Reader comments · Anti-gay Cardinal Keith O’Brien quits post following allegations of inappropriate behaviour · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Anti-gay Cardinal Keith O’Brien quits post following allegations of inappropriate behaviour

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Jamie Caffiera 25 Feb 2013, 11:21am

    Bye bye Mr Self-Loathing Hypocrite…

    1. Mike Ayres 25 Feb 2013, 1:31pm

      Goodbye and good riddance to a useless bigot.

    2. Actually Keith O’Brien was immediately fired.

  2. Laughing my ass off. Anyone care to join me in a rousing chorus of Another One Bites the Dust?

    1. Anannother one bites ananother one bites. Another one bites the dust.

  3. Why am I not shocked by these allegations? It’s always the ones who shout the loudest that have the most to hide.

    1. You’re absolutely right!

  4. The 75 year old bigot and hypocrite has resigned! First the evil 85 year old kaiser decides to step down, now this piece of great news! Aahhhh another beautiful day!

  5. That There Other David 25 Feb 2013, 11:30am

    Sadly all this will achieve is for the Vatican to now stop its investigation into the allegations. They’ve got the perfect excuse now he’s no longer working for them.

    Yet another scandal brushed under the carpet.

    1. It has been reported that it will be heard by the procurator fiscal in Scotland, which means, if it goes ahead, that this is now a criminal matter whether the Catholic Church decides to investigate itself or not..

      1. Now THAT is excellent news! Thank you, Mike.

      2. That There Other David 25 Feb 2013, 1:01pm

        I can’t find any evidence of that Mike. Can you share your source?

        1. Google provides no results for [“Keith O’Brien” + “Procurator Fiscal”].

          I think Mike may be mistaken.

  6. So is he resigning or is he retiring (and presumably getting a pension anyways)?

    1. Catholic bishops automatically tender their resignation upon reaching the age of 75. No doubt O’Brien will enjoy a comfortable retirement all paid for by the catholic church.

    2. Jock S. Trap 25 Feb 2013, 3:29pm

      He was due to retire very soon but because of this hypocracy, of being found out he’s now resigning.

      Still as BennieM say, still comfortably paid for in retirement by his bigoted religion.

      1. He specifically refers to his retirement in his statement on the other Pink News article. This whole business has simply brought it forward. He clearly feels he’s not resigning in disgrace at all but simply retiring.

  7. I hope it doesn’t end for him there and the police were notified about the case too.

    1. It has been reported that it will be heard by the procurator fiscal in Scotland, which means, if it goes ahead, that this is now a criminal matter whether the Catholic Church decides to investigate itself or not..

  8. Maybe now the foolish anti gay people will realise that when they shout at us they are letting us all know how gay they are

  9. Great news! :D I do hope the BBC covers this properly with a reminder of all the vile, spiteful things he said so people who listened then can now see those homophobic remarks in a new light.

    Another two-faced bigot hits the dust.

    1. That There Other David 25 Feb 2013, 11:41am

      Unlikely. The BBC’s main point in the article is how this now leaves the UK without a vote at the Papal Conclave.

      As if anyone actually gives a shit about that compared to the allegations being put towards O’Brien.

      1. casparthegood 25 Feb 2013, 2:17pm

        What are the relative percentages of catholics and gays in this country overall ? They claim WE have disproprtionate influence. I for one don’t give a monkeys who rules a tiny foreign state.

    2. Unlikely to be reported by Newsround but a few retweets of this might help:–

    3. Iris, no doubt it will be covered at length by the BBC but with its own slant on it – more of a sombre coverage than an accurate one. Yesterday, its religion correspondent only added as a footnote that the Cardinal has been “quite hawkish” regarding same-sex marriage, when commenting on the BBC News channel. “Quite hawkish” is the understatement of the century. If it could, the BBC would probably omit any reference to the Cardinal’s homophobic views.

