Defining ‘religious body’ under Irish marriage law

ABSTRACT

Census 2022 shows an ever more diverse religious landscape in the Republic of Ireland. Recent marriage data published by the Central Statistics Office further speaks to the dramatic socio-religious shifts which have taken place in the jurisdiction, particularly over the past 20 years. Yet, although there has been a rapid proliferation of legislatively recognised religious bodies under Irish marriage law, specifically the Civil Registration Act 2004 (as amended), this development appears to have largely gone unnoticed, attracting little (if any) academic attention. This article therefore seeks to place the spotlight on how the definition of ‘religious body’ pursuant to the 2004 Act (as amended) has been interpreted by the Registrar General and highlights how the legislative machinery facilitating the legal recognition of such bodies is being utilised in practice as a result. It then considers the correctness of the Registrar General’s liberal understanding of the term ‘worship’ before turning to explore whether this interpretation is likely to have any broader implications for the understanding of ‘religion’ or ‘religious body’ in other legislative or constitutional contexts.

KEYWORDS:

• Religion
• religious body
• inclusion
• Ireland
• Civil Registration Act 2004
• religious pluralism

Introduction

Census 2022 shows an ever more diverse religious landscape in the Republic of Ireland. Although 3.5 million people, or almost 70% of the population, continue to identify as Roman Catholic – with a further 124,749 recognised as ‘Church of Ireland or England, Anglican and Episcopalian’ – the results are particularly notable for evidencing the growth in the range and importance of other Christian and, especially, non-Christian religions in the Republic (Central Statistics Office 2023a).¹ Over 100,000 people in Ireland now identify their religion as falling within the Orthodox (specifically Greek, Coptic and Russian) grouping, with almost 82,000 followers of Islam now present in the state (Central Statistics Office 2023b).² The results also show the rapid growth of Hinduism in Ireland with in excess of 33,000 adherents (up from 13,729 in 2016) and the emergence of a small but significant representation of those following Buddhist traditions with over 9,000 followers recorded in 2022 (Central Statistics Office 2023b).

Yet these headline statistics do not paint a full picture of the sheer diversity of religious bodies present in Ireland today. Data on Irish marriage practice can provide much more of an insight in this regard. For example, figures for 2022 show that almost 5,300 wedding ceremonies were solemnised by representatives of religions other than the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland (Central Statistics Office 2023b).³ While representatives of the Spiritualist Union of Ireland performed a large share of such ceremonies (2,299), representatives of Orthodox, Islamic, and Hindu communities, combined, accounted for a mere 45 weddings.⁴ The majority of the remaining ceremonies solemnised by representatives of religious organisations were instead conducted by those representing a wide range of new and emerging religious bodies recognised pursuant to the Civil Registration Act 2004 (as amended).

To date, the rapid proliferation of such legislatively recognised religious bodies has largely gone unnoticed. This article seeks to place the spotlight on how ‘religion’ or, more specifically, ‘religious body’ is understood under Irish marriage law and considers how the legislative machinery facilitating the legal recognition of such bodies is being utilised in practice. It then considers the correctness of the Registrar General’s liberal understanding of the term ‘worship’ for the purposes of the 2004 Act (as amended) before turning to explore whether this interpretation is likely to have any broader implications for the understanding of ‘religion’ or ‘religious body’ in other legislative or constitutional contexts.

Law and practice in defining ‘religious body’ under Irish marriage law

Despite its importance within Article 44 of the Irish Constitution (Bunreacht na hÉireann), ‘religion’ is not defined in the constitutional text.⁵ In a now-deleted reference, Article 44 (as originally enacted in 1937) did confirm the ‘special position of the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church as the guardian of the Faith professed by the great majority of the citizens’ and ‘recognised’ other minority denominations including the Church of Ireland, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, the Methodist Church in Ireland, the Religious Society of Friends in Ireland, the Jewish Congregations and ‘the other religious denominations existing’ in Ireland. However, notwithstanding that the reference to the ‘special position’ of the Catholic Church was not considered to have legal effect,⁶ it was nonetheless removed with the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution in Ireland in 1972.⁷ Although Whyte (2008, 450) argues that the religions listed must ‘conclusively be deemed to be religious for the purposes of the Constitution’, it remains unclear as to what principles will be applied to determine the status of other religions or religious bodies existing in Ireland today.

