As the vote drew closer, attention focussed on on Bart Stupak, the Democrat congressman who authored the controversial “Stupak amendment” on the original House bill that placed onerous conditions barring abortion provision from health insurance subsidised by federal funds. The last-minute deal was lashed together, involving President Obama, in order to win over Stupak and several of his allies.
Stupak held a late afternoon press conference announcing his dramatic change of heart, and pledged that he and several of his anti-abortion conservative Democrat colleagues would support the bill after seeing President Obama’s proposed executive order.
Under the deal, Obama will sign an executive order affirming that no federal funds can be used for abortions. You can read the order here. It doesn’t seem to say much to me beyond the fact of reaffirming that nothing in the act shall be construed to run counter to the so-called existing Hyde language that bars federal funds for abortions.
The mini-instant-conventional wisdom that I’m picking up, subject to alteration, is that Stupak kind of caved. Someone who was at the press conference says that someone read a statement from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops indicating a certain unease with the deal. I don’t know this firsthand, and I’ll report back as developments merit, and you can Google this on your own of course.
As noted, UCUNF have selected 17 out of 18 candidates for the Westminster election. Only the decision on South Antrim is outstanding.
Slugger (me and people I talk to) has been informed, via three separate sources, this is due to concerns from the Conservatives on the alleged homophopbia of current frontrunner Adrian Watson.
Think of Liam Adams, the brother of the Sinn Fein president. Liam has not been tried and is entitled to the presumption of innocence in the sex-abuse charges against him, but consider how the allegations were handled. He was moved about the country and for a time lived in America without those he was staying with being told that he was under suspicion. Gerry Adams, who says he believed the allegations when they were first made to him in 1987, did not inform other members of Sinn Fein or the authorities. The result was that McGuinness was photographed opening a Sinn Fein office in Dundalk alongside Liam Adams, who worked on youth projects there and in west Belfast.
Gerry attended Liam’s second wedding and was photographed canvassing with him. To any onlooker, or anyone following Liam’s career through the press, there was no hint of suspicion. What is more, Gerry told a meeting in north Belfast in 1995 that child abuse should not be reported to the police because “the RUC are not acceptable”. This was 20 years after Fr Brady, as he then was, and his superiors failed to report child-abuse allegations to the gardai.
As the likelihood of an agreed unionist candidate for both Fermangah South Tyrone and South Belfast recedes so the blame game seems to be beginning. Jim Allister has noted that the TUV can claim to be innocent in this argument. The DUP and CUs, however, are both in the process of getting their retaliation in first. The DUP of course are far from innocent in the past of the charge of being vote splitters. However, this time they do seem to have a bit more legitimacy in their complaints: unless that is of course one takes Trimble’s non sectarian claims seriously.
The problem of course is that stating things like: “We have said all along that we will not be joining with any party of a sectarian nature” could be seen to sit a little ill with one who made his political reputation tripping along the Garvaghy Road hand in hand with Dr. Paisley: the then leader of the party he is now describing as sectarian.
There is also another problem in Trimble’s comments, he went on to say: “we will be fighting every seat in the UK, and the Province will be no exception.” Whilst that is sort of true it is only sort of true as Norman Tebbit has pointed out on the BBC’s Politics Show (reproduced here on Conservative Home):“Mr Bercow is not a Conservative candidate. He is an independent candidate. And it’s, in my view, not the business of the Conservative Party to support independent candidates. He did cast himself in my mould, indeed. But he has been reworked in recent years. But I don’t think he would really be able to describe himself as a Conservative any more, even if he were not the Speaker.”
Reg Empey’s response was a little less inflammatory: “DUP have nine out of 10 seats and one wonders how many more they want. It was they who gave South Belfast and Fermanagh-South Tyrone to the nationalists and they should return them to us, the new coalition.” Again, however, that form of words ignores the reality that seats are not in the specific gift of a political party and further that in both Fermanagh South Tyrone and South Belfast the sitting MP was retiring at the election where the seats fell to nationalists. In addition the DUP heavily out polled the UUP in South Belfast at the election when the seat was lost and it is far from clear which candidate the out going MP would have felt was his natural political heir.
