BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:58 PM

I am not convinced it was for the acquisition of wealth and power. These nuns and brothers and priests who did the abusing were in more or less poverty themselves, the nuns at least taking a vow of poverty. (mg)

Absolutely, but I meant wealth and power for the Catholic church, not individuals. They seem to have achieved that with ruthless efficiency since Constantine's time, and they certainly didn't do it by accident. I'm not trying to say that caused the abuse, just that it is a circumstantial contributory factor. The Bishops (and those heirarchically above) don't like their boat to be rocked because, if I'm not mistaken, they are the keystones to the overall financial structure.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 08:18 PM

I'll quote Mary, too:

These nuns and brothers and priests who did the abusing were in more or less poverty themseleves, the nuns at least taking a vow of poverty.

In many nations, young men and women were forced into the convent or the priesthood by a number of factors - economic, social, and familial. When I was in the seminary in Milwaukee, we had a number of students from the Philippines. Some didn't want to be there, but it would bring shame upon their families if they left. One went berserk, and got a pistol and threatened to commit suicide.

Vatican II largely brought an end to that, and I think most modern priests and nuns chose their vocation by free choice.

I'm sure this will get all sorts of people mad at me all over gain, but I think the wealth of the Catholic Church is largely a myth. Somebody above suggested that the Vatican could sell off some art works and raise cash, but I wonder about that. Those artifacts are available for public viewing at the Vatican now- would it be better for them to be in private collections? And yes, the Catholic Church owns many gorgeous church buildings that are open to the public and are very expensive to maintain - would it be better for those building to be razed and the real estate sold? The Vatican does have a very large stock portfolio (compensation from Italy for loss of the Papal States) that serves as an endowment for the operation of the Vatican, but it still needs contributions from Catholics to supplement the endowment income.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 09:29 PM

I think the whole idea of razing churches is probably a little old fashioned, even over here in Old Blighty.. Why do you think the wealth is a myth, Joe? Just one ugly building in Ireland, where prices aren't high, fetched twenty million. I'd guess that they are by far the biggest owners of 'bricks and mortar' on this planet. Buildings and land virtually everywhere. It's no myth.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 03:22 AM

Oh, there's wealth, all right - but most of it doesn't belong to the Vatican, or to dioceses - and the property that does belong to the Vatican or dioceses, is often historic buildings that are expensive to maintain and unlikely to be razed, or local parish buildings that are in use by the people who paid for them.

I don't know how it is in Ireland; but most Catholic dioceses in the US, lost the excess property they had in paying off the sexual abuse reparations.

But the "vast" wealth of the Church is mostly in priceless art and architecture. The Pieta would bring a pretty price, but does anyone really believe it should be sold to a private collector?

More than that, this problem isn't something money can fix - and bankrupting the Catholic Church isn't going to fix the problem, either. Child abuse and molestation are far deeper problems than that. Putting a lid on the Catholic Church isn't going to end the problem, or even reduce it significantly.

And, as been stated above, the worst of the problems occurred prior to 1970 (although the coverups have continued to the present time). One good aspect of all this, is that Catholics may have learned not to trust their bishops so completely. Those of us who worked for the church, already knew that many bishops were often far more concerned with power and money, than they were with the spiritual welfare of their "flocks." In the United States, I'd say 25 percent of bishops are really good, and 25 percent really bad. The rest are timid, plodding, unimaginative bureaucrats.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:57 PM

So who actually owns most of the land and buildings then? I'm afraid I can't remember where it came from, but I thought the property in any one diocese was registered in the name of the bishop of that diocese. It may well be tripe, though.

I think the wealth that is tied up in art treasures is incalculable - I wasn't even including it in my estimation of their disposable capital assets, likewise the Vatican library and the buildings of historical interest. It doesn't really matter who owns it so long as it's accessible and looked after.

Interesting view of bishops - I can imagine that's true, but it's a lot of bad bishops.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 12:16 AM

"That the Church has the money to make itself felt is shown by the table given below:


                   Church Valuations in 1926

          Baptist ................ $469,835,000
          Congregational ......... 164,212,000
          Jewish ................. 100,890,000
          Methodist .............. 654,736,000
          Presbyterian ........... 443,572,000
          Protestant Episcopal ... 314,596,000

But the Roman Catholic Church property alone in America is valued at $837,271,000! "

from
this article.

Theodore Dreiser wrote it.

---

' "In a statement published in connection with a bond prospectus, the Boston archdiocese listed its assets at Six Hundred and Thirty-five Million ($635,891,004), which is 9.9 times its liabilities. This leaves a net worth of Five Hundred and Seventy-one million dollars ($571,704,953). It is not difficult to discover the truly astonishing wealth of the church, once we add the riches of the twenty-eight archdioceses and 122 dioceses of the U.S.A., some of which are even wealthier than that of Boston. '

from

this site.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: MartinRyan
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 01:31 PM

First bishop (Murray) has just resigned. Does so because of the impact of continuing on the survivors i.e. no admission that what he did was wrong. Pity.

The four other ex-auxiliary bishops from the Dublin diosesce concerned will come under increasing pressure to follow him.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 02:11 PM

I notice that 999 got information from sources other than reputable news organizations.

