 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Clerical Abuse of Children
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 13 Aug 17 - 04:18 AM "There was a time in the not-too-distant past when abuse was acceptable in many spheres. " The wholesale sexual molestation of children has never been acceptable in my lifetime - not openly anyway - Clerical abuse was was still an issue well within my lifetime Slavery was abolished in Britain in 1835 nd a few decades later in the US - the last Magdalene Laundry closed its doors 21 years ago Transportation ended in the mid- 19th century here - illegitimate children were being sold to wealthy American buyers up to th e latter half of the twentieth century These are relatively recent events We know they've been exposed and stopped - now comes the mopping up Many of the victims are still living and still need to be helped close an extremely traumatic period in their lives. You don't do that by telling them to forget it and move n - these sort of incidents just don't work like that I'm with Steve about the dangers of compensation, but that's not for us to decide The first step is for the church as a body to accept its complicity If it doesn't do it voluntarily, it could well end up having to do it in the International courts - which wouldn't do anybody any good, particularly the Church Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 13 Aug 17 - 03:23 AM I'm struggling to figure out what to think of all this, Jim, to get it into some sort of balance. I tend to prefer to consider current problems rather than past ones, but I do realize we need to do what we can to heal the wounds of the past. There was a time in the not-too-distant past when abuse was acceptable in many spheres. Many people are right on the cusp of demanding abuse even today - I hear all sorts of complaints about "luxuries" that our local jail inmates get, and yet it seems to me that inmates get the bare minimum of what would be considered humane treatment. For some reason, we had a lot of military academies in Wisconsin when I was growing up - and I was embarrassed that some of them were Catholic. I don't really know what went on at those academies, but I imagine they were quite harsh. I think there was a time in our history when harsh treatment of children was considered to be a virtue. During college, I worked as a counselor at a Catholic boys' camp outside Milwaukee. The usual camp term was 2 weeks, but there were maybe 15 wealthy Mexican kids who stayed they entire 8-week summer season at camp and went to military academies during the rest of the year. They spent time with their families before and after camp, but were away from home all year round. The families were really wealthy - Presidential Cabinet members and such. I felt bad for the kids - they never seemed very happy. That was the 1960s, and I think that was a time when brutality in U.S. schools and institutions was becoming no longer acceptable. I think that brutality carried on longer in Ireland. During my last year of college and until I entered the Army, I also worked at a Catholic home for emotionally disturbed boys. The director was a priest who was a social worker, and there were nuns who were social workers who directed the four age-separated "cottages." The home seemed to use the best practices known at the time. One thing bothered me - the "quiet room." When kids got out of control, their shoes and belts were taken from them and they were locked in a padded room. They didn't stay in the room long and the room didn't seem to be used abusively, but I just didn't feel right about it. The home is still in operation, but I'm sure there are no priests and nuns staffing it any more. I keep wondering about St. John's School for the Deaf in Milwaukee, where the priest who directed the school molested as many as 200 boys. I had a friend whose brother was at the school during the time, but I see her only rarely now. I wonder if I'll ever get a chance to ask what happened to her brother. I keep trying to find opportunities to ask Irish priests and nuns here about their experience growing up in Ireland - I generally have contact with Irish priests and nuns a couple times a week, including a weekly Scrabble game with an 85-yr-old nun from Kerry. So far, I really haven't heard anything negative. They don't deny that things happened, but they generally contend that the abuse was the exception, not the rule. I have not been able to get a balanced, proportional view from them about what happened in the Catholic Church in Ireland, but I keep trying. This is a group of about 40-60 Irish-born priests and nuns that I know, so it's not an insignificant number. And most of them have kept their ties to Ireland alive, and have visited regularly. My wife got a Catholic education in Rhode Island, and she went home every night. But she knew resident student who lived in dormitories, and and they said there "certain nuns that you had to look out for." She didn't know of any nuns who actually did anything wrong, but there were nuns she knew not to trust. I suppose the same could be said about my seminary experience - there were priests I didn't trust, although I don't remember ever discussing with my classmates that feeling of not trusting certain professors. The priest/professors I did not trust, were often very popular with other students. I did have one incident in high school where an upper classman got too "friendly" with me and slipped into my bed to tell me about what he had experienced at some music event. I was 14, and didn't understand what was going on - and actually, nothing happened. The other guy confessed it to the priest who was Dean of Discipline, who handled it very well. I'm still in awe of how that dean handled things. He may have saved me from a lifetime of trauma and guilt. I always thought that priests were a little out of touch with reality, but that guy wasn't. I thought the world of him, and still do. May he rest in peace. If my incident had happened a year earlier, I'm not sure what would have happened. The previous year, we were under the "old rules" and we had a Dean of Discipline who enforced them the "old way" (he later became Chief of Maintenance). I think there has been a change in the Catholic Church, and I don't think there are philosophies still extant that would support what created the scandalous things that happened in the Industrial Schools and the Mother and Baby Homes and the Magdalene Laundries in Ireland, as well as in seminaries and Indian schools and military academies and other church-run institutions in the U.S. I just don't think the things that happened then could happen now, but maybe I'm wrong. You're not going to like to hear me say it, Jim, but I need to point out that the director of St. John's School for the Deaf in Milwaukee was named Lawrence Murphy. At the same time, there were Irish-born U.S. priests in the U.S. like