In Fermanagh South Tyrone it is alleged that Norman Baxter was willing to run as a unity candidate but it was the CU’s insistence that he take the Tory whip which resulted in him withdrawing from the fray. Going back to Buckingham: it is abundantly clear that the MP the Tories are backing will not be taking their whip.
Somehow, however, honouring an age old tradition of not standing against the speaker and, hence, depriving the Buckingham constituents of the option of voting for a Conservative member of parliament, potential government minister etc. etc. is acceptable. However, having an agreed candidate to stop the election of an MP who refuses to take her seat and is an open supporter of the IRA’s campaign of murder, nowhere more brutal, sectarian or indiscriminate than in Fermanagh; is sectarian.
We were fortunate that our time in Washington at the same time the government was trying to get its healthcare bill through Congress. I say ‘government’ when in actual fact the government (ie the executive office functions overseen by the White House) when - unlike the strong arm approach of LBJ (or even the Bush administration) - the President had little or nothing to do with the drafting of this bill. Rather his contribution seems to have been cast more in the strategic framing of the bill:
His aim is to establish a long-term political direction—one centered on a more activist government that shapes and polices the market to strengthen the foundation for sustainable, broadly shared growth. Everything else—the legislative tactics, even most individual policies—is negotiable. He wants to chart the course for the supertanker, not to steer it around each wave or decide which crates are loaded into its hull.
To the legislation itself, the Economist gives two reasons to back it: one, decency; and two cost control. The second first:
America’s health-care system is a nightmare of perverse incentives. Because employer-provided health insurance is not considered to be a taxable benefit, people feel insulated from the real cost of their coverage and consequently over-consume. Because hospitals and medical practices in many areas face too little competition, they charge absurdly too much even for simple procedures. Because of the rapacity of America’s lawyers, the fear of lawsuits encourages doctors to practise “defensive” medicine, again driving up costs.
This is the libertarian trap that prefers to let freedom reign which encourage the country to consume resources simply to game the system. Thus the cost of the UK’s universal system come in at around 8% of its GDP, whereas the US system which currently excludes 45 million of its population, eats up 16% of its gross domestic product.
Even ‘Obamacare’ will leave a significant number of people outside the system. And there will be no ‘public option’ (a government-run insurance option). Medicine will remain private, but it will be regulated into ‘exchanges’ or government regulated markets in which competition will exert a downward pressure on costs, with a tax being implemented on high-cost insurance plans.
And on the decency thing, for the Economist it is simply about closing an obvious gap between the US and the rest of the developed world. And it is not about covering those currently excluded, but those wage earners whom the insurance companies consider too bad a risk to make money on:
...the much larger number of people who fear falling into that position through losing their jobs; and the larger number again who cannot get affordable insurance because they have an existing medical condition, or because they are too old, or because they have exhausted the “lifetime caps” imposed by insurance companies.
That said, it is still no done thing. House Democrats have - in the words of one Congressman we met last week - ‘lost the narrative’ to outlying rumours like Sarah Palin’s Death Panel story... And the Republicans are counting on fears that these reforms will play into their hands come the mid term elections in November…
That is still a long way away. Obama’s pitch to his party’s Congress caucus yesterday was that this was a straight down the middle bill, which balances fairness with an attempt to bring down America’s sky high healthcare costs… Turning the US Supertaker will take a lot longer than 7 or 8 months…
And there are a dozen other reasons to kick the government party (not least the stubbornly persistent 10% unemployment rate)... Some of those waverers must now be calculating that it is as better to be hung for stealing the proverbial sheep than a lamb…
The study notes that there will be opposition to moving the crosses. “Some local residents strongly oppose any option that involves moving the high crosses because of their spiritual connection to the site, and this opinion should be weighed against the potential damage or structural failure of the crosses if they are left in situ without any protection,” it said. “If the crosses are to be moved, it is preferable that they are retained as close as practically possible to their current location so that they retain their link to the ecclesiastical enclosure.”
While a number of structures on the site require conservation, and there are a number of pressing issues that need to be addressed, none present as urgent or as important an issue as the protection of the crosses.
