(Merged) RC Child Abuse Issues/Comments

luckat

Just listening to Drivetime's report on the systematic child abuse by Catholic clergy.

It seems to me that the church that protected serial rapists and murderers (there are graveyards of children in those 'reformatories') for decades could not possibly believe the words of Jesus.

If anyone really believed them, they would immediately say: "Quick, let us sell everything we have and put every resource at our command into healing the harm done to helpless children."

The Catholic Church has done the opposite. It has threatened and bullied anyone who tried to make it face its responsibilities, and it has slithered out of paying for its employees' rapes, beatings and torture.

Discuss.

Mark Hamill

I am deeply offended by anyone stupid enough to think that protecting serial rapists and murderers is something that an atheist would do because he doesnt believe in Jesus. You, sir, are a moron.

Overheal

Im not sure business laws apply. Hence clergy arent employees are they.

edit: and that ^ just because someones an Atheist does not make them immoral. We've been doing this dance for decades if not centuries.

luckat

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I am deeply offended by anyone stupid enough to think that protecting serial rapists and murderers is something that an atheist would do because he doesnt believe in Jesus. You, sir, are a moron.

You, sir, have misunderstood what I said.

PDN

Ho ho! Try to rile up the Catholics in the Christianity forum and end up upsetting the atheists. Classic!

Overheal

luckat wrote: »

You, sir, have misunderstood what I said.

im not sure he has.

luckat

Indeed he has.

Of course I'm not saying "to be an atheist is to be a child abuser".

I'm saying that if Catholic clergy believed the reported words of the person they have pledged to follow, they would immediately pull out all the stops to heal what has been done by their church.

Since they don't do that, obviously they don't believe a word of what Jesus said.

JoeB-

Yes, I too am sickened at what I heard.

The correct charge to level at the perpetrators is that they are hypocrites.. that they stand up and say sex is bad, homesexual sex is worse, taking advantage of a minor is worse, and yet they have colluded to do all three simultaneausly. And the bishops etc don't seem to care, and have covered it up as best they can.

It is sickening, completely sickening. I have detested the hyprocrisy of the Catholic Church for a long time, the scale of it just makes it worse. I can hardly stand the sight of your man Benedict.. .and I, as a cynic, don't accept that knowledge of these horrible events didn't go a long way up the ladder.

It's the hypocrisy that really kills me.

Genghiz Cohen

luckat wrote: »

Since they don't do that, obviously they don't believe a word of what Jesus said.

Or they are sick twisted freaks.

luckat

That's too easy. That suggests that they're 'not like me' and gives them a get-out.

But these are people who taught children that if they 'sinned', they must have 'a sincere desire for repentance' and must make reparation if they were to have God's forgiveness.

Where is that repentance? Where is that reparation?

homer911

In the interests of not bashing Catholosism(?) I'm quite sure other established churches have had their "fair share" of abuse cases but have been better at covering them up, simply because of their minority status

Genghiz Cohen

homer911 wrote: »

In the interests of not bashing Catholosism(?) I'm quite sure other established churches have had their "fair share" of abuse cases but have been better at covering them up, simply because of their minority status

If there has ever been an institution in power that has not abused that power I will eat a live ferret. The abuse has nothing to do with the teachings of the Catholic church as a whole. Revered men were put in positions of power without any supervision. They were never checked up on and did monstrous things.
The only place blame can be assigned to the church is the cover up of it. That part is still horrendous.

bluecell99

The catholics who did this and their protectors are dirty,filthy ,stinking scum.

Their supporters are also sick scum and will eventually face justice.

PDN

While the subject of child abuse makes everybody understandably angry let's observe the Forum Charter please.

bluecell99 is taking a holiday from this forum.

luckat

Yes, I'm sure there was abuse in Protestant institutions. But saying "yes, but" isn't adequate to the revelations today. It is so sickening.

And it is not in the past until reparation is made.

Mark Hamill

luckat wrote: »

Indeed he has.

Of course I'm not saying "to be an atheist is to be a child abuser".

