New Paedophile Priest Exposed

cooperation

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
44
beardyboy said:
cooperation said:
As have seen before the church claim poverty and the goverment payed more then half the compo
If the priest is at fault why would the Church pay?
The church has now of the crimes and hid the criminal. And then the taxpayer pays for their crime with this goverments bless.
 


zacchy

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
15
The bishops should be removed from child-protection roles, and independent experts ought to be installed in their place. I do not trust Ireland's wooly-minded liberal clergy to look after children, especially the older 'spirit of vatican 2' brigade. Also the Vatican should seriously consider re-instating the death penalty for child abuse.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
I have posted this to reveal something to you. You are anti-Catholic bigots. This post could have been about any organisation. It just happens to be an Anglican Priest - exactly the one zacchy made the post about.

So much for what us prods do.

Now go away and think before you launch into your anti-Catholic rants again
 

Armchair Activist

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
2,168
surely another wexford man we can have to be proud of!!!! (sense the sarcasim)
 

MichaelR

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
1,924
beardyboy said:
I have posted this to reveal something to you. You are anti-Catholic bigots. This post could have been about any organisation. It just happens to be an Anglican Priest - exactly the one zacchy made the post about.

So much for what us prods do.

Now go away and think before you launch into your anti-Catholic rants again
"What us prods do" referred to full cooperation with the secular powers in investigating any offender. Nobody could claim that a child abuser can't appear in any church at all; and the church's beliefs i.e. celibacy are not a proven cause.

The part about officials saying it has been "dealt with" is strange - I know establishment rots any church but I did not think England went as bad as that. If that is proven, *jail the officials*, there's enough room in Her Majesty's prisons. And the Church of England should be disestablished as soon as possible.

I don't have double standards - if anything, rooting that sort of behaviour out of prod lines is more important for me personally. Anyone who has hindered secular prosecution of child abusers, including inaction on legitimate requests, is an "accessory after the fact" and should be treated as such - whatever the denomination. ("That sort" refers not to abusers - it's unrealistic to expect that they will never appear again - but to non-reporters and "dealt-with"-ers).

As an aside I would ask you not to make generalized statements on "you" plural based on my personal opinions.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
MichaelR said:
beardyboy said:
I have posted this to reveal something to you. You are anti-Catholic bigots. This post could have been about any organisation. It just happens to be an Anglican Priest - exactly the one zacchy made the post about.

So much for what us prods do.

Now go away and think before you launch into your anti-Catholic rants again
"What us prods do" referred to full cooperation with the secular powers in investigating any offender. Nobody could claim that a child abuser can't appear in any church at all; and the church's beliefs i.e. celibacy are not a proven cause.

The part about officials saying it has been "dealt with" is strange - I know establishment rots any church but I did not think England went as bad as that. If that is proven, *jail the officials*, there's enough room in Her Majesty's prisons. And the Church of England should be disestablished as soon as possible.

I don't have double standards - if anything, rooting that sort of behaviour out of prod lines is more important for me personally. Anyone who has hindered secular prosecution of child abusers, including inaction on legitimate requests, is an "accessory after the fact" and should be treated as such - whatever the denomination. ("That sort" refers not to abusers - it's unrealistic to expect that they will never appear again - but to non-reporters and "dealt-with"-ers).

As an aside I would ask you not to make generalized statements on "you" plural based on my personal opinions.
The Anglican Church tried to cover it up
 

MichaelR

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
1,924
beardyboy said:
The Anglican Church tried to cover it up
The officials involved in the cover-up should be prosecuted. At least in this case, even the top boss is in the country (Britain) and if this ultimately leads to him, can be apprehended.

No double standards - get them ALL. RC or Prod or Muslim or Jew. Cover-up of a crime is a crime.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
I agree - this is the worst of crimes in my book - or damn close to it.

All paedophiles should never be allowed back into general society.

However I was interested to see how quickly you all turned it into an anti-Catholic rant.

