Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cardinal Brady - holed and sunk, but does he know it?

168101112

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    Good thing thats not what he said.

    I too wonder how anyone can follow the RCC in Ireland in good faith anymore, knowing the complicity of Brady and the likelyhood of Ratzinger's knowledge.

    How can anyone remain an Irish citizen knowing the corruption of some Irish leaders and the failures of the Irish state ?

    Brady has to go, and the sooner the better, such a man is fit to lead no one. As for the Pope, I know its not popular, but I prefer facts and evidence before I'll be making my mind up and jumping on the bandwagon.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    Bravo, lets not wait for the facts, lets blame all Catholics for telling Smyth. :rolleyes:

    I never actually said anything to say don't wait for more facts. Sure, let's wait for more, but we already know that facts are of no use to people who rely on beliefs for guidance in believing what selectively suits them.

    Lest I be misinterpreted yet again, my point is that if people still think that there is some way to follow a belief system that claims to be the ultimate power on earth but has been shown to conceal and divert attention from the rape of children, then good luck to them, as they obviously don't really follow what they claim to believe in the first place. I seem to remember being advised as a child to "beware of the company you keep".


  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,866 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    How can anyone remain an Irish citizen knowing the corruption of some Irish leaders and the failures of the Irish state ?

    Brady has to go, and the sooner the better, such a man is fit to lead no one. As for the Pope, I know its not popular, but I prefer facts and evidence before I'll be making my mind up and jumping on the bandwagon.

    Well, personally I have recently stopped supporting a political party due to their behaviour.

    As far as I know, none of them are accused of abusing children though, which tbh morally puts me ahead of the game.

    There's already an amount of evidence all ready Ratzinger knew- and asked people to stay quiet. Given the RCC's tendency to withhold the truth, however I don't think we'll ever know the full story.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8587082.stm

    http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2010/03/pope-benedict-xvi-knew-child-abuser.html

    so it's not bandwagon jumping- in my case, I'm pretty happy to say my disgust is legit.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    How can anyone remain an Irish citizen knowing the corruption of some Irish leaders and the failures of the Irish state ?

    Brady has to go, and the sooner the better, such a man is fit to lead no one. As for the Pope, I know its not popular, but I prefer facts and evidence before I'll be making my mind up and jumping on the bandwagon.

    Yes indeed, how can they remain a citizen in good consience when the whole country is under the rule of the authority of a god for whom these perverts act on behalf of, as declared solemly in the Irish Consitution. There never was an real separation of Church and State. It was more like a messed up appendectomy, where some of the organ was removed but the infection continued to poison the patient. :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    F12 wrote: »
    I never actually said anything to say don't wait for more facts. Sure, let's wait for more, but we already know that facts are of no use to people who rely on beliefs for guidance in believing what selectively suits them.

    Lest I be misinterpreted yet again, my point is that if people still think that there is some way to follow a belief system that claims to be the ultimate power on earth but has been shown to conceal and divert attention from the rape of children, then good luck to them, as they obviously don't really follow what they claim to believe in the first place. I seem to remember being advised as a child to "beware of the company you keep".


    I learned as a child everyone is innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, that’s what our justice system hangs on as well. I could make certain claims about you and your family, and then demand you prove them wrong, I doubt you could. If we're going to talk about justice, lets apply it. The Catholic Church has been infiltrated by its fair few villains over its 2000 years, and it was these villains failure to practice actual Catholicism that was the root of its problems. Also every centuries old institution I can think of has had its fair share of villains and imposters. I know being anti-Catholic is one of the last few acceptable, popular, and fashionable prejudices in western society, but, popular or not I think it’s as neanderthal as any other prejudice.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,866 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    I learned as a child everyone is innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, that’s what our justice system hangs on as well. I could make certain claims about you and your family, and then demand you prove them wrong, I doubt you could. If we're going to talk about justice, lets apply it. The Catholic Church has been infiltrated by its fair few villains over its 2000 years, and it was these villains failure to practice actual Catholicism that was the root of its problems. Also every centuries old institution I can think of has had its fair share of villains and imposters. I know being anti-Catholic is one of the last few acceptable, popular, and fashionable prejudices in western society, but, popular or not I think it’s as neanderthal as any other prejudice.

    Well, given that I have provided some evidence Ratzy knew about this all along, and Brady has admitted that he knew, are they villains infiltrating the church?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd



    There's already an amount of evidence all ready Ratzinger knew- and asked people to stay quiet. Given the RCC's tendency to withhold the truth, however I don't think we'll ever know the full story.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8587082.stm

    http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2010/03/pope-benedict-xvi-knew-child-abuser.html

    so it's not bandwagon jumping- in my case, I'm pretty happy to say my disgust is legit.

