Institutional abuse was "endemic".. - MERGED

crosstownk

I haven't voted in the poll.

Yes, the religious orders should pay more - a lot more as they were the ones that dished out this unthinkable abuse on poor defenseless children. They did it knowingly and without any consideration for the child's emotions not to mention the lack of regard for the long term effects this abuse had on the children that were confined to these institutions.

At the same time, the state had responsibility for certifying these institutions. It was also responsible for dealing with complaints and concerns raised. It failed miserably in this regard. As an example, take some time out to read Vol I-15 of the report on St. Conleths, Daingean.

So to my mind there are two parties responsible. That said, the orders were obviously responsible for the sadistic and sexual abuse that took place so they should bear the brunt of any compensation awards that are to follow.

Unfortunately, no money would ever be enough to compensate for the childhoods that have been stolen from so many individuals. Some left such institutions incapable of trusting or loving. The legacy that this has left behind will take a long time to wash out of society.

It's a shameful, shameful reflection on those that were entrusted with children's welfare - especially as the same people were purporting to be God's messengers.

Every monster who doled out this abuse that is still alive should do the honourable thing and own up. Stand up in public and admit to their sins. Let the justice system hand them their penance. But they won't because they were never followers of Christ in the first place. They are ba$tards.

Ultravid

Biggins wrote: »

Is there a saying that goes along the line "God helps those who help themselves" ? If we all just wait around for "IT" to happen, we better not hold our breaths too long.
So if the church or any organisation wants to help, they should get up off their knees, stop praying and actually call to those who are still suffering to do something more useful and physical and mentally productive!

Again, all stated with the greatest respect to you and your chosen faith.

Thanks. I don't mean we should just pray; actions are also needed. The orders should issue compensation to the utmost of their capabilities and abusers should, if possible, face criminal proceedings. I honestly don't think the Christian Brother's, as an order, has much of a future.

We must, and we are, as a Church, working towards ensuring that such things do not happen again. But poor leadership is a big problem, not just with this issue in the past, but many others in the present. I say this as a devout Catholic. Shepherds should shepherd. Good shepherds, modelled on Christ, look after their sheep, not send wolves among them. A major problem which allowed abuse to continue, was Bishops acting like managers of corporations, whereby the corporate image mattered more than child protection.

I believe satan hates the Church and he corrupted many within the Priesthood to turn so many people against the Church, and harm the moswt innocent members of the Church.

Clarification: Priests, like all of us mortals, can choose good or evil. But obviously priests, by the fact that they represent Christ, have a very special position of trust and such, and when this is betrayed, it is heinous. Satan obviously knows this. He is not stupid. He knew what this ciris would do to the Church. However he will not have the last word. I see a very bright future for the Church around the corner. We must cut out the dead and decaying wood in the meantime. Nature usually takes care of that, but we can help out.

the_dark_side

If you never do another thing, have a look at this short video... and give it a minute as the intro maybe a bit OTT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xajCUE6oHkI

Acacia

Hrududu wrote: »

I'm also sick of these threads degenerating into religious debates. Any thread that pops up about this always gets derailed by posters arguing pointlessly with each other over whether or not God exists. And its always the same posters, with the same arguments. I just get sick of reading these points over and over again.

I agree. For once, I wish people would realize that some things are more important than winning some internet argument about the existence of God.

This thread is not about that.

It's about the abuse of thousands of children at the hands of the Church, aided by the State. An absolute disgrace and a national embarrassment.

The victims should be fully compensated and the religious orders involved should pay dearly for the lives they ruined. I only wish the rapists and other violent scumbags who hurt children up and down this country were alive today so they could be punished. Unfortunately most of them are dead now- they got off too easily.

Also, fair play to the guy in the Q&A video posted here for telling off the minister. It's outrageous that he was told he was 'lying' about the abuse he suffered. Disgrace. :mad:

Tha Gopher

CiaranC wrote: »

Have you read the report?

