gaaboard.com

Non GAA Discussion => General discussion => Topic started by: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:09:14 PM

Poll
Question: We all know this disgusting scandal is as a result of The Church and The State, but who do you hold mostly accountable, and should therefore pay out the most in compensation to victims?
Option 1: The State
Option 2: The Church
Option 3: Split 50/50
Title: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:09:14 PM
It seems the first thread on this topic has been deleted! WHY?

It is absolutely disgusting the way the catholic church dealt with this unbelievable sickening crime!  They moved priests onto another parish, another small village, or into schools away from parishes (jackpot for the paedos), to continue their brutality.  It makes me sick to the stomach to think the people of Ireland stood by and trusted these manipulators not knowing what was happening, while bishops stood by and watched.  Some priests still have the audacity to lecture on their pulpits about 'living in sin', 'sex before marriage', children out of wedlock'.  Is it any wonder society is the way it is today, attendances at Mass are so low, and enrolment at Maynooth is virtually non-existent when we were all conned by those who were meant to be trusted.  I know it is not all priests but the number of cases which have come to light have been enormous it seems over the last 10 years.

I hope that any of those who suffered can get some small peace of mind knowing that the catholic church has been outed by todays report proving what we already knew.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 05:12:56 PM
Quote from: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:09:14 PM
It seems the first thread on this topic has been deleted! WHY?

It is absolutely disgusting the way the catholic church dealt with this unbelievable sickening crime!  They moved priests onto another parish, another small village, or into schools away from parishes (jackpot for the paedos), to continue their brutality.  It makes me sick to the stomach to think the  people of Ireland stood by and trusted these manipulatorsnot knowing what was happening, while bishops stood by and watched.  Some priests still have the audacity to lecture on their pulpits about 'living in sin', 'sex before marriage', children out of wedlock'.  Is it any wonder society is the way it is today, attendances at Mass are so low, and enrolment at Maynooth is virtually non-existent when we were all conned by those who were meant to be trusted.  I know it is not all priests but the number of cases which have come to light have been enormous it seems over the last 10 years.

I hope that any of those who suffered can get some small peace of mind knowing that the catholic church has been outed by todays report proving what we already knew.

That is the biggest lie that has been perpetrated about the whole thing. Everyone knew what was going on - the State, the Church and importantly the people. They've all as much blame to shoulder for this as the Church. These people weren't the responsibility of the Church but of the Irish State.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:15:59 PM
Donagh I'm referring to the regular parishioner + parents of children who were abused in that statement.  Although I know todays report is largely on the institutions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:19:45 PM
There were cruel b*****ds with dog collars in Catholic Schools in the 70s and parents knew. Some of the sadists have passed to their eternal reward  ::) and had cups and awards named after them.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Square Ball on May 20, 2009, 05:26:55 PM
Just listened to a fella from Limerick who was put into an industrial school at three, re recalled the sexual, physical and psychological absuse he and others suffered at the hands of some of the brothers at the school. he stated that the night watchman reported this to the school, the church and the state, giving names of the brothers who were doing this and nothing happened.

It was a terrible story to listen to and no doubt one that happened to many and innocent person over many years, a terrible terrible thing indeed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:33:57 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.



I agree 100% Stew.  Got married last year and my new parish priest who married us is a very good man.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: GalwayBayBoy on May 20, 2009, 05:38:00 PM
A nine-year investigation has found Catholic priests and nuns for decades terrorised thousands of boys and girls in workhouse-style children's institutions in the Irish Republic. Government inspectors failed to stop the chronic beatings, rape and humiliation.

High court judge Sean Ryan today unveiled the 2,600-page final report of Ireland's commission into child abuse, which drew on testimony from thousands of former inmates and officials from more than 250 church-run institutions.

More than 30,000 children deemed to be petty thieves, truants or from dysfunctional families – a category that unmarried mothers were often lumped into – were sent to Ireland's austere network of industrial schools, reformatories, orphanages and hostels from the 1930s until the last church-run facilities shut in the 1990s.

The report found that molestation and rape were "endemic" in boys' facilities, chiefly run by the Christian Brothers order, and supervisors pursued policies that increased the danger. Girls supervised by orders of nuns, chiefly the Sisters of Mercy, suffered much less sexual abuse but instead endured frequent assaults and humiliation designed to make them feel worthless.

"In some schools a high level of ritualised beating was routine. ... Girls were struck with implements designed to maximise pain and were struck on all parts of the body," the report said. "Personal and family denigration was widespread."

The Catholic church had been steeling itself for the report, which was repeatedly delayed by church lawsuits, missing documentation and alleged government obstruction.

The church had already been under fire over the sexual misbehaviour of several priests in various Irish parishes. The commission's experts have sought to produce a comprehensive portrait of sexual, physical and emotional damage inflicted on the child victims. The thousands of survivors said they had no safe way to tell their stories until the investigation began because much of Irish Catholic society sought to label them as liars.

Irish Survivors of Child Abuse (Isoca), an organisation set up to help victims, today said it was now up to the Vatican to investigate its religious orders in the republic.

John Kelly, the Isoca coordinator in Dublin, said: "Now that the Ryan [Laffoy] commission is finished, we call upon ... Pope Benedict XVI to convene a special consistory court to fully investigate the activities of the Catholic religious orders in Ireland.

"Amongst other things, such a court could establish the whereabouts of Irish state assets that were misappropriated over many years by the religious orders and make restitution to the Irish state exchequer."

During the commission's investigations, oral evidence was collected from more than 1,000 people, mainly aged from their 50s to 70s.

Several hundred travelled back to Ireland from the US and Australia to describe their childhood of terror and intimidation.

The Christian Brothers delayed the investigation for more than a year with a lawsuit that successfully defended their members' right to anonymity in all references in the report, even in cases in which individual Christian Brothers had already been convicted of sexual and physical attacks on children.

The commission's original judge, Mary Laffoy, resigned from her post in 2003 over claims that the Irish department of education – which was in charge of inspecting the orphanages and industrial schools – was refusing to hand over documents to her.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:40:31 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.



Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: red hander on May 20, 2009, 05:45:59 PM
What's got to happen is that the perpetrators who are still alive be brought to trial and dealt with by the courts ... but I don't think that will happen some how or other
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 20, 2009, 05:47:04 PM
Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?

Yeah thats what I'd love to know. Would need to understand the zeitgeist which existed at that time. The stranglehold the clergy had at that time on the people must have been seriously strong. Unquestioned trust and authority and just like our MP's on expenses (which they have been abusing for countless years) there were no whilstle blowers when it was spotted.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:49:35 PM
The generation above me  :o go on about youth and violence and they were so violent to children. Parents kicked the shit out of their kids and were happy for teachers to do so. I  wouldn't let anyone lay a hand on my kids and have no inclination to do so myself.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:18:21 PM
Would you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship an invisible pink unicorn ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM
QuoteThat is the biggest lie that has been perpetrated about the whole thing. Everyone knew what was going on - the State, the Church and importantly the people. They've all as much blame to shoulder for this as the Church. These people weren't the responsibility of the Church but of the Irish State.

Absolutely correct. I've had the same conversation with my parents and the thing that became abundantly clear is that people knew what was happening and it was covered up because it was the done thing - you never interfered in anyone's business and particularly the schools/churches. It was the equivalent of the Taliban running Ireland at the time and God forbid you crossed them.
Corporal punishment was the method of disciplining people and it was carred out in houses, schools etc. The fact that these poor kids were under the protection of the state makes it sickening.
Actually in my school the evil b**tards were all lay teachers and the Brothers were the more enlightened ones

QuoteWould you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship and invisible pink unicorn

Reality was that the state absolved themselves of their responsibilty by gladly letting the religous orders take on the task of "looking after" these people - Nothing got to do with the belief system - Think of Chines/Romanian orphanages in recent times for an equivalent situation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:42:49 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM
QuoteThat is the biggest lie that has been perpetrated about the whole thing. Everyone knew what was going on - the State, the Church and importantly the people. They've all as much blame to shoulder for this as the Church. These people weren't the responsibility of the Church but of the Irish State.

Absolutely correct. I've had the same conversation with my parents and the thing that became abundantly clear is that people knew what was happening and it was covered up because it was the done thing - you never interfered in anyone's business and particularly the schools/churches. It was the equivalent of the Taliban running Ireland at the time and God forbid you crossed them.
Corporal punishment was the method of disciplining people and it was carred out in houses, schools etc. The fact that these poor kids were under the protection of the state makes it sickening.
Actually in my school the evil b**tards were all lay teachers and the Brothers were the more enlightened ones

QuoteWould you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship and invisible pink unicorn

Reality was that the state absolved themselves of their responsibilty by gladly letting the religous orders take on the task of "looking after" these people - Nothing got to do with the belief system - Think of Chines/Romanian orphanages in recent times for an equivalent situation.

True it can and has happened any where with any system of  beliefs but it's events like this that make a lot of people question God and Religion .
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 20, 2009, 07:01:24 PM
Quotebut it's events like this that make a lot of people question God and Religion

Correct - me included
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AFS on May 20, 2009, 07:31:08 PM
Channel 4 news running big with this
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 07:49:07 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:40:31 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.

Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?
I would in no way try to defend what has gone on LRTF - in fact i'd be vocal in condemning all that has gone on, but 'stew' may be talking about priests today, rather than priests back at that time, who may have looked on. There are plenty of priests now who are in their 'jobs' for the right reasons - they too get tarred with the same brush.

And we can't just talk about priests looking the other way when everyone else was doing the same - but yes, as the saying goes, evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:40:31 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.



Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?
A lot of c***ts looked the other way, not just the clergy, for god sakes the children's parent's looked the other way!!! or put them in to these homes to be abused, or threw their daughters out of the house if they became pregnant etc 

I just dont understand how the church could have such control. Was talking to my mother recently about this actually when she was criticising some of the priests years ago getting involved in family situations (one story was about a priest landing to a woman's door to get her to take back the husband that had been beating her) and my response was that it was the people's fault for allowing the priest to do that when they should have been told to f**k off.  Her response was "you didn't go against the priests, you wouldnt be able to go to mass, they wouldnt give you communion etc".  Wtf? So what?

I just dont understand the control or why people were so fearful. 


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 20, 2009, 08:29:21 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 08:01:17 PM

I just dont understand the control or why people were so fearful. 


Just in the same way future generations will fail to understand the failings of this generation pints. Unless you were living in that time it's impossible to understand whilst having our current view of the world
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:31:30 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:18:21 PM
Would you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship an invisible pink unicorn ?


grow up gnevin and shove your athiestic bullshit up your opinionated hole.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:38:38 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:42:49 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM
QuoteThat is the biggest lie that has been perpetrated about the whole thing. Everyone knew what was going on - the State, the Church and importantly the people. They've all as much blame to shoulder for this as the Church. These people weren't the responsibility of the Church but of the Irish State.

Absolutely correct. I've had the same conversation with my parents and the thing that became abundantly clear is that people knew what was happening and it was covered up because it was the done thing - you never interfered in anyone's business and particularly the schools/churches. It was the equivalent of the Taliban running Ireland at the time and God forbid you crossed them.
Corporal punishment was the method of disciplining people and it was carred out in houses, schools etc. The fact that these poor kids were under the protection of the state makes it sickening.
Actually in my school the evil b**tards were all lay teachers and the Brothers were the more enlightened ones

QuoteWould you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship and invisible pink unicorn

Reality was that the state absolved themselves of their responsibilty by gladly letting the religous orders take on the task of "looking after" these people - Nothing got to do with the belief system - Think of Chines/Romanian orphanages in recent times for an equivalent situation.

True it can and has happened any where with any system of  beliefs but it's events like this that make a lot of people question God and Religion .

God did not have these priests do what they did, he had no hand in it and he has said that we all will be judged. the fact is people need to understand that these scumbags were false teachers and that they were only in the priesthood to satisfy their bloodlust & unnatural urges. God was a smokescreen for their putrid acts. The Church is not without blame, especially the Popes of the different eras, instead of makin JP 2 a saint they should be holding him accountable posthumously for his abject failure to stop the awful human misery some of his vicars pawned off on those they were supposed to support and teach.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:48:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:40:31 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.



Two wors why pog, social stigma.

I was told in the point by the archdeacon that if my kids went to attend a school that was about to open that was integrated that my kids would not be allowed to make their first holy communion. It was all i could do not to tell him to fcuk away off as i was fit to be tied, i would have but the wife was with me telling me with that look to shut up. She proceeded to tell the bastard that not only where they going to attend but that if he so much as attempted to do what he was suggesting that the media would land on his doorstep and she would see him in court. The kids went to the integrated school and two years after that we emigrated but if we hadnt they would have made their holy communion in mary queen of peace in the point.

Although she handled it very well i still think my way of telling the old todger to feck away aff was the way to go. I am just as happy in a protestant Church as I am my own and I have not confessed my sins to anyone other that the man himself in over 30 years.

Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?
A lot of c***ts looked the other way, not just the clergy, for god sakes the children's parent's looked the other way!!! or put them in to these homes to be abused, or threw their daughters out of the house if they became pregnant etc 

I just dont understand how the church could have such control. Was talking to my mother recently about this actually when she was criticising some of the priests years ago getting involved in family situations (one story was about a priest landing to a woman's door to get her to take back the husband that had been beating her) and my response was that it was the people's fault for allowing the priest to do that when they should have been told to f**k off.  Her response was "you didn't go against the priests, you wouldnt be able to go to mass, they wouldnt give you communion etc".  Wtf? So what?

I just dont understand the control or why people were so fearful. 



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:51:41 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 20, 2009, 07:01:24 PM
Quotebut it's events like this that make a lot of people question God and Religion

Correct - me included

These people were not God fearing people Declan. They were wolves in sheeps clothing ffs, they will answer to the god they claimed to love and they will be found wanting.

Dont let the likes of this affect your belief in God. This is mans work not Gods.

The christain faith has been under attack from it's inception and will always be under attack, if you abuse children physically, mentally or in any way, shape or form and you are in the clergy you are a false teacher and give not one shite about the God you claimed to love or the flock you lead.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2009, 07:49:07 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 20, 2009, 05:40:31 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM
I agree that there were a lot of scumbags in the clergy, still are in fact but dont forget that there were and are some tremendous Priests that unfortunately get tarred with the same brush.

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.

Why did all these 'good' people look the other way?
I would in no way try to defend what has gone on LRTF - in fact i'd be vocal in condemning all that has gone on, but 'stew' may be talking about priests today, rather than priests back at that time, who may have looked on. There are plenty of priests now who are in their 'jobs' for the right reasons - they too get tarred with the same brush.

And we can't just talk about priests looking the other way when everyone else was doing the same - but yes, as the saying goes, evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Like judges, mechanics and for example nurses and doctors, there are ggood and bad people in the clergy of all faiths be they Christian, Muslim, jewish etc. Good men did do nothing however this report to me is the cornerstone that ensures this never happens again in Ireland and only good can come from it after the pain subsides and the dust settles. Future generations will probably look back in astonishment at our ineptitude on this matter............... well that and disgust.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 08:57:28 PM
We will get this crap now about how everyone knew and did nothing. Its called spreading the blame to dilute it. Well I'm sorry, it is a load of shite. The people to take full blame are the catholic church as they were responsible for the keep of these people. Today many of the groups within the church apologised again and proclaimed their shame at what happened under their care. They allowed sadists and paedophilles to get into their clergy and did nothing when they knew. No priests to my knowledge ever made waves about the issue - surely if there are so many "good" priests some of them would have taken the side of the innocent child???? Those priests and bishops that turned a blind eye are just as guilty as the other f**kers. We also be told that the parents of these kids are to blame for putting them into these places in the first place too. More bullshit. Most of these kids were born out of wedlock and your same catholic priests demonised single mothers and shamed them into this action. Some had to leave home for ever and some opted to put the child in care, probably after being told they would be looked after. Personally I'd withhold all funding to the church until they pay for all the court cases and claims that our idiotic government decided to pay for them. It is also a absolute disgrace that no prosecutions will result. I'd like to see prosecutions against the abusers and the bishops that did nothing (for with holding evidence)
I realise some devout catholics will struggle to square this report with their beliefs but the truth is out now and the church has been laid bare in front of you (or at least the church of that time). This report has said that abuse (sexual and physical) was "endemic" in these homes. That is a very very strong word. Has it changed today? I don't know.

Here is the acid test. All ye that go to mass at the weekend - come back on here on Monday and tell us what your parish priest had to say on the matter in his sermon at the weekend. If your priest is expressing sorrow for what is happened then at least we can say that the church is moving on. If your priest ignores the issue then I think ye should be asking why.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 09:21:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 08:57:28 PM
We will get this crap now about how everyone knew and did nothing. Its called spreading the blame to dilute it. Well I'm sorry, it is a load of shite. The people to take full blame are the catholic church as they were responsible for the keep of these people. Today many of the groups within the church apologised again and proclaimed their shame at what happened under their care. They allowed sadists and paedophilles to get into their clergy and did nothing when they knew. No priests to my knowledge ever made waves about the issue - surely if there are so many "good" priests some of them would have taken the side of the innocent child???? Those priests and bishops that turned a blind eye are just as guilty as the other f**kers. We also be told that the parents of these kids are to blame for putting them into these places in the first place too. More bullshit. Most of these kids were born out of wedlock and your same catholic priests demonised single mothers and shamed them into this action. Some had to leave home for ever and some opted to put the child in care, probably after being told they would be looked after. Personally I'd withhold all funding to the church until they pay for all the court cases and claims that our idiotic government decided to pay for them. It is also a absolute disgrace that no prosecutions will result. I'd like to see prosecutions against the abusers and the bishops that did nothing (for with holding evidence)
I realise some devout catholics will struggle to square this report with their beliefs but the truth is out now and the church has been laid bare in front of you (or at least the church of that time). This report has said that abuse (sexual and physical) was "endemic" in these homes. That is a very very strong word. Has it changed today? I don't know.

Here is the acid test. All ye that go to mass at the weekend - come back on here on Monday and tell us what your parish priest had to say on the matter in his sermon at the weekend. If your priest is expressing sorrow for what is happened then at least we can say that the church is moving on. If your priest ignores the issue then I think ye should be asking why.

I'm afraid your obvious lack of knowledge of even the basics tends to dilute your argument Myles. The vast majority of those in the industrial schools were young offenders not born out of wedlock as you claim. Let's not forget also that it was the State judicial system which sent these people to these places for petty crimes. For info on the basic and about who knew have a look at this:

http://www.paddydoyle.com/historyofneglect.html (http://www.paddydoyle.com/historyofneglect.html)

Some excerpts below:

1946- Fr. Flanagan, famous founder of Boystown schools for orphans and delinquents in the US, visits Irish industrial schools. He describes them as "a national disgrace," leading to a public debate in the Daíl and media. State and Church pressure forces him to leave Ireland.

1949- Minister of Education General Mulcahey received complaints from Cork City Council about Greenmount IS. A visit is arranged (with advanced warning) and the case is dismissed.

1951- State Inspector denounced conditions of industrial schools and care of children.

1952- State funding to industrial schools increased.

1955- Secretary of the Department of Education visited Daingean Industrial School, Offaly, and found that "the cows are better fed than the boys." Nothing was done for another 16 years.

It goes on...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:26:42 PM
Perhaps the majority were young offenders. It doesn't really take from the core argument that the church was in charge of these kids and allowed them to be abused, dishing out blame elsewhere by some is an attempt to share the blame. I do know that many single mothers were forced to put their kids in these place too by priests. With the exception on an American priest where are the good priests on the ground in Ireland that stood up for these kids?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 20, 2009, 09:26:56 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:56:01 PM
Like judges, mechanics and for example nurses and doctors, there are ggood and bad people in the clergy of all faiths be they Christian, Muslim, jewish etc. Good men did do nothing however this report to me is the cornerstone that ensures this never happens again in Ireland and only good can come from it after the pain subsides and the dust settles. Future generations will probably look back in astonishment at our ineptitude on this matter............... well that and disgust.

Yeah so all the good priests let themselves be governed by the institution rather than the word of god. Pretty damning for them to listen to their superiors rather than the big man himself but yet thats OK. Surely all their studying of theology should have given them the courage to stand up and be counted and be damned by the evil doers if it came to it for eternal happiness awaited them for their brave deeded. But they didn't and will be damned to hell for not doing anything. When they knew so much was at stake.......we really need to get an answer as to why none of them dealt with this abuse when they had evidence of it.

In those days people worshiped those in higher authority than themselves and were encouraged to see their subservience to them as a path to god (e.g The master in the house was closer to god than the servants, so to get to god they had to do it through serving the master of the house....I read that in a catholic doctrine publication from about 60 years ago....it really is hard to believe nowadays). So it is easy to understand potentially abusive power the doctor, the teacher(I heard they had their fair share as well), and finally the priest had over their minions.

Not the place I go looking for a moral compass anymore.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Caid on May 20, 2009, 09:29:52 PM
Quote from: Square Ball on May 20, 2009, 05:26:55 PM
Just listened to a fella from Limerick who was put into an industrial school at three, re recalled the sexual, physical and psychological absuse he and others suffered at the hands of some of the brothers at the school. he stated that the night watchman reported this to the school, the church and the state, giving names of the brothers who were doing this and nothing happened.

It was a terrible story to listen to and no doubt one that happened to many and innocent person over many years, a terrible terrible thing indeed

Just finished reading a book by a Limerick fella John Devane (Nobody heard me cry).  My mother bought it for me for xmas and to be honest it isn't the sort of book I qould have bought meself.  But it is a real eye opener to the extent of Paedophilia in 1960's and 1970's Ireland.  And i'm not just talking about priests, but also lawyers, Gardai, celebrities etc.  What is almost as bad is that the victims often had no one to tell.  

Def worth a read though it is somewhat distressing (and graphic)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:48:35 PM
Main story on the UK Independent

Thousands were raped in Irish reform schools
By Shawn Pogatchnik, Associated Press

A fiercely debated, nine-year investigation into Ireland's Roman Catholic-run institutions says priests and nuns terrorised thousands of boys and girls in workhouse-style schools for decades — and government inspectors failed to stop the chronic beatings, rapes and humiliation.


High Court Justice Sean Ryan today unveiled the 2,600-page final report of Ireland's Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse, which is based on testimony from thousands of former students and officials from more than 250 church-run institutions.

More than 30,000 children deemed to be petty thieves, truants or from dysfunctional families — a category that often included unmarried mothers — were sent to Ireland's austere network of industrial schools, reformatories, orphanages and hostels from the 1930s until the last church-run facilities shut in the 1990s.

The report found that molestation and rape were "endemic" in boys' facilities, chiefly run by the Christian Brothers order, and supervisors pursued policies that increased the danger. Girls supervised by orders of nuns, chiefly the Sisters of Mercy, suffered much less sexual abuse but frequent assaults and humiliation designed to make them feel worthless.

"In some schools a high level of ritualized beating was routine. ... Girls were struck with implements designed to maximize pain and were struck on all parts of the body," the report said. "Personal and family denigration was widespread."

Victims of the system have long demanded that the truth of their experiences be documented and made public, so that children in Ireland never endure such suffering again.

But most leaders of religious orders have rejected the allegations as exaggerations and lies, and testified to the commission that any abuses were the responsibility of often long-dead individuals.

Wednesday's five-volume report sides almost completely with the former students' accounts. It concludes that church officials always shielded their orders' pedophiles from arrest amid a culture of self-serving secrecy.

"A climate of fear, created by pervasive, excessive and arbitrary punishment, permeated most of the institutions and all those run for boys. Children lived with the daily terror of not knowing where the next beating was coming from," the report concluded.

The commission said overwhelming, consistent testimony from still-traumatized men and women, now in their 50s to 80s, had demonstrated beyond a doubt that the entire system treated children more like prison inmates and slaves than people with legal rights and human potential.

The report proposed 21 ways the government could recognize past wrongs, including building a permanent memorial, providing counseling and education to victims and improving Ireland's current child protection services.

But its findings will not be used for criminal prosecutions — in part because the Christian Brothers successfully sued the commission in 2004 to keep the identities of all of its members, dead or alive, unnamed in the report. No real names, whether of victims or perpetrators, appear in the final document.

Irish church leaders and religious orders all declined to comment Wednesday, citing the need to read the massive document first. The Vatican also declined to comment.

The Irish government already has funded a parallel compensation system that has paid 12,000 abuse victims an average of €65,000 ($90,000). About 2,000 claims remain outstanding.

Victims receive the payouts only if they waive their rights to sue the state and the church. Hundreds have rejected that condition and taken their abusers and those church employers to court.

Wednesday's report said children had no safe way to tell authorities about the assaults they were suffering, particularly the sexual aggression from church officials and older inmates in boys' institutions.

"The management did not listen to or believe children when they complained of the activities of some of the men who had responsibility for their care," the commission found. "At best, the abusers were moved, but nothing was done about the harm done to the child. At worst, the child was blamed and seen as corrupted by the sexual activity, and was punished severely."

The commission dismissed as implausible a central defense of the religious orders — that, in bygone days, people did not recognize the sexual abuse of a child as a criminal offense, but rather as a sin that required repentance.

In their testimony, religious orders typically cited this opinion as the principal reason why sex-predator priests and brothers were sheltered within the system and moved to new posts where they could still maintain daily contact with children.

But the commission said its fact-finding — which included unearthing decades-old church files, chiefly stored in the Vatican, on scores of unreported abuse cases from Ireland's industrial schools — demonstrated that officials understood exactly what was at stake: their own reputations.

It cited numerous examples where school managers told police about child abusers who were not church officials — but never did this when one of their own had committed the crime.

"Contrary to the congregations' claims that the recidivist nature of sexual offending was not understood, it is clear from the documented cases that they were aware of the propensity for abusers to re-abuse," it said.

Religious orders were chiefly concerned about preventing scandal, not the danger to children, it said.

The commission also condemned Ireland's Education Department for aiding the abusive culture through infrequent, toothless inspections that deferred to church authority.

Inspectors were supposed to restrict the use of corporal punishment and make sure the children were adequately fed, clothed and educated — but the report called those inspections "fundamentally flawed."

It said a lone inspector was responsible for monitoring more than 50 industrial schools, schools were told about the visits in advance and inspectors rarely talked to the children.

Wednesday's report also highlighted the rarity of human kindness in the institutions.

"A word of consideration or encouragement, or an act of sympathy or understanding, had a profound effect. Adults in their 60s and 70s recalled seemingly insignificant events that had remained with them all their lives," the report said.

"Often the act of kindness, recalled in such a positive light, arose from the simple fact that the staff member had not given a beating when one was expected."

www.childabusecommission.ie/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 09:48:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:26:42 PM
Perhaps the majority were young offenders. It doesn't really take from the core argument that the church was in charge of these kids and allowed them to be abused, dishing out blame elsewhere by some is an attempt to share the blame. I do know that many single mothers were forced to put their kids in these place too by priests. With the exception on an American priest where are the good priests on the ground in Ireland that stood up for these kids?

But surely the point is that the State were "in charge" of the children and as such it is the State who are ultimately responsible for placing them there in the first place and turning a blind eye to the abuse. Article 40.3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann: "The State guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen". The State were responsible for these children and by their laws, sent them to these schools knowing full well what was happening there. Just as the modern establishment Parties feathered their own nests with the help of the property developers, back then they weren't prepared to rock the boat lest it should hammer their political careers.

All Catholic Priests take a vow of obedience to their Bishop and breaking that vow can lead to them being stripped of their ministry or even excommunicated. Now you might not think that is a big deal but to someone of faith it is the last thing they would risk, even after their life. The vast majority of Catholic priests were and still are very good and humble men.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:55:34 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 09:48:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:26:42 PM
Perhaps the majority were young offenders. It doesn't really take from the core argument that the church was in charge of these kids and allowed them to be abused, dishing out blame elsewhere by some is an attempt to share the blame. I do know that many single mothers were forced to put their kids in these place too by priests. With the exception on an American priest where are the good priests on the ground in Ireland that stood up for these kids?

But surely the point is that the State were "in charge" of the children and as such it is the State who are ultimately responsible for placing them there in the first place and turning a blind eye to the abuse. Article 40.3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann: "The State guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen". The State were responsible for these children and by their laws, sent them to these schools knowing full well what was happening there. Just as the modern establishment Parties feathered their own nests with the help of the property developers, back then they weren't prepared to rock the boat lest it should hammer their political careers.

All Catholic Priests take a vow of obedience to their Bishop and breaking that vow can lead to them being stripped of their ministry or even excommunicated. Now you might not think that is a big deal but to someone of faith it is the last thing they would want. The vast majority of Catholic priests were and still are very good and humble men.

I have not read the full report but I have been listening to the news and reading the papers and to me it seems that this report is laying the vast majoity of the blame on the church. Do you agree that this is what this report is doing?
These priests made plenty of vows before and broke them all - any muppet can take a vow. What happens when the bishop is corrupt like the ones that moved Brendan Smith around the country where he abused everywhere he went. The report above paints a picture of a pathetic church trying to defend the indefensible and then when it is over coming out with apologies. The christian brothers sued to prevent members being named and then issue a "heartfelt" apology today.

I have nothing against a man (or woman) having a relationship with God. Why you would want middle men like the church involved is beyond me.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:04:39 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:31:30 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:18:21 PM
Would you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship an invisible pink unicorn ?


grow up gnevin and shove your athiestic bullshit up your opinionated hole.
Very well said stew
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 09:55:34 PM
I have not read the full report but I have been listening to the news and reading the papers and to me it seems that this report is laying the vast majoity of the blame on the church. Do you agree that this is what this report is doing?
These priests made plenty of vows before and broke them all - any muppet can take a vow. What happens when the bishop is corrupt like the ones that moved Brendan Smith around the country where he abused everywhere he went. The report above paints a picture of a pathetic church trying to defend the indefensible and then when it is over coming out with apologies. The christian brothers sued to prevent members being named and then issue a "heartfelt" apology today.

I have nothing against a man (or woman) having a relationship with God. Why you would want middle men like the church involved is beyond me.

I do agree it seems to be laying the blame at the door of the Church but I wouldn't have expected any different from a State sponsored report. I also know many of these Priests broke their vows but you asked why there wasn't an outcry from the 'good' Priests - I am suggesting that they would have been the ones that kept their vows by trying to go through the Bishops and as such were silenced. To get a little of the Priests perspective you have to understand that those who break their vow of obedience to the Bishop will be seen as being guilty of the 'sin of pride' or a preoccupation with the self - the 'original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and indeed the ultimate source from which the others arise' - as Wiki helpfully points out. The 'good' Priest is always obedient and does not work outside the system. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 10:06:40 PM
Quote
Here is the acid test. All ye that go to mass at the weekend - come back on here on Monday and tell us what your parish priest had to say on the matter in his sermon at the weekend. If your priest is expressing sorrow for what is happened then at least we can say that the church is moving on. If your priest ignores the issue then I think ye should be asking why.
Most will say nothing, we've waited years on them to say something.

That said, our local priest (a good sort), a couple of years ago done mass at either christmas or easter (some special occassion). It was clear early on he'd a couple jars in him too! But anyway after holy communion he got up and started to preach again, talked about 10 minutes about some candle stick holder in the chapel and moved on to the subject of child abuse and preached for another 15 minutes, almost breaking down on a number of occasions!, on the disgrace it was, how all priests were being tarred with the one brush, how he and most of them had only good intentions, how embarrassed and disgusted he was at what went on etc etc.  So fair play to him.  It's a pity more wouldnt open their gobs.  
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: comethekingdom on May 20, 2009, 10:07:51 PM
This has made headlines on BBC news at 10!!!!!!!! :o :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 10:08:49 PM
QuoteI also know many of these Priests broke their vows but you asked why there wasn't an outcry from the 'good' Priests - I am suggesting that they would have been the ones that kept their vows by trying to go through the Bishops and as such were silenced. To get a little of the Priests perspective you have to understand that those who break their vow of obedience to the Bishop will be seen as being guilty of the 'sin of pride' or a preoccupation with the self - the 'original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and indeed the ultimate source from which the others arise' - as Wiki helpfully points out. The 'good' Priest is always obedient and does not work outside the system.
I dont buy that donagh, any clown with an ounce of common sense would hardly think that they should continue to let a child be abused because they took a vow!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.

Some people in the church may have known different bits and pieces, there is certainly no one member of the clergy in Ireland (north and south) who would have had all the details given to them... not until it all came out in the late 90's anyway.  So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.  As others have said, the state knew what was going on and did precious little to stop it.  Those looking someone to blame should have a look at the state's role.  That was much more systematic and deliberate in hiding the truth for years than anything the Church did.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 10:18:18 PM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 08:38:38 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 20, 2009, 06:42:49 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM
QuoteThat is the biggest lie that has been perpetrated about the whole thing. Everyone knew what was going on - the State, the Church and importantly the people. They've all as much blame to shoulder for this as the Church. These people weren't the responsibility of the Church but of the Irish State.

Absolutely correct. I've had the same conversation with my parents and the thing that became abundantly clear is that people knew what was happening and it was covered up because it was the done thing - you never interfered in anyone's business and particularly the schools/churches. It was the equivalent of the Taliban running Ireland at the time and God forbid you crossed them.
Corporal punishment was the method of disciplining people and it was carred out in houses, schools etc. The fact that these poor kids were under the protection of the state makes it sickening.
Actually in my school the evil b**tards were all lay teachers and the Brothers were the more enlightened ones

QuoteWould you place your children in the care of someone who claimed to worship and invisible pink unicorn

Reality was that the state absolved themselves of their responsibilty by gladly letting the religous orders take on the task of "looking after" these people - Nothing got to do with the belief system - Think of Chines/Romanian orphanages in recent times for an equivalent situation.

True it can and has happened any where with any system of  beliefs but it's events like this that make a lot of people question God and Religion .

God did not have these priests do what they did, he had no hand in it and he has said that we all will be judged. the fact is people need to understand that these scumbags were false teachers and that they were only in the priesthood to satisfy their bloodlust & unnatural urges. God was a smokescreen for their putrid acts. The Church is not without blame, especially the Popes of the different eras, instead of makin JP 2 a saint they should be holding him accountable posthumously for his abject failure to stop the awful human misery some of his vicars pawned off on those they were supposed to support and teach.

Rememeber in the old teastiment God use to take a more direct approach with evil doers . In what why are their urges unnatural if god designed them that way? Surely god intended them to be sick and perverted?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.

Some people in the church may have known different bits and pieces, there is certainly no one member of the clergy in Ireland (north and south) who would have had all the details given to them... not until it all came out in the late 90's anyway.  So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.  As others have said, the state knew what was going on and did precious little to stop it.  Those looking someone to blame should have a look at the state's role.  That was much more systematic and deliberate in hiding the truth for years than anything the Church did.

The report disagrees with you. The church did cover it up. Did you read the report above from the indo? They church authorities reported non clergy to the cops if they suspected abuse and never report one of  their own. They buried documents of abuse in Rome and never acted on them. If I worked for a company that covered up child abuse and I would at least refuse to be apart of it and personally, I would have made some serious noise about it. Your argument that the wider church did not know but the government did is nonsensical.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:27:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.

Some people in the church may have known different bits and pieces, there is certainly no one member of the clergy in Ireland (north and south) who would have had all the details given to them... not until it all came out in the late 90's anyway.  So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.  As others have said, the state knew what was going on and did precious little to stop it.  Those looking someone to blame should have a look at the state's role.  That was much more systematic and deliberate in hiding the truth for years than anything the Church did.

The report disagrees with you. The church did cover it up. Did you read the report above from the indo? They church authorities reported non clergy to the cops if they suspected abuse and never report one of  their own. They buried documents of abuse in Rome and never acted on them. If I worked for a company that covered up child abuse and I would at least refuse to be apart of it and personally, I would have made some serious noise about it. Your argument that the wider church did not know but the government did is nonsensical.
You didn't read what I typed carefully enough.  You clearly hate the Church, you have made that abundantly clear on any number of occasions, I get it, it bores me to death listening to you bang on about it every time you get a chance but I do get it.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 10:34:52 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:27:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 20, 2009, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.

Some people in the church may have known different bits and pieces, there is certainly no one member of the clergy in Ireland (north and south) who would have had all the details given to them... not until it all came out in the late 90's anyway.  So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.  As others have said, the state knew what was going on and did precious little to stop it.  Those looking someone to blame should have a look at the state's role.  That was much more systematic and deliberate in hiding the truth for years than anything the Church did.

The report disagrees with you. The church did cover it up. Did you read the report above from the indo? They church authorities reported non clergy to the cops if they suspected abuse and never report one of  their own. They buried documents of abuse in Rome and never acted on them. If I worked for a company that covered up child abuse and I would at least refuse to be apart of it and personally, I would have made some serious noise about it. Your argument that the wider church did not know but the government did is nonsensical.
You didn't read what I typed carefully enough.  You clearly hate the Church, you have made that abundantly clear on any number of occasions, I get it, it bores me to death listening to you bang on about it every time you get a chance but I do get it.



I don't hate anything but what is clear is that when you have no argument left you attack the messenger. We are talking about the abuse and destruction of the lives of little children and you bring it down to accusing me of hating of the church. Maybe you should be a little ashamed too. When people talk of the church covering up abuse they of course are talking about senior authorities in the church. However, it also follows that a large number of normal priests had to have known about this and did nothing. It does not mean that every priest knew nor does it mean that every priest is bad.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:41:35 PM
myles, you still haven't read what I typed carefully enough.

When you deign to read what I already put, I will reply to your other points.  Until then, you can spout and rant and rave as much as you want  :)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 10:45:20 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 20, 2009, 10:06:04 PM
I do agree it seems to be laying the blame at the door of the Church but I wouldn't have expected any different from a State sponsored report. I also know many of these Priests broke their vows but you asked why there wasn't an outcry from the 'good' Priests - I am suggesting that they would have been the ones that kept their vows by trying to go through the Bishops and as such were silenced. To get a little of the Priests perspective you have to understand that those who break their vow of obedience to the Bishop will be seen as being guilty of the 'sin of pride' or a preoccupation with the self - the 'original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and indeed the ultimate source from which the others arise' - as Wiki helpfully points out. The 'good' Priest is always obedient and does not work outside the system. 

Firstly I would agree that the state are ultimately reponsible for state institutions regardless of who they outsourced the running to.

However, the Ferns investigation showed the fallacy of the above argument in terms of church rules:

As early as the Didache in the first century outlawed the abuse of children.  It was formally brought into Canon Law (Law 71) in 309.  In 1962 a document from Pope John XXII entitled "Crimens Sollicitationis"  to bring in this secrecy aspect with the threat of excommunication of witness etc.. who spoke publicly.   As Myles points out any human with an ounce of sense (or compassion) would see which Law was more important.  The above document also stated that all cases where to reported to the Vatican directly, giving the Pope ultimate power in these cases.

I am sure there are indeed good/bad priest and religious.  However the Catholic Church, specifically the Vatican and Pope by claiming ultimate power in the context of abuse, must also assume ultimate responsibility.  This responsibility should be realised by dealing wth the culprits, not using the strength of the organisation to persecute victims.  As for the "sin of pride", is it not pride that saw the diocese of Cloyne continuing this year to hide credible cases of abuse from the authorities and hence endangering children again?

Regardless of individuals within, the Catholic Church as an organisation has still not addressed this issue and as such is a corrupt, unacceptable organisation masquerading as a religion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:57:50 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 10:46:44 PM
Jaysus, ardmhachaabu, a strange post.

"You clearly hate the church".

It's like when someone reports abuse of children by Priests to another Priest and he says "You don't love God".
I don't think so hs, I have seen myles's attitude to the church in many posts.  I have no desire to trawl through his posts to give you examples.  The posts I am talking about clearly show what myles thinks, which is fair enough imo.  I am not saying that everyone has to see things in the way I do.  Neither will I let anyone rubbish the entire church because of the actions of a few.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 10:58:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.
...  
So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.

Maybe not everyone knew but it was systematic.  The pope issued an order to keep it in-house on pain of excommunication.  The order came from the top down.  It doesn't get anymore systematic than that!  For example Sean Fortune was reported for abusing children in the scouts before he was even ordained.   In the early 80's the Papal Nuncio wrote to parents who had complained about Fortune that he had raised the issue with Pope John Paul II himself.  So either the Papal Nuncio lied (in writing!) or the Pope decided to let him at it for another 15 years.  So the Pope, the Pope's ambassador, the Irish Cardinal and Bishop Comiskey knew they had an evil sadist on their hands (so much so that he had 3 psychiatrict treatments at the church's expense) but they left him in ministry for a further 15 years until the Guards caught up with him?  

Doesn't get any more systematic than that.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Sandino on May 20, 2009, 11:00:47 PM
I have a question for those of you posters who have have argued  that there were those in society who must have stood by when they were bound to know this was happening and did nothing. Where you out in the streets when war and death and destruction was directed at Iraq? A war declared in all our names and in which our countries played an active part. Did you do all you could do to stop it? How will history judge us? This is such a tragic story but i feel its wrong to judge others were subservient to important members of society at that time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 10:58:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 10:14:04 PM
I don't understand why some people are saying the entire church knew about it.  I know a priest whose brother (also a priest) has been convicted of child abuse on several counts.  The priest I know certainly didn't know what his brother was up to until it was in the glare of the media.
...  
So it is erroneous at best to say that the church covered it all up.  You can say that some members of the church covered it up but it wasn't systematic and not everyone knew.

Maybe not everyone knew but it was systematic.  The pope issued an order to keep it in-house on pain of excommunication.  The order came from the top down.  It doesn't get anymore systematic than that!  For example Sean Fortune was reported for abusing children in the scouts before he was even ordained.   In the early 80's the Papal Nuncio wrote to parents who had complained about Fortune that he had raised the issue with Pope John Paul II himself.  So either the Papal Nuncio lied (in writing!) or the Pope decided to let him at it for another 15 years.  So the Pope, the Pope's ambassador, the Irish Cardinal and Bishop Comiskey knew they had an evil sadist on their hands (so much so that he had 3 psychiatrict treatments at the church's expense) but they left him in ministry for a further 15 years until the Guards caught up with him?  

Doesn't get any more systematic than that.


Jim, I would say that the higher up you go in the Church (as a member of clergy) that the more responsibility you have to the whole of the Church.  Who are you to know whether the Pope actually knew or not?  Who is to say that his secretary didn't shield him from it?  You don't know the full facts, neither do I.  Even if the Pope did know, how do you think he came to the decision?  Do you think he would have come to it easy?  Do you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?

The media are just using the report being published as yet another stick to beat the church with, nothing new there and certainly nothing newsworthy.  We all know what happened.  I daresay some of us know people who were abused.  I am not condoning any of it.  I just think that it's easy for people to cast the entire blame on the church when the state knew exactly what was going on for years and did absolutely nothing about it.  How many government employees decided to say nothing?  I don't see anyone clamouring against the government though.  I have heard for calls for prosecution against clergy involved and rightly so (if they are still living) but I haven't heard anyone calling for government employees to be taken to account for their failings.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:43:41 PM
By the way, the thread title reads to me as if someone in an administrative role has done something wrong...  :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 20, 2009, 11:49:49 PM
Quote from: Sandino on May 20, 2009, 11:00:47 PM
I have a question for those of you posters who have have argued  that there were those in society who must have stood by when they were bound to know this was happening and did nothing. Where you out in the streets when war and death and destruction was directed at Iraq? A war declared in all our names and in which our countries played an active part. Did you do all you could do to stop it? How will history judge us? This is such a tragic story but i feel its wrong to judge others were subservient to important members of society at that time.
I dont see the correlation, we are not in a position to do anything about Iraq but we would be in a postion to do something if our child told us they were being abused or we became aware of a child being abused.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 11:57:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Jim, I would say that the higher up you go in the Church (as a member of clergy) that the more responsibility you have to the whole of the Church.  Who are you to know whether the Pope actually knew or not?  Who is to say that his secretary didn't shield him from it?  You don't know the full facts, neither do I.

My point is that the papacy issued a decree saying that they were the arbitrators and reports were to go to them, not external.   By taking on that power, the papacy took on the reponsibility.  Whether the Pope personally knew or not is immaterial to me.  A Pope gave the order, so the Pope is responsible.  That was a huge tenet of the findings in the Ferns report.

Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Even if the Pope did know, how do you think he came to the decision?  Do you think he would have come to it easy?  Do you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?

In my opinion (only an opinion), the greater good was the image of the church.  That, to my my mind, cannot outweigh 15 years of a pervert running amok around Wexford.  Even worse it was 15 years of the church serving kids on a platter to him by putting him into contact with kids.  However if you can suggest a "greater good" that was served I'm open to suggestion.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:59:00 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
It means what it says
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 11:57:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Jim, I would say that the higher up you go in the Church (as a member of clergy) that the more responsibility you have to the whole of the Church.  Who are you to know whether the Pope actually knew or not?  Who is to say that his secretary didn't shield him from it?  You don't know the full facts, neither do I.

My point is that the papacy issued a decree saying that they were the arbitrators and reports were to go to them, not external.   By taking on that power, the papacy took on the reponsibility.  Whether the Pope personally knew or not is immaterial to me.  A Pope gave the order, so the Pope is responsible.  That was a huge tenet of the findings in the Ferns report.

Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Even if the Pope did know, how do you think he came to the decision?  Do you think he would have come to it easy?  Do you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?

In my opinion (only an opinion), the greater good was the image of the church.  That, to my my mind, cannot outweigh 15 years of a pervert running amok around Wexford.  Even worse it was 15 years of the church serving kids on a platter to him by putting him into contact with kids.  However if you can suggest a "greater good" that was served I'm open to suggestion.


Jim, the papacy isn't the Pope so you can't say that any Pope was responsible. 

What I would say the greater good wasn't just the image of the church but the good work that the Church does.  Don't forget this was only a very small minority of people who engaged in such behaviour.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 21, 2009, 12:07:32 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 20, 2009, 11:57:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Jim, I would say that the higher up you go in the Church (as a member of clergy) that the more responsibility you have to the whole of the Church.  Who are you to know whether the Pope actually knew or not?  Who is to say that his secretary didn't shield him from it?  You don't know the full facts, neither do I.

My point is that the papacy issued a decree saying that they were the arbitrators and reports were to go to them, not external.   By taking on that power, the papacy took on the reponsibility.  Whether the Pope personally knew or not is immaterial to me.  A Pope gave the order, so the Pope is responsible.  That was a huge tenet of the findings in the Ferns report.

Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:41:55 PM
Even if the Pope did know, how do you think he came to the decision?  Do you think he would have come to it easy?  Do you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?


In my opinion (only an opinion), the greater good was the image of the church.  That, to my my mind, cannot outweigh 15 years of a pervert running amok around Wexford.  Even worse it was 15 years of the church serving kids on a platter to him by putting him into contact with kids.  However if you can suggest a "greater good" that was served I'm open to suggestion.


Jim, the papacy isn't the Pope so you can't say that any Pope was responsible. 

What I would say the greater good wasn't just the image of the church but the good work that the Church does.  Don't forget this was only a very small minority of people who engaged in such behaviour.
So was the papacy wrong in the actions it took?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 21, 2009, 12:24:41 AM
Part of the reason why such abuses unchecked , is revealed by the confusion of some posters on this thread, as to who is the Church. Our Grand-Parents and Parents were taught and believed, that Pope,Bishops, Religious Orders etc.. were the Church. This was theologically wrong. The Church  includes all baptised members be they clerical or lay. While it is true that the clerical faction seized control, and became drunk with power, the timidity and obsequiousness of the laity in the wider Catholic society and state, make them equally culpable. Donagh is correct when he states , that the responsibility of protecting the welfare of children, under the constitution , lay with the state. Not only did they fail then, they are failing today, and there is very little outcry. So lets not look rightously down our noses at previous generations, lets start answering for our own
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Turlough O Carolan on May 21, 2009, 01:40:40 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 21, 2009, 12:24:41 AM
Part of the reason why such abuses unchecked , is revealed by the confusion of some posters on this thread, as to who is the Church. Our Grand-Parents and Parents were taught and believed, that Pope,Bishops, Religious Orders etc.. were the Church. This was theologically wrong. The Church  includes all baptised members be they clerical or lay. While it is true that the clerical faction seized control, and became drunk with power, the timidity and obsequiousness of the laity in the wider Catholic society and state, make them equally culpable. Donagh is correct when he states , that the responsibility of protecting the welfare of children, under the constitution , lay with the state. Not only did they fail then, they are failing today, and there is very little outcry. So lets not look rightously down our noses at previous generations, lets start answering for our own

Correct. Many people are still loathe to stand up. During the building boom of the Celtic Tiger, I saw the church sell some land to a developer in a small town in the West of Ireland. Part of that land contained an Industrial School that closed around 1969 - actually it just changed into a convent. Before the builders could build their shiny new houses there was the minor inconvenience of having to remove some coffins that were buried in unmarked graves. Coffins of young people who were thrown into this school - God knows how they died, God knows who they were - and the church didn't have the decency of giving them a dignified burial. They were removed quickly one night so the houses could be built. No one said a word. The houses were built. The shameful values of the Ireland of the past and the Ireland of the present certainly collided that night
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 21, 2009, 07:37:24 AM
QuoteQuestion why did the priesthood attract such a large percentage of this sort of people? Was it a commonly known fact or  maybe a result of celibacy

Nothing to do with celibacy - Read somewhere that the percentage involved when compared to other "professions" wasn't that great i.e. Just as many doctors, teachers, etc. Pangurban's assessment is quite good.

It's very hard to judge the inaction of the community at large from 2009 but I know from talking to my parents and particularly people who worked in the Dept of Education during the 50's, 60's and 70 's that this was a different country and it was too all intents and purpose a catholic fundamentalist state - the equivalent of what is termed now an islamic republic if you like. 

Our own PP has spoken out a number of occasions on this and apoloogised etc - Actually spoke to him about it once and he confirmed my thining on the "silence" of the vast majority of people.

The state to my mind is equally as culpable in failing in their primary duty towards the children of the countrry and we've seen enough in recent times that that attitude hasn't changed either.

   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hound on May 21, 2009, 09:08:56 AM
Quote from: Declan on May 21, 2009, 07:37:24 AM
QuoteQuestion why did the priesthood attract such a large percentage of this sort of people? Was it a commonly known fact or  maybe a result of celibacy

Nothing to do with celibacy - Read somewhere that the percentage involved when compared to other "professions" wasn't that great i.e. Just as many doctors, teachers, etc. Pangurban's assessment is quite good.
   
If you are saying there are as many (percentage wise) paedophile accountants and lawyers as priest, that's just plain wrong, and miles wrong.

The percentages are skewed by the celibacy factor. There are many men would make good priests, bar the fact they wanted a marry woman.

Plus if you were homosexual and also a paedophile, preisthood would be high on  your agenda for a job. Especially as up to the last couple of decades gays were held in such low regard in Irish society generally. Whereas if they choose the preisthood, then suddenly they have power and are on a pedestal. Of course priesthood would be a magnet for gay paedophiles.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 21, 2009, 09:21:43 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:43:41 PM
By the way, the thread title reads to me as if someone in an administrative role has done something wrong...  :D

Quite an immature statement, you were getting it tough there trying to stand up for the church mr ardmhaca.  Google 'clerical abuse' and you can read all about it, no mention of administrative errors, just of the abuse and degradation of children by brutes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 21, 2009, 09:40:05 AM
QuoteIf you are saying there are as many (percentage wise) paedophile accountants and lawyers as priest, that's just plain wrong, and miles wrong.

Didn't explain my thoughts clearly - I don't think celibacy has anything to do with child abuse and I don't think it is the reason why religious orders attracted a higher proportion of abusers than anywhere else. Re the percentages I thought I read somewhere that the number of clerics who were chlid abusers were not significantly greater a percentage than other professions - In other words out of every 100 cases it wasn't like 25 were religious and only 2 were teachers or lawyers or accountants etc. I maybe wrong on that but I'll try and root out the research articles I read before.   

I think there is a whole thesis involved in why they were "attracted" to the religious life and one is the solitary nature of the job, power over kids etc. Not too sure If I picked you up wrong I don't think you should link homosexuality and paedophilia so directly as you did
QuotePlus if you were homosexual and also a paedophile, priesthood would be high on  your agenda for a job.
-
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on May 21, 2009, 10:43:23 AM
At the end of day, In my whole life experience I never encountered ANY PROOF that God exists. Zero, even in the darkest nights no sign. And yet we are to believe blindly based on few visions here and there and happy are those who believe but have not seen. I dont believe everything the catholic church says, i think that shows a serious lack of cop on. There are good Priests out there of course, i served under a Fr Healy for 4 yrs and he was a great man, so you cant pigeon hole them all.

It pisses me off Id like to thank God for this that and the other on the oscar poduim or whatever, really but it was you who did it not God, wasnt it you who did it. Where is God with all the suffering? He never intervenes does He, never never, ever, only 2000 yrs ago with Jesus and Moses why then? and not now? Reality says to me you really only have yourself to rely and your prayers are futile.

What happened in these places was beyond anything, really, it so sad and disgusting, from all angles, I really hope the priests face it at mass this weekend and give there feeling  on it. My heart goes out those that were the innocent victims. Just hope this isnt happening today and will never happen again. The amount of abuse of power in Ireland is astonishing when you stand back, the govt, the guards, the priests etc... although the first 2 prob not as bad as the priests nevertheless a poisoness trend.

For everyones information this was on all the Arab, bbc world, italian, French etc.. channels last night as there main news item.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 21, 2009, 11:06:02 AM
Quote from: stew on May 20, 2009, 05:24:26 PM

I would say that like any other vocation, there are good people in the Church and there are bad people in the church, I hate to see the good men get hurt for the sins of the bad.



Then its time these good men and women had the convictions to stand up and be counted, give evidence against their colleagues who've let the institution of the catholic church down not to mention the terrible crimes they allowed their colleagues to get away with.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
I have to agree. The 'greater good' comment is disgraceful. There is no greater good - there's right and wrong and it's that simple.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 01:49:01 PM
Quote from: D4S on May 20, 2009, 05:15:59 PM
Donagh I'm referring to the regular parishioner + parents of children who were abused in that statement.  Although I know todays report is largely on the institutions.
Before that, you had written  "people of Ireland stood by and trusted these manipulatorsnot knowing what was happening"

I don't have any bone to pick with your post but if you don't mind I'll make a few comments.
These forms of sexual abuse,  the nature of it, are a very complex picture, both from people who effect and those who are affected.
I only want to address the    "what parents knew" bit.

It's very hard to measure up what people knew was happening against their ability to deny it to themselves.
Personally, this is the one issue that took me a long time to understand as best I could, come to terms with it and get away from blame.
It would require about 50 chapters to explain properly.

Both the children and parents were abused, in different ways. As we know, abusers are the most devious.
Parents were abused, their trust and their ability/ parental guardianships were abused.
Abuse does not just affect one individual but the entire family dynamics are damaged to different degrees for decades, consciously and unconsciously.

