The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

ISAW

philiporeilly wrote: »

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PB09000504

Hopefully similar reports will be conducted for every diocese in the country showing how the church covered this up.

Many have already been done.

Didn't know that catholics had to prove their worth to you or know an abuse victim before they could comment on what they believe what is wrong with the church.

You can comment on anything you like but your unqualified inexperienced opinion will be just that. You can't say you know anything about the church not doing anything if you are not involved in anything the church is doing in any field.
Ever heard " If you are not part of the solution ..."
You are claiming Brady did nothing about changing the church or society. What are you doing about it? What did you do to change the Church? Other than negative criticism what positive involvment did you have in your own parish? It doesn't have to be in theology . Did you ever get involved in a sports club for children? Go to a local school to give a talk about your job? Get involved in any school committees other than for your own child?

ISAW

--amadeus-- wrote: »

That would be:

ISAW I have already said that I don't intend to debate further with you for many, many reasons. The answers to all of your points are in my earlier posts, I'll be ignoring all of your representations from here in.

And I have already told you your reluctance to debate will not make you right. I know the you may like to fire off unsupported accusations and run away. That is up to you. I however will continue to callyou to task and ask you to support your bald and unjust assertions even if you want to ignore me. Why ? Ironically because i would not have it on my conscience. You are right about that at lease. If someone sees something wrong then they should speak out about it. Your claims about me were wrong and you haven't withdrawn them and your arguments about Brady while coherent and well expressed are not like the dictat of a authoritarian the like of which you ironically claim to oppose.

ISAW

underclass wrote: »

Quite a lot actually. An MSc from Tralee IT pales in insignificance to an MSc from say Oxbridge or an Ivy League university. And yes, your name is very important when you're citing your academic credentials.

I don't think it does. It is an international standard. I would have to read the Thesis and look at who the external examiners were and what they reported. Yes a degree from a n Ivy league University migh carry more Kudos but the sytandard of an MSc or PhD are closely monitored and you would hae to go by quaiuty control mechanisms in place. It is a bit like doing a leavin certificate in a "top" school. Someone else elsewhere migh get more points that you but the school rates in having on average the higher marks or no fails or better sports or whatever.

Oppos sorry about what what I meant to say is someones academic credentials are off topic really and please dont turn them into a personal slight.

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

It's very hard to remove someone from tenured employment. The trick is to weed them out before you let them into the classroom. That said, there are ways and means of getting rid of people - anyone who works for any organisation knows this.

Please expand your points if you can but...

Realistically, how could a board of management find out or legally enquire about a person's sexual orientation or private beliefs?

Obviously you know little about how our education system works if you think they can be removed like that. If they are are qualified and are executing their duties there is nothing you can do to remove them.

Ash.J.Williams

ISAW wrote: »

nope I have stated it several times - what did you expect Brady should have done?
You are now in 2010 and you hae the internet and all the information at your fingertips.
What do you think Brady should have dnone in 1977?
Gone to the RUC? And reported what?
Did other Catholics go to the RUC? No. did Catholics r go to the RUC about non clerical abuse?

Lets take the Republic. SAy he filed the report and he waited and nothing happened. You are suggesting that a priest involved in a case who has filed a report should go to the Gardai and report a common law misdemeanor? When? Say a year later? doyou eally think in 1978 that a sexual assualt case would be entertained? SAy it was. The Gardai then go to the family and want to take statements and the parents refuse to allow them to. This type of thing happeded regularly with husbands who beat their wives back in the 1970s.
Yes it was wrong but the society or the law or the systems were not in place to deal with it. It was only later when women refuges got going in the 1980s that they could get away form the abuse and were prepared to make statements. And only then usually if they had children. yes thses womes should have left their husbands but they didnt . they were wrong but they dint know any better. Brady also knew something was wrong but I suspected felt powerless just as a woman being beaten feels powerless. it makes no difference if the woman is rich or a successful business woman she may still be paralyzed.

Bull****, when people tried to report church sex crimes, they were shunned by those involved in the church both lay and clerical people. There was an example only recently where a former member of the gardai spoke about what happened when he confronted a priest over abuse claims. The bishop, other (so called religious) gardai, and the church going locals all began a campaign of hatred. One good catholic even took the time to take a sh*t in an envelope and deliver it to the former guards house. The sad thing was the garda was in fact very much correct in his suspicians and the priest is now serving a hefty sentence, he was eventually found out to be a horrific serial rapist who was moved from parish to parish to avoid prosecution.
The same went for families who didn't report or give statements about abuse. They didn't do so because the church instilled fear in people at that time.
So you cannot pass the blame onto non church people so easily, because in many of cases the church are still the root cause.

underclass

philiporeilly wrote: »

Please expand your points if you can but...

