and pay his bill.  Interestingly enough - and I am sure much to the consternation of the Vatican staff - he did not travel in the official papal Mercedes limousine with the papal flag flying and the registration SCV-1, but instead drove in an ordinary black sedan. He also broke with tradition by receiving greetings from his fellow Cardinals standing up rather than sitting in the Papal Throne as had been the custom to date.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is well known for his concern about the poor and the needy in countries around the world.  He has worked with the poor in Nigeria and Burundi and received death threats for doing so on more than one occasion.  He has worked in Eastern Europe during the Cold War era and smuggled bibles into Romania during the dictatorship of President Ceausescu.  During his time as Bishop of Durham he chose to shun some of the gaudy trappings of a bishop, choosing to wear a simple black cassock and a very plain pectoral cross instead of the purple cassock and huge crosses favoured by so many bishops and he is continuing that as Archbishop of Canterbury.  For five days prior to his enthronement at Canterbury, Archbishop Welby is on a pilgrimage to five different cities in England where he joins with the people as he walks the streets, listening to them talking to them and praying with them.

Whether it is the Anglican Communion or the Roman Catholic Church doesn't matter.  They both have two common denominators - they each have a new leader and they each have a multitude of problems to sort out.  The question of sexuality is an ongoing problem in both churches.  The question of women in leadership roles such as bishops is still divisive in the Anglican Communion and even women as priests is a huge concern in the Roman Catholic Church as well as the question of dealing with the pedophilia scandals.

As I said at the beginning, I don't know either man.  I hear they are conservative in many areas, but then so am I on some matters.  To me the very fact that they go "out and about" and meet with and listen to and talk to the people is a huge step forward.  We need leaders in every walk of life that are accessible and who listen. We have to remember that the Vatican is a sovereign state and the Pope is head of that state - in other words he is on a par with Presidents, Kings and Queens so even if he likes travelling by bus and walking around, wherever and when ever, that really may not be a possibility for him in the future.  There will have to be a certain amount of security as well as pomp and circumstance - and even at Canterbury also.

So even if we wish to see these new leaders making drastic changes, lets just give them time.  They have a lot with which to contend and a lot of traditions with which to cope - not to mention having to deal with those staff members and others who have been around for some time and are used to having their way on certain matters,   It is not easy to change things quickly in these circumstance. Power hungry people are hard to deal with and these two good men will have their hands full.

A FINAL FAREWELL

 

It was on the morning of the15th of October last that the whole Kingdom of Cambodia was stunned to learn that their beloved and much revered King Father Norodom Sihanouk had died suddenly of a massive heart attack in Beijing just a couple of weeks before he had intended to return to Phnom Penh for his birthday celebrations.  A million people lined the streets from the airport to the Royal Palace to watch the return of the King's body two days later accompanied by the Queen Mother and their son the present King Norodom Sihamoni.

Since that day, His Majesty has been lying in state in the Royal Palace. It is a tradition here that on the death of a King or Queen, their funeral and cremation does not take place for about three months.  To a westerner that may seem strange, but there are many reasons for it.  Such a funeral and cremation takes much preparation which cannot be completed in a matter of days.  Also the time allows people from all over the country to come and pay their respects to the late monarch.

Since the passing of King Sihanouk in October, hundreds of thousands of people have come from all over the country to pray and pay their respects outside the Palace.  It was not unusual on any evening, to see two or three thousand people sitting there.  On occasions there were some 30,000 monks there. Such is the love of the people for the Royal Family and in particular for the late King Father. On several evenings during this time period, Her Majesty the Queen Mother as well as King Sihamoni would come out from the Palace and mingle with the crowd and talk with them.  It was not unusual to see the Queen Mother sitting on the road itself, talking to some old people who had traveled many miles to be there.

Over the past three months, a most impressive crematorium was built in a park next to the Royal Palace, together with some six or seven pavilions to accommodate the Royal Family, foreign dignitaries, invited guests and members of the Government.  It is a dignified building and one fitting for such an occasion.

On the morning of February 1st, The gold coffin containing the late King's body was brought from the Palace on a big golden float.  Some 1-million plus people lined the route to watch the procession and among the silent crowds, tears were shed as the float carrying the coffin past them by.  Twenty thousand people took part in the procession that took almost four hours to complete its route back to the cremation compound next to the Palace.  Apart from the armed forces and the police and government officials, representatives were there from all the different people that make up the population of Cambodia.  The seventeen ethnic tribes from Mondolkiri and Rattanakiri provinces in the north were there in force marching in their traditional costumes.They were followed by a large contingent of the Chinese population as well the Islam population.  Cambodia had never seen such a procession.  The last King who died was King Suramarit, who was King Sihanouk's father.  He was popular but not as popular as his son, and his funeral was less dramatic.

