Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

1114115117119120131

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11 Glined


    marienbad wrote: »
    Aiding and abetting is crime and covers this perfectly. And that is the least of the church's crimes.

    I see you are a new poster - might I ask why would you raise this particular question and in such a peculiar manner ?

    What peculiar manner? My first point was laid out clearly: I see a difference between the Church in her mission ans in other organizations. The claimed 'coverup' is an illusion.

    This 'aiding and abetting' cannot truly be applied to this organization, unlike others, because of the nature of her mission and whom she claims to speak on behalf of, so it is a natural consequence that they attempted, and failed to handle the abuses within their own walls.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,813 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Loathe as I am to quote Margaret Thatcher, but "crime is a crime is a crime".

    It is wilfully ignorant to suggest that moving sexual predators from parish to parish and swearing victims of clerical abuse is anything other than a "cover-up".


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    Loathe as I am to quote Margaret Thatcher, but "crime is a crime is a crime".

    It is wilfully ignorant to suggest that moving sexual predators from parish to parish and swearing victims of clerical abuse is anything other than a "cover-up".

    I don't think he's saying that it wasn't in effect a cover up, what he's claiming is that it wasn't done with criminal intention. I'm not sure if this is better or worse though, Were they fools or knaves?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Glined wrote: »
    What peculiar manner? My first point was laid out clearly: I see a difference between the Church in her mission ans in other organizations. The claimed 'coverup' is an illusion.

    This 'aiding and abetting' cannot truly be applied to this organization, unlike others, because of the nature of her mission and whom she claims to speak on behalf of, so it is a natural consequence that they attempted, and failed to handle the abuses within their own walls.
    Lets allow that there is, or was, no legal failure in not reporting child abuse when it was discovered, this still leaves a couple of issues for the church and its management.

    First of all, I find it difficult to imagine that those in the church did not think that raping children was a bad thing. The excuses that get trotted out, which I fear you are on the verge of using, like "well we didn't understand child abuse" or "we didn't understand what was going on" are fairly weak. The church has some fairly intelligent people working in it, I can't understand how these people could not realise that raping children was wrong and harmful.

    Leading on from this, and still allowing that there legal failure in not reporting the abuse, do you not think the church had a moral obligation to society in general and the victims in particular? That the church could put its own well being before that of the victims of its employees is an absolute disgrace.

    Considering the type of organisation this is, and what they claim to be, some kind of moral guardians, it is arguable that their moral failings in the sex abuse scandal are equally, if not more, serious that any legal failing they may be guilty of.

    And however you might try to paint it, "... they attempted, and failed to handle the abuses within their own walls" there was a coverup. Crimes were committed, these crimes were known but through various mechanisms those crimes were not reported to the the authorities. It is the very definition of a coverup.

    MrP


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,639 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Given the authorian nature of the State of the time and its record of institutional hear no evil/see no evil on what are now considered human rights abuses, the reporting of such matters - which only effected a tiny minority of priests - would have been unlikely have to been effectual given the collusive nature of the Church/State interaction. As well, now the State has taken on the responsible for children rights both here and from trends abroad, the situation has not significantly improved given the broken nature of society (or lack thereof to quote Thatcher.)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Manach wrote: »
    Given the authorian nature of the State of the time and its record of institutional hear no evil/see no evil on what are now considered human rights abuses, the reporting of such matters - which only effected a tiny minority of priests - would have been unlikely have to been effectual given the collusive nature of the Church/State interaction. As well, now the State has taken on the responsible for children rights both here and from trends abroad, the situation has not significantly improved given the broken nature of society (or lack thereof to quote Thatcher.)
    Well, we'll never know, will we, as the church put its reputation and well being above that of its employee's rape victims...

    MrP


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,639 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Well, we'll never know, will we, as the church put its reputation and well being above that of its employee's rape victims...

