Catholic Church suggests Hate Crime review, offers opportunity to consolidate rather than separate legislation
Catholic Church suggests Hate Crime review, offers opportunity to consolidate rather than separate legislation
Church comments come in response to the Scottish Government’s Review of Hate Crime legislation, chaired by Lord Bracadale:
http://www.gov.scot/About/Review/Hate-Crime-Legislation
The review is charged with considering whether existing hate crime law represents the most effective approach for the justice system to deal with criminal conduct motivated by hatred, malice, ill-will or prejudice.
Commenting on the review, Director of the Catholic Parliamentary Office, Anthony Horan who submitted a detailed response on behalf of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland said:
“This process is an opportunity, ultimately, to ensure that the legislation is just and that every group is protected. This does not have to be a “zero sum game” where one group “wins” and another “loses” but rather could be an opportunity to rationalise and simplify legislation. A desirable outcome would be a single aggravation such as section 74 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. Applied to all protected characteristics equally, it would be a simple and straightforward “message.” which would foster harmony in that all groups would be treated equally in the eyes of the law.”
Mr Horan added;
“It is important that any legislation, preserves judicial discretion recognising that Scotland has a Criminal Justice System populated by highly trained prosecutors and Judges. They are best placed to assess the strengths and weaknesses of individual cases and should be free to do so in the absence of their decision being “politicised” by legislation which creates a perceived “scandal” where none exists.”
The Church response also highlights Scotland’s long history of anti-Catholicism and urges Government recognition be given to the historic roots of present conflicts. Pointing out that for over twenty years successive Scottish Governments have dedicated significant resources into programmes and projects designed to tackle the symptoms of sectarianism. The submission adds, that in the same period the growth in such funding has been matched by an increase in religious hate crime.
The response notes, that “an opportunity exists to acknowledge that anti-Catholic sectarianism is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other types of religious hate crime in Scotland. Instances of anti-Catholicism outnumber all other type of religious hate crime combined, in a country where Catholics represent only 16% of the population. This is a product of the Reformation Parliament of 1560 and its condemnation of Catholic doctrine and worship including the ban on the celebration of all Catholic sacraments. No other religion or belief has ever been so proscribed in Scotland, the legacy of this proscription continues to the present day. A recommendation by this review, that the Scottish Government consider issuing a collective, retrospective apology could go some way towards building, repairing and renewing bonds between communities harmed by historical wrongdoing. It could also be the first step in addressing historical iniquities.”
ENDS
Peter Kearney
Director
Catholic Media Office
5 St. Vincent Place
Glasgow
G1 2DH
0141 221 1168
07968 122291
Note to Editors:
The full text of the response to the Hate Crime Review, is shown below:
Response ID ANON-T58X-H9EZ-S
Submitted to Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation in Scotland Submitted on 2017-11-22 14:43:00
What do we mean by hate crime legislation and why does it exist?
Do you consider that the working definition, discussed in this chapter, adequately covers what should be regarded as hate crime by the law of Scotland?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer.:
The definition discussed in this chapter is only partially adequate in terms of covering what should be regarded as hate crime. This definition is appropriate in the context of an aggravation and in the context of sentencing.
The questions regarding what constitutes a “hate crime” become more understandable and manageable when placed in the context of an aggravation. When creating a “new offence” these questions become fraught with difficulty. For example, legislation for certain words such as those identified in the consultation paper, could quickly render the legislation obsolete since the words used by society to identify particular groups (whether pejoratively or otherwise) are constantly changing. What constitutes “animus” or “unfriendliness” is constantly in flux depending on the mores of society at any given time. There is a disconnect between what the victim “perceives” to be animus and what the perpetrator thinks of his or her own conduct. The Stonewall commissioned report observes “many perpetrators would not necessarily think themselves capable of committing a ‘hate crime’.” This is the very essence of the difficulties created. When the internal dialogue between members of a particular group about what constitutes “animus” towards them changes more quickly than society’s ability to keep up with these changes there will inevitably be tension. The legislature cannot seek to fill this gap since the gap is protean by its very nature. The use of certain terms in the course of a criminal act is much more readily understandable and the courts can easily apply the objective facts of the case to infer a state of mind on the part of the perpetrator.
