New church leadership needed

IF the Papal Nuncio had contributed, as requested, to the deliberations of the Murphy Commission investigation into the Dublin and Cloyne dioceses, the Response of the Holy See to the Cloyne Report might have not been cast so heavily in the context of post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this) in a style designed to retrospectively limit reputational damage rather than minimising the risk of children being abused.

The Nuncio’s refusal to collaborate on this vital matter of national importance must demand a fundamental analysis by the Government of the primacy, purpose and relevance of a diplomatic relationship with The Vatican.

The response offers no insight into how Church and State could proceed from here on the issue of safeguarding children. The two-year delay from January 2009 to January 2011 in implementing the diocesan audits on grounds of a smokescreen connected to data protection legislation and the lacklustre record last year of promptly advising the Safeguarding Board of episodes of clerical sex abuse do not inspire public confidence.

The fact that Archbishop Martin is compelled, after the publication of the response, to remind us of the existence of individuals’ in pivotal influential roles in Ireland and the Vatican whose disposition is to ignore guidelines, or approved papal norms, begs the question why this response was not accompanied simultaneously by radical changes in Church leadership. There are currently three vacancies for bishops, and three others from the cohort of 31 bishops are past the mandatory retirement age of 75 years.

Fresh ecclesiastical faces and new leadership are inescapable milestones if the emphasis is to shift from words and aspirations to accomplishments and progress.

A new regime with a mandate characterised by vitality, destiny and trust is a prerequisite to healing and optimism.

Myles Duffy

Glenageary

Co Dublin