Wives and mothers of Ireland covered up abuse says Wexford Priest

patff

“Few can accept my next point and, of course, it’s so politically incorrect to make the point, but there is another category of people that will match the failure of the bishops, and probably surpass it; the wives and mothers of Ireland, not exclusively wives and mothers but far too many who failed miserably to deal with the abuse of their children by other family members.”
“A multitude of people are implicated in this cover-up. I believe it is a significant percentage of the population. Nobody in this once sovereign democratic republic wants to hear this.”

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/wives-and-mothers-ireland-covered-abuse-says-wexford-priest

Here's the question.......If a wife or mother in this "once sovereign democratic republic" of ours was to make a complaint about abuse of their children, who do you think would be the first person to tell them that it might be better, for the sake of the family, if they kept it under wraps ?

My answer: The local parish priest.

bmaxi

patff wrote: »

“Few can accept my next point and, of course, it’s so politically incorrect to make the point, but there is another category of people that will match the failure of the bishops, and probably surpass it; the wives and mothers of Ireland, not exclusively wives and mothers but far too many who failed miserably to deal with the abuse of their children by other family members.”
“A multitude of people are implicated in this cover-up. I believe it is a significant percentage of the population. Nobody in this once sovereign democratic republic wants to hear this.”

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/wives-and-mothers-ireland-covered-abuse-says-wexford-priest

Here's the question.......If a wife or mother in this "once sovereign democratic republic" of ours was to make a complaint about abuse of their children, who do you think would be the first person to tell them that it might be better, for the sake of the family, if they kept it under wraps ?

My answer: The local parish priest.

This is yet another shameful PR exercise by the the Church, casting around for scapegoats to take the heat off themselves.
I have no doubt that abuse by family members did and does take place but never on the institutional scale perpetrated by the religious, if discovered, it was also likely to be dealt with summarily, within the community or family. Abuse within Church or school was a whole different ball game, the Church was untouchable, it's Religious unreproachable.
I am no longer in the first (or even second) flush of my youth and I can remember the 1950s when the PP was not just the local churchman, he was akin to a feudal lord. No questions would be asked of him, his decisions were final and his opinion was paramount. I can quite well believe that mothers would not dare to challenge him or to accuse him or any of his curates. To do so would not only bring down the wrath of the church but would probably lead to their being shunned by neighbours, friends and even family, who themselves would not believe that any priest could be capable of such things.. Such was the hold the Church had, it would probably be considered preferable to keep your mouth shut than to have your entire family ostracised.
That's the way it was, the Church was the highest authority in the land, even Government ministers sought the approval of the Church in affairs of state and you only have to look at the way the last administration turned cartwheels to avoid exacting just recompense, to see the grip is only very slowly loosening.
Fr. Banville is just another in a long line of those seeking to downplay what is probably the most reprehensible era in the existence of this state. Unfortunately, in the Irish Catholic, he is likely to have an appreciative and receptive readership.

patff

Paddy Banville is making some rather serious allegations. Either he is engaging in supposition or he has hard facts. Whichever it is he ought to come clean with it, otherwise he is no more than a bluffer.

vicwatson

What a tosser:mad:

oldyouth

I'd pay more attention to what Maggie Hurley would have to say on any topic than a priest

purplepanda

Sod the priests, there only there for Baptisms, Weddings & Funerals as the Uncle always says :rolleyes: Meanwhile they still keep trying to convert the C of E Aunt

Why so many listened to their rubbish for decades is beyond me, when the "Brits" moved out the church certainly moved in according to my late father! :rolleyes:

Ian Whelan

Unreal. It's just not the point. Absolute scapegoating and a classic example of the class of ignorant and arrogant bastards that we are dealing with.

Mollmoments

If anything his point proves how scare mongered Irish people were by the church. His statement just proves how irresponsible the church are...there may be truth in what he says but the root of it is that the church told people what their values were and how to think and behave. They cannot separate themselves from that kind of oppression. I say well done to him for pointing out another toxic aspect of the church.

patff

Mollmoments wrote: »

If anything his point proves how scare mongered Irish people were by the church. His statement just proves how irresponsible the church are...there may be truth in what he says but the root of it is that the church told people what their values were and how to think and behave. They cannot separate themselves from that kind of oppression. I say well done to him for pointing out another toxic aspect of the church.