Realistically, how could a board of management find out or legally enquire about a person's sexual orientation or private beliefs?

Obviously you know little about how our education system works if you think they can be removed like that. If they are are qualified and are executing their duties there is nothing you can do to remove them.

There is no doubt that closet homosexuals have operated deep inside the Church itself. But when they are found out to be operating against the teachings of the Church, appropriate action has to be taken. If action is not taken, all kinds of problems can arise as we know only too well about here in Ireland.

problemchimp

Tigger wrote: »

serious question as i was arguing this with a mate and he says there is no way people support his position but i honestly believe that many people can see his side.

judging by the response on this forum I believe the Primate DOES NOT have public support depite the blind devotion of the chosen few.

underclass

problemchimp wrote: »

judging by the response on this forum I believe the Primate DOES NOT have public support depite the blind devotion of the chosen few.

He has the support of Rome, of his bishops and of the faithful. He also has the support of all Catholics in the world who are praying for the renewal of the Irish church. I know many non-Catholics of more moderate opinion who think that, while the Irish church leadership is far from perfect, they've achieved a huge amount over the last 10 years and are on the right path.

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

There is no doubt that closet homosexuals have operated deep inside the Church itself. But when they are found out to be operating against the teachings of the Church, appropriate action has to be taken. If action is not taken, all kinds of problems can arise as we know only too well about here in Ireland.

Would appreciate it if you could clarify or expand your previous comments? Still don't see how you could remove or "weed out" someone.

Also homosexuality and pedophillia are not the same. Just because someone is interested in someone of the same sex does not mean they like to abuse or rape innocent children.

problemchimp

underclass wrote: »

I note that you post nothing on boards.ie about the failings of the regional health boards. You have proven yourself to be selective in your outrage. Do you have a good reason for this?

I haven't posted anything on boards.ie about the failings of regional health boards yet as I am quite new to this forum, but I'm sure I'll have a lot to say about many issues in the future. And yes I do have a very good reason for my outrage on this subject, probably better reasons than you will ever have for your blind defence. Another question for you to think about, do you think the children of Africa and such like impoverished places are presently being systematicaly abused by Catholic clergy knowing that these poor souls have no voice?

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

He has the support of Rome, of his bishops and of the faithful. He also has the support of all Catholics in the world who are praying for the renewal of the Irish church. I know many non-Catholics of more moderate opinion who think that, while the Irish church leadership is far from perfect, they've achieved a huge amount over the last 10 years and are on the right path.

Didn't know you spoke for ALL Catholics. Many catholics here including myself want to see a renewal of the Irish church, but this cannot be done by those who were involved in decades of coverup or inaction.

underclass

philiporeilly wrote: »

Didn't know you spoke for ALL Catholics. Many catholics here including myself want to see a renewal of the Irish church, but this cannot be done by those who were involved in decades of coverup or inaction.

So put the bishops into early retirement and replace the class of 1960 with the class of 1970? What would that achieve? The Church needs renewal and healing, not rupturing and division. She needs to learn from her mistakes, apologise, repent and move on in her mission. This is the assignment that Cardinal Brady has been given. Since he took office in 2007, he has demonstrated that he is the man for the job.

underclass

philiporeilly wrote: »

Would appreciate it if you could clarify or expand your previous comments?

Are you waiting for me to tell you something you already know? That homosexuality is wrong. You're a clever guy. You know perfectly well the Church's position on these matters.

Homosexuality and paedophilia are both sexual perversions. As is the desire to sleep with one's mother, get locked up in a cage and be spanked, etc. On the great spectrum of sexual perversion, paedophilia must surely rank as one of the worst things a human can do.

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

I don't want my child being taught by a member of Hell's Angels. Nor do I want my child being taught by a Freemason or a homosexual or someone who enjoys paying prostitutes to whip him at weekends. Catholic schools will scrutinise potential candidates and they have every right to do so. And this screening process is going to be even more stringent once representatives from the Curia pull up their sleeves.

philiporeilly wrote: »

Please expand your points if you can but...

Realistically, how could a board of management find out or legally enquire about a person's sexual orientation or private beliefs?

