BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:31 PM

We should not shut down speculation on this or other tragedies. That is how the truth is buried..no pun intended. Tell people to shut up long enough and they have and they will. There will be all sorts of dead ends and conspiracies and coverups and lies and eventually through all this the truth will shine. We have to get used to asking for the truth and having some expectation that we will get it. This is a new concept for some of us...that the church could be forced to come clean on a number of things...even now you have a trail of clergy running behind the pope saying what the pope really meant to say. We have bishops and priests afraid to speak out on anything just about except gay marriage. We need to hear more from them. One got removed from his post for letting parents or godparents pour water over a baby's head in baptism and yet they can't demote a clerical liar or thief or abuser..well, that is fixing to change and not just because of a new pope..there is also a new laity, some of whom are just fixing for a fight.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jack Campin
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:11 PM

Has anybody in the Irish Catholic Church promised to trace all the living relatives of these dead children and give them a voice in what happens next?

...

Didn't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:08 PM

An jnteresting read is:

"Ourselves Unborn: A History of the Fetus in Modern America By Sara Dubow"

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:25 PM

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say, Ed. If you Google anti-abortion burial, you'll find that at least in the U.S., anti-abortion activists make a big deal of burying the remains of fetuses they can get their hands on. Whether they do it out of respect or for propaganda purposes, is a matter of debate. I suppose it's like the people who are appalled that a bishop and a nun would offer to contribute to building a memorial at Tuam. Who has the propaganda rights to these remains?

Dealing with old graveyards brings up all sorts of questions. I live in the Sierra Nevada foothills, in the heart of the 1849 Gold Rush. There are old graveyards everywhere in this area, and most of them don't meet modern standards. I told you above about the overgrown graveyard next door to me on the grounds of a former state tuberculosis sanatorium. Two ridges south of me is the Greenwood Cemetery where the remains of Gold Rush songwriter John A. Stone are buried [he called himself "Old Put," but the gravestone calls him Joe Bowers]. My Catholic parish held title to an unregulated cemetery in the Gold Rush town of Foresthill, and I was on the parish council when we were tasked with the job of bringing the cemetery up to code. The Catholic church in Foresthill burned down in about 1950, I think. For years thereafter, people of all faiths in the community continued to bury their dead in the church graveyard, often without recording the burials and sometimes without asking permission. I think we finally ended up deeding the cemetery over to the county.

So, a ten-year-old kid found 20 skeletons in Tuam in 1975. It will certainly be interesting to watch as the truth of this story unfolds. Sure will be hard to sort the truth from the speculation, though.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:48 PM

Thanks for pointing that out, Peter. I hadn't realized that today's Irish Times story had several pages I hadn't read. Note that the witness, Barry Sweeney, discovered the skeletons in 1975, when he was ten years old. He estimated that there were twenty skeletons in the container under the concrete lid.

Here's the Irish Times story of the interview of witness Barry Sweeney:

Sweeney was 10 in 1975, and the friend he was with on that day, Frannie Hopkins, was 12. They dropped down from the two-and-a-half-metre boundary wall as usual, into the part of the former grounds that Corless and local people believe is the unofficial burial place for those who died in the home. "We used to be in there playing regular. There was always this slab of concrete there," he says.
In his kitchen, Sweeney demonstrates the size of this concrete flag as he recalls it: it's an area a little bigger than his coffee table, about 120cm long and 60cm wide. He says he does not recall seeing any other similar flags in their many visits to the area.
Between them the boys levered up the slab. "There were skeletons thrown in there. They were all this way and that way. They weren't wrapped in anything, and there were no coffins," he says. "But there was no way there were 800 skeletons down that hole. Nothing like that number. I don't know where the papers got that." How many skeletons does he believe there were? "About 20."

Twenty skeletons. Not 796. "Thrown in there," "all this way and that way." Note that the institution closed in 1961, and years later a new housing estate and playground were built in its place.

I'm just wondering if perhaps these skeletons had been buried elsewhere on the property. Could it be that their graves were found years after the institution closed, and that in the process of preparing the property for development, the contents of these graves were consolidated by workmen into a septic tank or water tank that was buried on the property?

I'm just wondering. It's speculation, but it makes a lot more sense to me than the idea of 796 bodies intentionally dumped into a septic tank by wicked nuns with orders from the Vatican under guidance of their imaginary friend.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:41 PM

It always seemed odd to me that those who say they have "a firm belief that the undeveloped fetus and the unborn have same rights to those lucky to being born" do not treat these "potential living humans" with the same respect as infants lucky to have a birth. If so, would theynot be treated with the same burial respect? I suspect few (religious, pro-life pro-choice, or not) would condone or defend disposing of a full term born baby in a septic system, let alone seeing those from a "so-called religious order" possiblg doing it?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:23 PM

well that seems to put a milder perspective on it than the initial , sensationalist reporting.
but it gives the dawkins followers [ or maybe he gleaned his wording from other atheist sites ] opportunity to attack the God they say they don't believe in.
there may well prove to be cause for condemnation, and maybe legal proceedings, but seems to me that the usual suspects are more concerned with the religious affiliation of any perpetrators than that they might be offenders, who happen to be catholic.
i'm not RC but I reckon that the many charitable causes that have come out of the church balance out well against whatever [genuine] faults there may be.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:11 PM

Wikipedia tells me that in 2009, British author Martin Sixsmith wrote a book titled The Lost Child of Philomena Lee, about the forcible separation of a mother (Philomena Lee) and child (Michael A. Hess) by the nuns of an Irish convent during the 1950s, and the subsequent attempts of the mother and child to contact one another. The book was adapted into the 2013 film Philomena, starring Dame Judi Dench and Steve Coogan (as Sixsmith), and written by Coogan and Jeff Pope.