From what Ive heard it is about beatings, abuse, covered up suspicious deaths, starvation, government inaction, reports being ignored, problem preists being moved from parish to parish, essentially everything that has been in the public domain since when, about 1993 or so? I remember at least two documentaries, one on BBC and one on RTE, that went through the whole history of it. I doubt Bosnians are particularly shocked by anything they hear from the Hague tribunals, they heard/saw it all 15 years ago. Why is this so big now is what Im asking. Much of the compensation claims were settled long ago.

One of the funnier things I read here lately was someone enquiring how to go through a de baptism ceremony, because of what they read in this report. Fcuk sake, havent they read a newspaper in the previous 15 years? Laughable.

Carlow52 wrote: »

I was going to ask
To what country do you refer as u say u have been out of the country and then refer to back home.

Bu then I read you signature:

<"Politically correct" is a politically correct term meaning retarded. >

And all was revealed.

What?!!?

Tha Gopher

Tha Gopher wrote: »

From what Ive heard it is about beatings, abuse, covered up suspicious deaths, starvation, government inaction, reports being ignored, problem preists being moved from parish to parish, essentially everything that has been in the public domain since when, about 1993 or so? I remember at least two documentaries, one on BBC and one on RTE, that went through the whole history of it. I doubt Bosnians are particularly shocked by anything they hear from the Hague tribunals, they heard/saw it all 15 years ago. Why is this so big now is what Im asking. Much of the compensation claims were settled long ago.

One of the funnier things I read here lately was someone enquiring how to go through a de baptism ceremony, because of what they read in this report. Fcuk sake, havent they read a newspaper in the previous 15 years? Laughable.



What?!!?

You see the difference is that we knew these things had happened but we didn't know that the government and the church knew so much & let it happen continuously while keeping it under raps. That is what angers me the most & I am close to being ashamed of being Irish because of it. Our people have a certain fúcking greediness about them & once things are going ok for for them they keep their mouth shut whatever the consequences.

How anyone can attack people for being angry about this now after the extra exposure is mind boggling. But meh, there is always one.

philologos

KaG: This is horrible, but I don't see why people have to blame those who adhere to it, and the belief system of Christianity itself because they are appalled what happened. They aren't related to the actual crimes themselves.

However, I still remain unconvinced as to whether much more abuse actually took outside the Catholic Church than actually within it. In this post I quote Christopher Hitchens saying that nonreligious organisations were involved in the same amount of abuse or worse than the Catholic Church and yet people haven't seemed to be publicising them to the same degree. Without intending to frustrate the discussion, would one be fair to say that the Catholic Church has been publicised the way it was because it was a religious organisation and the others weren't because they were non-religious?

Tha Gopher

Deleted User wrote: »

You see the difference is that we knew these things had happened but we didn't know that the government and the church knew so much & let it happen continuously while keeping it under raps.

ROFLBURGERS.

How anyone can attack people for being angry about this now after the extra exposure is mind boggling.

Wait......are you honestly telling me that until now you didnt realise that the Gardai and the government knew about this between circa 1940s and 1980s but did nothing because the church ruled the roost? That decent honest cops, doctors, social workers and inspectors who knew this was happening were either shouted down or threatened with dismissal? ROFL. The above has been common knowledge since the mid 90s, this report has nothing groundbreaking bar the government officially acknowledging it. I assume you watch so little news you are the type who would warn a friend going on holiday to Bosnia not to go because there is a war on there (Ive heard it in real life, I nearly split my sides). Some Irish people are so out of touch with current affairs it is embarrasing.

But meh, there is always one.

Always one what? Always one person who follows current affairs more than the average Joe?
If you want to insult me with that Ill take it as a compliment.

boards gets worse by the day, I already mentioned the depaptism thread.

"I hate the Catholic church. Catholic priests raped boys"....all good.

" I hate gays. Gay priests raped boys"....banned.


Both sweeping generalisations, neither of which I agree with, but only one of which is acceptable on AH. Hilarious (and Im not remotely religious)

Tha Gopher

Tha Gopher wrote: »

ROFLBURGERS.



Wait......are you honestly telling me that until now you didnt realise that the Gardai and the government knew about this between circa 1940s and 1980s but did nothing because the church ruled the roost? That decent honest cops, doctors, social workers and inspectors who knew this was happening were either shouted down or threatened with dismissal? ROFL. The above has been common knowledge since the mid 90s, this report has nothing groundbreaking bar the government officially acknowledging it. I assume you watch so little news you are the type who would warn a friend going on holiday to Bosnia not to go because there is a war on there (Ive heard it in real life, I nearly split my sides). Some Irish people are so out of touch with current affairs it is embarrasing.




Always one what? Always one person who follows current affairs more than the average Joe?
If you want to insult me with that Ill take it as a compliment.

boards gets worse by the day, I already mentioned the depaptism thread.

"I hate the Catholic church. Catholic priests raped boys"....all good.

" I hate gays. Gay priests raped boys"....banned.


Both sweeping generalisations, neither of which I agree with, but only one of which is acceptable on AH. Hilarious (and Im not remotely religious)

I am happy you're happy.

goldenbrown

Mariane Finucane (exasperated)'why don't you give them the whole 15 billion?'

(estimated total Irish congregation's wealth by Times newspaper rich list analyst)

Sister Maxwell (who lead cori deal dream team in 1999 with Minister Michael Woods (committed Catholic) ): 'well we might get to that point.....'


....progress

philologos

What 15 billion? By total wealth what do you mean, that's incredibly vague.

partyatmygaff

goldenbrown wrote: »

Mariane Finucane (exasperated)'why don't you give them the whole 15 billion?'

(estimated total Irish congregation's wealth by Times newspaper rich list analyst)

Sister Maxwell (who lead cori deal dream team in 1999 with Minister Michael Woods (committed Catholic) ): 'well we might get to that point.....'


....progress

What are you smoking man? Are you trying to say that all the money of the Irish catholic congregation should be given to the ones who were abused?
Are you seriously implying the whole catholic congregation should be punished as the result of a few religious orders AND non-religious orders poor member screening?


:rolleyes:

gimme5minutes

Jakkass wrote: »

I agree. As for give up all and follow me there is a controversy in Christianity concerning the meaning of that. Jesus says you cannot serve God and wealth and I agree. He also says that you cannot live by bread alone but from every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord, however one must also live by bread. People also confuse the passage of the rich man to say that all Christians should give up all of their wealth, however in context, Jesus is saying because the man is rich, he should forsake his wealth and put God first.

Jesus says this, Jesus says that. Would you ever listen to yourself. Your beliefs are based on completely unproven fairy stories written two thousand years ago by guys from an organization who had a vested interest in promoting these stories. Luckily for them they were selling these stories to naive unenlightened peasants who hadn't a clue about the world they were living in. At least the peasants had an excuse for being naieve enough to believe it. Do you think these kind of stories would take hold today? Well actually they still do, if your target demographic is dumb/susceptible enough - look at all the idiots who bought into Scientology.

The guys who wrote these stories about Jesus stood to gain wealth and power just like all the people who have followed in their footsteps since. The christian organisation has gone on to amass massive wealth and control since the time of 'Jesus'.

BELIEFS..BELIEFS...(not facts)..BELIEFS....then they came up with a great method to deflect the obvious question of 'where's the proof for all this stuff?' Their answer - 'their is no proof, you just have to believe and have faith and you will be rewarded when you die'. There's no point in even trying to put forward evidence for the truth of this story as the religion itself acknowledges that 'faith' is what they require not proof.

You need to snap out of it, stop believing in superstitious nonsense and ditch this cult. If you were born in Iran, Jamaica or India you would be blindly following a completely different religion purely because of the circumstance of your birth. It's just a joke no matter how much you try to rationalize it.

