The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

PDN · 20-03-2010 2:26pm

Ghost Buster wrote: »

you must answer for it before Almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals.
But what about answering before the law or, as seems apparent, is the Church outside the reach of state law?

That's up to the civil authorities. The Pope has no jurisdiction or authority to make pronouncements about what will happen under the Irish legal system. He can only talk from his own perspective as a church leader.

looksee · 20-03-2010 2:29pm

As I read the letter I thought there was some good, sincere thoughts in it, but as I read on I was rather saddened to see that the vast bulk of the letter was about rescuing the church.
While I can see that this would be important to the faithful, surely it would have been more appropriate in a separate letter/document.
I tried to read it sympathetically, but I am afraid by the time I got to the end I was thinking - they are still missing the point.
And there was no reference to the culpability of the Pope (of the time) in being the person with authority to amend Canon law and remove the veil of secrecy. In any civil situation this would be a resigning matter, but of course we are talking about the Church, and the rules don't apply.

Ghost Buster · 20-03-2010 2:38pm

PDN wrote: »

That's up to the civil authorities. The Pope has no jurisdiction or authority to make pronouncements about what will happen under the Irish legal system. He can only talk from his own perspective as a church leader.

Im not suggesting the Pope has any jurasdiction any more than I do but morally if I was in his shoes I think I would address one of the burning issues for many that being that the church regards canon law as more important than state law.
Wouldnt it be a little apt for him to reccomend that Church leaders respect the law of the land and turn in paedophiles rather than deal with it (or not) themselves?

Ghost Buster · 20-03-2010 2:40pm

Originally Posted by PDN
That's up to the civil authorities
Indeed it is but they cant act if they dont get informed

marty1985 · 20-03-2010 2:40pm

I am relieved by his words and apology, I know it's too little too late, but I think it might be remembered as a turning point. I think the priests who have to read it will be relieved too that it actually says sorry.

PDN · 20-03-2010 2:42pm

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Im not suggesting the Pope has any jurasdiction any more than I do but morally if I was in his shoes I think I would address one of the burning issues for many that being that the church regards canon law as more important than state law.
Wouldnt it be a little apt for him to reccomend that Church leaders respect the law of the land and turn in paedophiles rather than deal with it (or not) themselves?

As I understand it that has already been done. Procedures are in place within the Church instructing leaders to report all allegations of child abuse to the Garda. The purpose of this statement was obviously to apologise to the victims and to encourage the many ordinary Catholics who are hurt and confused by what has happened.

prinz · 20-03-2010 2:47pm

Ciaran500 wrote: »

What are they? They don't have to take out an add just make the information available.

They are there to be researched.

taconnol wrote: »

Er..you just said that we are not "privy" to them... Either they are made public or they are not. They're not Amish - they can use the internet if they want to broadcast the changes widely.

Either are you presumably so go use the internet and find out.

taconnol wrote: »

And you wouldn't tell a survivor of abuse to wander down to their local RCC priest for a chat about this.

Survivors of abuse are dealingwith the Church day in day out.

checkyabadself · 20-03-2010 2:48pm

PDN wrote: »

The Pope has no jurisdiction or authority to make pronouncements about what will happen under the Irish legal system.

I`m sure he has the power to remove every single paedophile reported and convicted and anyone who aided and abetted paedophile priests from his church. Surely he has the power to do that much.

He could order an inquiry to purge the ranks of paedophiles, but lets get real, he himself was involved in the cover up.

It`s too late, the mountain of reports from VICTIMS (not survivors) will ensure that it`ll be years if not decades of headlines until each single victim has been heard.

dunleakelleher · 20-03-2010 2:49pm

prinz wrote: »

er yes that is the point of a Pastoral Letter.

Oh please do be a such a smart a#$. This a serious issue. One can also discipline, call people to account and call for resignations in a letter.

prinz wrote: »

There have been massive changes within the Church, that those of us outside of it are not privy to.

The RCC is made up of the ordinary people of the Church. Only a minute percentage are clergy. So if the majority of the Church are not privy to those changes it really means nothing and nothing will change..
Remember Vatican II was fundamental in giving the Church back to the ordinary people from the hierarchy of the Church.