Has anybody read the book or seen the film?

All of these stories, not just the story of the Tuam home, have engendered all sorts of anti-Catholic diatribes all over the Internet, even here. The stories, for the most part, are all true - and they are indeed horrible stories. There's no doubt the Church was involved, and involved deeply in this scandal. But is the Church the only party to blame? The mother and baby homes and industrial schools were located all over Ireland. Some were owned by government entities (local or national), and I believe some were owned by the Catholic Church. Many were managed by Catholic religious orders, some by others. Were they completely staffed by nuns or brothers, or were there lay people on staff? Apparently, there were doctors and nurses on the staff or working as consultants for many of these institutions.

Some of the young people who went to these institutions were sent by courts and other government agencies, and some were sent by their own parents.

So there's no doubt that this was a horrible situation and that it was widespread, institutionalized cruelty. But who's to blame? Who's NOT to blame? Can you blame the Vatican and send UN representatives to arrest the Pope and lead him off in chains and neatly resolve the whole matter? Can you blame the bishop and the nun who offered to contribute to a memorial to these 706 children? [how appallingly shocking!!] If you blame "The Church," just exactly whom are you blaming? After all, almost everyone in Ireland was Catholic. All the priests and nuns came from Irish parents, not from the Vatican. All the doctors and nurses and judges and government officials and the people who signed the death certificates came from Irish parents. Now, there are a lot of people in Ireland who no longer belong to "The Church," but does that mean that they have no share in the blame for this and that it is only current members of "The Church" who deserve to be denounced?

Maybe we should blame England. I know a lot of Irish-born American priests and nuns who are now in their 60s to their 90s in age, and they like to blame England for everything that's wrong in Ireland.

But this happened in an Ireland that was newly free from English rule, and able finally to do things the way they should be done. This newly independent nation of Ireland had the chance to do things the right way - why didn't they?

Well, I don't know who's to blame. And before you enlightened British atheists go shouting about what right do I as an American Catholic to condemn the Irish people for all this, let me remind you that I'd rather join with the priest and accept that "times were different then." I know full well that my country still suffers from its history of racism - that the cost of racism will linger for centuries, even though "times were different then." I think we do need to study the atrocities of the past and learn from them. I see little value in placing blame for events that happened fifty years ago, or (in most situations) for making reparation payments to the descendants of the victims of such atrocities. The time for blame and the time for reparation is right after the event, not fifty years or a century later. But still, we must study these events honestly and learn from them, considering how easily we ourselves can be responsible for similar events in our own time.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:05 PM

Joe, the situation is developing and in a fluent state, Jim's contribution is perfectly relevant when taken in the context of the government inquire that is being set up after the Tuam revelations. This inquiry will cover all mother and baby homes and as such is perfectly relevant to this thread.

When you make a case this may well have been orderly burials in a proper concrete vault, re-read the Irish Times piece and pay attention to the eye witness account from one of the men who discovered the burial site in 1975, when playing there as a boy :

"There were skeletons thrown in there. They were all this way and that way. They weren't wrapped in anything, and there were no coffins,"

Which is at least an indication the situation is not that of an orderly burial vault with coffins 'placed' there.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:36 PM

At least I can get on with getting comfy for the England match in 10 mins.

After all, don't bother reading what I put. Just read what Joe Offer thinks I say. Joe, don't forget to put what I have to say about why so many of the poor buggers died in the first place. Golden statues and painted madonnas don't buy themselves...

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:00 PM

Jim Carroll, when you posted that letter to the editor about the medical inspection, I first had the impression that you were posting evidence about the mother-and-baby home in Tuam, which is what we're talking about in this thread. But no, this is a report about another home in another county. Maybe the same thing happened at Tuam, but we don't know that yet.
So, no, you really don't have any actual data to add to the very sketchy information available about the discovery of the mass grave at Tuam. Still, the speculation runs wild. Greg F. is outraged at my attempt to say what was described as a septic tank could also be simply a concrete vault - and I'm not sure that there's verified evidence even of that. There's so much speculation, even in supposedly reputable newspapers, that it's hard to determine what actually are the facts of the matter.
If you want to investigate something and actually find out the truth, you have to start by stripping down the available information to what is actually known - remove all words that have additional implications implications and report in words that can be understood incontrovertibly, in only one way. "Septic tank" has all sorts of implications, so maybe it wasn't the correct word to use. I didn't know what a septic tank actually looked like until I moved here to the countryside in 2002 and started living here in a farm house built in 1942. Now I know about septic tanks. Ours is a concrete vault, it's almost a cube - ten feet long, eight feet wide, and ten feet deep. It has a partition inside that splits the vault into two chambers. It has a heavy concrete lid that slides across the top, and the lid is usually covered with a thin layer of dirt and leaves. And you know, it looks very much like the vaults that I've seen coffers lowered into in some graveyards.
Now, I've seen coffins being lowered into such concrete vaults - they're never "dumped." Maybe my use of the word "placed" also had unintentional implications. Maybe the only thing was can say so far is that the remains of bodies were found in a concrete vault - if we even know that. I don't see any documentation that this grave was ever actually dug up and investigated.
The concrete vault raises lots of questions, and we don't know any answers yet. if the vault actually was a septic tank and shows evidence of having been used as a septic tank, then its use as a mass grave would have all sorts of additional implications. Can we determine how these bodies ended up in the vault? Were they placed there all at once, perhaps moved from a morgue or from individual graves? Were they buried in dirt individually within the vault? Was the vault then sealed after the institution closed? Or could it be that all of the bodies were moved to the vault from less-permanent graves as part of the closing of the institution. We don't really know the answers, do we?
Now, the deaths of all of these children were carefully documented on individual death certificates. As reported in the Irish Times story in the link above - Between 2011 and 2013, historian Catherine Corless paid €4 each time to get the children's publicly available death certificates. She says the total cost was €3,184.
What questions can we ask about that? Corless paid €3,184 for the death certificates at €4 apiece, so that means there were 796 death certificates. Do we know, then, that there were exactly 796 bodies in the grave? It appears that each death was reported to legal authorities, including the cause of death. How many different signatures are there on the 796 death certificates? If only one person signed every certificate, was that person intentionally concealing these deaths? If a number of different people signed the certificates, why didn't at least one of them raise an alarm if something was amiss about these deaths? In the situation in Cork that Jim Carroll reported, the chief medical officer discovered malpractice and had the matron of the home sacked - why didn't a medical officer in Tuam do the same thing if there was malpractice in the Tuam institution? WAS there malpractice in the Tuam institution? If so, how many people knew about it and did nothing?