Don't make the mistake of the 60+ year old priests who have dedicated their whole lives to an imaginary concept and are too far gone now to admit they were wrong and the thing they based their whole lives is not real.

luckat

partyatmygaff wrote: »

What are you smoking man? Are you trying to say that all the money of the Irish catholic congregation should be given to the ones who were abused?
Are you seriously implying the whole catholic congregation should be punished as the result of a few religious orders AND non-religious orders poor member screening?


:rolleyes:

Well, why not? Two thousand five hundred people gave evidence of torment, beatings, mental and physical cruelty, sexual abuse, rape, the deaths of children and other horrors perpetrated by the 8,000 people from 18 religious orders over 60 years.

The Catholic Church as an institution worked together to cover up this abuse, bully anyone who tried to expose it and protect the perpetrators.

Of course they should pay.

Apart from the sheer viciousness and murderousness of these people, there was the point that they were doing it for profit. From an article in Thursday's Monsters and Critics:

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/features/article_1479956.php/Anger_at_abuse_in_Ireland_turns_to_rows_over_payments__News_Feature__

Despite all of the hand-wringing, few have pointed out that the answer may lie in the simple economics outlined in the report.

According to the report, 'the capital and financial commitment made by the religious congregations' was a 'major factor' in prolonging the system of institutional care of children in the state.

Despite some Irish politicians' attempts to blame an industrial school system inherited from the time of British rule, the report points out that from 'the mid 1920s in England, smaller more family-like settings were established.'

These were viewed as 'providing a better standard of care for children in need.'

In Ireland, however, the 'industrial school system thrived.'

It did so, the report says because funding through capitation grants led to 'demands by managers for children to be committed to industrial schools for reasons of economic viability of the institutions.'

The more children that the religious orders crammed into their schools, the more money they received. It was in their financial interest to feed and clothe the children inadequately and to use them for forced labour. This practice yielded profits, which they funnelled into their other schools and properties.

The reason why they got away with systemic abuse of their charges was because of the 'deferential and submissive attitude' shown towards the congregrations by society in general and by the Department of Education in particular.

partyatmygaff

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Jesus says this, Jesus says that. Would you ever listen to yourself. Your beliefs are based on completely unproven fairy stories written two thousand years ago by guys from an organization who had a vested interest in promoting these stories. Luckily for them they were selling these stories to naive unenlightened peasants who hadn't a clue about the world they were living in. At least the peasants had an excuse for being naieve enough to believe it. Do you think these kind of stories would take hold today? Well actually they still do, if your target demographic is dumb/susceptible enough - look at all the idiots who bought into Scientology.

The guys who wrote these stories about Jesus stood to gain wealth and power just like all the people who have followed in their footsteps since. The christian organisation has gone on to amass massive wealth and control since the time of 'Jesus'.

BELIEFS..BELIEFS...(not facts)..BELIEFS....then they came up with a great method to deflect the obvious question of 'where's the proof for all this stuff?' Their answer - 'their is no proof, you just have to believe and have faith and you will be rewarded when you die'. There's no point in even trying to put forward evidence for the truth of this story as the religion itself acknowledges that 'faith' is what they require not proof.

You need to snap out of it, stop believing in superstitious nonsense and ditch this cult. If you were born in Iran, Jamaica or India you would be blindly following a completely different religion purely because of the circumstance of your birth. It's just a joke no matter how much you try to rationalize it.

Don't make the mistake of the 60+ year old priests who have dedicated their whole lives to an imaginary concept and are too far gone now to admit they were wrong and the thing they based their whole lives is not real.

Please study some facts about the religion you are attempting to "disprove":rolleyes: and then come back here and talk on topic.

We aren't discussing christianity, if you wan't to discuss that, the christianity forum is elsewhere.

This is for discussing the actions of about 800 of thousands of irish priests and many other non-religious abusers who abused their position.

