Child buried in unmarked grave

mezuzaj

My mother mentioned last night that her first child died before she gave birth. The nuns gave the baby to my Father who buried in family plot, but unmarked. She had spina bifida and was still born.

That was the reality of the day for many children born like this, they were not given funerals. Not just in Catholic Church but also in protestant, it was the way things were done 60 years ago.

There are hundreds of unmarked mass graves around Ireland, from the 1840's to 1950's. This is the historical realities in a era of poverty and pre-antibiotics/medical care that we have today.

It seems some what to shine the spotlight on what some Catholic institutions did.. but they forget that Protestant institutions did the exact same.. If a Child died a birth they were also buried in an unmarked grave. That was the thinking of the day.

There are many thousands of unmarked graves around Ireland of Children who died at Child birth in an era when child mortality was 5-6% that has nothing to do with any Catholic or Protestant institution.

Kiwi in IE

I think that dying of malnutrition in a 'care' home that was funded by the state to provide the necessities of life is seriously concerning though? Also it dosn't sound as if these children were stillbirths, the oldest one found was nine I believe (I might be wrong there). I doubt that it was common practice to throw the bodies of older babies, toddlers and children into communal pits (or septic tanks). There is no excusing it!

newmug

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

Flippyfloppy

mezuzaj wrote: »

My mother mentioned last night that her first child died before she gave birth. The nuns gave the baby to my Father who buried in family plot, but unmarked. She had spina bifida and was still born.

That was the reality of the day for many children born like this, they were not given funerals. Not just in Catholic Church but also in protestant, it was the way things were done 60 years ago.

There are hundreds of unmarked mass graves around Ireland, from the 1840's to 1950's. This is the historical realities in a era of poverty and pre-antibiotics/medical care that we have today.

It seems some what to shine the spotlight on what some Catholic institutions did.. but they forget that Protestant institutions did the exact same.. If a Child died a birth they were also buried in an unmarked grave. That was the thinking of the day.

There are many thousands of unmarked graves around Ireland of Children who died at Child birth in an era when child mortality was 5-6% that has nothing to do with any Catholic or Protestant institution.

It was 60% in the Home in Tuam. Weird.

Manach

I've commented elsewhere on this. One thing at least I'd like to see (and I reckon most people would) is an objective review of the research done by the Tuam historian so as to examine this, place it in context, and if there were actionable legal evidence to progress it further.

tommy2bad

I'm pretty sure their some law being broken here, that needs examination. Also the church itself needs to look into this.
As to babies being buried without the attention of the church, it happened and it's regrettable. Bad enough loosing a child without the added hurt of it being treated as shameful and best not mentioned.
Limbo had something to do with this practise, the notion that the unbabtised could not go to heaven and therefore couldn't be buried as Christians in consecrated ground.
Article here looking at this practise.;http://www.scribd.com/doc/227930657/Outside-of-life-traditions-of-infant-burial-in-Ireland-from-cillin-to-cist-Nyree-Finlay
To use this as some form of excuse for what happened in Tuam is insulting to both the victims of Bon Secours and the poor unfortunates who were neglected due to ignorance.

visual

Church would have records unless they weren't christened and the nine year old didn't made first communion before throwing them all into sceptic tank.

Horrible people doing horrible things

jjpep

mezuzaj wrote: »

My mother mentioned last night that her first child died before she gave birth. The nuns gave the baby to my Father who buried in family plot, but unmarked. She had spina bifida and was still born.

That was the reality of the day for many children born like this, they were not given funerals. Not just in Catholic Church but also in protestant, it was the way things were done 60 years ago.

There are hundreds of unmarked mass graves around Ireland, from the 1840's to 1950's. This is the historical realities in a era of poverty and pre-antibiotics/medical care that we have today.

It seems some what to shine the spotlight on what some Catholic institutions did.. but they forget that Protestant institutions did the exact same.. If a Child died a birth they were also buried in an unmarked grave. That was the thinking of the day.

