BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 13 Jun 14 - 11:08 AM

I saw it. I'm not sure any of the panelists came out smelling of roses. I was even shouting at the telly at the end of a particular contribution by Ian Hislop, and that doesn't happen too often.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jun 14 - 12:06 PM

The previous two entries referring to BBC's Question Time 12.6.14, which I turned off within two minutes once it became clear the agenda was rigged.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Jun 14 - 01:23 PM

The program "Question Time" is seen in N. Am. but I seldom watch.

However, if "that muslim woman" applies to Salma Yaqoob, it sounds like a gratuitous racist slur.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Jun 14 - 01:40 PM

IDS = Iain Duncan Smith, Tory leader.
mudcat is international, and posts that are not made with this in mind are useless for many who look at the thread.

A summary of Selma Yaqoob's comments and Smith's appeared in the Huffington Post United Kingdom, 13/06/2014; which may be found with Google.

Just how this applies to the subject of this thread is not apparent.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 03:39 AM

IDS isn't the Tory leader, but he used to be many years ago, when they were in opposition. He is the works and pensions secretary.

Question Time is never rigged, other than the panel is known beforehand to the audience who may tailor their questions accordingly.

Nothing to do with this thread. Al made a link, I commented and the rest is par for the course.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 04:23 AM

"Question Time is never rigged,"
Moot point Muskie.
The questions are submitted beforehand and sometimes the programme is 'sanitised' by careful selection I understand.
Also, as I understand it, it operates a '20 second' system, whereby the technicians are able to edit or exclude offensive, liable or maybe 'controversial' contributions before the signal is actually transmitted.
One of the reasons I ceased to be a devoted follower is the infuriating way in which the chairman insists on interrupting with his own opinions - he never used to, way back.
I never watched the Irish counterpart of the programme for exactly the same reason, only here it was far worse - no longer with us.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 04:50 AM

I said all that Jim.

The programme doesn't have a delay as it is recorded earlier in the evening these days. As a licence payer I don't wish to see my fee being used fighting libel cases so the opportunity to edit it out is rather important. More money to spend on commissioning a new series of Quirke.

Back to the subject. An interesting article with an interview with the lady herself in today's Guardian.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 04:56 AM

Up above, Musket describes the Catholic Church as an organisation that sees itself as fit for judging the morals of others.

I wonder what qualifications an organization has to have to be worthy to comment on the morality of something.

To my mind, "morality" has very little to do with sexual conduct. Sexual matters fit in there somewhere, but most of the time they serve to distract us from the real matters of morality, the well-being of people who are oppressed and the commandment to "do unto others as you would have them....."

The Washington Post says that last Sunday, Pope Francis hosted Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in what he termed a "Prayer Summit." Peres and Abbas "concluded the two-hour ceremony by kissing each other on the cheek and then planting an olive tree, gestures intended to signal a commitment to trying to end one of the longest-running, most intractable conflicts in the world."

I'd say that was quite an accomplishment, to get Peres and Abbas together in peace for two hours.

I've been working particularly hard the last two weeks as a Catholic representative in an interfaith effort on two projects - to reduce the phenomenal incarceration rate in the U.S., and to provide housing for homeless people in our community. Particularly in the mass incarceration project, I had to stand up before county officials and tell them they were wrong.

I suppose you could say that in these situations, the Pope and I were guilty of "judging the morals of others." The Pope said Israel and Palestine were wrong to have kept fighting these 65 years, and I said our county officials were wrong to suppress a report that pointed out mismanagement of our criminal justice system.

According to Musket's logic, the Pope and I have no right to speak out on such matters, because we belong to a church that was responsible for running institutions in Ireland that practiced cruelty in a variety of ways during the first half of the twentieth century.

In my area, most of the social service programs have Catholic roots, the community organizing group where I'm the spokesman and the women's center where I do maintenance work, the food bank, the dining room that provides meals and services to homeless people, Mercy Housing that builds low-income housing, and many other services. All of these agencies started out Catholic, but they are now all but Mercy Housing* are disconnected from any church and open to all volunteers and clients. But still, these agencies show their Catholic roots - two have nuns as executive directors (and I'm proud to say that both of them are friends of mine). And these agencies are very vocal in speaking up for the rights of people in need, so they also are guilty of making moral judgments of the actions of those who seek to oppress the poor.

I get really involved in this stuff, and I get a lot of satisfaction out of doing something worthwhile - but it's hard work. The worst part is having to get up early in the morning when the work demands it. I'm not the kind of person who functions very well before about noon.

But according to Musket and many others who have posted above, I'm not worthy to be doing this work, because I belong to a church that was responsible for some really bad stuff in Ireland during the first half of the twentieth century.

What they say about the industrial schools and the mother and baby homes and the Magdalene Laundries is all true, as are the countless stories of priests molesting children, as are so many other stories of injustice committed by people in the name of the Catholic Church. I wouldn't dream of denying these things. Indeed, I have been aware of child molestation in the Catholic Church since the 1960s, and I have worked in many different ways to promote efforts to stop this abuse and punish the offenders. One time, I was recruited by my diocese to monitor the conduct of a priest who had been accused of making inappropriate advances toward a woman, and (because of my background as an investigator) I have been called on to provide assistance in a number of programs designed to protect the safety of children.

I am well aware of the many bad things that have been done under Catholic auspices. Rog Peek says, "If Joe you had heard some of the harrowing stories that people have been telling on RTE radio recently, of their personal experiences you would realise just how right he is." I'm sure that I would be moved by those stories, Rog - but I'm already convinced that what was done in the mother and baby homes was wrong, and in the industrial schools, and in the Magdalene Laundries, and in the countless cases of molestation of children by priests. No question about it - I am appalled by these things, just as appalled as anyone here.