    4. ...Paddyswurds 25 Feb 2013, 12:19pm

      I was hugely disappointed how Ireland’s national broadcaster, RTE studiously ignored this story all day yesterday. Whether they didn’t know about it, which I doubt or were actually ignoring it, colours them as either incompetent or out of touch with the vast majority of Irish people who have been so affected and offended by the RCCs catalogue of abuse, especially in Ireland where tens of thousands of boys and girls were raped and sadistically abused by it’s clerics for decades and probably hundreds of years…..

    5. Well, if the BBC doesn’t report this fully, including his anti-gay rhetoric, then that’s more proof their reporting of EM has been totally unbalanced. They can’t wait to report every ridiculous lie that some homophobe comes out with (often as a top news story) but anything that contradicts these lies or shows bigots up seems to be ignored.

      No doubt they’ll say ‘nothing’s been proved’ but they certainly don’t apply that rule when reporting crap from homophobes about incest being next to be legalised, no gay people wanting marriage, teachers losing their jobs, etc etc. They report every lie bigots say as facts re EM – even though none of them are proven…

      Disgusting bias.

  10. Wonder whether Vincent Nichols will be appointed as a cardinal shortly? He has the right homophobic credentials, after all.

    1. Wonder when we will learn that Nichols has been diddling the altar boys? He has the right homophobic credentials, after all.

  11. Jock S. Trap 25 Feb 2013, 11:36am

    Oh excellent…. couldn’t happen to a ‘nicer’ bloke… puke!!

    What goes around, comes around and this vile man gets what he deserves for the years of homophobia he has deliberately spread, whilst hiding this secret. The man has no shame, no morals.

    He is a hypocrite and I am pleased he has been forced to go.

    Trouble now… which bigot will replace him?

    1. Jock S. Trap 25 Feb 2013, 11:38am

      Have to add, I suspect we’re in for a rougher ride from the heads of the catholic over all this… be prepared. We all know it’ll be our fault somehow.

      They are one disgusting bunch of hypocrites!

      1. That There Other David 25 Feb 2013, 11:47am

        Every year gives us more ammunition to counter them with. This, their jangle-jangle Papal Knight, Ratzinger’s coverup of paedophilia…if they try deflecting anything towards healthy out gay people living healthy out gay lives we can easily point out that suppressing your sexuality, whether straight or gay, is the cause of these crimes. All the more reason why the Catholic Church needs to stop demanding its followers do so.

  12. Truth will out. Hypocrisy thy name is Catholicism.

  13. Ding dong, the witch is dead….. well, not quite, but that’s the last we’ll hear from her on any subject even slightly related to LGBT rights (with any luck!)

  14. An admission of guilt?

  15. ...Paddyswurds 25 Feb 2013, 11:43am

    The irony, were it not so galling is absolutely delicious. I have lost count of the number of us who last year predicted something like this. No ordinary straight self assured person could have displayed such self loathing and homophobia as Keith O’Brien displayed over the last two years. Anyone with just a smidgen of working gaydar could see that this vile excuse for a human being was the epitome of a self loathing and homophobic homosexual, the worst kind of homophobe there is and which hurt us all the more. Good riddance to this utterly detestable man and if we never hear of him again it will be too soon.

  16. Peter & Michael 25 Feb 2013, 11:48am

    What goes round, comes round to bite ! There have been many instances of an MP or religious minister spouting homophobic comments for them to turn out to be repressed, and outed by their own actions. Great news to hear this !

  17. Toby Rorvall 25 Feb 2013, 11:50am

    As the Catholic church have defended slavery, antisemitism and child abuse before they have determined that is better to be more in support of equal marriage once the support for it is too overwhelming. That seems to be the practice of the Catholic church in moral matters. They will support or oppose anything once they don’t have a choice, but to do so. In the meanwhile they will argue that one can not have a moral compass without being Catholic, and they will continue to blame others for their own indiscretions. It’s a rotten institution if there ever was one.

  18. casparthegood 25 Feb 2013, 11:57am

    My heart pumps custard for the wee bigot

  19. Ann Widdecombe will definitely choke on her dentures now if she survived yesterday’s revelations!

    And what about Jacob Rees-Mogg? I wonder how he’s feeling?HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

    1. Little Jacob will be hoping no TV cameras appear to catch his expressions at this time! His only way out would be to spout the usual Christian claptrap of “All of us have weaknesses, and, sadly, Cardinal O’Brien APPEARS to have had his. Let us pray for his soul.” Jacob has no doubt been rehearsing something like this, but he’ll be avoiding scrutiny. If the BBC had any balls, they’d be at his front door right now.

