Mass card law: Update

I checked out the website of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs today regarding the criminalisation of those who sell Mass cards without the permission of a Catholic bishop. Specifically, I wanted to know what a commencement order was and how that affected the enactment of the Charities Act, 2009.

The following is from the website’s Q & A section.

When will the Charities Act come into force?

The enactment of the Bill does not in itself immediately bring the Act into force. It is only when the Minister commences individual provisions sections of the Bill that charities will find themselves with new legal responsibilities.

There is a considerable body of work to be undertaken in preparation for statutory regulation. The Department will be rolling out an implementation plan for the Act.

This plan will ensure that the essential elements are in place to enable the introduction in due course of the statutory regulatory framework provided for in the Act.

In other countries, it has taken a number of years after enactment of the legislation for the new regulatory system for charities to be formally introduced. This is likely to be the case in Ireland also, though some individual provisions of the Act may be commenced before the bulk of the Act is commenced.

I rang the Department and was told by a spokesperson that Section 99, which deals with the selling of Mass cards, should be commenced without any great delay.

I’ll be keeping an eye on the Department’s website and ringing from time to time to check on progress.

Letter to the bishop

On the same day I submitted a formal complaint to the European Parliament regarding the criminalisation of those who sell Mass cards without the permission of a Catholic bishop I also wrote to the local bishop here in Cobh for permission to sell Mass cards.

I received a curious, minimalist, reply yesterday saying that as a commencement order has not yet been issued the Act remains inoperative.

Fair enough, I’ll check that out with the relevant department next week. The case continues.

Mass card law

I received a reply from Marian Harkin, MEP, today regarding my formal complaint on the issue of the criminalisation of those who sell Mass cards without the permission of a Catholic bishop.

Ms. Harkin agrees with my stance on the matter and has indicated that she will write to the Attorney General for his view and get back to me.

I received no acknowledgement to my petition to the European Parliament on the matter so I sent off a reminder to them today.

Going to EU on criminalisation of Mass card sellers

I received very little response to my email to the three Munster MEPs regarding the criminalisation of those who sell Mass cards without the permission of a Catholic bishop so I’ve sent the same email to all 13 Irish MEPs.

I’ve also submitted the following petition to the European Parliament.

To Whom It May Concern:

In February this year the Irish government enacted a law which makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card not authorised by a Catholic bishop (Charities Act 2009, Section 99).

I strongly object to this law for the following reasons.

1. Contained within the Act is a presumption of guilt until proved innocent. This runs contrary to Article 48 (1) of the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights which states:

“Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”

2. Section 99 is an unjustified restriction on Article 44 of the Irish Constitution which guarantees the free profession and practice of religion (See newspaper article below).

3. The criminalisation of the sale of Mass cards is a disproportionate reaction to what is a very minor business activity (See newspaper article below).

4. This law confers an absolute monopoly to the Catholic Church for the sale of Mass Cards. I believe this to be contrary to EU law.

5. The requirement to obtain permission from a member of a religious organisation to engage in legitimate business is an infringement of the right of all EU citizens to engage in such activity.

I request that the EU take action to force the Irish government to repeal section 99 of the Charities Act, 2009 or, at a minimum, have that part which is offensive to the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights regarding the principle of ‘innocent until proved guilty’ struck out.

Thank You
Anthony Sheridan

References:

Section 99. (Charities Act, 2009)

(1) A person who sells a Mass card other than pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) In proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities, that the sale of the Mass card to which the alleged offence relates was not done pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person.

(3) In this section—

“Church” means the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church;

“Mass card” means a card or other printed material that indicates, or purports to indicate, that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass howsoever described will be offered for—

(a) the intentions specified therein, or
(b) such intentions as will include the intentions specified therein;

“priest” means a priest ordained according to the rites of the Church;

“recognised person” means—

(a) a bishop of the Church, or
(b) a provincial of an order of priests established under the authority of, and recognised by, the Church;

“sell” includes, in relation to a Mass card, offer or expose the card for sale or invite the making by a person of an offer to purchase the card.

Irish Times article

Mass card section of Charities Bill could be unconstitutional

CAROL COULTER, Legal Affairs Editor

Thu, Feb 26, 2009

A SECTION of the Charities Bill may be unconstitutional because it makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card not authorised by a Catholic bishop, according to a former attorney general. The Bill went to President Mary McAleese for signing earlier this week.

The section in question was inserted into the Bill by the Seanad on February 11th last to deal with a problem of the sale of “bogus Mass cards”, which purport to be signed by a priest, but where the signature is not genuine and no Mass is actually said.