Arising from the study, it is clear that on-going weathering and the existing public access will cause the continuing deterioration of the high crosses. A range of options for the preservation of the crosses have been examined. All of these options involve the crosses remaining within the immediate vicinity of the National Monument. The table below illustrates how the issue was assessed and the options that are available, adopting the following criteria:
(A) Protection from the weather and preservation in present condition in perpetuity.
(B) Round-the-clock security from vandalism/wilful damage.
(C) Protection from casual visitor damage.
(D) Protection of visual integrity and character of monument group and visitor experience of monument.
The Options
The evaluation of the options was guided by principles of best practice in conservation (O=objective achieved; X=objective not achieved)
Options
(1) Moving crosses into purpose-built visitor centre nearby and putting exact replicas, indistinguishable from originals, at the original locations A O B O C O D O
(2) Leaving crosses exposed to continued weathering (and deterioration) where they are and placing high quality replicas within visitor centre A X B X C X D O
(3) Erecting protective railings around crosses A X B X C O D O?
(4) Erecting shelter around crosses (roof only with supports) A O? B X C X? D X
(5) Erecting shelter around crosses (glazed walls and roof) A O? B O C O D X
The other objectives
Depending on the decision agreed in relation to the crosses, all other related decisions, including those relating to the extension to the graveyard, traffic management, visitor management and visitor facilities can be further analysed.
Severalblogs got here first, but 17 or the 18 joint UUP and Conservative candidates have been announced today.
Mike Nesbitt - Strangford
Daphne Trimble - Lagan Valley
Sandra Overend - Mid Ulster
Fred Cobain - North Belfast
Ross Hussey - West Tyrone
Bill Manwaring - West Belfast
Trevor Ringland - East Belfast
Harry Hamilton - Upper Bann
Danny Kennedy - Newry and Armagh
John McAllister - South Down
Rodney McCune - East Antrim.
Lesley McAuley - East Londonderry.
Paula Bradshaw - South Belfast
David Harding - Foyle
Irwin Armstrong - North Antrim.
Ian Parsley - North Down
Tom Elliott - Fermanagh and South Tyrone
The facebook series titled “Out and About” sees the former promising Alliance upstart stand, dare I say it, UNCUNFortably, at some of the North Down issue key battlegrounds, including the Bangor fountain “I say NO, NO, NO, to the needless waste of fairy washing up liquid in this fine seaside water feature.”, Donaghadee Harbour and the above pictured temporary carpark. Talk about drawing battle-lines.
Chosing ‘friends’ or becoming a ‘fan’ of something on Facebook doesn’t necessarily indicate you support the views you are connecting with, for example I’m a ‘fan’ of the Orange Order.
However, I do wonder at the wisdom of elected representative like the DUP’s Pam Lewis becoming a fan of a group which sails as close to a hate site as this
WE DENOUNCE KEITH HARBINSON & JIM ALLISTER OF TRADITIONAL UNIONIST VOICE AS COWARDS, TRAITORS, LUNDIES AND BIG GIRLS’ BLOUSES FOR THEIR GROVELING “APOLOGY” TO GURU MAGGOTS!
Yesterday, the museum’s director, Dr Pat Wallace said the psalter was so rare and important it now ranks among the top 10 of the tens of thousands of objects in the national collection. It will form the centrepiece of a permanent exhibition in a room of its own expected to open by “early summer 2011” at the museum’s Kildare Street galleries. Dr Wallace said the discovery was “more important for Ireland than the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls” had been for biblical scholars and has changed our views about how ancient Irish manuscripts were produced. He added: “We never thought anything like this would ever be found.”
The psalter was found on the afternoon of July 20th, 2006, by Eddie Fogarty, a workman who was operating a mechanical digger.
He spotted the book in the bucket of his digger and contacted the bog’s owners, Kevin and Patrick Leonard, who gathered the fragments and covered them with wet peat before notifying the staff of the National Museum.
A specialist team that arrived at the scene discovered that the psalter had fallen open with lines from Psalm 83 clearly visible.
Hmm… I’m not convinced it had “fallen open”
And before we have a re-run of the international furore which accompanied the original discovery there’s an important clarification which the report omits. The archived statement from the museum doesn’t appear to be available, but the relevant quote is recorded in the comments here.
The Director of the National Museum of Ireland, Dr. Patrick F. Wallace, would like to highlight that the text visible on the manuscript does NOT refer to wiping out Israel but to the ‘vale of tears’.