There are many thousands of unmarked graves around Ireland of Children who died at Child birth in an era when child mortality was 5-6% that has nothing to do with any Catholic or Protestant institution.

What is the point your making? All I'm getting from is that religious people of all flavours put their faith ahead of others dignity, which I'm not sure is the point your aiming for.

DarkJager

newmug wrote: »

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

[Snip]

bumper234

tommy2bad wrote: »

I'm pretty sure their some law being broken here, that needs examination. Also the church itself needs to look into this.
As to babies being buried without the attention of the church, it happened and it's regrettable. Bad enough loosing a child without the added hurt of it being treated as shameful and best not mentioned.
Limbo had something to do with this practise, the notion that the unbabtised could not go to heaven and therefore couldn't be buried as Christians in consecrated ground.
Article here looking at this practise.;http://www.scribd.com/doc/227930657/Outside-of-life-traditions-of-infant-burial-in-Ireland-from-cillin-to-cist-Nyree-Finlay
To use this as some form of excuse for what happened in Tuam is insulting to both the victims of Bon Secours and the poor unfortunates who were neglected due to ignorance.

They were not "buried" at best they were DUMPED in a cess pit and left to rot. As for the church having no knowledge? :rolleyes:

PopePalpatine

newmug wrote: »

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

It's not Catholics as a whole that are evil, but please, continue with your persecution complex like David Quinn on meth.

Sonics2k

newmug wrote: »

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

I love that you can't tell the difference between the two, it explains so much.

tommy2bad

bumper234 wrote: »

They were not "buried" at best they were DUMPED in a cess pit and left to rot. As for the church having no knowledge? :rolleyes:

Sorry bumper, I was referring to the stillborn and un baptised babies buried in unconsecrated ground.
Reread the post and you'll see what I'm saying is to compair that with what happened in Tuam is an insult to both.

homer911

Lets not extrapolate from this!

Tuam seems to have been particularly bad, it doesn't mean we have to extrapolate to the whole Catholic church, or even the whole Christian church in Ireland. We are all repulsed by this with the benefit of a more informed and enlightened era. Let's wait for the investigation before jumping to conclusions

SteelyDanJalapeno

Why would God do this?

bumper234

TiltedBrain wrote: »

Why would God do this?

Which one?

Kiwi in IE

newmug wrote: »

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

It appears to me that foetuses (specifically when the pregnant woman does not want to be pregnant) are considered by the RCC to be so much more important than born children. Are you able to explain why?

newmug

TiltedBrain wrote: »

Why would God do this?

He didn't. Some humans did.

newmug

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

It appears to me that foetuses (specifically when the pregnant woman does not want to be pregnant) are considered by the RCC to be so much more important than born children. Are you able to explain why?

No, I value all life, born and unborn. Your assumption is wrong.

Kiwi in IE

newmug wrote: »

No, I value all life, born and unborn. Your assumption is wrong.

I was not making any assumption about you. I am talking about the position of the RCC, who seem to consider foetuses as sacred, but children not so? Is there any explanation for this? It is possibly unfair to ask ordinary Catholics to explain on behalf of the RCC, but I think the establishment itself needs to provide the public with some explanation for what appears to be a massive hypocrisy.

newmug

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I was not making any assumption about you. I am talking about the position of the RCC, who seem to consider foetuses as sacred, but children not so? Is there any explanation for this? It is possibly unfair to ask ordinary Catholics to explain on behalf of the RCC, but I think the establishment itself needs to provide the public with some explanation for what appears to be a massive hypocrisy.

I'm sorry, but you ARE making an assumption about me. I am the RCC. Every time you blame the RCC for something, you are including me in that blame. Neither I, nor any other of the 1.5 billion Catholics (including the Pope) did this, condone it, or even knew about it until now. Obviously *somebody* buried those children, for all we know they mightn't even have been Catholic at all! Who are YOU to say how they identified themselves? Don't go around making judgements until you know the facts.

nelly17

newmug wrote: »

Typical boards!


