This section is reprinted from The Irish Times, March 9, 2006. Author is Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent. View original link at http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/0309/3961174392HM1PRIESTS.html

A growing number of priests are protesting about "over-strict" interpretations by bishops of Catholic Church guidelines on dealing with those accused of child sex abuse. They believe priests are too often stood aside from ministry - and their reputations irreparably damaged - on the basis of flimsy allegations.

Speaking to The Irish Times last night, National Conference of Priests of Ireland president Fr John Littleton said there was growing concern among priests at "overstrict" interpretations of the guidelines. He said there were also priests who believed that the Our Children Our Church document on child protection, published recently by the bishops, was "not fair where clergy was concerned".

He said priests seemed to be singled out for particular public notoriety when it came to allegations, and "the real damage is done" when the innocent were involved. He criticised the slow pace of State inquiries following allegations, which he said compounded the notoriety and delayed justice.

Meanwhile, the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, was confronted repeatedly by "angry and very upset" priests on the issue at meetings in the archdiocese in recent weeks. Priests expressed anxiety that they appeared to be without any rights in the context of allegations.

A meeting on the issue at Clonliffe College in Dublin, called by one of the 16 Dublin deaneries for February 19th last, was attended by more than 100 priests. Barrister Ed Morgan told them that in the bishops' document on child protection, "there is little to indicate that the rights of the accused have been materially and substantially accommodated". Mr Morgan said: "It is perhaps regrettable that the only reference to human rights [in the document] is child specific."

It is understood that at his recent meetings with priests in Dublin, Dr Martin emphasised that an accused priest did indeed have rights, which included the right not to say anything when accused. The accused were also supplied with a list of canon and civil lawyers, whose costs would be paid for by the church.

Further, Dr Martin pointed out, a priest was stood aside from ministry only when a preliminary investigation had established the allegations were credible and/or reasonable.

One of the organisers of the Clonliffe College meeting, which today's Irish Catholic reports to have been attended by more than 150 priests, spoke last night of clergy being "in a no-win situation". The man, who did not wish to be named, said there was a particular concern that "people were being 'taken out', even where allegations were not proved".

Fr Patrick Connolly, a lecturer at Mary Immaculate College in Limerick, has said that "in the current climate, it is probably better to be accused of murder and cleared, than to be accused of abuse and cleared". Writing in the current issue of the Furrow magazine, Fr Connolly said: "The suspicion is that in the past, victims [of clerical sex abuse] were sacrificed on the institutional altar, and now it is the turn of accused clerics, even those who vehemently assert their innocence, and that policies can have as much to do with episcopal protection as child protection."

He warned that "just as the [sex abuse] scandals have seriously damaged trust between priests and people, the danger now is that the bond of trust between priest and bishop will become likewise undermined".

© The Irish Times