I'm saying that if Catholic clergy believed the reported words of the person they have pledged to follow, they would immediately pull out all the stops to heal what has been done by their church.

Since they don't do that, obviously they don't believe a word of what Jesus said.

But plenty of people dont believe the word of Jesus: Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims etc. But you didn't title this thread: "Is the Irish Catholic Church Jewish?" or "is the Irish Catholic Church Buddhist?" Or even "Is the Irish Catholic Church Christian?". Your titled implies that its an atheistic view of Jesus that leads people to rape, murder, bullying and the protection of those that do, and its that view which is moronic.

I agree thats its hypocritical and wrong for the Catholic Church to protect those of its members who abused their power, which i believe is your point, but your thread title is awful.

Overheal

bluecell99 wrote: »

The catholics who did this and their protectors are dirty,filthy ,stinking scum.

Their supporters are also sick scum and will eventually face justice.

Im sure you dont mean catholic followers but rather those in the church that facilitated them/covered it up? I dont see anyone else supporting their actions.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

But plenty of people dont believe the word of Jesus: Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims etc. But you didn't title this thread: "Is the Irish Catholic Church Jewish?" or "is the Irish Catholic Church Buddhist?" Or even "Is the Irish Catholic Church Christian?". Your titled implies that its an atheistic view of Jesus that leads people to rape, murder, bullying and the protection of those that do, and its that view which is moronic.

Though he misconstrued that, the OP has gone on to explain the titling was unintentional as it stands. cut him a break already.

luckat

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I agree thats its hypocritical and wrong for the Catholic Church to protect those of its members who abused their power, which i believe is your point, but your thread title is awful.

Sorry about that.

KINGVictor

I was very unfortunate to listen to a victim of these atrousities on RTE 6 O'Clock news (Christine Buckley) and it sent shivers down my spine.It was so unbelievable as I listened to the horrific and horrendous actions that took place (and most probably taking place till today in our society today,albeit in a more organised fashion).

As a Christain ( and proud to be one),I was mortified by some of the allegations that were made against these Catholic institutions.Initially I thought the allegations were exaggerations and I would beg for the forgiveness of the victims as no one can properly comprehend the effects these actions must have had on their lives and I think it is about time the Catholic church takes ownership and responsiblity for these despicable crimes,it is very apparent that even the leadership of the church was somewhat culpable as they could have investigated this allegations and should have the taken neccesary actions at the time rather than let it degenerate into the present messy situation.

One poster mentioned he hoped that this report would eventually lead to Godless Ireland..I completely disagree.Despite all these we cannot make blanket judgements and imply that the country as a whole has not benefitted from Christainity,a lot of homeless,poor,and vulnerable people who have been aided by the church in their hour of need would certainly disagree.

Yes some elements in the Catholic church have been disgraceful and utterly unbecoming in their behaviour but they should not used as a yardstick for judging the entire church...that would simply be very myopic.One of the fundamental tenet of the Christain religion is that everyone has a free will and as such cannot and should not be coerced to believe in God ( unlike a lot of other religions).Out of every 12 ,there is a Judas and it is absolutely impossible to police every person to examine if they are adhering to the rules and regulations of the Church.

In recent times,I have come to the conclusion that peodophilism has been very prevailent and endemic in Europe (although we dont like to hear or acknowledge that fact) and it has eaten very deep to the fabric of the society.I had a discussion with a friend of mine who was researching on this topic and he told me that it is common practise in some places in Ireland ( although it is never talked about or mentioned for fear of stigmatisation).

The honest truth is that if we could pursue with the same vigour in which the Catholic Institutions were scrutinized ( and I totally agree it was neccessary) and try to investigate everyone who has been abused physically ,emotionally and sexually by family members,the results would be shocking!!! and probably a lot more .

Christine Buckely made an interesting statement today when she said the girls in her school were been offered to outsiders for sexual purposes, so essentially I would not be surprised that a lot of the people that carried out some of this violations were people on the outside and that would explain why this was covered up for so long.

