Thread #154680   Message #3630969
Posted By: GUEST
06-Jun-14 - 10:47 PM
Thread Name: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
Joe, the problem is that your response allows the abusers to hide behind you. Nobody's saying everyone in the Roman Church is a child abuser, what they're saying is the Church as a whole allows child abuse free rein. Michael Neary, the Archbishop of Tuam, for example, simply pontificated about meeting leaders of the Bon Secours Order to assist with a memorial. Nothing about asking the Police to investigate, or giving the remains a decent Christian burial or anything. They never counted in life, so why in death? is obviously his motto.

I really find anonymous posts annoying. I know there's no longer a rule prohibiting anonymous posts, but I believe that identifying yourself in a conversation is the civil thing to do.

Nonetheless, I think this post warrants an answer.

---

Our anonymous writer says my response allows the abusers to "hide behind me." I'm sorry, but I can't understand why that might be. I spent thirty years as a U.S. government investigator. I've read tens of thousands of crime reports, and I know what it takes to investigate a crime thoroughly. It takes honesty and balance, and a dispassionate attitude - and most of all, it takes time. All the screaming and tabloid journalism and Dawkins propaganda only serves to cover up the truth.

We really don't know the facts of this case yet, and that's important to acknowledge. At this point, there's nothing for church spokesmen to say, and yet they have to say something. The poor priest who said that the incident happened in another time and must be understood within context, told the absolute truth - but he was going to be excoriated for whatever he would say, and he certainly was here. And then somebody said above that the local bishop "pontificated" by offering to help pay for a memorial to tell the story of the babies who died. It was said that the bishop was wrong for not demanding an immediate investigation - hey, it's a forgone conclusion in situations like these that there's going to be an extensive investigation, so what's the sense in demanding one? There's a good story on this in Saturday's Irish Times, which says, "In a statement last night, Archbishop of Tuam Michael Neary said while the archdiocese would co-operate with any inquiry, it did not have any involvement in the running of the home and had no records in its archives."

That points out a reality that even most Catholics do not understand - the Catholic Church has a very loose authority structure. Rome has very little control over what happens in the rest of the world, and even local bishops have a difficult time knowing and controlling what goes on in their own diocese. The illusion is that the Pope in Rome counts and controls every footstep of every Catholic, but that is far from the reality. Even the extremist Catholics who profess absolute obedience and loyalty to the Pope, are loyal only to whatever it is they think he should be saying. I've asked these people what the Pope says about this or that, and they really can't come up with an answer because they really don't know (and really don't want to know). I have a good idea what Benedict and Pope Francis have said because I read what they say. Can't say the same for John Paul II - I despised him and his flowery, self-serving style of writing. I have to admit, though, that John Paul said some pretty good things against the U.S. wars in Iraq.

So, keep that reality of the loose authority structure of the Catholic Church in mind when you study these incidents. If you continue to believe that every step was dictated by Rome, you will never be able to understand the truth.

I said that details of the instant offense are not yet known. That is the absolute truth, and it is dangerous to speculate because all that speculation serves to conceal the truth. But on the other hand, we know the general story very well because we've heard it over and over again, all over the world. We've heard of the industrial schools and the Magdalene Laundries and so many other church and government institutions have been sites for systematic abuse of children. We've also heard the ongoing story of molestation of children by priests. The institutions no longer exist, so almost all of those institutional problems are long in the past. They must be investigated and action must be taken to provide punishment and compensation where appropriate - but the fact of the matter is that this was all in the past and is unlikely to happen again.

The molestation of children continues, by priests and others, in religious contexts and in other situations. If we're not careful, we can let the long-past institutional scandals distract us from ongoing crimes of child molestation.

I've studied these things since I first became aware of them in the 1960s, and I still don't have the answer I'm seeking: Why did these things, happen, and why were they covered up? Part of the answer lies in the individuals who committed the crimes, part in the church that employed them and at times concealed their crimes, and part lies in the society that ignored the fact that these things were happening.

I generally don't think much of bishops and I have mixed feelings about a lot of priests, but some of the priests who molested boys were people I admired and knew well. And two of the bishops were people I thought were remarkable leaders in the cause of social justice, Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles and Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee, showed themselves to be of weaker stuff when they were confronted with the child molestation scandal. Why?

I was a camp counselor in college and a Scout leader for over twenty years as an adult, and I have worked with kids all my life. It has occurred to me that I could be a suspect in the midst of all this, even though I've never done anything inappropriate to a child other than losing my temper a time or two. But in this day and age, you can go to jail for losing your temper at a kid who has driven you to the brink.

There are many, many unanswered questions, and we desperately need to know the answers. But to arrive at the answers, we need time, honesty, and a far-reaching examination of all factors that may have contributed - including the societal mores that allowed such institutions to be established. All the screaming and tabloid-style rants, all the Dawkins propaganda, all the hysteria - it all gets in the way of what we really need to do.

And in the midst of all this, we need to respect each other, and refrain from pointing fingers of blame.

-Joe Offer-