Yet while there have been no meaningful developments at a constitutional or judicial level in defining ‘religion’ for the purposes of Irish law, at a legislative level the plot has thickened since the enactment of the Civil Registration Act 2004. Pursuant to the 2004 Act (as amended), three categories of persons are identified as potential solemnisers of state-recognised marriage ceremonies: a civil registrar who is employed by the Health Service Executive to conduct what is commonly called a ‘civil ceremony’; a registered solemniser from a ‘religious body’ who may conduct a so-called religious ceremony; or a registered solemniser from a ‘secular body’ authorised to conduct a so-called secular ceremony.⁸ To be registered on the Register of Solemnisers to conduct a state-recognised religious ceremony, a prospective solemniser must be a nominated member of a recognised ‘religious body’.⁹ A ‘religious body’ is defined in section 45 as ‘an organised group of people members of which meet regularly for common religious worship’.¹⁰ The exact criteria, if any, for determining whether an organisation is a ‘religious body’ or otherwise remains speculative. Although Whyte (2008, 449 at footnote 10) suggested that ‘the reference to “worship” in the definition arguably implied a belief in a Supreme Being’ - with the Charities Regulator (n.d.) also stressing the importance of a belief in ‘Supreme Being’ within its understanding of what constitutes a religion under Irish charities law¹¹ - it does not appear that the Registrar General (An tArd-Chláraitheoir) has interpreted the 2004 Act (as amended) in such a way.¹² To secure recognition as a religious body with a view to nominating a solemniser under the 2004 Act (as amended), it seems the body concerned must simply provide details of its constitution (including a description of the organisation structure), a brief description of its belief system, confirmation of registration as a charity (if applicable), a copy of the credentials of the nominee, and a certificate to the effect that the form of marriage ceremony complies with the legal requirements for a valid marriage (see Leahy and O’Sullivan 2018).

Utilising the framework of the 2004 Act (as amended), a vast range of organisations have sought and secured legislative recognition as ‘religious bodies’ under Irish marriage law. While the Register of Solemnisers continues to be dominated by solemnisers representing the Roman Catholic Church (4,006), other traditionally important religions have proportionately few representatives (Department of Social Protection 2023). For example, the minority religions name-checked in the now-deleted constitutional provisions of Article 44, namely the Church of Ireland (322), the Presbyterian Church (107), the Methodist Church (189), the Religious Society of Friends in Ireland (7) and the Jewish Congregations (2)¹³ account for 627 registered religious solemnisers (Department of Social Protection 2023). However, speaking to the growth of religious diversity in Ireland, a further 879 solemnisers are also registered representing over 130 different religious bodies. Large denominations within this cohort include well-established religions such as Jehovah’s Witnesses (117) and the Baptist Church (26), as well as non-denominational or interfaith bodies such as One Spirit Ireland (90), Entheos Ireland (62), the Spiritualist Union of Ireland (54), the Earth Spiritualist Foundation (28), One World Ministers (23) and Omnism Ireland (1). Among the religious bodies with a smaller number of solemnisers are a noteworthy range of those ostensibly focused on paganism such as Pagan Life Rites (Ireland) (7), the Pagan Federation Ireland (7) and the Celtic Druid Temple (3). Other nature-based religious bodies include the Temple of Éiriú Celtic Tradition (4) and the Temple of Plants (2). Seemingly skirting the confines of the religious/secular divide is the Anthropocenic Humanist Fellowship (1).

Unforeseen consequences?

While the definition of ‘religious body’ adopted in the 2004 Act (as amended) was undoubtedly drafted to facilitate a liberal, open and inclusive agenda, encouraging and respecting religious pluralism, whether the legislature foresaw such a growth in the number of legislatively recognised religious denominations in Ireland within such a short period of time appears doubtful. A dive into the parliamentary (Oireachtas) debates preceding the introduction of the Civil Registration Act 2004, shows little attention was given to the definition of ‘religious body’ or its potential implications.¹⁴ Given the context of the time, this is perhaps unsurprising. On the enactment of the Civil Registration Act in 2004, 80% of all weddings conducted in Ireland were religious marriage ceremonies, with 76% undertaken according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church and a further 3% conducted by the Church of Ireland (Central Statistics Office 2010). Only 1% of all wedding ceremonies in 2004 were solemnised by ‘other religions’. Today, by contrast, nearly a quarter of all state-recognised wedding ceremonies (22.8%) are so-called religious ceremonies solemnised by authorised religious representatives according to rites and practices beyond those of the Roman Catholic Church or Church of Ireland (Central Statistics Office 2023a).