      1. The BBC at Jacob’s front door?!! Now, that’s a sight I’d like to see. ‘Little Jacob’ would be hiding under the stairs on his knees praying.

        1. He’ll get his nanny to answer the door and shoo away any nasty reporters!

    2. Actually, the thought of slimy little Rees-Mogg being discomfited rather delights me.

      1. His nanny will provide him with his dummy to suck on for consolation in these difficult times.

  20. oohh the Irony – what goes around comes around – another example of the hypercritical attitudes of organised religion –

  21. Nixi Otemba Bongers 25 Feb 2013, 12:01pm


  22. It has been reported that it will be heard by the procurator fiscal in Scotland, which means, if it goes ahead, that this is now a criminal matter whether the Catholic Church decides to investigate itself or not..

    1. Where is that being reported?

      1. Paul Halsall 26 Feb 2013, 5:02pm

        Making a pass at a 20 year old is certainly inappropriate, but is not in itself especially immoral.

        1. When you are standing in front of thousands saying anything of the sort is “wrong”, disordered” and “contributing to society’s downfall”, it most certainly is both inappropriate and highly immoral…as well as overweeningly hypocritical!

  23. Mr O’Brien, you may now go to your grave knowing that we now know what you’ve always known, that your whole life has been a worthless sham.

    Let’s hope the pearly gates don’t exist. If they do, you’re in for a difficult interview.

  24. hahahahahahahhahahhaha (pause for breath) hahahahahahahahahahaha etc

    1. On a serious note – hope the allegations are properly investigated and those making the allegations receive any support and counselling they need

      1. Yes, good point. We have to remember that if the allegations are true, then there are victims in all of this who will be needing support right now. It would have been stressful to have made the complaints, especially within a powerful hierarchal system that the accused person is/was part of.

  25. attanasio66 25 Feb 2013, 12:08pm

    One less hypocrite “in charge”. Full police investigation, please. These holy men need to face justice, and that include the bigger players resigning in Vatican…

  26. Nutjobsareeverywhere 25 Feb 2013, 12:14pm

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone !! Bye bye bigot

  27. Let’s party!

    Who could have imagined two weeks ago or two days ago! such joy! such bliss!


    1. Paul Halsall 26 Feb 2013, 5:03pm

      Making a pass at a 20 year old is certainly inappropriate, but is not in itself especially immoral.

  28. Cardinal Capone 25 Feb 2013, 12:18pm

    This all sounds like Vatican politics and manipulation.

    We have heard that for years under this authoritarian administration, only grotesquely anti-gay views will get you promoted, and priests who happen to be gay or have liberal views about it have been persecuted into hiding.

    I wonder what’s really going on.

    1. You don’t think that natural justice ever occurs in the world, Mr. Capone? You don’t think that ordinary mortals like us can ever bring about the downfall of evil persons?

  29. Good I hope he suffers – the pain this person has caused to others with his vile comments about gay people. I hope the police are investigating these claims

  30. This makes the Bigot of the year nomination from Stonewall all the more ironic!

  31. I believe the saying – Don’t let the door smack you on the arse on the way out seems appropriate.

  32. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Feb 2013, 12:22pm

    There you have it, resigning so fast means the allegations are true. Good riddance.

    Now why aren’t catholics like Widdecombe taking to the streets to demand a police investigation? Prosecute the evil bastard, throw the book at him.

    1. Re. why “decent folk” like Widdecombe haven’t taken to the streets to demand the man be investigated, yes, exactly!

      Answer: Widdecombe and suchlike are bullies who pick on the vulnerable. They balk at questioning figures of authority.

      They have NO INTEGRITY.

      But anybody who sincerely believes in fairies, angels, elves, sprites, gods, goddesses, spirits, ghosts, leprechauns, et al, has no true integrity. They are responsible for their own behaviour and they have chosen to believe in utter nonsenses.

