ANALYSIS:Bishop Magee's handling of clerical child sex abuse allegations in Cloyne left him in an untenable position writes PATSY MCGARRY
THE VERY brevity of the one-line statement from the Catholic Communications Office last Saturday morning suggested taut drama behind the scenes. "His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI has appointed the Archbishop of Cashel and Emly, the Most Reverend Dermot Clifford DD, as apostolic administrator, sede plena and ad nutum Sanctae Sedis, of the Diocese of Cloyne," was all it said.
To which, in school days, we might have added QED, quod erat demonstrandum (“that which was to be demonstrated”). In those distant days we had a more pedestrian translation: “Quite Easily Done.”
Where Bishop John Magee is concerned, it wasn’t. He is not for resigning. Indeed, he was not for moving at all.
That initial statement from the Catholic Communications Office was followed within minutes by one from Archbishop Dermot Clifford, announcing that he was to take over governance of Cloyne diocese as its apostolic administrator. It was followed by a brief word from Catholic primate Cardinal Seán Brady announcing the same.
Both Cardinal Brady and Archbishop Clifford began their statements by saying that Bishop Magee had asked the pope to appoint an apostolic administrator to Cloyne. It was at his initiative. This was emphasised later on Saturday by Cardinal Brady at a confirmation in Dundalk.
The choreography involved would would do credit to participants in Dancing on Ice. That is, at once, to recognise the delicacy of movement involved and the surprise that it could be done at all.
Because even getting Bishop Magee to step aside was no easy task. However, he has. And many believe it unlikely that he will ever again have responsibility for the governance of Cloyne diocese.
On St Patrick’s Day he will have been a bishop for 22 years and, in another of those events which marked him apart, he was consecrated bishop by no less a personage than Pope John Paul himself, and in St Peter’s Basilica.
He had been pope John Paul’s private secretary and then MC, having previously been private secretary to Pope John Paul I and Pope Paul VI.
Clearly, serving in such company for 18 years (from 1969 to 1987) instilled a certain confidence. It may have been that which in later years enabled him ignore church guidelines, State guidelines and Vatican directives on dealing with allegations of clerical child sex abuse.
Possibly it was also that which allowed him to address such allegations in his own way while, a member of the Irish Bishops’ Conference since 1987, associating himself with repeated assurances that all bishops were complying with church guidelines.
Clearly it was such confidence which allowed him last February to provide “incomplete and insufficient” information on an abuse case to Ian Elliott, chief executive of the church’s own watchdog, the National Board for Safeguarding Children (NBSC), a body Bishop Magee was himself party to setting up in 2006.
It must also have been that which allowed his case management advisory committee to respond as it did by letter on July 9th last to Elliott’s damning report of child protection practices in Cloyne. They threatened fire and brimstone, as well as actions in the ecceclesiatical and secular courts, should the “seriously flawed”, “false” and “defamatory” NBSC report be published. The report was, on December 19th last, and on the Cloyne diocesan website. That took some persuading too.
Bishop Magee accepted responsibility. He was sorry. He would stay on to implement Elliott’s recommendations. His enthusiasm was drowned in a chorus of calls for his resignation. The damage to the church was, once more extensive and at its own hand, and grew with every day Bishop Magee remained in situ.
Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin said Bishop Magee should do what was in the best interests of child protection in his diocese. What he meant was not lost in translation. Similarly with Bishop Willie Walsh of Killaloe , who said Bishop Magee should reflect on his position. It was January 2nd before there was any comment from Cardinal Seán Brady. He said: “I realise the extent to which so many people now feel let down, angry and bewildered by recent events.” On January 9th a survey of bishops revealed support for Bishop Magee, including from Archbishop Clifford and Archbishop Michael Neary of Tuam. Archbishop Martin repeated his mantra about the best interests of child protection in Cloyne diocese.
Which left Cardinal Brady of the four Catholic archbishops.
He was “heartened by Minister Andrews’s recognition that strides have been taken by the diocese of Cloyne to improve how child protection matters there are handled”. Still, no one saw what was coming. The following Tuesday, January 13th, Cardinal Brady was in Killarney to address the priests and people of the diocese of Kerry.
Stopped by reporters, he dropped a bombshell. Rejecting calls for Bishop Magee to resign, he said: “I have known John Magee for almost 50 years and I have always found him a reliable and dependable person. I know trust has been damaged, but trust can be restored and built up and even earned by genuine steps being taken to address the issues and the concerns of victims.”
Following the NBSC report “reliable” and “dependable” were not words which immediately sprang to mind when reflecting on Bishop Magee’s handling of clerical child sex abuse allegations in Cloyne. It was quickly realised, within church circles and without, that Cardinal Brady had made a major error.
It was said he had done so unexpectedly, where colleagues were concerned, and was prompted by reports that Bishop Magee was under severe strain.
There was also another factor. The previous day, Monday January 12th, the former bishop of Waterford and Lismore Michael Russell died. His funeral would be on January 15th and Cardinal Brady was scheduled to attend. So too was Bishop Magee. It would be their first time to meet in public since the Cloyne report of December 19th.
Whatever Cardinal Brady’s motive, or that of his two fellow Archbishops Clifford and Neary, their very public stances in support did take the heat off Bishop Magee and allowed for the employment of considerable moral persuasion behind the scenes. After all, they had put their heads above the parapet on his behalf and suffered the brickbats as had the church. He owed them.
The least he could do was step aside while the State Commission conducted its investigation. The necessary extent of his co-operation with the commission also offered a plausible fig leaf.
Meanwhile, it has been noted that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was in Rome again last month. He was there with Our Lady's Choral Society which was accompanied by the RTÉ Concert Orchestra. They performed Handel's Messiahfor Pope Benedict.
At the event Archbishop Martin spoke warmly in support of the Pope, currently at the centre of a number of sticky controversies.
The Pope knows Bishop Magee from the latter’s days in Rome. The Pope also knows Archbishop Martin from the latter’s days in Rome and very well indeed. No one is saying anything. But . . .