Michael Wolraich's picture

    A Cardinal's Regret

    In 1975, the Catholic Church of Ireland sent Father Sean Brady to interview two teenage boys who had been abused by their priest, Brendan Smyth. Brady recorded their harrowing testimony and submitted it to his superiors, who transferred Smyth to a different parish, again and again. Twenty years later, Smyth was finally imprisoned after being convicted on 153 counts of child abuse in Ireland and Northern Ireland.

    Meanwhile, Father Sean Brady moved up the Church hierarchy. He is now Cardinal Sean Brady.

    After the BBC recently reported his role in Smyth's investigation, Brady publicly expressed regret. He regrets that his superiors dealt inappropriately with Smyth. He regrets that the Church had no "guidelines" for handling pedophilia by priests. He regrets that he and others did not understand the "full impact of abuse" on the lives of children.

    But for his own role in abetting child abuse, Cardinal Brady's regret is rather meager. He explained that he was nothing more than a note-taker without any authority to act. As to why he remained silent when his superiors transferred Smyth, he reluctantly conceded, "I also accept that I was part of an unhelpful culture of deference and silence in society, and the Church."

    Despite the outrage rising in Ireland, he has refused to resign.

    But what if Sean Brady were not a Cardinal?

    Suppose that he had been an army lieutenant investigating a massacre by U.S. soldiers and that his superiors allowed the perpetrators to continue killing. Would he be permitted to continue as Army Chief of Staff when the news broke?

    Suppose that he had been a corporate accountant who reported criminal fraud within his company and said nothing when his boss allowed the culprits to carry on defrauding customers? Would he be entitled to remain Chief Financial Officer when the fraud was revealed?

    Suppose that he had been a teacher tasked with investigating child abuse in his school and that he kept quiet when the school board transferred the pedophile to a different school where he abused more children. Would he be able to stay on as Secretary of Education?

    But Sean Brady is a Cardinal, a man of God chosen not only for his administrative skills but also for his moral authority. More than soldiers, executives, and educators, his office requires a deep understanding of the difference between good and evil and a profound commitment to moral law.

    And so, in the logic of Catholic Church, he has been allowed to remain in his place to continue the work of God.

    Michael Wolraich is the author of Blowing Smoke: Why the Right Keeps Serving Up Whack-Job Fantasies about the Plot to Euthanize Grandma, Outlaw Christmas, and Turn Junior into a Raging Homosexual

    Topics: 

    Comments

    Genghis,

    And so it goes on and on ad nauseam.  What is there left to say that hasn't been said about this ongoing travesty?  Rants and screams of condemnation have little, if any, impact on them or theirs......

    I will refrain from doing either, because it will only, once again, begin another unholy war that will not produce much of any value.  

    That said, this is an excellent factual report.  Appreciate.


    And you have explained why it is the Church itself is losing parishioners. 

    Are they are criminal enterprise? Yes they are, they've covered up crimes for decades. They should have been punished in the US under RICO laws, because they conspired to cover up crimes.  Long ago they quit representing "God". They always knew the difference between right and wrong and they sided with wrong.

    Whether is it Dublin, Boston, Paris or LA, it is all the same. The church allowed pedophiles to roam free without consequence.  These priests are not men of God, everyone can see that now.


    I don't think the logic is that unusual. In fact, I suspect you'll find it almost everywhere where those who would do the punishing are as guilty as those who they would punish…


    Not unusual at all, but there's a special branch of hypocrisy reserved for our spiritual leaders.

    One of my recent favorites, albeit less serious in its impact, is this one

    Russian bloggers have expressed particular outrage about the patriarch’s watch, rumored to be a Breguet time piece worth tens of thousands of dollars. It was first sighted on the wrist of the patriarch in 2009 on a visit to Ukraine, where he held forth in a televised interview on the importance of asceticism.

    ...

    In an interview with a prominent Russian television journalist this week, Patriarch Kirill admitted for the first time that he did in fact own the Breguet watch in question, but insisted that he had never worn it. The watch, he said, was in a box that he only recently found among a collection of gifts he had received over the years. As for photographs that appear to show him wearing the watch, he said he suspected that they had been created through digital manipulation.

    As it turns out there was some digital manipulation but not quite as Kirill described it:

    The Russian Orthodox Church admitted on Thursday to altering an image on its Web site to remove a watch worn by its leader. The alteration was discovered this week by Russian bloggers who suggested that the deleted watch was an expensive timepiece Patriarch Kirill has admitted he owns but claims to never wear.
     
    The editor who removed the watch from the photograph, which showed Patriarch Kirill at a meeting with Russia’s justice minister in 2009, might have gotten away with the ruse if she had noticed that the watch also appeared in a reflection on the highly glossed table at which the church leader was seated.
     
    After the clumsiness of the deception was roundly mocked online, the church took the unusual step of apologizing and restoring the original image to its Web site.

    Next up: A Patriarch's Regrets

    PS Good luck on your dissertation defense!


    And who says certain Christian sects are not set to take us all back to the Middle Ages.

    Just a side note:

    The Cardinals look pretty good this year.

    They might repeat their 2011 success!


    Suppose that he had been an army lieutenant investigating a massacre by U.S. soldiers and that his superiors allowed the perpetrators to continue killing. Would he be permitted to continue as Army Chief of Staff when the news broke?

    Suppose that he had been a corporate accountant who reported criminal fraud within his company and said nothing when his boss allowed the culprits to carry on defrauding customers? Would he be entitled to remain Chief Financial Officer when the fraud was revealed?

    Suppose that he had been a teacher tasked with investigating child abuse in his school and that he kept quiet when the school board transferred the pedophile to a different school where he abused more children. Would he be able to stay on as Secretary of Education?

     

    My answers: Yes, Yes, No.


    The depth of the hierarchy's denial and self-deception is awesome to behold.


    Latest Comments