BS: Child abuse in Ireland

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 02:50 PM

PoppaGator - I'm sure you're right about ownership and occupancy, it would make good sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 02:42 PM

Misandry seems quite common among nuns - it's not hard to see why. I think nuns are more likely to observe their celibacy more literally than priests too.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 02:37 PM

I think one thing that saved the Irish from excesses of the church was the strong feeling that being a decent man or woman trumped everything else, even extreme religious fervor and practices...mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: PoppaGator
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 02:30 PM

"The pattern of the eldest son inheriting the family 'seat' (property) and the younger sons going into the church (or the army, depending on suitability) was certainly the tradition among the UK's landed gentry - it's not just a Catholic phenomenon, although it may well be a relevant factor in your theory. Historically speaking though, I don't think the great majority of Irish Catholics were property owners."

From what I've heard about my father's family ("oral history"), the customary inheritance of land by the eldest son ~ to prevent to constant subdivision of the family farm into smaller and smaller pieces ~ prevailed even through the centuries when native Catholic Irish were not allowed to own land, but had to pay rent as tenants to English Protestant landlords, often absentee landlords.

I've visited the family farm in County Mayo where my second cousin lives; supposedly, the same land has been in the family since before it was forcibly taken away and assigned to a new owner, then throughout the long years of British dominance, and finally after independence, when ownership reverted to the tenant/occupants.

In other words, technical ownership of property by favored members of a conquering nation's ruling class did not put an end to the practice of keeping a family's land intact by avoiding subdivion among multiple heirs. Occupancy of a homestead by a family was maintained in the customary manner even when ownership was prohibited.

This probably means that the age-old problem of second and third sons, etc., having to find some kind of livlihood away from the family farm. For many, I'm sure, the priesthood was the only, or at least the most obviously available, alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: freda underhill
Date: 02 Jun 09 - 08:02 AM

I have a friend whose life is destroyed by the beatings, violence, canings and terror he endured at the hands of Catholic nuns when he was a five year old. He will always need medical support and a psychiatrist to get him through each week.

At the same time, I know people whose broken lives have been restored through the brave and courageous work of Catholic activists.

Some people leave a trail of bloody destruction in their path - some people transform the world with their courage and goodness.

funny world, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 07:28 PM

mg, I'm not sure what you mean about mothers - could you perhaps expand on that a bit? The pattern of the eldest son inheriting the family 'seat' (property) and the younger sons going into the church (or the army, depending on suitability) was certainly the tradition among the UK's landed gentry - it's not just a Catholic phenomenon, although it may well be a relevant factor in your theory. Historically speaking though, I don't think the great majority of Irish Catholics were property owners.

Goatfell - Please accept my apologies if I misunderstood any of your earlier posts.

I don't think this abuse problem can be simplified down to easily addressable causes, sadly. The abuse is quite varied in nature, as would appear to be the motivation. Prevention would therefore seem to be a more fruitful way forward than trying to determine 'a cause'. I agree with the preventative measures Joe described many posts ago and it would be good to see the Catholic Church doing this universally as a matter of course, along with a great deal of investigation (from within and without) into all areas of care and education over which they currently preside, not least in less developed areas of the world. I strongly suspect that a lot more has been, and is being 'got away with' than has yet come to light.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 02:28 PM

I think there certainly is probably a fair amount of unresolved anger, at least in the olden days...the whole Irish at least system of oldest son getting the tiny farm..younger sons..it could be they became priests to get an education or to leave the area or to get food on a regular basis...and there was a practice of saintly mother dedicating one of her sons to the priesthood and exherting unhealthy pressure on him...don't leave the mothers out of this equation...

And there is the whole thing of seminary at the age of 13 or 14. It could be a situation of frozen development. I doubt many priests saw themselves as abusers or stuck in an adolescent stage but something has caused this to happen and it is systemic. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: PoppaGator
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 02:00 PM

Pedophiles who are priests did not become child-abusers because they're not allowed to marry, and I don't believe that anyone has really presented that "straw-man" (easily refuted) argument.

The overall culture of celibacy has, over the centuries, evolved into a situation where abnormalities of various different types can flourish. Sexual abuse of boys by men is just one piece of the pie. Sadism in general (probably rooted in frustration and self-hatred) is pretty well nurtured and protected in the celibate religious community as well.

Joe, we understand that the post-Vatican-II church has issued pronouncements stating that celibacy should not be considered any more virtuous than married life; I just don't believe that such statements have much effect upon how the institution operates, nor upon customs and attitudes that have taken centuries to develop.

The Church has also stated, quite emphatically, that the doctrine of "respect for life" applies equally to political violence, undeclared/unjust warefare, capital punishment, and abortion. Yeah, right. In practice, the hierarchy loves to suck up to warmongers and executioners, while denying the sacraments to politicians who do not favor the criminalization of abortion.

