Change in the Irish church is unlikely to come if the current selection process for bishops remains in place, and a conservative leadership gives way to a cautious crop of successors, writes News Investigations Correspondent John Downes The saga surrounding the resignation of Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray last week once again cast a light on the ongoing implications of the Murphy report for the Catholic church's ruling class of bishops.
But as they gathered for their scheduled quarterly meeting of the Irish Bishops Conference in Maynooth on Wednesday –the first since the results of the commission's investigation were made public – there is likely to have been a palpable sense of nervousness among those present.
Most if not all of the attendees at last week's get-together have progressed through the ranks of a church which appears to value loyalty to the institution above all else.
As Judge Yvonne Murphy so meticulously documented in her report, this fidelity to the church has all too often extended to the cover-up and protection of voracious sexual predators at the expense of vulnerable young children.
But just how does a bishop become a bishop? And what are the implications of this for an organisation whose leaders have shown themselves time and again to be incapable of reform?
Even more worryingly, how can the public have faith in the child-protection credentials of anyone who attended last week's meeting, given that most if not all are now tainted by association?
The process of selecting an Irish bishop typically involves a communication from the pope's permanent representative in Ireland – the papal nuncio – to the senior clergy in a diocese, asking them to identify the names of people whom they think might be suitable for the senior positions.
They are asked a number of questions about their proposed candidates. Unsurprisingly, there is a strong emphasis on whether or not they adhere to the prevailing church doctrine.
In a confidential letter sent to selected priests in the diocese of Down and Connor in March 2007, subsequently reproduced in the Irish Times, the then papal nuncio to Ireland, Archbishop Giuseppe Lazzarotto, outlined some of the key qualities required of a bishop.
In an attached questionnaire, he sought information on candidates under 11 category headings, including "personal attributes", "human qualities" and "moral character".
Tellingly, category six, entitled "discipline", sought the following details about the proposed successor:
"Loyal obedience to the Holy Father, the Apostolic See, the Sacred Hierarchy; esteem for and acceptance of priestly celibacy as put forward by the magisterium of the church; respect for and observance of the norms governing divine worship and ecclesiastical attire."
Yet sources say the process of marking an individual out for "greatness" can begin as early as their initial seminarian training, with the decision to send them to Rome to study viewed as a key indication of a young priest's potential.
Similarly, a senior role heading up certain church institutions, such as the Irish College in Rome and St Patrick's College in Maynooth, are seen in some quarters as relative 'bankers' for appointment as a bishop down the line, barring any outspoken criticism of church doctrine from the persons concerned.
In practice, recent years have seen a sea change in the appointment process of Irish bishops, as the Vatican has increasingly moved away from the practice of appointing from within the Irish clerical ranks.
Michael Kelly, deputy editor of the Irish Catholic, points out that all of the appointments during the past five years have involved outsiders being brought in as bishops to individual dioceses.
Frequently, such individuals will have served overseas, for example in Africa, although, again, time spent in Rome is another key 'plus' factor.
"The best way to become a bishop is to have friends who are bishops. We see that in the fact that so many members of the current Irish hierarchy are former classmates," he says.
But as Lazzarotto's leaked letter indicates, there is a far more fundamental process of selection (or preselection) at play here, even when the identification of potential candidates is not left up to the priests of a particular diocese.
Fr Tony Flannery, the outspoken Redemptorist priest and commentator, notes that the Rome-based appointment system is a relatively recent phenomenon, allowing the Vatican to wield total control over the selection process.
"A lot of the bishops who have been appointed, and they are often lovely men whom I know personally, tend to be academics or to have come from the Irish College in Rome. They tend to be ultra-cautious, conservative men who wouldn't express an opinion against the Vatican in any way," he says.
"But if you only pick people who are orthodox in their faith, that does not go hand in hand with good leadership, and the need for people with independent minds.
"For example, if you were in line to be a bishop and if you wrote an article 20 years ago saying you were in favour of the ordination of women, your name would be scratched off straightaway."
It is a theme taken up by theologian Gina Menzies, who notes that most of the apostles were married, while in earlier Christian times bishops themselves also had wives.
She points to the ongoing influence of Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI's 41-year-old encyclical which banned the use of artificial contraception, as a key factor in the decision-making process.
