Tuesday, June 29, 2010

John Cooney and John Charles McQuaid

The following is the introduction to the section on my website http://www.irishsalem.com re John Cooney


John Cooney and John Charles McQuaid

John Cooney is currently Religious Affairs correspondent for the Irish Independent, having held a similar position in the Irish Times during the 1970s. He is best known for his 1999 biography of John Charles McQuaid who was Archbishop of Dublin from 1940 to 1972 and was Ireland's best known Catholic prelate since independence. In the book "John Charles McQuaid: Ruler of Catholic Ireland", Cooney depicts him as a homesexual paedophile. The allegation is rejected by all historians and almost all other journalists (with Irish Times jounalist Fintan O'Toole being a partial exception.) Even historians who praise the remainder of the book, say that the child abuse allegations are nonsence and that Cooney should have omitted them. However the controversy did not prevent Cooney's appointment to the Religious Affairs post in the Independent in 2004.

See also the section "John Charles McQuaid" in the "Accused Individuals" part of the website.

Sunday, June 27, 2010

"Bishop" Pat Buckley, Cardinal Cahal Daly and Father Vincent McKinley

"Bishop" Pat Buckley

This is part of a discussion on "Bishop" Pat Buckley and Cardinal Cahal Daly on the Politics.ie website in June 2010

Original post by Kilbarry1 [Myself] on 15 June 2010

"Bishop" Pat Buckley and Cardinal Cahal Daly
The following are a couple of extracts from "Bishop" Pat Buckley's website. They claim to explain why, in 1986, the then Bishop Cahal Daly dismissed him as a Catholic curate from the diocese of Down and Connor (based in Belfast). The reason seems to be strongly linked to "Bishop Pat's" difficulties with the late Father Vincent McKinley. Indeed if Father McKinley were still alive he might well raise some legal issues about the following:

Daly became the Bishop of Down and Connor (Belfast) in late 1982. Bishop Pat had been in St. Peter’s Cathedral Belfast as curate since August 1978.

When Daly took over Belfast he asked all the priests in the Diocese to write a report for him about the state of things in the Diocese. Over a 4 week period Bishop Pat prayed about this and eventually posted Daly a very honest and comprehensive report on the 7th November 1982. In his report Bishop Pat made the following comments and suggestions:

1. That Daly should abandon his luxurious palace in Belfast’s stockbroker belt and come and live at his cathedral among the poor as would Christ.

2. That Daly should renovate the Diocese’s churches in line with Vatican 11

3. That rules about marriages etc be implemented on a Diocesan level so that people would not be encountering difficult priests abusing their power.

4. That the laity should be more involved in every aspect of Church life.

5. That priests should be appointed on merit and not by age seniority.

6. That Daly and the Church should do more to reach out to the alienated youth.

About this time the Parish Priest of the Cathedral Father Vincent McKinley was bullying both the priests in the Cathedral Presbytery and the people of the parish. Bishop Pat reported this to Daly.

As a result Father McKinley jumped on Bishop Pat one night in the presbytery dining room and physically beat and kicked him repeatedly!

Bishop Pat reported this to Bishop Daly who replied: “Father McKinley is a saint and you have a persecution complex”. Bishop Pat later regretted not calling in the police.

Bishop Pat was banned from eating in the cathedral priest’s dining room and had to eat in the kitchen with the lady housekeeper. At night when Father McKinley would get drunk he would kick Bishop Pat’s bedroom door and sing pornographic rugby songs about “ w***ing” and “f***g” !!! He was determined to break Bishop Pat’s spirit.

When Bishop Pat later organised a big clean up of the infamous Divis Flats complex which surrounded the presbytery Father McKinley stood at the presbytery window giving Bishop Pat and the parishioners the 2 finger “f*** off” sign.

Daly and the clergy became furious with Bishop Pat. In February 1983 Daly banished Bishop Pat to the furthest parish in the Diocese – Attical – on the top of the Mountains of Mourne. .........
"Bishop" Pat seems to have been watching too much Father Ted but there is more to it than that!

Also Posted by Kilbarry1 on 15 June 2010
This is from my own website and may provide a better explanation of why Father McKinley fell out with Bishop Pat:

Note regarding Father Vincent McKinley and Gerry Fitt from Debate in British House of Lords, 17 May 1985

Annie Maguire - Hansard HL Deb 17 May 1985

vol 463 cc1384-408

Lord Fitt
  rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will reopen the case of Annie Maguire and her family who were convicted and sentenced in 1976 ...........................................