I judge the Church by its actions, not its pronouncements.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 11:47 AM

I am not talking about recognized abuse..just a pattern of child-rearing that needs to be looked at...I don't know what it is but hopefully someone is looking at patterns. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: nutty
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 08:27 AM

mg ...... child abusers are far more likely (we are told) to be people who themselves were abused as children. so how can you maintain that parents, particularly the mothers, are at fault?

Yes chances are it's a family member who carried out the initial abuse but who?

Mother , father, uncle, cousin, step sister/brother or family priest. Or it could be a teacher, scout leader, older child, adolescent - who knows?

Abusers need treatment to stop this pattern of abuse continuing

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 02:14 AM

You have to look at the behavior of the parents in raising these pedophiles..particularly the mothers. The whole entire system was sick. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 01:42 AM

Barry Says:

It's a terrible thought that the Cathloic Church has made it an all season sport & issued licenses to all those that choose to sign up. Just like a sporting club, they hunt with impunity & without fear & all children that are under the churches unbrella became fair game.

What does matter is that the church has made the priesthood attractive to predators by it's own policies of shielding, hiding, sheltering, aiding & abetting these criminals. The priesthood has become a haven for child molestors.

Well, Barry, that's a little strong. I think you can blame church leaders for being naive and maybe lethargic about remedying the problem - denying it and hoping it go away. I've seen very little evidence that Catholic leaders have encouraged child molesters, although it does seem that in some situations there were molesters who built networks for mutual protection. Maybe there is some truth in what you say, though - in many dioceses, it has seemed to me that the "weird priests" end up in administrative positions, possibly because they don't have the social skills to function as a pastor. I've met a lot of haughty, unlikeable priests in powerful administrative positions in dioceses. So maybe there has been "protection" going on in some dioceses. It's often the case that parish priests don't trust the priests "downtown" in the bishop's office.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: goatfell
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 01:23 AM

did I not say that in one of my early posts

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 01:07 AM

It's a fact that there are plenty of married child abusers. I think the homosexual element is an illusion caused by the segregation of the sexes. If priests had the same access to girls as they currently have to boys, then the girls would get abused, I'm pretty sure of that. It's a question of opportunity.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Barry Finn
Date: 01 Jun 09 - 12:02 AM

The issues of child sexual abuse in not a marriage issue. Weither or not a Priest can or can not marry or induge in sex with willing male or female adult partbers is not a contriubing factor is the role of a child sexual predators. They hunt children (male & female) weither they indulge in adult sex or not & weither they're married or not, doesn't make much difference generally. They are hunters & know where to hunt, how to & who to hunt. It's a terrible thought that the Cathloic Church has made it an all season sport & issued licenses to all those that choose to sign up. Just like a sporting club, they hunt with impunity & without fear & all children that are under the churches unbrella became fair game.
What does matter is that the church has made the priesthood attractive to predators by it's own policies of shielding, hiding, sheltering, aiding & abetting these criminals. The priesthood has become a haven for child molestors. Homosexuality has nothing to do with the issue just as the prevention of maggaige has nothing to do with this issue. Those are smokescreens & those issues only made the cover for the haven of predators to hide behind.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:50 PM

No...you got me mixed up. I don't think there would be less child abuse if priests were allowed to marry because I think it is a separate problem and created by the way that Catholics are raised. Could be some overlap of course but I don't think the child abuse stems from priests not marrying. We were always told that one reason was that if priests were married their wives would be wanting to know what was going on in confession and it was sort of a safeguard. Nutty reason but it made sense to the nuns. (I had delightful nuns in grade school but odd ones in high school). mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:43 PM

There'd be less, perhaps, but it wouldn't go away, and it wouldn't stop the violence.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 31 May 09 - 11:24 PM

As mg says, there would be less child abuse if priests were allowed to marry. But it's not gonna happen. Celibacy insures that the Church gets maximum return on its investment in a priest. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with economics. A celibate, hence unmarried, priest will work longer hours for less money and will live in more Spartan conditions than any married minister would ever consider doing. And, most importantly, when he dies the Church doesn't have to pay any survivor benefits to his wife or dependents. If priests were allowed to marry, the Church's cost of payroll and benefits would at least double.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 31 May 09 - 08:09 PM

I think the homosexuality aspect of the Catholic child abuse problem comes from segregating the sexes - not necessarily as the only cause, but that system provides the 'heaven sent' opportunities for homosexual child abusers very effectively. It should be noted though that the problem consists of more than sexual abuse. Violence and sadism is much more common, and whilst that can be sexual in origin, it isn't necessarily so.

Interesting to note that both the Marquis de Sade and Leopold von Sacher-Masoch were raised as Catholics..