How can we prevent tensions and misunderstandings arising over differences inwhat is perceived by victims, and others, to be hate crime, and what can be proved as hate crime?
Please give reasons for your answer.:
The rationalisation and simplification of the legislation would make it easier for victims to understand and easier for police and prosecutors to explain.
It does not serve victims to give them unreasonable expectations. Experience shows that this leads to greater dissatisfaction and upset. The simplification of the legislation would assist in this regard.
The most effective “message” is a straightforward one. A single statutory provision for example, widely known and recognised, which uniformly deals with aggravated conduct is more likely to make an impact in the minds of the general public, reassuring them and warning them as to what constitutes this type of behaviour.
Should we have specific hate crime legislation?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer.:
We should have specific hate crime legislation in the form of the present section 74 (Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003) aggravation and applied to all groups.
This process is an opportunity, ultimately, to ensure that the legislation is just and that each group with an interest is rendered his or her due. This does not have to be a “zero sum game” where one group “wins” and another “loses” but rather could be an opportunity to create a rationalised and simplified piece of legislation.
To that end, it is submitted, that a desirable outcome of this review would be a single aggravation in the manner of the present section 74 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. This, we submit, would be the most effective solution. This aggravation could be applied to all protected characteristics equally. It would have the benefit of precedent in terms of its understanding and interpretation by the legal community in Scotland. It would be a simple and straightforward “message.” It would allow the conduct to be assessed in the light of the “suite” of offences already available and already understood by the general public. It would allow Judges and prosecutors to maintain their discretion in a statutory framework with which they are already familiar. It would foster harmony in that all groups would be treated equally in the eyes of the law. It would not create confusing provisions with uncertain thresholds which might lead to the unjust criminalisation of private citizens and the stigma and impact which flows from that coupled with the grievances which can be fostered by such an approach.
It is also critically important that the individual discretion of prosecutors and judges is maintained. Scotland has a Criminal Justice System populated by highly trained prosecutors and Judges. They are best placed to assess the strengths and weaknesses of individual cases and should be free to do so in the absence of their decision being “politicised” by legislation which creates a perceived “scandal” when it is not deployed or insisted upon. This interference with the criminal justice system can provide a staging ground for social media campaigns designed to influence the judicial process which in turn renders the process susceptible to miscarriages of justice.
It should also be noted that for over twenty years successive Scottish Governments have dedicated significant resources into programmes and projects designed to tackle the symptoms of sectarianism. The growth in such funding has been matched by an increase in religious hate crime. Having devoted significant resources to the symptoms of sectarianism it is now appropriate that some attention is being given to its cause, through this review. In this context, an opportunity exists to acknowledge that anti-Catholic sectarianism is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other types of religious hate crime in Scotland. Instances of anti-Catholicism outnumber all other type of religious hate crime combined, in a country where Catholics represent only 16% of the population. This is a product of the Reformation Parliament of 1560 and its condemnation of Catholic doctrine and worship including the ban on the celebration of all Catholic sacraments. No other religion or belief has ever been so proscribed in Scotland, the legacy of this proscription continues to the present day. A recommendation by this review, that the Scottish Government consider issuing a collective, retrospective apology could go some way towards building, repairing and renewing bonds between communities harmed by historical wrongdoing. It could also be the first step in addressing historical iniquities.
Statutory aggravations: some issues
Do you believe there is a need to bring all the statutory sentencing provisions, and other hate crime offences, together in a single piece of legislation?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer.:
As already stated, a single statutory provision, widely known and recognised, which uniformly deals with aggravated conduct is more likely to make an impact in the minds of the general public reassuring them and warning them as to what constitutes this type of behaviour.