Father Flanagan (of Boys' Town) who condemned the Industrial Schools when he visited Ireland. There were Irish-born priests in the U.S. who committed absolute atrocities, and there were Irish-born priests here who spoke out with amazing courage against those atrocities. All I can say is that I'm struggling to figure all this out. I see both remarkable and horrendous people in the Catholic Church, so I just can't make generalizations. -Joe- Jim, I want you to understand that in all of our discussions of this issue, I have tried my best to be brutally honest. Sometimes my observations will not coincide with yours, because I have had very close relationships with American and Irish-born priests and nuns who were absolutely remarkable people - and I have to say that the bulk of my experience has been positive. But I have also been able to observe and sometimes to work against things in the Catholic Church that were NOT right. And I struggle to get it all in balance and make sense of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 13 Aug 17 - 02:05 AM Plenty more where they came from Joe Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Aug 17 - 05:57 PM Thanks for the article on the Magdalene Laundries, Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 12 Aug 17 - 03:00 PM Ake, can you please take yout homophobic and anti-Pakistani bullshit somewhere else? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 12 Aug 17 - 10:06 AM And by the way - I suggest you read your own mouth-frothing diatribes before you call anybody a bully I don't think I've encountered such arrogant bluster since th balmy days of Speke Seconary Modern Junior School Grow up Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 12 Aug 17 - 10:01 AM "Don't give me any of that shit about cruelty and trying to equate it with sexual assault," Sexul assault is the oldest form of denigration of victims - it has nothing to do with homosexuality - it doesn't even have anyhting to do with rape - it is a way of subjugating victims The united Nations has made it clear on the the violence and slavery connected with the Laudndris - I, or anybody else need not expect anybody to be "dragged into court" - the Church institutions stand to be tried fro crimes against humanity - this has nohing to do with established and adhered to methods of punishment - it involves severe beatings, starvation, the stealing and trafficing of children and possible manslaughter You seem reduced to schoolyard name-calling in the absence of argument - why don't you go and sort out your own sexuality and clean up the atmosphere here Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:22 AM My post was aimed at Jim, Raggytash. You appear to be a more complex character. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:11 AM Akenaton, you are talking through your anal orifice, amongst my friends I have a reverend, a canon and a bishop. People I meet regularly, people I drink with, people who I invite into my home. Your diatribe is far removed from the truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 12 Aug 17 - 06:58 AM Don't give me any of that shit about cruelty and trying to equate it with sexual assault, I suppose you are about my age and probably been belted with the Lochgelly Tawse as often as I and my compatriots were, sure there were a few "psychopaths" amongst our teachers, but you soon learned not to be disruptive in class or impudent. Do you expect teachers of the fifties and sixties to be dragged into court and punished for cruelty? Do you think we could take the Education Authorities for a couple of million? Grow up you bully! You just couldn't wait to get your fangs into Joe, not because you give a flying fuck about historic cruelty, but because you have a pathological hatred of anyone with a belief in God. The cruelty and sex issues in the church have two distinct and differing causes.....the evidence on the sexual issue pertaining to the gender of the young people and the sexual orientation of most of the perpetrators is irrefutable. Read the Jay report, it proved the case, presented evidence, then reported that the abuse had little to do with homosexuality.....a complete cop out. Just like the British Pakistani grooming gangs the authorities preferred to look the other way....DISGRACE. The times are changing again, people no longer believe the PC message. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 12 Aug 17 - 06:00 AM The United Nations' view; from this morning's Times (Irish edition) This is not going to go Away Jim Carroll MAGDALENE ABUSE MUST NOT GO UNPUNISHED, UN TELLS IRELAND Ellen Coyne Senior Ireland Reporter Members of the Catholic Church must be prosecuted and punished for their role in the Magdalene laundries, the United Nations has said. The UN committee against torture has unequivocally dismissed the state's investigation into the institutions and claims damning documents showing church and state collusion against women have been ignored. The international human rights body has said that the government must en¬sure that religious orders responsible for perpetrating abuse against women and children for decades must be forced to hand over evidence. In 2011 the committee called for an independent investigation into the laundries, which helped lead to the McAleese commission and Enda Ken¬ny's apology in 2013 to the women who had been affected. Despite the apology, the state has maintained that it was not liable for how women and girls were treated in the institutions. Finishing its second examination of Ireland's compliance with torture laws yesterday, the committee criticised the McAleese commission, saying there had been no independent, thorough and effective investigation into the treatment of women. The panel of international human rights experts said that the state had not exhausted all of the information and records of laundries available, and criticised the fact that documents were re¬turned to religious congregations after the McAleese commission had finished its work. The committee received correspondence from an American academic that Felice Gaer believes documents were left out of official reports by the state appeared to suggest that the state knew about documents that showed gardai were often used to stop women being removed from the Galway Magdalene laundry by family members but did not include it in official reports. James Smith, an academic at Boston College, informed the UN committee this year that he had made the government aware of records in the Galway diocese archive. Felice Gaer, vice-chairwoman of the committee, told The Times that she believed the Irish government was aware of these documents as far back as 2012. It is understood that members of the McAleese commission visited the archive in the same year but did not include a reference to the use of gardai in its final report. In its concluding observations, the committee yesterday