TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 15 °C Saturday 25 May, 2013

Column: Being held to accountability is not persecution, Cardinal Brady

One’s civic duties are not the same as one’s self-imposed religious obligations, writes TheJournal.ie columnist Lisa McInerney – nor are they superseded by them.

Lisa McInerney

ONE OF THE most abiding slogans from the reproductive rights movement is “Keep Your Rosaries Off My Ovaries”. It’s a motto chanted at rallies, seen on banners, even printed on coffee mugs for those occasions when one is saddled with providing refreshments to pearl-clutchers. It’s an abiding slogan because it’s catchy, rhyming, and darkly humorous, and also because it’s so rigidly sensible you can prop up an entire philosophy with it. Personal religious beliefs are not national policy. A more reasonable ethos there has never been.

Personal religious beliefs are not national policy. And still, Cardinal Seán Brady has apologists.

In a sense, he probably doesn’t need them. Seán Brady is his own biggest apologist. That he so firmly believes his conduct as notary in the interrogation of Brendan Boland was exemplary is indicative of a massive failure in his moral and ethical faculties, which would be a tragedy in any circumstances, but a particularly sinister tragedy when it involves a man who is supposed to hold some semblance of spiritual authority.

But I guess spiritual authority is its own apologist, too. If you’re hampered by the inflexibility of pompous moral code, how can you act in any other way, but to point your chin at the heavens and pout that it’s not your fault? That acting with any sense of common decency was somehow outside of your remit? “But no one ordered me to be compassionate,” is no excuse, but telling Seán Brady that won’t make a blind bit of difference. His willing institutionalisation robbed him of his humanity long ago. Made him sub-primate, if anything.

“We’ve found it difficult to extract religious contract from municipal code of conduct”

Not so for the rest of us, though, so Seán Brady, a citizen of the state whether he likes it or not, should be made feel the weight of his civic failures. Because one’s civic duties are not the same as one’s self-imposed religious obligations. Nor are they superseded by them. State before faith.

Ireland is by no means unique as a nation whose identity is entwined with religious tradition (even the Land Of The Free is choked by it, so what hope did our little start-up have?) As we’ve matured as a state, we’ve found it difficult to extract religious contract from municipal code of conduct. That’s why we now have a frankly confounding situation where representatives of an entirely optional religion think that they can make up their own rules and follow them instead. And if that wasn’t bad enough, representatives of this entirely optional religion think that they can impose these rules on people who have fully-functioning minds of their own. Bonkers, right?

Yes, the Bonkers Right. The kind who believe that their way is the only way and you must follow it, whether you fancy sharing a path with them or not. We see it in Seán Brady, who doesn’t understand why everyone’s getting het up about his failure to stop a predatory paedophile wreak havoc on the lives of innocents. We see it in the case of the Munster school manager who refused to enrol a young mother, stating when questioned by the Children’s Ombudsman that it was in the school’s “moral code” not to “entertain” young parents. We see it in the careless pontificating of TD Michelle Mulherin, who when taking part in the debate about legislating for medically-necessary abortion, segued into personal opinion on “fornication” and giving an unnecessary shout-out to “the grace of God”.

“You have the right to worship whichever deity you fancy, so long as you’re not hurting anyone else in the process”

Whether you’re Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or even a fully paid-up member of the The Western Branch of American Reform Presbylutheranism is no one else’s business. You have the right to worship whichever deity you fancy, so long as you’re not hurting anyone else in the process. And here’s where it gets tricky: “not hurting anyone else in the process” is clear-cut if we’re talking about stealing your neighbour’s chickens to sacrifice on the homemade altar in your garden shed, but what if your religious compulsion means protecting a vicious colleague over an innocent child?

What if it means knowingly installing your moral code as an obstacle to the wellbeing of fellow citizens? Hampering their rights, whether or not they believe in the same kind of god you do?