Unfortunately, as a result of the confluence of these shifts in contemporary Irish marriage practice, the seemingly broad interpretation of ‘worship’ adopted by the Registrar General with the associated expansion in the range of religious bodies recognised under the 2004 Act (as amended), and the introduction of secular wedding ceremonies through the Civil Registration (Amendment) Act 2012, a number of inconsistencies have emerged in the scheme.

First, although the definition of ‘religious body’ appears to have been left purposely vague, a much more prescriptive approach (based on the application of ‘robust’ criteria¹⁵) was subsequently taken to the definition of a ‘secular body’ in 2012. Designed ‘to ensure the institution of marriage is protected by applying a rigorous set of rules regarding the type of body that can be deemed eligible’,¹⁶ section 45A of the 2004 Act (as amended)¹⁷ provides that a body will be a ‘secular body’ if it has at least fifty members, has been in existence for a continuous period of at least five years and its principal objects are secular, ethical, and humanist. The definition provides that the members of the body must meet regularly in relation to their beliefs and in furtherance of these objects, and must not have any rules regarding marriage or the solemnisation of marriages that are in contravention of the requirements of the 2004 Act or any other enactment or the rule of law. It must also be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Registrar General that the body has appropriate procedures in writing for selecting, training, and accrediting members as fit and proper persons to solemnise marriages.¹⁸ The body must maintain a register of its members, have secured charitable status for tax purposes, and not have the making of profit as one of its principal objects.¹⁹

However, while the legislature was conscious of the need to ‘[respect] the obligation of the State to safeguard the institution of marriage and [ensure] the [secular] bodies involved are stable, long-standing and reputable organisations’,²⁰ no such requirements are imposed on organisations falling within the current definition of ‘religious body’. Although this discrepancy was indirectly acknowledged in 2012 – with concerns raised as to the potential for organisations, such as the Church of Scientology and the Universal Church of Satan, to be empowered to solemnise religious weddings under the current scheme²¹ – no reform was forthcoming. Nevertheless, whether the retention of such a two-tier system, holding secular bodies to a (much) higher standard than their religious counterparts, can be justified remains doubtful.²²

Second, by including within the definition of ‘religious body’ for the purposes of the 2004 Act (as amended) interfaith, spiritual, and other organisations which do not appear to worship a Supreme Being, the Registrar General’s interpretation of ‘worship’ as not necessitating such a belief has given rise to some confusion. Over 20 years ago, the Law Society of Ireland’s Law Reform Committee, in its publication on Charity Law: The Case for Reform, called for clarification as to whether the legal definition of religion extends beyond Supreme Beings to embrace a belief in principles or ethics (2002, 75). It was divided on which approach should be favoured with no further clarity provided by either the 2004 Act (as amended) or the Charities Act 2009 (as amended).²³ Yet in light of the range of organisations now recognised under the 2004 Act (as amended), it appears such belief systems are included within the definition of ‘religious body’ for the purposes of Irish marriage law albeit that, paradoxically, several also openly reject their being defined as such. One Spirit Interfaith Ireland, for instance, despite having applied for and secured status as a ‘religious body’, makes it explicitly clear that ‘InterFaith is not a new religion or even an old one. In fact, it’s not a religion at all’.²⁴ It further explains that it is ‘not focussed on any one tradition, religious or not, but on the beliefs and values of individuals’.²⁵ One World Ministers, another recognised religious body under Irish marriage law, also appear to perform non-religious ceremonies, stating ‘[w]e aim to bridge the gap between church and civil or humanist wedding services offering ceremonies that can be spiritual in nature if you require but not aligned with any particular religion’.²⁶ As well as arguably bringing the law into disrepute, such an unsatisfactory state of affairs appears anecdotally to have created confusion among stakeholders and the wider public as to what constitutes a ‘religion’ for the purposes of Irish marriage law.²⁷

The question therefore arises: is the Registrar General’s interpretation of ‘worship’ for the purposes of Irish marriage law, as no longer requiring a belief in a Supreme Being, correct? The answer is unclear. In 2008, one year after the commencement of the Civil Registration Act 2004, Whyte (2008, 460) commented:

To date, the issue of a legal definition of ‘religion’ for either constitutional or statutory purposes has not arisen in the Irish courts. However, the recent growth in religious and cultural diversification in our society increases the possibility that some Irish judge will eventually have to resolve this question in relation to a belief system that is not explicitly listed or alluded to in constitutional and legislative texts.

