Opinion

Patrick Murphy: Time to decide if we want religious belief to take precedence over democracy

Patrick Murphy

Patrick Murphy

Patrick Murphy is an Irish News columnist and former director of Belfast Institute for Further and Higher Education.

Patrick Murphy
Patrick Murphy Patrick Murphy

I blame the Bible. Not that I am an expert on it, you understand, but it appears to be a stumbling block in the current political talks at Stormont.

The difficulty is that unionism is still influenced by organised religion, but nationalism is not. That, in a nutshell, may help to explain at least some of the gap between the two main parties. Welcome to the world of Irish politics where, 500 years after the Reformation, the Bible is still a live issue.

A rather simplistic analysis, you say, and you have a point. But if the main issues of outstanding disagreement include the Irish language, same-sex marriage and possibly abortion, you can see that the social implications of religious belief certainly form a key part of the negotiations.

The Irish language is the odd one out. Sinn Féin did little about it during ten years in government at Stormont, which suggests it is not as high on their shopping list as they claim. Indeed, the party was prepared to significantly water down its demands on the language in its most recent agreement with the DUP.

So that leaves same sex marriage and abortion as the stumbling blocks.

All the Christian churches regard both homosexuality and abortion as wrong, so in theory there is no difference between Catholic nationalism and Protestant unionism on these two issues.

The problem, however, is that nationalism is no longer linked to the Catholic Church, largely because Ireland has abandoned a church which thought the Ten Commandments applied to the laity but not the clergy.

So Catholicism now largely consists of First Communion, often as a fashion statement, even more fashionable church weddings and a religious funeral.

The Church's teaching on abortion and same-sex marriage are ignored by a majority of Catholics, as evidenced by overwhelming popular support in the south to legalise both.

Protestant Churches here have generally not been involved in widespread child abuse and its concealment, so their reputation remains largely intact and their teachings carry a moral authority which the Catholic Church no longer conveys to much of its flock.

So SF can advocate same-sex marriage, in defiance of the Church's teaching, and win electoral support. If the DUP were to do the same, it would suffer significant losses. The Bible is still a vote-winner in the Protestant heartlands.

You will, of course, argue that whatever its views on the Bible, the DUP should not be allowed to deny others the right to same sex marriage and abortion. You have a point, but they believe that one is an abomination and the other is murder. In their view, no one has the right to sin.

And that's the point about religion - most faiths see it as their duty to save the rest of us from eternal damnation. Centuries of Irish missionary activity in British colonies were based on this same principle.

While much attention centres on the political role of, for example, the Free Presbyterian Church, no one said anything about this week's political statement from the Irish Catholic bishops, which turned out to be a party political broadcast on behalf of the European Union.

The statement could have been written by Sinn Féin, which suggests that not only are nationalist politicians not following the Church's teachings, the Church is following theirs.

Oddly, the bishops did not mention the divorce referendum on the same day as the EU elections. That was left to an individual statement by Bishop Kevin Doran, who said that, "the Church understands marriage to be a lifelong commitment".

Some Catholics might have expected "understands" to be replaced with "teaches", but maybe the Church has given up on teaching.

You will have your own view on the role of churches in society, but whatever you think, the key issue in the Stormont talks revolves around what part, if any, religious belief should play in politics and civil legislation.

In the south, legislation on same-sex marriage and abortion were determined by referendum. Why don't we do the same? If the parties cannot agree, let the people decide. The Assembly can then implement the democratic will of the people with no face lost on either side.

Of course, some in the DUP might argue that the Bible is not keen on democracy. St Peter apparently said that we must obey God rather than men and there appears to be no mention of referendums in the scriptures.

But would anyone seriously suggest that religious belief, however genuinely held, should take precedence over democracy? The answer to that question will significantly influence the outcome of the Stormont talks.