The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

philiporeilly · 22-03-2010 9:57pm

underclass wrote: »

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.

You cannot ask them that!

philiporeilly wrote: »

...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.

And please do not associate people who rightfully fight for equality for all people to Nazis. The Nazis would have been more in line with your comments regarding sexual orientation than those who seek a free society.

ISAW · 22-03-2010 10:02pm

philiporeilly wrote: »

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.

One does not re commit the same sin by not admitting it in public! If i commit adultery and confess it and later become a banker and solve the national debt crises and later I decide to publicl admit was an adulterer do you think these are grounds for my being fired as national debt manager?

Coincidentally during that time he rose through the ranks of the church that also tried everything possible to conceal the truth.

that is interesting . Can you list all the things he tried along with supplying a timeline parallel to that of his getting offices in the church?

Obviously he wouldnt have got to that position if he was a man of good conscience and spoke out against these wrongs.

and that is "obvious" because???

He should leave and soon.

Bases on "obvious" evidence you don't supply and bald assertion of your unsupported personal opinion? And your record of involvement in doing anything for the Church is?

Stephentlig · 22-03-2010 10:03pm

as a lay person of the Church I understand that no letter will ever be enough, I've heard people say ''it'll be enough when he addresses this'' or ''it'll be enough if he had of said that'' several different people give their different and various views as to what he should of said but none are ever the same.

It therefore has dawned on me ( challenge it if you will ) that people are just ranting and raving, and that even if the letter did address the things they wished it would still never be enough.

Its time to move on and as a Lay person that is also scarred with the memory of abuse and knowing that it will always be there, I must look to God and move on, for Jesus Christ tells me I have a right to happiness and I'm not gonna allow my own ignorance to take that away from me.

Pax Christi
Stephen

Ash.J.Williams · 22-03-2010 10:13pm

ISAW wrote: »

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.

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

Sorry if i wasn't clear, he was only brought to justice recently, the crimes in question occurred in the early 80's. Molestation in my parish and buggery/rape in another.

dunleakelleher · 22-03-2010 10:35pm

wolfsbane wrote: »

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

Yes it does. And its a very true argument. Its a sorrowful state for the church

Seth Brundle · 22-03-2010 10:36pm

ISAW wrote: »

One does not re commit the same sin by not admitting it in public! If i commit adultery and confess it and later become a banker and solve the national debt crises and later I decide to publicl admit was an adulterer do you think these are grounds for my being fired as national debt manager?

In fairness, comparing a banker to a bishop isn't using a level playing pitch. One works in an industry based on greed whereas the other is supposed to work in an industry promoting morals

ISAW · 22-03-2010 10:39pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Sorry if i wasn't clear, he was only brought to justice recently, the crimes in question occurred in the early 80's. Molestation in my parish and buggery/rape in another.

Thanks for the clarification but Im still unclear. So the person was charged in the early 1980s of molestation and of buggery and convicted then or he offended then as was charged and convicted only recently?

Michael G · 22-03-2010 10:45pm

J C wrote: »

... 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 .... 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' ?

I don't know whether he has or not. In my own post, I told you what my niece was told about her First Communion, which was – for a Catholic – a lie. Are you assuming that this nun made it up on her own?

Michael G · 22-03-2010 10:49pm

wolfsbane wrote: »

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.

The term for that is grandstanding.

ISAW · 22-03-2010 10:50pm

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.

This is a very valid point. what is utility? But I would go further . Even if you were a dictator and knew of all the people involved Why sack all gardai nurses teachers social workers and parents who knew about child abuse and didn't do anything? Loads of people today know about child abuse and do nothing for the Church but offer complaints. How Irish! I haven't offered a solution up to now but mine is this:
The solution should be partly top down as the Pope and Bishops have instituted but it should also be bottom up. Laity have no real business informing Clergy about morality or theology or the sacraments. tHat should be the job of the clergy. Ownership of property, funds, the buildings in which children are educated (what they are given n the curriculum should be heavily influences by the clergy) the salaries of the teachers, the houses in which priests live, the management of parish halls, and all other temporal matters not related to the sacraments could easily be handed over to the laity. this would remove temporal power and temptation of the material world from clergy and they could concentrate on their real job.

ISAW · 22-03-2010 10:53pm

kbannon wrote: »

In fairness, comparing a banker to a bishop isn't using a level playing pitch.

True Bishops are only paying out about 100 million or so over the abuse problems of the last 70 years. Bankers got us int 80 thousand million debt half of which is bad in only ten years.