Obviously you know little about how our education system works if you think they can be removed like that. If they are are qualified and are executing their duties there is nothing you can do to remove them.

underclass wrote: »

Are you waiting for me to tell you something you already know? That homosexuality is wrong. You're a clever guy. You know perfectly well the Church's position on these matters.

You still haven't explained how a board of management could find out or legally enquire about a person's sexual orientation or private beliefs?

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

So put the bishops into early retirement and replace the class of 1960 with the class of 1970? What would that achieve? The Church needs renewal and healing, not rupturing and division. She needs to learn from her mistakes, apologise, repent and move on in her mission. This is the assignment that Cardinal Brady has been given. Since he took office in 2007, he has demonstrated that he is the man for the job.

And even after 2007 the church in Ireland has done everything possible to stop the publication of reports. Surely you cannot have faith in men that want to hide or ignore the truth?

underclass

philiporeilly wrote: »

You still haven't explained how a board of management could find out or legally enquire about a person's sexual orientation or private beliefs?

You're quite an abrasive little nit-picker aren't you? I told you already that the task facing Catholic BOM's is to weed out candidates before they set foot in a classroom and preferably before they set foot in the interview room. Evidence of commitment to their local parish or a personal reference would be the most obvious starting point. The Protestants are very good at selecting suitable teachers for their schools. These days, the young people being churned out of the Catholic-by-name teacher training colleges haven't the foggiest about even the most fundamental of Catholic teachings.

Seth Brundle

underclass wrote: »

Quite a lot actually. An MSc from Tralee IT pales in insignificance to an MSc from say Oxbridge or an Ivy League university. And yes, your name is very important when you're citing your academic credentials.

Convienently missing my point I see!

underclass wrote: »

He has the support of Rome, of his bishops and of the faithful. He also has the support of all Catholics in the world who are praying for the renewal of the Irish church. I know many non-Catholics of more moderate opinion who think that, while the Irish church leadership is far from perfect, they've achieved a huge amount over the last 10 years and are on the right path.

I seem to have missed your global survey. I'd be curious to see the survey itself and the statistics from it.
Anyhow, I'm Catholic and he doesn't have my support.

As for what they have done in the last 10 years, how do you explain Desmond Connell taking a high court challenge against the revealing of abuse files? How do you explain the church authorities trying to suppress the release of the CICA report last year?
They have made changes but IMO its far too little, far far too late. Also some of their actions during this period outweigh the good that they have done!

Ghost Buster

underclass wrote: »

You're quite an abrasive little nit-picker aren't you? I told you already that the task facing Catholic BOM's is to weed out candidates before they set foot in a classroom and preferably before they set foot in the interview room. Evidence of commitment to their local parish or a personal reference would be the most obvious starting point. The Protestants are very good at selecting suitable teachers for their schools. These days, the young people being churned out of the Catholic-by-name teacher training colleges haven't the foggiest about even the most fundamental of Catholic teachings.

Everybody knows you test for homosexuality by playing an Abba or Petshop Boys song in their company and watch for them tapping their feet. Also they could be asked their opinion on the interior design of the school. If they offer an opinion they are definately queer...:cool:

philiporeilly

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Everybody knows you test for homosexuality by playing an Abba or Petshop Boys song in their company and watch for them tapping their feet. Also they could be asked their opinion on the interior design of the school. If they offer an opinion they are definately queer...:cool:

LOL

philiporeilly

underclass wrote: »

You're quite an abrasive little nit-picker aren't you? I told you already that the task facing Catholic BOM's is to weed out candidates before they set foot in a classroom and preferably before they set foot in the interview room. Evidence of commitment to their local parish or a personal reference would be the most obvious starting point. The Protestants are very good at selecting suitable teachers for their schools. These days, the young people being churned out of the Catholic-by-name teacher training colleges haven't the foggiest about even the most fundamental of Catholic teachings.

Nit Picking? You may a broad statement with no explanation on how it could be done! Attacking the person rather than the argument?

Having been a member of a board of management of a catholic school for the past few years AND having previously been a member of the Governing Body of a third level college for a few years I was interested in listening to your explanation.

If we followed your guidelines, no doubt both establishments I served would be fighting (and lose) discrimination and/or wrongful dismissal cases.

Michael G

The clue is in the title: this was a "Pastoral letter to the Catholics of Ireland". It was not primarily for non-believers or the secular media. Their reactions are predictable but not terribly relevant. The reactions of some of those who were abused are predictable also though, in their case, entirely understandable. But (and I know this is delicate ground) I can't help wondering whether there are people who have turned being "survivors" into something like a career.