Now, if you ask Musket and Jim Carroll and MtheGM about this incident, you'll get some interesting answers. Musket will explain that his "imaginary friend" told him all this happened because the Catholic Church opposes gay marriage, and thus everyone who belongs to the Catholic Church is an evil baby-killer. Jim Carroll will come up with a lengthy, pseudo-scholarly explanation of how every single person in the county was brainwashed by evil Jesuits. MtheGM will explained that all those people in Tuam lived lives based on a "series of facts and postulations which just ain't so."

Looking a little further, though, it appears that Corless did extensive research of the story. It was reported on Facebook, apparently by Corless herself to a Facebook group called Mother/Baby Home Research. A guest poster who failed to name himself/herself above, posted the same text that he/she found on a Website called freethoughtblogs.com.

The first mention of the Tuam home in the Facebook group was dated 7 October 2013, and then the account by Corless was posted 6 January 2014. Peter Laban started this thread with a link to an article about the Tuam home in the Irish Times. Note that the Irish Times article first says the bodies "were possibly buried in a septic tank." Later in the story is the following: "Details are also emerging of the discovery in the 1970s of a large number of unidentified remains in a water tank close to the home, leading some to conclude that deceased children were disposed of in the tank without a proper burial or any records being kept on their interment." So, where did the idea of "dumping in a septic tank" come from?

An Irish Times article dated today, June 7, gives a list of headlines from all over the world about this Tuam story, and then says this:

Corless, who lives outside Tuam, has been working for several years on records associated with the former St Mary's mother-and-baby home in the town. Her research has revealed that 796 children, most of them infants, died between 1925 and 1961, the 36 years that the home, run by Bon Secours, existed.
Between 2011 and 2013 Corless paid €4 each time to get the children's publicly available death certificates. She says the total cost was €3,184. "If I didn't do it, nobody else would have done it. I had them all by last September."
The children's names, ages, places of birth and causes of death were recorded. The average number of deaths over the 36-year period was just over 22 a year. The information recorded on these State- issued certificates has been seen by The Irish Times; the children are marked as having died variously of tuberculosis, convulsions, measles, whooping cough, influenza, bronchitis and meningitis, among other illnesses.
The deaths of these 796 children are not in doubt. Their numbers are a stark reflection of a period in Ireland when infant mortality in general was very much higher than today, particularly in institutions, where infection spread rapidly. At times during those 36 years the Tuam home housed more than 200 children and 100 mothers, plus those who worked there, according to records Corless has found.
What has upset, confused and dismayed her in recent days is the speculative nature of much of the reporting around the story, particularly about what happened to the children after they died. "I never used that word 'dumped'," she says again, with distress. "I just wanted those children to be remembered and for their names to go up on a plaque. That was why I did this project, and now it has taken [on] a life of its own."
In 2012 Corless published an article entitled "The Home" in the annual Journal of the Old Tuam Society. By then she had discovered that the 796 children had died while at St Mary's, although she did not yet have all of their death certificates.
She also discovered that there were no burial records for the children and that they had not been interred in any of the local public cemeteries. In her article she concludes that many of the children were buried in an unofficial graveyard at the rear of the former home. This small grassy space has been attended for decades by local people, who have planted roses and other flowers there, and put up a grotto in one corner.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Rog Peek
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 02:53 PM

"Would not necessarily be an inappropriate grave". In this context, what an unbelievably insensitive suggestion. Was this supposed to excuse in some way the method of disposal of these childen?

Rog

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,"Hidden behind"
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 09:13 AM

The data is there in the death certificates, Joe, it shows a long stream of deaths which should have been investigated by a coroner. In the UK, at any rate, there's also been a check in the system for a very long time that every body is disposed of responsibly, and this obviously hasn't happened here. So it doesn't need more prevarication waiting for more data to avoid speculation: the facts are there. Face themn and stop defending this sepulcher which if not actually whited has been grassed over.

Or maybe you prefer to explain it as the fruit of the Fair Folk?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:56 AM

My home's septic tank is a huge, sturdy concrete vault that looks very similar to the concrete vaults used in graveyards. It would not necessarily be an inappropriate grave.

I sincerely hope you don't mean that, Joe - I thought you were better than that.

Next you'll be quoting from "Shine Your Buttons With Brasso, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:11 AM

This, from the letter page of the Irish Times this morning.

