The Queen led in prayer by Sean Brady - WTF?

[IndieSkies]

Amidst all the doubtless difficult protocols, how on earth could that happen? It shouldn't have to happen because any church with any self respect would have had him ousted. What now of justice for the boys he terrified into silence? How can they be heard in the context that he is a man the queen allowed to lead her in prayer?

I know the British monarchy and the government and church they head up have been complicit in atrocities..that many crimes lay on the big book of justice in the sky...but he is the actual man, the actual individual.

My cynicism is complete.

Good grief, it was Sean Brady? Saw something on the news but didn't realise it was him. WTF?

Well it is a fitting end to a day that should never have happened imo. I wonder how much say she had in the arrangements? My guess is next to none.

Edam - yes because he is Primate of Ireland.
I doubt she had any say in it, but surely it could have been managed differently by those who arrange these things? It would have been planned months and months ago. Maybe they didn;t know about the BBC programme and all the publicity? Maybe they couldn't imagine that he wouldn't have resigned by then?

The BBC News report online talks of Martin Mcguinness's sensitivities around shaking her hand - and no mention of her being ministered to by an apologist for paedophiles.

The statements he made to the BBC in that programme were utterly shocking.

I know the Queen is very diplomatic but i hope she spat on her hand after Martin McGuinness shook it - after all he has ('been alleged to have') the blood of British soldiers on them.
And the IRA (of which Martin McGuinness is 'alleged' to have been a senior member) did actively want her dead until quite recently.

As for Church Services led by an apologist for paedophiles - there are no words.

Why do we bother jailing Real IRA & suspected Al-Qaeda members now?

Why not just free them all immediately, & get them shaking hands with the Queen too??
After all, it's pointless wasting British taxpayers' money locking up (sorry must put 'alleged' again) terrorists who will get freed & fawned over as soon as the political wind changes.

I have to agree about Sean Brady, but the comments about McGuinness are sour grapes.

He is a British taxpayer too, and so are the people he represents, many of whom suffered greatly at the hands of NI security forces (for decades) and the British Army (whose uniform my grandfather wore, and my uncle did too).

McGuinness is NI's Deputy First Minister. Deal with it.

....and a mass murderer.

The British Government over the generations oversaw the murder and starvation of thousands of irish catholics, Martin McGuinness, whatever you think about rights and wrongs, swallowed his own pride to shake hands with the Queeen. The British Gvt apologised for Bloody Sunday...These things are done in the name of peace (we hope).

But a man who pro-actively supressed information about known victims of paedophilila, who pro-actively took part in silencing the voice of a child who came forward, is presiding over prayers.

Whereas Martin McGuinness just sanctioned the murder of children...yeah, you're right - let it go, eh?

I know it is a good thing and a sign of progress that McGuinness has turned to politics instead of guns. But I do think it is cruel that he won't order his former IRA colleagues to tell families where their mothers and sons are buried. At least let the families grieve properly. Let them bury their dead.

Martin McGuiness was the head of the IRA - a terrorist organisation. He is responsible for the deaths of innocents. I am highly pissed off at the coverage regarding his feelings about shaking the Queen's hand, how he is going to find it difficult. I could not care less about his feelings. He may now be a politician but he was an active terrorist and in my opinion belongs in prison. The Queen should not be shaking his hand.

Oh and regards to the original title of the post, she should not be preached to by the pedophile apologist Sean Brady. WTF were the people who arranged this visit thinking?!!!!

Nancy66 - what do think about Sean Brady presiding over prayers for the service with the Queen?

I don't think terrorist killings can ever be justified. Amongst other things that can never be justified. This thread is about the Queen taking religious ministry from Sean Brady.

Why forgive and forget wrt McGuiness but not Sean Brady? What makes the murderer less offensive to you?

Because The troubles is a political situation that can be mended, perhaps, by mutual stepping back from hostilities.
Desmond Tutu.
Because as Math said the catholic / republican citizens suffered atrocities at the hands of the security forces.
and
maybe I don't know if I could forgive and forget, I don't know

I am raising the issue of Sean Brady as a thing on it's own. He was not representing a cause (and mnay believe the republican cause to be just if not it's methods), there is no mutuality, his victims have nothing to be forgotten and forgiven they are his victims.

Are you trying to say that it was OK for Sean Brady to lead the Queen (or anyone) in prayer?

That is what I want to know.

And perhaps because the handshake between HRH and Martin McGuinness may enable people to move forwards and avoid the future deaths of more children, whilst the sanctioning of Brady saying prayers just bolsters his position and enables him to claim his lack of responsibility. There is no co-lateral.