Macha · 20-03-2010 2:57pm

prinz wrote: »

Either are you presumably so go use the internet and find out.

I don't think you get it. The onus is on the Church to demonstrate that it has changed, not for people like me to go running around trying to figure out if they've decided that I can be "privy" to their internal procedural changes.

prinz wrote: »

Survivors of abuse are dealingwith the Church day in day out.

Good for them. Thousands are not. To suggest that one has to go to a RCC priest to find out what the Church has implemented is inconsiderate to those that do not want to have direct contact with the Church.

prinz · 20-03-2010 3:03pm

dunleakelleher wrote: »

Oh please do be a such a smart a#$. This a serious issue. One can also discipline, call people to account and call for resignations in a letter.

A pastoral letter to the congregation is not the time or place to call for a resignation. One the one hand you claim it is a serious issue on the other hand you want it treated like some sort of circus, which is it? Would you expect your boss to send an email around the company telling them that he is calling for your resignation? Or would you expect him to come to you.

dunleakelleher wrote: »

The RCC is made up of the ordinary people of the Church. Only a minute percentage are clergy. So if the majority of the Church are not privy to those changes it really means nothing and nothing will change.. .

These changes mean nothing will change?

checkyabadself wrote: »

I`m sure he has the power to remove every single paedophile reported and convicted and anyone who aided and abetted paedophile priests from his church. Surely he has the power to do that much.He could order an inquiry to purge the ranks of paedophiles, but lets get real, he himself was involved in the cover up.

Did you miss the part about a visitation? The Vatican is getting involved on the ground here so that outsiders can come in and try to clean up. About time too.

taconnol wrote: »

I don't think you get it. The onus is on the Church to demonstrate that it has changed, not for people like me to go running around trying to figure out if they've decided that I can be "privy" to their internal procedural changes.

Would you listen even when they do? People over on another thread aren't even bothered reading the Pastoral Letter, apparently all waffle/too long etc. The same people complain that the Church hasn't done x,y and z, when in fact it has.

taconnol wrote: »

Good for them. Thousands are not. To suggest that one has to go to a RCC priest to find out what the Church has implemented is inconsiderate to those that do not want to have direct contact with the Church.

Like I said, the internet is wonderful. Of course you could also go down to the local pub where there is no doubt an armchair Vatican expert.

Macha · 20-03-2010 3:07pm

prinz wrote: »

Would you listen even when they do? People over on another thread aren't even bothered reading the Pastoral Letter, apparently all waffle/too long etc. The same people complain that the Church hasn't done x,y and z, when in fact it has.

So...your argument is the Church doesn't need to publicize the changes it has implemented to make sure this doesn't happen every again because we wouldn't bother listening anyway. What utter nonsense. What has it done? Where have the changes been instigated? Where are the mandatory reportings of abuse to the authorities?

prinz wrote: »

Like I said, the internet is wonderful. Of course you could also go down to the local pub where there is no doubt an armchair Vatican expert.

So provide a link. Your comments about the pub are quite irrelevant to this debate.

You seem far, far too willing to dismiss people who want answers. The Church has a very bad history of having a similar attitude.

checkyabadself · 20-03-2010 3:12pm

prinz wrote: »

Did you miss the part about a visitation? The Vatican is getting involved on the ground here so that outsiders can come in and try to clean up. About time too.

With respect, I`ll believe it when I see it. If he does remove every paedophile priest, or lets face it, even one, I`ll be amazed. He was involved in the cover up so I dont see how he`s going to start kicking priests out of the church, without himself going too. He did after all send a letter to bishops(not 100%, might have been cardinals) requiring secrecy about cases of abuse a few years back. That makes todays letter hypocritical.