In summary,I think we should look at this as a systematic failure as a country and not just take swipes at Christains...as we have heard of Judges,gardai,teachers,lawyers,doctors,bricklayers,Christains,Atheists etc that have been guilty of the same.It is more of a social problem than a religious one.

waves

KINGVictor wrote: »

In summary,I think we should look at this as a systematic failure as a country and not just take swipes at Christains...as we have heard of Judges,gardai,teachers,lawyers,doctors,bricklayers,Christains,Atheists etc that have been guilty of the same.It is more of a social problem than a religious one.

Yes, in a society that was influenced by the Church.

I could never understand how parents of children who were abused went to the bishops rather than to the police but that was what they were brought up to believe...

And sure the police and the Govt were in thrall to the church as well and they weren't going to rock the boat.

And maybe there is such a problem with incest and abuse due to the way sex was taught, or not taught, in our schools over the last number of decades.

Remember, there were victims complaining about the abuse - I can't imagine that it was the non Catholics who were holding up reporting it, getting it dealt with and covering it all up.....

luckat

The Catholic Church spent 40 years

* moving abusers on, after complaints, to new parishes where they continued to abuse
* hiding documentation of complaints
* denying the evidence of people who had been abused
* refusing to give compensation
* denying any responsibility

The knowledge and the responsibility goes right up to the Vatican, where papers were found revealing many years of abuse.

Muddying the waters with "oh, but it happens in lots of places" is not good enough. The Catholic Church is responsible for fostering the abuse that was revealed in todays 2,500-page series of testimonies.

When with the Church make reparation?

waves

luckat wrote: »

When with the Church make reparation?

And when will the ordinary Catholics of this country demand action against the members who perpetrated these crimes?

O'Coonassa

luckat wrote: »

The Catholic Church is responsible for fostering the abuse that was revealed in todays 2,500-page series of testimonies.

TBH the Irish Nation as a whole is to blame. If people hadn't generally been such fawning craven sycophants to those in 'holy orders' then this could never have happened. It's all very well to palm it off on the Church alone but the entire rotten social fabric of Dev's Ireland is what really lies behind it all IMO.

postcynical

This was anticipated and there was little shock in the announcement today. Even the initial anger is gone. It's almost routine now.

How could God let this happen?

How could people do this who were ostentatiously acting in the name of Christ?

How could God let them do this?

As a Catholic, how could Christ let this happen to His Church?

How could our bishops cover up these horrible acts. This part still angers me. Everything should come out into the open. What motivated the bishops to act in this way? Was it evil? Naivety? Laziness? The cowardly belief that by hiding a problem it would go away? Everything comes to light. Even this darkness will lead to light. But a lot of innocent people suffered. The weakest, the most vulnerable. Why did they get such a cross to bear?

As a Catholic I'm very upset today. But I'll get over it without any psychological trauma unlike those who were abused in the name of the one I follow.

The Church is not atheist, nor is it evil which is probably what you meant. The beating and kicking which the Irish Catholic Church has been getting and will continue to get will improve it. The same treatment does not work on a child.

Until the Church brings all the facts to light it cannot be repentant and cannot be forgiven. The past cannot be undone but Catholics are now charged with an extra mission to prevent such horrors today and tomorrow in our society.

May the Lord's healing touch come to those who are hurt.

luckat

O'Coonassa wrote: »

TBH the Irish Nation as a whole is to blame. If people hadn't generally been such fawning craven sycophants to those in 'holy orders' then this could never have happened. It's all very well to palm it off on the Church alone but the entire rotten social fabric of Dev's Ireland is what really lies behind it all IMO.

O'Coonassa, I don't think you're right, with respect.

Let us not try to share the blame that belongs to the 800 abusers and those who actively sheltered them, their bosses in the Catholic Church.

To do so dilutes their guilt.

But if you want to do something, you - and all other Catholics - could write a letter of protest to your bishop, cardinal and pope, cc-ing it to the heads of the religious orders, demanding - not asking, demanding - that land and goods be sold immediately, without bargaining or wriggling or lying - and the money be given to the fund to compensate the Church's victims.

And if you want to feel comfortable that this has ended now, forget it. Many children go missing each year from the care of the Health Boards; it is thought that many are trafficked into brothels. There's a whole new can of worms waiting for us.

O'Coonassa

luckat wrote: »

O'Coonassa, I don't think you're right, with respect.

Let us not try to share the blame that belongs to the 800 abusers and those who actively sheltered them, their bosses in the Catholic Church.

To do so dilutes their guilt.

But if you want to do something, you - and all other Catholics -

Er..I totally despise the Church that the Normans brought here. It made me not believe in God for a long time. But if it was entirely the RC Church that was responsible for this horror then why has it not happened to this extent in any other country?

O'Coonassa

luckat wrote: »

And if you want to feel comfortable that this has ended now, forget it. Many children go missing each year from the care of the Health Boards; it is thought that many are trafficked into brothels. There's a whole new can of worms waiting for us.

Sorry, but if that's true, it kind of proves my point about the problem not being with the Church per se but with the nation.

luckat

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Sorry, but if that's true, it kind of proves my point about the problem not being with the Church per se but with the nation.

It's true. What are you going to do about it, O'Coonassa?

O'Coonassa

luckat wrote: »

It's true. What are you going to do about it, O'Coonassa?

Point my finger in the right direction I guess instead of trying to palm it all off on the RC Church.

Tim Robbins

luckat wrote: »

Just listening to Drivetime's report on the systematic child abuse by Catholic clergy.

It seems to me that the church that protected serial rapists and murderers (there are graveyards of children in those 'reformatories') for decades could not possibly believe the words of Jesus.

I've received infractions in this forum for saying a lot less than what you've just said and implied in your thread title.

You're a disgrace.

luckat

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Point my finger in the right direction I guess instead of trying to palm it all off on the RC Church.

You're absolutely right - the State was the employer of these people, and paid them, and failed to inspect the schools and reformatories, and supplied them with their baby victims.

When Henry Moore (a priest, I think?) made a report to the Department of Education on the conditions in Artane, the Department colluded with the Church in rubbishing it.

But the rapists and tormentors of the children were employees of the Catholic Church - oh, I know they don't use that word, but they were and are employees.

And the Church did - and does - suppress information, and refuse to compensate its employees' victims.

If this were a worldwide computer firm, say, you wouldn't be able to hear yourself for the howls of rage and demands for it to be stripped of every penny. The Catholic Church is just another employer, and should be forced to compensate for its employees' actions, and for its own actions in backing its employees rather than its victims.

philologos

This has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ, or of His church (the Christian Church in general). I'm appalled by this, and I'm appalled that people are not only abusing children which is certainly the worst part but destroying the image of Christianity in Ireland. They should be getting jail time. People who do this generally don't get away with abusing children so why should they? This gets right down to the bottom of my stomach.

EDIT: To the atheists, lighten up, much worse about Christians and Christianity has been posted in the A&A forum and in After Hours.

robindch

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

The abuse has nothing to do with the teachings of the Catholic church as a whole.

I'm not so sure about that.

Part of the problem seems to have been that the church sincerely believed its own teachings about itself and saw itself as an organization which was incapable of making a mistake. This was not helped by things like the doctrine of papal infallibility and the personality of the church leaders, particularly McQuaid, who exuded political power and were not afraid to use it whenever it suited them.

In such circumstances, it's not surprising that the church as a whole, and almost everybody in it, were simply unable to see, and unable to appreciate, that they were doing enormous harm to many people.

Flamed Diving

The fact that the govt took a payment in exchange for indemnity makes it all the worse. It shows you how complicit both state and church were in all of this.

Genghiz Cohen

robindch wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that.

Part of the problem seems to have been that the church sincerely believed its own teachings about itself and saw itself as an organization which was incapable of making a mistake. This was not helped by things like the doctrine of papal infallibility and the personality of the church leaders, particularly McQuaid, who exuded political power and were not afraid to use it whenever it suited them.

In such circumstances, it's not surprising that the church as a whole, and almost everybody in it, were simply unable to see, and unable to appreciate, that they were doing enormous harm to many people.

Quite possibly.
But I think it was the people, not the doctrine, "do unto others" comes to mind.


