Here in Ireland, we're already far too familiar with the crimes committed by the catholic church. Rape, paedophilia, conspiracy, theft, I could go on but there's only so much space. Now it seems that murder and terrorism are to be added to this list. The publication of the Police Ombudsman's Commission Report into the Claudy bombings in 1972 has found that not only was a catholic priest directly involved in the bombing and other terrorist activities but that the catholic church conspired to pervert the course of justice and protected this priest from prosecution.
The really disgusting part of this whole tragedy was having to listen to Sean Brady being interviewed about the report, claiming that the church did not engage in a cover-up. Brady refers to one of the findings of the report to buttress his claim.
This point is negated somewhat by other findings of the inquiry, particularly this one:
The pro-catholic media are at great pains to point out that the church did not commit any crime in this incident. The reason for this, is the indecisive nature of some of the report's findings. This is exemplified in these excerpts from the report:
Crimes with which church officials, and others, could have been prosecuted include being an accessory after the fact as outlined in the Criminal Law Act 1997 which in turn is based on the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861. Since the catholic church, by their actions, prevented James Chesney from ever being prosecuted, such a charge could not be upheld. It would appear, though, that the church knew about the activities of this priest and wilfully aided his escape from prosecution.
Clearly the catholic church felt that murder and terrorism were not grounds for being removed from the priesthood as no disciplinary action was taken.
Of course this shouldn't really surprise anyone. Just a year after the events in Claudy a priest named Patrick Ryan refused a transfer to England and resigned from the priesthood. On 1st May 1988 Ryan was arrested by Belgian police as a result of intelligence that he was acting as the quartermaster of an IRA active service unit in Belgium. Police who raided the house where he was staying seized bomb-making equipment, manuals and a large sum of foreign currency. The case never went to trial as the extradition to England was denied on the basis of prejudicial remarks made in the House of Commons. Later in 1993, Ryan was tried in the Special Criminal Court on charges of receiving stolen goods. This incident raises the question: Why was the Church so eager to transfer this priest to England?
The cumulative impact of these incidents is troubling in the extreme. When the Organized Crime Control Act was passed in the United States in 1970 it defined organized crime as:
With regard to the role of the Catholic Church, when informed of the level of concerns others had about one of their priests, they challenged Father Chesney about his alleged activities, which he denied. In the course of this enquiry the Police Ombudsman’s investigation found no evidence of any criminal intent on the part of any Church official.
This point is negated somewhat by other findings of the inquiry, particularly this one:
The Police Ombudsman may only investigate and report on matters of alleged police criminality or misconduct. His responsibility in this matter is to reach a determination on the actions of police, not the State or the Catholic Church.
The pro-catholic media are at great pains to point out that the church did not commit any crime in this incident. The reason for this, is the indecisive nature of some of the report's findings. This is exemplified in these excerpts from the report:
There has been commentary in relation to the bombing of Claudy alleging police collusion with the State and the Catholic Church. The term ‘collusion’ has yet to be fully defined and while there are a number of authorities on the subject, there is no single accepted all encompassing definition. The New Oxford Dictionary of English defines the verb ‘collude’ as; ‘Come to a secret understanding; conspire.’
However, collusion may or may not involve a criminal act.
Crimes with which church officials, and others, could have been prosecuted include being an accessory after the fact as outlined in the Criminal Law Act 1997 which in turn is based on the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861. Since the catholic church, by their actions, prevented James Chesney from ever being prosecuted, such a charge could not be upheld. It would appear, though, that the church knew about the activities of this priest and wilfully aided his escape from prosecution.
The Cardinal said that he knew that the priest was a very bad man and would see what could be done. The Cardinal mentioned the possibility of transferring him to Donegal.’
Clearly the catholic church felt that murder and terrorism were not grounds for being removed from the priesthood as no disciplinary action was taken.
Of course this shouldn't really surprise anyone. Just a year after the events in Claudy a priest named Patrick Ryan refused a transfer to England and resigned from the priesthood. On 1st May 1988 Ryan was arrested by Belgian police as a result of intelligence that he was acting as the quartermaster of an IRA active service unit in Belgium. Police who raided the house where he was staying seized bomb-making equipment, manuals and a large sum of foreign currency. The case never went to trial as the extradition to England was denied on the basis of prejudicial remarks made in the House of Commons. Later in 1993, Ryan was tried in the Special Criminal Court on charges of receiving stolen goods. This incident raises the question: Why was the Church so eager to transfer this priest to England?
The cumulative impact of these incidents is troubling in the extreme. When the Organized Crime Control Act was passed in the United States in 1970 it defined organized crime as:
The unlawful activities of [...] a highly organized, disciplined association [...]
I think that definition applies to the catholic church quite nicely. They have demonstrated a continued disregard for the legal system and a willingness to subvert the laws of the state at every turn. It's hardly surprising given comments like this one:
No court of civil law has the authority to reach into areas of human experience that nature itself has defined.
That quote was from USCCB president Cardinal Francis George speaking on Judge Walker's ruling on Prop 8.
It's time that the people of this country woke up to the activities of the church and decide if there should be a place for it in the future of our country.
No comments:
Post a Comment