Please for the sake of this thread, take it elsewhere.

partyatmygaff

luckat wrote: »

Well, why not? Two thousand five hundred people gave evidence of torment, beatings, mental and physical cruelty, sexual abuse, rape, the deaths of children and other horrors perpetrated by the 8,000 people from 18 religious orders over 60 years.

The Catholic Church as an institution worked together to cover up this abuse, bully anyone who tried to expose it and protect the perpetrators.

Of course they should pay.

Your changing your words, you said the congregation should pay.
Congregation means ordinary lay people of the church of this generation. Now unless you are contemplating stripping all of the money of innocent followers of a faith while conveiniently ignoring the actual abusers to make matters right, Im sorry but nobody in their right mind could agree to that.

I am pretty sure like it or not the entire church were not involved in this abuse, I'm sure this is not what you want to hear though so lets just leave it at that.

philologos

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Jesus says this, Jesus says that. Would you ever listen to yourself. Your beliefs are based on completely unproven fairy stories written two thousand years ago by guys from an organization who had a vested interest in promoting these stories. Luckily for them they were selling these stories to naive unenlightened peasants who hadn't a clue about the world they were living in. At least the peasants had an excuse for being naieve enough to believe it. Do you think these kind of stories would take hold today? Well actually they still do, if your target demographic is dumb/susceptible enough - look at all the idiots who bought into Scientology.

My beliefs are based on the word of an amazing testimony to the power of God in the lives of human beings relating to their creator, and to the passion of Jesus Christ . Look, I'm sorry that you are taking offence to my beliefs, however, I was replying to Wibbs concerning Jesus' teachings about poverty. If you wouldn't mind reading the context of my replies it would give you a bit of perspective into my position.

"Vested interest" - Hm, what vested interests would a group of fishermen who gave up absolutely everything in their lives to follow Jesus have? Just curious? What conspiracy theory can we spin from this today

Naiive peasants who hadn't a clue about the world they lived in? People who have written some of the most enlightened material in relation to humanity and the world hadn't a clue? I'm really wondering how much of the Bible have you actually read?

It's funny that you attack the Bible, and the witness of Jesus Christ when it is the witness of Jesus Christ which could actually offer us the best perspective on these abuses. Just look at the interaction between Jesus and the Pharisees and replace some of the religious orders in their place, or whoever you think has become corrupt in the day.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

The guys who wrote these stories about Jesus stood to gain wealth and power just like all the people who have followed in their footsteps since. The christian organisation has gone on to amass massive wealth and control since the time of 'Jesus'.

This isn't the truth. For the first 300 years of the Gospel the Christians were fed to lions, persecuted for party humour, crucified, stoned to death, killed for their beliefs. It was hardly a desirable thing to propogate. The Apostles were all martyred as far as I can recall. Does that sounds like a desirable thing to do with your life?

gimme5minutes wrote: »

BELIEFS..BELIEFS...(not facts)..BELIEFS....then they came up with a great method to deflect the obvious question of 'where's the proof for all this stuff?' Their answer - 'their is no proof, you just have to believe and have faith and you will be rewarded when you die'. There's no point in even trying to put forward evidence for the truth of this story as the religion itself acknowledges that 'faith' is what they require not proof.

Read what the reply to Wibbs was about. It was about Christian teachings concerning poverty. I replied based on those teachings and what Jesus was recorded to have said in the accounts that the Christians hold authoritative about Jesus Christ

As for proof, I've already explained that enough on this thread. Neither side has absolute proof in this debate, and I never claimed that I had. I do have indication for what I believe however. This is the best we can do, atheists can give their indications and reasons for why they think God doesn't exist, and Christians can give their indications and reasons for why they think that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and why they think that God exists.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

You need to snap out of it, stop believing in superstitious nonsense and ditch this cult. If you were born in Iran, Jamaica or India you would be blindly following a completely different religion purely because of the circumstance of your birth. It's just a joke no matter how much you try to rationalize it.