Michael you said this:-

I think this will end when the Roman Catholic church clearly and explicitly recognizes the supremacy of civil law over ecclesiastical law in carnal/physical matters. In this case, there will be no question of "dealing with" this in the Church; instead, the police would be in at once, with Church officials only coming in as witnesses.
Now what control of the Anglican Church does the Catholic Church have? You just revealed your own prejudice.

At least I can say that I have always stood by the line that if you help the paedo escape justice you should share in the punishment.

The Church should accept partial blame only if they helped the perpetrator escape justice. They must be on the side of the victim. The paedo has no right to ever perform his duties as a priest again.

Now gentlemen - let me say it again - if you thought this was about a Catholic priest and choirmaster and started to rave against the Catholic Church you were wrong and should do a moments self reflection and see if you have been conditioned to think that way.
 

The Analyser

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
115
zacchy said:
The bishops should be removed from child-protection roles, and independent experts ought to be installed in their place. I do not trust Ireland's wooly-minded liberal clergy to look after children, especially the older 'spirit of vatican 2' brigade. Also the Vatican should seriously consider re-instating the death penalty for child abuse.
You really haven't a clue, have you, Zac? It was your beloved pre-Vatican II church was ordered the cover-up. Child rapist Father Brendan Smyth was a notorious conservative who was trained in the pre-Vatican II church, whose abuse started in the pre-Vatican II church. It was the Vatican of Pius XII that was notified of his child abuse in 1949 and did nothing. Some of the worst cases date back to the pre-Vatican II church.

As for your bullshit about the death penalty, you imbecile. First the Church opposes the death penalty. Secondly it does not have the means to execute anyone. Thirdly, where Catholic priests abuse children in Ireland, it is a matter for Irish law. It is no ****ing business of the Vatican. The Catholic Church better get used to the fact that in issues like this, its laws have no force whatsoever in Ireland. If you and the Catholic Church wants to live under Church law, move to the Vatican. If you live in Ireland, it is Irish law, and ONLY Irish law, that matters.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
The Analyser said:
zacchy said:
The bishops should be removed from child-protection roles, and independent experts ought to be installed in their place. I do not trust Ireland's wooly-minded liberal clergy to look after children, especially the older 'spirit of vatican 2' brigade. Also the Vatican should seriously consider re-instating the death penalty for child abuse.
You really haven't a clue, have you, Zac? It was your beloved pre-Vatican II church was ordered the cover-up. Child rapist Father Brendan Smyth was a notorious conservative who was trained in the pre-Vatican II church, whose abuse started in the pre-Vatican II church. It was the Vatican of Pius XII that was notified of his child abuse in 1949 and did nothing. Some of the worst cases date back to the pre-Vatican II church.

As for your bullshit about the death penalty, you imbecile. First the Church opposes the death penalty. Secondly it does not have the means to execute anyone. Thirdly, where Catholic priests abuse children in Ireland, it is a matter for Irish law. It is no ****ing business of the Vatican. The Catholic Church better get used to the fact that in issues like this, its laws have no force whatsoever in Ireland. If you and the Catholic Church wants to live under Church law, move to the Vatican. If you live in Ireland, it is Irish law, and ONLY Irish law, that matters.
Unfortunately the thinking of the times was to keep evrything quiet - and the state and the people of the time thouht that way - you may as well rant against all society of the time
 

The Analyser

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
115
beardyboy said:
Now gentlemen - let me say it again - if you thought this was about a Catholic priest and choirmaster and started to rave against the Catholic Church you were wrong and should do a moments self reflection and see if you have been conditioned to think that way.
You missed the point, as usual. It doesn't matter whether the clergyman was a Roman Catholic, Methodist, Anglican, Jew, Hindu, Muslim or anyone else. If something happens in Ireland, Irish law, AND ONLY IRISH LAW, is what matters.

Most religions seem to have got that message at this stage. A lot of Roman Catholics don't seem to. They need to realise that their church's rules do not matter a damn in Ireland. Their church law is as irrelevant as is anyone else's law here. It is Irish law, and only Irish law, that matters. If anyone in any faith conspires to protect one of their own by referring to their church's law, they, whether they are a priest, bishop, cardinal or pope, should face criminal prosecution as conspirators to pervert the course of justice.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
The Analyser said:
beardyboy said:
cooperation said:
As have seen before the church claim poverty and the goverment payed more then half the compo
If the priest is at fault why would the Church pay?
I cannot believe you asked such a ridiculous question.