    As I said, I've seen lots of allegations, suggestions, and slants about Benedict, but no actual evidence. I don't trust either the supporters or detractors over one another. Maybe I read things too carefully and factually, maybe thats not popular and going against the grain, but so be it, that's the way I work.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Fergus, what exactly do the church need to do before you would stop defending them?

    There's a reason it's popular to be anti-catholic. They're responsible for not stopping child abuse they could have and are still claiming no group responsibility for it, despite the fact that it was orders from on high that allowed it to continue.

    Who do you need to see convicted in a court before you'd accept the organisation is rotten?


  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,866 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    As I said, I've seen lots of allegations, suggestions, and slants about Benedict, but no actual evidence.

    Besides the letter provided above?

    How about this one from 2001 where he reminds priests sex abuse cases should be handled internally?

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/EpistulaEnglish.htm


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    Dades wrote: »
    Fergus, what exactly do the church need to do before you would stop defending them?

    To me "the church" is a bit like saying "the Irish state", "Judaism" etc., I have no problem with any individual being brought to task, I don't believe in pre judging everyone else.

    Dades wrote: »
    despite the fact that it was orders from on high that allowed it to continue.

    Any links, I havn't come across any proof of this, just speculation.
    Dades wrote: »
    Who do you need to see convicted in a court before you'd accept the organisation is rotten?

    I don't. Brady is wrong, the bishop of Cloyne was wrong etc. and the state should prosecute. After that, its a bit like claiming the Irish state is rotten due to the actions/ inactions of some Irish leaders. I'm sorry I don't buy that neat argument.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    I learned as a child everyone is innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, that’s what our justice system hangs on as well. I could make certain claims about you and your family, and then demand you prove them wrong, I doubt you could. If we're going to talk about justice, lets apply it. The Catholic Church has been infiltrated by its fair few villains over its 2000 years, and it was these villains failure to practice actual Catholicism that was the root of its problems. Also every centuries old institution I can think of has had its fair share of villains and imposters. I know being anti-Catholic is one of the last few acceptable, popular, and fashionable prejudices in western society, but, popular or not I think it’s as neanderthal as any other prejudice.

    Well if that is what you were taught as a child then it's not from Christianity, as it teaches that everyone is born guilty of sin from our supposed first ancestors, who weren't supposed to be Neanderthals but fully formed humans. So if God is suposed to be just, then making people guilty even before birth and then making them feel inadequate because of it (leaving talking snakes out of it), makes no sense regarding principles of justice to me, and I have really tried to make sense of it all.
    I completely agree with you that there is no society without its share of perverts, none, and I think that any rational person would not try to suggest otherwise. However, the issue here is that this particular society claims complete dominion and moral supremacy over all the earth, yet repeatedly fails to be clear, honest and fully open as to the root of the problem, which, given the pattern of emerging evidence and facts to date, shows a lack of capacity to face basic rules of conduct that even the most primitive of tribal societies recognise and do adhere to; that's all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    Besides the letter provided above?

    How about this one from 2001 where he reminds priests sex abuse cases should be handled internally?

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/EpistulaEnglish.htm

    Prior to 2001, the primary responsibility for investigating allegations of sexual abuse and disciplining perpetrators rested with the individual dioceses, this had proved a disaster.

    The letter covers a dozen other subjects, I can only see it saying that instead of just the local bishop dealing with it, Rome should be informed, I also don't see any instruction anywhere not to report it to the civil authorities?


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    F12 wrote: »
    It all depends on what you mean by 'metally ill'.The rapists were/are not merely mentally ill - they were/are simply evil.

    Evil is a religious construct. People cannot be "evil". They can do things that are evil but ultimately, all people are a product of their genes and environment. That's not an excuse but an observation.
    F12 wrote: »
    Mental illness means that mind doesn't function properly as it's working on false ideas and can't operate according to what reality presents itself to it. Such illness may be caused by a number of things, such as abuse of drugs and alcohol, but also including cultural habits and beliefs that contradict reality and confuse the mind to such a degree that the mind becomes unbalanced, but the possessor of the mind itself is not necessarily evil; not consciously aware of doing harm to themselves or others, to any great degree, though of course this varies from case to case. You could be mentally ill but not intentionally do harm to others, but that is not the case where violent sexual predators are concerned.


