Sir, – I am very saddened that once again that the victims of clerical child sexual abuse have to endure more pain and suffering. I could hardly believe what I was hearing when Cardinal Brady tried to reassure his position by abject words of support from a monsignor in the Vatican. Why for once cannot the genuine requests of the survivors be granted as they look for the cardinal’s resignation.
If such action can bring some healing and consolation to the courageous long-suffering victims and to have even a little faith in their church, it is hardly too much to ask and hope for. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The ongoing vilification of Cardinal Brady seems to me to miss the point.
Fr Brady, as he then was, was asked to investigate an alleged crime against certain children. He did so and sent the report to his superior, the bishop.
Similarly the gardaí investigate alleged crime. They send a report to the DPP, whose job it is to initiate a prosecution in the courts. The DPP may decide to take no action. There is nothing the gardaí can do about it.
As regards the oath binding the the children to silence, I imagine that the purpose was to ensure that they did not about spreading rumours and so alerting the accused, who at that time was considered to be innocent until proven otherwise.
Had he been innocent he would have been able to sue the church for defamation. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – In his statement responding to the BBC programme The Shame of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Sean Brady states “However, I also accept that I was part of an unhelpful culture of deference and silence in society, and the church, which thankfully is now a thing of the past”.
It is inexplicable that the leading Roman Catholic cleric in Ireland believes that such a culture of silence in the church is “now a thing of the past”. He is undoubtedly aware of the silencing of five Irish priests for speaking their conscience on church matters and the message it sends to other priests. In such a climate, the Cardinal’s statement is wishful thinking at best and disingenuous as worst.
At the time of writing, I have heard or read the views of only one of the approximately 3,500 priests in Ireland on whether or not Cardinal Brady should resign. Such a lack of response speaks much more loudly and accurately to the culture of silence in which today’s clergy find themselves than Cardinal Brady’s statement. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Having listened since early this morning to to clerical reaction to the BBC programme The Shame of the Catholic Church, I am amazed at the equivocation and the unwillingness to engage with concepts of criminal acts, of personal responsibility or of conscience.
The Gospels contain the most unequivocal teaching on how children are to be cared for. If only church authorities had followed the example of the person they claim as their founder and set themselves against a complacent and casually cruel culture, what a wonderful sign their church would have been. Instead, they betrayed their prophetic mission to teach eternal values and they deserve the contempt which they have brought upon their institution.
But perhaps words such as “child”, “millstone” and “drown” are only Semitic exaggeration or rabbinical rhetoric and were never meant to be taken seriously? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – In light of Cardinal Seán Brady’s refusal to resign despite numerous calls on him to do so, I strongly feel that Irish people, including the politicians, should boycott the upcoming Eucharistic Congress.
This will allow all Catholics to express their disgust at the hierarchy of the Catholic Church’s cover-up of all the child abuse that has been exposed in recent years. Will this public display of church strength be led by Cardinal Brady? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The reaction to the BBC documentary revealing the then Fr Brady’s role in the silencing and cover-up of child abuse by the hierarchy is being met with the usual hand-wringing.
Again, we seem shocked by the hierarchy’s elevation of canon law over morality. If you are a good Catholic, you and your conscience are subservient to Rome. Cultural à la carte Catholics seem surprised by this, regardless of how often this arises.
How long before we accept the Vatican for what it is and decide that it having any say in our society is incompatible with Ireland being a supposed sovereign Republic.
We may have sold enough of Ireland to be but strangers in it, but this does not mean we have to persist in selling out our conscience and our children. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I have a profound distrust of virtually everything I hear, read, or see on any of our news media, and the latest furore about what Cardinal Brady did and did not do in 1975 is no exception.
I am aware that abusers were able to manipulate their victims to the point that they would not tell even their parents of the fiendish torment being inflicted upon them. I find it impossible, however, as a parent of four children who, to put it crudely, were at an abusable age at about that time, to conceive of any circumstance in which I would not know that one of my children, at any time whatever throughout their teens, had been brought before a formal tribunal, or had been sought out by a priest, who was unknown to both them and me, to corroborate something that had been stated at such a tribunal.
At the very least, it is a matter that requires explanation. Yet it is only one of several matters that all of you, self-proclaimed, self-appointed and self-serving champions of “the public’s right to know”, glibly ignore as you parade your select team of casters of the 101st stone.
We certainly have the right to know, but it is all too clear that journalists willing to pervert that right are in the overwhelming majority. – Yours, etc,
Sir,
– I quote
Cardinal Seán Brady: “The only people who had authority within the Church to stop Brendan Smyth from having contact with children were his Abbot in the Monastery in Kilnacrott and his Religious Superiors in the Norbertine Order.”
Mark 11:15: “Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers”.
Throwing over tables is one thing, but what else might Jesus have done with Fr Brendan Smyth? Would he have taken notes?
– Yours, etc,
Sir, – Cardinal Brady tells us that, back in the 1970s, they didn’t fully understand the effects of priests raping children.
Yet, during those same 1970s, when we went to confession and admitted to sexual peccadilloes, they quizzed us, in depth, about our actions. They told us that our actions were grievous matter and mortal sins. I am puzzled.
Is the Cardinal telling us that girls French-kissing their boyfriends and boys putting their hands up their girlfriends’ jumpers are more serious offences than a priest raping children over decades? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The plaintiff plea of the Primate of all Ireland, Cardinal Seán Brady, that if the church had known then what is known now, is a pathetic defence of his and the institutional church’s failure to protect children.
This excuse does not stand up to scrutiny when we look at the extraordinary measures the church took to conceal and hide the truth of what was happening. If they didn’t understand the rape of children was wrong why did they make such strenuous efforts to conceal and protect those who perpetrated the abuse?
At what time in humanity’s history did the church not know the rape of a child was evil, criminal, immoral and utterly contrary to a Christian way of life? – Yours, etc,
Sir,
– Here we go again with attacks on Cardinal Brady. Wasn’t this all already debated?
I find it very surprising, if not sinister, that calls are being made for the Cardinal’s resignation.
He reported accurately on the abuse claims, as he was required to do, and passed his findings on to the appropriate authority.
Their failure to act attaches no blame to him.
Why the witch hunt?
Surely I didn’t hear aright that “gagged” Fr Brian D’Arcy suggests he should resign? – Yours, etc,