One works in an industry based on greed whereas the other is supposed to work in an industry promoting morals

If you want to bring the criminal law and punishment and damages into it you have to resort to economic metrics.

Michael G · 22-03-2010 10:56pm

philiporeilly wrote: »

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.

I agree completely with you on that. We need better bishops. But not more superannuated Vatican II hippies. What we need is bishops who will throw out not only sexual perverts but also priests who turn the Mass into a cabaret and those who slyly dissociate themselves from what the Church says.

J C · 22-03-2010 11:54pm

Michael G wrote: »

I don't know whether he has or not. In my own post, I told you what my niece was told about her First Communion, which was – for a Catholic – a lie. Are you assuming that this nun made it up on her own?

... I obviously haven't a clue what this particular nun did or didn't do... I will have the 'full story' on this Alive-O by tomorrow ... and from what I hear, calling Holy Communion 'Holy Bread' pales into insignificance in comparison with some of the other things that this Alive-O series teaches!!!

Did you investigate what your niece was being taught ... I mean did you examine the text books for this Alive-O stuff ???

Michael G · 23-03-2010 1:21am

J C wrote: »

Did you investigate what your niece was being taught ... I mean did you examine the text books for this Alive-O stuff ???

She was only 8 and she was in England, where they don't go in much for books as we understand the term. I gather there were some "games" and "role-play".

Michael G · 23-03-2010 1:24am

underclass wrote: »

I think at this stage, a smaller truer church is inevitable.

When the wind blows, the dead leaves fall off the tree.

J C · 23-03-2010 9:18am

Michael G wrote: »

She was only 8 and she was in England, where they don't go in much for books as we understand the term. I gather there were some "games" and "role-play".

... but was she taught any orthodox Christian Doctrine in the middle of all these 'fun and games'?

J C · 23-03-2010 9:26am

Michael G wrote: »

When the wind blows, the dead leaves fall off the tree.

... the real question is where are these 'dead leaves' located.

God will not be mocked ... and every man shall reap what he sows!!!

Ga 6:3 For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.
4 But let each one examine his own work, and then he will have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5 For each one shall bear his own load.
6 Let him who is taught the word share in all good things with him who teaches.
7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.
8 For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life
9 And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose hear.
10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 10:02am

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.

What would or wouldn't have happened after it is reported is irrelevant to this thread. The point is what would the right thing have been for Brady to have done. And most are in agreement that he should have reported it. If the system fails the victims after that would then not have been his responsibility.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 10:10am

ISAW wrote: »

This is a very valid point. what is utility? But I would go further . Even if you were a dictator and knew of all the people involved Why sack all gardai nurses teachers social workers and parents who knew about child abuse and didn't do anything? Loads of people today know about child abuse and do nothing for the Church but offer complaints. How Irish! I haven't offered a solution up to now but mine is this:
The solution should be partly top down as the Pope and Bishops have instituted but it should also be bottom up. Laity have no real business informing Clergy about morality or theology or the sacraments. tHat should be the job of the clergy. Ownership of property, funds, the buildings in which children are educated (what they are given n the curriculum should be heavily influences by the clergy) the salaries of the teachers, the houses in which priests live, the management of parish halls, and all other temporal matters not related to the sacraments could easily be handed over to the laity. this would remove temporal power and temptation of the material world from clergy and they could concentrate on their real job.

Again - the old 'everyone else did it as well' argument. If you want to start another thread about individual gardai, nurses, teachers etc who should resign, then please do so. This thread is about Brady.

philiporeilly · 23-03-2010 11:05am

ISAW wrote: »

One does not re commit the same sin by not admitting it in public! If i commit adultery and confess it and later become a banker and solve the national debt crises and later I decide to publicl admit was an adulterer do you think these are grounds for my being fired as national debt manager?

If you committed adultery what has that got to do with banking? If you were a banker that made decisions to make the banking crisis or through inaction / coverup I'd hardly expect people to have faith in you to fix the economy.

Likewise, if through decades of deceit, inaction or coverup you were part of a system that caused suffering and abuse to many innocent people, I'd hardly have faith in you to rebuild confidence in the church or healing with survivors.

ISAW wrote: »

that is interesting . Can you list all the things he tried along with supplying a timeline parallel to that of his getting offices in the church?

I said it was an interesting coincidence.

ISAW wrote: »

and that is "obvious" because???

Can't mention any senior cleric that spoke out against abuse allegations in the 70s or 80s but many did criticise, refute or condemn those who made allegations when this was first disclosed. Also the church fought up until recently to coverup the truth in reports.

