´óÏó´«Ã½

Usual Protestant anti-Catholic rant. The Catholic Church is not a "sister church" with his communion.

The Murphy commission made no serious attempt to engage with the Holy See - they refused to use the normal channels even after it was explained to them it would be appropriate. It actually looks like they tried to get no response from the Holy See.

The Commission should explain why it refused to use the appropriate channels.

Sometimes the old ways are best. Has anyone considered....the rack? :-)

Where's the IRA when you need them? Has anyone noticed that there's been some "troubles" in the North too? Is it time for Tony Blair and Sentator Mitchell to stop wasting their time in the Middle East and return to waste some more time in Northern Ireland?

Everyone says they don't want a return to the past...but nobody does anything about it...just like the weather. Was the recent lull just the calm before the storm?

Maybe you can explain to me exactly what were the appropriate channels that the Murphy Commission should have used?

William - thanks for the coverage - re the other Neill - couldn't possibly comment - I am not my father's keeper ;-)

BrendanFOConnor, the proper channel is to give your message to god and he will speak to the Pope about it. If the Pope deems the message worthy of a response, he will convey it to god who will get back to you. If you don't hear anything then the Pope obviously felt there was nothing worth saying to you. What do you expect god to tell you anyway, make stuff up? BTW, do your think god has mental reservations too? Perhaps he was crossing his fingers behind his back when he wrote the ten commandments. Do you think the eleventh commandment was that the previous ten should be ignored, it was just his little joke? Gee, Pastorphillip, you've been awfully silent lately. I'll bet you're off doing a lot of praying and other good stuff.

Will

I'm having a little difficulty in tracking down how many Priests were practising in the Dublin Diocese over the 35 year period in question.
Have you come across that info?

GV

Marc

Is this really the time and place for trolling?

Brendan - States engage at the level of States, through their foreign ministries. I understand this was explained to the Commission both by the Holy See and DFA and they ignored the advice.

It's a bit like that trick some bad journalists use - ring up somebody just before they go to press and ask for a comment and when the person or organisation doesn't get back to them say "Bladey blah refused to comment".

I can think of no situation in which an embassy would hand over files directly to a commission in a foreign country. No Embassy of Ireland or British Embassy would.

Chris, don't talk a lot of nonsense. This is an issue that goes well beyond the level of mere state-to-state communication. The Vatican's reponse to the Murphy Commission requests has been appalling, and yes, the Papal Noncio should be made to feel the disopprobium of the Irish State.

As for all the "good work" that the Roman Catholic Church has done in Ireland over the years, yes, it has done *some*, and there are indeed many good and honest people who have been involved in this organisation. But there is a word for much of the other work it has done, particularly in the area of inveigling itself into the care of the vulnerable. That word is "grooming".

Gv;

It seems to me that in light of Catholic doctrine proclaiming itself the ultimate and only source of truth and morality in the universe based on its direct connection to god through the pope, you fail to see the remarkable irony in all this. Not very Irish of you IMO. Hoist on their own petard, the Catholic clerics seem to have forgotten their own mantra that "pride goeth before a fall." The higher up the pedistal you put yourself on, the greater the crash when you are toppled off of it. Even for those who find the fall from grace of the catholic church a tragedy and not a comedy, they have to admit there is an unmistakable graveyard humor to it. As for the victims, as was pointed out above by McCamel, their tragedy is in most ways comparable to what would have happened had they encountered other criminals with similar perversions. It isn't the plight of the victims I mock, it's the unquestioning faith of those who allowed it to go on for so long and are now so horrified. A little like a Greek tragedy in a way because of the inevitability of it. It isn't the criminals who assaulted the children who are only to blame, much of the real balme goes to the attitude of those who made it possible on such a wide scale and for so long. Unless that changes drastically and the church is put on a level playing field with all of the other institutions in society, it will surely happen again, it's only a matter of time. If the Irish don't see that, that would be the ultimate tragedy.

