BS: Clerical Abuse of Children

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 05:35 AM

You are prevaricating Joe - and you have the support here in the form of obne of our tame trolls to underline that fact
You don't have to be a Christian to give to charity - - being a human being usually does the trick -
Some of us do it without bothering to mention it and never raise the question of being "ripped off" - we give what we give without a fanfare and without question.
It seems a 'Christian' tendency in some to flaunt their charitable donations
"Do you arseholes see what real liberalism means and can accomplish?
Or would you rather sit on your fat arses and polish your mythical ideology."
Says what needs to be said without need for comment
I hope to two will be very happy together
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 06:23 AM

I really do not have anything to bring to the prior discussion but I have read with interest the views on limiting the time when prosecutions can be brought about. My view is that there are some crimes which should never have a statute of limitations applied. Particularly those where the victims are still suffering as a result of that crime. Just my opinion but I think that may be backed up by the effort put in to capturing and prosecuting, for instance, Nazi war criminals.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 06:50 AM

Dave beat me to it there. I heartily disagree with setting any kind of time limit for sex abuse cases. The powers that be can decide on a case-by-case basis whether the remaining evidence has any prospect of leading to a conviction if pursued in court. And stating that victims will still be suffering many decades after the immunity from prosecution deadline has kicked in is not an emotional add-on, Joe. It's a fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 08:21 AM

The question of institutional abuse should never have a time limit set on it, particularly in relation to children
Any institution found to be involved in abuse should have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that they have cleared out their Augian Stable and that it can not happen again
Behaving as the Church has done doesn't even to begin to address those conditions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 08:56 AM

So, THEN Jim sez: You are prevaricating Joe
Oh, I wonder what he's calling me a liar for now. I guess I have to put up with it. The poor guy babbles a lot and doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

And then she says: You don't have to be a Christian to give to charity
Which I guess is supposed to be an implication that I said one had to be Christian to give to charity. When did I ever say that, Jim?

But still I'm stuck with a dilemma, and that's what I was trying to talk about. But Jim Carroll believes in free expression only from people who agree with him. Nonetheless, it's a dilemma. I think that Catholics were overwhelmingly favorable to the victims when this whole scandal broke out. After all, it was mostly Catholic children who were the victims. They favored immediate compensation of the victims, and immediate prosecution of the criminals. But this thing has gone on and on, and the compensation thing became a bidding war in the U.S. until the price got up to a million dollars a victim - and many dioceses who had already made settlements were forced to pay the same victims a second time for the same crime.

And most of these reparations are coming out of money that people gave as charitable contributions. And if the bills go up higher, the people will have to give more or see their churches go into bankruptcy. Indeed, many dioceses did go into bankruptcy because of these claims.

So, yeah, it's a dilemma for people who contribute to churches. Do they donate to what has become a bottomless pit of million-dollar claims for forty-year-old crimes, or do they bypass the church and give their money direct to charitable needs? As I said above before I was so rudely called a liar, I know the immigrants and the homeless people and their need is real to me. I've never met a person I knew to have been molested by a priest, so their need is not real to me. And on top of that, I have seen no proof that ever-increasing reparations serve to heal the harm that was done to the victims.

So, Jim, try to answer my question without calling me a liar this time. Why should I want to donate to a compensation fund when the compensation doesn't appear to do any good?

And Jim, please remember that I have never said that one has to have a particular religious faith in order to give to charity. And don't call me a liar again. It isn't nice, even if you use the word "prevaricator." I'm smart enough to know what that big word means.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 09:09 AM

Now that Joe has filled in his background and experiences I can better understand what and why he has communicated in the past that always seemed like a hidden agenda guided his words.

Until we know the etiology of ones language from experience we can not communicate effectively.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 11:57 AM

I've never met a person I knew to have been molested by a priest, so their need is not real to me.

However, that doesn't mean their need is not real, Joe- only that you choose to denegrate and dismiss it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 11:59 AM

Joe is perfectly correct to support the Statute of Limitations, in the UK we have loads of historic sexual offences milked to the bitter end by people who were assaulted fifty years ago in a completely different time frame......Remember the "groupies" who just couldn't wait to get into bed with their pimply heroes....I suppose there will be many of them in the compensation queue telling everyone how their life was ruined by the harrowing experience.
In my day, you learned who to avoid if you had any sense and if you were a young woman you made bloody sure you didn't end up in the wrong place with the wrong person.