Unfortunately, in the intervening 15 years, the issue has not come before the Irish courts. Although a legal challenge in the context of the 2004 Act (as amended) might most likely arise from a refusal to recognise a purported religious body, given the Registrar General’s liberal interpretation of the law, almost all applications for recognition have been accepted. While it remains unclear precisely how many applications by supposedly religious bodies to nominate a solemniser to the Register of Solemnisers have been refused, as of 2015 there had only been just six such decisions made by the Registrar General.²⁸ A refusal may, however, be appealed to the Minister for Social Protection with at least one such appeal, namely by the aforementioned Pagan Federation Ireland, upheld to date.²⁹

Despite this, it does seem inevitable that the issue will eventually have to be considered by the judiciary. Whether, at that point, the Registrar General’s approach will stand up to scrutiny is debateable. On one hand, as noted above, Whyte considered the reference to ‘worship’ in the 2004 Act (as amended) ‘arguably implied’ a belief in a Supreme Being (2008, 449 at footnote 10) with such an understanding also long held under Irish charities law. On the other hand, the difficulties which such an interpretation is liable to create if applied strictly, for example in excluding Buddhist traditions, have been noted in England and Wales (Sandberg 2014).³⁰ There, since the ‘bold’ (Sandberg 2014) Supreme Court judgement in R (on the Application of Hodkin) v Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages, English marriage law has moved away from the need for a belief in a Supreme Being.³¹ Lord Toulson reasoned that in the absence of ′some compelling contextual reason for holding otherwise, religion should not be confined to religions which recognise a supreme deity′, concluding that this would ′be a form of religious discrimination unacceptable in today′s society′.³² Of particular interest from an Irish perspective, Toulson LJ reasoned that requiring the presence of a Supreme Being would lead the Registrar General and courts into ′difficult theological territory′ in a way that ′is not appropriate′.³³ Whether the Irish courts will follow the English lead on this question, however, remains speculative.³⁴

Possible broader implications of the Registrar General’s approach

Significant protection is afforded to religion and recognised religious bodies in Ireland. In addition to ensuring that the State ‘shall respect and honour religion’,³⁵ Article 44 includes key constitutional protections for religious denominations and their followers, representing a strong constitutional endorsement of the freedom of religion. Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject only to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen pursuant to Article 44.2.1°. Article 44.2.5° further guarantees that every religious denomination shall have the right to ‘manage its own affairs, own, acquire and administer property … and maintain institutions for religious … purposes’. Thus, as Daly (2012, 384–385) observes, ‘[b]arring issues of public order, the internal structure and form of denominations appear to be constitutionally protected against any imposition of statist and secular policy agendas’. Such protections, he contends (2012, 384–385), ‘would also clearly apply to any attempt to administer or regulate religious rituals, practices or functions or to bring the “management” of denominational “affairs”, in any other way, within the remit of public authority’.³⁶ Under Article 44.2.6°, strong protections for the property of religious denominations moreover exist. Unlike for private property, there appears to be no need to balance the property rights of religious bodies with the ‘exigencies of the common good’³⁷ nor may they be regulated ‘by the principles of social justice’³⁸ while, where religious property is diverted, compensation will necessarily be paid to the denomination concerned.³⁹ From an educational perspective, under Article 42 religious denominations may establish denominational schools representing their own unique ethos and, in so doing, secure State aid to this end (see Hogan 2019).⁴⁰

At a legislative level, religious followers are protected from religious discrimination under the Equal Status Act 2000 (as amended) and the Employment Equality Act 1998 (as amended) while religions may also benefit from a range of legislative provisions aimed at better accommodating religious communities.⁴¹ The Prison Rules 2007, to take a less well documented example, provide that each prisoner shall, subject to certain limitations, ‘be permitted to practice and comply with the rules, observances and norms of behaviour of the religious denomination’ of which they are or member.⁴² Subject to limited conditions, each prisoner shall be permitted to have access to ‘religious books, items and materials’ relating to their religious faith⁴³ and ‘may attend such services or meetings in the prison of his or her denomination as may, with the consent of the Governor, be arranged’.⁴⁴ The Rules also provide that a prisoner who belongs to a religious denomination for which there is no authorised chaplain may enjoy visits from a spiritual or pastoral advisor with the permission of the Governor,⁴⁵ while the need to respect the dietary practices of a prisoners’ religion is further recognised in Rule 23(2).⁴⁶ Similar protections, facilitating insofar as is reasonably practicable the exercise of a resident’s ‘civil, political and religious rights’, and respecting a resident’s right to follow dietary practices in line with their religion or culture, are also found in Regulation 9 of the Health Act 2007 (Care and Welfare of Residents In Designated Centres For Older People) Regulations 2013. Linked to these latter protections, it is worthwhile to note that, notwithstanding rules regarding the compulsory use of approved instruments for the slaughter of animals, exemptions for ritual slaughter in line with religious beliefs exist under Irish law pursuant to the EU (Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing) Regulations 2013.⁴⁷