It would be pertinent to note our concerns that the judicial system is becoming too politicised and it is vitally important to maintain a clear distinction between the three arms of democratic governance: the judiciary, the legislature and the executive. The judiciary mustn’t be hamstrung by endless reams of new legislation that is complex, confusing and inaccessible to the judiciary and to the general public.
Do you consider that the current Scottish thresholds are appropriate?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
The current Scottish thresholds are appropriate for the section 74 aggravation.
Should evincing malice and ill-will be replaced by a more accessible form of words?
No
If you support that, please give examples of what might be appropriate.:
For the reasons already set out elsewhere in this consultation, one aggravation would be appropriate.
The words “malice and ill-will” are perfectly understandable and accessible to members of the public and are well understood by the Scottish legal community. They retain the Scottish character of the offence and show continuity with the past in terms of what constitutes the type of behaviour which can meet this test.
Should an aggravation apply where an offence is motivated by malice and ill-will towards a political entity (e.g. foreign country, overseas movement) which the victim is perceived to be associated with by virtue of their racial or religious group?
No
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Again this only becomes manageable in the context of an aggravation of an existing crime since it demonstrates a connected “animus.” The difficulty with criminalising separately this type of behaviour is that it can have a severely illiberal effect. If a crime is committed, then the animus towards the individual, as a result of the protected characteristic, could constitute an aggravation of the crime (regardless of whether that it is further connected with a political entity). Thus, a perpetrator shouting and swearing at an individual whilst referring to their protected characteristic and seeking to draw a connection with the negative actions of a political entity could easily give rise to an inference of malice and ill-will in objectively assessing the evidence.
Should an aggravation apply where an offence is motivated by malice and ill-will towards religious or other beliefs that are held an individual rather than a wider group?
No
Please give reasons for your answer.:
This would be unworkable in practice. The sentence passed by Lady Rae in the Tanveer Ahmed case and her sentencing statement demonstrate perfectly that the administration of justice in individual unusual cases is best left to the deft touch of the Judge than the blunt brute force of legislation.
Do you have any views about the appropriate way to refer to transgender identity and/or intersex?
Do you have any views about the appropriate way to refer to transgender identity:
The fact that the language requires “updating” in the view of the community most directly impacted is a demonstration of the difficulties already alluded to. There is the possibility that any new definition will require to be updated again in the near future. The language currently used is now seen as inadequate when it was deployed in absolute good faith at the time.
Any definition used must take into account the fact that there is a metaphysical disagreement between significant sections of the community regarding the nature of this issue. There is a counter view that biological sex is an intimate part of our identity and that to separate gender and biological sex is a “dualist” approach of separation of mind and body which is novel in the tradition of Western thought. There is the danger of descending into a semantic game which may give rise to
inadvertent further offence. Regard should be had to the objective reality of biological sex and the acceptance of biological sex as indicative of gender in large sections of society.
Does the current legislation operate effectively where conduct involves malice and ill-will based on more than one protected characteristic?
No
Please give reasons for your answer.:
This would operate effectively where one aggravation was deployed.
The use of a single aggravation incorporating all characteristics would allow the prosecutor in each individual case to draft as an averment in the charge libelled the particular characteristics struck at in any given offence.
Should the aggravation consistently be recorded?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Consistently recording the nature of the aggravation in any case is desirable.
Is it necessary to have a rule that the sentencing judge states the difference between what the sentence is and what it would have been but for the aggravation?
No
Please give reasons for your answer.:
It is unnecessary and potentially counterproductive for a Judge or Sheriff to separately state the impact of the aggravation on sentence. There are potentially unnecessary appeal difficulties if this is overlooked. Additionally, there is the danger of a perceived “minimising” of the nature of the offence where the victim and wider public would otherwise see a sentence as just but for the fact that the part of the sentence attributable to the aggravation is not “enough.” It also artificially seeks to separate the crime from the aggravation when often both aspects are intimately connected.
