THE Bishop of Ferns, Dr Denis Brennan, ignited a furious national reaction with his tentative move towards persuading Wexford parishes to contribute financially to the crippling costs accruing from settlements with victims of clerical child abuse.It was an almighty public relations disaster for the mild-mannered Bishop Brennan, who was appointed by the Vatican after the resignation of Bishop Brendan Comiskey and who has been to the fore in post-Ferns Inquiry episcopal efforts to install sound child protection safeguards in the schools and parishes of all 26 dioceses.
In an effort to quell public wrath, Fr John Carroll, the diocese's press officer, circulated a briefing note saying that "going to the parishes is but one option the diocesan finance committee has put to parish finance committees in response to some requests from individuals within the diocese as to how we might help to complete the work of justice and healing".
Fr Carroll stressed that nothing definite had yet been decided in Ferns as to how to fund future claims, and he suggested that "it may very well be that a decision will be taken to dispose of a diocesan asset".
In a revealing insight into the process embarked on by Bishop Brennan, Fr Carroll indicated that diocesan authority -- the bishop and his mainly clerical lieutenants at the helm of administrative power -- would continue to consult with members of "the diocesan family" -- church-goers -- as to what direction should be taken from here.
The limits of this ecclesiastical process were further revealed when Fr Carroll wrote that "at no time anything but a consultation, or an invitation to further engagement and discernment, was proposed", and he added that decisions on future funding "will only occur after the conclusion of consultation over the coming months, and perhaps years, with church-goers".
Implicit in these remarks is the reality that the bishop will make the ultimate decisions in accordance with the responsibilities of church governance invested solely in him under Roman canon law.
In spite of Fr Carroll's valiant attempt to portray his boss as a listening bishop carefully weighing up the mood of church-goers -- but ignoring the growing numbers of Catholics alienated from the male, celibate, authoritarian system that for decades covered up the heinous rapes of children by paedophile priests -- it was Bishop Brennan who fanned the flames by saying "it will be necessary to invite the parishes to become part of the process financially".
Bishop Brennan also courted controversy by declaring it a moral obligation on committed Catholics to contribute financially towards justice and reconciliation for victims.
"Funding sought is not about sharing the blame, it is about asking for help to fulfil a God-given responsibility," he said, insisting it was not a Christian response for parishioners to say that they did not cause the problem of priestly paedophilia.
"To help in the work of justice, healing, reconciliation, a safer environment for children in the future, proper financial stewardship and overall good economic health is a Christian response," he said.
There is Christian insight in these sentiments but they also emit what Gerald Slevin, an Irish-American lawyer whose parents emigrated to New York from Donegal, calls "mystical smokescreens" to distract the laity -- whose forebears built the Irish church but never imagined it would provide a place for their children and grandchildren to be abused by clerics they trusted.
'No longer can we let single men, whether well-intentioned or not, write the rules and then apply them, without being accountable," Slevin says.
"In my view, there is only one way consistent with the church's teachings to do this, but Catholics must wake up for the sake of all children and return their church to its original apostolic and consensual structure with a clergy that is fully accountable."
Addressing the crunch question of whether this can be done by dialogue or negotiation, Slevin concludes that dialogue won't work because the hierarchy does not recognise the faithful as equals.
Negotiation could work but requires the faithful to have adequate bargaining power to be taken seriously by bishops.
The only real power the faithful have is their purse.
Slevin proposes that the only way to get change and protect children is to withhold all future contributions until convincing church reform is initiated.
This "contribution strike" could be effected by Catholics advocating reform by stopping their contributions to church collections until sooner or later a few bishops, perhaps led by Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, will begin to negotiate.
"The contribution strike is a form of Christian love, 'tough love', to cure those in the hierarchy addicted to power of their addiction and, most importantly, to protect defenceless children," Slevin urges.
As all Catholics have a clear moral obligation to protect children far above any duty they may have to preserve the present medieval structure in the church, perhaps Bishop Brennan will negotiate with reform Catholics rather than merely consult church-goers to secure his objective of agreement to pick up the abuse tab.
Or will it need "a contribution strike" to bring Bishop Brennan to the negotiating table?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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: II