The world these days is populated by "victims" of on sort or another, with no sense of responsibility for their own wellbeing....society will look after them. Well the times are a changin' once again.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 12:23 PM

"Oh, I wonder what he's calling me a liar for now."
"prevaricate
prɪˈvarɪkeɪt/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: prevaricating
speak or act in an evasive way."
Didn't even have to pull the dictionary off the shelf for that one - I thought everbody knew that
"When did I ever say that, Jim?"
What other purpose did your list of donations to the needy have here if not to prove your Christianity?
"But Jim Carroll believes in free expression only from people who agree with him"
When did I ever say that, Jim?
I'm asking you to qualify your arguments - you have done so by blaming the victims for their suffering and suggesting that they have no rights to justice because they cannot be trusted not to misuse it.
As things stand at present, the church has proved itself untrustworthy in its relationship with the most vulnerable of its parishioners.
It's role in collecting for charity is not an issue here.
Ireland is one of the most charitable places I have ever experienced - most of those charities are non-religious, so if ever we had to choose, we would find no difficulty in picking one.
It really isn't an issue when it comes to putting the church where it truely belongs - as spiritual guide.
Similar types of argument have been used in defence of allowing our hospitals and schools to remain under religious control
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Iains
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 12:47 PM

Presumably the law concerning the statute of limitations was thoroughly thrashed out prior to reaching the statute book. Different places came to different views as to the length of time dictated by the statute, what exemptions should apply to modify it, or even if, for sexual crimes against minors, any statute of limitations should apply. The law in any particular jurisdiction is what the law is. My feeling is that a limitation in this particular set of circumstances is not ideal, but conversely I would also argue that the arguments for presenting a case must satisfy a progressively higher bar as time elapses.It is a difficult issue to resolve. After a considerable period of time has elapsed how is justice best served? Neither Joe nor Jim seem to articulate a decisive argument- both sides have merit. For this particular crime a closure for the victim is of far greater importance than satisfying the letter of the law. Surely restoring the complete mental stability of the victim is the end result required.(having not been there I cannot begin to understand the victim's anguish, often bottled up for years) Compensation should not just be financial. I know nothing about the subject but I would have thought therapy was required above all. The additional cross the victims have to carry is that they themselves(30% according to some figures), due to their own abuse subsequently go on to start the cycle of abuse all over again
That is a terrible legacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/24/science/sad-legacy-of-abuse-the-search-for-remedies.html?pagewanted=all

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 01:47 PM

"Presumably the law concerning the statute of limitations was thoroughly thrashed out prior to reaching the statute book."
And presumably the Irish Government was well aware of the law concerning the statute of limitations when it agreed to take the lion's share of reparation debt in conjunction with the Church
Maybe they were guided by conscience rather than law - would that the church had adopted the same principle - but that's religious organisations for you!!
ANOTHER TERRIBLE LEGACY
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 02:15 PM

Steve Shaw, in response to my saying I don't knowe any sex crime victims:
However, that doesn't mean their need is not real, Joe- only that you choose to denegrate and dismiss it.

To say that a stranger's need of a million dollars is not real to me, is certainly not to denigrate or dismiss it. I merely question how a million-dollar settlement is going to resolve the harm done.

And Jim, in his oh-so-righteous tone of condemnation, says: I'm asking you to qualify your arguments - you have done so by blaming the victims for their suffering and suggesting that they have no rights to justice because they cannot be trusted not to misuse it.

Jim, I'm going to have to see a quote to believe I would say such a thing. I certainly do not blame the victims for their suffering and all those other empty accusations that you spew so freely and with such solemnity.

Look, I'm in a predicament here. I'm on the losing side, and I know it. I don't deny the crimes committed and the harm done and the suffering that continues. I am horrified and ashamed that some of the people who committed the crimes were people I once considered to be my friends. I truly believe that there is a need for fair and immediate settlements.

But that's my money that they're paying in those settlements. A huge portion of the contributions I paid to my church over the last 50 years or go, goes to those settlements. And so, I dare to ask how long and how much I'm going to have to keep paying, and is it doing any good. This isn't priests or bishops or cardinals or the Pope who's paying - it's me. I'm glad that many priests and bishops learned that they are going to have to lead a more austere lifestyle - some of them were outrageously big spenders. But they and the child molesters are not paying the bill for these settlements - I am.

To remain Catholic through all of this, is to choose to be on the losing side. But it's my church where I grew up, and it is a spiritual home to me. I have never been a big fan of the so-called "institutional church," but that institution is not my faith. For me, Church is the people I've loved and joined with in ancient rituals and sacred songs for decades. I have nothing but disdain for officious and judgmental priests and bishops I've known over the years, but I've known so many more good ones. And I realize that no group of people is perfect and that every group has some members who do wrong, so I remain part of the church even though I am appalled by the actions of the wrongdoers.

