BS: Clerical Abuse of Children

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

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

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

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


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

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

-Joe-

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

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

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

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

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

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

I get so confused....

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Joe-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Joe-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DtG

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Joe Offer-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Joe-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Joe Offer-

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

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

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

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

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

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

DtG

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

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

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 05:22 AM

Bravely said sir.

Do you arseholes see what real liberalism means and can accomplish?

Or would you rather sit on your fat arses and polish your mythical ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:24 AM

On one hand I have an immigrant who is facing imminent deportation and a lifetime of separation from her children, and I have five people sleeping in the rain with no blankets.
On the other hand, I have a person who was molested by a priest forty years ago and wants a million-dollar settlement.
I see the homeless people and immigrants every day, and their welfare is where my passion lies.
I have compassion for victims of child molestation, but I have never met a child molest victim.
Where will I want to spend my money?
Does that mean I'm unsympathetic?
I spent eighty bucks on a stranger's rent yesterday, or maybe he just ripped me off. Was I wrong because I didn't spend it on child molest victims wanting a million bucks?
If I believed my million would heal a victim of abuse, I'd pay it - but it won't.
Joe

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:24 AM

"I WILL NOT BE SILENCED."
Your church is a waelthy and powerful organisasation Joe - it flaunts that wealth and has abused that power
That is the Church I am referring to,, not the dedcated Christins who speak up of behalf of immigrants and the homeless - that is the real job of the church written into thee sctipures. part of the job description
You kow the Church I am referring to
All to often, your church throws its weight behind those who oppress the poor, homeless - and particularly the immigrants, (not only yours, but other Churches)
In Britain, The House of Lords has often been described as "The Conservative Party at prayer".
Please try to address my poing without distorting it - you know where I stand on these matters
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:41 AM

Jim sez: What has to come out of all this is that the church be confined to the teaching of philosophy to those who voluntarily seek its advice.

What I find frightening, Jim, is that word "confined." I speak loudly and constantly in the name of the Catholic Church on behalf of immigrants and the homeless, which are currently my two main concerns. And no matter what happened in the sex scandal, I WILL NOT BE CONFINED.

I acknowledge that other members of my church have done terrible things. Nonetheless, I WILL NOT BE SILENCED.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:11 AM

"Is this an attack on a religion or those guilty of child abuse?"
As the main protagonists in this affair from the very beginning have been (often devout) believers, it is certainly not an attack on religion, not should it be - beliefs ought to stand or fall on their own merits as society develops to the stage where they can debate the subject freely and competently.
The danger of what is happening is that the church will totally collapse, leaving a vacuum in the philosophy - a cynicism.
What has to come out of all this is that the church be confined to the teaching of philosophy to those who voluntarily seek its advice.
If the clergy have any input into the nation's affairs, it has to be on the same basis as we all have, as individuals and not as representatives of a powerful pressure group.
It's position in education is now coming under scrutiny, as is it role in health.
Some of its most prominent 'messages'; on homosexuality for instance, have now been swept aside - Ireland has a gay Prime minister and a children's minister who has been in a life-long lesbian relationship - the Prime Minister recently took part in the Gay Parade in Belfast, along with representatives of the Garda Siochana (Irish Police Force)
The Church has failed to gain ownership of Ireland's most important maternity hospital - one of the most significant statements made in that campaign was made by a participant in one of the demonstrations, who said, "I'm fed up with the church and its influence on the state. Taxpayers money going into the hospital does not equal religious ownership of the new hospital".
This is only a start - but it is a start.
The decision on reparation mus be one decided by those directly affected - the question of the continuing power and influence is one we all have to decide - and are deciding.
The Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, has admitted that these exposures have been "badly handled" - no doubt he is a pragmatist who realises the damage that this has done and will continue to
People like Joe have yet to arrive at that conclusion - blaming the victims, The Irish and Irish Catholics and telling the victims they are not to be trusted with the right to justice....... don't think so really!!!
Jim Carroll
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Aug 17 - 12:21 AM

Yes, Steve, that's what I'm saying, without the emotional add-ons. That's one of the many reasons why there are statutes of limitations for most crimes. We should be able to expect that our criminal and civil courts and our law enforcement agencies should be able to handle such serious cases with reasonable alacrity. There comes a point in time where evidence is stale and witness testimonies are no longer valid because of lapse of memory and the death or unavailability of witnesses. So, from a legal perspective, it is no longer possible to conduct a fair trial. And yes, I believe that there should be a law that sets time limits on prosecutors, requiring them to file charges and bring cases to trial within a reasonable amount of time. Yes, there may be a few valid cases that get missed because of that, but so be it.

Now, because of the special nature of child molestation and the fact that children are often not able to step forward and press charges until they have reached adulthood, I think the limit should be set at twenty to twenty-five years after the victim reaches adulthood. Ten years would be a reasonable limit for most crimes, but I think that the special circumstances of the crime of child molestation demand a longer time allowance.