    Rape is about deliberately and intentionally exerting forceful control over another being so as to deliberately harm them, degrade them, and reduce them to a place in the pervert's mind where they can feel superior to the victim. They do it because they choose to take no responsibility for control over themselves, as everyone else in their belief is out of step with what they consider to their selective and ego-centred reality.
    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]They hate their fellow man to such a degree that they can believe and justify ruining lives with absolutely no concern for the harm done or the consequences of their attitudes. They are of a mindset that they know what they do is not justifiable, so they create beliefs and excuses about the people they victimise so as to make them appear more deserving of pain and suffering than they do, and that they must punish them for their imagined sins or failings. The only wrong they are concerned about is if a wrong and evil act they commit becomes visible and known about by others. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]This sort of perverted mind can justify just about anything to make what is obviously evil to any sane mind, look like it is right and justifiable. They are wilfully delusional and have ignored all capacity to reason they may possess, and be in such a state of belief that they become either violent or defensive, often both, when confronted by anything that might possibly suggest that they are not in conformity with reality. “Everyone else is mad around here...” or “What's your problem?” and “Who do you think you are, questioning me?”, and “Do you know who I am?”, are some of the pre-prepared scripts that trip off the tongues of these perverts, and where such exculpatory thinking has been promoted in a society where the mindless mantra of “Everyone must believe in something” is the norm, then they buy into such lowly excuse because that the sort of mind they possess. Why expect anything from a pig but a grunt? Only a pervert would even think for one second to stand up for a pervert. [/FONT]

    Just to make sure; you're not suggesting that i'm either a) defending the rapist priests or b) a pervert, are you? Because that would be silly.

    Let's assume, first of all, that all the clergy who knew about the abuse and did nothing did not do so because they too were mentally ill and thought raping children was ok.

    Then those who you would assume to have better judgement than sick perverted rapists, against whom the population should be protected, failed to act and that to me is far more difficult to understand.

    There's plenty of people with defective brains that cause them to harm people but you would think that something like the catholic church hierarchy would have someone capable of acting with even the most basic amount of decency.

    To me that indicates that the system in which they function - the Catholic church itself, is rotten to the core and beyond redemption.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    the cardinal did was wrong and he shouldnt have just left it at that,but what i was saying was that by his moral logic he thought he had done all he could,which i dont think he did personally myself..
    Then his morality is flawed, and as it comes from his religion, that's flawed too.
    This Pope is doing a lot to correct the sins of the past.

    :pac:

    I mean I'd have thought atheists couldn't/shouldn't care less about the Christians? I was expecting theoreticals on atheism
    Eh ? Theoreticals on atheism? Is that, like, the atheist doctrine?
    F12 wrote: »
    Nope, he knows too much. Remember he was a notary, one who keeps notes and records events and meetings, and his kind like to keep track of things for insurance in case they ever get cornered. He holds the cards, and the Ratican will have to be careful in how they might even consider dismounting him from his clerical position.
    Hmmm...good point. Well, it seems they are replacing him, while simultaneously keeping him. Two Primates for the price of one. Can you have two Primates actually (no monkey jokes please)? Does it make them both Second-rates?
    It will all make perfect sense to the followers. After all, they are well used to these kinds of mental gymnastics being used to explain strange happenings.


  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,866 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    I think the bit that says "Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret." is pretty explanatory, tbh, especially as it expliticty refers to minors.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    I think the bit that says "Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret." is pretty explanatory, tbh, especially as it expliticty refers to minors.

    I'm afraid that mis-reporting and consipracy theory has been well debunked.

    http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/keeping-record-straight-benedict-and-crisis

    http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0324.htm


  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,866 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    Well, if the catholic educator says so...

    I'm done, you're just desperate to believe what you want to believe. I shall leave you to it.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    Gbear wrote: »
    Evil is a religious construct. People cannot be "evil". They can do things that are evil but ultimately, all people are a product of their genes and environment. That's not an excuse but an observation.

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]Evil is what is morally wrong or bad, perverse, immoral, wicked, evil deeds; an evil life, harmful; injurious to beings or things.
    Evil is not a religious construct, for if it were then people who have no religion could not be determined to act evilly. To separate people from the evil that comes from them is like trying to separate wetness from water or air from wind. People are a product of their choices as exercised by the workings of their minds, and their minds are their responsibility, so evil is a choice. We all have capacities or tendencies for all sorts of things, but ultimately we choose how we act.
    [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]
    Just to make sure; you're not suggesting that i'm either a) defending the rapist priests or b) a pervert, are you? Because that would be silly.
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]It would indeed be silly, so it's not silly ;).
    Let's assume, first of all, that all the clergy who knew about the abuse and did nothing did not do so because they too were mentally ill and thought raping children was ok.