One reason that Catholic dioceses appear to be so wealthy, is the centralized financial structure. Most Catholic parishes and schools are operated locally, but the bishop holds the title to the property. Our diocese has a hundred parishes, and maybe fifty schools. That's a lot of assets, but they are being used by a lot of people. If the schools were to close, that would be a heavy burden on taxpayers, because all those children would then be educated in public schools.

And that's the crux about my statement about the wealth of the Catholic Church. Yes, it has a lot of assets - but it also has somewhere around a billion members to use those assets.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 03:49 PM

For some reason fate keeps putting these books etc. in my path relating somewhat to Spanish Inquisition, Templars etc..I am not seeking them out.

I think we need to look at allover evil that has existed in the church and shine a light on it.

one thing I heard of exactly once was that in some parish in east cost US the priests used to essentially draft the exhausted working men of the parish to work after hours on building the church. They had no say in the matter. I say far better to worship in a tent if you have to and leave abuse of working men out of the picture..and from how it was described it was definitely abuse.

I read some bad Irish stuff too..post=famine..looking up information on Dunquin and Blasket Islands...people..perhaps soupers..were denied passage too and from the Islands..and the congragation of Catholics was forbidden to give them rides in boats..or to buy and sell from them etc. It was quite cruel.

I don't know how much the potato famine has to do with all this, but I would say a lot..and I don't know how much the Inquisition has on any of this..probably not toomuch in the Irish church but certainly it must on South American and Italian and Spanish etc. There is a sadistic streak that is there and should be routed out. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:46 PM

Both sadism and masochism have always featured prominently in (at least) European Catholicism. They say the last pope was partial to self-flagellation. Very holy, I'm sure.. Then there's the Opus Dei lot, with their barbed wire leggings (the cilice) and distinctly dodgy politics, especially the treatment of women. I don't have a problem with sexual perversion among consenting parties, but when it's supposedly done for religious reasons and the obvious sexual side (conscious or unconscious) is so righteously denied, it rather points to being something seriously wrong afoot, and the moral corruption it implies is, to me, quite disturbing.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 06:16 PM

It's not an Irish thing, nor yet a minority thing. It happened in English Catholic schools too.

I spent my teens at one of the best boys' Grammar schools in London, which was run by Jesuits (God's Storm troopers we called 'em), and they had a strange notion of education and discipline.

1. They established an understanding of the school rules with a big stick as the default option.

2. It wasn't a punishment unless it left marks.

3. It was insufficient if the master inflicting said punishment did not need a rest break on completion.

4. Once they had inculcated a healthy respect for the consequences of disobedience, they went on to demonstrate that the same system was in operation in pursuit of the goal of teaching. Mistakes, omissions, or sub standard work, whatever the reason or excuse, invited beatings.

One master in particular, who was in charge of discipline for the whole school and also taught Latin, had his own special method for driving home the lesson for pupils who had difficulty assimilating the data.

He would pick one of us up by the shirt front with his right hand, step toward the nearest wall, and then repeat the lesson in a sing-song chant, emphasising the tempo with alternate slaps with the left hand to the face, and banging the back of the head against the wall. When he felt the knowledge had penetrated, he would, without warning, release his grip, whereupon you would hit the floor on your heels from three feet in the air. The shock would send a shaft of pain up your back to the base of your skull.

I have been giddy for as much as four hours after an interview with him.

This was not a peculiarity of this particular school, as new Jesuit teachers arriving during my five years as a pupil were on message from day one.

I believe that physical abuse, in the guise of education and discipline, were endemic in the catholic church as a whole, and in the Jesuit brotherhood particularly. I don't find it too much of a stretch to believe that sexual abuse, which is generally about power and control, was similarly endemic.

I have stayed out of this discussion because I would prefer not to remember those days, but you, Joe, have been casting doubt on the authenticity of several posters' accounts as anecdotal.

Believe me, there is nothing anecdotal about the foregoing account.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 07:43 PM

Don, it IS anecdotal, but "anecdotal" does not mean that information is untrue. My dictionary says that "anecdotal" means "based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers." I have no doubt whatsoever about "the authenticity of several posters' accounts" - I have no doubt about the authenticity of any of the accounts posted above. But still, they are anecdotal, describing individual incidents or locations. As I said, it's not the incidents cited above that I question. My doubt is about the validity of the wide-reaching conclusions and condemnations that many have made, based on their personal reading and observations. To arrive at the truth, you need a far more comprehensive study. The Ryan Report, on the other hand, follows the discipline of a scientific study, and is therefore far more credible in its conclusions.

My anecdotal evidence is quite different, and it is also valid and true - but again, not sufficient evidence for a broad-reaching conclusion. Although I have seen misconduct in the Catholic Church on many occasions and I have often spoken out against it, most of my experiences in the Catholic Church have been very positive. I work at least one day a week in an women's center run by Catholic nuns, which operates under the slogan "hospitality with dignity and love" - and the nuns take that slogan very seriously. The center has served the poor of Sacramento generously for 23 years, with never a hint of scandal or abuse. Same with our local food closet and homeless dining room, which serve thousands and thousands of meals a year, never with disrespect or financial manipulation or any shade of doubt about their integrity.

