Following the resignation of Cardinal Law the position of Cardinal Connell has become much less secure, writes Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent
There is no doubt now that the pressure on Cardinal Connell to follow in the footsteps of Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston will intensify over coming weeks. To a lesser extent there will also be added pressure on Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, the Archbishop of Westminster.
Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's difficulties centre on his decision in 1985, when he was bishop of Arundel and Brighton, to move Father Michael Hill to the chaplaincy at Gatwick Airport, even though he knew he was a child abuser. Hill was jailed for five years last month.
"I should not have appointed him . . . All one can do is apologise" and admit ignorance of the gravity of the issue at the time and the danger to children, the Cardinal told The Irish Times on a visit to Dublin last October.
Cardinal Connell is in an altogether more vulnerable position. But let us first look at what is different between the situation concerning this issue in the Dublin archdiocese and what has been happening in Boston.
In Dublin there is no organised group of loyal laity such as the Voice of the Faithful group there, who have been and are demanding accountability by the clerical authorities or - as latterly in Boston - the Cardinal's resignation.
And, crucially, the priests of Dublin remain mum. While despairing privately of church leadership, locally and institutionally, in public they maintain "a face to meet the faces that you meet" profile.
Indeed, when they complain publicly about this issue at all it is most likely about their own victimhood as a result of abuses by brother priests and/or the effects of an unrefined media response to such revelations.
There has been little public criticism in Ireland by priests about the handling of clerical child sex-abuse case by their bishops. In Boston the fact that 58 priests signed a document last weekend calling for Cardinal Law's resignation, and that 300 of them were to meet last night to discuss the issue, was a deciding factor when it came to the Vatican agreeing on this occasion to accept Cardinal Law's resignation.
It has been claimed that Cardinal Law ignored the 1993 guidelines of the US church in handling clerical child sex-abuse cases. It has been claimed that Cardinal Connell did likewise where the Irish bishops January 1996 guidelines are concerned. These said that civil authorities should be notified immediately such allegations were made and that the relevant priest must be removed from parish duties.
Later in 1996 Cardinal Connell met Ms Marie Collins to discuss her complaints about abuse by Father Paul McGennis in 1960. It was her second attempt to bring this to the notice of church authorities. She did so to her curate in 1985, since confirmed in writing to her.
The Cardinal accused her of trying to ruin the good name of a man who had not abused since. However, it emerged on the RTE Prime Time programme on October 17th that just 18 months before complaints had been reported to the Cardinal's office about Father McGennis's behaviour in Edenmore parish.
Further, the Cardinal told Ms Collins the archdiocese couldn't co-operate with gardaí in the investigation into Father McGennis as the priest had not been warned in advance of his admission of guilt in the case, that it could be used against him, nor was it confirmed to gardai by the Dublin church authorities.
Ms Collins pointed out what she felt was the Cardinal's contradictory position in the context of the church's guidelines. He said, according to her, that the guidelines had no effect in civil or canon law. He said, according to himself, the guidelines superseded both canon and civil law.
Then there was his appointment of Father Noel Reynolds as chaplain to the National Rehabilitation Hospital, Dun Laoghaire, in 1997 without telling authorities there about "concerns" that had been expressed about the priest since 1995. The priest was himself said to have admitted to over 100 cases of child sex abuse.
Father Ivan Payne was sent for psychiatric assessment in 1991 and 1994 (Cardinal Connell was appointed Archbishop of Dublin in 1988) while serving in Sutton parish. He continued to serve there despite reaching an out-of-court settlement in 1993 with Andrew Madden, whom he abused in 1981. Throughout the period he also continued to serve on the Dublin Regional Marriage Tribunal.
In May 1995 Cardinal Connell told RTÉ he had paid out no money in compensation to any victims of clerical child sex abuse. But in September 1995 it emerged that Father Payne had secured a £30,000 loan from the archdiocese to pay compensation to Andrew Madden. The Cardinal threatened to sue RTÉ for libel, but did not do so.
And there was the case of Tony Walsh. Still a priest despite a decision by a diocesan tribunal that he be defrocked, he again abused a boy in 1995 while his appeal against the tribunal decision was being investigated by Rome.