Galwaymother · 20-03-2010 3:14pm

I am not a Catholic, nor a Christian, and from my standpoint, it is too little, too late, indeed. Child sex abuse, i.e. rape (of minors), has been recognised and illegal for hundred of years, and the Catholic Church has tried to confuse the matter for too long. Personally, I can't wait for the time when Church and State will be truly separate in Ireland, and people will be able to make an informed decision about their belief-system and attitudes, without the weight of social pressure to conform. Too many of my own acquaintances go along with the sacraments without an iota of real belief, just because they feel this pressure, and have no alternative world-view to give meaning to their lives. It's either Christianity or a moral vacuum in this country! Time to construct a more flexible sense of identity, less reliant on religious beliefs, I think...

Ciaran500 · 20-03-2010 3:24pm

prinz wrote: »

Would you listen even when they do? People over on another thread aren't even bothered reading the Pastoral Letter, apparently all waffle/too long etc. The same people complain that the Church hasn't done x,y and z, when in fact it has.

Complete bull. Some people not reading it is not a reason to not publicise any changes.

So, have any changes been made publicly?

dunleakelleher · 20-03-2010 3:24pm

prinz wrote: »

Would you expect your boss to send an email around the company telling them that he is calling for your resignation?

I would if I raped the kids of my fellow employees.

prinz wrote: »

These changes mean nothing will change?

Oh do answer my point please, and stop fluffing around.

Here it is again.

prinz wrote:

There have been massive changes within the Church, that those of us outside of it are not privy to.

The RCC is made up of the ordinary people of the Church. Only a minute percentage are clergy. So if the majority of the Church are not privy to those changes it really means nothing and nothing will change..
Remember Vatican II was fundamental in giving the Church back to the ordinary people from the hierarchy of the Church.

prinz · 20-03-2010 3:35pm

taconnol wrote: »

So...your argument is the Church doesn't need to publicize the changes it has implemented to make sure this doesn't happen every again because we wouldn't bother listening anyway. What utter nonsense. What has it done? Where have the changes been instigated? Where are the mandatory reportings of abuse to the authorities?

I ask the priests of the diocese and the Parish Pastoral Councils to ensure that the wide reaching measures introduced into our parishes and organizations regarding the safeguarding of children are rigorously observed and constantly verified and updated. This scandal must be an occasion for all of us to be vigilant so that the abuse of children - wherever it takes place in our society - is addressed and the correct measures are taken promptly.

It is important to repeat that anyone with information regarding child sexual abuse by priests in Dublin makes contact with the Child Protection Service of the Diocese, the Garda Síochána, the Health Service Executive or a counselling or support service of their choice.

Archbishop Martin reiterates an appeal, made many times before, that anyone with information regarding child sexual abuse by priests in Dublin makes contact with the Child Protection Service of the Diocese, the Garda Síochána, the Health Service Executive or a counselling or support service of their choice. It is only by knowing the full truth of the past can we improve the levels of safety for children today.

Safeguarding children in the Dublin Diocese
26th November 2009
In Brief

The Archdiocese of Dublin operates Children First – State Child Protection Guidelines -in conjunction with Church Guidelines.

The Child Protection Service in the Diocese has two main objectives; to minimise the possibility of abuse happening, and if it does to maximise the possibility of detection.

It is Diocesan policy to report all allegations of child sexual abuse to the civil authorities.

Every parish in the Archdiocese of Dublin has a trained child protection representative in place.

2,100 parish volunteers and Diocesan Organisation personnel and volunteers have participated in the Keeping Safe programme as licensed by the VDA (Volunteer Development Agency) and used by the HSE.

7,065 personnel have taken part in the Garda Vetting Process. This includes clergy, parish workers and volunteers, Diocesan agency workers and volunteers and ancillary staff in catholic schools. (Teachers are vetted by the Teaching Council)

All Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Dublin, like every other school in the country, are required to implement the State Child Protection guidelines, Children First. The Dublin Diocesan Education secretariat has also carried out training for Boards of Management in Dublin Catholic schools to ensure best practice in child protection. This is monitored on an ongoing basis.

The Archbishop ensures that no priest is permitted to minister in the Diocese against whom an allegation has been made, who is considered by the Diocesan Child Protection Service, Diocesan Advisory Panel, the HSE or the Gardai to be a risk to children.