Seán Brady does not have the right to hide behind his chosen religion’s guidelines when faced with civic responsibility. The Munster school manager did not have the right to deny an education to a young woman based on whether or not he agreed with her reproductive choices. Michelle Mulherin had no right to slather her religious beliefs through a debate on providing medically-necessary abortion.

This shouldn’t be a difficult concept to grasp.

Nor should this: just because you cannot force your religious beliefs on others doesn’t mean you have to abandon your religion. Seán Brady doesn’t have to leave his Church because its archaic, insular laws don’t hold more weight than his home country’s. The Munster school manager doesn’t have to impregnate a teenager if he doesn’t like the idea of pregnant teenagers, and Michelle Mulherin doesn’t have to get an abortion. Interestingly, the notion of fellow citizens having to toe the line with conservative values doesn’t apply when it’s flipped to reflect liberal viewpoints. Liberal means pro-reason and pro-choice, which, perplexingly, translates into “persecution” for some conservatives.

“Ireland’s moral majority have enjoyed a remarkably persecution-free run since the formation of the State”

Being held to accountability, despite your self-imposed religious privilege, is not persecution. Nor is having your beliefs questioned or criticised, even derided. Those who defend Seán Brady may feel that miscreants, bereft of a moral backbone, are gleefully attempting to pull the rug from under him, delighted for another chance to sneer at the faithful, but it’s not Seán Brady’s religion that’s being criticised here. It’s his appalling conduct, which he is conveniently blaming his religion for.

Seán Brady is being rightfully wrung out at the moment, but he’s not being persecuted. The Children’s Ombudsman questioning the Munster school manager about his conduct is not persecution, nor is Michelle Mulherin being called a bit of a spade for waffling on about fornication in a delicate debate about unviable pregnancies. In fact, Ireland’s moral majority have enjoyed a remarkably persecution-free run since the formation of the state, given the changing tides of public opinion and, let’s face it, the wanton excesses and evils of the country’s largest church.

We’re maturing as a nation, and less likely to bend under scaremongering, conservative will. We’re asking questions, we’re condemning failures. We’re not quite there yet. These three stories from only the last month – Brady’s self-serving incompetence, the school manager’s anger at the Ombudsman’s questioning, Mulherin’s muddled words – prove that we have still quite a way to go before reason and logic can take the places of ritual and tradition in national affairs.

In the meantime, one would wonder for how long more the likes of Seán Brady intend to sow the wind.

Read previous columns by Lisa McInerney>

Read next:

Comments (59 Comments)

  • The reason cardinal Brady is in the news is because of the persecution of children by him and his clergy colleagues. Forcing a child, who had been raped by a clergy colleague, to swear an oath of secrecy compounded the persecution on the child.

    Reply
  • If you reside in the state you live by the state rules I’ve always thought.
    If Brady is caught doing 80 in a 50 zone on the way to say mass is he also of the opinion that he is exempt from state law. I really feel sorry for the honest hard working Priests. Their work is bring made impossible by these elderly ……. ( I cannot call them men).

    Reply
  • Brady is as guilty of abusing these children as the buyers of child porn are. They let it happen and condone it.

    Reply
    • Maybe the priests should down tools until he goes! A gesture of that magnitude would go a long way to restore the churches credibility within these shores!

      Reply
    • @rodrigo Would be a good idea – but the priesthood in Ireland doesn’t have ideas. Despite the Ferns report, the Ryan Report, the Murphy Commission Report, the Cloyne Report, and the revelations over cardinal Brady’s forcing of child victims of rape to swear oaths of secrecy, not one priest has resigned in disgust.

      Reply
    • @andrew Actually, I know 2 priests who have resigned as a direct result of the child sex abuse scandals, so they do resign. They may not have made a huge fuss about it, but it has happened.

      Reply
    • @ Dermot It appears they haven’t made ANY fuss about it – they just walked out! They remained silent in the face of all those damning reports and their reaction is to leave and stay silent. They must have been sworn to secrecy … oh hold on … that’s where Brady’s troubles began!