    MrP
    And that was utterly wrong, but they also had been a support and aid to many other poor vulnerable families in both social and spiritual without categorising them for being poor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Manach wrote: »
    And that was utterly wrong, but they also had been a support and aid to many other poor vulnerable families in both social and spiritual without categorising them for being poor.

    This is what I find so utterly disgraceful and repulsive. Can we for once just state without caveat what was done was wrong .

    By their own beliefs no amount of good works relieves the burden of mortal sin, is that not so ?

    So lets stop this constant equivalence of good works compensating for pure evil.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,813 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Classic whataboutery from Manach there. :rolleyes:

    Ever wondered WHY the State couldn't give two sh*ts about abuse victims?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    Classic whataboutery from Manach there. :rolleyes:

    Ever wondered WHY the State couldn't give two sh*ts about abuse victims?
    Would it be the cost? Same reason as the RCC.
    It could be because no one gave a sh1t about kids at the time. And yes we have to accept that the past is another country, 1950 to 1990 is kinda like the Isl of Man, near enough for us to assume it the same as now but it's not.
    I'm not excusing anyone but to try to understand how stuff like this happened. As Manach pointed out the RCC did a lot of stuff we consider good, in fact the bad and good were done by in many cases the same people.
    What kind of cognitive dissonance was operating, I don't know but they didn't see the world the way we do.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,639 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    marienbad wrote: »
    This is what I find so utterly disgraceful and repulsive.
    ... and if we getting an education on rheothic lets not forget the old faithful of ad hominem.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Manach wrote: »
    ... and if we getting an education on rheothic lets not forget the old faithful of ad hominem.

    just more deflection-sad.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,858 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    400 priests defrocked in one year...Wo, just how many priests are abusers? This is just the tip of the iceberg of course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Manach wrote: »
    ... and if we getting an education on rheothic lets not forget the old faithful of ad hominem.
    How is saying something is disgraceful and repulsive an ad hominem?

    MrP


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,639 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    In that it refers to the poster and not the the substantive topic in hand.

    As well harping on about deflection leaves the overall topic on abuse both focused on church errors and does not address the both the majoritian of child neglect and abuse occurred outside the remit of the Church and allows a mis-informed narrative to emerge which is being used to attack all aspects of the Clergy and Catholic teaching. This child-neglect I've covered during academic readings of reports on Government handling of the issues since the 90s as well as current trends on child care such as the protection of children online.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Manach wrote: »
    In that it refers to the poster and not the the substantive topic in hand.

    As well harping on about deflection leaves the overall topic on abuse both focused on church errors and does not address the both the majoritian of child neglect and abuse occurred outside the remit of the Church and allows a mis-informed narrative to emerge which is being used to attack all aspects of the Clergy and Catholic teaching. This child-neglect I've covered during academic readings of reports on Government handling of the issues since the 90s as well as current trends on child care such as the protection of children online.
    Well, it does not really refer to you, had she said "you are utterly disgusting and repulsive" then you would be correct. What Marien actually did was refer to the views that you stated, she tackled the post and not the poster, as the rules of boards say she should.

    Marien is one of many people that find the typical whatabouttery trotted out by supporters of the church disgusting and repulsive. Trying to justify all the wrongs that the church has done by say, "but they do some good stuff", is pretty disgusting and repulsive, not to mention offensive to the victims and any right thinking person.

    Even your inadequate explaination of how Marien's post is supposed to be an hominem is just yet more whatabouttery. I guess that is all you have when you try to defend the undefendable.