Personally, no abuser ever got far with me as a kid, I don't know how, I just had an antenna for those sorts of things, but other family members were abused.
In my case, there was a holy trinity, a lay teacher, a Christian brother and a travelling salesman, who did their level best.
The teacher became a part of a very high profile prosecution where he eventually pleaded guilty.  
Members of our family were directly involved as witnesses.
My Mother was totally supportive of the witnesses involved the instant it became known to her.
In one discussion I had with my Mother, I was attempting to point out (while not actually saying it) that it was a bigger crime that an abused kid feared telling his parents because they wouldn't believe him and probably get a whack. I said, rather than face not being believed by one's own parent, a kid would shut up. That, to a kid/teenager,  trust from one's parents is a major one. My Mother did not get this. For the first time I told her about the distant family member the (Christian Brother) who tried to abuse me. She simply did not take it on board,  not exactly not believing me, but just changed the subject. I impressed upon her that I was not making this up, can she at least acknowledge what I have just said and discuss it. Again she gave a similar response. So I said, there is a perfect example of not being believed, that I had no trauma from the attempted abuse but the fact that my own mother did not believe me in this matter gave me a pain.
There was a social environment where all this abuse could prosper. Part of that environment was a stupendous denial of evidence and even if it was offered by one's own children, it was not accepted as being real. To my mind, some people knew the extent and were complicit, but I object to the general use of the term "people knew" and I object to you claiming that "parents knew". Many had not even the consciousness to know.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 21, 2009, 02:10:03 PM
Is a lot to read all the messages but those male and female paedophiles must have thought they died and gone to heaven having these buildings with all the children locked up and no-one to account to. The reports on the radio this morning were heartbreaking and hopefully if there is a God the fires of hell will burn these evil b*****rds for eternity.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 21, 2009, 02:25:00 PM
I have to say Main Street, luckily I have not had the first hand experience you are talking about, I come from a different generation so perhaps I'm not knowledgeable enough to discuss the topic in any depth without possibly offending certain people, but I hope I haven't offended you.  It doesn't however make me feel any less disgusted or horrified when you hear of the stories from individuals and to think there are 10s of thousands of stories like that.

I like longrunsthefox listened to the radio this morning and it was gutwrenching and very emotional.  I listened to 1 lady of 65 totally unable to compose herself on stephen nolan, at the physical + UNBELIEVABLE emotional abuse she had suffered at being told she was worthless, ugly, an illegitamite bastard growing up for 16 years in an institution.  She grew up and had a family and still feels worthless and is massively emotionally scarred yet.  Another man on Gerry Ryan spoke of the abuse he endured, his marriage is now broke up and he never even brought himself to tell his wife such was his shame.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II. Outside of Ireland your Catholic experience was very similar in that families had weekly mass attendance, devotions, family prayer and a reliance on the clergy to lay out all the rules to get to heaven. Life was good, or so it seemed.  
In Ireland this reliance on clergy extended from what I understand beyond just religious matters.  The Clergy had a power that very few challenged.
Things changed around the world and in Ireland post Vatican II but the clergy up until recently held onto that stigma of power and ultimate respect.  This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
It is a very sad reality and a lot of people stood by and let it happen.  Blame could be diluted and we can all go back and forth as much as we want but ultimately the Church needs to take responsibility here for the actions of its clergy.  Nothing else will satisfy the majority and nothing less will help towards healing a huge wound which remains open.

I wonder if this happened though would people be satisfied?  Would it be enough?




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 21, 2009, 03:30:24 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
Jim, the papacy isn't the Pope so you can't say that any Pope was responsible. 

The Church hide behind their rules, their rules make the Vatican and hence the Pope directly responsible.  The Church cannot have it's cake and eat it.  Either they accept the laws of the land or if they are above the laws they accept the responsibility.  The Pope is the head-honcho so I can't accept that the Pope and papacy are not equivalent here.

Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
What I would say the greater good wasn't just the image of the church but the good work that the Church does.  Don't forget thiOnces was only a very small minority of people who engaged in such behaviour.

I'm not sure those that were abused due to the Church's inaction would agree.  Also if the Pope and the Church claim they didn't know about the problem on one hand, they can't claim that they know if was a minority on the other.

Once again having their cake and eating it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 21, 2009, 04:01:56 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II. Outside of Ireland your Catholic experience was very similar in that families had weekly mass attendance, devotions, family prayer and a reliance on the clergy to lay out all the rules to get to heaven. Life was good, or so it seemed. 
In Ireland this reliance on clergy extended from what I understand beyond just religious matters.  The Clergy had a power that very few challenged.
Things changed around the world and in Ireland post Vatican II but the clergy up until recently held onto that stigma of power and ultimate respect.  This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
It is a very sad reality and a lot of people stood by and let it happen.  Blame could be diluted and we can all go back and forth as much as we want but ultimately the Church needs to take responsibility here for the actions of its clergy.  Nothing else will satisfy the majority and nothing less will help towards healing a huge wound which remains open.

I wonder if this happened though would people be satisfied?  Would it be enough?



What might be a start would be all the Catholic clergy paedos and sadists still alive and those who covered them up still alive be brought before the criminal courts like the old Nazi War criminals. The ones who are dead named and those people abused compensated out of the church's coffers.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 04:15:48 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II.
But did this report not cover a 40 or 60 year period up to the 80s?

Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
Come on Iceman, a few offenders would not be "endemic".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 05:54:02 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 04:15:48 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II.
But did this report not cover a 40 or 60 year period up to the 80s?

Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
Come on Iceman, a few offenders would not be "endemic".
I don't understand your question on the years prior to Vatican II Maguire if you want to elaborate?

Looking at the bigger picture in comparison to those members of the clergy who did not participate in forms of abuse the ratio is quite vast therefore I think I am justified in labeling the offenders as "few".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 21, 2009, 06:04:23 PM
If the abuse was 'endemic' and you have a aportotion some blame to those who knew about it but done nothing or turned a blind eye then i would not think you are justified.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 06:07:34 PM
Quote from: ludermor on May 21, 2009, 06:04:23 PM
If the abuse was 'endemic' and you have a aportotion some blame to those who knew about it but done nothing or turned a blind eye then i would not think you are justified.
Based on that argument then can I blame society also?  I was trying to keep this to blaming the Church here ludermor.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 05:54:02 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 04:15:48 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II.
But did this report not cover a 40 or 60 year period up to the 80s?

Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
Come on Iceman, a few offenders would not be "endemic".
I don't understand your question on the years prior to Vatican II Maguire if you want to elaborate?

Looking at the bigger picture in comparison to those members of the clergy who did not participate in forms of abuse the ratio is quite vast therefore I think I am justified in labeling the offenders as "few".
In relation to Vatican II:
I thought you were implying that all of these wrongdoings were pre-Vatican II. When you said: "the Catholic World was a completely different place", I read this as implying that the abuse that went on was pre-Vatican II and that Vatican II sorted things out. Maybe i picked you up wrong?

I can't agree with your second point. I can't reconcile the idea of "a few" with the term "endemic". And no one seems to be arguing with the report's use of the term. Synonyms of 'endemic' include: 'widespread', 'common', 'rife', 'prevalent'.... not 'few'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 21, 2009, 06:50:38 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 06:07:34 PM
Quote from: ludermor on May 21, 2009, 06:04:23 PM
If the abuse was 'endemic' and you have a aportotion some blame to those who knew about it but done nothing or turned a blind eye then i would not think you are justified.
Based on that argument then can I blame society also?  I was trying to keep this to blaming the Church here ludermor.

Not sure if you can,but i dont know how you can seperate the people  who commited the crime and the people who knew about them. Most of these people seem to have been transferred from one institution to another with the superiors ( be they bishops, parish preists, principles) knowing of their 'habits'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 06:56:08 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 05:54:02 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 04:15:48 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
Ireland and in fact the entire Catholic World was a completely different place Pre-Vatican II.
But did this report not cover a 40 or 60 year period up to the 80s?

Quote from: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 03:05:18 PM
This allowed those few offenders that existed within the church to continue to prey on their victims under the guise of the collar or habit.
Come on Iceman, a few offenders would not be "endemic".
I don't understand your question on the years prior to Vatican II Maguire if you want to elaborate?

Looking at the bigger picture in comparison to those members of the clergy who did not participate in forms of abuse the ratio is quite vast therefore I think I am justified in labeling the offenders as "few".
In relation to Vatican II:
I thought you were implying that all of these wrongdoings were pre-Vatican II. When you said: "the Catholic World was a completely different place", I read this as implying that the abuse that went on was pre-Vatican II and that Vatican II sorted things out. Maybe i picked you up wrong?

I can't agree with your second point. I can't reconcile the idea of "a few" with the term "endemic". And no one seems to be arguing with the report's use of the term. Synonyms of 'endemic' include: 'widespread', 'common', 'rife', 'prevalent'.... not 'few'.

I was merely trying to set the scene for some people who do not even know of Vatican II or understand its implications for the wider Catholic Church.  Also the insight into Catholicism pre-Vatican II helps explain the stigma around priests, especially in Ireland, and people's reluctance to challenge them on anything.

I'll concede that based on the report my use of "few" doesn't carry much weight but as I stressed before I was apportioning the offenders to the Global Church - seeing as it is the Global Catholic Church and Papacy under attack and being held accountable here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 07:06:06 PM
Quote from: D4S on May 21, 2009, 02:25:00 PM
I have to say Main Street, luckily I have not had the first hand experience you are talking about, I come from a different generation so perhaps I'm not knowledgeable enough to discuss the topic in any depth without possibly offending certain people, but I hope I haven't offended you.  It doesn't however make me feel any less disgusted or horrified when you hear of the stories from individuals and to think there are 10s of thousands of stories like that.

If I was offended you would know about it :) You just have to more careful about putting onus on the family, that they must have known what was happening.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
I have to agree. The 'greater good' comment is disgraceful. There is no greater good - there's right and wrong and it's that simple.
Tell me this Maguire, who are you to judge anyone?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:17:43 PM
Quote from: D4S on May 21, 2009, 09:21:43 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 20, 2009, 11:43:41 PM
By the way, the thread title reads to me as if someone in an administrative role has done something wrong...  :D

Quite an immature statement, you were getting it tough there trying to stand up for the church mr ardmhaca.  Google 'clerical abuse' and you can read all about it, no mention of administrative errors, just of the abuse and degradation of children by brutes.
Wind your neck in son.  I have given my opinion and nothing more.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:19:58 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 21, 2009, 03:30:24 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
Jim, the papacy isn't the Pope so you can't say that any Pope was responsible. 

The Church hide behind their rules, their rules make the Vatican and hence the Pope directly responsible.  The Church cannot have it's cake and eat it.  Either they accept the laws of the land or if they are above the laws they accept the responsibility.  The Pope is the head-honcho so I can't accept that the Pope and papacy are not equivalent here.

Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 12:03:19 AM
What I would say the greater good wasn't just the image of the church but the good work that the Church does.  Don't forget thiOnces was only a very small minority of people who engaged in such behaviour.

I'm not sure those that were abused due to the Church's inaction would agree.  Also if the Pope and the Church claim they didn't know about the problem on one hand, they can't claim that they know if was a minority on the other.

Once again having their cake and eating it.
Jim, where is your criticism of the state?  The authorities knew all along what was going on and refused to do anything about it.  You can't only blame the Church if you are being even-handed about it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:23:49 PM
Main Street, very brave of you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 21, 2009, 07:33:51 PM
Such a sensitive issue will take a long long time to resolve and many if not all of those who suffered at the hands of these so called "leaders" may never get over it.
It is our responsibility as human beings to not let this happen again - through the Church, in schools or any other place.
For those of us who give a crap it is our responsibility as Catholics to insist that the correct structures are in place to make sure pedophiles and other men and women with mental illnesses are not permitted to enter the clergy.  The lay people need to take a much more active role in this and as a congregation we should not slam the Church but support it through these times and encourage others to do the same.

There is no way forward if we continue to look back and there is no way to climb out of a whole if people continue to judge and condemn us all for the sins of the minority.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Farrandeelin on May 21, 2009, 07:36:11 PM
My uncle was a priest, so all the people who say all the clergy are evil scumbags are wrong. But those who did terrible things to those poor children at the time in those schools were all f**king bastards. It is an awful shame we had to wait this long for this enquiry to come out. Just because my uncle was a priest, I am not going to say the church were right on this, in fact the opposite is the case. They should be ashamed and they all lied. The Church did let the young children down big time. Society under the Church's firm grip let the children down at the time. Parents let their children by letting them go to those schools, Church let them down by abusing them, society let them down as they didn't want to know about it. That's my opinion on the whole sorry issue. But by Christ those 'priests' who committed those crimes and the Bishops who refused to name anyone in their dioceses are some c***ts.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 07:49:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
I have to agree. The 'greater good' comment is disgraceful. There is no greater good - there's right and wrong and it's that simple.
Tell me this Maguire, who are you to judge anyone?
I'm not judging anyone, merely commenting on someone else's opinion - this being a discussion board - that there may be a 'greater good' than defending children.

I don't believe there is a justifiably higher priority here than protecting the children. I think any attempts to do so are disgraceful.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:10:58 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 07:49:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
I have to agree. The 'greater good' comment is disgraceful. There is no greater good - there's right and wrong and it's that simple.
Tell me this Maguire, who are you to judge anyone?
I'm not judging anyone, merely commenting on someone else's opinion - this being a discussion board - that there may be a 'greater good' than defending children.

I don't believe there is a justifiably higher priority here than protecting the children. I think any attempts to do so are disgraceful.
Yes, you are judging.  You are judging me for one with your 'disgraceful' comment.

Put yourself in the shoes of the Pope (if he knew about it).  Others were criticising Popes and saying they were wrong and ultimately responsible.  To which I replied that maybe they had the greater good of the Church in mind.  I can't see how that would surprise even the most hardened Catholic Church hater.

I am not condoning those clergy who were involved just to be clear and I also believe they were very evil people who manipulated young people.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Myles Na G. on May 21, 2009, 08:15:57 PM
If the greater good of the Church is served by allowing the physical and sexual abuse of children to continue unhindered, then in truth it is a morally bankrupt and corrupted organisation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:19:42 PM
Quote
Put yourself in the shoes of the Pope (if he knew about it).  Others were criticising Popes and saying they were wrong and ultimately responsible.  To which I replied that maybe they had the greater good of the Church in mind.  I can't see how that would surprise even the most hardened Catholic Church hater.

I'm sory ardmhacha it sounds like you're looking ways to defend the indefensible. 
I dont see how the church alerting the police to the abuse they've discovered would put the church at risk. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:25:38 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:19:42 PM
Quote
Put yourself in the shoes of the Pope (if he knew about it).  Others were criticising Popes and saying they were wrong and ultimately responsible.  To which I replied that maybe they had the greater good of the Church in mind.  I can't see how that would surprise even the most hardened Catholic Church hater.

I'm sory ardmhacha it sounds like you're looking ways to defend the indefensible. 
I dont see how the church alerting the police to the abuse they've discovered would put the church at risk. 
Pints, again I was replying to someone who was blaming the Popes.  I am not seeking to defend what happened.  That would be stupid and wrong.

You do know that members of the clergy alerted the authorities at various times throughout the years and were ignored ?

In my opinion, highlighting the abuse at an earlier stage would have been the right thing to do.  It didn't happen like that so I am putting my own interpretation on it as to why that happened the way it did.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:28:12 PM
QuoteQuestion why did the priesthood attract such a large percentage of this sort of people? Was it a commonly known fact or  maybe a result of celibacy ?

Celibacy has nothing to do with it, going without will not make you rape children but it's weird how they collected such a  bunch of perverts and bastards of women who'd strip and beat children?

Declan
Quote
Read somewhere that the percentage involved when compared to other "professions" wasn't that great i.e. Just as many doctors, teachers, etc. Pangurban's assessment is quite good.

I'd find that difficult to believe declan, the abuse was so widespread, is there any idea of what sort of a percentage of the clergy we're talking about? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:38:58 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:25:38 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:19:42 PM
Quote
Put yourself in the shoes of the Pope (if he knew about it).  Others were criticising Popes and saying they were wrong and ultimately responsible.  To which I replied that maybe they had the greater good of the Church in mind.  I can't see how that would surprise even the most hardened Catholic Church hater.

I'm sory ardmhacha it sounds like you're looking ways to defend the indefensible. 
I dont see how the church alerting the police to the abuse they've discovered would put the church at risk. 
Pints, again I was replying to someone who was blaming the Popes.  I am not seeking to defend what happened.  That would be stupid and wrong.

You do know that members of the clergy alerted the authorities at various times throughout the years and were ignored ?

In my opinion, highlighting the abuse at an earlier stage would have been the right thing to do.  It didn't happen like that so I am putting my own interpretation on it as to why that happened the way it did.
Fair enough, who knows why the church sat on it and I could buy that they didnt want it to get out as it would damage them (still unacceptable imo)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:44:28 PM
I would go further than that pints and say that they definitely didn't want it to get out because they knew the damage it would do to the Church and people's trust in it, you know what too, they were right... not in what they did but what they thought.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2009, 08:59:07 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:44:28 PM
I would go further than that pints and say that they definitely didn't want it to get out because they knew the damage it would do to the Church and people's trust in it, you know what too, they were right... not in what they did but what they thought.

Well obviously, I guess they thought attitudes would never change, that there would never be a day when such a report would be issued.

I'm truely ashamed of our previous generations, my mother was telling me there she mentioned the report to an aunt of hers - she must be near 90 - this morning and the aunt's response was "I wouldnt believe everything I hear".  Unbelievable!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:01:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:44:28 PM
I would go further than that pints and say that they definitely didn't want it to get out because they knew the damage it would do to the Church and people's trust in it, you know what too, they were right... not in what they did but what they thought.
With hindsight it seems that the cover up by both Vatican and State that allowed these monsters to continue destroying thousands of lives has has inflicted more damage to the Church. The Pope/Church hierarchy either thought the sexual/physical/psychological abuse was okay or else it felt that the victims presented an acceptable level of collateral damage to protect the image of the Church. Neither is acceptable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on May 21, 2009, 09:05:13 PM
The Church is at fault because it knew about sadistic brothers/ priests as well as the perverse ones, their response was either to ignore them or reassign them elsewhere. what the feck did they think ws going to happen at their new locations???? Guilty.

The State is at fault because not only did it fail to protect the most innocent of its citizens but it actually condemned thousands to lives scarred by sexual depravity and torture at the hands of those who should have been protecting them. Guilty.

The Church MUST come clean, 100% no matter the consequences once and for all.

The state must burden some of the financial and moral blame here, they must do what is right and they must make sure this never happens again.

God Bless those who have to live with the horror of this situation, we will never know the true numbers and it is to our eternal shame as a nation that this was allowed to go on in our Country unchecked.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 09:15:22 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 08:10:58 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 07:49:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:16:27 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 21, 2009, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 20, 2009, 11:46:24 PM
QuoteDo you not think he maybe decided that for the greater good it was better to say nothing, if he knew?
What in under f**k is this supposed to mean?
I have to agree. The 'greater good' comment is disgraceful. There is no greater good - there's right and wrong and it's that simple.
Tell me this Maguire, who are you to judge anyone?
I'm not judging anyone, merely commenting on someone else's opinion - this being a discussion board - that there may be a 'greater good' than defending children.

I don't believe there is a justifiably higher priority here than protecting the children. I think any attempts to do so are disgraceful.
Yes, you are judging.  You are judging me for one with your 'disgraceful' comment.

Put yourself in the shoes of the Pope (if he knew about it).  Others were criticising Popes and saying they were wrong and ultimately responsible.  To which I replied that maybe they had the greater good of the Church in mind.  I can't see how that would surprise even the most hardened Catholic Church hater.

I am not condoning those clergy who were involved just to be clear and I also believe they were very evil people who manipulated young people.
Call it judging if it makes you feel better. I said your comment was disgraceful - not you. But if that's judging you, then so be it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:01:50 PM
With hindsight it seems that the cover up by both Vatican and State that allowed these monsters to continue destroying thousands of lives has has inflicted more damage to the Church. The Pope/Church hierarchy either thought the sexual/physical/psychological abuse was okay or else it felt that the victims presented an acceptable level of collateral damage to protect the image of the Church. Neither is acceptable.
You are getting close, surely you should have a viewing of Doubt. :)

Protecting the Priest was more of a priority for the Catholic Church than the protection of children. The priest has/had a much higher status in the hierarchial scheme of things. All members of the church, more or less subscribed to that hierarchy. Priests and Nuns are compelled to follow hierarchy above all else.
Maintaining the hierarchy was sacrosanct, no matter what the cost, even to the point of lying.
Knowledge of the extent of abuse is documented up to Cardinal level in the US, I don't know how far the paper trail goes to in Ireland.
The abuser priest just had to say sincere confession and do penance. According to the doctrine, that was sufficient.
Of course the internal discipline system was ridden with faults.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:44:16 PM
Quote from: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:01:50 PM
With hindsight it seems that the cover up by both Vatican and State that allowed these monsters to continue destroying thousands of lives has has inflicted more damage to the Church. The Pope/Church hierarchy either thought the sexual/physical/psychological abuse was okay or else it felt that the victims presented an acceptable level of collateral damage to protect the image of the Church. Neither is acceptable.
You are getting close, surely you should have a viewing of Doubt. :)

Protecting the Priest was more of a priority for the Catholic Church than the protection of children. The priest has/had a much higher status in the hierarchial scheme of things. All members of the church, more or less subscribed to that hierarchy. Priests and Nuns are compelled to follow hierarchy above all else.
Maintaining the hierarchy was sacrosanct, no matter what the cost, even to the point of lying.
Knowledge of the extent of abuse is documented up to Cardinal level in the US, I don't know how far the paper trail goes to in Ireland.
The abuser priest just had to say sincere confession and do penance. According to the doctrine, that was sufficient.
Of course the internal discipline system was ridden with faults.


I just haven't the stomach for the likes of Doubt or the Magdalene Sisters. Will never see either of them but I remember that movie Sleepers made me so f**king cross that people would behave like that!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 09:56:05 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:44:16 PM
Quote from: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:01:50 PM
With hindsight it seems that the cover up by both Vatican and State that allowed these monsters to continue destroying thousands of lives has has inflicted more damage to the Church. The Pope/Church hierarchy either thought the sexual/physical/psychological abuse was okay or else it felt that the victims presented an acceptable level of collateral damage to protect the image of the Church. Neither is acceptable.
You are getting close, surely you should have a viewing of Doubt. :)

Protecting the Priest was more of a priority for the Catholic Church than the protection of children. The priest has/had a much higher status in the hierarchial scheme of things. All members of the church, more or less subscribed to that hierarchy. Priests and Nuns are compelled to follow hierarchy above all else.
Maintaining the hierarchy was sacrosanct, no matter what the cost, even to the point of lying.
Knowledge of the extent of abuse is documented up to Cardinal level in the US, I don't know how far the paper trail goes to in Ireland.
The abuser priest just had to say sincere confession and do penance. According to the doctrine, that was sufficient.
Of course the internal discipline system was ridden with faults.


I just haven't the stomach for the likes of Doubt or the Magdalene Sisters. Will never see either of them but I remember that movie Sleepers made me so f**king cross that people would behave like that!
I liked Sleepers, it had a happy ending!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 21, 2009, 09:59:48 PM
Abuse was endemic. That is the key. It means than a lot more than a few bad apples were at the root of this. The report says the abuse was "systematic". I heard a story on RTE radio 1 this morning. It told of a new brother who started at one of these schools. He didn't like to beat the kids. The other brothers teased this guy and told him he'd have to get tough or the boys would think he was a sissy. One day he finally gave in and hammered the head of some young lad. He entered the staff room and got a standing ovation and cheers from the whole staff! This is sick and is not a few bad apples - this was the system.

Now there are those that say things have changed. Really? Lets look at what the report said about the christian brothers behaviour over the past 10 years. The report says they obstructed the investigation. Their apologies were always guarded and conditional. They claimed that 50% of the claims were lies and made for money. They sued the enquiry so that the commission can not name the names of the abusers. So where are the decent priests today within the christian brothers that will stand up and say I am a better man than this shitty corrupt self serving bastard of an organisation. If I was a good man within this organisation I would walk, no question.

Prime time is on now and the haunting faces of little kids in black and white photos from these schools is staring out of the TV. Little kids of 4/5 yrs old. Just a little older than my own daughter. It sickens me to the pit of my stomach. Any of you who's first reaction is to lauch a defence of the church really need to take a look at yourselves.

Elections are coming up now. The tax payer is paying 1 billion euro to cover all these claims, the church gave 100 million I think. This needs to reversed and if it can't be legally then the government should refuse funding to any catholic church project until 1 billion is recouped. Maybe the vatican could sell of some of the gold that adorns their huge palaces to pay the bill. The same vatican that buried the dirty secrets of Irelands industrial schools deep in its vaults.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 21, 2009, 10:22:31 PM
One rotten bastard made a lad who defecated eat his own shit - another bastard made another lad who soiled himself and it got on to the brother's shoe made the young lad lick it off the sole of his shoe.


These bastards were so perverted, so evil, so corrupt that it defies logic. Words can't describe the pian and suffering they caused.


Was listening to one man this morning who was getting the shite knocked out of him every day but who didn't mention anything to his mother when she visited every month - when asked why he said he didn't want to upset his mother more than she was already.

His crime ?? He stole a bicycle !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 10:32:17 PM
The levels of depravity shown in some stories are reminiscent of the behaviour of the Nazis towards Jews in the concentration camps. These people had evil coursing through their veins and had a peculiar way of spreading the Good News!

I feel genuine pity for anyone that had to endure a minute in the company of those bastards.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2009, 11:41:11 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 21, 2009, 09:44:16 PM
I just haven't the stomach for the likes of Doubt or the Magdalene Sisters. Will never see either of them but I remember that movie Sleepers made me so f**king cross that people would behave like that!
Doubt is not that type of film, I'm telling you, have a look, if after 20 minutes you don't like it, walk away.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 21, 2009, 11:51:34 PM
There will be no justice for victims, nor no meaningful change in the system, until a Bishop, Head of religious order, or government minister, is placed in the dock to account for their stewardship. Then and only then will justice be seen to be done.  Until that happens, nothing has changed. At the root of all of this is class. None of the abused come from upper or middle class backgrounds
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 22, 2009, 01:10:17 AM
Class is very relevant here, there wasn't much sign of this stuff in Blackrock College and no son of a judge or doctor was interfered with. These orders ran regular schools that contributed greatly to Irish education. In the past there was a "spare the rod and spoil the child" mentality and all schools had an element of violence about them. But if you attended a regular school and had a pretty positive experience it was natural to think that other schools run by the same order were similar, i.e. you might get the strap from time to time but you'd get a good education. Normal people could hardly imagine some of the sexual stuff. It is clear that there was two tier system in place, schools with orphans and industrial schools were run on entirely different principles. The perverts and paedophiles made sure to end up in these places where the culture allowed them do what they liked and where parents could not easily control them. But the administrators of these orders knew what was going on and allowed it continue to the eternal shame of the Catholic church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 22, 2009, 07:44:33 AM
QuoteWas listening to one man this morning who was getting the shite knocked out of him every day but who didn't mention anything to his mother when she visited every month - when asked why he said he didn't want to upset his mother more than she was already. His crime ?? He stole a bicycle !

A neighbour of my wife's wrote a book about his experiences in Artane - The reason he ended up there was that his father died when he was quite young and his mother was left raising a few kids alone. A male relation , think it was an uncle, used call to the house on a regular enough basis to help out. Nothing going on with the young widow but a neighbour complained to the local PP re "immoral behaviour" etc and together with the local Sergeant the kids were taken off the woman and sent to these hell holes. This was in the 30s but gives an indication of the sort of atmosphere that existed.

How the people who perpertrated this abuse have not been named and ashamed in the public courts is beyond me.

Far from the ideals that Edmund Rice had when he set them up!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 09:31:37 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 21, 2009, 07:19:58 PM
Jim, where is your criticism of the state?  The authorities knew all along what was going on and refused to do anything about it.  You can't only blame the Church if you are being even-handed about it.

If you read my posts you would see that the first line of my first post is that the state were utlimate responsible for what happened.  I couldn't be clearer about it. 

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 09:39:43 AM
The only way that there can be any sense of victims getting justice is by being adequately compensated, properly treated psychologically and each one of them getting a personal apology from the Church.


The government need to look again at the figure of € 127m that the church gave over - it should be 10 times this amount - thy can well afford it.


And finally, any priest, brother, bishop, cardinal, nun who was in any way complicit should come out and admit their guilt as there are still people in positions of authority who were complicit in all of this evil.


This last bit won't happen by the way.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 09:56:16 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 09:39:43 AM
The only way that there can be any sense of victims getting justice is by being adequately compensated, properly treated psychologically and each one of them getting a personal apology from the Church.

The government need to look again at the figure of € 127m that the church gave over - it should be 10 times this amount - thy can well afford it.

And finally, any priest, brother, bishop, cardinal, nun who was in any way complicit should come out and admit their guilt as there are still people in positions of authority who were complicit in all of this evil.

This last bit won't happen by the way.

As far as I know the Church has apologised numerous time, but a few other questions:

Why should the Church pay? If you were abused in a prison who wouldn't sue the prision but the State.

Besides the large amount of false claims, how would you decide who gets compensation? Would someone who was sexually abused and someone who got a clout around the ear get the same amount?

Most of the radio phone-ins I'm hearing relate mainly to verbal/emotional abuse and some 'beatings'. If you say those people should get compensation does that not also mean all of us over 35 who were beat at school by lay teachers should also get compensation? Should it stop there i.e. should everyone who was beaten by their parents not also get compensation?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:00:39 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 09:56:16 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 09:39:43 AM
The only way that there can be any sense of victims getting justice is by being adequately compensated, properly treated psychologically and each one of them getting a personal apology from the Church.

The government need to look again at the figure of € 127m that the church gave over - it should be 10 times this amount - thy can well afford it.

And finally, any priest, brother, bishop, cardinal, nun who was in any way complicit should come out and admit their guilt as there are still people in positions of authority who were complicit in all of this evil.

This last bit won't happen by the way.

As far as I know the Church has apologised numerous time, but a few other questions:

Why should the Church pay? If you were abused in a prison who wouldn't sue the prision but the State.

Besides the large amount of false claims, how would you decide who gets compensation? Would someone who was sexually abused and someone who got a clout around the ear get the same amount?

Most of the radio phone-ins I'm hearing relate mainly to verbal/emotional abuse and some 'beatings'. If you say those people should get compensation does that not also mean all of us over 35 who were beat at school by lay teachers should also get compensation? Should it stop there i.e. should everyone who was beaten by their parents not also get compensation?

Cos they've already paid - back then CHURCH = STATE. So both are paying except that the church has paid about 10% so far.

There's beating and then there were floggings with all sorts of perverted sideshows - bit of a difference.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:01:09 AM
The controversy sparked by the Ryan Commission's landmark findings turned political yesterday evening with the Minister for Education, Batt O'Keeffe, ruling out - for legal reasons - any renegotiation of the Catholic Church's liability to compensate survivors.

Minister O'Keeffe was responding to Opposition fury over the 2002 deal between his predecessor, Michael Woods, and the religious that looks set to land the orders with a tenth of the bill, with the taxpayer paying about €1bn.

However, Mr O'Keeffe also invited the Catholic congregations to consider shouldering more of the burden.

The Christian Brothers' responded that the deal was made in good faith and was the fairest that could have been struck seven years ago.

CORI, which facilitated the 18 Orders in making it, said it was not aware that any of them was planning a renegotiation.

Meanwhile, the Commission's unprecedented official confirmation that the religious institutionally abused tens of thousands of children after the courts locked them up in Catholic institutions has triggered a mounting cry for help from abuse victims.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:08:19 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:00:39 AM
Cos they've already paid - back then CHURCH = STATE. So both are paying except that the church has paid about 10% so far.

There's beating and then there were floggings with all sorts of perverted sideshows - bit of a difference.

The Church and State may have been connected but they didn't and don't share a common treasury or pot of money so to say the Church should pay more is just vindictive. The State was ultimately responsible for placing the children in these places and allowing the abuse to continue, so they are liable not the Church. The Church has paid 10% of the agreed compensation which is probably more than they've be forced to do by any court.

I don't get your second comment. There were beatings, floggings and everything in between, so are you saying everyone should get compensated? Does that include those who were beaten by lay teachers in schools?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:13:28 AM

Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 09:56:16 AM
Besides the large amount of false claims, how would you decide who gets compensation? Would someone who was sexually abused and someone who got a clout around the ear get the same amount?

Donagh,

There is already a board of redress set up to check the veracity of claims and decide appropriate payment. 

Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 09:56:16 AM
Why should the Church pay? If you were abused in a prison who wouldn't sue the prision but the State.

If the government must pay out compensation it has to come from somewhere.  Seeing as the government in essence had the church working for them (monies were received!) I think the state is perfectly entitled to seek financial input from the church.   Was this not the essence of the deal made by Michael Woods?    Given that records since found (for example the Christian Brother files that had been moved to Rome) indicate the church's knowledge of the crimes was much broader than conceeded at the time, I think the state need to revisit that agreement.

If taken via the courts, the church will have to pay and that has already been shown.

The principal vulnerability in the church's defence is that they moved this pricks around when they knew they had committed offences.  Most successful cases against them have hinged on that.   It is not the fact that the perpetrator was a church member but the fact that the church organisational helped that perpetrator.

The more worrying aspect is the fact the underlying issue in that behaviour (protection of reputation etc..) is still evident today.  Look at Cloyne earlier this year.......

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:16:46 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:08:19 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:00:39 AM
Cos they've already paid - back then CHURCH = STATE. So both are paying except that the church has paid about 10% so far.

There's beating and then there were floggings with all sorts of perverted sideshows - bit of a difference.

The Church and State may have been connected but they didn't and don't share a common treasury or pot of money so to say the Church should pay more is just vindictive. The State was ultimately responsible for placing the children in these places and allowing the abuse to continue, so they are liable not the Church. The Church has paid 10% of the agreed compensation which is probably more than they've be forced to do by any court.

I don't get your second comment. There were beatings, floggings and everything in between, so are you saying everyone should get compensated? Does that include those who were beaten by lay teachers in schools?


I'm saying there's a difference in getting a slap form a teacher and regular floggings.

The redress board can deal wth this.

The Church should pay more than 10% - thwy were responsible for most of it - ok the state was the organising body but as I said the state equalled the church back then. That's why 10% isn't enough. They've got maasive resources.


Look at what happened in the USA and how their claims of abuse were dealt with and how much the church there had to pay.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 22, 2009, 10:19:46 AM
To my mind the Christian Brothers should now voluntarily disband and all their assets sold and ring fenced into a victims fund to be administered via the redress board.

Unfortunately I think the "state's" involvement in all this will be understated and all the talk will be about the religious orders being made to pay etc. successive governments and departments to my mind are equally complicit as the orders but I don't think that message is getting out there. Oh and who was in power for the majority of this time - Any guesses???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:23:05 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:13:28 AM

If the government must pay out compensation it has to come from somewhere.  Seeing as the government in essence had the church working for them (monies were received!) I think the state is perfectly entitled to seek financial input from the church.   Was this not the essence of the deal made by Michael Woods?    Given that records since found (for example the Christian Brother files that had been moved to Rome) indicate the church's knowledge of the crimes was much broader than conceeded at the time, I think the state need to revisit that agreement.

If taken via the courts, the church will have to pay and that has already been shown.

The principal vulnerability in the church's defence is that they moved this pricks around when they knew they had committed offences.  Most successful cases against them have hinged on that.   It is not the fact that the perpetrator was a church member but the fact that the church organisational helped that perpetrator.

The more worrying aspect is the fact the underlying issue in that behaviour (protection of reputation etc..) is still evident today.  Look at Cloyne earlier this year.......



The State sought input from the Church and it was given, I don't understand why people are now demanding they pay more, particularly now that things have changed. E100 million is a lot of cash for the Irish Church to pay over. More than adequate IMO.

Re Cloyne - Magee fecked up his administrative procedures and was forced to go. Rather than evidence that the Church is still trying to protect abusers, I would see Magee's removal as evidence that the Church has changed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:25:47 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:16:46 AM

I'm saying there's a difference in getting a slap form a teacher and regular floggings.

The redress board can deal wth this.

The Church should pay more than 10% - thwy were responsible for most of it - ok the state was the organising body but as I said the state equalled the church back then. That's why 10% isn't enough. They've got maasive resources.


Look at what happened in the USA and how their claims of abuse were dealt with and how much the church there had to pay.

So are you now saying that the Church should pay because they've got the money regardless of who was liable? Okay if we run with that argument, do you have figures to support your claim that the Church has the money you claim they have?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:30:05 AM
Quote from: Declan on May 22, 2009, 10:19:46 AM
To my mind the Christian Brothers should now voluntarily disband and all their assets sold and ring fenced into a victims fund to be administered via the redress board.

Unfortunately I think the "state's" involvement in all this will be understated and all the talk will be about the religious orders being made to pay etc. successive governments and departments to my mind are equally complicit as the orders but I don't think that message is getting out there. Oh and who was in power for the majority of this time - Any guesses???

Including their schools? What will happen to the students? How about the drug and alcohol centres? Youth centres? Community halls? In the current economic climate, who do you think will be buying these assets?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:31:14 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:25:47 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:16:46 AM

I'm saying there's a difference in getting a slap form a teacher and regular floggings.

The redress board can deal wth this.

The Church should pay more than 10% - thwy were responsible for most of it - ok the state was the organising body but as I said the state equalled the church back then. That's why 10% isn't enough. They've got maasive resources.


Look at what happened in the USA and how their claims of abuse were dealt with and how much the church there had to pay.

So are you now saying that the Church should pay because they've got the money regardless of who was liable? Okay if we run with that argument, do you have figures to support your claim that the Church has the money you claim they have?


Go to Land Registry, Belfast and look under Sean Brady for starters.

Ditto for Dublin.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:32:50 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:31:14 AM
Go to Land Registry, Belfast and look under Sean Brady for starters.

Ditto for Dublin.

Does that mean you don't have any figures?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:33:34 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:23:05 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:13:28 AM

If the government must pay out compensation it has to come from somewhere.  Seeing as the government in essence had the church working for them (monies were received!) I think the state is perfectly entitled to seek financial input from the church.   Was this not the essence of the deal made by Michael Woods?    Given that records since found (for example the Christian Brother files that had been moved to Rome) indicate the church's knowledge of the crimes was much broader than conceeded at the time, I think the state need to revisit that agreement.

If taken via the courts, the church will have to pay and that has already been shown.

The principal vulnerability in the church's defence is that they moved this pricks around when they knew they had committed offences.  Most successful cases against them have hinged on that.   It is not the fact that the perpetrator was a church member but the fact that the church organisational helped that perpetrator.

The more worrying aspect is the fact the underlying issue in that behaviour (protection of reputation etc..) is still evident today.  Look at Cloyne earlier this year.......



The State sought input from the Church and it was given, I don't understand why people are now demanding they pay more, particularly now that things have changed. E100 million is a lot of cash for the Irish Church to pay over. More than adequate IMO.

Re Cloyne - Magee fecked up his administrative procedures and was forced to go. Rather than evidence that the Church is still trying to protect abusers, I would see Magee's removal as evidence that the Church has changed.


It is - but it represents less than 10% - they were more than 10% responsible I'm sure you'd agree ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:34:04 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:32:50 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:31:14 AM
Go to Land Registry, Belfast and look under Sean Brady for starters.

Ditto for Dublin.

Does that mean you don't have any figures?


Don't have enough time this morning to work it out - sorry.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:33:34 AM
It is - but it represents less than 10% - they were more than 10% responsible I'm sure you'd agree ?

I've already said on this thread that individual priests were involved in dishing out the abuse but that State is liable because they were doing it on their behalf. The State and everyone else knew the abuse was happening and allowed it to continue and continued to send people to the industrial schools. This I believe makes the State liable.  
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:33:34 AM
It is - but it represents less than 10% - they were more than 10% responsible I'm sure you'd agree ?

I've already said on this thread that individual priests were involved in dishing out the abuse but that State is liable because they were doing it on their behalf. The State and everyone else knew the abuse was happening and allowed it to continue and continued to send people to the industrial schools. This I believe makes the State liable.  


Your argument is logical enough but I think you're wrong in that there was a very, very close relationship between church and state and that the church need to pay more than 10% - the fact that they paid anything at all shows that they had no option.

If you conducted a poll and asked people who was resonsible for this sacandal and who should pay, I reckon most people would say that it was the church who were mainly responsible and the state after that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:53:39 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:43:29 AM
Your argument is logical enough but I think you're wrong in that there was a very, very close relationship between church and state and that the church need to pay more than 10% - the fact that they paid anything at all shows that they had no option.

If you conducted a poll and asked people who was resonsible for this sacandal and who should pay, I reckon most people would say that it was the church who were mainly responsible and the state after that.

Yeah but if you had an election in the morning the vast majority of people would still vote of either FF or FG despite these parties being on the take for decades. Doesn't say much for public opinion or polls.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:54:15 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
I've already said on this thread that individual priests were involved in dishing out the abuse but that State is liable because they were doing it on their behalf.

Do you acknowledge that there is another issue in regard to the church's knowledge of abuse and their hiding/moving/not reporting these offenders?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:56:55 AM
Read the piece in today's Irish News page 12 by Patrick Murphy about the abuse scandal and how it was inevitable given the relationship between church and state.





Also read on page 13 the "letter" of apology sent to an abuse victim who had taken a case against the De la Salle order and was compensated :


To whom it may concern :


The De la Salle Order was founded to care for abandoned, disadvantaged and deprived boys and regrets if any boy was abused while inder its care.

Br. Francis Manning,
Provincial.



Your analogy with the election in the morning is not a good one. You're out on a limb here I'm afraid - trying to defend the indefensible.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 22, 2009, 11:02:11 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:33:34 AM
It is - but it represents less than 10% - they were more than 10% responsible I'm sure you'd agree ?

I've already said on this thread that individual priests were involved in dishing out the abuse but that State is liable because they were doing it on their behalf. The State and everyone else knew the abuse was happening and allowed it to continue and continued to send people to the industrial schools. This I believe makes the State liable.  


Your argument is logical enough but I think you're wrong in that there was a very, very close relationship between church and state and that the church need to pay more than 10% - the fact that they paid anything at all shows that they had no option.

If you conducted a poll and asked people who was resonsible for this sacandal and who should pay, I reckon most people would say that it was the church who were mainly responsible and the state after that.


I added a poll there orangeman.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:07:52 AM
Quote from: D4S on May 22, 2009, 11:02:11 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 10:36:37 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:33:34 AM
It is - but it represents less than 10% - they were more than 10% responsible I'm sure you'd agree ?

I've already said on this thread that individual priests were involved in dishing out the abuse but that State is liable because they were doing it on their behalf. The State and everyone else knew the abuse was happening and allowed it to continue and continued to send people to the industrial schools. This I believe makes the State liable.  


Your argument is logical enough but I think you're wrong in that there was a very, very close relationship between church and state and that the church need to pay more than 10% - the fact that they paid anything at all shows that they had no option.

If you conducted a poll and asked people who was resonsible for this sacandal and who should pay, I reckon most people would say that it was the church who were mainly responsible and the state after that.


I added a poll there orangeman.


Cheers.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:14:00 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:56:55 AM
Read the piece in today's Irish News page 12 by Patrick Murphy about the abuse scandal and how it was inevitable given the relationship between church and state.

Also read on page 13 the "letter" of apology sent to an abuse victim who had taken a case against the De la Salle order and was compensated :

To whom it may concern :

The De la Salle Order was founded to care for abandoned, disadvantaged and deprived boys and regrets if any boy was abused while inder its care.

Br. Francis Manning,
Provincial.

Your analogy with the election in the morning is not a good one. You're out on a limb here I'm afraid - trying to defend the indefensible.

How am I out on a limb? I agreed with your comment that most people would probably judge the Church to be responsible. I'm merely saying that doesn't necessarily make them correct.

I don't normally agree with ex-NIO mandarins but in this case Murphy is correct, this all stems from the privileged position given to the Church in the Irish State. I am a secularist when it comes to government, so I don't see how you can claim I'm trying to defend the Church. I'm not. I'm simply trying to point out that the problem lay with the State and the bastardised version of the 'Republic' established by DeValera which was a betrayal of everything hoped for in 1916 and Democratic Programme of the First Dáil.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:14:56 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:54:15 AM
Do you acknowledge that there is another issue in regard to the church's knowledge of abuse and their hiding/moving/not reporting these offenders?

Of course I do.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:33:36 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:14:00 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 10:56:55 AM
Read the piece in today's Irish News page 12 by Patrick Murphy about the abuse scandal and how it was inevitable given the relationship between church and state.

Also read on page 13 the "letter" of apology sent to an abuse victim who had taken a case against the De la Salle order and was compensated :

To whom it may concern :

The De la Salle Order was founded to care for abandoned, disadvantaged and deprived boys and regrets if any boy was abused while inder its care.

Br. Francis Manning,
Provincial.

Your analogy with the election in the morning is not a good one. You're out on a limb here I'm afraid - trying to defend the indefensible.

How am I out on a limb? I agreed with your comment that most people would probably judge the Church to be responsible. I'm merely saying that doesn't necessarily make them correct.

I don't normally agree with ex-NIO mandarins but in this case Murphy is correct, this all stems from the privileged position given to the Church in the Irish State. I am a secularist when it comes to government, so I don't see how you can claim I'm trying to defend the Church. I'm not. I'm simply trying to point out that the problem lay with the State and the bastardised version of the 'Republic' established by DeValera which was a betrayal of everything hoped for in 1916 and Democratic Programme of the First Dáil.

Fair enough but I reckon the Church should be made to stump up more - they're the ones that were doing the abusing - and the they had the cheek in certain places to take up collections in order to pay the victims of child abuse - what they did to the children was perverse but it's even more perverse asking the people to pay for their misdemeanours.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Stall the Bailer on May 22, 2009, 11:34:12 AM
Those who need to admit guilt to some degree of another are
The evil scum who carried out the horrid acts on the victims
The hierarchy of church who protected and covered up the offenders while do nothing for the victims.
The state, who protected the church and failed in their duty to the children of Ireland
Those involved with church and state who had suspicions but did nothing.
Anyone who didn't believe the victims and could see no wrong in the church
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:14:56 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 10:54:15 AM
Do you acknowledge that there is another issue in regard to the church's knowledge of abuse and their hiding/moving/not reporting these offenders?

Of course I do.

And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?

Jim I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:55:33 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?

Jim I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 


Now you're taking the piss and having a laugh.  ;) You're on the wind here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:06:27 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?

Jim I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 

If you came canvasing for SF to my door and came out with that shite SF would never get a vote from me again. Cop yourself on a bit Donagh. The absolute minimum the church should pay is half (500 million). I think they are liable for 3/4 at least. And if you read the report you'll see that the commission lays the majority of the blame at the door of the church. Since they are the ones that have spend 10 hard years compiliing it I take their word over anyone elses on it.

Agree with Declan in that the christian brothers are so disgraced by this that they should disband and transfer all assets to the state. There weasel worded apology means nothing now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 12:28:11 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:06:27 PM
If you came canvasing for SF to my door and came out with that shite SF would never get a vote from me again. Cop yourself on a bit Donagh. The absolute minimum the church should pay is half (500 million). I think they are liable for 3/4 at least. And if you read the report you'll see that the commission lays the majority of the blame at the door of the church. Since they are the ones that have spend 10 hard years compiliing it I take their word over anyone elses on it.

Agree with Declan in that the christian brothers are so disgraced by this that they should disband and transfer all assets to the state. There weasel worded apology means nothing now.

Myles let's try to stick to the topic. You havn't addressed any of my points about liability.
Also, if you agree with Declan, perhaps you would like to address the questions I put regarding Church assets?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

In my opinion the schools, treatment centers etc in any country should be run by the government. All these buildings should be transferred to the government. A study would then need to take place on how these can be efficiently managed and which if any can be sold of. If the church, out of christain charity, still wish to help out in these facilities then fine. But the government should Vet every member of staff and appoint the manager of the school.

I don't have all the figures of the value of church assets, but I'd imagine they are worth quite a bit. I think there is also a case for the government to take a case against the vatican in europe if the catholic church in Ireland can't cough up the money.

In any case, it is the church that needs to figure out how to pay not me.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 22, 2009, 01:02:18 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 22, 2009, 01:10:17 AM
Class is very relevant here, there wasn't much sign of this stuff in Blackrock College and no son of a judge or doctor was interfered with. These orders ran regular schools that contributed greatly to Irish education. In the past there was a "spare the rod and spoil the child" mentality and all schools had an element of violence about them. But if you attended a regular school and had a pretty positive experience it was natural to think that other schools run by the same order were similar, i.e. you might get the strap from time to time but you'd get a good education. Normal people could hardly imagine some of the sexual stuff. It is clear that there was two tier system in place, schools with orphans and industrial schools were run on entirely different principles. The perverts and paedophiles made sure to end up in these places where the culture allowed them do what they liked and where parents could not easily control them. But the administrators of these orders knew what was going on and allowed it continue to the eternal shame of the Catholic church.
Those institutions are a separate case, imo. Whatever passed for scrutiny outside those institution was suspended inside.
In general, abuse of children was widespread enough outside of those institutions to go across what you refer to as class boundaries. What determines the process of selection of a victim by an abuser is an intricate matter.
We have become well aware of serious abuse incidents right across the social spectrum inflicted by abusers from a wide range of "trusted" professions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 01:26:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

In my opinion the schools, treatment centers etc in any country should be run by the government. All these buildings should be transferred to the government. A study would then need to take place on how these can be efficiently managed and which if any can be sold of. If the church, out of christain charity, still wish to help out in these facilities then fine. But the government should Vet every member of staff and appoint the manager of the school.

I don't have all the figures of the value of church assets, but I'd imagine they are worth quite a bit. I think there is also a case for the government to take a case against the vatican in europe if the catholic church in Ireland can't cough up the money.

In any case, it is the church that needs to figure out how to pay not me.


But the abusers were caring for these children on behalf of the State. Why do you want to punish the modern Church despite all of the good they are doing and not the State?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 22, 2009, 01:31:32 PM
QuoteAlso, if you agree with Declan, perhaps you would like to address the questions I put regarding Church assets?

I would make a distinction between the Christian Brothers and the  "church" in this regard. Re the schools ,if the lands and buildings are still owned by the brothers then they should be taken off them and initially put into trust/state ownership. Re community centres/outreach facilities etc - how many are now actually run by the brothers? So an audit of assets facilities etc to be carried out and then a plan put in place to sell/reallocate etc to appropriate organisations/causes.

I genuinely believe that the brothers should be disbanded and if not voluntarily I think there is a case for making them a proscribed organisation based on the abuse they perpetrated on the weakest and vulnerable of society. I'm not sure of the current numbers but if they want to join another religious organisation or set up a new order etc let them do that but not as it is currently constituted.

From reading the reports and listening to people it's obvious to me that the victims feel that the guilty parties here i.e orders and the institutional church - haven't contributed enough either by way of apology or recompense and there is a valid argument to be made to revisit the agreement made by Woods with them.

Of course given our governments record in looking after the welfare of the people I have no great faith in our ability as a country to do any better in providing services for any of our citizens.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

How many Bishop's mansions have you been in Myles? You are all talk - back up your claims with facts lad or keep them to yourself.
The Arch Bishop's house in Armagh beside the Cathedral could be described as a mansion.  It also contains offices for 6 or more administrative staff as well as several other offices for various roles within the Diocese.  This house/office is in a key position next to the Church and needs to remain there.

The Church does own a lot of land - but how many Churches are you going to knock down and how many graves are you going to overturn to get what you want?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lazer on May 22, 2009, 01:59:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:55:33 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?

Jim I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 


Now you're taking the piss and having a laugh.  ;) You're on the wind here.

Throwing money to the victims is not the solution to this.
Which do you think the victims would prefer
1) Money
2) Justice

What should be done is for any individuals who either commited the acts, or covered them up should be taken to court and made to face justice

I do not see what can be gained from the modern church or the state taking responsibity - they should publically apologise for all the abuse caused by their pre-deceasers and fully commit themselves to providing whatever help they can with any legal proceedings.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 22, 2009, 02:03:34 PM
Just to show how our attitudes have changed  >:(

High-risk children given 'cheapest' care

By Jennifer Hough

Friday, May 22, 2009

HIGH-RISK children are being put on waiting lists or placed "in the cheapest option" of care by the HSE, a leading residential service provider has claimed.

Paula Kane, manager of Ashdale Care, a group of private care homes to which the HSE refers children, said she had kept quiet for too long and did not want to see mistakes of the past repeated due to what she called an "alleged lack of funding".

Ms Kane claimed that:

The HSE was "playing down" risk assessments so placements would not be required.

Some children were not being placed at all and were left in high risk and potentially dangerous situations.

High risk referrals are being put on waiting lists.

The social worker said the situation was at crisis point, and she hoped speaking out would help frontline HSE staff who were working with impossible caseloads.

"Things are really going backwards. It is clear that those in the HSE who are charged with making decisions about the welfare of children and adolescents are making decisions purely on financial grounds," she said.

Children as young as 12, Ms Kane said, were being advised they could no longer stay in placements because the HSE has no money, and placements sometimes ended overnight.

She said teenagers from age 16 were being moved from long term placements into bed and breakfasts.

"These young people have suffered significantly and are being left unsupported in these establishments – which are unregulated – with no trained professional staff." Although foster placements were over-crowded, foster carers were being offered more money to take children because it is a cheaper alternative to residential care, she claimed.

A spokesperson for the HSE said everything it does was "tightly focused on meeting the needs of children in care, and that in the current climate this needed to be done in a cost effective way".

"We are currently putting together a tender to procure residential placements in the private sector, if and when they are required."

Norah Givens, from Barnardos, said the charity has heard anecdotal evidence that decisions were being taken to remove children from expensive facilities, and is was extremely concerned about this.

"Some children are not suitable for foster care and receive very good residential care. It would be shocking to think that children were being moved around because of financial situation."

Read more: "| Irish Examiner" - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/highrisk-children-given-cheapest-care-92381.html#ixzz0GEwQK6KC&A
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 02:17:01 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Jim
I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 

Donagh,

This is where I cannot agree:

1.  On the basic issue of the acts of abuse, I can see your argument as to ultimate responsibility lying with the state.  I don't agree with your analysis as I think the state have a right to recoup the compensation, particularly from those orders that received payment from the government for their services.

2.  The issue of protection of know offenders, the half-truths (and outright lies), the moving of suspects etc... is soley the responsiblity of the church and nobody else.  I expect a lot more than a nominal gesture, financial or otherwise.  I am afraid I have yet to see that.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 02:18:22 PM
Did the state PAY the orders / institutions for looking after the children ?????
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 02:24:33 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 02:18:22 PM
Did the state PAY the orders / institutions for looking after the children ?????

Most congregations were paid a captitation grant per child.

The comission determined that grants were sufficient for child needs but that funds were diverted to other uses by the congregations involved.

EDIT: Todays Indo:

http://www.independent.ie/health/latest-news/children-used-as-a-cash-crop-by-schools-1747689.html (http://www.independent.ie/health/latest-news/children-used-as-a-cash-crop-by-schools-1747689.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 02:51:59 PM
On the subject of the Indo, did anyone see Eoghan Harris on the telly last night? Apparently he is convinced all the child abusers were ardent nationalists and that this only happened because Ireland left the British Empire.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 22, 2009, 02:55:10 PM
QuoteOn the subject of the Indo, did anyone see Eoghan Harris on the telly last night? Apparently he is convinced all the child abusers were ardent nationalists and that this only happened because Ireland left the British Empire.

Didn't see muppet Harris but maybe this was his pseudonym this morning in the Times!

Madam, – The War of Independence ushered in a reign of terror for children who were poor, abandoned or from family circumstances which did not conform to a semi-fascist ideal. Would their lives have been as wretched had the entire island remained under British control? I doubt it. – Yours, etc,

SHEELAGH MORRIS,

Shankill,

Co Dublin.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 22, 2009, 03:49:46 PM
QuoteApparently he is convinced all the child abusers were ardent nationalists and that this only happened because Ireland left the British Empire.