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 31 May 09 - 03:30 PM

I don't think that a man denied marriage would go after young boys unless he was raised in a totally unhealthy way and then he would still have the boy problem. I think hopefully he would decide he needed to be married or have female companionship (or male if that were the case) and children and teens would not be involved. I think the pedophile problem is not a direct result of not being able to marry..I think it is almost two separate problems, and based on the way boys were raised at least in the past by neurotic mothers and a sin-obsessed clergy. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: goatfell
Date: 31 May 09 - 09:20 AM

this the rules in the catholic church, priests arn't allowed to marry, and if they did then the problem would kept under control

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 May 09 - 04:00 AM

Well, in my diocese, if a priest is involved with a woman, he's asked to choose between his job and his relationship. Most other dioceses have similar policies.
If he has molested a child, he is reported to law enforcement authorities and removed from the priesthood. That's the policy on child molestation in all but one diocese in the United States. Lincoln, Nebraska, has its own rules.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 30 May 09 - 07:49 PM

Sexual abuse...I think I was too young to remember him as I would only have been around 7 when he went to Everett. I have an old song about this to the tune of Boston Burgler. I am pretty sure I posted it here at some time but PM me if you want the words. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 30 May 09 - 05:49 PM

That's awful mg. Is this physical/violent abuse, mental abuse or sexual abuse?

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 30 May 09 - 05:29 PM

This was a statement by his archbishop.

And I just found out today that there was trouble in my home parish, a father Edward Boyle, who served in Longview, WA and Bremerton and I think MOntana. Just a story in the local news today. They said he abused a lot of boys..usually 13 to 15. I will google and see if I find anything out..so this is no longer strangers..but my brothers, neighbors, classmates. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 30 May 09 - 05:24 PM

"it's just not true that Catholics see priests falling for women to be as bad as pedophilia."

I rather think mg meant 'Catholicism' rather than 'Catholics' Joe - as you've rightly illustrated, they are not necessarily the same thing, and the Catholic Church is only a 'monolith' when it suits their purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 May 09 - 03:19 PM

Well, there's no comparison, between a pedophile priest and a priest being involved with a woman. That's just not logical. Yeah, people are disappointed if a priest gets involved with a woman and leaves the priesthood and they lose a priest they love. Yes, they do get scandalized if the priest runs off with the wife of a parishioner. But generally, there's a lot of sympathy expressed, too.

But when it's found out that a priest is a pedophile, all hell breaks loose. Parents don't want their children anywhere near known pedophiles, and they make that well known. There was a time when people just couldn't believe that a priest could do such a thing, so there was denial at least from some factors - but no longer.

MG, it's just not true that Catholics see priests falling for women to be as bad as pedophilia. Most of the noise about the recent pedophilia scandal came from outraged Catholics - after all, it was almost exclusively Catholic children who were the victims.



-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 30 May 09 - 01:05 PM

Here is what I mean..off the Huffington Post..a priest in his 30s having a relationship with a woman in her 30s...

He has never told me that he was considering joining the Episcopal Church," Favalora said. "(The Episcopal Bishop) has never spoken to me about his position on this delicate matter or what actions he was contemplating. This truly is a serious setback for ecumenical relations and cooperation between us."

Added Favalora: "It's unsettling to the faith, that's why it's a scandal. But the church has been through scandals before _ the church will survive."


----

See..a priest with a woman is so scandalous we have to worry about the church surviving...the same or greater amount of alarm about the child pedophiles...it is sick. I don't care what a priest does with an adult woman (or man) any more than I care what my dentist does. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 29 May 09 - 06:19 PM

geeze..I am amongst those who never got the memo...

There were plenty of stories about the Christian Brothers in Newfoundland, if I remember correctly..they could have been imported from Ireland...and the Irish and Irish Americans I have met are universally nice..so you wonder how it can happen...like you wonder what happened to Germans and Cambodians to turn on their own like they did...there is a theory about it all but I forget how it goes..but when you have a basically nice, compliant population, you have a situation where abuse can be done with impunity. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 May 09 - 05:42 PM

Since Vatican II ended in 1965, the Catholic Church has made an effort to make clear that celibacy is NOT superior to married life. Not everybody got that message, but that's the policy.

Please note that the "Irish Christian Brothers" that are under fire in Ireland, are not the same Christian Brothers (Brothers of the Christian Schools) who run schools in the United States and used to subsidize the schools by making brandy. They sold the winery, but the profits still subsidize the schools.

Click here for an article called "Will the Catholic Church Renounce Its Violent Past?" by Patrick Rice, a former priest who was educated (and abused) by the Irish Christian Brothers. I don't agree with Rice's assessment of Pope Benedict XVI, but such is life.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 29 May 09 - 03:04 PM

One problem is that parents turned their children over to the celibates, some of whom had ..many of whom...had probably mental health problems, as defined by today's standards. They were on witch-hunts in their young charges...and something endemic in Christian Brothers especially from all that I have heard. You had no instruction from happily married couples, because, after all, they were people who had refused the "gift" of celibacy and were led to believe that their way was deficient and the more morally pure should instruct the young. Morally pure could include child abusers. Hard to explain unless you are Catholic, I know.