Boards 2013: "Legalise abortion, free abortions for all, Catholics are evil for opposing this liberty"


Boards 2014: "Oh look, a big pile of dead babies! Catholics are evil, they obviously killed them. Those poor babies, Catholics are evil, blah blah blah"

With 2775 posts you seem to be enjoying it

Ash.J.Williams

newmug wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you ARE making an assumption about me. I am the RCC. Every time you blame the RCC for something, you are including me in that blame. Neither I, nor any other of the 1.5 billion Catholics (including the Pope) did this, condone it, or even knew about it until now. Obviously *somebody* buried those children, for all we know they mightn't even have been Catholic at all! Who are YOU to say how they identified themselves? Don't go around making judgements until you know the facts.

a mate of mine was anally raped by a priest, and the RCC felt best to move him to a more urban area where he raped again. I am blaming you for that.

o1s1n

newmug wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you ARE making an assumption about me. I am the RCC. Every time you blame the RCC for something, you are including me in that blame.

You are a member of the catholic church. You are not the entity that is the catholic church. That is a bizarre comment to make.

newmug wrote: »

Neither I, nor any other of the 1.5 billion Catholics (including the Pope) did this, condone it, or even knew about it until now.

Now you're making assumptions. How do you know that some of the people involved in this aren't alive today and members of the catholic church?

We won't know the full details until there is a proper investigation.

However, through the powers of reasoning and deduction, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that at least some people involved in that home were responsible.

Manach

o1s1n wrote: »

We won't know the full details until there is a proper investigation.

However, through the powers of reasoning and deduction, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that at least some people involved in that home were responsible.

That same reasoning must be based, as you say, on an investigation. This would need to access whatever source records that were used in the initial historian's analysis and place in contrast with the UK at the time in similar institutes, and/or with continental Europe (Sweden, USSR, etc).
This would allow empirical evidence to show how much of the mortality rate could be correlated to normal causes of the time, or due to possible neglect, and (as other commentators as claiming) willful legal neglience.
Evidence that needs to show the latter has to beyond reasonable doubt so has to adhere to standards laid down in circumstances where such statistical proof is used and where context is important to investigate outliers; [source textbook on Maths and evidence]

This would be preferred instead of just acting on media reports just because it fits into a prevailing narrative


And as an aside, as anecdotal evidence has been introduction : bar one exception, the RCC have always treated immediate family with a dignity both here and where ever the economic situation force them to emigrate.

_Brian

This seems to have been a truly horrible time in our past..

These institutions were funded by the state, ran by the religious orders and the general population were very glad of their services to hide their "scandalous" unmarried mothers, apparently never questioning or caring when the women did return where the babies had gone.. The way I see it there was a breakdown in society as a whole to allow this happen..

Surely the best way forward would be an investigation team from outside Ireland to take the lead on this issue, have an amnesty based on full and frank disclosure by both church and state and lets have it out there, warts and all.

Kiwi in IE

newmug wrote: »

Obviously *somebody* buried those children, for all we know they mightn't even have been Catholic at all! Who are YOU to say how they identified themselves? Don't go around making judgements until you know the facts.

The Catholic nuns might not have been Catholic???

tommy2bad

Manach wrote: »

That same reasoning must be based, as you say, on an investigation. This would need to access whatever source records that were used in the initial historian's analysis and place in contrast with the UK at the time in similar institutes, and/or with continental Europe (Sweden, USSR, etc).
This would allow empirical evidence to show how much of the mortality rate could be correlated to normal causes of the time, or due to possible neglect, and (as other commentators as claiming) willful legal neglience.
Evidence that needs to show the latter has to beyond reasonable doubt so has to adhere to standards laid down in circumstances where such statistical proof is used and where context is important to investigate outliers; [source textbook on Maths and evidence]

This would be preferred instead of just acting on media reports just because it fits into a prevailing narrative


And as an aside, as anecdotal evidence has been introduction : bar one exception, the RCC have always treated immediate family with a dignity both here and where ever the economic situation force them to emigrate.

