The Irish Bishops’ Conference has criticised the inertia of the government in addressing concerns of the religious in Ireland – a watershed moment as up to now, the Bishops have instructed priests across the country to adhere to Government restrictions.
The Bishops have collectively, publicly, called on the Government to ease the restrictions on public worship and funerals, while stating their frustration at being ignored: “Despite assurances from the Taoiseach last month that the concerns expressed by the Archbishops would be given serious consideration, we note with disappointment that none of the issues raised has been responded to.”
The statement from the Bishops comes after what has been a relentless squeeze on religion by the government over the last twelve months resulting in the disenfranchisement of the faithful as they understand that belief in the transcendent has been reduced (in the eyes of their elected representatives) to little more than a subjective – and possibly irrational – choice.
Once valued sufficiently to be protected under international law, human rights treaties and the many constitutions, the right to freely practice religion is valued no more highly than any other daily activity in Ireland.
In fact, it seems to be of less value than some activities that could be considered toxic to the well-being society. The diminution of religious belief by official Ireland was underlined most clearly when the distribution of the Eucharist in orderly manner to people who arrived and queued up as they might at any shop required Garda intervention to essentially cease and desist. While this was happening, across the country people are allowed to queue up for take-away alcohol, take-away chips, take-away coffee, take-away shopping.
The rationale? Unclear. While take-away alcohol points toward people drinking in houses, and take-away coffees point toward people hanging out outside to catch up and socialise, receiving of Communion in such a manner points to no such social interaction.
Why then was it not allowed? There is no health rationale that is not applicable to other forms of take-away. It rather offers a lower possibility of dangerous interaction. If the Government was agnostic about religion, it would consider the different forms of interaction objectively. The conclusion they would draw would be a scientific one – there is less risk of the onward spread of virus from people receiving Communion compared to the many forms of take-away allowed under the law. Communion in itself is not a social activity. Partaking in the Mass is – but that is not what is in question here, but we will discuss that later.
The only conclusion to be drawn is that the government has some deep-seated dislike or fear of religion – or at the least, a significant disdain. There’s a certain smack of spite about the refusal to allow worship, especially when the government can’t point to any evidence that re-opening churches or places of worship in the summer led to Covid clusters.
Recent surveys have shown that there has been a significant increase over time in the numbers that say they will not return to public worship in Ireland once restrictions are lifted. If the restrictions were a strategy to try to kill off religion in Ireland, they have done quite well so far. Maintaining the restrictions would be a rational decision if the continued erosion of religion were a Government objective.
It is clear from government policy in the last five years – the changes to the Constitution, the removal of religion from education, the aspiration of introducing euthanasia – that the religious faith stands at odds with government policy. Indeed, it is probably the only significant opposition to government policy that exists in Ireland at the moment – ineffective as it has been in stemming the secularisation of Irish political and cultural life. Nonetheless, it remains more than a minor nuisance.
Such a policy of erosion of religion will never be admitted. It probably does not explicitly exist, let’s be honest. But there is no doubt that the prevailing attitude in government is one of disregard for religion, resentment at its continued centrality in Irish life, and a desire to remove it to the periphery, to the private sphere, as has been clearly articulated through the pandemic, where it should be. And that the faithful should be happy to be able (allowed) to practice their faith in private.
This attitude has percolated into the public square. Whether disingenuous or not, the social and public value of religion is articulated with great frequency: ‘If God is everywhere, why do you need to go Mass?’ ‘You can see Mass online. That’s fine.’ Those are the polite answers – for many others, aggressive attacks on people simply because they believe are increasing. The idea of respect and tolerance toward religion and the faithful is disappearing quickly, hidden behind a veneer of concern for public health and the well-being of the vulnerable and the elderly.
It is with this that many who wish to take part in the obligatory rituals of their faith are denied a right protected under all forms of international law and the Constitution of Ireland. Unfortunately, with the support of the hierarchy in the Church and many public Catholics, the rubrics of the faith are being interpreted as optional. This is not intentional, but the consequences are becoming clear and will be evident when we are allowed to return to public worship. There will be emptier Churches.
Once the impression was given that what was once a weekly obligation could be sidestepped upon the instruction of the Bishops and that the instructions of Caesar were paramount, the inevitable question was: why does it matter at all? Isn’t an internal faith enough? That theological question has been answered many times over in the past: faith is a public Obligation.
However, that answer has been lost in all the noise.
While the Government continues to outlaw public worship under the guise of public health, the frustrations of some will grow and the faith of others will diminish. Those that grow frustrated will continue to try to find ways to meet their obligations. Instead of worshiping in a socially-distanced manner, with sufficient sanitation, in a large, spacious and airy Church, the faithful will be forced ‘underground’. Mass will be said behind closed doors, with the blinds drawn, in confined spaces. The result of government policy will be to increase the health risk rather than reduce it.
It is evident, as a study published in the British Medical Journal in July found the chances of people getting Covid-19 in an indoor environment were more than 18 times higher than in an outdoor setting, that prohibitions on public worship will have unintended consequences. The health authorities and the Government will say that they are protecting the vulnerable, yet many of the vulnerable are being driven into riskier settings because they value their faith as much as their health.
The government treats these people like children who need to be ‘protected’ from themselves and their ‘irrational’ choices instead of rational human beings on the one hand, and then like pariahs who are a threat to the safety and security of the whole country on the other, at risk of arrest and detention for the replicating the actions of teenagers outside an off-license – queuing.
Whether the Bishops’ statement will spur the government into a response, realising perhaps they cannot be relied upon indefinitely to further a repressive policy remains to be seen. Whether the Bishops will, if ignored further, instruct the Priests and the faithful to return to their Sunday obligation as the Government moves to Level 4 restrictions, is a question that many who feel too much has been ceded to Caesar await with some interest – more in hope than expectation?
Dualta Roughneen