And the wrongdoers are not paying the bills for their actions. I'm paying, and I didn't do the crime. And so I dare to ask how much and how long I'm going to have to pay. That's all.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 02:29 PM

And Jim, where I grew up, "prevaricate" was just a nice way of calling somebody a liar. I guess I took that on faith, and never bothered to look up the word.
You learn something new every day.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 02:45 PM

Joe, Firstly I am not having a go at you personally, please be clear on that.

I can understand your predicament, however the church you follow has for decades allowed atrocious abuse to take place by the very people who are supposed to be LEADERS of that faith and then sought to protect those same people from the punishments they should be subject too, and that they so richly deserve.

It matters not one iota whether that the abuse occurred last month, last year or even fifty years ago, the victims are still VICTIMS.

Though I accept that a financial sop does not "cure" the problem it MAY go some little way to compensate the VICTIMS.

I care not one jot for the prepetrators, if they are ruined so be it, and if the church that has strenuously endeavoured to protect them to brought to ruin, so be it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: robomatic
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:03 PM

There was no reaction to my post of: 31 Jul 17 - 02:06 PM
Yet that raised an issue which has not been directly addressed otherwise in this forum, that the institutional call for sublimation of a natural and powerful human drive is a contributor or motivator to this worldwide problem.

It may be that no one has the willingness to challenge this thousand plus year old policy but to me that means that the problem is not being completely addressed and will persist.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:10 PM

I should also add that the Catholic church is one of the most wealthy organisations the world has ever seen.

If the church is forced to pay out they can well afford it, not individuals like yourself Joe, the church.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:18 PM

"was just a nice way of calling somebody a liar."
Americans always have had a poor grasp of the English language
If I gave the impression I was accusing you of telling lies, I apologise
I have been saying that you have been avoiding important questions throughout this argument - that was what I meant
"Jim, I'm going to have to see a quote to believe I would say such a thing. "
You put something up about a local "victims rights" group to illustrate how those seekers for justice abused their position - isn't that comparison an indication that you believe claimants cannot be trusted - if not, what's it doing here?
Again, if I have got that wrong, I apologise.
And still you prevaricate
I've said on numerous occasions that I believe that how the actual perpetrators should be dealt with is something for the victims to decide, or if not, to at least have an input into.
My point has been all along is that it is how the Church, Churches, Diocese, Bishop, archbishops, Popes.... whoever, dealt with what was certainly common knowledge   
The church, as a body, were part of these crimes, for ignoring them or for facilitating them by assisting the perps bt passing them on to parishes were their "little weaknesses" were not known.
I really find it upsetting to fall out with you over this, but you honestly do not seem to have grasped the seriousness - both to the victims and to the genuine believers whose lives have been turned upside-down by these revelations.
I am ashamed to say that I find myself pleased that people like the Lenihans, or Martin Reidy or Junior and Cissie Crehan.... or any of those kind gentle people who used to splash holy water over us from the little font by the door as we left their homes (because we hadn't done it for ourselves) did not survive to experience what is happening now.
They were as much betrayed by what was happening as those who were the actual victims
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:31 PM

Did you know that the splashing of holy water stems from washing on entering the house rather than leaving, Jim? I learned that from a priest in Whitby of all places!

Sorry to detract from such a serious topic but I like to impart bits of useless information.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:42 PM

This isn't priests or bishops or cardinals or the Pope who's paying - it's me..... so I dare to ask how much and how long I'm going to have to pay.

Well, Joe - I suggest that you take that up with the Church, rather than complain about the victims. For example, the Church might re-direct the money spent to attempt to take away a woman's Constitutional right to choose- they seem to have plenty to spend there and to further other political causes. Or perhaps its time to re-direct your philanthropy.

RE: how settlements might benefit the victims, with all your connections and experience in the various aid organizations and communities it shouldn't be to difficult for you to locate several victims, and talk to them & get to know them. That might make it "real" to you.

And the question wasn't from Steve, it was from me.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:09 PM

No disagreement there, Raggytash.
You say: the church you follow has for decades allowed atrocious abuse to take place by the very people who are supposed to be LEADERS of that faith and then sought to protect those same people from the punishments they should be subject too, and that they so richly deserve.

I have lived most of my life as a Catholic in two dioceses: Sacramento (California) and Milwaukee (Wisconsin). Both of these dioceses had priests who were child molesters, and I have known a number of priests in both dioceses who committed these crimes. Both of these dioceses took immediate action against the offenders as soon as the crimes were discovered. Sacramento offered immediate settlements and counseling to all who filed complaints. I don't know what Milwaukee did - the scandal came to light long after I left the seminary and moved away from Milwaukee in 1970. But I do know that Miulwaukee paid a lot of money in settlements and had to file bankruptcy. I'm sure that some cases were not handled well in both dioceses, but it appears to me that for the most part, both dioceses tried hard to "do the right thing."