This is part of verse 7 of Psalm 83 in the old latin translation of the Bible (the Vulgate) which, in turn, was translated from an original Greek text would have been the version used in the medieval period. In the much later King James version the number of the Psalms is different, based on the Hebrew text and the ‘vale of tears’ occurs in Psalm 84. The text about wiping out Israel occurs in the Vulgate as Psalm 82 = Psalm 83 (King James version).
14. I now wish to propose to you some concrete initiatives to address the situation.
At the conclusion of my meeting with the Irish bishops, I asked that Lent this year be set aside as a time to pray for an outpouring of God’s mercy and the Holy Spirit’s gifts of holiness and strength upon the Church in your country. I now invite all of you to devote your Friday penances, for a period of one year, between now and Easter 2011, to this intention. I ask you to offer up your fasting, your prayer, your reading of Scripture and your works of mercy in order to obtain the grace of healing and renewal for the Church in Ireland. I encourage you to discover anew the sacrament of Reconciliation and to avail yourselves more frequently of the transforming power of its grace.
Particular attention should also be given to Eucharistic adoration, and in every diocese there should be churches or chapels specifically devoted to this purpose. I ask parishes, seminaries, religious houses and monasteries to organize periods of Eucharistic adoration, so that all have an opportunity to take part. Through intense prayer before the real presence of the Lord, you can make reparation for the sins of abuse that have done so much harm, at the same time imploring the grace of renewed strength and a deeper sense of mission on the part of all bishops, priests, religious and lay faithful.
I am confident that this programme will lead to a rebirth of the Church in Ireland in the fullness of God’s own truth, for it is the truth that sets us free (cf. Jn 8:32).
Furthermore, having consulted and prayed about the matter, I intend to hold an Apostolic Visitation of certain dioceses in Ireland, as well as seminaries and religious congregations. Arrangements for the Visitation, which is intended to assist the local Church on her path of renewal, will be made in cooperation with the competent offices of the Roman Curia and the Irish Episcopal Conference. The details will be announced in due course.
I also propose that a nationwide Mission be held for all bishops, priests and religious. It is my hope that, by drawing on the expertise of experienced preachers and retreat-givers from Ireland and from elsewhere, and by exploring anew the conciliar documents, the liturgical rites of ordination and profession, and recent pontifical teaching, you will come to a more profound appreciation of your respective vocations, so as to rediscover the roots of your faith in Jesus Christ and to drink deeply from the springs of living water that he offers you through his Church.
In this Year for Priests, I commend to you most particularly the figure of Saint John Mary Vianney, who had such a rich understanding of the mystery of the priesthood. “The priest”, he wrote, “holds the key to the treasures of heaven: it is he who opens the door: he is the steward of the good Lord; the administrator of his goods.” The Curé d’Ars understood well how greatly blessed a community is when served by a good and holy priest: “A good shepherd, a pastor after God’s heart, is the greatest treasure which the good Lord can grant to a parish, and one of the most precious gifts of divine mercy.” Through the intercession of Saint John Mary Vianney, may the priesthood in Ireland be revitalized, and may the whole Church in Ireland grow in appreciation for the great gift of the priestly ministry.
On a first reading and leaving aside the inevitable and overdue apology, the striking message of the Pope’s pastoral letter is that a clean-up is needed to strengthen the authority of the clergy, not dilute it. At the heart of his response is a basic refusal to grasp the full extent of the problem. Conservative as ever and as unquestioning as ever of the traditions, structures and authority of the Church, the Pope blames the swingin’ sixties for creating a climate of abuse, a turning away from the values of Holy Ireland. Vatican 2 wasn’t what we thought it was.
The programme of renewal proposed by the Second Vatican Council was sometimes misinterpreted and indeed, in the light of the profound social changes that were taking place, it was far from easy to know how best to implement it. In particular, there was a well-intentioned but misguided tendency to avoid penal approaches to canonically irregular situations. It is in this overall context that we must try to understand the disturbing problem of child sexual abuse, which has contributed in no small measure to the weakening of faith and the loss of respect for the Church and her teachings.