Theirs a report drawn up at the time of the mother and child debate that shows the difference in mortality rates for children of unmarried and married mothers, it's over twice the rate for unmarried mothers.
Lets not try to obscure what happened here. In Tuam unmarried mothers had their babies held and neglected to the point of death. They were then unceremoniously dumped in a handy receptor. The fact that they used a cess pit shows the attitude of the 'carers' towards these people.
Their is no excuse for what happened, neither comparison with other country's or guff about poverty, this was driven by callousness and cruelty. Done by representatives of the RCC. It's a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance.

Galwayguy35

newmug wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you ARE making an assumption about me. I am the RCC. Every time you blame the RCC for something, you are including me in that blame. Neither I, nor any other of the 1.5 billion Catholics (including the Pope) did this, condone it, or even knew about it until now. Obviously *somebody* buried those children, for all we know they mightn't even have been Catholic at all! Who are YOU to say how they identified themselves? Don't go around making judgements until you know the facts.

I'm Catholic as well but it looks like the nuns knew well what was going on, most of the nuns in those places were brutes and there is no getting away from this.

Safehands

newmug wrote: »

He didn't. Some humans did.

No, no, no, his representatives on Earth did it, not humans!

PucaMama

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

a mate of mine was anally raped by a priest, and the RCC felt best to move him to a more urban area where he raped again. I am blaming you for that.

why????

Blowfish

newmug wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you ARE making an assumption about me. I am the RCC. Every time you blame the RCC for something, you are including me in that blame.

Surely though, by your own definition if you are the RCC, then the nuns involved in Tuam are the RCC as well? Wouldn't this atrocity then be directly the responsibility of the RCC?

newmug

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

a mate of mine was anally raped by a priest, and the RCC felt best to move him to a more urban area where he raped again. I am blaming you for that.

I know you are, wrongfully. I didn't rape your mate. Blame the rapist, not others belonging to the same race, nationality, religion, eye colour etc.

Safehands wrote: »

No, no, no, his representatives on Earth did it, not humans!

Eh?

Blowfish wrote: »

Surely though, by your own definition if you are the RCC, then the nuns involved in Tuam are the RCC as well? Wouldn't this atrocity then be directly the responsibility of the RCC?

NO! It would be the direct responsibility of the perpetrators, regardless of their religion! If this was done by atheists, would you hold ALL atheists responsible?

Blowfish

newmug wrote: »

NO! It would be the direct responsibility of the perpetrators, regardless of their religion! If this was done by atheists, would you hold ALL atheists responsible?

Nope, which is entirely the point being made. Blaming the RCC as an institution for these atrocities does not mean you are blaming every single individual member.

Manach

tommy2bad wrote: »

Lets not try to obscure what happened here. In Tuam unmarried mothers had their babies held and neglected to the point of death. They were then unceremoniously dumped in a handy receptor. The fact that they used a cess pit shows the attitude of the 'carers' towards these people.
Their is no excuse for what happened, neither comparison with other country's or guff about poverty, this was driven by callousness and cruelty. Done by representatives of the RCC. It's a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance.

Highly emotive, very much in the vein of politicans demanding immediate retribution and so contributing nothing much. Poverty is never mere guff but was a grinding fact of life for most people people in this island for the vast majority of their existence. No post-modern after the facts framework of rights would have fixed that reality, nor will skipping past the report phase to judgement.

tommy2bad

Well Manach, unlike you I find it hard to look at this in a cold rational matter. It is highly emotive, I am a little concerned that someone would not be emotionally affected by what happened.
By the way, it's not just the church, the nuns, and the state overseers that I condemn for this. I'mm willing to get out the distemper brush and a whole barell of tar, the entire society of the time deserves to hang, their head in shame at the least.