I also know that there were many dioceses that did NOT handle these crimes well. It would be interesting to see a study of how each diocese in my country responded. I'm afraid that the U.S. map would be covered with far too many dioceses that consistently mishandled cases - and a good number where the coverups were clearly criminal, some notoriously so. I did not experience these coverups in Milwaukee and Sacramento. Indeed, Milwaukee was already making efforts in the 1960s to screen out seminarians who might become sex offenders - I went through that screening myself, and I can tell you that it was rigorous.

My sister was a very active Catholic, and she lived in the Boston area during the reign of the notorious Cardinal Law. She said that Law's attempts to deny and cover up sex crimes in the Boston Archdiocese were like a sickness that pervaded all Catholic activities in the entire area. My sister left the Catholic Church, and will have nothing to do with any sort of religious practice. I can't talk with her about religious matters any more - she just gets angry. When I visited her in Egypt five years ago, I was interested in learning about Islam and Coptic Christianity and the history of Judaism in Alexandria, but she got angry every time I brought up a question. My other siblings stopped practicing religion when they became adults, but my sister lasted until she was in her 40s. Only my parents and I remained Catholic - and I think I can say that my parents and I enjoyed being Catholic and did not experience the negative side of Catholicism that does indeed exist in many places.

I don't post what I post here in an attempt to defend the Catholic Church - there is no defense for the terrible things that were done in the name of my church. I have not and I will not defend these terrible crimes. But I do believe that there is a need for fair and open discussion of this scandal and its repercussions. And that's what I'm trying to do - just discuss the matter and share my thoughts and experiences, because that's all that I have the power to do.

Still, I do not think that larger and larger settlements are going to heal the wrong done. Healing is not going to occur by throwing money at the wound. I agree that there is a need for financial settlements, but financial settlements are not enough.

I do not believe that the process can stop with the payment of settlements. That's just not enough. I think that the next step is free and opoen and honest discussion by the victims and by those who committed these horrible crimes against them. We all need to hear why these things happened, what led up to them, what actually happened, and what has happened to both victims and offenders since the offenses. There have beginnings of these discussions in many places, but nothing really significant has happened so far.

Now I'm going to say something that will put our sharks into a frenzy, but I think it needs to be said. I do not think that honest discussion and healing can begin until the criminal prosecutions and reparations have been completed. How can a priest or bishop talk freely and honestly, if he has to fear being sent to prison or being required to pay millions of dollars more? The truth of this matter is not pretty; and if offenders tell the truth, it will bring about another frenzy of anger and demands for more prosecutions and reparations. And I think it's safe to say that most of the people who are in a frenzy, are NOT people who were victims of sex crimes.

But we need to know why this terrible thing happened, and we need to know how to prevent it from happening again - in churches, or in other parts of society. If we can allow the truth to be spoken, we may learn how to stop or control this problem of child molestation that is so widespread in our world.

As I've said before, the independent newspaper National Catholic Reporter has been publishing bluntly honest articles on the Catholic sex abuse scandal since 1983. Today I was reading an NCR article titled 'Uncommon conversation' on sex abuse falls silent. It tells the story of one attempt made to achieve the honest dialogue I seek between victims and offenders - and the article reports that this effort failed. I hope that people will continue to attempt such discussions - they are the next step beyond reparations, and it is a necessary step.

But such discussions may happen only if there are statutes of limitations that put an end to the prosecutions and reparations after a reasonable length of time.

Please remember that I seek only honest discussion. I do not seek to defend the people who committed these crimes or to denigrate the victims. Why would I want to do that?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:36 PM

Raggytash says: I should also add that the Catholic church is one of the most wealthy organisations the world has ever seen.

Well, I suppose they could give empty churches and convents to the victims. Nobody wants to buy the darn things.

A major item of disagreement, is whether the Catholic Church is one entity that should be liable as a whole for reparations for these crimes, or if all of the separate dioceses and religious orders should be individually liable. I believe the latter should be the case, since each religious order head or local ordinary (head bishop) is the chief executive of that particular entity and should be able to control what goes on there. Most of the rest of you choose the former (that the Catholic Church as a whole should be liable), and I have to say that both positions have validity.

