Archbishop's views on ships disappointing

THE EDITOR: I listened with some concern to Archbishop Jason Gordon being interviewed by the media about the three ships being removed from the coat of arms, wherein he indicated that doing so was an attempt to change our history.

With all due respect to the archbishop, removing the ships is not about changing history, but rather about not celebrating those aspects of our history that are horrible, to say the least.

In the wake of those ships, the genocide of the First Peoples came about, committed by Europeans. Additionally, the genocidal transatlantic slave trade, the violent enslavement of millions of Africans, and the indentureship of Indians were also committed by the European colonisers.

So, we are not engaging in revisionist history by removing the ships, but rather choosing not to afford them such a place of honour on such an important national emblem.

The archbishop's point about cost is understandable to a certain extent, but not entirely valid. His statement, however, that the ships should remain, but in the ocean (to the bottom of the emblem) is disappointing and reflects perhaps his failure to recognise the historical trauma and its lingering effects brought about by European (Spanish, French, English, etc) invasion and colonisation in this part of the world.

Perhaps it would have been an act of mercy towards the First Peoples and others if the ships had actually sunk in 1492.

There are people going hungry due to the State's ongoing failure to ensure a proper redistribution of income and unbridled capitalism. But the hunger for justice and the right understanding of our history must be satisfied.

The archbishop's view is his own, as he said, and I believe is not shared by many Catholics and others who are mindful and observant of the social justice teachings of the Catholic Church.

MICHAEL JATTAN

Diego Martin