Their Majesties The Queen Mother and King Sihamoni did not take part in the procession but waited until it returned from its route around the city and passed once more in front of the Palace before stopping at the cremation compound.  At that point both the King and the Queen Mother came out of the Palace Gate dressed in their traditional white silk mourning wear and walked from the Palace to the cremation compound acknowledging the crowds as they went.

The King's body lay on a big pedestal in the crematorium for three days, then on Monday 4th February the cremation took place.  It was a dignified four hour event that could not fail to move any who were present and watched.  Many dignitaries from around the world came including the Prime Ministers of France, Thailand, Myanmar, Indonesia, Laos and Vietnam.  HRH Prince Akishino of Japan, the Vice Premier of China, the Foreign Ministers of Australia, Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei and many others were present.  

At 6.00pm Their Majesties the Queen Mother and King Sihamoni entered the crematorium and after prayers they started the cremation fire.  It was a very private and personal moment and no cameras of any kind were allowed to be present at that time.  Some western people were anticipating being able to see a huge cloud of smoke arising, but nothing of the kind.  At the moment of starting the cremation, all around the compound pyrotechnic operated smoke - such as you see on some variety stages - shot into the air for just a few seconds and after that nothing could be seen except what looked like steam coming from the very top of the crematorium. At the same time a 21-gun salute was fired to honor the life of a great statesman who loved his country and people, and a huge firework display went on over the Mekong River as a celebration of his life.

The next morning, following the instructions of King Sihanouk himself, some of his ashes were taken on a Royal Barge to where the Mekong and Tonle Sap Rivers  meet in front of the Royal Palace, and they were scattered there.  The remaining ashes were taken in a golden urn to the Royal Palace where they will be placed in a stupe there next to those of the King's daughter and also his son who died in 2004.

My personal feeling is that this was indeed an extremely fitting tribute and final farewell to a man who lived his life for the good of his country and his people.  A man of tremendous personality who brought independence to his country from colonial rule and then finally brought stability and peace. He was a fascinating person who loved to sing, dance and tell stories.  He liked nothing better than to be out and about among his people whether in the country in the small villages and farms or in the city. He will be greatly missed by all here, but he will never be forgotten.  

A CHILDHOOD MEMORY

I have been told over the years that as you get older your memory fades and then eventually you get to the stage where either you remember nothing at all - or else you remember only those things from way back when.   Things that happened in the recent past you cannot remember.  I am both happy and thankful to be able to say that as of now, my memory seems to be working fine both for things from way back and things from the recent past.

One of my most vivid memories in my lifetime goes back to when I was aged eight or nine.  An impressionable age.  At that time, my mother had a weekly 30-minute radio show on Radio Eireann in Dublin called "Saints We Have Loved".  It was broadcast live in those days every Saturday evening at 8.00pm - such a difference to now when everything is usually pre-recorded, edited, chopped and changed before being broadcast.  Each week the show would highlight the life of a saint - some well known, some not so well known, but it must have been a popular show for it ran for over two years.  I have no idea if they ran out of saints or if the show just stopped!  Many of the well known actors and actresses of the day who passed through Dublin - people like Orson Welles, Dame Sybil Thorndyke  and Sir John Gielgud - would take part in the programme.

At that stage of my life I had to be in bed by 8.00pm (unlike now when children of any age can stay up until any time) so I seldom heard the show.  However, on one occasion when my grandmother was away in England and had taken our maid with her, there was no one to stay at home with me, so mother had no alternative but to take me to the studio with her.  I have no idea what saint was portrayed that night but whoever she was, was seemingly unfortunate enough to be in Rome at some point during the reign of an unsympathetic Emperor Pilate (played by Sir John Gielgud) and had the further misfortune of coming to a very unpleasant ending by being thrown to the lions.  A thing the Romans of those days did quite often with Christians and other unwanted people.

In those days recording studios - and certainly those of Radio Eireann - had nothing like the technology they have today, so most sound effects were made manually.  For example, I remember the sound of galloping horses was made by hitting two coconut halves together on top of a table.  If someone was talking to someone else and leaving, they just talked while they walked to the other side of the studio away from the one standing microphone so their voice faded naturally.  Nowadays that all sounds so primitive, but it worked well back then and for those listening on the radio at home, it sounded very real.

On the Saturday I was taken to Dublin to the studio I was so excited.  I remember in the afternoon the wife of one of the technicians took me to the Dublin Zoo while my mother, Sir John Gielgud and the rest of the cast rehearsed in the studio.  I am sure it was very kind of the good lady to take me to the Zoo.  I enjoyed seeing all the animals and birds and at that time the Dublin Zoo was one of very few Zoos that had huge open areas done up in their natural habitat for animals and birds rather than having them in cages.  So it made for a very interesting and educational time for both the children and adults who went there.  However, that particular day we were just looking at the area where the lions lived (incidentally, one of those lions is the one that appears on the Metro Goldwyn Mayer logo) when it was feeding time, and the way the lions attacked the bones and meat that was thrown to them both interested and scared me.  They were fierce animals at that moment of time and ones I would not want to meet face to face.