Galwayguy35

I was talking to some people from Tuam today, they didn't seem to have any more information on what is going to happen, everyone seems to be in the dark at the moment as to what the next course of action will be.

lmaopml

tommy2bad wrote: »

Well Manach, unlike you I find it hard to look at this in a cold rational matter. It is highly emotive, I am a little concerned that someone would not be emotionally affected by what happened.
By the way, it's not just the church, the nuns, and the state overseers that I condemn for this. I'mm willing to get out the distemper brush and a whole barell of tar, the entire society of the time deserves to hang, their head in shame at the least.

Tommy you might as well bury humanity and give future society the medal of honour, just well because...there are so many goodies there and ye now all the baddies are here..lol...



Most likely the same thing will happen again and again and again, everywhere imperfect people are in fact - and in fact it is happening right now somewhere on the globe we populate and mere 'people' are doing something about it right now, and we will never know their names because they are not news worthy - but they are there nonetheless, still living with this stigma, the name calling and still they carry on..hundreds of thousands of nameless faceless people are this day giving up their own lives for the benefit of others simply because it the right thing to do.

It amazes me even 'why' they do it... I'm quite glad of them however!

Something tells me that they are not quite as daft as your average facebooker or 'Rag' reader...

I think there must indeed be such a thing as 'Wisdom from the Spirit'

PlainP

Trying to explain to my children about this at the moment.

I told them they were very lucky to have been born in the 21st century as I was not married when I had them.

If it had of been 40 years ago they probably would have been one if those poor babies.

The anger I feel towards the church and its followers can not be measured.

You should all be ashamed to associate yourselves with an institution that would do this.

Hiding behind the whole "just because some people are like that, we are not all like that" gets weary.

Shame on the church and all it stands for.

lmaopml

PlainP wrote: »

Trying to explain to my children about this at the moment.

I told them they were very lucky to have been born in the 21st century as I was not married when I had them.

If it had of been 40 years ago they probably would have been one if those poor babies.

The anger I feel towards the church and its followers can not be measured.

You should all be ashamed to associate yourselves with an institution that would do this.

Hiding behind the whole "just because some people are like that, we are not all like that" gets weary.

Shame on the church and all it stands for.

Are you trying to explain this to babies at the moment? My Children haven't got a solitary clue about this at the moment...they are fast asleep right now. My little one is so proud to have made his First Holy Communion - and I am very proud that he did so with such understanding too..

To be perfectly honest I think it's a little weary blaming all Catholic's on every single bad thing that ever happens ever...it's getting old.

YES, we do 'feel' YES, we do know that there are terrible things that happened, YES, we can't change history - but YES, we do recognise the good too, because most of us have seen more of that than the other.

Not every Catholic child was abused or tortured or terribly treated as is commonly newsworthy etc.... there are just normal people who really really don't identify with that because we never experienced a bad Catholic, even being surrounded by them, it never particularly had a place with them. There are, and I would imagine for the most part Catholics who only have very good memories and admiration too - not this bitter spirit. However, it's our job to deal with it and to make amends for those of us who have done wrong..

I'm sorry some of us did wrong, there are so many many of us..

Obliq

It was GOOD catholics who couldn't tolerate the catholic "shame" of unmarried women getting pregnant in our society, not just bad ones. Bad moral codes require good people to do bad things. Simples.

foggy_lad

mezuzaj wrote: »

My mother mentioned last night that her first child died before she gave birth. The nuns gave the baby to my Father who buried in family plot, but unmarked. She had spina bifida and was still born.

That was the reality of the day for many children born like this, they were not given funerals. Not just in Catholic Church but also in protestant, it was the way things were done 60 years ago.

There are hundreds of unmarked mass graves around Ireland, from the 1840's to 1950's. This is the historical realities in a era of poverty and pre-antibiotics/medical care that we have today.

It seems some what to shine the spotlight on what some Catholic institutions did.. but they forget that Protestant institutions did the exact same.. If a Child died a birth they were also buried in an unmarked grave. That was the thinking of the day.

There are many thousands of unmarked graves around Ireland of Children who died at Child birth in an era when child mortality was 5-6% that has nothing to do with any Catholic or Protestant institution.