-Joe-

Robomatic, I don't understand what you said July 31, and I don't understand it any better now.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:45 PM

That's somewhat disingenuous Joe, both you and I know that the Catholic church has wealth far beyond its buildings.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 05:40 PM

For the most part, Raggytash, what I say is true. Dioceses and religious orders have a lot of wealth tied up in buildings, and many have filed bankruptcy. The area of contention is about the endowment of the Vatican, a multi-billion-dollar stock portfolio built on reparations that Italy paid for the loss of the Papal States. The Vatican is supported by the earnings from that portfolio, which makes it financially independent - and as I said before, it means that it is no longer the political pawn of wealthy interests that it was when it was kicked around among the Spanish, French, and Italians. I would think that forfeiting that portfolio would make the Vatican dependent on the wealthy American interests that have such a powerful (and conservative) effect on the Catholic Church in the United States.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 07:08 PM

"Steve Shaw, in response to my saying I don't knowe any sex crime victims:
However, that doesn't mean their need is not real, Joe- only that you choose to denegrate and dismiss it"

I don't know which Steve Shaw said that to you, Joe, but it wasn't this Steve Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 07:13 PM

Oops, sorry, Greg, I hadn't spotted that you'd already corrected Joe on that.

Could be two countries divided by a common language thang, but, to me, "to prevaricate" means nothing remotely like "to lie."

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 07:57 PM

I get so confused....

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 02:43 AM

"I do not seek to defend the people who committed these crimes or to denigrate the victims."
You are still missing or avoiding the point Joe
That is not what is being discussed here.
The perpetrators should have been punished by law - the vast majority of them weren't - those who were found out (or were investigated when they were accused) got off with a slapped wrist and let go on their merry way
If they had been Muslims or schoolteachers or medical staff, they would have been facing long jail sentences.
But that is beside the point
The Church on every level, as an institution, participated in in these crimes at the time and the church hierarchy continue to hide evidence essential to bringing closure the victims and their families
Again, if that were to happen outside the church, it would be punishable by law.
The lack of contrition on the part of the Church has led to its being undermined in the eyes of ordinary worshipers - that is why your churches are empty and it is why your religion is dying.
Personally, I don't care that it is dying - but I would rather that believers thought about it and said "this doesn't make sense"
As for the power of the church being undermined; that is long overdue - these crimes could never have gone on for so long if the Church had not possessed as much power as it did.
Your religion makes a creat thing about confession and forgiveness - yet it is a little short of it when it comes to its own sins
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 03:11 AM

better look at milwaukee again. it is one of the very worst places, presided over by creepy creep himself...read up on the deaf boys..the perpetual care cemetary fund...

it does not bother me to pay for these offenses. i figure it is my obligation as much as anyone's. i have not reduced the not huge amount i donate to the church or diverted it...i do not want parishes to suffer or go bankrupt..but i think the vatican needs to start at least having more treasures visible to the public for an admission fee...and they need to open secret archives...they are afraid, very afraid, of what is in there...too many wicked secrets...and some possibly wonderful ones....to do with mary magdalene for one...

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 04:41 AM

I do wonder about things that happened in my home town of Milwaukee, mg. St. John's School for the Deaf was right next door to the seminary I attended. I never saw any people there, although the brother of a friend of mine was a student there and she never said anything bad about the deaf school. And thirty years later, I learn that the priest in charge of the school, Fr. Lawrence Murphy, was molesting students for years, at the time I was living next door. Yes, that was creepy to find that out.
We had lots of priests in the seminary as professors, but none of them ever mentioned the School for the Deaf or the priest who was in charge.
The School for the Deaf was located on a huge piece of church-owned property that included the minor and major seminaries, the motherhouse of the Sisters of St. Francis, a Catholic parish church and school, and later a Catholic high school. All of these institutions interacted, but not the School for the Deaf. I heard the names of many, many priests - but never heard mention of the name of this priest who was in charge of the deaf school. I think I knew every other priest who worked on this piece of property where I lived for eight years (maybe 35-50 priests), but not this one. Interesting how he could escape unnoticed.


The Milwaukee perpetual care cemetery fund was something I was going to bring up. When people bought plots in Catholic cemeteries, they paid an endowment fee that guaranteed perpetual care of their graves. This money was banked with the rest of the assets of the diocese. When the diocese was threatened with sexual abuse claims, the diocese separated the cemeteries into a separate corporation and transferred the perpetual care funds to the cemetery corporation. Some people challenged this transfer. I think it was legitimate, but it sure made a lot of people angry. I know that from the other side, I would have been angry if I had paid good money for my parents' graves, and then lost that money to abuse settlements.