Standalone offence: section 50A Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995: racially aggravated harassment and conduct
Is this provision necessary?
No
Please give reasons for your answer.:
To foster harmony, all protected groups should be treated equally in the eyes of the law and the “suite” of criminal offences presently available are perfectly adequate.
Should the concept of a standalone charge be extended to other characteristics?
No
If so, which groups? Please give reasons for your answer.:
Stirring up hatred and online hate crime
Should there be offences relating to the stirring up of hatred against groups?
No
If so, which groups? Please give reasons for your answer.:
If there are to be offences dealing with the stirring up of hatred against groups, do you consider that there needs to be any specific provision protecting freedom of expression?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Does the current law deal effectively with online hate?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer. :
Existing provisions are adequate.
Are there specific forms of online activity which should be criminal but are not covered by the existing law?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer. :
Should this be tackled through prosecution of individuals or regulation of social media companies or a combination of the two?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Offensive behaviour at football
How clear is the 2012 Act about what actions might constitute a criminal offence in the context of a regulated football match?
How clear is the 2012 Act about what actions might constitute a criminal offence in the context of a regulated football match? :
Should sectarian singing and speech, and the waving of banners and making gestures of a sectarian nature at a football match be the subject of the criminal law at all?
Not Answered
If so, what kind of behaviour should be criminalised?:
Does equivalent behaviour exist in a non-football context?
Not Answered
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Is it beneficial to be able to prosecute in Scotland people who usually live in Scotland for offences committed at football matches in other countries?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Should a similar provision apply to non-football related hate crime?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Is it appropriate to have a requirement that behaviour is or would be likely to incite public disorder in order for it to amount to a criminal offence?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Is there any conduct currently subject to prosecution under section 1 of the 2012 Act which would not be covered by pre-existing common law or legislation?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Should a football club be able to apply to the court for a football banning order?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Should the law be extended to other groups?
Do you consider any change to existing criminal law is required to ensure that there is clarity about when bullying behaviour based on prejudice becomes a hate crime?
Not Answered
If so, what would you suggest?:
Do you think that specific legislation should be created to deal with offences involving malice or ill-will based on:
Do you think that specific legislation should be created to deal with offences involving malice or ill-will based on::
The present protected characteristics of religion, race, disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity are sufficient. This would assist in keeping the legislation both simple and accessible, avoiding confusion and complexity, which are two of the concerns we have raised in relation to the wider legislative context of hate crime.
It is also important to bear in mind the right to freedom of conscience and freedom of speech. There is a danger that suppressing these freedoms in relation to one group will make societal divisions worse and foster grievances. There is a climate of heightened sensitivity in the present culture and there is a very real danger that individual or collective opinions or beliefs will become a hate crime. We must guard against this and ensure basic freedoms, including religious freedom, are protected.
Other specific issues
Do you have any views as to how levels of under-reporting might be improved?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Do you consider that in certain circumstances press reporting of the identity of the complainer in a hate crime should not be permitted?
Not Answered
If so, in what circumstances should restriction be permissible?:
Do you consider that a third party reporting scheme is valuable in encouraging reporting of hate crime?
No
If so, how might the current scheme be improved?:
The police are trained to deal with complainers. An intermediary leaves the process open to criticism and politicisation. Any complaint directed through a third party can give rise to evidential difficulties and potential interference with the process.
Are diversion and restorative justice useful parts of the criminal justice process in dealing with hate crime?
Yes
Please give reasons for your answer.:
Possibly, but it must always be at the behest of the victim.
Should such schemes be placed on a statutory footing?
Not Answered
Please give reasons for your answer.:
About You
What is your name?
Name:
Anthony Horan
What is your email address?
Email:
Are you responding as an individual or an organisation?
Organisation
What is your organisation?
Organisation:
Catholic Parliamentary Office of the Bishops' Conference of Scotland
The Review would like your permission to publish your consultation response. Please indicate your publishing preference:
Publish response with name
The Review may share your response internally with Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for Scottish Government to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise?