The Pope recognises no systemic problem like celibacy, only the faulty application of procedures – tucked among them, “a misplaced concern for the reputation of the Church”. But no thought here that the Church’s claim to its own elevated position might be a basic problem. The admission to a sin of clerical pride is welcome though.
Only by examining carefully the many elements that gave rise to the present crisis can a clear-sighted diagnosis of its causes be undertaken and Certainly, among the contributing factors we can include: inadequate procedures for determining the suitability of candidates for the priesthood and the religious life; insufficient human, moral, intellectual and spiritual formation in seminaries and novitiates; a tendency in society to favour the clergy and other authority figures; and a misplaced concern for the reputation of the Church and the avoidance of scandal, resulting in failure to apply existing canonical penalties and to safeguard the dignity of every person. Urgent action is needed to address these factors, which have had such tragic consequences in the lives of victims and their families, and have obscured the light of the Gospel to a degree that not even centuries of persecution succeeded in doing.
Here, in addressing the Irish bishops he comes closest to admitting cover up but is unspecific about the remedy. The idea of a wholesale reorganisation of the Church introduced after the bishops’ visit to Rome isn’t developed. This will disappoint many. However Cardinal Brady in introducing the Popes’ letter refers to it as “ one small step” and Archbishop Martin call it “a further step.” This is unlikely to satisfy many victims.
Serious mistakes were made in responding to allegations. I recognize how difficult it was to grasp the extent and complexity of the problem, to obtain reliable information and to make the right decisions in the light of conflicting expert advice. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that grave errors of judgement were made and failures of leadership occurred. All this has seriously undermined your credibility and effectiveness. I appreciate the efforts you have made to remedy past mistakes and to guarantee that they do not happen again. Besides fully implementing the norms of canon law in addressing cases of child abuse, continue to cooperate with the civil authorities in their area of competence. It is imperative that the child safety norms of the Church in Ireland be continually revised and updated and that they be applied fully and impartially in conformity with canon law.
Further resignations aren’t mentioned and as far as the Pope is concerned, we may assume that Cardinal Brady is off the hook. His role in reading out the letter on TV suggests he’s staying on. This is probably correct. The whole idea of makng boys swear an oath even if not to undying secrecy was wrong but some confidentiality is needed in such cases before effective action is taken. He was craven for failing to speak out about it earlier but this is not a hanging offence. ” Wounded healer” is a good formulation, provided he gets on with real healing and doesn’t fool himself into thinking it can be limited to more praying. Action may come as a result of a review operation to be conducted by the Vatican. A 21st century Inquisition or Star Chamber? But this is specific to Ireland and implies no wholesale reform where it is equally needed – in the opaque and overcentralised systems of the Vatican itself. “Physician, heal thyself.” The unreformed Vatican is the problem not the solution.
Furthermore, having consulted and prayed about the matter, I intend to hold an Apostolic Visitation of certain dioceses in Ireland, as well as seminaries and religious congregations. Arrangements for the Visitation, which is intended to assist the local Church on her path of renewal, will be made in cooperation with the competent offices of the Roman Curia and the Irish Episcopal Conference. The details will be announced in due course.
As usual, the laity are exhorted, but he makes no suggestion of serious democraticisation. They remain in a supporting role.
The lay faithful, too, should be encouraged to play their proper part in the life of the Church. See that they are formed in such a way that they can offer an articulate and convincing account of the Gospel in the midst of modern society (cf. 1 Pet 3:15) and cooperate more fully in the Church’s life and mission. This in turn will help you once again become credible leaders and witnesses to the redeeming truth of Christ.
This letter however unprecedented, is hardly enough unless followed up more radical measures not alluded to here. so now it’s up to the State and the people. They have to ask themsleves if they retain confidence in the authority of the clergy over aspects of education and welfare. Why leave it all up to the old man in the Vatican and his immediate cohorts, however contrite they are?
In responding to the crimes of its clergy, the Vatican has chosen to operate at an almost unimaginable level of triviality. First of all the Irish bishops fly over to Rome and MEET THE POPE. Then the Pope announces that is going to WRITE A LETTER.
I’m reminded of a passage from Sir Walter Scott’s novel COUNT ROBERT OF PARIS.
