Sean Brady Steps Down

[Maguire01]

Brady made mistakes and didn't want attention drawn to these,to prevent further embarrassment for the church more than himself.He was an oustanding Churchman despite of this.

Without doubt. But was he an outstanding Christian?

Tonight's Spotlight will test the resolve of those political animals among you and I look forward to the demonisation of another Irish institution.

Absolutely, if appropriate. Presumably you'll be happy if someone took a note, swore a victim to silence and reported something to a superior?

[Maguire01]

The more you hear about what happened in society in previous generations, and the inexplicable manner in which there seems to have been a universal tolerance level just beggars belief. Not one institutions, but hundreds, across continents - across all spectrum of class, position, religious and authority. By recognising this fact, Tonys use of the word "carte blanch" does have some relevance.

Sean Brady was the head of one of these institutions, and everyone here, including Tony, acknowledges that his handling of the situation/response was nowhere near adequate or acceptable. We know that, Tony knows that - and Fr Sean Brady knows that better than anyone.

If the truth was told there are many worse examples that can be found in the Roman Curia, who dictate a policy by which all Cardinals and bishops worldwide must adhere to with regard to how they address these situations. It is all about drip feeding the minimum response, right up as far as outright lies. Its a sickening policy designed to ensure that the RC church somehow manages to maintain its power, wealth and reputation. Enda Kenny to his credit chased the Papal See out of Ireland, basically telling them to butt out whilst the country attempts to put correct checks and balances in place to make sure the clergy never again attempt to assert its influence on secular matters.

Thats why Pope Benedict (the German) resigned - the place was rotten, and the influence of the Curia was just too much. Thankfully Pope Francis really does seem to be taking the fight right back to them.

Sean Brady is guilty by association, by being appointed to a position that was ultimately the poisoned chalice of them all - the head of the leading Irish religious institution that was allowed to become a law onto itself for many years. Thats the Ireland we all grew up in. Sean Brady was the last remnant of that despicable era, but we need to remember that he is also a product of this environment - he didnt create it. The chances are high we would be saying the exact same things about whatever Cardinal was appointed!

Sean Bradys hands were tied in many respects by Roman dictat. Sure he could have gone solo on it and posted a response that was appropriate to the circumstances. But that would have left him in an untenable position within the church, shunned by many of his peers, and ostracised by many. That he hadn't the moral strength to do this will be a regret to him now. Placed in that position how many of us would have had the strength to shun all vestige of officialdom and be the total paragon of virtue. Having said that the rock may be better than the hard place he now finds himself in.

But personally I see SB too as a victim in all this. He is certainly not the monster many on here are doing their best to portray. Outside of this one defining aspect of his career, Sean Brady was  highly popular, articulate and well respected both inside and outside the church. He is not Brendan Smyth. I have mixed feelings on this, a mixture of much scorn, but some pity too.

I'm not sure how many are portraying him as a "monster", more as someone lacking the moral authority, respect or credibility to be the leader of the Church.

[bannside]

Fair point Maguire.

[LCohen]

Here we go again.He was unaware of a crime,instead he heard allegations made by young boys , unsubstantiated) and reported these to his superiors,who failed to act appropriately

If it wasn't so serious that would be a frankly hilarious rendition of events

though given that police were moving suspected bomb clerics over the border,it is a moot point to suggest reporting to the police would have made any difference.

At best infantile thinking or possibly some hare-brained attempt at diverting the discussion form any form of logic. Poor, poor effort. Tell me, where were you educated?

Are you really suggested an educated man thought "er the police are a bit dodgy I'll do nothing about these abuse allegations". Surely Brady had the merest of intelligence required to discount that sort of hand washing?

Conscience clear,morals undiluted.

Afraid not dear boy, afraid not

PS your reference to the Pole and German shows adequately your contempt for the Catholic faith which is undoubtedly behind the campaign of vitriol against Sean Brady

Get over yourself. A great advert for humanity's capacity for faith and what faith in turn does to their humanity

Weak effort merely dismissing my valid points without denying the veracity of them.

1.Hearing allegations is not being aware of a crime.

2.Parents also aware of allegations but didn't contact the Police either.

3.Referring to popes blandly by their nationality is evidence of contempt for Catholicism,the prime motivation of most on this thread.

I do not dismiss your valid points. I dismiss the points you make as being wholly invalid. Invalid because they evade if the obvious question of what would an ordinary person do when faced with an allegation of child abuse against a colleague? The answer to that will not be that they would do nothing or that they would swear the person making the allegation to silence.

[LCohen]

Watch Spotlight tonight for real evidence of child abuse cover up.I look forward to threads condemning the offenders in this case.

Kincora has a bit to run to get to the true extent of who knew what. But lets be clear this will be allegations and hopefully, subsequently proof of the guilt of others. It will not make one iota of difference to the guilt of Brady and others within the church

[LCohen]

Brady made mistakes and didn't want attention drawn to these,to prevent further embarrassment for the church more than himself.He was an oustanding Churchman despite of this.

Tonight's Spotlight will test the resolve of those political animals among you and I look forward to the demonisation of another Irish institution.

"An outstanding churchman"

Forget about Brady for a bit and just think what phrase means.

[muppet]

Here we go again.He was unaware of a crime,instead he heard allegations made by young boys , unsubstantiated) and reported these to his superiors,who failed to act appropriately,though given that police were moving suspected bomb clerics over the border,it is a moot point to suggest reporting to the police would have made any difference.

Conscience clear,morals undiluted.

