Can it be right that other dioceses in the State will avoid statutory inquiry, asks Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent
The inquiry into the handling of clerical child sex abuse allegations by the Dublin archdiocese is unprecedented in the history of church-State relations in Ireland. Never before will Catholic Church authorities have been called to account, and on such a scale, before a statutory inquiry of this State.
The Ferns inquiry, precipitated by the BBC Suing the Pope programme in March 2002, was non-statutory and dependent on the co-operation of witnesses. Not so the Dublin inquiry, which will have statutory powers from day one.
Ferns saw two bishops give evidence, Bishop Brendan Comiskey and Bishop Eamonn Walsh. Among the main witnesses at the Dublin inquiry will be a cardinal, an archbishop, and at least five bishops, as well as two former chancellors of the archdiocese. As in the Ferns inquiry, local Garda and health authorities will also be called.
The chief witness in Dublin will be Cardinal Desmond Connell, who has said the clerical child sex abuse issue "devastated" his term as archbishop of Dublin from 1988 until 2004. The inquiry timeframe is from January 1st, 1975, to May 2004, when Cardinal Connell retired as archbishop.
He was the main focus of the RTÉ Cardinal Secrets programme, broadcast in October 2002, which set in motion procedures leading to the Dublin inquiry. The programme showed that the cardinal had serious questions to answer around his handling of allegations of clerical child sex abuse.
His successor, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, is also expected to be called as a witness, although his evidence may be less crucial to the inquiry outcome as, prior to his appointment as co-adjutor archbishop in 2002, he had been away from the Dublin archdiocese for almost 30 years.
However, three of Dublin's auxiliary bishops since 1975 are likely be called as witnesses. These would include the current Bishop of Limerick, Dr Donal Murray; the current Bishop of Kildare and Leighlin, Dr Jim Moriarty; and the retired auxiliary Bishop of Dublin, Dr Dermot O'Mahony.
Also giving evidence will be Mgr Alex Stenson and Mgr John Dolan, who have both been chancellors in Dublin. Indeed it is believed Mgr Stenson's evidence is awaited with interest.
Also a focus of particular interest - and where a possible clash between canon law and civil law may emerge - will be whether the inquiry feels it ought to investigate a 1992 tribunal set up under canon law by Cardinal Connell to investigate allegations against (then) Fr Tony Walsh.
It found him guilty and recommended that he be laicised but nobody in civil authority was told. Walsh appealed the decision to Rome and continued to act as a priest.
In 1995, while awaiting the appeal outcome, following a funeral in Palmerstown, Co Dublin, he attacked the 11-year-old grandson of the deceased and was later charged with indecent assault. He faced further charges two years afterwards and was sentenced to six years in jail. He is currently challenging other charges through judicial review.
Among the members of the 1992 tribunal set up by Cardinal Connell were the current Bishop of Killaloe, Dr Willie Walsh, and the current Bishop of Kilmore, Dr John McAreavey.
Last Sunday in Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin, Bishop Willie Walsh repeated his assertion that where there might be a conflict between canon law and that of the State, he would "feel obliged to obey the law of the State". He may soon have an opportunity to do just that. As will his fellow bishops. He said of them that they "would say the same, despite recent suggestions to the contrary".
The indications are that the Dublin inquiry will receive full co-operation from the Catholic Church authorities there. Last night Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said, "as I have said before, it is vitally important that the truth of what happened regarding abuse of children by priests is brought to light. We can only begin to fully address the issue of child abuse when we establish what happened in the past. Horrendous damage was done to people, compounded by inadequate responses."
But it begs a question. If it is "vitally important" that the truth emerge about clerical child sex abuse and that the issue can only be fully addressed when it is established what happened in the past, what of those dioceses where no inquiry is planned?
Is it to be the case that the only Catholic dioceses of the 26 on the island which are to be allowed exorcism on this issue are Ferns and Dublin? What of the other 18 Catholic dioceses wholly in this State? What of the three cross-Border dioceses? What of those three Catholic dioceses wholly in Northern Ireland, each too with its own story of allegations of abuse by priests?
The Ferns report indicated that 26 priests there had allegations made against them. The Dublin archdiocese has provided information that 67 priests there have had allegations made against them. A recent survey by The Irish Times established that, according to figures supplied by 24 of the 26 Catholic dioceses (Clogher and Meath did not supply figures) on this island, a total of 286 priests had allegations of child sex abuse made against them.
What of the 191 cases that do not include those in Dublin and Ferns? Is there to be one law for Dublin and Ferns and another for the rest? Is this because both featured in powerful television programmes? Will it be necessary for RTÉ and the BBC to make documentaries on the remaining 24 dioceses before inquiries are conducted in those? Is television determining where these inquiries are to take place, as opposed to allegations of clerical child sex abuse?
If so, how can this be right?