Jim, you seem so reasonable and analytical on most topics - but on this one, you come out with a shotgun. I'd like to see a rational discussion of this topic, but all you can do is blast away with your blanket condemnations.

Nobody is trying to deny any of the allegations that have been made with some evidence, but it would be refreshing to see some balance and proportion in the discussion. The Murphy and Ryan Reports are indeed a serious and factual condemnation of the abuse in the Irish industrial schools and reformatories. These institutions, which were operated for the Irish government by religious brothers and nuns, did appear to have a culture of abuse. I have no question that this was extreme wrongdoing, and reparations must be made and those who committed crimes must be punished.

HOWEVER, this situation took place in a correctional system, and correctional systems have problems that are not necessarily a reflection of the wider community. Were these institutions operated by the entire Catholic Church and were all priests and nuns involved in the operation of these institutions? Certainly not. A very small percentage of the priests and nuns of Ireland worked in these institutions, and the rest were most probably unaware of the situation - it's rare that normal citizens have much awareness of what goes on in their penal institutions. In many countries, priests and nuns serve as agents for penal reform because they visit such institutions as chaplains and witness and report abuses. In the Irish system, priests and nuns and brothers were the staff - so there were no visiting chaplains to discover and report problems.

I do not deny that things went horribly wrong in these institutions, and those responsible should be punished and the victims compensated. You look at the problem, find out who was responsible, and deal with the problem. And it does seem to me that in these institutions, abuse was the rule, not the exception to the rule. Most of the abuse consisted of corporal punishment and a draconian system of discipline. This system allowed sexual abuse to exist under the cover of a discipline system that did not allow questioning, but it does not appear from the reports that sexual abuse was anywhere near universal. Look at the facts, and deal with the problem.

Local Irish parishes were quite another situation, and we are only beginning to learn the extent of the problem of sexual abuse in parish churches. It does appear that there was an organized effort on the part of several successive Archbishops of Dublin and Primates of Ireland (Armagh), to cover up all information about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (to protect the Church from "scandal"; and this secrecy allowed child molesters to operate quite freely. The attempt to protect the Church from scandal has involved it in a far greater scandal, one of unimaginable proportion - I think we will find this scandal was worst in Ireland, because the attitudes and discipline of the Catholic Church in Ireland are far more severe than they are in the Catholic Church anywhere else in the world.

Still, I have many friends who are Irish-born priests and nuns, and they tell quite a different story about growing up Catholic in Ireland. Most of the Irish-born priests I know are about my age, in their 60s, and they came to the United States from 1960-75. The nuns are older, age 65-85, and came to the U.S. from 1950-70 - all are members of an American branch of the Sisters of Mercy. Since this has been such a hot topic here for so long, I questioned many of them about what it was like to grow up Catholic in Ireland. They all had experiences similar to mine - mostly positive, some negative, no contact with molesters (although some had heard rumors of sexual abuse incidents). Somebody told me that Irish priests and nuns came from the middle class, and that the abuse targeted only the lower class in Ireland - but the Irish-born priests and nuns I know, did not generally come from the upper classes. Mind you, the nuns are currently not disposed toward having a good opinion of the Catholic Church these days, because the Vatican is currently conducting an investigation of women religious in the US, and the nuns are livid about it.

I haven't seen data on the extent of the physical and sexual abuse of children in the Catholic Church in Ireland. It appears that the problem was widespread, but certainly not universal. From what I've seen, I would guess that the number of priests in Ireland who are guilty of abuse, will be less than ten percent. That's still a huge number, but certainly not enough to justify Jim Carroll's statement, "the real mystery is why the Catholic Church is allowed anywhere near children given the atrocities committed by the clergy."

You're not going to control crime with an hysterical approach. You have to deal with it realistically and rationally. I'm afraid I have to say that several people here have nothing to offer the discussion but hysteria.

Too bad.

-Joe-

Ed T asks this about a qote from me:

Joe: "the vast majority of parishes had no such crimes, and the vast majority of bishops did not cover up the crimes that happened in their dioceses. Please remember that the number of priest-molesters was about five percent. I have no data on the number of bishops who covered up crimes - but I suspect the number is far lower than people might think".

Ed: Where is the proof of all that?

Ed, the best data I've found is at http://www.bishop-accountability.org/. Their approach is far harsher then mine, and they include priests on their lists that have not been proved to be molesters - but their data will give you an idea of the numbers involved. From all that I've read on this crisis, it appears that five percent is about the number of priest-molesters in the U.S. I suspect it will be higher in Ireland and other "Catholic" countries, and lower where Catholics are a minority.

-Joe-