      1. I would say they do have an integrity of sorts (the sincerity of their beliefs, however deluded they may seem to us, is not always in doubt), what they lack is objectivity combined with intelligence, and curiosity. And their sense of fairness often appears to be heavily tilted towards themselves only.

        1. Rehan, I believe that true rational integrity rules out any possibility of believe in supernatural beings of any kind.

          If one pushes oneself hard enough and demands proof for everything one believes in, i.e. if one has integrity, then one cannot, simply cannot, belief in any religion.

          1. I know where you’re coming from Eddy, but for myself I would find it difficult to question the integrity of people like – to use 2 obvious examples – Dietrich Bonhoeffer or Richard Holloway.

          2. Rehan, why not add Benedict himself to that list of two, or any other SEEMINGLY genuine “authority”?

            Has Benedict integrity?

      2. Jock S. Trap 26 Feb 2013, 3:13pm

        I see Widdecombe may be getting into the House of Lords soon…. Gaga help us all!!

        1. Oh bloody hell! I shouldn’t be surprised, though. She can’t keep her nose out even though she’s no longer a polictician. She’ll be even worse in the Lords when she has some authority again.

  33. A man who suffered from “defection of human nature” had been able to be a cardinal for many years and nobody noticed anything, either the Pope who has the divine assistance of the holy spirit. I´m amazed.

  34. Well the Bigot of the year reaches Endgame. What a farrago of hypocrisy from beginning to end.

  35. Paul Clevett 25 Feb 2013, 12:37pm

    The pope is next.

  36. “Rox-keith! You don’t have to put on that Red Dress!”

    I am not the least repentent in laughing about this matter. The Catholic Church is imploding and soon the frightened little red-coated ptarmigans will scurry through the corridors of Catholic power eager to promote a “hard man” from Ghana who will, no doubt, support all the vicious anti-gay legislation “in train” in Africa. We shall hear the call raised that the “only good gay is a dead one” echoing out of the papally blessed Uganda! These dreadful hypocrites and bigots really make me sick; they who claim sanctity in the name of a man who preached love and toleration, qualities so sadly lacking where it should be most demonstrably present.

    1. Christopher in Canada 25 Feb 2013, 12:50pm

      How DARE you insult the fine reputation of ptarmigans!! This is a bunch of LEMMINGS, rodents, rodentia… As a happy graduate of the Canadian Public School system, I know my tundra fauna!! ;-p

      Christopher Hitchens is my hero…!

    2. A superb comment, Alan!

  37. At this point i just assume they are all at it.

  38. Great news that’s he’s resigned and great news that the authorities are looking into it (someone has said so on this thread). However, I’m disgusted that the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond has once again saw fit to defend O’Brien. From BBC News:

    Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond said: “It would be a great pity if a lifetime of positive work was lost from comment in the circumstances of his resignation.

    “None of us know the outcome of the investigation into the claims made against him but I have found him to be a good man for his church and country.”

    1. Notice that Salmond only has sympathy for O’Brien and not his alleged victims. Coming after Salmond’s defence of O’Brien following the Stonewall Bigot of the Year award, this really is disgusting.

      “A good man for his country” – except for gay people in his country.

    2. Yes, it’s disgusting indeed that Alex Salmond thinks it’s appropriate to defend O’Brien in the circumstances or to think that he’s worth defending at all considering his homophobic record. I’m sure there will be many people angered by Salmond’s comments.

      1. What really annoyed me at the time of the Stonewall Bigot of the Year award, was that Salmond had said nothing at all about O’Brien’s homophobic vitriol in the preceeding months (and years), yet he leapt to his defence only days after the bigot award. O’Brien was far more offensive about gay people than we were when we called him a bigot – in fact, it was only stating the truth.

        1. Very true indeed. But it is not just Salmond. The whole of society is only just coming round to the notion that gays are as worthy as people of other races, etc. I think Salmond is trying to play it gently nowadays, seeing as independence support seems not enough to pass, his style seems much more humble than before, as if he’s scared to rock the boat.