called for archives on the laundries to be open and accessible to survivors. In 2013 the McAleese commission, which had no powers to compel evi¬ dence or make criminal recommendations about abuse, published its report into the laundries. It found that at least 11,500 women passed through between 1922 and 1996 and that more than a quarter were sent to carry out forced labour without pay by state authorities. The report has repeatedly been criticised by survivors' groups as a white¬wash that was too close to the government. The UN committee yesterday said it "deeply regrets" that the state had not independently investigated the institutions and has called for an impartial investigation of the historic abuse with the power to compel evidence and en¬sure perpetrators are prosecuted. During its examination, the commit¬tee had accused the government of "walking away" from Mr Kenny's apology. In the same year Mr Justice John Quirke drew up a report to compensate women who had been incarcerated in the laundries. The UN committee said the ex-gratia payment scheme, which has provided €25.5 million to 667 survivors so far, should be expanded to include other women who were forced to work in the laundries but who did not reside there. The government will have to update the committee on progress it has made on its concluding observations within one year. Justice for Magdalenes, the cam¬paign group, welcomed the commit¬tee's findings. The Department of Justice yesterday defended the McAleese report as a "comprehensive and independent examination of the Magdalen laundries". A spokesman said: "It did not uncover evidence of any systematic criminal abuse in the particular institutions." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 12 Aug 17 - 05:33 AM Galway Bay FM News Item from Yesterday It gives a brief glimpse of the prevarication that has taken place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 12 Aug 17 - 03:26 AM "Is it not more important to determine why these men are assaulting mainly teenagers and young adult males? " This one was dealt with at the beginning and has been reiterated over and over again - including by Joe That was what was available, these were the people the clerics had access to. It had nothing to do with the sex of these victims - the boys and the girls were equally abused - the priests were given access mainly to the boys - the Nuns took charge of the young women The aabuses were not just sexual; they were physical The cruelty of of the Industrial Schools like Ferns, run by Priests was the first to hit the headlines - others emerged later Patrick Galvin's autobiographical 'Raggy Boy' trilogy covered this fully - sex was never the main issue - just the inordinate wielding of power. The Magdalene Laundries ran from the 18th century to the 1990s - for the correction of "fallen women" When are you going to stop trying to make it one of your homophobic rants? Physical cruelty dominated all of these institutions. Ken Loach's son, Jim, lifted the lid off Britain's dirty linen box with his, 'Sunshine and Oranges' when he exposed the secret deportation of English Children to Australia to be put to work there - again, brutality rather than sex. Please take your obsessive hatred of a form of life that is now accepted for what it is - natural Get help "maybe you'd actually be able to carry on an intelligent discussion." If you actually ansered the points I am making rather than pretending I am talking about something else, maybe then we can have an intelligent discussion. As far as I am concerned, blaming the victim and the country they came from (Ireland, The "Irish" church" and "the Irish people" is sick - you have done this. The Churches and the Vatican were fully complicit in these crimes - that is what I am claiming has wielded the massive damage to your religion - not "a few bad apples" as you originally claimed way back Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 12 Aug 17 - 02:57 AM There is a gigantic elephant in the room......Why is the abuse taking place? Hundreds of posts agonising about who is responsible, who are the victims, how much money should they get. Is it not more important to determine why these men are assaulting mainly teenagers and young adult males? Only when we are prepared to accept the evidence of why the assaults are being perpetrated, can a remedy be found. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:51 PM Steve, it is self-contradictory, I suppose. The reality was that dioceses are independent - and for the most part, I like it that way. But in the area of child sexual abuse, there were several bishops whose conduct was abhorrent, a long time ago. And although I prefer decentralization, I see there was a need to intervene nonetheless. SOMEBODY needed to kick butt. And if the bishop reigns supreme in his own diocese, who's gonna kick his ass when he needs it? I don't know how things operate in law enforcement agencies where you live. In the U.S., local police agencies handle local crimes. The FBI does not deal with sex offenses unless they involve interstate trafficking. In the Catholic Church until Ratzinger took over supervision of child abuse cases in 2001, local dioceses had authority over all local matters. What's the difference? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:37 PM Read your own response to me again, Joe, and tell me how it's not self-contradictory. Oi, I'm going to bed now, Perseids or no! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:34 PM P.S. Jim, if you'd drop your moralizations and you "sick in the extreme" bullshit commentaries, maybe you'd actually be able to carry on an intelligent discussion. I don't deal in propaganda. I believe in reason. I do my best to discuss facts and reasoned opinions, considering all sides of an issue. I am not "sick in the extreme." -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:30 PM Steve, most of those bishops in Rome, came from other places all around the world. And many of them fought hard to keep Rome's nose out of what they considered to be local matters. The effective targets are the local and national churches, not Rome. That's just the way it was until Ratzinger shifte responsibility in 2001. As I said above, I think John Paul II should have taken responsibility for this issue soon after when he was elected in 1978, but he stayed out of it. The problem was widely known by the mid-1980s, but Rome stayed away from it. But for many reasons, I am happy that the Roman Catholic Church is decentralized. It gives me much more say-so, since my local bishop is boss and I can talk to him directly. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:07 PM "Jim has taken a statment made by two old nuns and repeated it time and time again in an attempt to show that it is the general opinion of the Catholic Church toward the Magdalene Laundries." I did no such thing - I said that their quote was typical - the Church has yet to even acknoledge their role in filling the laudndries with"sinners" Amazing that you should regard them as "old" - incradibly ageist as well - don't the opinions of "old" people count for anything with you? The Quote was actually 4 years old You really do thrash around for to find defence for your Church. You people really do confirm my opinion that the world would be a cleaner place without your church being in a position to foul it up. Your defence of what happens far suppses that of any public statement made by any churchman I have heard here Most just hand their heads and remain silent - it takes a special devotion to blame victims Sick in the extreme Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Aug 17 - 08:04 PM "So, for better or worse, because of the decentralized nature of the Catholic Church, Rome was not involved in the sex abuse scandal. I think that it has been generally helpful since Ratzinger took over the problem in 2001, but it is still mostly a local problem." Unbelievable, Joe. Your defence of Rome is valiant yet unconscionable at the same time. An institutional problem, largely ignored as you admit by a very long-term pope, is no local problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 07:28 PM I think you're being unfair to my position, Raggytash. Jim has taken a statment made by two old nuns and repeated it time and time again in an attempt to show that it is the general opinion of the Catholic Church toward the Magdalene Laundries. It's a tendency people have when they speak out against crime - they exaggerate and they use information out of context and out of proportion. As I've said before, there was a homeless man in a wheelchair who yelled at a teenage kid at our Catholic school gym. The father of the boy is very much opposed to our homeless shelter. He milked that story for all it was worth for over a year, saying that the man "assaulted" his son and leaving out the detail that this was an old man in a wheelchair. It was stretching things to even call this a "verbal assault." I highly suspect that Jim's quote is at least ten years old, possibly from 2002, when the Magdalene Sisters film came out. It was indeed an expression of contempt for the victims, and that is deplorable. I'm sure some of the sisters who worked in the laundries did their best to try to rationalize their way out of the guilt for their actions - we humans have a natural tendency to rationalize our offenses. But whatever the case, the last of the laundries closed in 1996, and most were closed long before. So, yeah, if Jim is going to use an example over and over again, over the course of a number of years, then I think he needs to give that quote some context. It's just like his ludicrous use above of a 1925 statement from bishops about dancing - although at least he did us the favor of furnishing a date for that one. But for him to use an undated and undocumented statement from two nuns as proof of the "general contempt [my] Church had for its victims," is ludicrous. Some officials in my church showed contempt for victims, of that I have no doubt. I gave the example of Cardinal Pell, who was described as having a "sociopathic lack of empathy" when he met with victims in Australia. He was later transferred to Rome to act as finance minister, a job he was good at - I think his inability to handle the sex scandal at home may well have been part of the reason why he was transferred to a finance position. And yes, there were many Catholic leaders who had a lack of empathy for victims - and they deserve whatever penalty they have to pay for that. But as a whole, I think that Catholics were very sympathetic toward the victims, and they were outraged by bishops like Pell who failed to show empathy and put business interests over the interests of the victims. To counter Jim's two Magdalene nuns, I can quote a nun who very angrily told me, "Joe, we told them (the bishop's office) what was going on, and they did NOTHING." Many, many priests and nuns and lay Catholics were and still are very angry about the conduct of bishops in this scandal. Benedict and Francis have appointed local bishops who are focused on finally cleaning up the mess, but there are still many John Paul II appointees in office. But my point is that if we are to address these crimes effectively, we must address them specifically. Individual people committed these individual crimes at specific locations and at specific times. There were many parallel events, but the stories and reasons behind the events are different. When the same stories and the same perpetrators and the same victims and the same incidents are reported over and over again, this gives a false impression of the actuality of the event - just like the dad who left out inconvenient details of the story of the old cripple who yelled at his kid. And then we get back to Rome. There's an excellent article in New Yorker Magazine (click) titled "What Pope Benedict Knew about abuse in the Catholic Church." Here's an excerpt:
John Paul II had become Pope in 1978, and he ignored the sex abuse problems at the very time when they were happening, preferring to let the local dioceses take care of their own problems. John Paul II has phenomenal power and popularity during his reign. He could have traded on that to bring the problem under control much earlier, but he didn't. There was no apparatus for collecting child abuse information in Rome until Ratzinger set it up in 2001, so it's unlikely that much will be found in any "secret archives" Rome might have on the matter. So, for better or worse, because of the decentralized nature of the Catholic Church, Rome was not involved in the sex abuse scandal. I think that it has been generally helpful since Ratzinger took over the problem in 2001, but it is still mostly a local problem. There are those who find fault with Rome for failing to defrock priests who committed sex crimes, but that's a debatable legal matter. If Rome defrocks a priest, it loses its last ability to exert any control over that priest, and can therefore no longer be held responsible for that ex-priest's actions after the defrocking. So, yes, it was a very bad problem. But we need to discuss it realistically, in a realistic context. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 11 Aug 17 - 03:23 PM Joe, you are starting to sound like another infamous poster to this forum, expecting military precision. (if there is such a thing) People, in general, do not interview the individual, they do not interrogate them intensely as a police officer would, they take a viewpoint from the information available to them. If posters here are cannot post their "gut" feeling without being called to account there would be few, if any, posts. Now that may suit you in the present discussion (I know this thread in particular is difficult for you) but I would not benefit a wider understanding of the subject. Another "let's sweep this under the carpet" approach. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 03:20 PM "When did these nuns make their statements expressing contempt?" On our local readio in an interview Didn't do much for your Church's reputation in an area one noted for its devotion to the Church I pointed out that it echoed the general contempt your Church had for its victims and I specified why - you still don't seem to be prepared to go there Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 03:04 PM Jim, you often speak of the arrogance of Magdalene nuns who still express contempt for their former victims When did these nuns make their statements expressing contempt? Are these arrogant nuns still alive? How many nuns made these statements? These were real crimes committed by real people. I think I need to demand that you discuss them realistically. Details like who, when, and where and how often are important. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 02:47 PM Steve Shaw says: I'm uncomfortable with the concept of big financial compensation for this kind of crime. If you're injured by a crime and can't work, or if you lose your money or property, that's different. Of course, there are mental as well physical injuries and it isn't possible to be black and white about it. But I'd hate to think that the prospect of a huge payout would be the main enticement to claim abuse. I also think that the prospect of having to pay out vast sums to many victims would be an enticement to cover up. I can see vast compensation prospects getting in the way of justice and closure. I think maybe we're getting somewhere. I've been trying to say the same thing, but Steve said it better. I think that if Steve and I were to sit down and talk this out, I might suggest that compensation should be more generous that what Steve proposes. I do not deny that priests and nuns committed crimes of both sexual and physical abuse - and the crime of obstruction of justice by covering up those crimes. I am appalled by those crimes. But I've dealt with crime all my life, and I've learned to take a rational, constructive, methodical approach to it. I've also seen how the public naturally respond to crime, and it isn't very rational. When crime happens, we all have the tendency to place blame - and the tendency is to place the blame on all the members of a certain group. My town is in an absolute frenzy about homeless people, and there is a loud, frightened mob of people who blame homeless people for everything bad that happens - as if the mere fact of not having a home makes a person a criminal. And yes, there are a lot of crimes committed in our town by people who are homeless. The vast majority of crime is committed by people who do have homes, but people tend to ignore that. When we place blame, we humans do our best to place the blame on people who are "other," who have nothing in common with us. So, if we are going to deal with crime rationally, we have to put aside our irrational responses and plan a measured approach that is targeted on the actual sources of crime. And that's all I'm asking for. And part of this approach, is to take a very realistic view of the structure of the Catholic Church, and target those portions of the church that contributed to the crime and the coverups. We don't want to hear it, but the sources of crime that most affected us, are often very close to us. Until very recently, there were Sisters of Mercy motherhouses scattered all over Ireland - and each one was independent. Some were very good, and some were seething with harshness and anger. The motherhouse at Kinsale had a particular reputation for harshness, and that motherhouse operated a huge industrial school up on the bluff above the harbor of Kinsale. That motherhouse was one of the first to be closed. But that harshness didn't happen everywhere. I visited the motherhouse at Tralee several years ago, and it was a friendly place - the women there were wise, honest, and happy. But the nuns died off, and the Tralee motherhouse closed last year. Each motherhouse controlled a network so schools and convents and other institutions. In some situations, the sisters owned and operated the institutions, and they worked in the employ of other institutions that were operated by outside authorities. But each motherhouse had a spirit of its own, and that spirit tended to be pervasive among all the nuns who belonged to that particular province. If the spirit of the motherhouse was harsh, there would still be a few strong women who could resist that harshness and carry on in a constructive manner - but it was very tough for them. If the spirit of the motherhouse was positive and generous, then it was easy for most of then nuns to be constructive - but there would still be a few troublesome nuns in every province, even the good ones. It's the "tipping point" rule - a small force for good or evil can have a remarkably powerful effect on a large group of people. But there aren't many nuns left, and most of the motherhouses have closed or could no longer afford to operate independently in recent years. So, the Sisters of Mercy have consolidated, and the power structure has changed radically. I think we have five independent regions of the Sisters of Mercy, consolidated from dozens of motherhouses in about 2005. They will all be consolidated into one Institute of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas in about 2020. By then, the primary function of the Sisters of Mercy, will be to operate nursing homes for their own members. By then, the average age of nuns in English-speaking countries will be about 80. But I digress. My point is that each motherhouse of the Sisters of Mercy was an independent power center. Some were managed in a very positive way; and some were harsh communities of angry, unhappy women. All of the provinces had members who abused children, but only a few provinces were responsible for the worst of the crimes - but "a few provinces" is still many hundreds of women. The Irish Christian Brothers had particularly widespread problems, and some of their provinces had to file bankruptcy. For the most part, the problems in each province of each religious order happened independently - but in a parallel fashion, because the causative factors were very similar. And to a great extent, members of religious orders belonged to provinces where they came from, and they lived their lives in the area where they were born. And if they committed crimes, they committed them not far from where they were born. The people who committed the crimes, were people who were known locally. They were not sent to the victims from outside powers. Rome had very little to do with sex crimes that were committed in local institutions. The crimes were committed locally, and the criminals lived locally. Blaming a faraway entity will not get to the root of the problem. Wish I had time to write more. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 01:31 PM "Cloths" Would that be tea cloths, by the way? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 01:02 PM Very profound and crammed full of content - a usual Ake Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 11 Aug 17 - 12:40 PM This thread is really beginning to remind me of Anderson's "The Emperor's New Cloths"...the stupidity and vanity the inability to see what is staring you in the face while you pirouette around in your glad rags (ideologies). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 09:27 AM "I'm uncomfortable with the concept of big financial compensation for this kind of crime." I heartily agree The rush to litigation is a problem in Ireland and has restricted many things - especially access to walkers on opn land. Doesn't mean that those with genuine grievances should not be compensated for, just that the rights to compensation should be used circumspectly However, in the case of clerical abuse, this has not been as issue - there have been very few false claims by individuals, if any and compensation was agreed by the Government without too much prevarication by them. The breathtaking strutting arrogance of the Church is what has brought the situation to its present dilemma Its failure to meet agreed settlements, the arrogance of Magdalene nuns who still express contempt for their former victims, their failure to offer an acknowledgement or apology for what has happened and above all, their continued insistence that nothing will change, particularly in regard to education. If I was a former abuse victim and was met with such arrogant intransigence I would be very inclined to say, "Feck 'em - I'll sue the bastards for every penny I can get out of them and I'll call a policeman whenever I see a priest withing 100 yards of a child" (that situation is now being depicted in our popular culture - see the extremely popular film 'Calvary' where it shows an innocent priest being chased away from a child's presence) The Church could have avoided a great deal of this with the type of humility it demands of its followers. As it is, it is happily digging its own grave - egged on by supporters like Joe, it would appear. "Ladybird, ladybird, your house is on fire" as the children's rhyme points out Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Aug 17 - 06:34 AM I know it's illegal to have abortions in lots of places, Excuse my somewhat western-centric thinking there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Aug 17 - 06:30 AM May I suggest that you don't respond to Jim at all rather than respond in this rude manner. In fact, Jim's point is well made. Whatever you say about the forces pulling in different directions within the Church, it is essentially an undemocratic, authoritarian institution that attempts to impose dictats on its members. In that regard it may not be the worst of the big religions, but that's how it is. It isn't my club any more so I haven't got much to say about celibacy or about how many gay men are permitted to become priests. The gay men I know are all wonderful, balanced human beings as it happens and I don't see it as an issue. The point is about the institutional nature of the cover-up of what we have learned to be widespread abuse. It simply isn't believable that these things went on unobserved or without concern for decades, or centuries, and it's clear that the ranks higher up than the perpetrating priests were concerned enough to cover for them in all the escalating ways Jim describes. The abuse has been so widespread that it simply isn't possible that the highest authorities were not aware of the scale of the issue. Yet it isn't the Church that has been leading the exposures. In other words, the people who knew most about the abuse were the one saying the least and doing the most dragging of feet (and, in consideration of the cover-ups, I think I'm being kind there). It isn't an excuse to say the the Church is in fact many churches and that there was no control. Sure, priests may find it easier than many to carry out the abuses by dint of the position they are in. The Church isn't to blame for that, but it is completely to blame for its lack of vigilance, and, worse, its apparent greater concern for the abusers, and for itself, than for the victims. It isn't the same as saying that Catholics still have abortions in spite of the dictats. It isn't illegal to have an abortion in most places, but sexual abuse is not only a breach of Church law but also, universally, a breach of secular law. As a supposed moral arbiter, the Church should have shouted every abuse from the rooftops, but it did the precise opposite. I'm uncomfortable with the concept of big financial compensation for this kind of crime. If you're injured by a crime and can't work, or if you lose your money or property, that's different. Of course, there are mental as well physical injuries and it isn't possible to be black and white about it. But I'd hate to think that the prospect of a huge payout would be the main enticement to claim abuse. I also think that the prospect of having to pay out vast sums to many victims would be an enticement to cover up. I can see vast compensation prospects getting in the way of justice and closure. Shoot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 06:24 AM Stop being patronising Joe I am not being irrational - I am presenting a picture of how your church is now being regarded You appear to have the same disregard for the fate of your church as you do for the suffering of its victims Kindly respond to the points - I really am not going to go away - I'm well used to being insulted by people like yourself Let's try to make it easy for you (to use your own partonising attitude) Which of the points I have put up regarding to education is not applicable to the behaviour of your Church - and why? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 05:43 AM Jim, you're getting irrational again. Calm down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 11 Aug 17 - 03:39 AM "You appear to be unable to carry on an intelligent conversation," And you appear to be incapable of carrying out an honest one, " so I'm not going to bother to answer you." You haven't ansewred me so fat - and now you are making it official - fine by me Simple questions - for all if not for you - for anybody What if it had been found that schoolteachers throughout our education had been sexually abusing pupils for generations, that fellow teachers had been ignoring those abuses and headmasters, when the abuses became impossible to ignore, had allowed the abusers to other school's where they could continue their abuses. What if the various education departments had gotten wind of these buses and, when they became too prominent to cover up, had moved them on to places abroad to continue their abuse. Finally, when the abuses became generally known throughout the the world, what if all the various local and national education authorities had conspired to hide any recorded facts and, where financial compensation for the survivors had been agreed upon, the education department were these abuses had been most prominent, had reneged and allowed the taxpayer to bear the major part of the burden. If this all had happened, had been reported on nationally as having happened, and if the situation had reached a stalemate, with the vast majority of the culprits unpunished and the facts of their abuses still locked away somewhere in the middle of a foreign country - would you continue to trust such organisations with the care of children and would you blame the parents of the victims they should forget what had happened and get on with their lives - that last bit is rhetorical, because that is exactly what you have done. I said earlier that I bear no great ill will to your religion and, for the sake of genuine believers, I would hate to see the church disappear over this, but to be honest, if your view represents the liberally minded wing of Catholicism, I would demand that every priest, canon, Bishop, Archbishop, passed an rigorous annual test before they were let within reach of any child What I have described above is exactly what has happened in your church and your response is an indication that it is rotten to the core. Arguing with you has been a sharp learning curve, for which - many thanks I hope that all the money Milwaukee has spent on the care of its abusive priests was not wasted and has allowed them to carry on their lives untroubled by their bast sins I'm sure tat their fellow priests will ensure them a safe passage to Heaven!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 11 Aug 17 - 01:19 AM Well, mg, I get the impression that Dolan of New York is kind of like a car salesman. For him, business is his first priority. He's charming, and he can ooze with compassion when he's trying to win you over, but you get the impression that his primary motivations are his business interests. And he's made himself very popular with the ultra-conservatives, which is a red flag for me. Don't think he's been suspected of anything criminal, though. Pell, from Australia, is actually facing criminal charges. The charges have not been revealed, but it appears that he has been accused of directly sexually abusing children himself. When he was serving as a bishop in Australia, his was the only diocese that did not go along with the child abuse protection plan set up by the bishops of the nation. His plan wasn't horrible, but it did give less protection to victims and more protection to his diocese. I've read descriptions of contacts he's had with victims and their parents, and they show a total lack of sensitivity. I really liked Cardinal Roger Mahoney from Los Angeles, but he got in a lot of trouble and there was thought of filing criminal charges against him for covering up. I'd like to think that he just got buried in an impossible situation, and that he didn't do anything intentionally wrong - but I dunno. It does appear that he bungled the abuse scandal in his early years and was exemplary in his later years. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 10 Aug 17 - 11:22 PM he is the worst or second worst..one in australia is very very bad...they sure know how to pick them. people were calling him the american pope. that has died down. i have never ever heard one good word about him..oh he is fine once you get to know him, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Aug 17 - 11:03 PM MG has harsh words for Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York. Here (click) is an article she'll appreciate. I sure don't trust the m----f-----... -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Aug 17 - 10:52 PM Sorry, Jim. You appear to be unable to carry on an intelligent conversation, so I'm not going to bother to answer you. Steve, my latest copy of National Catholic Reporter arrived today, once again telling the story of the difference between the actuality of the Catholic Church and the power structure of the Catholic Church. I couldn't help but think how much the Catholic Church is like the United States in this Year of Trump. The dictates of Trump are indeed outrageous, as are the dictates of many Catholic leaders on abortion and birth control. But Catholics still get abortions and use birth control at the same rate as other people. And yes, the way that many priests and bishops and church lawyers handled child abuse victims was appalling, but there were also many church leaders who handled victims with great compassion and generosity. So, you have to look at the Catholic Church as an organic, diverse, and constantly changing whole, a mass of conflicting forces. When you pronounce solemn condemnations of the whole for real offenses, without recognizing all those within the body who are fighting against those offenses, you do a grave disservice to those who are fighting the good fight. Same with us Americans - many of us were in shock when Trump was elected President by a minority vote. We just didn't see that comeing. But hey, don't hate us because Trump is our President. Hate Trump, like we do. But we'll come back. Just watch us. Here's an article on Extending the Statute of Limitations, written by Tom Reese, a Jesuit priest who's a good guy. The temporary extensions enacted by a number of state legislatures opened a window to allow processing of claims without a lot of legal delays. It gave immediate and generous compensation to victims, and it sped up the process so dioceses could get on with things. There is still room for old claims to be filed, but the temporary extensions made it possible to handle the bulk of the claims quickly and with a minimum of hassle for all involved. And when the claims are settled, the anger dies down and we are all able to move forward again. I do think that million-dollar settlements are too high. I think a hundred thousand would be fair in most cases. But I know damn well why the amount got up to a million and many dioceses had to pay a second time. There were a number of bishops who tried all sorts of delaying tactics, and they got caught. There was righteous anger because of the games those bishops were playing, and that anger drove the compensation rate up to a million. Those very bishops were the ones who made such a mess of the scandal in the first place - and because of them, all of us had to pay. And believe me, it won't be bishops paying those bills. Some of them downsized their cars and residences, but the bishops who made the mess are still living in the lap of luxury - or else they're dead or retired. Read the Reese article. It gives some good insights. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Aug 17 - 07:29 PM "Jim, is that you fail to understand the complexity of organizations" The stock reesponse of all politicians when confronted with a situation they are unable to deal with "don'yt you worry yourr pretty little head about it" How dare you be so partonising? "Everything that happens in the Catholic Church is the result of one faction prevailing over another faction, for at least a brief moment and at a particular location. " Then they are not fit foir purpose - how can anybody trust an organisation so unstable - would you put chidren in their charge - woulyd you expose childrens minds to such a set-up from their earliest days? I'm **** if I would You talk anout how Milwaukee treated the offenders - how generous of them!!!!! How about the victims - were similar amounts spent on repairing their damaged minds - or were they just told to go away and forget it as you have suggested? You once again absolve the church for their crimes Sorry Joe - your non-responses have become embarrassing - you reflect the self-serving evasive dishonesty of your church perfectly Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Aug 17 - 07:11 PM Hmmm. I'm all for devolution, Joe, but kindly tell me whether the dictats from on high apropos of contraception and abortion (for example) are able to be officially varied regionally. Oh, I know that they they are unofficially varied. But I tend to think that your claims for wide spectrums of powers and local decision-making are somewhat abitrarily variable. Sounds like a get-out clause to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Aug 17 - 03:42 PM Jim Who Knows All Things says, solemnly: The first step to healing is to recognise the illness - the church has refused to do so, so it has painted itself out of the picture Jim, that is downright ludicrous. Why do you think the Archdiocese of Milwaukee hired psychiatrists to screen us seminarians in the 1960s? Why do you think the bishops of the United States spent millions on treatment centers for child molester priests in the 1970s. Why do you think that the National Catholic Reporter and other Catholic publications like the Jesuits' America have published a steady stream of articles exposing the sex abuse scandal since 1983? They recognize the illness, no doubt about it. I don't know the details of how things happened in the Catholic Church in Ireland and in the UK, but I imagine the story came out in much the same way, and much earlier than you might contend. The problem, Jim, is that you fail to understand the complexity of organizations, including the Catholic Church. All organizations of people are the product of myriad conflicting forces There is no such thing as a monolithic organization, where all the members think the same and act the same. Even rigid dictatorships are far more diverse than you might think. And most organizations have a wide spectrum of power centers - very few leaders are able to direct everything from the top. Most actions and decisions happen locally, not at headquarters. Everything you say about the Catholic Church is true - and at the same time, everything you say about the Catholic Church is false. Everything that happens in the Catholic Church is the result of one faction prevailing over another faction, for at least a brief moment and at a particular location. And in a worldwide organization like the Catholic Church, one thing can happen in one location, while the exact opposite thing can be happening unnoticed on the other side of the earth - or right next door, as happened with the School for the Deaf next door to my seminary. Jim, I think you need to take a course in organizational dynamics. You, sir, just don't get it. Talking to you is like talking to a wall, because you cannot accept the idea of diversity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 10 Aug 17 - 03:31 PM read usa today. big story, front page. guam problems. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:48 PM And please take your anti-Pakistani racist BS with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:47 PM Ake, would you please take your repetitive homophobic bullshit somewhere else? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:41 PM No need for any "soul searching", The Catholic Church should scrap the celibacy rule and employ married priests especially married with children, the pederasty would stop. It seems mad to me that a Church which extols family values employs priests who have no knowledge of family life and with such a very high percentage of homosexuals when homosexuality is proscribed by the Catholic Church. In the UK the grooming and trafficking of young girls by British Pakistani gangs is at last being called what it is ...racist crime. Time to have an honest look at homosexuality in the priesthood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Aug 17 - 01:22 PM "I am honestly seeking a solution, for healing for the victims" The first step to healing is to recognise the illness - the church has refused to do so, so it has painted itself out of the picture "I" do not wish to beat the church into submission - I am watching as it is being rejected wholesale because of its inaction and detachment Please don't blame me for what many thousands of former churchgoers are now doing You act if this is a one-man campaign and refuse to even acknowledge what actually happening on the ground here. This really is head-in-the-sand stuff. Today's papers are full of articles announcing that older priests are having to take on other parishes because the disillusionment has severely effected the recruitment of priests Wake up Joe - your House is on fire!! I really am only the messenger here Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 10 Aug 17 - 09:35 AM So Joe, what then would you say to the victims, if given a chance? Sorry folks, happened a long time ago, not my problem, I ain't paying, tough shit, get over it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 10 Aug 17 - 08:41 AM I should have made clear he has only been charged with offences .......... not proven guilty at this time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 10 Aug 17 - 08:39 AM It just goes on and on ............ Catholic Priest - Lawrence Soper |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Aug 17 - 06:20 AM Jim. take to read carefully to what I have said above. I am honestly seeking a solution, for healing for the victims. It seems to me that the only solution you seek, is that the Catholic Church be beaten into total submission. Winners often seek such solutions - and such solutions rarely work. I humbly admit that the Catholic Church lost in this situation, and lost bigtime. But no matter how bad the offense committed by a group, there is still a sizeable number of well-meaning people on the losing side. If you win and set out to destroy the losers, you'll lose. If you win and acknowledge that a vast number of the losers are people of good will, then you can truly win. -Joe Offer- |