Last night, I spent an hour in church preparing for Christmas, listening to how important it is for us to care for the homeless, and especially for children in need.

The "preferential option for the poor" is official Catholic teaching. So are the Seven Principles of Catholic Social Teaching:

• Sacredness of Life and the Dignity of the Human Person
  
• Call to Family, Community, and Participation
  
• Human Rights and Responsibilities
  
• Option for the Poor and Vulnerable
  
• The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers
  
• Solidarity of the Human Family/Race
  
• Care for God's Creation

These are the rules. The abuse and molestation of children are violations of the rules, horrible abuses of both moral and criminal law. I am appalled that people have committed these crimes in the name of my religious faith, and I have worked to combat these evil people, ever since I first learned of these offenses when I was in college. I do not defend them in any way, and I am outraged that they have seen fit to make use of MY church for their evil actions. I do not respect any Catholic or Catholic leader who condones or conceals this sort of conduct - and I acknowledge that there are many who have.

But their conduct is not the essence of the Catholic Church, and you will find nothing in Catholic teaching that supports their conduct. The essence of the Catholic faith is living a life in service to a loving God and to all of God's creation. Child abuse and molestation are a sacrilege, a horrible abuse of God's wonderful creation.

I fully acknowledge that these abuses have taken place, and the evidence indicates that these abuses are particularly widespread in Ireland. Should I be ashamed of these abuses, should I apologize for them? Well, I wonder how meaningful it is to apologize for something that I've never supported, enabled, or condoned in any way.

What about the question of compensation for the victims? Yes, I believe that the victims should be generously compensated, and should be given psychiatric treatment and whatever else will be helpful to their healing. However, I do wonder how much compensation is enough. The million-dollar settlements in the US are making the victims wealthy, but they're not healing the victims or preventing future abuse. The settlements are leading to cutbacks and closures in education and social service programs, most of which were not involved in the scandals in any way (one major exception is Covenant House, whose founder Fr. Bruce Ritter was a child molester).

And about those art works and church buildings - they also belong to ordinary Catholics, not only to the child molesters. Must the rest of us lose all of this to pay for their misdeeds? Must we close soup kitchens and homeless shelters, and Catholic Relief Services warehouses for food supplies for Third World countries? Must we auction off the Pieta and the Sistine Chapel to pay for the deeds of these miscreants?

If child molesters were found to be active in an organization that's important to you or to which you belong, how much liability should you have for the molester's actions? If you father molested your brother and not you, should your brother become the sole heir of family property?

So, no, I don't deny the problem of child abuse and molestation in the Catholic Church. It's a huge, serious scandal. And almost universally, the victims were Catholic, so this scandal is something that hurt our own members. But there aren't easy solutions and easy answers. Nobody knows why people do such horrible things, and nobody knows how to prevent it.

It's clear that the offenders should pay for their crimes - but how much should be paid by other Catholics, including by those who were among the victims? I don't know any Catholics who defend or deny the actions of the molesters and abusers, or who defend the bishops who tried to cover up these crimes (although I admit that there ARE some idiots who still defend the bastards). However, while this scandal has implications outside the Catholic Church, the primary effect was within the church. We feel we were betrayed and violated by these bishops and molesters and abusers. We are absolutely outraged by their actions. What we have trouble dealing with, is how people outside the Catholic Church criticize us and demand we make repayment for the outrageous actions committed by others against us and against our children.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:34 PM

You know, come to think of it, I suppose I shouldn't expect better treatment. The same thing happens to peace activists and civil rights activists and whoever dares to speak out. Many of us Americans spoke out against the first war in Iraq, and we campaigned against the School of the Americas and American imperialism in Latin America, and we were against the second war in Iraq from the beginning. The "Johnny Come Lately" outsiders later lumped us together with all Americans and condemned us as warmongering American imperialists - even though we opposed American imperialism long before the outsiders knew about it.

I was concerned about child abuse and molestation in the 1970s. I was employed by the Catholic Church, and I lost my job in 2005 because I was outspoken in opposition to things in the Church that I thought were wrong.

And if you look at a lot of posts in this thread, you'd think I was a major supporter for the cause of child molestation, simply because I'm looking for a truthful, unbiased, balanced, realistic, unhysterical assessment of the problem.

Bullshit.

Absolute, profound bullshit.

We're all seeking the same truth here - please, let's not forget that.

-Joe Offer, a proud member of the "Loyal Opposition" of the Catholic Church-

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:38 PM

I don't think anyone's meant anything personally, Joe. Opinions are bound to differ, and after all, you have said one or two things that were bound to cause a strong reaction, given the sensitive nature of the subject matter.

My 'umble opinion is that to even approach fully understanding anything, it's best to look at it from as many viewpoints and perspectives as possible. Keep them coming, is what I say.

"I'm looking for a truthful, unbiased, balanced, realistic, unhysterical assessment of the problem."

That seems to imply that you don't have one. Nor do I, but this discussion, including your contributions, is helping me form one.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Roughyed
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:40 AM

I think the problem in the Catholic Church is that the Christian god has two aspects, the god of love and the god of authority. You can delegate authority but you can't delegate love. This leads to problems in all Christian sects (and other theistic religions too). I think the Catholic Church historically has been an extremely authoritarian church and large areas of it lost touch with the god of love completely. Certainly he was not in a lot of evidence in my own English Catholic upbringing at least at my school which mirrored Don's and still causes damage to my life - although it's not so serious now as it was when I was younger.