ISAW wrote: »

Bases on "obvious" evidence you don't supply and bald assertion of your unsupported personal opinion? And your record of involvement in doing anything for the Church is?

I see you like to satisfy your own vanity by questioning people's academic qualifications or faith in comparison to yours. Must we post you a CV before posting a comment?

philiporeilly · 23-03-2010 11:08am

Bduffman wrote: »

Again - the old 'everyone else did it as well' argument. If you want to start another thread about individual gardai, nurses, teachers etc who should resign, then please do so. This thread is about Brady.

Agreed. Likewise if anyone in a state body who is still in position that was involved in covering up abuse should also go.

Those who allow the innocent to suffer through inaction or coverup to save the image of the church or state do not deserve to be in position.

ISAW · 23-03-2010 11:08am

Bduffman wrote: »

What would or wouldn't have happened after it is reported is irrelevant to this thread.

No it isn't! The context of the time is important. Do you remember the old sideline flags which were wooden and a bit thinner than a broom handle and were on the side of a pitch marking the centre line ? We had a brother who used on instead of a leather. When I was ten that christian brother broke the sideline flagpole on my back when I was sitting in a "double seat" . He continued to use it afterward for "slaps". I didn't report it. Another time I spilt my cartridge pen on my hand and the same brother made me "wash it off" The only thing in the toilets were cold taps and sand (we were beside a beach). No soap or detergent. after two oir three tripos back to the class with ink still on my skin I ended up rubbing the surface skin off my hand. That hurt for days until the skin grew back- much more than the back.
Half my family are police. People in my class may have mentioned it to their parents but it never got back to my family as far as I know. I didn't report it to any police and no parents did. It would have been "pointless" at the time.
Maybe the brother today feels sorry for that. i don't bear him any malice for it. what he did was wrong by today's standards and what he did then was wrong too. If he is superiour of the order I today I am not going to suggest he should resign because of it or anyone else who didn't report it should be ashamed and immediately resign form any job where they might be instructing about morals.

The point is what would the right thing have been for Brady to have done. And most are in agreement that he should have reported it. If the system fails the victims after that would then not have been his responsibility.

But brady DID report it. He filed a report. that was the only system he knew. but still in the back of his mind he knew someone was abusing kids and wasn't punished. He trusted the system an he trusted Smith felt remorse and wouldn't reoffend. His trust was in error.

DerryRed · 23-03-2010 11:13am

underclass wrote: »

I think at this stage, a smaller truer church is inevitable.

I think this is what needs to happen. It is only by being brought to its knees that our church will come back to any kind of grace.

I always ask myself what would Jesus do if he were here. I think he'd go Temple style on our current spiritual leadership, and clear them all out.

ISAW · 23-03-2010 11:16am

Bduffman wrote: »

Again - the old 'everyone else did it as well' argument. If you want to start another thread about individual gardai, nurses, teachers etc who should resign, then please do so. This thread is about Brady.

It is about "why didnt he report it to the Gardai?" !!!

In asking such a question you have to understand that the criminal law operates for the common good and not in single cases where one decides whether the thing is wrong or not.
I that context you MUST consider other similar crimes.

second in addition to the criminal context you have to consider the social and cultural context at the time. You can't say "why didnt mr x" do something and not consider what Mr Y or Mrs Z would have done in the same situation at that time. When you look at other simiular cases you see that in most cases nobody was prosecuted or even reported under the criminal law. In fact the penalties under law for some of the offences were not as sevcere because the law didn't exist for such a serious crime! Only a lesser offence under law existed. The apparatus of the state was not as effective in investigating such a crime let alone securing a conviction.

In short It is more "what happened in similar morally wrong cases at the time" than any attempt to justify it by saying "others were doing it".

ISAW · 23-03-2010 11:21am

philiporeilly wrote: »

Agreed. Likewise if anyone in a state body who is still in position that was involved in covering up abuse should also go.

And if there are 20,000 such people? The Stazi and KGB did terrible things in Russia and Germany but just sacking them all can lead to more harm than good.

Those who allow the innocent to suffer through inaction or cover up to save the image of the church or state do not deserve to be in position.

What did Brady cover up? He filed the report which was investigating the behavior! You are saying that any garda who heard of any abuse and didn't act should be dismissed today from the force? Especially if a senior garda told him " no forget that it is being dealt with elsewhere "

philiporeilly · 23-03-2010 12:06pm

ISAW wrote: »

Laity have no real business informing Clergy about morality or theology or the sacraments. tHat should be the job of the clergy.