But these things happened in the past, and most of them were done by people I would readily condemn. But then some other things were done by people I've known and admired, and It's really hard for me to decide what to think about that. I knew so-and-so, and I really liked him. He was a brilliant person, and he was good to everybody. And he led a number of programs that accomplished wonderful things. But along the way, he molested children - and the news accounts have convinced me that the accusations against him are true. But I've known this guy, and I've seen all the good things he's done. I can't understand why he molested those children, but the reports are very credible and there's no way I can deny them. But do the accusations mean that everything good this man has done is for naught?

And what about me? I know my own faults very well, and I've done lots of things I'm not proud of. Do my faults mean I'm not worthy to do anything worthwhile? But if I'm not worthy do do what I have to do this week to oppose mass incarceration, nobody is going to do it - so what do I do now?

Peter Laban asks difficult questions, but he does so in a way that's fair; and I've never found reason to oppose him. I know Jim Carroll and Musket and MtheGM much better and I like them very much, and I appreciate much of what they have to say, but sometimes I think they're unfair. I'm not sure they realize how much I like them, but I do.

I have to say that threads like this give me a lot to think about. They also give me good reason for humility, which is a very good thing. I think they're right in many ways. I really am not worthy to stand in front of county officials and tell them they are wrong. Who am I to say that? Since I know I am not worthy to pass judgment on them, I've been forced to think about them and their value, and I've come to really like most of the people I'm opposing. And then a funny thing is happening - I'm finding that they like me. And I'm actually finding out that we want the same thing, but that we describe it differently.

-Joe-

*Mercy Housing is operated by the Sisters of Mercy, who also operated some of the mother-and-baby homes and industrial schools in Ireland. Now they use hospital profits to build housing for homeless people in my area. I'm an associate member of the Sisters of Mercy, by the way. Oh, and they gave my community organizing group a $20,000 grant from those hospital profits, so we can fight for immigrant rights and against mass incarceration.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 06:53 AM

The church has always seen fit to judge the morals of others - from the 'cuttie stools' in Scots chapels to the public shaming of immoral women (never men) in front of congregations in Catholic churches.
One of the main reasons given by the church for their devastating opposition to crossroads and house dances was that they encouraged young people to socialise "unchaperoned".
The homes for "sinning" women, the Magdalene laundries and the seizure and sale of "illegitimate" babies were among the the results of this judgement, and the widespread and long-term clerical abuses were proof, if any were needed, of the total unsuitability of the largely male-dominated church as a guide and arbiter in sexual matters.
Interesting comment on the subject in this morning's Irish Times letter page:

"Sir, - David Smith (June 13th) might be surprised to learn that most atheists are not overly concerned with the belief (or non-belief) of others in deities. Their primary concern is the belief that the same deity cares, among other things, about who you sleep with, how you get married, what you learn in school, and whether your non-viable pregnancy should be terminated. The devolution of authority from the people to the church, often with disastrous consequences, is what really beggars belief.
Separate the church from the so-called republic, and you can believe in whatever you like.-
Yours, etc,
EOIN O'LOUGHLIN,
Newtown Park,
Naas Road,
Blessington,
Co Wicklow."

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 08:02 AM

these things happened in the past

No they didn't. The cover-up of these events and the marginalization of the living relatives affected by them continues to the present day. People in the Church hierarchy are ACTIVELY doing this as part of their job and knowingly causing real suffering in the process.

The term in Anglo-American law is "accessory after the fact". It seems that Catholic canon law not only has no such concept, it says the secular authority should be prevented from applying it by every means possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 08:41 AM

Regarding the 'judgement' Jim is writing about: the Clare Champion this week carries a story about the mother & baby home as was operated by the Sisters of Mercy in Kilrush. The mothers in that particular home were separated in 'First time offenders', who were there to have their first baby, and the 'degenerates', those who had the temerity of having two or more babies outside of wedlock.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 10:15 AM

Tell you what Joe, judging by the word count, judging by the words and judging by the strong emphasis on morals..

I seem to have hit a nerve.

You see, I don't need humility. Why? I don't have any association to defend.

Churches speak of teaching when they are really speaking of adherence. I didn't teach my children what to think, but I went to great pains trying to teach them how to think.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 04:21 PM

Joe probably thought he was on safe ground when he said "modern pro-lifers are unlikely to be in favor of burying dead babies in a septic tank." But he is forgetting that these kids were wicked little bastards: fit for neither baptism nor Christian burial; drenched in that oh, so compassionate concept, Original Sin.

Joe's world of sweet old ladies making nice tea, and jesuits capturing young minds purely to instil a lifelong love of learning(!), betrays an innocence that would be touching if the realities he overlooks were not so monstrous.

In Joe's world it is the brainwashed, not the brainwashers, who are to blame. The exploited are to blame rather than an arrogant church that learnt in mediaeval times that where education and knowledge are in short supply, ludicrous superstitions can be spread like a virus.

Joe's desire to bury the past would exculpate the Nazis and it would exculpate a number of churches, not least his own. It took the Nazis less than a decade to take hold of impressionable minds en masse. The Catholic church worked at it over many centuries, embedding its power deep in many cultures, enjoying its greatest success where access to education was most limited. Yet so easy to resist, in Joe's halcyon world.

In rural Irish communities even in the 1950s, it would have been as hard to defy the Catholic church as it would have been for German youth to defy Hitler. I always refrained from criticising the last pope for enlisting in the Hitler Youth in his salad days. To hold out against it would have needed an order of bravery I would probably not have had myself. Yet Joe is ready to blame entire communities for falling under the sway of an arrogant hierarchy, kitted to the hilt in their disgusting finery, which even (in the person of Dublin archbishop McQuade) drafted itself into the heart of the Irish Constitution. When a cabinet minister proposed mother-and-child legislation that would have taken the sinful little critturs away from the church's clutches, the church brought down the government.