If, ultimately, the Irish courts do uphold the Registrar General’s broad interpretation of ‘worship’, is it conceivable that the nearly 150 religious bodies recognised pursuant to the Civil Registration Act 2004 (as amended) could be deemed entitled to such extensive legal and constitutional protection? All things considered, probably not. Notwithstanding the merits of adopting a universal definition of religion as advanced by Sandberg (2018), the practice in Ireland, akin to our neighbours across the Irish Sea, remains that it is left to the courts to interpret the understanding of ‘religion’ under each different statute and legal instrument in accordance with the context of that statute or legal instrument (for England and Wales, see Sandberg 2014, 2018; for Scotland, see; Brown, Green, and Mair 2016; note also; Kenny 2014 who, looking even further afield explained, ‘In European states, religion is generally not defined constitutionally or in formal legislation but it is left to the courts to decide, contextually, whether the belief system under question has the attributes associated with religion’).⁴⁸ It therefore seems highly unlikely that the Irish courts will adopt a general definition of ‘religion’ and thus the approach taken in the marriage solemnisation context will not necessarily be applicable for other specified contexts. Indeed, although it might be thought that there is little downside to allowing people to have their marriage solemnised by a person of their choice, a conclusion that someone has unlawfully discriminated on the basis of religion, or that a gift is charitable, raises very different concerns that might legitimately bear on the appropriate definition of ‘religion’.⁴⁹ Nevertheless, while the Irish Superior Courts will rarely interpret a statutory provision, much less a constitutional provision, with reference to another statutory provision, the Registrar General’s understanding of and practice in interpreting ‘worship’ may yet be relied upon to provide some evidence of the general understanding of ‘religion’ in contemporary Ireland.⁵⁰

Conclusion

The interface between law, religion and society in Ireland has undergone profound change in recent years. As the soft power of the Catholic Church in dictating Irish law and policy has waned (Daly 2012, 3–4), concerted efforts have been made to be more accommodating of the range of new religious communities in Ireland.⁵¹ Nevertheless, while such developments are to be welcomed in responding to the needs of minority religions, the very understanding of ‘religion’ or ‘religious body’ under Irish marriage law remains somewhat ambiguous. This article has shown how the Registrar General’s interpretation of ‘worship’, specifically, pursuant to the 2004 Act has exacerbated the differential standards applied to religious and secular bodies as well as appearing to have permitted ostensibly secular bodies (who may have been unable to meet the stringent criteria required to gain status as such) to secure recognition as ‘religious bodies’.

Given these difficulties, one cannot help but wonder how much more theoretically consistent the law could have been if an approach akin to that now applied in Scotland had been adopted. Under Scots law, for example, although ‘religious bodies’ include Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu communities and organisations amongst others, humanist, pagan, spiritualist and interfaith communities and organisations are considered ‘belief bodies’.⁵² Such an approach could have avoided some of the difficulties bedevilling the Irish scheme and would, in hindsight, appear to have been preferable. Unfortunately, however, it now seems that the proverbial horse has bolted and the Irish courts will, sooner or later, have to determine the delicate question of whether the Registrar General’s interpretation of ‘worship’ under the 2004 Act’s definition of ‘religious body’ is correct.

Once a bastion of Roman Catholicism, Ireland’s ever more multicultural society is now characterised by its religious pluralism. From an Irish socio-religious perspective it could be said, to quote W. B. Yeats, that ‘all’s changed, changed utterly’.⁵³ In this context it will certainly be interesting to see how the state, legislature and/or judiciary answer the questions which will surely inevitably be raised in the not-too-distant future vis-à-vis the definition of ‘religion’ under Irish law.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Kathryn O’Sullivan

Kathryn O’ Sullivan is an Associate Professor at the School of Law, University of Limerick, Ireland. Kathryn’s primary research interest lies in family law, family property law and religious family law. She has published two monographs including Religion and Law in Ireland (Kluwer, 2nd ed, 2024) and edited an important contribution to religious law scholarship in Ireland: Minority Religions under Irish Law: Islam in National and International Context (Brill, 2019).