PS your reference to the Pole and German shows adequately your contempt for the Catholic faith which is undoubtedly behind the campaign of vitriol against Sean Brady

Do you understand what the word unsubstantiated means? Because either you don't or you are deliberately lying.

Brady interviewed Boland. Boland named other children he saw or believed were abuse by Smyth. Brady traveled to meet one of those named by Boland and that boy substantiated the allegations. Brady, to his great shame, didn't even contact the other children. Brady's story is that he believed both boys allegations, thus the second boy substantiated the calims of the first. So your claim the allegations were unsubstantiated are completely false.

Brady doesn't make this claim this himself.

Now why would you say something like that Tony?

[Maguire01]

Watch Spotlight tonight for real evidence of child abuse cover up.I look forward to threads condemning the offenders in this case.

Kincora has a bit to run to get to the true extent of who knew what. But lets be clear this will be allegations and hopefully, subsequently proof of the guilt of others. It will not make one iota of difference to the guilt of Brady and others within the church

Spotlight tonight is about allegations against the IRA.

[LCohen]

Here we go again.He was unaware of a crime,instead he heard allegations made by young boys , unsubstantiated) and reported these to his superiors,who failed to act appropriately,though given that police were moving suspected bomb clerics over the border,it is a moot point to suggest reporting to the police would have made any difference.

Conscience clear,morals undiluted.

PS your reference to the Pole and German shows adequately your contempt for the Catholic faith which is undoubtedly behind the campaign of vitriol against Sean Brady

Do you understand what the word unsubstantiated means? Because either you don't or you are deliberately lying.

Brady interviewed Boland. Boland named other children he saw or believed were abuse by Smyth. Brady traveled to meet one of those named by Boland and that boy substantiated the allegations. Brady, to his great shame, didn't even contact the other children. Brady's story is that he believed both boys allegations, thus the second boy substantiated the calims of the first. So your claim the allegations were unsubstantiated are completely false.

Brady doesn't make this claim this himself.

Now why would you say something like that Tony?

An interestung question. I have a funny feeling the answer will be interesting. Nonsense but in an interesting sort of way

[LCohen]

Watch Spotlight tonight for real evidence of child abuse cover up.I look forward to threads condemning the offenders in this case.

Kincora has a bit to run to get to the true extent of who knew what. But lets be clear this will be allegations and hopefully, subsequently proof of the guilt of others. It will not make one iota of difference to the guilt of Brady and others within the church

Spotlight tonight is about allegations against the IRA.

Those well known bastions of truth, morality and legal diligence

Has Tony's church found its moral level?

[T Fearon]

Just because someone believes allegations does not verify them.Perhaps Brady thought that interviewing one other boy,and not all of them,was enough evidence for him to present to his superiors.I genuinely don't think too many on this thread can separate Fr John Brady in 1975 from the Cardinal Brady of latter years.

No LCohen but abuse cover ups are abuse cover ups so it'll be interesting to see if other institutions are similarly demonised especially those who have far more influence in modern Ireland than the Catholic Church

[LCohen]

Just because someone believes allegations does not verify them.Perhaps Brady thought that interviewing one other boy,and not all of them,was enough evidence for him to present to his superiors.I genuinely don't think too many on this thread can separate Fr John Brady in 1975 from the Cardinal Brady of latter years.

No LCohen but abuse cover ups are abuse cover ups so it'll be interesting to see if other institutions are similarly demonised especially those who have far more influence in modern Ireland than the Catholic Church

Still attempting to evade I see.

You described the allegations as "unsubstantiated". It was at best dishonest of you to do so

In possession of cross-substantiating evidence (given that he belives, without evidence in trans-substantiation he must recognise this higher proof) he did noting to report this to the only proper authority, just accepted that a report up the line washed his hands of the incident and any future consequnces and for good measure threw in a few oaths of secrecy.

He must be a very poor individual indeed if his mind never turned again to finding out where Smyth was and what he was at? In no sane word would doning nothing about that be acceptable or indeed moral.

To be clear I condem all sexually abusers irrespective of who their employer or faith.
To be clear I hold in the lowest of esteems those who protect abusers, facilitate abuse or frustrate due legal process irrespective of what religious sect or paramilitary organisation they belong to

[T Fearon]

For God sake,there was no intention to protect abusers,there were misguided attempts to protect the good name of the Church,and the impact on victims not fully considered.

It was not Sean Brady's responsibility to follow up on Smyth,he had enough on his hands looking after St Patrick 's College in Cavan and the Irish College in Rome.It was totally reasonable for him to pass that responsibility on to his superiors along with the information he had given to them.

[LCohen]

For God sake,there was no intention to protect abusers,there were misguided attempts to protect the good name of the Church,and the impact on victims not fully considered.

It was not Sean Brady's responsibility to follow up on Smyth,he had enough on his hands looking after St Patrick 's College in Cavan and the Irish College in Rome.It was totally reasonable for him to pass that responsibility on to his superiors along with the information he had given to them.

Well its clear that we disagree on what he had a duty to do.

I said he had a moral duty to follow up, you disagree claiming he would be too busy at work in school to care about the welfare of children.

It is surely instructive that the poster who believes in a god, in scripture, in the teachings, instruction, hierarchy and discipline of the catholic church does not in fact that we humans, in the real world have any responsibility and a moral duty to act on intelligence to protect children from sexual abuse. It really is no advert for religious instruction

[T Fearon]

For the umpteenth time he wasn't a Cardinal in 1975,He made Senior a Church figures aware,he had every right to assume they had done the right thing