SEAN O'CONAILL,
Madam, - Too many of us Irish Catholics have not yet fully absorbed the full meaning of the scandals of the past decade, beginning with Eamonn Casey and culminating now with Desmond Connell. Across the West an avalanche of similar scandals tells the same story: the institution we support financially is in need of a radical structural reform. This must remove it forever from the control of a self-electing patriarchy bent above all upon preserving the myth of its own moral superiority - the basis of its absolute power.
To simply call for the resignation of this or that bishop is therefore futile. It implies that bishops are accountable only upwardly. This invites the Vatican simply to appoint others of the same ilk, with future scandal guaranteed. The permanent accountability of pastors to their own flocks must be achieved through the creation of structures of lay representation in every diocese - and these structures must be consulted in the appointment of bishops also.
This reform will simply not happen unless laity take the crucial step of withholding the greater part of their financial contribution to their Church until it does, saving the balance until that happy day. Those who do this can expect to be vilified as disloyal by the oligarchy they threaten.
There will be appeals to "apostolic succession" - in flagrant denial of St Paul's insistence that the place for an apostle was at the end of the triumphal procession, rather than the head of it.
Let no one be in any doubt about the challenge that faces us laity at this time: not simply to take the easy option of calling for a rolling of heads, but to demand radical institutional change that will impose upon ourselves new and permanent responsibilities. Forty years after the start of Vatican II it is high time for us all to become the adult Church the council envisaged. - Yours, etc.,
SEAN O'CONAILL, Greenhill Road, Coleraine, Co Derry.
Madam, - The recent RTE Prime Time programme raised emotions sufficiently high to trigger off a lynch mob. Some commentators developed instant "hanging fever", as your letters page attests.
Luckily RTE is not a law court. Prime Time's presentation failed to spell out clearly that its drama covered 40 years and four Archbishops. Over that time, 1,200 priests served in the diocese and complaints about 35 were received.
The Church mishandled the child sexual abuse issue badly, as did swimming clubs and most other institutions that encountered it. It was paralysed by professionals. Doctors said priests were cured and safe to minister. Lawyers advised against approaching alleged victims so as not to compromise legal proceedings. The professional advice was wrong.
Society knew little about child sexual abuse until the late 1980s. A complaint is not proof that abuse occurred. In 2000, 2,104 complaints of child sexual abuse were recorded by health boards. Only 517 complaints (24 per cent) were actually confirmed - i.e. only in 24 per cent of complaints did professionals judge that sexual abuse occurred. However, even among these, there is unlikely to be sufficient proof in most cases to satisfy a court. Compared with complaints made, resulting convictions may be minuscule.
Prime Time gave one facet of the problem. It was emotive, admitting no doubts or reservations. Such presentations need certainty and few things are ever that clear-cut. If the programme wanted an impartial examination, it would have dealt with it more dispassionately. The evidence presented (and that not presented) needs calm reflection. Has everyone forgotten the Nora Wall case, where media gurus were screaming for blood and, only for a happy accident, an innocent woman would have been jailed for years?
Cardinal Connell inherited a difficult situation and is addressing it. He has no reason to resign and his doing so would be a bad precedent. TV programmers do not seek the whole truth and nothing but the truth; their aim is to make memorable programmes and too much balance weakens impact.
No intelligent person accepts a TV programme uncritically. This week the lynch mob want Cardinal Connell's head. Last month it was Bertie Ahern's and Charlie McCreevy's. Who next? - Yours, etc.,
E Ó RAGHALLAIGH, Mapas Road, Dalkey, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Asas a group of actively involved members of the Catholic Church we are registering our disgust at the callous inaction of the Hierarchy in failing to bring to justice the perpetrators of the heinous crime of sexual abuse/rape of children.
We do not wish to have our continued involvement in Church activities to be interpreted as in any way supporting the church in its ongoing reluctance to deal with these crimes. We strongly support the victims in their demand for immediate justice. - Yours, etc.,
F.A. O'HARE, ITA O'DONOGH, KAY KAVANAGH, KITTY ROSNEY, BREDA BUTLER, JIM KELLY, JIM BARRY, MARY ROSE FLANNERY, JUNE O'HARE, Alden Park, Bayside, Dublin 13.
Madam, - Much as one might sympathise with Jack Morrissey's intention to cancel his direct debit to the Church (October 19th), how will this help the victims of child abuse? It is his Church, not just the cardinal's Church, that he would be harming by withdrawing support for some of the hundreds of priests who are just as horrified as he is by these scandals.
It is they, together with committed Catholics like Mr Morrissey, who will eventually help to bring about healing for the victims and their families. - Yours, etc.,
PATRICIA DALY, Home Farm Road, Drumcondra, Dublin 9.
Madam, - I've noticed that when politicians and other apologists for the Roman Catholic Church are asked to comment on clerical child sex abuse they invariably start with the mantra about the vast majority of priests being decent, hard working men, blah, blah, blah.
Of course, it takes only one priest to abuse a child. But how many does it take to cover up that abuse? And where are the voices of protest from those decent, hard-working priests? Where are their challenges to their superiors? Come on, I'm still waiting.
We are also asked to consider the hurt that these scandals have caused to lay Roman Catholics. I'm sorry, but I find it difficult to empathise with those unfortunates because I believe it is not "hurt" that they are suffering, but the shock of realising that the "paragon of virtue" that they have slavishly followed is nothing more than a vile, nepotistic and corrupt man-made institution. - Yours, etc.,
SEAN MOORE, Millmount Terrace, Drogheda, Co Louth.
Madam, - I would like to mention an apparently missing part of the equation: the accountability of human behavioural scientists. Media reports refer to the fact that some bishops sent their priests for professional psychological and psychiatric assessment. In some cases, upon completion of the therapy, the bishops were told their priests could return to pastoral ministry - where they re-offended.
In sending priests for professional therapy, the bishops were admitting their need for skilled guidance to understand the nature of paedophilia.
However the outcome of some therapeutic assessments were clearly flawed. Consequently children and minors were placed in grave danger.
While I acknowledge that some bishops have a clear case to answer over the appalling mishandling of some of their priests, is it not also obvious that some behavioural scientists and therapy centres owe us an explanation and should be held accountable?
Their colleagues in general or surgical medicine would be so accountable in the event of a comparable mis-diagnosis. - Yours, etc.,
Father STEPHEN CUMMINS, Churchtown, Mallow, Co Cork.