Pope summons Irish bishops

[Yellow_Belle]

Pope Benedict has summoned the Irish bishops to Rome to discuss the clerical abuse scandal.

According to the Irish Catholic newspaper, the pontiff has called the meeting next month because of what is perceived as a very serious situation in Ireland.

It is believed the Vatican is keen to attempt to address the anger and shock felt by Catholics since the publication of the Ryan and Murphy reports into clerical abuse.

The Irish Catholic reported the key meetings between the bishops and the Pope will take place on February 15th and 16th, and will be similar in nature to Pope Benedict’s meeting with Cardinal Seán Brady and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin on December 11th, with several senior Vatican officials also attending.

It is expected that proposals on dealing with the fallout from the abuse scandal will be put forward, with conclusions offered by the pope.

The bishops will return to their dioceses for the Ash Wednesday liturgies on February 17th where they will address congregations on the way forward.

MORE

 

[NPC]

Obviously we can’t anticipate the exact content or outcome of the meetings, but I think this is a welcome development. Perhaps it should have happened some time ago, but the idea of summoning all the bishops to Rome certainly gives me the feeling that there is some sense of urgency on the part of His Holiness to deal with the issues. If I’m not mistaken, there had been no prior speculation (in the media at least) that the Pope might do such a thing; I don’t think we expected the Pope to call all of the bishops to Rome at once (or at all, for that matter).

I don’t suppose Desmond Cardinal Connell will be one of the bishops attending the meetings? I doubt it…but I really feel that his silence has been deafening - he could have clarified the exact position of his auxiliaries, for example. I think Pope Benedict should arrange talks with him.

Anyway, Ash Wednesday’s not too far off really, so we’ll find out soon enough - as I say, a good development, but as to whether there will be radical change in our diocesan structures as a result of the talks, I doubt it…

 

[Yellow_Belle]

Obviously we can’t anticipate the exact content or outcome of the meetings, but I think this is a welcome development. Perhaps it should have happened some time ago, but the idea of summoning all the bishops to Rome certainly gives me the feeling that there is some sense of urgency on the part of His Holiness to deal with the issues. If I’m not mistaken, there had been no prior speculation (in the media at least) that the Pope might do such a thing; I don’t think we expected the Pope to call all of the bishops to Rome at once (or at all, for that matter).

I don’t suppose Desmond Cardinal Connell will be one of the bishops attending the meetings? I doubt it…but I really feel that his silence has been deafening - he could have clarified the exact position of his auxiliaries, for example. I think Pope Benedict should arrange talks with him.

Anyway, Ash Wednesday’s not too far off really, so we’ll find out soon enough - as I say, a good development, but as to whether there will be radical change in our diocesan structures as a result of the talks, I doubt it…

Yes, it’s certainly an unexpected development - and probably unprecedented, too. I’d love to be a fly on the wall

I’m guessing that only currently serving bishops will be going so that will probably rule out Cardinal Connell and the recently resigned bishops from the meeting. That’s a pity, I think: they need such a meeting just as much as their colleagues, perhaps more so.

 

[NPC]

I’m guessing that only currently serving bishops will be going so that will probably rule out Cardinal Connell and the recently resigned bishops from the meeting. That’s a pity, I think: they need such a meeting just as much as their colleagues, perhaps more so.

I heard some speculation that Bishops Walsh and Field may go - given that the Holy Father hasn’t yet accepted their resignations (I think?)… I hope that they will all have their say though. As you know, I am particularly concerned for my own bishop, Dr Drennan - Archbishop Martin still has not made any comment about him, and I hope that if the Archbishop still wants Dr Drennan to resign he will give full and convincing reasons why, because he has not been able to do so thus far - no one has in my opinion.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

I heard some speculation that Bishops Walsh and Field may go - given that the Holy Father hasn’t yet accepted their resignations (I think?)… I hope that they will all have their say though. As you know, I am particularly concerned for my own bishop, Dr Drennan - Archbishop Martin still has not made any comment about him, and I hope that if the Archbishop still wants Dr Drennan to resign he will give full and convincing reasons why, because he has not been able to do so thus far - no one has in my opinion.

I think you’re right - their resignations have not been accepted as yet. But, of course, that may change before the middle of February. Still, I think all the Irish hierarchy should be there, including the resigned/retired ones.