      Reply
    • Is it just the priests who should down tools? 84% of Irish people who completed the last census form declared themselves to be Roman Catholic!

      Reply
    • Perhaps if those 84% were to fill the Church Offerings envelope with these: http://bit.ly/K1N6JQ

      Reply
    • Andrew, sometimes out of the most dire of circumstances we can get a laugh.
      Bishop Denis Brennan of Ferns asked for donations from the ‘faithful’ towards it’s 10 million legal bill for defending abuse cases:
      http://www.alliancesupport.org/news/archives/003527.html
      Ten (!) people subscribed ‘insubstantial’ donations! Looks like the 84% are less likely to declare their allegiance when it comes to forking out money!

      Reply
    • Probably because all the money has gone to …. guess who? http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?t=9130

      In 2008 a leading member of Ireland’s oldest Catholic newspaper has said that there is an onus on the community to take care of Father Eugene Greene, the former parish priest from West Donegal, when he is released from prison. The priest violently abused boys over a span of three decades and was incarcerated in 2000. Deputy editor of the ‘Irish Catholic,’ Michael Kelly said: “” “The priest has to live somewhere. He has committed dreadful crimes and to the best of my knowledge he has not tried to rehabilitate himself. There is an onus on the community to look after him as a christian community.”

      When the priest was released from prison, there was a whip around and a substantial nest egg was collected for him. I suppose it was raised by those members of the community who just couldn’t accept the truth. The collection is estimated to exceed €50,000.

      What the F……………..!

      Reply
    • Well you could be right, it was the Bishop himself claimed he only got 10 ‘insubstantial’ donations! It’s hardly that the good catholics of Donegal would be more forthcoming to the churches plight than the lousers of the Ferns diocese now could it?

      Reply
  • excellent piece Lisa.

    Reply
  • Given the concept of the separation of church and State, I find it peculiar that atheist cabinet ministers are commenting on Brady’s position at all. Why not just develop secular policies so it does not matter who the primate is? Why not ban religious discrimination? Why fund religious dogma? Leave Brady to the Pope, his flock and (if applicable) the gardai/psni.

    Reply
    • a 05/05/12 #

      I agree. Time for their Charity status to go too.

      Reply
    • I agree totaly. The mind boggles as to why so much time is spent in the Dail at our expense talking about the catholic church when it need not be. The schools were built with the money of the Irish people they may have been put into the name of the catholic diocies . Take them back. Scools are lucrative businessess otherwise they would not be holding on so tightly. Keep religion in the churches and see who will be interested.

      Reply
  • Can I pose a question and a suggestion all in one?
    The Catholic Church has Tax Free status in Ireland ?
    Why?
    In these austere times , should this status be removed ?

    Surely the Roman Catholic Church , should from now on be on the same level playing field as every Citizen of our Republic , where Tax and VAT is concerned ?

    This would remove the perception that the “Organisation” that is Vatican City, Rome , is above the Law – as it perceives itself at the moment !

    It would also bring about the repair of our economy quicker , bearing in mind the extraordinary wealth of this organisation, which I witnessed at its most obnoxious level when I visited Rome some five years ago .

    On visiting Vatican City and witnessing the gross wealth and Property assets concerned, it made me sick to my stomach that this regime preached humility , while “The Princes” lived a life of extraordinary wealth and affluence!

    I could not wait to get out of the area concerned.

    It left a particular feeling with me that so many hundreds of millions throughout the World would do well to witness for themselves!

    Reply
  • Very good and well worded article Lisa .