On the contrary the British Empire were responsible for much of this. The Irish Catholic church was formed in the second part of the 19th century as a conservative institution with Victorian values. The church obtained excessive influence because it was seen as being Irish in response to the colonial government. Catholic education became predominant because 19th century State education was distrusted because it pedalled colonial values, as it still does in the 6 counties. With the foundation of the State a much more secular approach was possible, but almost all the non Catholics seized the northern part of the country for their own use, reinforcing the "national" aspect of Catholicism and making all the harder for the State to get control over things. Not that this excuses them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Roger on May 22, 2009, 04:15:32 PM
I wondered when the Brits would be implicated  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 04:22:10 PM
Quote from: Roger on May 22, 2009, 04:15:32 PM
I wondered when the Brits would be implicated  ::)

Bastards - it was their fault all along.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 22, 2009, 04:46:50 PM
I knew it and people blaming those poor nuns and priests and brothers
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 05:04:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

How many Bishop's mansions have you been in Myles? You are all talk - back up your claims with facts lad or keep them to yourself.
The Arch Bishop's house in Armagh beside the Cathedral could be described as a mansion.  It also contains offices for 6 or more administrative staff as well as several other offices for various roles within the Diocese.  This house/office is in a key position next to the Church and needs to remain there.

The Church does own a lot of land - but how many Churches are you going to knock down and how many graves are you going to overturn to get what you want?

I don't have to be in them to see them. Everyone I've seen is a large house, many of which used to belong to our ancestors British landlords. I tell you what - lad - why don't you name a house that a bishop lives in that is say less than 1500 sq ft or maybe with a value less than €200k?? You know, the type of house the great unwashed live in. And who said anything about knocking churches or disrespecting the dead by overturning graves. Thats cheap coming in defence of people that buried little kids in unmarked graves in their industrial schools, not a headstone in sight and not an explanation in site. Why don't you go and develop some integrity.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 05:10:58 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 01:26:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

In my opinion the schools, treatment centers etc in any country should be run by the government. All these buildings should be transferred to the government. A study would then need to take place on how these can be efficiently managed and which if any can be sold of. If the church, out of christain charity, still wish to help out in these facilities then fine. But the government should Vet every member of staff and appoint the manager of the school.

I don't have all the figures of the value of church assets, but I'd imagine they are worth quite a bit. I think there is also a case for the government to take a case against the vatican in europe if the catholic church in Ireland can't cough up the money.

In any case, it is the church that needs to figure out how to pay not me.


But the abusers were caring for these children on behalf of the State. Why do you want to punish the modern Church despite all of the good they are doing and not the State?

I punish the church because they ran the schools, beat the children, raped the children, tortured the children and covered it all up and buried evidence in the vatican. Some sections obstructed the investigation. I blame the church because an independent enquiry that lasted 10 years found them to shoulder most of the blame. I am punishing the church because they deserve it. The taxpayer does not deserve it. BTW - the MODERN christian brothers sued the the commission to prevent them naming these brutes. The MODERN christian brothers obstructed the investigation. I know some of ye have deep affiliation with the church and may find this all very hard to accept but the facts are out at last out in daylight and there is no spinning it into anything other than what it is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 05:12:00 PM
The poll is interesting. Only 1 person reckons the state alone should pay !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 05:15:23 PM
Quote from: Lazer on May 22, 2009, 01:59:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:55:33 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 22, 2009, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 22, 2009, 11:35:21 AM
And do you acknowledge that they have a financial liability here?  and if so is that adequately covered by their contribution to the redress fund?

Jim I think I've already said previously that I think they have a liability and the E100 million is more than adequate. Considering everything the Church does and continues to do for the good of Irish society, I'd probably suggest that a more appropriate figure would be a nominal E1, with the rest being picked up by those most liable, the State. There are many faults within the Irish Church, particularly with the Bishops, but IMO opinion the vast majority of Priests do an invaluable job and they should not be penalised for the sins of their predecessors. 




Now you're taking the piss and having a laugh.  ;) You're on the wind here.

Throwing money to the victims is not the solution to this.
Which do you think the victims would prefer
1) Money
2) Justice

What should be done is for any individuals who either commited the acts, or covered them up should be taken to court and made to face justice

I do not see what can be gained from the modern church or the state taking responsibity - they should publically apologise for all the abuse caused by their pre-deceasers and fully commit themselves to providing whatever help they can with any legal proceedings.

The money has already been agreed. 65k per victim or something along those lines - coming to a total of €1 billion. The question of who pays this has already been agreed. The church pays 10%, the state pays 90%. This is one of the most disgraceful deals ever signed off by an irish government. It needs to be renegotiated and if that can't be done then the taxpayer should not be expected to pay one cent to the catholic church for anything again. Justice would be nice except the commission is not allowed to name the evil bastards due to a legal challenge by the CB as I said earlier. Does that mean that the church is interested in justice for their victims?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on May 22, 2009, 05:19:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 22, 2009, 03:49:46 PM
On the contrary the British Empire were responsible for much of this.

Q. "So tell me, Sister, why did you beat this little girl? And you, Father, why did you molest that other boy?"

A. "It was the Brits made us do it..."

Were this not such an appalling, distressing and sad story all round, Armaghniac's post could almost have made me laugh.

Anyhow, having desisted from commenting for a number of reasons, I suppose I might as well add my tuppence-worth.

As I see it, the people primarily responsible for this scandal are those who beat and abused the children given to their care. I cannot see any excuse for them. Consequently, I can conceive of no good reason why all the suspected perpetrators are not facing criminal charges - after all, the identity of the majority MUST be known to the Church authorities and/or the State.

Thereafter, the question of compensation arises. Of course, money can never adequately compensate the victims, or give them back their lost childhoods etc. But quite aside from the comfort it may bring in practical terms (counselling and treatment for their mental and physical ailments, depression, drug dependancy and alcoholism etc), it must also be highly symbolic for the victims as a means of proving that Society takes their plight seriously, and is determined to make the abusers pay (literally).

Which leaves the question of exactly who should pay this compensation, and how much etc. Clearly the individual abusers are unlikely to be especially wealthy (though many who would abuse their position over matters like this, might also have been tempted to abuse it in financial affairs as well, so should be forced to pay, if they have it.)

The main donor (imo) should, therefore, be the Church, since it was the Church which "employed" the abusers, and to an extent protected them. Moreover, the Church benefited directly itself from agreeing to "look after" these children, so it would only be right that as much of this money as possible should be redistributed to their victims as possible. Of course, many of the "assets" of the Church will not be realisable - eg. churches and graveyards etc. But where, for instance, the church owns schools and hospitals which it runs on behalf of the State, these properties should imo be handed over in lieu of the (90%) compensation already being paid by the State.

Which finally brings us to the position of the State itself. As many have pointed out, their hands are hardly clean on all of this either i.e. they were seeking to abdicate their responsibility for these children when they willingly handed them over to the care of Institutions which at best, they declined to regulate, and at worst knew (or should have known) were abusing children.

However, it should not be a case of "either/or" between Church and State when determining responsibilty. As I see it the Church should be held accountable for what it did (sins of commission) AND the State should be held accountable for what it did not do (sins of omission).

How one apportions that responsibility in financial terms is a decision for wiser and more informed people than me, but if I had to guess, it might be something like 50:50?

But whichever way the bill is divided up, one thing strikes me as absolutely crucial, and that is the need to provide Justice to the victims, so that they may finally be persuaded that they are now believed and sympathised with. But I cannot see how that will ever happen so long as the abusers are knowingly being allowed to maintain their anonymity and escape prosecution in the Courts.

For unless that issue is addressed, then that for me will be the greatest scandal of this whole sordid and sorry affair.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 06:19:24 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 05:04:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

How many Bishop's mansions have you been in Myles? You are all talk - back up your claims with facts lad or keep them to yourself.
The Arch Bishop's house in Armagh beside the Cathedral could be described as a mansion.  It also contains offices for 6 or more administrative staff as well as several other offices for various roles within the Diocese.  This house/office is in a key position next to the Church and needs to remain there.

The Church does own a lot of land - but how many Churches are you going to knock down and how many graves are you going to overturn to get what you want?

I don't have to be in them to see them. Everyone I've seen is a large house, many of which used to belong to our ancestors British landlords. I tell you what - lad - why don't you name a house that a bishop lives in that is say less than 1500 sq ft or maybe with a value less than €200k?? You know, the type of house the great unwashed live in. And who said anything about knocking churches or disrespecting the dead by overturning graves. Thats cheap coming in defence of people that buried little kids in unmarked graves in their industrial schools, not a headstone in sight and not an explanation in site. Why don't you go and develop some integrity.
Where have I not shown integrity? Please point out some examples if you will.

Of course these houses are worth money.  Most towns and villages in urban areas grew up organically around the Church.  Obviously the Bishops house (beside the Church) and the ground the Church is on itself is going to be worth money.  I don't understand your point.  What would you ahve the Church do?
The same can be said for rural areas.  My own townland/parish grew organically around the Church.  The Priest's house is next door.  Of course it is right in the middle of the parish and on prime land.  This would be true of most churches from most denominations.  What would you have the Church do?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 06:30:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 06:19:24 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 05:04:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 12:44:37 PM
Every bishop in this country is living in a mansion, on their own. Transfer them to the state and sell them off to the highest bidder. Church can find a more modest home for the bishop.

How many Bishop's mansions have you been in Myles? You are all talk - back up your claims with facts lad or keep them to yourself.
The Arch Bishop's house in Armagh beside the Cathedral could be described as a mansion.  It also contains offices for 6 or more administrative staff as well as several other offices for various roles within the Diocese.  This house/office is in a key position next to the Church and needs to remain there.

The Church does own a lot of land - but how many Churches are you going to knock down and how many graves are you going to overturn to get what you want?

I don't have to be in them to see them. Everyone I've seen is a large house, many of which used to belong to our ancestors British landlords. I tell you what - lad - why don't you name a house that a bishop lives in that is say less than 1500 sq ft or maybe with a value less than €200k?? You know, the type of house the great unwashed live in. And who said anything about knocking churches or disrespecting the dead by overturning graves. Thats cheap coming in defence of people that buried little kids in unmarked graves in their industrial schools, not a headstone in sight and not an explanation in site. Why don't you go and develop some integrity.
Where have I not shown integrity? Please point out some examples if you will.

Of course these houses are worth money.  Most towns and villages in urban areas grew up organically around the Church.  Obviously the Bishops house (beside the Church) and the ground the Church is on itself is going to be worth money.  I don't understand your point.  What would you ahve the Church do?
The same can be said for rural areas.  My own townland/parish grew organically around the Church.  The Priest's house is next door.  Of course it is right in the middle of the parish and on prime land.  This would be true of most churches from most denominations.  What would you have the Church do?

I would have the church pay minimum 50% of damages. If they don't have the cash then they should sell off some of their assets or even better get the cash from the vatican. Of course the church building and graveyards would be the last thing on the list but the bishops big house would be the 1st
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 22, 2009, 06:48:19 PM
I have just read through the whole thread and I have to say it is sad to see the grip the Church still to this day has on some of the posters.

The report has described the abuse as 'endemic' within these Catholic institutions. There is no getting away from this.

I cannot believe the amount of posters who feel the need everytime they condemn the abuse to qualify their statements by either sharing the blame or making sure to reiterate that there are many 'good' priests also.

Yes, this will be used as a stick to beat the Church with. It's quite a big f**king stick, so be it and rightly so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 22, 2009, 06:52:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 06:30:52 PM
I would have the church pay minimum 50% of damages. If they don't have the cash then they should sell off some of their assets or even better get the cash from the vatican. Of course the church building and graveyards would be the last thing on the list but the bishops big house would be the 1st

My point is people are throwing out these ideas about how the Church should pay without thinking it through.
Yes something needs to be done.  Yes the Church has to be held accountable.  Yes people have and continue to suffer and there needs to be justice.
I don't think selling off land around a parish center is the answer.  I for one do not need a McDonalds on the way out of Mass or a Tesco's next door.

Let's come up with some realistic options and ideas instead of fanciful nonsense that will not solve anything.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 09:04:19 PM
Tell me Iceman, where are the church getting the 128 million that they have already committed to pay? You seem to be implying that raising this type of money is Fanciful nonsense. The only thing that is nonsense is that the tax payer in the 26 counties pays for the crimes of the church to the tune of 1 billion euro. It just shows how far the tentacles of the church reach when people can here what is in this report and then come up with all sorts of reasons why the church should not pay. We don't want McDonalds near the church?!, all the churches good work etc etc. I don't care about the churches "good" work. I care about justice. I care that we the taxpayer do not pay for the churches crimes.

Now lets assume that the protestant church was responsible for this disgrace. Ask yourselves would ye all be so reasonable towards that church. Would ye f**k!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 22, 2009, 11:18:17 PM
A local parish here was renovating the church here recently - the renovation cost was £2.5m - they asked the parishioners and got £5m on the basis that they had "other" things to spend the money on.

This is just one parish - albeit a large enough parish. Imagine if the whole diocese or the whole country were to renovate all their chapels !!


I know quite elderly people who after the report came out yesterday have sadly decided that going to chapel is no longer attractive.

They'll probably change their mind but for them not to go to chapel is massive and it demonstrates the enormity of the report having been confirmed and made public.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2009, 10:36:09 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 22, 2009, 09:04:19 PM
Tell me Iceman, where are the church getting the 128 million that they have already committed to pay? You seem to be implying that raising this type of money is Fanciful nonsense. The only thing that is nonsense is that the tax payer in the 26 counties pays for the crimes of the church to the tune of 1 billion euro. It just shows how far the tentacles of the church reach when people can here what is in this report and then come up with all sorts of reasons why the church should not pay. We don't want McDonalds near the church?!, all the churches good work etc etc. I don't care about the churches "good" work. I care about justice. I care that we the taxpayer do not pay for the churches crimes.

Now lets assume that the protestant church was responsible for this disgrace. Ask yourselves would ye all be so reasonable towards that church. Would ye f**k!

agree with that, should be at least 50:50.  Where is the church meant to get their money? Their problem.  Have the vatican sell a couple of their assets and they should have no trouble raising the cash. The Irish governnment/Irish tax payer can hardly afford what they're expected to pay either.

That said what I'd imagine the victims want is justice, I've yet to hear a reason why these c***ts (still living) can't be prosecuted and the c***ts already burning in hell (hopefully) can't be named. 
If they're not prosecuted then that's just another kick in the teeth for the victims and shows that society hasn't changed an awful lot!

As fro the brothers, have them f**k off.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on May 23, 2009, 11:50:08 AM
Article from Independant.ie

So, here's the deal. It's the 1970s. You lie awake at night, afraid to go to sleep in case they come and get you.

Not the bogey man, because you'd like to believe you're too old for such things (although that doesn't stop you staring at that strange shadow on the ceiling and fervently wishing it would go away) but rather the people from the Madonna House.

They come at night, you're told, and take away bold boys and bring them to the orphanage where they don't treat bold boys very well...

So, here's the deal. It's the 1980s. Your coach warns you and your team mates not to allow yourself to be left alone in the dressing room with a particular member of staff. Why? "You don't want to find out" is the not very enigmatic answer before the conversation is quickly changed ...

As Ireland and, indeed Britain, Europe and America reads some of the details of the Ryan Report and tries its best not to vomit with disgust, we should ask ourselves this question -- why were the vast majority of the citizens of this state prepared to allow the Catholic Church to work as a huge paedophile ring? Were people so cowed by their fear of a belt of the crozier that they were prepared to allow our children become beaten, battered catamites?

There are times when we all feel proud to be Irish. This happened perhaps most recently when England received such a warm reception in Croke Park, proving to the world, but most importantly to ourselves, that we had indeed grown up, even if only ever so slightly.

But the converse to that is that there are times when it is appropriate to feel a collective sense of shame; a feeling of gross and nauseating self-loathing.

Because the Ryan Report only articulates in gruesome, graphic detail what we all knew -- these bastards were allowed to get away with what they did because nobody, or at least not enough people, stepped in to call a halt.

Forget about the sickening, mealy mouthed apologies from politicians, forget about the deranged, defensive rantings of Catholic fundamentalists -- most of whom seem to spend their time banging off angry, paranoid screeds to journalists claiming that there was never any abuse and it's all an anti-Catholic plot -- forget about the rest of the talking heads talking rubbish.

Let's get one thing straight -- everyone knew what was going on.

And how can such a sweeping statement be made with confidence? Well, ask yourself this -- why were places like the Madonna House, Artane, Letterfrack and so many others used as an alternative to the bogey man to put manners on kids?

The fact that such dire warnings could ever be given, even though they weren't meant with malice, shows just how widespread awareness of these places was. After all, you don't threaten kids by warning them that if they don't behave you're going to bring them to the circus.

As a people, we lied to ourselves then and if we don't confront the collective responsibility we bear towards the victims then we're lying to ourselves now.

Journalism, for example, should hold its head in shame for its complicity in these crimes.

Stories of suppressed articles, veiled threats and outright censorship abound in every newsroom -- how disgraceful it is that the one industry which is meant to dedicate itself to lifting the lid on society's wrongs should effectively help to nail that lid even tighter shut.

That the Fourth Estate should be so in thrall to the Church is particularly nauseating.

For instance, when one journalist was threatened with rape by the then powerful Bishop Comiskey, she sat on that rather pertinent piece of information for more than a decade, then wrote about it when Comiskey was a disgraced, shambling alcoholic and the Church had become irrelevant. It was a classically cowardly case of too little, too late.

If that incident had been reported when it happened, it would have shaken the Church to its core. Instead, when it was published, it was just another story of clerical depravity delivered to a public which had grown weary of such revelations. We let down thousands of victims back then and we're still letting them down.

There are 800 people who are now categorically guilty of rape, violence, buggery and torture, yet not one of these degenerates has been named.

That means there are an awful lot of people who like to rape and terrorise small children. And it means they are free to walk the streets with their good name intact, while the people whose lives they have ruined stand impotently by, with the full knowledge that the State has as much contempt for them now as they did back then.

Generations of disposable, broken children have now become generations of disposable, broken adults who know that their worst childhood fears have been confirmed -- they really are, in the eyes of the Church that abused them and the system that allowed it to happen, devoid of value.

Surely, if we are to try and properly apologise and however belatedly make amends to these people who must, every day for the rest of their lives, re-live the torment they endured, then we need to start seeing prosecutions.

And we need to start making the Church hurt for what it did.

While there is undoubtedly a wider, collective burden of responsibility in our complicity to these crimes, they were carried out on Church-run premises by Church employees. And, when exposed, they were protected by the Church.

If any other organisation in the world had been guilty of such protracted and systemic abuse then heads would have rolled. A lot of them.

Instead, we can look forward to more mealy mouthed bullshit: "profound regret", "deep sadness" and all the usual meaningless, smug platitudes which pour from the mouths of senior clergy, here and in Rome, like so much sewage from a pipe.

Truly, this a time to be ashamed to be Irish.


You know I dont know how the victims felt or cant imagine, I just admire there courage to still be here and getting on which ever way they can, what would heal those wounds most, i would say justice, Well why then is there none? Why cant we arrest them now, why isnt there a couple 100,000 people marching down the dail demanding that these scum be thrown in jail? Why? 3 things, Jail, Proper Apology, I swear to God if this happened me and theprinicipal apology said, sorry IF any boys were abused >:(, I would of _____ him.; and massive compensation in that order.

Why are we now accepting the outcome of this report? Force the politions to do something...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 23, 2009, 11:59:39 AM
Did anyone watch the 'discussion' on the Late Late show last night?

I kept turning over expecting it to be mentioned at some stage, sure enough the LAST 20 mins was devoted to the biggest story of the decade in Ireland.

Thought Pat tip-toed around the big issues a bit, had a priest on who agreed constantly with every point of view to seem as if the catholic church has all changed.  The man was bad with his nerves. The panel spent much of the time trying to find some sort of justification as to WHY these clergy behaved in this way. One reason being young men at 12-13 brought into the Brothers who were abused by older ones, and then they in turn carried on the abuse.  They even went on about the famine and suppressed sexuality post-famine, I was watching it thinking speak about the big issue hear of accountability + justice for victims and what should happen now!

They spoke to a woman in the audience who spoke very powerfully saying she was sad there was only men on the panel, sad there was no representative from Christian Brothers, and spoke of the victims reliving their abuse by being asked at their redress meetings what 'size' their sexual abuser was.  The whole story is just so shocking, I am ashamed of the catholic church now and whilst I really like/respect my parish priest I find it hard to bring myself to go back to Mass (I don't go every week anyway) and listen to him telling us how we should live.  DON'T live in sin....DON'T have sex before marriage etc.  Surely older priests who were not involved in this, still knew what was going on.  If they were the majority why didn't they stand up and be counted and overthrow this regime??  Where was our Primate of Ireland Sean Brady last night, surely this was an opportunity for him to speak out to the people?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 23, 2009, 12:13:26 PM
And we wonder why this happened - Have a read of this letter to the Times for an inkling into the mentality that allowed it to happen

Madam, – In the wake of the report concerning the child abuse suffered by many in the industrial schools and similar institutions run by Christian Brothers and nuns, much opprobrium has been heaped on the various religious orders because of their alleged involvement in abuse.

Granted, there was abuse, but please spare a thought for the countless thousands of honourable decent Brothers and nuns who are now being tarred with the same brush.

No one knows what really happened in those institutions. Many of those accused (though unnamed) are now dead and they cannot defend themselves.

I do know, and I'm sure many other people know, that the majority of the boys who were sent to those institutions were the thugs of their era. That is why they ended up there. In many cases they were from broken homes and the trauma they suffered probably resulted in their anti-social behaviour. I am not attempting to make a case for the few religious or lay thugs who took advantage of their vulnerability, but I amening to see the religious orders beiequally stating that it is quite sickng pilloried today.

The sight of the congregational leader of the Sisters of Mercy, almost in tears, having to apologise on national television for the sins of a few of her order (probably all deceased) was most appalling. That good lady was in no way responsible for any wrongdoing and I feel a solicitor might have been employed to make such a statement.


ART KAVANAGH,

Emerald Cottages,

Dublin 4.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 23, 2009, 12:16:51 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2009, 10:36:09 AM
agree with that, should be at least 50:50.  Where is the church meant to get their money? Their problem.  Have the vatican sell a couple of their assets and they should have no trouble raising the cash. The Irish governnment/Irish tax payer can hardly afford what they're expected to pay either.

That said what I'd imagine the victims want is justice, I've yet to hear a reason why these c***ts (still living) can't be prosecuted and the c***ts already burning in hell (hopefully) can't be named. 
If they're not prosecuted then that's just another kick in the teeth for the victims and shows that society hasn't changed an awful lot!

As fro the brothers, have them f**k off.

It isn't that they can't be prosecuted, there has to be a trial. They can't be named unless there is a trial.

What has money got to do with justice in these abuse cases?
Have not people got their heads twisted back to front by this lawyer compensation culture?
The compensation is a process of fobbing off the victims in the absence of justice.
It is also a process by which the legal profession take their huge slice.

If people actually listened to what the victims  of abuse wanted,  instead of this insanity that money cures all.
The abused wanted justice. This report,  ten long years in the making, is only a part of this justice.
Justice is a process,  a big part of that process  is where the  victims can testify in open court, face to face with their abuser (even if the abuser pleads guilty).
Looks like we have been doing hoola hoops and bribery in order to avoid justice.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on May 23, 2009, 12:25:36 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 23, 2009, 12:13:26 PM
No one knows what really happened in those institutions. Many of those accused (though unnamed) are now dead and they cannot defend themselves.

I do know, and I'm sure many other people know, that the majority of the boys who were sent to those institutions were the thugs of their era. That is why they ended up there. In many cases they were from broken homes and the trauma they suffered probably resulted in their anti-social behaviour. I am not attempting to make a case for the few religious or lay thugs who took advantage of their vulnerability, but I amening to see the religious orders beiequally stating that it is quite sickng pilloried today.



Agree with you Declan that letter is a disgrace.  No one knows what really happened in those institutions he says, that was the point of the report.  What a narrow minded idiot.  As for saying the majority were the thugs of their era...that's a joke! I'm sure some were thieves, vandals etc but did they deserve the abuse they got??? I don't think so! It was a crime to have been born out of wedlock, a crime to steal a bike, a crime to steal a loaf of bread from the shop! It was all about money for the church + the state....disgusting!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 23, 2009, 12:33:06 PM
The whole story is nothing short of a national disgrace. The disgrace will continue unless the perverts behind the abuse are convicted and left to rot in jail. Whether they are members of Holy Orders or not, their actions were criminal as well as obscene and immoral.

If this was anywhere else the streets of Dublin would be awash with protestors demanding convictions and reparations. Instead, we'll see acres of print but very little action.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on May 23, 2009, 12:37:07 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 23, 2009, 12:33:06 PM
The whole story is nothing short of a national disgrace. The disgrace will continue unless the perverts behind the abuse are convicted and left to rot in jail. Whether they are members of Holy Orders or not, their actions were criminal as well as obscene and immoral.

If this was anywhere else the streets of Dublin would be awash with protestors demanding convictions and reparations. Instead, we'll see acres of print but very little action.

Thats exactly what im getting at. Its astonishing what power gets you away with. Our Country is a joke, so much corruption from those in power. Get them named and shammed and thrown in jail.

On another question any of yee at mass back home today, what did the local priest have to say?

Got my days mixed up above, thought today was Sunday, as our day off is Friday and every second Saturday over here it gets confusing sometimes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 23, 2009, 03:50:47 PM
I'm sorry lads but the fact that compensation has been paid has nothing to do with chasing these f**kers and putting them on trial. Crime has been committed and what happened in terms of a civil claim and a civil settlement has no effect, to the best of my knowledge, on using evidence to secure a conviction against a criminal. I'm no lawyer and maybe there are some on here more clued into the law that can explain exactly whey these people cannot be charged with these monstrous crimes. Also, aren't the bishops and others that knew but moved these bastards around and buried truth also guilty of witholding evidence or obstruction. I hope to hear everyones report from their local mass this Sat/Sun. Let here what the clergy have to tell their flock.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 24, 2009, 10:00:02 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Perhaps for the fact that some of them suffer from chronic depression, many have tried and succeeded in killing themselves and generally have had their lives ruined. There are costs associated with being ill like that and 65k goes nowhere near paying for it i'd imagine. I have to say I am disgusted that you'd come on here and your contribution is to whinge that these poor brutalised people get or seek compensation. Perhaps you might enlighten us with your solution to the problem.  Let me guess - the church says sorry and we wait for all these moaners to die and then we can just forget about the whole nasty affair.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on May 24, 2009, 10:05:24 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 24, 2009, 10:00:02 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Perhaps for the fact that some of them suffer from chronic depression, many have tried and succeeded in killing themselves and generally have had their lives ruined. There are costs associated with being ill like that and 65k goes nowhere near paying for it i'd imagine. I have to say I am disgusted that you'd come on here and your contribution is to whinge that these poor brutalised people get or seek compensation. Perhaps you might enlighten us with your solution to the problem.  Let me guess - the church says sorry and we wait for all these moaners to die and then we can just forget about the whole nasty affair.

I dont think GD was getting at the victims, I think he was getting at the state.

Compensation is part of the healing I agree myles, of course it is, its not free to see a pyschologist or guidance counsellor etc.., im sure they are getting help this way to somehow manage to live on. You have to id say.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 24, 2009, 12:57:11 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


A good starting polint alright.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 24, 2009, 01:03:12 PM
Welcome development


The personnel assistant to Cardinal Seán Brady has said those who ran the industrial school system had to take responsibility for child abuse.

Fr Timothy Bartlett said the relevant members of the Conference of Religious in Ireland who ran the schools had to pay more towards the State's redress scheme.

Fr Bartlett was speaking on Radio Ulster's Sunday Sequence programme
He also said the Catholic Church had to establish why such evil was inflicted upon the victims
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 01:15:43 PM
If it was any other organisation there would be calls for it to be disband... just a thought   ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 24, 2009, 01:23:24 PM
Bishop apology for 'evil' abuse 

Dr Noel Treanor made the comments to a congregation in Carryduff 
The Bishop of Down and Connor has apologised to all victims of child sex abuse by the Catholic church.

Dr Noel Treanor was speaking after a report last week said thousands had been abused over 60 years.

He said the report was "heartbreaking" and had recorded cruelty and abuses which were "criminal and sinful."

But Dr Treanor said the church was addressing the "evil", adding that the Down and Connor diocese now had robust child protection measures in place.

"I state my sorrow, shame and visceral pain in the face of these and all abuses inflicted on children and vulnerable adults, whenever they took place, wherever they are perpetrated," he told a congregation in Carryduff on Sunday.

"I apologise on behalf of the church to all who are victims of abuse on the part of those who professed to care for them, or minister to them, in the name of Christ.

"I apologise, too, for the failure of those in positions of leadership in the Church to deal with the abusers."

The victims of child abuse by religious orders were among 35,000 children who were placed in a network of reformatories, industrial schools and workhouses until the early 1990s.



Abuse at Catholic institutions was investigated
More than 2,000 people told the Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse they suffered physical and sexual abuse as children in the institutions.

The commission found that sexual abuse was "endemic" in boys' institutions, and church leaders knew what was going on.

Dr Treanor said: "As we grasp the extent and dimensions of this evil that has been at work within the church, we have to recognise that as a church in particular, and as society, and as individuals, we stand in need of chastening our moral and personal radar.

"Anger, indifference, denial, washing one's hands of guilt, like Pilate, if partly comprehensible as reactions, will not suffice on the part of anyone."

The Irish deputy prime minister called the abuse of children in Catholic-run institutions as one of the "darkest chapters" in Irish history.

The leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, said anyone responsible for the abuse should be held to account.

The report, nine years in the making and covering a period of six decades, also found government inspectors failed to stop beatings, rapes and humiliation.

The findings will not be used for criminal prosecutions.  
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 24, 2009, 08:54:06 PM
The Minister for Finance has welcomed calls for the religious orders cited in the Ryan Report to increase their contributions to the State's compensation fund for victims of institutional child abuse.


But Mr Lenihan and the Taoiseach have both stressed that the Government may not have the legal ability to force the religious orders to make a larger contribution.

The Bishop of Down and Connor, Noel Treanor, said he supported calls for the religious orders involved to increase their contributions to the compensation fund for victims.

AdvertisementOn RTÉ Radio's This Week programme, Bishop Treanor said the Church must take the necessary steps to address outstanding issues and be seen to do so honestly, courageously and humbly.

Fr Timothy Bartlett, personal assistant to Cardinal Séan Brady, said the members of the Conference of Religious in Ireland who ran the schools had to pay more towards the State's redress scheme.

The Labour leader, Eamon Gilmore, described the remarks as a 'strong signal' that the Church was prepared to reopen the agreement capping the contribution by the orders, which was signed in 2002.

He called on the Government to get in touch with the religious orders quickly, with a view to reopening negotiations.

However, the Taoiseach said that it would not be helpful for him to speculate on what had been said.

The Government is to hold a special meeting this week to discuss the fall-out from the Commission report, and will be getting legal advice from the Attorney General on the deal.

But obviously, Mr Cowen said, if those on the other side of the agreement were prepared to reopen it, the State would sit down and discuss that.

On a possible referendum on children, Mr Cowen said it had not been possible to reach a consensus on the holding of a referendum, and it was now up to the Minister for Children to come back to Government with his considered opinion on how to move forward.

Meanwhile, Ombudsman for Children Emily Logan said it was incorrect for the Health Service Executive to say that all children in residential were assured of independent inspection.

She said that only two of the nine centres accommodating 180 children who have come here from abroad without their families are independently monitored.

She added that a further 200 children with intellectual disabilities are living in residential institutions which are not inspected by the Health Information and Quality Authority.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 24, 2009, 09:14:23 PM
I don't go to mass but would be interested to know of many local priests who spoke out this Sunday. Anyone anything to report?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 24, 2009, 09:18:22 PM
Parish priest in Cross did, strangely he said something similar to the bishop, that the perverts were criminals and talked about the child protection measures in place, how he can't give a child a lift if he sees one on the road etc.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 24, 2009, 09:20:46 PM
Bishop Casey said today that the abusers should all be charged, convicted and jailed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


The guilty monsters should be charged and tried in a court of law and if found guilty should be sent to prison for the full term available.
As for myles, please don't try and second guess my opinion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 25, 2009, 01:43:53 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 24, 2009, 09:16:58 PM
My ma came in from mass the other night with a wee piece of card, asking for 'Prayers for the Priests'.

Sure it wasn't 'Prayers for Vocations'?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


The guilty monsters should be charged and tried in a court of law and if found guilty should be sent to prison for the full term available.
As for myles, please don't try and second guess my opinion.

And what about all the ones who buried the truth, obstructed the investigation. What should be done with them?

All these statements coming from leading church figures are nothing but words until some of them get off their arses and do something. Most victims that I've seen interviewed are not impressed by mere words. It is only the church grasping at straws as public opinion turns against them. Action is what the church needs to do, not releasing of statements. Start by paying what they said they would (they haven't even done this yet), then agree to pay more. Name and shame all involved and cooperate fully with any criminal investigation.

So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 25, 2009, 02:02:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


The guilty monsters should be charged and tried in a court of law and if found guilty should be sent to prison for the full term available.
As for myles, please don't try and second guess my opinion.

And what about all the ones who buried the truth, obstructed the investigation. What should be done with them?

All these statements coming from leading church figures are nothing but words until some of them get off their arses and do something. Most victims that I've seen interviewed are not impressed by mere words. It is only the church grasping at straws as public opinion turns against them. Action is what the church needs to do, not releasing of statements. Start by paying what they said they would (they haven't even done this yet), then agree to pay more. Name and shame all involved and cooperate fully with any criminal investigation.

So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......


Not a thing mentioned. Just put more money on the plate !  ;) They never said what it was for.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


The guilty monsters should be charged and tried in a court of law and if found guilty should be sent to prison for the full term available.
As for myles, please don't try and second guess my opinion.

And what about all the ones who buried the truth, obstructed the investigation. What should be done with them?

All these statements coming from leading church figures are nothing but words until some of them get off their arses and do something. Most victims that I've seen interviewed are not impressed by mere words. It is only the church grasping at straws as public opinion turns against them. Action is what the church needs to do, not releasing of statements. Start by paying what they said they would (they haven't even done this yet), then agree to pay more. Name and shame all involved and cooperate fully with any criminal investigation.

So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......


If evidence can be found to prove obstruction, then the individuals involved should be tried as well - happy enough with that or will you only be happy if the whole church is made to wear sack cloth and ashes?

Local PP said that he was both ashamed and disgusted by what has happened and he asked everyone to join with him in praying for the victims of abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 25, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 24, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 24, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Compensation - why do people need money to make things right?!!!
f**king Ireland turning American!
Throw money at a problem and everything will be sorted.

Can see what you are seeing to an extent but what else is there?  'Sorry.. now on yer way'...  It will help make life more comfortable and these people deserve all the comfort now they can get. Money don't make it right but it is something. Would be more important to have these sadists in jail.


The guilty monsters should be charged and tried in a court of law and if found guilty should be sent to prison for the full term available.
As for myles, please don't try and second guess my opinion.

And what about all the ones who buried the truth, obstructed the investigation. What should be done with them?

All these statements coming from leading church figures are nothing but words until some of them get off their arses and do something. Most victims that I've seen interviewed are not impressed by mere words. It is only the church grasping at straws as public opinion turns against them. Action is what the church needs to do, not releasing of statements. Start by paying what they said they would (they haven't even done this yet), then agree to pay more. Name and shame all involved and cooperate fully with any criminal investigation.

So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......


If evidence can be found to prove obstruction, then the individuals involved should be tried as well - happy enough with that or will you only be happy if the whole church is made to wear sack cloth and ashes?

Local PP said that he was both ashamed and disgusted by what has happened and he asked everyone to join with him in praying for the victims of abuse.
Prayers are cheap. How about they pay the victims what agreed to pay and that's without getting into should they pay more .
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 25, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......

FFS Myles on one hand you're going to chase me from the door when I come canvassing because you have me pegged as a Shinner and now you have me down as a regular Mass attender because I'm trying to point out that others are laible for this scandal than the Church. On both cases you are incorrect, but since you ask, I was at a Traditional (Latin) Mass yesterday. They tend not to dwell on such parochial matters as this but we did pray for the salvation of Protestants, the conversion of the Jews and the conversion of communist Russia.

Must let them know next time that they've got the last one bate.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 07:50:12 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

No thats why I was asking, I wouldn't profess to know the inner workings of the Church very well.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 07:58:15 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 25, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 01:49:40 PM
So what did the parish priests have to say for themselves at the weekend. Donagh, GDA  or any of ye that went to mass......

FFS Myles on one hand you're going to chase me from the door when I come canvassing because you have me pegged as a Shinner and now you have me down as a regular Mass attender because I'm trying to point out that others are laible for this scandal than the Church. On both cases you are incorrect, but since you ask, I was at a Traditional (Latin) Mass yesterday. They tend not to dwell on such parochial matters as this but we did pray for the salvation of Protestants, the conversion of the Jews and the conversion of communist Russia.

Must let them know next time that they've got the last one bate.

Sorry Donagh, I thought somewhere before you said you were a Sinn Fein member. Got my wires crossed on that one.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:09:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

I'm hugely confused, so are you agreeing that the Christian Brothers can do what they want without any bother from the Catholic Church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:16:11 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

The arch bishop seems to disagree with you! So are you saying the CB are directly answerable to Rome instead of the Irish church? Does that mean the government should be going to Rome for their money - I think thats a great idea. Then when the inevitable similar scandals happen in other countries they'll know where to go to.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:16:11 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

The arch bishop seems to disagree with you! So are you saying the CB are directly answerable to Rome instead of the Irish church? Does that mean the government should be going to Rome for their money - I think thats a great idea. Then when the inevitable similar scandals happen in other countries they'll know where to go to.
If you would read the bits I emboldened, it would be a lot easier to talk about issues with you.  I have a feeling you see what you want in whatever I say so I am done.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:23:27 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:09:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

I'm hugely confused, so are you agreeing that the Christian Brothers can do what they want without any bother from the Catholic Church?
You are confused?

What is it you are confused about?  I already explained to you...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:31:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:23:27 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:09:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

I'm hugely confused, so are you agreeing that the Christian Brothers can do what they want without any bother from the Catholic Church?
You are confused?

What is it you are confused about?  I already explained to you...

A yes or no answer to my emboldened question would clear up my confusion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:32:54 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:31:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:23:27 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:09:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

I'm hugely confused, so are you agreeing that the Christian Brothers can do what they want without any bother from the Catholic Church?
You are confused?

What is it you are confused about?  I already explained to you...

A yes or no answer to my emboldened question would clear up my confusion.

You can't or won't read what I typed either?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:41:58 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:32:54 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:31:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:23:27 PM
Quote from: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:09:39 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:03:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
PPS, it's better to be armed with the facts.

The Catholic Church in Ireland doesn't have control over any religious order.  Religious orders have their own processes for making decisions.  So, the Church had nothing to do with the court case the Brothers brought against the state.

Oh yes, when it suits them they have no control. So I suppose the christian brothers could just do anything they like without fear of Rome. Of course they can't. The arch bishop of Dublin today said he was giving them a chance to consider paying more. He then said that he was doing this instead of "telling" them to do more, which sort of implies he could force them to if he wanted to.
Look at the bits I emboldened.  Try reading what I type, it helps.

I'm hugely confused, so are you agreeing that the Christian Brothers can do what they want without any bother from the Catholic Church?
You are confused?

What is it you are confused about?  I already explained to you...

A yes or no answer to my emboldened question would clear up my confusion.

You can't or won't read what I typed either?


You've gone very defensive here, I'm not getting at you.

I have read what you said, I am looking for clarification without the possibility of sarcasm or defensive bitterness.

If you could please answer my emboldened question yes or no it would clear everything up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:44:25 PM
PPS, I will refer you to what I typed earlier.  Don't waste my time asking again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ping Pong Santa on May 25, 2009, 08:46:46 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:44:25 PM
PPS, I will refer you to what I typed earlier.  Don't waste my time asking again.

I am at a loss to understand as to why you won't answer my very simple yes or no question?

Would it really take up so much of your precious time? You've posted twice not answering where one post would have answered.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 25, 2009, 08:48:56 PM
Mylesthe slasher is well capable of understanding that the Religious Orders do not come under the control of the Diocesan church or any of its Bishops. His justifiable anger has clouded his judgement and led to his irrational response. Only today the Synod of Bishops said that the deal should be reviewed and if necessary renegotiated, the response of the Orders was an emphatic NO. I believe the state response should be very robust, up to and including the removal of Orders freedom to practise
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 08:54:31 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 25, 2009, 08:48:56 PM
Mylesthe slasher is well capable of understanding that the Religious Orders do not come under the control of the Diocesan church or any of its Bishops. His justifiable anger has clouded his judgement and led to his irrational response. Only today the Synod of Bishops said that the deal should be reviewed and if necessary renegotiated, the response of the Orders was an emphatic NO. I believe the state response should be very robust, up to and including the removal of Orders freedom to practise
100% correct about the Bishops.  I am unsure as to what you mean about the state response.  I mean, the state can't tell a religious order they can't practice as far as I know.  As far as I am aware, the only person who can do anything like that would be the Cardinal and even at that, as far as I know the Cardinal can only tell an order they are no longer welcome in the country.  In the case of the Brothers, I don't know what could be done.  In any case, there can't be too many Brothers left in the country.  All the schools I know of are now run by lay people and there are no Brothers teaching in any of them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 25, 2009, 09:07:14 PM
Ardmhachu i think you will find that the state can prevent certain religious groups from operating in the country, if they fail to conform to certain norms. In the past the Jesuits have been banned from operating in many Countries which would deem themselves to be catholic
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 09:15:43 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 25, 2009, 09:07:14 PM
Ardmhachu i think you will find that the state can prevent certain religious groups from operating in the country, if they fail to conform to certain norms. In the past the Jesuits have been banned from operating in many Countries which would deem themselves to be catholic
Is there legislation north and south that would allow them to do this?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 25, 2009, 09:24:51 PM
I am unable to quote you the precise piece of legislation which would cover such an action, but it has been used against religious sects that were considered harmful to the public good, the Moonies and the Church of Scientology being comparitively recent examples
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on May 25, 2009, 09:28:52 PM
Fair enough.  I wasn't being pernickety, genuinely I have never heard of it happening before.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 09:38:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 09:20:21 PM


Sure poor auld Bertie has no money either. My heart bleeds.
did you even read what the article said?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 09:47:12 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 09:38:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 09:20:21 PM


Sure poor auld Bertie has no money either. My heart bleeds.
did you even read what the article said?

Yes I did Gnevin. When Irelands no 1 con man tells me that the church have no money (just like he had no money when he got the auld dig out) I would be looking for a second opinion. Aherns word is just as worthless as the churches at this moment in time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 09:50:40 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 09:47:12 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 09:38:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 09:20:21 PM


Sure poor auld Bertie has no money either. My heart bleeds.
did you even read what the article said?

Yes I did Gnevin. When Irelands no 1 con man tells me that the church have no money (just like he had no money when he got the auld dig out) I would be looking for a second opinion. Aherns word is just as worthless as the churches at this moment in time.
Ok . I agree with you . How can one of the biggest land owners in the state be broke?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 25, 2009, 10:38:59 PM
The church have no money ?????????


Bollocks they have no money - they've fortunes in cash and very valuable assets.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 10:40:29 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!

Not a thread for humour I don't think.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 25, 2009, 10:45:59 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.

The only thing you could get compensation for is being an idiot and I don't think the church can be held responsible for that. Amazing that this is your first post on what is one of the darkest and shameful episodes in Irelands recent history. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 25, 2009, 11:06:57 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 25, 2009, 10:38:59 PM
The church have no money ?????????


Bollocks they have no money - they've fortunes in cash and very valuable assets.
Believe it or not, the diocese of Dublin doesn't have a lot of cash at the present time. I believe the same can be said for other dioceses around the country.
Note I am referring to cash and not property or other forms of assets.
A report in a Sunday paper some months ago reported that the money held in stocks and shares is now worth only €4m, whereas it's value was once €25m before the onset of the recession. The same loss of value the reporter assumed was probably the case in every diocese around the country.
Probably the main culprits, the "religious" congregations, are in the same boat and are strapped for readies but they sure do own a lot of properties and lands, most of which was bequeathed to them in wills in former times.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 25, 2009, 11:07:28 PM
Yes, there are people in the church who used their position to abuse people. But i think people often go overboard in their criticism. The world was different then. So was society.

- Teachers used to think that canning was agood thing.
- Authorities used to think that people with leaning difficulties could be cured by giving the patient electric shocks.
- My granny was brought up in a Victorian age, and throught that children should be seen and not heard. Whisper and you got a clip on the ear.

I wouldt condone what some of the clerics did, but there are many more good clerics than bad ones.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 25, 2009, 11:21:14 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 25, 2009, 11:06:57 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 25, 2009, 10:38:59 PM
The church have no money ?????????


Bollocks they have no money - they've fortunes in cash and very valuable assets.
Believe it or not, the diocese of Dublin doesn't have a lot of cash at the present time. I believe the same can be said for other dioceses around the country.
Note I am referring to cash and not property or other forms of assets.
A report in a Sunday paper some months ago reported that the money held in stocks and shares is now worth only €4m, whereas it's value was once €25m before the onset of the recession. The same loss of value the reporter assumed was probably the case in every diocese around the country.
Probably the main culprits, the "religious" congregations, are in the same boat and are strapped for readies but they sure do own a lot of properties and lands, most of which was bequeathed to them in wills in former times.

They have serious assets - sell them if they have to.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:29:42 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.
New low for the GAA board
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:37:25 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 11:07:28 PM
Yes, there are people in the church who used their position to abuse people. But i think people often go overboard in their criticism. The world was different then. So was society.

- Teachers used to think that canning was agood thing.
- Authorities used to think that people with leaning difficulties could be cured by giving the patient electric shocks.
- My granny was brought up in a Victorian age, and throught that children should be seen and not heard. Whisper and you got a clip on the ear.

I wouldt condone what some of the clerics did, but there are many more good clerics than bad ones.
Clearly a WUM
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 26, 2009, 08:59:04 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:29:42 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.
New low for the GAA board

So exactly will money help ease the pain and suffering? Explain.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 26, 2009, 09:40:49 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 08:59:04 AM
So exactly will money help ease the pain and suffering? Explain.

It will allow them access to treatment (of their choice) for their trauma for a start.

That said, they could follow the advise the spokeswoman for CORI gave on RTE Radio 1 this morning and let the religious orders that abused them in the first place look after the provision of counselling and psychiatric treatment.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Billys Boots on May 26, 2009, 09:43:48 AM
QuoteWe all know this disgusting scandal is as a result of The Church and The State, but who do you hold mostly accountable, and should therefore pay out the most in compensation to victims?

I have a lot of sympathy for the victims, and the way the state/church has gone about 'redressing' their apalling treatment is a low in the history of the state.  My own take (from listening to the victims) is that the best way of making this right is by putting structures in place that will convince them (the victims) that this cannot possibly happen in Ireland again.  I don't think that money is the major issue for most of them.

That said, I think the state should seize all church property that is used for educational purposes (already paid for, and maintained by the state), and this appears like a good time to do it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 26, 2009, 09:58:50 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 26, 2009, 12:43:31 AM
In Marino, close to where I live, the CBs have a plot of 11 acres of prime development land. It had a pitch & putt course that was used by old folks'clubs in the area for some years. Then the Brothers decided to turf the pensioners out and applied for planning permission. One brother who disagreed with the decision to evict the tenants told me that the land back then was valued at around €11 million- €1m per acre.. However, they were refused this permission on the ground that the land ws zoned for leisure and recreation purposes. They may apply again in 2012 and in the meantime the 11 acres are unused.

Why is there a need for this to stop at the irish church?  

Surely given that they were following the vatican's rules vis a vis keeping this information "in-house", then the vatican is as liable as anyone?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 10:56:48 AM
The Catholic Church should be disbanded and all their wealth used to help the abused, the poor and the sick. The buildings and the grounds would make great facilities for childrens centres and play areas with giant slides and Disney characters. John Lennon was rite..
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 11:05:07 AM
I took my cubs to this in Wales last year. It was a church. Wonderful place put to better use...

This was a church a short walk from Rhyl town centre is a beautiful red brick church with a difference.

Molly Mouse Play House is a much needed clean and contemporary environment for those wanting a safe place to have a family outing. It has an enormous soft play frame for those with lots of energy, and for younger members there is a baby/toddler area filled with activity toys.

There is a lovely adult sofa room, with a television and daily papers to sit and enjoy a cup of coffee and a fresh cream cake.

Rest assured, your children will have a fantastic time and are monitored by qualified and experienced staff ready to help with any of your needs.
Would be like an amend by the church to the children of Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 26, 2009, 11:42:53 AM
The Conference of the Religious in Ireland has said the refusal by the orders to renegotiate the compensation deal agreed with the State is not a blocking mechanism or a way of saying no to the survivors.

CORI represents the 18 congregations responsible for institutional abuse of children.

On RTÉ's Morning Ireland, CORI Director General Marianne O'Connor said the orders involved would put more resources, including money, into meeting the needs of abuse survivors directly.
Advertisement

She said that the orders were already supporting former residents and that they were seeking the best way to help those still suffering from the abuse they experienced at the hands of those who ran the institutions.

However Ms O'Connor said the 2002 deal would not be revisited.

The Cabinet will be briefed by the Attorney General about the legal situation of the deal when it meets later today.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 08:59:04 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:29:42 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.
New low for the GAA board

So exactly will money help ease the pain and suffering? Explain.

In the same way as if some one crashed in too your car and destroyed your leg.  If this happened would you claim compensation?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 12:49:15 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!

That is a terrible comment... not funny and the abuse was not just sexual as there was terrible beatings as well although these sadists probably got some kinky sexual kick out of that too. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 26, 2009, 01:19:48 PM
Youse are all going to wash the baby out with the bath water.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lazer on May 26, 2009, 01:47:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 26, 2009, 09:40:49 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 08:59:04 AM
So exactly will money help ease the pain and suffering? Explain.

It will allow them access to treatment (of their choice) for their trauma for a start.

That said, they could follow the advise the spokeswoman for CORI gave on RTE Radio 1 this morning and let the religious orders that abused them in the first place look after the provision of counselling and psychiatric treatment.



Give them access to the treatment of their choice for free instead of simply handing out money, for some the cost of the treatment will be more then €65k, for some it could be less.

Compensation is NOT the answer as a lot of people on this thread have stated

The money put aside for this should be used to provide free treatment as required, put in place measures to ensure this cannot happen again and to fund criminal investigations.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 02:09:19 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 01:19:48 PM
Youse are all going to wash the baby out with the bath water.

I think you mean throw the baby out...  :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 26, 2009, 02:13:55 PM
Questions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4)

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 26, 2009, 02:37:20 PM
I have purposely stayed away from the thread for a few days and in reading the last 6/7 pages there is nothing being solved, no compromises, no conceding points and no willingness to understand.
Myles seems to dominate with his anger and inability to actually read people's posts and try to understand their point before picking one little aspect of what they said and going off on a rant. 
It is nearly impossible to engage with people in a serious discussion unless they have the intelligence to discuss the issue seriously.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 02:44:32 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 26, 2009, 02:37:20 PM
I have purposely stayed away from the thread for a few days and in reading the last 6/7 pages there is nothing being solved, no compromises, no conceding points and no willingness to understand.
Myles seems to dominate with his anger and inability to actually read people's posts and try to understand their point before picking one little aspect of what they said and going off on a rant. 
It is nearly impossible to engage with people in a serious discussion unless they have the intelligence to discuss the issue seriously.

Patronising or wot? Maybe you need to find another discussion board then...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 26, 2009, 03:26:21 PM
I reserve my understanding for the little orphans, brutalised children, brutalised single mothers etc etc that suffered inhuman abuse at the hands of so called holy men. The abuse was "endemic" and "systematic". The bodies within the church (for example the christian brothers) have not cooperated with the enquiry, have taken legal action to prevent any of their evil monsters from being named and to this day have not even forked out the money that they said they would (i believe only 50% has been paid to date). The church has been apologetic and has gone on what to me seems to be a PR stunt of suggesting that the orders should look at paying more, while knowing that the orders have no intention of paying more. We hear from bishops about the bad priests that were there which totally ignores what the report said about "endemic" and "systematic". There were not only a few bad apples, on the contrary there were only a few good apples. And there were a whole lot of bad ones outside these schools that knew full well about it and did sweet FA. So you want me to understand the churches position. I say f**k the church. Let them get the money they morally owe to these people. The tax payer should not be forking out for the evil carried out by and covered up by the church. I think I have a right to be angry and I'm not the only one. Those that come on here and the first thing they do is make excuses for the church not doing what is right -  they are the ones that are showing no understanding for the innocents that were broken. They are the ones that lack intelligence, so caught up in the brainwashing of teh church that can't even tell the difference of right and wrong in even as black and white a case as this. They are the people that should look into their hearts and ask are they living a christian life as described by the bible. I don't think they are.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: guy crouchback on May 26, 2009, 03:48:02 PM
Quoteuestions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.



i watched this last night and can safely say it was one of the most powerful and moving  moments of television i have ever seen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 26, 2009, 04:01:52 PM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 26, 2009, 03:48:02 PM
Quoteuestions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.



Indeed. A brave man. That sets the tone for this debate - not understanding of the church and not the Jokes of Orior. I suppose Iceman thinks he is too angry?

i watched this last night and can safley say it was one of the most powerful and moving  momemts of television i have ever seen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 26, 2009, 03:48:02 PM
Quoteuestions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.




Jesus Christ of Almighty - this made the hairs stand on the back of my neck. This man's testimony was frightening to say the least - 2 days after he was brought to the home, he was raped, then beaten by 2 of them for a solid hour with not a shred of cloth on his body.


This testimony really puts it into perspective.

i watched this last night and can safley say it was one of the most powerful and moving  momemts of television i have ever seen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 26, 2009, 04:51:24 PM
QuoteQuestions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.

This should be shown again and again to illustrate what these bastards did. The whole lot of them should be named and charges brought against them in open court. Watched it and can safely say I haven't been as upset by anything I've seen or heard in a long long time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Billys Boots on May 26, 2009, 04:59:47 PM
Noel Dempsey was a shook-looking man after that - and, in fairness, who wouldn't be?  A very moving account of an atrocity. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 26, 2009, 05:01:16 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Are you serious? Baby, bath water!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:09:06 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

That was for the 2008 panel - new track suits needed for Sunday. The county board have let them down again.   ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 26, 2009, 05:17:27 PM

QuoteSeriously though, how far do you take this ?
Quote

Until the guilty have been brought to justice

QuoteDo you stop going to chapel ?
Quote
A very personal choice I'd have thought and I can see how people could stop going.

QuoteDo you change religion ?
Quote
It's not the religion I'd have thought was the issue but the institutions

QuoteDo you stop putting money in the envelope ?
Quote
I have


Where does it end ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:25:27 PM
Justice meaning what exactly ???


Jail terms ???


Public apologies ?


Sack cloth and ashes ??



More compensation ??


A bit of all the above ??


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 26, 2009, 05:27:22 PM
A very moving and brave act in deed.

Let's get something straight here  - I am all for justice. I am all for the Church taking the blame and atoning for the sins of its clergy and members.  If you take the time to read over the thread again and my posts in particular I think you will find this to be true.
My point is that we should be realistic in how this justice is obtained.

We can't tear down Churches or schools or parochial houses and sell off the land.  It isn't an option.
We can't tell people to stop going to Church, to stop supporting their Church and their parish - at least for me this isn't an option.

My point all along has been to come up with some realistic suggestions to seek justice for the victims.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 05:27:49 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 08:59:04 AM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 12:29:42 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Gnevin on May 25, 2009, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 25, 2009, 10:08:48 PM
I served as an alterboy for 5 years.

I went to St Colmans College for 7 years.

I was never abused (probably related to the fact that I'm an ugly hoor).



Should I be upset that I wasnt abused? Hell, now I'm gonna miss out on the big pay-out. It aint fair. Justice for all. Shame!
Are you disagreeing with the concept of the abused getting compensation to help with with the suffering and pain the church caused them?

Yes.
New low for the GAA board

So exactly will money help ease the pain and suffering? Explain.