"Sir, - In relation to infant deaths in mother-and-baby homes, James Deeny, who was appointed chief medical officer in the 1940s, provided interest¬ing insights in his biography.
With a death rate in Bessborough, Cork, of over 50 per cent (100 out of 180 babies born), Deeny personally inspected the home.
He said that, initially, he could find nothing wrong. Then he asked staff to undress the babies.
In his own words, he found "every baby had some purulent infection of their skin and all had green diarrhea, carefully covered up.
There was obviously a staphylococcus infection about. Without any legal authority I closed the place down and sacked the matron, a nun, and also got rid of the medical officer."
He added, "The deaths had been going on for years. They had done nothing about it but had accepted the situation and were quite complacent about it."
Bishop Lucey of Cork complained to the papal nuncio.
The nuncio complained to de Valera but Deeny's report in made clear that his decision was the right one.        
He recorded that with a new matron, medical officer, disinfection and painting, the death rate fell to single figures.        
Deeny wrote of his attempts by to deal with infant mortality in the wider community too - "it was very difficult. All sorts of vested interests were involved and the in-fighting was terrific, I came in for a lot of 'stick' and abuse."
-Yours, etc,        
Dr SANDRA McAVOY, Douglas Road, Cork."

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 07:08 AM

Well, mebbe...

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:54 AM

Which joke was that Michael?

If you thought I was cracking a joke above, it says more about your state of mind than mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:41 AM

Is there any jibe or crack too cheap for Musket to perpetrate, or any context where any possible sense or consideration of seemliness would deter him from doing so. Really doesn't appear so. He really is a - um - er - you·know - er

ain't he just!

Enjoy da barbie!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:38 AM

" It would not necessarily be an inappropriate grave."
What!!!
This gets more and more disgusting as it continues.
Ireland is full of plots of land referred to as "kileens", there are even some towns bearing that name.
They are plots of unconsecrated ground once reserved for the bodies of children who died before they could receive the church's blessing, hence considered unfit for church burial.
These have long been regarded as an abomination and a part of Catholicism's barbaric past - now it seems that places where we dispose of our faeces is a suitable place to place dead children.
God protect us all from such 'Christians'.
I trust you consecrated your septic tank Joe - it seems important to some people?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:37 AM

If not 'dumped in septic tank' then they were 'dropped into a septic tank.' 'Hundreds of dead babies dropped into a concrete pit' would suffice. I don't see how anything could correctly be described as being 'placed' in a septic tank, be it shit or dead children. Waste matter is dropped from a height into a pit.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:33 AM

A big difference between interred and in turd...

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:17 AM

do i believe in a 'god who does tricks'? no i don't believe in any god

do you believe in a god who is omnipotent and who loves us?

do you believe in a god who is content to sit back and watch the most appalling crimes happen in his name?

where these crimes take place no-one is interested in your or anyone else's definition of any religious doctrine or excuse for the crime.

the victims are dead or in a living hell - i am lucky in that i don't have the problem of having to reconcile my faith with the callous behaviour of 'our creator' or his representatives and apologists on earth. maybe that distance from any faith allows me to see this and other atrocities more clearly for what they are.

really, how much more abuse can people take the world over from their faiths before we turn away from all such immoral and corrupt institutions

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 06:15 AM

from the Irish Times article that Peter Laban referred to:

What has upset, confused and dismayed her in recent days is the speculative nature of much of the reporting around the story, particularly about what happened to the children after they died. "I never used that word 'dumped'," she says again, with distress. "I just wanted those children to be remembered and for their names to go up on a plaque. That was why I did this project, and now it has taken [on] a life of its own."

And it's the speculation that I object to, also. There's no doubt that we need to find out what happened to all these children, but it's wise not to speculate until something is known.
I live next to a former state tuberculosis sanatorium, a place where many people died and were buried in nondescript graves. It seems that mass graves were common here in California until the 1950s - in March, I went to Fresno and visited the mass grave of the 28 Deportees that Woody Guthrie sang about.

My home's septic tank is a huge, sturdy concrete vault that looks very similar to the concrete vaults used in graveyards. It would not necessarily be an inappropriate grave.

When you speak of a body being "dumped," it has quite a different meaning from "interred." I suppose "placed" is a word that describes what's known without any extraneous implications.

So, maybe it's too soon to speculate, hey?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:58 AM

This was posted on another thread by mistake, sorry.

From: akenaton - PM
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 03:24 AM

We don't know any of the details regarding the Irish remains, so theories are not very helpful at present.

Don't forget it's only a few years since UK hospitals disposed of stillborn babies in ways that were quite immoral.
Kept them in jars I believe, or disposed of them without the permission of the mothers.

I n saying that, the Catholic Church does have questions to answer, both over the sexual abuse of boys and young men by adult men and their historic attitude to unmarried mothers and their children.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:39 AM

I can't see why the fact that Ms Corless never used the word 'dumped' should preclude anyone else from doing so. What does she think happened? — that each separate individual bone was laid reverently in the septic tank to an Ave Maria & a Paternoster piously intoned?

Oh, come on, They were, so, 'dumped'. What does she or any of the rest of you find so offensive in the correct word being used?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,"Hiding behind"
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:36 AM

Joe, you are a fine guy, but not the only one with a background in investigation. I was 20 years with the European Defence HQ running peaxemaking operations in places like the Balkans. I was put there by the Boss Man, quite indubitably, with a double agenda sorting out the perversion of the ArchiAssociation of the Eucharist, the home of the US Tabernacle Societies. The double-dealing of the Vatican in the preservation of what should be its core ethos is incredible - five major recalcitrances to date, defying several Papal instructions. I can document this from the public record.
In this instance, this starts to resemble a war crime. We're talking Auschwitz level in all but enormity and speed (and one of the assessors in the Baby P case is in my immediate circle, I should add). Anyone not promoting an urgent investigation, in my mind, has to be suspect, and when there is this kind of alignmment in association, then my comment that you are allowing the murderesses to hie behind you is entirely justified. The deaths and means thereunto are on the public record and therefore proven already, the only question being why no investigation was started long before, and the answer for that being that the investigators responsible were exactly like you and turned a blind eye nearly eight hundred times here alone.

