No reference to State inquiries after bishops' meeting, writes Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent
Yesterday's meeting in Maynooth was billed as "an extraordinary general meeting". It followed what was described in the bishops' own statement afterwards as "the justifiable anger and distress that have been highlighted in recent days". And also in that statement after the meeting they said they felt "a sense of urgency" about the need to establish the full truth about how complaints of child abuse have been dealt with in dioceses.
Considering what little emerged from yesterday's meeting you have to wonder about that sense of urgency. They announced agreement on a proposal for an independent audit of all 26 dioceses on the island and that there would be an extension to the powers of their Child Protection Office. Though they had been together from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m., with a brief break for lunch at 1.30 p.m., they hadn't time, it seems, to agree terms of reference for the independent audit, who would be on it, how many people it would be made up of, or how long it would take to conduct the audit. Weeks, months, years? Nor did they agree just what an extension to the powers of the Child Protection Office meant either. And their next meeting in this urgent process will be "within weeks". It is difficult to detect any real sense of urgency there, at least as understood by most.
Queried at the press conference about the delay in their response to the current crisis Bishop Joseph Duffy of Clogher wondered "what delay?" It depended on what you meant by delay. If something was to be done properly it took time, and he instanced the length of preparation that went into the setting up of the bishops' Child Protection Office last year. In the episcopal world, it seems, the urgent just takes a little less longer. There was also palpable surprise that their statement, read to a press conference by Archbishop Seán Brady, contained no reference whatsoever to State inquiries or the levels of co-operation the church might or could make available to such inquiries.
In a questions and answer session afterwards, Archbishop Brady indicated that relevant information might be supplied to State investigators. But even after lengthy pressure the degree of such co-operation was by no means clear. What was clear was that the bishops would co-operate fully with their own independent audit making available to it whatever it considered necessary. Sources later indicated there was sensitivity among the bishops about handing over some files to State investigations as some victims might not want some information on the church files revealed to the State.
Cardinal Connell was the source of another surprise. He said his period as archbishop had been "devastated" by the clerical child sex-abuse issue. He revealed that on becoming archbishop in 1988 he removed two priests from the ministry, in connection with abuse, and that in 1995 he had a trawl through diocesan records done.
It went back 50 years and he passed on to the gardaí "the name of every priest and every complaint against such a priest" in what was turned up. He was not saying he had handled the issue adequately, he said, but he had "suffered greatly" because of it, not least when, as he recalled, the then Auxiliary Bishop O'Mahony told him about two families who had lost the faith because of abuse by priests.
He was also angry over newspaper reports which said he was to meet victims for the first time soon. This was not so. He had met victims before.
And he spoke of the difficulty of dealing with paedophiles. "They lie through their teeth. They are the most extraordinarily devious people."