But yeah, after a certain amount of time, the claims get less credible and harder to prove or disprove. And when we've reached that point, I believe it's time to stop. I say this with thirty years of experience as an investigator. It's not about sympathy or lack of sympathy for the victims - everybody has sympathy for the victims. There comes a time when it just doesn't make sense to try to get evidence about events that happened long ago. It's still worthwhile to research such things and learn from them, but information gets to a point where it is too old to be valid in a court of law.

Now, once a claim has been filed and a crime has been reported within the time allowed by that statute of limitations, then I think the case must be prosecuted to the end, even if the court trial takes years. And if there is a judgment against the offender or his/her employer, that judgment should never be invalidated by the simple passage of time.

I don't know the details of the story in Jim's March 2017 (thejournal.ie) link that says

In 2002, an indemnity agreement was entered into by the Fianna Fáil Government and 18 religious orders. Under this agreement, the congregations agreed to hand over €128 million in cash and property. This was increased to €353 million after the publication of the Ryan report.

Did the religious orders agree to the increase to €353 million? Can they afford to pay it? Did some of the orders pay, and others not? The Christian Brothers (not the LaSalle Christian Brothers, the Irish Christian Brothers) were particularly notorious in their operation of the industrial schools in Ireland and other institutions in Canada and other nations. They seemed to have a philosophy of harsh treatment, and they got found out. I would imagine that their portion of the debt is huge, and I also imagine that they may well be close to bankruptcy. So, it may be that the Christian Brothers have failed to pay their portion, while others like the Sisters of Mercy have paid in full. Sorry, but I don't believe that the Vatican should be required to pay the debts of individual religious orders or dioceses out of its endowment. These were local crimes, not Vatican crimes.

Now, the question arises whether all Catholics should share equally in responsibility for all reparations for all victims. I think not. The sexual abuse existed everywhere, but some dioceses and some religious orders responded to victims with compassion and sympathy and nearly-immediate compensation. Should those who "did the right thing" be penalized equally? I don't think so.

It's a difficult question. I believe that most of people involved tried their best to "do the right thing," but a sizeable number of people did not. What's the proper response in all this? Punish all for the misdeeds of a minority?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 06:16 PM

Joe, in effect you are saying that child sexual abusers should be left alone after x number of years, arbitrarily defined, whereas their victims, many of whom will long outlive that time limit, will continue with their living hell until the day they die. I've already illustrated this point with a recent case that happened locally which saw a man sent to prison for abuses dating back to 1959. The evidence against him, though ancient, was corroborated by his many victims, which is what nailed him. He pleaded guilty, no option. That abuse occurred nearly sixty years ago, Joe, but after all that time the victims still got justice and many of them still live round here. You are being far too kind to the abusers and far too couldn't-care-less about their victims. That's how you are coming across. Let the courts decide whether evidence is too degraded on a case-by-case basis. It could be that the prospect of justice fades with the decades, but, even after half a century, it may not be impossible, as I've shown. So, no arbitrary limits. Think of those victims first.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 05:56 PM

I am as aware of the australian problem as i know how to be. it is awful. horrible number of suicides. perhaps there will be justice at the top..who knows.

I also volunteer to work with girls who have been abused, often by the mother's creepy boyfriend. If you want me to toot that particular horn more, I will be glad to.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 05:39 PM

Leading on from Iains post of Aug 17 04:38
Oranges and Subshine - Film Critique
Interesting reading as well as some current side issues re treatment of Mexican migrants by ICE

Relevant Sample from end of Oranges and Sunshine
In his speech delivered at Parliament House in November 2009, then Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told child migrants, "the laws of our nation failed you." But the laws of the nation worked then, as now, just as intended: upholding the economic and political power of the ruling class and reserving its greatest repression for the most oppressed and vulnerable sections of the population

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Iains
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:38 PM

When child abuse occurs in all environments and belief systems by persons of any number of backgrounds and occupations then it is an unhealthy obsession that focuses attention on one small subset of one particular religion and ignores the true scale of the problem.

Is this an attack on a religion or those guilty of child abuse? Why not focus attention, for example, on the more than 130,000 children sent to a "better life" in former colonies, mainly Australia and Canada, from the 1920s to 1970s under the child migrant programme .

The children, aged between three and 14, were almost invariably from deprived backgrounds and already in some form of social or charitable care. The reality, for some of those children, was a childhood of servitude and hard labour at foster homes: on remote farms, at state-run orphanages and church-run institutions. They were often separated from siblings. Some were subjected to physical and sexual abuse.