I believe that the Vatican Archives are open to scholars, just as the Library of Congress and the National Archives are open in the U.S. In all these institutions, some documents are protected for various reasons. The Vatican Museum and many areas of the Vatican are open to the public. It costs 15 euros to go to the Vatican Museum and Sistine Chapel, and 6 euros to go up into the dome of St. Peter's. The Vatican Museum has a huge amount of stuff that is reportedly of great value, but it certainly is not a state-of-the art display. The display cases look lie they haven't been dusted for a century. The Egyptian Museum in Cairo is the only other museum I've seen with such funky displays of such valuable artifacts. The Vatican sure doesn't waste its money on museum maintenance.
Entrance to St. Peter's Basilica and all the basilicas in Rome, is free. Only a very few Catholic churches charge admission. Most of the Missions here in California charge admission except during worship services, and that bugs me.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 05:55 AM

And still you are shuffling around the Vatican and other leading Church bosies being directly implicated in the crimes and their cover up
Your message is clear and simple - Joe as is your dedicated lemmingism that will take your religion over the cliff along with you.
More power to your elbow, I say - at least we will have made the most of an appalling period in history
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 06:20 AM

Jim. take to read carefully to what I have said above. I am honestly seeking a solution, for healing for the victims. It seems to me that the only solution you seek, is that the Catholic Church be beaten into total submission. Winners often seek such solutions - and such solutions rarely work. I humbly admit that the Catholic Church lost in this situation, and lost bigtime. But no matter how bad the offense committed by a group, there is still a sizeable number of well-meaning people on the losing side.
If you win and set out to destroy the losers, you'll lose. If you win and acknowledge that a vast number of the losers are people of good will, then you can truly win.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 08:39 AM

It just goes on and on ............

Catholic Priest - Lawrence Soper

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 08:41 AM

I should have made clear he has only been charged with offences

.......... not proven guilty at this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 09:35 AM

So Joe, what then would you say to the victims, if given a chance?

Sorry folks, happened a long time ago, not my problem, I ain't paying, tough shit, get over it?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:22 PM

"I am honestly seeking a solution, for healing for the victims"
The first step to healing is to recognise the illness - the church has refused to do so, so it has painted itself out of the picture
"I" do not wish to beat the church into submission - I am watching as it is being rejected wholesale because of its inaction and detachment
Please don't blame me for what many thousands of former churchgoers are now doing
You act if this is a one-man campaign and refuse to even acknowledge what actually happening on the ground here.
This really is head-in-the-sand stuff.
Today's papers are full of articles announcing that older priests are having to take on other parishes because the disillusionment has severely effected the recruitment of priests
Wake up Joe - your House is on fire!!
I really am only the messenger here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:41 PM

No need for any "soul searching", The Catholic Church should scrap the celibacy rule and employ married priests especially married with children, the pederasty would stop.

It seems mad to me that a Church which extols family values employs priests who have no knowledge of family life and with such a very high percentage of homosexuals when homosexuality is proscribed by the Catholic Church.

In the UK the grooming and trafficking of young girls by British Pakistani gangs is at last being called what it is ...racist crime.

Time to have an honest look at homosexuality in the priesthood.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:47 PM

Ake, would you please take your repetitive homophobic bullshit somewhere else?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:48 PM

And please take your anti-Pakistani racist BS with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 03:31 PM

read usa today. big story, front page. guam problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 03:42 PM

Jim Who Knows All Things says, solemnly: The first step to healing is to recognise the illness - the church has refused to do so, so it has painted itself out of the picture

Jim, that is downright ludicrous. Why do you think the Archdiocese of Milwaukee hired psychiatrists to screen us seminarians in the 1960s? Why do you think the bishops of the United States spent millions on treatment centers for child molester priests in the 1970s. Why do you think that the National Catholic Reporter and other Catholic publications like the Jesuits' America have published a steady stream of articles exposing the sex abuse scandal since 1983? They recognize the illness, no doubt about it.

I don't know the details of how things happened in the Catholic Church in Ireland and in the UK, but I imagine the story came out in much the same way, and much earlier than you might contend.

The problem, Jim, is that you fail to understand the complexity of organizations, including the Catholic Church. All organizations of people are the product of myriad conflicting forces There is no such thing as a monolithic organization, where all the members think the same and act the same. Even rigid dictatorships are far more diverse than you might think. And most organizations have a wide spectrum of power centers - very few leaders are able to direct everything from the top. Most actions and decisions happen locally, not at headquarters.

Everything you say about the Catholic Church is true - and at the same time, everything you say about the Catholic Church is false. Everything that happens in the Catholic Church is the result of one faction prevailing over another faction, for at least a brief moment and at a particular location. And in a worldwide organization like the Catholic Church, one thing can happen in one location, while the exact opposite thing can be happening unnoticed on the other side of the earth - or right next door, as happened with the School for the Deaf next door to my seminary.