“Notwithstanding this derangement of his most sacred time, our imperial
father, who had postponed the ceremony of disrobing, so important were the
necessities of the moment, continued, until deep in the night, to hold a
council of his wisest chiefs, men whose depth of judgment might have saved
a sinking world, and who now consulted what was to be done under the
pressure of the circumstances in which they were now placed. And so great
was the urgency, that all ordinary observances of the household were set
aside, since I have heard from those who witnessed the fact, that the royal
bed was displayed in the very room where the council assembled, and that
the sacred lamp, called the Light of the Council, and which always burns
when the Emperor presides in person over the deliberations of his servants,
was for that night—a thing unknown in our annals—fed with unperfumed oil!!”
The fair speaker here threw her fine form into an attitude which expressed
holy horror, and the hearers intimated their sympathy in the exciting cause
by corresponding signs of interest…..
*LORD Foster’s architectural firm has been dropped from Boris Johnson’s project to design a new Routemaster bus, despite having won the design competition back in 2008. The Mayor’s Transport for London (TfL) has instead awarded an £8 million contract to design and build five of the new buses by 2012 to Northern Ireland-based Wrightbus.
Getting rid of the unloved bendy buses and the reintroduction of a modern version of the hop-on, hop-off Routemaster were among the central planks of Boris’s mayoral campaign in May 2008, some of which he famously conducted from the rear platform of one of the few remaining in service.
His predecessor, Ken Livingstone, was much derided for getting rid of the Routemasters in 2005, having previously said that “only a ghastly, dehumanised moron” would do such a thing.
In December 2008, the mayor announced Foster + Partners and Aston Martin as joint winners alongside bus-design firm Capoco. Foster’s design featured cream leather seating, wooden floors and a glazed roof. But a TfL spokesman has now told the Architects’ Journal: “Neither the Foster nor the Capoco concepts will be used.”
Wrightbus’s working design, which will be unveiled next month, is understood to have a limited “open” platform to the rear and two staircases.
As the Washington Post observes, the world will be watching to see if the Pope in his letter to the Irish church tears away the veil of secrecy over the full extent of clerical cover-up and admits some blame of his own. Honesty demands that Joseph Ratzinger himself, the man who for decades has been principally responsible for the worldwide cover-up, at last pronounce his own mea culpa,” says Hans Kung, the world’s most famous Catholic theologian, harrassed by JP2 for his liberal thoughts. It seems to me the Pope is between a rock and a hard place of his own making. Does the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. the old Holy Office he headed, hold all the details of the thousands of cases? If so, will he promise full disclosure? If he does, he exposes his own cover-up; if he doesn’t, he continues it. If neither as is likely, the pressure for full disclosure will be mightily boosted by anti-climax and his very authority put seriously at risk. The BBC’s Rome correspondent David Willey, no callow secularist and the veteran of six papacies “has never seen a graver crisis affecting the very credibility of the leadership of the world’s longest surviving international organisation, the Roman Catholic Church.” Willey believes the Irish letter was held up because of the emergence of the Munich case which points straight to Joseph Ratzinger himself. It’s the old Watergate question: what did he know and when did he know it?. .
The other day a senior Vatican official, Monsignor Charles Scicluna - an amiable priest from Malta who holds the title of Promoter of Justice - actually gave a lengthy official interview about how headquarters in Rome have been reacting to the huge growth in the number of cases of clerical abuse reported to the Pope during the past decade alone. He also gave numbers: during the past decade the Holy Office received details of 3,000 Catholic priests reported by their Bishops to Rome for sexual misconduct or, even worse, crimes.
Sixty per cent of these cases involved homosexual acts, 30% related to heterosexual behaviour and only 10% - or 300 priests - were, he said, “actual cases of paedophilia.” This was, of course, too many, Monsignor Scicluna admitted, but he added: “The phenomenon is not as widespread as has been believed.”
So how many cases and how many to come? 3000 reported to Rome says the reverend Promoter, “7000 in the US, 700 new cases” says the (unsourced ) Guardian report which quotes another veteran reporter and prominent lay Catholic Clifford Longley with an even more expansive verdict than Willey’s.