That being said, I do not believe in not controlling behavior and dress of young people especially...they are too blatant. There seems to be no modesty almost mainstream these days. That can only lead to societal problems. So I can't say everything was all bad. I certainly won't say it was all good. I think there does need to be modesty, responsibility, etc. etc...certainly private behaviors should be kept private....so I am certainly a prude and think there need to be standards, and in fact laws on how people dress and speak and cavort in public...and certainly in schools and on public transportation...mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: PoppaGator
Date: 29 May 09 - 02:25 PM

Many of the problems under discussion here, notably authoritariansim, abuse of power, and sexual repression, are hardly unique to the Roman Catholic Church. Much of this stuff is part of our history and our overall culture, and even the aspects that exist only within the structure of the churches date far back into history, when there was no such thing as Catholicism as opposed to any other denomination, back when Western Christianity was "united" or "monolithic" (your choice of adjectives).

Also, Joe is quite correct in pointing out that the Church includes many exemplary members intent upon doing the right thing at all times.

What it all boils down to, for me, is that the preoccupation with celibacy as prerequisite to spirituality is so wrongheaded and sick that it has led to terrible hypocrisy, abuse, and corruption. For those who are so comfortable within the church that they can recognize the problems and still devote themselves to "working within the system" for reform ~ well, more power to 'em. None for me, thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 May 09 - 12:50 PM

Peter, the image of a God who controls things and writes the script of our lives, is not the only possible image of God. It's not even the only Christian image of God. The God of the mystics* is a God who is the essence of all things, not the controller of all things. The First Letter of John says, "God is love, and he abides in love, abides in God, and God in him." I think that makes a lot of sense to me - this idea of abiding in love, the essence and source of all. To the extent that we abide in God, it becomes impossible for us to sin. And in that abiding, we approach oneness with God and with all that is good - and with each other.

I think that people get to a point of maturity in faith where they realize that if God doesn't control us, why should a church control us? That's a lot foggier and harder to grasp that the limited grasp that children get in catechism class, but I think it has solid scriptural and doctrinal basis. I think that most people don't get to that point of maturity of faith, that they still hold onto their childhood image of a Parent God who controls their lives somehow. I think there are many bishops who haven't gotten beyond that point, either - it's very hard for CEO's to think in mystical terms.

The trouble is, those with primitive faith don't understand those who have crossed the line into maturity of faith - and a natural inclination is for the primitive believers to hate the mystics. Isn't that what happened to Jesus? He was put to death by "believers" who could not understand that he was the incarnation of love, of the essence of all things. And the infinite power of that love conquered all, through abandonment of self and suffering and death and rebirth.

When we look on God as a source of power and control, it's easy to fall into perversions of religion like what happened in the schools in Ireland. When we look on a God of love who is our essence, it becomes almost impossible to do those horrible things in the name of faith. That's where I'd draw the line, between the primitive faith of childhood, and the mature faith which approaches mysticism. I don't condemn that primitive faith because it's a necessary first step, but mature faith is radically different. And when people reach maturity of faith, all those things like denominational distinctions and power and authority and doctrine become quite unimportant. Those things are necessary to the structure and function of a denomination, but they are not the essence of faith.

I've heard theologians speculate that it isn't God who punishes sin, and I've always felt that's true. They say that hell is the natural consequence of sin, or removing oneself from that unity with God and all that is good - that we make our own hell, if that's what we deserve.

Are you going to hell, Peter? Not a chance. You're a good man, and I think you've spent your life seeking unity with whatever or Whoever is at our essence.

-Joe-


*and mystics come from all denominations, and from those who have no "religious" faith at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 29 May 09 - 09:10 AM

Joe, you are skirting round some important fundamentals. Not least mg's point. What kind of a God are you worshipping that allows, say, the Holocaust? That allows innocent, vulnerable, sometimes orphaned, sometimes impoverished, children to be mercilessly tormented by his representatives on earth? (Or are your priests NOT his representatives?)

Why did he invest in us the capacity to do these things? Why did he (allegedly) give us free will? Is he still fighting a (losing) battle with Satan? If so, what of the claim that he's all-powerful? Surely if he was, he would have locked up or otherwise neutered Satan. That way he would not have needed to create a son to sacrifice. Though how putting a freshly created son among the many thousands who were crucified saves the whole world is something I never fully understood. But then I never understood why he would get a buzz out of sacrifices anyway. (If he does, I can see I'm going to be in trouble, because it's an area of my worship that I've rather let slide.)

Am I going to go to Hell? It's a serious question. I'm interested.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: nutty
Date: 29 May 09 - 05:05 AM

I would love to believe you Joe but that saying about leopards and spots keeps coming to mind.

Maybe you and people like you are the crusaders but I feel there is a long war to be fought before you can claim victory.

Thank-you for your comments and your time. This thread has been extremely interesting.

