Madam, - Patricia McKenna has a peculiar understanding of free speech (January 23rd). She is dismayed that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin will not promise to refrain from involvement in any future debate on the EU constitution. This, she feels, is a political matter and outside the church's sphere of concern.
Since immigration is likely to be an election issue, should Archbishop Martin now desist from public comment on the rights of migrants and asylum seekers? That debate is political, after all.
Clearly, Ms McKenna's delineation of the Church's engagement in the national discourse is absurd and represents a demand to curb its right to free speech.
At the root of her desire to gag the Catholic Church is a fear that its contributions threaten the freedom of its members at the ballot box. This fear is without foundation. Surely Ms McKenna can see that, in modern Irish society, freedom of conscience and Church commentary are not mutually exclusive.
The Church's agenda is not to "use its power to influence Catholics how to vote" as Ms McKenna dreads. The Church's primary role in such a debate is to offer a Christian perspective on the issue in question. The Catholic Church has every right to do this in a democratic and pluralist state. Such contributions are often very valuable and, as you note in your Editorial of January 19th, in the case of European integration are frequently quite "insightful". - Yours, etc,
Dr ANDREW O'CONNELL,
Mount Andrew Grove,
Lucan,
Co Dublin.