Priests who are out of ministry as a result of child protection concerns are required to co-operate with a monitoring system operated by the Child Protection Service .
The Gardai and the HSE are kept informed of the support systems put in place for priests who are out of ministry and are notified of any changes in their circumstances.

All taken at a glance from press releases on the Dublin Archdiocese website. But you're right, nothing has changed..

Macha · 20-03-2010 3:40pm

prinz wrote: »

All taken at a glance from press releases on the Dublin Archdiocese website. But you're right, nothing has changed..

Please point out where I said nothing had changed.

There is a really bad attitude towards questioning the actions of the Church. It is not healthy.

Blueboyd · 20-03-2010 3:48pm

How about appologising for the Vatican issuing a letter in 1922 and reisuing it in 1962 to all bishops of the world how to keep all abuse secret. How about appologising for the letter he sent personally to all the bishops of the world in 2001 where he told the issue of child sexual abuse should be dealt purely inside the church and all data should be sent to him directly and kept all details secret. How about admitting that in each country where RCC operates all national laws should be respected and in all cases without any exceptions the national law takes place over canonical law. How about appolgising that those who kept these hideous crimes secret locally were only following the orders of the Vatican and he personally was to blame of all cover ups that has happened.

looksee · 20-03-2010 5:03pm

I have just read the document linked in Blueboyd's post. If it is indeed a real document, and it certainly appears to be, then there is no wonder Bishop Brady felt that reporting to his superior was as much as he need do.

The implications in that document are staggering by current thinking, and it would be appropriate for the Pope to state that it has been withdrawn. It is apparent that the current letter does not require that clergy have a civil responsibility for the reporting of offenses. What is especially bizarre is that the victim is under pain of excommunication to report offences within a month (thats how I read it anyway) but the accused is not to be required to take an oath to tell the truth. And under NO circumstances is it suggested that any matter be dealt with other than by ecclesiastical law.

ISAW · 20-03-2010 6:00pm

dunleakelleher wrote: »

ISAW. Can I ask you for your personal view to a very simple question?
Do you think it is acceptable or not acceptable for a person not to report a child abuser to the police?

You present a tabloid newspaper headline type situation. You even put it in bold.

In 2010 it is child abuse should be reported.
some things were not illegal in the past which are nowadays.

We can't judge something in the past based today's standards.

Nor do I subscribe to Whig history.

Whether in every case today it should instantly be reported to the police or to social service I don't know. It certainly should be in almost every case I would think.

Consider for example where an adult patient in a hospital is "abusing" younger people. the staff of the hospital should be probably first called. whether one should then go to the police i don't know. This would be akin to the institutional abuse in the 1970s. You might trust the staff to deal with it.

Also just suppose it was not a crime as rape was not a crime against a male in 1977. would that make it right? I think it wouldn't. so just being illegal isn't the criterion for it being wrong.

second what about "suspected" child abuse. You have to be quite carefull here. if for example you accuse a sports or swimming instructor in the wrong then you could ruin their career and if they prove that, then your company (say for example a sports club) could be in liquidation because of a false rape claim or similar. it is very easy to moralise about what is right and wrong but in practice there are ramifications which you may not have considered.

An adult having sexual relations with a child however is always wrong in my opinion even if it is allowed under law. But then we are into what is an adult or a child? I woudl consider that when ther are no sewcondary sexual charachteristics then we a re talking about a child.

I woudl have sympathy for the man in the CC (i think) case . I dont approve of what he did but i donbt consider it rape. He met a 14 year old in a night club. The 14 year old was admitted and was drinking there and he thought she was eighteen and to him she looked 18. he had sex with her. i think that is wrong but I would still not be happy if she was eighteen and it was legal for him to do so.

so it isn't quite so "simple" as you might imagine.

dunleakelleher · 20-03-2010 6:22pm

ISAW wrote: »

some things were not illegal in the past which are nowadays.

I disagree but
Thank you for your personal view.

My personal view is raping a child is a crime even in the 70s and should be reported to the police.
I don't think i would like to continue a conversation with you. But thank you for your input.