There is a big difference between a plot at the back wall of a graveyard or childrens home even if outside the wall and hundreds of corpses wrapped in linen and put into an old septic tank to decompose. In my opinion it says everything about what was thought of these babies and children.

lmaopml

Not so 'simples' - simple people do simple things, and those who don't know or understand the 'good' of what they have been given. They only know human standards.

Our Lady was the first well known 'single' parent that Catholics are taught about who faced more than your average single parent today. Alot to consider there...and a hell of a lot to admire about the Lady.

PlainP

lmaopml wrote: »

Are you trying to explain this to babies at the moment? My Children haven't got a solitary clue about this at the moment...they are fast asleep right now. My little one is so proud to have made his First Holy Communion - and I am very proud that he did so with such understanding too..

To be perfectly honest I think it's a little weary blaming all Catholic's on every single bad thing that ever happens ever...it's getting old.

YES, we do 'feel' YES, we do know that there are terrible things that happened, YES, we can't change history - but YES, we do recognise the good too, because most of us have seen more of that than the other.

Not every Catholic child was abused or tortured or terribly treated as is commonly newsworthy etc.... there are just normal people who really really don't identify with that because we never experienced a bad Catholic, even being surrounded by them, it never particularly had a place with them. There are, and I would imagine for the most part Catholics who only have very good memories and admiration too - not this bitter spirit. However, it's our job to deal with it and to make amends for those of us who have done wrong..

I'm sorry some of us did wrong, there are so many many of us..

My children watch the news and asked me about it.

I explained how nuns and priests supposedly working on behalf of an all powerful figure in the sky let these atrocities happen to women who were not married.

Are you afraid to tell your son the truth behind the catholic church and it's stance on unmarried mothers?

Are you afraid he will turn around and question the reason he is part of an institution that would do these horrible things.

Your child is not stupid he will one day question you and your reasoning behind indoctrinating him into such a hateful corrupt organisation.

I hope you have your answer ready for him.

Kiwi in IE

I spoke to a woman the other day who was making feeble attempts to defend the church when this issue was bring discussed. The 'different time' defense. This despite that out of her four children, all whom have children of their own, only one was married prior to the birth of their child. Basically out of her eight grandchildren, 7 could have been these babies, but still "it was a different time". 'Different time' is not a reasonable defense when talking about the 1960's. If the last baby was buried there in 1961, that makes them not even 2 decades older than myself and I am in my 30's. My older cousins were born in the 60's (fortunately not in Ireland as their parents didn't marry until after the first two were born).

If you look at the time it took to legalise contraception and divorce and the current state of abortion laws and education system, the influence of the RCC continues to ensure that it is constantly a 'different time' in Ireland compared to the rest of the first world where personal freedoms are concerned.

Obliq

lmaopml wrote: »

Not so 'simples' - simple people do simple things, and those who don't know or understand the 'good' of what they have been given. They only know human standards.

Our Lady was the first well known 'single' parent that Catholics are taught about who faced more than your average single parent today. Alot to consider there...and a hell of a lot to admire about the Lady.

What does that even mean in relation to the kind of "charity" that was shown by the religious orders, AND the society at the time to babies, children and mothers who were incarcerated and abused by those self-same catholic morals? Your reference to the "Lady" makes no sense in this context, especially since the crux of this whole sorry catholic problem with women having sex outside marriage is based on the exception of your "Lady" from the traditional shaming (due to the clever get out clause that is the notion of immaculate conception)

foggy_lad

_Brian wrote: »

This seems to have been a truly horrible time in our past..

These institutions were funded by the state, ran by the religious orders and the general population were very glad of their services to hide their "scandalous" unmarried mothers, apparently never questioning or caring when the women did return where the babies had gone.. The way I see it there was a breakdown in society as a whole to allow this happen..

Surely the best way forward would be an investigation team from outside Ireland to take the lead on this issue, have an amnesty based on full and frank disclosure by both church and state and lets have it out there, warts and all.

Anyone daring to make comment or question what was going on would be ruined and would probably have to leave the area or even emigrate and even then the scandal of questioning the clergy could follow you around the world!