Sir John first took an interest in this case not through me but through a Unionist lady whom he knew in Northern Ireland. This lady was acquainted with a Catholic priest from St. Peter's Church in West Belfast. This Catholic priest, whose name was Father Vincent McKinley, made the headlines as a result of another terrorist act. In that case a terrorist by the name of Delaney carried a bomb on a train from Lisburn to Dublin. The bomb exploded prematurely and killed the terrorist himself and three or four innocent people. [This was in January 1980.] When the remains of that terrorist's body were found, his relatives wanted him to be buried from St. Peter's Church. Father Vincent said, "I'm not letting the remains of that terrorist inside the door of my church". That shows how opposed Father Vincent is to acts of terrorism.

That action by Father Vincent caused great controversy, and he went through an awful time for a number of months because he refused to allow the remains of that terrorist in his church. So Father Vincent knew the Unionist lady of whom I spoke, and she then spoke to Sir John Biggs-Davison. .......................
Annie Maguire (Hansard, 17 May 1985)

Original post by michaelhenry 
was there any history of funny goings on with these two.

Reply by Kilbarry1
to michaelhenry
I would say that Father McKinley was not the kind of man who would enjoy "Bishop" Pat's company. The bit about Buckley being banished from the priests' dining room and having to eat in the kitchen with the lady housekeeper is probably true. Some of the rest comes from "Father Ted".

HOWEVER - moving from farce to tragedy - Father McKinley's difficulties with the residents of Divis Flats were NOT caused by his failure to join Buckey's "big clean up" operation.

Originally Posted by Cruimh (quoting Post by Kilbarry1)
"Indeed if Father McKinley were still alive he might well raise some legal issues."

And what has this rubbish to do with Current affairs? To cause trouble If there is a possibility of legal issues why post it on this site ?

Reply by Kilbarry1 to Cruimh
Father McKinley is dead and I am criticising Pat Buckley not him. It is "Bishop" Buckley who would be likely to have legal problems if Fr McKinley was still alive. However the Bishop is frequently in the news and the Irish Times and Sunday Tribune definitely consider him to be part of current affairs.

Originally Posted by George Washington
This carry on has been referenced in one of Martin Dillon's books before, "God and the Gun" I think

Reply by Kilbarry1 to George Washington
I didn't read the book but even checking out the Internet, I came across this quotation from An Phoblacht dated 28 January 1999 regarding the IRA man who was killed in the explosion in in January 1980:
"Under pressure from the British the Catholic Church attempted to deny the Delaney family their right to bury their son as a republican. His coffin draped in the Irish flag would not be permitted into the Corpus Christi church.

Fr Des Wilson interceded however, exposed their hypocrisy and officiated himself in the family home."

If this is what republicans were saying nearly 20 years later, you can imagine the pressure Fr McKinley was under in 1980.

The media are prepared to take "Bishop" Pat seriously (e.g. in reporting his recent Gay Marriage), because they have the same attitude to the Church that he has. The truth does not matter in their eyes

Original post by Cruimh
Link to this "Story" in either the IT or Sunday Tribune this year then ?
If not then you are trolling.

My Reply (as Kilbarry1) to Cruimh
I don't mean that this particular story was carried in the Irish Times or Sunday Tribune this year. However the story of Bishop Pat's On-Off-On-Again gay marriage was carried by both - and by lots of other "serious" newspapers as well.

The following is a summary:
Bishop" Pat Buckley, Cardinal Cahal Daly, Cardinal Desmond Connell, Eduardo Yango, Fr Vincent McKinley

In January 2010 "Bishop" Pat gave an exclusive interview to the Sunday Tribune in which he proclaimed his "deep love" for his Filipino boyfriend Eduardo Yango (32) and announced that they would be married on 8 February. Other media were referred to Max Clifford, who was handling publicity surrounding the nuptials. His announcement received world-wide publicity - not least in his boyfriend's homeland. However on the appointed day he had to announce a postponement.
"We have had 10 days of intense media interest and, while I have been used to dealing with the media for 25 years, Eduardo has no experience of the media and has found the intrusion very stressful. He is also a very private person and comes from a culture in the Philippines where family and personal issues are handled very discreetly and privately.”
(He had apparently forgotten to tell Edwardo about Max Clifford.)
They were eventually married in March - albeit with much reduced media coverage.

The above is essentially a non-story but the fact that "respectable" newspapers gave it huge coverage says a lot about the state of mind of our up-market journalists. "Bishop" Pat is not just an isolated idiot.

Query by Cruimh
So why have you posted this bilge about supposed events of over 30 years ago in current affairs?

