The leaking of Rome's dismissal of two priests convicted of child abuse smacks of spin, writes Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent.
It is difficult not to wonder at the timing of the leak from Ferns diocese that two former priests from there, who were convicted of child sex abuse, have "been dismissed from the clerical state".
In 1990, James Doyle, former president at St Peter's College in Wexford, was convicted of indecent assault on a teenage boy and given a suspended sentence of one year. In 1998, Donal Collins was given a four-year sentence, with three years suspended, for indecent assault and gross indecency against teenage boys.
But it was not until earlier this year, according to a spokesman for the diocese, that the process to have both men removed from the priesthood was initiated by Bishop Éamonn Walsh, Apostolic Administrator in Ferns.
In other words, the process was not begun for 14 years following James Doyle's conviction, and for six years following the conviction of Donal Collins.
The decision by the Vatican to dismiss both men from the priesthood was received at Ferns "in recent weeks", the spokesman for the diocese said yesterday. But it was not leaked until Wednesday.
Nor are these the first cases of Irish priests being dismissed from the priesthood following child sex abuse charges.
In the Dublin archdiocese alone, five men have had their priestly functions removed from them in connection with clerical child sex abuse. Two of those were dismissed involuntarily. And an additional two are currently going through the process of voluntary laicisation.
It may be coincidence of course, but the report of the Ferns inquiry into the handling of clerical child sex abuse in that diocese was expected - until yesterday - to be with the Tánaiste and Minister for Health, Ms Harney, before Christmas.
Indeed, it was originally expected to be with the Minister by about mid-November, then it was to be early December or, in other words, sometime "in recent weeks".
News that the report will not now be with the Minister until March will probably come as a surprise to some in Ferns diocese, where it is widely expected to be very critical of both the Catholic Church's handling of abuse allegations and that of some secular authorities.
Over recent weeks it has been known that potential legal problems with the report may necessitate limited publication, and with parts being read under privilege into the Dáil record. The problem is that the inquiry was instructed by the Oireachtas to prepare a "full" report. This has been interpreted rigorously and will mean naming names.
However, as some of those being named have not been convicted of offences related to clerical child sex abuse or arising from the manner in which they handled investigations into such allegations, the naming of such people could leave the State vulnerable to legal action.
Moreover, as this is the first State inquiry into diocesan handling of clerical child sex abuse allegations, there is a determination to get it right. With that end in mind, there is a desire to do this in such a way as not to endanger the co-operation of church authorities and others in future inquiries.
Such co-operation is essential to the success of these non-statutory inquiries, which are dependent on the voluntary assistance of relevant parties in the interest of a speedier and less expensive process.
It is widely acknowledged that the Ferns inquiry has received exemplary co-operation from all relevant bodies, particularly from Bishop Walsh and the diocesan staff. Indeed, this has led to muted (of necessity, in these times) mutterings among some of his episcopal colleagues about the degree of Dr Walsh's co-operation with the inquiry.
That unease can be gleaned from a homily delivered by one former colleague of Dr Walsh's on the Irish Bishops' Conference. Cardinal Desmond Connell, in one of his few public utterances since leaving office as Archbishop of Dublin, spoke about the status of canon law in Irish law, at a Mass in Dublin on May 30th commemorating the 160th anniversary of the St Vincent de Paul Society in Ireland.
The cardinal claimed that canon law, which governs the relationship between bishop and priest, has the status of foreign law in this State.
If recognised as such, it could dictate the degree of co-operation a bishop might afford State inquiries into clerical child sex abuse.
Just this month the cardinal's view has been backed by a legal expert in the Law Society's Gazette.
A barrister, Mr Henry Murdoch, the author of Murdoch's Dictionary of Irish Law (2004), wrote: "The cardinal is right in that, if a relationship at issue is clearly subject to canon law, the courts will give effect to it."
He added that, particularly "if a line can be drawn around a relationship between, say, a bishop and a curate in canon law that does not adversely affect any other party, the courts will probably give effect to the canon law".
This might suggest wriggle room for a reluctant bishop, who only wished to give limited co-operation to State inquiries.
In his May 30th homily, the cardinal said: "I note the idea has got around that in Ireland the law of the church has the standing of the rules of a private association. But as early as 1925, the Supreme Court decided that in our jurisdiction the canon law enjoys the status of foreign law.
"It is recognised, therefore, as law enacted by a sovereign independent authority. That sovereign authority resides in the Holy See."
He was alluding to comments on October 22nd, 2002, by the Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, that canon law was viewed by the civil law of the State as "equivalent to the laws of, say, the Presbyterian Church or the internal rules of a sporting organisation".
In his article, Mr Murdoch added, however, that it would not be correct to imply that canon law takes precedence over civil law in all instances. "If a third party is affected, it might not be applied." The situation, it would appear, will not be clear unless tested in the courts.
The 1925 (O'Callaghan v O'Sullivan) case, to which Cardinal Connell referred, involved a legal challenge by Father O'Callaghan, a parish priest in west Cork, to his removal by the then bishop of Kerry, Dr O'Sullivan. The Supreme Court held that it was a term of the contract between the bishop and the priest that they were "bound by a foreign law [ canon law] regulating their respective offices". It found for Dr O'Sullivan.
It was during the cardinal's term as Archbishop of Dublin that two priests there were dismissed from the clerical state by Rome and, certainly in one case, on his intervention.