“It is such a big story because everything about it is extreme,” says the religious affairs author and journalist Clifford Longley. “It is the worst crisis for the Vatican since the middle ages.“Longley says the church survived nazism, fascism and communism and will outlast the EU, the UN, the US. “Bad though this crisis is, it has survived much worse. At the start of the 16th century the Vatican was little better than a shit-hole.”
There
is a sharp distinction between his attitude while a cardinal and his activities as pope that could yet leave an indelible stain on the reign of Benedict XVI. In 2005 he was elected days after declaring that the time had come to sweep “the filth” from his church. By then he had read – and was disgusted by – files on more than 3,000 clerical abuse cases that were channelled to his department by a decree issued four years earlier by John Paul II.
Most of the cases dealt with by the Vatican department in recent years resulted in the accused being removed, if not defrocked. The problem for Benedict is that, as in many other theological respects, he changed his mind. The US Vatican-watcher John Allen this week published in National Catholic Reporter an extract from the transcript of a conference in Spain that showed that, as late as November 2002, Ratzinger dismissed the American abuse scandals as the result of a “planned campaign” in the media.
I can find only one voice in the press joining the valiant band of Slugger commenters defending the Church’s behaviour, Damian Thomson in the Daily Telegraph.
Many Catholics – and I am one of them – believe that the Pope has been stitched up over this Munich case.
Abdul-Salam Mansour Al-Jehani, who was arrested on 15 March in Waterford, pleaded guilty this morning. Detective Sergeant Donal Donohue told the court he had arrested Al-Jehani, who is originally from Libya, for not having proper identity documents and charged him under the 2004 Immigration Act. The court heard he previously applied for asylum in the Netherlands under his real name but had been refused and when he came to Ireland in 2001, he applied for asylum under a false name. In October 2008, he was granted leave to remain in Ireland until July 2011.
Irish News journalist Seamus McKinney gave evidence that Mr Donnelly had been bundled to the ground by police officers as he paused to acknowledge the crowd.
Judge Bates said he had been “impressed” by Mr McKinney’s evidence.
Speaking outside the court, Mr Donnelly said it was now the fourth occasion he had been charged with assaulting police and the charges had been dismissed.
The District Judge said while there were a number of discrepancies in the evidence given by police officers during the trial, he believed the discrepancies proved that the officers had not colluded before giving their evidence.
“However, it surprises me somewhat that no-one took seriously enough Mr. Donnelly’s protestations that his arm was broken”, Mr. McElholm said.
Then after being removed from the republican wing in Magheraberry Donnelly commenced a seven Hunger Strike. This appears to have stopped today with the ending of his segregatation from other republican prisoners.
Winding Up Allowance is paid to a former Member to allow him or her to bring their Assembly business to an orderly close. Office Costs Allowance is not payable from the date on which a former Member ceases to be a Member of the Assembly. Winding Up Allowance (like OCA) can only be claimed for actual receipted expenditure. During 2009-2010 Winding Up Allowance has been paid to one Member
Burnside’s most recent accounts for not being a member of the Assembly show a claim of £15,789.09 from June 09. Francie Brollie has also received £4,929.30 thus far for Winding Up.
Suggestions that Sammy Wilson is receiving this Allowance while still a member of the Assembly seem to be inaccurate. Claims for 14p whoopee cushions may also be fiction.
The administrator of the troubled Presbyterian Mutual Society had applied for a five year extension to his firm’s contract. But following arguments from lawyers representing some of the shareholders in the PMS - that “Some of them may die, some of them may not have the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of their savings” - the application was amended to a period of 12 months. Although whether the property market will have recovered sufficiently by then is another matter… And the amendment was made “on the understanding that if within that 12-month period there was a need for an extension, and that may arise, we would come back to court and ask for an extension”.