One aspect to be remembered in partial mitigation is that the law on murder did not extend until early into this period to protect children under ten. But for most of the period it did, and common humanity has to ask why it wasn't applied.

We know that some of the mothers are still alive. We may therefore suspect that some of the Sisters are still as well, and so must ask why no measures are being taken to identify them yet. And that is why I say they are being allowed to hide behind the rest of the faith. Pope Francis has indicated that this kind of behaviour must stop, and it must stop immediately. So cease and desist, or you will have the same effect as the priests in this case trying to continue the cover-up, destroying what you most cherish.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:31 AM

That was me posting.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,P
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:30 AM

Meanwhile, back in Tuam, Catherine Corless puts a bit of nuance on what was reported in the press earlier:

Tuuam mother and baby home : the trouble with the septic tank story

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 05:11 AM

I suppose, achmelvich, it depends on whether or not you believe in a God who does tricks. You know, the man behind the screen, the magnificently mustachioed magician who makes wonderful things happen for those who pay the price of admission. Well, only people who don't believe in God, believe in a God like that.
And only people like Mr. Dawkins, believe in the God that Dawkins defines.
Bad things happen. That's the way life works. Part of the wonder of life, is the ability we humans have when we're at our best, to confront these bad things and prevail over them.
If people commit appalling crimes, then it's people -not God- who have to resolve those crimes.


Don't like my tying you to Richard Dawkins, fellahs? Well, I googled some of the buzzwords you folks use time and time again. "Imaginary friend?" - Dawkins. "Brainwashing" and the Jesuit "Give Me a Child" quote? - Dawkins. The buzzwords always come up tied to Dawkins.

Why don't you stop talking in buzzwords and take the time to read and think about exactly what I've written? I really believe that civil and fruitful discussion of any topic should be possible between religious and non-religious people, but only if they can respect the other for having a different but equally valid perspective. But how can I carry on any sort of discussion with you if you say I base my life on an invalid faith that you proceed to define according to your own specifications?

Musket says, I have yet to come across a person who uses a religion as their moral guide accept that some of us can be comfortable with our morals without needing such a crutch.. Twice before he made that statement, I said that I base my morals on rational thinking and not on faith. As I said above, morality is societal conduct and values that make sense for the health of society. And you know, I learned that in moral theology class. Now, if you're an ideological person and incapable of thinking for yourself, that doesn't work. And if you have not advanced beyond the ideological level, you cannot even comprehend that some people are able to function quite well by thinking for themselves - even if their thinking is different from the "correct" ideology.

Now, settle down and drop the buzzwords, and see if you can come up with some answers to the questions I ask.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:57 AM

Michael - you know I like and respect you.

Please don't call Joe names like Mr wanting-to-have-it-both-ways Offer.

best wishes to you both.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:41 AM

among all the debate above about who is responsible for this, and continuing, tragedy i have yet to see the obvious guilty party blamed. christians believe that god looks after us and is all powerful etc. while people are committing such appalling crimes against children where is he? is he discussing the finer points of theocracy- being a living god- in the minds of priests, popes and friendly fascists? how could any reasonable person continue to have faith in any omnipotent god who continually fails to intervene in even the most disgusting slaughter of the innocents? particularly when it is so often going on in 'his' houses. joe's glib 'it's a wonderful world' optimism seems insensitive at best in these circumstances

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:24 AM

Precisely. Thank you Musket. So just get hold of all that, Mr wanting-to-have-it-both-ways Offer.

There are only so many ways of stating the obvious; if Dawkins uses the same vocabulary that I was using 60 years before he even wrote a line, how dare you come up with a nasty little innuendo like "strangely similar"!? Don't be so bloody rude! Surprised at you.

"why don't you take the time to respond to what I said about faith being a sacred perspective rather than an ideology based on a false proposition?" you demand rhetorically. Why, because it's complete bollocks not worth wasting time on, if you really want to know.

That's why.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:06 AM

"I just haven't come across all these "brainwashed" people you people talk about."
My family lived in awe, and often in fear of the clergy - my mother constantly admitted it, my father's fear was replaced by contempt when he witnessed their behaviour in one of Franco's prisons.
He described how, as a prisoner during the Spanish Civil war, he was taken out and placed before a firing squad one morning.
Last rites were administered by the pries, and the executioners lined up and aimed their rifles - they all then fell about laughing at the fact he'd pissed himself.
The procedure was repeated at irregular intervals during his 18 months as a POW.   
My aunt and uncle spent their lives working with those trying to bring peace and civil rights to Ireland, I always admired their work and dedication, and the suffering they had experienced when they were forced to flee their burning home in Derry in the 1950s.
I visited them in their home near Ballymun, in Dublin some years before they died and was appalled to see their obsequious and fearful attitude towards their priest neighbour, even though the church had been one of the great opponents of their beliefs throughout their lives
"Give me a child for its first seven years..." indeed
Thankfully, the effects of brainwashing are rapidly disappearing from Ireland today, but it has taken horrific revelation of generations of church implicated abuse to exorcise them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 04:04 AM

You want an answer Joe?