As for Bishop Drennan, I cannot see any reason arising out of the Murphy report why he should resign. But, I don’t have a dog in this fight, so to speak, and some of the victims have a contrary opinion which may carry more weight with how your average Irish person- in-the-street views the matter. I notice that Andrew Madden, one of Fr Ivan Payne’s victims, has formally defected from the Church, citing as a contributing factor Dr Madden’s lack of response to his request for a meeting. Here’s his letter in response to one from Archbishop Martin:

Dear Archbishop Martin,

Thank you for your letter of 11th January 2010.

In 1983 the Catholic Church in Dublin decided that I was not suitable for entry into the priesthood. Two years earlier the same Catholic Church had allowed Ivan Payne to continue as a priest despite knowing that he had sexually abused me for 2 1/2 years when I was aged 12-14 years. The idea that anyone sexually abusing children was more suitable for the priesthood than I was totally devastated me at that time and a belief in God and his Church, which had survived Ivan Payne’s actions, came to an abrupt and painful end.

In November 2009 the Murphy Report was published. I was deeply saddened at the sexual abuse of children and I was furiously angry at how the Catholic Church had caused the further sexual abuse of children by covering up abuse in different ways.

My anger soon turned to rage when I saw Catholic bishops, including yourself, fail to articulately take responsibility for what your Church had done. You spoke so well about the awfulness of what some priests had done and the suffering of those abused; but there was no real mention of the sexual abuse caused by Bishops who had covered up for priests.

I was also appalled, as I believe you may have been, by the behaviour of your fellow bishops as they did everything to try and hold onto office, four of them failing, but not before they had added insult to injury by a collective failure to immediately offer their resignations in acknowledgment of what they had done, or failed to do, and out of respect for the experiences of children sexually abused by Catholic priests in Dublin.

A Church whose leading members behave in this way is not a Church I want in my life, not even in name only. A Church whose Bishops shielded paedophile priests is not a Church I want in my life. A Church whose priests congregate to express support for those Bishops continuing in office in direct opposition to what many victims asked for is not a Church I want in my life.

A Church which finds Bishop Drennan acceptable in its Episcopal ranks, despite having been part of a Church in Dublin between 1997 and 2004 which covered up the sexual abuse of children is not a Church I want in my life. A Church which baptises babies but is arrogant enough to tell young people, or their parents, that defection is not possible until they are aged 18 is not a Church I want in my life. A Church which does not value gay and lesbian people as it does heterosexual people is not a Church I want in my life. A Church which parades itself as a State when it wants to avoid accounting to the citizens of a country whose children it has abused is not a Church I want in my life.

No priest will ever preach to me standards his own Church doesn’t even try to live up to. No priest will ever comfort me when I am sick. No priest will hear my ‘sins’. No priest will instruct me in penance. No priest will bless my relationship with my beautiful partner, Alan. No priest will pray over my coffin when I am dead. And no priest will bury me in ‘consecrated ground’.

Archbishop Martin, I believe you are a good man. I believe there are good priests, I know some of them. But that is not the same as saying I believe that the Catholic Church will ever change its ways or learn from what it has done.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Madden

 

[puzzleannie]

they ought to approach on their knees

 

[Yellow_Belle]

I think I know what you’re saying here, JC, and I think it’s probably similar to my own thinking, but just in case I have it wrong, can you elaborate a bit on what you see as our share of the blame?

 

[BVM_1221]

MORE

Well, about time

 

[NPC]

As for Bishop Drennan, I cannot see any reason arising out of the Murphy report why he should resign. But, I don’t have a dog in this fight, so to speak, and some of the victims have a contrary opinion which may carry more weight with how your average Irish person- in-the-street views the matter. I notice that Andrew Madden, one of Fr Ivan Payne’s victims, has formally defected from the Church, citing as a contributing factor Dr Drennan’s lack of response to his request for a meeting. Here’s his letter in response to one from Archbishop Martin:

As I’ve said before, I want justice for the victims as much as anybody else, and I don’t want to seem insensitive to the suffering that Mr Madden and others have gone through (and continue to go through). However, I am, quite frankly, sick to the teeth of the continued attacks on Bishop Drennan - Mr McGarry from the Irish Times is still leading the campaign apparently. How in the world can Mr Madden call for the resignation of Dr Drennan simply because he served in the Archdiocese between 1997 and 2005 and yet not call for the resignation of Archbishop Martin? Everyone calling for the resignation of Bishop Drennan falls back, without fail, to the “collective responsibility” or “guilt by association” charge. However, in that case, Dr Martin is equally as culpable as Dr Drennan as he served in the Archdiocese for no less that 18 months of the period investigated by the Murphy Commission, having been appointed Coadjutor Archbishop of Dublin in May 2003. Mr Madden believes that Archbishop Martin is “a good man” - why? Because Dr Martin did his best… As I see it, Dr Drennan did his best.

