 sj |
||
|
||
BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Dec 10 - 01:08 AM Remember that I worked as an investigator for the U.S. Government for 25 years, doing security clearance investigations. I could do a pretty good job investigating incidents that happened up to five years ago, but I hated the ones that went back 15 years. It's well-nigh impossible to do an honest job investigating something that took place 15 years ago. People change, and their memories and perceptions change. If a person committed a crime 15 years ago and didn't get caught, I suppose that's his good luck. If he hasn't committed any other crimes in the last 15 years, then I don't see a lot of harm done by his getting away. Most likely, he HAS committed more recent crimes, and he'll get the punishment he deserves getting caught on something more recent. But it always pains me a bit when I see a long-forgotten fugitive get caught and sent to jail, after living a decent life for a number of years. It pains me to see a prisoner executed after 25 years on death row, no matter how horrible his crime was. If punishment is not immediate, people move on and change. If they've changed for the good, then that punishment becomes an injustice. As for the Pope's speech, I think the Guardian's summary didn't quite do him justice. His entire speech can be found here. The Guardian makes it appear he's shifting the blame for the child molestation, but he doesn't do that at all. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 11:10 PM Joe, you seem to be ignoring an important aspect of punishment which is as a deterrent to others. However insignificant a factor anyone may claim it to be we know it works to some degree and that is infinitely better than none at all. All offences should therefore be dealt with on an equal basis regardless of how long ago they occurred. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: mg Date: 21 Dec 10 - 10:11 PM Could we start with Cardinal Law, perhaps in abstentia. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 10:00 PM Don, I think that to be effective, punishment for crime must be immediate. If fifteen years have passed, I don't think punishment does a whole lot of good; and I think we reach a point in time where society is better off easing off on its quest to "bring criminals to justice" - yes, even to some extent for murder. In general, I think that felonious crime should be punished. However, I think we reach a point where punishment doesn't do much good and wastes a lot of the resources of society. Fifteen years after the commission of a crime, the whole world has changed. Current priorities need to be considered along with the need for "justice" for past offenses. As far as I can see, the child molestation crimes peaked during the 1980s, both in Europe and in the United States. I think it's quite clear that all crimes of molestation should be punished, within reasonable limits. As for the coverups, I think it's a different story because responsibility for the offense is not so clear-cut. The coverups are for a large part a function of the organization, and the organization has changed radically in the last 20 years. The Catholic Church is no longer the powerful entity it once was. The number of priests has been greatly reduced, churches in Ireland and Europe are often empty, and the leadership of the Catholic Church in Ireland has changed almost completely. So, whom do you prosecute for the coverup crimes committed so long ago? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:39 PM ""I don't really care whether people are punished for what they did fifteen years ago, as long as they're in a position where they cannot do it again. I do desperately want to know why they did what they did, so we can make sure it does not happen again."" Surely the best way to make sure it doesn't happen again is to bring those who covered it up to justice Joe. Some of the people who committed these crimes have not been put into a position where they cannot again offend, and those who covered up for them are certainly able to do it again, unless we deal with their crimes as we should already have done. Would you make the above statement in relation to murderers, armed robbers, muggers or burglars?......I think not!! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 21 Dec 10 - 06:43 PM It seems important to see the actual text of the pope's speech, and a tape of what he said, as they can differ. Joe said: "I would say that only some people do significantly bad things in the world. I would also say that only some Catholics do significantly bad things in the world. But maybe that's a difference in our overall worldview. I see the vast majority of the people in the world as good, and only a small percentage as evil. In my experience, most people are pretty good people". There is a big difference between the two concepts. One is the act (and interpretation) of doing bad. The other is whether you knowingly participate in doing good or bad. They differ...that is why I took issue with your statements. Lets say the USA military bombs a village in Iraq, for example. To the folks in the USA (and, the troops), this can be seen as good, as the perception is they are being protected in the fight against terrorism (aggression). To the Iraq people who are impacted, (their families die) this is a bad act. Above all of that is there are dead people that possibly did not need to die? So, would the Global RC church (and the local parishioners) see this as good or bad, if the solder dropping the bomb were a local RC? I try to stay away from Good and bad RC church (and God believers, in General) arguments related to distant history. While there are some really bad things that happened in history, under the watch of the RC church, there was a certain prevailing view (I suspect) that has to be taken into account...but, I don't know where