    Then those who you would assume to have better judgement than sick perverted rapists, against whom the population should be protected, failed to act and that to me is far more difficult to understand.
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]If they knew (were aware of it) then they could not be mentally ill, as they were in charge of their judgement, as knowing requires fact and recognition of the facts. If they knew the facts and chose to not recognise them or their implications for harm to befall any other being, then that was a deliberate choice to do evil, even if they might try to selectively believe there was any excuse to do otherwise.
    There's plenty of people with defective brains that cause them to harm people but you would think that something like the catholic church hierarchy would have someone capable of acting with even the most basic amount of decency.
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]One might indeed think, expect, imagine, suppose, like to believe, but what it appears to show is that such people in either the body or the hierarchy of the Church are not the ones who have any part in acting so that the evils could be stopped.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]
    To me that indicates that the system in which they function - the Catholic church itself, is rotten to the core and beyond redemption.
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]Yes. If the mind is sick, the body will become sick also, as the body is ruled and directed by the mind. Once the mind malfunctions, the body, though comprised of many organs, will cease to function correctly, both individually and collectively, thus destroying the whole being.
    Likewise, if the fruit barrel becomes rotten by containing some bad apples, then the fault lies with those who are in charge of the fruit, doesn't it? ;) [/FONT]

    [FONT=Arial Narrow, sans-serif]
    [/FONT]


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    recedite wrote: »
    Hmmm...good point. Well, it seems they are replacing him, while simultaneously keeping him. Two Primates for the price of one. Can you have two Primates actually (no monkey jokes please)? Does it make them both Second-rates?
    It will all make perfect sense to the followers. After all, they are well used to these kinds of mental gymnastics being used to explain strange happenings.

    Well, it looks like the primates are the best candidates for the job then, as they are widely known of for their gymnastic abilities. Maybe they should go full on, and make a trinity of it, and then they could chant "Hear no evil, see no evil, I don't believe in evil". :rolleyes:


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    No, "evil" is a religious concept.

    Just because it's used in common terminology doesn't change that. It's part of the fabricated mythology of religion that tries to explain away the reality that the the world is so utterly rudderless by inventing a term to describe something that goes against gods will.

    i.e., The world would be perfect if it wasn't for evil.

    Well the world will never be perfect because perfection is subjective, and we are but carbon-based life forms who act in accordance with our nature.

    This is evidenced in the poorest societies, the wealthiest, and in organisations like the catholic church who claim to represent the moral guardians fail to protect the most vulnerable life-forms out of an their innate need for self preservation.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭FergusODowd


    Well, if the catholic educator says so...

    I'm done, you're just desperate to believe what you want to believe. I shall leave you to it.

    No, I just like balance and facts. I have no decision made either way on the Benedict question. I have my mind made up about Brady and he should go, sometimes impartiality is not popular, but to be honest that does not bother me in the slightest.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    Dades wrote: »
    No, "evil" is a religious concept.
    Just because it's used in common terminology doesn't change that. It's part of the fabricated mythology of religion that tries to explain away the reality that the the world is so utterly rudderless by inventing a term to describe something that goes against gods will.


    So are you saying that a non-religious person can't do deliberate harm, either by way of direct action or inaction? Not sure if I'm getting you here Dades.
    i.e., The world would be perfect if it wasn't for evil.
    Well the world will never be perfect because perfection is subjective, and we are but carbon-based life forms who act in accordance with our nature.
    Do you really think so? How could it ber prefect if you have no choices? Surely, to have no choice would mean that we are harnessed to unending obligation to only do as programmed? Humans have varying capacities for reason, unlike a lump of carbon in the form of coal, which makes choice possible, and though it's a faculty that needs to be developed, each one chooses to develop that capacity, or not. If we act in accordance with some form of inanimate nature, then why are we not all identical in mind and form, like say, lumps of carbon?
    This is evidenced in the poorest societies, the wealthiest, and in organisations like the catholic church who claim to represent the moral guardians fail to protect the most vulnerable life-forms out of an their innate need for self preservation.
    I agree that we are all driven by self preservation, but making irrational choices that reduces or threaten our individual and collective capacities to do that very important thing, is a choice. We know we should not murder, rape etc, so no one can justify such actions and be considered human, but humanity is not a given and automatic plug-in product, but must be developed according to logical and reasoned principles, principles that can also be seen at work in the world and the universe around us, if we care to look and learn, that is.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    F12, you seem to be talking about an existence that was designed, rather than me that just, well, evolved. I think we're getting into a bigger conversion here though, and I've had too much wine. :)


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 146 ✭✭F12


    Dades wrote: »
    F12, you seem to be talking about an existence that was designed, rather than me that just, well, evolved. I think we're getting into a bigger conversion here though, and I've had too much wine. :)


    Hope the head has cleared Dades.