Jim, I think you need to take a course in organizational dynamics. You, sir, just don't get it. Talking to you is like talking to a wall, because you cannot accept the idea of diversity.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 07:11 PM

Hmmm. I'm all for devolution, Joe, but kindly tell me whether the dictats from on high apropos of contraception and abortion (for example) are able to be officially varied regionally. Oh, I know that they they are unofficially varied. But I tend to think that your claims for wide spectrums of powers and local decision-making are somewhat abitrarily variable. Sounds like a get-out clause to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 07:29 PM

"Jim, is that you fail to understand the complexity of organizations"
The stock reesponse of all politicians when confronted with a situation they are unable to deal with "don'yt you worry yourr pretty little head about it"
How dare you be so partonising?
"Everything that happens in the Catholic Church is the result of one faction prevailing over another faction, for at least a brief moment and at a particular location. "
Then they are not fit foir purpose - how can anybody trust an organisation so unstable - would you put chidren in their charge - woulyd you expose childrens minds to such a set-up from their earliest days?
I'm **** if I would
You talk anout how Milwaukee treated the offenders - how generous of them!!!!!
How about the victims - were similar amounts spent on repairing their damaged minds - or were they just told to go away and forget it as you have suggested?
You once again absolve the church for their crimes
Sorry Joe - your non-responses have become embarrassing - you reflect the self-serving evasive dishonesty of your church perfectly
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 10:52 PM

Sorry, Jim. You appear to be unable to carry on an intelligent conversation, so I'm not going to bother to answer you.

Steve, my latest copy of National Catholic Reporter arrived today, once again telling the story of the difference between the actuality of the Catholic Church and the power structure of the Catholic Church. I couldn't help but think how much the Catholic Church is like the United States in this Year of Trump. The dictates of Trump are indeed outrageous, as are the dictates of many Catholic leaders on abortion and birth control. But Catholics still get abortions and use birth control at the same rate as other people. And yes, the way that many priests and bishops and church lawyers handled child abuse victims was appalling, but there were also many church leaders who handled victims with great compassion and generosity.

So, you have to look at the Catholic Church as an organic, diverse, and constantly changing whole, a mass of conflicting forces. When you pronounce solemn condemnations of the whole for real offenses, without recognizing all those within the body who are fighting against those offenses, you do a grave disservice to those who are fighting the good fight.

Same with us Americans - many of us were in shock when Trump was elected President by a minority vote. We just didn't see that comeing. But hey, don't hate us because Trump is our President. Hate Trump, like we do. But we'll come back. Just watch us.

Here's an article on Extending the Statute of Limitations, written by Tom Reese, a Jesuit priest who's a good guy. The temporary extensions enacted by a number of state legislatures opened a window to allow processing of claims without a lot of legal delays. It gave immediate and generous compensation to victims, and it sped up the process so dioceses could get on with things. There is still room for old claims to be filed, but the temporary extensions made it possible to handle the bulk of the claims quickly and with a minimum of hassle for all involved. And when the claims are settled, the anger dies down and we are all able to move forward again.

I do think that million-dollar settlements are too high. I think a hundred thousand would be fair in most cases. But I know damn well why the amount got up to a million and many dioceses had to pay a second time. There were a number of bishops who tried all sorts of delaying tactics, and they got caught. There was righteous anger because of the games those bishops were playing, and that anger drove the compensation rate up to a million. Those very bishops were the ones who made such a mess of the scandal in the first place - and because of them, all of us had to pay. And believe me, it won't be bishops paying those bills. Some of them downsized their cars and residences, but the bishops who made the mess are still living in the lap of luxury - or else they're dead or retired.

Read the Reese article. It gives some good insights.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 11:03 PM

MG has harsh words for Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York. Here (click) is an article she'll appreciate. I sure don't trust the m----f-----...

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 10 Aug 17 - 11:22 PM

he is the worst or second worst..one in australia is very very bad...they sure know how to pick them. people were calling him the american pope. that has died down. i have never ever heard one good word about him..oh he is fine once you get to know him, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Aug 17 - 01:19 AM

Well, mg, I get the impression that Dolan of New York is kind of like a car salesman. For him, business is his first priority. He's charming, and he can ooze with compassion when he's trying to win you over, but you get the impression that his primary motivations are his business interests. And he's made himself very popular with the ultra-conservatives, which is a red flag for me. Don't think he's been suspected of anything criminal, though.

Pell, from Australia, is actually facing criminal charges. The charges have not been revealed, but it appears that he has been accused of directly sexually abusing children himself. When he was serving as a bishop in Australia, his was the only diocese that did not go along with the child abuse protection plan set up by the bishops of the nation. His plan wasn't horrible, but it did give less protection to victims and more protection to his diocese.
I've read descriptions of contacts he's had with victims and their parents, and they show a total lack of sensitivity.