To give some sort of perspective to what I say a link is attached.

http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=aaschsslbk

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:28 PM

Maudlin sympathy...that takes the cake. That is sick.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:27 PM

And furthermore, I don't count hoping to help prevent the rape and perhaps future suicide of 12 year olds, or God forbid, 3 year olds, to be a hobby. Hobbies are more like refinishing furniture or training falcons or gluing macaroni on jars for art.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:26 PM

Spectator sport?

Kinda like a fantasy football league, I think. It's quite divorced from reality, all this breathless reporting every three years of recycled crimes that happened in the 1970s, and all the maudlin sympathy for the poor little children who are now drawing pensions.

I worked for thirty years as an investigator, mg. I like to see things reported accurately and in proportion and context, with exploration into the reasons why things happened. This sex abuse by clergy was a serious problem, and it will continue to be a problem. I think that we have made great headway toward resolving the problem, but I think we have a whole lot to learn. The frenzied finger-pointing doesn't allow for serious discussion and learning.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:18 PM

hobby does not quite cut it...

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: mg
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:17 PM

let's not call it feeding frenzy or obsession. Give it a nicer name..ministry let's call it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:16 PM

I don't question the actual victims of crime at all, Jim.

I question people like you and mg who have made the sex abuse scandal into a hobby.

The victims want peace and healing and sympathy, and they deserve it. You want blood. Don't try to misdirect this and try to convince people I have no sympathy for the victims. The Benghazi people keep trying that on Hillary Clinton. And the likes of you are trying to make the plight of the sex scandal victims into a tool to promote atheism and your political agenda.



-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:04 PM

@But it seems we have our little group here who dwell on crime, @
What you have just suggested is that the victims cannot be trusted with justice because they might abuse it
How disgusting is that?
You ought to be ashamed of yourself - you oun, but you won't be
Depressing when you see the mask fall away
As for your #little group# = you, Ake and maybe Iains (the feller who said the victims of the London fire couldn't be house in vacant property) are the only ones who support nott giving the victims of clerical abuse justice
You are now down to attacking the victims for claiming reperation - How soon before we get "They brought it on themselves" like Smythe claimed?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:36 PM

Usually, it's the conservatives who dwell on crime, recycling their outrage time and time again. Benghazi comes to mind. I just realized the other day that only 4 Americans died in the attack. The story has been repeated and amplified so many times, that nobody knows what happens. I do have sympathy for the families of those four diplomats who died, but I really don't want Mrs. Clinton to go to prison for their deaths.

In my community, we have a group that is very strongly organized in opposition to our homeless shelter. Anytime a transient is arrested, the group will beat the story to the ground, repeating and amplifying it over and over again. There was a wheelchair-bound homeless man in a cowboy hat who came into our choir practice one night. He was a little intoxicated, but not bad; so we let him stay and listen. I was afraid I was going to have to force him to leave when I was locking up the doors, but he was already gone. The next day, I learned that he had left the church and gotten involved in a disturbance next door. The father of a teenage boy said the homeless man had "assaulted" his son. I learned later that it was a VERBAL assault, a detail the father managed to omit, along with the fact that the assaulter was in a wheelchair. In other words, an old man in a wheelchair yelled at a kid. The father repeated the story at a hearing before the County Board of Supervisors almost a year longer, adding that Joe Offer was responsible for the crime because he failed to call the police when the man was listening to the choir practice.

But it seems we have our little group here who dwell on crime, too. I was wondering about the Abuse Tracker that mg reads daily. Turns out, it is part of the bishopaccountability Website that I use as my main source of information.

I do believe that justice must be done in these cases, that criminals should be prosecuted and punished, and victims should be compensated. But I think a reasonable statute of limitations would be 20 or 25 years after the victim reaches adulthood. Even after 20 years, evidence gets very stale and it becomes impossible to reconstruct what happened with any accuracy.

And I really don't think that this feeding frenzy of abuse trackers is a healthy thing for anybody. Life goes on. We can't live our lives obsessed with crime. I agree with Donuel about the value of the movie "Doubt," and I think "Spotlight" was excellent. We need to come to an understanding of all this and do our best to ensure it does not happen again. But dwelling on the whole thing and repeating it over and over, is just like the Benghazi addicts do. This obsession with Catholic sex crimes does seem to be an addiction for some people.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:28 PM

Who here has seen the movie 'Doubt' about a Parrish Priest.(Philip Seymour Hoffman)

Powerful performances without being apologetic

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 17 - 02:58 PM

@But does it do the victims any good to keep reopening these wounds on a regular cycle, year after year?@
What makes you think such wounds ecver close
The facts are now open - too late to keep them hidedem
The victims and their families are tho ones demanding that their wrongs be redressed
How dare you compare these events to a woman demanding vengeance?
The recognition is what is being demanded - who the hell do you and yours think you are to refuse it?
A feeble excuse Joe - getting more feeble by the minute
Jim Carroll