Cardinal Brady allegedly tells Irish politician not to be concerned about excommunication if he votes for abortion

Mr Tom Barry TD, the Fine Gael member for Cork North West, has claimed that Cardinal Brady has told him not to be concerned about excommunication if he votes in support of Enda Kenny’s abortion bill. The Irish Examiner reports under the headline, ‘TD assured he will not be excommunicated for backing abortion laws’:

‘A Mass-going North Cork TD has been given assurances by Church leaders that he will not be excommunicated for supporting the abortion legislation.

Tom Barry, a father of three who has spoken of his anti-abortion views, wrote to the papal nuncio Archbishop Charles Brown and Cardinal Sean Brady over the Government’s abortion legislation.

Three Fine Gael parliamentary members — Peter Matthews, Fidelma Healy- Eames, and Brian Walsh — said they will not vote with the Coalition. However, up to five others, including European Minister Lucinda Creighton and Senator Paul Bradford, have been vocal in their opposition to the bill.

Mr Barry, 44, is serving his first term in the Dáil and is a Fine Gael member for Cork North West. In letters to the papal nuncio and Cardinal Brady, he raised the possibility of being excommunicated from the Church for supporting his party — even though paedophile priests in his diocese were not excommunicated when they were found to be abusing children.

“I received responses from both,” said Mr Barry. “But in particular, Cardinal Brady’s letter was very decent, telling me not be to be concerned but outlining his and the Church’s views on the matter.”

Mr Barry was concerned after anti-abortion activists handed out leaflets labelling him and another Fine Gael TD as “baby killers”. The leaflets were distributed outside his local Killavullen church as his children were on the way into Mass. Mr Barry said “a line was crossed that day” and he politely advised the activists to leave the churchyard.

Protect the Pope comment: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger gave very clear guidance to fellow cardinals that Catholic politicians who voted for the legalisation of abortion or supported abortion should first be informed of the consequences of their immoral actions, and if they persisted in supporting the killing of unborn children should be denied Holy Communion. If Tom Barry TD is telling the truth then Cardinal Brady is not following the guidance given by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. If Enda Kenny’s abortion bill passes with the support of practicing Catholic politicians it is not only those politicians who will answer for this mortal sin before God but also those Catholic prelates and clergy who abysmally failed to defend the unborn babies of Ireland and who utterly failed to convey to these politicians the gravity of the mortal sin they committed.

Finally, Tom Barry expresses outrage that he has been called a ‘baby killer’ for intending to vote for Kenny’s abortion bill, apparently a ‘line was crossed that day’. What does he think he will be doing when he votes to legalise abortion, does this father of three think he is the ‘protector of babies’, ‘the champion of unborn babies’, the ‘saviour of babies’? He obviously doesn’t want to face the reality of the situation!

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/td-assured-he-will-not-be-excommunicated-for-backing-abortion-laws-234822.html

61 comments to Cardinal Brady allegedly tells Irish politician not to be concerned about excommunication if he votes for abortion

  • Roatnev

    People can call abortion whatever they like. Its still murder.

    I hope Cardinal Brady and the Nuncio made very clear how the Church views abortion and those that vote / facilitate it and Tom Barry is convieniently ignoring the bits he doesn’t like.

  • Joseph Matthew

    Tom Barry is in denial. Is Cardinal Brady ?

  • Is the media report true though?
    Are they not trying to manipulate public opinion and influence the vote in a certain dirction, in the same way as they manipulated the public by the way they spinned the case of Savita Halappanvar’s death a last year?
    One is left wondering.

  • Wake up England

    This is extremely serious.

    Is Tom Barry telling the truth? IF he is telling the truth (and let’s face it, politicians have been known to lie) it’s a huge, huge scandal.

    A Call to Action WILL be pleased.

    Hope Rome’s watching all this.

    Cardinal Brady: have you anything to tell us Catholics about what’s going on, Your Eminence? I think we world-wide fraternity of Catholics have a right to know the truth of this matter.

  • ms Catholic state

    Cardinal Brady needs to issue a clear statement before this vote…..and for the sake of Irish children, must issue the threat of excommunication to those who vote for abortion. And let us continue to pray to Our Lady for the defeat of this malign abortion bill.

    Ever notice how the greatest bullies ie those who call for the murder of the helpless in the womb….whine the loudest at any slight. Or when the harsh truth is told about them. Pure arrogance and evil.

  • peter

    If memory serves me – the Uruguayan bishops were of the same mind as Cardinal Brady (if Brady’s letter is true).

    • Wake up England

      Peter: You sound rather pleased with developments. Are you for, or against, abortion at the moment? As we all know, your views on the Church’s doctrines are highly variable.

      As we will all doubtlessly have the benefit of your whacky opinion sooner or later anyway, let me ask you what you think about the Cardinal Brady news. (And try not to be dull.)

      • peter

        Hi Wake up England,
        I am pro life, and that includes being against abortion. If Cardinal Brady’s remarks are true, he may have stated them for pastoral reasons and I don’t know what they are.
        peter

        • Wake up England

          Peter:

          So, in your make-it-up-as-you-go-along distortion of Catholicism it’s okay to condone politicians’ support of abortion – as long as it’s for “Pastoral Reasons”.

          Ladies and Gentlemen: here we have this week’s new teaching from the whacky world of Peterism.

          • peter

            Dear Wake up England
            Please read what i wrote. I said i don’t agree with abortion and i don’t know if Brady’s remarks are true. If he said what is reported maybe he had a pastoral reason in mind – it was just a suggestion, but i have no idea why he may have stated these things. Your argument is with Brady not with me.
            peter

          • John Dare

            The thing is WUE, one of the many doubtful aspects of some opinions expressed on this site is how unattractive and vindictive they sound.

            I’m far from convinced that abortion is a good thing, but, well, lets just say that you need to consider your tone quite carefully.

          • Wake up England

            Peter,

            Is abortion Okay under some circumstances then?

            Or not?

            Please give us the benefit of (this week’s) teaching from the sect of Peterism.

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            You are the very last person I would ask for advice upon my writing style or “tone” as you call it.

            I make no apology for trying to defend the unborn. Abortion is the worst kind of child abuse. The Church condemns it outright and in all circumstances. So should you.

  • Michael Petek

    That it, then.

    Game over!

  • tro

    Looks like Cardinal Brady is running scared. I wonder why.

  • JamesM

    A line was crossed when the Irish government announced their plans to legislate for abortion.

  • John Dare

    ‘Mr Barry was concerned after anti-abortion activists handed out leaflets labelling him and another Fine Gael TD as “baby killers”. The leaflets were distributed outside his local Killavullen church as his children were on the way into Mass. Mr Barry said “a line was crossed that day” and he politely advised the activists to leave the churchyard.’

    I can see why Mr Barry would say what he did. You can disagree with him, but thats no excuse for dragging his children into the discussion.

    • Wake up England

      John Dare

      You say Let’s not drag children into the discussion about abortion!!

      Is this some sick and twisted attempt at humour?

      I consider your comment to be extremely evil.

      • John Dare

        I agree WUE, no one should. So why did they?

        • Wake up England

          John Dare

          I am pleased you recognise your former comment as extremely evil ( “I agree WUE” you say).

          Children are seminal to abortion. Without them there would be no need for abortion.

          Doubtless you will be able to remind me who said:

          Have you ever noticed that all “pro” abortion supporters have already been born?

    • ms Catholic state

      Sadly John…..other people’s children will be dragged into abortion….fatally. It is incumbent upon all Catholics and especially Cardinal Brady to put this bluntly to the likes of Mr Barry….who seems full of concern for himself and his own children….but not an iota for other unborn children. Isn’t that hypocrisy at the very least?!

      • John Dare

        Maybe it is, but see my question above – ‘would you have stood in front of the lads children and told him that he is a murderer’.

        • Wake up England

          By “The Lad” do you mean Tom Barry, aged 44? What an odd way of describing him.

          • John Dare

            Depends where y’come from WUE. Would you have stood in front of his children and told him that he’s a murderer?

        • Wake up England

          John Dare:

          You see, John, in the real world life is made difficult for the children of murderers and their accomplices.

          A fictitious example may illustrate my point:

          Little Johnny says to his mother “Where’s Daddy gone?”. His mother may or may not tell Johnny the truth of the matter: that his father is doing 20 years in prison for torturing and raping and murdering a four year old girl. He crushed her skull with a blunt instrument. But little Johnny soon sees the news on the television and learns the ghastly truth about his father. Then his school friends all ask searching questions of little Johnny about his dad. Little Johnny has a rough few months at school.

          The policeman who arrested Johnny’s father lives nearby; so does the reporter for the local paper who first suspected something was wrong; so do the murdered victim’s family. Little Johnny feels uncomfortable whenever he sees one of them; they look at him in a funny way.

          Who’s at fault John Dare? The father? Or the people who discovered he was a murderer and brought him to justice?

          MORAL: If you are a parent think most carefully about how your own immoral behaviour may impact on your wife, children and family.

          I feel far sorrier for the children who are crushed to death in their mothers’ wombs than I do for a moment of awkwardness caused to the living children of abortion-supporting so called “Catholic” members of Parliament.

          And so yes, John Dare, to answer your question. Yes.

          No doubt you would have hummed and haa’d and fiddled with your buttons, staying schtumm?

          Sad fact: children are harmed by abortion; it’s child abuse. So don’t support it.

          • John Dare

            WUE, thanks for the reply, and no I wouldn’t have discussed it in front of them.

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            Please will YOU now answer MY question above:

            “Who’s at fault? The father, or the people who discovered he was a murderer and brought him to justice?”

          • John Dare

            No thanks WUE; I was talking about courtesy, not principles. I’ll stick at that.

          • Wake up England

            Well John Dare

            What a surprise.

            As long as there’s no breach of etiquette and no-one’s made to feel awkward all will be well.

            Courtesy wins over child-abuse, you seem to think!

            So everything’s hunky-dory as long as we all say please and thank-you (unless you happen to be the baby being ripped out of its mother’s womb, that is).

            You appal me John Dare; and many others who read this blog.

          • John Dare

            There’s a time and a place for everything WUE.

          • Wake up England

            No John Dare

            There is no “time” or “place” for abortion.

            If an MP publicly supports abortion and then goes to a Catholic church with his family what does he expect? Trying to use his own children as a “human shield” against valid criticism is sick.

            Your trouble is that your priorities are quite wrong; and you do not appear to be able to tell right from wrong.

          • John Dare

            You’re not an accountant are you WUE?

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            I cannot imagine why you should think me an accountant. Another weird comment from you.

            If anyone’s remotely interested in me my name’s W.L. Weber; I’m Anglo-Saxon English, a practising Catholic layman; and my family came from Bavaria to London in 1850. For those interested, I happen to be a lifelong homosexual. I believe in God and all his Holy Church teaches, because he has said it and His word is true.

            I really don’t think my occupation is any of your business, do you? Rather bad manners to ask, in fact (as you’re so keen on etiquette). Asking”What do you do for a living” is considered gauche in civilised circles, didn’t you know?

          • Deacon Nick Donnelly

            Wake Up England, thank you for your honesty, which I expect to be treated with courtesy and respect by readers of Protect the Pope, especially homosexual activists and secularists. Deacon Nick.

          • John Dare

            Well that counts me out WUE; I’m not from civilised circles. Thanks for the chat.

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            Best not to lecture other people in manners, then. Although one ought not to be surprised, I suppose, given your penchant for holding-forth on subject about you know seemingly very little.

  • Good Jesus, have mercy. This is terrible!

  • Damian

    Ok now I am confused, (probably my fault I admit) but I am interested to know does voting in support of Enda Kenny’s abortion bill constitute “formal cooperation” as described in the Catechism?

    2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.
    The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life.
    “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,”76 “by the very commission of the offense,”77 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.78

    • Lynda

      In my opinion, if legalising the killing of unborn children in a given jurisdiction is not formal cooperation in all the abortions carried out under and by virtue of that law, then nothing is. The appeasement by Bishops makes me physically ill.

      • Wake up England

        My dear Lynda:

        Weird, don’t you think, that Damian can ask such a peculiar question when the answer’s so glaringly obvious.

        Perhaps he’s got another agenda…………..