          Just look at what happened to poor old Cleggy when he called someone a bigot, the media backlash was just, wrong. A bigot is a bigot and yes, SHOULD be labelled as such…

          At least Salmond pushed through the gay marriage intent, before the UK gov’t, even though Scotland doesn’t yet have the power devolved to implement the law change that it would require. Salmond handled the Cardinal’s shite for months through all of that, and came out on the right side despite the Cardinal involving himself hugely. He handled the ‘sensitive’ issue pretty well..push too much and the nutjob bigots get militant.

          1. I was under the impression that same sex marriage law is devolved to Scotland. Can I ask what you mean when you say Scotland doesn’t yet have the power to implement the law? You refer to Salmond pushing through the intent, but the Scottish government has drafted a Bill which will be voted on at some point in the Scottish Parliament. That’s more than intent , that’s having the power to do it.

    3. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that Salmond just meant to refer to the dangers of judging on the basis of possibly scurrilous rumours. Don’t get me wrong, I couldn’t be more delighted if O’Brien were exposed as the dirtiest of hypocrites, but in our glee at the current situation we should also remember that unfounded rumours can cause great damage too.

      1. But why does Salmond need to comment at all? He’s sided with O’Brien over gay people in the recent past when he defended him over the Bigot of the Year award, and now he’s full of praise for O’Brien yet once again ignores O’Brien’s homophobia – something Salmond does with Brian Souter too. If O’Brien or Souter had been openly racist or anti-Semitic, Salmond wouldn’t turn a blind eye and lavish praise on them, so why does he do it when they’re homophobic?

        1. True, he needn’t have said anything, but perhaps he considers him a friend, or at least (mistakenly) an honourable man.

          Souter is beyond excuse, though.

          1. If it’s inexcusable for Salmond to lavish praise on Souter while ignoring his homophobia, then why are you finding excuses when it comes to O’Brien?

            If it’s unnacceptable for Souter to be homophobic, then it’s equally unacceptable for O’Brien to be homophobic, surely?

          2. BennieM, I can’t really reply to you without sounding like an apologist for organised religion, which I assure you I’m not; but O’Brien, loathsome as he is, had to represent the organisation he was such an important part of. Granted, he didn’t have to represent it with quite the fervour he did, but to some extent his stance wasn’t his entirely his own. Souther, on the other hand, is a private individual and his repellent views are therefore his own, the odious little turd.

          3. I do understand the point you are making, Rehan, but I just don’t agree with it. The way I see it, is that O’Brien did have a choice. He chose to become a priest, he chose to accept the offer to become an Archbishop and later a Cardinal. He was only made a Cardinal in 2003, just after the Section 28 business in Scotland and when Civil Partnerships were on the agenda so he must have anticipated that he’d have to speak out on gay issues and if he wasn’t comfortable doing so, then he could have refused to become a Cardinal. But he accepted the position.

            I just think it’s disgusting how people like O’Brien and Souter can be so openly homophobic yet they are fawned over by politicians who convienently ignore it.

      2. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Feb 2013, 2:01pm

        I think the allegations are probably true. If they aren’t, then I see no reason to resign. Any normal innocent person wouldn’t. He hasn’t even denied they are untrue. It wasn’t just one priest but three and a former priest. Why put one’s self in a situation where one could be prosecuted for lying if it ever becomes a police matter? It would mean the end of their careers too.

        1. I expect they are, though I have to say I find the timing – given that O’Brien was retiring next month anyway – more than a little odd.

    4. Also from the BBC:

      Mr Salmond’s statement says he heard the news of Cardinal O’Brien’s resignation with “greatest sadness”. He says: “In all of my dealings with the cardinal, he has been a considerate and thoughtful leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, stalwart in his faith but constructive in his approach.”

      1. And it seems Salmond’s not the only one. It’s really quite disgusting how they’re lining up to sympathise with O’Brien:

        Scottish Conservative MSP @murdo_fraser tweets: Cardinal Keith O’Brien resigns. I am not a Catholic but his leadership will be missed

        1. See that none of those people will have been born catholics, or current catholics. They are apologists trying to appear sympathetic to catholics in scotland. There is still a defensiveness among scottish catholics, especially the older ones, who grew up being sidelined or treated poorly, or hearing anti catholic sentiment. Those politicians are pretty spineless in going out of their way to appear like catholic lovers though, it’s making me feel sick. I don’t think it’s necessary nowadays.

