For Bertie Ahern it must be the present he most wished for this Christmas, but did not dare hope he would get. Now it is his, and courtesy, above all it seems, of his increasingly good friend and neighbour in Drumcondra, Cardinal Desmond Connell.
And the timing could hardly have been better for the Taoiseach. With what had been hailed as the most ingeniously-crafted proposals to solve a 20-year-old Irish problem beginning to fall apart at the seams, along come the bishops giving the sort of unanimous support possibly dreamt of by the Government. And not just that but saying how very disappointed they would be if the referendum did not go ahead, as has been suggested recently.
At yesterday's press conference in St Patrick College, Maynooth, which was attended by the Catholic Primate, Archbishop Sean Brady, Cardinal Desmond Connell, Bishop Donal Murray of Limerick, moral theologian Father Paul Tighe, and the spokesman for the Bishops' Conference, Father Martin Clarke, they insisted "no deal was done".
"Nothing could be further from the truth," said Father Clarke. He again explained how the first time the Bishops' Conference became aware of the proposals was when he went into the Government Information Offices in Molesworth Street, Dublin, on October 3rd, the day after they were announced, and collected them. He then circulated them to bishops around the country.
However, and seemingly unknown to most of the other members of the Bishops' Conference at the time, soundings had been made by the Government of Cardinal Connell's views on proposed proposals.
It has also emerged that similar soundings had been made of the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin, the Most Rev Dr Walton Empey.
But yesterday, at least initially, the Cardinal was not very forthcoming on this matter. Replying to questions, he said he "personally" had had no contact with any politician on the issue. Nor had his office. There was, however, "indirect contact" of which he "knew nothing whatsoever".
Returning to the matter later and, as he said, fearing he may have given the wrong impression, he "would have to say I was made indirectly aware of the broad outlines of what the Government might be proposing".
This he felt was "an act of prudence on the part of the Government" as "if the Catholic Church were to reject them it would be very foolish to make such proposals."
However "at no stage did I give my commitment, whatsoever" but "I did not say they would be totally unacceptable".
He did "not say they would not be worth trying". And where the Cardinal is concerned, such double negatives are as good as a nod to a keen Taoiseach.
The thrust of yesterday's document is clear. Dictated by the bishops' deep and unconcealed desire to see the Supreme Court judgment in the X case undone, they want a referendum and they want it passed.
In that context they welcome "and support the new proposal as a significant improvement on the current unsatisfactory situation". They were "satisfied" that "on any reasonable interpretation" the protection offered by the new proposal "does not dilute or weaken the general protection already offered by Article 40.3.3. of the Constitution".
This while still believing existing rights of the unborn under that Article need to be reinforced, not least "prior to implantation".
Then in a most unequivocal paragraph they continued that the issues raised by the proposed referendum were "crucial" and merited the serious attention of voters. It was "an opportunity that should not be lost". And where the fertilisation/implantation debate was concerned, it was their conviction, while recognising the concerns involved, that the new proposal represented "a considerable improvement on the existing situation".
Then in a real blow to those right-to-life people opposed to the proposals, they said "Catholics voters should feel free in conscience to support this measure".
Further, they encouraged "all our people to vote in the forthcoming referendum". So doing, they stopped just short of telling people directly to vote for the proposals. They could hardly have given a stronger endorsement.
But what has intrigued many is how they arrived at such a position considering their statement to the Oireachtas Committee on Abortion in July 2000 that "from the first moment of conception that new human being has the right to be treated as a human person and has the right to have its life protected".
And considering the Government definition of abortion in the new proposals as "the deliberate destruction by any means of unborn life after implantation my italics in the womb of a woman".
Bishop Donal Murray said yesterday there had been no change in the bishops' position. Indeed, the bishops' statement begins with the assertion: "It is the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that human life is sacred from the moment of conception".
Cardinal Connell said they were aware there was a difficulty here for some which had to be teased out and which presented "a teaching moment" for the bishops. But, crucially, he believed nothing proposed by the Government diluted or weakened the general protection already afforded the unborn under the Constitution as it stood. The bishops did believe, however, that those existing rights "from the moment of conception" needed to be reinforced by law.
And so the referendum debate has been given new life.
Patsy McGarry is Religious Affairs Correspondent of The Irish Times