Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has expressed surprise at Cardinal Desmond Connell's court action against the Dublin Child Abuse Commission. Dr Martin said nothing had changed from his point of view and he had set out to ensure the church would get the truth out well and that it would protect children.
He also said he had no reason to believe Rome was not supporting him in waiving privilege over diocesan documents that he had given the commission.
Earlier the High Court postponed the challenge filed by Cardinal Desmond Connell to stop church documents from being examined.
The case will come up for mention again next Monday, but it is not known when a full hearing will take place.
Last week, Cardinal Connell initiated High Court proceedings to try to prevent documents handed over by his successor, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, from being examined by the Dublin Archdiocese Commission of Investigation.
The commission is investigating clerical child abuse.
Today Mr Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill told counsel for the commission, Brian Murray, the court would facilitate his request for a full hearing rather than a further hearing of the injunction restraining the commission from examining controversial documents.
The commission has said it will not examine the documents in the interim.
Cardinal Connell claims he is entitled to assert legal privilege over the files. They contain legal advice that he requested while handling child abuse allegations when he was Archbishop between 1988 and 2004.
Shane Murphy, Counsel for the Cardinal's successor Archbishop Diarmund Martin, told the judge he was reserving his right to join the action as a Notice Party.
Counsel for Cardinal Connell, Roderick Horan, said he has no objection to the Archbishop's lawyers reviewing the documents in the case to facilitate their decision-making.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce