Ongoing religious scandals

robindch · 14-02-2017 1:53pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Cash is all they care about.

And believers.

Assets + believers = religion.

Hotblack Desiato · 19-02-2017 8:16pm

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/protest-over-paedophile-priest-set-to-embarrass-spanish-church-1.2979651

Protest over paedophile priest set to embarrass Spanish church

A group of former residents of a seminary are planning to stage a street demonstration on Saturday to demand that a priest who has admitted to sexually abusing boys under his tutelage face the full force of the Spanish legal system.

Some 30 men, who as children lived in the La Bañeza seminary in northern Spain, will take part in the demonstration in the town of Astorga. Among them are expected to be some of the victims of José Manuel Ramos Gordón, a former teacher at the seminary.

La Opinión de Zamora newspaper recently revealed that Ramos Gordón had admitted to abusing several pupils at the school in the academic year 1988-89, following an investigation by the Archbishopric of Astorga last year. In May 2016, he was suspended from his duties as a parish priest for “a period of no less than a year,” according to a decree signed by Archbishop Juan Antonio Menéndez, and he was sent to work in a home for retired clergy.

However, Ramos Gordón received a tribute in a local church last autumn, during which he gave Mass, despite having been suspended from his duties.

Another man who said he was a victim of the abuse, identified as HH, described as “intolerable” the church authorities’ lenient treatment of Ramos Gordón and the fact he had been allowed to give Mass. “Perhaps they want to see a demonstration at the doors of the archbishop’s office, with all the media there,” he said, in a reference to this Saturday’s demonstration.

recedite · 19-02-2017 8:20pm

...a street demonstration on Saturday to demand that a priest who has admitted to sexually abusing boys under his tutelage face the full force of the Spanish legal system

What have the Spanish police got to say about this? They seem strangely quiet.

Hotblack Desiato · 19-02-2017 9:52pm

recedite wrote: »

They seem strangely quiet.

No quieter than ours, who have no inclination to investigate hundreds of homicides in Tuam, or numerous conspiracies to pervert the course of justice.

recedite · 25-02-2017 6:58pm

In fairness to the Gardai, if a priest today admitted in public to abusing boys back in the 1980's, I think the Gardai would not hesitate to investigate the matter and bring charges against him.

Seth Brundle · 25-02-2017 11:11pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

No quieter than ours, who have no inclination to investigate hundreds of homicides in Tuam, or numerous conspiracies to pervert the course of justice.

As a point of clarity, there are *allegations* of homicide (amongst other suggestions) in Tuam.

pauldla · 02-03-2017 5:41am

From Reuters

Abuse survivor quits pope's commission citing 'shameful' resistance

A leading member of a group advising Pope Francis on how to root out sex abuse in the Catholic Church quit in frustration on Wednesday, citing "shameful" resistance within the Vatican.

The sudden departure of Marie Collins, an outspoken Irish woman who was the last remaining survivor of priestly abuse on a Holy See commission, was a major setback for the pope, who has faced criticism of not doing enough to tackle the problem.

The work of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, set up by Francis in March 2014, has been slowed down by internal disputes and Collins blamed the Vatican's administration, known as the Curia, for the "constant setbacks".

"The lack of cooperation, particularly by the dicastery most closely involved in dealing with cases of abuse, has been shameful," she said in a statement.

Full story is here.

marienbad · 02-03-2017 3:26pm

pauldla wrote: »

From Reuters

Full story is here.

same ol same ol - it never ends . anyone expecting the RCC to reform from within is simply naive

robindch · 03-03-2017 3:44pm

Seems that the Vatican is refusing to co-operate with the ongoing Australian commission into child sex abuse and this is causing some within the Aussie government to consider whether the Vatican really needs an Embassy.

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4501959/turnbull-government-questioned-over-vatican-ties/

recedite · 06-03-2017 11:46am

robindch wrote: »

Seems that the Vatican is refusing to co-operate with the ongoing Australian commission into child sex abuse and this is causing some within the Aussie government to consider whether the Vatican really needs an Embassy.

Seems like deja vu.
The article doesn't mention that Ireland reopened an embassy 3 years later, albeit as a much smaller one person operation.
As I understand it, the former Holy See embassy, which was a much larger pad on Villa Spada, became the Italian embassy instead.

pauldla · 07-03-2017 7:40am

From the Independent:

Church blames 'consumerism' and 'temptations of body' after Catholic priest 'rapes 15-year-old girl'

The Catholic Church has sparked outrage in India after it blamed "consumerism" and bodily "temptations" for the alleged rape of a 15-year-old girl.

Priest Mathew Vadakkacheril, from Kerala in India, was accused of raping the child and later arrested.

The girl was allegedly raped several times and became pregnant, according to India Today. The child has since been delivered at a private hospital and since taken to an orphanage, reportedly without the mother's consent.

Yet it is the response to the incident among the Christian community in India that is now making headlines.

A Christian weekly magazine, which is backed by a Catholic Sabha or association, blamed the alleged victim for the event and said Mr Vadakkacheril may have momentarily “forgotten his position”.

“Daughter, why did you forget who a priest is?" read an extract in the Sunday Shalom, according to an India Today translation. "He has a human body and has temptations. He may have forgotten his position for a few seconds, my child who has taken the Holy Communion, why didn't you stop or correct him?"

Father Paul Thelekat from the Bishops’ Council, also commented on the incident and blamed consumerism for the rape.

"Consumerism is indeed a situation affecting everyone in the world and priests are also in the world. It is in celibacy and in virginity the crisis become apparent first, then it will become a crisis of fidelity in marriage with extra-marital and premarital sex,” he told The News Minute.

“Women are presented as commodity both in media and in advertisements and all commodities are marketed with girls and women, where [the] human body is dehumanise[d]."

Original story here.

robindch · 10-03-2017 12:28am

The religious orders covered by the abuse indemnity bill fifteen years ago just keep on forgetting to pay money.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/cost-of-redress-scheme-for-those-abused-by-religious-hits-1-5bn-1.3004012

Haven't checked for a while, but I'd imagine that by now all of these orders have since been converted into trusts in order to protect their assets.

Hotblack Desiato · 11-03-2017 3:37am

It's oh so remiss of them to forget to pay the small fraction the paedophile bailout required of them. What I'd like to know is how it was legal that Michael Woods imposed such a charge upon the exchequer (That's us) without any Dail oversight, in the interregnum before the 2002 election.

We're looking at the guts of a billion fûcking euro here.

recedite · 12-03-2017 3:05pm

The 2002 indemnity has been renewed and extended many times since 2002.
In the last year TDs Clare Daly and Mick Wallace have been trying to keep the money flowing indefinitely.

The Minister's predecessors, the former Ministers, Ruairí Quinn and Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, both committed to me in the previous Dáil that they would have such a review and would examine widening eligibility to the fund. There is huge concern about this because of the age profile of the survivor community who are getting older. They feel that they have not been consulted on what might be new terms of reference. They are very keen that the children of survivors would be included in being enabled to access the fund. The idea of a €12,000 cap needs to be lifted...

Hotblack Desiato · 23-03-2017 1:30am

Another institution had a not-so-mysterious fire. But not all the records were lost.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/christian-brothers-papers-show-children-being-sold-into-slavery-1.3020770

Documents, including contracts that showed children being “effectively sold into slavery”, are at the centre of a dispute between the Christian Brothers and a former industrial school resident who retained the papers for more than 40 years.

Tom Wall, a former resident of St Joseph’s industrial school in Glin, Co Limerick, obtained the documents in 1973, when the Christian Brothers who were leaving Glin asked him to burn files on every resident.

Mr Wall held onto his own file as well as a significant number of files on other residents. In 2015, he donated them to the University of Limerick so they could be maintained and catalogued.

Fianna Fáil TD Niall Collins told the Dáil that the Christian Brothers were now threatening legal action and seeking to recover all the documents from the university. He called on the State to intervene to secure the documents.

The Limerick TD said Mr Wall believed the Brothers could have a copy of the documents but not the originals because he felt they “cannot be trusted” with exclusive possession of the original documents. A number of the documents “are incriminating”, he said.

Hotblack Desiato · 06-04-2017 1:39am

The Oblates (nothing to do with geometry) have been kicking up a bit of a fuss.

Government was forced to set up redress scheme, say Oblates

The remarks are made in a lengthy statement on the Oblates (Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate) website which, The Irish Times understands, reflects the general views of all 18 congregations investigated by the Ryan Commission.
[...]
Mr Bruton told the Seanad that [...] “after today’s report we have to ask questions as to why organisations with stated missions to serve the public and uphold moral codes apparently place so little importance on these values”.

The Oblate statement claimed such comments by politicians were “immoral and should stop” as the congregations “were adjuncts to the scheme, and certainly not partners”.

They're ones to talk.
Then they get to work on impugning the victims.

The statement noted how “even before the investigation of abuse by the (Ryan) Commission had got under way, the Government – relying solely on the media exposés – had decided to compensate the protesters with awards fully-funded by the Government. Its hand was being forced by the refusal of victims’ groups, with the support of their legal representatives, to cooperate with an investigation unless such a scheme was put into immediate effect.”

Is it not the case that the victims' groups were seeking a compensation scheme due to the vigour with which the orders were defending abuse cases, and the desire to avoid long delays and further traumatising victims in court? (and risking their home or assets should they lose their case)

It said: “We are not here in the zone of ‘evidence beyond all reasonable doubt’ or even of ‘probabilities’, certainly not ‘cast-iron facts’. There must always be serious reservations too in any context about evidence that is given long after the events described, or to a Commission with a statutory duty to adopt a therapeutic stance towards the complainants and in the shadow of a generous redress scheme, to mention just some factors.”

It said that “while the Dáil may sweepingly accept all the findings of the Commission for the purposes for which it was established, anyone who wants to rely on them for another purpose is not only entitled to quiz them but is morally bound to do so.

“Please note that, in saying this, one is not saying the findings were unfounded, but that they can and ought to be evaluated. In the present context, the religious congregations are constitutionally and morally entitled to form opinions of their own.”

More generally the statement concluded: “Bad things are still happening. And while, ‘in the old days’, bad things happened, it was not a desert waste. Surely, some balance has to be restored.”

What is that sentence supposed to mean?

...

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/oblates-came-from-france-to-set-up-at-inchicore-in-1856-1.3035205

Daingean was one of the most severely criticised reformatories investigated by the Ryan commission for the sexual, physical and emotional abuses of children that took place there as well as their neglect.

The report also said of the building itself that “the refusal by management to accept any responsibility for even day-to-day maintenance led to its complete disintegration over the years”.

In a recent statement from the Oblates on their website, responsibility for all of this is laid, mainly, elsewhere.

Its unnamed author is unequivocal: “Top of my list of culprits are those who held the purse strings [the Ryan report lets these off too lightly] and starved the institutions of the capital and income to do an adequate job.

“Then there are the policy-setters both of civil and church society who took so long to see that society was changing. Then there were the judiciary and the law-enforcers who presided over an outdated system.

“Finally, there were the foot-soldiers [members of the congregation]. It is on the foot-soldiers that the ‘make them pay until it hurts’ party want to put the burden.”

So they admit they did these things, but accept no responsibility for them.

Didn't the Oblates make large sums from land sales in the Inchicore area? I wonder what happened to that money.

...

A little insight into the machinations behind the infamous 2002 deal.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/congregations-proven-right-about-cost-dangers-of-redress-scheme-1.3035408

On October 4th, 2000, the Conference of Religious of Ireland indicated the 18 relevant congregations’ willingness to be involved with a State compensation scheme for victims of abuse in residential institutions run by them.

It was in response to an announcement on October 3rd by then minister for education Michael Woods that the government was setting up such a scheme.

Talks began on November 10th, 2000, when it was agreed in principle the congregations would be part of such a scheme. Soon, however, it was clear they were troubled by what the State had in mind.

At a meeting on February 7th, 2001, they expressed concern at the level of contributions sought from them but in particular at “the process for validating claims of abuse which will require a low burden of proof”.

As the recent Oblate statement put it about these talks, “no religious order had a bottomless purse. At that time, the government did seem to think it had a bottomless purse”.

Seeing the direction in which the state was headed, the congregations sought an indemnity “against all further liability” as anything else “would leave them facing financial uncertainty for years to come”.

By a meeting on April 4th, 2001, the indemnity had become “critical”.

On April 30th, 2001, they told officials suggestions of a “50:50 ratio of contribution” from them was “far beyond what they envisaged happening”.

It is the first time this “50:50 ratio” emerges.

Rather, they felt their contribution should reflect “the fact that it was the State that had decided to proceed with this form of redress; that the State had decided to set the level of validation lower than that of the courts; [and] their own [congregations’] assessment of their own liability in a court situation”.

Negotiations became tense. On June 26th, 2001, the congregations made their “final offer” of IR£45 million – IR£20 million of which would be cash – payable over five years. They argued it exceeded “by a considerable margin what they reckon their exposure in litigation to be”.

They further claimed the scheme devised by Government would “in itself increase the number of claims, claims that they would otherwise never have had to meet”.

In a letter to Mr Woods on June 29th, 2001, then minister for finance Charlie McCreevy described the congregations’ offer as “quite disappointing” in the context “when contrasted with a possible cost to the State of the order of £200-£400 million” in redress payments.

Further correspondence between the congregations and government took place before an announcement on January 30th, 2002, that a deal was agreed. The congregations would contribute a €128 million (IR£100 million) to the redress scheme and would be indemnified by the State against further claims.

The deal was signed on June 5th, 2002. The Residential Institutions Redress Board was set up seven months later in December 2002.

Such were government estimates at the time that, according to a report by the comptroller and auditor general of October 2003: “By November 2001, the Department of Education and Science was estimating that the potential number of claimants was likely to exceed 3,000 and might rise to 4,000. By June 2002, [when the indemnity deal was signed] it was being estimated that the number of claimants could be 5,200 or more.”

In the event, 15,579 people received awards ,which averaged €62,250.

Of course the orders knew the extent of the horrors within these instututions and must have had a far better idea than the government then did as to the potential number of claimants.

I don't think we'll be seeing the bottom of the Oblates' purse any time soon.

Hotblack Desiato · 30-04-2017 2:31am

Interesting story here about Frank Duff, the founder of the Legion of Mary:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/legion-of-mary-founder-s-kindness-to-unmarried-mothers-recalled-1.3064272

Dr Kennedy, author of the 2011 biography Frank Duff: A Life Story, was giving a talk hosted by the Iona Institute in Dublin.

She spoke of how in 1930 Frank Duff opened the Regina Coeli hostel for homeless women in Dublin's North Brunswick Street.

'Soon after opening, a pregnant woman sought admission. Her entry to the hostel, remaining there subsequently, and keeping her child, led to the inauguration of the Mater Dei aspect of the hostel, a type of hostel within a hostel, specifically organised on the basis of units for mothers and children,' she said.

Later, the Legion of Mary acquired houses in North Great Georges Street 'which were divided into flats and could be used by the women and their children as step-down facilities before moving on to independent living'.

So if Duff was able to do this, why were the nuns at that time so horrifically cruel?

looksee · 30-04-2017 1:11pm

Frank Duff was one individual, he was male (and thus had some authority) and free to pursue ideas or ambitions.

The nuns were caught in a structure of control, subservience, and loss of individuality. They were as oppressed as the people in their care on whom they took out their frustrations. They were not all vicious, but the gentle souls were not likely to progress into positions of authority. These women were trapped in a situation that very often they had not chosen, or they had chosen in their mid teens when they had not realised what they were giving up. Society at the time raised children in a strict and restrictive atmosphere, it was expected of parents that they control and discipline their children as harshly as necessary. Young women exchanged this parental repression for the loveless atmosphere of the convent. They did not have the energy, the initiative or the opportunity to make life decisions, and many of them took out their frustration where they could.

The environment the church created was harsh, and individuals were sometimes cruel, but it was the organisation and the power hungry individuals within it that created the corruption that has become evident.

There is something of a parallel in the vast numbers of men who marched off to fight wars that they knew nothing about. From our perspective now it is easy to say 'why did they go?' 'why didn't they just refuse?' For most they were accustomed to 'doing what they were told' from childhood, if authority tells you to go, you go. For many it was a pair of boots and reliable meals. It was the alternative to grindingly boring jobs, from being trapped in the day to day oppression of normal life. And it was the belief that this was a noble and heroic thing to do, just as it was the virtuous and proper thing to do to become a nun, but finding too late that it was not all that it appeared to be.