I don't need to do anything!

I have freedom of conscience and freedom of religion in Ireland! I love Christianity and it's done wonderful things in my life, why should I lose it?

As for the "what if you were born somewhere else argument". It's ridiculous as people have converted to Christianity in all of these countries. I've seen people from countries all over the world who are Christians, and there is strong missionary activity all over the world currently even in countries where Christianity is illegal. I have no reason to believe that I wouldn't have the opportunity to accept Christianity anywhere in the world.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Don't make the mistake of the 60+ year old priests who have dedicated their whole lives to an imaginary concept and are too far gone now to admit they were wrong and the thing they based their whole lives is not real.

These priests who carried out abuse dedicated their lives to abuse and corruption which seem more satanic than Christian. They have their whole lives to come to terms with what they did and to bear the guilt.

I believe Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and I think I'll be taking that to the grave with me

luckat

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Your changing your words, you said the congregation should pay.
Congregation means ordinary lay people of the church of this generation. Now unless you are contemplating stripping all of the money of innocent followers of a faith while conveiniently ignoring the actual abusers to make matters right, Im sorry but nobody in their right mind could agree to that.

I am pretty sure like it or not the entire church were not involved in this abuse, I'm sure this is not what you want to hear though so lets just leave it at that.

I did not say the congregation should pay. I said the church should pay. I say the church should pay. I say the church will pay, even if this means the Criminal Assets Bureau confiscating its lands.

Carlow52

can we please stick to the topic and debate all the 'God stuff' elsewhere

Wibbs

Jakkass wrote: »

This isn't the truth. For the first 300 years of the Gospel the Christians were fed to lions, persecuted for party humour, crucified, stoned to death, killed for their beliefs. It was hardly a desirable thing to propogate. The Apostles were all martyred as far as I can recall. Does that sounds like a desirable thing to do with your life

I agree. But the moment it became the state religion of the roman empire, that changed and it very rapidly became an imperial economic and military arm of the state. They changed the nature and the organisation of the church itself. It became less Jewish Jesus and more Paulian Jesus for a start. Womens earlier central role, which was amazing for the time was massively reduced for a start. Witness the recent discoveries(in turkey I think??) where an early woman preacher of the faith(whose name escapes) is given a more important role and bigger portrait than Paul. Women were reduced to whores, mothers or virgins, a quite roman notion of womanhood. Even the idea of an unmarried clergy was largely down to keeping the money in the church as kids had claim rights on land and assets. It isn't called the roman catholic church for fun. Indeed regardless of one's personal feelings or faith towards Jesus, I think most would agree that the irony would not have been lost on him.

And I think all of the above is on topic. When you have a strongly self protecting organisation that is designed like that, with men with no sexual outlet, many essentially forced into being a priest, especially in ireland where every family was expected to have one and this level of abuse is not surprising. Indeed it was to be expected.

philologos

Wibbs wrote: »

I agree. But the moment it became the state religion of the roman empire, that changed and it very rapidly became an imperial economic and military arm of the state.

I agree with this much.

Wibbs wrote: »

They changed the nature and the organisation of the church itself. It became less Jewish Jesus and more Paulian Jesus for a start.

I don't see the difference between Jesus in Pauline theology and in the Gospels. Both were the same in my view, and Paul even directly quotes from instances in the Gospels in quite a lot of his work. I wouldn't be so harsh on Paul, he was quite the man

Wibbs wrote: »

Womens earlier central role, which was amazing for the time was massively reduced for a start. Witness the recent discoveries(in turkey I think??) where an early woman preacher of the faith(whose name escapes) is given a more important role and bigger portrait than Paul.

I agree with you in part here. Women had a huge role in the church in the first century and in many of the Pauline letters Paul thanks God for the contribution of the women in the church. Couples even shared the Gospel together, Priscilla and Aquilla being the prime example of this. As for them being more important than Paul, I don't think that this is a contest, and I don't think it could be true given the clear lack of literature to suggest so.

