IN THE light of the hullabaloo surrounding the Tara and M3 motorway situation, it is perhaps timely to examine some of Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's remarks in the past regarding the whole issue of heritage in this country.

While in opposition in 1996, he stated nobly: "It is imperative that no more of our irreplaceable national heritage be destroyed because of political inertia."

As Taoiseach, he's on record as being put out about major road building projects being held up "because of swans, snails and the occasional person hanging out of a tree" and, in specific reference to Tara, he made the asinine observation in November 2004 that he stood on its route and "couldn't even see the hill from there". Two months later, in January 2005, he compounded his ignorance by stating that the Tara/M3 controversy was merely "a row about who was there 5,000 years ago" and he didn't know the inhabitants of Tara but asserted that they must have been "very significant people".

Then in March 2005, while campaigning in local by-elections in the Meath constituency, he replied to those expressing reservations about the M3's mooted route with the admission that he didn't wish to upset Tara's kings: "If I had known they were there, I would've gone around them."

Hardly the epitome of erudition and about as incredible and inconsistent as his continued denial and obfuscation regarding the Mahon tribunal's investigation into his rather singular financial affairs.

David Marlborough, Kenilworth Park, Dublin 6W.

Religion not to blame for tyranny
From Judy Peddle

I ADMIT I have not read Christopher Hitchens's book, God Is Not Great but from AC Grayling's review (Tribune Review, 8 July) it does indeed appear to be a rant.

It brings to mind Sherlock Holmes's observation about twisting facts to suit a theory, to imply that religion is somehow to blame for the atrocities of non-religious tyrants . . .

"similarity of form", "Stalin's education in a seminary" . . . is frankly ridiculous. Also, when Hitchens and Grayling disingenuously quote the apparent preference of the French religious right for Hitler in the 1930s, they must know that the world was not aware of Nazi horrors at the time.

How dare Grayling claim 'apologists', who simply cite the beauty of its art as a positive of religion, are trying to justify religious wrongs? Hitchens claims such art would exist anyway because of humanity's creative urge. He doesn't seem to consider that cruel acts also occur without religion because of humanity's nastier side.

Militant atheists are like the boys in Lord of the Flies . . . always projecting human failings onto something external.

Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and Co are the atheistic mirror image of extreme religious evangelists. I doubt, however, if a book from the latter school would receive such an uncritical review from your paper.

Judy Peddle, Love Lane, An Rath, Charleville, Co Cork.

Shannon's excellent article on Tony Griffin
From James Hickey

I WOULD like to compliment Kieran Shannon for his excellent article on Tony Griffin (Sport, 1 July). I felt we really got a feeling for what Tony Griffin is attempting. I compliment the paper for highlighting such a good-news story also.

James Hickey, Oaklands Drive, Rathgar, Dublin 6.

Antrim in Leinster . . .not good for Ulster From Brendan Toibin I AGREE with most of what your correspondent Michael O'Connor from Co Cork says (Letters, 8 July) but I would like to pull him up on one point.

If Antrim come into the Leinster Championship it would mean the end of the Ulster senior hurling championship.

Are the people in Derry and Down supposed to be abandoned?

Brendan Toibin, Parnell Avenue, Enniscorthy, Co Wexford.

Great Agbonlahor and family deserve to stay
From Paul Doran

TODAY I took part in a very dignified protest outside the Garda National Immigration Bureau offices in Burgh Quay, Dublin to show my solidarity with the Agbonlahor family.

I was greatly relieved to hear that this case has been put back for another month.

But I would appeal to the new minister for justice to show compassion and to let the whole family stay in Ireland. Great Agbonlahor, who has never been to Africa and is suffering from autism, deserves more from the Irish nation.

Paul Doran, Monastery Walk, Clondalkin, Dublin 22.

Send Diarmuid Doyle on a long holiday From Paul Edson

UNLIKE the letter writer last week, calling for Diarmuid Doyle to get a raise, he should instead be given a long holiday, preferably until the next general election. We may then be spared more of his "Greens betray principles" rants of simplistic, lazy journalism that he obviously pens whilst taking a quick toilet break.

It seems Doyle just cannot (or will not) grasp the simple notion that a party out of government changes nothing, whilst in government it is in a position to try and bring about meaningful change.

Any reasonable political commentator would at least reserve judgement beyond a few weeks on whether the Greens can achieve anything in government. But clearly Doyle has a closed and empty mind on the subject.

Paul Edson, Merchant's Quay, Kilrush, Co Clare.

Tridentine mass and pope's encyclical From Joseph Smyth

ECUMENISM celebrates commonality and the points of agreement. There are, naturally, differences between the Christian churches on philoso-phical and theological grounds and, in that respect, the remarks of the Presbyterian spokesman were apposite. (News, 15 July) The rights of the Church of Ireland to appoint canons and ministers is a matter for itself and the conscience of its clergy, as are the issues of liturgy, doctrine or any other matter.

Similarly, any other church or organisation has the freedom to practise as it sees fit within itself. It follows then that the Roman church should be free to express itself in terms of liturgy, worship and doctrine, most specifically an area relating to the mass and the fundamental issue of transubstantiation, keystone principles setting Catholicism aside from other churches, and in the now muchquoted or perhaps apocryphal words of the late Cardinal Hume: "as fundamental to Catholicism; and if you don't like the menu, try somewhere else".

The current pope as Cardinal Ratzinger would have had significant input into the formulation of the current Catechism. The Roman church recognises the Old Testament.

Catholics pray for the Jewish people worldwide, as they do for other Christians, heretics, pagans and apostates. These prayers are part of the current Easter services and are for the salvation of souls. Each Catholic is supposed inter alia to pray for the souls of all mankind, because, according to Catholicism, it is simply the right thing to do. How is this "unnerving"?

Surely by asserting the divinity of Jesus Christ, Catholicism is bound to be offensive to any other faith which does not share this position?

For those who have attended the Tridentine mass and have attended any Orthodox liturgy, it becomes obvious that the similarities of these rites reveal a deep conjoined bond going back millennia. Perhaps it is in recognition of these facts that the current administration is "reaching out" to members of its own flock, by "accommodating diversity" and subsequently "building bridges" with the one group of churches to which it is dogmatically and doctrinally closest, the eastern and Orthodox Christians of many hues who have been ignored or lost in the rubble of centuries of conflict and oppression. How is this "conservative"?

The clarification given by the pope on 7 July is to be formally applied from 14 September. The papal ordinance does not "revive the Latin mass" but merely allows those who want to worship using the Tridentine rite to be included in the main body of the church, as is their canon-law entitlement. Further-more, the encyclical acknowledges that the "old" missal of Pius V was never abrogated and that its use remains valid. How is this a reformation?

Whilst some have not found the pope's "explanation" satisfactory or "reasonable", would it not be somewhat bizarre for the pope to seek the approval of, say, the Quakers or Mormons before making pronouncements on Catholic liturgy, or vice versa? Each faith has its own rites and processes to be observed and applied.

Without fear of retribution, each must and should be allowed express itself truthfully to its own traditions and should outwardly show civil respect to different religions . . . and be afforded the same.

The Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church makes it clear: "It is never lawful for anyone to force others to embrace the Catholic faith against their conscience."

Joseph Smyth, Ennereilly, Arklow, Co Wicklow.