Why did the "good" nuns and brothers speak out against the rapes beatings and systematic neglect of thousands and thousands of children?

Benny_Cake

foggy_lad wrote: »

Why did the "good" nuns and brothers speak out against the rapes beatings and systematic neglect of thousands and thousands of children?

Father Edward Flanagan, of Boy's Town fame, visited Ireland in 1946. After visiting some industrial schools, he described them as a "disgrace to the nation". For that, he was ripped to shreds by the establishment. While not directly related to the mother and baby homes, it was a symptom of a disordered society that tried to hide it's "problems" behind high walls. Undoubtedly the people who staffed these homes were from the same communities, even the same families, as the women sent there. People talk about these institutions as if they were some type of thing imposed on us by the church. It would be easier to understand if they were, but unfortunately society at the time was determined to offload these women and the church just so happened to be the institution that provided a place to offload them. The religious orders had neither the facilities nor the training to deal with this, and more importantly, the sisters, by and large, had the same prejudiced mindset as the wider community.

Fr Flanagan's words on returning to America say it all:

What you need over there is to have someone shake you loose from your smugness and satisfaction and set an example by punishing those who are guilty of cruelty, ignorance and neglect of their duties in high places . . . I wonder what God's judgment will be with reference to those who hold the deposit of faith and who fail in their God-given stewardship of little children.

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/boys-town-founder-fr-flanagan-warned-irish-church-about-abuse-46390952-237644371.html

Obliq

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Father Edward Flanagan, of Boy's Town fame, visited Ireland in 1946. After visiting some industrial schools, he described them as a "disgrace to the nation". For that, he was ripped to shreds by the establishment. While not directly related to the mother and baby homes, it was a symptom of a disordered society that tried to hide it's "problems" behind high walls. Undoubtedly the people who staffed these homes were from the same communities, even the same families, as the women sent there. People talk about these institutions as if they were some type of thing imposed on us by the church. It would be easier to understand if they were, but unfortunately society at the time was determined to offload these women and the church just so happened to be the institution that provided a place to offload them. The religious orders had neither the facilities nor the training to deal with this, and more importantly, the sisters, by and large, had the same prejudiced mindset as the wider community.

Benny, I agree with you but with one vital difference. I wouldn't gloss over how society got these notions of impropriety and shame in the first place. Of course the sisters, and all other orders in the country shared the same prejudiced mindset as the wider community - the RCC had already been bating it into people for generations. WHY was society determined to offload these women? Because of the shame. Where did the shaming come from? From the church. IT STILL DOES.

At this stage we have to ask why does it still suit us so well as an Irish people to not question ourselves about the kind of people we were to have listened to and obeyed the RCC for so long? Would we prefer not to have to develop our own moral code, as it's much easier to have it done for us? Why yes.....then we could also leave all the other hard decisions to the church too - and the education, and the health care of the nation. Is this still ok with people?

Jesus H., we are the most emotionally and socially immature nation in Europe.

tommy2bad

lmaopml wrote: »

Tommy you might as well bury humanity and give future society the medal of honour, just well because...there are so many goodies there and ye now all the baddies are here..lol...



Most likely the same thing will happen again and again and again, everywhere imperfect people are in fact - and in fact it is happening right now somewhere on the globe we populate and mere 'people' are doing something about it right now, and we will never know their names because they are not news worthy - but they are there nonetheless, still living with this stigma, the name calling and still they carry on..hundreds of thousands of nameless faceless people are this day giving up their own lives for the benefit of others simply because it the right thing to do.

It amazes me even 'why' they do it... I'm quite glad of them however!

Something tells me that they are not quite as daft as your average facebooker or 'Rag' reader...