    I see no evidence that any 'design' or pattern was created by some Goofy Old Deity who worried endlessly over whether a bunch of migrant tribes in the Levant would bow down and grovel type of thing. If it's anything, it seems to be a force that manifests itself by way of progressive impulse, like life itself, but to identify it as a being-entity makes no sense at all.

    It appears obvious to me that the progressive pattern evolved and simply didn't pop into a full blown and complete end-product, as it is still moving and changing. That, to me at least, seems to be the natural order of things that progress, so mankind should also progress his thinking along similar lines. That's unlike the likes of Brady, who became stuck in an unnatural dogmatic evolutionary cul de sac and now can't work out simple things like the principles of good and evil that his type have mercilessly shoved down people's throats for generations.

    I would think that that which does not evolve and change dies, even it dies slowly, like all false things that are not established in reality. It only survives for as long as it does because it feeds off the life of others, just like a parasite, giving nothing and taking all. By doing so, it shows that it does not have the interest of the common good of life itself, upon which it mercilessly feeds, at heart, no matter how righteous it might claim to so do. This is called hypocrisy, when one fails to live up to the standards it sets for others.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Well, if the catholic educator says so...

    I'm done, you're just desperate to believe what you want to believe. I shall leave you to it.
    Sarky wrote: »
    Catholics just can't troll. It's probably the sheep mentality, although Stockholm Syndrome likely gets in the way too. Happy Monday is another in a long line of bitter disappointments, albeit not at all a surprising one.

    Catholics!
    Filling the world with bloody people they can't feed!
    What are we love?
    Atheists and agnostics!!
    And fiercely proud of it!

    All this from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Catholics!
    Filling the world with bloody people they can't feed!
    What are we love?
    Atheists and agnostics!!
    And fiercely proud of it!

    All this from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life.

    No it's not, like any good Religious person, you take a text, alter it to suit your own means and change it completely from it's original meaning.

    How nice.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Catholics!
    Filling the world with bloody people they can't feed!
    What are we love?
    Atheists and agnostics!!
    And fiercely proud of it!

    All this from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life.

    ^ ^ ^
    :confused::confused::confused:


  • Moderators Posts: 51,683 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    I know its bad form to quote posts from other forums but on the phone and can't get another source for the segments of an article biggins posted on AH. I've removed his own comments so that its only the article clips in the quote I've posted.
    Biggins wrote: »
    From todays Times (England)
    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/News/article1032698.ece#standard-comments
    Cardinal Seán Brady is being sued by a man who was sexually abused by Fr Brendan Smyth while he attended a school where Brady was teaching. The abuse is alleged to have happened after Brady was involved in secret canonical inquiries in 1975, in which the cardinal deemed accounts given by two teenage boys of abuse to be “credible”.
    ...a spokesman for Brady, who is the archbishop of Armagh and primate of all-Ireland, said he “will be defending any allegation of negligence”.
    The High Court case was initiated after Brady’s role in the canonical inquiry was revealed two years ago. Brady is being sued for personal negligence in three sets of proceedings. Asked if any of the plaintiffs in those cases were children identified by Boland in the inquiry 37 years ago, Brady’s spokesman said: “The diocese has received claims on behalf of people who appear to be similarly named.”
    Oliver McShane, a former Dominican priest who attended the church inquiry in Dundalk, has told The Sunday Times that church officials told gardai in 1991 that no such inquiry had taken place.

    “In 1991, gardai in Dundalk asked the London Metropolitan police’s child protection unit to take a statement from me,” said McShane, who has now left the priesthood and lives abroad. “I told them about the inquiry as part of my statement.

    The detective heading the inquiry in Dundalk rang me a couple of months later saying the church was denying the inquiry happened. I said I would come over to Ireland and swear on the Bible it did,” said McShane, who was the priest in whom Boland confided about Smyth’s abuse and who accompanied the boy when he informed his parents about what he had suffered.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    I would quote Father Ted (decided against) but i'll be honest it would be highly inappropriate to be quoting monty python films in a discussion about the cover up of the abuse children. I'm still not even sure of the purpose of Happy monday's quote.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    I would quote Father Ted (decided against) but i'll be honest it would be highly inappropriate to be quoting monty python films in a discussion about the cover up of the abuse children. I'm still not even sure of the purpose of Happy monday's quote.

    In response to 2 things.

    First the reference to Tropic Thunder earlier in the thread when I referred to you people.

    And second to the point expressed that Catholics can't troll mentioned above.

    On my I phone so I can't put a picture up of that scene from Monty Python.


Advertisement