BishopAccountability.org
	Response to Clerical Child Abuse Report The Irish Times December 4, 2009 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1204/1224260043154.html Madam, – I started reading the Murphy report at 10am in an office of the Department of Justice last Thursday week and quickly became both very angry and very sad as chapter after chapter revealed sickening details of acts of abuse perpetrated by priests on vulnerable young children. No matter how many other reports I may have read or how easily I recall my own childhood experiences at the hands of former priest Ivan Payne, there is nothing that prepares a decent human being for the details of how any adults, let alone priests, sexually abused young children. And then there is the cover-up of that abuse. The knowing calculating self-serving cover-up of the sexual abuse of children in order to maintain secrecy, avoid scandal, protect the reputation of the church and preserve its assets. The report is quite clear that these were the preoccupations of the archdiocese in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, adding that the commission of investigation had no doubt that child sexual abuse was covered up by the archdiocese and that the structures and roles of the church facilitated that cover-up. Bishop Donal Murray’s behaviour is described as inexcusable; he protests that this is not the only description of his behaviour. He is right: the report also says he was aware for many years of complaints and/or suspicions of clerical child sexual abuse, dealt badly with a number of complaints, and he did not deal properly with the suspicions and concerns that were expressed to him. These comments don’t exactly balance out the finding of his actions being inexcusable. Although Bishop Jim Moriarty told the people in Kildare and Leighlin, he was not directly criticised in the report, in fact he was. He claimed his reason for not properly investigating Fr Edmondus was because he did not have access to the archives, but the report says that he could have asked the archbishop to conduct a search which would have revealed earlier sexual abuse by the priest. Bishops Drennan, Walsh and Field, were auxiliary bishops of Dublin during some of the period (1975-2004) covered by the commission of investigation. The report tells us that a number of auxiliary bishops were made aware of complaints of child sexual abuse by priests in their geographical areas. Others found out about such priests through the regular monthly meetings involving the archbishop and the auxiliary bishops. It is not believable to me that none of these three, as bishops attending those meetings, were unaware that child sexual abuse was covered up by the archdiocese. They were bishops working in a diocese where children were sexually abused by priests, priests that the diocese knew were dangerous. They were all part of a structure and culture that facilitated the sexual abuse of children. It is time for Bishops Murray, Moriarty, Drennan, Walsh and Field to resign. Some of them tried to keep a low profile, others are trying to hold onto office in a manner that has become obscene. I would urge them not to hide behind the fact that some of them were not criticised in the report; the report details only a sample of allegations against 46 priests, but it found allegations against 172. There are almost 40 pages missing from the report: what will they reveal when they are published? For the Murphy report to so conclusively find that child sexual abuse was covered up by the archdiocese at a time when these men were all bishops in the diocese, and for them all to remain in office is to add insult to injury to me, and many people like me, who were sexually abused by priests. It is deeply hurtful and distressing that none of them can see that the hurt and pain caused to so many children in the archdiocese at a time when they were bishops is reason enough for them all to respect those sad experiences and go. Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has told his fellow bishops that they must come out and answer questions raised in the report. But there are no questions raised in the report, each chapter concludes with findings of fact. It doesn’t ask Bishop Murray if he thinks his actions were inexcusable, it tells us they were. It doesn’t accuse him of behaving inexcusably, it tells us he did. Archbishop Martin has no right to tell bishops that they should respond to this report and if their responses are acceptable to him and his priests then maybe things will be okay. Things are not okay; he is not the one to judge their actions, Judge Yvonne Murphy has done that and on the basis of her findings, the bishops, as named here, should resign. And if they don’t, Archbishop Martin should resign before his meeting with them next week. In the meantime, Archbishop Martin should stop trying to undermine the commission of investigation and its findings. – Yours, etc, ANDREW MADDEN, Meath Square, Dublin 8. Madam, – Would this be a good time to consider repealing the 21st Amendment to the Irish Constitution, which prohibited the death penalty? It might then be possible to make it a capital crime in Ireland to rape a child, and obtain appropriate retributive justice against the Irish religious brothers, sisters, priests, bishops, and cardinals who practised, facilitated, or covered up these rapes. – Yours, etc, DENIS