In the same way as if some one crashed in too your car and destroyed your leg.  If this happened would you claim compensation?

Well Orior ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 05:28:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 26, 2009, 05:01:16 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Are you serious? Baby, bath water!

Some things are so broken they can't be fixed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 05:45:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?

I wouldn't give the church 1 pence of my money... are you for real?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:00:03 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 05:45:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?

I wouldn't give the church 1 pence of my money... are you for real?


Stupid question maybe, but why not ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:13:51 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:00:03 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 05:45:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?

I wouldn't give the church 1 pence of my money... are you for real?


Stupid question maybe, but why not ?

They have more money than I have. Work all week to throw money to that shower!  Yeah-stupid question...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:17:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:13:51 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:00:03 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 05:45:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?

I wouldn't give the church 1 pence of my money... are you for real?


Stupid question maybe, but why not ?

They have more money than I have. Work all week to throw money to that shower!  Yeah-stupid question...

I knew it was a stupid question. But do you not feel obliged to contribute financially to your religion and the maintenance of it ? Bible says we should pay tithes - i.e 10% of our gross income to the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:22:31 PM
I'll take my chances and explain to God when I meet him  ;D 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:22:31 PM
I'll take my chances and explain to God when I meet him  ;D 


Put in a good word for me too  !!  ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on May 26, 2009, 06:26:52 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:17:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:13:51 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:00:03 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 05:45:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 04:50:01 PM
I heard on the radio that there was a nun in full attire collecting for the Sisters of (no) Mercy in Cork city on Saturday. Typical denial and arrogance as they were the worst perpetrators

Seriously though, how far do you take this ?


Do you stop going to chapel ?


Do you change religion ?


Do you stop putting money in the envelope ?


Where does it end ?

I wouldn't give the church 1 pence of my money... are you for real?


Stupid question maybe, but why not ?

They have more money than I have. Work all week to throw money to that shower!  Yeah-stupid question...

I knew it was a stupid question. But do you not feel obliged to contribute financially to your religion and the maintenance of it ? Bible says we should pay tithes - i.e 10% of our gross income to the church.

Bible says alot of things. Do you eat shellfish or pork etc. etc.?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:28:27 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:22:31 PM
I'll take my chances and explain to God when I meet him  ;D 


Put in a good word for me too  !!  ;)

I knew you were winding me up  :P
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:32:16 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:28:27 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 26, 2009, 06:22:31 PM
I'll take my chances and explain to God when I meet him  ;D 


Put in a good word for me too  !!  ;)

I knew you were winding me up  :P

Both of us beyond redemption !!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 26, 2009, 07:06:43 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 26, 2009, 02:13:55 PM
Questions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4)

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.

Christ, very brave men. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 26, 2009, 08:30:09 PM
I watched that video of last night's Question and Answers again. That man is one courageous man. Fair play.




Remember Wexford !!!!!!!!!!!! What was that about ???????????
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Boy Wonder on May 27, 2009, 12:05:06 AM
I've only read the first page or two here so am not responding to any post in particular. Just to say that I'm appalled at the anti-Church frenzy in the media.

There is no denying the in-human treatment and abuse that occurred but there are other scandals growing out of this: 
1) the totally unjust way that the clergy in general and religious institutions are being portrayed on radio, tv and papers
2) the lack of acknowledgement of the positive role that the majority of clergy & religious bodies have played and continue to play in eduacaion, health etc.
3) the lack of any reasonable explanation as to the enormous cost of the enquiries and redress.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 27, 2009, 08:16:29 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 27, 2009, 12:05:06 AM
I've only read the first page or two here so am not responding to any post in particular. Just to say that I'm appalled at the anti-Church frenzy in the media.

There is no denying the in-human treatment and abuse that occurred but there are other scandals growing out of this: 
1) the totally unjust way that the clergy in general and religious institutions are being portrayed on radio, tv and papers
2) the lack of acknowledgement of the positive role that the majority of clergy & religious bodies have played and continue to play in eduacaion, health etc.
3) the lack of any reasonable explanation as to the enormous cost of the enquiries and redress.





1) You can't be serious - they abused, raped and destroyed the lives of 1000's when the were only kids. The report said the abuse was endemic - look it up in a dictionary if you can't comprehend. They then covered it up and obstructed the enquiry. They deserve every bit of negative reporting they get.
2) There has been some good work done but their name is dirt now due to pt 1 above and until they fix what they've done in a serious and sincere way then why should we think about the good they've done.
3) Again, are you serious. Are you saying we should let justice fall by the way side cos its too much hassle and money to get to the truth. Cop yourself on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: DrinkingHarp on May 27, 2009, 09:38:58 AM

Orders to offer more to abused
The Christian Brothers accept, with shame, the findings of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. The congregation is deeply sorry for the hurt we have caused - not just for the mistakes of the past, but for the inadequacy of our responses over recent years.
Thousands of children were abused in church-run institutions in Ireland

The Christian Brothers in the Irish Republic have announced they will review how much more compensation they can offer to victims of abuse.

The move follows last week's publication of the Ryan Report into the abuse of children in church-run institutions over six decades.

The Oblate Order also said it would devote more resources to compensate children abused in its care.

The order ran the Daingean Reformatory in County Offaly.

On Tuesday Taoiseach Brian Cowen said orders must make more payments "in view of the moral responsibility they continue to hold in these matters".

The Christian Brothers said they would enter into a six-week consultation process. It is understood that they could hand over properties worth tens of millions of euros.

In a statement the order said it recognised its "moral obligation" to former residents.

"The Christian Brothers accept, with shame, the findings of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse.

"The congregation is deeply sorry for the hurt we have caused - not just for the mistakes of the past, but for the inadequacy of our responses over recent years," said the statement.

The Irish government have also said they will implement all 20 of the reports recommendations and will meet with all of the religious orders to discuss how they can make further payments.

The Sisters of Mercy have said that they intend to accept the Taoiseach's invitation to meet them and to continue to co-operate in helping people who were in their care while children.

In a statement, the nuns make no reference to calls to provide more money.

In 2002 the 18 congregations responsible for the institutional abuse of children in Ireland struck a deal with government which capped their contribution to a compensation pot to 128 million euros.

An Assistant Garda Commissioner has been appointed to examine the potential for future prosecutions.

"Those accountable for such crimes - no matter how long ago - must also face the full rigours of the law," said Mr Cowen.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 27, 2009, 10:07:22 AM
Quote from: DrinkingHarp on May 27, 2009, 09:38:58 AM

Orders to offer more to abused
The Christian Brothers accept, with shame, the findings of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. The congregation is deeply sorry for the hurt we have caused - not just for the mistakes of the past, but for the inadequacy of our responses over recent years.
Thousands of children were abused in church-run institutions in Ireland

The Christian Brothers in the Irish Republic have announced they will review how much more compensation they can offer to victims of abuse.

The move follows last week's publication of the Ryan Report into the abuse of children in church-run institutions over six decades.

The Oblate Order also said it would devote more resources to compensate children abused in its care.

The order ran the Daingean Reformatory in County Offaly.

On Tuesday Taoiseach Brian Cowen said orders must make more payments "in view of the moral responsibility they continue to hold in these matters".

The Christian Brothers said they would enter into a six-week consultation process. It is understood that they could hand over properties worth tens of millions of euros.

In a statement the order said it recognised its "moral obligation" to former residents.

"The Christian Brothers accept, with shame, the findings of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse.

"The congregation is deeply sorry for the hurt we have caused - not just for the mistakes of the past, but for the inadequacy of our responses over recent years," said the statement.

The Irish government have also said they will implement all 20 of the reports recommendations and will meet with all of the religious orders to discuss how they can make further payments.

The Sisters of Mercy have said that they intend to accept the Taoiseach's invitation to meet them and to continue to co-operate in helping people who were in their care while children.

In a statement, the nuns make no reference to calls to provide more money.

In 2002 the 18 congregations responsible for the institutional abuse of children in Ireland struck a deal with government which capped their contribution to a compensation pot to 128 million euros.

An Assistant Garda Commissioner has been appointed to examine the potential for future prosecutions.

"Those accountable for such crimes - no matter how long ago - must also face the full rigours of the law," said Mr Cowen.



To OFFER! more... such arrogance.  The state should go and take it off them... same as Gilligan and other criminals.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 27, 2009, 10:39:52 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 27, 2009, 12:05:06 AM
I've only read the first page or two here so am not responding to any post in particular. Just to say that I'm appalled at the anti-Church frenzy in the media.

There is no denying the in-human treatment and abuse that occurred but there are other scandals growing out of this: 
1) the totally unjust way that the clergy in general and religious institutions are being portrayed on radio, tv and papers
2) the lack of acknowledgement of the positive role that the majority of clergy & religious bodies have played and continue to play in eduacaion, health etc.
3) the lack of any reasonable explanation as to the enormous cost of the enquiries and redress.





If that's the only three things you are appalled by then you really have to get your priorities right.

Is it open season on the Catholic church as a whole, good priests, bad priests, Bishops etc etc, yes it is and it should remain so until they sort out their house internally, give evidence against those who sullied their good name and come clean on all the abuse that was perptrated in their name throughout the decades.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 27, 2009, 10:46:16 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 27, 2009, 12:05:06 AM
I've only read the first page or two here so am not responding to any post in particular. Just to say that I'm appalled at the anti-Church frenzy in the media.

There is no denying the in-human treatment and abuse that occurred but there are other scandals growing out of this: 
1) the totally unjust way that the clergy in general and religious institutions are being portrayed on radio, tv and papers
2) the lack of acknowledgement of the positive role that the majority of clergy & religious bodies have played and continue to play in eduacaion, health etc.
3) the lack of any reasonable explanation as to the enormous cost of the enquiries and redress.






You can't be serious ? Where have you been ? I take it you haven't read the report at all ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bcarrier on May 27, 2009, 12:56:23 PM
I cant get this song out of my head lately ....

ALL I REMEMBER
Mick Hanly

I was raised on a rocking horse, sweets and bualadh bas,
Fifty wild boys to a room,
sing lámh, lámh, eile, the dish ran away with the spoon
Black shoes and stockings, for those who say don't, blue is the colour outside
God made the world, the snake tempted Eve and she died.
Wild Christian Brothers, sharpening their leathers
Learn it by heart that's the rule
All I remember is dreading September and school

CHORUS:
And they made me for better or worse,
the fool that I am or the wise man I'll be
And they gave me their blessings or curse
it wasn't their fault I was me,
Not the one that you see.


Its over 25 years since they taught me bit I think there are probably a lot of people educated by the christian brothers who have felt that way about them....a kind of hard but mainly fair memory. Brother Garvey who is head man now taught me and i would find it hard to believe that he is anything but a decent man struggling with a most horrible and shameful inheritance. It seems to me that he is effectively and belatedly going to have to oversee the winding up of the order. Even in my day they were in decline and most of those that I came across were old men - plenty were decent but there were certainly a sprinkling of brutal and dodgy ones - on hearing what I have lately I would not like to have come across them as younger men.  

It is easy in hindsight to see that the whole thing was a recipe for disaster - this quote from yesterdays telegraph says it better than I could ...

And then we must try to understand how these things happen. Presumably many of those who joined the orders did so with an honest intention of living a disciplined and celibate life. Many of them left home at 14 to join junior seminaries, before their own sexuality was awakened and then had to learn to live with an impossible pledge to celibacy taken before they were fully formed. These boys and girls also swore obedience to their orders and were, therefore, easily manipulated.
And then they were clustered together in single sex institutions, treated like gormless functionaries by their own superiors and put in charge of vulnerable children, who served the role of the cat that the office boy kicks.

But we have seen it in prisons and concentration camps and in English public schools, that a combination of sexual repression and power produces sadism.
Our own beloved CS Lewis, in a book regarded as a spiritual classic, Surprised By Joy, describes, indulgently, the routine sexual exploitation of little boys in an English public school. These things were worse in Ireland than elsewhere, and where they were at their worst elsewhere it was often Irish clergy and religious orders who were doing it. That is the unforgettable legacy of a proud Irish missionary endeavour.





Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 27, 2009, 01:24:33 PM
Don Baker sang a song on The Late Late Show on Friday about the 'religious' abusers... it was a haunting... if anyone knows how to paste up here
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 27, 2009, 01:50:01 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on May 27, 2009, 10:39:52 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 27, 2009, 12:05:06 AM
I've only read the first page or two here so am not responding to any post in particular. Just to say that I'm appalled at the anti-Church frenzy in the media.

There is no denying the in-human treatment and abuse that occurred but there are other scandals growing out of this: 
1) the totally unjust way that the clergy in general and religious institutions are being portrayed on radio, tv and papers
2) the lack of acknowledgement of the positive role that the majority of clergy & religious bodies have played and continue to play in eduacaion, health etc.
3) the lack of any reasonable explanation as to the enormous cost of the enquiries and redress.





If that's the only three things you are appalled by then you really have to get your priorities right.

Is it open season on the Catholic church as a whole, good priests, bad priests, Bishops etc etc, yes it is and it should remain so until they sort out their house internally, give evidence against those who sullied their good name and come clean on all the abuse that was perptrated in their name throughout the decades.

Yes, and Irish history doesn't fairly teach that Cromwell's campaign here brought lots of benefits to Ireland such as mapping the entire country, a much improved legal system and local government system. Using your ideology it is a scandal the way Cromwell's campaign is portrayed as genocide only.

This was the tolerance of child sex slavery by those trusted with those children, for decades. The Church in Ireland had this coming to them for the way they hid behind barristers and a weak Government.

BTW I notice the HSE announced spectacular bullshit statistics yesterday knowing that it would slip under the radar.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Croí na hÉireann on May 27, 2009, 02:43:45 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 26, 2009, 04:51:24 PM
QuoteQuestions and Answers, May 25th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Maybe the commission in itself is out of kilter, regardless of who's stumping up the bills.

One very brave and eloquent man.

This should be shown again and again to illustrate what these b**tards did. The whole lot of them should be named and charges brought against them in open court. Watched it and can safely say I haven't been as upset by anything I've seen or heard in a long long time.

It is to that man's eternal credit that he has turned into the decent, upstanding citizen that he is today. Fair play to him to have the composure to come on to national television & recount the torture he experienced. Why do we as a nation have to rely on brave citizens to stick their heads above the parapet before we take action??? Orla Tinsley, a 20 year old, had to go on the Late Late to get a new unit for Cystic Fibrosis that they were promised by the HSE the year before. You can watch it here http://www.rte.ie/tv/latelate/20090403.html (http://www.rte.ie/tv/latelate/20090403.html) Another disgrace  >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 09:29:16 AM
Mary Mc Aleece on the radio now being very frank about the whole situation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:07:59 AM
Well if everyone else is getting some money I'd like some as well please. I had the shite bate out of me by a teacher in a CCMS school when I was about 9 or 10 years old. Anyone know know where I put the claim in? If there's no cash left can I do swapsies for that painting in the Sistine Chapel?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 10:17:39 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:07:59 AM
Well if everyone else is getting some money I'd like some as well please. I had the shite bate out of me by a teacher in a CCMS school when I was about 9 or 10 years old. Anyone know know where I put the claim in? If there's no cash left can I do swapsies for that painting in the Sistine Chapel?

If you think you taking a beating in your school is the same as what went on in these industrial schools then you really have not got a clue (considering your first post on this thread you started by accusing me of not knowing the facts). What you are doing is trying to water down what happened, normalising it as if it is nothing really. Making a joke of thing. I used to think you had your head screwed on based on some comments you made on other issues Donagh but your credibility is fading fast. May I ask if you have family in the religious orders because I suspect a personal interest of some sort in this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 10:17:39 AM
If you think you taking a beating in your school is the same as what went on in these industrial schools then you really have not got a clue (considering your first post on this thread you started by accusing me of not knowing the facts). What you are doing is trying to water down what happened, normalising it as if it is nothing really. Making a joke of thing. I used to think you had your head screwed on based on some comments you made on other issues Donagh but your credibility is fading fast. May I ask if you have family in the religious orders because I suspect a personal interest of some sort in this.

Firstly, no one has yet come onto this thread and explained why the Church should be held liable when the children were under the protection of the State.
Secondly, you don't know the extent of the batin I took just as you don't know the extent of the batin all of these victims took, so don't try to belittle either. The point is that if I took a batin every bit as bad as some of these victims from a lay teacher, then surely I have as much right to claim against the Church as anyone else? 
Thirdly, no I don't have any family members in any of the Orders (except a few cousins in the Orange) and nor do I have any family members in Sinn Fein. Sometimes I just like to point out the foolishness which has people gunning for people or organisations on the basis of some hysterical media reaction which seeks to protect their own agenda.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 28, 2009, 10:52:25 AM
QuoteFirstly, no one has yet come onto this thread and explained why the Church should be held liable when the children were under the protection of the State.

The state abdicated their responsibility to the religious orders and paid them for taking the children so therefore the bulk of the liability to my mind lies with the religious orders

QuoteThe point is that if I took a batin every bit as bad as some of these victims from a lay teacher, then surely I have as much right to claim against the Church as anyone else?

I took plenty of physical beatings from lay teachers in the CBS system but because I had a strong family unit and structure to my life and wasn't at their mercy 24/7 for years it didn't have a lasting physical/psychological affect on me thankfully. So in my mind I don't have a reason to claim given the culture/laws of the time was that corporal punishment was allowable. However I wasn't raped and tortured like the testimonies I've read so there's no comparison.

Quotepeople gunning for people or organisations on the basis of some hysterical media reaction which seeks to protect their own agenda.   

I'd agree to a certain extent with that quote but that's the new secular orthodoxy for you - one form of thought control replacing the old clericalism. However to my mind it's blindingly obvious that the Christian Brothers in particular have not been held to account for their participation in this shameful episode and as I've said before I think there is a strong argument for their dissolution and transfer of all their assets to the state. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 11:01:24 AM
The Ryan report will be the final nail in the coffin for some of these orders who I believe are in the process of effectively winding down.

They themselves know that the game is up and attitudes have really hardened against them and anyone who would foolishly try to defend them or dilute what went on.

In addition, I predict that we'll see prosecutions in the cases of a lot of those still living who carried out the abuse.


I was watching the TV last night late on and Demot Aherne was on about building this new jail. I think they'll need it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:02:02 AM
Quote from: Declan on May 28, 2009, 10:52:25 AM
QuoteFirstly, no one has yet come onto this thread and explained why the Church should be held liable when the children were under the protection of the State.

The state abdicated their responsibility to the religious orders and paid them for taking the children so therefore the bulk of the liability to my mind lies with the religious orders

QuoteThe point is that if I took a batin every bit as bad as some of these victims from a lay teacher, then surely I have as much right to claim against the Church as anyone else?

I took plenty of physical beatings from lay teachers in the CBS system but because I had a strong family unit and structure to my life and wasn't at their mercy 24/7 for years it didn't have a lasting physical/psychological affect on me thankfully. So in my mind I don't have a reason to claim given the culture/laws of the time was that corporal punishment was allowable. However I wasn't raped and tortured like the testimonies I've read so there's no comparison.

Quotepeople gunning for people or organisations on the basis of some hysterical media reaction which seeks to protect their own agenda.   

I'd agree to a certain extent with that quote but that's the new secular orthodoxy for you - one form of thought control replacing the old clericalism. However to my mind it's blindingly obvious that the Christian Brothers in particular have not been held to account for their participation in this shameful episode and as I've said before I think there is a strong argument for their dissolution and transfer of all their assets to the state. 

1. The State cannot "abdicated their responsibility" - that would be unconstitutional.
2. Not all of the 35k claimants were raped or tortured, so even came anywhere near that level of abuse.
3. The individuals responsible should be held to account but going back to point one, present day Catholics should not be punished, which they will be if the Church assets are seized.

On an aside, I'll bet the Fianna Failers are loving this as there hasn't been a mention of the bankrupt state of the country since all of this broke.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 11:13:22 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Firstly, no one has yet come onto this thread and explained why the Church should be held liable when the children were under the protection of the State.

1) The orders were paid by the government to fulfill a service.  The service was fulfilled correctly and the state are liable.  However surely the state is entitled to recoup their losses (at least in part) from any thirld party contractor that failed in their task?

2) It is apparent from the investigations that the orders acted as a whole to hide the abusers and the extent of their knowledge.  Therefore we are not dealing purely with errant individuals but also we organisation that aided and abetted them.

3) Regardless if the legal "have to" aspect, many people feel they should pay up because it is the christian/moral thing to do

Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Thirdly, no I don't have any family members in any of the Orders (except a few cousins in the Orange) and nor do I have any family members in Sinn Fein. Sometimes I just like to point out the foolishness which has people gunning for people or organisations on the basis of some hysterical media reaction which seeks to protect their own agenda.    

This isn't a hysterical media reaction.  There is too documentary evidence of certain orders (eg. Christian Brothers) acting in at best an obtuse manner and at worst an evasive manner when it comes to compensation and justice for victims.    For example Prime Time showed excerpts from legal adivce forwarded by orders in the U.S. to orders in Canada, advising on how to use trust/corporation law to protect assets.   Equally, the church as a whole continues to be evasive on the role of canon law versus civil law in these manners.  

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 11:19:09 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:02:02 AM
3. The individuals responsible should be held to account but going back to point one, present day Catholics should not be punished, which they will be if the Church assets are seized.

How much turnover has their been in terms of membership of the Christian Brothers since 2002?

Because in 2002 the willfully with-held information on abusers from the state.  The relevant files (from Rome) were only made available at a later stage to the Ryan commission.   

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:46:34 AM
Jim in this case the State knew that the abuse was happening for decades and did nothing while the abuse continued. So for the State to start crying about it now is like the Church going after the descendants of Guglielmo because he f**ked up the Leaning Tower of Pisa. The Church has already agreed to hand over £100 million which is the right thing to do, just as it was correct for Volkswagen to do something similar for the Jews but there are people who will not be happy until they see the Church stripped of everything. The Church has conceded the principal and the cash so now there is nothing to be gained by further punishing modern Catholics for the sins of the past.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 28, 2009, 12:03:19 PM
What was the 100million based on? If they agreed to hand over 100 then why not 150-200?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 12:07:19 PM
Quote from: ludermor on May 28, 2009, 12:03:19 PM
What was the 100million based on? If they agreed to hand over 100 then why not 150-200?

And why not 5 or 1? The important thing is that they have conceded the principle that they were at fault. The money is inconsequential.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 28, 2009, 12:15:42 PM
So you dont think they should have paid anything?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 12:16:29 PM
Your saying that giving 100 million was the right thing to do yet the other day E1 was sufficient as a jesture. You seem awful concerned about the members of the catholic church being out of pocket, I'm more concerned with the tax payer being iout of pocket which does not correspond to the amount of blame apportional to them. CORI finally came out yesterday and said 50:50 was about right, as did the governments own advisers at the time of this shameful deal. Everyone seems to be saying this now (bishops, normal clergy etc) It seems to me it is only the orders themselves that are saying they don't need to give another 400 million. Well the orders and Donagh.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on May 28, 2009, 12:19:41 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Firstly, no one has yet come onto this thread and explained why the Church should be held liable when the children were under the protection of the State.
Many people have explained (or at least attempted to explain) why the Church should be held at least partly liable and almost everyone has accepted those explanations to one degree or another.  Just because you do not/cannot accept those explanations does not mean this issue has not been addressed.
But just in case you missed it somewhere, as far as I personally am concerned the explanation is as follows. The abused children were "under the protection of the state", but they were also in the care of the Church. What you do not seem to appreciate (will not accept?) is that the question of accountability is not an "either/or". Yes, the State has a responsibility, but to try to use that to deny the additional responsibility of the Church, when it was Church-owned and run Institutions where the abuse occurred, carried out by Priests and Nuns of the Church etc, is perverse in the extreme.
Or to put it another way. If you had a youngster whom you left in the care of a State-registered Child Minder, and you discovered that your child was horribly abused, who would you blame? Would you simply say that the State was entirely to blame for not checking the Childminder sufficiently? And if awarded compensation by a Court, would you insist that it all comes from the State (taxpayer), even if the Childminder lived in a big house? Would the State not be entitled to recover some of the damages awarded against it from the childminder? Or maybe you wouldn't accept damages at all?  
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Secondly, you don't know the extent of the batin I took just as you don't know the extent of the batin all of these victims took, so don't try to belittle either. The point is that if I took a batin every bit as bad as some of these victims from a lay teacher, then surely I have as much right to claim against the Church as anyone else?  
What you may have suffered and what these children suffered actually differs only as to degree, not in principle (imo). That is, if you suffered abuse as part of your education, then yes, you should be eligible for compensation. As for whom that compensation comes from, that depends on circumstance. For example, there is a difference between an individual teacher abusing kids at a school, where the school immediately turns him over to the police when uncovered, and a school where it was "endemic", with several teachers involved, and the school authorities knew it was happening and took action only in order to cover it up etc.
I don't know, but you seem to have a problem with the "Church" aspect of this matter. How would you react if you sent your child to a secular, fee-paying school eg in England or the USA, and found that he/she was being systematically abused by a number of teachers/staff who had been doing such things for years, without the school's owners taking any action to prevent what they did/ought to have known what was occurring?
Would you be happy if the individual teacher(s) were prosecuted and the State paid you compensation, but the School's owners were permitted to carry on, solely on condition they cleaned up their act in future? If the school was eg a Registered Charity, would you consider that that status, and the benefits which flow therefrom, be unaffected?

Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 10:39:30 AM
Sometimes I just like to point out the foolishness which has people gunning for people or organisations on the basis of some hysterical media reaction which seeks to protect their own agenda.    
Of course you must be entitled to your opinion, but have you never wondered why, on a Board where controversial topics normally tend to draw a wide variety of reactions and opinions, you appear to be in a tiny minority who characterises this affair in terms of "foolishness", "hysteria" and "protecting agendas" etc?
You remind me of the proud mother watching her soldier son march down the road with his Regiment, observing that "the rest are all out of step except him"... ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on May 28, 2009, 12:35:58 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:02:02 AM

3. The individuals responsible should be held to account but going back to point one, present day Catholics should not be punished, which they will be if the Church assets are seized.


Really?
You see, when the State has to pay out compensation, that means every citizen/taxpayer gets punished, including eg those who are not Catholic, or who had no connection whatever with what went on, or who are in their late teens/early 20's etc and so were minors themselves when this abuse occurred.. Yet they cannot avoid their obligations as citizens/taxpayers by pointing out that "It was nothing to do with me".
Whereas, those people who are Members of the Catholic church and who contributed money to that organisation, including the Orders who committed the abuse, did so entirely voluntarily, even after stories of this abuse began to leak out.
Yet you would conclude that the former must pay, but the latter should not?
Whatever else your opinions, they are normally at least coherently expressed and containing a certain logic; nor are you a typical WUM. But I must say I find your comments on this matter so perverse that I cannot ascribe them to woolly-mindedness, but wilful contrariness (or somesuch).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 12:16:29 PM
Your saying that giving 100 million was the right thing to do yet the other day E1 was sufficient as a jesture. You seem awful concerned about the members of the catholic church being out of pocket, I'm more concerned with the tax payer being iout of pocket which does not correspond to the amount of blame apportional to them. CORI finally came out yesterday and said 50:50 was about right, as did the governments own advisers at the time of this shameful deal. Everyone seems to be saying this now (bishops, normal clergy etc) It seems to me it is only the orders themselves that are saying they don't need to give another 400 million. Well the orders and Donagh.

Myles, I'm not concerned about the Church being out of pocket but just trying to ensure that those liable are the ones to pay up. In this case it's the State and unfortunately the State cannot absolve itself of paying out because you don't want the taxpayer to foot the bill. If you want to use that approach, sure why not get the Church to bail out the banks or the eVoting machines or any other balls up made by FF and FG over the last 80 years? At the end of the day the State screwed up by placing the children in the hands of these people and it's those gombeens in charge of the State and running FF and FG that have questions to answer as to why they allowed this to continue. Just as the State were liable to pay out after the hepatitis and haemophilia cases  because the Blood Transfusion Service was carring out services on it's behalf then so they are laible for the compensation claims here. CORI and the rest may now be jumping on the bandwagon and saying the Church should pay more but that is more in response to the hysterical media reaction than anything else.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 28, 2009, 02:00:04 PM
A lot of people will not be satisfied until the Church is completely brought down.  For some people I can imagine (and please read the word "some" ) that this isn't about justice - this about bringing down the Church.
But aside from that let's not get away from the issue at hand.

So everyone agrees that the Church is to blame.  Some people agree that the State has to share a portion of that blame but this does not take anything away from the responsibility of the Church to atone for it's past sins.
The Church has agreed to pay out EUR 100million to the victims.  The State have yet to pledge anything.

When will people be satisfied?  When can we look forward and move on from this and make sure it never happens again?
When get we let the victims get on with the rest of their lives?

Present reasonable demands from the Church.  Present reasonable, intelligent suggestions.
Doing otherwise would suggest that you have no interest in justice for the victims but only to bash the Church and bring it down however possible.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on May 28, 2009, 02:08:52 PM
QuoteIf you want to use that approach, sure why not get the Church to bail out the banks or the eVoting machines or any other balls up made by FF and FG over the last 80 years?

If it could be shown that church personnel caused and covered up the banking collapse you might be onto something.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 28, 2009, 02:12:45 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on May 28, 2009, 12:35:58 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:02:02 AM

3. The individuals responsible should be held to account but going back to point one, present day Catholics should not be punished, which they will be if the Church assets are seized.


Really?
You see, when the State has to pay out compensation, that means every citizen/taxpayer gets punished, including eg those who are not Catholic, or who had no connection whatever with what went on, or who are in their late teens/early 20's etc and so were minors themselves when this abuse occurred.. Yet they cannot avoid their obligations as citizens/taxpayers by pointing out that "It was nothing to do with me".
Whereas, those people who are Members of the Catholic church and who contributed money to that organisation, including the Orders who committed the abuse, did so entirely voluntarily, even after stories of this abuse began to leak out.
Yet you would conclude that the former must pay, but the latter should not?
Whatever else your opinions, they are normally at least coherently expressed and containing a certain logic; nor are you a typical WUM. But I must say I find your comments on this matter so perverse that I cannot ascribe them to woolly-mindedness, but wilful contrariness (or somesuch).
Good to see you back again, EG. I'm sure you are not trying to provoke Donagh or anything as base as that. (You're not, are you?)
I do agree with your line of reasoning here. I've no problem with that. (Well, maybe that agreement doesn't extend to the last paragraph. I think that could be a matter of unfinished business with Donagh.)
However, I would suggest that all of us should bear in mind the terms of reference given to the commission and the conclusions it arrived at.; that's the objective part; any consideration of moral culpability or financial redress is very much a subjective issue. It's a case of us all of having an opinion and expressing it.
Personally, I do agree with the consensus now emerging that both State and Church have been found wanting in the discharge of their legal and moral obligations. The most common form of redress is financial restitution of some sort. Therefore, I say both Church and State are morally bound to make restitution. At the moment, the obligation to do so is a moral one.
Perhaps it will also become a legal one if a court of the land should find this to be the case.
I think the State failed in both its legal and moral duties in failing to adequately supervise the running of the religious institutions. I think  our present Taoiseach (or Chief in Roger-speak) was in no way involved in the perpetration of this scandal but as he willingly undertook the duties and responsibilities that go with his office, he and his administration must shoulder the State's share of the blame.
Yes; I do accept that restitution should be made on behalf of all citizens of this state even though most of us were not around when much of the wrong doing took place.
We, the citizens of the Republic accept the rights and privileges that come with our citizenship so we also have to bear responsibility for the actions carried out on the state's behalf, both past and present.
That includes my atheist buddy who moved his family back from England around ten years ago. It's part of the baggage that comes with becoming an Irish citizen.
I've no problem with the State having to pony up.
The Church, through its religious congregations, assumed responsibility for the care and supervision of the children committed by the State into its collective care.
My parish priest is as sound a skin as you could meet; I would say he never willfully harmed a child and I would back the family silver on my assertion.

However, both he and I are both members of the Catholic Church. We find ourselves there by choice. We are consenting adults and both accept the responsibilities that come with membership. I feel my church is obliged to make financial redress as it is the only practical way to make reparation and I am a member of this Church..
My non-Catholic buddy should not be obliged to pay up in this way. Even if I decided to leave the Church after hearing of this scandal, I would still be obliged to accept my moral responsibilities as I was a member when the commission reported.
One final point; many of us confuse the Church with the Hierarchy. All Irish Catholics are bound to acknowledge our collective failings as we have inherited them from previous generations.
It's a case of "If you are in, you accept the bad with the good," and Irish Catholics are so by choice.
Anyway, EG, that's a fine post and it gets "nihil obstat " from me and my  Imprimatur as well but resist the temptation to wander off-topic, won't you?  ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 02:14:42 PM
I know it's only a straw poll and only 59 people have voted -


But does anyone want to comment on the outcome of the poll so far ???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 02:21:40 PM
Quote from: nifan on May 28, 2009, 02:08:52 PM
QuoteIf you want to use that approach, sure why not get the Church to bail out the banks or the eVoting machines or any other balls up made by FF and FG over the last 80 years?

If it could be shown that church personnel caused and covered up the banking collapse you might be onto something.

It's not me that's onto it nifan, it's myles - he wants the Church to pick up the bills of the State.

At the end of the day these industrial schools were the young offender centres of their day. If I'm abused while in an offenders centre, my claim for compensation won't be against the Prison Officers Federation but against the individual and the State in who's care I had been placed. Do you think it would be appropriate for the Prison Officers Federation to meet my compensation costs?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 02:22:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 02:14:42 PM
I know it's only a straw poll and only 59 people have voted -


But does anyone want to comment on the outcome of the poll so far ???

I haven't vote, so can't see the result. What is it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 02:29:16 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:46:34 AM
Jim in this case the State knew that the abuse was happening for decades and did nothing while the abuse continued. So for the State to start crying about it now is like the Church going after the descendants of Guglielmo because he f**ked up the Leaning Tower of Pisa. The Church has already agreed to hand over £100 million which is the right thing to do, just as it was correct for Volkswagen to do something similar for the Jews but there are people who will not be happy until they see the Church stripped of everything. The Church has conceded the principal and the cash so now there is nothing to be gained by further punishing modern Catholics for the sins of the past.

Donagh,

There may have been a time that the state knew what was going on but in recent times the church (or elements) within have been very evasive in their dealings with the state.  Either that or the Ryan and Fern reports are very very misleading.

Not everybody (victims in particular) would acknowledge that the church have conceeded the principle.  

Do you think that Cardinal Brady or Diarmuid Martin will not be "happy until they see the Church stripped of everything"?  Because they are unequivocal in their view of what the relevant orders should do.

I think you are correct in a sense that there is a swell of opinion against the worst offenders like the Christian Brothers but I think you'll find that this is because of recent behaviour as much as sins of the past.

I personally would be happy with the following:

1.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by the Brady and the Pope ackowledging the events and the churchs culpability.  I would like them to have some victims groups (1 in 4 etc.)  review the wording to avoid usage of terms such as "occasional lapses" etc.. to describe abuse.

2.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by Taosisech Cowen and President McAleese.  It should also be reviewed as above.

3.  Removal of church management (of any denomination) of state-run institutions.  

4.  An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.

5.  An audit of assets of religious orders named in Ryan report to determined their ability to pay compensation and set request compensation accordingly.  Legislation if necessary.

6. A criminal investiagation into the results of the Ryan report to prosecute sex offenders and those that aided them (within and without church).

7. If necessary a legal reform or constitional referendum on article 44 regarding rights of religious orders and property ensuring that the practice of placing property in trust is not abused to avoid compensation payments.

I don't any of the above will run the church into the ground.  In fact I suspect it would help grow their future numbers.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 02:45:46 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 02:22:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 02:14:42 PM
I know it's only a straw poll and only 59 people have voted -


But does anyone want to comment on the outcome of the poll so far ???

I haven't vote, so can't see the result. What is it?

10% say state should pay the most
40% say the Church should pay the most
50% say a 50/50 split between Church and State.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 28, 2009, 02:51:43 PM
There is too much being made of the money thing... getting these sadists/paedophiles into prison should be priority. The money debate is becoming a diversion.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 28, 2009, 02:53:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 02:29:16 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:46:34 AM
Jim in this case the State knew that the abuse was happening for decades and did nothing while the abuse continued. So for the State to start crying about it now is like the Church going after the descendants of Guglielmo because he f**ked up the Leaning Tower of Pisa. The Church has already agreed to hand over £100 million which is the right thing to do, just as it was correct for Volkswagen to do something similar for the Jews but there are people who will not be happy until they see the Church stripped of everything. The Church has conceded the principal and the cash so now there is nothing to be gained by further punishing modern Catholics for the sins of the past.

Donagh,

There may have been a time that the state knew what was going on but in recent times the church (or elements) within have been very evasive in their dealings with the state.  Either that or the Ryan and Fern reports are very very misleading.

Not everybody (victims in particular) would acknowledge that the church have conceeded the principle.  

Do you think that Cardinal Brady or Diarmuid Martin will not be "happy until they see the Church stripped of everything"?  Because they are unequivocal in their view of what the relevant orders should do.

I think you are correct in a sense that there is a swell of opinion against the worst offenders like the Christian Brothers but I think you'll find that this is because of recent behaviour as much as sins of the past.

I personally would be happy with the following:

1.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by the Brady and the Pope ackowledging the events and the churchs culpability.  I would like them to have some victims groups (1 in 4 etc.)  review the wording to avoid usage of terms such as "occasional lapses" etc.. to describe abuse.

2.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by Taosisech Cowen and President McAleese.  It should also be reviewed as above.

3.  Removal of church management (of any denomination) of state-run institutions.  

4.  An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.

5.  An audit of assets of religious orders named in Ryan report to determined their ability to pay compensation and set request compensation accordingly.  Legislation if necessary.

6. A criminal investiagation into the results of the Ryan report to prosecute sex offenders and those that aided them (within and without church).

7. If necessary a legal reform or constitional referendum on article 44 regarding rights of religious orders and property ensuring that the practice of placing property in trust is not abused to avoid compensation payments.

I don't any of the above will run the church into the ground.  In fact I suspect it would help grow their future numbers.

Good work Jim.  At last  - the start of something constructive.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on May 28, 2009, 03:04:16 PM
Why Iceman? Is putting them in jail not constructive. In the film Sleepers the best part was the evil doers getting their just reward.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on May 28, 2009, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 28, 2009, 02:12:45 PM


Good to see you back again, EG. I'm sure you are not trying to provoke Donagh or anything as base as that. (You're not, are you?)
I do agree with your line of reasoning here. I've no problem with that. (Well, maybe that agreement doesn't extend to the last paragraph. I think that could be a matter of unfinished business with Donagh.)
However, I would suggest that all of us should bear in mind the terms of reference given to the commission and the conclusions it arrived at.; that's the objective part; any consideration of moral culpability or financial redress is very much a subjective issue. It's a case of us all of having an opinion and expressing it.
Personally, I do agree with the consensus now emerging that both State and Church have been found wanting in the discharge of their legal and moral obligations. The most common form of redress is financial restitution of some sort. Therefore, I say both Church and State are morally bound to make restitution. At the moment, the obligation to do so is a moral one.
Perhaps it will also become a legal one if a court of the land should find this to be the case.
I think the State failed in both its legal and moral duties in failing to adequately supervise the running of the religious institutions. I think  our present Taoiseach (or Chief in Roger-speak) was in no way involved in the perpetration of this scandal but as he willingly undertook the duties and responsibilities that go with his office, he and his administration must shoulder the State's share of the blame.
Yes; I do accept that restitution should be made on behalf of all citizens of this state even though most of us were not around when much of the wrong doing took place.
We, the citizens of the Republic accept the rights and privileges that come with our citizenship so we also have to bear responsibility for the actions carried out on the state's behalf, both past and present.
That includes my atheist buddy who moved his family back from England around ten years ago. It's part of the baggage that comes with becoming an Irish citizen.
I've no problem with the State having to pony up.
The Church, through its religious congregations, assumed responsibility for the care and supervision of the children committed by the State into its collective care.
My parish priest is as sound a skin as you could meet; I would say he never willfully harmed a child and I would back the family silver on my assertion.

However, both he and I are both members of the Catholic Church. We find ourselves there by choice. We are consenting adults and both accept the responsibilities that come with membership. I feel my church is obliged to make financial redress as it is the only practical way to make reparation and I am a member of this Church..
My non-Catholic buddy should not be obliged to pay up in this way. Even if I decided to leave the Church after hearing of this scandal, I would still be obliged to accept my moral responsibilities as I was a member when the commission reported.
One final point; many of us confuse the Church with the Hierarchy. All Irish Catholics are bound to acknowledge our collective failings as we have inherited them from previous generations.
It's a case of "If you are in, you accept the bad with the good," and Irish Catholics are so by choice.
Anyway, EG, that's a fine post and it gets "nihil obstat " from me and my  Imprimatur as well but resist the temptation to wander off-topic, won't you?  ;D

Not trying to provoke, nor is it because it is Donagh - my view would be the same regardless of who it was was expressing such opinions.

As regards the rest, considering there appears to be a broad consensus in the Republic over the gravity and extent of the scandal etc, I'm genuinely astonished that those responsible haven't even been identified, never mind lost their jobs, never mind been prosecuted etc.

Compare that with the relatively much more trivial (imo) subject of MP's expenses in the UK. Such has been the public anger that 10 MP's (so far) have been disciplined or stood down, with possibly many more to follow. Moreover, this has caused the Speaker to be (effectively) sacked, for the first time in 300 years, with potentially far-reaching Constitutional reform liable to follow. And despite this being something which affects all parties, it is entirely possible that this will be the final nail in Labour's hopes of forming the next Government.

Now as a UK Taxpayer, I am as angry as anyone at the thought of my hard-earned going towards eg some Toff's Moat, or some so-called Socialist's "second home" 120 miles from either her Constituency or from Parliament. But that is as nothing compared with what I would feel if my taxes were going towards mitigating the moral and legal obligations of an organisation which condoned and covered-up some of the most vile and endemic abuse of its kind witnessed anywhere in the developed world, whilst all the time the actual perpetrators appear to have received some sort of immunity from prosecution.

In fact if anything, that final aspect (immunity) is even more shocking to me than the actual abuse itself  :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 28, 2009, 03:14:39 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on May 28, 2009, 03:04:16 PM
Why Iceman? Is putting them in jail not constructive. In the film Sleepers the best part was the evil doers getting their just reward.
Putting them in jail is one of many suggestions bundled in with a lot of other whimsical ideas that are all talk and no sense.
I don't agree with everything Jim has suggested but at least he is being sensible and realistic about the whole thing.  It's a refreshing change from the mass chant of "Barabbas"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 02:29:16 PM
Donagh,

There may have been a time that the state knew what was going on but in recent times the church (or elements) within have been very evasive in their dealings with the state.  Either that or the Ryan and Fern reports are very very misleading.

Not everybody (victims in particular) would acknowledge that the church have conceeded the principle.  

Do you think that Cardinal Brady or Diarmuid Martin will not be "happy until they see the Church stripped of everything"?  Because they are unequivocal in their view of what the relevant orders should do.

I think you are correct in a sense that there is a swell of opinion against the worst offenders like the Christian Brothers but I think you'll find that this is because of recent behaviour as much as sins of the past.

I personally would be happy with the following:

1.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by the Brady and the Pope ackowledging the events and the churchs culpability.  I would like them to have some victims groups (1 in 4 etc.)  review the wording to avoid usage of terms such as "occasional lapses" etc.. to describe abuse.

2.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by Taosisech Cowen and President McAleese.  It should also be reviewed as above.

3.  Removal of church management (of any denomination) of state-run institutions.  

4.  An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.

5.  An audit of assets of religious orders named in Ryan report to determined their ability to pay compensation and set request compensation accordingly.  Legislation if necessary.

6. A criminal investiagation into the results of the Ryan report to prosecute sex offenders and those that aided them (within and without church).

7. If necessary a legal reform or constitional referendum on article 44 regarding rights of religious orders and property ensuring that the practice of placing property in trust is not abused to avoid compensation payments.

I don't any of the above will run the church into the ground.  In fact I suspect it would help grow their future numbers.



Jim it seems that you are actually one of the few on this thread who understands that I am not absolving the religious orders of any responsibility so I find it difficult to object to anything you suggest there. I would expect that in light of your Point 5, you would also have no objection if the £100 million promised under the original deal was subsequently reduced?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 04:18:28 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 02:29:16 PM
Donagh,

There may have been a time that the state knew what was going on but in recent times the church (or elements) within have been very evasive in their dealings with the state.  Either that or the Ryan and Fern reports are very very misleading.

Not everybody (victims in particular) would acknowledge that the church have conceeded the principle.  

Do you think that Cardinal Brady or Diarmuid Martin will not be "happy until they see the Church stripped of everything"?  Because they are unequivocal in their view of what the relevant orders should do.

I think you are correct in a sense that there is a swell of opinion against the worst offenders like the Christian Brothers but I think you'll find that this is because of recent behaviour as much as sins of the past.

I personally would be happy with the following:

1.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by the Brady and the Pope ackowledging the events and the churchs culpability.  I would like them to have some victims groups (1 in 4 etc.)  review the wording to avoid usage of terms such as "occasional lapses" etc.. to describe abuse.

2.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by Taosisech Cowen and President McAleese.  It should also be reviewed as above.

3.  Removal of church management (of any denomination) of state-run institutions.  

4.  An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.

5.  An audit of assets of religious orders named in Ryan report to determined their ability to pay compensation and set request compensation accordingly.  Legislation if necessary.

6. A criminal investiagation into the results of the Ryan report to prosecute sex offenders and those that aided them (within and without church).

7. If necessary a legal reform or constitional referendum on article 44 regarding rights of religious orders and property ensuring that the practice of placing property in trust is not abused to avoid compensation payments.

I don't any of the above will run the church into the ground.  In fact I suspect it would help grow their future numbers.



Jim it seems that you are actually one of the few on this thread who understands that I am not absolving the religious orders of any responsibility so I find it difficult to object to anything you suggest there. I would expect that in light of your Point 5, you would also have no objection if the £100 million promised under the original deal was subsequently reduced?

Donagh,

If that is how it turned out based on an open and fair audit and process I would have no objecton, assuming other points were delivered.

If the other points, most particularly 1 and 4 are not delivered I would be in favour of going after the church for everything, regardless of consequences for them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 04:28:47 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 28, 2009, 02:00:04 PM
A lot of people will not be satisfied until the Church is completely brought down.  For some people I can imagine (and please read the word "some" ) that this isn't about justice - this about bringing down the Church.
But aside from that let's not get away from the issue at hand.

So everyone agrees that the Church is to blame.  Some people agree that the State has to share a portion of that blame but this does not take anything away from the responsibility of the Church to atone for it's past sins.
The Church has agreed to pay out EUR 100million to the victims.  The State have yet to pledge anything.

When will people be satisfied?  When can we look forward and move on from this and make sure it never happens again?
When get we let the victims get on with the rest of their lives?

Present reasonable demands from the Church.  Present reasonable, intelligent suggestions.
Doing otherwise would suggest that you have no interest in justice for the victims but only to bash the Church and bring it down however possible.

Thats bullshit and you know it. The state is paying for everything over and above 100 million promised by the Church Orders. The current estimate on the end bill is 1 billion. That means the Orders who inflicted the abuse, covered it up and obstructed the enquiry are deemed 10% liable and the tax payer 90%. I can concede the state are without fault but if it was up to me those percentages would be reversed. However, a 50:50 arrangement would be a big improvement.

When will people be satisfied and move on? Oh I'm sure the victims are awful sorry for holding things up! I think what they want is justice. Genuine apologies and acceptance of the truth. Do a google and read some of their statements and you'll see what they want. To the best of my knowledge (I could be wrong) neither you or Donagh have made any comment on the fact that the modern church has obstructed the investigation and fought every allegation brought against it tooth and nail. That is why the mealy mouthed apologies mean nothing when accompanied by the language of dilution, which is what we get with every apology.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 28, 2009, 04:30:36 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 28, 2009, 02:00:04 PM
A lot of people will not be satisfied until the Church is completely brought down.  For some people I can imagine (and please read the word "some" ) that this isn't about justice - this about bringing down the Church.
But aside from that let's not get away from the issue at hand.

So everyone agrees that the Church is to blame.  Some people agree that the State has to share a portion of that blame but this does not take anything away from the responsibility of the Church to atone for it's past sins.
The Church has agreed to pay out EUR 100million to the victims.  The State have yet to pledge anything.

When will people be satisfied?  When can we look forward and move on from this and make sure it never happens again?
When get we let the victims get on with the rest of their lives?

Present reasonable demands from the Church.  Present reasonable, intelligent suggestions.
Doing otherwise would suggest that you have no interest in justice for the victims but only to bash the Church and bring it down however possible.

That is not correct. The Church's EUR100million was agreed as 10% of the total. The State has agreed to pay the rest. 90%. That is why people are annoyed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 04:31:56 PM
Out of curiosity can anyone tell me who was the 90 year old brought from Rome as referred to by the gentleman on Questions and Answers on Monday night, who said that the victim were telling lies ?????
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 04:50:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 04:18:28 PM

If the other points, most particularly 1 and 4 are not delivered I would be in favour of going after the church for everything, regardless of consequences for them.


Even if that means the closure of essential services? I'm thinking in particular here of Sister Consilios in Newry which is the only emergency admittance drug and alcohol treatment centre in the north.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 28, 2009, 04:57:22 PM
QuoteNot trying to provoke, nor is it because it is Donagh - my view would be the same regardless of who it was was expressing such opinions
.

My apologies; I accept what you say. Maybe I wasn't being totally serious here.

QuoteAs regards the rest, considering there appears to be a broad consensus in the Republic over the gravity and extent of the scandal etc, I'm genuinely astonished that those responsible haven't even been identified, never mind lost their jobs, never mind been prosecuted etc.

It is important for us all to realise that this was a commission of inquiry and not a criminal investigation. Indications are that the DPP's office is studying the findings of the report and prosecutions may very well follow.


QuoteIn fact if anything, that final aspect (immunity) is even more shocking to me than the actual abuse itself 

I do not think immunity has been guaranteed to any specific individual or organisation. Indeed, it could well be that persons not referred to in this report (lay teachers and department inspectors for instance) could find themselves facing criminal charges.
This has not been explicitly stated but it could arise from any follow up investigations by the gardai.

Quote4. An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.
I think Jim's point must be followed up. In the past various church authorities tried to hide behind Canon Law when asked to release evidence to the gardai.
The former archbishop of Dublin, O'Connell, said at one stage that he was bound by the dictates of Canon Law when he refused to co-operate with an inquiry. (The Ferns one I think.) To this, the then Minister for Justice (Michael McDowell) retorted that Canon Law had as much legal standing as the rules of a golf club would have on its members.
Fair dues to him; Rome must acknowledge that the law of the land takes precedence and that its internal rules apply only to its own members.

QuoteI would expect that in light of your Point 5, you would also have no objection if the £100 million promised under the original deal was subsequently reduced?

I can only speak for myself. If a court of law found this to be the case, I would abide by its verdict.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 04:59:31 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 04:50:57 PM
Even if that means the closure of essential services? I'm thinking in particular here of Sister Consilios in Newry which is the only emergency admittance drug and alcohol treatment centre in the north.

If they cannot unreservedly apologise and remove the rules/canon laws/policy that contributed to covering up what happened, then unfortunately could happen.  That said I doubt it would.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 05:04:41 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 04:28:47 PM
Thats bullshit and you know it. The state is paying for everything over and above 100 million promised by the Church Orders. The current estimate on the end bill is 1 billion. That means the Orders who inflicted the abuse, covered it up and obstructed the enquiry are deemed 10% liable and the tax payer 90%. I can concede the state are without fault but if it was up to me those percentages would be reversed. However, a 50:50 arrangement would be a big improvement.

Myles you still haven't put a case as to why those figures should be reversed. It wasn't the Church that carried out the abuse but individuals who were members of the Church. Do you hold the Prison Officers Federation responsible for abuse of prisoners locked up at the moment? The victims were placed in the abusive environment by the State in full knowledge they would be abused. The citizens of this country kept putting the same corrupt bastards into power knowing they would do nothing. In such instances, the buck stops with the State, the people who run the State and ultimately the fools that put them there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 05:09:24 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 05:04:41 PM
Myles you still haven't put a case as to why those figures should be reversed. It wasn't the Church that carried out the abuse but individuals who were members of the Church. Do you hold the Prison Officers Federation responsible for abuse of prisoners locked up at the moment?

Donagh,

The Prison Officers Federation is a representative group, the catholic church is far more than that.  The day the vatican issued a dictat that abuse was not to be reported to civil authorities (with a punishment of excommunication) then the church as a body took on a role much greater than representation.   With that role came responsibility and liability.  This responsiblity was not foisted upon them, they took it of their own volition and need to face up to that.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 05:12:58 PM
Better late than never !!!!!


Evidence of abuse sought by gardaí
  Thursday, 28 May 2009 16:58
The Government is encouraging anyone who has information about child abuse in Catholic institutions to come forward to gardaí.

Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern stressed that the more evidence provided, the greater the chances of securing convictions.

However, he acknowledged that there would be difficulties in proving offences from a long time ago.

AdvertisementHe said witnesses could come forward in complete confidence and should contact the office of the Garda Assistant Commissioner appointed to examine the Ryan Report.

A special garda phone number has also been set up: 01-6663612.

The Dáil has unanimously passed an all-party motion calling on the Congregations to make further substantial contributions by way of reparation to the victims of institutional abuse.

It called on the congregations to make further substantial contributions, including to a trust set up and managed by the State for the support of victims and to other education and welfare purposes.

The motion also apologises to the victims of abuse for the failure to intervene, and says support for them must be the priority for all concerned.

A full two-day debate on the Report of the Commission on Child Abuse will be held when the Dáil returns after next week's local and European elections.

Minister for Health Mary Harney, who was taking the Order of Business for the Government, told the Dáil she did not want to pre-empt the outcome of discussions with the congregations.

However she added that the Taoiseach would be taking a 'robust' approach in those talks.

Meanwhile, Labour's Joan Burton has called on the Government to verify if the Ryan Commission was planning to destroy documents it gathered in its compilation of the report on institutional abuse.

She said such an outcome would be an appalling insult to the victims of abuse.

McAleese backs abuse prosecutions

President Mary McAleese believes people should face prosecutions as a result of the Ryan Report into child abuse.

Mrs McAleese was speaking in Boston on the final leg of an official visit to the US state of Massachusetts. She has been meeting Irish communities and promoting Irish industry and tourism.

Her visit also coincided with a considerable amount of publicity in US media on the fall-out from the Ryan Report.

In an interview with RTÉ News, the President said the report showed a catalogue of criminal offences, and that people who committed these awful crimes against innocent children should face prosecution.

Prosecution might not bring closure, but it would bring justice, she added.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 05:23:33 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 05:09:24 PM
The Prison Officers Federation is a representative group, the catholic church is far more than that.  The day the vatican issued a dictat that abuse was not to be reported to civil authorities (with a punishment of excommunication) then the church as a body took on a role much greater than representation.   With that role came responsibility and liability.  This responsiblity was not foisted upon them, they took it of their own volition and need to face up to that.

Jim the Vatican didn't issue any such dictat and even if it had it would make any difference. Those responsible for the abuse and cover-up are still bound by the laws of the State and should be prosecuted accordingly. The State failed in it's duty of care to it's most vulnerable citizens and should also have to answer for that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 05:50:24 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 05:23:33 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 05:09:24 PM
The Prison Officers Federation is a representative group, the catholic church is far more than that.  The day the vatican issued a dictat that abuse was not to be reported to civil authorities (with a punishment of excommunication) then the church as a body took on a role much greater than representation.   With that role came responsibility and liability.  This responsiblity was not foisted upon them, they took it of their own volition and need to face up to that.