Yes
Please select which version(s) of the consultation paper you read to respond to the questions:
the full version
Evaluation
Please help us improve our consultations by answering the questions below. (Responses to the evaluation will not be published.)
Matrix 1 - How satisfied were you with this consultation?:
Slightly satisfied
Please enter comments here.:
Matrix 1 - How would you rate your satisfaction with using this platform (Citizen Space) to respond to this consultation?:
Very satisfied
Please enter comments here.:
Subscribe to Updates
If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates ?
Subscribe to News updates
Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS 
We never share or sell your email address to anyone.
Recent Posts
SCMO | 4 days ago | Blogging
Sunday 11 April 2021 Bishops urge politicians to put human life at centre of Scotland’s political discourse. Scotland’s Catholic Bishops have released a pre-election Pastoral letter, urging Catholics to play their part “in putting human life and the inviolable dignity of the human person at the centre of Scotland’s political discourse” and to warn politicians against imposing “unjust restrictions on free speech, free expression and freedom of thought, conscience and religion”. In a 1,000-word letter distributed online and via Scotland’s 500 Catholic parishes, the Bishops ask Catholic voters to give consideration to six key areas, when selecting a candidate: Beginning and end of life Family and Work Poverty, Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery Environment Free speech, free expression, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion Catholic schools Pointing out that “society relies on the building block of the family to exist and flourish” the bishops add; “government should respond to this reality with policies creating economic and fiscal advantages for families with children.” Voters are also urged to visit the website rcpolitics.org and to use the resources there to help them consider a range of election issues and to question candidates. ENDS Peter Kearney Director Catholic Media Office 0141 221 116807968 122291 pk@scmo.org www.scmo.org Note to Editors: The Election resources are available here: https://rcpolitics.org/scottish-parliament-election-2021/ The full text of the Pastoral Letter is shown below: Scottish Parliament Election 2021 - Putting Human Life and Dignity at the Centre A letter from the Catholic Bishops of Scotland Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, This election presents us with an opportunity to play our part in putting human life and the inviolable dignity of the human person at the centre of Scotland’s political discourse. As Catholics we have a duty: to share the Gospel and to help form the public conscience on key moral issues. It is a duty of both faith and citizenship. This election is an opportunity to be the effective witness our Baptism calls us to be. The new parliament and government will be tasked with leading the recovery from the damage wrought by the current health crisis and to tackle the significant impact it has had on many aspects of life including health care, mental health and wellbeing, religious freedom, and care for the poor. It must also build on the positives arising from the Pandemic, including caring for the most vulnerable, and a renewed sense of respect for human life, human dignity, and the value of community. These are some of the issues you may want to consider in the forthcoming election: Beginning and end of life It is the duty of parliamentarians to uphold the most basic and fundamental human right to life. Elected representatives ought to recognise the existence of human life from the moment of conception and be committed to the protection of human life at every stage. Caring for the unborn and their mothers is a fundamental measure of a caring and compassionate society; a society which puts human dignity at the centre. We ought to be mindful of a further attempt to legalise assisted suicide in Scotland, likely to happen in this parliament. Legalising assisted suicide or euthanasia suggests that some lives are not worth living, contrary to the Christian belief that every life has equal dignity and value. It is incumbent upon our parliamentarians to show compassion for the sick and dying. This is not achieved by assisted suicide or euthanasia but by ensuring support is provided through caring and attentive politics, including investment in palliative care. Family and Work Society relies on the building block of the family to exist and flourish. The love of man and woman in marriage and openness to new life is th...