Notes

1. Note 736,210 respondents identified as of ‘no religion’, representing 14% of the population.

2. Although only 3,875 persons were recorded as Muslim in 1991, this figure increased to 19,147 in 2002, 32539 in 2006 and 49,204 in 2011 (Central Statistics Office 2012, 16). The 2022 figures therefore represent a 250% increase on the 2006 figures and a more than four-fold increase in the 20 years since 2002. While little appears to be known about most minority religions in the state, Islam is one of the few such religions which has attracted academic attention to date. It has been observed, for example, that Ireland’s Muslim community is largely characterised by its diversity. As Scharbrodt (2012, 231) notes: ‘Muslim migration to Ireland has been extremely diverse, without any particular ethnic or cultural group being predominant’. At a macro level, most Muslims in Ireland are Sunni. However, it appears that there are a number of different sects within this grouping, see Khan et al (2015, 113–138). Historically, the Irish Muslim community was comprised of middle- and upper-class educated professionals, however, it has been observed that there has been a significant shift in this composition with the arrival in more recent times of labour migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. For more, see Scharbrodt (2012, 222).

3. The total number of marriage ceremonies held in Ireland in 2022 was 23,173.

4. With thanks to Ms Margaret Hurley, Central Statistics Office for these figures. Any errors are my own. Note, while representatives of the Spiritualist Union of Ireland perform a large number of ceremonies annually, only 3,293 Spiritualists were recorded in Census 2022.

5. See below for more on Article 44. The ‘exalted position’ (Daly 2012, 82) given to religion in the constitutional order in Ireland has been recognised.

6. See the obiter comments of Geoghegan J in Ó Beoláin v. Fahy [2001] 2 IR 279. See also Ó Corráin (2008, 53).

7. Mullally and O’Donovan (2011, 287) note: ‘The amendment was largely a response to the outbreak of conflict in Northern Ireland and reflected a desire to signal a greater openness to religious minorities’. See also Ní Leathlobhair and Coffey (2021, 357–384).

8. This was an important change introduced by the 2004 Act (as amended). Prior to its commencement, Roman Catholic marriages were governed by the common law with the formalities for civil marriages or religious marriages (other than Roman Catholic marriage) derived principally from the Marriages (Ireland) Act 1844, as amended by the Registration of Marriages (Ireland) Act 1863. With the introduction of the 2004 Act, however, Irish law shifted from recognising various religious marriages to now effectively authorising religious representatives to conduct a state marriage. Nevertheless, the practice has continued – including within official state publications such as those produced by the Central Statistics Office (2023b) – to refer to the ceremony type by reference to the civil, religious or secular status of the solemniser or registrar.

9. Section 51(3)(c). Would-be solemnisers may not self-nominate and all nominations must be approved by the Registrar General.

10. Beyond the need to be nominated by such a body, it is uncertain what the approval process for solemnisers requires. It is not clear, for example, whether criteria are applied to determine the suitability and qualifications of the proposed solemniser.

11. It notes that although the Charities Act 2009 does not contain a definition of religion, existing case law has established that a religion has two core elements: the existence of a ‘Supreme Being’ and faith and worship of that ‘Supreme Being’. It therefore notes that ‘[t]o advance religion, your organisation’s work must support a religion that contains the two core elements outlined, but it does not necessarily need to be a religious body’. See also In Re South Place Ethical Society [1980] 3 ALL ER 918. See below for more.

12. See below for a sample of bodies which secured ‘religious body’ status despite making it clear they do no share a belief in a Supreme Being.

13. Note the Register refers to the body as the ‘Jewish Community’.

14. For a full list of debates, see https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2003/35/?tab=debates. Note, however, should the issue arise, the courts cannot have regard to parliamentary debates in interpreting statutes, see Crilly v. Farrington [2001] 3 IR 251.

15. Dáil Éireann debate, Thursday − 20 Dec 2012.

16. Dáil Éireann debate, Thursday − 20 Dec 2012 (per Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton) (emphasis added).

17. As inserted by section 3 of the Civil Registration (Amendment) Act 2012.

18. The double standards vis-à-vis the training of solemnisers was previously highlighted by Leahy and O’Sullivan (2018, note 16).

19. See section 45A(2), noted below, for a list of what does not constitute a secular body.

20. Dáil Éireann debate, Thursday − 20 Dec 2012 (per Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton) emphasis added).