Joe seems to have been lucky to have experienced a part of Catholicism that was inspired by the god of love (and for these purposes it doesn't matter whether that god has any objective existence or not and good luck to him and the good people around him. I agree that the Catholic Church is not just an oppressive organisation but it can be at the same as parts of it can be the opposite. Both are faces of the same organisation.

I think the abuse in the Catholic church is because of the unusual level of authority that it was able to abuse. Any authoritarian body will attract bullies and sadists. I wonder whether the celibacy rule attracts people who are trying to deny their own sexuality which could add an extra twist but I don't know. Certainly a few of my teachers use to get a kick out of hurting children but most of them were married laymen.

I think Joe sometines steps over the line in his attempts to put the other side though and fudges things. The abuse was wicked, it was solely the responsibility of the perpetrators and their protectors, not the victims and their families and the Catholic church as an organisation is liable for any abuse of the authority that organisation exercised.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 03:51 AM

One thing that many religions suffer from is a sense of priority.

Here in The UK, as in any democracy, we have a higher calling, it is called government.

How many times do you hear a priest / vicar whatever say they answer to a higher authority?

No they don't. If they want to enjoy the benefits of living in our society, they have to accept that they answer to the law. Full stop.

Sorry, but the actions of the Bishops and others in high office in covering up these crimes are, under Irish law as I understand it, an unlawful act in themselves.

If a stamp collector was in court for interfering with children and the chairman of the local philatelical society had been aware of it and had taken action to remove him but not report it to the police.... he would be deemed guilty of a number of crimes. So why not the clerical equivalent?

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:13 PM

Just got back from a trip to West Cork and have no intention of becoming involved in the main discussion until I have had a chance to read all the posts - but:
Another incident of abuse to consider, albeit indirect.
A club bouncer in Kerry has just been convicted of rape and sentenced to seven years imprisonment. He was filmed on CCTV, after the rape, carrying his victim to a skip (dumpster?), where he was discovered bending over her unconcious body - he claimed he had "found "the wan*" there" .
During the trial parish priest FR Seán Sheehy appeared as a character witness for the rapist claiming he "didn't have an abusive bone in his body". The judge in his summing up commented on the unsuitable nature of Sheehy's 'evidence'.   
Following the verdict, Sheehy was among the fifty-odd locals (mostly middle aged to elderly men) who shook hands and embraced the rapist offering their support. Yesterday Sheehy appeared on local radio saying he would do exactly the same again, and challenging the validity of the unanimous verdict.
The rapists victim has said that, thanks to the reaction of Sheehy and the locals, despite the fact that she has family locally, she feels that the can no longer continue living in the area.
* Wan - female (slightly derogatory)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: MartinRyan
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 04:39 AM

The parish priest has resigned, the bishop has apologised and praised the victim's courage.

At least the response times are coming down....

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 09:35 AM

Joe
Sorry - a lot to catch up on, here and elsewhere.
There is a big difference between your "Child molestation and child abuse reside in every facet of society" and people who use the power held by the church to molest and abuse.
It is certainly not melodramatic to describe this power as 'mesmerising' - how else would you explain a priest being in a position to beat a child so severely as to burst her eardum - without consequences to himself? Similarly how could a single stick-weilding priest get away with breaking up a dance, beating the participants and smashing their instruments - as happened on many occasions? This latter also happened in Scotland - different religion and two centuries earlier.
If Irish society or Irish lay people are in any way to blame it is in allowing the church ever to attain and abuse this control of their lives, but this assumes that lay people ever had any say in the matter.
This was a spiritual power, based (to a non-believer like myself) on deep-rooted superstition and fear, which allowed the holy man/priest/witch doctor to become the most powerful individual in the community and above the laws of that community.
The following letter appeared in this morning's Irish Times; I find it extremely moving, but also I believe it paints a vivid picture of how these things could happen.
Jim Carroll

"Madam, -
I am a 62-year-old ex-pat Irishman living in Australia.
As a young child, I was molested by a Catholic priest. I did at one stage approach my local parish priest, who in turn contacted our bishop (of Clogher).
The priest continually abused kids and young men, but the church continually swept it under the carpet. I thought the matter was resolved.
As a result of this, as soon as I became an adult, I disavowed the Catholic Church. I still suffer recurrent nightmares about this priest's abuse. When it first happened, he would have been in his mid-20s.
It did not occur once, but many times. When it first happened, I approached my mother, whom I loved dearly, but, typical of the real Irish Catholic, I got a slap on the face, and was told not to "speak about a priest like that". Unfortunately, that was the attitude from the 1950s.
If this person is extradited from the US, I am prepared to fly to Ireland and testify against him, and also name other witnesses who may not yet have come forward.
Some years ago, I met a lady who gave me comfort and solace from this nightmare, but sadly she passed away three months ago. Now all my pent up anger has surfaced again. All I want is the ultimate justice. -Yours, etc,
MICHAEL CREEDON,
Woodfield Street,
Enfield,
Adelaide,
Australia."

