Chicago cardinal said to snub Irish Prime Minister’s visit over Vatican Embassy closure

You people with your warped and bigoted comments are very lucky you are not Muslim ! I can not come to terms with the vicious comments coming from people born and raised in Ireland !

@Torontohab - of course you are entitled to your own opinion as I am mine. In my case, I do not accept that Papal infallability is a gift from God, but rather it is an assumption based upon a (very) loose interpretation of Scripture. I expressed my opinion in an earlier post. I do not believe that it is possible to separate the human condition an its influence on every man and woman. I have read enough history to know that the actions of many Popes in history were driven by anything but Divine Guidance. Matthew 16:18-19 is the foundation, but I have seen no instance where the Pope can claim "Im right, your wrong; get over it" To err is human, but to forgive IS Divine!!

"papal infallibility a gift from God" what nonsense infallibilty is just a political tool used by a myriad of religions to suppress free thinking and control the minds and souls of the populace. God is an invention of man,a power tool to justify wars and the suppression and control as I have said to control independent taught.

Thanks for your reply, Barneyjo. I still contend that society at large did not really understand how to tackle the scourge of sex abuse of minors during the 60's or 70's. Church Canon law recognized it as a grave sin and it was viewed in the light of it being a failure of the spirit to overcome temptation to sin rather than a deeply-rooted, pyscho-sexual aberration that required specialist counselling and an appropriate sentencing in court. Secular courts did not have a consistent policy of sentencing regarding this in countries like the US, Ireland or GB. It was a great pity that bishops did not utilize the full weight of Canon law to punish those found guilty of such crimes in ecclesiastical courts. Dioceses in the US and in Ireland as well as other western countries employed psychologists who often released their patients back to their parishes again without releasing the recidivist nature of their affliction and this was to be disastrous for the future victims. We cannot ignore the clericalism inherent in the attitude of bishops who placed the defense of the institution and accused priests above the interests of the victims. These factors all coalesced to create the conditions for these scandals to take place and remain hidden from public inspection for decades. You further take issue for using the term "predators in priestly garb". My intention was never to play down the fact that these man were ordained to the priesthood but rather to point out that they behaved like "wolves in sheep clothing". Their clerical attire was the outward expression of their office and thus many people trusted them for being representatives of Christ in the priesthood. But a dark reality remained obscured within those who so disgracefully betrayed their vocation and the awful consequences of this has been revealed to us all to often through the media.

Reading some of the comments, it's a little disheartening to realize the general level of knowledge of my fellow westerners who ideally have the benefit of at least 2000 years of history. Papal infallibility is a gift of God, not a psychological tour de force. So even with the very few 'bad' popes's there was no bizarre formulated doctrine. "Bad" popes often still respected their office, whatever their faults. They often followed the loss of so many saints ministering to the Black Death incidentally. The church has indeed been portected from error in doctrine and sacarment since Christ led his small band of apostles. The church is about 2000 years more than the corruption that the John Jay report clearly states is a western-worlwide problem , though from the press, a thirty year old administrative foul up is more serious than ongoing problems in the Boy Scouts of America and the list of over 6000 leaders they refused to hand over. Hmmm.

Papal authority and infallibility , for the successor of the 'bishop of Rome' was acknowledged long before it was formally defined in the earliest christian writers. It's also ironic to find people claiming the book authorized on the authority of these same bishops.. what we call today the "bible", being used to argue against their authority. I can understand though, as I was surprised to see how strong the evidence is for papal claims, which from an organizational standpoint, just show God's no dummy. Rather difficult to call a council for a billion Catholics every morning as events arise, don't ya think? One of the major appeals of Catholicism is her simple sanity.