I'm now going to spend the weekend singing for charity.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 May 09 - 02:17 AM

Your answer, Nutty, is that God doesn't write the script. God doesn't allow or create evil - it just happens, usually because somebody decides to do it. Otherwise, we'd all be mere marionettes.

As for the bit about "administering rules" and such, I think it's important for people to look at religious organizations in a new way:

The "administration" exists to serve the members, not to direct them.

Now, I realize that it's very difficult for administrative people to act like they're serving the people they're supposed to be serving, but that anomaly exists in all facets of life. It's up to us not to allow ourselves to be directed by those who are supposed to be serving us. I've always thought that it's my church, just as much as it is the Pope's. If the Pope doesn't like it, that doesn't particularly bother me.

Many people in the Catholic Church have finally begun to realize that their membership is voluntary, and their cooperation with management is also voluntary, and their financial contributions are voluntary. The thread of hellfire means very little to modern Catholics. That realization can make all the difference in the world. Oh, and for a long, long time, it has said in the books that the Pope and bishops are supposed to discern the sensus fidelium, the commonly-held beliefs of the faithful - religious teaching is not supposed to be dictated from the top down.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: nutty
Date: 29 May 09 - 02:01 AM

"but legalists are seldom able to grasp the basic principles that are at the root of all religious beliefs"

but this is (and has been ) the case, whenever violation of a 'principle' means a loss of power.

Is the power that is gained by administering the principle more important than the principle itself?

Such power produces zealots who will fight tooth and nail to hold on to their 'God given right'.

The thing that has always puzzled me about religion is ..........

If God is a God of love
If God is all powerful
If God makes the rules for man to follow

How does he/she allow such things to happen?

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:06 PM

In somes ways, mg, the rules were rigid and cruel - but most priests (especially Irish-American priests) have always found ways to bend the rules to make them fit real human life. Legalists from both the right and the left can't deal with "bending rules," and either blame the rule or the people who don't adhere exactly to the rule. I think that common sense should overrule the rules, at least sometimes.

In the areas of birth control and divorce/remarriage most American Catholic priests have been able to reconcile the rules with reality. These issues have ceased to be a problem for most modern American Catholics.

I suppose that's something about religion that people can't accept. It's part of the nature of religion to have both rules and principles. The rules are supposed to be applications of the principles, not the other way around. When the application of a rule violates the principle, the principle should supercede the rule. The trouble is, legalists (on both the left and the right) can't accept this. Religious groups are always rife with legalists - Jesus spent much of his life being exasperated with the Pharisees - but legalists are seldom able to grasp the basic principles that are at the root of all religious beliefs.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 28 May 09 - 09:01 PM

There are some fundamental problems..and the main one is an acceptance of cruelty because it is God's will. This is reflected in a harsh, criminal to my mind, stance on birth control...we are taught, and it is probably still the rule if not enforced, that we are to reproduce literally, literally, until we die in the process, leaving behind a dozen orphans. A man was to work himself to death, literally, literally, on high scaffolds, to support more children than anyone would deam reasonable. Children were left to starve, literally. Remarriage after divorce was refused, causing certainly financial and emotional problems. You could not come up with a scenario in my education in Catholic schools where birth control was OK or divorce/remarriage was OK..no disease, no financial cataspophe...nothing. Totally dogmatic, totally unbending, totally unapologetic. If I had to tell a middle-aged broken, impoverished women she had to bear more children that her body could stand, that her husband would work or drink himself to death in despair, I would at least say, gee, I am really sorry about this but that is the rule here and we can't break it. No apology ever offered I can recall. And some people take delight in passing on these rules, and of course many don't. And this whole birth control ban was only based on one line of the bible..be fruitful and multiply. That was the entire theological underpinnings. No reference ever to the scriptures on stewardship etc.

But given all that, the church produced some wonderful people..including the sometimes awful Irish Catholic church..some people whose likes we will never see again..people who obeyed the rules without having the slightest understanding of why they were so cruel, but did it anyway, with hope of some compensation in the hereafter. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Joe Offer
Date: 28 May 09 - 06:41 PM

Yeah, sure, apologists for the Church will object and say that this (reasonable and idealistic) teaching or that is "really" what the church is all about ~ but the unspoken premise at the very bottom of how the institution clings to its membership is that you need to fear eternal punishment for your very nature, and only The Church can save you.

I suppose part of the issue is that outsiders have a monolithic view of the Catholic Church. Wikipedia says Church membership in 2007 was 1.147 billion people, increasing from the 1950 figure of 437 million and the 1970 figure of 654 million. With a membership that large and spread all over the world, there is no way that the Catholic Church can function in lockstep. Most churchgoing Catholics can go for weeks without hearing anything about what happens in Rome, or even the activities of their own bishop. Most Catholic activities happen in parishes, and each parish is largely autonomous. Some are ruled by tyrannical pastors, and some are very democratic in their operation.