SCMO | 01st March 2021 | Blogging
Return to Worship in time for Easter 1 March 2021 Responding to last week’s statement on the reopening of Places of Worship by the First Minister, the Catholic Bishops of Scotland have issued a statement welcoming the move and calling for a removal of the cap, which limits the number of people who can attend. Instead, the bishops maintain congregation size should be calculated in accordance with the size of each church, a system similar to that used in the retail sector, which still maintains social distancing regulations. The full text of the statement is shown below. ENDS Peter Kearney Director Catholic Media Office 0141 221 116807968 122291 pk@scmo.org www.scmo.org As Scotland’s Catholic bishops, we welcome the recent announcement by the First Minister foreseeing a return to our churches for the most important celebration of the liturgical year at Easter. We also welcome the recognition of the status of public worship implicit in this decision. The Catholic Community recognises the seriousness of the pandemic and is committed to working with others to avoid the spreading of infection. At the same time, we anticipate ongoing dialogue with the Scottish Government regarding the requirement of a numerical “cap” on the number of worshippers. As we continue to observe social distancing and the protocols on infection control and hygiene formulated by the Bishops’ Conference working group under the leadership of the former Chief Medical Officer Sir Harry Burns, we maintain that it would be more appropriate for each church building to accommodate a congregation in proportion to its size rather than on the basis of an imposed number. We echo here the timely words Pope Francis addressed to the representatives of countries to the Holy See on the 8th February 2021: Even as we seek ways to protect human lives from the spread of the virus, we cannot view the spiritual and moral dimension of the human person as less important than physical health. The opening of churches is a sign that the sacrifices endured so far are bearing fruit and gives us hope and encouragement to persevere. We pray that the Risen Christ, for whom we long during this holy season of Lent, will bless and bring healing to our nation. ...
SCMO | 12th February 2021 | Blogging
Church leaders urge withdraw of controversial section of Hate Crime Bill to allow “adequate consideration” Friday 12 February An unprecedented alliance of Catholic and Evangelical church leaders are urging the Scottish Government to drop part of its proposed Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill to allow time for “detailed consideration of crucial provisions.” The Bill, which would potentially criminalise any criticism of Transgender ideology has been criticised by the Catholic Church, the Free Church of Scotland and the Evangelical Alliance. In a letter addressed today (Friday 12 February) to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice Humza Yousaf, the church leaders call for greater protections for freedom of expression and say: “We believe that people should be completely free to disagree with our faith in any way, including mocking and ridiculing us. We are convinced that our faith is true and has a sufficient evidential basis to withstand any criticism, we therefore welcome open debate.” By contrast, concerns are raised that any disagreement with or criticism of Transgender identity could fall foul of the new law, if passed in its current form. The church leaders point out, that “Transgender identity has been subject of extensive and emotional public discussion. Such free discussion and criticism of views is vital as society wrestles with these ideas.” They warn however, that they “cannot accept that any position or opinion at variance with the proposition that sex (or gender) is fluid and changeable should not be heard.” The letter marks the first time Catholic, Free Church and Evangelical Alliance leaders have jointly petitioned the Scottish Government and sought a meeting with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice. Supporting “open and honest debate” the letter ends with an assertion, that “A right to claim that binary sex does not exist or is fluid must be matched with a right to disagree with that opinion; and protection from prosecution for holding it.” As well as a warning that: ”The Parliament now has approximately four weeks to complete the passage of the bill. This is extraordinarily tight and risks inadequate and ill-thought through legislation being passed. No workable solutions to issues of freedom of expression have so far been suggested. If no such solutions can be found we hope the Scottish Government will now consider withdrawing the stirring up hatred offences in Part 2 of the bill to allow more detailed consideration and discussion and to ensure freedom of expression provisions, which enshrine free and open debate, are afforded the scrutiny they require.” ENDS Peter Kearney Director Catholic Media Office 5 St. Vincent Place Glasgow G1 2DH 0141 221 116807968 122291 pk@scmo.org www.scmo.org Notes to Editors: The full text of the letter is shown below. Humza Yousaf MSP Cabinet Secretary for Justice The Scottish Government St. Andrew's House Edinburgh EH1 3DG Friday 12th February 2021 Dear Mr Yousaf, Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill – Stage 2 amendments We are writing to you as representatives of three communities of churches in Scotland in relation to the progress of the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) bill at Stage 2 and to ask if we may be able to meet with you in the coming days in relation to this. As you know we have engaged extensively throughout the bill process including a number of meetings with you and your officials, and all gave oral evidence to the Justice Committee on 10th November. In all of this we have sought to play a constructive role. We recognise the sensitivities involved in this bill, have sought consensus, and looked to help play our part in protecting vulnerable communities from hate crime whilst at the same time protecting fundamental freedoms on which we all depend for our common life. Our approach has never been to just narrowly consider...