    Reply
  • Great article

    Reply
  • The silence of the ‘good’ priests is quite deafening at the moment. Why aren’t they out on the streets protesting the evils of those in power. Those mute colleagues of Brady’s are in a position of immense potential right now, they have the opportunity to revolutionise the church in Ireland, but they are strangely silent.
    They don’t have a pair of balls between the lot of them.
    I’ve been in a constant state of disgust with church leaders for years but I’m not a devout churchgoer so it doesn’t me directly. But if Cardinal Brady was my boss I’d be on the streets raising Cain.

    Reply
  • a 05/05/12 #

    It is time for the Church to be honest and truthful. It is not better the a CULT. The Children of God Cult was a pedophile ring. The church is looking like this cult on a massive scale. The cover-up goes on.

    Reply
  • Wonderful article and clear and insightful… Well done…

    Reply
  • A splendid and clear exposition of everything I wanted to say but was too enraged to make a coherent fist of . Thank you , Lisa McInerney . I hope this will be widely read and thoroughly taken to heart .

    Reply
  • Good article, Its time for the Irish people to call for the civil arrest of Brady and other,s who hid crimes against humanity…..

    Reply
  • I fully agree with your article, its a good piece and I enjoyed reading it. can we the people really rely on the church, the government or the guards to hold this man to account? I have always believed that the power resides with the people, but how do we make this happen? How do we cause real changes, ones that we know are the correct choices. How do we make public servants the government and the guards understand what we the people want. From my point of view this man used his position to swear a young, frightened and abused child to keep the evil that was forced onto him a secret, we can all see how wrong, how utterly vile this act is. This is a perversion of trust and power, its a crime of one man against the most vulnerable of our citizens. How do we, the citizens who all feel that knot of frustration as to why this had to happen bring him to account, and enact changed for when we encounter this again, these self professed spiritual men do no get hide behind their church from crimes against us as a people?

    Reply
  • Great points, nicely made, and I totally agree.

    I think the church’s hypocritical behaviour was their own undoing in a lot of ways, and this is another step on the way from pre-conventional (authoritarian) to conventional (secular) values in Ireland as our centre of gravity, and not just our cutting-edge. We are not there yet, but it’s chugging along.

    Even if Brady wasn’t the criminal enabler that he was, he still has no place inflicting his views. If he wants to have a spiritual role, he ought to let people seek out his views, based on his results. If they are any good, people will do that.

    Reply
  • Excellently written. It articulates what I think.

    Reply
  • It is a moral imperative that the state shold be separate fron the church. The state assumes dominion over and responsibility for its citizens. Irrespective of their religions or creeds. Therefore the state must not be linked to ANY church or faith or it fails in its duty.

    Then again, the state has failed us in many other ways . . . . . .

    Brady, and many others of the same kind, are purple-robed ostriches with their heads in the sand. No wonder people are attending churches in ever decreasing numbers, who would want to be preached at by such sanctimonious old hypocrites?

    Reply
  • There is one flaw in the article: disgraceful behaviour cannot be connected to adult argument – no matter how offensive the argument. Indeed, it might be argued that the more offensive the argument the more we need it.

    The cardinal should go because he has been exposed as a person lacking in integrity. He failed to act as a responsible person. Instead he clung fast to job descriptions and the possibility of career advancement.

    There is a general lesson here for all of us but particularly for journalists: the concept of integrity should be a routine part of public discourse. http://colummccaffery.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/from-the-cardinal-to-the-chancers-its-time-to-make-integrity-important/

    Reply
  • Sean Brady, as primate of the catholic church in the island of Ireland, has a position of power, on an everyday basis. It is the same basis on which the young mother was not accepted back to school in her pregnancy or new motherhood. The catholic church runs the majority of our primary (and many of our Secondary…even “community”) schools. Would you consider that such a body, which has shown such disregard for the rights of children, are the best custodians of our children’s welfare? I don’t. It IS time for separation of church and state. Let those who wish to continue within the RC church do so, of their own free will. Let the rest of us choose the ethos of the schools to which we send our children. For me, the development of a morality based on a sense of justice, a sense of compassion & lack of prejudice, and the taking responsibility for one’s actions, should be the ethos of a secular school. Sean Brady is not an example of that.