That church is at last starting to lose the battle in Ireland, but Africa still offers fertile ground, with the Catholic bishops relentless in their quest to infest minds against the benefits of condoms. It would be better if Joe and all like-minded sweet innocents just shut up until they learn a little more about the miseries and destroyed lives for which their loving church is responsible.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 10:19 PM

Jim Carroll says: The church has always seen fit to judge the morals of others - from the 'cuttie stools' in Scots chapels to the public shaming of immoral women (never men) in front of congregations in Catholic churches.
One of the main reasons given by the church for their devastating opposition to crossroads and house dances was that they encouraged young people to socialise "unchaperoned".
The homes for "sinning" women, the Magdalene laundries and the seizure and sale of "illegitimate" babies were among the the results of this judgement, and the widespread and long-term clerical abuses were proof, if any were needed, of the total unsuitability of the largely male-dominated church as a guide and arbiter in sexual matters.

Jim, Jim, Jim....why this compulsion to dwell on the past? Adn why this obsession with sex? We're in the twenty-first century now, not the fifteenth. Public shaming hasn't been a practice in the Catholic Church for over fifty years, and it was uncommon even in the first half of the twentieth century. For a long time even before the Second Vatican Council, the practice of the Catholic Church has been to express moral opinions in a rational fashion, not as edicts. When John Paul II condemned the American invasions of Iraq, he used logical arguments against the attacks - not edicts. And instead of damning all Americans to hell for the attacks, he explained the logical consequences of the action.

When Pope Francis attempted to intervene in the Israel-Palestine conflict, he used persuasion, not threats of damnation.

When Benedict XVI spoke against the greed of capitalism, he used a logical argument, not moral sanctions.

And the same goes back a long way. Most of the moral pronouncements of the Catholic Church in recent centuries have not been the moral dictates of your stereotype - they've been rational discussions of moral issues. Now, you may or may not agree with the church's opinion on these matters, but certainly that Catholic Church has as much right to voice an opinion as you have (and when the Catholic Church voices a moral opinion, it does so with a far less moralistic tone than you use yourself).

Your argument that the Catholic Church has no right to voice an opinion on moral matters because it has immoral acts in its history, simply doesn't make sense.

I see that the message I typed last night, brought out the bigots in full force. Even Fionn has raised his angry head to repeat the angry, self-righteous cry of condemnation (and his false implication that I would support Nazis). Musket, Jim Carroll, Fionn, and the others are all the same - they get on their white chargers and lead the charge of righteousness against the hordes of dead Catholics who committed the horrible atrocities of the past. And of course, they seek to righteously silence all current Catholics because of the misdeeds of past Catholics.

If you disagree with Catholic opposition to capital punishment, capitalist greed, American imperialism, oppression of immigrants, or whatever, do so by addressing the issue directly instead of bringing up past history on unrelated issues. If you agree with me and condemn the coverups of priests who molest children, or disagree with Catholic opposition to homosexual marriage, use of condoms, and a number of other issues, join me in addressing those issues directly and rationally.

But don't bring up the past in order to condemn the present. That's just not fair. I agree that these past issues are important and that they must be investigated fully. But they're in the past and were committed by people who are mostly dead or over the age of 80. And these things happened in institutions that no longer exist, and nobody would dream of building similar institutions in the current day or any time in the future. The guilt is still there, and will remain forever - but the guilty people are, for the most part, dead...or nearly so.

And don't get all hung up on sex. Think about what elderly celibate bishops are likely to know about sex, and then take what they say for what it's worth. And for that matter, the current practice of the Catholic Church is not to say much about sex - and it's been that way for fifty years, since the fiasco of Humanae Vitae of 1968. Better update your stereotypes.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: LadyJean
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 10:37 PM

American nuns have been arguing with the Pope for years, bless them.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 10:42 PM

Fionn says: In rural Irish communities even in the 1950s, it would have been as hard to defy the Catholic church as it would have been for German youth to defy Hitler.

Fionn, look up the definition of the word "truism."

Yes, I agree that the Catholic Church of Ireland had too much power in the 1950s, and that it had a most unholy alliance with the government.

Now, tell me how your statement applies to rural Irish communities of 2014. Why is it that you people try to make a statement about the present by using all these impassioned references to the past?

Take what's happening now and address it head-on, not by referring to past things done by dead people.

What's that? Do you mean to tell me that you don't have the courage to do that?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jun 14 - 11:03 PM

Hi, LadyJean-

I'm an associate member of the Sisters of Mercy. We're very proud of our nun in Phoenix who was excommunicated for approving an abortion when the mother's life was in danger. There's a subtle but very effective memorial to that event in the original chapel of the Sisters of Mercy on Baggot Street in Dublin - the tabernacle from the chapel of the hospital that the bishop "unconsecrated" in conjunction with the excommunication.

Those darn nuns are very good at practicing the annoying virtues of solidarity and collegiality. It does tend to make the Vatican bureaucrats rather testy.

And while Pope Francis does a lot of good stuff, the Vatican bureaucracy is alive and well - and still quite powerful.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 03:12 AM

But if Catholic teaching is worth a damn, the Irish lot could have been trusted with their political influence in the '50s but turned out to be as corruptible as anyone else.

The Vatican loved this national influence rather than warning about it. Mmmm.

The more Joe injects reality, the more you question the privilege society offers religion. It's alright saying ignore celibate priests when they give advice on sex but listen to them on a n other issue but if you are capable of filtering where they can help you in the first place, why bother asking them?

Or can you trust them to not give advice on matters YOU think they have no expertise?