That's exactly what I thought about this.

The catholic church dominated the moral landscape of Ireland for generations. They set the standard and heaven help anyone who spoke out.

Paddy Banville doesn't realise it, but he's actually confirming to us what a rotten hearted bunch the catholic church really were, and often still are.

Mollmoments

This whole thing might make people wake up and realise that the church is a man made organisation aimed at being in control and power....it is not the religion and it is certainly not spiritual.

patff

Mollmoments wrote: »

This whole thing might make people wake up and realise that the church is a man made organisation aimed at being in control and power....it is not the religion and it is certainly not spiritual.

Well, I've no problem with the existence of the catholic church (or any other religion) as long as they behave themselves, show some respect and humility, and most importantly they don't try to convert me!!

bmaxi

Mollmoments wrote: »

This whole thing might make people wake up and realise that the church is a man made organisation aimed at being in control and power....it is not the religion and it is certainly not spiritual.

It has always been my opinion that being a Catholic is like belonging to a dance troupe. You just need to get the music and the actions right, faith and spirituality are secondary. Despite renouncing religion in my early teens I would still attend funerals, weddings etc. and it has always amused me how the actions we ridicule in other faiths and in hardline Communist regimes, the choreographed standing up, sitting down, speaking, singing, are mirrored in the Mass. Does anybody really know, or care, what is really supposed to be going on? I reckon with most people the idea is to get this over with and get out in the real world.
I don't mean to upset people who truly believe all this but to me,the greatest argument against the existence of God, is religion.

Mollmoments

patff wrote: »

Well, I've no problem with the existence of the catholic church (or any other religion) as long as they behave themselves, show some respect and humility, and most importantly they don't try to convert me!!

I agree! But the catholic church has done anything but behave and show respect and humility so how dare a representative of the church turn around and point the finger at a "loyal group of followers" who out of fear or misguidance of and from the church kept their mouths shut.

2 movies based on history (and I know they are dramatised and who knows how accurate they are etc) that really get the point across are "Elizabeth" and "Elizabeth - The Golden Age". Mary Queen of England is beheading protestants for not converting to catholicism while Elizabeth as successor to the throne fights off all demands on her to massacre catholics "I will not punish people for their beliefs" - she didn't have to -the catholic church themselves punished their followers for believing in them. Those films are set in the late 1500's - not much has changed...

bmaxi wrote: »

I don't mean to upset people who truly believe all this but to me,the greatest argument against the existence of God, is religion.

Exactly!

bmaxi

Mollmoments wrote: »

I agree! But the catholic church has done anything but behave and show respect and humility so how dare a representative of the church turn around and point the finger at a "loyal group of followers" who out of fear or misguidance of and from the church kept their mouths shut.

2 movies based on history (and I know they are dramatised and who knows how accurate they are etc) that really get the point across are "Elizabeth" and "Elizabeth - The Golden Age". Mary Queen of England is beheading protestants for not converting to catholicism while Elizabeth as successor to the throne fights off all demands on her to massacre catholics "I will not punish people for their beliefs" - she didn't have to -the catholic church themselves punished their followers for believing in them. Those films are set in the late 1500's - not much has changed...


Exactly!

The British have a tendency to massage history to suit themselves, I doubt if Elizabeth 1 was as white as she is painted and these were barbaric times across Europe.
In the "enlightened" 20th century however, we had, in Wexford, the Fethard Boycott, a sparkling example of Christian charity, Catholic church style. How many of the people who participated in that, did so of their own volition?
Even in my own family, I had a cousin whose best friend was C of I. My cousin was invited to attend her wedding and at the insistence of her mother, mentioned it to the PP. He informed her that she would have to obtain a "dispensation" from the Bishop to enter the church, that she was not to participate in any way in the service, that she was not to cover her head (as was the norm in those days) and she was to take a seat at the back of the church as far as possible away from the altar. When my cousin ignored this, her mother, fearing for her immortal soul, told the PP and if they had still been burning people at the stake, he would have been rushing out to buy the matches. This all happened in the last fifty years, in the island of saints and scholars and was one of the reasons for my falling out of love with the church.
I can't really blame the ordinary people for the way they stuck with the church, it provided a lot of the things they needed but I always compare religion with drug dealers, it'll provide for your needs as long as you pay the price.