I met up with John Arovosis and his America Blog colleague Joe Sudbury whilst here in Washington a few nights ago, and we recorded an interview in the street... It was good fun, though I failed miserably to fulfill John’s demands that I briefly explain the history of the whole problem of politics and identity in Northern Ireland… Nonetheless, it was great fun and good to meet up with John on his home beat…
As Brian notes of the church abuse cases, the state has as many questions as the church to answer about the ‘strangeness’ of their behaviours towards the church. What’s disturbing about the piecemeal way in which the story has been emerging all week is it’s implications for what’s been going on in Archdioceses outside Dublin. Regardless of where this ends up, the Archbishop of Dublin looks like a moral colossus - not simply for his brave words, but for what he has done on his own patch, even as the Cardinal loses stature day by day… Given the problem of child abuse runs so wide and so deep in Irish society (north as well as south - and as Chris points out perhaps a lot further up than that), this piece meal disclosure of dirty back room deals is the opposite of moral leadership… It requires actions from church leaders to clean out their own stables, and follow Martin’s lead. And that’s not to mention something more than pious and given the recent past, rather insincere words from our political leaders... See Matt Cooper’s column on Martin McGuinness and the throwing of 1970s stones:
McGuinness, who says he’s a Catholic, is entitled to his beliefs and to state them, but if he is judging the cardinal, then perhaps he should consider just how well he and his colleagues, through their actions, lived up to their responsibilities both to the state they profess to love and to their faith.
The Guardian’s veteran political commentator Michael White takes world weariness to new heights by predicting that the Catholic Church has the stamina to sit out the media firestorm. These things blow themselves out in time, as all Westminster watchers know. In Britain perhaps, where the abuse crisis hasn’t reached the same level but there’s no sign of a firebreak in Ireland and indeed worldwide, where the storm is gaining second wind and is now engulfing the Vatican. But balance and fairness are essential and never more so than when the cause is just. I see that the Church’s sclerotic spokemen have taken care to spell out that the latest cases under the microscope were reported to the police. This applies to the Bishop Hegarty case . Not for thre first time, the issue here implicates the State which has to answer why a private civil settlement was deemed appropriate for a rape case. Responsibility seems clearer in a 2001 rape case in Cardinal Brady’s Armagh archdiocese reported by UTV tonight. This came to trial, resulting in acquittal but also a follow up compensation settlement. According to a lengthy statement issued hastily to the Irish Times, the cardinal was not bound by the confidentiality agreement of the civil action and suspended the priest, named only as “Father X”. His identity was at first withheld to protect the victim. Then late tonight the suspended priest was named as Father Joseph Quinn. While the priest seems to have been named under pressure, making his life difficult beyond the immediate circle of those in the know, the cardinal’s position appears not to have worsened. But the case again puts him under the closest scrutiny. What other cases will come out in the Irish wash? Interestingly the Economist declares that “ removing the Irish primate, who has said he will only go if the pope requests it, could signal that the era of cover-ups is finally over ” a view which I believe fails to rise to the level of events.
Back to Mike White, who links to an interesting court ruling reported in the Daily Mail, market leader in turned-on crossness, which upholds the right of conscience of Catholic adoption agencies not to permit adoptions by gays. I must admit I’ve some sympathy with this view although I wouldn’t have any, if gays didn’t have recourse to other agencies.
Mr Justice Briggs said because an exemption in the 2007 Sexual Orientation Regulations allowed gay charities to restrict their help to homosexuals, it was right that Catholic Care should also be allowed to discriminate. The judge added that the good work carried out by the charity outweighed the importance of European anti-discrimination legislation…However, he sent the case back to the Charity Commission to reconsider in light of his ruling, which means it could yet find reasons to force the adoption agency to close.
We were fortunate that our time in Washington at the same time the government was trying to get its healthcare bill through Congress. I say ‘government’ when in actual fact the government (ie the executive office functions overseen by the White House) when - unlike the strong arm approach of LBJ (or even the Bush administration) - the President had little or nothing to do with the drafting of this bill. Rather his contribution seems to have been cast more in the strategic framing of the bill:
Chosing ‘friends’ or becoming a ‘fan’ of something on Facebook doesn’t necessarily indicate you support the views you are connecting with, for example I’m a ‘fan’ of the Orange Order.
The Irish Times reports that conservation work on the 1,200-year-old “Faddan More Psalter”, discovered in 2006 by a workman operating a mechanical digger, is almost complete. The National Museum of Ireland plans to put the eighth century religious manuscript “of staggering importance” on public display next year. From the Irish Times report
After noting the ways Stoneyford POVFB will go about getting around Parades Commission rulings by taking to the fields, I’ll also note how well behaved their colour party and speeches from the Orange Hall seemed to have been - despite the notable exception of current band leader, Paul Smith;