    • Michael Petek

      Voting for abortion presupposes that it is not a sin, and whoever denies that it is a grave sin is a heretic and is excommunicated for that reason.

    • Wake up England

      Damian

      Of course it’s “Formal Co-operation”. How can anyone possibly doubt it?

      What a strange question, Damian.

    • Nicolas Bellord

      Just to clarify. “latae sententiae” means automatic excommunication i.e. you excommunicate yourself and it does not need a Bishop to do this for you. If they vote for the bill and thereby excommunicate themselves in such a public manner then no priest should give them communion. We will see!

      • Damian

        @Nicholal Bellord, thank you, that was my understanding of “latae sententiae” and hence my confusion. @WUE, I personally have no doubt that voting in favour constitutes “Formal Cooperation” I was raising the issue it seems to being interpreted in a manner at odds with church teaching.

  • Hopefully whether he makes a ‘clear’ statement or not at the eleventh hour, Brady will be at the receiving end of the Bergoglio broom along with the Curia and all the other rotten eggs! It’s time for a clean sweep!

  • AsItIs

    My usual comment to this type of report–
    The Second Message JUNE 18, 1965. GARABANDAL

    Many cardinals, many bishops and many priests are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them. Less and less importance is being given to the Eucharist. You should turn the wrath of God away from yourselves by your efforts.

    If you ask for His forgiveness with sincere hearts, He will pardon you. I, your mother, through the intercession of Saint Michael the Archangel, ask you to amend your lives.

  • Lionel (Paris)

    Appalling!

  • Same old, same old

    If you are going to condemn Cardinal Brady for not taking any action against Tom Barry then should you not also condemn Pope Francis if he takes no action against Barry or Brady or even both?

    • Wake up England

      Same-old boring nonsense:

      You quite obviously have no idea of how the Catholic Church organises itself.

      Would you blame The Queen for a maverick mayor in Brighton who should never have been appointed?

      Pope Francis has only been in office for four months (less actually). What a silly comment.

      • John Dare

        How are senior appointments made?

      • same old, same old

        My ignorance of how the Catholic Church organises itself is as nothing compared to your ignorance of the British constitution.

        The Queen does not appoint the Mayor of Brighton nor does she appoint the people who do appoint.

        And my point about the Pope has nothing to do with whether he has been in office for one day or 40 years. It was about his future intentions and actions and not what he has done in the past.

        • Wake up England

          Well, Same-old

          Just let my reach for my crystal ball and have a look at what the Pope’s going to be doing in the months ahead. Oh dear, can’t see anything. Sorry.

          The Papal Nuncio makes recommendations fro episcopal appointments to the relevant dicastry within the Holy See.

          My comment about The Queen is quite obviously analogous. Somewhat dim not to identify analogy immediately; it’s a basic tool of philosophical debate – rather than your favoured technique of arguing the hind legs off donkeys with (same old) repetitive droning-on and on.

  • Same old, same old

    Who appoints the cardinals? Do keep up.

    • Wake up England

      Same old: You’ve now got so far away from your original point, you’ve obviously confused yourself. You’re the one who should try to “keep up”. Just exactly what point are you trying to make? Or are you just gushing on for the crack of it?

  • Manus

    I have received the following message sent from the Cardinal’s office:

    From: “Michael Toner”
    To:
    Sent: Tuesday, 2 July, 2013 12:36:03 PM

    “Dear Manus,

    I write on behalf of Cardinal Brady to say that he has written to Mr Tom Barry, TD, clarifying that he had given him no assurances whatsoever and making clear the teaching of the Church as outlined by Blessed John Paul II in the Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae).

    Yours sincerely,

    (Rev) Michael C Toner
    (Diocesan Secretary)”

    Manus adds that Evangelium Vitae states:
    The 1917 Code of Canon Law punished abortion with excommunication. 69 The revised canonical legislation continues this tradition when it decrees that “a person who actually procures an abortion incurs automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication”.70 The excommunication affects all those who commit this crime with knowledge of the penalty attached, and thus includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would not have been committed.

    Canon Law:
    Canon 915:
    Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

    Canon 916:
    A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

    Canon 1398:
    A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>