Helio - in response to your grooming remarks I would like to tell you to go and do something to yourself that rhymes with duck but doubtless the moderators wouldn't approve.

Chris, it's all in the Murphy Report. You should read it and realise the systemic failures within the organisation you call your church and the people - the criminals - who in effect drove the getaway car. Believe me, I take no glee in all this - it is appalling. But nothing I have said is not currently being said by people who are Catholics, and wish to see their church reformed, brought under the law, and changed into a force for good. What you are seeing is the ultimate proof that separation of church and state is not a woolly PC aspiration, but a concrete necessity in any country that dares to call itself a nation.

Helio, there are some four million members of the Catholic Church in Ireland - what you have said is that anything good done by my Church, presumably since it arrived here some 1,700 years ago was grooming for the likes of Ivor Payne and Sean Fortune.

Individual Catholics are of course subject to the law of the land - how could they be otherwise - so let the law take its course. But of course what we've had in Dublin report, Ferns, Ryan etc, while really worthwhile at bringing information to the fore, were outside the normal criminal law process. If we simply treated Catholic priests like everyone else and applied the law none of this information would have emerged.

You can call them systemic failure but systemic is wooly word. It does not mean that the Church has some systemmic problem to be corrected. It may mean that in Dublin the system of auxiliary bishops was problemmatic. But if bishops had done their jobs as required by canon law most of these problems would have been dealt with.

We have separation of church and state already, unlike in England where bishops sit in the house of lords, prime ministers appoint bishops and the commons decides on issues of canon law.

Why then, is this foreign, sovereign microstate, which is so offended by less than formal diplomatic communication, keeping files on the criminal actions against Irish citizens, committed on Irish soil, by other Irish citizens? What has it got to do with them? How is it appropriate, that a horde of Italians, at least one German and God know who else, has any intimate knowledge of the sexual abuse of Irish citizens? To make matters worse, they then have the breathtaking arrogance to hide behind this "foreign state, diplomatic channels" crap. Show him the door! Good bye and good riddance!

If you don't like how diplomatic relations work you should petition for a change to the Vienna Conventions. They are designed to protect States from inappropriate pressures and allow for peaceful cooperation between States. If you prefer the Iranian method, well that's up to you.

Nice to see the nice mixture of anti-catholicism and racism these things throw up.

mccamleyc, I am sick and tired of your self-appointed spokesman role for catholicism. You don't speak for any catholics, just for yourself. I'll tell you whats anti-catholic here, it is those in power in the church covering up the rape and abuse of children. That's not the church I belong to. That's not the Christian Gospel. Those bishops or priests who have been shown to have participated in a system that covered up that abuse should resign or be resigned immediately. We don't need another John Magee situation where the Vatican has to appoint an administrator to pretend that a bishop has not been shamed into going. They should go. That goes for the papal nuncio too. The Vatican at the highest level is implicated in a world-wide cover up of child abuse. Why can't you see that? Because of that, the Vatican's representative needs to be shown the door by the Irish government. Thats the sort of statement we need to show that Ireland is not prepared to sit back and allow this cover up of crimes to go unchecked. I will be a proud catholic again when the leadership of my church follows in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.

I wonder if something like this isn't how the Protestant Reformation really got started.

Just listened to the interview with Sir Ivor Roberts on Sunday Sequence. If you haven't heard it do - it firmly puts to bed the notion that the Holy See acted in any way inappropriately. This expert indeed expressed surprise at the failure by the Murphy Commission to make use of the appropriate channels. Question is was it through ignorance or something else?

So Sir Ivor Roberts, KCMG, says the diplomatic niceties weren't observed. Well that alright then, the Vatican's "hands are clean"! Glad we sorted that out. Still begs the question, why has this foreign state been keeping files on the criminal actions against Irish citizens, committed on Irish soil, by other Irish citizens? Surely that contravenes diplomatic niceties?

mccamleyc,

can you explain to me why a (by your diplomatic channels logic) a foreign state had papers to do with the actions of irish nationals anyway? Why did a foreign government interest it self in the internal affairs of the irish state? Again by your logic - state to state etc.