I really liked Cardinal Roger Mahoney from Los Angeles, but he got in a lot of trouble and there was thought of filing criminal charges against him for covering up. I'd like to think that he just got buried in an impossible situation, and that he didn't do anything intentionally wrong - but I dunno. It does appear that he bungled the abuse scandal in his early years and was exemplary in his later years.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Aug 17 - 03:39 AM

"You appear to be unable to carry on an intelligent conversation,"
And you appear to be incapable of carrying out an honest one,
" so I'm not going to bother to answer you."
You haven't ansewred me so fat - and now you are making it official - fine by me
Simple questions - for all if not for you - for anybody
What if it had been found that schoolteachers throughout our education had been sexually abusing pupils for generations, that fellow teachers had been ignoring those abuses and headmasters, when the abuses became impossible to ignore, had allowed the abusers to other school's where they could continue their abuses.
What if the various education departments had gotten wind of these buses and, when they became too prominent to cover up, had moved them on to places abroad to continue their abuse.
Finally, when the abuses became generally known throughout the the world, what if all the various local and national education authorities had conspired to hide any recorded facts and, where financial compensation for the survivors had been agreed upon, the education department were these abuses had been most prominent, had reneged and allowed the taxpayer to bear the major part of the burden.
If this all had happened, had been reported on nationally as having happened, and if the situation had reached a stalemate, with the vast majority of the culprits unpunished and the facts of their abuses still locked away somewhere in the middle of a foreign country - would you continue to trust such organisations with the care of children and would you blame the parents of the victims they should forget what had happened and get on with their lives - that last bit is rhetorical, because that is exactly what you have done.
I said earlier that I bear no great ill will to your religion and, for the sake of genuine believers, I would hate to see the church disappear over this, but to be honest, if your view represents the liberally minded wing of Catholicism, I would demand that every priest, canon, Bishop, Archbishop, passed an rigorous annual test before they were let within reach of any child
What I have described above is exactly what has happened in your church and your response is an indication that it is rotten to the core.
Arguing with you has been a sharp learning curve, for which - many thanks
I hope that all the money Milwaukee has spent on the care of its abusive priests was not wasted and has allowed them to carry on their lives untroubled by their bast sins
I'm sure tat their fellow priests will ensure them a safe passage to Heaven!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Aug 17 - 05:43 AM

Jim, you're getting irrational again. Calm down.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Aug 17 - 06:24 AM

Stop being patronising Joe
I am not being irrational - I am presenting a picture of how your church is now being regarded
You appear to have the same disregard for the fate of your church as you do for the suffering of its victims
Kindly respond to the points - I really am not going to go away - I'm well used to being insulted by people like yourself
Let's try to make it easy for you (to use your own partonising attitude)
Which of the points I have put up regarding to education is not applicable to the behaviour of your Church - and why?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 17 - 06:30 AM

May I suggest that you don't respond to Jim at all rather than respond in this rude manner. In fact, Jim's point is well made. Whatever you say about the forces pulling in different directions within the Church, it is essentially an undemocratic, authoritarian institution that attempts to impose dictats on its members. In that regard it may not be the worst of the big religions, but that's how it is. It isn't my club any more so I haven't got much to say about celibacy or about how many gay men are permitted to become priests. The gay men I know are all wonderful, balanced human beings as it happens and I don't see it as an issue. The point is about the institutional nature of the cover-up of what we have learned to be widespread abuse. It simply isn't believable that these things went on unobserved or without concern for decades, or centuries, and it's clear that the ranks higher up than the perpetrating priests were concerned enough to cover for them in all the escalating ways Jim describes. The abuse has been so widespread that it simply isn't possible that the highest authorities were not aware of the scale of the issue. Yet it isn't the Church that has been leading the exposures. In other words, the people who knew most about the abuse were the one saying the least and doing the most dragging of feet (and, in consideration of the cover-ups, I think I'm being kind there). It isn't an excuse to say the the Church is in fact many churches and that there was no control. Sure, priests may find it easier than many to carry out the abuses by dint of the position they are in. The Church isn't to blame for that, but it is completely to blame for its lack of vigilance, and, worse, its apparent greater concern for the abusers, and for itself, than for the victims. It isn't the same as saying that Catholics still have abortions in spite of the dictats. It isn't illegal to have an abortion in most places, but sexual abuse is not only a breach of Church law but also, universally, a breach of secular law. As a supposed moral arbiter, the Church should have shouted every abuse from the rooftops, but it did the precise opposite.

I'm uncomfortable with the concept of big financial compensation for this kind of crime. If you're injured by a crime and can't work, or if you lose your money or property, that's different. Of course, there are mental as well physical injuries and it isn't possible to be black and white about it. But I'd hate to think that the prospect of a huge payout would be the main enticement to claim abuse. I also think that the prospect of having to pay out vast sums to many victims would be an enticement to cover up. I can see vast compensation prospects getting in the way of justice and closure. Shoot.