Clerical abuse!

[Main Street]

I listened to that RTE at One interview with Brady.
Pretty bad when he resorts to using the Nuremberg defence.

[Maguire01]

the BBC should now redirect their investigations and go after those responsible for the cover-up in the first place, they (in my mind) are the real perpetrators and almost as bad those responsible for the abusing, not Brady.

I'd imagine that if they were Brady's superiors at the time, they're now dead. They're definitely not in a leadership position.

[Maguire01]

The question is whether someone is excluded from office because of a past mistake? [/quote
It depends on the nature/magnitude of the mistake. In this case, i'd say yes. He has no moral authority or credibility.

[Maguire01]

I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

Are you serious? Why would you want to shake his hand? Why would you want him to shake your child's hand?

[give her dixie]

Last nights show is on now on BBC 2 if anyone missed it.

[Tony Baloney]

Last nights show is on now on BBC 2 if anyone missed it.

Watching it again to see if I missed anything in Brady's defence. What an absolute ****!

[ross matt]

Folks think of Sharia law and how it is administered in fundamentalist Muslim countries and then you have some idea of what Ireland was like pre 1980s. I'm old enough to remember it and to speak out against the church wasn't on anyone's radar never mind a card carrying member like Brady. Not excusing the lack of action on his behalf just contextualising it.
I remember having a row with my own parents about an incident that happened with a local young neighbour of mine that was "hushed" up not by the clerical authorities but by the local pillars of the civil community and when they told me how it had been dealt with I could understand it more while still being repulsed by it.

Everyone is ignoring Declan's post, which sets the context perfectly. He was a bit player in these awful incidents.

I truely believe that he is a good and decent man.

He might well be but as they saying goes all it takes for evil to prosper if for good men to do nothing.  As muppet said whatever about the hush hush attitude of those times it has to be viewed in the context of what we know now.... the widespread rape of young vunerable children by those who were as you say were pillars of soceity. He simply has to go... decent man or not..... or whether he even gets the point or not.  His resignation would be a tiny but nonetheless symbolic act of justice for or at least acknowledgement of the unthinkable suffering of those innocent victims many of who are now today broken adults.

[ross matt]

I just read Brady's statement and it disgusts me.

While there might be an argument for his actions being viewed in the context of the 1970s, his failure to resign will be viewed in the context of all that we know now, in 2012. He simply doesn't get that and evidently neither does Rome.

+1

[ross matt]

I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

Are you serious? Why would you want to shake his hand? Why would you want him to shake your child's hand?

Abble your attitude defies belief. Like Maguire asked... are you serious???

[BarryBreensBandage]

I see religion and the church as very different things. To me it is the church that is warped and steeped in this mess, religion does not belong to the church. My religion belongs to me.

EC - In my opinion, I regard this as a difference between faith and religion, and that religion and the Church are one.

As for Cardinal Brady, the fact is that when this broke in 2010, he declared that if it came to light that other children were abused due to his inaction, he would consider resigning.

Fast forward to 2012, and these fresh allegations are made; no denial from him, no threats of legal action from the Church in defence of Cardinal Brady (always a good yardstick as to how guilty people are), no defence of the man and
yet he refuses to consider his position.

Cardinal Brady should resign - he is not a man of his own word and his credibility is shot.

[mylestheslasher]

In 1970 people knew that raping children was a heinous crime. It's not 1670 we are talking about. Brady is a piece of shit and its that simple

[ONeill]

One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.

[Rufus T Firefly]

One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.

Great post.

Abble, fair play too for putting your head above the parapet.

[Main Street]

One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.

Use of corporal punishment in schools started to diminish from 1970 onwards.
A rape in 1975 is just as serious as a rape in 2012. That's why a rapist can be prosecuted now for a crime of rape committed in 1975.
Under the law it's just as serious, but rules of evidence may work against prosecution or chances of conviction. Certainly rules of evidence are nigh impossible to satisfy when it comes prosecuting those who facilitated the rape of children. However,  from a moral viewpoint, there is no context for mitigating factors when it comes to a rape committed 35 - 30 - 25 - 20 years ago. Neither is time a mitigating factor for those who facilitated that rape.

I am absolutely astonished that Brady can be regarded as a man who acted according to the standard moral of the time. I can well  remember 1975, it was not the dark ages.  Any human being with a morsel of morals would have been outraged at the rape of a child in 1975. Why do you think the church wanted it suppressed? It was all kept in house, why did Brady facilitate in swearing the abused children into secrecy?
He was what? 35 years old? 10 years in the priesthood,  and he is saying  'I was a mere notetaker' attempting to diminish his responsibility

Crimes of rape were committed and Brady was part of a tribunal that conspired to cover it up.
Brady was a silencer, not just a part of the masses who trusted the teachers or who trustingly deferred to the church, neither was he a victim like the family of an abused, he was an active participant, an integral part of the cover up campaign.

Brady's statement minimising his role, contradicts the evidence of the abused on three obvious points.  He is accused of conducting at least one interview personally, swearing a kid into silence and he's accused of lying about interviewing a kid without his parent being present.
I don't trust Brady's statement at all.

[NetNitrate]

Would Brady be cardinal today if he did the right thing in his 30s and reported abuse to police and parents? And how come senior figures in the church have and had difficulty knowing what the morally correct thing to do is or was, resorting to no laws in place or a different era. Yet they were very quick with judgement if a woman got pregnant out of wedlock, banishing fallen women into convents and sending the child to America for adoption. They were quick to label McGahern's novel The Dark sinful with its scenes of sexual abuse by the clergy. How well they had an informed opinion on the like of that back in the 60s yet no regard at all for the children being raped by the clergy in real life. Someone like McGahern wasnt fit to teach yet the predatory priests were still fit to preach. Even the devil won't want these phuckers.