21. Dáil Éireann debate, Thursday − 20 Dec 2012 (per Mr Willie O’Dee TD). He noted: ‘Most people would find it undesirable that such organisations might be authorised to solemnise marriages among their members in this country simply because they happen to be part of a religious group as per the broad definition set out in the principal Act’. Note the issue of the breadth of definition of religion appears to have been discussed in the Seanad at Second Stage of 2012 Bill (according to subsequent debates) however there is no online record of this debate. It is also interesting to note that the controversial Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, otherwise known as the Unification Church or the Moonies, are recognised under the 2004 Act. While section 45A(2), provides that a secular body can be refused recognition under the 2004 Act (as amended) if its objects are, for example, contrary to public policy or morality, there are no such provisions vis-à-vis religious bodies.

22. Many recognised religious bodies have just one solemniser and no online presence. Perhaps in light of the stringent criteria applied to secular bodies, only one body beyond the Humanist Association of Ireland, namely Aisling Árann Teoranta, is as of November 2023 recognised as a secular body on the Register of Solemnisers. Interestingly, Deputy Ó Snodaigh was particularly opposed to the retention of the current scheme, see Dáil Éireann debate, Thursday − 20 Dec 2012. He argued: ‘Giving the power to solemnise the legal contract of marriage to bodies outside the State’s infrastructure, be they religious or not, opens the State to endless and unsolvable problems which could end up in court’. He proposed that ‘if marriage solemnisers were restricted to being accountable registrars employed by the State under the [Registrar General] Ard-Chláraitheoir, it would be a better system’

23. This would be in line with the approach in many common law jurisdictions whereby the legislatures typically leave it up to the courts to provide such definitions, see Sandberg (2018). However, note such clarity was provided by the Charities Act 2006 in England and Wales.

24. See https://onespiritministers.ie/about/what-is-interfaith.html (emphasis added).

25. See https://onespiritministers.ie/about/what-is-interfaith.html (emphasis added).

26. See https://oneworldministers.ie/ (emphasis added).

27. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some prospective spouses chose a solemniser based on his or her ability to conduct a state recognised marriage ceremony, remaining unclear as to whether the solemniser is a representative of a religious or a secular body.

28. Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday − 30 June 2015 (per Ms. Joan Burton, Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection) available at https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2015-06-30/156/.

29. Seanad Éireann debate, Wednesday − 2 May 2012 (per Ms. Joan Burton, Minister for Social Protection) available at https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/seanad/2012-05-02/7/. Minister Burton confirmed the successful appeal noting the Federation ‘represents people who would describe themselves as witches and so on. They would have a variety of beliefs and describe themselves as forming a federation. That was upheld by the previous Minister because it came within the remit of the original legislation’.

30. See also In Re South Place Ethical Society [1980] 3 ALL ER 918 which, despite defining religion as having a ‘faith in a god and worship of that god’, noted an ‘exception’ vis-à-vis Buddhism.

31. [2013] UKSC 77. The decision in Hodkin saw the Supreme Court overrule its earlier decision in R v Registrar General, ex parte Segerdal [1970] 2 QB 697 which had held that ‘worship’ for the purposes of the Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 required ′reverence or veneration of God or a Supreme Being′. Note English charities law has also moved away from a need for a Supreme Being, with this shift being reflected in the Charities Act 2006.

32. ibid. Para 51.

33. ibid. Paras 52–53.

34. It is possible, albeit perhaps not probable, that the failure of the Irish legislature to address the issue on the introduction of Civil Registration (Amendment) Act 2012 permitting so called secular ceremonies could be construed as signalling an endorsement of the Registrar General’s interpretation of ‘worship’.

35. Article 44.1 of the Constitution. Note, although there is no established church in Ireland, there are many references throughout the Irish Constitution which nod to the existence of a Christian, if not Catholic, state. For example, Article 6.1 of the Constitution states: ‘All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good’. Several oaths for the office of President (Article 12.8), for membership of the Council of State (Article 31.4) and membership of the Irish judiciary (Article 34.6.1°) also include references to ‘the presence of Almighty God’.

36. ibid 384–385. However, note section 99(3) of the Charities Act 2009 regarding the regulation of mass cards.

37. Article 43.2.2° of the Constitution.

38. Article 43.2.1° of the Constitution. See Articles 40.3 and 43 of the Constitution, generally.

39. There is no constitutional right to compensation where the property rights of non-religious bodies are affected, see Whyte (2008, 447).