Jim the Vatican didn't issue any such dictat and even if it had it would make any difference. Those responsible for the abuse and cover-up are still bound by the laws of the State and should be prosecuted accordingly. The State failed in it's duty of care to it's most vulnerable citizens and should also have to answer for that.

Donagh,

The Ferns inquiry stated taht the document "Crimens Sollicitationis" from Pope John XXIII "specifically  dealt with how priests who abused children were to be handled and imposed a high degree of secrecy on all Church officials involved in such case".   "Automatic excomunication should be imposed on any person breaking the oath of secrecy".  I don't know anymore only that is what the inquiry stated.

The day that document was published was the day they took responsibility.  I can't agree that this makes no difference.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 07:46:12 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 05:50:24 PM
The Ferns inquiry stated taht the document "Crimens Sollicitationis" from Pope John XXIII "specifically  dealt with how priests who abused children were to be handled and imposed a high degree of secrecy on all Church officials involved in such case".   "Automatic excomunication should be imposed on any person breaking the oath of secrecy".  I don't know anymore only that is what the inquiry stated.

The day that document was published was the day they took responsibility.  I can't agree that this makes no difference.


Where does it say that they shouldn't be reported to the civil authorities?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 28, 2009, 08:34:53 PM
Its a reasonable assumption Donagh, and is open to that interpretation, intended or not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 09:09:57 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 28, 2009, 08:34:53 PM
Its a reasonable assumption Donagh, and is open to that interpretation, intended or not.

I was curious about the John XXIII reference so I Wikied there to see what it is all about and this is what I found:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimen_sollicitationis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimen_sollicitationis)

That document relates to solicitations by a priest during Confession. I think Jim is being a little disingenuous throwing that one into the mix. My Latin isn't the best so I can't comment directly on the source but here is a comment from Wiki:

The document dealt exclusively with the procedure to be followed in connection with a denunciation to the ecclesiastical authority of a priest guilty of solicitation in Confession or of similar acts. It imposed secrecy about the conduct of the ecclesiastical trial, not allowing, for instance, statements made during the trial by witnesses or by the accused to be published. But it did not in any way impose silence on those who were victims of the priest's conduct or who had learned of it in ways unconnected with the ecclesiastical trial.

"These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities."
-- Archbishop Joseph Fiorenza
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 10:01:41 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 05:04:41 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 28, 2009, 04:28:47 PM
Thats bullshit and you know it. The state is paying for everything over and above 100 million promised by the Church Orders. The current estimate on the end bill is 1 billion. That means the Orders who inflicted the abuse, covered it up and obstructed the enquiry are deemed 10% liable and the tax payer 90%. I can concede the state are without fault but if it was up to me those percentages would be reversed. However, a 50:50 arrangement would be a big improvement.

Myles you still haven't put a case as to why those figures should be reversed. It wasn't the Church that carried out the abuse but individuals who were members of the Church. Do you hold the Prison Officers Federation responsible for abuse of prisoners locked up at the moment? The victims were placed in the abusive environment by the State in full knowledge they would be abused. The citizens of this country kept putting the same corrupt b**tards into power knowing they would do nothing. In such instances, the buck stops with the State, the people who run the State and ultimately the fools that put them there.

Plenty of people have made the case already with a range of reason but if you want mine on top of that then fine. The church ran the institutions. The churches representatives raped, abused tortured children from the ages of FOUR to 18. The report says that this abuse was Endemic and systematic. That means there was not the couple of bad apples and that the whole system was set up to brutalise. I already relayed a story from the report how a christian brother who was not violent when he started in the school was forced to be violent by his colleagues. When he finally turned violent he was greeted with a round of applause by all his fellow "teachers". The state did not rape, abuse or torture children. Any child that tried to report what was happening got the shite kicked out of them. Any allegations made were buried and sent to the VATICAN for hiding. All efforts over the years to get to the truth have been met with absolute defence by the churches representative who increased the hurt to victims by insinuating they were liars and in it for the money. Right up until this report was put out the church has resisted and obstructed the investigation - the state did not.

Now your case is that the government is responsible as they placed the kids into these institutions. That ignores the times that were in it back then. The church was more powerful than the state. People were afraid of the church, afraid they'd be refused communion. People who fell out with the church were banished and were pariahs in society. TD's and ministers were no different, the church had a stranglehold on the state. These schools were set up by the church to "correct" young fallen people. There are plenty of stories in the report of courts being "instructed" by the church on what sentances to give kids. 2 years for stealing a bike I read yesterday in one of the papers, the judge wanted to give 6 months but the church said they would not take him in unless it was for two years. The judge gave in. That was the power they yielded. That was the power they abused - just like the FF politicans of today that you are always (righfully) pulling up on their corruption.

Some of the institutions were full of fallen girls who committed the crime of becoming pregant out of marriage. Some were full of orphans. None of these were sent to  these places by the state. They were sent by the priests of the country. Fallen girls were hounded out of parishes by priests who threatened the fires of hell on their families. I have a friend who was adopted. He told me how he met his mother for the first time when he turned 30 yrs old, she was forced to give him up to an orphanage by her family due to pressure from a priest.

The church had it filthy claws all over Irish society. In its government and in its institutions. It is absolutley vastly in the wrong here as is the state to a much lesser degree.

I am no friend of  the church. I am a republican and the church have been no friend of republicanism for 100's of years. I believe they have too much power in this country. I believe a church should be concerned with spirituality and nothing more in a state. I believe the church has absolutley no place in a primary school to warp the mind of the most vunerable in society. So quite frankly I don't give too shits where they get the money to fork up for what they owe - thats their problem (just like it would be mine if I was liable for damages against someone).

The state is not without blame but today the state is taking 90% of it which we, taxpayers in the south must now pay for. The church should be taking the majority
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:01:14 PM
"Whoever done the work, it was done in the name of the State."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:30:32 PM
Myles I've a number of issues with you post. Firstly the Church did not run the industrial schools, but individual members of the Church ran them on behalf of the State. Those people may have been representatives of their Orders but in their role as teachers and warders, they were primarily representatives of the State.

I haven't denied the abuse was systemic.

Your claim about allegations being sent to the Vatican for hiding needs to be substantiated in that it's almost DaVinci Codesque in terms of the conspiracy theory it conjures. What makes you think that the Church had total control over all complaints that came in? Did the government inspectorates report directly to the Vatican?

You say the Church was more powerful than the State. If that was so then the State was again failing in it's duties.

You say the priests took children away from their mothers. If that was so then it was illegal. If it was allowed then again the State was failing in it's constitutional obligations in terms of caring for it's citizens.

Now, I guess I'm going to have to put a disclaimer in here. I am in no way defending the actions of the people involved in the abuse nor am I defending the privileged position the Church had in Irish society. I believe the state that was established in the south and DeValeras 'Republic' to be a betrayal of everything that was fought for during the War of Independence but it was the politicians of FF and FG that betrayed the republican ideal and the Irish people by putting the Church in that privileged position. The Church should not and should never have any say in the affairs of State. That is not to say that it doesn't have a role in society looking after it's own.  

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 28, 2009, 11:35:42 PM
Remember the way the Bishop used to throw the ball up for the start of the All ireland finals and the captains had to kiss his ring before the match ???


What the f--k was all that about ??????????
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 29, 2009, 12:02:23 AM
Have to agree with Donagh, the people elected politicians to uphold and defend the state and its citizens. That those politicians clearly failed, has now been firmly established. Though it has to be said that the few brave politicians who stood up to the Bishops eg. Peader o Donnell and Noel Browne, received little support from the public at large and in many cases were vilified. There are no clean hands here, and lots of blame to go around. Much has been made of the cultural norms of the times, it would therefore be interesting to know did a similar state of affairs exist in any other catholic country, or was it just part of an Irish psyche
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 29, 2009, 08:03:09 AM
QuoteMuch has been made of the cultural norms of the times, it would therefore be interesting to know did a similar state of affairs exist in any other catholic country, or was it just part of an Irish psyche

I've said it in a couple of my contributions to this thread but the republic was the equivalent of what is now known as a fundamentalist Islamic state - Think Afghanistan under the Taliban. Saudi Arabia currently or Iran post 1979 and you get an idea of what it was like in the Republic. The Church was all powerful and as we know "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

QuoteI believe the state that was established in the south and DeValeras 'Republic' to be a betrayal of everything that was fought for during the War of Independence but it was the politicians of FF and FG that betrayed the republican ideal and the Irish people by putting the Church in that privileged position. The Church should not and should never have any say in the affairs of State. That is not to say that it doesn't have a role in society looking after it's own. 

Agree 100%. Interestingly I quote this segment of the proclamation to every politician who comes to my door looking for a vote - The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and all of its parts, cherishing all of the children of the nation equally and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.

However remember that God was invoked in the proclamation as well  We place the cause of the Irish Republic under the protection of the Most High God. Whose blessing we invoke upon our arms, and we pray that no one who serves that cause will dishonour it by cowardice, inhumanity, or rapine
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 29, 2009, 08:06:59 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 29, 2009, 12:02:23 AM
Have to agree with Donagh, the people elected politicians to uphold and defend the state and its citizens. That those politicians clearly failed, has now been firmly established. Though it has to be said that the few brave politicians who stood up to the Bishops eg. Peader o Donnell and Noel Browne, received little support from the public at large and in many cases were vilified. There are no clean hands here, and lots of blame to go around. Much has been made of the cultural norms of the times, it would therefore be interesting to know did a similar state of affairs exist in any other catholic country, or was it just part of an Irish psyche

My point is that the church apply huge pschological pressure on our people and on our politicians in order to have the country run they way they wanted. You can ignore this by blaming the state for allowing it to happen but people were concerned with getting  to heaven back then and absolutlety feared the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 29, 2009, 09:30:33 AM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 09:09:57 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 28, 2009, 08:34:53 PM
Its a reasonable assumption Donagh, and is open to that interpretation, intended or not.

I was curious about the John XXIII reference so I Wikied there to see what it is all about and this is what I found:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimen_sollicitationis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimen_sollicitationis)

That document relates to solicitations by a priest during Confession. I think Jim is being a little disingenuous throwing that one into the mix. My Latin isn't the best so I can't comment directly on the source but here is a comment from Wiki:

The document dealt exclusively with the procedure to be followed in connection with a denunciation to the ecclesiastical authority of a priest guilty of solicitation in Confession or of similar acts. It imposed secrecy about the conduct of the ecclesiastical trial, not allowing, for instance, statements made during the trial by witnesses or by the accused to be published. But it did not in any way impose silence on those who were victims of the priest's conduct or who had learned of it in ways unconnected with the ecclesiastical trial.

"These matters are confidential only to the procedures within the Church, but do not preclude in any way for these matters to be brought to civil authorities for proper legal adjudication. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People of June, 2002, approved by the Vatican, requires that credible allegations of sexual abuse of children be reported to legal authorities."
-- Archbishop Joseph Fiorenza

Donagh,

That is the "headline" part of the document.  The canon lawyer that the Ferns inquiry used pointed out that it is common practice to include other items within.  Child abuse is covered and it is categorically stated it should be kept in-house.  Also this was part of the case Colm O'Gorman took against the church, a case he won.   We also had the case of an arch-bishop saying he didn't "lie" to the inquiry by withholding information because he was just following Canon Law.

Also with regard to "I think Jim is being a little disingenuous throwing that one into the mix".  I didn't put it in the mix.  I quoted the Ferns Report which put it in the mix.  So the author of the Ferns Report might be disingenuous................................

You can't deny that this stuff was kept secret and it has been shown this wasn't by accident.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 29, 2009, 10:04:54 AM
All last week and all this week I've been listening to older people in their 70s and 80s and the very interesting thing is that the Ryan report seems to have lanced a boil. All of a sudden this older generation are starting to talk about what happened back then and whilst it's by no means a revolution, I feel that there is a sense that they are at long last able to talk about it. Talking to a very old maan this morning, he was telling the stroy of a Christian Brother who had a cane and wherever the cane landed, too bad. He was able to recount stories and name individuals abused by these men. I felt that there was a sense of relief that he was now able to share these stories as he said that all along people wouldn't have believed them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 29, 2009, 01:20:03 PM
QuoteThat is the "headline" part of the document.  The canon lawyer that the Ferns inquiry used pointed out that it is common practice to include other items within.  Child abuse is covered and it is categorically stated it should be kept in-house.  Also this was part of the case Colm O'Gorman took against the church, a case he won.   We also had the case of an arch-bishop saying he didn't "lie" to the inquiry by withholding information because he was just following Canon Law.

Also with regard to "I think Jim is being a little disingenuous throwing that one into the mix".  I didn't put it in the mix.  I quoted the Ferns Report which put it in the mix.  So the author of the Ferns Report might be disingenuous................................

You can't deny that this stuff was kept secret and it has been shown this wasn't by accident.

You are spot on there, Jim.
I believe the bishop you are referring to is Desmond Connell, the former archbishop of Dublin. This is the man who quoted Caon Law when he refused to let the police authorities examine the files the church had on child abuse cases in the diocese.
I mentioned earlier that to his credit, Michael McDowell responded by saying Canon Law had no more legal standing that the rules of a golf club had on its members.
Connell was to go on to have a very public and bitter dust up with his incoming successor, the present archbishop, Diarmuid Martin.
This happened about 5 years ago. Does anyone here remember it?
Connell insisted on holding onto the files in his possession but Dr. Martin said he would co-operate fully with requests for disclosure.
We cannot forget the case of John Magee, the bishop of Cloyne either. Last year Magee, was accused by an internal church inquiry of taking minimal action over accusations against two priests. The inquiry was to find his child protection guidelines were both inadequate and downright dangerous.

Fr. Tom Doyle is a frequent contributor to RTE's Morning Ireland radio show and writes in a number of Catholic papers and magazines. Heis a canon lawyer and was a consultant to the Dublin archdiocese's commission on clerical abuse.

What he had to say on the subject of 'Crimen Sollicitationis' can be read here.
http://ncronline.org/node/4530 (http://ncronline.org/node/4530)

His reaction to the recent commission's report can be read here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/08/child-abuse-catholicism-john-magee (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/08/child-abuse-catholicism-john-magee)

For those in a hurry, this is his summing up of the commission's report:


The sadistic world of these institutions is not that of some crazed secular dictatorship. It is not the world of an uncivilized tribal culture that ravaged the weak in ages long past. This report describes a world created and sustained by the Roman Catholic Church. The horrors inflicted on these helpless, trapped children -- rapes, beatings, molestation, starvation, isolation -- all were inflicted by men and women who had vowed themselves to the service of people in the name of Christ's love.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 29, 2009, 01:31:12 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 29, 2009, 01:20:03 PM
QuoteThat is the "headline" part of the document.  The canon lawyer that the Ferns inquiry used pointed out that it is common practice to include other items within.  Child abuse is covered and it is categorically stated it should be kept in-house.  Also this was part of the case Colm O'Gorman took against the church, a case he won.   We also had the case of an arch-bishop saying he didn't "lie" to the inquiry by withholding information because he was just following Canon Law.

Also with regard to "I think Jim is being a little disingenuous throwing that one into the mix".  I didn't put it in the mix.  I quoted the Ferns Report which put it in the mix.  So the author of the Ferns Report might be disingenuous................................

You can't deny that this stuff was kept secret and it has been shown this wasn't by accident.

You are spot on there, Jim.
I believe the bishop you are referring to is Desmond Connell, the former archbishop of Dublin. This is the man who quoted Caon Law when he refused to let the police authorities examine the files the church had on child abuse cases in the diocese.
I mentioned earlier that to his credit, Michael McDowell responded by saying Canon Law had no more legal standing that the rules of a golf club had on its members.
Connell was to go on to have a very public and bitter dust up with his incoming successor, the present archbishop, Diarmuid Martin.
This happened about 5 years ago. Does anyone here remember it?
Connell insisted on holding onto the files in his possession but Dr. Martin said he would co-operate fully with requests for disclosure.
We cannot forget the case of John Magee, the bishop of Cloyne either. Last year Magee, was accused by an internal church inquiry of taking minimal action over accusations against two priests. The inquiry was to find his child protection guidelines were both inadequate and downright dangerous.
Fr. Tom Doyle is a frequent contributor to RTE's Morning Ireland radio show and writes in a number of Catholic papers and magazines. Heis a canon lawyer and was a consultant to the Dublin archdiocese's commission on clerical abuse.

What he had to say on the subject of 'Crimen Sollicitationis' can be read here.
http://ncronline.org/node/4530 (http://ncronline.org/node/4530)

His reaction to the recent commission's report can be read here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/08/child-abuse-catholicism-john-magee (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/08/child-abuse-catholicism-john-magee)

For those in a hurry, this is his summing up of the commission's report:


The sadistic world of these institutions is not that of some crazed secular dictatorship. It is not the world of an uncivilized tribal culture that ravaged the weak in ages long past. This report describes a world created and sustained by the Roman Catholic Church. The horrors inflicted on these helpless, trapped children -- rapes, beatings, molestation, starvation, isolation -- all were inflicted by men and women who had vowed themselves to the service of people in the name of Christ's love.



He still got the backing of Cardinal Brady, the leader of the Catholic church in Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 29, 2009, 01:54:01 PM
Quote from: Donagh on May 28, 2009, 11:30:32 PM
Now, I guess I'm going to have to put a disclaimer in here. I am in no way defending the actions of the people involved in the abuse nor am I defending the privileged position the Church had in Irish society. I believe the state that was established in the south and DeValeras 'Republic' to be a betrayal of everything that was fought for during the War of Independence but it was the politicians of FF and FG that betrayed the republican ideal and the Irish people by putting the Church in that privileged position. The Church should not and should never have any say in the affairs of State. That is not to say that it doesn't have a role in society looking after it's own.  

Great post!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 29, 2009, 02:53:16 PM
Aye, unlike your last one where you told a blatant untruth about the government (ie taxpayer) havnig committed zero to the victim of abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on May 29, 2009, 03:50:45 PM
Ok Donagh, you are adamant that the Church has no legal obligation to pay restitution to the victims of this abuse.  (I disagree by the way).

However, would you not agree that the moral obligation to provide some sort of recompense to victims here is somewhat greater and the ratio of moral wrongdoing here is much greater than 90:10?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 29, 2009, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 29, 2009, 10:04:54 AM
All last week and all this week I've been listening to older people in their 70s and 80s and the very interesting thing is that the Ryan report seems to have lanced a boil. All of a sudden this older generation are starting to talk about what happened back then and whilst it's by no means a revolution, I feel that there is a sense that they are at long last able to talk about it. Talking to a very old maan this morning, he was telling the stroy of a Christian Brother who had a cane and wherever the cane landed, too bad. He was able to recount stories and name individuals abused by these men. I felt that there was a sense of relief that he was now able to share these stories as he said that all along people wouldn't have believed them.
As harrowing as this report is, it does not compare to the impact of a live witness.
Also if you listen to what the abused say, you will not hear any mention of financial compensation.
I am puzzled by the focus in this thread about who is responsible for financial compensation.
One of the big crimes has been the exchange of prosecution for the promise of compensation.
And imo, the squabble about who pays what, is disrespectful to the abused, ignores what the abused are saying.
So far the priorites have been dictated by lawyers hired by the State to prevent prosecution and it has been swallowed hook line and sinker by the population.
There is no legal barrier towards prosecuting those accused. The State were also complicit, no wonder the government don't want that can of worms opened.
If the abusers can not be prosecuted then the the institution itself should be held accountable. The abusers and the particular institution they represented can not be separated from any guilt. Part of the State's responsibility is to ensure that the process is allowed to mature and listen seriously to the abused.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 29, 2009, 05:15:56 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 29, 2009, 02:53:16 PM
Aye, unlike your last one where you told a blatant untruth about the government (ie taxpayer) havnig committed zero to the victim of abuse.
I didn't blatantly tell lies - I made an uninformed comment Myles - hang me from the nearest tree sure.
Man but you are a serious twister.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 30, 2009, 12:50:47 PM
There may be trouble ahead !!!!!!!!

Orders disagree on involving wider Church
Saturday, 30 May 2009 10:18
The 18 Catholic religious congregations criticised by the Child Abuse Commission have said they do not see a role for the broader Irish Church in examining their failures in their duty of care to children.

After meeting yesterday in Dublin, the 18 orders cited by the Commission promised to continue examining its finding that they had failed to listen to children abused in their institutions.

Belfast-based Bishop Noel Treanor said last Sunday that this would require an inter-disciplinary discussion with Catholics and others, and would involve the abused themselves.

AdvertisementSr Elizabeth Maxwell, a spokeswoman for the 18 orders, has told RTÉ News that she did not see how other church bodies here could become involved because the congregations concerned were autonomous.

Meanwhile, the HSE's national counselling service for survivors of abuse has seen its waiting lists more than double over the past seven days.

The service has been extended during what the HSE calls 'this critical time'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:37:57 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 30, 2009, 12:50:47 PM
There may be trouble ahead !!!!!!!!

Meanwhile, the HSE's national counselling service for survivors of abuse has seen its waiting lists more than double over the past seven days.



This is the problem, how many spongers will use this report as an excuse for a nest egg?
I have not heard anyone here tell tales of "good stories" from the religious orders, but I have heard and know numerous (sp) tales from people that say different, they were educated and looked after by religious instituitions and were better for it.

Yeah lets demonise the Catholic Church (suits alot of agendas), the people on here procrastinating about all things Catholic, do you really give a shite or is it just about getting a dig in?


I wonder if the posters on this thread and others, who slag of the church, are doing it for the victims or just for themselves??????
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 31, 2009, 12:09:15 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:37:57 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 30, 2009, 12:50:47 PM
There may be trouble ahead !!!!!!!!

Meanwhile, the HSE's national counselling service for survivors of abuse has seen its waiting lists more than double over the past seven days.



This is the problem, how many spongers will use this report as an excuse for a nest egg?
I have not heard anyone here tell tales of "good stories" from the religious orders, but I have heard and know numerous (sp) tales from people that say different, they were educated and looked after by religious instituitions and were better for it.

Yeah lets demonise the Catholic Church (suits alot of agendas), the people on here procrastinating about all things Catholic, do you really give a shite or is it just about getting a dig in?


I wonder if the posters on this thread and others, who slag of the church, are doing it for the victims or just for themselves??????
I think you are being extremely harsh here, GDA.
Orangeman, back in post # 377 had some very apt observations to pass on. I'm repeating one of them here:
"I feel that there is a sense that they are at long last able to talk about it."
The sense of injustice and hurt the victims must have endured over the decades must have been too great to comprehend. I can well understand the sense of relief they now feel since their sufferings have been acknowledged.
I'd say many are now coming forward because they are now being believed.
Are there spongers getting ready to cash in on other's misfortunes?
Quite possibly there are. It is up to the regulatory bodies to sort out the wheat from the chaff, isn't it?
To prove their eligibility for compensation, applicants will have their cases scrutinised; I don't see a canteen line scenario, with lines of octogenarians lining up in a queue with their hands outstretched for their share of the loot..
Even if a trickle of bogus claims were to get through, that shouldn't detract for the right of genuine claimants to receive what they are deemed to be entitled to.
I haven't heard of one single victim asking for money. All without exception asked for justice and acknowledgement of the wrongs done to them.
Personally, I have no problem whatsoever in denouncing the role of Rome in the whole sordid affair. How could I?
Rome stinks of complicity and tacit acceptance of what went on, the Curia has had files on every allegation made in its keeping. It has kept them secret and tried to hinder external investigation every step of the way. That has been Rome's policy not because it helps the cause of justice but has been followed to preserve the Church's assets.
I do know many clerics; decent, unassuming men who went about their ministries without looking for recognition or reward. They were doing what they accepted was their duty, plain and simple. There is no way in which their good works can be set off against the depredations of their colleagues.
The fact that many youngsters benefited from the education and care they received in religious institutions is not a cause for comment, is it?
They got what the same institutions undertook to provide them with.
I certainly do give a shite, lots of them.
I sincerely wish I did not have any grounds for criticising the actions and motives of the Church. But I have lots of them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on May 31, 2009, 12:26:25 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:37:57 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 30, 2009, 12:50:47 PM
There may be trouble ahead !!!!!!!!

Meanwhile, the HSE's national counselling service for survivors of abuse has seen its waiting lists more than double over the past seven days.



This is the problem, how many spongers will use this report as an excuse for a nest egg?
I have not heard anyone here tell tales of "good stories" from the religious orders, but I have heard and know numerous (sp) tales from people that say different, they were educated and looked after by religious instituitions and were better for it.

Yeah lets demonise the Catholic Church
(suits alot of agendas), the people on here procrastinating about all things Catholic, do you really give a shite or is it just about getting a dig in?


I wonder if the posters on this thread and others, who slag of the church, are doing it for the victims or just for themselves??????

Lets, because they deserve it.

As for "good stories" from religious orders, what relevance has that? Lets hear more good stories so we can forget about the bad ones?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 31, 2009, 09:15:06 PM
Pat Rabbitte has called for CORI to be kicked out of social partnership. I agree with him 100%. I also hear through some poliical commentators that more of the same is on the way when the report on the Dublin diocese is release in the next few months.
GDA - I think your attitude is a disgrace on this. If we were talking about abuse by protestant clergy or some other organisation you wouldn't be talking about their other "good work". Your attempts to suggest that there are "spongers" ready to make claims is also a disgrace. Have you any evidence of this. On the contrary, the poor victims were treated like filth by the churches lawyers when they first went to complain. Treated like criminals by people who now tell us how sorry they are and how they'll do what they can. Your 2nd allegation that we should somehow balance the huge evil endemic systematic abuse of CHILDREN by the "good work" of the church and of course those who don't just hate the church and aren't worth listening to. I put it to you that you are brain washed by the church and are unable to take a step back and look at what has gone on. No sensible person could take the view you have with the evidence that is there. Instead you try and make the evidence fit with what you have always believed. Its like I said before, some people are having a real hard time trying to fathom what this report says. The report is there, out in the open and there is no spinning or diluting what it said happened to little boys and girls.

Did any of ye see the late late on Friday night. Gabriel Byrne was on and made a statement to try and break through the reams of words that are being written on this issue he said "what we are talking about here is the penetration of young boys & girls by priests using spittle and vasaline". That is the shocking brutal truth.

Also, have a read of today (Sundays) Daily mail. It lists estimates of the orders wealth. A conservative estimate puts it at 15 billion euro.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Boy Wonder on June 01, 2009, 12:37:54 AM
It's quite apparent that many strident opponents of the Catholic Church have no interest in listening or trying to appreciate any viewpoint they don't agree with.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on June 01, 2009, 12:50:42 AM
Banana Republic
Septic Isle
Screaming in the suffering sea
It sounds like crying
Everywhere I go
Everywhere I see
The black and blue uniforms
Police and priests

And I wonder do you wonder
While you're sleeping with your whore
That sharing beds with history
Is like a-licking running sores
Forty shades of green yeah
Sixty shades of red
Heroes going cheap these days
Price; a bullet in the head

repeat chorus

Take your hand and lead you
Up a garden path
Let me stand aside here
And watch you pass
Striking up a soldier's song
I know that tune
It begs too many questions
And answers to,

repeat chorus

The purple and the pinstripe
Mutely shake their heads
A silense shrieking volumes
A violence worse than the condemn
Stab you in the back yeah
Laughing in your face
Glad to see the place again
It's a pitty nothing's changed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 01, 2009, 10:05:11 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on June 01, 2009, 12:37:54 AM
It's quite apparent that many strident opponents of the Catholic Church have no interest in listening or trying to appreciate any viewpoint they don't agree with.



Quite.

Lar, I'm not making excuses for the church, just trying to balance the views expressed on here.
I'll state my views on this subject AGAIN. My total sympathy and sorrow goes towards the victims, my total anger, resentment and hatred goes towards the perpetrators of these heinous crimes and I believe that they should face the full rigors of the law.
My spongers comment is meant to waken people to the very real possibility of the scandel being abused by unscruplious people (human nature).
Because my views may differ slightly from others I'm "brain washed" or talking rubbish - yeah great arguement!  ::)

Myles your constant permarage on this subject is becoming tired.
What happened was WRONG and thankfully has been exposed AND people are now trying to find resolution to the situation, lets let them get on with it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 01, 2009, 11:27:09 AM
15 billion euro ??


That could save the state from bankruptcy.



I think most people are looking on with interest into the police investigations and whether charges will follow. Jail terms for the perpetrators will help a lot without any other money changing hands.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on June 01, 2009, 12:41:20 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 01, 2009, 10:05:11 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on June 01, 2009, 12:37:54 AM
It's quite apparent that many strident opponents of the Catholic Church have no interest in listening or trying to appreciate any viewpoint they don't agree with.



Quite.

Lar, I'm not making excuses for the church, just trying to balance the views expressed on here.
I'll state my views on this subject AGAIN. My total sympathy and sorrow goes towards the victims, my total anger, resentment and hatred goes towards the perpetrators of these heinous crimes and I believe that they should face the full rigors of the law.
My spongers comment is meant to waken people to the very real possibility of the scandel being abused by unscruplious people (human nature).
Because my views may differ slightly from others I'm "brain washed" or talking rubbish - yeah great arguement!  ::)

Myles your constant permarage on this subject is becoming tired.
What happened was WRONG and thankfully has been exposed AND people are now trying to find resolution to the situation, lets let them get on with it.
No problem whatsoever, GDA.
You are one of the more balanced posters on the board and I don't recall ever finding myself in total disagreement with you on any subject.
You may have noticed that I said you were being a bit harsh, not totally wrong or peddling bullsugar or anything like that.
At the present time, people on all sides are reacting with shock more than reason.
I don' think anyone is suggesting that what went on was not totally wrong and completely unacceptable in any civilised society but some will feel that it should not be a case of throwing out the baby with the bath water. Maybe when emotions settle down somewhat, a more reasoned consensus will emerge.
I think orangeman is right in thinking that people will start concentrating on the probable police investigations that will follow. I do think that reason should prevail and that the law must be allowed to run its course.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 12:55:18 PM
When the anger and attention comes off all this the heads of the Catholic Church  will be back pontificating and trying to tell us how to live or lives. A friend of mine often said when these stories broke and the church was under pressure, 'Keep your foot on their neck.' Wise words as far the most part with their leaders are only sorry to be exposed again. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on June 01, 2009, 01:05:28 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 12:55:18 PM
When the anger and attention comes off all this the heads of the Catholic Church  will be back pontificating and trying to tell us how to live or lives.
If you are not a Catholic, why let the teachings of the Catholic Church bother you about how you lead your personal life?



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 02:40:28 PM
Quote from: Main Street on June 01, 2009, 01:05:28 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 12:55:18 PM
When the anger and attention comes off all this the heads of the Catholic Church  will be back pontificating and trying to tell us how to live or lives.
If you are not a Catholic, why let the teachings of the Catholic Church bother you about how you lead your personal life?

I was in the traditional sense-going to Mass etc-and I do find it grating they continue to tell people how to behave with their track record. They would love to take control of people again through fear but is important that is not allowed to happen. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on June 01, 2009, 03:22:58 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 02:40:28 PM
Quote from: Main Street on June 01, 2009, 01:05:28 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 12:55:18 PM
When the anger and attention comes off all this the heads of the Catholic Church  will be back pontificating and trying to tell us how to live or lives.
If you are not a Catholic, why let the teachings of the Catholic Church bother you about how you lead your personal life?

I was in the traditional sense-going to Mass etc-and I do find it grating they continue to tell people how to behave with their track record. They would love to take control of people again through fear but is important that is not allowed to happen. 
Longrunsthefox, you used the term "us"  "trying to tell us how to live or lives".  As you are no longer a Catholic, why would the teaching of the Catholic Church have any concern for you directly or even faintly indirectly?
The teachings of the Catholic Church are a matter for their members.
Should they do "pontificating and trying to tell us how to live or lives",  that has no relevance to you or your life.
If you let it bother you, then it is your choice.





Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on June 01, 2009, 03:44:21 PM
You're probably rite... is like scraping shit from your shoe, can be hard to clean it off completly   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2009, 08:55:19 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on June 01, 2009, 10:05:11 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on June 01, 2009, 12:37:54 AM
It's quite apparent that many strident opponents of the Catholic Church have no interest in listening or trying to appreciate any viewpoint they don't agree with.



Quite.

Lar, I'm not making excuses for the church, just trying to balance the views expressed on here.
I'll state my views on this subject AGAIN. My total sympathy and sorrow goes towards the victims, my total anger, resentment and hatred goes towards the perpetrators of these heinous crimes and I believe that they should face the full rigors of the law.
My spongers comment is meant to waken people to the very real possibility of the scandel being abused by unscruplious people (human nature).
Because my views may differ slightly from others I'm "brain washed" or talking rubbish - yeah great arguement!  ::)

Myles your constant permarage on this subject is becoming tired.
What happened was WRONG and thankfully has been exposed AND people are now trying to find resolution to the situation, lets let them get on with it.

Thats a great opinion. Unfortunately it is only one of many aspects of the whole dirty scandal. May I inquire your opinion on the remainder of the issues (that is if you have not become over tired with my repeating of the facts of this report in the hope it might sink into some peoples sculls)

1) You say those responsible should be held to account in a court of law. I agree 100%. However, what do think should happen to those that ran these institutions, knew about what was going on and did nothing. Remember the report says abuse was endemic and systematic which implies that pretty much every knew and most took part. By those that knew I mean the head honchos inside the "schools" and indeed those outside - many of who now make "mealy mouthed" apologies to borrow a phrase of one of the victims. My problem is that these people will never be tried for anything yet are equally as responsible as the sicko bastards that carried out the abuse. My opinion is that the church is responsible for this, not just a few bad apples. Do you not agree?
2) The orders that inflicted this own a conservative estimate of 15 billion in wealth of one sort or another. They have committed to pay 128million in compensation to the victims. The state have to pay the remainder (i.e. the taxpayer). The total compensation is extimated to be about 1.2 billion euro, leaving joe soap to pay 10 times what the church does. Do you think that is a fair proportion. I think the church should pay 90% of the damage but 50:50 would also be a step in the right direction. Do you think it is fair that the church should be allowed to voluntarily increase the amount by a degree they come up with themselves (i.e. the criminal setting his own sentance) or do think the state should force the church to fork out a fari amount. Maybe you think 10% is a fair amount?
3) What do you think of the churches response over the past 10 years to the commission. The Christian brothers took legal action to prevent names being named. All the orders fought the victims tooth and nail all the way suggesting they were spongers, liars etc. Many withheld documents or hid them in Rome. The sister of mercy refuse today to speak to the family of a 10month old baby that died under mysterious circumstances in their care. Victims were aggressively questioned by solicitors of the church, they were asked questions such as to tell how big the abusers penis was. These questions came from organisations who knew they were guilty but still proceeded to put victims through more pain. Tell me do you think the well being of the victims was their concern or the survival or their own little institutions? Many priests were interviewed and refused to give any evidence. But the truth gets out and we get apologies from these same people. Do you believe the apologies are genuine? I certainly don't.
4) What do you think of CORI's statement pretty much telling the rest of the church to butt out of their business? This from Fr Healy champion of the needy, he who gets the special position of advising on government policy. Do you think that CORI are correct in saying this? Do you think they should be allowed to stay in the social partnership while they speak like this and refuse to increase monies towards compensation.

Perhaps some of the you that have been defending the church could answer the above because I am genuinely interested to know your opinions on them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on June 01, 2009, 09:45:51 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on May 31, 2009, 02:37:57 AM
I have not heard anyone here tell tales of "good stories" from the religious orders, but I have heard and know numerous (sp) tales from people that say different, they were educated and looked after by religious instituitions and were better for it.

Yeah lets demonise the Catholic Church (suits alot of agendas), the people on here procrastinating about all things Catholic, do you really give a shite or is it just about getting a dig in?
This isn't the place to tell 'good stories'. This thread shouldn't be about trying to balance out the revelations of this report with the good things the Church has done.
The fact that the Church has done good things is totally irrelevant to the victims.

Quote from: The Boy Wonder on June 01, 2009, 12:37:54 AM
It's quite apparent that many strident opponents of the Catholic Church have no interest in listening or trying to appreciate any viewpoint they don't agree with.
Yes, you'll have the same posters who will be vocal about this and other such stories relating to the Church. But you'll also get the other posters, like yourself, using the above argument to try and undermine the credibility of those posters.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Boy Wonder on June 02, 2009, 12:53:15 AM
To Magurie01:  No -  I am not trying to undermine the the views of anyone when I question the motives of anti-Cathoclic Church posters. Even the staunchest ally of the Catholic Church will not try to defend the accusations against the Church in the Ryan Report. I have read and accept many genuine and constructive criticisms of my Church recently.

I have a huge problem with how the Ryan Report is being used for a no-holds-barrred attack on my Church - please remember that lay people comprise majority membership of the Catholic Church. When good works (e.g. ministering to the sick and dying) are denied then it is time to call the cirtics' bluff.

Back in the bad old days of the conflict in Northenn Ireland one was accused of being a fellow-traveller if one expressed any views deemed sympathetic to the Nationalist population in the 6-counties. Today I would be honoured to be called a fellow-traveller of the Cathoclic Church.

Myles is an unfortunate by-product of the total access that the internet allows. This guy (maybe he is a crank) deems himself judge and jury on all matters relating to the current controversy. If he is genuine then I suggest he refrains from posting for a day or two. Maybe this might encourage some fair-minded posters to contribute constructive comment.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 02, 2009, 08:01:52 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on June 02, 2009, 12:53:15 AM
To Magurie01:  No -  I am not trying to undermine the the views of anyone when I question the motives of anti-Cathoclic Church posters. Even the staunchest ally of the Catholic Church will not try to defend the accusations against the Church in the Ryan Report. I have read and accept many genuine and constructive criticisms of my Church recently.

I have a huge problem with how the Ryan Report is being used for a no-holds-barrred attack on my Church - please remember that lay people comprise majority membership of the Catholic Church. When good works (e.g. ministering to the sick and dying) are denied then it is time to call the cirtics' bluff.

Back in the bad old days of the conflict in Northenn Ireland one was accused of being a fellow-traveller if one expressed any views deemed sympathetic to the Nationalist population in the 6-counties. Today I would be honoured to be called a fellow-traveller of the Cathoclic Church.

Myles is an unfortunate by-product of the total access that the internet allows. This guy (maybe he is a crank) deems himself judge and jury on all matters relating to the current controversy. If he is genuine then I suggest he refrains from posting for a day or two. Maybe this might encourage some fair-minded posters to contribute constructive comment.


Any chance you might address the questions above that I posted instead of waffling around the issue? The internet allows total access and that is a good thing as it makes it impossible to bury very important reports like the ryan report.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 03, 2009, 04:39:32 PM
Jaysus, I thought some of ye defenders of the church would at least make an attempt at my questions above. The silence is deafening.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 15, 2009, 10:26:27 PM
Charlie bird was on RTE news tonight about the catholic church abuse scandal in the USA, he mentioned a figure of 1 billion in payouts to victims. I thought I was hearing things but a quick google confirms that Charlie was bang on. How can a church compile monies which are obviously way in excess of billions of dollars. Does no one see anything wrong in this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655265.stm

Church faces record abuse payout


A Kentucky judge has provisionally approved the largest payout yet in the US Catholic Church abuse scandal.
The settlement, between a diocese in the state and an unknown number of sexual abuse victims, amounts to a record $120m (£68m).

The class-action suit accused the Church of covering up child abuse by priests and others over 50 years.

The scandal has cost the Church more than $1bn in payouts since 1950,an Associated Press review says.

In the Kentucky case, the diocese of Covington will have to make $40m available immediately from its assets, if the payout is confirmed by the judge, John W Potter, at a hearing set for January.

The diocese is suing insurance companies for the remaining $80m.

One of the plaintiffs in court was Richard Lillick, 63, who said he was first molested in 1957.

"I can't imagine anything better from our point of view," he said of the settlement, which he described as "an attempt to root out a very grotesque cancer that's been eating at the diocese for years and years".

The judge has ordered attorneys to determine exactly how many people qualify for compensation.

Victims have until November to file claims, and could be entitled to awards of between $5,000 and $450,000, depending on the severity of their ordeal.

The abuse scandal in the US blew up in the Boston Archdiocese three years ago and spread across the country.

Last year, a report commissioned by the Church said more than 4,000 US Roman Catholic priests had faced sexual abuse allegations in the last 50 years in cases involving more than 10,000 children, mostly boys.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on June 16, 2009, 02:03:31 AM
I have the answer to the whole thing sorted lads........ :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpuYoK6wv_Y
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on June 16, 2009, 02:41:39 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2009, 08:55:19 PM
Perhaps some of the you that have been defending the church could answer the above because I am genuinely interested to know your opinions on them.
Myles  quite frankly you have a, dare I say it, preachy style, that does not attract discussion :)
The USA abuse has been well known for some time and the Cardinal O'Connell is strongly implicated in the cover up. Unfortunatly he had the pull to avoid  a grand jury investigation of his role. I have absolutely no doubt that the cover up here went up to Cardinal level.

It has been a very long process to get this far and it is going to take a lot more effort to bring this further. The story of the campaign for justice by the disempowered is one of the most positive developments of modern day Ireland. The so called Celtic Tiger in its boom years  is nothing compared to this.
I remember once trying to talk to some people about one abuser in our midst on the eve of Tyrone  Kerry AISF, for about an hour I detailed all I knew. Unknown to me, about 5 in the group were abused by this man. Later the next day I was told that I shouldn't be talking about such a well respected figure like that, not that it bothered me in the least.  Some 15 years later, this man eventually pleaded guilty to all charges. I met these guys again, all of whom came forward to bear witness. None of them could remember me talking about it so stridently some 15 years earlier.
I suppose that gives you an idea how deep this was buried, the personal denial of the abuse and the progress that has painfully been made  since. Be in no doubt that for each abuse victim to come to terms with something like that, is pain you cannot imagine.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 16, 2009, 09:54:51 AM
Did you'se hear about the PP in Offaly at the weekend who described the pupils of an Daingean as "ruffians" and half the parishioners got up and walked out of the chapel ????


This PP is some boy. Where has he been living ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 16, 2009, 08:37:47 PM
Quote from: Main Street on June 16, 2009, 02:41:39 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2009, 08:55:19 PM
Perhaps some of the you that have been defending the church could answer the above because I am genuinely interested to know your opinions on them.
Myles  quite frankly you have a, dare I say it, preachy style, that does not attract discussion :)
The USA abuse has been well known for some time and the Cardinal O'Connell is strongly implicated in the cover up. Unfortunatly he had the pull to avoid  a grand jury investigation of his role. I have absolutely no doubt that the cover up here went up to Cardinal level.

It has been a very long process to get this far and it is going to take a lot more effort to bring this further. The story of the campaign for justice by the disempowered is one of the most positive developments of modern day Ireland. The so called Celtic Tiger in its boom years  is nothing compared to this.
I remember once trying to talk to some people about one abuser in our midst on the eve of Tyrone  Kerry AISF, for about an hour I detailed all I knew. Unknown to me, about 5 in the group were abused by this man. Later the next day I was told that I shouldn't be talking about such a well respected figure like that, not that it bothered me in the least.  Some 15 years later, this man eventually pleaded guilty to all charges. I met these guys again, all of whom came forward to bear witness. None of them could remember me talking about it so stridently some 15 years earlier.
I suppose that gives you an idea how deep this was buried, the personal denial of the abuse and the progress that has painfully been made  since. Be in no doubt that for each abuse victim to come to terms with something like that, is pain you cannot imagine.

Preachy style or not I asked a question directed at those who would have the opinion that this whole scandal is about a few bad apples etc etc. They take this view, in my opinion, as they simply can't face the fact that their beloved church could inflict such horrendous abuse onto little kids and then cover it up, obstruct investigations etc. Much easier to blame the few bad apples that inflicted the abuse and ignore the responsibility of the rest of the church in the equally disgusting behaviour ever since. As you have clearly stated in your post, the cover up in the US went to cardinal level. I wonder how high up it went in Ireland. The US church could find 1 billion to pay the victims. The church here has committed to 120 million or so, has only to date handed over half of that and is crying about the fact they can't find the rest. They would have us believe they don't even know the assets they own. And still more scandal is to come, - see abuse of trust 9pm tonight on TV3 (although knowing TV3 they'll probably make a balls of it).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 07, 2009, 10:35:21 PM
Redress board to be reformed ???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 03, 2009, 02:21:02 PM
I know this isn't the same thing but is the reponse not similar ?


Flasher 'working at elderly home' 
 
It has emerged that a convicted sex offender is continuing to work at a home for the elderly in south Belfast.

Terry McCauley, of Elgin Court, was found guilty of an exposure charge last month and given a suspended sentence.

But the 59-year-old is still employed as a maintenance officer at Nazareth House Care Village on Ravenhill Road.

In a statement, the Sisters of Nazareth, who run the home, said they had "no concerns about" McCauley.

The Ballynafeigh man received a sentence of five months at Belfast Magistrates Court, suspended for three years, in addition to being placed on the sex offenders' register for the original offence, which took place in June 2006.

SDLP assembly member Carmel Hanna said that it was a decision for the nuns.

"I'm in no way minimising any sex crimes and I can understand people's concerns, but this conviction was very much at the lower end of the scale," she said.

"There was no custodial sentence, it doesn't involve children and the nuns, who appear to have discussed this at length with this man, are very well aware of it and they have made the decision to retain him in their employment."

Sister Teresa Joseph, regional superior for Ireland, told the South Belfast News she knew McCauley personally and had "no doubts" about him, even after the court ruling.

"We made it quite clear that because of the suspended sentence he has to be very careful with regards as to how he acts, especially if children come into the village," she said.

"We have done our part as employers and made Terry aware of what people have been saying."



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on September 03, 2009, 03:30:24 PM
In the name of f**king Jesus!!!

Have these people learned  nothing?  Are the stupid or what!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 03, 2009, 03:40:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on September 03, 2009, 03:30:24 PM
In the name of f**king Jesus!!!

Have these people learned  nothing?  Are the stupid or what!

That was my immediate reaction as well when I read it, so I thought I would guage opinion.
Mind boggling response.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 03, 2009, 06:20:32 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on September 03, 2009, 03:30:24 PM
In the name of f**king Jesus!!!

Have these people learned  nothing?  Are the stupid or what!

No they have learned nothing and yes they are stupid, as is anyone that gives them the time of day.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on September 03, 2009, 07:10:39 PM
I hope he's not gettin nun.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on September 03, 2009, 07:20:52 PM
Maybe they feel he has reformed and forgiveness is possible, anyway they may think his crime was just a flash in the pan!

I'll get my coat
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 14, 2009, 08:48:41 PM
Anyone listening to the last word on today fm today. Interesting guy on who wrote a book on the story of a woman looking for her brother.

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/s/martin-sixsmith/lost-child-of-philomena-lee.htm

Selling babies, another shameful act of the church. I don't know how anyone can have anything to do with this shower.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 18, 2009, 12:13:37 PM
Collection levy not compensation 
 
The Catholic church in the Derry Diocese has said no collection money used to compensate abuse victims.

It was responding to concerns raised by the Voice of the Faithful organisation over an increase in the levy taken by the diocese from parish collections.

The diocese said the increase was "due to a prudent assessment of costs associated with running the diocese."

Voice of the Faithful spokesman, Sean O'Connell, said parishioners have a right to know how their money is spent.

"It was Bishop Hegarty himself who said in 2005 that people have a right to know where their money goes, but since then he seems to use to have gone out of his way to keep us in the dark in that regard.

"It was only because our statement went into the media that we now know that no donations are being made to the stewardship trust, but we should have known that long ago."

In a statement, the Derry diocese said it did not contribute to the Stewardship Trust Fund for the victims of clerical abuse.

"The increase in levy on parish income arises from increasing costs borne by the diocese and is not linked to the Stewardship Trust Fund.

"The diocese is obliged to pay the costs associated with providing services at diocesan level, many of which are directly availed of by parishes.

"The increase in levy is not linked to any special fund, diocesan or national, for compensation arising from child sexual abuse allegations."




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 27, 2009, 08:22:24 PM
To those of you that thought the joke of a church has changed one iota...

From Drogheda Independent 23/09 (http://www.drogheda-independent.ie/news/colm-ogorman-key-speaker-at-mass-1894034.html)

Colm O'Gorman key speaker at Mass

By Alison Comyn
Wednesday September 23 2009
FOUNDER of the group 1 in 4 Colm O'Gorman has agreed to be key speaker at the Mass of Reconciliation in the Augustinian Church, Shop Street in memory of the 30th anniversary of the visit of Pope John Paul II to Drogheda.

The Mass will take place at 1.15pm on Sunday September 27th.

Mr O'Gorman was the first to highlight the abuse of Fr Sean Fortune, and Fr Iggy O'Donovan says this is the perfect time to recall the same message of reconciliation brought by the then Pontiff three decades ago.

'The theme will be one of healing and we invite everyone to come and join us on Sunday and pray for the Church, and hear from this wonderful man,' says Fr Iggy.

'The Pope appealed for reconciliation all those years ago, and we have seen great scenes like Bertie Ahern and Ian Paisley at the Boyne since, so we would like to carry on the message.


And from Irish times 26/09 (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0926/1224255283848.html)

O'Gorman 'surprised' as Mass invitation withdrawn

ONE IN FOUR founder Colm O'Gorman has spoken of his surprise at "the unique experience of being 'uninvited' from taking part" in a Mass of healing and reconciliation planned by Fr Iggy O'Donovan at the Augustinian Church in Drogheda for tomorrow.

He said: "It appears that the Archdiocese of Armagh, led by Cardinal Seán Brady, believes there was something inappropriate about the invitation and instructed Fr O'Donovan to withdraw it." This, Mr O'Gorman felt, was "a real shame".

It was "a shame that senior church leaders have chosen to close their hearts, their minds and their ears to words offered in a true spirit of hope. Hope informed by an absolute belief in the endless possibilities to be found in our human capacity to transcend terrible trauma and find a way forward together."

Instead they had "used their power to prevent such a process from finding even more powerful expression by locating it in church". In his planned address he had "no intention of raking over old, now established hurts".

Instead, he had hoped "to speak about my sense of an immense opportunity for us all, having named and to a large part owned the truth of the terrible crimes inflicted upon children within church, to find a way forward together in a new spirit of truth, compassion, understanding and love".

He believed "in the power of truth. Naming the truth in difficult circumstances is always the right thing to do." So often "we run from things we have done that we feel mark us as bad. I know that feeling; for so many years I ran from my own feelings of shame and self-blame."

He had planned to end his address by quoting from the Gospel of John: "Let us love, not in word or speech, but in truth and action."



Ah, I'm sure the sheep will continue to support that heartless fu*k Brady (not too often I would describe a fellow Cavan man in these terms). Makes me sick to the pit of my stomach. When are the decent people in the catholic church going to get off their lazy holes and say "stop" instead of pretending there is nothing amiss.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 27, 2009, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on September 27, 2009, 08:22:24 PM
To those of you that thought the joke of a church has changed one iota...

From Drogheda Independent 23/09 (http://www.drogheda-independent.ie/news/colm-ogorman-key-speaker-at-mass-1894034.html)

Colm O'Gorman key speaker at Mass

By Alison Comyn
Wednesday September 23 2009
FOUNDER of the group 1 in 4 Colm O'Gorman has agreed to be key speaker at the Mass of Reconciliation in the Augustinian Church, Shop Street in memory of the 30th anniversary of the visit of Pope John Paul II to Drogheda.

The Mass will take place at 1.15pm on Sunday September 27th.

Mr O'Gorman was the first to highlight the abuse of Fr Sean Fortune, and Fr Iggy O'Donovan says this is the perfect time to recall the same message of reconciliation brought by the then Pontiff three decades ago.

'The theme will be one of healing and we invite everyone to come and join us on Sunday and pray for the Church, and hear from this wonderful man,' says Fr Iggy.

'The Pope appealed for reconciliation all those years ago, and we have seen great scenes like Bertie Ahern and Ian Paisley at the Boyne since, so we would like to carry on the message.


And from Irish times 26/09 (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0926/1224255283848.html)

O'Gorman 'surprised' as Mass invitation withdrawn

ONE IN FOUR founder Colm O'Gorman has spoken of his surprise at "the unique experience of being 'uninvited' from taking part" in a Mass of healing and reconciliation planned by Fr Iggy O'Donovan at the Augustinian Church in Drogheda for tomorrow.

He said: "It appears that the Archdiocese of Armagh, led by Cardinal Seán Brady, believes there was something inappropriate about the invitation and instructed Fr O'Donovan to withdraw it." This, Mr O'Gorman felt, was "a real shame".

It was "a shame that senior church leaders have chosen to close their hearts, their minds and their ears to words offered in a true spirit of hope. Hope informed by an absolute belief in the endless possibilities to be found in our human capacity to transcend terrible trauma and find a way forward together."

Instead they had "used their power to prevent such a process from finding even more powerful expression by locating it in church". In his planned address he had "no intention of raking over old, now established hurts".

Instead, he had hoped "to speak about my sense of an immense opportunity for us all, having named and to a large part owned the truth of the terrible crimes inflicted upon children within church, to find a way forward together in a new spirit of truth, compassion, understanding and love".

He believed "in the power of truth. Naming the truth in difficult circumstances is always the right thing to do." So often "we run from things we have done that we feel mark us as bad. I know that feeling; for so many years I ran from my own feelings of shame and self-blame."

He had planned to end his address by quoting from the Gospel of John: "Let us love, not in word or speech, but in truth and action."



Ah, I'm sure the sheep will continue to support that heartless f**k Brady (not too often I would describe a fellow Cavan man in these terms). Makes me sick to the pit of my stomach. When are the decent people in the catholic church going to get off their lazy holes and say "stop" instead of pretending there is nothing amiss.
[/b]


A lot of decent RC peole have got off their asses and have tried to raise issues with the Cavan man in Armagh but it's impossible to get the man's attention. He won't meet ordinary parishioners - he remains aloof and closes his eyes and ears to those who seek change.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on October 06, 2009, 10:44:00 PM
Programme on BBC 1 now about the Nazareth homes in Belfast and Derry. Daragh Mc Intyre programme.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Square Ball on October 06, 2009, 10:56:47 PM
Quote from: orangeman on October 06, 2009, 10:44:00 PM
Programme on BBC 1 now about the Nazareth homes in Belfast and Derry. Daragh Mc Intyre programme.

ayh, watching it now, they were put in a large tumble dryer for wetting the bed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on October 06, 2009, 11:08:08 PM
God help those poor children and what was done to them. Sure a lot of the 'Christian' brothers and priests at the schools that weren't homes for kids were sadistic madmen as well. Even through the 70s...  Never encountered those witches of nuns tho...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on October 07, 2009, 12:39:46 AM
There is a lot of Hand-Washing going on here. Nothing to do with me Guv. it wos the Church that did it. It begs the Question who are the Church. Are the laity not members of the Church. Did some of them not fail in their responsibility to protect Children. What about the role of the state, who placed Children in these institutions and then failed to carry out proper inspections. In this sad tragedy there are no clean Hands, and it is incumbent on all members of the church clerical and lay, and also the state, to ensure that victims of abuse receive proper compensation. This will inevitably require that we put our Hands in our pockets and contribute towards it. If we are for whatever reason reluctant to do that, then we are merely tinkling cymbals, whose indignation is feigned
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on October 15, 2009, 09:47:49 PM
Looks like the truth is now going to be published on the scandal of clerical abuse in the Dublin diocese..

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1015/abuse.html

Dublin abuse report to be published
   
The High Court has ruled that the report of the Commission of Investigation into sexual abuse allegations in the Dublin archdiocese can be published - but all references to one person must be removed.

The commission investigated how clerical child sex abuse allegations involving a sample of 46 priests were handled by Church and State authorities in Dublin between 1 January 1975 and 30 April 2004.

Some of the cases involve men who are facing court proceedings.

Its report was referred to the High Court by Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern in July.