Back at the studio later that day I was equally fascinated and excited by watching the technicians do their job, watching them doing the sound effects. I felt very important just because I was there.  My mother gave me strict instructions that I was to sit on a certain chair in the corner furthest from the microphone, not to move and not to make a sound - otherwise I would have to wait outside until the show was over.  It was probably not such a good idea to have a little boy of that age sitting right in the recording studio, but as I was not about to miss the broadcast, I gave my solemn promise I would do exactly as I was told and sit quietly just watching.

The red light over the studio door went on, the show's signature music started playing. My mother was playing the part of the saint that night and I remember the first scene was my mother and Sir John Gielgud (who was playing Pilate) arguing over something about their differences of opinion regarding Christianity in Rome. All the cast which was about twelve in number I think - the others included the Irish actors Eileen Crowe,  Rita O'Dea and Patrick Bedford - were assembled around one big single microphone in the centre of the studio and whenever Pilate said something they didn't like everyone - including the main characters - would at the same time stand back from the microphone and go "blah, blah, blah, blah" which when they all did it, gave the sound of discontented murmurings.

Finally Pilate decided he had heard enough and sentenced all the Christians to death - including of course, my mother - the main one.  I was not quite prepared for that and as I was totally involved in watching and listening to everything, being so young it suddenly seemed so real.  I remember well, I began to quietly cry.  I remember heavy music being brought up to signify a change of scene, and then being faded out.  Now the scene was in the Colosseum.  The cast cheered as Pilate apparently appeared and gave a long speech, had conversations with his fellow Romans and several other cast members also made speeches.  I didn't understand much of it but I listened intently.  Then finally at the end of the show, Pilate made another short speech and ended by giving the signal for the Christians to be martyred.  I can still hear Sir John Gielgud's voice shouting "Throw them to the lions".  My mother was standing beside him right beside the microphone and being the main character was, of course the first to be "thrown to the lions".  A recording of lions roaring loudly came on which immediately brought back to my mind the frenzied feeding time at the Zoo I had seen earlier in the day.  I was scared once more.  To illustrate what was happening, my mother let out an unmerciful scream as she was supposedly thrown to the lions,  But in order to give the impression of falling into the lions' pit, she continued to scream as she ran to the furthest end of the studio, so her scream faded as she got further away and turned away from the microphone.

That was just too much for me.  I remember jumping up from the chair, running over to Sir John at the microphone and yelling as I cried "Don't kill my mother, I hate you" and thumping him as I did so!!!!  I was not a popular child at that moment in time!  Those listening on their radios must have wondered what was going on.  The saint concerned was a virtuous, chaste, virgin-like woman who now suddenly had a son that was never mentioned anywhere before, who was yelling after her - as my goodly mother reminded me many times in the years that followed.  

Is it worth even mentioning that my mother never brought me to the studio again for the rest of the run of that series?  As a further punishment I had to go to bed at 7.00pm for two weeks instead of 8.00pm.  My grandmother, when she returned from London where she had listened to the show merely said that she thought it "incredibly touching" that I could be so worried about my mother.  I don't think Radio Eireann viewed it in the same light.

That whole incident came back to me so vividly just this evening when I switched on one of the National Geographic channels on the TV and it was relating an incident somewhere in India where last year a tiger had eaten a person from a village as they apparently do from time to time.  It is strange when things are brought back to you like that.

Those times back then were both fun and interesting - except for hearing one's mother being thrown to the lions!  People have often said I had a weird and unconventional childhood and upbringing, but in actual fact - I would not want to have any of it changed.

ANOTHER DAY - ANOTHER SHOOTING!

The title to this posting may sound a bit callous or sarcastic, but it is certainly not meant to be.  I put that title there because there has been so many dramatic and tragic shootings this year, it seems that we are always waiting for the next one.  This morning (Cambodian time) I was horrified as were most other people who watched or read the news, and learned of the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.  Twenty-six people dead -  twenty of them young children - and six people injured.  Nothing less than horrific.  But that isn't all.  The same day a man walked into a mosque full of people in Freemont near San Francisco and threatened to shoot everyone. Fortunately in that case he was accosted and stopped but managed to get away. The police are now searching for him. Last Tuesday three people were killed in a shopping mall in Portland, Oregon in another shooting spree.  That is three shooting related matters in one week.  No wonder it seems like "another day - another shooting".