The day I start pointing out the weaknesses of Sheffield Wednesday is the day I am no longer a true fan.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 04:01 AM

....why this compulsion to dwell on the past? and why this obsession with sex?"
Joe, Joe, Joe,
We learn from the mistakes of the past - or some of us do.
Many of the victims of "the past" are still alive, have had their lives ruined and are entitled to some sort of recognition of that fact from the perpetrators of the crimes that blighted their lives.
Following the Holocaust, the survivors declared that such a thing should never happen again, they advocated that those responsible should be punished and their crimes revealed - they even set up museums in order that these events should be remembered.
Germany has made Holocaust denial a crime.
Would you deny them the right to have done this?
The church today - certainly here in Ireland - is fighting tooth-and-nail to maintain it's right to educate children.
It is using its (diminishing) power to control laws on homosexuality and on pregnancy termination, its main weapon in this being spiritual blackmail as it has lost its political clout.
You have ignored and refused to respond to every single salient point of these events.
Your church has yet to acknowledge the damage they did to peoples lives - they/you were dragged kicking and screaming, to answering for their part in child abuse, in the Laundries, the Industrial Schools, the "homes for fallen women" - the sale of children hasn't fueled yet, never mind taken off.
The Philomena Lee case didn't just uncover a past horrendous practice, but the continuing cruelty of the perpetrators right up to the present day - not in the dim and distant past - if you haven't, I suggest you go and see the film, if for no other reason that to prepare yourself for more of the same.
Those of us who lived under the influence of Catholicism were burdened with guilt for being what we were - that was always the church's 'thing', yet the church has not shown a shred of contrition for what it did - even those who have accepted it wish to male it a thing of the past.
""Jim, Jim, Jim"
If you go in for mantras Joe - try "never aain, never again, never again".

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 06:41 AM

By the way,
I didn't respond my "obsession" with sex because I thought it beyond words - would that I still had the luxury of such an obsession.
It is the church's obsession with sex that filled these institutions with "sinners" which enabled them to be abused the way they were.
It was the churches "obsession" with sex that destroyed an important cultural pastime.
That "obsession" continues with the church's persecution of other people'sexuality.
Please tell me the rape of children by clergymen taking advantage of their authority, has nothing to do with sex - that really will make my day!!
If the mantra I suggested doesn't work for you, try "mea maxima culpa X 1000" that might do the trick!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:15 AM

Joe, you yourself recognise that the Vatican bureaucracy is resisting Francis' clear instructions to clean the ship. I've seen similar instructions in Belgium go utterly disregarded for five years and more. The Pope counts as nothing these days, and so if the ship's determined to remain a cesspit, there's not a thing to be done to defend the image that it's a part of paradise.
Sure, the cesspit may contain chunks of undigested food which are utterly palateable if the external corruption is cleansed away and the result cut back. But it doesn't alter the fact that a cesspit is a cespit is a cesspit and not even the injection of Holy Innocents can change that.
Your actions are clearly virtuous in and of themselves and have no effect on the moral values of others of your fellowship. They would be equally virtuous if performed by a followwer of another religion, an agnostic, or an atheist. They give no credit beyond the do-er of the deed, it's not Rome which makes you moral, but you. That may come from your inmost faith, but as Matt 5-8 points out, that is intrinsic to you and nothing to do with your Church. Your Church does not make you virtuous, nor your virtue the Church, nor is it exclusive to Roman Catholicism.
So stop conflating the acts of pew fodder with the organised, endemic perversion of a faith your heirarchy has become, in part proactively, predominantly tacitly through its refusal to cast out the recalcitrantly sinful. However much you might wish a turd become a steak, a turd it is, and a turd it will remain until its internal corruption breaks it down to useful manure. Perhaps it's time for Rome to start over from scratch, in other words, pay off all those who make a living from HolyJoeing, liquidate the assets and start doing the real-world work it's supposed to.
The eternal Steeple Fund campaign in an area where people are starving is to my mind putrid. It's time to attend to the real Commandments and not the heirarchy.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:20 AM

Mr. Carroll, your impassioned exhortations are ninety percent rhetoric, and ten percent truth - and the examples you use as "proof," while mostly truthful, are 100 percent irrelevant.

The child molestation scandal is indeed a scandal, and it should never have happened. However, there is no evidence that its occurrence is significantly higher among priests, than it is among the male population in general.

And, as I have said so many times before, institutions such as the mother and baby homes and industrial schools and Magdalene Laundries, no longer exist. Your suggestion that a museum be built to tell the story of how people suffered in these institutions, is a good one.

As for the sex obsession, that was another age. Certainly some vestiges remain, but the Catholic Church is mostly out of its Victorian attitudes about sex. As for homosexuality and homosexual marriage, church attitudes seem to be slowly coming around, as they are in the population in general. If you want proof, go to the Vatican Website and look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other documents, and take note of how few of the materials there have anything to do with sex. Time to update your stereotypes, Jim.

You say, "The church today - certainly here in Ireland - is fighting tooth-and-nail to maintain it's right to educate children."

[I should make a comment here that if nothing else, I learned the correct use of the apostrophe in Catholic school.]

Now, your statement is hard for me as an American to understand. I chose to send my kids to Catholic schools, and I paid every penny of the cost of their education. The primary reason for my choice was that Catholic schools offered an education that I thought was far better than that offered in tax-supported schools (which I paid for but didn't use). My children had some contact with priests and nuns in school, but most of their teachers were lay people.

Now, what is it about the setup of schools in Ireland that makes Catholic schools objectionable to you? Why shouldn't parents have the right to choose to send their children to whatever school they choose? Because of the history of the institutions in the first half of the twentieth century? Why not evaluate the current record of Catholic schools in Ireland, instead of dwelling on past history?

---

Unnamed guest, whoever you are, you say: Your actions are clearly virtuous in and of themselves and have no effect on the moral values of others of your fellowship. They would be equally virtuous if performed by a followwer of another religion, an agnostic, or an atheist. They give no credit beyond the do-er of the deed, it's not Rome which makes you moral, but you. That may come from your inmost faith, but as Matt 5-8 points out, that is intrinsic to you and nothing to do with your Church. Your Church does not make you virtuous, nor your virtue the Church, nor is it exclusive to Roman Catholicism.

The Germans might respond, "Na und?" (And so?). Please tell me when I have ever claimed that the Catholic Church is virtuous. Some of its members are virtuous, and some are not. Therefore, one has to evaluate the individuals. It is a fallacy to issue a blanket condemnation of the Catholic Church as a whole (as you have done), for that is the essence of bigotry.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:44 AM

I have an obsession with sex. On account of being the male of the species.

