Church, State and Taoiseach
Madam, - I fully agree with the views expressed so fluently by Kevin Healy (July 15th) about the article which appeared under Bertie Ahern's name. Of course it was a load of rubbish, but what else could one expect of something which was hastily concocted for purely political and publicity purposes? What would interest me is whether Bertie has got around to reading it yet.
I do empathise with Mr Healy's medical complications while trying to deal with the matter. But rather than a pain in the side, what I had was a pain a bit further round and a bit lower down. - Yours, etc,
JOHN NEWMAN, Glasnevin Avenue, Dublin 11.
Madam, - Cormac O'Connell (July 12th) rightly commends the Taoiseach for his sentiments on the separation of Church and State.But he is not correct when he says the Taoiseach is leader of a secular State. Nowhere in Bunreacht na Éireann is it so classified.
The separation of Church and State does not mean that religions based on the non-existence of God are to replace religions which accept the existence of God. Bertie Ahern is leader of a State which embraces all religions, even the religions of atheism, secular humanism, agnosticism, etc. He is also right in stating that without God humanity cannot truly live.
Life, spirit and soul are not material, so they are immaterial. What is immaterial is spirit and has no beginning or end, so its source, course and destiny must be the God who brings them into existence, holds them in existance and gives them meaning and purpose.
The Constitution gives free "profession and practice of faith" (Article 44). Why should this be treated as a private matter? Well done, Bertie. - Yours, etc,
FRANK FLANAGAN, Martin Grove, Dublin 7.