As a matter of fact, on no less than three occasions Mr McGarry has published the statement by Mr Madden where he described his disgust at Bishop Drennan’s calling victims’ calls for accountability as vengeful. Bishop Drennan said no such thing - he referred to a “spiral of revenge” in answer to Sean O’Rourke’s question in a radio interview regarding Dr Vincent Twomey’s (now amended) assertion that ALL bishops mentioned in the report should resign. It seems clear to me that Bishop Drennan’s prediction of the spiral of revenge has come to pass - I mean, the resignations of four bishops has not, as far as I can see, done anything to lessen the anger of the people or bring healing.

Anyway, clearly Mr Madden defected from the Church a long time ago - he has many other issues with the Church and its teachings with which his lifestyle is incompatible; he cannot accept the Church as a moral authority, so perhaps his decision was the right one. However, I hope he may some day be reconciled with the Church.

If anyone should be compelled to answer questions it’s Desmond Cardinal Connell - yet no one seems to be batting an eyelid at the fact that he has been silent since his statement on November 26. At very least, he should clarify what the exact position of the auxiliary bishops was during his time as archbishop.

If you’re interested, a letter was published in a local newspaper describing at length and in detail why I do not think Bishop Drennan should resign. I think I posted it somewhere on CAF already…

 

[Yellow_Belle]

A mini Paisleyite Two chances of you sounding like that, JC

I’m just on my way to bed but I hope to respond tomorrow at more length. Meanwhile, thanks for the response

 

[NPC]

This doesn’t add a whole lot to what we already knew about the meetings, but an article in today’s Irish Times (21/01) suggests that Church governance will be central to the talks.

THE GOVERNANCE of the Catholic Church in Ireland is likely to be at the heart of two days of discussions between Pope Benedict, senior Curia cardinals and the Irish bishops when they gather in Rome next month for a meeting to examine the implications of the church’s 15-year clerical child abuse crisis.

Plans for the meeting will be discussed at an extraordinary general meeting of the Irish bishops at Maynooth tomorrow.

Full Article HERE

There doesn’t seem to be any speculation about the possibility of Desmond Cardinal Connell being called to Rome. Serving bishops only is all we’re getting at the moment - however, surely if, as the article suggests, one major question is going to be “what went wrong”, bishops past and present should attend.

 

[Brendan]

Any news about Bishop Flemming of Killala, Mayo, or Bishop Kelly of Sligo\Roscommon? They are the bishop for most of my relatives.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

Any news about Bishop Flemming of Killala, Mayo, or Bishop Kelly of Sligo\Roscommon? They are the bishop for most of my relatives.

As Bishop John Fleming was never an auxiliary bishop in Dublin archdiocese (he was consecrated for Killala in 2002), there wouldn’t be much about him in the news regarding the Murphy report, but he did issue a statement about it HERE

It’s a similar case with Bishop Brendan Kelly of Achonry who was consecrated to that diocese in 2008 and who never served as a Dublin auxiliary. He, too, issued a statement on the Dublin report HERE.

 

[NPC]

Any news about Bishop Flemming of Killala, Mayo, or Bishop Kelly of Sligo\Roscommon? They are the bishop for most of my relatives.

As YellowBelle said, apart from their statements have not had any part in the governance of the Archdiocese of Dublin.

However, I did hear some speculation - I can’t remember where - that Bishop Fleming might succeed Bishop Donal Murray as bishop of Limerick. Bishop Fleming is from Limerick himself - after what has happened, the people of Limerick might be more comfortable having “one of their own” as bishop. It would also be seen as a promotion for Bishop Fleming… I did also hear that the Vicar General to Bishop Michael Smith of Meath is also a possible successor to Dr Murray.

As for Bishop Brendan Kelly, he had no episcopal appointment before being consecrated as Bishop of Achonry in 2008. Up to 2008 he was parish priest in the parish of Spiddal in the Diocese of Galway. I haven’t heard how his episcopate is going - I just know that his departure from Galway was seen as a great loss!