Nano Nagle was a woman who educated poor children in Penal times, at risk to herself. She avoided taking religious vows specifically so that she could continue this work (nuns had to remain enclosed at that time). She did eventually create an order of nuns - the Presentation sisters - and they ultimately became as restrictive as any of the other orders. She was beatified, but most of her pioneering charitable work was done as a result of her personal spirit and access to family wealth, rather than her position as the head of an order of nuns.

Hotblack Desiato · 30-04-2017 5:29pm

All true. But at the same time what Duff was able to do puts the lie to the usual line from the defenders of the nuns - that society practically demanded that they did as they did. Society appears to have had no problem with a kinder approach to single mothers when it was tried. I wonder what the RC hierarchy thought of it.

......... · 30-04-2017 5:50pm

English imported notions of conservatism also had a lot to do with it. The first magdalene institution was set up in England in 1758, they spread all over England, and very few of them there were Catholic. In Ireland the first one was set up by the Church of Ireland in 1765 in Lesson street. They weren't really heard of in other "Catholic" countries on the continent.

Hotblack Desiato · 30-04-2017 6:46pm

Deflect, deflect, deflect.

looksee · 30-04-2017 7:02pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

All true. But at the same time what Duff was able to do puts the lie to the usual line from the defenders of the nuns - that society practically demanded that they did as they did. Society appears to have had no problem with a kinder approach to single mothers when it was tried. I wonder what the RC hierarchy thought of it.

This was not 'Society' though, not all of it. It was a few individuals. Rescuing 'falled women' was an acceptable activity (provided you were not too specific about it - and I have no doubt that it was a great cover for less well intentioned activities, in some cases). You cannot lump everyone in on one side of the argument or the other, it is not black and white.

We have social security payments now, but not everyone thinks that it is a great idea, there are still people who say 'why should my taxes support these layabouts', and the other side who say 'it isn't enough'.

I am simply trying to make the point that while individuals undoubtedly performed acts of cruelty, not all of them did. But it was the organisation that controlled them who were responsible for maintaining standards of decency, they did not, and they are culpable.

And now, our elected government, the people we elected, are once again allowing this unelected, foreign, out of control organisation to have control over a new state maternity hospital. Two decent people have been forced off the board of a private organisation because they object to this situation being allowed to continue. In 20 years time who will be considered responsible? Us, 'society', we will be blamed for allowing it.

mrslancaster · 30-04-2017 7:27pm

looksee wrote: »

The nuns were caught in a structure of control, subservience, and loss of individuality. They were as oppressed as the people in their care on whom they took out their frustrations. They were not all vicious, but the gentle souls were not likely to progress into positions of authority. These women were trapped in a situation that very often they had not chosen, or they had chosen in their mid teens when they had not realised what they were giving up. Society at the time raised children in a strict and restrictive atmosphere, it was expected of parents that they control and discipline their children as harshly as necessary.

what a load of rubbish..imo
the schools I went to were run by nuns & there were a few nice kind nuns but lots of vicious nasty nuns who treated children appallingly.
to say they were trapped is not true they could always leave before they took their final vows

I wish people would stop making excuses for the terrible things the nuns priests & brothers did to children, mothers, & disadvantaged people in this country. I grew up in the times when the rc church had a lot of power so know what it was like.
maybe others here are relying on media reports or hearsay

and to say parents treated children harshly is also rubbish IMO as most parents loved their kids & treated them no differently than today although they may have had less money

looksee · 30-04-2017 8:30pm

mrslancaster wrote: »

what a load of rubbish..imo
the schools I went to were run by nuns & there were a few nice kind nuns but lots of vicious nasty nuns who treated children appallingly.
to say they were trapped is not true they could always leave before they took their final vows

I wish people would stop making excuses for the terrible things the nuns priests & brothers did to children, mothers, & disadvantaged people in this country. I grew up in the times when the rc church had a lot of power so know what it was like.
maybe others here are relying on media reports or hearsay

and to say parents treated children harshly is also rubbish IMO as most parents loved their kids & treated them no differently than today although they may have had less money

You may wish to read my post more carefully, I was offering an answer to Hotblack's question. I could have given a knee-jerk 'damn all the nuns' response, but it would not have progressed the discussion very far.

