BishopAccountability.org
	Martin Takes Clergy to Task for Denial of Role in Abuse The Irish Times May 11, 2010 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0511/1224270129996.html THERE WAS more than a note of exasperation in Archbishop Diarmuid Martin’s words to the Knights of Columbanus in Dublin last night, writes PATSY McGARRY He may be as “disheartened and discouraged” as he has ever been since becoming Archbishop of Dublin in May 2004, but what comes through his 4,000-word address seems more like grim frustration. Who can blame him? Almost six months after publication of the Murphy report, there remain many, at all levels of the church in Ireland, who simply resist the truth. As he put it, “there are still strong forces which would prefer that the truth did not emerge”. There was “subconscious denial on the part of many” and “other signs of rejection of a sense of responsibility for what had happened”. Those latter words echo those of Bishop Jim Moriarty who resigned because, as an auxiliary bishop of Dublin, he did not challenge the prevailing culture on handling the clerical child sex abuse issue. Neither did others. They remain in situ. They do not seem to share Bishop Moriarty’s sense of responsibility. In this they have been defended by senior church figures, including bishops. Nor then did, as we now know, other bishops challenge the prevailing culture on this issue. The question is this: did any? Archbishop Martin was “struck by the level of disassociation by people from any sense of responsibility”. Significantly, he said that “while people rightly question the concept of collective responsibility, this does not mean that one is not responsible for one’s personal share in the decisions of the collective structures to which one was part”. “Significantly” because, since the Murphy report, there have been those who argued the auxiliary bishops of Dublin in the period investigated by the Murphy commission did not have collective responsibility for what occurred then. Included among those “excusers” would be the “church academics and church publicists” Archbishop Martin referred to last night. Those who “can calmly act as pundits on the roots of the sexual abuse scandals in the church as if they were totally extraneous to the scandal”. Pungently, he asked, “where did responsibility lie for a culture of seminary institutions which produced both those who abused and those who mismanaged the abuse?” Which should make some wince in Maynooth and former seminaries. “Where were the pundits/publicists while a church culture failed to recognise what was happening?” he asked last night. But he must know. Those would-be “defenders of the faith” were off denying. It’s what they do. Most intolerable of all, Archbishop Martin went on to say, was that “there are worrying signs that despite solid regulations and norms , these are not being followed with the rigour required.” Is this a foretaste of what is to come from the audit of Catholic dioceses and institutions, soon to be published by the church’s own watchdog, the National Board for Safeguarding Children (NBSC)? If it is, then such an eventuality is unforgivable. That, following the Ferns, Ryan and Murphy reports, there are institutions which do not implement child-protection norms “with the rigour required” seems unbelievable. If so, those responsible should suffer the most severe sanction by both church and State. Of particular importance last night was the emphasis he placed on scripture and parish when it came to church renewal and faith formation. The parish, not the school, is where it’s at, he indicated, which may yet have implications for the schools debate. But, unlike others, he sees the church’s situation as it is and with a realism that is as daunting as it is true. “The Catholic Church in Ireland is coming out of one of the most difficult moments in its history and the light at the end of the tunnel is still a long way off,” he said. Sounds like the economy. It’s a time for people of faith to have faith.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.