Mental Health: Is Wearing Our Heart on Our Sleeve Good for the Soul? 

Comment:

News commentators are enjoying dissecting the ITV documentary interview with Prince Harry and his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, generally known as “Harry & Meghan”, in which they both speak very openly about the negative impact of their royal public life on their mental health. 

 The reaction from viewers has been mixed.  Given that they are able to travel the globe at taxpayers’ expense, and use the camera and thick column inches in newspapers to lecture us all not to do the same (in the interests of saving the planet), there has been lots of criticism along the lines of “hypocrites”. 

However, whether true or not, that’s not the purpose of this discussion. We can all be hypocrites on occasion.   Right now, we are much more interested in the growing custom within once “stiff upper lip” British society, of just about everyone – royal or not – wearing their hearts on their sleeves and claiming poor mental health at every turn.

The following point was made in conversation with a friend on the topic earlier today:  what, at one time, a Catholic would have offered up in silent prayer for the sake of his/her own soul, and the souls of others in spiritual danger, is now considered a matter for counselling and/or medication.  Stress, anxiety, depression, you name it, there seems to be an increased sensitivity, to the point of hyper-sensitivity in many, if not most people, for – more often than not – trivial/no good reason.  Lamentably, that includes Catholics.  Surely, Catholics should be living on a rather higher level – notwithstanding that there will be, of course, those with genuine, diagnosed, mental health illness.

Or is the above assessment a bit too hard? Harsh, even?

By Royal Command: Stop Having [more than two] Children – Save the Planet! 

Comment: 

Having fallen for the climate change propaganda, Prince Harry has promised to do his bit – not by cycling or cutting down on those private jet flights, but (drum roll) by limiting his family to only two children.  Click here to read more

Now, not a lot of people are having more than two children these days (unless the original twosome doesn’t conform to the “one boy, one girl” package) but, still, his words send a signal which will encourage the gullible to follow his shocking example.  I’ve already had a “you had to hear it to believe it” conversation with a check-out assistant in a local supermarket who “worries” about climate change, to the extent that she told her married children that she doesn’t want grandchildren, for the sake of saving the planet.  And this was way before today’s news about Prince Harry’s and Meghan’s decision. Truly, you just couldn’t make this stuff up. 

Although, somebody did – the pseudo-scientists who spread, and continue to spread, a message of fear and alarm about the end of the world, which, when it comes from Evangelical preachers rightly concerned about the wrath of God descending upon us, is laughed away as evidence of eccentricity.

Remember Climategate, folks?  Not a lot of people seem to remember it; it hasn’t featured in any of the recent reports about the extreme weather, or the “babies to blame” debates as the newspaper reviewers unthinkingly agree that Prince Harry has set the standard.  Fewer babies, better planet.  The same commentators who are  lamenting our departure from the EU with an end to freedom of movement and thus a shortage, they believe, of workers in many professions, are now supporting the Prince’s call for population control.  Laugh? I thought I’d never start. 

When you hear a Prince promising to have “two maximum” children and China being praised for its one-child policy now turned two-child policy, is there really any doubt that population control is the real motive underlying the drive for “action” to deal with the “problem” of climate change?