Even if I don't seem to be alpha male domestically. (Mrs Musket, pet greyhound, poor third.)

Religions are very jealous contraptions. Most of them don't like to see you enjoy yourself in any meaningful way, let alone sexually, and inject a sense of shame. Fuck that for a game of soldiers. It is this hateful philosophy that eventually leads to the awful controlling influence it has on superstitious vulnerable people. Left to run riot without accountability, you end up with the tragic situations such as these.

A fair few years ago, it was a popular joke to say that in some parts of Ireland, Father Ted was thought to be a fly on the wall documentary. Not quite so funny comparison now.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:44 AM

'Now, what is it about the setup of schools in Ireland that makes Catholic schools objectionable to you? Why shouldn't parents have the right to choose to send their children to whatever school they choose?'

To understand this in an Irish context Joe, you need to know what the situation in Ireland is. This has been up for discussion here several times but I'll outline it again: There is no choice of school in Ireland where it comes to religion. You go to a Catholic school and are forced to subscribe to the (Catholic) ethos of the school.

True, multi-denominational schools have been on the rise in the last decade (non denominational or non religious is still many steps to far apparently) but in reality this is not a viable choice in many locations, especially in rural Ireland.

So the reality is, children are exposed to many hours of religious education, visits by and talks with the PP and are prepared for their communions and what have you as part of the curriculum. Some school principals may or may not allow your child to sit these things out and read, in a corner but not all will be as understanding towards the non religious.

The church is, lets say, not eager to cooperate with any efforts to change the school system. And quality, you say? Well sure there are decent schools, overall though, don't get me started.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:01 AM

Hi, Peter-

If attendance at a church school is compulsory, I wouldn't agree with that, either. That's a recipe for mediocrity, not to mention that it's unfair to force religion on those who do not wish to practice it.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:22 AM

"Mr. Carroll, your impassioned exhortations are ninety percent rhetoric"
No they are not Joe - and your problem appears to be that you are totally incapable of addressing the truth
Everything I have claimed is based on the reality of a church with unassailable power
If anything I have claimed is untrue, then feel free to disprove it with argument, rather than throwing stones in the form of labels from a distance.
"However, there is no evidence that its occurrence is significantly higher among priests, than it is among the male population in general."
Totally immaterial in the circumstances where priests had spiritual power and control over those they were raping.
It was the church who turned sex into a regrettable necessity and it was the representatives of the church who abused children using the power that the church gave them.
"tell the story of how people suffered in these institutions, is a good one"
It was not my suggestion, nor is it one of my particular desires, as things stand, though the monument that has been proposes has been greeted by an offer of a minuscule amount of money from one church group
The Magdalene girls weren't so lucky - they were told to piss off and look elsewhere, the "sweepings of the street" that they were.
As far as church education is concerned - parents do not have the right to choose the type of education for their children here, or in many Catholic countries - it is a case of having a Catholic education or staying uneducated.
The growing demand is that education should be either downgraded or removed entirely from the educational curriculum.
If the church wishes to provide for parents who want more, then they should provide classes outside the mainstream educational system for same.   
Given what has passed, these should be closely scrutinised - the church has proved beyond doubt that they are not to be trusted where children are concerned.
Jim Carroll

One more time - the argument in full:
FAITH SCHOOLS ARE DIVISIVE. LET'S GET RID OF THEM
A state education should celebrate all religions equally. Churches, synagogues and mosques can teach the devout
When I was a teenager I was fascinated by the Jewish boarding school a few fields away from our house. The local children barely ever saw any orthodox pupils leave their citadel. Occasionally they would ask us to buy them pork scratchings at the local garage, which they would eat illicitly by the river.
Theirs was a different world. Girls and boys didn't swim together. They couldn't even turn on a light bulb on Saturdays; they performed no Shakespeare because he was considered antisemitic; and they had hours of Hebrew each week.
Still I rather wanted to go there: it had amazing sports and music facilities and was only five minutes from home. But I couldn't because, my parents explained, I wasn't Jewish. Instead I went to a school a bus ride away, which was once run by Anglican nuns but now catered for every denomination. We had the occasional church service with a few beautiful hymns, there was an option to be confirmed and pupils could wear discreet crosses or headscarves. My friends were Church of England, Plymouth Brethren, Catholic and Jewish. We learnt about every faith and I went to bar mitzvahs as well as confirmations. It showed me a wide and tolerant world.
So I have always felt uneasy about fervently religious schools. They seem to teach exactly the opposite of what education should be about — to give pupils all the facts and allow them to discover their beliefs for themselves. The issue resurfaced when my husband was a governor of our local school which had a large
If we had Muslim or Catholic NHS hospitals there'd be an outcry
number of pupils from Morocco. An imam was trying to stop the pupils from drawing pictures or playing sport together. The head teacher was desperate and Christian parents began to complain that their children were being excluded. The local authority eventually intervened and the imam, who was in Britain illegally, was deported.
Twenty years later I feel even more strongly that that there is something disquieting about faith schools. We. accept them because they often achieve great results and have good discipline, something that has been missing from the British state education system recently. There are so few excellent schools, the argument goes, that we must protect those that excel, however they do it.
This is partly why the schools caught up in the Trojan Horse row, which were secular but prioritised Islam, were allowed to continue without much scrutiny — their grades were generally good.
It is also partly why, I suspect, Tony Blair, David Cameron and Michael Gove have all chosen faith schools for their children. They like the ethos and the results.
But it is an anomaly to allow publicly funded schools to choose their intake, overtly or covertly, on religious background only. No other state-funded institution is exempt from the Equality Act. There would be an outcry if there were exclusively Jewish, Catholic or Muslim NHS hospitals.
The French with their new charter for secularism in schools have been too aggressive, banning the wearing of hijabs and crosses and preventing discussion of religion. But in America, a more religious country than Britain, they have a system set up 50 years ago whereby schools cannot proselytise or promote one religion, but children's differing faiths are celebrated and accepted.
In Britain we could do the same. Nearly 16 per cent of children attend schools that select on religious identity. Instead of encouraging more faith schools as the Department for Education is now doing, we should gradually phase out religious selection in state-funded
No creed should make girls, gays or non¬believers feel inferior
establishments. High morals and good discipline shouldn't be the preserve of the devout.
There is no reason why schools that are not faith-based cannot be every bit as good as those that are. Part of the reason that faith schools excel is because their exclusive entry precludes many children from more disadvantaged backgrounds. Church of England schools admit 10 per cent fewer pupils eligible for free school meals than live in their catchment area, RC schools admit 24 per cent fewer, Muslim schools 25 per cent and Jewish schools 61 per cent.
I want my children to enjoy discovering Hinduism and Jainism as
well as the stories from the Koran and the Bible —they are all now part of Britain's broader culture.
In our fragmented society schools can be one of the few ways to bring people of differing cultures together and encourage inclusiveness. In Northern Ireland, where schools have long been divided on religious grounds, the effects have been coruscating. We need to teach children empathy, tolerance, respect for others and the importance of a cohesive society where everyone's beliefs and views are valued as long as they don't impinge on others. The best place for this is at school. Girls, gays or non-believers should not be made to feel inferior by any creed. Education should be the enemy of rabid extremism because it should encourage children to question and think for themselves.
Devout parents can still teach their children at home about their own beliefs; they can enrol their children at Sunday classes, hold Shabbat dinners or take the family to their mosque.
But schools should abide by the words of Thomas Paine, the philosopher who argued against institutionalised religion more than 200 years ago: "The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren and to do good is my religion."

