Citing the Bible must never lead to any penalty

Pastor James McConnell was put on trial for a sermon in which he described Islam as "heathen" and “satanic".

The late evangelical preacher was charged under the 2003 Communications Act with sending via a “a message or other matter that was grossly offensive".

The trial was bad enough, but made worse by the fact that the PSNI investigated the pastor after a complaint from an Iraqi Muslim academic who was given home in the UK yet who praised the peace in Mosul secured by Isis (the mass murdering Islamic extremists).

Which was more offensive? The pastor's sermon or the complainant's defence of Isis? Yet it was Pastor McConnell put in the dock.

The preacher was acquitted. But at the end of the trial, the judge (Mr McNally) said he agreed “entirely with [the prosecution] that [some McConnell comments] are easily capable of being construed as grossly offensive”.

There was a disturbing implication that if Pastor McConnell had not said that in a sermon, and not been protected under Article 9 of the Human Rights Act (freedom of belief and religion) then he might have been justly convicted The pastor was acquitted but in another context might have been found guilty.

Now there has been a similarly troubling development. Great Britain's main prosecution service says it is "no longer appropriate" to read parts of the Bible aloud. The Crown Prosecution Service said it contains references “which are simply no longer appropriate in modern society and which would be deemed offensive if stated in public”.

Many people who are thoughtful and also irreligious see the Bible as one of the most important texts in western civilisation. It will be outrageous if citing it, or any part of it, leads to official penalty.