        2. Basically trying to prove to their electorate that they are not anti catholic. ‘Courting the catholics’ becomes excruciatingly important for politicians with constituencies within a 25 mile radius of Glasgow. Remember it is ony recently that the cardinals and bishops were telling us who to vote for, as though their flock were just power fodder.

          Oh, well, they are that anyway, what’s left of them.

      2. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Feb 2013, 2:36pm

        Vile, disgusting that Salmond would refer to O’Brien as considerate? Of whom? Certainly not gay people, calling equal marriage grotesque is a direct attack on our loving, committed relationships. If CPs weren’t around, the same hateful rhetoric would have been forthcoming from O’Brien and his ilk. Even more appalling is that Salmond expresses his ‘greatest sadness’ to hear of his resignation. Defending a blatant bigot and hypocrite is unacceptable. He never once condemned O’Brien’s comments regarding equal marriage either.

    5. In fact, his lifetime of work, however much of it may have appeared positive, is negated by the circumstances of his resignation. This hypocrisy brings into question the integrity of anything he has done. One can only hope that more of his victims will feel strong enough to come forward to demonstrate to the world the depths of the shamed cardinal’s duplicity. The pity would have been the cardinal getting away with this amoral behavior.

      1. Something tells me that there is a will in Scotland to deal with this and not to allow it to be swept under the carpet, as has happened in other places with the blessing of the Vatican.

        Ratzinger himself was only a decade ago straining at the bit to keep paedophilic abuses from coming to light, but one after the other they kept coming. People need to hold these charlatans to account. Many have seen their life’s dedication be so easily betrayed by their abuses of power….. Not to say that the church’s rules make sense, but, when it’s little old grannies devastated at all she thought was real, completely betrayed by lie after lie after insecure filthy disgusting lie.

        Keep our society open and honest forever more.

    6. Guys guys,

      Salmond needs to be very careful when it comes to the catholic church in Scotland. Due to some history in Scotland and also some current ongoing issues, catholics in scotland are constantly on the defensive about being treated differently for being catholics. Alex Salmond is not a catholic and has tried to be seen to be ‘down with the catholics’ – courting them bu his friendship with Cardinal. The slightest comment against Cardinal may be construed as Alex Salmond taking sides against the catholics. This is what it’s like in Scotland. This is why my blood boils when catholics complain about bigotry when it’s done to them – but they demand the right to be bigots to others (gays). These people (including my extended family) are delusional, sickeningly self-righteous & morally void at this stage, on these topics. While convincing indeed, remember the allegations are not necessarily proved yet. So Alex played it safe. I hope to see Alex make a stronger comment soon.

      1. Salmond didn’t need to make any comment at all. I know very well what it’s like here in Scotland, and I was raised as a Catholic and most of my family still go to mass. By pandering to these delusional, bigoted catholics (as you call them), Salmond is just reinforcing their warped views and keeping Scotland a land of religious intolerance.

        Salmond kept quiet when O’Brien was very vocal about gay people yet lept to his defence when a gay rights organisation dared to call him what he was – a bigot. Did Salmond agree with O’Brien’s views about gay people? If not, then why keep quiet? He didn’t need to attack O’Brien, all he had to do was publicy state that he disagreed with O’Brien – that’s it. Now he’s full of sympathy & praise for O’Brien once again. So no, I don’t agree that Salmond is playing it safe, he’s going beyond that.

  39. I am very surprised he has resigned so soon. I had expected him to brazen it out like Brady in Ireland.

    1. perhaps a mission to Uganda to save some geographically misplaced gays would be penance? Im sure he still has Rebecca Kadaga’s deets from Ratzingers speed dial

  40. The days when catholic clergy can demand unthinking respect are long gone, and that’s a good thing.

    1. Not amongst Scotland’s politicians, it seems!

  41. If there is a network of gay prelates operating at the heart of the Vatican, they are deeply closeted men in denial of their orientation and who are filled with self-loathing.
    Priests who are openly gay and advocate for equality are defrocked as soon as they are identified.