Speaking on television, Mr. Obama said "Enough is enough".  He is right on that and I hope now he will follow through and do something about the gun situation regardless of the fact that the National Rifle Association will protest loudly.  It was scary to watch the Piers Morgan programme on CNN today when he had a member of the National Rifle Association I believe it was, on saying that if more people had guns there would be more protection.  That is total and utter nonsense and anyone with a modicum of sense would see that.  America has more guns privately owned per capita than any other country according to published reports.  America has more horrific shootings and gun related deaths than any other western country.  Some 12,000 people are shot to death every year and yet the NRA people spend millions lobbying in Washington against laws that might control guns.

I wrote an article last July following the Aurora, Colorado cinema shooting in which I mentioned that in 2008 Mr. Obama stated very forcefully that if elected to the White House he would push through legislation that would effectively control the use and sale of guns.  That did not happen.  Obviously the reason was the influence of the NRA and the fact that he would be seeking re-election.  The situation today is different. He has been re-elected and therefore will not be facing another election.  Therefore, Mr Obama, please see through on your promises in this respect. What are the NRA people thinking?  They throw out the Second Amendment as their reason, but you don't have to be an A+ graduate of Yale to see that the Second Amendment was inserted to allow people to defend them selves in times of war.  There is no war in America now.

Of the many "experts" and "analysts" who have appeared on the television and given their opinions on this shooting in Connecticut, most of them point to the fact that it would seem the shooter - apparently a man by the name of Adam Lanza - must have been mentally unstable.  That may well be the case, but you cannot stop there.  His mother - who unfortunately was shot and killed also - had three guns licensed in her name at her house; two hand guns, a Glock and a Sig Sauer as well as a semi-automatic .223 Bushmaster.  I have to ask just WHY does someone need to have two hand guns and a semi automatic - in fact why does a person need a semi-automatic in the first place?   And if Mr. Lanza did have mental problems, those guns should not have been kept in a place to which he had access.  You cannot stop there either.  If there is supposed to be back ground checks and whatever when people buy guns, why would the sale of three such items be permitted to one person?  Something is wrong somewhere.

There are shootings in almost every country these days at some point but certainly nothing like the 12,000 a year we are told happen in the U.S..  People ask me why I live in Cambodia which they describe as a dangerous country, but here children can walk to school unaccompanied without fear of being kidnapped or shot.  Parents don't have to be afraid that their child will not come home.  I can go to a cinema and not worry about being blown to bits.

This is not a subject for politics. This is a plain, straight forward matter of keeping the general populace safe.  There should be no "ifs or buts" about it.  Mr. Obama and all the other politicians and "wanna-bees" in Washington, just take your hands out of your pockets, stop the "our hearts go out to you" talk and do something practical about these weapons before more innocent people - women and children are massacred.

THE ELECTION - OVER THE TOP?

The election in the United States is over, so maybe the other important things throughout the world will again be reported on the various U.S. media channels.  Thankfully, over here in this part of the world the election didn't dominate the media.  Other matters of importance such as the events in Syria, the Communist Party Congress in Beijing currently in progress, the financial crisis in Greece all got their fair share of coverage each day which is good.

For those of us who may have followed the election whether we live in America or not - one thing was really disturbing and that was a report that came out almost at the very last day of campaigning.

A friend sent me an email containing the findings of a report by the Center for Responsive Politics which said that the amount spent on this election was $6-billion.  I was shocked even though in a previous blog a few months ago I did make comment about what seemed to be excessive spending in that area.  However, never having heard of the Center for Responsive Politics before, I instantly thought this was some sort of joke as the figure seemed so way "over the top".  The report also said that this figure of $6-billion was sufficient to pay for 981 Public Elementary Schools, 451 small hospitals and one year of lunches for 11-million school children.  Unbelievable.

The following day I was equally surprised to hear one of the anchors on CNN mentioning this particular report and the figures I have stated above in an equally shocked tone.  It was no joke.  It was all fact.

I live in a country where incomes are extraordinary low and I work with students who are struggling with trying to pay for their university education because they come from poor farming families - some of whom at times may only earn $20.00 in a month.  So to me, spending $6-billion on an election seems utterly disgraceful and decidedly immoral.  But I live the other side of the world in a country that does not receive that much aid/help as yet from the United States.  

Nevertheless, if you look at the situation there where the unemployment figures are enormous, where thousands cannot afford to pay their mortgages and so have their homes re-possessed, where thousands of children go hungry because their families cannot afford to give them lunches to take to school, and where some school can't even find the money to provide the necessary items to give a good education (although it is not always considered a popular thing to mention these facts), the figure of $6-billion dollars for an election seems even more immoral and disgraceful.  Both parties are equally responsible.  Both parties happily asked some people to pay $10,000, $25,000 and even $50,000 just to have a dinner with a candidate!  $5-million dollars raised at one dinner.  Can they not do the same to help those who need help?

Surely some there can speak up about this and get it changed before the next round of elections starts up. The time will come around very quickly.