    Reply
  • The Church, since the dawn of our Free State, have been in control of every running of our country. They ran the schools, the health service, the guards, even the government. They have no desire to convert, to teach the people about God, the morality they teach has no biblical reference, in fact Catholics were forbidden to read the Bible until the 70s, and this is still discouraged, as to read it would be to realize the lies they were taught. They have used Christianity as a tool to garner obedience from the masses and nothing more. They have and still do hide behind the Vatican as a sovereign state.

    These people are a force of occupation, they are not a religion. People who go to church on Sunday do not worship God, they worship the Vatican, they worship the Pope. These priests, even those Irish born, are foreign soldiers. We take huge pride in the victories of Michael Collins and Eamon De Valera, but what was the point if the British were replaced with the Romans, a far worse force? Would the British have done this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iQGczIx6Sg In order for any of the republican victories we hold dear to us as Irish people to mean anything, we have to do it again. We have to get rid of this occupying force.

    The Unionists said Home Rule was Rome Rule, they were right.

    Reply
    • Still an absolutely chilling piece proving the collusion of Government with the RC Church in Rape and the abuse of children !

      Reply
    • Spot on Brendan, think of the millions of pounds sent to Rome while Ireland was still a third world country. The church has held this country back

      Reply
    • @ Eddie The government involvement doesn’t sit right with me either. I like to think of it as a Stockholm Syndrome or that they were part of the obedient masses…but I don’t know.

      @Caroline I know, and we still hold grudges over what the Black and Tans did, it pales to insignificance in comparison to the abuse at the hands of the Vatican

      Reply
    • @Brendan Most, if not all, of the physical abuses visited on children in the Institutions could have been ameliorated or even stopped if the State had taken a more hands-on attitude. As it was they left the children to the merciless Religious Orders. The State didn’t even get to look at the financial records of the Institutions.

      Sexual Abuse, by its nature would have been hard for State inspectors to detect …. but if a child did report that they were sexually abused to the priest/Brother/Nun in charge then that child would have been physically punished – “to beat the devil out of you” – and that punishment would have been entered in the Punishment Book for the institution under the heading .. NO KIDDING … Occasion of Sin. If the State Inspector had perused these Punishment Books I wonder would they have asked questioned if they saw that heading?

      Most (or maybe all) of these Punishment Books from the Institutions have gone ‘missing’!!

      Reply
    • It’s true. The ‘apostles creed’ is a kind of national anthem/oath of allegience, mumbled out in sheep-like monotone. I don’t remember Jesus saying anything about that kind of thing – he was pretty much the opposite of that.

      Also, even the Bible itself, which you say people were prevented from reading is edited to bits. Things like The Gospel of Thomas, which is full of paradox and ‘pointing-out’ passages, like you’d find in Dzogchen Buddhism, and other things like that you could actually chew on if you were interested in a spiritual awakening, are kept *well* out of the mainstream. The Vatican have always been an Illuminati of sorts, hidden in plain sight, and I believe they still are. They just don’t get away with overt murder, rape and torture any more, and we are beginning to expose the more subtle layers of psychological, instinctual and political etc., control as well.

      Reply
    • @ Andrew I don’t mean to be an apologist of the State, but if a government minister had spoken out, would they have been listened to? Or would they have been kicked out of office? There have also been cases of Garda collusion, especially in relation to Magdalene asylums and industrial schools, and questions need to be answered. But would a free thinking Garda have been tolerated in those times? I don’t know whether or not the public in those times were brainwashed, beat down, or part of the problem, but they reflected the governments stance, and the Gardai stance. Again I must stress I dont mean to be an apologist but whether or not people, Gardai or governments acted like puppets, they were nothing more than puppets, we should keep our eyes on the puppet masters.

