The Sunday Sequence radio synod
Since the press launch of the Murphy Report in November, four Irish Catholic bishops , a fifth is facing , an already-retired bishop has been banned from participating in confirmations, and Pope Benedict has held an unprecedented crisis summit at the Vatican this week with all the remain serving bishops. The statement released following that meeting, which may be an indication of what we can expect to see in the pastoral letter the Pope is about to send to the Catholic faithful of ireland, has They say the statement represents a church leadership mired in clericalism and still in denial about the role played by bishops in covering-up the abuse of children over many years.
What's next for the Catholic Church in Ireland, after some of the most turbulent few months in its long history? And what should the Pope say to Ireland's Catholics in his historic pastoral letter?
On tomorrow's Sunday Sequence, we invite a studio audience to look at the options facing the church and debate the questions many are asking about how the institutions of the church should be renewed, reformed or retired. The Bishop of Down and Connor, Noel Treanor, joins us from 8.30 a.m., along with the theologian Fr Vincent Twomey, who said it was a "grave scandal" that all the bishops named in the Murphy Report had not resigned. His intervention may have encouraged some subsequent resignations. Others taking part include Baroness Nuala O'Loan, Gary O'Sullivan, Editor The Irish Catholic, and Marie Collins, a survivor of clerical abuse whose evidence proved extremely significant in the Murphy Report findings.
If you have a question you'd like me to raise at tomorrow's live, you can add it to this thread or send it to me on Twitter (www.twitter.com/williamcrawley).
Comment number 1.
At 20th Feb 2010, romejellybeen wrote:Will
You have to ask the Bishop and the priest about the role of Ratzinger in all of this when he headed the CDF. He ordered the Bishops to keep quiet in his letter in 2001 and report abuse cases only to himself. How can he criticise the Irish Bishops when they were following instructions given by himself?
If they acknowledge that there are at least questions to be answered, it would be an indication that a spirit of honesty and humility is coming into the Church. If they dont, well, same old, same old.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 21st Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:Perhaps it would be best if people actually read the letter which they can find here This is the letter which the ´óÏó´«Ã½ pretended in Panorama was a big secret, even though it had been published by the Holy See and was available on the Vatican website.
The letter covers canonical crimes against the Eucharist, the Confessional and the abuse of children by clerics. Among the provisions is an extension of the statute of limitations to ten years from the date on which a child turns eighteen.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 21st Feb 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:The good news for the bishops and any of the other perps is that if they ever face criminal prosecution, the Catholic Church has a long track record of getting people in trouble with the law to the safety of South America where they can vanish into the great masses of unknowns in places like Argentina and Paraguay.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 21st Feb 2010, romejellybeen wrote:Drill-bit # 2
Thats not a question.
Will,
you may also like to ask them why Irish Bishop's implicated in cover up have been asked to resign, while Cardinal Bernard Francis Law, whose cover ups were far worse than any of the Irish Bishops and who refused to co operate with the Boston Police Department, was rewarded by being asked to officiate (main celebrant) at a funeral Mass for JPII on the steps of St Peter's in Rome and who is presently a member of the Roman Curia and Archpriest of the Basilica of St Mary Major's, one of the most prestigious churches in Rome.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 21st Feb 2010, catherine wrote:Listened to this morning's programme. Heard Bishop Treanor say that there were no loopholes by which offending priests could escape. This is not so. I recently initiated an investigation into probable abuse of my son 30 years ago. As the abuse was perpetrated by a priest who was not a diocesan priest but a priest from a religious order from Dublin, who was then serving in Belfast, I was told by the investigator, that their remit did not extend outside the diocese.This is what's called moving the problem around. Very unsatisfactory.
Catherine
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 21st Feb 2010, Rusticatus wrote:Congratulations, William, on an excellent programme.
On a recent visit to the Vatican I found the papal cartographers already gleefully at work on re-organising the Irish dioceses. How could they expect to get away with it? Don't worry, they said, we've already done this in Sicily. (To which there is no answer.) In the first phase a single bishop will be appointed to head two or three neighbouring dioceses as they become vacant. Northern Ireland is receiving special attention. Now that the political situation has stabilised significantly it is thought the time has come for the Vatican to recognise the border. The intention is to set up an independent episcopal conference with three dioceses centred on Armagh, Belfast and Derry. This would of course come under the jurisdiction of the Nuncio in London. Some curial enthusiasts would even like to bring forward the recognition of the border so that the Pope could include Northern Ireland in his forthcoming visit to the United Kingdom.
Exciting times ahead.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 21st Feb 2010, Gerry47 wrote:William love your progs. I listened to your live prog this morning Sun 21st Feb. Its too soon to start talking about the FUTURE of the Catholic Church. A lot of REPENTENCE/REPARATION by way of MONEY paid out to victim needs to happen first.
Lets start looking at Church property and finances. Where exactly does all that parish money go to? Millions collected and no accounts published - churches demolished and other things built with NO consultation. I note Nazarath Lodge demolished and sold to developpers - what happened to the money ? And dont tell me a new old persons care village. The cost in there is equal the Hilton - so WHO ACTUALLY OWNS IT AND WHO GETS THE PROFITS ? Come on what about a bit of real investigative journalism - its not just the Robinsons' finances which need scrutinizing but the Roman Catholic church.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 21st Feb 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:A recent report I heard has it that similar cases among Jesuit priests in Germany are coming to light. I suspect this may turn out to be a secret that has been kept by the church about its affiliates all over the world. If that came out, would it spell its demise? Would it at the very least force changes to its celebacy rules for its priests?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 21st Feb 2010, dennisjunior1 wrote:William:
Thanks, for bringing this issue to the table on Sunday Seqence Radio synod....
