Irish Cardinal latest to be asked to skip conclave over sex abuse scandal

I went back to the last page to read the comments generated by this article, and I am shocked beyond belief at the cavalier judgmental attitude, and summary condemnation of others exercised by people who conceivably think of themselves as 'Catholic' -- forget about the gleeful joining of the chorus by those who are not; the malevolent haters, the ones who claim to be 'atheist', or those who are addicted at jeering any time the words Catholic Church appear on this cyber-rag... just for the hell of it (literally!) --- You people are beyond contempt as you wallow in your pathetic arrogance and ignorance! Are you perchance able to look inside other people’s lives and motives so perfectly as to arrogate to yourselves the ability to point fingers and condemn? Furthermore, are you so clean and pure of sin that you are entitled to cast stones at others? Hopefully at the end of your days you’ll find a kinder and gentler judge than you are to those you those you are damning to hell now.

Thanks to seano and eiriamach for great ripostes which gave me great chuckles. Unfortunately, neither of their ripostes dealt with the truths of my posts about Ms. Christine Buckley... truths, which, I fear, both are afraid of but will face in full.

Well now, that's surely the clincher. If the NY Times says it, it must be true!

Yes, Seano, except those stone statues on Easter Island have never a word to say for all the centuries they've been standing sentinel. Jacers, on the other hand, tells us every detail of every tale, along with the stories he hears from churchmen. He has great faith in stories told by priests and bishops and cardinals. I know many people who have great faith in God, and they're all skeptical about stories told by long-robed men in churches. You're likely to get more truth from the Easter Island statues.

If the truth be known there are probably more than two cardinals involved. Eiriamach do you ever get the feeling you are talking to stone statues?. Send all the bigots to easter Island.

Regardless of how many mountains of words Jacers piles onto his opinion, he's still calling for censorship of Christine Buckley for no better reason than that she has less education that Cardinal Brady! Los Angeles Cardinal Mahony, who covered up decades of abuse by his priests, wrote in his self-excusing blog, "Nothing in my own background or education equipped me to deal with this grave problem. In two years spent in graduate school earning a Master’s Degree in Social Work, no textbook and no lecture ever referred to the sexual abuse of children. While there was some information dealing with child neglect, sexual abuse was never discussed." The NY Times editorial that quoted these words pointedly asked how much education it takes "to recognize criminal child abusers for what they are." Buckley can recognize them; Brady failed to recognize them. The difference is character, not erudition.

(…more) Ms Buckley, like-wise, certainly has no right to speak out against the right and God-given duty of Seán Cardinal Brady to carry out his own singularly Holy Spirit-guided duty in a Papal Conclave, just as the present Pope electors have the duty to vote on what no one else of us all in our God’s world would have the courage or necessary spiritualism to cast our lot in with, like the laughing Roman soldiers immediately did in their ignorance of the future history of the death of Jesus and more importantly, of His Resurrection from dead to life again. That is something that Ms. Buckley, and all others seeking compensaton, like the Roman soldiers at the foot of The Cross were, in casting their lots, failed to achieve or acknowledg, under the bleeding feet of Jesus Christ.

(…more) But that does not disqualify Sean Cardinal Brady, on any grounds, not to be a decision-maker in the next Papal Conclave, whatever the nay-sayers might publish online. Ms. Buckley is today known to be a good, well-meaning woman within her own self-seeking and justice-seeking for people like her in her world but is also known to be a woman of limited education, mainly because she missed or skipped education classes as a young girl (some due to her own ‘couldn’t-be-bothered’ decisions, some due to the abuses and the effects of the abuses that she suffered). >>> It has to be acknowledged and asked (why is no one except me doing the asking?): By what right does Ms Buckley think that Seán Cardinal Brady, trained and eminently-qualified in various secular and theological fields, in which she isn’t, should not vote in an historical Papal Conclave? She hasn’t a clue, doesn't she? I think she would honestly say to all of us “No, I haven’t a clue about Pope elections”… and she should graciously admit that - and keep her mouth shut to only speak out on matters of rights that she has singular Holy Spirit-guided qualifications and a God-given duty to speak out upon. (more…)

(…more) The young Fr. Brady was simply a note-taker during those interviews of abuse-accusing boys (a few of which had no substance). As Seán Cardinal Brady, as we know him today, has said vociferously many times, he passed his notes or minutes of meetings to his superiors who would make or take appropriate decisions and actions ‘AS PER SET STANDARDS’ in those times (how wrong they were back then we now know – but you get the gist of the ‘just’ message of standards back then). Like the decisions of USA Armed Forces’ decision-makers of ‘AS PER SET STANDARDS’ in those days, they were not sufficient to justify True Justice, just like Cardinal Brady constantly admits to his own sorrow that he as a young priest didn’t know of, and could not have been expected to act upon every matter that was recorded given his ignorance in his learning young days, by today’s standards, were not sufficient. In fact, in saying so, he spoke on behalf of me and loads of other Catholics and people of no religion too >>> But that doesn’t… (more…)

(more…) It really needs to be acknowledged by many, especially by young people of today posting on Irish Central and by Catholic Church haters who may be descendant of Nth Irish-Scot misguided belief and already know of the history of child abuse within their own Protestant communities, how really harshly-structured things were back in time when parents didn’t have the courage to check allegations made by their children of what we call today Abuse of Children by those who were trusted in every way, including Parsons, Rectors, Priests, Nuns and by - let us all not forget to mention - family people: Fathers, Mothers, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins etc within one’s own family and their friends or by ‘friendly’ neighbours - as are being rightfully exposed in Irish Courts these days (Irish Central is notably not highlighting these family-orientated abuse injustices as much as they do on Catholic Church injustices, may everyone please take note). (More…)

I don’t agree with the wildly charging and assuming posts of the last few posters… there is no truth in them. On the article above by James O’Shea, I think Ms Christine Buckley has no right to decide whether Seán Cardinal Brady should or not vote in the next Papal Conclave. She is just expressing her personal opinion, not a definitive exorcism or self-invocated prayer based on wrongly-held beliefs in false stories about Brady’s history… i.e. wrong allegations that he was personally responsible for cover-ups about Fr. Brendan Smyth. The then-young Fr. Brady (35-ish, still a student priest by Church standards back then) was complying with standard procedures within the Church of that time during those investigations, just as USA and Irish Army personnel were obliged, and still are today, perhaps to a lesser extent, to comply with orders within their ranks in any investigation of any kind. (More…)

Eireamach is still on her killing spree.

Pittsburghkid takes some wild leaps of imagination -- "Liberal want the money and reversal of basic church doctrine to protect all life." Keep the laundered, ill-gotten money, and as for protecting "all life," I and millions of others would be happy enough just to see the Roman Church finally protecting Catholic children from sexually predatory priests! Calling the desire to protect children a "witch hunt" won't cover up the stench coming from decades of Vatican criminal deceit. I imagine the cardinals will have a whiff of that stench as they cast their ballots in the Sistine Chapel while facing Michaelangelo's "Last Judgment." That's the fresco for which the artist used male prostitutes for models of the virile figures he painted, right?

Eireamach is pro killing for convenience.

Pittsburhkid...Bingo! You got it right. I trust eirimach is pro choice.