      On a side note, ust heard a comment from a religious relative that “they’ve been beating the Church for long enough now and they should leave them be at this stage.” Sickening.

      Reply
    • I had a comment removed here it seems. I wonder why? I supported my comment by linking to an article in the Irish Independent newspaper and stated no more than was published in that article.

      Reply
    • @ Brendan I wouldn’t put you down as an apologist for either Church or State – you make enough succinct and relevant points to show you are neither.

      Here’s a link to A History of Neglect – a Timeline of Church & State collusion in the abuse of children in care.

      http://www.paddydoyle.com/a-history-of-neglect/

      The list will show the deference elected Ministers showed to the Church. All are important but there are a few that are quite astounding concerning Father Flanagan of Boystown in America. He visited Ireland after World War II and visited penal institutions here; also he had a look at the Industrial Schools. At that time Artane Industrial School was considered as – no laughing now – the Boystown of Ireland. Well Father Flanagan had a different view and he roundly condemned the Industrial Schools system. For that bravery he was roundly condemned in the Dail and the Church – http://bit.ly/Ix41AT

      Sometimes I think that thee only people opposing the authoritarian Church were the children in the Institutions and the women in the Magdalene Asylums! No political party did. Maybe three politicians – Noel Browne and .. believe it or not … Donough O’Malley. O’Malley set up the Kennedy Committee to look into the Industrial Schools system in 1967. O’Malley said he wanted the ‘skin pulled of that pudding’

      It published its report in 1970 …. it got debated in 1973 in the Seanad only … moved by Mary Robinson. And it has sat on a shelf since.

      Reply
  • More importantly why haven’t his superiors ( the same people who silence dissenters or people with a conscience) removed him .because the scandal of having to remove a cardinal would cause far toomuch damage. This cardinal who lacks any moral fibre or conscience has had 35 years tomull over this and still thinks he has done no wrong. The church authorities Arent going to move him and he says he can’t understand that he has done something wrong. Only one thing for it…hunt him out. Protest at any public appearance he makes.

    Reply
  • Excellent article

    Reply
  • Very well written article. The problem is that while the conclusions made are as obvious and compelling as could be to secular Ireland. They were not to the religiously zealous country of ours at the time. Catholics today like to talk of bad eggs but deeply religious societies do the most appalling things believing they are good or necessary.

    Reply
  • Why can’t we run this organisation out of the Country, along with FF/FG/labour/SF and the unions and start again. A new Ireland, ran by the people for the people and a proper Democracy!

    Reply
  • Excellent piece.

    Reply
  • Firstly, let me say that there is no doubt in my mind that Cardinal Sean Brady should not only step down but should be stripped of his title. Despite his defence of being a simple notary it is clear that he was appointed as an investigator in the Brendan Boland case. Even if church structure meant that the ultimate decision regarding Smyth lay elsewhere, Fr Brady at the time still had a multitude of options open to him. At very least he should have contacted the family of the other victims that Brendan identified in his testimony. He might also have stepped in when the questioning priest seemed to query whether this poor child had some consented to his abuse. He completely failed in both his moral and legal duties to protect the most innocent in society.

    That said, and while I understand the anger that surrounds this case, I find it unhelpful that the kind of anti-religion and anti-Catholic statements that are usually only found in the comments section of this site have now made the leap to pieces written by regular contributors (or staff writers I’m not sure in this case). Phrases such as “pearl clutchers” indicate a distain for those with religious belief. Arguing that, in this case, Brady was “hampered by the inflexibility of pompous moral code”, or that his moral code acted as an “obstacle to the wellbeing of fellow citizens” is moving the push for Cardinal Brady’s resignation and for the protection of children in to a push for something else entirely. Let’s be clear, Brady’s ambition, his compliance and his ignorance all contributed to his inaction in this case. What didn’t contribute to it was his Christianity. If he was following the teachings of Christ he would have done everything in his power to protect this child and any other children who Brendan Smyth threatened or would threaten in the future and would not have washed his hands on supposed completion of his duties under canon law. The statement that while following a religious based moral code “how can you act in any other way, but to point your chin at the heavens and pout that it’s not your fault” is insulting and ridiculous. If you want a more secular state then I am right there with you but at least keep your anti-religious opinions to yourself and maintain some journalistic professionalism.