Now i can understand why a worldwide organisation, may have held papers regarding the operations of that organisation in ireland, but to suddenly swing to "diplomatic status" suggests that a foreign power was operating in Ireland, and its "citizens" if we could call the priests that, were acting illegally. This actually opens up a yet undiscussed fall out of this matter - what is the relationship between the church in Ireland, the Vatican and the law?

The point, Brendan, is that they aren't, as you call them, "diplomatic niceties" but the normal way in which States communicate. The Holy See wasn't suggesting something difficult or unusual or arduous.

As regards the other points, it's hardly unusual for one State to have information on citizens of another State. That said, of course the Holy See is not like other countries, I don't think anyone would dispute that. That's why, for example, the Vienna Conventions provide that the Nuncio may act as Dean of the Diplomatic Corps. I know some commentators keep trying to suggest there is something unusually Irish in this when in reality it is very common. There are good reasons why countries do it. It removes the randomness of the position and gives it to someone traditionally perceived as neutral.

The Nuncio has a dual role in engaging with the State and with the Church. Clearly the Murphy Commission would be regarded by anyone as a State inquiry.

Forgot to add - article 24 of the Vienna Convention states "The archives and documents of the mission shall be inviolable at any time and wherever they may be."

That's not to say the Nuncio cannot cooperate with the inquiry, but it underlines that for it to happen really should require a request from the State.

Precisely, how does that answer my question?

How would an embassy keeping a record of criminal behaviour within a country breach international law?

At no point did the Holy See ever tell anyone to fail to comply with the requirements of civil law.

Can you explian in more detail your statement;'The Nuncio has a dual role in engaging with the State and with the Church.'

He represents the Holy See to the State and he represents the Pope to the local Church.

Of course many Ambassadors have a similar role, particularly Irish ambassadors in certain countries. For example the Irish Ambassador in America has a clear role vis-a-vis the US State - but he also has a role to the Irish community in America, including providing consular services.

It's always important for Ambassadors to remember which hat they are wearing. For example, the Irish abroad, (and indeed most people abroad) think their diplomats are supposed to get them things from the host country - like out of jail when drunk.

If a Catholic priest tried to use the offices of the Nuncio to influence the State to get off with a crime, then that would be an abuse. Or if the Nuncio tried to interfere with a criminal investigation. None of these things are what the Commission requests were about.

Just to go back to American example. If some Senate inquiry started looking at illegal immigration in America, if they wrote to the Irish Embassy and said "please send us any information you have on illegal immigrants in US, names, addresses etc." the Embassy would say, NO. Now illegal immigration isn't child abuse but you can see that an embassy wouldn't respond to that. But if the US State wrote to the Irish State and requested assistance, there would be discussions, and info on numbers might be shared as part of a diplomatic process. The same might be true with Holy See and Ireland if the approach was correct.

But and here is where so much mistaken info has been put out. The letter from Cardinal Ratzinger in 2001 - dealt particularly with abuse of the confessional - priests using the confessional to solicit. A particularly awful crime, but one which may require a confidential approach, depending on how the info emerges because of the importance of the seal of confession, a seal in place to protect confessors, not priests.

If you will indulge me in one more question? How can you state this; 'I understand this was explained to the Commission both by the Holy See and DFA and they ignored the advice'? I, as a citizen, am not aware of any statement from either the DFA or the Nuncio that would suggest that they had given any advice to the commission? What do you know that we don’t, and why do you know it?
Indeed, as far as I am aware, the problem was that there was NO reply from either the Vatican or the pope’s ambassador!

I think the Report says that the Holy See told DFA and DFA told the Commission. I think DFA confirmed that. I suspect that's why Cowan was basically supportive cos he might have felt DFA could have done something more once they were aware of the situation. But Murphy seemed insistent on her independent position so presumably nothing further was pursued. In this instance you could say that none of the players covered themselves in glory.