My Reply to Cruimh
"Supposed" events? When Hansard's account of a House of Lord's debate is in basic agreement with An Phoblacht (regarding Father McKinley), then we are talking about real events. "Bishop" Pat is obviously talking through his hat. Yet newspapers like the Irish Times, Sunday Tribune and Belfast Telegraph STILL take him seriously and even run "exclusives" on his gay marriage that could be published unchanged in the News of the World. (The Sunday Tribune exclusive was entitled  Rebel Cleric's Gay Marriage Will 'Infuriate' Church Heads - by their Northern Editor Suzanne Breen)
This says a great deal about the corruption of the "respectable" media and that is definitely part of current affairs.

Incidentally the fact that the media takes Buckley seriously does not do the man himself any good in the long run. After the death of Cardinal Daly the Irish Times published the following letter from Bishop Pat under the heading "Legacy of Cardinal Daly" (Jan 13, 2010)

Cardinal Cahal Daly, died 31 December 2009

Legacy of Cardinal Daly - The Irish Times - Wed, Jan 13, 2010

Madam, – I am a victim of Cardinal Cahal Daly, and I have found his death and recent glorification in The Irish Times and elsewhere very traumatic and painful.

By summarily dismissing me as curate of Larne and from the Diocese of Down and Connor in the summer of 1986 Cahal Daly abused his authority over me.

As a result, I developed the stress-related and chronic medical condition Crohn’s disease and have suffered ecclesiastical exile with its attendant emotional and mental anguish for 23 years.
I was given two reasons for my dismissal.

One, I was guilty of being critical of my church and ecclesiastical superiors.

Second, I was guilty of expressing those criticisms to journalists and in the media.

In the summer of 1986, I learned of my removal from Larne and the name of my replacement not from Cahal Daly personally but from the morning news on RTÉ Radio 1 as I travelled in my car.
Each year since my “sacking”, I wrote to Cardinal Daly suggesting that he and I be reconciled before going to meet our maker. My letters were ignored.

At the time of my “sacking” Father Brendan Smyth was ministering in Down and Connor with the knowledge and consent of its then bishop, Cahal Daly.

Cahal Daly was also a senior member of the Irish Bishops Conference from 1967 to 1996, all during the time when the Irish bishops were dismissing the claims of victims, were not informing the Garda of priest abusers and were insuring their dioceses against possible claims by victims.

As he “lay in state” in my former parish, St Peter’s Cathedral, Belfast, a parishioner in her 80s telephoned me to let me know that she was thinking of me at what must be a painful time for me.
She finished her call with the words: “I wonder how many secrets he has taken with him to his grave”?
– Yours, etc,

The Oratory,
Co Antrim.

Further Query by Cruimh
How does a letter from 5 months ago have any bearing on whether or not this bilge from 30 years ago belongs in current affairs ?

My Reply to Cruimh
The main point I am making is that our "respectable" media are grossly corrupt and insist on treating the doings of an idiot as serious news. They publish tripe that would not be out of place in the News of the World. The point of the letter is that by encouraging "Bishop" Pat, they are not doing him any favours e.g.
I am a victim of Cardinal Cahal Daly, and I have found his death and recent glorification in The Irish Times and elsewhere very traumatic and painful. By summarily dismissing me as curate of Larne and from the Diocese of Down and Connor in the summer of 1986 Cahal Daly abused his authority over me. As a result, I developed the stress-related and chronic medical condition Crohn’s disease and have suffered ecclesiastical exile with its attendant emotional and mental anguish for 23 years.

(I quoted from Buckley's current website regarding Cardinal Daly and Father McKinley to demonstrate that Buckley is an idiot.)

Perhaps this thread could be put under "Media" but the corruption of the Irish Times, Tribune etc IS part of current affairs.

Still another query from Cruimh.
How does posting tripe from a non-media website about events in 1978 qualify as "Current affairs as presented by the  "respectable" media " ?

My FINAL Reply to Cruimh
The "tripe" from Buckley's current website demonstrates that he is an imbecile - and this has been obvious for a very long time. The fact that "respectable" media take him seriously and publish "exclusives" about him worthy of the UK gutter press, is an indication that our serious newspapers are descending to the level of the News of the World. THAT certainly qualifies as a "Current Affair

On a related  note the following is from the Sunday Tribune article on Bishop Pat on 31st January last:
When asked how his marriage would be viewed in loyalist Larne, Buckley said: "Larne is 83% Protestant, and has a fair share of Free Presbyterians. But I've lived here 25 years and served on the council, so I suppose I've become part of the furniture.

I sometimes wonder about that.
Are the Protestants of Larne
(a) very tolerant OR
(b) Bishop Pat is so far off their radar that they couldn't care less OR
(c) they see Bishop  Pat as a Useful Idiot who discredits the Catholic Church.