the line should be drawn? Surely, the slave trade, residential schools and the like.. And treating other humans like sub species must be wrong (bad). But, how do we rate it in today's standards? I don't know...that's why I mostly stay away from those discussions. Many bad things (that impact others) happen in the world. And, many of the folks doing them feel comforted, even revered, in church.... (In some of the RC countries, and others, I mentioned). The USA and its allies control a huge amount of the world's wealth. It surely is a good thing to give a portion to aid others (but, what amount)? Is it good to hoard wealth, for shiny trinkets, when others are starving? Others, who are starving may see this as bad? Do you feel God has a western, or USA, sympathy? Evil is another topic. But, then, some evil acts, under any reasonable standard, have been committed under the sign of white mans cross in world history. Just some of my thoughts on doing good and bad, and on being a good person.Not to claim they are right, or wrong.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: katlaughing Date: 21 Dec 10 - 04:42 PM Kat, it's quite obvious that you did not understand what I said about my reason for using the word "Father." At the time he committed his crimes, that was his title. I'd rather disown the man, but I have to humbly admit that at the time he committed his crimes, he was a priest in my church. My use of that term was my admission of that sad fact. No, you misunderstood me, Joe. No one is questioning your acceptance of that "sad fact." What you aren't *hearing* is how hurtful it can be for victims to still hear such ilk called by what they are no longer, i.e. "Father." It was bad enough when it happened. No need to constant reminding. And, how do you reconcile these two statements: I don't really care whether people are punished for what they did fifteen years ago, as long as they're in a position where they cannot do it again. and, Saying that people were bad and they need to be punished, is not enough. Understanding is far more important than punishment - although I do not deny the need for punishment for crimes. Do you want them punished or not? Do you really not care if they did it long enough ago? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Penny S. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 03:38 PM Joe, I came across those quotes in The Guardian. Report of Pope's speech It looks as though the paedophile reference is strictly accurate - there were people, though not many, making that argument back then, and the Pope's words can bear that meaning. I'm sorry you are feeling beleaguered - your vision of what the Catholic Church should be is good - if only the heirarchy wre more like that. Or Andrew Greeley. Happy Christmas, Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:59 PM "I would hope that things are different now in the Catholic Church in Ireland." Nothing to do with dictatorial Bishops, who have always been there. More to do with the uncontrolled influence the church has ALWAYS had over peoples' lives - that hopefully has gone now, thanks to their own behaviour (probably the best thing to have emerged from this sordid mess). You've got to hand it to them though, they're still trying to maintain their grip on peoples' minds. Front page news this morning is of a woman with cancer who was advised that her pregnancy was a threat to her life; she was advised to have a termination. The hospital authorities decided that her condition wasn't life-threatening enough, so, in her delicate state, she was forced to go to England for her termination. Not too different, eh? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:47 PM ...or even implies it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:45 PM As for the child abuse scandal, I know that the situation in Ireland was far worse than it was almost anywhere else. Dublin had a string of dictatorial archbishops over a number of decades, and their oppressive rule affected the Catholic Church all over Ireland. But Irish church leaders over the past couple of decades seem to be far more moderate (despite some mistakes in handling the horrible damage done by this scandal). I would hope that things are different now in the Catholic Church in Ireland. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:40 PM I do not know how extensive the coverups were, and I have no idea why it was so important to these bishops to cover up the information. This document makes that pretty plain, though naturally it doesn't explain the Vatican's reason. We can only speculate on that, but the very existence of the document implicates the collusion of the entire heirarchy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:24 PM Smokey, many employers give some severance pay to terminated employees, even if they were terminated for misconduct. It gives the employee something to keep going while looking for another job. Would it be better for a fired priest to go on the dole and be supported by the taxpayers? It would be better if priests fired for child molestation went straight to jail. I don't think further employment is appropriate. We aren't really discussing normal employer/employee relationships and mere misconduct here. I suppose what struck me was the irony of the difference between my own (unspoken due to wrongness) gut-reaction to all this and the church's in apparently rewarding him for his efforts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:08 PM Ed T says: RC's are logically no better nor worse than the rest of us, with the same problems and potential solutions for them. I certainly wouldn't disagree with that part, Ed. Not in the least. This is the part I disagree with: But, to suggest that only some RCs do bad things in the world, IMO is true BS. I would say that only some people do significantly bad things in the world. I would also say that only some Catholics do significantly bad things in the world. But maybe that's a difference in our overall world view. I see the vast majority of the people in the world as good, and only a small percentage as evil. In my experience, most people are pretty good people. As for your quotes from the Pope in this message at 1:14 PM, I think they're a misquote or taken out of context. The guy doesn't talk like that, but he's frequently misquoted by the press. He's an intelligent man, and he makes sense when he speaks. Not sure I can say the same for John Paul II. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,mg Date: 21 Dec 10 - 01:29 PM Most of those who committed the molestation and coverups of the 1980s, are no longer in a position where they can do such things. --- No. Coverups? One is now the pope. Several are cardinals. Probably quite a few are still bishops. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 21 Dec 10 - 01:14 PM I believe a diffferent version of the story posted before, I noted a couple of quotes from the story that seem odd to me? I don't know of any society where child pornography is or was considered normal behaviour, or treated as such? #1 Benedict also said, however, that "the scandal must be seen in a broader social context, in which child pornography is seemingly considered normal by society and drug use and sexual tourism are on the rise". #2 He said (the Pope)that "as recently as as the 1970s, pedophilia wasn't considered an absolute evil but rather part of a spectrum of behaviours that people refused to judge in the name of tolerance and relativism". #3 "In the 1970s, pedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the Pope said. "It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than.' Nothing is good or bad in itself." "The effects of such theories are evident today," he said. Associated Press version |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: mg Date: 21 Dec 10 - 11:58 AM You got it backwards guest...Catholics are Christians but Christians are not Catholic, Roman, Greek Orthodox or whatever necessarily, althought he Catholic ones are Catholic, of which there are several groups. I don't know what percentage of Christians are Catholic..and we tend to not call ourselves Christians unless pressed because it is used more for Protestants and we were taught back then to separate ourselves from the Protestants...and Protestants would hate being called Catholic or catholic or Katholic or whatever. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,Patsy Date: 21 Dec 10 - 10:08 AM More should be done to protect children and vulnerable people from abusers in general whether it be Priests, Policemen, School teachers, school maintenance staff or Nursery school workers. It seems to me that in the majority of cases brought to light the abuser usually is in a trusted position where the 'sin' committed is totally against everything that he or sometimes she is supposed to stand for. Perhaps there lies the answer it is the forbidden that is the turn on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,guest cu Date: 21 Dec 10 - 09:02 AM Recent revelations show that the Vatican still believes it should not be amenable to any law but it"s own. "Where the head leads the limbs must follow" Surely a root and branch change of attitude would go some way to cut out the systematic problem that encourages certain clergy to adopt these foul practices. B.S.--I do not need luck. In these parts Roman Catholic or R.C. is term used to describe adherents of their branch of religious believe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Bonnie Shaljean Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:57 AM Even though Catholics themselves usually just refer to their faith as "Catholic", in all three countries I've lived in? OK, if you say so. Good luck with changing things. But I think there are more important battles to fight right now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,guest cu Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:41 AM B.S. received usage or not, it is still not correct. As was said of a certain Tony Blair "If a rat be born in a stable that does not make it a horse". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:18 AM Many Catholics have accomplished wonderfully good things People are people the world over whatever their stripe and I don't suppose Milgram would have turned up different results if he'd tested Buddhists, Jews, Catholics, Atheists or Muslims. That said I remain convinced of the intrinsic goodness of humanity despite the occasional glitch, but even so it's rarely gratuitous or else indicative of the sort of evil the RCC would have us believe necessitated the dolorous sacrifice that rests at the core of their bonkers mythology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Bonnie Shaljean Date: 21 Dec 10 - 06:57 AM Guest 6:07: That may be the correct terminology technically, but I think calling non-RC Christians "catholic" is just going to confuse an already volatile issue. I live in Ireland now but was born and raised in California (only about 40-50 miles south of where Joe is, as it happens). A lot of my friends in school were RC and they just said they were Catholic, while the rest of us were Protestant or Jewish or whatever. (And we did have quite a few Whatevers.) I also spent 20 years in and around London and it was a similar situation there. Is there anything actually incorrect with just using the term "Catholic" (capital C) when referring to followers of the Church of Rome? It's become received usage and we already have enough policitally-correct linguistic hoops to jump through. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 21 Dec 10 - 06:52 AM Ed T, "your comment is not worthy of a response" Actually, I wasn't advertising for a response:) Have you ever taken a walk in major cities in mostly RC Brazil, about the population of the USA? Let's say Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, or Brasilia? Try it out and then compare it to Sacramento, or let's say a mostly Buddhist city anywhere the world that is not RC. Tell me where you feel safer. There is no doubt that many RCs do good charitable work, like folks from other religious or non religious groups globally. But, to suggest that only some RCs do bad things in the world, IMO is true BS. RC's are logically no better nor worse than the rest of us, withe the same problems and potential solutions for them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,guest Date: 21 Dec 10 - 06:07 AM Can posters to this forum please use the correct terminology. The discussion in this thread is about the Roman Catholic Church. As I understand it most, if not all, Christians are Catholic, those who are thirlled to the Vatican are Roman Catholics. ------------Anonymous GUEST posting is not allowed. Please use a consistent Guest name. JoeClone---------- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 05:41 AM Well, I have to say I really like the idea Ed T posted above, suggesting that they should put a woman at the top of the Catholic Church. The Catholic hierarchy is the most exclusive "boys' club" on earth. Bringing an equal number of women into the mix, would make a huge difference. And no, Bonnie, I do not suggest that we "disregard the Church's shameful past and only focus on the present." I think we need to view the past dispassionately and analytically. If a man was convicted and went to prison in 1995-96, perhaps it's time to ease off on the anger and engage in a quiet and open discussion of the causes of his actions. Most of those who committed the molestation and coverups of the 1980s, are no longer in a position where they can do such things. I think that by the 1990s, it was far more difficult to do such crimes because the Catholic Church was under far greater public scrutiny (and rightly so). This has happened later in Europe than it did in the US, but there's certainly not much shelter left anywhere in the world for molesting priests and coverup bishops. I am not satisfied with the answers that have come from Catholic bishops on this issue. I do not know how extensive the coverups were, and I have no idea why it was so important to these bishops to cover up the information. I cannot understand how bishops could think they could get away with covering up this sort of crime. All I can do is guess - as far as I know, no bishop or Vatican official has openly discussed the reasons behind the coverups. I don't really care whether people are punished for what they did fifteen years ago, as long as they're in a position where they cannot do it again. I do desperately want to know why they did what they did, so we can make sure it does not happen again. The U.S. Catholic bishops have put a set of controls into effect, and many of them are quite good. Fingerprinting of volunteers and employees is required, along with psychiatric screening of seminarians. What I don't see is ongoing screening after people have started work, and I think it's dangerous not to have that. In the later years of my career doing clearance investigations, we did updates (partial investigations) every five years. We found that initial screenings and investigations could not guarantee an employee's integrity for a lifetime. The same principle applies to priests and church workers, as Yvonne stated above. Still, I'm not satisfied, and my reason is that I don't think we have an understanding of the reasons behind this scandal. Saying that people were bad and they need to be punished, is not enough. Understanding is far more important than punishment - although I do not deny the need for punishment for crimes. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Bonnie Shaljean Date: 21 Dec 10 - 04:51 AM > Those who disagree with the Conventional Wisdom are not free to speak their opinion honestly. When I have dared to ask for open discussion, I am greeted with the same hostility... Joe, this is the internet. Of course you are free to speak your opinion honestly. No one is stopping you. It's just that no one is agreeing with you. That's not the same thing. You say you have "dared" to ask for open discussion - well, you got it. We have been open, and we have been honest. There's quite a diversity of people posting here, from both sides of the Atlantic, and your call to disregard the Church's shameful past and only focus on the present is simply not being supported, for excellent reasons which have been outlined at length above. As for mobs carrying bludgeons, get a reality check. A mob is a crowd of people who are physically in one place at one time, fuelled by a consolidated, focused energy which can certainly be dangerous. By contrast, we are spread out all over the world, writing over a period of days, with plenty of room for anyone to dispute what we say, and no one is threatening you. It's a false and overly-dramatic analogy. It also sounds a little paranoid. We have been speaking honestly, and we are not a mob. We're simply a bunch of individuals airing our minds freely, in a forum designed for exactly that purpose. I think your real problem with this thread is that no one else shares your views. There's equal space here for a "counter mob" to build up in favour of your stance (would they still be a "mob" if they were on your side?) but no one has come forward. That doesn't mean you're being persecuted. "No middle ground on this forum"? There's any ground anyone wants to stand on. That's the nature of free speech and the nature of the internet. Your call to turn away - i.e. refuse to face - the Church's evil past and "stop beating a dead horse" is unpopular because many of us think it's a cop-out. That's why you don't get the support. And when you don't, you blame us for being a bludgeon-carrying mob who can't hold an honest open discussion. We've been honest. We've been open. Maybe it's you being paranoid, and calling us names rather than facing the truth - that your position is isolated because people don't share your feelings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 03:59 AM No, mg, you did not brand me anything. In case you didn't notice, there are other people participating in this discussion, and some of them certainly tried to convince people that I was blindly defending the Catholic Church, even implying I was making excuses for the molesters and the coverup. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: mg Date: 21 Dec 10 - 03:02 AM I am not branding you anything. I am talking about the church, which we have to fix. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:51 AM Smokey, many employers give some severance pay to terminated employees, even if they were terminated for misconduct. It gives the employee something to keep going while looking for another job. Would it be better for a fired priest to go on the dole and be supported by the taxpayers? mg, the things I mentioned like birth control, are examples to illustrate my usual position as a frequent and outspoken critic of the Catholic Church. I lost a job because of that, so it's unfair to brand me as some sort of mindless supporter of all aspects of the Catholic Church. I call myself part of the "loyal opposition." -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: mg Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:38 AM And what do these things have in common? The rules about birth control and divorce and child abuse to say nothing of Inquisition? Cruelty and not even apologies for how it affects people. As in I am sorry Mrs. O'Reilly that you are 48 years old and having your 14th child due to the church's teaching. An ability to enforce cruel rules, that somehow the Protestants, knowing the bible much better than any of us, do not see as necessary parts of religion. I just happened to get a book about Roman gladiators out from the library and was reading about the cult of the gladiator and martyrdom etc...and I went oh goodness..that sounds like what I was told. How much of the catholic religion is based on things like the cult of the gladiator? How much was the result of Constantine and his mother? I think we have to look at the whole entire picture now, spare no one, including His Holiness, and take out what is criminal to be sure, what hurts people, what is just plain unnecessary because Constantine's mother put it in there long ago and leave what is decent and necessary. And put the pretty songs and frankincense back in..they were never the problem. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Dec 10 - 02:02 AM Kat, it's quite obvious that you did not understand what I said about my reason for using the word "Father." At the time he committed his crimes, that was his title. I'd rather disown the man, but I have to humbly admit that at the time he committed his crimes, he was a priest in my church. My use of that term was my admission of that sad fact. You can read other things into what I said, but I carefully chose my words as an admission that my church bears responsibility for the crimes committed by this man. Ed T, your comment is not worthy of a response, but let me give you details of a number of programs founded by Catholics in my town, Sacramento (about 2 million people in the area):
If you look at the Websites of these organizations, you will see that they provide all sorts of services and have developed innovative solutions to a number of needs. While all started out as Catholic organizations, they are all non-sectarian and have volunteers and clients from all creeds and colors. There are many other Catholic-based organizations that serve the poor of the Sacramento diocese, but these four are the best-known. Bishop-Accountability.org, an organization that is very critical of the conduct of Catholic priests and bishops in the child molestation scandal, reports that 16 priests in the Sacramento Diocese were accused of molesting children. 33 victims filed claims against the diocese in the past decade for offenses dating back to the 1960s, and they were paid a total of $35 million. Were there other victims who did not file claims? Most probably, but these numbers give somewhat of an indication of the extent of the problem. Compared to the number of poor people served every day by the four organizations, the percentage of child molestation victims is very small. I do not mean to diminish the seriousness of the crimes that were committed and of the coverups that took place in a number of dioceses. However, as with most crime in the western world, a relatively small percentage of people were victimized, and an even smaller percentage of people committed the crimes. We must take crime seriously and we must do what we can to reduce the crime rate. While it is indeed a significant problem, some people become obsessed with crime, and see it as the primary aspect of human existence; and these people live in fear all the time. While they are a real and significant and shameful aspect of the existence of the Catholic Church, the child molestation crimes are only one facet of a vast and multifaceted organization. Those who committed or covered up these crimes must be punished, and structures must be set up to prevent and deal with such crimes in the future. But must all Catholic education and health services and services to the poor be subordinated to the crimes committed by a relatively small number of priests? I don't think they should be. The crimes committed by the priests and bishops are seriously wrong, and they make me very angry. If it were not for the unfair and disproportionate attacks on my church here at Mudcat, I would be in my usual role as an outspoken critic of leadership in my