    Reply
    • Paul 05/05/12 #

      The point is he was following the teachings of Rome rather than those of Christ. It’s not catholic bashing or persecution to point out the difference. If christianity, and especially roman catholicism was a bit more christian there would be no problem and no need to resist the influence of dogma over our national life. The people who would impose their Roman rules on the state and its citizens deserve to be mocked, we’re not persecuting, we’re asserting our independence. Lisa’s article is clearly labelled “column” not “breaking news” or “entirely balanced story giving both sides” (everyone knows the other side, and it’s a hard one to sell) -she has every right to make her point and she makes it well.

      Reply
    • Paul, I don’t feel the point is made well. Because instead of just concentrating on the failure of Cardinal Brady or the Catholic hierarchy the author instead decides to take swipes at lay Catholics and religion in general. This is clearly not necessary because the majority of Catholics likely agree that Cardinal Brady should resign and that the Church has failed miserably at protecting children in the past. Telling people that they are more apt to moral failings because of their religious beliefs is horribly arrogant and offensive. I appreciate that anyone including journalists are entitled to their opinion. It just surprises me, given the journal warns people against insulting the religious beliefs of others in comments, that they then allow it in their articles.

      Reply
    • If the church, even now, made a positive statement on the issue along the lines that you have, then one could see some reason in your point. Mr. Brady is wearing the dress of the church, is dignified and supported by the church, draws his power to talk with authority from the church : tyng his position to the church is, as a result, acceptable. This should not be an attack on a morally weak individual, why bother, but on the system that enabled him, encouraged him and continues to support in the context of obfuscating the moral Vs legal position on child abuse.

      Reply
  • Excellent piece of writing, Thank you Lisa!

    Reply
  • Thank you Lisa, too the meta point while dealing with the actual issues. Made my Sunday!

    Reply
  • i didnt read the whole article as i got sick of the sanctamonious bullshit after the 1st paragraph. if cardinal brady is guilty of any crime why have the law not got involved? if any of you have never made a mistake or done someone wrong you get to throw the 1st stone. it was decades ago in a different time and different era. dont bother preaching to me about child sex abuse i know all about it but i dont broadcast it in the hope of being glorified in the media and sympathized by the world, nor do i make 60,000 a year on a state board for ‘victims’. so i dont need to keep the debate going to get paid and laugh all the way to the bank while watching you lot carry on the witch hunt for me now they have run out of peadophile priests to sap their big state wage off they pick on any little detail they think the public will fall for and the bank balance keeps growing and colm o gorman gets richer and richer…..and you thought he was in it for the children

    Reply
    • @Anette No doubt Annette but if Brady’s cleric colleague was raping fetuses you’d have roundly condemned Smyth. But then again in your world the unborn are more worthy of more protection than actual living children.

      Fr Brendan Smyth was certainly ‘in it’ for the children – and Brady’s Clouseau-like ‘investigation’ made sure Smyth had 18 more years unhindered in the raping and buggering children.

      Reply
    • I really detest the argument (trotted out often by Chris Brown apologists) that the only people who can condemn sexual violence are those who have never done anything wrong in their lives.

      I admit, I stole a candy bar from the corner shop as a child. I still think sexual abuse in any form is disgusting and those who willfully ignore it morally reprehensible, whether it’s the cardinal who wants to make it go away or the mother who allows sexual abuse to continue so as to not make waves.

      It speaks volumes that you think prioritising child welfare is a “witch hunt.”

      Reply
  • What a bile filled, badly thought out article/

    Reply

Add New Comment