Wibbs wrote: »

Women were reduced to whores, mothers or virgins, a quite roman notion of womanhood. Even the idea of an unmarried clergy was largely down to keeping the money in the church as kids had claim rights on land and assets. It isn't called the roman catholic church for fun. Indeed regardless of one's personal feelings or faith towards Jesus, I think most would agree that the irony would not have been lost on him.

Now, heres the controversial bit that needs a bit of clearing up

Women were reduced to whores in general? I'm not sure if this could be said. I do think that Pope Gregory's notion that Mary Magdalene was a whore without any real textual evidence in the 6th century was highly damaging in the Western world, considering that in the Eastern Orthodox Church she is regarded as the "Apostle to the Apostles" because she was the first to see Jesus raised from the dead.

Celibacy in Catholicism as a practice is one I have a hard time dealing with in comparison to Christianity. There seems to be a huge contradiction between the Biblical text (1 Timothy, Titus) and Catholic commands to celibacy which originate from the 4th century AD. One says that priests should only be married once, the latter says they shouldn't be married at all. Judaism also holds the practice whereby priests should be married (Exodus) as long as they are virgins. It just doesn't seem consistent to me.

I don't see how having children would somehow entitle them to assets of the church. If that were the case Protestantism would have collapsed by now

Wibbs wrote: »

And I think all of the above is on topic. When you have a strongly self protecting organisation that is designed like that, with men with no sexual outlet, many essentially forced into being a priest, especially in ireland where every family was expected to have one and this level of abuse is not surprising. Indeed it was to be expected.

I agree entirely

luckat

I see the Indo has a piece about the sacking of Fr Kevin Hegarty as editor of an influential Irish Catholic journal in 1994.

When he published an article on clerical sex abuse, the majority of Irish bishops voted for him to be sacked.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/bishops-gave-editor-sack-over-articles-on-sex-abuse-1764670.html

or

http://tinyurl.com/o43uvx

The article says, in part:

At the time Bishop Brendan Comiskey was chairman of the Bishop's Commission for Communications and, effectively, Fr [Kevin] Hegarty's boss. Comiskey resigned in 2002 -- the first Irish Catholic bishop ever to do so -- over his role in the handling the many complaints of sexual abuse by several priests in his Ferns Diocese.

Fr Hegarty said last week: "The efforts to cover up clerical sexual abuse were in one sense disturbing. I joined (Intercom) in June 1991 and when I began raising questions like clerical sexual abuse and questioning compulsory celibacy and the issue of women priests I began to experience questioning from various bishops."

He said he was told that an editorial committee was being set up to oversee the material published in Intercom and that the 34 bishops were being surveyed for their opinions on the magazine. "That report was in June 1994 and they said that the material was damaging or undermining morale."

Fr Hegarty was asked to put forward names for the editorial committee. "I had no problem with having an editorial committee, in fact, it could be a good thing. I was asked to suggest names and I did. None of those named by me appeared."

He was sacked by the bishops in late 1994

and later it goes on to reference the Ryan Commission report, and quote from an article by Fr Kevin Hegarty on it:

In sober prose and with cumulative detail the Ryan report reveals a dark hinterland which we have failed to acknowledge or name until now. There were over 800 known abusers in over 200 institutions during a period of 35 years.

"The adjectives used in the report are stark and compelling. Abuse was systemic, pervasive, chronic, excessive, arbitrary and endemic. Abuse was not a failure of the system. Abuse was the system."

coffee_cake

Jakkass wrote: »

Women were reduced to whores in general? I'm not sure if this could be said.