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 12:40 PM

If Irish society or Irish lay people are in any way to blame it is in allowing the church ever to attain and abuse this control of their lives, but this assumes that lay people ever had any say in the matter. (Jim C)

Which, of course they didn't.. I've met countless people (UK Irish) who very obviously resented that control but knew or thought they were powerless against it. One significant factor being that to go against the Catholic church is, to some, tantamount to being a Protestant. All cults work the same way to a varying degree: if you aren't one of us, you must be against us. The Catholic church preaches 'tolerance' nowadays - I find that rather patronising, although it's obviously an improvement on their past behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: olddude
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 01:07 PM

Any organization that has a billion people worldwide will have abuse. When that abuse is uncovered it is an outrage to all good people including Catholics.   I could lump a lot of people into the same boat but you know what, I know better than to do such, ... as I know better to lump the sins and abuses of the radical Taliban, atheists such as Stalin and cult believers such as Hitler into the same boat as all atheist or pagan beliefs or Muslim or or or ... What a ridiculous statement that would be. I also don't lump races into some generalized statement. No people who are good will accept abuse from any organization, church or otherwise. You find it, and you get rid of it and you punish those who do it. There are many religious leaders and non religious leaders that are bad people, cause ya know what, there are bad people in this life. There are also many wonderful people who dedicate their life to others in the Catholic church and even people who are atheist, pagans, Muslims and and and and (IMAGINE THAT!). But those with hate will never admit to that either.

If ya haven't figured that out yet, I do so feel sorry for ya.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: olddude
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 01:41 PM

And since I am getting heated, You are typing your messages freely without any concern for censorship because of a Catholic like Joe who freely gives up his spare time and dedicates himself for allowing others the privilege of using his work at no cost to anyone. Me, I moved out of my office, I am renting it (ya renting, the rent won't even pay the mortgage) to a family that lost their house because the husband had 5 heart attacks and have no place to go. I could do my work at home so they are living in that great victorian house now ... mostly at my expense and I am far far from wealthy. Why did I do that (cause it was the right thing to do)
and Oh yea I am Catholic ...and it had nothing to do with my decision.

When you are on mudcat, who are you really railing at, the church or me and Joe and the rest of us, cause that is all who reads it

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Alice
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 01:58 PM

A lot of us on Mudcat were raised in the Catholic church.

This is about the leaders in the institution of the Church who covered up abuse and allowed it to continue.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: olddude
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM

Alice,
the cover up was a disgrace, it was an absolute evil ... and no one in the church or outside the church would even think of attempting to argue otherwise. I just do not like labels on anyone. So much of that any more in the world. I think that is why the hold world is nuts. It is non stop on TV and in all discussions, 'those liberals", those conservatives,those gays, those atheists, those catholics , those Christians ...Muslims, Jews .... on and on

it is a disease that is spreading across the nation and the world and that is why we are in the situation we are in right now at this moment in time.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Alice
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 02:17 PM

I don't see the people concerned with this thread "labeling" anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 02:20 PM

Old dude, I've spent at least half my life working with, entertaining, socialising with, and breeding with Irish Catholics - what's your point?

I enjoy and value Joe's contributions, and even when we disagree there is no malice in it. I think that's understood - I certainly hope so anyway.

What I don't 'lump together' are Catholics and Catholicism. Whatever criticisms I might make of Catholicism are most definitely not directed at all Catholics. Perhaps I should endeavour to make that more obvious in future.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: olddude
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 02:42 PM

Smokey
your point is well taken, Thank you ... I suppose I am overly sensitive at the moment which I get when I don't feel well ... There is lots of corruption in the church as every where an ymore in everything, lots of good people also but boy when it is bad it is really bad and I can tell you no one is more appalled then catholic people.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 03:02 PM

No problem, olddude, I hope you're feeling better soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:53 AM

A letter from an abuse victim in this morning's Irish Times:
Jim Carroll

Madam, - I agree 100 per cent with everything in Mary Raftery's article 'Still far from accepting personal responsibility' (December 18th).
The Irish Bishops Conference admitted they were ashamed of what had gone on in the Archdiocese. They said: "The avoidance of scandal, the preservation of the reputations of individuals and of the church, took precedence over the safety and welfare of children. This should never have happened and must never be allowed to happen again."
They asked for our forgiveness. Yet of the five bishops who were in positions of power in the Archdiocese during the period of the Murphy report all seem to feel they can be excluded from that plea as they feel they have no need of forgiveness.
The damage it causes to the Catholic Church to see these men hanging on with a vice like grip to power, prestige and title is immeasurable. Is there any real repentance in the Church or are the words from the Bishops conference just that "words".
As a survivor I found the resignation statement of Bishop Murray hard to swallow. He was resigning to save "survivors" from "difficulties". Not taking any responsibility at all for his mishandling of an abusing priest, rather he was doing us "the survivors" a favour by stepping down!
Similarly Bishop Moriarty has indicated he might step down if it would serve the people, the church and victims! Not because he feels any responsibility whatsoever.
NO, NO, NO - Bishops Field, Drennan, Walsh and Moriarty you cannot hide the fact that you met month after month in the Archdiocese seeing the policy that was in place and none of you stood up and cried STOP!
You do not seem to realise you must go, not because of how you might have handled individual cases - but because you were part of the regime that facilitated abusing priests to carry on abusing and did nothing to stop it or expose it.
When I was a child I learned of the sin of omission. Have none of these men ever heard of it?
They variously say - we were not criticised in the report (it was only a sample), or we do not feel we did anything wrong etc. . . Examine your consciences and realise standing by and doing nothing was a crime. It left children to be hurt and suffer who should never have been touched.
All are guilty of knowing what the system was and all must take responsibility for being part of that system and not having the courage then to say stop - have the courage now to take the responsibility you should have then and please, please go.
MARIE COLLINS
Firhouse,
Co Dublin

