Two former Catholic bishops of Ferns diocese have been criticised by a State investigation for their inaction in dealing with allegations of clerical child sex abuse there.
The Ferns Report, published yesterday, found that Bishop Donal Herlihy, who died in 1983, regarded clerical child sex abuse as a moral problem and only appreciated its psychological significance in his later years.
It also said that Bishop Brendan Comiskey, who resigned in April 2002 and was Bishop Herlihy's successor, believed his duty to his priests under canon law prevented him from removing priests from active ministry against whom allegations had been made.
The report also found that prior to 1990 Bishop Comiskey did not report any allegations of abuse to An Garda Síochána or the local health board and that up to 1996 some cases were still not passed on to civil authorities.
The Ferns Report states that in a random five-year period selected by the inquiry, 10 priests who were in St Peter's College, a diocesan seminary and boarding school in Co Wexford, came to its attention as being the subject of abuse allegations. However the report found that there was no evidence that there had been a paedophile ring at St Peter's.
The inquiry team held a two-day consultation with an expert group of therapists with specific experience of working with priests who had sexually abused children. The report states that this expert group "was unanimous that the vow of celibacy contributed to the problem of child sexual abuse in the church".
The report maintains that Bishop Comiskey had complained that priests of the diocese of Ferns "were reluctant to inform him of information or suspicions which they had in relation to child sexual abuse by their colleagues". It says the inquiry had heard evidence which supported this concern.
The inquiry found that this failure to communicate represented a particular problem for Bishop Comiskey who was new to the diocese and "did not have the benefit of a network of informal contacts who might have briefed him on issues of importance to his ministry".
However the report also states "that where complaints were made by either victims or parishioners, they were not handled in a sensitive or supportive manner which led to further hurt and alienation for the complainant".
The report also maintains that Bishop Comiskey's "serious problem" with alcohol abuse and associated depression "resulted in his absence from the diocese for significant periods of time and even when he was present, it unquestionably affected his capacity to deal with many problems which were placed before him".
The report says that Bishop Eamonn Walsh, who was appointed Apostolic Administrator of the Diocese of Ferns on the resignation of Bishop Comiskey in 2002, had an advantage over his predecessor in that a Vatican document, published in 2001, undoubtedly lent him greater authority when he asked a priest to step aside.
"Bishop Comiskey did not feel that he had such support and has informed the inquiry that he was very conscious that many bishops had been overruled by Rome and priests reinstated. He believed that such an outcome would have deeply affected both his credibility and standing in the diocese and his ability to deliver an effective ministry."
The report says that Bishop Comiskey had told the inquiry that in proceeding against priests he was guided by reputable canon lawyers.
"The inquiry has identified three separate occasions when Bishop Comiskey sought canon law advice with a view to removing a priest from active ministry who had had allegations of child sexual abuse made against him. The canon law advice he received did not assist in achieving this," it states.
The report says Bishop Comiskey sought further and more specific information to support allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse before attempting to exercise his canonical powers.
"Inquiries by Bishop Comiskey and later by the diocesan delegate on his own initiative or at the behest of the advisory panel necessarily involved delay. The result was that the priests remained in active ministry for months and even years after the complaints of child sexual abuse had been made against them."
The inquiry says that it was informed by a leading canon lawyer that a bishop could remove and temporarily suspend a priest when satisfied that there was some credibility to an allegation of abuse.
The inquiry states in its conclusions: "Bishop Comiskey correctly identified the objectives to be achieved in responding to allegations of child sexual abuse against priests operating under the aegis of the Diocese of Ferns.
"A variety of explanations were offered to the tribunal for this failure to achieve these . . . However on the evidence available to it, the inquiry believes that Bishop Comiskey failed to remove from active ministry priests against whom allegations of sexual abuse were made, primarily because of his belief that he could not and should not take an action which would necessarily damage the reputation of one of his priests without convincing evidence of their guilt. He did not prioritise child protection in his response."