Now back to the original post.
the support of the Primates Position.
Is the pope saying in his letter that he does not support the primates position.
The Pope said "Nevertheless, it must be admitted that grave errors of judgement were made and failures of leadership occurred. All this has seriously undermined your credibility and effectiveness"
Well can you have a leader of the Church in Ireland with
serious undermined credibility and effectiveness.

Blueboyd · 20-03-2010 6:33pm

Offences against the State Act 1939

17.—(1) Every person who shall administer or cause to be administered or take part in, be present at, or consent to the administering or taking in any form or manner of any oath, declaration, or engagement purporting or intended to bind the person taking the same to do all or any of the following things, that is to say:—
( a ) to commit or to plan, contrive, promote, assist, or conceal the commission of any crime or any breach of the peace, or
( d ) to abstain from disclosing or giving information of the Commission or intended or proposed commission of any crime, breach of the peace, or from informing or giving evidence against the person who committed such an act,

james finn · 20-03-2010 7:01pm

the 1970s are gone, its 2010 and yes it was bad form but why keep going on about it, whats done is done.

--amadeus-- · 20-03-2010 8:23pm

Claiming that what happened wasn't rape is below contemptable. Like dunleakelleher I have no interest in discussing morality with someone who's concept of right and wrong is so out of kilter with the norm.

james finn · 20-03-2010 8:28pm

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Claiming that what happened wasn't rape is below contemptable. Like dunleakelleher I have no interest in discussing morality with someone who's concept of right and wrong is so out of kilter with the norm.

yes its rape but what do we do, talk about it till we die or make the change and move on cos its on tv-radio everyday, you have to get to a point where you say enough is enough move on.

Orion · 20-03-2010 9:48pm

prinz wrote: »

There have been massive changes within the Church, that those of us outside of it are not privy to.

Aren't all catholics part of the church not outside it? I may be an atheist but I have read and do understand your bible. I cannot remember the chapter in it that states that only the frocked are part of the church :rolleyes:

my 2c - it's a letter that basically says "sorry now stfu". IMO Ratzinger is a lame duck pope. He's been implicated himself and has proven that this corruption goes all the way to the top. There wasn't even an implied criticism of Brady or any of the archbishops or cardinals that participated willingly in various cover-ups of child abuse. Basically it is a waste of ink.

On the plus side it probably will cause more people to leave the RCC as it being exposed more and more as a corrupt organisation that will do everything in its power to protect that power.

PDN wrote: »

That's up to the civil authorities. The Pope has no jurisdiction or authority to make pronouncements about what will happen under the Irish legal system. He can only talk from his own perspective as a church leader.

That is true. I do not blame the catholic church for the lack of prosecutions - that is our fault for allowing our politicians to protect these bastards.

aleybert · 20-03-2010 10:11pm

Macros42 wrote: »

That is true. I do not blame the catholic church for the lack of prosecutions - that is our fault for allowing our politicians to protect these bastards.

Couldn't agree more. However, I do blame the church for probably being the most corrupt evil organisation in the world today.
The answer of "sure theres good priests as well as bad" line doesn't work anymore. They work for this organisation, so are guilty by association. THATS how rotten to the core the church is. Its not just the child beatings and child rapes that makes me sick, its the excusing and condoning of it, that is just as evil.
The popes letter doesn't help anyone. Marching every paedophile up to the police station might.

dunleakelleher · 20-03-2010 10:22pm

Macros42 wrote: »

Aren't all catholics part of the church not outside it?

prinz. Seems to refuse to answer that point by many different posters here. But maybe prinz made that comment by mistake. So if so that is not an issue we all make mistakes. And as we know in the catholic church we can all make mistakes and sometimes even our leaders refuse to analogue them. And as our pope told us today Its all part of being a good catholic.

Fanny Cradock · 20-03-2010 10:27pm

goat2 wrote: »

no one will go to jail
none of the victims will receive the substantial damages they deserve
this is all in avoiding paying up

You don't actually know any of this. For what is is now worth, people have gone to jail and settlements have be agreed. I see no reason to think that this wont continue.

The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

Comments