Side note: I was sat down on the papal infallibility once before, IIRC it has only been called into effect once or twice, ever.

Flamed Diving

robindch wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that.

Part of the problem seems to have been that the church sincerely believed its own teachings about itself and saw itself as an organization which was incapable of making a mistake. This was not helped by things like the doctrine of papal infallibility and the personality of the church leaders, particularly McQuaid, who exuded political power and were not afraid to use it whenever it suited them.

In such circumstances, it's not surprising that the church as a whole, and almost everybody in it, were simply unable to see, and unable to appreciate, that they were doing enormous harm to many people.

In addition, the position of respect that religion assumed in society meant that they were above criticism for too long. Thankfully, we seem to be moving away from this and I hope we can both (religious and non-religious) learn from the mistakes of the past and see how dangerous it can be to give uncritical respect to belief systems (political too).

dvpower

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Sorry, but if that's true, it kind of proves my point about the problem not being with the Church per se but with the nation.

You must accept that there are levels of culpability here.

First the individuals that perpetrated the abuse; then the religious organisations which where directly responsible for the those in their care and who knew about the abuse and chose not to act; then the state who failed in their responsibility to oversee these organisations and then society in general who were happy enough to brush the whole thing under the carpet.

But there isn't an equivalence; a child rapist isn't the same as an official who failed to act because he had a 'deferential and submissive attitude' to the church authorities and the official who failed in their duty isn't the same as the individual who chose to block these people out of their mind.


Its hard not to conclude that there was a specific problem with the Church itself, most certainly with specific religious orders. 216 institutions involved, more than 1700 victims who gave evidence (more coming forward as we speak and over 15000 applications for compensation), more than 800 abusers implicated.

luckat

Still - from today's Indo:

But the inquiry was hampered by the unexplained disappearance of files on almost three-quarters of the children admitted to the institutions under investigation.

The report found:

- More than 25,000 children were sent to 55 industrial and reformatory schools in the years between 1937 and 1978.

- Files relating to 18,000 children sent to these schools and other Church-run institutions are missing.

robindch

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Side note: I was sat down on the papal infallibility once before, IIRC it has only been called into effect once or twice, ever.

Once only, I think, for the doctrine of the "Assumption of Mary" in the fifties. However, I'd imagine that many catholics are unfamiliar with exactly what infallibility means, or how it's exercised and what things fall into the infallible category and what don't.

BTW, it seems that the new archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, has landed himself in hot water on the first day in the job. On the ITV news last night, he apparently said that one shouldn't forget the abusers also did some good things and that they were displaying "courage" in facing their crimes. More on that strange story here.

luckat

How long can this have been going on? The investigations only go back so far.

The 'Christian' Brothers were running Letterfrack from 1887. Was this going on then?

robindch

Flamed Diving wrote: »

The fact that the govt took a payment in exchange for indemnity makes it all the worse.

It's not as simple as that. As dvpower points out, there were failures of oversight on the part of the state too.

One can argue endlessly about whether it was appropriate to split the liability equally between certain religious organizations and the state. But a figure had to be arrived at and it seems as fair as any. But what was undeniably underhand was the subsequent move by the same organizations to ignore the spirit of the indemnity agreement and to engage a topflight city-center law firm to cap their liability at 50% of the initial estimate, which liability turned out to be less than 10% of the estimated final bill.

Interestingly, the Tanaiste has said that, in the light of the report, the state may revisit the agreement. More on that here.

hiorta

The Catholic Church spent 40 years

* moving abusers on, after complaints, to new parishes where they continued to abuse
* hiding documentation of complaints
* denying the evidence of people who had been abused
* refusing to give compensation
* denying any responsibility.

...... luckat

The Roman Catholic Church should be run out of Ireland and made to be judicially examined at the highest European Court.
Their properties should be forfeit and sold with the proceeds going to their victims.

O'Coonassa

dvpower wrote: »

First the individuals that perpetrated the abuse; then the religious organisations which where directly responsible for the those in their care and who knew about the abuse and chose not to act; then the state who failed in their responsibility to oversee these organisations and then society in general who were happy enough to brush the whole thing under the carpet.