"It seems to me that the specific areas of orthodoxy which are prioritised are frequently tied up with sexual morality, for example contraception, and the role of women," she says. "When you read the church's documents on sexual morality, they are stuck in the medieval ages. They still don't understand women and sexuality."
Few who have read the Murphy report can be in any doubt about the devastating consequences which such an approach can have.
When the true litmus test of your capacity to do the job of bishop is your strict adherence to doctrinal orthodoxy – rather than, for example, your ability as a progressive leader or communicator – it is little surprise that so few seek to question the prevailing status quo, even when it is rotten to the core. It is perhaps the cruellest of sticks to wave at someone whose commitment to their church, including its flaws, means they feel compelled to speak out nonetheless.
For those somewhere in between, with aspirations towards power, it is a surefire way of buying silence and complicity.
The hierarchy's shameful treatment of abuse victims such as Marie Collins and Andrew Madden as they attempted to highlight their suffering is repeatedly highlighted in Judge Yvonne Murphy's report.
But when viewed in the context of the selection process outlined above, the actions of church leaders are perhaps less surprising.
Some bishops – such as the recently much-maligned Bishop of Killaloe Willie Walsh – may be good men, or at least well meaning. But many are also flawed advocates for change in the Catholic church, whose capacity to challenge the prevailing norms within the institution –and indeed their own behaviour – is severely limited.
Despite last week's events in Maynooth and Rome –where Archbishop Diarmuid Martin and Cardinal Sean Brady discussed the Murphy report with Pope Benedict directly – there are hugely worrying indications that, even now, the true scale of the problems within the church have still not really sunk in among the Irish bishops.
Many would have been briefed on the contents of the report in advance of publication, yet appear to have adopted a 'wait and see' approach to the reaction of the public before commenting in detail.
So the omens are not good for any real change in the church, particularly in a week when the various auxiliary bishops named in the Murphy report – including Bishop Eamonn Walsh and Bishop Jim Moriarty – defiantly moved to resist suggestions that they should resign.
On a sheer physical level, a number of the current crop of predominantly septuagenarian bishops are said to be physically exhausted, having spent the last 15 years mired in the various controversies surrounding clerical sexual abuse.
But Fr Flannery believes that we will simply not get sufficiently radical change from this group, as they will not challenge the Vatican.
"If the policy in relation to church appointments continues, their replacements will be similar. We need to put in more dynamic leadership, and appoint people for their leadership ability rather than their orthodoxy," he says.
"The church absolutely has to treat women as equals in all aspects of the church. It's a total anachronism to have had that meeting [in Maynooth] with 32 men gathering to discuss a major, major crisis for the church and not a woman's voice to be heard. I mean what way is that to go about it?"
In spite of repeated calls for such a move from survivors such as Collins and Madden, it also appears increasingly unlikely that a full-scale state inquiry into every diocese in the country will be established.
Meanwhile, a significant proportion of the powerful "men of Christ" who attended last week's meeting in Maynooth will have breathed a quiet sigh of relief that their own actions are unlikely ever to be subjected to such intense scrutiny by the likes of Judge Yvonne Murphy and her team.
Who will succeed archbishop Diarmuid Martin?
One of the most interesting aspects of the ongoing fallout from the Murphy report is its effect on bishops such as Eamonn Walsh, who has previously been seen in some quarters as a potential successor to Diarmuid Martin as archbishop of Dublin.
Walsh came out fighting last week, defending his child-protection record and stating that despite the findings of the Murphy report, "If I had done any wrong, I'd be gone."
He was soon joined by others, including his fellow Dublin auxiliary bishop Raymond Field, as well as Bishop Jim Moriarty of Kildare and Leighlin and Bishop Martin Drennan of Galway.
Yet despite their spirited defences, it would appear to be highly unlikely that Walsh, or indeed any of the current crop of Irish bishops, will ever succeed Martin as archbishop.
One seasoned observer points out that it would be a "PR disaster" for the church to make an appointment among their ranks, due to the fact that the entire hierarchy here is now effectively tainted by association.
This has prompted some speculation as to who might replace Martin if and when he goes.
One name which has been mooted is that of Bishop Brian Farrell, currently secretary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity in Rome.
Another possibility may be an appointment from a diocese north of the border, with Bishop Noel Traynor of Down and Connor and Bishop John McAreavey mentioned in some quarters.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to us 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 we agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
SIC: ST