(D)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 21st Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:Rusticatus - I think someone was pulling your leg.
Catherine - did you go to the police - that's who you go to when you want someone to investigate a crime
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 22nd Feb 2010, Rusticatus wrote:mccamleyc, if someone has pulled my leg I will be reporting it to the authorities and seeking substantial damages. It could be a mistake to underestimate either the unprecedented influence of Our Man in the Vatican (some of the monsignori are totally smitten) or Vatican dismay at Irish unhelpfulness. I notice that an appointment to the border-straggling Clogher is no longer as imminent as it was a few months ago.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 22nd Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:Rusty - I'm with your notion that the Holy See may, please God, be considering changes to the diocesan structures including the number of bishops and delaying appointments might well be part of that consideration. And if it were to happen I would hope they would do more than simply amalgamate existing dioceses as some of the boundaries are problemmatic to say the least, including strange enclaves within other diocese and a geopolitical desire to ensure every diocese has access to the sea (not See). So, as I say, I'm with you on that. But the idea of a separate episcopal conference for three bishops in Northern Ireland? No way going to happen.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 22nd Feb 2010, Phil Lucifer wrote:Crimen Sollicitationis is the rule by which victims and witnesses were sworn to secrecy, on pain of excommunication. It was devised by Ratzinger when he was in charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Father Tom Doyle was critical of it. He was a canon lawyer in the Vatican. See
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 23rd Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:AgainstDogma, Okay so Ratzinger devised a document when he was in charge of the CDF in the 1980s - except the document was issued in 1962 when Ratzinger was a university lecturer. Do some reading and thinking before ranting.
Wikepedia has a decent article on Crimen Sollicitationis -
A point which lots of people still don't get is that it was primarily concerned with solicitation using the confessional - a highly sensitive issue, and that is the main reason for the level of condidentiality involved in the proceedings since the seal of the confessional is so important. Read the document and you will notice how strongly it encourages people to come forward with complains.
As regards Fr Tom Doyle, here's a quote from his article "There is no basis to assume that the Holy See officially envisioned this process to be a substitute for any secular legal process, criminal or civil. It is also incorrect to assume, as some have unfortunately done, that these two Vatican documents are proof of a conspiracy to hide sexually abusive priests or to prevent the disclosure of sexual crimes committed by clerics to secular authorities."
You can read the rest of his article here [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)
Comment number 15.
At 23rd Feb 2010, romejellybeen wrote:Againstdogma
You'll find that if you say anything critical of the right wing of the RC Church, MCC will jump to its defence, whether you have a valid point or not. That's his 'thing.'
We had the Crimen Sollicitationis argument on here months ago. At the time, I referred to Fr Tom Doyle's powerful criticism of the Vatican and MCC came back with a diatribe against Doyle asserting that he was a nut job, or words to that effect. Now that he's found a quote from him which suits his purposes, Doyle is back to being an emminent Canon Lawyer again. There's a shock.
MCC even argued earlier that Ratzinger's demand for silence surrounding abuse cases and that they be reported only to the CDF, was so that he could get a 'handle' on the extent of the problem. He provided no quotes or links to back that one up because, well, there arent any. That particular 'argument' came from his own imagination. (He didnt seem to realise that in making that particular argument, the rest of his argument fell apart i.e. he acknowledged that Ratzinger wanted silence.)
The only time he has been stumped for an answer has been the mention of four simple words - Cardinal Bernard Francis Law. A man who was rewarded by the Vatican for his silence and for refusing to cooperate with the Boston PD. The message sent out to the world's Bishops by his continued inclusion in the Roman Curia and College of Cardinals is inescapable. Even MCC's fertile imagination cant get round that one.
Ratzinger has no right to even send a postcard to the people of Ireland, never mind a 'pastoral' letter, until he puts his own house in order first. Law must go.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 15)
Comment number 16.
At 23rd Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:Cardinal Law is on the Church's equivalent of gardening leave. He is no longer administrator of an important American diocese, instead he is archpriest of St Mary Major's. Ok, it's an important building, but it's not like he resigned from Boston and was given New York.
As for Fr Tom Doyle - he's not a black/white person - when he writes he is more balanced and considered than when he talks, or when the ´óÏó´«Ã½ interviews him. The link I left can be found in the references in the wikipedia article I mentioned above.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 16)
Comment number 17.
At 23rd Feb 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:Funny, with all this talk about all manner of cruel abuse of children by Priests and others in the church there isn't much talk about god or sin or Jesus, or hell, or the devil. I guess that book's been put back away in a locked drawer until this all blows over and it is safe to take it out again.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 17)
Comment number 18.
At 23rd Feb 2010, mccamleyc wrote:10 hours to get moderated?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 18)
Comment number 19.
At 26th Feb 2010, MarcusAureliusII wrote:I had terrible synod problems once. It made me miserable. So I went to the doctor and he gave me some antibiotics and antihistamines and before I knew it, I felt much better. :-)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 19)
Comment number 20.
At 12th Mar 2010, romejellybeen wrote:Just for information for those who are unaware of what is going on in Germany (and Austria) at the moment.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 20)
Comment number 21.
At 13th Mar 2010, romejellybeen wrote:Complain about this comment (Comment number 21)