My parents were very fussy about where they went to church. They were very active in the parishes we belonged to, but if they didn't like what was going on in the parish, they went somewhere else -
and my mother made sure the pastor knew why we were leaving. In the 21 years my family was in Wisconsin, they rotated among four Catholic churches, depending on how things were going. My mother taught in Catholic schools, so she knew where things were good, and where they weren't. My mom's dead now - I'd like to know if she knew of any child molestation going on in any of the Catholic schools in our area. As far as I know, there was none, and the nationwide database of priest-abusers doesn't note any significant problems in my home town of Racine, Wisconsin. Anyhow, because my parents were fussy, I had a very good experience in the Catholic Church when I was growing up.

I was in the seminary in Milwaukee from 9th grade through college, 1961-70, and it was a wonderful experience. We had a few priest-professors who were lousy or grouchy and perhaps even cruel, but the majority of the faculty were wonderful people who provided a rich, warm environment for us. At the time, there were 19 Catholic seminaries in the State of Wisconsin. At the time, I knew that some of them had an environment that was much more harsh and rigid than what I enjoyed, but I didn't know of any being horrible. They were all on our basketball circuit, so I'd see them at games and they all seemed reasonably content (and their teams were all better than ours). I know now that at least two or three of those seminaries had significant sex abuse problems that poisoned the atmosphere of the entire institution. I think there's a "tipping point" in any institution. A certain amount of good can tip the institution so the entire institution is good; and a certain amount of bad can poison the entire institution and turn it into a hellhole. I have never had direct experience of a "hellhole" institution in the Catholic Church, because I knew I didn't have to put up with that if I didn't want to. There have been significant problems in a number of Catholic institutions I have worked with in my lifetime, but not problems that seemed insurmountable. I felt I was able to do a lot to remedy many of those problems, and I usually felt I was respected and listened to.

But yes, I've always known of the "dark side" of the Catholic Church - and I stayed away from it and worked to make sure it didn't spread. There are families in my own parish that have dominant husbands and always-pregnant, unhappy wives with miserable children - and many of these families act as though they are the only "true Catholics" in the parish [these people have written letters to report on me for doctrinal matters more than once, and one incident resulted in a hearing with personnel from the bishop's office - I was exonerated, but laid off shortly afterwards "for financial reasons"]. There are Catholics who think that obedience to authority and fighting the evil of abortion are the two main pillars of the Catholic Church - following the teachings of Jesus Christ is beyond their conception, because they have the Church to tell them what God wants us to do. These people seek out dominating, tyrannical priests - and their children suffer because of it. I know people who have had a very good experience of the Catholic Church in Ireland, but it does seem like the "dark side" reached the tipping point in many parts of Ireland and made for a very bad environment. I'm not sure I could stand being Catholic in Ireland, although I'd probably be able to find a progressive haven somewhere. My sister lived in Boston, and she had been a very active Catholic. She left the Catholic Church during the days of Cardinal Law, when the "dark side" prevailed and seemed to control all of Catholicism in much of New England. I don't know if the Boston Archdiocese will ever heal from the damages done by Cardinal Law and his child-molesting priests.

Unfortunately, Catholic bishops are like CEO's everywhere. It isn't very often that you find a CEO of any good-sized organization that people can admire. It should be different in a church, but somehow it isn't. Of the 300 bishops in the US, there are 30 I admire, 60 I detest, and the rest unknown or somewhere in the middle. I'm on the board of directors of a Catholic retreat house. At our last meeting, somebody suggested that we should have an employee of the bishop's office on our board, and a nun pointed out that we needed to be very careful about that - the implication being that we can't quite trust the bishop's office in our diocese because we got burned by the last bishop (repressive, not criminal) and aren't sure yet whether we can trust the new one. Many priests in our diocese simply ignore directives from the bishop's office when the directives are unrealistic, and they get away with it because parishes are so autonomous most of the time.

The Catholic media are another interesting phenomenon. The only significant Catholic TV resource is EWTN (Eternal Word Television Network), founded by a looney nun in Alabama. Most of its content expresses that rigid, pietistic style of Catholicism that is very different from the thoughtful, questioning approach I was taught in the seminary. There is an Immaculate Heart Radio Network in the western U.S. with the same mindset - I don't know what's in the East and Midwest. There are a few conservative Catholic periodicals, but most seem to be middle-of-the road - far more acceptable to me than the TV and radio resources. There are three outstanding Catholic weekly publications in the U.S., that I think would win the approval of most people posting in this thread. America, the Jesuit weekly magazine, is always thought-provoking. The National Catholic Reporter is a little more doctrinaire in its liberal stance, and a little less thoughtful - but it's nonetheless a very interesting publication, and I've read it and America quite regularly for almost fifty years. I don't have time to read all the publications I subscribe to, so I finally dropped my subscription to Commonweal, which is now published every two weeks. You'll find a very interesting article in the current issue of Commonweal titled Meeting a Monster: Visiting a Priest Behind Bars. Anyhow, if you look at these three magazines, you'll see that there is a significant voice within the Catholic Church that is very critical of a wide spectrum of problems. I like to think that I'm part of that "significant critical voice."