SCMO | 26th January 2021 | Blogging
FUNERAL MASS FOR BISHOP VINCENT LOGAN 26/01/2021 It seems almost a cliche to say it, but every human person is a mystery. It’s not surprising though, as it is in God ‘we live and move and have our being’ and he himself is the ultimate mystery, and we have our origin in God. The Catechism reminds us that ‘we are most like unto God in our soul’, and since each one of us is unique in every way, to say we are a mystery seems almost like an understatement. And this mysteriousness is at so many levels. From the biological point of view, we are a mystery because we are formed by the mixing of our parents’ genes and by the environment in which we are planted. From a psychological point of view, we are formed by our parents by our families, by our siblings, friends and relations, by the circumstances of our lives and our loves, our knocks and our disappointments. Most of us have had the good fortune to have been conceived in love and nurtured and nourished in love. Others, though, regrettably haven’t had that great start. And often, for those who are fortunate, there is one great thread of God’s goodness that powerfully shapes us. For most of us, this powerful goodness originates in the Faith passed on to us from our parents, a thread which runs throughout our lives and more than any other influence, arguably, shapes and guides the direction of our lives. Also, for those of us fortunate enough to be baptised, as well as inheriting the common humanity into which we are created in the image and likeness of God, our baptism in Christ also confers on us divine filiation - sonship and daughtership in God - enabling us, as St Paul says, to call God, Abba, our Father. And we spend the rest of our lives on earth finding out what are the consequences for us of this wonderful gift: we never stop learning how to become a better son or a daughter of God. All of this is true of Vincent Paul Logan. Vincent was born on 30th June 1941 to Joseph and Elizabeth Logan (nee Flannigan) into a committed Bathgate Catholic family and - like all Bathgate Catholic bairns – Vincent, together with their other four sons, inherited a strong faith from them. Of Vincent’s brothers James, John, William and Joseph. Only James now is still alive. Later also, Vincent’s four married brothers’ spouses (Esther, Maeve, Grace and Celia) and subsequently their families – nephews (Vincent and Joseph here today), Gerard and Edward, also Paul, now deceased, who like Bishop Vincent, tried his vocation also at Drygrange Seminary, and nieces Elizabeth, Margaret, Lisa and Anne-Marie - All members of this great extended family had their influence on Bishop Vincent throughout his life, just as today they mourn for him, assisting him by their prayers and Masses on the cleansing road to the Heavenly Kingdom. But for a baptised Catholic man, who has in addition received a vocation from the Lord to priesthood, it is also his special relationships, outside the family - school friends, close friends met on life’s journey, fellow seminarians, priest friends and the pastoral and personal relationships a priest makes through his pastoral work, also continued to shape Vincent, up until almost the moment of his death. From his earliest days, Vincent Paul Logan wanted to be a priest. His desire to attend and serve Mass daily, as a young boy with his mother and brothers after their dad went off to work, of course pointed him in the direction of a vocation to priesthood. As a committed Altar Boy, Vincent’s first desire to put himself forward as a candidate for priesthood resulted, as he says himself, in ‘being chased’ in 1952 by Canon Davitt his parish priest because he was too young - only 11. A year later 1 though, in 1953, he went to Blairs, our National Junior Seminary, at 12 and his journey to priesthood began in earnest. Drygrange, the seminary for the Archdiocese of Saint Andrews and Edinburgh was the next step towards priesth...