Cardinal Law told Mary McAleese he was ‘sorry for Catholic Ireland to have you as President’

jetsnoone, you say, "lets move forward, already. No gays in the priesthood or military is a good starting point." I'm afraid you are directionally challenged; you have backward & forward confused.

"Mary McAleese's very public statements are causing the youth of Ireland to turn away from the Church in droves" Er - the church, not Profesor McAlesse, has caused the turning way. The methodical cover up of decades of child abuse is not exactly a vote catcher

Ronnie, whether I am a practicing Catholic or not is completely irrelevant. Whether I harbor any hatred of RCC is also completely irrelevant. To learn about logical relevance, look up "ad hominem," a common informal fallacy of logic. Criticize the statement, not the person (you'll find that rule among the canons of reason if you ever bother to consult them). The Lord would not recommend that anyone engage in "total condemnation of homosexual acts" while pretending a "total loving embrace of homosexual persons." Can it make sense that anyone would tolerate being embraced by people who totally condemn their sexuality? "The Christian thing to do" is to test those who claim to speak with the moral authority of Christ. And if they cannot make better sense than "total condemnation" of those they profess to extend "total loving embrace" to, then rest assured that they don't speak for Christ. The Gospels show that Christ warned continually NOT to "obey the commands" of hypocrites. I'm sure you can make better sense if you try.

eirimach, it seems that u misunderstood my comments, but I think it is perhaps a good guess to say u are not a practising catholic or at least not striving to be one. your poisonous castigation of the church's handling of the child abuse scandal is probably prompted by you blind hatred of its ( The Church), total condemnation of homosexual acts as opposed to its total loving embrace of homsexual persons. The Christian thing to do is obey the commands of the Church on this matter, for the Church is instituted by The Lord Himself and thus the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.

Wow, Mary Mc. leading the youth of Ireland to commit sin, mortal sin.....Millstone anyone?

jetsnoone, forcing gays and lesbians to suppress or deny their sexual orientation, whether in the priesthood or the military-- both are places where they exist in significant numbers-- is a giant step backward. Open acceptance of human sexuality in its diverse manifestations, as long as it's manifested between adults by mutual consent only with other adults, would be a move forward. It would also be the Christian thing to do.

eiriamach: lets move forward, already. No gays in the priesthood or military is a good starting point.

It was nice of Law to have the prominent heretic-chaser Mary Ann Glendon "lecture" McAleese - this lady is the Pat Robertson of the RCC. BTW,she created another stink when Notre Dame University in an admirable recognition of the first Black American as President invited OBAMA to speak at the university declining I think an honorary doctorate. Good for Notre Dame!

Oh Yeah, Ronnie, that's the real problem: Your Church was infiltrated by lib women and lib gay men in the 60s and 70s, and when they called for liberalizing Church teaching on sexuality, men like Bernard Law figured priests also had the "right" to liberalize their own sexual behavior by raping minors in church! So the Vatican II reformers are to blame, right? You'll think that's right only if you're a moral relativist who believes that the cultural milieu somehow "causes" you to sin and gives you your excuse. Churchmen who accuse liberals of being moral relativists have been quick to claim "diplomatic immunity" from criminal prosecution (that's Law's status under Vatican protection) because, after all, they just couldn't help it, now could they, and because canon law is "superior" to state law, which prosecutes pedophiles and leaves women priests free to practice their faith. It's all the fault of the liberals who called for sexual freedom for mutually consenting ADULTS but who consider sexual molestation to be an inexcusable crime.

I'm not surprised by Mrs McAleese's comments actually. She's quite typical of the a la carte catholics who emerged from Irish Universities in the late 60's & 70's. All they spoat on about is "rights", but readily shirk "responsi-bilities". She's has the neck to campaign for women's priests, but never uttered a peep in support for the irish living abroad to have the vote in our general elections while she was president. That's right, the irish living aboard, even for short stays LOSE the right to vote in all political elections in dear old Ireland. Its pure hyprocrisy actually. And she's on 150,000 per year pension ( index -linked of course)for the rest of her natural life. And she's not even Irish, she's from Northern Ireland, which makes her, strictly speaking a british subject. Now I'm no republican, just a normal Irish Catholic sinner whose sick to the back teeth of lukewarm half catholic, half irish people destroying our native and gifted heritage evrytime they open their double chinned gobs.

Uppinko, are you having a laugh? Mary McAleese was elected by the people of Ireland!!!! My aunts and uncles voted for her, and they regularly attend mass. As for Law, he is hiding in the Vatican knowing that if he returns to the USA, he will have a lot to answer for. Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese did astounding work as the heads of state, and this notion that they are anti Catholic is ridicules. On one final point, The Roman Catholic Church in Ireland did something the British counld not do in over 500 years. They failed to provide leadership and protection to those who needed it the most, and you think its ok for a disgraced "prince of the church" to lecture the Irish head of state. "A group of arrogant, self centered politicians"?. Are you talking about the Dail or the Vatican? :)

On behalf of the 150 Sex-abuse victims of former priest John Geoghan who charge that Cardinal Bernard Law was told of Geoghan’s criminal activity as early as 1984 and did nothing, I say the man should have been dragged back to the states and prosecuted and all the others he was protecting.These are not men of God; they are men protecting an institution from litigation at the price of innocent children. How dare he preach to Mary McAleese. One thing is certain; if there had been women in power in the Vatican the abuse scandal would have ended the day it began.

Last time I looked, Mary McAleese had not molested children, or indeed transferred those who did, to other locations to hide 'em! So who should be ashamed of whom?

Jetsnoone -- Do you think public dissent is a bad thing?

@irelandnorth - well said ( I think) Mind you given the level of attivism that runs large in the sentiments of some posters on this site, on can only imagine what your precise observations will mean to them!!