Oh, and to continue on media, the Catholic presence on the Internet is pretty bad. Catholic.com and Catholic.org are back in that Middle Ages mindset, but americancatholic.org, the Fanciscan Website, has a lot of good materials used by religious education teachers. And for that mater, the vast majority of published material used in Catholic religious education is very solid, and includes very good sex education materials. Many of you would be surprised at how these Catholic religious education materials don't fit the stereotype many of you have described above.

So, here's the situation: Most educated Catholics, at least in the United States and Europe, are well aware of the problems in the Catholic Church - and they are appalled and outraged by these problems and have been demanding loudly that these problems be fixes. Priests and nuns, probably the majority of priest and nuns, are in the forefront of these protests. They are working hard to wrest control of the Catholic Church away from the "dark side."
It's my opinion that the "dark side" of the Catholic Church is not as powerful as outsiders might think. I say that from a lifetime of good experiences in the Catholic Church, including occasional periods of employment and almost constant participation as a volunteer religion teacher and activity leader and social welfare program worker.

I think most educated Catholics want the problems fixed and the victims compensated and given treated, and the wrongdoers punished. I have heard absolutely no support or defense for priests or others who abuse or molest children - none at all. With regards to the handling of abuse and molestation by diocesan offices, I don't know how much is known. The "outside world" became aware of sexual abuse by priests in 1999-2000, but this was big news in the Catholic press in the 1970's, and bishops spent millions of dollars for treatment of victims and of priest abusers, and for compensation of victims. In my diocese, almost all of the victims who received million-dollar settlements in about 2005, had already received psychiatric treatment and settlements of $25,000 or $40,000 in the 1970's and 1980's. There were ten to twelve priests reported for cases of abuse in my 100-parish diocese. None of the priests who were found to have abused children, are functioning as priests today. Most were removed within a short time after their first offense was reported. The actions of these priests was deplorable and some of the situations were not handled as well or as quickly as they should have been handled, but it's not true that nothing was done.

On the other hand, I think most active Catholics enjoy being Catholic, and find that it adds something good to their lives. I've found that only a small minority of priests and nuns are bad, but they can give an undeserved bad name to a lot of wonderful people who have spent their lifetimes serving the people of the world as priests and nuns. I'm not alone in living a lifetime in the Catholic Church and finding it mostly good. We want the victims compensated, but we've become reluctant to contribute to ongoing activities of our church because it seems that every penny we contribute, goes to million-dollar settlements for compensation for crimes we had nothing to do with. People from the outside tell us that if we continue our membership, we are only contributing to the problem - but our experience in the Catholic Church has been good.

So, what do we do? Turn our Catholic Church over to those that want to make it a mindless fortress of fear and prejudice and abuse? A large number of Catholic priest, nuns, and lay people are well aware of the problems in the Church and have been fighting these problems for years. We don't defend or ignore these abuses at all - but we want these abuses corrected without completely abolishing or crippling our Church.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 28 May 09 - 04:19 PM

They set up cognitive dissonance and then offer their product as the 'cure'.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: PoppaGator
Date: 28 May 09 - 02:37 PM

I sympathize with what Joe is trying to say, but it would be hypocritical of me to express complete agreement/approval. I am, after all, an ex-Catholic who many years ago quite deliberately rejected and left the church.

I had no experience with actual abuse, but I certainly had a very strong sense that one of the most basic principles of the institution was a wrongheaded and sick attitude about human sexuality. mg quite eloquently expressed feelings like mine just a few posts above (27 May 09 - 05:19 PM); I don't feel the need to add anything more.

Yeah, sure, apologists for the Church will object and say that this (reasonable and idealistic) teaching or that is "really" what the church is all about ~ but the unspoken premise at the very bottom of how the institution clings to its membership is that you need to fear eternal punishment for your very nature, and only The Church can save you.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 28 May 09 - 12:52 PM

It seems that to many in the Catholic Church, the reputation and continued survival of the organisation as a lucrative and powerful business is a much more important priority than the welfare of ordinary people, despite the good and positive things that some of its members may do on its behalf.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,CrazyEddie
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:33 AM

Abusers exist, and will find ways to be with vulnerable people.
What sticks in my craw about this situation, is that people in positions of responsibility (Heads of institutions, Heads of Orders, Bishops, Monseignieurs, Canons, & Parish Priests) KNEW what these people were doing.
And rather than take ANY action to stop them, they moved them from place to place when they were discovered, allowing them to offend again & again.
They should have called the cops & used their influence to get a prosecution.
Failing that, they could have used their own organisations to ensure that these abusers were kept away from kids, and given psychological treatment (if they felt it might work).

Those people need to examine their conciences, & stand up in public & admit what they did.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: goatfell
Date: 28 May 09 - 11:02 AM

what about other religons?