You provided it yourself in your discussion with Michael.

I have yet to come across a person who uses a religion as their moral guide accept that some of us can be comfortable with our morals without needing such a crutch.

So you, like all the others, feel the need to think we use Dawkins as a substitute. That is a prime example of irrationality. I recall Jack the Sailor note I said something similar to Dawkins on a particular subject and he became adamant that I substituted his work for scripture in my moral code.

The blinkered rationale that we all have a faith of some description. That is what I mean. And that is part of the problem.

You can point to catholic good works all day but if you insist on them describing Catholicism , you can't be surprised when I ask if issues such as this thread subject describe it also?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 03:45 AM

OK, Michael, you arrived at your own distorted view of religious faith on your own, although you define religious faith in words that are strangely similar to those of the Dawkins machine. Maybe all atheist bigots talk the same. Maybe the wording was there long before Dawkins, and he's just marketing it. Rather than getting all bent out of shape about that, why don't you take the time to respond to what I said about faith being a sacred perspective rather than an ideology based on a false proposition? Exactly what is this false proposition that you suppose I base my life on? Your definition of faith and Musket's insulting "imaginary friend" bullshit do not even come close what I have worked very hard to explain to you is my faith. I took a risk and I explained to you twice as best I could what it is, that is sacred to me. I exposed myself to people like you and Musket and your propaganda.
I think that it should be possible for open-minded atheists and open-minded people of faith to have meaningful discussions of just about anything, with a respectful realization that they both have different but equally valid perspectives.
I don't think that fundamentalist religious people can do that, and I don't think that Dawkins atheists could do that. I had hoped that you and Musket and some others might be able to do that (Bill D does), but maybe you are too strongly tied to an absolutist way of looking at things.
Now, do me the favor of giving me a rational response.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 03:29 AM

You grossly, and most offensively if I may say so, underrate me, Joe. I was there long before Dawkins -- I won't say before he was born, as he is only 9 years younger than me; but certainly long before he was ever even heard of. What do you mean by saying I am influenced in any way by his 'propaganda'? — "been listening to too much Dawkins propaganda" in-bloody-deed!. How very dare you!

The fact that he has recently published a summary of what I, and millions of other rational beings, have been thinking & saying for years, and contrived to pick his moment skilfully to ride the zeitgeist & call in aid a well-oiled publicity machine, doesn't make me [us] mere mouthpiece for parroting his, to us, self-evidently accurate views. We have just got a new spokesperson for the nonce, is all.

Most disagreeably surprised at such a cheap shot from you, Joe.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 03:28 AM

Musket, I can't quite figure out what you see wrong with my seeking balance by "pointing out the good work of the Catholic Church." I think that if you want to see the truth of the matter, you have to look at both the good and the bad. In your own life, haven't you done a lot of good things and a few bad things? Same thing with me, and the same thing with my Catholic Church - the good exists, and the bad exists.

And just what is "the reaction of the Catholic Church authorities" to this mass grave discovery? People above have speculated upon brief comments from a priest and a bishop, but it's far too early and far too little is known for anyone to make a rational response to this discovery. As far as I can tell, the only "reaction" you have to condemn is a couple of sound bites. Give it some time, willya?

My suggestion of twenty years for a statute of limitations is just my idea, from my perspective as an investigator. After twenty years, it's damn hard to get the really accurate information needed for criminal prosecution. My personal opinion is that by that time, the parties involved are all totally different people. By that time, it may be better to resolve the situation by means other than prosecution - but as CS says, such situations still need resolution, healing, and a feeling that justice has been done. My twenty-year proposal is my opinion, and I think I have a right to that. I suppose you have a right to be appalled by my proposal, but I think that would be a very immature response.



Oh, and I'm still waiting for your explanation of my "simplistic condemnation of rational thought."


-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 02:58 AM

There's one hell of a difference between pointing blame and observing the reaction of the Catholic Church authorities to the issue.

Joe yet again links the moral stance of individual members to the blame that is attached to the criminals in this case and the church authorities that condoned and supported the regime.

By feeling offended, you ascribe yourself disdain that has not been aimed in the first place. I take issue with your ideas of statute of limitation and I take issue with your pointing out the good work of the Catholic Church. That's it. So stop carrying a cross you can drop at any time.

You wish me to explain why I use the word rational when applied to people who don't have an imaginary friend? Simple. You yourself point out the good work of the catholic movement but separate it from the bad. You can't have it both ways. If you associate yourself with good works you can't wash your hands of the criminal aspects carried out by members in the name of the church and not condemned till the world found out what was going on.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 02:57 AM

MtheGM, I think you've been listening to too much Dawkins propaganda.

You say, "these high principles on which he has based his entire life & thinking rest on a series of facts and postulations which just ain't so."

Well, yes, I do live my life on high principles. Those principles are based on rational thinking* about what I want to accomplish in life, not on any particularly religious principles. And by the way, my perspective is that you live your own life based on high principles that are also derived from rational thinking.

I addressed this issue in a message to you above:

To my mind, God doesn't really deal with authority - that's a human concept. God simply is. I see God as the Essence of All, as Love, as That Which Is Beyond. I see that God as worthy of pondering and of awe, which is my form of prayer. It works for me, and I'm not particularly concerned whether it works for anyone else.

I realize that this differs from the idea of God as defined by the Dawkins Doctrine, but it's a more accurate understanding of the God that non-fundamentalist people revere.

If you see things through the eyes of a number of philosophical schools, everything has an essence of one sort or another. People can believe in an essence, whether they believe in God or not. I see that essence as sacred - but whether it's sacred or not, it's still there.
And most people believe in Love, whether or not they believe in God. I see Love as sacred and divine. But whether Love is divine or not, it still exists.

