Sean Brady Steps Down

[Lar Naparka]

He didnt cover anything up,he was a relatively small part of a mishandled issue.

The evidence suggests otherwise.

as a matter of interest muppet- what evidence is that?


this and the other thread are a load of cobblers.
I personally don't wholly agree with either faction here- I think brady played a poor game here and should have been hauled off long ago
but no one knows who or what actions or steps he took to address things or raise the issue
the problem might not have been brady, but as I said, he didn't do well here imo
there is no evidence of anything
just a load of abused kids and a disgracefully antiquated system that has hopefully been addressed and fixed for future.
the handful of priests who did this should have got the death penalty imo.
the church system was dreadful. but worldwide in recent years we have seen that bad systems are only identified long after the abuse and sorry events have occurred.
Various abuses in religious faiths in various countries, financial abuses in our own and various countries.
Proper Procedure, policy and regulation in everything is so vitally important imo.

You just can't be serious if that means what I think it means.
This is the message I take out of it.

"Ah, sure FFS nothing happened really- no big deal. After all, we're only talking about kids, aren't we?
Okay, the system  that should have been in place to protect them just wasn't working and we didn't bother our arses doing anything about it until we were caught out.
Ah, but now that's been sorted out and we have nice, new robust procedures in place so all will be hunky dory from now on won't, it? So, it's business as usual after that trifling hiccup."

The PPI are delivering their answer, loud and clear.
The numbers of practising Catholic are in free fall. That's not just my opinion, Diarmuid Martin recently said that only 17% of the said PPI describe themselves as regular mass-goers.
Today in the IT. he had this to say;
Just two Catholic priests in Dublin are under 40, while a further 44 are aged between 70 and 75 and "in the next four or five years will be going into a more retired sort of life"
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/just-two-catholic-priests-in-dublin-aged-under-40-martin-1.1818859

The "anti-Catholic bigots" that seem to bother Tony so much can't be held responsible for that, can they?

[T Fearon]

This is the secular world we live in.Nothing to do with child abuse.Anyone who has left the church,due to child abuse has cut their nose off to spite their face.They simply haven't thought it through,otherwise they wouldn't jeopardise their souls for all eternity

[Jeepers Creepers]

This is the secular world we live in.Nothing to do with child abuse.Anyone who has left the church,due to child abuse has cut their nose off to spite their face.They simply haven't thought it through,otherwise they wouldn't jeopardise their souls for all eternity

Alright Big Ian....

[LCohen]

Frequently Tony labels those who criticise the church (and its involment in the rape of children and the cover up of the rape of children) as anti-catholic. Then we have his comments on secularism. Can Tiny outline what difficulties he would have with secularism?

[LCohen]

It seems from reading this thread that the standards to be aimed at for a high performing church member would be implement the rules of the church even it prevents serious crime being reported to the police and risk further heinous definition being committed, to swear to secrecy the victims of serios crime (worry not about the future victims this might leave exposed), keep quiet about any legal or moral wrong doing you might have been involved in and act to frustrate any investigation that expose your wrong doing, bring justice to the victims of heinous crime and bring to an end the commiting of that heinous crime by some people.

Any idea that leading church members should show bravery, do the right thing, have sympathy for victims, seek to protect victims, act with integrity and openess has been exploded as a fallacy   

[T Fearon]

I have no problem with secularism,each to their own,but the clerical abuse is not driving secularism.

Your last comment is totally wrong.I have said time and again the church was wrong to try and protect its reputation 40 years ago by trying to manage this issue in house when it was not in any way experienced or equipped to do so effectively.But you would concede that lessons have been learned and apologies offered.

[LCohen]

I have no problem with secularism,each to their own,but the clerical abuse is not driving secularism.

Your last comment is totally wrong.I have said time and again the church was wrong to try and protect its reputation 40 years ago by trying to manage this issue in house when it was not in any way experienced or equipped to do so effectively.But you would concede that lessons have been learned and apologies offered.

The church was wrong in its actions. We can agree that because its obvious.

The individual church members who committed the abuse, covered it up at the time, failed to report to the police at the time, frustrated legal inquiries at the time, frustrated the subsequent inquries, moved assets beyond the reach of victims and fail to bring forward all the evidence they have today were/are also wrong. This is equally obvious. Can you agree that?

When these actions are reversed/made good then I will join you in saying that the lessons that need to be learned have in fact been learned. Everything is inadequate and indeed shameful.

[T Fearon]

No I disagree.The Church responded in the time honoured way of trying to protect its reputation.I don't believe that Brady or anyone else in the mid 70s had a tiny conception of the scale of the problem or indeed that they were managing a monster in Brendan Smyth.Perhaps they in all innocence felt that if Smyth was made aware of his activities,like an errant schoolboy, he would not repeat them.It is all to easy knowing what we know now,to criticise mistakes and omissions 40 years ago.

The number of abusive clerics imprisoned in Ireland would suggest that the authorities are not being denied the required information and evidence to secure convictions.

[muppet]

No I disagree.The Church responded in the time honoured way of trying to protect its reputation.I don't believe that Brady or anyone else in the mid 70s had a tiny conception of the scale of the problem or indeed that they were managing a monster in Brendan Smyth.Perhaps they in all innocence felt that if Smyth was made aware of his activities,like an errant schoolboy, he would not repeat them.It is all to easy knowing what we know now,to criticise mistakes and omissions 40 years ago.

The number of abusive clerics imprisoned in Ireland would suggest that the authorities are not being denied the required information and evidence to secure convictions.

Do you understand that the Church is still covering up?
Do you understand that the problem is not stuck in 1970s?

[T Fearon]

How is the Church covering up ? If it is why are the Police not arresting people,or arriving with search warrants etc?

[foxcommander]

but the clerical abuse is not driving secularism.

Correct - it's a combination of laziness / wealth / and the notion that you are invincible.

Who needs a god when you can drive to the pub on a sunday in your big feck-off SUV you couldn't really afford to watch the Man Utd game on Sky Sports.

[T Fearon]

Indeed.What a shallow and meaningless existence.

[Zip Code]

but the clerical abuse is not driving secularism.

Correct - it's a combination of laziness / wealth / and the notion that you are invincible.

Who needs a god when you can drive to the pub on a sunday in your big feck-off SUV you couldn't really afford to watch the Man Utd game on Sky Sports.

Or a realisation that they whole thing is a load of bollocks.

[T Fearon]

Can you prove that?

[Zip Code]

Can you prove that?

Can you prove it's not?