At the moment, media commentary, posts to forums like this, texts and emails to current affairs programmes and letters to the papers are dominated by people who clearly have a fundamental hatred of Catholicism and are joyfully seizing this opportunity which has been handed to them on a plate by weak, incompetent and in some cases cynical bishops. There is little appetite for hearing any other point of view. Catholics are keeping their heads down and getting on with life. Catholics who remain supportive of the Church are those whose faith convinces them that it is the church that Christ founded and that, notwithstanding the wickedness of some priests and religious and the collusion of some bishops in hiding it, it is still where the Truth is to be found.

There is also a Fifth Column within the Church for whom this cloud has a shiny silver lining. These are the hard-core remnants of the "Spirit of Vatican II" faction who see an unexpected opportunity to reactivate their dream of weakening the authority of the Pope and revive an old agenda that had almost become obsolete. A particular example of this is John Cooney in the Indo, whose open and near-obsessive dislike of both this Pope and the last one must call his credibility as an analyst of religious matters into question.

Michael G

underclass wrote: »

You're quite an abrasive little nit-picker aren't you? I told you already that the task facing Catholic BOM's is to weed out candidates before they set foot in a classroom and preferably before they set foot in the interview room. Evidence of commitment to their local parish or a personal reference would be the most obvious starting point. The Protestants are very good at selecting suitable teachers for their schools. These days, the young people being churned out of the Catholic-by-name teacher training colleges haven't the foggiest about even the most fundamental of Catholic teachings.

Not just the young people. My niece, who was "prepared" for her First Communion two years ago by a nun of the Vatican II generation, told me she had received the "holy bread". Perhaps the visitations (which are like audits) will do something about this kind of thing.

J C

philiporeilly wrote: »

If qualified teachers are doing their jobs and delivering a set curriculum what does it matter about their personal beliefs?

... I cannot see why there should be any issue with people's personal beliefs as long as they do their job with professionalism and teach the curriculum they are paid to teach .
However, the 'set curriculum' (for Roman Catholic RE) itself seems to be a problem.
So I repeat my question, what is the problem that Hermann Kelly was referring to yesterday with this Alive-O curriculum ... or will I have to go and get the textbooks and have a look at them myself?

... and Underclass, do you have any examples of the half truths and watered down versions of the Bible that are in the 'Alive-O Catechetical Series' ?

philiporeilly

Michael G wrote: »

......At the moment, media commentary, posts to forums like this, texts and emails to current affairs programmes and letters to the papers are dominated by people who clearly have a fundamental hatred of Catholicism and are joyfully seizing this opportunity which has been handed to them on a plate by weak, incompetent and in some cases cynical bishops.........

While I agree this may be the case for some I don't understand why everyone who criticises the establishment for their wrongs is made any less catholic by some posters here.

Some want to see improvement and better times for the church and don't believe this can be done by "weak, incompetent and in some cases cynical bishops". This scandal has been ongoing for decades and up until recently some in the church did everything in their power to conceal the truth. They are not worthy in my opinion to help rebuild healing.

wolfsbane

dunleakelleher wrote: »

I presume that this linked article is completely unbiased and its quotes are taken IN context coming for an militant atheist.
Its like asking Bin Laden to write a article on the achievements of the Bush administration and how it has benefited the Muslim world. I did read it and followed all the links. But...

No, I gave the 'militant atheist' caveat, so I expected all would bear that in mind.

But do the arguments have any merit, no matter the source?

And the Rev.Tom Doyle has been campaigning for Catholic victims for many years. I remember him being ejected from the Vatican city by the pope's guard, when he went to ask for answers to the abuse in the American church.

ISAW

goat2 wrote: »

he knew what had gone on

getz wrote: »

i am not sure what you are saying,the church and the bishops was responsible for the large number of nuns[magdalene sisters] who are on record[a official irish report] for the locking up and abuse of over 60,000 young girls, some of were horrific abused and raped,or doesent that count ?

Very good point. how many cases and what bishop was responsible?
you refer to a report so ill leave you to quote from it ans we wil see which Bishiop was responsible.
If it was Bradey and he was a Bishop then then I'm prepared to admit that.

You claim 60,000 cases so if you can link Brady to ONE of these I'll admit it!

underclass

Michael G wrote: »

Not just the young people. My niece, who was "prepared" for her First Communion two years ago by a nun of the Vatican II generation, told me she had received the "holy bread". Perhaps the visitations (which are like audits) will do something about this kind of thing.