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:52 AM

If attendance at a church school is compulsory, I wouldn't agree with that, either. That's a recipe for mediocrity, not to mention that it's unfair to force religion on those who do not wish to practice it.

Yet Joe, that's the de facto situation. 90% of National (=primary) education is in the hands of the school. In many areas that will mean that there is no choice. I don't have the figures for secondary schools but the de facto situation in the area where I live is again not one of choice. Enrolment of pupils will only be accepted by the various schools if the parents sign a declaration they will support and subscribe to the schools' catholic ethos. At this point my son is in college, there again the school is very clear about the 'ethos' they follow.

Yes, mediocrity. And that's an understatement.

There are attempts by the government to have 50% of catholic schools as they exist change to a non religious management in order to provide choice for parents. The process is slow, as I said, the church is not eager to loosen the reins.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 12:59 PM

I took a look at the Vatican website, and found prominently the very lengthy "Apostolic exhortation" on evangelization and promulgation of the faith.
The thrust is to encourage Catholics to act as St. Paul pronounced, "Woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel."
Other groups also have taken this as "gospel," so we find Jehovah's Witless ringing our doorbell.
I find all evangelism aimed at conversions or recruitment repulsive, regardless of their listing of good deeds and actions.

The Catechism also is a very long and involved. Looking at the section on baptism in the section on sacraments, "Baptism of Infants...... Born with a fallen human nature and tainted with original sin, children also have need of the new birth in baptism to be freed from the power of darkness....."

Primitive superstition abounds throughout this section; one can visualize early humans huddled in the safety of their campfire, fearfully looking over their shoulders into the surrounding darkness

Reading through the catechism, It is easy to see how various groups within the church develop rules and superstitions of their own which can lead to the horrors of the treatment of unwed mothers and their babies, leading to their deaths since they are unworthy of baptism.
I remember. at one New Mexico Catholic graveyard, the unkempt plot without markers outside the fence of the consecrated, well-tended area, for those who were unbaptized or excommunicated.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 02:08 PM

Using the Curate's Egg as an argument does not offer you much credit, Joe: it is you who are bigotted, turning a blind eye to the core corruption in the centre of your creed. Eleven days, eleven days it is since the problem arose, and what has your Church done? Diddly squat. All mouth and no trousers.
The Garda are taking the "Nothing happened, move on" stance. The Government are not talking about doing, but how to do, which means they're not doing. As ever, the problem's in the past - except it isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 02:14 PM

I recall our more pious members complaining when I said that it is difficult to discuss some subjects with religious people as they lack objective intelligence where superstition is concerned.

I had a quick gander at the website too Q. It answers so many questions as to why children and vulnerable adults need protecting from religions. Here in The UK, we are hand wringing over Islamic influence in state schools. Meanwhile, children are being dressed as brides in a rather sinister Christian ritual.

Toss a coin if you must differentiate but membership and participation in religious cults should be the free wish of adults, not brainwashed children.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 04:49 PM

So are the children of the unwed still denied "baptism" in the Catholic Church ?       And the doctrine that children are born with a sin nature is a biblical doctrine. Are you saying that Christians are not to believe the bible? I should have thought that would be expected.       Seems strange to me that even though joe does not excuse the crimes of clerics and nuns, and even is a "progressive"catholic, that you are going after him so strongly and persistently.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 05:22 PM

Using a dramatic style all too common in this thread, our unnamed Guest says: Eleven days, eleven days it is since the problem arose, and what has your Church done?

There's no doubt that the story of the mother-and-baby homes is a serious one, but most of the story has been known for a long time. While the recent book and film titled Philomena covered a different institution, it was clear that story applied to most or all of the institutions. What problem was it that arose eleven days ago, Guest? It has been public record that there were 796 deaths at the Tuam home in the 44 years from 1925 to 1961. This was 18 deaths a year. People in the community have known for decades that the bodies of the children were buried in the graveyard on the grounds. In 1975, two ten-year-old boys found perhaps 20 skeletons in a hole in the ground with a concrete cover, and some people speculated the hole was a septic tank. The Garda searched the grounds and found no bodies in a septic tank.

So, what's the urgent problem?