Surely the State that put such organisations in charge of the welfare of it's Citizens has to be the primary culprit in all of this?

If say I had a bus company and hired an alcoholic driver who got drunk behind the wheel and mowed into a crowd of people can I really just blame the driver?

CiaranC

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Surely the State that put such organisations in charge of the welfare of it's Citizens has to be the primary culprit in all of this?

If say I had a bus company and hired an alcoholic driver who got drunk behind the wheel and mowed into a crowd of people can I really just blame the driver?

I think you are confused. You seem to be thinking in terms of todays times, when the power lies with the government.

The church ran the country in this period, nobody else. It held all the power, the state was its servant.

O'Coonassa

CiaranC wrote: »

I think you are confused. You seem to be thinking in terms of todays times, when the power lies with the government.

The church ran the country in this period, nobody else. It held all the power, the state was its servant.

Well I'd agree with the sentiment but that's really not how things stood legally on paper, in the Constitution.

It's as if I were afraid of the alcoholic bus driver and had allowed myself to be bullied into hiring him. It wouldn't make me any less culpable for letting him out on the road.

CiaranC

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Well I'd agree with the sentiment but that's really not how things stood legally on paper, in the Constitution.

It's as if I were afraid of the alcoholic bus driver and had allowed myself to be bullied into hiring him. It wouldn't make me any less culpable for letting him out on the road.

The constitution wasnt worth the paper it was written on. None of the freedoms supposedly guaranteed within it existed. Ireland was a state run by the catholic church. The government, the civil service, the police and the education system were under its control.

In that context, the catholic church was directly guilty. It had many collaborators, but thats where it started.

O'Coonassa

CiaranC wrote: »

The constitution wasnt worth the paper it was written on. None of the freedoms supposedly guaranteed within it existed. Ireland was a state run by the catholic church. The government, the civil service, the police and the education system were under its control.

In that context, the catholic church was directly guilty. It had many collaborators, but thats where it started.

Well I see what you're saying but what has changed and when? Where were the Citizens who challenged the State over not respecting the constitution. It wasn't and isn't percieved as a problem. So far as I can see the education system is still under its control. Garda stations still get blessed by priests, hospitals etc still display Catholic imagary and have wards named after Catholic saints. Secular Republic it isn't and I can't blame the Church for that but have to place the blame at the feet of the Citizens and the State.

The level and degree of abuse that has happened here has not happened anywhere else and yet the Catholic Church exists everywhere else. What is more in those places where it has been found guilty of a lesser degree of abuse there has generally been some Irish connection.

CiaranC

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Well I see what you're saying but what has changed and when? Where were the Citizens who challenged the State over not respecting the constitution. It wasn't and isn't percieved as a problem. So far as I can see the education system is still under its control. Garda stations still get blessed by priests, hospitals etc still display Catholic imagary and have wards named after Catholic saints. Secular Republic it isn't and I can't blame the Church for that but have to place the blame at the feet of the Citizens and the State.

The level and degree of abuse that has happened here has not happened anywhere else and yet the Catholic Church exists everywhere else. What is more in those places where it has been found guilty of a lesser degree of abuse there has generally been some Irish connection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country

Have a look at the above. While you are blaming the Citizens of the Irish Republic for the abuse here, youll need to add a few more types and locations of state to the list.

This list is unbelievable.

dvpower

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Surely the State that put such organisations in charge of the welfare of it's Citizens has to be the primary culprit in all of this?

If say I had a bus company and hired an alcoholic driver who got drunk behind the wheel and mowed into a crowd of people can I really just blame the driver?

No. Both are culpable. I would primarily blame the bus driver for getting drunk and then getting behind the wheel and then driving into a crowd of people. The bus company would be next in my line of fire.

But we don't really need an analogy for this one. This analogy does narrow the boundaries, but a good analogy makes an opaque situation clearer. This one does not.

A rapist is always primarily responsible for his rapes.

Flamed Diving

Rupert Murdoch? Is that you?

Fanny Cradock

fryup, your post has been deleted and you are banned for a month.