BishopAccountability.org
	Church Clarifies Wording of Oath in Smyth Abuse Inquiry By Patsy Mcgarry The Irish Times March 20, 2010 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0320/1224266710454.html OATH OF SECRECY: THE CATHOLIC Communications Office issued a statement yesterday detailing the wording of the oath administered by then Fr Sean Brady to two boys, one 14, the other 15, in a 1975 inquiry into abuse allegations against Fr Brendan Smyth. In response to what it said were inaccurate media reports this week, it said the correct wording of the oath was: “I [name] hereby swear that I have told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and that I will talk to no one about this interview except authorised priests.” It continued that: “In addition, the following sentence was included in the second oath: ‘So help me God and these holy Gospels which I touch’.” Authorised priests in the context referred to “the personnel who were taking evidence”, it said. “The intention of the oaths was to avoid potential collusion in the gathering of the inquiry’s evidence and to ensure that the process was robust enough to withstand challenge by the perpetrator, Fr Brendan Smyth.” Last Tuesday the same office said that: “at the end of both interviews, the boys were asked to confirm by oath the truthfulness of their statements and that they would preserve the confidentiality of the interview process”. Commenting on how such inquiries were conducted, the Murphy report said it was “in stark contrast to the civil law which requires the public administration of justice. “Moreover, an obligation to secrecy/confidentiality on the part of participants in a canonical process could undoubtedly constitute an inhibition on reporting child sexual abuse to the civil authorities or others.” The commission also felt it was “not clear ... whether the obligation of confidentiality relates only to what takes place during the canonical process or whether it extends to the underlying details of complaint”. It said “a number of complainants, however, spoke of being urged, when making a complaint outside the canonical process, to keep it confidential.” The commission also found that another aspect of this emphasis on secrecy in the canonical process was that “it was very definitely a process in which the complainant (like the accused) was subjected to questioning but no information was given...” This, it said, was “illustrated graphically” in a note taken by the current chancellor of the Dublin archdiocese Msgr John Dolan at a lecture by a canon lawyer on such inquiries, which read “gain his knowledge/tell him nothing”. Emphasising that this may not be as sinister as it could appear, the report said it did indicate that “the mode of procedure was to extract from the complainant what he knew without in any way informing him as to the process, the other evidence available, the standing of the accused or other matters”. It said the obligation of secrecy was described as a “secret of the Holy Office” in church documents, “the penalty for breach of which was excommunication and which breach was a sin which could only be absolved by a bishop”.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.