He said "whores, mothers or virgins"

luckat

Panorama did a 40-minute programme a few years back on the Vatican and clerical sexual abuse. It's viewable on Google Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9216902699740163930&ei=PnorStiyJYSE-QaXvsy2CQ&q=sex+crimes+and+the+vatican&dur=3

or in parts on Youtube

and follow on to parts 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6

luckat

Panorama did a 40-minute programme a few years back on the Vatican and clerical sexual abuse. It's viewable on Google Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9216902699740163930&ei=PnorStiyJYSE-QaXvsy2CQ&q=sex+crimes+and+the+vatican&dur=3

Yasmine

I agree that what happend to victims in the care of the catholic church is awfull its just sad that these people are only getting heard 40 years on. Im also very annoyed about the hype over it yes it was awfull but what about the abuse that is going on TODAY in the care homes run by the HSE if Barnodos, the Guards and the HSE and all are so helpfull now why didnt they help me 2 years ago when I told them i was being mentally, physically and almost sexually abused when I was in a care home in Dublin run by the Hse. Its sad to think its still going on today but it will come ot in another 40 years and then everyone will help after the damage has been done to me and many others. THE ABUSE IS STILL GOING ON TODAY IN CARE HOMES FOR CHILDREN RUN BY THE HSE..................................

treasher

I am so sorry Yasmin to hear of the treatment that you received when you needed love the most. No child anywhere any time should have to suffer abuse from any adult. Children shoud not have to go into a care home in the first place, a traumitic enough event without having to suffer abuse. As well as seeking justice for the abused we need to make sure that it never happens again in the future. But unfortunately I am not sure it won't. If there are parents in the world who do not live up to their responsibility, how can we trust strangers to do so, certainly not without being heavily monitored.
The Jews have a motto about the holocost, "Lest we forget" which would be a good motto to keep us aware of the vulnerability of people in care - of all ages.
treasher

Yasmine

I agree it will happen again the government and HSE are all corrupt in my opionion it may sound harsh but its true. I put in more complaint about the abuse I was getting from SOCIAL 'CARE' WORKERS on a daily basis. And it went to the manager of the 'care' home my social worker the area manager and each time they said I was lying and social CARE workers would never do anything like that???? And it all got brushed under the carpet like what happend to the them poor children and if they told someone theyd get the same response as me oh priests wouldt do things like that. It makes me pure sick to my stomach that its just history repeating itself and the government will never control these enviornment that children and also the elderly live in. My motto is if it was you a friend, your child or family member what way would you treat them in a care home?
And whats more annoying that the people of the institutional abuse will never get justice

patrickthomas

I just read the Ryan report over the weekend.......................

I also checked statistics from all over the world as well.

It has left me with only one conclusion, All of the Clergy knew this was going on for a very long time. I would have thought before this that it was just a few bad eggs but now I know that that they all knew, all of the priests and all of the Bishops have known for decades.

I have always had respect for peoples beliefs but now I really look twice at anyone who attends church and am dismayed at anyone who supports the church financially.

I now look on people who attend mass with serious reservations about their "Christianity"

This is an absolute disgrace and there is another report on its way, already sitting on government desks as I write this, how many times must we see this........???

I could go on but........:(

philologos

luckat wrote: »

Panorama did a 40-minute programme a few years back on the Vatican and clerical sexual abuse. It's viewable on Google Video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9216902699740163930&ei=PnorStiyJYSE-QaXvsy2CQ&q=sex+crimes+and+the+vatican&dur=3

I watched this whole documentary. Thanks a lot, it really makes things more clear.

I still do not think that these actions however horrific they are are representative of all the priests who have served in Catholicism, and I think it would be unfair to say so. However, the suffering and the abuse is quite frankly horrific and I am appalled at the Vatican involvement.

Blaming adherents and congregants of the Catholic Church is also grossly unfair, considering they had nothing to do with the abuse.

I'm going to take a different approach in my criticisms. The Catholic Church should be criticised about this, and we should help the church to change it's ways, put effective child abuse measures in place and make sure that this never happens again. Getting behind the Catholic Church for change, rather than expecting the majority of Catholics, and priests who were not involved to just forget their faith is the way foward.