AMERICANS SHOULD MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS AND KEEP OUT OF IRISH AFFAIRS... IM 'IRISH' LIVE IN 'IRELAND' AND THE MAJORITY OF US AGREE WITH WHAT OUR GOVERMENT DONE... SO PLEASE JUST SORT OUT YOUR OWN AFFAIRS AND KEEP OUR OF YOURS.. CHEERS THANKS

@tempranillo - "You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church.I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. What you tie on earth will be tied in heaven. What you set free on earth will be set free in heaven." (Matthew 16:18-19)And dont forget this was the man who went on to deny even knowing Jesus prior to his death. That still doesent mean that Peter or his successors would not make mistakes ( and many Popes have)You cannont negate the impact of the human condition to be mistaken, no matter who you are or what you do. Peter made mistakes; and many of his successors, right down to the present day have made mistakes also. Silliness? I could equally stand before a large crowd at a Ball game and declare "I am a Walrus". I am not a Walrus, and never could be. Papal infallability is an assumption, not a given, as there is no basis in Scripture for it.

barneyjo--as i understand it, infallibility is now an attribute of the office. performance was not a condition imposed upon the office, nor the attribute. so, an idiot, duly elected, could dictate an infallible dogma. the issue would be the legitimacy of the elelction. but, were everyone to agree that the idiot were not, the papal election would be valid unless the impediment were discovered, proven, etc. i offer this silliness to illustrate a point--behavior doen't nullify the attribute of infallibility. if i misunderstand, please set me right. otherwise, this is a great set-up.

Judging from the looks of him,I'd say he's busy that night. Busy porking an alter boy or two and covering it up.

@Gearoid4 - I also meant to comment on your views relating to moral lapses in the 1960s and 1970s and how the abuse was not understood. It was understood back then and it has been understood, and reports of such abuses have been collated by the Magesterium of the Church for well over 10 Centuries. If it were not so why then were eminent saints of the church sufficiently exercised so as to draw up policies to deal with abuses. "Liber Gomorrhianus" written by St Peter Damien around about 1051. Peter Damian was especially indignant about priests having sexual relationships with adolescent boys. He singles out superiors who, due to excessive and misplaced piety, have been lax in their duty to uphold church discipline.Liber Gomorrhianus is also significant because Significant attention is given to the "hurts" of the victims of priestly abuse. Others including St Benedict have written in a similar vein. Interestingly, what is common in both cases was the level of dis interest that both men met with when they presented their writings to either the Pope in the case of Peter Damian, and his Superiors in the case of Benedict. Sound familiar??

My sentiments exactly, 'seamusryan'. He's just an old coot.

There are always going to be those Catholics who will ardently defend the representatives of their church, no matter how vile their acts. If, heaven forbid, it was discovered that the pope himself committed an evil act upon a child, there will be those who will defend that pope vehemently. Defence of the church is necessary for some because for the church to be a fallacy is to bring into question their faith. Without faith, there is no hope. Without hope, there is no purpose. Without purpose there is no will. Without will, there is no God. Or maybe they need to understand that one doesn't put faith in a church, but puts faith in God. If there is a god, there is a will, if there is a will, there is a purpose. If there is a purpose, there is hope and if there is hope, there is faith. And faith is in God, not in the necessity to believe in a Church and pope. You can accept that the Church is forsaken. God won't mind you thinking this way because he has already forsaken it. This is shown by the fact that God doesn't attend mass any more. He went a few times and then gave up on it because after you've been to one mass, you've been to them all: It's just a ritual of standing up, sitting down, kneeling down, murmuring a couple of phrases, partaking of some soluble dough, and drinking the very odd glass of wine.

@Gearoid4 - less obfuscation if you please; these were not merely "predators in priestly garb" they were (are) ordained priests of the Catholic Church. They were not posing as Priests; They are Priests, and by definition their ministry would be just as valid as any other priest of the church who may or may not also be a Paedophile!!

I'm putting it into perspective, Eiriamachn because if you focus on the Church alone, you are inclined to miss the bigger picture concerning the magnitude of this plague called child-abuse within society as a whole. I do not for one moment, excuse the predators in priestly garb, who have committed such terrible acts or the bishops which covered them up. They all should be dismissed and face jail time. I understand the fundamental problems which caused this things to happen in the Church. The sins of priests were treated by their superiors and psychologists used to evaluate them during the 60's and 70's as moral lapses rather than a mental, recidivist condition. Society then had not really got to grips with the causes or symptoms of this terrible evil There was no linkage in my comments between child rape and abortions and it is disingenuous of you to attempt to do to make this. They are too very separate evils which should be treated as such