Indeed. We can only pray. I am hoping that it can all be done through re-education and re-invigoration of the faith - not by imposing change and causing divisions. The leadership of the senior clergy will be crucial in this regard.

I predict there will be some serious re-organisation of the church structures: I think at this stage, a smaller truer church is inevitable. There is a serious problem with the schools, teacher training colleges and seminaries. I would go far to say that if you're truly concerned about your vocation, you should go study abroad (e.g. priestly fraternity of St Peter). If you're a teacher who wants to impart your faith onto the next generation, steer well clear of St Pat's or Mary I cos chances are you'll come out an alcoholic and have had 50 sexual partners. If you're a parent, there are some decent schools left thank God, but I think we need an Irish version of Chavagnes to educate the next generation of Catholic leaders in addition to the current network of fine educational establishments.

underclass

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Everybody knows you test for homosexuality by playing an Abba or Petshop Boys song in their company and watch for them tapping their feet. Also they could be asked their opinion on the interior design of the school. If they offer an opinion they are definately queer...:cool:

Lol. I think the best way is just to ask them straight out. I.e. "Are you that way inclined?", "Do you act on your homosexual urges?" and "Are you in full communion with the Catholic Church?" Very important questions to be answered. It's not rocket science. I don't know why an active homosexual would even want a job in the Catholic Church. Mass-goers don't go applying for jobs in the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network. It's the equality Nazis gone mad to try and change laws such that Catholic schools can't maintain their ethos. Let common sense prevail. Government interference in every detail of our lives is not desirable in a free society.

philiporeilly

ISAW wrote: »

Very good point. how many cases and what bishop was responsible?
you refer to a report so ill leave you to quote from it ans we wil see which Bishiop was responsible.
If it was Bradey and he was a Bishop then then I'm prepared to admit that.

You claim 60,000 cases so if you can link Brady to ONE of these I'll admit it!

Brady may have done his duty but he admits he made a mistake. He continued that mistake every single day up until recently when it eventually became knowledge.

Coincidentally during that time he rose through the ranks of the church that also tried everything possible to conceal the truth. Obviously he wouldnt have got to that position if he was a man of good conscience and spoke out against these wrongs.

He should leave and soon.

ISAW

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Bull****, when people tried to report church sex crimes, they were shunned by those involved in the church both lay and clerical people.

But you have already been given evidence that the church authorities DID investigate them. They might have done nothing after that but they did look into the matter and file reports.

Aqlso the people to which we are talking about "reporting" criminal charges to here are the Gardai. Whether or njot the church or anyone else shunned people (which you have not proven) it remains that the main contention of the claims against Brady is that he should have reported to the Gardai. If you are not saying the state apparatus was not adequate to deal with the issue then you can't say Brady reporting anything to them would have resorted in any outcome.

There was an example only recently

The problem here is "only recently" . You judge Brady on what he should have done but others on what they did "only recently"

where a former member of the gardai spoke about what happened when he confronted a priest over abuse claims. The bishop, other (so called religious) gardai, and the church going locals all began a campaign of hatred.

I know of such retired gardai one of whom is now dead and who was a good Catholic who would not have taken any such crap from "pius" people. at the same time he served whern as he said one lived in threat of a "bang of a crozier" . This applied even to cabinet ministers. But people also lived in awe of bank managers and even of Gardai. And indeed the person of which i speak got a lot of things "sorted" . Im sure many parish prioests did the same. It was a different time and things like that were better than they are now. SAdly as we all know some things were worse. But they didn't have to be.

One good catholic even took the time to take a sh*t in an envelope and deliver it to the former guards house. The sad thing was the garda was in fact very much correct in his suspicians and the priest is now serving a hefty sentence, he was eventually found out to be a horrific serial rapist who was moved from parish to parish to avoid prosecution.

What was the clerics name and what sort of a sentence is he serving and for what crime?

The same went for families who didn't report or give statements about abuse. They didn't do so because the church instilled fear in people at that time.
So you cannot pass the blame onto non church people so easily, because in many of cases the church are still the root cause.

I dont entirely accept this. The church had HUGE influence but only inb the sense that the "cap in hand" peasant had replaced the British hierarchy with a "Catholic Ireland" idealism. Yuo have to remember that most of the people in industrial schools were from poor backgrounds. people the church looked after in the famine and after. "Croppies lie down" became mabe replaced with "laity lie down" but there IS a cultural context!