Catholic church, because I believe that many leaders did serious wrong and deserve to be punished severely. In Catholic gatherings and in Catholic publications, I have spoken and written against the requirement for celibacy for priests, against the prohibition of second marriages after divorce, against the prohibition of birth control, against the refusal to ordain women as Catholic priests, and against the obnoxiousness of the "right to life" movement. And I have spoken and written against the conduct of Catholic priests and bishops in the child molestation scandal. I lost my job as a religion teacher in the Catholic Church because I was thought to be too outspoken, and I had to face a hearing because I was accused of teaching things that were doctrinally unsound (I was exonerated, but lost my job a few months later). But the anti-Catholic criticism at Mudcat is disproportionate and unfair in almost every thread that makes mention of the Catholic Church, and I stand here in protest against it. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 21 Dec 10 - 01:56 AM You have a very good point there, Yvonne. How much severance pay do get if you get sacked for molesting children? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: GUEST,Yvonne Date: 21 Dec 10 - 01:04 AM I have stumbled onto this discussion from something I noted in Concertina.net about lyrics for Captain O'Kaine. Please be patient with my comments as they are a bit circuitous. I have an answer to how the abuse of power exercised by the clergy could be obviated. Please read on. I am 60 years old and have practiced Obstetrics and Gynecology for the last 31 years. I have seen the life long suffering of women who have been sexually abused as children. It is no different for those men who have been molested as boys. Priests and physicians have in common the desire to help others. Both either work for G-d, do G-d's work, or think of themselves as at least being close to G-d, if not G-d like. (Tongue in cheek). Physicians in general have fallen off the pedestal and are no longer treated like G-ds but rather like people who have to learn to get along with others and conform to standards of good behavior (no throwing instruments in the operating room). I had a startling thing happen to me when I finished medical school and submitted an application for a license to practice medicine in California. The first thing I had to do was go to the police department and have my fingerprints taken. I thought to myself, why am I being treated like a criminal? I am here to help people, I have not committed any crimes! That was in 1979, 31 years ago. I have learned a lot in the intervening years. Physicians commit crimes, and commit them with some regularity. I read about them all the time……the Board of Medical Quality Assurance in California periodically publishes a list of all the physicians who have lost their licenses to practice medicine in California and the offenses for which they lost their license. I am licensed to practice medicine in two states: California and Oregon. I am licensed by the federal government to prescribe narcotic medications. The hospital where I work requires me to resubmit my credentials for the practice of medicine every two years. The American Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists requires me to maintain my Board Certification every year by submitting answers to articles that I've read. I have to repeat my Advanced Cardiac Life Support training every two years to stay current. One may not be able to eradicate child sexual abuse, but if priests had to be licensed every two years like physicians it would be much harder for the abusing priests to hide. Priests could be licensed by the State just like physicians are. Here are the questions on the form that the State of Oregon requires me to fill out every two years in order for me to maintain my license to practice medicine in the State of Oregon: Has any state licensing board refused to license, refused to renew, denied you a license to practice, or asked you or permitted you to withdraw an application for licensure? Have you had any disciplinary or adverse action imposed against any professional license or certification, or were you ever denied a professional license or certification, or have you entered into any consent agreement, stipulated order or settlement with any regulatory Board or certification agency, or have you been notified of any complaints or investigations related to any license or certification? Have you been denied approval to prescribe controlled substances, or been charged with a violation of federal or state narcotic laws, or been asked to surrender your DEA number? Have you been arrested, convicted of, or pled guilty or "nolo contendere" to ANY offense in any state in the United States or any foreign country, other than minor traffic violations, or a substance use related offense which has been evaluated by the Oregon Health Professionals Program and you are in compliance with their recommendations? Matters in which you were pardoned or diverted, or the conviction was deferred or set aside, must be disclosed. Serious traffic convictions, such as reckless driving, driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, hit-and-run, evading a peace officer, driving while the license was suspended or revoked, or failure to appear, must be disclosed. This list is not all-inclusive. Have you been contacted by or asked to make a response to any governmental agency in any jurisdiction regarding any criminal or civil investigation of which you are the subject, whether or not a charge, claim or filing with a court actually occurred? Are you aware of any current, proposed, impending or threatened civil or criminal action against you? This includes whether or not a claim, charge or filing was actually made with a court. Have you entered into any formal, informal, out-of-court