In many ways, one could say that the problem was mostly resolved in 1961, by the closing of the institution. It does appear that the clients of the institution were treated poorly, so the institutions were closed for good reason. There are also reports that children at the Tuam home were used to test vaccines. There is no doubt that the history of these homes must be investigated fully, along with the industrial schools and the Magdalene Laundries.

But rushing to answer unfounded claims of bodies in a septic tank? I can't see any reason for that. Better to take the time to investigate the entire situation fully and correctly.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 06:11 PM

It does appear that the clients of the institution were treated poorly.

Hmmm..... starving children to death is "treating them poorly".

I suppose lynching Black folks was also "treating them poorly" in your book, Joe?

And the same book would have us forget about both, because they "happened in the past"?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 06:33 PM

bias and memory 

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:12 PM

Most of us hope that history will judge our actions by the standards of our time.

Abusing, and failing to provide for the young under our care was not considered a reasonable standard in civilized society for some time. I suspect (and hope) this will not change much into the future

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 07:31 PM

As a scientist who used evolutionary change through time throughout my career to determine geologic sequences of sedimentary rocks and to identify determine past environmental conditions, mostly in aid of petroleum exploration, I regard the encyclical "Humani generis" at the Vatican website as complete nonsense.

In our supposedly enlightened age it is superstition that leads to statements such as "some imprudently and indiscreetly hold that evolution, which has not been fully proved even in the domain of natural sciences..." "and audaciously support the monastic and pantheistic opinion that the world is in continual evolution." "Communists gladly subscribe to this opinion..." "Dialectical materialism."

The Catholic Church is the great fount of superstition in our world; it is not alone, but the brain-washing tactics of this giant structure do the most damage.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:04 PM

But then, Q, you might consider that Humani Generis was written in 1950, and that it was a great advance for its time - a major step toward the general acceptance of evolution by Catholics. In 1945, Pius XII gave official approval to modern methods of scripture study, thereby abandoning the last vestiges of biblical fundamentalism. By the time I got to college in a Catholic seminary in 1966, I was taught that evolution was a fact.

I think it's important to consider these things in the context of the times when they happened. If you want to evaluate the Catholic Church, I'd suggest that you focus your attention on the last twenty-five years. Most things that happened before the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) are irrelevant. There are places (notably Ireland and Poland) where the Catholic Church has evolved much more slowly, but even they have changed significantly since Vatican II.

I'm sorry you didn't like Evangelii Gaudium, the recent "apostolic exhortation" by Pope Francis. Perhaps it will comfort you to know that when Catholics evangelize, they wait until a person walks in the door and starts asking questions. I'm sure some overzealous Catholics will prove me wrong and find a call to start preaching door-to-door, but I don't think that will become a common practice. I find Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel) to be a refreshing change in attitude. Notice that Francis says, "It is not by proselytizing that the Church grows, but 'by attraction'”.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:23 PM

"Most things that happened before the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) are irrelevant."


Wow!

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jun 14 - 08:55 PM

Vatican II was a major housecleaning, Ed. It was a time of really honest introspection, and many of the medievalisms that allowed such things as the Magdalene Laundries, were cast aside. To a great extent, much of the theological work done after Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was ignored, as was much of the doctrine promulgated during those 700 years after Aquinas. It was recognized that the Church had been a political entity for most of the millennium, and much was done to move away from involvement in political intrigue. Still, the Catholic Church is deeply flawed. And we have far more than our fair share of hypocrites.

So, no, it's not fair to judge the Catholic Church primarily by things that happened before Vatican II. That being said, the peak of child molestation by priests seems to have been 1970-1985 in both the U.S. and Europe, and I don't know why. At least in the U.S., the Catholic Church spent millions of dollars on programs that were supposed to cure molesting priests. Unfortunately, the programs didn't work like the bishops expected them to.

And I will repeat that it is simply not fair to judge the current Catholic Church or anyone by what happened in the mother and baby homes, the industrial schools, and the Magdalene Laundries. These institutions had largely been abandoned by the mid-1980s, and rightly so. All of the voices above who condemn these institutions, are correct in doing so - and I join them in their condemnation, even though they did not invite me to do so. Nonetheless, in the name of fairness, I repeat that if you wish to find fault with an institution, you had better be prepared to use more recent evidence.

And Jim Carroll, please note that I agree with you that it is wrong for religious schools to be the only option available to taxpayers who wish to educate their children. Non-religious schools must be the primary education system. When religion is supported by taxes, religion becomes beholden to political interests.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 12:09 AM

Joe asked "Now, tell me how your statement applies to rural Irish communities of 2014."

OK, so it applies a little less now than 30 years ago. But the church has lost ground only because of a succession of shameful episodes coming to light that it did everything in its power to suppress, and which would be quietly forgotten if Joe had his way.

If I were to put a date on when the hierarchy started to lose its grip, I'd say it was in 1992 with the revelation that Bishop Eamon Casey was the father of a grown-up son whose upbringing - like that of many other sons of clerics - had been part funded from church collecting plates. Even then, many in rural Ireland who had been taught to ostracise and condemn "fallen women" could not bring themselves to question a bishop, and for RTE's fawning Gay Byrne, Casey was still a fine man. But in Dublin, tee-shirts started to appear with advice to "Wear a condom, just in Casey" - the hierarchy's first real taste of open ridicule.

A couple of years later apparent church-state collusion concerning the imfamous paedophile Father Brendan Smyth brought the collapse of Ireland's government. That was followed by many more revelations of corruption and abuse, and evidence of the hierarchy's extraordinary tenacity in trying to protect its own interests.

And as Peter Laban noted, the church still works hard at getting into young minds. It seems you didn't know, Joe, that most people in Ireland have access only to Catholic schools. But then it seems there's quite a lot you did't know, like the fact that the last Magdalene asylum closed in 1996, some 30-odd years after Vatican II.

I know you have some experience of your church's operations beyond the US, so I am baffled that you persistently argue as though your US experiences are the norm.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 01:11 AM

Am I the only one who noticed pete's contribution?

Something about the bible justifying the concept of children born with sin.