Under the Commission of Investigation Act, the minister must seek directions from the High Court if it is felt the report could prejudice court proceedings.

Mr Justice Paul Gilligan ruled that the report could be published but that a specified part, Chapter 19, might prejudice court proceedings.

He directed that Chapter 19, or references in the report to the person who is the subject of Chapter 19, could not be published unless otherwise directed by the court.

His judgment lists 22 references to that person which must be removed before the report is published.

Justice Gilligan said this part of the report could be mentioned to the court again on 5 May next year.

Andrew Madden, a survivor of sexual abuse in the Dublin archdiocese, said he was very pleased the report would be published.

He said the commission investigated 46 priests so removing reference to one person would still allow people to examine the trends in the report.

Marie Collins, another survivor, said she was pleased the report would be published.

But she said she was disappointed it would not be published in its entirety.

Ms Collins said the purpose of the report was to show if there was a pattern to the way the archdiocese dealt with abuse and it would be difficult to establish that if certain parts of the report were not published.

Maeve Lewis of One in Four, a support group for victims of abuse, urged the Minister for Justice to publish the report quickly.

She also asked the Minister to give support groups some advance notice as to when he intends to publish.

A spokesperson for the Minister for Justice said he had always made it clear he wanted to publish the report as soon as practicable.

However, he said Mr Ahern would have to consider the High Court's written judgment.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gnevin on October 15, 2009, 09:50:22 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on October 06, 2009, 11:08:08 PM
God help those poor children and what was done to them. Sure a lot of the 'Christian' brothers and priests at the schools that weren't homes for kids were sadistic madmen as well. Even through the 70s...  Never encountered those witches of nuns tho...

God's too busy in Knock making the sun dance to help these children . ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on October 16, 2009, 09:23:47 AM
See that post was at 1.05 am  - might explain it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on October 16, 2009, 09:48:47 AM
It doesnt explain the rest of the shite he posts though
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on October 17, 2009, 09:33:36 PM
Maybe ye should click on this link, an ordinary planning application that was defeated but if, you scroll down through the third party submisions then maybe, just maybe if you find the right one you will know the conniving that was going on and that I wanted to highlight when BISHOP Eamonn Walsh, a barrister by the way, was in position to know, not what he should have known, but what he was been faxed and been told to Naoim Brid on Old Blessington Road.

http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=144&regref=SD07A/0151&type=apps&dateoptions=any&area=Any&keywordtype=location&term=scoil%20treasa (http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=144&regref=SD07A/0151&type=apps&dateoptions=any&area=Any&keywordtype=location&term=scoil%20treasa)

(The link does not allow the specific direction to the file, scroll down and think Cat's as in Fennelly.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on October 17, 2009, 09:36:54 PM
Quote from: Bud Wiser on October 17, 2009, 09:33:36 PM
Maybe ye should click on this link, an ordinary planning application that was defeated but if, you scroll down through the third party submisions then maybe, just maybe if you find the right one you will know the conniving that was going on and that I wanted to highlight when Eamonn Walsh, a barrister by the way was in position to know, not what he should have known, but what he was been faxed and been told to Naoim Brid on Old Blessington Road.

http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=144&regref=SD07A/0151&type=apps&dateoptions=any&area=Any&keywordtype=location&term=scoil%20treasa (http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=144&regref=SD07A/0151&type=apps&dateoptions=any&area=Any&keywordtype=location&term=scoil%20treasa)

I'd love to know what you are on about Bud. Any chance you might put some flesh on the  bones?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on October 17, 2009, 09:39:24 PM
I have edited
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on October 17, 2009, 09:55:45 PM
Well, can you see it now, it was put in the public domain? Needless to say, the two priests that were in my area have left, one no longer a priest and the other a slithering debacle that bears no mention.  Fact is, when the new report comes out this week there will be very few people that will sleep easy.  There are so many many people (and I don't mean this in any respect to you or any board members) that have not got a clue, not a clue, ever, to what was going on, right up to recently.  There have been so so many suicides, so many bullshit media reports about how they happen and why but nobody has got these b**tards because they were moved like chess pieces.

EDIT: If you still cant see what I meant,when the first report came out each head of Parish  was instructed to qualify how much land they could grab to sell back to the state. (too tired now after been with Dessie all day so I will wait forthe report this week before further comment)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on October 25, 2009, 08:51:02 PM
Another scandalous story in the mail today about Archbishop Burke and his affair and alleged abuse of a 14 year old girl in Nigeria. Take a look at the link below for an account of her claims. This is very interesting for 2 reasons, 1st obviously how this man had access in a 3rd world country to young girls and 2nd for the reaction of people on the ground who can not even accept the possibility of truth in the story. I would suggest Nigeria is a now a little like Ireland of the 50's?

http://www.catholicreport.org/comments.php?cID=5650

Before anyone else jumps to this mans defence, you should know there are taped recordings, letters etc which amounts to solid evidence against the man details of which were in todays Mail on Sunday.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on October 25, 2009, 10:21:38 PM
Rome investigating abuse complaint
Sunday, 25 October 2009 21:01
The Vatican is investigating an allegation of child sexual abuse against an Irish Archbishop based in Nigeria.

St Patrick's Missionary Society, also known as the Kiltegan Fathers, has confirmed that a complaint was made about one of its members, Archbishop Richard Burke, by a 41-year-old Nigerian woman, Ms Dolores Atwood.

Archbishop Burke, 60, from Fethard in County Tipperary, is one of the most senior members of the Catholic hierarchy known to be facing an accusation of this kind. He denies the allegation.

AdvertisementA statement released by the Society in response to a report in today's 'Irish Mail On Sunday' said that Ms Atwood had made a complaint alleging that Archbishop Burke had begun abusing her when she was a 14-year-old patient in hospital.


The statement said that once the complaint was made, two representatives of the Society promptly met Ms Atwood, who now lives in Canada and is married with three children.

It said that the complaint was received in December and that the Archbishop voluntarily withdrew from ministry six months after it was made while it was being investigated.

The Society expressed its deep sorrow and regret for the suffering that Ms Atwood and her family were going through.

It also confirmed that within the past fortnight, the Society had sent all papers relating to the case to the Vatican following a request from the Catholic Church's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, its second most important office,

Archbishop Burke was ordained a priest 34 years ago and was made a Archbishop of Benin in 2008.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 12:42:00 PM
Orders offer abuse compensation 

Children suffered systematic abuse and neglect in Catholic-run institutions
More religious orders have offered compensation packages for victims who suffered child abuse in Catholic-run institutions in the Irish Republic.

It follows the announcement of a 161m euros package from the Christian Brothers on Wednesday, to atone for the crimes of its members.
Five more congregations have offered 43m euros in reparations between them.

An official report, published in May, found children had been systematically abused in many institutions.

Oppressive regime

The Ryan report took submissions from over 2,000 people who said they had suffered physical and sexual abuse at Catholic-run orphanages and industrial schools in the Republic of Ireland, going back many decades.

COMPENSATION OFFERS
20m euros - Oblates of Mary Immaculate
10m euros - Daughters of Charity of St Vincent de Paul
5m euros - Sisters of Charity
5m euros - Presentation Sisters
3m euros - Presentation Brothers
It painted a picture of an oppressive regime, where many children were frequently hungry, neglected and sometimes subjected to beatings and rape.

The report was greeted with public outrage and demands that religious orders contribute to a new trust fund to help former residents come to terms with their abuse.

The new fund would collect payments in addition to those already submitted by religious orders through the Republic's Residential Institutions Redress Board, which was set up in 2002 to make awards to former residents who had received injuries consistent with abuse.

In addition to the Christian Brothers, five other orders have published details of their compensation offer on their websites.

The Oblates of Mary Immaculate said they would contribute 20m euros "in reparation for failings on their part while managing St Conleth's Reformatory in Daingean, County Offaly between 1940 and 1973.

"This payment is also motivated by a desire to assist in alleviating the present needs of former pupils of St. Conleth's who are in need of help," the statement said.

'Genuine regret'

The Daughters of Charity of St Vincent de Paul are to give 10m euros and said they "again unreservedly apologise to anyone who was abused and hurt while in our care as children".

The order outlined its valued assets, which total 339.2m euros, and said it would donate the 10m euros
"over three years or in a shorter time, depending on how quickly the Congregation can sell properties to make up the figure promised".

The Sisters of Charity have offered 5m euros which they will pay over a five year period.

In a letter to the Irish education minister, the sisters said they "genuinely regret any suffering experienced by former residents while in institutions under our care".

The Presentation Sisters said their contribution of 5m euros was given in the context that only 1% of the claims made under the redress scheme related to their order

'Help and healing'

They also said the offer would be supplemented by their ongoing contributions to the counselling service for persons who experienced abuse and was "in addition to an earlier contribution of 5.2 m euro to the Redress Board".

The Presentation Brothers offered 3m euros, which it said represented one third of its available funds.
The order was responsible for one industrial school, St Joseph's in Greenmount, County Cork, which closed in 1959.

In a statement the brothers said they wanted to "bring help and healing to the survivors" and were "willing to co-operate with the government and others in this process".


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 03:30:49 PM
Irish Church accused of abuse cover-up 

Four archbishops turned a blind eye to abuse 
A damning report into clerical child abuse in the Dublin archdiocese has criticised the Church authorities for covering up the abuse.

The report investigated how Church and state authorities handled allegations of child abuse against 46 priests.

It found that the Church placed its own reputation above the protection of children in its care.

It also said that state authorities facilitated the cover-up by allowing the Church to operate outside the law.





The "Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin" covered a period from 1975 to 2004.

It has laid bare a culture of concealment where church leaders prioritised the protection of their own institution above that of vulnerable children in their care.

Victims

Instead of reporting the allegations to civic authorities, those accused of horrific crimes were systematically shuffled from parish to parish where they could prey on new, unsuspecting victims.

The avoidance of public scandal which would inevitably follow high-profile prosecutions appeared more important than preventing abusers from repeating their crimes.



Church and state authorities colluded to cover up child abuse
The report found that four archbishops - John Charles McQuaid who died in 1973, Dermot Ryan who died in 1984, Kevin McNamara who died in 1987, and retired Cardinal Desmond Connell - did not hand over information on abusers.

Civic authorities were also criticised for their cosy relationship with the Church.

The commissioner of the Irish police, Fachtna Murphy, said the report made for "difficult and disturbing reading, detailing as it does many instances of sexual abuse and failure on the part of both Church and State authorities to protect victims".

He added: "The commission has found that in some cases, because of acts or omissions, individuals who sought assistance did not always receive the level of response or protection which any citizen in trouble is entitled to expect from An Garda Síochána (the Irish police).

He said he was "deeply sorry" for the failures.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omagh_gael on November 26, 2009, 03:35:14 PM
Did anyone hear Dermot Ahernes speech earlier regarding the Dublin abuse report? Extreme savaging of the catholic church in general relating to this matter and severely critical of the Garda for their role in not policing the matter appropriately. About time this matter and the animals that committed these henious crimes serve their time.     
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 03:36:21 PM
Quote from: omagh_gael on November 26, 2009, 03:35:14 PM
Did anyone hear Dermot Ahernes speech earlier regarding the Dublin abuse report? Extreme savaging of the catholic church in general relating to this matter and severely critical of the Garda for their role in not policing the matter appropriately. About time this matter and the animals that committed these henious crimes serve their time.   
[/b]


Can't see this happening anytime soon.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omagh_gael on November 26, 2009, 04:24:30 PM
Quote from: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 03:36:21 PM
Quote from: omagh_gael on November 26, 2009, 03:35:14 PM
Did anyone hear Dermot Ahernes speech earlier regarding the Dublin abuse report? Extreme savaging of the catholic church in general relating to this matter and severely critical of the Garda for their role in not policing the matter appropriately. About time this matter and the animals that committed these henious crimes serve their time.   
[/b]


Can't see this happening anytime soon.

More than likely OM although he did insist that no matter how long ago these crimes were committed all possible measures will be made to bring them to book. I hope this is the case.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lazer on November 26, 2009, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.

- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

First of all - for the parts in Bold above - should these not been past tense? The church may have done these things in the past - but have taken steps to prevent this happening again

Secondly - A major part of being a Christian is being able to forgive
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 05:08:31 PM
Quote from: Lazer on November 26, 2009, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.

- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

First of all - for the parts in Bold above - should these not been past tense? The church may have done these things in the past - but have taken steps to prevent this happening again

Secondly - A major part of being a Christian is being able to forgive

The past!!!!

The cover up was not in the past (unless you are talking 1 or 2 years), neither were the mealy mouth apologies nor the frustration of the investigation or the compensation issue. But, but heh, if it makes you feel better let say it was all in the past. Sure I started writing this post in the past too...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Yes I Would on November 26, 2009, 05:11:22 PM
Quote from: Lazer on November 26, 2009, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.

- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

First of all - for the parts in Bold above - should these not been past tense? The church may have done these things in the past - but have taken steps to prevent this happening again

Secondly - A major part of being a Christian is being able to forgive

Not so sure!.. There still exists many within the church in my opinion who were part of this sick and evil regime that was commonplace throughout Ireland and have resisted any attempts at every opportunity to part with control and money at every opportunity. Everyone of the bastards should be named and shamed!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 05:59:08 PM
Quote from: Lazer on November 26, 2009, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.

- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

First of all - for the parts in Bold above - should these not been past tense? The church may have done these things in the past - but have taken steps to prevent this happening again

Secondly - A major part of being a Christian is being able to forgive
They have only taken steps to prevent this happening in the future after being shamed into it. They knew this was going on and did next to nothing until the scale of the issue was made public.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 06:54:08 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 05:59:08 PM
Quote from: Lazer on November 26, 2009, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.

- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

First of all - for the parts in Bold above - should these not been past tense? The church may have done these things in the past - but have taken steps to prevent this happening again

Secondly - A major part of being a Christian is being able to forgive
They have only taken steps to prevent this happening in the future after being shamed into it. They knew this was going on and did next to nothing until the scale of the issue was made public.

Agreed and worse than that they covered it up for decades. Anyone who perverted (sorry) the course of justice should be prosecuted. I believe the report refers to high ranking Gárdaí who didn't properly pursue the issues possibly due to their strong beliefs. I have a problem with a certain lay religious group that hold powerful positions in this country and indeed one of their members carried out an early whimsical investigation into this isse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:01:49 PM
Glad to see this getting coverage abroad too. You never know, the vatican may even respond. On page 223 of the report it outlines how th vatican were contacted for information. They never bothered  to respond - instead  they complained to the Irish government for the judge having the gaul to contact them instead of using diplomatic channels!! Oh yes, the church has really changed.

From the Indo in the UK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/church-had-immunity-to-conceal-sex-abuse-says-report-1828168.html

Church had immunity to conceal sex abuse, says report
By Ed Carty and Sarah Stack, Press Association

The Catholic hierarchy in Ireland was granted immunity to cover up child sex abuse among paedophile priests in Dublin, a damning report revealed today.

Authorities enjoyed a cosy relationship with the Church and did not enforce the law as four archbishops, obsessed with secrecy and avoiding scandal, protected abusers and reputations at all costs.

Hundreds of crimes against defenceless children from the 1960s to the 1990s were not reported while gardai treated clergy as though they were above the law.

In a three-year inquiry, the Commission to Inquire into the Dublin Archdiocese uncovered a sickening tactic of "don't ask, don't tell" throughout the Church.

"The Commission has no doubt that clerical child sexual abuse was covered up by the Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities," it said.

"The structures and rules of the Catholic Church facilitated that cover-up.

"The State authorities facilitated that cover-up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all and allowing the Church institutions to be beyond the reach of the normal law enforcement processes."

Four archbishops - John Charles McQuaid who died in 1973, Dermot Ryan who died in 1984, Kevin McNamara who died in 1987, and retired Cardinal Desmond Connell - did not hand over information on abusers.

The first files were handed over by the Cardinal in 1995 but even then he had records of complaints against at least 28 priests.

The primary loyalty of bishops and archbishops is to the Church, the report said.

Bishop James Kavanagh, Bishop Dermot O'Mahony, Bishop Laurence Forristal, Bishop Donal Murray and disgraced Bishop Brendan Comiskey, a reformed alcoholic who failed to control paedophile priests when in charge of the Ferns Diocese, all knew about child abuse for many years.

The inquiry, headed by Judge Yvonne Murphy, said the hierarchy cannot claim they did not know that child sex abuse was a crime.

Cardinal Connell was credited for instigating two secret canon law trials which took place over the 30-year period and led to two priests being defrocked.

Monsignor Gerard Sheehy, a powerful figure in the Catholic Archdiocese, one of the largest in Europe, fought to prevent the internal prosecutions.

Religious orders, for example the Columbans, had clear knowledge of complaints dating back to the early 1970s.

Parts of the 700-page report have been censored to prevent pending or potential prosecutions of abusers being prejudiced with references to two priests, and one of the cleric's brothers, removed.

While the Dublin Archdiocese inquiry found no evidence of a paedophile ring, some of the most shocking findings included:

* One priest admitted sexually abusing more than 100 children;

* Another accepted he abused on a fortnightly basis during his 25-year ministry;

* One complaint was made against a priest who later admitted abusing at least six other children;

* It took gardai 20 years to decide on a prosecution of one priest.

The inquiry said it uncovered inappropriate contacts between authorities and the Archdiocese.

Allegations were made against one priest, known as Fr Edmondus, but Garda Commissioner Daniel Costigan handed the case to Archbishop McQuaid and took no other action.

The inquiry also warned of inappropriate relations between some senior gardai and priests in two other cases.

"A number of very senior members of the gardai, including the Commissioner (Costigan) in 1960, clearly regarded priests as being outside their remit," the report said.

"There are some examples of gardai actually reporting complaints to the Archdiocese instead of investigating them.

"It is fortunate that some junior members of the force did not take the same view."

The inquiry, which was looking at a sample of 46 priests dating back to 1975 but took its review back as far as the 1940s, outlined an insurance scheme for victims set up by the Archdiocese in 1987.

Church files show at the time Archbishops McNamara, Ryan and McQuaid had, between them, information on complaints against at least 17 priests.

The Commission said it proved the hierarchy knew the sex abuse scandals would cost the Church dearly.

"The taking out of insurance was proving knowledge of child sex abuse as a major cost to the Archdiocese and is inconsistent with the view that archdiocesan officials were still 'on a learning curve' at a much later date, or were lacking in an appreciation of the phenomenon of clerical child sex abuse," it said.

The Archdiocese was pre-occupied until the mid-1990s with maintaining secrecy, avoiding scandal, protecting the reputation of the Church and preservation of assets.

All other concerns, including the damage done to young victims, came second, the report said.

"The welfare of the children, which should have been the first priority, was not even a factor to be considered in the early days," the Commission said.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 07:16:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie

Can I ask that you delete that post and start it in a new thread? It is an interesting subject but might be better in another thread. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 07:34:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie
I think that's been posted up before?  Is that real? 
I think it was pointed out the last time it was posted that people would want to think about that before they do it.


You know who I'm most angry and disgusted with in all of this, and I'm not sure why, the people. The normal people who must have been f**king completely brain washed! What the hell was wrong with them!  People, not just the police or the govt, knew this was happening and did nothing.
My ma was telling me there about something on the radio today, some woman was on and her and the sister were abused by the priest. Her mother was one of these who'd cook the priest's dinners, and the priest would call around at night when they were in bed and he'd have to to the children's bedroom to "say goodnight".  That's were the abuse took place. Now, there is no doubt in my mind the mother knew what has happening, you would have to be clean stupid not to and she done nothing.  And then there was something else about some woman going to the bishops house (as you do, rather than to the guards) to complain about a priest abusing someone and she was threatened with excommunication so she didn't pursue it.  What the f**k!  Same goes for the mothers and fathers who allowed their grandchildren, who's only crime was to be born out of wedlock, to be taken away and their daughters through in these laundries.  Unbelievable.
Those are the people I am most disgusted with.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: redhugh on November 26, 2009, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...

Great post Myles.Sick, deviant, corrupt, lying bastids that betrayed trust to an astonishing level.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 08:11:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 07:34:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie
I think that's been posted up before?  Is that real? 
I think it was pointed out the last time it was posted that people would want to think about that before they do it.


You know who I'm most angry and disgusted with in all of this, and I'm not sure why, the people. The normal people who must have been f**king completely brain washed! What the hell was wrong with them!  People, not just the police or the govt, knew this was happening and did nothing.
My ma was telling me there about something on the radio today, some woman was on and her and the sister were abused by the priest. Her mother was one of these who'd cook the priest's dinners, and the priest would call around at night when they were in bed and he'd have to to the children's bedroom to "say goodnight".  That's were the abuse took place. Now, there is no doubt in my mind the mother knew what has happening, you would have to be clean stupid not to and she done nothing.  And then there was something else about some woman going to the bishops house (as you do, rather than to the guards) to complain about a priest abusing someone and she was threatened with excommunication so she didn't pursue it.  What the f**k!  Same goes for the mothers and fathers who allowed their grandchildren, who's only crime was to be born out of wedlock, to be taken away and their daughters through in these laundries.  Unbelievable.
Those are the people I am most disgusted with.
Good post Pints. It was a very different time in Catholic Ireland, which seems to have been ruled by the Church rather than the State. I still don't understand the mindset of subservience to any body which asks you to do something totally against human nature ie give up your children for no good reason. There are many, many members of public culpable in allowing this to happen. And you know what, I'll bet there are still people in Ireland don't believe a word of it and think it's all a conspiracy against the Catholic Church. They're the nutters were out collecting money for paedophile priests a few years back.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 08:15:02 PM
QuoteI'll bet there are still people in Ireland don't believe a word of it and think it's all a conspiracy against the Catholic Church.
Of course there are, I know at least one and she (shes about 80) refuses to believe a word of any of this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 08:22:21 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 08:15:02 PM
QuoteI'll bet there are still people in Ireland don't believe a word of it and think it's all a conspiracy against the Catholic Church.
Of course there are, I know at least one and she (shes about 80) refuses to believe a word of any of this.
I don't if my Granny would believe it either if she was alive.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: redhugh on November 26, 2009, 08:27:36 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 08:22:21 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 08:15:02 PM
QuoteI'll bet there are still people in Ireland don't believe a word of it and think it's all a conspiracy against the Catholic Church.
Of course there are, I know at least one and she (shes about 80) refuses to believe a word of any of this.
I don't if my Granny would believe it either if she was alive.

My Ma would'nt have heard a bad word about the church in her house for the longest time.But fair play to her she started to research it and saw the truth for what it was.She now has little good to say about it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 08:41:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 26, 2009, 07:16:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie

Can I ask that you delete that post and start it in a new thread? It is an interesting subject but might be better in another thread.

Muppet - I'll start  a thread on it when this one dies down cos i'd imagine both will end up covering the same stuff, if thats ok with you?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 08:43:29 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 08:41:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 26, 2009, 07:16:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie

Can I ask that you delete that post and start it in a new thread? It is an interesting subject but might be better in another thread.

Muppet - I'll start  a thread on it when this one dies down cos i'd imagine both will end up covering the same stuff, if thats ok with you?

It was just a suggestion. I think it'll get lost in this thread.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 08:46:05 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 26, 2009, 08:11:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 07:34:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 07:03:36 PM
Some of you may find this site of use...

www.countmeout.ie
I think that's been posted up before?  Is that real? 
I think it was pointed out the last time it was posted that people would want to think about that before they do it.


You know who I'm most angry and disgusted with in all of this, and I'm not sure why, the people. The normal people who must have been f**king completely brain washed! What the hell was wrong with them!  People, not just the police or the govt, knew this was happening and did nothing.
My ma was telling me there about something on the radio today, some woman was on and her and the sister were abused by the priest. Her mother was one of these who'd cook the priest's dinners, and the priest would call around at night when they were in bed and he'd have to to the children's bedroom to "say goodnight".  That's were the abuse took place. Now, there is no doubt in my mind the mother knew what has happening, you would have to be clean stupid not to and she done nothing.  And then there was something else about some woman going to the bishops house (as you do, rather than to the guards) to complain about a priest abusing someone and she was threatened with excommunication so she didn't pursue it.  What the f**k!  Same goes for the mothers and fathers who allowed their grandchildren, who's only crime was to be born out of wedlock, to be taken away and their daughters through in these laundries.  Unbelievable.
Those are the people I am most disgusted with.
Good post Pints. It was a very different time in Catholic Ireland, which seems to have been ruled by the Church rather than the State. I still don't understand the mindset of subservience to any body which asks you to do something totally against human nature ie give up your children for no good reason. There are many, many members of public culpable in allowing this to happen. And you know what, I'll bet there are still people in Ireland don't believe a word of it and think it's all a conspiracy against the Catholic Church. They're the nutters were out collecting money for paedophile priests a few years back.

The catholic church has always been about maintaining power in this country and they succeeded for a long long time. They were the law. You have to remember people in these times were in genuine fear of their souls going to hell such was the mental pressure put on them. It was like a cult built on fear. Then on the other hand they had their tentacles in everything. They had a say in who was the headmaster, the garda etc. You could not avoid them or live your life without crossing them. They controlled what the tv showed and what was said on the radio.To us today we can't fathom how ordinary people let themselves be totally controlled like this. We'd like to think we'd be different but who knows.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: anglocelt39 on November 26, 2009, 08:47:38 PM
I have children that are currently being educated in the Catholic system. As a result of this I have communions, confirmations every so often and tend to rock up to mass more often than would be the case if it was left up to me. Sometimes I might hear something that makes the outing worthwhile and rewarding. On one visit in the last three years I heard some visiting Padre go on, at some length, about the sin of couples cohabiting when not married. I f**king well kid you not.

I will rock up next Sunday and I will have my ears pricked for Something resembling an abject apology. I may have to wait. I was nearly sick in the car today as I heard the latest catalogue of shame on the radio.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 08:50:07 PM
Anyone know if the words 'Opus Dei' appear in the report?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 08:52:53 PM
Quote from: anglocelt39 on November 26, 2009, 08:47:38 PM
I have children that are currently being educated in the Catholic system. As a result of this I have communions, confirmations every so often and tend to rock up to mass more often than would be the case if it was left up to me. Sometimes I might hear something that makes the outing worthwhile and rewarding. On one visit in the last three years I heard some visiting Padre go on, at some length, about the sin of couples cohabiting when not married. I f**king well kid you not.

I will rock up next Sunday and I will have my ears pricked for Something resembling an abject apology. I may have to wait. I was nearly sick in the car today as I heard the latest catalogue of shame on the radio.

I'd guess there will be a split. Many priests will try and express sorrow, shame regret etc many will say nothing and hope it blows over and we all forget about it and return to normal. I would urge those good priests to leave the church like the priest in Derry. Let them do the work of Jesus, if they wish, as normal people. They'll achieve a lot more in my opinion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on November 26, 2009, 09:29:43 PM
Okay, so there were very bad eggs in the priesthood, and peoples lives were ruined.

Do people on this board want:

1 ) perpretators put in jail
2 ) aiding and abetting put in jail
3 ) sack cloth and ashes
4 ) the church disbanded
5 ) compo
6 ) an apology
7 ) all the above
8 ) none of the above
9 ) something else?

(Updated following 5Sams post)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: 5 Sams on November 26, 2009, 09:33:22 PM
Quote from: Orior on November 26, 2009, 09:29:43 PM
Okay, so there were very bad eggs in the priesthood, and peoples lives were ruined.

Do people on this board want:

1) sack cloth and ashes
2) the church disbanded
3) compo
4) an apology
5) all the above
6) none of the above
7) something else?

7........just cut the balls of the perverted cnuts. Simple. Priest or lay man....psychos like that need to be sorted out.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on November 26, 2009, 09:35:17 PM
130 complaints since 2004,

2000 and fcking 4.

How can this still be happening? >:(. When will it stop?.

Just beyond thought the evilness. I hope the victims can find the strength to live there lives in peace.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 09:42:09 PM
Quote from: Orior on November 26, 2009, 09:29:43 PM
Okay, so there were very bad eggs in the priesthood, and peoples lives were ruined.

Do people on this board want:

1 ) perpretators put in jail
2 ) aiding and abetting put in jail
3 ) sack cloth and ashes
4 ) the church disbanded
5 ) compo
6 ) an apology
7 ) all the above
8 ) none of the above
9 ) something else?

(Updated following 5Sams post)

1) yes should be jailed & 2) should be prosecuted, not all would go to jail, it would depend on the circumstances.

Disbanding the Church is not the solution but there needs to be a lot of weeding out done and I'm afraid the current Pontiff may not be willing to help, judging by his actions as a Cardinal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on November 26, 2009, 09:58:22 PM
Prime Time now, absolutely shocking stuff.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 10:07:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on November 26, 2009, 09:29:43 PM
Okay, so there were very bad eggs in the priesthood, and peoples lives were ruined.

Do people on this board want:

1 ) perpretators put in jail
2 ) aiding and abetting put in jail
3 ) sack cloth and ashes
4 ) the church disbanded
5 ) compo
6 ) an apology
7 ) all the above
8 ) none of the above
9 ) something else?

(Updated following 5Sams post)

- 1 & 2 & 5 definetely
- If i were a victim an apology now would be pretty meaningless.
- All state funding removed from catholic church for a period until it demonstrates it deserves it
- Church removed from all schools, hospitals etc, Compulsory purchase of all relevant assets to achieve this, for say a token €1.
- Letter of protest sent to the pope outlining the disgust of the government.
- Laws introduced that makes it a minimum 10 year offence for anyone who knows of child abuse and does not inform authorities.
- Rights of the child enshrined in the constitution.
- Any mention of special place for catholic church in law or constitution removed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 26, 2009, 09:58:22 PM
Prime Time now, absolutely shocking stuff.


Scandlous.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 10:16:52 PM
what's happening on prime time?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Yes I Would on November 26, 2009, 10:30:38 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 10:16:52 PM
what's happening on prime time?

Pretty graphic detail what these evil bastards were up to, and how it was covered up and brushed under the carpet!!
Hope they rot in hell!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 26, 2009, 10:31:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 26, 2009, 10:16:52 PM
what's happening on prime time?
harrowing.

Miriam and 3 other women, lots of hand wringing and a humble Bishop we should be grateful for although he couldn't answer any question when the women got around to asking any.

2 ministers wouldn't go on the show.

Aside from the chatter the reports of activities of individual offenders and the cover-ups were particularly harrowing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 26, 2009, 10:40:59 PM
The protection and covering up of Fr. Greene in Donegal was particularly shocking. Moved from one parish to another. Truly amazing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on November 26, 2009, 11:17:36 PM
That Fr Greene story was absolutely diabolical.  I was in tears at parts of Prime Time.  Felt pretty sorry for the Archbishop, he is carrying the weight of the whole lot on his shoulders. 

The psycho-analyst was pretty poor though - maybe I just misunderstood her role.

This is so sad (but necessary) to hear.  How, how could there be such a concentration of paedophiles in a pretty small population of priests?  What made so many of them think it was acceptable?  There has to be a lot of psychology behind the behaviour.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:27:56 PM
Quote from: Rois on November 26, 2009, 11:17:36 PM
That Fr Greene story was absolutely diabolical.  I was in tears at parts of Prime Time.  Felt pretty sorry for the Archbishop, he is carrying the weight of the whole lot on his shoulders. 

The psycho-analyst was pretty poor though - maybe I just misunderstood her role.

This is so sad (but necessary) to hear.  How, how could there be such a concentration of paedophiles in a pretty small population of priests?  What made so many of them think it was acceptable?  There has to be a lot of psychology behind the behaviour.

Same as that Rois... I find that very distressing to watch. I be looking at mantle piece at pics of my kids. They are evil b**tards including the ones who covered up. How the f** could they cover that. Sickening. I never darken the door of the church anyway,. Is totally corrupt. Sean Brady comes across as very shallow, trying to say the right thing. The survivers are the heroes in this country. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 26, 2009, 11:42:07 PM
Diarmuid Martin is truly repentant, shocked, sorrowful and aghast, on behalf of the evil bastards who abused under the protection of the Catholic Church authorities, of which there were a multitude. And let's not forget, they (certain Church orders) were calling the abused liars and fantasists right up until very, very recently.

At the root of all this, in my opinion, is the contemptible, corrupting vow of celibacy, something that was introduced solely to protect the Churches' assets on Earth from the 'threat' of inheritance, i.e., protect material. It had no basis in theology, though a theological framework was contrived around it over the centuries as the casuits and sophists spun and wove, and all the while the young innocent were being buggered, raped, and killed.

It wasn't just the celibacy vow of course, but that laid the groundwork wherein it offered 'respectable' sanctuary for depraved monsters like 'Father' Seán Fortune in Wexford, who probably couldn't believe his luck having being ordained and bestowed with all the inbuilt unquestioned trust that that position entailed and guaranteed. Sick. And all the while, the Christian Catholic Church shimmied and skived to move the abusers around like harmless draughts on a board, to some other place where they could abuse with a clean sheet again, and with sure impunity regardless of the twisted depths of their perversion.

There are good priests, and I feel for them, for such will be the fallout here that the scattergun of opprobrium will spare few, if any. But if the Catholic Church wants to have any relevance, trust (ha!), or future it needs to address the shameful source of sacrilege that celibacy is.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on November 26, 2009, 11:48:46 PM
If they were allowed to have sex with a woman (or man?) would that stop them raping kids?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 26, 2009, 11:52:12 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 26, 2009, 11:48:46 PM
If they were allowed to have sex with a woman (or man?) would that stop them raping kids?

Where the feck do I say that?

But no, it almost certainly wouldn't, but no more than the usual sexual deviant Joe, of which there are a few. My whole point is that it's such a contrived, unnatural stricture that it's going to pervert, much more than a random sample of the ordinary Joes would be perverted (and it isn't just the blokes you know).

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:54:14 PM
A lot of shite talk there Fear an Srath Ban. Celebacy like f**. If celebacy was a problem why didn't they go and have sex with adult women or men if that is their thing or even pay a prostitute. They were paedophiles... forget the dog collar shite. Evil paedos who probably got into the church to get acess to kids and be trusted. Jees! if someone goes a while without sex they don't get the urge to rape a child!!.... unless they are paedophiles.   
As for Martin being truly repentant... by his actions he will be judged... like standing down the bishops that covered up... 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 26, 2009, 11:58:59 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:54:14 PM
A lot of shite talk there Fear an Srath Ban. Celebacy like f**. If celebacy was a problem why didn't they go and have sex with adult women or men if that is their thing or even apy a prostitute.
Celibacy isn't natural, and neither you, nor anyone else can predict exactly how humans react to such unnatural directives. Adult women or men likely involved more risk, and so perverted were they that adults may not have cut it. Who are you, David Attenborough? You don't know, all I know is that something that's so unnatural cannot be good for a soul.


Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:54:14 PM
They were paedophiles... forget the dog collar shite. Evil paedos who probably got into the church to get acess to kids and be trusted. Jees! if someone goes a while without sex they don't get the urge to rape a child!!.... unless they are paedophiles.   
Read what I wrote again slowly, especially the sanctuary bit.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 26, 2009, 11:58:59 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:54:14 PM
A lot of shite talk there Fear an Srath Ban. Celebacy like f**. If celebacy was a problem why didn't they go and have sex with adult women or men if that is their thing or even apy a prostitute.
Celibacy isn't natural, and neither you, nor anyone else can predict exactly how humans react to such unnatural directives. Adult women or men likely involved more risk, and so perverted were they that adults may not have cut it. Who are you, David Attenborough? You don't know, all I know is that something that's so unnatural cannot be good for a soul.


Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 26, 2009, 11:54:14 PM
They were paedophiles... forget the dog collar shite. Evil paedos who probably got into the church to get acess to kids and be trusted. Jees! if someone goes a while without sex they don't get the urge to rape a child!!.... unless they are paedophiles.   
Read what I wrote again slowly, especially the sanctuary bit.

What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.

What are you?... a sex therapist?  :o  I'll guareentee you if I went 12 monthes without sex I wouldn't start raping children but if you want to make excuses for evil paedophiles go ahead...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:27:04 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
I'll guareentee you if I went 12 monthes without sex I wouldn't start raping children but if you want to make excuses for evil paedophiles go ahead...

Go fcuk yourself, I'm making excuses for no one (you're good at the tabloid talk).

That doesn't mean that if something's broken it shouldn't be fixed, or if there's a problem with something it shouldn't be addressed. Grow up sometime.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:29:27 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:27:04 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
I'll guareentee you if I went 12 monthes without sex I wouldn't start raping children but if you want to make excuses for evil paedophiles go ahead...

Go fcuk yourself, I'm making excuses for no one (you're good at the tabloid talk).

That doesn't mean that if something's broken it shouldn't be fixed, or if there's a problem with something it shouldn't be addressed. Grow up sometime.

The name calling and insults cut no ice with Mr Fox  8) ... stop making excuses about celebacy for paedophiles.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:33:50 AM
A childish, rabble-raiser and mob ruler. Tabloid trash.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:40:22 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:33:50 AM
A childish, rabble-raiser and mob ruler. Tabloid trash.

Is too serious a subject to give that the reply it merits. Goodnite       
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Sandino on November 27, 2009, 12:41:24 AM
In my opinion the celibacy issue is a discourse it has little bearing in relation to sex attacks on children. most people who abuse children are married hetrosexual men. I have also read somewhere that the percentage of abusers within the church is equal to most other professions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:42:39 AM
Quote from: Sandino on November 27, 2009, 12:41:24 AM
In my opinion the celibacy issue is a discourse it has little bearing in relation to sex attacks on children. most people who abuse children are married hetrosexual men. I have also read somewhere that the persentage of abusers within the church is equal to most other professions.

Good luck Sandino... Strabane man will give you hell for that opinion  :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Sandino on November 27, 2009, 12:45:19 AM
I disagree with celibacy but i think that it  is a different issue from the abuse of children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:51:33 AM
Quote from: Sandino on November 27, 2009, 12:41:24 AM
In my opinion the celibacy issue is a discourse it has little bearing in relation to sex attacks on children. most people who abuse children are married hetrosexual men. I have also read somewhere that the persentage of abusers within the church is equal to most other professions.

I'd like to see the stats on that Sandino.  I'm talking about percentages, not absolute figures, i.e., there are many more married heterosexual men than priests, so by the law of averages alone that would be expected, but I'd say there's more than the law of averages at work. Again, I'd like to see stats on the professions.

And bear in mind that a lot of the abuse within the Church is only coming to light now, i.e., whenever those statistics were gathered it might still have been the case that there was no abuse within the Catholic Church at all, virtually, or very little, i.e., no more than the equal of other professions.

And I agree, that celibacy is no excuse, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that a vocation such as the priesthood that involves and embodies the care, protection and support of all in society, especially for the most vulnerable, but which ends up actually being the greatest persecutor of the most vulnerable and needful in society represents something more than a statistical aberration. It represents a perversion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 01:57:23 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...


As a practicing member of the catholic church why should i be painted with the same brush as these evil psychos.
I feel sorrow for the victims but why should these so called humans actions make me feel ashamed to be a catholic.
I or people like me have done nothing wrong.
I feel that the religion i believe has in done nothing wrong.

The church has done a terrible wrong that in this life will never be righted or forgotten about.
The only way it can continue to be existent with any degree of decency and respect is a big change from the inside out and from the top down especially in terms of modern thinking personnel.

But for you to come on here and question why i should be a catholic and support a religious belief because of some big cover up of a sicko society in the church is ludicrous.

I believe in the catholic faith because i have a faith.
I believe in all the good people can do in this world to help others and to make life easier for the more vulnerable.

Thats why im helping my neighbours look after their houses during the floods,thats why im looking after my elderly neighbours farm because hes not able to cause of the floods,thats why i visit a 80 year old man every saturday and sunday morning to make sure he is ok cause he is isolated,its why i support the neil mellon township fund,its why i train the u-10s in my club,its why i support concern and its why i love my child.

My faith helps me do all the above and none of what i do makes me any better or worse than you or anyone else in fact id say that the vast amount of members of this board are better people than me but my point is the catholic religion has so much good in it and that what makes me be a catholic.

The church should be criticised from the highest authority in the state,be made compensate its victims and relatives,all perpretrators and accomplaces be punished vigoursly including lay people and hierarchy of the judicial and policing systems who were in on the cover up.

However the practising people who are just catholics because its their religion should not be painted with the same brush and let them get on with their religion and let it try and do good for people.

Let this awful chapter in our history never be forgotton so we as a people can learn from the mistakes of the past. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on November 27, 2009, 04:44:42 AM
Well said Rossie Mad, the church is bigger than any Pope,Bishop,Priest or pervert. Sweeping changes will be required, but the Church will survive because people like you recognise the postive contributions it has and  can make to society. Trust no Pope,Bishop or Priest, let our trust be in God alone
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on November 27, 2009, 07:45:51 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:27:04 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
I'll guareentee you if I went 12 monthes without sex I wouldn't start raping children but if you want to make excuses for evil paedophiles go ahead...

Go fcuk yourself, I'm making excuses for no one (you're good at the tabloid talk).

That doesn't mean that if something's broken it shouldn't be fixed, or if there's a problem with something it shouldn't be addressed. Grow up sometime.
Whether you are meaning it or not it sounds to me that you are using celibacy as an excuse ( or an explaination). You may have a point but its more like a theory unless you can back it up woth some stats.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 08:20:13 AM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 01:57:23 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...


As a practicing member of the catholic church why should i be painted with the same brush as these evil psychos.
I feel sorrow for the victims but why should these so called humans actions make me feel ashamed to be a catholic.
I or people like me have done nothing wrong.
I feel that the religion i believe has in done nothing wrong.

The church has done a terrible wrong that in this life will never be righted or forgotten about.
The only way it can continue to be existent with any degree of decency and respect is a big change from the inside out and from the top down especially in terms of modern thinking personnel.

But for you to come on here and question why i should be a catholic and support a religious belief because of some big cover up of a sicko society in the church is ludicrous.

I believe in the catholic faith because i have a faith.
I believe in all the good people can do in this world to help others and to make life easier for the more vulnerable.

Thats why im helping my neighbours look after their houses during the floods,thats why im looking after my elderly neighbours farm because hes not able to cause of the floods,thats why i visit a 80 year old man every saturday and sunday morning to make sure he is ok cause he is isolated,its why i support the neil mellon township fund,its why i train the u-10s in my club,its why i support concern and its why i love my child.

My faith helps me do all the above and none of what i do makes me any better or worse than you or anyone else in fact id say that the vast amount of members of this board are better people than me but my point is the catholic religion has so much good in it and that what makes me be a catholic.

The church should be criticised from the highest authority in the state,be made compensate its victims and relatives,all perpretrators and accomplaces be punished vigoursly including lay people and hierarchy of the judicial and policing systems who were in on the cover up.

However the practising people who are just catholics because its their religion should not be painted with the same brush and let them get on with their religion and let it try and do good for people.

Let this awful chapter in our history never be forgotton so we as a people can learn from the mistakes of the past.

You have completely missed the point. But at least you replied unlike most of the other devout catholics on the board. I presume that you are a christian first and foremost. That is believe in Jesus Christ, son of god sent to earth to save us. As a Christain you believe in the bible as the word of god. That is my starting point.

All a church is, is a vehicle for you to express the above beliefs is it not? There are many christian organised churches and there are many christians that live their lives by the bible without the need for any church.

What I am saying is why if you are a christain would you have anything to do with the catholic church that abuses kids and covers it up. Can you not be a christian outside of the catholic church and do all the things you list above.

A very simple analogy - I love GAA and am a member of a club. If that club were shown to be harbouring child abusers I would leave that club without hesitation. I might join another club or I might not but it doesn't stop me still loving the GAA does it?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on November 27, 2009, 09:05:31 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 08:20:13 AM

What I am saying is why if you are a christain would you have anything to do with the catholic church that abuses kids and covers it up. Can you not be a christian outside of the catholic church and do all the things you list above.



Maybe it isn't your intention myles but it upsets me that others are insinuating that by not disassociating yourself from the Church in the wake of this means you are somehow condoning or at least excusing or ignoring what's gone on.

Well if you're going to use the GAA in this context, could I also liken parishes to clubs - the Catholic Church to me is more than a hierarchy - it's a community thing, much like the GAA club. 
I had a fantastic experience with those involved in the church while growing up, and since.  I don't want to see my parish community disintegrate.  The nuns and priests who had a bearing on my life were nothing but inspiring in their Christian values. 
And that to me is the Catholic Church - if any of those clergy that I had contact with on a regular basis were involved in any cover-up or directly in abuse, then I'd be disgusted on a personal level (and am with those I've never had any contact with), but I also won't forget how much comfort their colleagues brought me after a bereavement, the investment they put into teaching Christian behaviours and the joy and friendships they encouraged through involvement in parish life. 

What's being uncovered now is sad and the perpitrators (in whatever sense) should be held accountable, hopefully beginning with the replacement of those guilty parties still involved in the Church.  But on a daily basis, this affair will not change my memories or practices with the Church, and I hope that people don't try to make me feel guilty for it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 09:14:17 AM
Quote from: ludermor on November 27, 2009, 07:45:51 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:27:04 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
I'll guareentee you if I went 12 monthes without sex I wouldn't start raping children but if you want to make excuses for evil paedophiles go ahead...

Go fcuk yourself, I'm making excuses for no one (you're good at the tabloid talk).

That doesn't mean that if something's broken it shouldn't be fixed, or if there's a problem with something it shouldn't be addressed. Grow up sometime.
Whether you are meaning it or not it sounds to me that you are using celibacy as an excuse ( or an explaination). You may have a point but its more like a theory unless you can back it up woth some stats.

We are all responsible for our own individual actions ludermor, so it can never be an excuse. That doesn't mean, however, that some rational analysis can't be applied. That always leaves you open to accusations of being an apologist, but then we were all psychopathic sociopathic dysfunctional republicans in the worst days of the recent troubles.

Tabloid analysis is easy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 09:33:32 AM
Quote from: Rois on November 27, 2009, 09:05:31 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 08:20:13 AM

What I am saying is why if you are a christain would you have anything to do with the catholic church that abuses kids and covers it up. Can you not be a christian outside of the catholic church and do all the things you list above.



Maybe it isn't your intention myles but it upsets me that others are insinuating that by not disassociating yourself from the Church in the wake of this means you are somehow condoning or at least excusing or ignoring what's gone on.

Well if you're going to use the GAA in this context, could I also liken parishes to clubs - the Catholic Church to me is more than a hierarchy - it's a community thing, much like the GAA club. 
I had a fantastic experience with those involved in the church while growing up, and since.  I don't want to see my parish community disintegrate.  The nuns and priests who had a bearing on my life were nothing but inspiring in their Christian values. 
And that to me is the Catholic Church - if any of those clergy that I had contact with on a regular basis were involved in any cover-up or directly in abuse, then I'd be disgusted on a personal level (and am with those I've never had any contact with), but I also won't forget how much comfort their colleagues brought me after a bereavement, the investment they put into teaching Christian behaviours and the joy and friendships they encouraged through involvement in parish life. 

What's being uncovered now is sad and the perpitrators (in whatever sense) should be held accountable, hopefully beginning with the replacement of those guilty parties still involved in the Church.  But on a daily basis, this affair will not change my memories or practices with the Church, and I hope that people don't try to make me feel guilty for it.

Rois -  I am not trying to upset you, genuinely asking the question. Neither am I trying to make you feel guilty. But the fact remains that the church is rotten to the core right from the top. That is now an established fact in my opinion. The good people that influenced you would be better off to take their christian values outside the church now and work from there or they risk getting sucked down with it. You are right too, the church is like a hierarchy or maybe even a monarchy. A monarchy that allowed unspeakable acts to happen. Even if there are good people within, I could not bring myself to give a penny to that organisation ever again for anything. I could never allow myself to be apart of any group that had an affiliation to such acts. I don't know if you have kids but I do and when you hear these things you think of your own kids and what they could have been subjected too. It makes me mad and i am not afraid to admit that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: HowAreYeGettinOn on November 27, 2009, 10:01:31 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 09:33:32 AM
But the fact remains that the church is rotten to the core right from the top. That is now an established fact in my opinion.

Well said.

Miriam O'Callaghan asked an interesting question of Diarmuid Martin last night - it was along the lines of 'If you are so humbled / ashamed / troubled by these revelations, why don't you use your influence to do some good and ask some of the bishops named in the report, who are now serving in other dioceses in the country, to resign?'

Martin, despite his obvious decent intentions (and he is a quantum leap forward from his predecessors in that regard), gave the old reliable 'bishops should look into their own hearts and ask themselves the question...'-type answer. In other words, he ain't gonna sack no-one.

Like Marie Collins, the abuse survivor said, nothing has really changed. The Catholic Church see this whole thing not as a mortifying scandal that necessitates a long (i.e. decades) period of contrition, humility and repentance on their behalf, but as state busybodies interfering in their business. They just want it all to go away so that they can get back to 'normal'.

There will be no great purge of offenders, no putting in place of transparent safety measures, no real effort to change on the Church's behalf. Just apologies like Martin's yesterday. They're just keeping their heads down, hoping that these reports stop soon. They haven't a notion of doing anything about their internal 'culture'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on November 27, 2009, 10:14:09 AM
QuoteIn other words, he ain't gonna sack no-one.

He can't sack anyone
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 27, 2009, 10:15:07 AM
The contempt in which the commission was held by the Vatican and the Papal Nuncio would lend weight to the argument that things haven't really changed that much :


Vatican 'snubbed Ireland church abuse inquiry' 

The handling of allegations of child sex abuse in Dublin was investigated
The inquiry into sex abuse by Catholic priests in Ireland has disclosed that the Vatican ignored formal requests for information.

The inquiry asked for details of reports on abuse sent to the Vatican by the Dublin archdiocese in 2006.

The Vatican did not reply but told the Irish Foreign Affairs department the request "had not gone through appropriate diplomatic channels".
The inquiry condemned church leaders for covering-up abuse for decades.

The Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin, which was published on Thursday, covered a period from 1975 to 2004.

The commission said it was independent of the government and therefore did not regard it as appropriate to use diplomatic channels when seeking information.

A request for information from the Papal Nuncio also was ignored. In February 2007, the commission wrote to the Dublin-based Papal Nuncio asking him to forward all relevant documents in his possession.

It also requested that he confirm whether he had any such documents but the Papal Nuncio did not reply.

Ashamed

Earlier this year, the commission again failed to receive a reply after sending the Papal Nuncio extracts from its draft report which referred to him and his office, as it was required to do.

The Vatican told The Irish Times it "was a matter for the local church involved".

A senior Vatican spokesman said diplomatic practice required that outside requests made to the governance of the Vatican pass through diplomatic channels, in this case the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin and the Irish Embassy to the Holy See in Rome.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 10:32:05 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.

First time I've ever been called an 'aul wan'   :P  I ain't in my 70s or 80s... or even 50s! I don't now anyone was forced to go into the priesthood although I know of a woman whose son left the church and she felt such shame apparently said, "It would be better if he was dead." For someone who is such an expert on abuse you really personalise your messages.
.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 10:53:15 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 08:20:13 AM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 01:57:23 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...


As a practicing member of the catholic church why should i be painted with the same brush as these evil psychos.
I feel sorrow for the victims but why should these so called humans actions make me feel ashamed to be a catholic.
I or people like me have done nothing wrong.
I feel that the religion i believe has in done nothing wrong.

The church has done a terrible wrong that in this life will never be righted or forgotten about.
The only way it can continue to be existent with any degree of decency and respect is a big change from the inside out and from the top down especially in terms of modern thinking personnel.

But for you to come on here and question why i should be a catholic and support a religious belief because of some big cover up of a sicko society in the church is ludicrous.

I believe in the catholic faith because i have a faith.
I believe in all the good people can do in this world to help others and to make life easier for the more vulnerable.

Thats why im helping my neighbours look after their houses during the floods,thats why im looking after my elderly neighbours farm because hes not able to cause of the floods,thats why i visit a 80 year old man every saturday and sunday morning to make sure he is ok cause he is isolated,its why i support the neil mellon township fund,its why i train the u-10s in my club,its why i support concern and its why i love my child.

My faith helps me do all the above and none of what i do makes me any better or worse than you or anyone else in fact id say that the vast amount of members of this board are better people than me but my point is the catholic religion has so much good in it and that what makes me be a catholic.

The church should be criticised from the highest authority in the state,be made compensate its victims and relatives,all perpretrators and accomplaces be punished vigoursly including lay people and hierarchy of the judicial and policing systems who were in on the cover up.

However the practising people who are just catholics because its their religion should not be painted with the same brush and let them get on with their religion and let it try and do good for people.

Let this awful chapter in our history never be forgotton so we as a people can learn from the mistakes of the past.

You have completely missed the point. But at least you replied unlike most of the other devout catholics on the board. I presume that you are a christian first and foremost. That is believe in Jesus Christ, son of god sent to earth to save us. As a Christain you believe in the bible as the word of god. That is my starting point.

All a church is, is a vehicle for you to express the above beliefs is it not? There are many christian organised churches and there are many christians that live their lives by the bible without the need for any church.

What I am saying is why if you are a christain would you have anything to do with the catholic church that abuses kids and covers it up. Can you not be a christian outside of the catholic church and do all the things you list above.

A very simple analogy - I love GAA and am a member of a club. If that club were shown to be harbouring child abusers I would leave that club without hesitation. I might join another club or I might not but it doesn't stop me still loving the GAA does it?

I am also an active member of a GAA club and if this sort thing was happening and lets say covered up by a chairman or secretary or even an club executive i would be genuinely horrified but would i leave that club?
I most definitly would not.For two reasons
1 I absolutely love that club and would not ever dream of leaving it.
2 Why should i leave a club that is my birth right to be a part of and has been ingrained in my psyche from an early age because of a paedophile and a group of people who covered it up.I didnt do any thing wrong.

I would make sure that all memebers who acted in such ways and covered up such acts would be first brought to justice under civil law and then make sure that they were never a member of the GAA again or a member of ANY club again.

I would try and rebuild the club with sweeping changes in protocols and coaching set ups so that a level of trust could be built up between the club members and parents who undoubtedly would be very wary of letting their children near such a club again.

It might not work but at least i would try.

Im not saying im going to make these changes to the catholic church but what i will do is talk to my parish preist and my parish council to make sure that in the future something like this wont happen in my parish because the protocols and systems are in place to prevent such a horrenendous act.

On another point i spent hours thinking to myself questioning my faith after watching prime time.
Forgiveness is a big value in any christian religion and i know i cant forgive these animals for the hurt they have caused to the church and if it was me or my child i kmow i wouldnt be able to forgive them.

Believe it or believe not but i am hurting badly because i am genuinely questioning my faith since revelations of this was revealed months ago and this new report has only sown fresh seeds of doubt in my mind.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 11:07:56 AM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 10:53:15 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 08:20:13 AM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 01:57:23 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 26, 2009, 04:10:05 PM
So here we are again another report another outrage. The sheep will claim it was a minority and the government should have done this and that. Sure they said sorry. Sure they paid compensation. Is it worth going into it anymore? I just want to say this.

If you are a christian and believe in the bible as the word of God thats grand. If you want to lead a good life by the rules of the bible thats fine. But why why why do people need to be apart of an organisation that...

- Put their own survival above all else.
- That allows little children to be raped, abused and destroyed by its members.
- Protects the evil paedophilles within its ranks.
- Frustrates all attempts at investigation.
- Offers mealy mouthed apologies decades on.
- Thats fights tooth and nail not to compensate until public opinion (& dwindling crowds) force it.

I could add more but whats the point. The hardliner catholics on the board will avoid commenting on this thread, probably because they are still clinging to the "minority of bad apples" theory or the big bad "anti catholics" just turn it into a slagging match. Or maybe their brains have been short circuited by the shock of the truth. Maybe they can't deal with everything they believe in being turned on its head.

But stop and think - if you believe in the word of God as written in the bible, how can you belong to an organisation that perpetrates crimes so outrageous against the most vulnerable. Ask yourselves that.