    MrP


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,813 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    The UN have released their report on abuse in the Catholic Church, and it's damning. BBC


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,858 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    The UN also highlighted the Catholic Church's negative attitude towards homosexuality and it's damaging effect on societies. Given the recent Iona controversy, this is very pertinent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,521 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    I'm waiting to see whether the "Holy See's Permanent Observer" at the UN is called home for consultations, given the UN's demand for access to all the Vatican's files on sex-offending clargy and nuns, and all it's files naming those who covered up for the sex offenders.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Rucking_Fetard




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    2% sounds about right, that's 1 in 50 so not that low really. Shame celibacy got mentioned in the same article, it implies some sort of cause and effect. They are two different problems and I hope the pope realizes that celibacy isn't the cause of pedophilia. I think he dose but the media like to toss the two in together.
    It remains to be seen what exactly will be done, expulsion and handing over to relevant authorities or will the church take responsibility for these priests and send them to enclosed orders or something like that. Hard to see any solution that will satisfy everyone or remove the stain this has caused on the churches reputation.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,639 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Quote on news, about the significant proportion of his flock:so it turns out to be 2%. Unfortunately that is about 2% too much but roughly in line with what I've read/studied on the general population when it comes to such crimes against children.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    Its about 4% in the general population.

    2 % too many is right. I wonder what it is now though with the new childcare safeguards in place.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,521 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    In a highly unusual move, senior Vatican spokesman, Fr Federico Lombardi, intervened yesterday to deny comments allegedly made by Pope Francis to Rome daily, La Repubblica, in relation to the issues of clerical sex abuse and priestly celibacy. He explained that it was a result of the former editor using his memory of the interview, which Fr Lombardi said was NOT reocorded.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/lombardi-denies-sex-abuse-comments-attributed-to-pope-1.1865094


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    Its sadly reached the point now where newspaper reports cannot be trusted.
    The basic principles of Journalism, along with basic source and fact checking, seems to have gone out the window.
    The press only quote and report what suits.
    Investigative journalism now seems completely extinct and has been replaced by empty opinion pieces.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,521 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Citizen Kane would roll in his grave.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    You don't have to go back that far. Nixon would have remained untouchable and in power for another few years if today's lack of journalism standards and investigative journalism were in vogue then, which is history changing really, and not for the better. . . . I guess we'll never know the true impact of today's lack of quality journalism. It's not the professions fault, instead of just printing an accurate narrative and facts, and letting people make their own minds up, newspaper owners now want their opinions and world-view presented and little else. The fast pace and instant demand of on line news also means quickly copying emerging stories, edited to suit owner approved opinions, and then worry about the facts later. Churnalism it's called in the trade.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    You don't have to go back that far. Nixon would have remained untouchable and in power for another few years if today's lack of journalism standards and investigative journalism were in vogue then, which is history changing really, and not for the better. . . . I guess we'll never know the true impact of today's lack of quality journalism. It's not the professions fault, instead of just printing an accurate narrative and facts, and letting people make their own minds up, newspaper owners now want their opinions and world-view presented and little else. The fast pace and instant demand of on line news also means quickly copying emerging stories, edited to suit owner approved opinions, and then worry about the facts later. Churnalism it's called in the trade.

    Well cost is a big factor, it's cheaper to publish parsed press releases (and in many cases verbatim press releases). I don't think it's an agenda as such to spin stories, more an attempt at sensationalism and appealing to the perceived basis of the target market. Unfortunately media is entertainment and that includes news. We seem to respond to emotion and sensation more than to information.
    I wouldn't dismiss the entire story as the result of this trend though, obviously the story has been sexed up a bit but it shows that these matters are being discussed and considered.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    tommy2bad wrote: »
    Well cost is a big factor, it's cheaper to publish parsed press releases (and in many cases verbatim press releases). I don't think it's an agenda as such to spin stories, more an attempt at sensationalism and appealing to the perceived basis of the target market. Unfortunately media is entertainment and that includes news. We seem to respond to emotion and sensation more than to information.
    I wouldn't dismiss the entire story as the result of this trend though, obviously the story has been sexed up a bit but it shows that these matters are being discussed and considered.

    with the wages journalists are paid, its buttons, the integrity of newspaper owners just isn't there, factless tabloid style rules in broadsheet now.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    with the wages journalists are paid, its buttons, the integrity of newspaper owners just isn't there, factless tabloid style rules in broadsheet now.

    Yeah and the fact we always rush to judge the messenger and not the crime doesn't help.


Advertisement