I think there must indeed be such a thing as 'Wisdom from the Spirit'

I think I wasn't clear enough with that post. My anger is not directed at any individual at the time other than in a general disappointed way.
I don't doubt for one minute that all of them thought they were doing the best thing or at least the best hey could. Evil isn't the act of some depraved individual, it a systemic thing. We can't see it when we are in the middle of it. Possibly this blindness is original sin. The ability to square our conscience with the what we do and what we want to do. We define people as 'the other' and once this is done then all kinds of things are permissible that would cause outrage if done to one of 'us'.
Is their some future time when things like this won't happen? I hope so but don't hold much hope for it. Today we do the same thing to children in our society, traveller children have a 4 times higher mortality than settled children, dose this cause outrage? Look at the death rate for children in care, outrage caused? We have a panic at the homelessness problem now 'ordinary people' are in danger of homelessness. What were the homeless before now extraordinary? No they were 'the other'.

However just saying 'that's the way things are' isn't an answer nor an excuse. Sometimes anger is the right response, in this case the only right response.
If I'mm emotional about what happened, how do you think I feel at the deep desire for this to just go away shown by the establishment? They ignored this story until it went global, our media didn't cover it, our state didn't respond at all and even now it an inadequate response.
Again, dead babies in a septic tank.... a real thing, not the opening of some tasteless joke that ends with 'cant empty the rocks with a pitchfork'.
For God sake, if that doesn't get you angry, you need to think about your priorities.

Safehands

Obliq wrote: »

I wouldn't gloss over how society got these notions of impropriety and shame in the first place. Of course the sisters, and all other orders in the country shared the same prejudiced mindset as the wider community - the RCC had already been bating it into people for generations. WHY was society determined to offload these women? Because of the shame. Where did the shaming come from? From the church. IT STILL DOES.
At this stage we have to ask why does it still suit us so well as an Irish people to not question ourselves about the kind of people we were to have listened to and obeyed the RCC for so long? Would we prefer not to have to develop our own moral code, as it's much easier to have it done for us? Why yes.....then we could also leave all the other hard decisions to the church too - and the education, and the health care of the nation. Is this still ok with people?
Jesus H., we are the most emotionally and socially immature nation in Europe.

The revelation of this tomb / tank / burial place seems horrible. The posts here are very emotional, which is quite understandable. We must remember though, the Ireland of the early to mid twentieth century was a very different place to the country we live in today. Anybody under the age of forty could not imagine what life was like for the children who grew up and were educated in Ireland. Authority figures at that time could basically do what they liked to children, with the full knowledge of parents and society. I was in school in the 60's. Myself and my peers were subjected to daily "corporal punishment". What that meant was that virtually every day, we were beaten. These beatings were not for misbehaving, they were administered for not knowing or understanding what we were taught or maybe for being late for school. The severity, or the method of punishment was at the discretion of the teacher. People with sadistic tendencies, who entered the teaching profession, had a field day. I remember one boy who sat beside me, being dragged out of his seat by his hair, thrown to the ground and kicked across the room by the teacher, until he was out of the class. Nobody said a word. Another day, I had a broken leg and I was on crutches. I was five minutes late for the afternoon classes and I was put standing outside the room for two hours, on my crutches. Parents knew what was happening but daren't say a word. I must add that these events were not perpetrated by any religious order. These were lay teachers. I actually found most of the Christian Brothers who taught me, to be very nice, humane people. There were some exceptions of course, but they were basically quite nice men.

I mention these things by way of caution. Society's values in the 1940's, 50's and 60's were not the same as we enjoy today. The church laid down rules, which were quite draconian. Shame and guilt played a large role in their teachings. Irish people were not as well educated as they are today. Their moral understanding and beliefs had been handed down by the church to previous generations and they, together with the church, passed them on to their children. If a young Catholic girl became pregnant, it was regarded as shameful. Quite often, nobody knew about it, not even her own father. That was the way things were in the Ireland of the time. The government were complicit in everything that happened. Everybody in Irish society either knew what was going on, or if they didn't know, they would not have been surprised.
Education helped to free the Irish people. Corporal punishment was abolished in the early 80's and children began to enjoy the experience of going to school.

It is easy to blame the church, blame the government or blame society. I think the truth is far more complex than that.