I am not defending the nuns, I have no reason to and not a great deal of respect for the various organisations. Whether individual nuns were worthy of respect or condemnation is down to the same rationale that you would use on any members of society.

I was also referring to an earlier era, the time Frank Duff opened his hostel, as referred to by Hotblack, when I believe the circumstances that I listed did apply, and attitudes and practices were established that lasted as long as religious sisters were active in 'caring' services.

robindch · 23-05-2017 11:11pm

Things getting better and better for the church - new allegations of clerical sex abuse continue to decline in the year to end of March, this year:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/downward-trend-in-reports-of-new-clerical-child-sex-abuse-allegations-continues-1.3093486

Irish Times wrote:

The Catholic Church?s child protection watchdog received reports of 72 new allegations of clerical child sex abuse as well as 10 of physical and emotional abuse in the year to March 31st 2017, as a downward trend in such allegations continues. The National Board for Safeguarding Children (NBSC), based at Maynooth, also received one allegation relating to boundary violation during the year and three where the abuse was unspecified. Most allegations related to a period from the 1950s to the 1990s, with a sharp drop after the year 2000.

The figures were supplied in the latest annual report from the NBSC published on Tuesday morning. They represent a significant drop in new allegations, from 153 in 2015/16, and 265 in 2014/2015.
Teresa Devlin, NBSC chief executive, noted however that an examination of the downward trend ?shows we cannot assume the work is complete.? Since 2009, when the NBSC began compiling such figures, ?there have been years where the figures rose and only constant vigilance will keep children safe,? she said. [...]

recedite · 23-05-2017 11:57pm

Eventually these instances of abuse will become as rare in Ireland as wolf attacks. For much the same reason....gradual extinction.

Absolam · 24-05-2017 1:29am

Hopefully not to be matched by a corresponding increase in non-clerical abuse. It would be an appallingly blinkered (not to say foolishly prejudiced) view to imagine that a decline in religious affiliations will lead to a decline in child abuse.

Far better to ensure that all institutions, regardless of religious or any other affiliation, are implementing and improving robust measures to protect children in their care, and create a societal environment hostile to abuse rather than hope it's becoming extinct for unrelated reasons....

recedite · 24-05-2017 9:40pm

Absolam wrote: »

Far better to ensure that all institutions, regardless of religious or any other affiliation, are implementing and improving robust measures to protect children in their care, and create a societal environment hostile to abuse rather than hope it's becoming extinct for unrelated reasons....

In hindsight though, we know that a lot of the religious orders fostered a societal environment favourable to abuse.
If paedophile priests become extinct, I agree it does not mean that all paedophiles will be extinct.
But, at the risk of overstretching the analogy, habitat destruction is normally the prime cause of extinctions

......... · 24-05-2017 9:44pm

recedite wrote: »

In hindsight though, we know that a lot of the religious orders fostered a societal environment favourable to abuse.
If paedophile priests become extinct, I agree it does not mean that all paedophiles will be extinct.
But, at the risk of overstretching the analogy, habitat destruction is normally the prime cause of extinctions

Regretfully, the vast majority of child sexual abuse was and still is every day being carried out by family members behind closed doors. Fathers, brothers, uncles, neighbours etc.

Peregrinus · 25-05-2017 2:15am

......... wrote: »

Regretfully, the vast majority of child sexual abuse was and still is every day being carried out by family members behind closed doors. Fathers, brothers, uncles, neighbours etc.

Yes, of course, but this isn't an either/or thing. We're not required to choose between tackling sexual abuse in an institutional setting while ignoring sexual abuse in families, and vice versa. There clearly was a cultural problem in childcare institutions, and a further cultural problem in the hierarchical church which reinforced and magnified the consequences of the first problem, and the combination of the two was simply catastrophic. To acknowledge that, and to try and do something about it, does not imply that we should ignore or be complacent about familial child abuse.

Ongoing religious scandals

Comments