- The Church hired this man.
- The Church educated this man for priesthood in the seminary.
- The Church dispatched this man to parishes, where as a priest he was allowed uncontrolled access to children by parents taught by the Church that it was by definition trustworthy and its clergymen 'men of God'.
- The Church failed to offer any 'duty of care' both for their employee or for those who came into contact through Church structures with him.
- When informed that the man was committing a criminal offence, the Church failed to report him to the required civil authorities and the Gardaí.
- The Church failed to ensure the man was withdrawn from access to children.

What has to happen in Ireland is quite simple. Church law has to declared subservient to civil law. Everyone who fails to report the criminal actions of someone else must be subject to full prosecution for perverting the course and justice, and jailed.

Maybe it might finally make some churchmen cop themselves on when, on the next occasion it turns out that a child molester was in effect protected by the church and his criminal acts not reported, his parish priest (if he was curate) is investigated and if it turns out that he was aware of the actions and himself did not report them, he is prosecuted and jailed. And if the bishop was aware of it, he too is jailed. And his he told any other bishops and they did not report the man to the gardaí, they too are jailed. And if someone in the Vatican was told, and did not inform the Irish authorities of the man's behaviour, the Irish state begins extradition proceedings against whichever bishop, archbishop or cardinal in Rome was aware of the facts.

And if an major financial award is made against the church and it pulls the usual 'inability to pay' stunt, the courts should order the seizure of church property: the church would soon cop on when it finds that it loses valuable real estate, a parochial house, bishop's palace, church or seminary.
No Analyser - you have missed the point - everyone knows that in Ireland Irish law is supreme (with the possible exception of a certain M McDowell), the whole point is that you all - including you, immediately jumped into the assumption that the priest was catholic and that the catholic church covered up - and then went into the usual rants - like you did as quoted. You were all wrong footed and as I have said - revealed your prejudice.

We all know the doctrine of the two swords - so your subsequent rant is just an attempt to deflect the post away from your prejudice - accept that you were well had and take it on the chin.
 

cooperation

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
44
beardyboy said:
I have posted this to reveal something to you. You are anti-Catholic bigots. This post could have been about any organisation. It just happens to be an Anglican Priest - exactly the one zacchy made the post about.

So much for what us prods do.

Now go away and think before you launch into your anti-Catholic rants again[/quote

Our comment are for all churchs and religions. Stop covering for perverts
 

zacchy

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
15
You really haven't a clue, have you, Zac? It was your beloved pre-Vatican II church was ordered the cover-up. Child rapist Father Brendan Smyth was a notorious conservative who was trained in the pre-Vatican II church, whose abuse started in the pre-Vatican II church. It was the Vatican of Pius XII that was notified of his child abuse in 1949 and did nothing. Some of the worst cases date back to the pre-Vatican II church.
I wasn't bashing Vatican 2, I have nothing against it (I affirm it). I am against these people who profess belief in the 'spirit of Vatican 2', as an excuse to justify their theological liberalism.

Also, conservative priests should be aware of the nature of God's holiness and should know that rape/fornication/homosexual sex are crimes worthy of eternal damnation.


The Analyser said:
As for your bullshit about the death penalty, you imbecile. First the Church opposes the death penalty. Secondly it does not have the means to execute anyone.
I was referring to child abusers, or their supporters, that live in the Vatican (like the ones you talked about---"if someone in the Vatican was told"), not in Ireland.

And the Church does not teach that the death penalty is intrinsically sinful, most theologians and most of the hierarchy may oppose it, but the Church has always taught(and still teaches) that governments have the authority to enforce it. Cardinal Ratzinger said that "it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment" and that there is "a LEGITIMATE diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia". Catholics are free to believe that the death penalty is a perfectly judicious form of punishment, but they are not at liberty to support abortion, euthanasia or same-sex 'marriage'.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
cooperation said:
beardyboy said:
I have posted this to reveal something to you. You are anti-Catholic bigots. This post could have been about any organisation. It just happens to be an Anglican Priest - exactly the one zacchy made the post about.

