nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What gave Gaybo the right to be condescending to a single mother on The Late Late

TheLastMohican

"I hope his son will be half the man his father was", was Gay's parting salvo to Annie Murphy, the former lover of arch-hypocrite Bishop Eamon Casey. And got a massive round of applause from the audience.
Did this include Casey's fleeing from the cops in the Bayswater/Queensway area of West London, a notorious red light district, and subsequent arrest? And did it include his ignoring his vows, fathering a child, stealing money from his employers etc among other notable deeds?
Gaybo, if you're reading this, how about an explanation?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Norwesterner

Mardy Bum wrote: »

What error? For his job all right but in the grand scheme it makes no difference!

Of course having unprotected sex whilst a Priest/Bishop is an error.
Unless, you're prepared to pick up the tab for rearing a child, you should not have children.
And that goes for the Mother as well.
Thats the problem in this country.

kneemos

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

There's been a lot of revisionism on Byrne. He took on the church when nobody else did. Good interviewer too.

In this case he liked Casey and while nobody doubted the parentage the question was how big an issue was this. It was an adult relationship.

And was bay's water ever red light?

It was huge back in the day.Priests were fawned upon Bishops were akin to gods you kissed their rings when you met them,for a Bishop to have a child back then was unbelieveable for many people even though many local priests at the time had a "reputation"but going public with Bishop Casey was a game changer.

goose2005

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

You've been sitting on this for a while.

as the housekeeper said to the bishop

TeddyTedson

jjpep wrote: »

Yeah, it is a little bit of a time warp this tread... I'm going on memory because the last time I saw gay Byrne on the late late would have been the mid 90's. Maybe I'd have a different take on him now but really my overriding memory of him was constantly thinking 'prick' while he was talking.

When I hear him now talk about drivers he's unbelievably condescending. He even looks at people condescendingly it seems.

Here's a good interview for it's time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjWTT8Q8nN0

goose2005

Clareman wrote: »

IMVHO the whole Eamon Casey thing was the beginning of the end of the dominance of the Church in Ireland, people were openly making jokes about the whole thing. What amazed me about the whole thing is everyone only goes on about him being a father, he stole thousands and thousands of money at a time when there wasn't any money in the country. I read the article in the Irish Times today and the whole "all he wants to do is say mass in public again", if you want to say mass in public you abide by the rules, if you don't then you don't.

As for the whole "at least he didn't interfere with kids, sure let him off", what those scumbags did to those poor children should never be used as a comparison to anything.

Because he's a "daycent" person, not a "scumbag".

_Kaiser_

goose2005 wrote: »

as the housekeeper said to the bishop

Surely the other way around, no?

Zen65

Red Nissan wrote: »

All those years he was not a minister, he was a fake or imposter, his blessings and sacraments were void and unlawful in the eyes of whom he professed to believe in.

How do you know they were void and unlawful?

Z

Nodin

Norwesterner wrote: »

What exactly did she think would happen by opening her legs to a Priest/Bishop?
Takes two to Tango.
Casey made an error, but so did she.
Whatever happened to personal responsibilty?

...she wasn't preaching about the evils of condoms and pre-marital sex to the rest of us though.

Benny_Cake

Norwesterner wrote: »

Of course having unprotected sex whilst a Priest/Bishop is an error.
Unless, you're prepared to pick up the tab for rearing a child, you should not have children.
And that goes for the Mother as well.
Thats the problem in this country.

She raised their son, effectively on her own. It's hard to see how she was dodging responsibility for her actions.

Red Nissan

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

You've been sitting on this for a while.

I'm amazed at how angry I am. I wanted to hang Casey and I despised the vast majority that proclaimed him a saint ~ at the time, all those feelings, I have again now.

Zen65

TeddyTedson wrote: »

Here's a good interview for it's time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjWTT8Q8nN0

"You can tell it's my wife because she has a microphone over her head"

Well fair play Mr Bono! Put him in his place!

Z

grey_so_what

I will never forget that interview.

In my opinion it was the epitome of everything that was wrong with Ireland at the time.

I was mortified watching it. And Gay's smug righteous attitude towards Annie Murphy damaged his credibility for me in my eyes. I thought it was awful and, downright, disrespectful........ But I remember the Mammy's on my street delighted "he gave her what she deserved".......I think we now know better.

It galls me to think I was at the Galway mass and he and that other hypocrite Michael Cleary preaching to us all at the youth mass. I don't care about the fact they had families but their righteous preaching was utter falsehood. If they were real men they would have looked after their families instead of putting themselves on a pedestal.

All that was wrong with the chrurch, please God it will never happen again.