Wasn't that the system that operated in Ireland while thousands of innocent people were being physically or sexually abused?

If anyone in society believes that something immoral is happening it is their duty to report or fight it. You cannot allow the innocent to suffer for the sake of image. If it wasn't for the laity questioning abuse and the subsequent coverups we would hardly have the pope apologising for the church today.

A good friend of mine is a priest and I regularly have discussions with him over issues such as morality.

The church cannot go back to the days where people are afraid to question the judgement of those in charge of the church. People need transparency and faith that those in power will do the right thing and not allow innocence suffer to save image.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 12:43pm

ISAW wrote: »

No it isn't! The context of the time is important. Do you remember the old sideline flags which were wooden and a bit thinner than a broom handle and were on the side of a pitch marking the centre line ? We had a brother who used on instead of a leather. When I was ten that christian brother broke the sideline flagpole on my back when I was sitting in a "double seat" . He continued to use it afterward for "slaps". I didn't report it. Another time I spilt my cartridge pen on my hand and the same brother made me "wash it off" The only thing in the toilets were cold taps and sand (we were beside a beach). No soap or detergent. after two oir three tripos back to the class with ink still on my skin I ended up rubbing the surface skin off my hand. That hurt for days until the skin grew back- much more than the back.
Half my family are police. People in my class may have mentioned it to their parents but it never got back to my family as far as I know. I didn't report it to any police and no parents did. It would have been "pointless" at the time.
Maybe the brother today feels sorry for that. i don't bear him any malice for it. what he did was wrong by today's standards and what he did then was wrong too. If he is superiour of the order I today I am not going to suggest he should resign because of it or anyone else who didn't report it should be ashamed and immediately resign form any job where they might be instructing about morals.

Pointless or not - reporting child abuse is still the right thing to do. But I believe that reporting to the gardai would have damaged the church and this was the over-riding concern for senior church officials. If Brady was in any way morally guided individual he would still do what was right. But sure, what would a good person be doing staying in an evil & corrupt organisation like the RCC.

ISAW wrote: »

But brady DID report it. He filed a report. that was the only system he knew. but still in the back of his mind he knew someone was abusing kids and wasn't punished. He trusted the system an he trusted Smith felt remorse and wouldn't reoffend. His trust was in error.

So he reported it. Then nothing was done for decades & Smyth abused again. So he went no further. Thats for his conscience.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 12:46pm

ISAW wrote: »

It is about "why didnt he report it to the Gardai?" !!!

In asking such a question you have to understand that the criminal law operates for the common good and not in single cases where one decides whether the thing is wrong or not.
I that context you MUST consider other similar crimes.

second in addition to the criminal context you have to consider the social and cultural context at the time. You can't say "why didnt mr x" do something and not consider what Mr Y or Mrs Z would have done in the same situation at that time. When you look at other simiular cases you see that in most cases nobody was prosecuted or even reported under the criminal law. In fact the penalties under law for some of the offences were not as sevcere because the law didn't exist for such a serious crime! Only a lesser offence under law existed. The apparatus of the state was not as effective in investigating such a crime let alone securing a conviction.

In short It is more "what happened in similar morally wrong cases at the time" than any attempt to justify it by saying "others were doing it".

Yes this is about why Brady didn't report this to the Gardai - not about what other individual Gardai did or didn't do in other cases. In the Smyth case it was not reported to the Gardai so therefore they didn't even know about it. Again if you want to discuss the actions or inaction of the Gardai or the weaknesses of Irish law at that time then open another thread.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 12:51pm

ISAW wrote: »

And if there are 20,000 such people? The Stazi and KGB did terrible things in Russia and Germany but just sacking them all can lead to more harm than good.

Indeed, sacking the entire Gardai or all teachers etc would not be practical as the country would come to a standstill.
But sacking the RCC? What disruption would that cause? Not much - so lets do it.

ISAW wrote: »

What did Brady cover up? He filed the report which was investigating the behavior! You are saying that any garda who heard of any abuse and didn't act should be dismissed today from the force? Especially if a senior garda told him " no forget that it is being dealt with elsewhere "

He did nothing after that 'report' for several decades - therefore after the inaction of his bosses he was fully entitled to take it further. He chose to sit on it - thats a cover up.

Bduffman · 23-03-2010 12:54pm

ISAW wrote: »

Laity have no real business informing Clergy about morality

I missed this the first time - thats a class statement.

The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

Comments