or confidential settlement to deter, prevent, or settle a claim, lawsuit, letter of intent to sue, and/or criminal action? This includes whether or not a claim, charge or filing was actually made with a court. Has any award, settlement or payment of any kind been made by you or on your behalf to resolve a malpractice claim, even if it was not required to be reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB); or have you been notified in any manner that any such claim is proposed, pending or threatened, whether or not a claim, charge or filing was actually made with a court? Have you been restricted, suspended, terminated, requested to voluntarily resign, placed on probation, counseled, received a warning, or been subject to any remedial or disciplinary action during medical school or postgraduate training? Have you had privileges denied, reduced, restricted, suspended, revoked, terminated or have you been placed on probation, been subject to staff disciplinary action or non-renewal of an employment contract, or been requested to voluntarily resign or suspend your privileges while under investigation from a hospital, clinic, surgical center, or other medically related employment; or have you been notified that such action or request is pending or proposed? Have you been allowed to withdraw your staff privileges from a hospital or surgical center? Have you interrupted the practice of your health care profession for one year or more? Have you ceased the active practice of medicine in your specialty? Have you had, or do you currently have any physical, mental, or emotional condition which impaired, or does impair your ability to practice your health care profession safely and competently? Has there been any type of inquiry into your physical, mental, or emotional health? Have you been admitted to any hospital or other in-patient care facility for any physical, mental or emotional condition? Have you had, or do you currently have a dependency on the use of alcohol or drugs which impaired, or does impair, your ability to practice your health care profession safely and competently? Have you engaged in the excessive or habitual use of alcohol or illegal drugs, or received any in-patient therapy treatment or been hospitalized for alcoholism, or illegal drug use, or been arrested or received a citation for a DUII (Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants) or DWI (Driving While Intoxicated)? "Excessive" as used in this question means the use of alcohol or drugs that leads to disturbances, fights, arrest, injury, accident, illness, loss of consciousness, or other adverse consequences. Have you been the subject of any chemical substance screening test which resulted in an indication of the presence in your body of any controlled substance, any dangerous drug, or alcohol level above .08% BAC? Have you refused to submit to any such test? This does not include those drugs taken by you as a result of a legitimate health care diagnosis, and prescribed for you in good faith by another licensed health care professional, unless the test was conducted as part of a criminal investigation, such as DUII. Have you entered into a diversion program other than the Oregon Health Professionals Program for evaluation, treatment or monitoring for substance abuse or dependency, or for correction of communication or boundary issues, in lieu of or as a condition of resolving a matter before a health care program or facility, regulatory or licensing Board, or criminal or civil court; or have you been notified that such action is pending or proposed? I certify that I am the Licensee, and the information submitted by me is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that fraud or misrepresentation in applying for registration renewal may be grounds for disciplinary action by the Board, including revocation of license (ORS 677.205), and is reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank and/or appropriate national professional credentialing organizations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 20 Dec 10 - 11:53 PM Anyway, it was Joe who suggested slicing their alberts off.. That's a bit too biblical for me. Personally, I'm more in favour of a longer sentence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 20 Dec 10 - 11:22 PM ...sniff... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: katlaughing Date: 20 Dec 10 - 11:20 PM Aw, right then, that's it fer the lot o'youse..inta the jammer ya go for the nicht! G'wan ,now! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:52 PM It's me spell'in dat's jus dun rong |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:42 PM It weren't me bein' crude, Miss, it were that other lad - 'e's a wrong un. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: katlaughing Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:38 PM Aw, right, then, gi' on wi' ye.:-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:31 PM "Smokey and Ed, no need to be so crude" Sorry Mum:). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:29 PM ..."I truly think you are not looking beyond your own backyard" Yes, just look at the violent crime statisticts for some of the RC countries. Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Haiti, Dominica....and these are just a few. To suggest only some Rcs do bad things,not many makes no sense at all. I submit that globally, (and logically) RC's do just as many bad things as people of other religions and those who have no religion at all. For sure crime differs from coutry to country and by culture and form of government. But, I cannot see that RCs do any bette than others in avoiding it and doing bad things. And, what one may see as good, another may see as bad, if you are on the other side of a situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: katlaughing Date: 20 Dec 10 - 10:17 PM Smokey and Ed, no need to be so crude. Joe, you said, But some day, there must be an end to this frenzy of anger and vengeance. The anger and vengeance must give way to rational plans to prevent such horrible crimes form happening again. I say to you, again, if you truly want to help in bringing that about, quit honouring him by calling him that which he is no longer. There is no need to keep reminding people, some of them victims of his ilk, that he once held such a position, esp. if you purport to move on. We all know and many of us do not carry bludgeons...I truly think you are not looking beyond your own backyard. It's okay to still love your church and the individuals you work with whom you know and trust, but it's unseemly, imo, to keep on defending the RC as a whole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:55 PM "Hanging's reasonably effective too, and cheaper" Possibly, if they are well hung. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:51 PM Well, Smokey, there is some evidence that castration significantly reduced that likelihood that a child molester will commit similar crimes after castration. In fact, it seems to be the only remedy that has any level of certainty of success. Hanging's reasonably effective too, and cheaper. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:36 PM "I think your question is insulting. In my experience, most people do good things, far in excess of the evil done in this world" Well Joe, take off your rose coloured galsses and look farther away than your local parish. Or, are there billions of RCs there? There are many bad things happening in the world, and to boldly say ony a few of the billions of RCs do aby of them is an insult to logic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:32 PM Well, Smokey, there is some evidence that castration significantly reduced that likelihood that a child molester will commit similar crimes after castration. In fact, it seems to be the only remedy that has any level of certainty of success. There are places that have experimented with "chemical castration," using medications that make a man impotent; and there has been some success with these experiments. Ed T, as to your question about "many" Catholics accomplishing good things, I have only to look to the city of Sacramento, California - that's the big city near my home. Catholics have established a huge and successful network of services for the poor and hungry and homeless. But you are well aware of the many good things Catholics do in your community - and some of the bad things. I think your question is insulting. In my experience, most people do good things, far in excess of the evil done in this world. I've done a few good things myself. As I said, it's hard to speak honestly when your opponent is armed with a bludgeon. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Ed T Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:23 PM "Many Catholics have accomplished wonderfully good things - and some have not (and in a church with a billion members, "some" is a very large number)". Are there reliable (independant) sources to back these very broad statements up(especially the odd use of many and some)? How does one know it is not actually Many and Many, outside of wishful thinking? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Smokey. Date: 20 Dec 10 - 09:03 PM Joe, you suggested lopping their plums off the other day.. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And yet more abusing priests (Ireland) From: Joe Offer Date: 20 Dec 10 - 08:49 PM How can the active propagation of lies, superstition, poverty, disease, suffering and general spiritual & cultural impoverishment possibly be for good? When you have a billion members, some of those members are going to do this sort of stuff - unless you happen to be that rare sort of organization that can command complete and mindless obedience from all its members. Despite opinions to the contrary, the Catholic Church is diverse and its members (and clergy) are largely autonomous. Many Catholics have accomplished wonderfully good things - and some have not (and in a church with a billion members, "some" is a very large number). Bonnie, I am sorry that I misunderstood which of your questions you claimed I failed to answer. I thought it was this one: How is healing ever going to begin when people like you insist on ignoring the troublesome part of the problem - what happened Then - I don't ignore the child molestation that is the at the heart of the problem at all, so the underlying premise of this question is false. Your other question, about "honest discussion" being impossible, is another matter. The ability (or inability) to be honest is on my part - it is difficult to speak honestly when faced with a mob of people carrying bludgeons. One person even questioned my referring to the person being discussed as "Fr. Tony Walsh." I used that title reluctantly, but I felt I was obliged to. At the time he committed his crimes, Tony Walsh bore that title as a priest in my church, a fact that causes me deep shame and embarrassment. I certainly would not refer to him or address him NOW as "Father," but that's the title he bore at the time he committed his crimes. And that is a horrible and deplorable thing. But no, there is no middle ground to be found right now in this forum on this subject. Those who disagree with the Conventional Wisdom are not free to speak their opinion honestly. When I have dared to ask for open discussion, I am greeted with the same hostility experienced by those who dare to oppose the death penalty here in California. Certainly, I oppose the crimes these people have committed. Certainly, I have deep sympathy for their victims. But some day, there must be an end to this frenzy of anger and vengeance. The anger and vengeance must give way to rational plans to prevent such horrible crimes form happening again. -Joe- |