Red Nissan

Zen65 wrote: »

How do you know they were void and unlawful?

Z

Because he broke his vows, he'd have been told that going into the seminary, now, he may have confessed to his confessor and got absolution, however, as Casey continued his sin for so long and indulged his sin, he was a multiple repeat offender, he would not have been given absolution repeatedly.

Now, let's quote me, shall wee, unlawful to what he professed to believe in. I believe that is God. God's grace would have stopped until absolution, 101 Catholicism.

CroatoanCat

Ah jaysus, I'm disturbed that 1992 is considered to be firmly in the category of "yore" now. Surely it was only yesterday?! :P

Anyway, as others have pointed out, the early 90s were not the 50s. Young people back then were mostly doing what young people are doing now, believe it or not. With a few more practical impediments, such as condoms still only being available in chemists, and fewer electronic devices. But, as another poster observed, I think it was indeed the beginning of the end for the Catholic Church in this country - the first "unmasking" of a senior cleric and a glimpse at the dark underbelly of a once all-powerful institution. That unmasking continues today.

The point Mohican is making though, as I understand it, is not really about Casey's "crimes" and his degree of culpability relative to the subsequently exposed criminal barbarity of some of his fellow religious. The point is the attitude of Gay Byrne to his interviewee. As I recall, Annie Murphy was an unfailingly dignified and brave woman. Byrne was, as usual, a smug, condescending a-hole. He has form, in fairness. Anybody remember his interview with Jimmy Nail or with the woman from Fair City who had lost loads of weight? To name just two.

Still, it's reassuring to know that we only got two or three pages before somebody wheeled out the "these damn sluts should just keep their legs closed, rabble, rabble" line, accompanied by the standard plaintive hand-wringing of the "can't people just lay off the poor, embattled Church?" brigade. All is right with the world this August night;).

CroatoanCat

Thom Merrilin wrote: »

How's the son

He means the son of God, how's the son of God? :pac:

Red Nissan

grey_so_what wrote: »

All that was wrong with the chrurch, please God it will never happen again.

See, this is the very seeds to allow the Church to rebuild, you still believe, you are still on the hook, they can still reel you in.

Despite all you said and it was a fine post, you ruin it by calling on their invention to subdue and manipulate mankind and they are shouting "YES, we will be back, they still believe in God we are invincible!"

Hallelujah the Heaven's gates are open and all are welcome

grey_so_what

Red Nissan wrote: »

See, this is the very seeds to allow the Church to rebuild, you still believe, you are still on the hook, they can still reel you in.

Despite all you said and it was a fine post, you ruin it by calling on their invention to subdue and manipulate mankind and they are shouting "YES, we will be back, they still believe in God we are invincible!"

Hallelujah the Heaven's gates are open and all are welcome

I don't believe that RN.......Rotten apples, when removed, can no longer do damage.

It takes time, but I have met some wonderful workers who are good people. No-one should ever give up on the work that the decent people do.

Red Nissan

CroatoanCat wrote: »

Still, it's reassuring to know that we only got two or three pages before somebody wheeled out the "these damn sluts should just keep their legs closed, rabble, rabble" line, accompanied by the standard plaintive hand-wringing of the "can't people just lay off the poor, embattled Church?" brigade. All is right with the world this August night;).

For After Hours, this must make a record. And the quality of postings is above average, IMO. Too.

OH right, school and college are on holidays, that explains it!

Red Nissan

grey_so_what wrote: »

It takes time, but I have met some wonderful workers who are good people. No-one should ever give up on the work that the decent people do.

Set yourself up as a new religion. If one studies hard, one will find that Christ never actually started a Church. Peter, his third in command set his wife Magdalene and daughter Sarah adrift as he [Peter] would not submit to a woman [not uncommon at that time, or even today in that part of the world]

Peter's church was destroyed and the Roman's created the RCC along with it's pomp and ceremony that we see today and it's pedophilia, research some of the Roman Emperor's and that is the founding on which the RCC is actually based on.

It's not Christ's Church, it never was, but it is based on his philosophy and personality to hoodwink the innocent into believing it was. The Muslims were amongst the first. but not the very first to see what was happening in Rome, albeit, it took them 350 years to figure it out, they did, we have had 2,000 years and some of the most outrageous episodes in history, genocide, ethnic cleansing, crusades, brothels, orphanages, and so on, it's all there.

Make a new Church and carry on your good work, but just not in God's name.

grey_so_what

Red Nissan wrote: »

Set yourself up as a new religion. If one studies hard, one will find that Christ never actually started a Church. Peter, his third in command set his wife Magdalene and daughter Sarah adrift as he [Peter] would not submit to a woman [not uncommon at that time, or even today in that part of the world]

Peter's church was destroyed and the Roman's created the RCC along with it's pomp and ceremony that we see today and it's pedophilia, research some of the Roman Emperor's and that is the founding on which the RCC is actually based on.