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 May 09 - 04:18 AM

Interesting thoughts, Penny. There is a capacity to exploit power and to abuse the vulnerable that seems to be endemic in humankind. Certainly it goes beyond the Catholic church and beyond all churches. Also it's not always driven by sexual perversions, though sexual abuse is often one of the main manifestations.

But nutty's point is relevant too, as a reminder that belief systems, as though by design, create perfect environments in which a powerful few can exploit the many who are weak and vulnerable. It's not just Catholic religious who achieve gratification through such systems, but witchdoctors etc too. But I think it's fair to say that the Catholic church has behaved with breathtaking arrogance and no little mendacity over many years, on the question of child abuse. And that has continued to the present day.

It seems a bit unfair to keep hammering Joe, who seems to be on his own in this thread. There are many in the church who thinks as Joe does, including some at Mudcat who have kept a low profile this time. But the fact is that Joe is attempting to defend a rotten institution. And singing the praises of Sister Libby, however saintly she may be, is simply a diversion.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: mg
Date: 27 May 09 - 05:19 PM

It is very complex. I am only Catholic on my father's side...my mother was Baptist,...converted but I don't think you can renounce Baptistism all that well...what she did was take the worst of the Catholic side, combine with worst of Baptist side...so I can not speak with an unconfused mind.

But I will say that this is a complex matter, that involves how Catholic children were reared..it is not just a matter of child abusers being drawn to the religious side..it is that they were created by a church obsessed with suppressing normal sexual activity and creating an atmosphere, even in my day, where any male/female activity was so awful, and so punishable in hell, that nothing else was particularly worse or even mentioned. For a priest, a woman was probably so unthinkable that a child was not worse..it was all maximally bad...so unhealthy stuff was the residual from blocking out any hope of normal stuff. I actually don't remember anyone trying to teach me that homosexual stuff was really awful..because it was all bad. Even happily married couples were only supposed to "do it" when they actively wanted to get pregnant..after the 12th child that sort of seems unrealistic..too much pleasure was a problem...

It was sick then and still probably sick today but people are just sort of ignoring a lot of it and going their healthier hopefully ways. But who knows what we will find out on judgement day...the Magdelen nuns were right after all? That would have been what I was lead to believe. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: Penny S.
Date: 27 May 09 - 01:21 PM

I've had a few thoughts since this reared its head again.

It's become obvious that sexual abusers find their ways to places where children are accessible, no matter what their religion or lack of it. Some men who can take a superior role in a religion, any religion, or denomination, or sect, seem to find it "necessary" to take sexual advantage of anyone available, adult or child. That isn't the whole of what's been happening in this case.

That anyone who has read that it is better to have a millstone round their neck than harm a child feels it appropriate to make a child lick faeces from a shoe beggars belief. That isn't sexual, is it? Sexual is almost understandable by comparison with the cruelty of rubbing salt into the wounds of "punishment".

And it isn't just Ireland. I remember the film of Bernadette Soubirous being treated appallingly in her convent. Wasn't it portrayed as part of what led to her being canonised that she could bear this without protest? (You can't blame the British government for that. Oops, cheap one.)

I've seen the seeds of this desire to humiliate in other places, and in the case of someone who approached a friend inappropriately, a reluctance in the case of someone else in the Cof E to believe it. I am reluctant to look as if I am anti-Catholic. The lovely Irish priest brothers of a neighbour were brilliant at visiting my mother in hospital, when she had stated she did not want any chaplain, because of the behaviour of our Congregationalist minister.

But the spending of money on the defence of the indefensible, the attempt to silence the victims is appalling.

It isn't just the money going to victims that is limiting Joe's ministry, it's the money opposing them.

The other thought is to wonder when it began. If it had been prevalent in the past, would so many people have been drawn to the church - any church? Would so many people have entered the religious life? Wouldn't they run away rather than enter convents where they knew abuse was rife?

I read something about the Magdalene Laundries about the time the film came out. It seems that the old nuns, in need of care, found themselves in the old peoples' homes that succeeded the Laundries, alongside some of their former victims.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: nutty
Date: 26 May 09 - 05:34 PM

The only reason I can find for such abuse - sexual and otherwise - is in the churches belief ( seemingly) that children were inately evil.

Even in the Church of England there was a belief that children were born in sin so the mother needed to be 'churched' and the child 'christened/baptised' as part of the 'cleansing' process.

When such a belief is held then harsh treatment can be easily justified by the person administering punishment.

I taught mentally disturbed youngsters for many years. One poor child was exorcised by the local Catholic priest, an act which profoundly affected him and actually made him worse than before.

I know his parents thought they were doing the right thing but to me this was an act of abuse born of ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Child abuse in Ireland
From: GUEST,Smokey
Date: 26 May 09 - 12:10 AM

Of course they don't deserve that Joe, but I don't really see anyone doing that here.