I can only imagine the depressing responses I'll get...


As a practicing member of the catholic church why should i be painted with the same brush as these evil psychos.
I feel sorrow for the victims but why should these so called humans actions make me feel ashamed to be a catholic.
I or people like me have done nothing wrong.
I feel that the religion i believe has in done nothing wrong.

The church has done a terrible wrong that in this life will never be righted or forgotten about.
The only way it can continue to be existent with any degree of decency and respect is a big change from the inside out and from the top down especially in terms of modern thinking personnel.

But for you to come on here and question why i should be a catholic and support a religious belief because of some big cover up of a sicko society in the church is ludicrous.

I believe in the catholic faith because i have a faith.
I believe in all the good people can do in this world to help others and to make life easier for the more vulnerable.

Thats why im helping my neighbours look after their houses during the floods,thats why im looking after my elderly neighbours farm because hes not able to cause of the floods,thats why i visit a 80 year old man every saturday and sunday morning to make sure he is ok cause he is isolated,its why i support the neil mellon township fund,its why i train the u-10s in my club,its why i support concern and its why i love my child.

My faith helps me do all the above and none of what i do makes me any better or worse than you or anyone else in fact id say that the vast amount of members of this board are better people than me but my point is the catholic religion has so much good in it and that what makes me be a catholic.

The church should be criticised from the highest authority in the state,be made compensate its victims and relatives,all perpretrators and accomplaces be punished vigoursly including lay people and hierarchy of the judicial and policing systems who were in on the cover up.

However the practising people who are just catholics because its their religion should not be painted with the same brush and let them get on with their religion and let it try and do good for people.

Let this awful chapter in our history never be forgotton so we as a people can learn from the mistakes of the past.

You have completely missed the point. But at least you replied unlike most of the other devout catholics on the board. I presume that you are a christian first and foremost. That is believe in Jesus Christ, son of god sent to earth to save us. As a Christain you believe in the bible as the word of god. That is my starting point.

All a church is, is a vehicle for you to express the above beliefs is it not? There are many christian organised churches and there are many christians that live their lives by the bible without the need for any church.

What I am saying is why if you are a christain would you have anything to do with the catholic church that abuses kids and covers it up. Can you not be a christian outside of the catholic church and do all the things you list above.

A very simple analogy - I love GAA and am a member of a club. If that club were shown to be harbouring child abusers I would leave that club without hesitation. I might join another club or I might not but it doesn't stop me still loving the GAA does it?

I am also an active member of a GAA club and if this sort thing was happening and lets say covered up by a chairman or secretary or even an club executive i would be genuinely horrified but would i leave that club?
I most definitly would not.For two reasons
1 I absolutely love that club and would not ever dream of leaving it.
2 Why should i leave a club that is my birth right to be a part of and has been ingrained in my psyche from an early age because of a paedophile and a group of people who covered it up.I didnt do any thing wrong.

I would make sure that all memebers who acted in such ways and covered up such acts would be first brought to justice under civil law and then make sure that they were never a member of the GAA again or a member of ANY club again.

I would try and rebuild the club with sweeping changes in protocols and coaching set ups so that a level of trust could be built up between the club members and parents who undoubtedly would be very wary of letting their children near such a club again.

It might not work but at least i would try.

Im not saying im going to make these changes to the catholic church but what i will do is talk to my parish preist and my parish council to make sure that in the future something like this wont happen in my parish because the protocols and systems are in place to prevent such a horrenendous act.

On another point i spent hours thinking to myself questioning my faith after watching prime time.
Forgiveness is a big value in any christian religion and i know i cant forgive these animals for the hurt they have caused to the church and if it was me or my child i kmow i wouldnt be able to forgive them.

Believe it or believe not but i am hurting badly because i am genuinely questioning my faith since revelations of this was revealed months ago and this new report has only sown fresh seeds of doubt in my mind.

If I may say this, is your "faith" not to God something that you can keep without being a member of anything. What you have to the catholic church is "allegiance" in my opinion. It is that I think you should be questioning.

Regarding the GAA club analogy. If the abusers were allowed to stay and work within the club would you still stay apart of it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:17:45 AM

Well i dont see how they could be let stay but no im afraid if my club let them stay i would leave the club but do everything in my power to get rid of them from outside.

But in fairness thats a very long winded point because as well you know it wouldnt happen however the church has done this in the past and maybe they are still at it i dont know but if they are i condemn the church wholeheartedly.

I dont have an allegiance to the catholic church i have a belief in the catholic church which has been rocked to say the least.

My faith is in god our lord jesus and the Virgin Mary.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on November 27, 2009, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:17:45 AM

Well i dont see how they could be let stay but no im afraid if my club let them stay i would leave the club but do everything in my power to get rid of them from outside.

But in fairness thats a very long winded point because as well you know it wouldnt happen however the church has done this in the past and maybe they are still at it i dont know but if they are i condemn the church wholeheartedly.

I dont have an allegiance to the catholic church i have a belief in the catholic church which has been rocked to say the least.

My faith is in god our lord jesus and the Virgin Mary.

You say it wouldn't happen in regards to an abuser being allowed to stay within a club rossie and you'd be right on that (you, me and the rest of us live in the real world  :-\). But what if you found out that there was a culture of covering up these abuses in your club and that you then found out the truth about what so many influencial clubmen did to keep it hush hush rather than exposing the perputrator and protecting the vunerable within your community. Could you work with these individuals in your club knowing that and take leadership from such people? I think you know the answer to that question.

As others have said ...you don't need the trappings of a religion to have faith in a god
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
i actually thought to myself this morning when would you join the debate ;D

I think ive already answered that.
I couldnt work with them if they were still allowed work and would expose everyone involved including the perpertrator as well as the people who covered it up.

I would then make sure they could never join my or any other club for life and then would try with the help of others rebuild the club structure so this wouldnt happen again.

However fo rme to do this within the catholic church is nigh impossible as already said i will talk to my parish preist and may even ask for a meeting with our bishop to discuss the current protocols in place to make sure something like this wont happen in my parish/diocese in the future.

I see the point of the religioous trappings and faith in god  but do i denounce everything ive grown to believe because of the wrong of others and what they did in my and others like me name.

I am asking myself that queston at this point in time.

By the way myles and skull ye arnt helping the whole situation either as the more i read ye the more i wonder. ;D

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: HowAreYeGettinOn on November 27, 2009, 11:56:41 AM
Quote from: Declan on November 27, 2009, 10:14:09 AM
QuoteIn other words, he ain't gonna sack no-one.

He can't sack anyone

Fair enough, but he could ask them to resign, which given the amount of public pressure that would then follow would surely amount to the same thing (at least I'd hope it would).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on November 27, 2009, 12:07:37 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?

Well according to Dermot Ahern they will, so we'll have to wait on that happening but I won't be holding my breath. I'd say most of the perpetrators will have to answer for their crimes at the pearly gates.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 27, 2009, 12:09:48 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on November 27, 2009, 12:07:37 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?

Well according to Dermot Ahern they will, so we'll have to wait on that happening but I won't be holding my breath. I'd say most of the perpetrators will have to answer for their crimes at the pearly gates.
[/b]


What Pearly gates ??  ;)  More fiction ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: HowAreYeGettinOn on November 27, 2009, 12:10:09 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 10:53:15 AM
I would make sure that all members who acted in such ways and covered up such acts would be first brought to justice under civil law and then make sure that they were never a member of the GAA again or a member of ANY club again.

I would try and rebuild the club with sweeping changes in protocols and coaching set ups so that a level of trust could be built up between the club members and parents who undoubtedly would be very wary of letting their children near such a club again.

It might not work but at least i would try.

RM, your attitude is the one we all wish the church would adopt regarding these scandals. If there was a SERIOUS intent demonstrated by the church to deal with the scandals along the lines you've mentioned - not just apologies, which Diarmuid Martin himself admitted yesterday will never be adequate to heal survivors' pain - then I might go back to church myself, or even have some respect for the church. Right now I have none.

Yes, there are good priests, and all of this is desperately unfair on them. But they're not speaking up in this debate either. Where is the movement within the priesthood to rid the church of this corruption? If the 'good priests' don't start that, who will?

The church continue to show, not by their words but by their (in)action, that they have no intention of doing anything to change their ways. In their world, all of this is an irritating imposition on them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on November 27, 2009, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
i actually thought to myself this morning when would you join the debate ;D

However fo rme to do this within the catholic church is nigh impossible as already said i will talk to my parish preist and may even ask for a meeting with our bishop to discuss the current protocols in place to make sure something like this wont happen in my parish/diocese in the future.


As long as we question rather than accept dogma then I think were all on the right path rossie (even though we're on two different one's)  ;)

Any talk you have with your priest/bishop will be all about them trying to quell the discussions regarding this sorry mess. You will get lots of soft words and admissions of shame and guilt, but they will trot out that language to everyone troubled soul who comes in the hope that it will help get things back to normal. Justice will not come into their thinking. The congregations are being played for fools

I wish you well on your journey....and always remember the dark side (athiesm) isn't as bad as you think  :)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 12:20:47 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
i actually thought to myself this morning when would you join the debate ;D

I think ive already answered that.
I couldnt work with them if they were still allowed work and would expose everyone involved including the perpertrator as well as the people who covered it up.

I would then make sure they could never join my or any other club for life and then would try with the help of others rebuild the club structure so this wouldnt happen again.

However fo rme to do this within the catholic church is nigh impossible as already said i will talk to my parish preist and may even ask for a meeting with our bishop to discuss the current protocols in place to make sure something like this wont happen in my parish/diocese in the future.

I see the point of the religioous trappings and faith in god  but do i denounce everything ive grown to believe because of the wrong of others and what they did in my and others like me name.

I am asking myself that queston at this point in time.

By the way myles and skull ye arnt helping the whole situation either as the more i read ye the more i wonder. ;D

Best of luck coming to a decision.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 12:23:01 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?

I'm sure the people who did the actual acts will be prosecuted, but what about those that covered it up. They are EQUALLY guilty but will face no penalty. The law needs to be changed in this regard. Only the church can deal with them now and there is little hope of that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 27, 2009, 12:33:28 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 12:23:01 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?

I'm sure the people who did the actual acts will be prosecuted, but what about those that covered it up. They are EQUALLY guilty but will face no penalty. The law needs to be changed in this regard. Only the church can deal with them now and there is little hope of that.



Do you remember this being rammed down your throat ? Penalty will be waiting for them at those gates !



"I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do"




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 27, 2009, 02:44:28 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 27, 2009, 11:07:56 AM
Regarding the GAA club analogy. If the abusers were allowed to stay and work within the club would you still stay apart of it?

Or if the club constitution stated that the reputation of the club and it's executive was more important than the safety of children?

Or if the club constitution outlined how to deal with criminals outside of the civil law?

Or if the club constitution was regarded (at least in practice) to over-ride civil law?

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 05:27:20 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.

Wtf? Going without will not turn you in to a pervert! There are ordinary lay people who go without too, there's no correlation between celibacy and raping children!

That's just a lazy suggestion as to why or how the Catholic Church gathered up so many perverts!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: redhugh on November 27, 2009, 05:35:58 PM
Rossie mad - in an earlier post you claim that the vast majority on the board here are better people than you.This is simply not true.You're  certainly no worse than anyone on here, in fact I'd say, you're probably a better person than many of us.
Personally I have a very strong faith in God.I was brought up a catholic and had a strong belief in the catholic church for most of my life.I have travelled a fair bit, and always in times of need sought and found sanctuary in the church,nomatter where in the world.I tried to live my life according to the churches teachings as much as I could.But when it began to dawn on me what this church that had been such a big part of my life had been up to,it made me feel sick - seriously.

You are right in saying that forgivness is a big part of what we believe in.I for one, feel that if I'm honest I cannot forgive so many lives being destroyed over and over,for such a long period of time,while the supposed men of God kept it all quiet.
I know that there is a lot of good in the church,and that a lot of good work is done.I know many good priests who are horified by all that has gone on in this church that they have devoted their lives to.I just feel that I can no longer be a part of this church.Good luck trying to find your answer - I did'nt come by mine easily.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 06:35:42 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 05:27:20 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.

Wtf? Going without will not turn you in to a pervert! There are ordinary lay people who go without too, there's no correlation between celibacy and raping children!

That's just a lazy suggestion as to why or how the Catholic Church gathered up so many perverts!

It's not just going without, it's enforced abstinence, or supposed to be, and I'd reckon there were more than a few that took that vow under emotional duress. And I haven't said that that's the sole reason, but it is part of the mix IMO. If it isn't, why don't the non-Catholic churches have the same problem to the same degree (they all have their perverts, but not to the extent that the Catholic Church does)?

Can you answer me that?

Of course, like I also said, it became a bolthole for perverts too, with the complicity of the State. Shameful.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on November 27, 2009, 07:12:05 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on November 27, 2009, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
i actually thought to myself this morning when would you join the debate ;D

However fo rme to do this within the catholic church is nigh impossible as already said i will talk to my parish preist and may even ask for a meeting with our bishop to discuss the current protocols in place to make sure something like this wont happen in my parish/diocese in the future.


As long as we question rather than accept dogma then I think were all on the right path rossie (even though we're on two different one's)  ;)

Any talk you have with your priest/bishop will be all about them trying to quell the discussions regarding this sorry mess. You will get lots of soft words and admissions of shame and guilt, but they will trot out that language to everyone troubled soul who comes in the hope that it will help get things back to normal. Justice will not come into their thinking. The congregations are being played for fools

I wish you well on your journey....and always remember the dark side (athiesm) isn't as bad as you think  :)

Athiesm is as bad as some people think, worse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 07:33:08 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on November 27, 2009, 11:57:23 AM
Excuse my igorance but there is one thing that confuses me very much.
Why can't these animals (those that are still alive) be prosecuted with the full rigour of the the law?

This is the crux of the problem in Ireland. The perpetrators and everyone who facilitated them or interfered with any official investigation into this should all be prosecuted. But this won't happen.

Firstly the fact that we are reading about this as yet another investigation report tells me that it will be filed under the same limbo status as the tribunals. Nothing will come out of it until it is a police investigation.

Secondly 180 odd priests were investigated and only 11 were named. This investigation doesn't include anything after 2004 so the mantra of 'sub judice' is a tonne of shite as the other 170 (I know some are dead) are hardly all before the courts for the last 5 years are they?

Thirdly there have been 130 odd complaints since so this has not been stopped, if anything it has gotten worse but the Church are against any other Diocese being investigated. So far there have been two, Ferns in 2005 which was described as 'the worst Diocese in the world' and now in 2009 Dublin which is worse that the worst Diocese in the world. They should all be investigated, by the Gárdaí, now!

Finally, the Vatican has behaved disgracefully. They are beneath contempt as far as I am concerned on one hand preaching the Gospel while on the other hiding behind diplomatic procedures to protect pedophiles.

I would advocate the immediate breaking off of Diplomatic Relations with the Vatican and the seizing of all their assets, until they furnish the DPP with every document they hold concerning any Irish victims of child abuse. The CAB legislation might allow it and if not introduce some that does.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 07:38:12 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on November 27, 2009, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on November 27, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
i actually thought to myself this morning when would you join the debate ;D

However fo rme to do this within the catholic church is nigh impossible as already said i will talk to my parish preist and may even ask for a meeting with our bishop to discuss the current protocols in place to make sure something like this wont happen in my parish/diocese in the future.


As long as we question rather than accept dogma then I think were all on the right path rossie (even though we're on two different one's)  ;)

Any talk you have with your priest/bishop will be all about them trying to quell the discussions regarding this sorry mess. You will get lots of soft words and admissions of shame and guilt, but they will trot out that language to everyone troubled soul who comes in the hope that it will help get things back to normal. Justice will not come into their thinking. The congregations are being played for fools

I wish you well on your journey....and always remember the dark side (athiesm) isn't as bad as you think  :)
All these high faluting ideas you have and you think you are so right in them and you can't even spell what you believe or don't believe in  :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on November 27, 2009, 07:40:26 PM
If i hear one more Bishop,Priest, or apologists of any ilk, say they are on a learning curve, i will go demented. Did they not know the difference between right and wrong, what is it they are learning. I still support the Church, and recognise that without the laity there is no Church. When the Laity demand the removal of all personell involved in covering up these horrific crimes, and force changes in structure and organisation which prevent decent priests and people from voicing concerns and being heard, then and only then will meaningful and genuine change be effected..I pray this will happen soon
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:14:02 PM
Pangurban, tell me this, what are they supposed to do?

There are still cases coming to light.  Whose fault is that?  It's not the victim's fault.  It's not the Church's fault.  It's the fault of all the perpetrators and the people who actively covered it up.  Of all the men and women in Ireland who have been or are currently members of religious orders who are without blame I don't see why they should be demonised like some posters are trying to do.  Those men/women who haven't been charged with anything but have questions to answer have to examine their own consciences - if there is evidence to charge them then they should be charged and if convicted they should never see the light of day, in my opinion as a father.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:14:02 PM
Pangurban, tell me this, what are they supposed to do?

There are still cases coming to light.  Whose fault is that?  It's not the victim's fault.  It's not the Church's fault.  It's the fault of all the perpetrators and the people who actively covered it up.  Of all the men and women in Ireland who have been or are currently members of religious orders who are without blame I don't see why they should be demonised like some posters are trying to do.  Those men/women who haven't been charged with anything but have questions to answer have to examine their own consciences - if there is evidence to charge them then they should be charged and if convicted they should never see the light of day, in my opinion as a father.

The 4 Arch-Bishops of Dublin were the Church for that Arch-Diocese.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on November 27, 2009, 09:27:49 PM
Totally agree Ardmhachaabu, no one should be demonised except the guilty, and i include those involved in the cover up amongst the guilty. But you and i both know that if the laity do not demand and force the speed of change, very little will happen. We owe it too the vast majority of good Priests, to lift this burden from them
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 09:30:45 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on November 27, 2009, 09:27:49 PM
Totally agree Ardmhachaabu, no one should be demonised except the guilty, and i include those involved in the cover up amongst the guilty. But you and i both know that if the laity do not demand and force the speed of change, very little will happen. We owe it too the vast majority of good Priests, to lift this burden from them

Agreed. The rush to avoid scandal ends up causing the tarring of innocent and decent people with the same brush as those being protected.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:35:10 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:14:02 PM
Pangurban, tell me this, what are they supposed to do?

There are still cases coming to light.  Whose fault is that?  It's not the victim's fault.  It's not the Church's fault.  It's the fault of all the perpetrators and the people who actively covered it up.  Of all the men and women in Ireland who have been or are currently members of religious orders who are without blame I don't see why they should be demonised like some posters are trying to do.  Those men/women who haven't been charged with anything but have questions to answer have to examine their own consciences - if there is evidence to charge them then they should be charged and if convicted they should never see the light of day, in my opinion as a father.

The 4 Arch-Bishops of Dublin were the Church for that Arch-Diocese.
I disagree muppet, I think you will find that the people are the Church for that Arch-Diocese, just like any other
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 09:39:14 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:35:10 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 09:14:02 PM
Pangurban, tell me this, what are they supposed to do?

There are still cases coming to light.  Whose fault is that?  It's not the victim's fault.  It's not the Church's fault.  It's the fault of all the perpetrators and the people who actively covered it up.  Of all the men and women in Ireland who have been or are currently members of religious orders who are without blame I don't see why they should be demonised like some posters are trying to do.  Those men/women who haven't been charged with anything but have questions to answer have to examine their own consciences - if there is evidence to charge them then they should be charged and if convicted they should never see the light of day, in my opinion as a father.

The 4 Arch-Bishops of Dublin were the Church for that Arch-Diocese.
I disagree muppet, I think you will find that the people are the Church for that Arch-Diocese, just like any other

That is mere semantics. The people in positions of authority make the decisions on behalf of the Church, not the people. In fact more than any other organisation I can think of, the people have no say whatsoever. It is all dogma.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 06:35:42 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 05:27:20 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 12:17:53 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 27, 2009, 12:09:33 AM
What are you, a psychologist?  :P  These 'good priests' you talk about... they are celebate, many for years, and don't rape (and beat little children). Blaming this as a reaction to celebacy is like an excuse for them. anyway they werent celebate!! They were getting their perverted needs met as paedophiles same as paedos who molest their own children and are married.   

Jeez you don't half talk crap at times fox. Three questions for you:

1. How is it that there are so many more paedophiles in the orders than in ordinary walks of life, as a percentage? And I know that it has acted as a bolthole for a certain number of perverts but that doesn't explain it all.
2. What the fcuk are you on about? If you're saying that celibacy is not a factor at all (or the pressure to appear to be celibate), you try it for 12 months and report back.
3. Should celibacy be scrapped?

For an oul wan I would have thought you had some inkling of the pressure on individuals not so long ago to go off and join the priesthood, whether they had a notion to or not. And if you did go off, but without a notion of abstaining for all eternity, well that wouldn't be the most pleasant thing in the world.

Wtf? Going without will not turn you in to a pervert! There are ordinary lay people who go without too, there's no correlation between celibacy and raping children!

That's just a lazy suggestion as to why or how the Catholic Church gathered up so many perverts!

It's not just going without, it's enforced abstinence, or supposed to be, and I'd reckon there were more than a few that took that vow under emotional duress. And I haven't said that that's the sole reason, but it is part of the mix IMO. If it isn't, why don't the non-Catholic churches have the same problem to the same degree (they all have their perverts, but not to the extent that the Catholic Church does)?

Can you answer me that?

Of course, like I also said, it became a bolthole for perverts too, with the complicity of the State. Shameful.
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.

Individual members of the Church were wrong, wrong beyond what I can put into words.  Not every member of the church can be found guilty because a minority of clergy engaged in behaviour which is/was/always will be wrong
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.

So my analysis is lazy, yet you can't offer up one single explanation.

Whether you like it or not PoG, or whether you just want to jump on the moral high ground and shout shame all around you, there's a reason for everything. I can't countenance what these individuals have done, I just can't conceive of the circumstances that could or would lead me to such morally bankrupt actions, but nor can I countenance what a large percentage of Germans did during WWII, yet I know they did it, and I know there must be a reason.

Like I said, celibacy is one factor, in my opinion.

Another was Irish partition, and Dev has a lot to answer for here. Such was the exalted, unassailable, irreproachable position of the Catholic Church in the church-state that materialised in the 26 counties after partition, that they (the Catholic Church) had carte-blanche to indulge their most uncharitable, unkind, and thoroughly nasty perversions, throughout not just the 26, but the 32 counties. Not all of them though, but far, far too many.

So, the confluence of those two critical factors (IMHO), celibacy and partition, sowed the seeds of a horrible, despicable legacy. Not just here, for the Catholic Church in both the US and Australia are currently being taken to the cleaners for the same sickness. None of the Protestant churches, none, are going through the same rigours though.

Celibacy is not just a meaningless, anachronistic vow, it's a potentially perverting vow. Why should we take the chance and not get rid of it now, especially when married Anglicans are being welcomed with open arms into the Vatican's fold? Remove the possibility that it provides a haven for the perverted in the first instance, regardless of its potential to twist. I don't care much for the Catholic Church, haven't done since the early eighties, so my concern for the removal of celibacy is not one of Church atonement, it's one of concern for the young innocent.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:38:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.

Individual members of the Church were wrong, wrong beyond what I can put into words.  Not every member of the church can be found guilty because a minority of clergy engaged in behaviour which is/was/always will be wrong

Yes but your earlier line of argument was that 'The Church' was not responsible. That is a cop out IMHO. The Vatican are a disgrace and 4 of the last five Arch Bishops of Dublin were almost as bad. We know the former Bishop of Ferns failed miserably in his duties and we only know these things because of the 2 dioceses investigated. 'The Church' don't want the other dioceses investigated.

These are the decision-makers of 'The Church'.

'The Church' has hidden these scumbags long enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:50:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:38:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.

Individual members of the Church were wrong, wrong beyond what I can put into words.  Not every member of the church can be found guilty because a minority of clergy engaged in behaviour which is/was/always will be wrong

Yes but your earlier line of argument was that 'The Church' was not responsible. That is a cop out IMHO. The Vatican are a disgrace and 4 of the last five Arch Bishops of Dublin were almost as bad. We know the former Bishop of Ferns failed miserably in his duties and we only know these things because of the 2 dioceses investigated. 'The Church' don't want the other dioceses investigated.

These are the decision-makers of 'The Church'.

'The Church' has hidden these scumbags long enough.
Oh dear, you are now a liar - you are not a Catholic in anything but name.  In other words, you telling the world you are doesn't make you one - you need to actually follow the teaching of the church instead of creating one of your own to suit whatever agenda it is you are following, which most certainly isn't a Catholic one
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:58:34 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.

So my analysis is lazy, yet you can't offer up one single explanation.

Whether you like it or not PoG, or whether you just want to jump on the moral high ground and shout shame all around you, there's a reason for everything. I can't countenance what these individuals have done, I just can't conceive of the circumstances that could or would lead me to such morally bankrupt actions, but nor can I countenance what a large percentage of Germans did during WWII, yet I know they did it, and I know there must be a reason.

Like I said, celibacy is one factor, in my opinion.

Another was Irish partition, and Dev has a lot to answer for here. Such was the exalted, unassailable, irreproachable position of the Catholic Church in the church-state that materialised in the 26 counties after partition, that they (the Catholic Church) had carte-blanche to indulge their most uncharitable, unkind, and thoroughly nasty perversions, throughout not just the 26, but the 32 counties. Not all of them though, but far, far too many.

So, the confluence of those two critical factors (IMHO), celibacy and partition, sowed the seeds of a horrible, despicable legacy. Not just here, for the Catholic Church in both the US and Australia are currently being taken to the cleaners for the same sickness. None of the Protestant churches, none, are going through the same rigours though.

Celibacy is not just a meaningless, anachronistic vow, it's a potentially perverting vow.
Why should we take the chance and not get rid of it now, especially when married Anglicans are being welcomed with open arms into the Vatican's fold? Remove the possibility that it provides a haven for the perverted in the first instance, regardless of its potential to twist. I don't care much for the Catholic Church, haven't done since the early eighties, so my concern for the removal of celibacy is not one of Church atonement, it's one of concern for the young innocent.
You don't have one shred of evidence to back that view.  You're basically saying that if people don't have sex they turn to paedophiles, that's some statement.  Many paedophiles are married men,, where does that fit in to your view?

I think it's more likely the case that the chuch was viewed as a safe haven for some of these people who probably knew they were sexual delinquents before the joined the priesthood. Once in the opportunity to abuse arose, aided by people's blind trust in them and the power they had over people and the knowledge that they would get away with it, and that was just to much for them to walk away from! 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:58:34 PM
You don't have one shred of evidence to back that view.  You're basically saying that if people don't have sex they turn to paedophiles, that's some statement.  Many paedophiles are married men,, where does that fit in to your view?

I think it's more likely the case that the chuch was viewed as a safe haven for some of these people who probably knew they were sexual delinquents before the joined the priesthood. Once in the opportunity to abuse arose, aided by people's blind trust in them and the power they had over people and the knowledge that they would get away with it, and that was just to much for them to walk away from!

I've already said I don't have proof (but when the only evidence you have are the prevailing factors, you make a reasoned judgement, then you test the hypothesis). And no, I'm not saying when people don't have sex they turn to paedophiles, feck off PoG, and read back a bit and quit putting words in my mouth. Lazy fecker, you like straw-men arguments.

I've already said what you're saying in your second paragraph about the haven, many, many posts ago. Ho hum  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on November 27, 2009, 11:17:36 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:58:34 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.

So my analysis is lazy, yet you can't offer up one single explanation.

Whether you like it or not PoG, or whether you just want to jump on the moral high ground and shout shame all around you, there's a reason for everything. I can't countenance what these individuals have done, I just can't conceive of the circumstances that could or would lead me to such morally bankrupt actions, but nor can I countenance what a large percentage of Germans did during WWII, yet I know they did it, and I know there must be a reason.

Like I said, celibacy is one factor, in my opinion.

Another was Irish partition, and Dev has a lot to answer for here. Such was the exalted, unassailable, irreproachable position of the Catholic Church in the church-state that materialised in the 26 counties after partition, that they (the Catholic Church) had carte-blanche to indulge their most uncharitable, unkind, and thoroughly nasty perversions, throughout not just the 26, but the 32 counties. Not all of them though, but far, far too many.

So, the confluence of those two critical factors (IMHO), celibacy and partition, sowed the seeds of a horrible, despicable legacy. Not just here, for the Catholic Church in both the US and Australia are currently being taken to the cleaners for the same sickness. None of the Protestant churches, none, are going through the same rigours though.

Celibacy is not just a meaningless, anachronistic vow, it's a potentially perverting vow.
Why should we take the chance and not get rid of it now, especially when married Anglicans are being welcomed with open arms into the Vatican's fold? Remove the possibility that it provides a haven for the perverted in the first instance, regardless of its potential to twist. I don't care much for the Catholic Church, haven't done since the early eighties, so my concern for the removal of celibacy is not one of Church atonement, it's one of concern for the young innocent.
You don't have one shred of evidence to back that view.  You're basically saying that if people don't have sex they turn to paedophiles, that's some statement.  Many paedophiles are married men,, where does that fit in to your view?

I think it's more likely the case that the chuch was viewed as a safe haven for some of these people who probably knew they were sexual delinquents before the joined the priesthood. Once in the opportunity to abuse arose, aided by people's blind trust in them and the power they had over people and the knowledge that they would get away with it, and that was just to much for them to walk away from!

I have to agree with FOSB here.  I dont think that celibacy was the main factor in these priests doing what they did. However, to forcibly suppress the natural human urge to have sex has to cause some sort of psychological disruption in a person and to think that it was not a factor at all is being very naive imho.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 11:18:51 PM
absolute nonsense
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on November 27, 2009, 11:22:53 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.

So my analysis is lazy, yet you can't offer up one single explanation.

Whether you like it or not PoG, or whether you just want to jump on the moral high ground and shout shame all around you, there's a reason for everything. I can't countenance what these individuals have done, I just can't conceive of the circumstances that could or would lead me to such morally bankrupt actions, but nor can I countenance what a large percentage of Germans did during WWII, yet I know they did it, and I know there must be a reason.

Like I said, celibacy is one factor, in my opinion.

Another was Irish partition, and Dev has a lot to answer for here. Such was the exalted, unassailable, irreproachable position of the Catholic Church in the church-state that materialised in the 26 counties after partition, that they (the Catholic Church) had carte-blanche to indulge their most uncharitable, unkind, and thoroughly nasty perversions, throughout not just the 26, but the 32 counties. Not all of them though, but far, far too many.

So, the confluence of those two critical factors (IMHO), celibacy and partition, sowed the seeds of a horrible, despicable legacy. Not just here, for the Catholic Church in both the US and Australia are currently being taken to the cleaners for the same sickness. None of the Protestant churches, none, are going through the same rigours though.

Celibacy is not just a meaningless, anachronistic vow, it's a potentially perverting vow. Why should we take the chance and not get rid of it now, especially when married Anglicans are being welcomed with open arms into the Vatican's fold? Remove the possibility that it provides a haven for the perverted in the first instance, regardless of its potential to twist. I don't care much for the Catholic Church, haven't done since the early eighties, so my concern for the removal of celibacy is not one of Church atonement, it's one of concern for the young innocent.

Tremendous post FoSB and sums up my views of this horrendous history.

What are the cases of abuse in Italy or South America compared to here?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 11:32:51 PM
Quote from: ONeill on November 27, 2009, 11:22:53 PM
What are the cases of abuse in Italy or South America compared to here?

Fair question Shane, and something I've wondered about myself. It seems that sexual abuse is more prevalent with adults than minors in the non-Anglophone areas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 28, 2009, 12:01:28 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 27, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 27, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
I have no idea why or how the catholic church managed to gather up such a collection of perverts but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being celibate.  Once again, being celibate does not make you rape children! No matter what circumstances they took the vow under.

So my analysis is lazy, yet you can't offer up one single explanation.

Whether you like it or not PoG, or whether you just want to jump on the moral high ground and shout shame all around you, there's a reason for everything. I can't countenance what these individuals have done, I just can't conceive of the circumstances that could or would lead me to such morally bankrupt actions, but nor can I countenance what a large percentage of Germans did during WWII, yet I know they did it, and I know there must be a reason.

Like I said, celibacy is one factor, in my opinion.

Another was Irish partition, and Dev has a lot to answer for here. Such was the exalted, unassailable, irreproachable position of the Catholic Church in the church-state that materialised in the 26 counties after partition, that they (the Catholic Church) had carte-blanche to indulge their most uncharitable, unkind, and thoroughly nasty perversions, throughout not just the 26, but the 32 counties. Not all of them though, but far, far too many.

So, the confluence of those two critical factors (IMHO), celibacy and partition, sowed the seeds of a horrible, despicable legacy. Not just here, for the Catholic Church in both the US and Australia are currently being taken to the cleaners for the same sickness. None of the Protestant churches, none, are going through the same rigours though.

Celibacy is not just a meaningless, anachronistic vow, it's a potentially perverting vow. Why should we take the chance and not get rid of it now, especially when married Anglicans are being welcomed with open arms into the Vatican's fold? Remove the possibility that it provides a haven for the perverted in the first instance, regardless of its potential to twist. I don't care much for the Catholic Church, haven't done since the early eighties, so my concern for the removal of celibacy is not one of Church atonement, it's one of concern for the young innocent.
FoSB :)

I think that the vow of celibacy which some clergy take is a very important part of their vocation - their vocation being to love everyone

You know my craic, my faith is very important to me - I am not asking it to be important to you or anyone else, with respect.  I don't think it's too much to ask for my thoughts to be respected in the same way as others want their beliefs in a 7 headed purple monster - actually those who say they believe in something so ludicrous are more likely to be believed than someone like  me with a simple faith :)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 28, 2009, 12:11:24 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 28, 2009, 12:01:28 AM
I think that the vow of celibacy which some clergy take is a very important part of their vocation - their vocation being to love everyone

You know my craic, my faith is very important to me - I am not asking it to be important to you or anyone else, with respect.  I don't think it's too much to ask for my thoughts to be respected in the same way as others want their beliefs in a 7 headed purple monster - actually those who say they believe in something so ludicrous are more likely to be believed than someone like  me with a simple faith :)

I'm not knocking it for everyone ardmhachaabu, but my preference would be for it to be a voluntary thing, not compulsory (there are so many instances of humans going off the rails with compulsory edicts that it's just not funny). I would like to see the compulsory aspect abolished, then it would truly be a thing of vocation, not compulsion.

And I respect your beliefs and faith, don't get me wrong. If the values of Christianity were adhered to by those who profess to love it most we wouldn't find ourselves in the mess we now do.
Good luck to you, sincerely.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on November 28, 2009, 12:20:53 AM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 28, 2009, 12:11:24 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 28, 2009, 12:01:28 AM
I think that the vow of celibacy which some clergy take is a very important part of their vocation - their vocation being to love everyone

You know my craic, my faith is very important to me - I am not asking it to be important to you or anyone else, with respect.  I don't think it's too much to ask for my thoughts to be respected in the same way as others want their beliefs in a 7 headed purple monster - actually those who say they believe in something so ludicrous are more likely to be believed than someone like  me with a simple faith :)

I'm not knocking it for everyone ardmhachaabu, but my preference would be for it to be a voluntary thing, not compulsory (there are so many instances of humans going off the rails with compulsory edicts that it's just not funny). I would like to see the compulsory aspect abolished, then it would truly be a thing of vocation, not compulsion.

And I respect your beliefs and faith, don't get me wrong. If the values of Christianity were adhered to by those who profess to love it most we wouldn't find ourselves in the mess we now do.
Good luck to you, sincerely.

Well said fear, your last sentence speaks volumes about you and sums up perfectly the state Christianity finds itself in.

I removed my last post because I am a coward, that said I love God and understand fully that none of us should put to much faith in man, any man, I did and I think to a certain extent we all did before the news of abuse broke. I cannot post on this thread anymore, it is too emotive.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 28, 2009, 02:13:09 AM
Begone with you, begone!

From today's (28th Nov) Irish Times:

Pressure mounts on bishops named in abuse report to resign


PATSY McGARRY & HARRY McGEE

PRESSURE ON the five bishops who still hold office and whose handling of clerical child sex abuse was addressed by the Dublin diocesan report increased throughout yesterday.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said all bishops implicated in the report should resign immediately. He said those who were in positions of authority in Dublin archdiocese, and who knew what was going on, should no longer continue in such positions.

"This is another appalling litany of shame. Apologies here are not good enough," he said.

Former Labour Party leader Pat Rabbitte said that any bishop "directly implicated" in the Dublin report "should have no role as a school patron".

Meanwhile, Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy has ordered Assistant Commissioner John O'Mahoney to commence an investigation into the findings of the report.

The relevant bishops are the Bishop of Limerick, Donal Murray, whose handling of a particular allegation was described as "inexcusable" in the report; Bishop Jim Moriarty of Kildare Leighlin diocese; Bishop Martin Drennan of Galway diocese; and the two Dublin auxiliary bishops, Bishop Ray Field and Bishop Éamonn Walsh.

Speaking at foundation day ceremonies at Our Lady's Children's Hospital in Crumlin yesterday, the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, said the story of how the sexual abuse of children was managed in the archdiocese, as shown in the report, "was inexcusable".

He noted that "regrettably this hospital was also the scene of abuse by at least two chaplains, who exploited their role of representing the care of Jesus for the children at their most vulnerable. Information about that abuse was inexcusably not shared with the hospital authorities, even though the archbishop of the time was also the chairman of the board."

He pointed out that the Dublin report "drew attention to the need "to clarify exactly what is the role of the HSE in relation to non-familial abusers".

Yet, he continued, "in the official Government statement yesterday [Thursday] the only reply to such a vital question, some four years after the Ferns report, was to say that it requires 'further consultation'."

Responding to the Dublin diocesan report, the Archbishop of Tuam Michael Neary said that "everyone is deeply disgusted and disillusioned by the awfulness of the abuse, the vulnerability of the victims and the betrayal of the sacred trust placed in those who carried out this abuse".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 28, 2009, 05:48:05 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:50:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:38:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.

Individual members of the Church were wrong, wrong beyond what I can put into words.  Not every member of the church can be found guilty because a minority of clergy engaged in behaviour which is/was/always will be wrong

Yes but your earlier line of argument was that 'The Church' was not responsible. That is a cop out IMHO. The Vatican are a disgrace and 4 of the last five Arch Bishops of Dublin were almost as bad. We know the former Bishop of Ferns failed miserably in his duties and we only know these things because of the 2 dioceses investigated. 'The Church' don't want the other dioceses investigated.

These are the decision-makers of 'The Church'.

'The Church' has hidden these scumbags long enough.
Oh dear, you are now a liar - you are not a Catholic in anything but name.  In other words, you telling the world you are doesn't make you one - you need to actually follow the teaching of the church instead of creating one of your own to suit whatever agenda it is you are following, which most certainly isn't a Catholic one

Oh dear, what a wonderful Catholic you are telling others, who you haven't even met, about their faith. You deny that the Church is responsible for the abuse of hundreds of children that were abused. Your absolution of the organisation is typical of the attitude that has perpetrated the cover-ups for decades.

You point blank refuse to discuss the abuse and resort to playing the man confident in your own Godly superiority.

The Catholic Church is responsible for the sexual abuse of hundreds of children in Ireland and thousands worldwide. That is an established fact and they have admitted it. You cannot change that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on November 28, 2009, 01:01:07 PM
My own opinion as to why it happened was because some of them ( not all ) were pushed into the priesthood by their mothers who thought that having a priest in the family was something to rejoice about and it conferred on the donor family a respect that hitherto perhaps ( not in all cases ) wasn't there.


Obviously forced celibacy was part of the problem.


The fact that priests were held in disproprtionately high esteem suggested to some that they could get away with almost anything - some of them took full advantage.


In addition, some abusers were already there when some of them went to the various seminaries and there was almost a culuture of abuse.


Therefore, there are no simple one word answers.

Here's an interesting view form today's Indo.



There are no simple answers to why it happened
By PATRICIA CASEY


Saturday November 28 2009

The theories that explain paedophilia do not provide any optimism that it can be prevented

The unfolding of the terrible horror of child sexual abuse by clerics in Ireland that has emerged over the past decade raises huge questions.

Since the publication of the Murphy report on Thursday, the focus has been on the collusion by Church and State to conceal this truth and protect the guilty.

However, a fundamental questions that begs for an answer is why did priests behave as they did? The answer is essential if such scandals are to be avoided in the future and if children are to be truly protected.

The obvious angle for many commentators has been to focus on celibacy. Yet the belief that marriage is a cure for paedophilia is flawed and is without foundation. Catholic priests in other countries have not been linked to child abuse to the extent that they have been in the English-speaking Church.


Indeed, Spanish, Italian and German Catholics describe bewilderment on hearing of the molestation of children in Ireland, the US and Australia.

Indeed, if child abusers were largely celibate then the frequency of child molestation generally should plummet since the setting in which it is currently reported is within the family usually, and those most at risk are children whose mothers are living with partners rather than with the biological father -- in other words, the child is living with a man who has no emotional tie to the child.

A recurring theme in much of the scientific literature, as well as from clinical reporting on child abuse, is that there is a cycle of abuse from one generation to the next. Not all studies support this thesis, but many do.

A possible explanation is that the rationalisations of the abuser, such as claims that the behaviour is an expression of love are incorporated into the thinking of the victim.

The understandable shame of what has happened becomes transmuted in a belief that the actions are an expression of care.

Furthermore, many children will never have known true parental love and the only "love" they will have experienced is the sexualised form -- hence their early sexualisation.

A further Fiach Kelly of abuse rests with the misuse of alcohol that many abused adolescents resort to in order to deaden the pain and block the memories of the abuse they suffered. Over time, whatever sexual inhibitions they possess are dissolved by alcohol and the brake pads of guilt, shame and restraint are no longer operational.

But it is vulnerable children who are usually targeted by abusers. Abusers do not relate easily in mature adult relationships and they feel more comfortable in those that do not make demands for reciprocity, trust, responsibility.

Instead, they crave power and control and seek out those who are unable to defend themselves against sexual pressures. In this respect, personality, immaturity and flawed sexual development are found in all child abusers, clerical or lay.

However, priests were in a unique position of trust within society and so had ready access to children. Whether they were attracted to the priesthood for that reason is unknown but, in my opinion, this is unlikely. After all, there were other methods by which they could gain access to children without having to survive the rigours of seminary life, the years of study and the loneliness of the priest's life.


It is possible that some entered the priesthood not because they wanted to, but because society and their parents expected them to.

Their religious vocation was externally rather than internally driven and they lacked the personal maturity to make independent choices.

Coupled with inadequate preparation for a life in the priesthood that involved loneliness and, among other things, celibacy, they decompensated into the sexual abuse of children. In their personalities they were weak but the abuse of children conferred a vicarious sense of power.


There is no single, magic bullet to explain the cause of paedophilia and seeking such will only yield fool's gold. And the theories that explain it do not provide any optimism that it can be prevented.

Above all, we must not accept claims it can be cured -- only tragedy will follow as the Murphy report shows.

Patricia Casey is Professor of Psychiatry at UCD/Mater HosPital

- PATRICIA CASEY

Irish Independent

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on November 28, 2009, 01:04:30 PM
Dev, partition and ......pedophiles? ::)

I have not come across one research which supports the contention that pedophiles are more prevalent in the Catholic Church nor have I come across one research which examines the effect and prevalence of celibacy as a factor. I wouldn't discount celibacy as contributing to an already devious, perverse mind in a position of almost absolute power.
In my home town, the children got abused by the parish priest, a teacher/GAA official and a traveling salesman. Both the priest and the teacher were protected for years by their own deviousness in manipulating the social environment that existed.

Celibacy in the traditional meaning, is total abstinence of sex, that means not even masturbation.
I would doubt that celibacy is followed to its full meaning.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 28, 2009, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 28, 2009, 01:04:30 PM
Dev, partition and ......pedophiles? ::)

I have not come across one research which supports the contention that pedophiles are more prevalent in the Catholic Church nor have I come across one research which examines the effect and prevalence of celibacy as a factor. I wouldn't discount celibacy as contributing to an already devious, perverse mind in a position of almost absolute power.
In my home town, the children got abused by the parish priest, a teacher/GAA official and a traveling salesman. Both the priest and the teacher were protected for years by their own deviousness in manipulating the social environment that existed.

Celibacy in the traditional meaning, is total abstinence of sex, that means not even masturbation.
I would doubt that celibacy is followed to its full meaning.

So would i!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 28, 2009, 01:21:11 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 28, 2009, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 28, 2009, 01:04:30 PM
Dev, partition and ......pedophiles? ::)

I have not come across one research which supports the contention that pedophiles are more prevalent in the Catholic Church nor have I come across one research which examines the effect and prevalence of celibacy as a factor. I wouldn't discount celibacy as contributing to an already devious, perverse mind in a position of almost absolute power.
In my home town, the children got abused by the parish priest, a teacher/GAA official and a traveling salesman. Both the priest and the teacher were protected for years by their own deviousness in manipulating the social environment that existed.

Celibacy in the traditional meaning, is total abstinence of sex, that means not even masturbation.
I would doubt that celibacy is followed to its full meaning.

So would i!

Why is that important?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 28, 2009, 01:24:46 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 28, 2009, 01:21:11 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 28, 2009, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 28, 2009, 01:04:30 PM
Dev, partition and ......pedophiles? ::)

I have not come across one research which supports the contention that pedophiles are more prevalent in the Catholic Church nor have I come across one research which examines the effect and prevalence of celibacy as a factor. I wouldn't discount celibacy as contributing to an already devious, perverse mind in a position of almost absolute power.
In my home town, the children got abused by the parish priest, a teacher/GAA official and a traveling salesman. Both the priest and the teacher were protected for years by their own deviousness in manipulating the social environment that existed.

Celibacy in the traditional meaning, is total abstinence of sex, that means not even masturbation.
I would doubt that celibacy is followed to its full meaning.

So would i!

Why is that important?
I dont think it is important or really relevant if we're talking about why there was so much abuse, just passing comment that I doubt many, if any stick to to celibacy, to it's full meaning.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 28, 2009, 05:08:10 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:50:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:38:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:28:44 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 27, 2009, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 27, 2009, 10:01:48 PM
muppet, I disagree.

Tell me this, when was the last time that you were in a Catholic Church because you wanted to be?  I don't mean weddings, funerals, christenings.  I mean, when did you last go in to say a prayer (assuming you are a Catholic)

If you don't consider yourself to be a Catholic, fair enough, you can't tell those of us who do believe that we are wrong

It would take arrogance of the most extreme nature to do that and I am sure you aren't going to do that...

I am a Catholic. I don't consider myself as being responsible for child abuse. I do consider the Church completely responsible and in particular those in power who hide the actions of others.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.

Individual members of the Church were wrong, wrong beyond what I can put into words.  Not every member of the church can be found guilty because a minority of clergy engaged in behaviour which is/was/always will be wrong

Yes but your earlier line of argument was that 'The Church' was not responsible. That is a cop out IMHO. The Vatican are a disgrace and 4 of the last five Arch Bishops of Dublin were almost as bad. We know the former Bishop of Ferns failed miserably in his duties and we only know these things because of the 2 dioceses investigated. 'The Church' don't want the other dioceses investigated.

These are the decision-makers of 'The Church'.

'The Church' has hidden these scumbags long enough.
Oh dear, you are now a liar - you are not a Catholic in anything but name.  In other words, you telling the world you are doesn't make you one - you need to actually follow the teaching of the church instead of creating one of your own to suit whatever agenda it is you are following, which most certainly isn't a Catholic one

This is the pathetic depressing type of comment I spoke about earlier. No better man to come out with it. What Muppet has said is the truth, is there something in the catholic teaching that says you only speak the truth as long as it is not critical of the church?

The church allowed priests to abuse kids, covered it up and hindered and fought tooth and nail to be keep it covered up. This attitude is right the way to the top in the vatican. You keep telling yourself it is all a few bad apples, stick your head in the sand and wait for it all to blow over. You are made of the same stuff as the bishops and cardinals. Sounds like you missed your calling.

The people abused in this country have done us a great service by fighting for justice against the catholic church. Now we can all see what a scourge they have been on this country. Go back to any major event in Irish history that the catholic church are all over it with their self serving manipulation. From the fenians, to the irb, the blackening of parnell, Infiltrating the land league all the way to the troubles they have been there looking after number 1. No Christian needs to have anything to do with this church to be a good Christian.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on November 28, 2009, 06:04:06 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 28, 2009, 05:08:10 PMis there something in the catholic teaching that says you only speak the truth as long as it is not critical of the church?

Dunno about that, but I learned yesterday that there's something called "mental reservation" that allows clerics to lie while pretending, even to themselves, to be telling the truth. Trust the sophists of the church to come up with something as mind-splitting as that.

It seems to be the church equivalent of crossing your fingers behind your back when you make a promise.

This is how it works - when you make a statement where you don't want to tell the truth, you make whatever statement you want to, but "mentally reserve" or hold back in your mind, the actual truth. That is, you lie, but it's allowed because, well, you pretend not to be lying. A sort of double lie, really.

Thus, some parish priest who wanted to avoid meeting a woman who had been challenging him about abuse allegations in his parish could tell his curate, "tell her I'm not in". He was, apparently, "mentally reserving" the addendum "to her". He wasn't in to her.

Likewise, the ex-archbishop (don't you love people who give themselves titles with words like "arch" and "superior" in them) of Dublin felt able to state that he co-operated with an enquiry by mentally reserving the word "fully".

Wouldn't that give you a squint, even trying to think about such a mentality?

Who could blame anyone for taking a two-by-four to a b**tard like that while "mentally reserving" the intent to do him any damage?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: haranguerer on November 28, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
The whole thing stank to the high heavens, and if the same situation was set up tomorrow, the same thing would happen.Those in the church are people, nothing more, nothing less. They were exalted in the state - they are bound to have felt untouchable and able to do what they want.

Celibacy is the entire reason for this child abuse. As FOSB says, it is a perversion inducing notion: that most primeval of urges being suppressed is bound to f**k anyone up. And so, children, it being easier to hide, became the victims. The fact that they got away with the abuse owes to the relationship the church and state had. Looking back now, its easy to say it was a mess, but Ireland of not that long ago was very different to that we have now, and for all todays problems, thank f**k for that.

Everything about the church stank - my father used to say that the only people who could ever buy land were those with priests in the family, down to the alms the f**kers got - money people gave them in the dusk of their life to 'gaurantee passage into heaven'. Such a bunch of c***ts. The chruch in Ireland will never be the same, thank god.

I do know quite a few very decent priests however, and I do feel for them a bit, in that everyone looks at a priest suspiciously now, but then better that than the alternative.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 28, 2009, 09:25:20 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on November 28, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
The whole thing stank to the high heavens, and if the same situation was set up tomorrow, the same thing would happen.Those in the church are people, nothing more, nothing less. They were exalted in the state - they are bound to have felt untouchable and able to do what they want.

Celibacy is the entire reason for this child abuse. As FOSB says, it is a perversion inducing notion: that most primeval of urges being suppressed is bound to f**k anyone up. And so, children, it being easier to hide, became the victims. The fact that they got away with the abuse owes to the relationship the church and state had. Looking back now, its easy to say it was a mess, but Ireland of not that long ago was very different to that we have now, and for all todays problems, thank f**k for that.

Everything about the church stank - my father used to say that the only people who could ever buy land were those with priests in the family, down to the alms the f**kers got - money people gave them in the dusk of their life to 'gaurantee passage into heaven'. Such a bunch of c***ts. The chruch in Ireland will never be the same, thank god.

I do know quite a few very decent priests however, and I do feel for them a bit, in that everyone looks at a priest suspiciously now, but then better that than the alternative.

Are they raping children or just breaking their vow of celibacy?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 28, 2009, 09:35:19 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on November 28, 2009, 09:18:47 PM
The whole thing stank to the high heavens, and if the same situation was set up tomorrow, the same thing would happen.Those in the church are people, nothing more, nothing less. They were exalted in the state - they are bound to have felt untouchable and able to do what they want.

Celibacy is the entire reason for this child abuse. As FOSB says, it is a perversion inducing notion: that most primeval of urges being suppressed is bound to f**k anyone up. And so, children, it being easier to hide, became the victims. The fact that they got away with the abuse owes to the relationship the church and state had. Looking back now, its easy to say it was a mess, but Ireland of not that long ago was very different to that we have now, and for all todays problems, thank f**k for that.

Everything about the church stank - my father used to say that the only people who could ever buy land were those with priests in the family, down to the alms the f**kers got - money people gave them in the dusk of their life to 'gaurantee passage into heaven'. Such a bunch of c***ts. The chruch in Ireland will never be the same, thank god.

I do know quite a few very decent priests however, and I do feel for them a bit, in that everyone looks at a priest suspiciously now, but then better that than the alternative.

I don't agree that celibacy is the entire reason for this child abuse. Paedophilles also infiltrated Swim Ireland where 3 of the highest guys in that organisation were abusing kids for years. To me this demonstrates a couple of things...

- There will always be sick sc**bag paedophilles.
- Paedophilles will always seek to get access to kids. Swim Ireland and the catholic church were easy targets.
- Paedophilles are often married men or in relationships. The fact that they are having sexual relations is not stopping them abusing kids.

Surely if a priest were being negatively affected by being celibate they would go and pay a prostitute. I don't think celibacy has any sensible reason but I don't think it changes men into Paedophilles.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: milltown row on November 28, 2009, 10:20:15 PM
Paedophiles are clever in that they enter Vocations like teaching, priesthood, Boy Scout leaders and other jobs that will bring them into contact with children.

The church is to blame for covering up, the state is to be blamed for ignoring pleas from victims, families are to be blamed for not listening to their children.

The celibacy is not the reason for raping children; the feckers doing it are just animals and need to be put down. But I believe the Catholic Church would be stronger if priest could marry or have partners.

I'm a non practicing Catholic, don't care much for religion and not against anyone who does.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 12:12:01 AM
I cut my stick with that shower long ago... wouldn't darken their door. Just weddings and funerals. Sick f**s. If it was any other outfit they'd be disbanded. Sad thing is tens of thousands will go to mass today and listen to their mealy mouthed bullshit and throw money on the plate. God love their wit. 
Truest words came from a priest from Derry... Michael Canny (I'll give the 'father' bit a miss  ::) ) He said, "The church has no credibility, no standing, and no moral authority."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 29, 2009, 12:52:39 AM
Once again, Fintan O'Toole calls it exactly as it is (WARNING: has the capacity to induce nausea!):

Church relationship with Irish society has itself been abusive


OPINION: The Roman Catholic Church's great achievement in Ireland has been to so disable our capacity to think about right and wrong that parents of abused children apologised for the abusing priest

IN HIS pastoral letter of February 1979, Archbishop of Dublin Dermot Ryan drew attention to the "corruption of the young". And he was quite specific about the forces that were responsible for it. He attacked "the modern era of enlightenment and permissiveness", and stated that "the new frankness and openness in regard to sexual matters had not made people more healthy in mind and body, but less healthy".

The corollary of Archbishop Ryan's complaint was, of course, that a lack of frankness and openness in sexual matters would make for a healthier society, and would protect the young from corruption. Like the three other holders of the office scrutinised in the Murphy report, Ryan certainly practised the first part of what he preached. He was a great enemy of openness and frankness, and a great practitioner of the arts of evasion and cover-up. It was the second part of the formula – the protection of the young – that gave him trouble.

In 1981, for example, Ryan sent a Father X as curate to Clogher Road church in the Dublin Corporation housing estate of Crumlin. He knew that this man was a dangerous and manipulative paedophile who was set on attacking children, as Ryan himself noted, "from six to 16". He knew that X cultivated parents who involved themselves in school or parish activities so as to gain access to their children.