It's not Christ's Church, it never was, but it is based on his philosophy and personality to hoodwink the innocent into believing it was. The Muslims were amongst the first. but not the very first to see what was happening in Rome, albeit, it took them 350 years to figure it out, they did, we have had 2,000 years and some of the most outrageous episodes in history, genocide, ethnic cleansing, crusades, brothels, orphanages, and so on, it's all there.

Make a new Church and carry on your good work, but just not in God's name.

No comment. Really.

Pro Hoc Vice

grey_so_what wrote: »

No comment. Really.

Why no comment? My understanding of history the post was much more accurate than the history many would have us believe about the origins of the Christian Church. In the very early church Christ was depicted with a wand for a reason.

grey_so_what

infosys wrote: »

Why no comment? My understanding of history the post was much more accurate than the history many would have us believe about the origins of the Christian Church. In the very early church Christ was depicted with a wand for a reason.

No-one can undo the past. Lots of good people do really good charitable work for little or no thanks, they seldom get no thanks, I can't pontificate about the Church of old, I'd rather praise the men and women who do good. It's not so hard to believe they are out there. I'm not bashing anyone here. It was a thread about Gay Byrne and his treatment of Annie Murphy after all.

Red Nissan

grey_so_what wrote: »

No comment. Really.

It's not like I want you to make me the head of your new church, do your research, it's all online now, it may be a shock to unearth the real history, a history that the Church actively sought out and destroyed as much as it could.

For whatever you do in my name you do for the father, most of the story is total fabrication, the underlining inspiration is a set of ideals, never mind the son of god, the underlying principals are still valid.

I think you should give it a voice. Thanks and Bye.

Pro Hoc Vice

grey_so_what wrote: »

No-one can undo the past. Lots of good people do really good charitable work for little or no thanks, they seldom get no thanks, I can't pontificate about the Church of old, I'd rather praise the men and women who do good. It's not so hard to believe they are out there. I'm not bashing anyone here. It was a thread about Gay Byrne and his treatment of Annie Murphy after all.

The other poster did not bash good people who do work in the Catholic Church, just like I nor many people would not knock good people in any church even though most have history.

Many members of FF do good work, same with Labour and FG, even SF, but that does not mean I nor others can't critique the organisation. The reason that the RCC is topical in this thread is that this event was for many in Ireland the turning point in both the power of RTE and a very different organisation the RCC.

Should we forgive or forget bad because of good, no, nor should we forget the good because of the bad. But we should at least question and probe.

grey_so_what

Red Nissan wrote: »

It's not like I want you to make me the head of your new church, do your research, it's all online now, it may be a shock to unearth the real history, a history that the Church actively sought out and destroyed as much as it could.

For whatever you do in my name you do for the father, most of the story is total fabrication, the underlining inspiration is a set of ideals, never mind the son of god, the underlying principals are still valid.

I think you should give it a voice. Thanks and Bye.

I honestly have no idea what you are going on about.

I gave you my opinion on your opening thread.

I think you do need your sleep.

Red Nissan

grey_so_what wrote: »

It was a thread about Gay Byrne and his treatment of Annie Murphy after all.

Jesus, don't give him any more credit, your new religion started on the Late Late Show.

Red Nissan

grey_so_what wrote: »

I honestly have no idea what you are going on about.

I gave you my opinion on your opening thread.

I think you do need your sleep.

Fine, I won't say another word.

grey_so_what

Red Nissan wrote: »

Jesus, don't give him any more credit, your new religion started on the Late Late Show.

Send your money to me........Bunny Carr..............

***If you don't remember then...........you are way to young.......***

StewartGriffin

TheLastMohican wrote: »

Gaybo, if you're reading this, how about an explanation?

The nearest Gaybo has got to the internet is a Lyric FM podcast of his show. He's an old man. Leave him alone.

regress

I remember that interview. I didn't see it as Gay Byrne defending the church.

Casey was a friend of his. Annie Murphy had an affair with him and a son. She then went public with the affair and destroyed his career and life. As far as I can recall Casey had not acted that dishonorably.

He embezzled chuch funds because she was demanding large sums of money from him to stay silent and d it was the only way he could get it.

I see the interview as Byrnes annoyance at a woman who had gone public to destroy the life of a friend of his.

Religious hypropricy deserved to be exposed but given the subsequent revelations Casey was far from the worst of the those that serve the catholic church.