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 05:33 AM

I think the child abuse scandal and the fallout from it has changed and is continuing to change everything about who and what we are and think we are as Irish people or people of Irish extraction. What strikes me is that we still haven't come to terms with what all this means to us about what sort of nation and what sort of community we have created in the years since the largest part of Ireland has been self-governing.

It's my own view that this will (or should) come to be seen as the worst and darkest episode in Irish history. Worse than Cromwell, worse than the famine, worse than the Black and Tans or Bloody Sunday.   Why? Because we've done it to ourselves - and to our children. The British didn't do it and no matter what political and intellectual gymnastics we try to perform we can't portray the Irish nation as the victims here because it's the Irish nation that is responsible - not just the Catholic church. The church couldn't have gotten away with it if the country, the state and the vast majority of the people hadn't turned a blind eye and colluded in the systematic rape and brutalisation of the most vulnerable members of the nation - it's own children.

Jim quotes from the lady's letter where she talks of the Sin of Omission.   Generations of Irish parents committed the same sin by ignoring what was happening to their own children at the hands of these men whom they allowed unfettered access to the people who looked to their parents for protection. I and many thousands of second-generation Irish people are fortunate in that my parents came to Britain and raised me there where these men didn't have the same power to do what they wanted with impunity - and where they didn't command the same craven, unquestioning, slavish deference from politicians, policemen, teachers, social workers and doctors. Though even in Britain, I'm sure many Irish and other Catholic parents would not have wanted to believe this was happening if they were told about it.

The roots of what has happened to these children lie in the very origins of the Irish state and the sectarian Catholic nationalism that gave rise to that state. And if it hadn't been for emigration, even more Irish children would have been exposed to it.

Even a cursory reading of the government report shows how reluctant and half-hearted the response of the Irish State continues to be. Even at the beginning the report refers to the 'Charitable Work' of the Christian Brothers and other religious orders. They still don't want to confront the extent to which the culture of abuse is woven into the fabric of the state.

To be sure, neither the Irish nation nor the Catholic church have a monopoly on child abuse. And it can't be ignored that partition has played a part in this by creating not one but two corrupt sectarian states. But the fact that partition helped create the problem doesn't mean that the removal of partition would be any kind of solution. Too much damage has probably been done in the meantime.

It's probably too much to hope for to expect that the Irish nation and the Irish community (at least the current generation) will learn from this and start to think differently about the assumptions and myths we have nurtured for so long about who we are and what our history has been but in the long run, perhaps we'll at least learn to take responsibility for our own history and stop thinking like victims. Because it is clear that in the last 90 years, the greatest oppression against Irish people has been committed by other Irish people.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 05:49 AM

The Savage Eye , last night on RTE. Satirical look at the Irish and religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 04:37 AM

I tried that link, Peter, but the RTE Player is only available in the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland. Not that satire ever changed anything. In England, all it achieved was to enable a few public schoolboys to get rich in showbusiness instead of in the City.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 10:53 AM

A similar cover up within Sinn Fein.
PIRA had a policy of kneecapping child abusers and executing child rapists.
Unless the offender was one of their own.
Gerry Adams knew in 1987 that his brother Liam had raped his own child.
He was not punished, and was allowed to work with a youth group.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 12:58 PM

Another bishop resigns over the Murphy report

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 05:22 PM

Another bishop gone – a little like pulling teeth, and still no acceptance of guilt or apology, but maybe, once the scapegoats have been sacrificed……. who knows?
To me, there is something distastefully perverse in blaming the population of Ireland for the abuse, as my fellow Scouser seems to be doing, continuing Joe's line of thought (if I mistake your reasoning I apologise).
If the people of Ireland are guilty, surely that must include the victims themselves, especially those who remained faithful to the church; so the abused become the abusers – do I have that right?
If everybody is guilty, then, for all practical purposes, nobody is – you can't punish a whole nation – can you? To me, this seems like an extension of the abuse rather than an attempt to alleviate the suffering caused by it..
Rather, I believe the opposite to be the case; that the whole of Ireland was victim to the abuse by having their trust betrayed by their church.

Another moving response from a victim in this morning's Irish Times; if nothing else has been achieved by the two reports, at least the victims have been given a voice.
The writer, having asked the Irish people why they aren't on the streets demanding justice for her and her fellow abused, se ends with the following proposals:

"□ Withdrawing funding from an organization that, in Irish terms, has been responsible for an "Irish holocaust" of physical and mental abuse of hundreds of children, as children and beyond into their adult lives.

□ Outlawing (proscribing) the Catholic organisation until such time as it (like other organisations which we have banned during our history) demonstrates that it has fully reformed itself.