The Government amendment was put forward following the earlier proposal of a similar amendment by Senator Ronan Mullen.

Former attorney general John Rogers SC has provided an opinion on it to the solicitor for a man who sells genuine Mass cards, signed by a priest in the Philippines by arrangement with a bishop there. The money raised goes to build churches there. He fears shops may feel pressure on them not to sell if the Bill becomes law.

During the Seanad debate, Senator David Norris read from Mr. Rogers’s opinion, which stated that section 96 was “an unjustified restriction on the Article 44 guarantee of the free profession and practice of religion.”

The section provides that a person who sells a Mass card “other than pursuant to arrangement with a recognised person” is guilty of an offence. A “recognised person” who can authorise the sale of such Mass cards is defined as a bishop of the church, or the head of an order recognised by it.

The section defines a Mass card as a card that indicates that “the holy sacrifice of the Mass” will be offered for a person’s intentions.

In any proceedings it will be presumed, unless proved to the contrary, that an offence has been committed.

In his opinion Mr. Rogers says this goes further than is reasonably required to deal with the problem of the sale of a Mass card not properly signed by a priest, where no Mass is said, or where the purchaser thinks it is for a charitable purpose and it is not.

“The narrow categories of persons is arbitrary and unfair and represents a serious interference with the religious practice of some priests and others who are members of non-Catholic churches and religious communities in this State,” he states.

He also points out that it presumes an offence has been committed until the contrary is proven. “The criminalisation of the sale of Mass cards is another aspect of the disproportionate nature of this piece of legislation,” he says.

ENDS

Fr. Good and the “Anti-Catholic Bigotry League”

From time to time I receive responses to letters published in various newspapers. Religious matters, in particular, seem to trigger strong responses.

I received the following letter from a Fr. James Good in response to my letter regarding a law that makes it a criminal offence to sell a Mass card without first getting the permission of a Catholic bishop.

I’ve reproduced my letter first and then an unedited copy of Fr. Good’s letter to me.

ARTICLE 48 of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights says: “Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”

Part 7, Section 99 (2) of the Charities Bill 2009, recently signed into law here, makes it a criminal offence to sell a mass card without the permission of a Catholic bishop. The act states:

“In proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved on the balance of probabilities, that the sale of the Mass card to which the alleged offence relates was not done pursuant to an arrangement with a recognised person.

The clear contradiction begs the question: are we living in a liberal democratic republic or a theocracy?

Dear Mr. Sheridan,

I was delighted to see your letter in the Irish Examiner (14.03.09). Since I had not seen a contribution from you for quite some time, I was beginning to fear that you might have departed to meet your Maker. An interesting meeting, indeed.

On the minus side, of course, one could say many things: your little letter, filling a bit of empty space at the foot of a page (as usual), was as bitter and irrelevant as always.

What saddened me, however, was the sight of a supposedly “good” atheist writing to support a MEAN FRAUD. Recent investigations show that the vast majority of Mass Cards sold in shops are legally fraudulent. Could you not perhaps use your God-given gifts to stop THEFT and FRAUD rather than sneering at our government in its effort to eliminate them?

Re-reading my letter of 2nd February suggests that in the intervening three years you have learned nothing about either Mass stipends or a ban on discussion of clerical celibacy. The latter controversy is still ongoing, despite your belief that it is banned.

I notice that your address in the Cork Examiner has dropped the Rock of Eoin. Protection for the writer – from the editor or from the writer?

Yours sincerely
Fr. James Good

Just a few things:

Fr. Good didn’t address the central point of my letter which is that the widely accepted principle of innocent until proven guilty has been reversed by this religious law.

His comment on celibacy concerns a previous letter of mine regarding the ban on theologians from discussing the matter by Pope John Paul II

His comment about my address displays an ignorance of the editorial practice of editing for space.

Fr. Good is also convinced that The Irish Examiner and The Irish Times are supporters of what he calls the “Anti-Catholic Bigotry League” only printing letters from ‘anti-Catholic bigots’ and refusing to print replies. In previous correspondence to me he says:

“The Irish Examiner prints only the letters of anti-Catholic bigots, and refuses to print any reply to these bigots. And of course the newspaper which replaced the Irish Times at the top of the Anti-Catholic Bigotry League is delighted to get nasty little pieces from the Rock of Eoin to fill up small empty spaces in its hate-sheet: that’s why they frequently end up a the end of a page.”

I wonder why editors don’t publish letters from this priest?