In what must rank as one of the most ludicrous pronouncements ever, Fr Alex Reid claimed during a recent interview with this newspaper that Irish political parties currently pose a greater threat to peace in Northern Ireland than the IRA.
He also talked of the prospect of "another Canary Wharf in Britain" if the two governments don't show "renewed commitment to the Belfast Agreement".
Fr Reid's remarks regarding the threat posed by political parties were, he explained, based on a concern that rivalry in the lead-up to the next election in the Republic could have a serious impact at a time when the Belfast Agreement requires renewed commitment.
In the convoluted language of the peace process, he was, in fact, suggesting that between now and the next election Sinn Féin should be immune from attack by other political parties.
In other words, don't mention the "war", the bank raid, the money-laundering, the murders, the extortion, the intimidation, or any of the other extracurricular activities republicans still get up to, in case it has a negative impact on the peace process. Or, more accurately, in case it has a negative impact on the Sinn Féin vote.
That a political party shouldn't be held up to public scrutiny is certainly a novel idea on how a fair and free election campaign should be conducted within a liberal democracy.
No doubt, irrespective of the impact, Sinn Féin fully intends exercising no such self-restraint and, with all the enthusiasm of a pack of Rottweilers, will continue attacking everyone else.
Neither, according to Fr Alex, should the two governments insist on IRA disbandment, because "If the IRA disbands, you run the risk of creating splits, many more 'Real IRAs' ".
Hence, presumably, his warning on the possibilities of "another Canary Wharf in Britain". It hardly needs stating that any Provo inclined to split from his organisation because of differences over tactics will have done so long before now. But more important and disturbing than that is the circular argument that two sovereign governments should tolerate the continued existence of an illegal organisation solely because of the threat it poses if any effort is made to force it to disband.
Bad enough that the same organisation is using the bodies of people it has murdered and "disappeared" as bargaining chips to be traded with the two governments for political advantage.
The most recent example was the remains of missing Armagh man, Gareth O'Connor, being suddenly delivered up from Newry canal.
Neither did Fr Alex leave much doubt about other ways he imagined the two governments might demonstrate a "renewed commitment to the Belfast Agreement".
In language reminiscent of someone in times past petitioning to have an awkward relative committed to a lunatic asylum, Fr Reid claimed that "unionists are far too damaged by history to make rational decisions in relation to breaking the current impasse".
Therefore, "both governments have to be more authoritative, because if a situation develops where there is still a refusal by unionists to agree to anything, and the IRA returns to the streets, you will have a far more violent situation than before".
That is another way of saying that the two governments should plough on regardless of unionists who simply cannot be trusted to make a rational decision for themselves: a notion that runs completely counter to the Belfast Agreement and, indeed, to democracy itself.
Besides, given how duplicitous republicans have been in the past, it seems wholly rational that unionists should now be demanding solid proof of good intent before entering into government with Sinn Féin again.
Though Fr Alex did say he was speaking personally, I find it hard to believe that the comments he made did not, in some fashion, originate with the leadership of Sinn Féin.
It may be that Sinn Féin leaders explained to him at length and in self-serving detail how the two governments and every other political party in Ireland were deliberately thwarting the best efforts of republicans to deliver peace.
And, after outlining all of the dangers this posed to the peace process and, not least, what they consider the remedies to be, finished with something like: "Father Alex, this really needs to be aired publicly".
But, if we say it, "no one will take a blind bit of notice." Fr Alex, in line with his calling, works on the assumption that those with whom he is dealing are as honourable as he is. In light of that and after listening to republicans bemoan the state of the peace process, he would probably feel duty-bound to take the initiative and "in a personal capacity" try to rectify things by speaking out himself.
Whatever the background or motivation, it was somewhat ironic that Fr Alex should decide to give a press interview on the occasion of his receiving an honorary doctorate from NUI Galway for his contribution to the peace process. A contribution greatly enhanced by, and noted for, his awareness of the damage that can be done by public comment.