So far as our "respectable" journalists are concerned, it is definitely (c) but they degrade themselves in the process!

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Bishop Willie Walsh, Patsy McGlinchey and Archbishop Martin

Bishop Walsh Supports Archbishop's Courageous Comments

The Clare People, Tuesday, 11 May 2010

Bishop Willie Walsh has come out in support of Archbishop Diarmuid Martin's comments that strong forces in the Catholic Church wanted the truth about clerical abuse scandals kept hidden. “I would agree I think generally with what the Archbishop was saying that our handling of child sex abuse issue in the past was catastrophic and that there is still a good deal of denial,” the Bishop told RTE. “There is a crisis of faith in Ireland and I think we are not fully facing up to it. I think in many ways there is denial in relation to the issue of child sex abuse and there’s denial in relation to the crisis of faith. I think it was a very powerful and courageous talk by the Archbishop and largely I would agree.” Bishop Walsh said he had also been discouraged with the response of the church hierarchy following the child abuse inquiries. He also suggested that if he had been a bishop in the 1970s he would have made a catastrophic mess of handling child abuse allegations.


The folllowing Comment was first published and then removed by The Clare People. Perhaps Bishop Willie, who is so careful not to hurt the feelings of false accusers by defending the innocent, is touchy when people criticise his own behaviour.

Willie Walsh has been a great media favourite since he became Bishop of Killaloe in 1995. He has frequently denounced the failures of the institutional Church in dealing with child abuse, apologised to victims, gone on pilgrimages of repentence etc.

Oddly enough he HAS "made a catastrophic mess of handling child abuse allegations" and it wasn't in the 1970s either! I am referring to Bishop Willie's patronage of a school where dozens of teachers were falsely accused of child abuse and for 13 years the Bishop did – and said – nothing.

Briefly Patrick McGlinchey was teaching in a school for mentally handicapped children when one mother accused him of child abuse in March 1997. (That was 2 years after Walsh became Bishop). There was an immediate outbreak of hysteria and practically every male teacher in the school was accused. One pupil accused 17 teachers, another accused 31 and McGlinchey himself was accused by 45 pupils. He was physically assaulted by parents and his solicitor was also accused of child abuse. After a 19 day trial in 2002, the jury acquitted him in less than 2 hours. However the school refused to take him back and he had to get an order in the High Court in May 2009 quashing his suspension. The High Court had to order the school to hold an inquiry.

40 people took CIVIL proceedings against Mr. McGlinchey. Half of them were struck out in 2000, several more after his acquital and the last ones in January 2010 i.e. 13 years after the initial allegations.

For all these 13 years Bishop Willlie remained silent. He is great at taking part in campaigns that the liberal media approve of, but condemning false allegations of child abuse does not come into that category. After all the school was founded by nuns and one of the originally accused was also a nun. That’s not something that Bishop Willie wanted to get involved in! It remains to be seen if his successor will do any better.

I have dealt with this issue on my website www.irishsalem.com The link is
http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/accused/patsy-mcglinchey/ ...

Rory Connor , June 01, 2010

Friday, June 11, 2010

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin

I have just finished my profile of Diarmuid Martin on www.irishsalem.com - well for the time being anyway). This is the Introduction:

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin

Diarmuid Martin was consecrated Archbishop of Dublin in April 2004 - about the same time that John Cooney was appointed Religious Affairs correspondent for the Irish Independent. He seems never to have made any comment on Cooney's allegation that Martin great predecessor John Charles McQuaid was a homosexual paedophile. In fact the two seem to have a very friendly relationship - based on the Archbishop's efforts to tackle the issue of child sex abuse by Catholic clergy. The Archbishop's method seems to be to accept ANY allegation at face value and treat a priest as guilty until proven innocent.

The Archbishop has also made friends with liberal journalists by declining to criticise homosexual acts or the Government's proposal to give "gay" civil unions a status very close to marriage.

Shortly after he became Archbishop, Diarmuid Martin held a two- hour meeting with Kathy O'Beirne who told of rapes, beatings and torture she said she had witnessed some 30 years before in a Magdalene Laundry. After the meeting she told the Irish Independent that she and the other girls in care were subject to regular abuse at the hands of religious members and lay people in the laundries. She herself was regularly beaten. One night, she said she watched in horror as a 14-year-old friend was repeatedly raped by five men. However she was now confident that, with the help of Archbishop Martin, the truth will be told. "When I saw him on Wednesday, a feeling of great relief came over me. I could see the compassion and pain on his face," she said.

Kathy O'Beirne was never in any Magdalene institution. The Archbishop's "compassion" for a false accuser is the obverse of his complete lack of concern for his falsely accused priests.