COTTER, Dover Road, Middleburg, Virginia, US. Madam, – The Pope needs to come to Dublin for 24 hours as a humble priest – without all the fanfare and “bling” of the Vatican – to apologise for all that has happened in the past 50 years. Only then can the healing begin. – Yours, etc, MICHAEL J McNAMARA, Ballyclough, Limerick. Madam, – It is futile, and sadly facile, for readers of your publication to call for the expulsion of the papal nuncio from a country whose elected leader feels compelled to defend his inaction and that of his employers in the Vatican. Would that such loyalty was shown to Ireland. – Yours, etc, MICHEAL O’DOHERTY, South Wood Street, Chicago, Illinois, US. Madam, – Your report “Taoiseach defends behaviour of Vatican” (Home News, December 2nd) evokes echoes of the Charles McQuaid era when, during the “mother and child scheme” controversy the then taoiseach John A Costello said he was a Catholic first and an Irishman second. The Vatican, being an independent state which appears to play the diplomatic card when it suits it, should be called in by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and asked to explain itself, and the breaking of diplomatic links should be seriously considered in the light of what its “agents” have perpetrated on innocent children of this independent state. Brian Cowen needs to realise that he should be standing up for the children of Ireland, not trying to kowtow to what he calls the “Holy See”. – Yours, etc, SEAN MARTIN, Kenure Lawns, Rush, Co Dublin. Madam, – What your photograph (Front page, December 1st) of a soldier escorting the papal nuncio, while carrying a raised sword, perfectly epitomises is the malign relationship between my church and secular power for almost all of Christian history. Jesus Christ told Peter to put away his sword (John 18/11). But since, the 4th-century Christian leaders have presumed to know better. A sword represents above all violence and as such is the very antithesis of the power-rejecting Jesus. Catholic spirituality enjoins personal humility. But Catholic practice constantly supports a quasi-demonic institutional obsession with the church’s control and prestige. Virtually no regime seems too brutal or corrupt to merit total condemnation. Not that of Hitler or Pinochet or many other murderous governments in Latin America – not so long as the authority and position of the church are recognised in significant ways. This, I believe, is part of the wider context of episcopal indulgence towards paedophile clergy. Innocent victims of abuse are seen in practice – if not in theory – as expendable so long as the “authority” of the church is preserved. Many prophetic priests and religious have abandoned their ministry in utter disgust with the double standards of church leadership in regard to fundamental values. My church has cared for countless poor and sick children with exemplary dedication throughout its long history. But until it fully confronts clerical paedophilia wherever the church is present, it does not deserve any longer to be entrusted with the care of the defenceless. And it should ask itself very seriously what its elitist, secretive, sexist and power-hungry governing structures have to do with the example and teaching of Jesus Christ. – Yours, etc, JOHN FEIGHERY SVD, North Circular Road, Dublin 7. Madam, – Absent from Revd Vincent Twomey’s comments on the Murphy report (December 3rd) is any recognition that the reality of clerical sexual abuse and the moving about and protection of these abusing priests by their superiors, both in this country and in the US, has been known about in the Vatican for several decades. Cardinal Ratzinger, as he then was, wrote to Catholic bishops in 2001 to remind them of the penalties for leaking details of inquiries into offences such as clerical sex abuse which hardly suggest his primary concern was for the victims. The calls for the resignation of those bishops named in the Murphy report seem like an exercise in damage limitation. Mary Raftery articulated the feelings of many us when she referred to the “moral bankruptcy that permeates the ranks of the supposed moral and religious leaders of our society” (Opinion, December 3rd). Indeed it is very difficult to reconcile a belief in God with the actions of those who protected the abusers for so long and those who stood by in silence. No doubt the churchs theologians or its public relations experts have a ready made answer for that naive question. – Yours, etc, GEAROID O DUBHAIN, Clarkeswood, Mount Oval Village, Rochestown, Co Cork. Madam, – As I set up my crib for the Christmas period, I reflected on the year 2009, and what it told us about the children of Ireland. My reflections concerned the sad legacy of our State where innocent children are concerned. In my head I dedicated it to all the survivors of abuse. It will not alleviate their suffering, but does help me to deal with the rage and impotence I feel. What an ugly, craven, history we have, where those in power did not have the courage or even humanity to tackle what was so wrong! They still do not. – Yours, etc, DEIRDRE BREEN, Fosterbrook, Booterstown, Co Dublin A chara, – The concept of “Sins of omission” was invented by the Catholic church. Why can’t the hierarchy recognise it in itself? – Is mise, CAIT Ni CHEALLACHAIN, Old Park Road, Corbally, Limerick
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.