Rónán Mullen (Independent)

I have had the privilege of introducing Archbishop John Barwa from the province of Orissa in India. He spoke in generous and interesting terms this morning about the challenges his people are facing, where Christians are being persecuted by extremist Hindus in that part of India. He was not asking us to do anything but was coming here to tell us about their Christian hope and love, even for those who persecute them as they try to build a better world there. Thankfully, we are not in that position. It is a long time since people in Ireland had to suffer like that for their faith. We should also hope that we never go to the other extreme either which is that, in seeking to include all traditions and be generous to all the different groups in our society, we lose the ability even to declare our identity. That is essentially what is at stake in this particular debate. I note and support everything Senator McAleese said.

Senator Byrne is right to hope that the media will not focus exclusively on this matter. If I were to strike one note of disagreement, however, it would be to invite the media and colleagues to consider that we should never be afraid or ashamed about having a debate on the deeper values that animate us individually or collectively. We have had many important debates in Ireland over the past ten or 15 years and we made a lot of mistakes. Perhaps one of the reasons we made those mistake was because we failed to reflect on the higher spiritual and moral values. Had they been followed more closely, they could have led to less selfish acts in banks and the marketplace. Scripture says that "Without a vision, the people perish", so we should always be willing to get back to the reflective space and never be ashamed of it. There will be plenty of time for the important bread and butter discussions as well.

If there was ever a time when Christianity was compulsory in Ireland it has certainly gone now, and thank goodness for that. If there was ever a time when Christianity was the fashion and many adhered to it for that purpose, then arguably that moment has also passed. As people, however, we still find ourselves searching for the truth about life and its meaning. We all need to be able to bring our deepest understanding of reality to important everyday business. That means that if we are people with a distinctive religious perspective, we need to be able to let that inspire what we propose as the common good, just as others with different philosophical perspectives need the freedom and respect to be able to articulate their views.

Senator Bacik proposed that since the Constitution recognised the separation of church and State, this somehow meant that we should not have a specifically religious prayer. I agree about the importance of separation between church and State, but we must always remember that it is for the protection of both from undue influence by the other. Our Constitution affirms the most Holy Trinity and our divine Lord Jesus Christ. It would be a misunderstanding of church and State separation to say that it is contravened by all public acknowledgement of God. It would be a misunderstanding of church and state separation to say that it is contravened by all public acknowledge of God, for example, the American Declaration of Independence clearly mentions God, the creator. The separation of church and state means that the state should not interfere with religious freedom and teaching and the church should not interfere with state powers, such as the legislative or judicial processes. It does not mean that the state cannot require church clergy to pay taxes, and by the same token, it does not prevent the state from enshrining an acknowledgement of God within its constitution or a prayer within its democratic processes. Like the prayer at the beginning of the proceedings at the House of Lords and the House of Commons, our prayer is a factor of tradition, specifically the Christian tradition to which a clear majority of Irish people still adhere. It should be noted that there is nothing exclusive to the Catholic tradition in the language of the prayer we use in these Houses. I agree with the comments on whether the Cathaoirleach should read it. I have on occasion taken up the prayer and shown it to guests who are visiting the Houses. There is a little instruction, in pencil, in spidery writing, saying, "Read Slowly".

A Senator said to me that it would be nice if the prayer was read with a greater degree of solemnity. I wonder if there is a psychological embarrassment about the prayer, in a sense that we need to compromise with those of no belief and other traditions, which means that if we have to say it, we will say it quickly. We need to invite ourselves to return to a solemn and reflective place. This compromise allows it because we will already be called into a reflective space, whether we have a faith tradition or none and the prayer of the majority can be said, hopefully in a reflective way. It is true that no prayer is said at the commencement of proceedings in other jurisdictions. There is a time for reflection in the Scottish Parliament as Senator Bacik has pointed out. As I said, the United States, Canada, the UK and Australia, all provide for the saying of prayers before parliamentary proceedings commence.

There is one important point that Senator Bacik's proposal highlighted, namely, a democratic state should always ensure that freedom of conscience and freedom of religion are protected. We do not want the prayer to impinge upon the freedom of conscience of Oireachtas Members who are atheist, agnostic or non-Christian. There would be a problem, if a Member were required to take an oath and that is the reason there is a possibility of an affirmation in court proceedings.