40. Article 42 of the Constitution is the basis of the denominational or patronage schools system applied in Ireland.

41. It is interesting to note in the context of employment law, that a desire to be more accommodating of religious diversity appears to have informed recent changes in the 2021 Policy Document on Uniform and Dress Code within the Irish Police Force (An Garda Síochána). It now provides at p. 9 that, despite the general ban on the wearing of symbols and adornments, headwear for religious and cultural reasons and beliefs, will be supported ‘where possible’. The pressure to make such a change was evident in the case of Ravinder Singh Oberoi v. Commissioner of An Garda Síochána [2013] IEHC 267; [2014] 25 ELR 17. The case concerned a Sikh complainant who was denied the right to wear a turban as part of the Garda Reserve uniform. However, as he was not regarded as an ‘employee’ within the meaning of the Employment Equality Act 1998 (as amended), a determination on the legality of the ban did not result.

42. Rule 34(1).

43. Rule 34(3).

44. Rule 34(4).

45. Rule 34(10). Note the different standards applied to visits of authorised Prison Chaplains and those who are not, see Rules 34(9) and 34(11).

46. It states: ‘Subject to the maintenance of good order and safe and secure custody, the Governor shall, in so far as is practicable … ensure that provision shall be made to enable a prisoner to observe dietary practices of a religion or culture of which he or she professes to be a follower’. For example, the Wheatfield Prison Chaplain noted in their 2021 Annual Report (6) that special dietary and dining arrangements were made for Muslim prisoners observing Ramadan.

47. See the Animal, Health and Welfare Act 2013 and Transposing Regulation 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009. The Regulations provide that rules regulating the stunning methods used in the slaughter of animals shall not apply in the case of animals subject to particular methods of slaughter prescribed by religious rites provided that the slaughter takes place in a slaughterhouse. For early Irish legislation in this regard, see section 15 of the Slaughter of Animals Act 1935.

48. Note in R (on the Application of Hodkin) v Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages [2013] UKSC 77 para 34 Lord Toulson observed:

‘There has never been a universal legal definition of religion in English law, and experience across the common law world over many years has shown the pitfalls of attempting to attach a narrowly circumscribed meaning to the word. There are several reasons for this – the different contexts in which the issue may arise, the variety of world religions, developments of new religions and religious practices, and developments in the common understanding of the concept of religion due to cultural changes in society’.

However, it is worthwhile to note that Whyte (2008, 452), from an Irish perspective, considers that express legislative recognition such as that afforded to the Baptist Union of Ireland and the Plymouth Brethren under the now-repealed Adoption Act 1952 would ‘clearly bolster the claims’ of a denomination to be recognised under the Constitution and Irish law generally.

49. It is perhaps worthwhile to note that in England and Wales, while a liberal approach was also taken to the description of ‘religion’ and definition of ‘worship’ for the purposes of marriage solemnisation in R (on the Application of Hodkin) v. Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages [2013] UKSC 77, as was repeatedly emphasised in the judgement, this definition was not intended to apply in other contexts.

50. See Zappone & Gilligan v. Revenue Commissioners & Ors [2006] IEHC 404 where the court did refer to section 2(2)(e) of the Civil Registration Act 2004 (regarding an impediment to marriage) as evidence of contemporary understandings of marriage.

51. Responding to the needs of the Muslim community, legislative reforms have, for example, been introduced to permit shroud or ‘uncoffined’ burials. See the Burial Ground (Amendment) Regulations 2013 amending the Rules and Regulations for the Regulation of Burial Grounds 1888. Unless a direction has been issued not to do so on the grounds of there being a health or environmental risk, uncoffined burials are thus now permitted. At a judicial level, the landmark Supreme Court decision in HAH v. SAA & ors [2017] IESC 40 [110]-[111] confirmed for the first time that a potentially polygamous marriage could be recognised as legally valid in Ireland with such recognition not lost or withdrawn if the husband contracts a further marriage. Conscious of the implications of its decision, the court held at [106] that there were ‘significant practical policy disadvantages in denying recognition to such marriages’. To deny such recognition, ‘would be likely to cause distress, disruption and confusion amongst a significant number of people living in the Irish community’ without any ‘corresponding gain in terms of the protection of marriage’, see [121].

52. See the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014 and https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/registration/i-want-to-get-married-in-scotland-how-do-i-go-about-it/who-can-be-a-celebrant-for-marriagecivil-partnership-in-scotland.

53. Taken from a poem entitled ‘Easter, 1916’.