So much for what us prods do.

Now go away and think before you launch into your anti-Catholic rants again[/quote

Our comment are for all churchs and religions. Stop covering for perverts
Rubbish - it is quite clear from the posts that the usual anti-Catholic hysterics started as soon as the posters saw the chance - they are hiding behind a very serious social issue to bash the Church - then when they were told that it was about an Anglican priest the posts stopped - except for a few who have tried to cover their tracks - strange who no-one has put their hands up to say the were had - shows lack of character I suppose
 

MichaelR

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
1,924
beardyboy said:
Rubbish - it is quite clear from the posts that the usual anti-Catholic hysterics started as soon as the posters saw the chance - they are hiding behind a very serious social issue to bash the Church - then when they were told that it was about an Anglican priest the posts stopped - except for a few who have tried to cover their tracks - strange who no-one has put their hands up to say the were had - shows lack of character I suppose
I've re-read all I wrote and the only phrase which does not apply was about the RCs needing to recognize the supremacy of civil law. Replace that with the Church of England needing to be disestablished immediately. The other things I wrote apply without changes.

My own bias is against church-state collusion. In Ireland the RCs did it (CofI too but that ended a real long time ago in 1870), in England the CofE, in Sweden the Lutherans, in Russia the Orthodox - it's always bad. Separation of church and state is key to resolving any such issues, by leaving them clearly in the state's sphere, and applying the state's sword appropriately.

Come to think of it: funny how Ireland's big creative people were often Protestant (Yeats, Hyde...), while England's, RC (Chesterton, Tolkien...). Perhaps being in a non-established community clears up the mind, or possibly it's the other way - some clear-minded people tend to shy away from established denominations.
 

tumeltyni

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
38
beardyboy said:
Rubbish - it is quite clear from the posts that the usual anti-Catholic hysterics started as soon as the posters saw the chance - they are hiding behind a very serious social issue to bash the Church - then when they were told that it was about an Anglican priest the posts stopped - except for a few who have tried to cover their tracks - strange who no-one has put their hands up to say the were had - shows lack of character I suppose
You're over-simplifying. In a country where something like 90% of the population is Roman Catholic, it's a natural assumption that you were talking about another of the many cases we've heard about within Catholicism.

If you think this thread bashed the Catholic Church, I suggest you read a few of the others - this is mild! Besides everyone has agreed that it's no better if it's coming from another church, so I don't know why you're going on as if they did.
 

Wolverine

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
86
Given the fact that the overwhelming number of news stories regarding paedophile priests relate to Catholic paedophile priests it is hardly surprising that people would assume this to be another one.

Regarding anti-catholicism, there is none of that here. There is criticism of the church as an institution but that does not equate to anti-catholicism.

Is it anti-Americanism to criticise Bush?
Is it racism to criticise the corruption of the Nigerian government?

No. And neither is it anti-catholicism to criticise the appaling behaviour of the hierarchy in dealing with this issue.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
tumeltyni said:
beardyboy said:
Rubbish - it is quite clear from the posts that the usual anti-Catholic hysterics started as soon as the posters saw the chance - they are hiding behind a very serious social issue to bash the Church - then when they were told that it was about an Anglican priest the posts stopped - except for a few who have tried to cover their tracks - strange who no-one has put their hands up to say the were had - shows lack of character I suppose
You're over-simplifying. In a country where something like 90% of the population is Roman Catholic, it's a natural assumption that you were talking about another of the many cases we've heard about within Catholicism.

If you think this thread bashed the Catholic Church, I suggest you read a few of the others - this is mild! Besides everyone has agreed that it's no better if it's coming from another church, so I don't know why you're going on as if they did.
I disagree - the replies were definitively anti-Catholic - there assumptions reveal their thinking - if they were not anti-Catholic they would have condemned the actions of the specific case not start unfounded and as it turned out erroneous anti_Catholic rants - in fact one poster said that the catholic church should do as the protestant churches do. He was revealing himself.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top