Said this on the AIBU thread just now; but i think that expecting an old lady to shake hands with a man who (allegedly) was in the IRA who (allegedly) wished to kill her - well, it's weird & cruel.
I have my views on Martin McGuiness but i know that others on Mumsnet may have different views & that is their right.
As for Sean Brady - sorry but he is NOT an appropriate person to be leading anyone in prayer.

McGuinness has moved forward. Brady hasn't.

I heard that First Communion services Brady had been scheduled to grace with his presence have been quietly rearranged to have someone else officiating because he just wasnt wanted at these occasions. Why hasn't he resigned? Can we imagine the head of any other organisation, or a politician, who'd done what he has still being in position?

Forgiveness is a fine thing, but only when it comes from the victims, not from a church or supernatural being.

The difference between a terrorist and a statesman is often quite subtle. The transformation can occur in the course of the signing of a treaty, with handshaking all round... Back in the days when the collapse of the Empire was occurring at the speed of a runaway train, plenty of former terrorists became heads of state, or if not then leading political movers and shakers. Look at Jomo Kenyatta, Michael Collins, Eamon de Valera.

All of the major political parties in Ireland, with the exception of Labour and the Greens, have their origins in the struggle for independence. Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein are the heirs of the republican mantle, while Fine Gael originated in the Pro Treaty/Free State side, with the addition of the very conservative Farmers Party and the Irish Fascists (the Blueshirts) thrown in along the way. But at one time the founding members were all (except the Farmers and the Fascists perhaps) the old IRA, IRB and Volunteers -- there was a plethora of pro-independence factions.

When you negotiate peace with a group of 'terrorists', you negotiate with the party that has the power to throw a spanner in the works and thus the mandate to negotiate, no matter how many armalites you suspect they may have in the boots of their cars parked outside. Hence the presence of Michael Collins at the negotiation table back in 1920/21 and the role of McGuinness and Adams in the Peace Process. There is absolutely no point in freezing out the most determined party from negotiations. For their part, Irish nationalists have always known that the party they need to sway is the Tories, whether in government or in opposition, because this is the party that has the closest links to the terrorists on the other side, the UVF, UDA, etc. You can't move forward unless you can present a solution that engages everyone in the process.

McGuinness was open to talking with the British from at least 1972 when he engaged in talks with William Whitelaw. He was first elected to the NI Assembly in Stormont in 1982. The allegations about his level of involvement with the Provos remain allegations -- there is no doubt that he has powers of persuasion over the membership of the Provos, or his role in the peace Process would have been in vain, but claims that he held any particular position in the IRA (including accusations from Irish politicians) have not been proven.

There is such a groundswell of revulsion directed at Brady that I am sure he will quietly resign due to 'ill health', perhaps following the appointment of a co-adjutor bishop who will be the acting bishop for a year or two. When so many voices are raised, including those of the police in both the Republic and NI, against a prelate, it surely can't be long before he slips out the back door. I believe I read somewhere that Cardinal Diarmuid Martin has been pulling the rug from under Brady too, while reiterating rightly that the problems of the Catholic Church in Ireland are not down to one single individual. (Cardinal Martin himself was appointed co-adjutor bishop to his predecessor Cardinal Connell when his position became untenable.)

Will it be acceptable to the people of Ireland if he 'slips out of the back door'? Shouldn't he be facing a criminal investigation for failing to report a crime?

"Forgiveness is a fine thing, but only when it comes from the victims, not from a church or supernatural being."

thank you - that has clarified some of my thinking for me on the parallel discussions re Brady and McGuinness.

Mathanxiety - some very important points, your post has educated me.

It probably won't be acceptable, but I think people are well aware that he wasn't the only person who failed to report, and I don't think there are many people who believe that child sex abuse by clerics has come to an end, or that clergy are the only perpetrators of this crime. I think there are a lot of gardai who would like to see him strung up as an example though -- some have made strong statements condemning his lack of initiative.

'From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.'

Can't argue with that, can he?

Unfortunately for him and for the abuse victims, he has tried arguing with that. It has backfired spectacularly. If he even thought for one minute about the effect his continued career was having on the RC church itself (never mind the victims of abuse) he might have resigned a long time ago. A weak man.

A weak and selfish man. His thin apology was entirely self serving, IMO, otherwise he would have done it long ago and with more meaningful actions behind it. Like disclosure of other abuses, a willingness to work with the authorities to being the guilty to justice, that sort of thing.