In June 2007, Paul Anderson was convicted of falsely accusing a priest of raping him while giving him prayer tuition 25 years previously. In a statement to the court the priest said that as a result of Anderson and the One-in-Four group going to the Archbishop of Dublin, he was instantly suspended from ministry. "Without any due process, my diocese - in this Guantanamo Bay reaction - had me stand aside from my work as a priest. I had to leave my house and home and stay with family and friends, and I lost almost a year out of my pastoral work." He described the allegations against him as being like a case of armed robbery, with the accuser using his name and reputation in order to extract money from the Church.

The most egregious example is the Archbishop's treatment of retired auxiliary Bishop Dermot O'Mahony. The Archbishop removed Bishop O'Mahony from his position as director of the archdiocese's pilgrimage to Lourdes on the basis that “I regret that you did not express any public clarification or remorse or apology” (letter dated 2 December 2009). However Bishop O’Mahony had sent a statement to the Archbishop’s Director of Communications Annette O’Donnell on 27 October 2009 which concluded : “I profoundly regret that any action or inaction of mine should have contributed to the suffering of even a single child. I want to apologise for my failures from the bottom of my heart”. The statement was not published by the Communications Office but Annette O'Donnell confirmed that the Archbishop had seen it. He made no apology to Dermot O'Mahony and indeed continued to criticise him.

In November 2009 the Archbishop invited the Bishop of Galway Martin Drennan who had previously been an auxiliary Bishop of Dublin to "consider his position" after the publication of the Murphy Report. While the Report mentions Bishop Drennan, it makes no criticism whatsoever of his conduct! In order to consolidate his status as a media hero, does the Archbishop want to hand the media as many heads as possible on a platter?

On 10 May 2010 the Archbishop gave a speech to the Knights of Columbanus in which he spoke about the way "Church academics and church publicists can today calmly act as pundits on the roots of the sexual abuse scandals in the church as if they were totally extraneous to the scandal". He gave no indication of whom he meant. There was a mysterious passage that made media headlines about "strong forces which would prefer that the truth (about child abuse) did not emerge." What "forces"? Archbishop Martin did not provide the answer. Pundits speculated that he meant "forces" like Cardinal Sean Brady, and even the Pope himself. It is more likely that he meant his own critics like Bishop O' Mahony and Bishop Drennan. Perhaps this is the Archbishop's way of getting back at them while generating publicity for himself? Even some of his media supporters described the speech as meaningless and child abuse watchdog Ian Elliot indicated that he did not know what Martin was talking about because "the Archbishop's knowledge exceeds mine"!

However an article by John Cooney in the Irish Independent on 20 June 2009 may point to the shape of things to come. Cooney quotes Martin as acknowledging that, when he was a young seminarian in the 1960s, he knew about physical abuse in Artane and asks "Why was good guy Martin silent so long". Perhaps John Cooney who slandered Martin's great predecessor John Charles McQuaid, will decide that the current Archbishop has served his purpose as a media stooge?

In the meantime on Easter Sunday 4 April 2010, the Archbishop was confronted and heckled by former residents of institutions run by religious when he arrived to say Mass at the Pro-Cathedral. About a dozen protested outside the cathedral after having draped its railings in pairs of infants’ shoes, with black ribbons attached. John Ayers, who “was beaten every day to make me a Catholic”, told the Archbishop: “Your church is not welcome in my country any more. It is a Nazi religion. I want it to leave my country, I want you to leave my country.” In May Mr Ayres went on to hold a hunger strike outside the Archbishops house in Drumcondra and lined the road outside with children's shoes to symbolise the victims of institutional abuse.

It seems possible that the Archbishop will be devoured by the demons he released with his combination of indiscriminate apologies AND his failure to defend the innocent.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

My website www.irishsalem.com

The following is from the Home Page of my website www.irishsalem.com

"This website is about false allegations of child abuse - mainly those directed at the Catholic Church in Ireland.
I do not dispute that there are real cases of abuse of children by clerics but my contention is that these have been used as an excuse to launch a witch-hunt. This witch-hunt has now spread to every part of our society so that every teacher, doctor, nurse, social worker etc has to take specific precautions to guard against becoming the target of a false accusation. In practise an accused person is treated as guilty until proven innocent so the allegation has a devastating effect on his career and personal life. People are routinely assaulted or their homes attacked as soon as they are accused. Relations between adults and children have broken down as no unrelated adult can afford to be seen alone with a child. (Thus a child who is being abused at home cannot speak privately to his teacher about his problems!). Although we are all now affected by this hysteria, it started in the early 1990s as an attack on the Catholic Church."