□ Requiring the church to publish the list of churches and timeframes where and when abuse occurred (those listed in the reports and those not listed, ie outside the sample of cases).

□ Forcing the Government truly to separate State and church through requiring Catholic clergy, and the religious, to resign from school boards/management, hospital boards/management, health services boards/management, etc. C3 Requiring any public servant who has expressed support - through inaction or through words of bureaucratic mumble-jumble - for the Catholic hierarchy, or the papal nuncio, to resign.

□   Requiring clerics in positions of governance who failed to act appropriately to resign rather than hide behind word games of "reflection", "mental reservation" and such utterances, insulting to victims such as myself.

As a child I was powerless in the face of my abuser. As an adult victim, I am now required to have strength, to stand up and be counted, to come forward (as Noel Dempsey asked), to understand the nuances of diplomatic procedure (as Brian Cowen asked).
When will it stop for me and others?
When will the people of Ireland stand up for me and others?
When will it be over for me and for others - and unfortunately for others who have yet to come? Everything tells me that nothing has changed, that it can still happen. That it is still happening."

For the life of me, I can't see anything wrong with any of her proposals.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 06:35 PM

"I believe the opposite to be the case; that the whole of Ireland was victim to the abuse by having their trust betrayed by their church."

I'll second that, Jim, but I also think that Chris B has some very good points.

In a way it's a shame these bishops are resigning, rather than being publicly slung out of office by the Catholic church. It looks like an easy option to me. They shouldn't even be given the option to resign unless they are willing to make full confessions to the police which can (and obviously should) be acted upon to bring about other arrests and track down as many victims as possible. People can only be prosecuted with proper non-circumstantial evidence against them - confessions and witness statements made to the police - and if I'm not mistaken, they don't actually have any yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: MartinRyan
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 07:05 PM

Another bishop gone – a little like pulling teeth, and still no acceptance of guilt or apology

By whom? FWIW, Moriarty HAS publicly accepted that what he did was wrong , apologised and admitted he should have stood up to the prevailing culture at the time. He may have done so belatedly - but at least he has done so.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 07:55 PM

"By whom?"
Surely by the church and the state bodies that made it all possible?
I am hearing a great deal at the present time of the anguish of bishops who are upset by events - on the other hand the case for the victims is having to be put largely by the victims themselves.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:30 AM

Jim, it's certainly not my intention to 'blame the victims' here. However, we need to remember that the victims were the children and what happened to them and the lack of justice they have received was not just the fault of the priests but also the fault of those who should have stood up for them and protected them. That doesn't just include parents but also the institutions of the State that could have stopped this but which chose not to. And that includes all the agencies I referred to earlier (and more besides, no doubt).

Yes, the church exercised a powerful and frightening influence on the parents of these children but at the end of the day these men were only men. Without the connivance of the State and the tacit complicity of the majority of the population they could never have gotten away with it for as long as they did and on the scale that they did.

To imply that somehow the Irish people (who had stood up to the most powerful empire in history for 800 years and won a kind of freedom from it) were powerless to do anything against a bunch of perverts in frocks seems, to be blunt, a rather condescending view of the Irish people. The fact that such a nation allowed this to happen suggests to me that many, in not most, Irish people made a choice not to challenge the power of the church as long as they thought their own children were OK.

Growing up in the Irish community in England, the church was important to us as something that kept us together and helped us keep our own culture and identity (or at least a version of it). Like Joe, I'm still part of the church and my own child goes to a Catholic school. However, I think I was lucky - when I was a kid our parish priests were American - they belonged to an order (The Society of St Edmund) which was based in Vermont and had parishes in Alabama.

Most of our parish priests had been based there at the time of the early civil rights movement and we grew up hearing more about Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King than we heard about Patrick Pearse or Roger Casement (two more men who should never have been allowed near children).

Nowadays I'm still active in Comhaltas and for years I argued that we needed to introduce CRB vetting in the face of entrenched opposition from people in the organisation who said we didn't need it because we didn't have 'outsiders' - and also, I think, because many people in the Irish community in England thought that because they were Irish they didn't need to take any notice of 'English' laws on things like Child Protection. And I think that in part, it's this 'Don't let outsiders know your business' attitude that allowed things in Ireland to get as bad as they did. But perhaps that's another story.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:01 AM

Scouser; you completely understate the position that the church played in Irish society up to comparatively recently, rather nicely summed up in a letter in today's Irish Times; "The Catholic church is so engrained into every facet of Irish life that any move against it feels like a move against yourself".
It was absolutely inconceivable that 'men of god' could commit such horrendous crimes, and anybody suggesting such ran the risk of eternal damnation (as well as all the other penalties that makin such a heretical statement brought with it).
"....as long as they thought their own children were OK."
Now that really is insultingly outrageous. The letter from the Australian abuse victim describes perfectly what any parent's response would have been when told her what was happening - he obviously wasn't OK.
If they were "only men", they managed to convince the general populace that they had 'God on their side' - I saw it first hand in members of my own family over here - the priest could do no wrong'.
In the end it comes down to this; within the protection of the church existed an extremely successful peodophile ring, so successful that it was provided with an infallable escape route and a means whereby it could continue in business, thanks to the co-operation of the church officers.
If you believe that people in general here knew this, I suggest you talk to Irish people in my age group and earlier who were around at the time - but wear a crash helmet.
Sorry - you are blaming the population as a whole, including the victims.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:20 AM

Jim,

The Ryan report contains an observation that within the Industrial School system run by the church (and particularly the Christian Brothers) that children (particularly boys) who came from lower-income families and families with parents of low educational attainment levels were more likely to be abused than kids from families with higher educational attainment levels (the children of teachers, for instance).

