Taoiseach Brian Cowen made some warm remarks about the Pope’s message for World Day of Peace last week, echoing his call for the protection of religious freedom.

Mr Cowen said that he welcomed “the focus of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI on the question of freedom of religion in his message for World Peace Day”.

He said he supported Pope Benedict’s belief that religious freedom was “rooted in the very dignity of the human person”. He stated that it is the duty of governments “to ensure that all are afforded the right and freedom to profess and practice their religion of choice, without obstruction or harassment”.

Fine sentiments. However, the Taoiseach’s statement on this issue is directly at odds with the acts of his Government with regard to the Civil Partnership Act.

This new law directly targets religious freedom in a number of ways. Civil registrars who refuse to conduct same-sex civil unions can be fined or even jailed for up to six months.

Church halls which refuse to host receptions after such ceremonies could be fined.

Photographers or printers who don’t wish to facilitate civil union ceremonies could similarly be fined.

Christians of all denominations wanted a conscience clause added to the law but were summarily dismissed by all the main parties.

Brian Cowen had nothing to say during all of this. Did he even know what was going on?

Also, what does he make of his fellow Government ministers, who appear to believe that religious freedom only amounts to freedom to worship, that is freedom to attend Church services, pray and observe certain rituals?

In the context of the debate about the Civil Partnership Bill, Mr Ahern said that, as a politician, he wouldn’t let religion “cloud” his judgement. On RTE Radio, last July, he said that he believed that religious belief should not be brought to bear in the considerations of any politician.

Speaking on LMFM radio, he said “When I legislate, particular as a Government Minister, I don’t bring whatever religion I have to the table.”

Meanwhile, John Gormley, reacting to the Catholic hierarchy’s opposition to the Civil Partnership Bill, said he “thought we had left the era of Church interference behind.” and told the Church to “concentrate its efforts on looking after the spiritual needs of its flock and not intrude on temporal or State matters.”

At the time, Mr Cowen made no effort to correct these Ministers. Furthermore, the actions of Mr Cowen’s Government back up such sentiments with the coercive powers of the State.

But Mr Cowen’s statement doesn’t make this distinction in any case. It specifically alludes to the references made by the Pope to the cultural and ethical contributions made to society by religion over centuries. Religious freedom in this context is meant in its widest context, since religion limited to private practice cannot have such a broad impact.

Mr Cowen also speaks of the inherent right of the person to religious belief and practice, a right which the Pope’s message expresses as the ability “freely to exercise the right to profess and manifest, individually or in community, his or her own religion or faith, in public and in private, in teaching, in practice, in publications, in worship and in ritual observances.”

He is in his dying days in office, so what he really thinks about religious freedom won’t be relevant for too much longer. What we do know, however, is that he stood idly by as two of his Ministers attacked this very right.