Non-ideological people of faith see the same things everybody else sees, but they see a divine element in what they hold sacred. So, their faith is seeing the same things through a different perspective, a perspective of sacredness. It's like seeing life through a really great pair of sunglasses, with an added dimension of richness and wonder...and sacredness. Now, other people have other perspectives that add depth to their perception of life. No perspective is better than the other - they're all valid, and they're all different.

I submit that despite the false misdefinition of faith that Mr. Dawkins has so effectively promulgated, faith doesn't "rest on a series of facts and postulations which just ain't so." Faith is a different perspective, but it can be every bit as valid as the perspective of one of you enlightened atheists.


And then you Dawkins atheists are going to want to attack the Bible, and I think maybe you need to accept the fact that there are valid ways of looking at sacred writings that are far different from the fundamentalist understandings that Mr. Dawkins proposes. Most cultures, including our own, have ancient writings that have been held sacred for centuries or even millennia. There is great truth to be found in the sacred writings of almost every culture, if those writings are understood in proper context. And a simplistic, fundamentalist, literal understanding of such writings is almost always wrong.

So, Michael, drop the propaganda and think again.

-Joe-

*Musket accuses me above of a "simplistic condemnation of rational thought." He hasn't answered my request for an explanation. Until he explains, I'm going to believe that I do hold rational thought in high esteem.

Oh, and while I'm at it, I gotta say something about that "give me a child" statement attributed to the Jesuits. All that stuff about that phrase being just the underpinnings for brainwashing, is propaganda from the Dawkins machine. It's a major part of their "doctrine." Look it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 02:13 AM

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-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jun 14 - 01:22 AM

Yes, indeed, Joe is a very good guy. One of the best I have ever come across in my 80+ years...

But you are all skating scared around the fact that these high principles on which he has based his entire life & thinking rest on a series of facts and postulations which just ain't so. There simply isn't this benign being who wishes us well and is so sad when we depart from his paths of righteousness & all that jazz. A point much insufficiently taken into account when considering all Joe's undoubted virtues ~~ whose whole edifice comes crashing down when this incontrovertible [oh, ok, not incontrovertible, just 99+∞% so] fact is taken into account.

Mind you, when Joe then appears seriously to interpret St Ignatius Loyola's notorious brainwash as meaning simply "that if you instill a love of learning in a child before the age of seven, he/she will have a lifelong love of learning", then he is not just one of the best guys I have ever come across in my long life,

but by a googol of lengths the most naive -- or disingenuous.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: LadyJean
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 11:53 PM

A tale is told of a priest here in Pittsburgh who fathered children by three married ladies in his parish, before somebody found out what he was doing. I don't know what happened to him. But, as all parties were adults, and knew what they were doing, I'm not terribly outraged.

Read about abuses in Native American schools in the U.S. and Canada for horrors. Not all of them were run by The Catholic Church, or any church.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I know this from experience. Power with no oversight is going to be abused. This is true in a church, in a prison, in the military, in a school, in a factory and any place else you care to name.

There are any number of equally shocking accounts of "baby farms" in nineteenth century England, and I did mention the Ideal Maternity Home in Nova Scotia. We don't know how many babies died there.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 11:44 PM

Ah, gang: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/tuam-mother-and-baby-home-the-trouble-with-the-septic-tank-story-1.1823393

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 11:10 PM

I get the sense Joe feels beleaguered and that's wrong/ he does a lot for us. we should be grateful and respectful.

he belongs to an organisation that will only employ you as a priest if you forswear sex. now I think even the most devout catholic would agree - you're bound to get more than a few odd coves - applying for jobs like that.

nevertheless Joe believes and identifies with the broad aims of the church. obviously gets some spiritual sustenance there - so leave him alone!

good guy!

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 11:09 PM

I think they should not be buried right away but should be removed from the septic tank and have forensic and dna testing and then be buried..you do not want to bury them and then bring them up later. There could be memorials right away of course...leaving in the is too traumatic for the relatives and current children...

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 10:47 PM

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.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 06:30 PM

Joe: "I just don't buy this idea of "brainwashing"

Jim: Jesuit maxim
"Give me a child for for his first seven years and I'll give you the man"
The brainwashing of someone who has no choice - a child

Well, gee, Jim, I always thought it meant that if you instill a love of learning in a child before the age of seven, he/she will have a lifelong love of learning.

I just haven't come across all these "brainwashed" people you people talk about. Maybe you're watching too many zombie movies, or something (or maybe Dawkins movies - same thing ;-)).

---

Musket says: And until they stop being misogynist and homophobic, they are to be dismissed and ignored in totality by respectable citizens.

Ah, but Musket, not all religious people are misogynist or homophobic. I'm a religious person, you know; and I and most religious people I respect, share your disdain for misogynists and homophobes. How does that fit into your equation?

And Musket sez: Your simplistic condemnation of rational thought is nearer the doctrine of your black hooded priests than that of a decent chap who claims to question doctrine.
Damn! And all this time I thought I've been a big fan of rational thought! Please point out this "simplistic condemnation" of mine.

Richard Bridge says" The alliance between the roman catholic church and the Irish state has been a terrible, terrible source of oppression. I think I could agree with that. And, as somebody says above, the same is true for Poland. There's bound to be trouble any time the vast majority of citizens in a nation belongs to the same religious group. Religious people are much better-behaved when they're the minority.

CS says: Any serious institutional crime, and especially one that is within the living memory of those who may have suffered from it, is worthy of pursuing in court.