  42. It’s always the ones who protest the loudest.

  43. O to the M to the G this year just keeps getting better! Goodbye Pope and Cardinal, you will not be missed x

  44. You really could not make it up. What wicked people these are. Quite why anyone follows this rotten organisation defeats me. I feel less joyous than many on here though. It’s just grist to the mill of those who think that gay men are inherently corrupt. I feel just so bloody angry.

    1. I think people are learning, the more honesty we have in society. Imagine, all this sex must have been rampant for centuries among the catholic clergy. There have been popes before who have had boyfriends. Back in the day, openness was almost impossible. But not now. The clearer and more open the world becomes, the cleaner these organisations will be and the more educated the masses become about things like, homosexuals. Clearly he was in hiding. The priestly calling (decades ago in the dark days) was just that – a homosexual seeking security from an unweilding society. Most priests are gay.

  45. Jim middle tn 25 Feb 2013, 5:14pm

    ah so we have another one who couldnt keep his robe down .. or his hands to himself … once the catholic church cleans up its act . and realizes that we are humans and their hate and homophobia is a sin then the world will be a better place . but it will take an awakening that I may not see ..
    but I can always pray

  46. Rarely has the sight of someone receiving a dose of their own medicine been more more compelling than this.

  47. Worth remembering that at least one of the victims was under 21 at the time (1980). And that the Act legalising homosexuality did not actually come into force in Scotland until 1 Feb 1981 with 21 as the age of consent.

    I wonder if O’Brien was opposed to that legalisation or not? Anyone know if he said anything on the record?

  48. Pavlos Prince of Greece 26 Feb 2013, 12:34pm

    On 22 February Mr. O`Brien has give his Imprimatur for abolition of celibacy, as ‘liberal’ candidate at the Conclave. And see – just one day later three recent and one former priest has come out with this story about gay relationship. What a coincidence.

  49. Oh quick… hide away before the truth comes out!

    Too scared to admit to your past demons?

    You’ve got away with it for 30 years or so and now the past has caught up.

    Egg on face. Goodbye you wretched old wart.

  50. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Feb 2013, 4:22pm

    Astounding that he is now denying the allegations. If it had been one priest, I could understand it, but three plus one former priest? No smoke without fire.

    1. According to the BBC News site, he said he doesn’t know who his accusers are and what he is being accused of!

  51. Paul Halsall 26 Feb 2013, 5:07pm

    I detest Cardinal O’Brien’s homophobia, but met him (and did NOT have him come on to me) on a visit to Drygrange in 1980 and then he seemed a very nice guy.

    Out of Christian Charity I feel sympathy with him and find all the preening posts here rather disgusting.

    By the way, I think the Catholic church should allow openly gay clergy, married clergy (both gay and straight) and is really messed up sexually

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 27 Feb 2013, 7:53pm

      Disgusting posts? Really? You defend someone who for years has vilified, denigrated and dehumanised gay people, our relationships calling equal marriage grotesque and our orientation defective as well as promoting homophobia and intolerance by his own words? You mean to say you don’t find any of that disgusting, especially when he’s also spreading lies, bearing false wtiness against gay people. I find that beyond disgusting and unforgiveable and his sexual behaviour towards four priests hypocritical whlie not practicing what his church preaches.

  52. Matt Charman 26 Feb 2013, 7:06pm

    The removal of both O’Brien and Ratzinger should be marked by the heaving of a colossal sigh of relief the world over. I’m not a Catholic but I am a Christian. I’m also bisexual. Perhaps most important, I’ve studied a fair degree of theology. My personal belief is that men like these twist Christianity to fit their own bigotries. I find the New Testament of Christ to be primarily concerned with tolerance and I don’t recognise it in these men. What I’m saying is that there is no excuse for hatred. Whatever our religious beliefs, we MUST all view one another as equal and valid. The enemy of us all is intolerance and hatred. And every time men like these fall, the world becomes a kinder place.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.