This suggests that the abusers in the Church were careful not to abuse the children of parents who would have had the resources to do something about it.

In other words, parents from professional backgrounds were held in sufficient awe by the abusers in the church for the abusers to avoid antagonising them.

It follows that such people would have had the power to take action. They chose not to.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:56 AM

That is incredibly and (coming from a working class background) unnbelieveably insulting
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 08:13 AM

To whom?

The abuse of children in Ireland (and anywhere else) is an abuse of trust and power. The least powerful in society are the most vulnerable.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 12:16 PM

I'm sorry to take so long in posting, but I just couldn't face this thread over Christmas and St. Stephen's Day -      

Insulting to whom? Yes, of course the least powerful in society - children - are the most vulnerable, but that doesn't mean they're the only vulnerable ones. Can you really not understand how such statements as the following are insulting?
   
"Without the ... tacit complicity of the majority of the population"
"They chose not to"
"The fact that such a nation allowed this to happen suggests to me that many, if not most, Irish people made a choice not to challenge the power of the church as long as they thought their own children were OK"   

These are not facts, they are your personal opinion based on a single line of reasoning. If, after having read all the posts in this thread, you can't see how reductive this is and how many elements - such as the secrecy and the spiritual blackmail - have been selectively ignored, no further explanations are going to do it either.   

> To imply that somehow the Irish people (who had stood up to the most powerful empire in history for 800 years and won a kind of freedom from it) were powerless to do anything against a bunch of perverts in frocks seems, to be blunt, a rather condescending view of the Irish people.

This is a rather condescending view of the Penal Laws, Cromwell's conquest, and The Famine (which resulted from many factors beyond the potato blight) to name only a few. "Stood up to" paints a misleadingly facile picture and is not an adequate description for the terrible privations and depletions suffered from these events. And this is exactly the sort of over-simplification I object to in the judgements made above. Your dismissal of the extensive social and sacred power the Church had over the Irish people as "a bunch of perverts in frocks" is pretty condescending too.   

"This suggests", "in other words", "would have had", "it follows that", "suggests to me", and "they chose"

are all personal interpretations, based on a process of logical deduction - and omissions - which lead to conclusions so generalised as to distort the situation as it was actually lived.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 02:20 PM

Thanks Bonnie (and seasons greetings) - I feel pretty much the same.
Update;
Two more bishops have tendered their resignations (with apologies) but the final one, The Bishop of Galway, Dr Martin Drennan, is refusing to do so insisting that he has done no wrong, and though he was named in the Murphy Report he was not asked to give evidence!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: MartinRyan
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 05:03 PM

Bishop Drennan , the last of the auxiliary bishops of Dublin concerned (in whose diocese I now live, as it happens) will go shortly - or the current Archbishop of Dublin will go instead (for Brutus is...). The real question is whether their delay ("the law's delay", given that two of them were qualified barristers) has done more harm than good. For me? - as a largely disinterested outsider by now - I have little doubt but that they have contributed to the ulitimate demise of the suzerainty of the Catholic (the capital is cultural) church in Ireland. How long it will take for some form of collective psyche to put manners on the "nation" is another question entirely!

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 06:12 PM

These bishops falling on their swords were not, in my opinion, the top of this pyramid of denial and deceit.

Bishops take orders from, and report to, Cardinals, and it is hard to imagine, given the length of time over which this occurred, that there weren't any promotions of culprits to that rank. It is also hard to believe that the cover-up didn't go all the way to the Vatican.

The policy of transferring the miscreants must have raised queries from above as to reasons, surely, and those that sanctioned transfer to other parishes also sanctioned the sacrifice of new victims to the preservation of the church's reputation.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 07:13 PM

This suggests that the abusers in the Church were careful not to abuse the children of parents who would have had the resources to do something about it.

It suggests to me that the children didn't necessarily even tell their parents, or their parents didn't necessarily believe them if they did. I've known both happen in the UK, with disastrous results. However, if the parents had believed and taken some sort of action, it would have been one small boy's word against an expensive private school full of Jesuit monks. The parents would have looked like fools and the boy a liar. What chance would they have in Ireland, where the authorities are known to collude with the church over such things, and the Catholic church virtually own (in effect) everything and everyone? They never had a choice and they never had a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Alice
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 07:18 PM

It is typical that the molester counts on the fact that most children are afraid to tell anyone what was done to them. That's common in child molestation all over the world, not just in this case in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Suffer The Children (Dublin child abuse)-2
From: Smokey.
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 08:04 PM

Very true Alice, but 1500(?) years of oppressive Catholic saturation and brainwashing in Ireland has bred the perfect social conditions for what we are now seeing uncovered, and I suspect that is only the tip of the iceberg.