I believe that atonement for great acts of evil, is a cathartic - psychological and even spiritual - necessity for both the individual victims and the collective victims (ie: society as a whole) of those corrupt and powerful organisations that perpetrated them with impunity. I think that is a very wise statement, and worth repeating.

Stu says: Here's the fundamental problem with discussing anything with religious people; their default position is EVERYONE who doesn't agree with them is wrong, otherwise they would have to accept their faith might be misplaced . . . and that would imply the possibility of God not existing, something they incapable of accepting if they are true believers.
I would suggest the reason for the rejection of established, instutionalised religion is philosophical as well as ideological, and depend on whether one believes the individual is ultimately responsible and answerable for their own actions regardless, and whether in time we are capable of understanding that past actions have consequences to this day. Stu, what you and Musket don't seem to comprehend, is that a vast number of religious people don't think in the way you describe. Every day, I acknowledge the possibility that God doesn't exist - that keeps me honest. I think that everyone who doesn't agree with me, has a perspective different from mine - and it may well be that both of us are right. Oh, and did you know that "the individual is ultimately responsible and answerable for their own actions" is the underlying principle of all Catholic moral teaching?

I happen to agree with most of the things that most of the people have said above. What I cannot agree with, are the blanket statements, the constant insistence that all religion is the same, that religious instruction or any instruction by religious people on any subject is "brainwashing," or that there is something inherently evil in all religion and that the day must come soon when all religion is abolished.

As in all of these Mudcat religious discussions, religion ends up being defined in very narrow, fundamentalist terms as some kind of mind control. People go on and on and on about the bad things that happen in churches - and most of these are true and are indeed deplorable. I see deplorable things happen in churches a lot more often than I'd like to - but I also know the other side. My experience in the Catholic Church is about 90 percent good and ten percent bad, which I don't think is a bad balance. I feel a great obligation to oppose that ten percent with all my power, and I do my best. I certainly don't deny all those bad things, and I don't defend them.

In 16 years of Catholic education (including 8 years of seminary), I did not experience anything like the horror stories so often conveyed here. I think I got an excellent education and that I learned to think for myself early on - and most of the Catholic-educated people I know, are the same. This accusation of "brainwashing" seems preposterous to me.

So, when you make your blanket statements, be careful. There's a damn good chance that many religious groups and many religious people are not as you describe. They may be as rational and intelligent and tolerant as you are - maybe more so.

As I said above, open your friggin' eyes.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: BrendanB
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 05:20 PM

OK, I am a Catholic and I am planning to stay a Catholic. That said, the vileness in Tuam and the dismissiveness of both the clergy and the order of nuns is obscene and sickening. If the Irish state has even the semblance of a backbone it will pursue this case vigorously, identify the guilty, name names and prosecute anyone who had criminal involvement. Do you think they will? No, me neither.
But Catholicism is not defined by the actions of an individual be they pope or pauper. Catholicism is a set of principles and of standards which adherents have failed to live up to since the inception of Christianity. I truly believe that Judas Iscariot believed his actions were righteous.
The church establishment has warped and twisted and undermined the Christian message for hundreds of years. But you know what? Screw the church establishment. My Catholicism resides in the goodness, decency and sanctity of my fellow Catholics, the ones who care for the vulnerable, stand up for the friendless, and speak out for what they believe to be right. I fail on a daily basis, I'm a shit Catholic. Knowing that I weep when I see the church powerful crap on decency - not Catholic decency, just ordinary, common, human decency.
Tuam, abuse of children by priests, collaboration with the nazis by the Vatican, the Magdalen laundries, the use of Catholicism to veil a thousand acts of wickedness - these are all vile and indefensible.   But they are the actions of fallible people. The standards and principles of Catholicism condemn them far more than any human agency can.
When you attack someone like Joe Offer for his beliefs you are looking 180 degrees in the wrong direction. I suspect that his grief and pain regarding Tuam is more raw and painful than yours because of his loyalty to a faith that has been besmirched by others, and yet he still seeks to live out that faith, truly and honourably.

Joe, I am sorry if I misrepresent you.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 02:54 PM

I am contemplating what Susan Lohan said in the Irish Examiner I believe...she runs an adoption rights organization. She said..and I had never heard this proposed before..that these mother and child institutions..or mother sans child and child sans mother...were set up to keep the young women from going to England and having babies adopted by Protestants. So they literally imprisoned them.

I had wonderful nuns in grade school, but I can absolutely imagine some of my high school ones throwing bodies into a septic tank because someone told them to. And they might have made us do it too and we might have done it.

And read all you can about Vatican finances..read up on BIshop or AB Marcincus and his thrall over Pope Paul VI. Read about the Mafia deaths. Read everything about the death of Pope John Paul I. You don't need to read any conspiracy theory stuff..just read the lists of people who died..cardinals dropping dead at Mass..other cardinals being killed by parts of buildings falling on them. THis stuff can be verified I hope..I am not going to. I am convinced that if we unravel the mysterious death of this pope a lot will unravel. I think that the church needs to get the hell out of Italy once and for all..they will never get rid of Mafia connections otherwise.. and go way way back...Ireland and its offshoots in Australia and US could go back to Celtic Christianity or Catholicism. Then we could weave little crosses out of grasses and we could visit holy wells and leave tokens behind (which I did at St. Gobnit's well recently) and have chants for churning butter etc...

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jun 14 - 08:07 AM

"Pupils in Ireland still do the choices my parents had "
Sorry - should read "Pupils in Ireland still do not have the choices my parents had"
Jim Carroll