An interesting question. Can an old book justify crime?

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 01:25 AM

Fionn says: But the church has lost ground only because of a succession of shameful episodes coming to light that it did everything in its power to suppress, and which would be quietly forgotten if Joe had his way.

Which is not correct. I would never seek to suppress the truth, but I do see the truth as important. I do admit to taking some delight in seeing oppressive prelates get the comeuppance they deserve, but I think there's also a need for fairness that gets lost amidst the rashe generalizations that are so common here. I think things need to be seen in proper perspective and proportion, and thus I object to the anachronistic hysteria that is so common here. What I see here at Mudcat is constant condemnation of the Catholic Church, usually based on half truths or distorted implications or long-ago events - e.g., Brainwashing from birth, small children forced to wear brides costumes in a grotesque ritual, bodies in a septic tank, Joe's desire to bury the past would exculpate the Nazis....


All these things make for a distorted, bigoted view. Yes, there are many wrong things in the history of the Catholic Church. But they must be viewed through realistic eyes, not shrouded with the language and hysteria of bigotry.

Yes, the last of the Magdalene Laundries closed in 1996, but tell us how many such institutions were extant at the time and how many were living in them, and what their living conditions were at the time the institutions closed. Same with the other institutions. While a few may have remained into the 1980s or even later, the conditions within them had greatly improved. I don't deny the existence of these institutions or the harshness of conditions in them when they were at their worst. All I ask is that in the name of fairness, they should be addressed factually.

All my life, I've been in the forefront of those seeking change in the Catholic Church, and I have actively opposed many of the same things you people have opposed. But I believe in fairness and proportion, not hysteria and constant distortion of the facts.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 04:09 AM

Joe:
"Rushing to judgement"
The clerical sex abuse scandals first began to emerge in the 1990s - around 15 years ago - hardly a "rush to judgement" by anybody's standards.
The Church impeded any in-depth enquiries into them at every step of the way and it continues to refuse to pass on information on them.
The realism is that the church should not be allowed to hold the power and influence it still seeks to retain.
Religion still, in fact, controls the education system here, and through it, the minds of the future citizens of Ireland, they have never been given any other choice
I have little doubt that, had a referendum been called on the matter twenty years ago, there might have considerable support for the church's position.
I am equally sure that, should a referendum be held today, there would be little support for it, both because of the revelations of Church behaviour and the necessity of getting the most practical education possible to survive in a world where young people are almost certainly going to be forced to emigrate to survive - as one devout Catholic told me in an interview "the church has done more to keep my belly empty than it has to put a meal on the table".
It has always been a foregone conclusion that the church should have control of education - that has ceased to be the case.
That is the parental freedom "to send children to the school of their choice you talk about" - one that they have never really had.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jack Campin
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 05:14 AM

the Catholic Church spent millions of dollars on programs that were supposed to cure molesting priests. Unfortunately, the programs didn't work like the bishops expected them to.

The victims were denied any voice in the process because the Church adopted the rapists' perspective and saw them as worthless scum. Of course it wasn't going to work given that attitude. An abuser could be confident of continued secrecy.


And I will repeat that it is simply not fair to judge the current Catholic Church or anyone by what happened in the mother and baby homes, the industrial schools, and the Magdalene Laundries. These institutions had largely been abandoned by the mid-1980s, and rightly so.

In Glasgow they weren't abandoned because of any change of heart by the Church. The prisoners in Lochburn Asylum organized a mass escape in 1958 which hit the headlines and forced the state to step in. That was well before Vatican II. I suspect the same was true elsewhere - liberation came from the victims standing up for themselves, not by freedom being granted from above.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 05:19 AM

Any normal society has another slush fund to deal with molesting priests. It's called the justice and penal budget, consisting of courts and prisons.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 05:25 AM

what puzzles me Joe is why, when you are living in such a liberated society, you are so keen stick up for this church which has been up to all sorts of repressive skulduggery, for as long as anyone can remember.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Ed T
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 05:44 AM

"Most things that happened before the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) are irrelevant."

"So, no, it's not fair to judge the Catholic Church primarily by things that happened before Vatican II."

There seems to be two discussions going on at the same time. One, the broader church and religion, and the other, cases of abuse of children some type by those in the church specific locations.

It seems problematic to make a general statement/assessment as you have done in the first quote, Joe, since it is likely that some of the people in positions of power over children and in church affairs most likely retained their power and church influence beyond the event you noted.

The second statement has more logic, mainly because you use the word "primarily" in that case.

Of course people will judge organizations by all events, past and present. Organizations do not absolve themselves from responsiblity for past events by saying "we had a meeting and we have changed". Branding an organization is more complex than that and takes time and with real-examples exemplifying thhis change. IMO, attempts at denying unfortunate past events happened, or attempts to limit their significance, takes away, rather then reinforces an embedded view that real change has actually not occured. As with other large organizations, fir example GM, expect that any new reports of bad actions will renew memories of bad past evenrs.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 05:55 AM

It seems apparent from this mornings papers that state and church-run mental homes are to be added to the list of enquiries now being demanded.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 06:33 AM

Link to the article Jim is referring to

It would seem to make sense as both mother and child homes and the mental institutions were used in Ireland to lock away elements that didn't fit in with the desired order of society. Left there to rot, safely out of sight, one could argue.

Subject: RE: BS: Dead babies and Tuam Bon Secours nuns
From: Musket
Date: 16 Jun 14 - 06:42 AM

Michael provided the legal side. There is no statute of limitation when investigating alleged murder, so this talk of Vatican councils is irrelevant. The starving and disposal of bodies took place in a country where the law allows criminals to be held to account, should they still be alive, as far back as you like.

Talk of judging religious cults and organisations doesn't come Into it. People on Irish soil at the time of alleged crimes are the only creatures needing judging.

Judgement is secular, and judged by secular standards. Hiding behind superstition is hopefully no defence. Following orders has a well known legal precedent for that matter.....