He knew that in one previous case, "Having got access to the home through this acquaintanceship, Father X abused a young son of six years of age."

Yet not alone did Ryan send X to Crumlin to continue his assaults on children, but he colluded with the activities of his auxiliary bishop, James Kavanagh, in interfering in a criminal investigation into X's behaviour, persuading one set of parents not to press charges against the priest.

As the commission concludes, Ryan took a "close personal interest" in the case of Fr X: "He protected Fr X to an extraordinary extent; he ensured, as far as he could, that very few people knew about his activities; it seems that the welfare of children simply did not play any part in his decisions."

In attempting to come to terms with the institutionalised depravity of the Roman Catholic Church's systematic collaboration with child abusers, it is useful to start by considering the contradiction between Ryan's preaching about the "corruption of the young" and his role as a facilitator of sexual assaults on children.

Is there, indeed, a contradiction at all? Or are we not, rather, dealing with two sides of the same debased coin?

The arrogance and obscurantism of a church leadership that could rail against openness and frankness is in fact completely consistent with the same hierarchy's consistent preference for secrecy over truth and for self-interest over the interests of children and families.

When all the numbing details of the report are absorbed, we have to reassemble the big picture of the institutional church's relationship with Irish society. And we have to say that that relationship itself has been an abusive one. The church leadership behaved towards society with the same callousness, the same deviousness, the same exploitative mentality, and the same blindly egotistical pursuit of its own desires that an abuser shows towards his victim.

It is important to say that this is not a comment on the Catholic faith. "The Church," as the report puts it, "is not only a religious organisation but also a human/civil instrument of control and power". It is this second aspect – the instrument of control and power – that we have to understand.

We know that all institutions and subcultures have the capacity to create systems of denial and self-protection – think, for example, of the toleration of paedophiles within Irish swimming, or the support of artists and intellectuals for the child rapist Roman Polanski.

But in the case of the institutional Catholic Church we have an organisation with an unusually powerful mechanism of self-protection: the capacity to convince the society it is abusing to take part in the cover-up. The damage the church has done to Irish society lies in the ways it has involved that society in the maintenance of an abusive instrument of control and power.

It is easy to miss a central aspect of this whole scandal. The report is concerned with the actions of the church authorities and describes in damning detail their sense of being above the law of the land. (Cardinal Desmond Connell, for example, told the commission that "the greatest crisis in my position as Archbishop" was not, as might be imagined, his discovery of appalling criminality among his clergy, or even his own disingenuous public claims that "I have compensated nobody", but the decision to allow gardaí access to diocesan files.) But it is striking that parents, teachers and wider communities seldom went to the police either.

This was not a matter of ignorance. It is clear that some of the paedophiles were not secretive and cunning, but reckless and flagrant. In the early 1970s, for example, Fr James McNamee, who had built a swimming pool in his house into which only young boys were allowed, was so notorious among the children in his Crumlin parish that "whenever the older boys in the area saw Fr McNamee, they either ran away or started throwing things and shouting insults at Fr McNamee. Apparently he was known as 'Father smack my gee'." If children were shouting abuse at a priest in 1970s Ireland, adults undoubtedly noticed. They must have known why.

Similarly, the appalling Patrick Maguire, who may have abused hundreds of children in Ireland, the UK and Japan, became, as the report notes, "astonishingly brazen". He actually told the parents of a child he had just abused that the boy had a problem with his testicles. "Not surprisingly, the parents wondered how he had discovered that."

Yet in most cases, parents who knew their children had been abused went to the bishop, not to the Garda. There may have been a mistrust of the Garda (sometimes well founded), or a fear of exposure in the courts. But, in Archbishop Ryan's internal notes on the Father X case there is a more extraordinary explanation: "The parents involved have, for the most part, reacted with what can only be described as incredible charity. In several cases, they were quite apologetic about having to discuss the matter and were as much concerned for the priest's welfare as for their child and other children."

This was the church's great achievement in Ireland. It had so successfully disabled a society's capacity to think for itself about right and wrong that it was the parents of an abused child, not the bishop who enabled that abuse, who were "quite apologetic".

It had managed to create a flock who, in the face of an outrageous violation of trust, would be more concerned about the abuser than about those he had abused and might abuse in the future. It had inserted its own "instrument of control and power" so deeply into the minds of the faithful that they could scarcely even feel angry about the perpetration of disgusting crimes on their own children.

This is, of course, precisely what paedophiles do to the children they abuse. They convince them that they are the guilty ones. The well-meaning local priest to whom Marie Collins – who has been a key figure in bringing this scandal to light – disclosed the fact that she had been abused as a child in Crumlin children's hospital, told her "not to feel any guilt about what had happened". He then, however, told her that "if she had guilt I could give her absolution".

The suggestion that the victim should be absolved of sin speaks for itself. And it had its effect – Marie Collins did not disclose the abuse again for a number of years.

This ultimate triumph of making the victims guilty and their parents apologetic produced both an underlying contempt for the laity (especially in the working-class parishes where abusers were generally sent) and a sense of belonging to an untouchable elite.

The religious superior of the serial abuser Patrick Maguire captured both when he advised him not to pay too much attention to the views of the therapist he was attending: "You are a priest and you should not allow any person other than yourself to conclude that you ought not remain in ministry, albeit a limited one. I am distrustful of the capacity of any layman or woman to know what it means to be a priest."

What it meant to be a priest was that, in the eyes of the church authorities, you were held to a different standard than the mere layman or woman. It was not just that you were not subject to the law, but that you were not really subject to Catholic teaching either.

All the episcopal fulminations about sexual sin were for the benefit of the ordinary punters. For the priests, there was a much more tolerant attitude. While bleating about the permissive society, the archbishops were often flippant about the sexual crimes of the clergy. Cardinal Connell, for example, told Marie Collins that the action of an abuser in taking pictures of the genitalia of young girls in the hospital "was not serious as it only involved the taking of photographs".

All of this did immense harm to the victims and to the church itself. But it also harmed Ireland as a whole. The abusive relationship between church and society in which people were induced to collude in the maintenance of a corrupt and cynical system of power and control screwed up the Irish relationship with authority.

It deeply damaged the democratic and republican notion that power comes from the people, by creating a culture of shame, of weakness and of collusion. It taught us to live with, and believe that we loved, an arrogant and unaccountable kind of authority.

If we are ever to awaken once and for all from the nightmare described by the commission, we have to unlearn that lesson and create forms of collective authority that are open, accountable, lawful and genuinely democratic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on November 29, 2009, 05:20:42 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

money is the only thing that will make the cnuts realize how serious the issue is because they are still not taking it seriously.

Celebacy has fcuk all to do with these scumbags raping children, less than fcuk all and some of you on here are either deluded or stupid or both for thinking it is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 05:45:19 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

I want everyone that facilitated the pedophiles, or interfered in any way with the law by covering up complaints, to be in court. I also want the Dept. of Foreign Affairs to fire a diplomatic rocket into the Vatican.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on November 29, 2009, 10:56:24 AM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 12:12:01 AM
Sad thing is tens of thousands will go to mass today and listen to their mealy mouthed bullshit and throw money on the plate. God love their wit. 

Thanks for your condacension and patronage.

If you don't need to be a Catholic to be a Christian (which is very true), you can also be a Christian whilst being a Catholic.  And those Catholics who go to mass and listen to the interpretation of the bible, pray for their frends and relatives, try to become better Christians, what makes them need your pity? 
It reminds me in some way of one of the Beatitudes - Blessed are those who are persecuted in the pursuit of righteousness, theirs is the kingdom of heaven (probably not the right words but along those lines).  If a Catholic who abhorrs what happened in the past continues with their faith in and support for the belief that change will occur where it is needed, and is ridiculed for their good and honest intentions, then they can count themselves fortunate.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:32:43 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

We'll rehash it how many times we want- it is not Tierry's Henry's handball we're talking about here. These b**tards raped and beat the children of Ireland for years and if you are uncomfortable that people are feeling angry, tuff shit.
On a more consilitary note I hear that the church in my town is giving all this weekend's  colections to child aid charities...  ::) of course I'm kidding!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 11:35:13 AM

Parishes told of abuse 'distress'
Church candles
A letter reflecting on the abuse report was read to congregations

A reading expressing distress at clerical child abuse in Dublin is being read at masses in Down and Connor, Northern Ireland's largest diocese.

It was prepared on behalf of Bishop Noel Treanor and his priests.

They said the heinous crimes against children described in the Murphy report were "appalling and distressing".

Meanwhile, Limerick Bishop Donal Murray has reiterated he did not fail to act on an abuse allegation he received while an auxiliary bishop of Dublin.

In a letter read on Saturday night at masses, Bishop Murray apologised to all children who had been abused and said he deeply regretted if "any action or omission of his had contributed to their suffering".


The prominent campaigner and victim of clerical abuse, Andrew Madden, has criticised Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen for not telling those criticised in the Murphy report to resign as patrons of state-funded schools.

The Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin covered a period from 1975 to 2004.

It investigated how Church and state authorities handled allegations of child abuse against 46 priests made by 320 children. Eleven priests were convicted of sexual assaults on children.

Some offending priests were shifted from parish to parish, leaving them free to abuse again.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8384936.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8384936.stm)


That's alright then  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:37:13 AM
Pints-stop rehashing this stuff   :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 11:43:43 AM
How could anyone sit in a chapel and listen to a letter from a **** like that who's as bad as those doing the abusing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 11:43:43 AM
How could anyone sit in a chapel and listen to a letter from a **** like that who's as bad as those doing the abusing.

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: charlieTully on November 29, 2009, 02:25:34 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 11:43:43 AM
How could anyone sit in a chapel and listen to a letter from a **** like that who's as bad as those doing the abusing.

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.   

Is this confined to Ireland alone or is it on a global scale, has there been similar scandals in other countries involving the catholic church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AFS on November 29, 2009, 02:30:22 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on November 29, 2009, 02:25:34 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 11:43:43 AM
How could anyone sit in a chapel and listen to a letter from a **** like that who's as bad as those doing the abusing.

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.   

Is this confined to Ireland alone or is it on a global scale, has there been similar scandals in other countries involving the catholic church?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on November 29, 2009, 05:09:29 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

GDA, if you have a problem with something specific someone says, then address it. Otherwise, who are you to try to dictate what can and cannot be discussed on this board?

Don't think I'd have a problem with financial compensation myself. Send the animals themselves to prison, but the church itself has to pay a penalty for their collusion. Hit them where it hurts and they'll be less likely to behave in that way in the future.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:09:11 PM
In my opinion, good people did wrong in covering up, they did so for the best reasons in the world in their view at that time.  They were wrong in what they did, I have no problem in saying that just like I have no problem in saying that any member of religious life who obtained that position because they were/are a paedophile should be prosecuted and the key thrown away

That doesn't mean the entire Church was responsible.

I read actual figures recently and am wondering if the figures I read were correct.  Can anyone quantify the number of priests and victims involved in the island of Ireland? (Just want to be sure of my facts)

On a personal note, I am not surprised one bit about this scandal involving the Church worldwide.  I knew something was always going to happen to make people question their faith and their beliefs, all Catholics knew it - none of us knew what fashion it would take and the fact that it involves children makes it that much harder to bear witness to the Catholic faith in its wake.  I am still a Catholic, I was at Mass this morning with my wife and son and the priest spoke of the deep sense of shame that he and his fellow clergy feel at the report's findings and other abuses which have occurred at the hands of so-called religious people.

None of it means the entire Catholic Church is culpable, individuals within the Church, including at least one Papal Nuncio should have questions to answer and jail terms to serve

I know I will be lambasted for this but this is what happened regarding the cover-up, in my opinion; priests, bishops, at least one papal nuncio all knew what was going on by different priests - the reason nothing happened to them is that the bishops took the decision not to rock the boat for fear of causing damage to the Church.

Yes, they were wrong and had they all acted much earlier, this could have been nipped in the bud.  That didn't happen. Gardai, PSNI, various government departments both north and south of the border knew what was happening and let it continue.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 07:13:33 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:09:11 PM
In my opinion, good people did wrong in covering up, they did so for the best reasons in the world in their view at that time.  They were wrong in what they did, I have no problem in saying that just like I have no problem in saying that any member of religious life who obtained that position because they were/are a paedophile should be prosecuted and the key thrown away

That doesn't mean the entire Church was responsible.

I read actual figures recently and am wondering if the figures I read were correct.  Can anyone quantify the number of priests and victims involved in the island of Ireland? (Just want to be sure of my facts)

On a personal note, I am not surprised one bit about this scandal involving the Church worldwide.  I knew something was always going to happen to make people question their faith and their beliefs, all Catholics knew it - none of us knew what fashion it would take and the fact that it involves children makes it that much harder to bear witness to the Catholic faith in its wake.  I am still a Catholic, I was at Mass this morning with my wife and son and the priest spoke of the deep sense of shame that he and his fellow clergy feel at the report's findings and other abuses which have occurred at the hands of so-called religious people.

None of it means the Catholic Church is culpable, individuals within the Church, including at least one Papal Nuncio should have questions to answer.

I know I will be lambasted for this but this is what happened regarding the cover-up, in my opinion; priests, bishops, at least one papal nuncio all knew what was going on by different priests - the reason nothing happened to them is that the bishops took the decision not to rock the boat for fear of causing damage to the Church.

Yes, they were wrong and had they all acted much earlier, this could have been nipped in the bud.  That didn't happen. Gardai, PSNI, various government departments both north and south of the border knew what was happening and let it continue.

We didn't agree earlier but IMHO that is a very reasonable position.

However I think you may underestimate how many decision makers knew about it, for example the former Cardinal Ratzinger is up to his neck in it allegedly. But in the absence of the Vatican coming clean, that is really only speculation and that in itself is a huge part of the problem.

Time to come clean and start on long the road to rebuilding trust.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:18:19 PM
QuoteI am still a Catholic, I was at Mass this morning with my wife and son and the priest spoke of the deep sense of shame that he and his fellow clergy feel at the report's findings and other abuses which have occurred at the hands of so-called religious people.

You probably weren't in one of the chapels where Donal Murray's letter was read out but how could you sit and listen to that from someone who's reported to be one of the ones responsible for covering it up? and if the Church isn't responsible and has a deep sense of shame etc, how are people like that still in their positions?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:38:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:18:19 PM
QuoteI am still a Catholic, I was at Mass this morning with my wife and son and the priest spoke of the deep sense of shame that he and his fellow clergy feel at the report's findings and other abuses which have occurred at the hands of so-called religious people.

You probably weren't in one of the chapels where Donal Murray's letter was read out but how could you sit and listen to that from someone who's reported to be one of the ones responsible for covering it up? and if the Church isn't responsible and has a deep sense of shame etc, how are people like that still in their positions?
I don't know if that letter was read out this morning, we got there late so I only got to hear his homily

pints, I don't know how these people are still there.  I daresay the same people are there in the Gardai, PSNI, civil service in both jurisdictions ...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:45:07 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 29, 2009, 07:13:33 PM
We didn't agree earlier but IMHO that is a very reasonable position.

However I think you may underestimate how many decision makers knew about it, for example the former Cardinal Ratzinger is up to his neck in it allegedly. But in the absence of the Vatican coming clean, that is really only speculation and that in itself is a huge part of the problem.

Time to come clean and start on long the road to rebuilding trust.
I thought it was time that my position wasn't misunderstood, it's hard to think when a 10 month old child is running round the room mad - I got time today so thought I would clarify
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 07:51:31 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection)

Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry
Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret
Jamie Doward, religious affairs correspondent
The Observer,    Sunday 24 April 2005 09.58 BST

Pope Benedict XVI faced claims last night he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret.
The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by The Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.

It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week.

Lawyers acting for abuse victims claim it was designed to prevent the allegations from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police. They accuse Ratzinger of committing a 'clear obstruction of justice'.

The letter, 'concerning very grave sins', was sent from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office that once presided over the Inquisition and was overseen by Ratzinger.

It spells out to bishops the church's position on a number of matters ranging from celebrating the eucharist with a non-Catholic to sexual abuse by a cleric 'with a minor below the age of 18 years'. Ratzinger's letter states that the church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been 'perpetrated with a minor by a cleric'.

The letter states that the church's jurisdiction 'begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age' and lasts for 10 years.

It orders that 'preliminary investigations' into any claims of abuse should be sent to Ratzinger's office, which has the option of referring them back to private tribunals in which the 'functions of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be performed for these cases only by priests'.

'Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret,' Ratzinger's letter concludes. Breaching the pontifical secret at any time while the 10-year jurisdiction order is operating carries penalties, including the threat of excommunication.

The letter is referred to in documents relating to a lawsuit filed earlier this year against a church in Texas and Ratzinger on behalf of two alleged abuse victims. By sending the letter, lawyers acting for the alleged victims claim the cardinal conspired to obstruct justice.

Daniel Shea, the lawyer for the two alleged victims who discovered the letter, said: 'It speaks for itself. You have to ask: why do you not start the clock ticking until the kid turns 18? It's an obstruction of justice.'

Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April last year in which he admitted to Shea that the letter extended the church's jurisdiction and control over sexual assault crimes.

The Ratzinger letter was co-signed by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone who gave an interview two years ago in which he hinted at the church's opposition to allowing outside agencies to investigate abuse claims.

'In my opinion, the demand that a bishop be obligated to contact the police in order to denounce a priest who has admitted the offence of paedophilia is unfounded,' Bertone said.

Shea criticised the order that abuse allegations should be investigated only in secret tribunals. 'They are imposing procedures and secrecy on these cases. If law enforcement agencies find out about the case, they can deal with it. But you can't investigate a case if you never find out about it. If you can manage to keep it secret for 18 years plus 10 the priest will get away with it,' Shea added.

A spokeswoman in the Vatican press office declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,' she said.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:09:11 PM
In my opinion, good people did wrong in covering up, they did so for the best reasons in the world in their view at that time.  They were wrong in what they did, I have no problem in saying that just like I have no problem in saying that any member of religious life who obtained that position because they were/are a paedophile should be prosecuted and the key thrown away

That doesn't mean the entire Church was responsible etc...


"Good people did wrong in covering up?!!  ??? wtf... a person who covers up the rape of a child is not a good person... unbelievable statement. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on November 29, 2009, 08:14:13 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:09:11 PM
In my opinion, good people did wrong in covering up, they did so for the best reasons in the world in their view at that time.  They were wrong in what they did, I have no problem in saying that just like I have no problem in saying that any member of religious life who obtained that position because they were/are a paedophile should be prosecuted and the key thrown away

That doesn't mean the entire Church was responsible etc...


"Good people did wrong in covering up?!!  ??? wtf... a person who covers up the rape of a child is not a good person... unbelievable statement. 

Spot on, Fox.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in terms of the number of priests through both jurisdictions and amount of victims in both jurisdictions.

Of course I would have preferred this not to have happened but I can't deny it has.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in my opinion.
Why what numbers did you read today?
you can have faith without going to mass or subscribing to an organisation that covers up child abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on November 29, 2009, 08:25:29 PM
By the way, they did a hell of a lot more than covering up. They gave these animals free rein to continue raping children. For years on end. They called the victims liars and threatened their families.

Even at this late stage, the church and many of its members don't get it. The sacrifice of children to protect the institution of the church is not only unreasonable and criminal. It's monstrous. But still they continue nauseatingly to protest that they did no wrong and refuse to salvage even a scrap of honour by at least resigning. Incredibly, some of the laity continue to support them.

"Good people" found out in an outrage like this would retire to the study with a bottle of whiskey and a revolver.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 08:26:02 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in terms of the number of priests through both jurisdictions and amount of victims in both jurisdictions.

Of course I would have preferred this not to have happened but I can't deny it has.

You sound like an apologist for the church trying to minimise what happened. 'Storm in a f**ing teacup'... your comments here are beneath contempt.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 08:31:44 PM
Quote...........Michael McDowell's most colourful sayings when, as Justice Minister, he reminded Cardinal Connell that the canon law code of the Catholic Church had no more status in Ireland than the membership rules of a golf club

Senior figures in the Church seem to think that they are entitled to enforce & and answer only to Canon Law. This was the smokescreen with which they dealt with child abuse. There is no doubt that lay people also participated.

If McDowell was correct when he was quoted above then everyone involved should be prosecuted without any delay.

In a few days some Government lackey will probably tell us that 'we can't have a witch hunt' or some other cliche and then I will be certain that this will be allowed to slide down the 'to do' list.

There is a huge elephant in the room though. Misguided loyalty to the Church is the single greatest reason why these people were never prosecuted. It is well known that a certain loyal Catholic organisation is extraordinarily well represented in some of our senior court benches.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:33:33 PM
Quote from: Hardy on November 29, 2009, 08:25:29 PM
By the way, they did a hell of a lot more than covering up. They gave these animals free rein to continue raping children. For years on end. They called the victims liars and threatened their families.

Even at this late stage, the church and many of its members don't get it. The sacrifice of children to protect the institution of the church is not only unreasonable and criminal. It's monstrous. But still they continue nauseatingly to protest that they did no wrong refuse to salvage even a scrap of honour by at least resigning. Incredibly, some of the laity continue to support them.

"Good people" found out in an outrage like this would retire to the study with a bottle of whiskey and a revolver.
Well said Hardy and they're still in their positions today and sending out f**king letters to be read at mass!!!
Makes my blood boil and some people seem to be as bad as the people were when all this was happening.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:40:18 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in my opinion.
Why what numbers did you read today?
you can have faith without going to mass or subscribing to an organisation that covers up child abuse.
I'd prefer for someone else to quote the figures so I can't be accused of anything, if the figures I read tally with what someone else saw then I will gladly confirm - what I am alluding to is that if what I saw is right, it's much the same as any othe section of society so it's another reason why I am suspicious of so much media attention over it

I mean you don't hear of Protestant ministers being involved in this sort of behaviour yet we know it happened before and was covered up, unionist politicians were also allegedly involved

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on November 29, 2009, 08:46:01 PM
There are thousands out marching and protesting over Nama and budget reforms. There should be hundreds of thousands out for justice for the victims of these animals in dog collars.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 08:46:51 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:40:18 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in my opinion.
Why what numbers did you read today?
you can have faith without going to mass or subscribing to an organisation that covers up child abuse.
I'd prefer for someone else to quote the figures so I can't be accused of anything, if the figures I read tally with what someone else saw then I will gladly confirm - what I am alluding to is that if what I saw is right, it's much the same as any othe section of society so it's another reason why I am suspicious of so much media attention over it

I mean you don't hear of Protestant ministers being involved in this sort of behaviour yet we know it happened before and was covered up, unionist politicians were also allegedly involved

The Ferns & Dublin Diocese reports are not media creations.

If the Church is to have any integrity at all as representing God it cannot hide behind any excuses.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 29, 2009, 08:48:44 PM
A possible quote of Edmund Burke's, but never more apt:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:49:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:40:18 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in my opinion.
Why what numbers did you read today?
you can have faith without going to mass or subscribing to an organisation that covers up child abuse.
I'd prefer for someone else to quote the figures so I can't be accused of anything, if the figures I read tally with what someone else saw then I will gladly confirm - what I am alluding to is that if what I saw is right, it's much the same as any othe section of society so it's another reason why I am suspicious of so much media attention over it

I mean you don't hear of Protestant ministers being involved in this sort of behaviour yet we know it happened before and was covered up, unionist politicians were also allegedly involved
I dont care if the covered up 1 or dozens or hundreds, the level of disgust should still be the same.
btw, if those bishops covered up child abuse to protect the church do you not think if they were so worried about the church they would be walking away now?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:06:03 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
That doesnt have any relevance to what we're talking about main street.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:07:24 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:49:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:40:18 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 08:09:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 07:46:33 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 07:43:28 PM
So how can you say the church is not responsible when it's the church leaders who are keeping those people in their positions and when the Vatican's silence is deafening!
To me the church is a lot more than the clergy, the church is everyone who is a Catholic, in deed as well as in name.
So you're happy to belong to something when it's leaders are covering up the rape of children?
Happy to have those people preach to you about the best way to live your life?
At this point in my life pints, I know enough to say that my faith is what's most important to me - I am not about to stop going to Mass because of what has been revealed - still not sure about numbers involved here - if the report I read today was accurate then you could be excused for thinking it was a storm in a teacup, in my opinion.
Why what numbers did you read today?
you can have faith without going to mass or subscribing to an organisation that covers up child abuse.
I'd prefer for someone else to quote the figures so I can't be accused of anything, if the figures I read tally with what someone else saw then I will gladly confirm - what I am alluding to is that if what I saw is right, it's much the same as any othe section of society so it's another reason why I am suspicious of so much media attention over it

I mean you don't hear of Protestant ministers being involved in this sort of behaviour yet we know it happened before and was covered up, unionist politicians were also allegedly involved
I dont care if the covered up 1 or dozens or hundreds, the level of disgust should still be the same.
btw, if those bishops covered up child abuse to protect the church do you not think if they were so worried about the church they would be walking away now?
I think that's a matter for them to answer to the Almighty for.  That's not a cop-out to your question either.

With respect to the level of disgust, pints, I am a father, I am no more comfortable with what was done than the next man - in an ideal world, it would never have happened but it has and now the Church has to answer for it - those priests involved, well the sooner they are locked up and the key thrown away the better
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on November 29, 2009, 09:09:04 PM
There has been much discussion here about the causes of Paedophilia and its extent within the Church. For the answer to this dilemna, you need only look into your own Hearts. Man is inherently sinful, we all have some Vices, some desires we fail to control, be it Drink,Drugs,Womenm Gambling etc.  No amount of reform within the Church or wider society will alter this fact. Abuse will continue, be assured of that. All we can do is remain vigilant, prevent some of it, and where possible make the abusers accountable to the law. Good Men fail frequently in their duties to speak up in the face of wrongdoing, is there one amongst us who has not. For the sake of the Church i would like to see a mass resignation of all the Bishops in Ireland, and their replacements appointed with input from the laity. I would like the Government to recall our representative to the Holy See, until we receive proper transparency and accountability from the Vatican. But i recognise that even if all this were to happen, it would not prevent future cases of abuse. Dysfunctional Men are the problem, whether in Church or Civil Society, and they will always be with us
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:14:07 PM
Quote
With respect to the level of disgust, pints, I am a father, I am no more comfortable with what was done than the next man - in an ideal world, it would never have happened but it has and now the Church has to answer for it - those priests involved, well the sooner they are locked up and the key thrown away the better
But you're still happy to be part of an organisation who still will not act and will are happy to have people who have covered this up in their ranks and in leadership positions.  I don't understand that. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:21:25 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:06:03 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
That doesnt have any relevance to what we're talking about main street.
With respect pints, MS does have a point.  His point is, he may correct may if I am wrong, that the Church is no different to any other organisation in terms of the amount of paedophiles are involved in it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:23:11 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:21:25 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:06:03 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
That doesnt have any relevance to what we're talking about main street.
With respect pints, MS does have a point.  His point is, he may correct may if I am wrong, that the Church is no different to any other organisation in terms of the amount of paedophiles are involved in it.
Well I've no evidence either way of that but the GAA didn't cover it up, threaten the victims etc so there's no comparison.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:24:27 PM
pints, what do you want me to say? :)

I have said I am still a Catholic despite what has happened
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:27:19 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:24:27 PM
pints, what do you want me to say? :)

I have said I am still a Catholic despite what has happened
I want to know how you can be part of an organisation (I dont expect you to stop being a catholic) who's leaders cover up child abuse and who STILL don't seem to see what they've done wrong.  Aren't you, as a catholic, suppose to be able to look to these people for moral guidance? How can you do that now?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:44:41 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:06:03 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
That doesnt have any relevance to what we're talking about main street.
It was written in reply to Fox. I believe it has relevance to what he wrote. The linked article refers to how the Ulster sec. enjoyed the privilege of the VIP box at the Ulster Final at a time after the investigation was in full swing.
On hearing that news at that time, my feeling was that the GAA hierarchy were supporting the Ulster secretary's pompous claims that the allegations were from blackguards. A typical, all too common reaction I might add, from such people. But it would not affect my relationship with the GAA.
Fox asks about a hypothetical situation of GAA club involvement however the GAA are not forthcoming on even basic details of allegations or convictions.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:54:28 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you

If you believe in God and Jesus then you are a Christian. If you want to go down to a church and listen to a priest then you are a catholic. Why do you need to seek guidance from priests or popes that know nothing more than any of us. Are you not able to form your own opinions of the bible? The church has shown that it is corrupt and self serving and not just with regards to child abuse but generally by way of keeping power.

I too am a father of a 2 year old. It makes me sick to think of what these fucks have done to kids. I can't believe the power this corrupt nasty organisation has wielded in my country.  I hope now that people will awaken from the trance they are in and finally see the truth.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:56:24 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you
So do I but I couldn't seek guidance from people who thought and still think it was acceptable to cover this stuff up.  I'll use my own judgement.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 10:00:29 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:56:24 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you
So do I but I couldn't seek guidance from people who thought and still think it was acceptable to cover this stuff up.  I'll use my own judgement.
Fair enough pints, I am not preaching that you should do anything else
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 10:03:23 PM
If the man wants to go to mass, he's entitled to go to mass. Tho I can't get my head around it either. I heard an old man on the radio coming out of mass today saying Jesus Christ suffered more than anyone. (ie: the children... like wtf  :-\ ). I'd say Jesus Christ is not too impressed with his self appointed foot soldiers running around in their dog collars telling impressionable people how to live their lives while their masters hide the evidence of paedophiles. Ard Mhaca.. you're welcome to them.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 10:17:00 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:54:28 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you

If you believe in God and Jesus then you are a Christian. If you want to go down to a church and listen to a priest then you are a catholic. Why do you need to seek guidance from priests or popes that know nothing more than any of us. Are you not able to form your own opinions of the bible? The church has shown that it is corrupt and self serving and not just with regards to child abuse but generally by way of keeping power.

I too am a father of a 2 year old. It makes me sick to think of what these f**ks have done to kids. I can't believe the power this corrupt nasty organisation has wielded in my country.  I hope now that people will awaken from the trance they are in and finally see the truth.
I have my own reasons for my faith.  I wouldn't have said this 10 years ago or even 5 years ago but there you go, things happen, people change - my own faith has changed over a long period of time from at one time being on the point of entering a seminary, it then got a lot less strong to the point where I was hardly attending Mass... and now it is something I want to do, I want to have a Catholic marriage and raise my kids as Catholics.  That's something I sought in a life-long partner and thankfully got.  That's where I am at myles, in a way it's because I want to be the same sort of father that mine was to me but on a much deeper level it's because of a lot of other things that all told me that being a Catholic is the most important thing for me and my family
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 10:22:20 PM
You are a very genuine fellow and as are many who go to mass. That's freedom... to go or not to go... I don't believe not going to mass means  a person has lost faith or God, but then you didn't say it does. There are those in the church do think that. I have young children too and they say goodnight to God every night and a wee prayer. I don't feel inclined to take them to mass. They don't really want to go anyway  :P   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Myles Na G. on November 29, 2009, 10:23:09 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:21:25 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 29, 2009, 09:06:03 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 29, 2009, 09:00:56 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 11:47:26 AM

If a local youth club or GAA club was involved in raping children and the same people who covered it up were in charge, would it still get community suport? Wouldn't darken the door. As early posters said, GOD is everywhere and the church have no monopoly on it. The devil, or evil, sure has been in the church alrite.
The Church hasn't got the monopoly on having evil in its midst.
A paedophile who for decades has abused numerous children managed to get elected to high office in Ulster GAA. When I say numerous, think of multiples of classroom numbers of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1004333.stm)

I have no doubt this paedophile used his special position in county GAA and provincial GAA as his evidence that he must be a good man and protect himself from the rumours/suspicions down through the years. I have no doubt that many of those in suits were scurrying around afterwards saying they knew absolutely nothing.

The GAA acknowledges that cases against members are in progress and that convictions have been obtained but it does not offer any details, of positions they held, not even of the numbers involved.
That doesnt have any relevance to what we're talking about main street.
With respect pints, MS does have a point.  His point is, he may correct may if I am wrong, that the Church is no different to any other organisation in terms of the amount of paedophiles are involved in it.
I would disagree with that. I think the church has a disproportionate number of paedophiles in it. The fact that so many seem drawn to the priesthood, should make people take a good hard look at how the church is set up and how it operates. But it won't, because ultimately the church is still run by a lot of celibate old men who won't relinquish their grip on the reins of power voluntarily.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tyssam5 on November 29, 2009, 10:27:50 PM
Has anyone read the report, is there a link to it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 29, 2009, 10:31:42 PM
http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PB09000504 (http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PB09000504)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 10:33:28 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 10:22:20 PM
You are a very genuine fellow and as are many who go to mass. That's freedom... to go or not to go... I don't believe not going to mass means  a person has lost faith or God, but then you didn't say it does. There are those in the church do think that. I have young children too and they say goodnight to God every night and a wee prayer. I don't feel inclined to take them to mass. They don't really want to go anyway  :P
That's up to you as a parent.  My son is almost 11 months old and has been at Mass every Sunday bar one since he was born, that's because of the way I want to raise him though.  I am not knocking you for not doing the same with yours.  That's your business, with respect
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on November 30, 2009, 12:04:41 AM
The catholic church will ride out this storm just fine with people like you about ardmhachaabu. Some will see that as a good thing. IMO you're letting them away far too easy considering the spiritual investment you're making with them. Don't be surprised if they don't let you down again.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 05:53:20 PM
NEWS
"Pressure has mounted on Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray to resign after an inquiry into the handling of child abuse cases in the Catholic Dublin Archdiocese branded his failure to investigate a paedophile priest inexcusable"
.... seems he got a standing ovation in Limerick yesterday...

their folk choir is very good tho...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on November 30, 2009, 05:58:17 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:54:28 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you

If you believe in God and Jesus then you are a Christian. If you want to go down to a church and listen to a priest then you are a catholic. Why do you need to seek guidance from priests or popes that know nothing more than any of us. Are you not able to form your own opinions of the bible? The church has shown that it is corrupt and self serving and not just with regards to child abuse but generally by way of keeping power.

I too am a father of a 2 year old. It makes me sick to think of what these f**ks have done to kids. I can't believe the power this corrupt nasty organisation has wielded in my country.  I hope now that people will awaken from the trance they are in and finally see the truth.

I say my prayers to Jesus and I also go to Mass, I have nothing but disdain for the cover up within the Churches ranks, the disgusting they moved this raping scum to different parishes etc when things got too hot, it is all despicable and deplorable. I do take exception however with the assertion that those of us that go to Church are incapable of thinking for ourselves, I have little to no faith in man, any man because he, like me, will do wrong, I do however reserve the right to go to a place of worship and pray to my God and that is what I choose to do, for a while after this all came out I could not bring myself to go to Mass and instead went to a Baptist Church, the problem there was that you had to sit there and endure the vitriol spewed forth by Catholic haters, we could not do that so we went back to Mass.

The Catholic Church is a Christian based Church, the issues arise with the politics of men within the Church, right up to the Pope himself, all who knew what was going on and did nothing should be held accountable, including both the last and Current Pope, and to think they are cannonizing JP2, it makes my blood boil.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 06:02:27 PM
I can't understand why people feel they need to go to a church to pray as God is everywhere. Maybe it is the community thing... the rest is just stain glass windows and statues. Each to their own I suppose. Is a lot of idolatary goes on too... kissing crosses, praying to statues and tree stumps etc...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on November 30, 2009, 06:43:06 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 06:02:27 PM
I can't understand why people feel they need to go to a church to pray as God is everywhere. Maybe it is the community thing... the rest is just stain glass windows and statues. Each to their own I suppose. Is a lot of idolatary goes on too... kissing crosses, praying to statues and tree stumps etc...

I dont kiss crosses, wear beads, pray to statues and have no feckin idea what you are on about with tree stumps.

We are supposed to commune with fellow believers, it's in the Bible you know. ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 06:45:10 PM
Quote from: stew on November 30, 2009, 05:58:17 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:54:28 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on November 29, 2009, 09:45:40 PM
pints, I know a member of clergy who was responsible for awful acts of child abuse which only came out years after they had left the parish they were in.  This is going back years.  I know that my grandparents would never have believed it of him but it is true - the fact that it happened rocked my world at the time because I would have been in his parish church a fair bit for Mass.  When it eventually came out what he was at there were quite a few people who didn't believe it, up until the point where the priest concerned was in court with a heap of charges against him with all sorts of witnesses testifying against him.

How can I still be a Catholic after that? How can I look to priests for spiritual guidance?

I am still a Catholic because I believe in God, I believe in Our Lady, I believe in Jesus Christ.  I am not sure who other than a priest I could be expected to seek spiritual guidance from.

It certainly wouldn't be Gnevin, that much I can tell you

If you believe in God and Jesus then you are a Christian. If you want to go down to a church and listen to a priest then you are a catholic. Why do you need to seek guidance from priests or popes that know nothing more than any of us. Are you not able to form your own opinions of the bible? The church has shown that it is corrupt and self serving and not just with regards to child abuse but generally by way of keeping power.

I too am a father of a 2 year old. It makes me sick to think of what these f**ks have done to kids. I can't believe the power this corrupt nasty organisation has wielded in my country.  I hope now that people will awaken from the trance they are in and finally see the truth.

I say my prayers to Jesus and I also go to Mass, I have nothing but disdain for the cover up within the Churches ranks, the disgusting they moved this raping scum to different parishes etc when things got too hot, it is all despicable and deplorable. I do take exception however with the assertion that those of us that go to Church are incapable of thinking for ourselves, I have little to no faith in man, any man because he, like me, will do wrong, I do however reserve the right to go to a place of worship and pray to my God and that is what I choose to do, for a while after this all came out I could not bring myself to go to Mass and instead went to a Baptist Church, the problem there was that you had to sit there and endure the vitriol spewed forth by Catholic haters, we could not do that so we went back to Mass.

The Catholic Church is a Christian based Church, the issues arise with the politics of men within the Church, right up to the Pope himself, all who knew what was going on and did nothing should be held accountable, including both the last and Current Pope, and to think they are cannonizing JP2, it makes my blood boil.

Was talking to a friend of mine there at the weekend. He would have been a devout catholic. He now never goes to mass but he does go to the local church to pray on his own time when no priest is around. I think that is a sensible approach.

A bunch of gobshite priests and brainwashed lay people have come out in favour of the bishop of limerick staying on. Apparently he is a good man and has done so much. Apparently none of us can be without sin and you know it is a complicated issue to deal with. What a bunch of stupid fucks. It is not a complicated issue. I'll spell it out for these imbeciles. A person (priest) under your command abuses kids and this is reported to you. YOU CALL THE GARDAI - SIMPLE. THE BISHOP OF LIMERICK IS A PROTECTOR OF PAEDOPHILLES - SIMPLE. Is there anyone out there that really believes the catholic church is cured and is moving on??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on November 30, 2009, 07:00:10 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 05:53:20 PM
NEWS
"Pressure has mounted on Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray to resign after an inquiry into the handling of child abuse cases in the Catholic Dublin Archdiocese branded his failure to investigate a paedophile priest inexcusable"
.... seems he got a standing ovation in Limerick yesterday...

their folk choir is very good tho...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE)
where did you get that info? I hope you're taking the piss!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:06:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 30, 2009, 07:00:10 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 05:53:20 PM
NEWS
"Pressure has mounted on Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray to resign after an inquiry into the handling of child abuse cases in the Catholic Dublin Archdiocese branded his failure to investigate a paedophile priest inexcusable"
.... seems he got a standing ovation in Limerick yesterday...

their folk choir is very good tho...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE)
where did you get that info? I hope you're taking the piss!

Don't know whether this is true but it wouldn't surprise me. Sure didn't some muppets in Donegal have a collection for paedophille priest Eugene Greene when he was released.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on November 30, 2009, 07:24:07 PM
The anti-catholic brigade here need not waste their energy fulminating about Donal Murray, as effectively he is gone. He has been selected as the patsy who will take the fall, after a couple of weeks debate about his position which will deflect attention from more serious aspects of this scandal
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 30, 2009, 07:28:40 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on November 30, 2009, 07:24:07 PM
The anti-catholic brigade here need not waste their energy fulminating about Donal Murray, as effectively he is gone. He has been selected as the patsy who will take the fall, after a couple of weeks debate about his position which will deflect attention from more serious aspects of this scandal

The anti-Catholic brigade probably compromises only one or two posters.

The rest could be divided into Conservative/Fundamentalist Catholics & Liberal Catholics.

I can't wait for Tyrone's Own to arrive................
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on November 30, 2009, 07:24:07 PM
The anti-catholic brigade here need not waste their energy fulminating about Donal Murray, as effectively he is gone. He has been selected as the patsy who will take the fall, after a couple of weeks debate about his position which will deflect attention from more serious aspects of this scandal

And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:53:29 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 30, 2009, 07:28:40 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on November 30, 2009, 07:24:07 PM
The anti-catholic brigade here need not waste their energy fulminating about Donal Murray, as effectively he is gone. He has been selected as the patsy who will take the fall, after a couple of weeks debate about his position which will deflect attention from more serious aspects of this scandal

The anti-Catholic brigade probably compromises only one or two posters.

The rest could be divided into Conservative/Fundamentalist Catholics & Liberal Catholics.

I can't wait for Tyrone's Own to arrive................

Oh there are plenty I am waiting to hear from but they are all too yellow to come on here now. They are probably busy trying to come with an argument to the defend their crazy viewpoints as we speak.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 09:44:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.

Where do I mock the irish people? I mock those who came on here after the industrial school reports defending the church and now are nowhere to be seen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on November 30, 2009, 09:55:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 09:44:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.

Where do I mock the irish people? I mock those who came on here after the industrial school reports defending the church and now are nowhere to be seen.
As a father just after putting the 3 to bed I don't know how anyone can defend an organisation that protected and assisted in the evasion of rapists and paedophiles is beyond comprehension. To many the evil deeds are just words but behind the words are stomach churning stories of these upstanding pillars of the community repeatedly buggering both boys and girls, forcing them to perform oral sex etc etc.

You cannot defend the indefensible and these were not isolated instances, they were known about and aided and abetted from the parish right to Rome. Rotten to the core.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on November 30, 2009, 09:58:20 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 30, 2009, 09:55:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 09:44:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.

Where do I mock the irish people? I mock those who came on here after the industrial school reports defending the church and now are nowhere to be seen.
As a father just after putting the 3 to bed I don't know how anyone can defend an organisation that protected and assisted in the evasion of rapists and paedophiles is beyond comprehension. To many the evil deeds are just words but behind the words are stomach churning stories of these upstanding pillars of the community repeatedly buggering both boys and girls, forcing them to perform oral sex etc etc.

You cannot defend the indefensible and these were not isolated instances, they were known about and aided and abetted from the parish right to Rome. Rotten to the core.

I have the greatest respect for all of the Priests I know personally, none who have been implicated in this, but it is hard to disagree with the above.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on November 30, 2009, 10:36:10 PM
Don't forget that this is only one diocese out of 26 on this island I believe, and thats before we go global. Is there enough energy from within the church going public to demand that every carpet is lifted and every protector of paedophiles is hunted from the church?

I think truth will be too hard to take for most they will rather take the blue pill making them just as morally corrupt as the protectors. Surely you have to stand up for what is right regardless of the consequences that might come about.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 11:00:47 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 30, 2009, 07:00:10 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 30, 2009, 05:53:20 PM
NEWS
"Pressure has mounted on Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray to resign after an inquiry into the handling of child abuse cases in the Catholic Dublin Archdiocese branded his failure to investigate a paedophile priest inexcusable"
.... seems he got a standing ovation in Limerick yesterday...

their folk choir is very good tho...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba5GW9DjHxE)
where did you get that info? I hope you're taking the piss!

I think I heard it on the Gerry Ryan show this morning- I didn't make it up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 11:11:12 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 09:44:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.

Where do I mock the irish people? I mock those who came on here after the industrial school reports defending the church and now are nowhere to be seen.
When I wrote that you mock the people who you deem to be suppressed and manipulated, I am of course referring to those people who you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.
Did you not refer to the "manipulated" members of a congregation in Limerick as imbeciles and stupid fxcks.

You do sound like an outraged, self righteous, foaming at the mouth, Johnny come lately to the abuse scene.

Frankly, I have been very vocal against child abuse in many of its forms since the mid 70's. I have witnessed this stuff close at hand and even managed to get expelled a few times from school then while authorities resisted/struggled to move on a teacher. I have long said that child abuse is the most serious issue in Ireland's history, if only people knew what went on and the damage. I have no problem with people's faith or their catholicism.

I would totally support that every PP, Bishop, Cardinal, headmaster, suspicious police investigation referred to in the reports, be brought in front of a commission/special court with legal powers and cross examined to the point of exhaustion over their complicity, until the full admission be extracted. This would certainly help the process of that one bishop called 'examine ones conscience- to see if you're fit for duty'.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 11:26:19 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 11:11:12 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 09:44:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 30, 2009, 09:17:23 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 30, 2009, 07:51:13 PM
And what exactly is that meant to mean? I have been anti catholic (if that is the label you want for me) for a long time when I bothered to do some research on their corrupt influence on this country. Unfortunately, everything I thought of them has proven to be true. You and others bandying around terms like "anti catholic" just allows these people of the hook as you are indirectly implying that "anti catholics" are some sort of extreme hate group - which I am not. I am anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country
You cross the line to from "anti anything that manipulates and suppresses the people of this country" to fanaticism when you mock the people that you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.

Where do I mock the irish people? I mock those who came on here after the industrial school reports defending the church and now are nowhere to be seen.
When I wrote that you mock the people who you deem to be suppressed and manipulated, I am of course referring to those people who you deem to be suppressed and manipulated.
Did you not refer to the "manipulated" members of a congregation in Limerick as imbeciles and stupid fxcks.

You do sound like an outraged, self righteous, foaming at the mouth, Johnny come lately to the abuse scene.

Frankly, I have been very vocal against child abuse in many of its forms since the mid 70's. I have witnessed this stuff close at hand and even managed to get expelled a few times from school then while authorities resisted/struggled to move on a teacher. I have long said that child abuse is the most serious issue in Ireland's history, if only people knew what went on and the damage. I have no problem with people's faith or their catholicism.

I would totally support that every PP, Bishop, Cardinal, headmaster, suspicious police investigation referred to in the reports, be brought in front of a commission/special court with legal powers and cross examined to the point of exhaustion over their complicity, until the full admission be extracted. This would certainly help the process of that one bishop called 'examine ones conscience- to see if you're fit for duty'.

Well thats me told.

A group of lay members and priests came out in favour a bishop in Limerick who the report said handled abuse badly and in one case I believe it said unbelievably badly. The mans name is dirt. This was a carefully planned statement timed to come out straight after the said bishop declared he would leave his fate with the priests and people in Limerick.

The vast majority of people in this country have already copped onto the catholic church, thats why numbers in churches are at all time lows and no one is joining the priesthood. I am mocking a hardline brainwashed minority.

I can assure you that I am not foaming at the mouth nor do I feel the need to tell you of my past to prove what a great guy I am. You don't know anything about me or what makes me tick. Your johnny come lately comment is childish. Are you implying that I only recently believed child abuse to be wrong? Perhaps in the 70's when I was 4 years old I should have been getting expelled from school? I can tell you one thing, if there was a child abuser teaching in my daughters school he would be removed one way or the other in 10 mins flat. That might make me a self righteous foaming mouth whatever but you know what - I don't care.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on November 30, 2009, 11:34:08 PM
Main street whilst agreeing on mts's main arguments, is more interested going out of his way to get offended. You're like like a drunk loyalist wearing a poppy
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:17:19 AM
Quote from: stew on November 29, 2009, 05:20:42 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

money is the only thing that will make the cnuts realize how serious the issue is because they are still not taking it seriously.

Celebacy has fcuk all to do with these scumbags raping children, less than fcuk all and some of you on here are either deluded or stupid or both for thinking it is.

Stew as far as I can see, throwing money at something bad is modern societies way of making it go away/appease a group/national conscience.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.

Myles what has Celtic got to do with this?
When I post on here has fcuk all to do with you.
No never made a bollix of myself on here, I have stated my opinion on things which others have disagreed on (but sure you continue to "play the man").
FFS church funds/assets and compo have been mentioned all through this thread, maybe you should take your own biased head from your own hole!
As for Justice, that is something for the courts to decide on.
Finally - so because I have different views then you on the Church, I'm controlled - thanks for clearing that up for me.  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:31:00 AM
Quote from: J70 on November 29, 2009, 05:09:29 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

GDA, if you have a problem with something specific someone says, then address it. Otherwise, who are you to try to dictate what can and cannot be discussed on this board?

Don't think I'd have a problem with financial compensation myself. Send the animals themselves to prison, but the church itself has to pay a penalty for their collusion. Hit them where it hurts and they'll be less likely to behave in that way in the future.

J70 I didn't dictate what can or can't be discussed on this board - was passing comment on the fact that this is pretty much the same stuff that has been rehashed from the last report, I also said that what has happened is a disgrace and justice needs to be done, but that's conveniently ignored.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on December 01, 2009, 10:37:33 AM
Another bad part of the Catholic Church selling playing fields to fund compensation is that it will be children who will be losing out because of the loss of sports facilities. I wonder how many of these pitches where payed for by past-pupils/students/parents/community donations and now the Catholic Church is selling this land to pay for THEIR sins.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 01, 2009, 10:46:14 AM
So you'll sit in silence on this issue and exert no pressure on the church at a local level from the inside whilst you wait for the state and the courts to deliver justice like they've been doing for years  :-\

Do you not think that it is imperative that every church congregation DEMANDS detailed investigations be carried out in every diocese and that proper punishment should be given to everybody involved if the catholic church as an institution is to survive or is the burying the head in the sand approach the only way devout catholics can deal with this trauma?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 01, 2009, 10:57:06 AM
Some of the arguments about the group of lay people coming out in defence of the bishop in Limerick reminds me of a situation a few years ago where a known abuser was moved on by the bishop to another parish ( Derry ) - when he "left" the parish some of the people wouldn't accpet that yer man had acted inappropriately and went as far as lifting a collection for him and handed him a tidy sum when he was moved.


Some people, for whatever reason will never feel able to condemn even though the facts are irrefutable. That's their right - if that's the way they want to think, fair enough.


We're getting a bit of this on the board as well.


It takes all kinds.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:58:36 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on December 01, 2009, 10:46:14 AM
So you'll sit in silence on this issue and exert no pressure on the church at a local level from the inside whilst you wait for the state and the courts to deliver justice like they've been doing for years  :-\

Do you not think that it is imperative that every church congregation DEMANDS detailed investigations be carried out in every diocese and that proper punishment should be given to everybody involved if the catholic church as an institution is to survive or is the burying the head in the sand approach the only way devout catholics can deal with this trauma?

You suggesting going above the Justice system?

The church has been put in the spotlight over abuse physical/sexual and mental, they are putting in place safeguards to stop these atrocities occurring again.
Sadly we cannot change the past, but must look to the future to ensure this never happens again, and I feel that this is beginning to happen. Irish society will never be the same again, but imho the Catholic church still has an important role to play in Irish daily life.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 01, 2009, 11:14:35 AM
What I am saying it is obvious that the people need to exert influence on the systems of control to ensure that proper justice is delivered. If you sit in silience then both the church & the state will tip toe away from the controversy. Has history taught you nothing?

So regardless of how morally reprehensible the decisions of those bestowed with theological and moral authority were (both the abusers and those who covered up), lets learn from it, draw a line under it and then congregations can go back and recieving moral, religeous and ethical guidance from the very people who knowingly passed child abuser after child abuser onto other unsuspecting parishes

You have to be having a laugh
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stephenite on December 01, 2009, 11:15:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:58:36 AM
but imho the Catholic church still has an important role to play in Irish daily life.

imho they shouldn't be let. But I feel the slow march of time will take care of that, their influence decreases greatly with every generation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.

Myles what has Celtic got to do with this?
When I post on here has fcuk all to do with you.
No never made a bollix of myself on here, I have stated my opinion on things which others have disagreed on (but sure you continue to "play the man").
FFS church funds/assets and compo have been mentioned all through this thread, maybe you should take your own biased head from your own hole!
As for Justice, that is something for the courts to decide on.
Finally - so because I have different views then you on the Church, I'm controlled - thanks for clearing that up for me.  ::)

You posted on this within the hour of posting on the "right I'm pissed thread" which tells me a little about the type of guy you are. Plus you tend to start up a load of meaningless threads on a Saturday night after a few scoops, no. Drink loosens the tongue they say but with you it loosens your fingers and a few screws in your head. I presume you are posting sober now so at least that is something.
There has hardly been a mention of compo since the latest report came out - except by you. And yes, you are controlled in my opinion based on the fact that you totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on December 01, 2009, 01:31:52 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on December 01, 2009, 10:46:14 AM
So you'll sit in silence on this issue and exert no pressure on the church at a local level from the inside whilst you wait for the state and the courts to deliver justice like they've been doing for years  :-\

Do you not think that it is imperative that every church congregation DEMANDS detailed investigations be carried out in every diocese and that proper punishment should be given to everybody involved if the catholic church as an institution is to survive or is the burying the head in the sand approach the only way devout catholics can deal with this trauma?

Do you honestly believe the hierarchy of the church care what the congregation actually think or demand?

They'll only sit up and take notice when the congregation stop paying their stipends in those wee envelopes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.

Myles what has Celtic got to do with this?
When I post on here has fcuk all to do with you.
No never made a bollix of myself on here, I have stated my opinion on things which others have disagreed on (but sure you continue to "play the man").
FFS church funds/assets and compo have been mentioned all through this thread, maybe you should take your own biased head from your own hole!
As for Justice, that is something for the courts to decide on.
Finally - so because I have different views then you on the Church, I'm controlled - thanks for clearing that up for me.  ::)

You posted on this within the hour of posting on the "right I'm pissed thread" which tells me a little about the type of guy you are. Plus you tend to start up a load of meaningless threads on a Saturday night after a few scoops, no. Drink loosens the tongue they say but with you it loosens your fingers and a few screws in your head. I presume you are posting sober now so at least that is something.
There has hardly been a mention of compo since the latest report came out - except by you. And yes, you are controlled in my opinion based on the fact that you totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only.
Again playing the man.  ::)
Meaningless threads on a Saturday night - feck me I thought this was a discussion forum!
You know nothing about me, and can tell even less about my personna from this discussion forum, fyi.
I'll be interested to know where I made a "bollix" of myself??
Finally where did I - "totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only." - or is that you spoofing again?

P.s Still want to know the revelence of Celtic or what I said in my "late night post" that you disagreed with? Would it be where I said it was disgraceful or maybe when I said we want justice?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 01, 2009, 02:12:52 PM
This boy must be kicking himself he didn't join the priesthood...


Boxing coach is jailed for abuse
Frank Mulligan
Mulligan is already serving a sentence for abusing children
A former boxing coach from County Monaghan has been sentenced to six and half years in jail for sexually abusing children.
Frank Mulligan, 64, from Smithboro, pleaded guilty to the offences which took place between 1997 and 2002.
He is already serving a seven year sentence for abusing two other boys.
Mulligan was once one of Ireland's most respected and successful amateur boxing coaches, once training former world featherweight champion Barry McGuigan.
Sentencing him, the judge said the abuse was "a heinous crime".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: gerrykeegan on December 01, 2009, 04:31:35 PM
More abuse

The tax defaulters' list, which relates to settlements made between July and the end of September, included a settlement of €433,475 made by Cork priest Fr Tadhg O'Donovan for undeclared income tax and capital gains tax.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bingobus on December 01, 2009, 04:35:19 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on December 01, 2009, 02:12:52 PM
This boy must be kicking himself he didn't join the priesthood...


Boxing coach is jailed for abuse
Frank Mulligan
Mulligan is already serving a sentence for abusing children
A former boxing coach from County Monaghan has been sentenced to six and half years in jail for sexually abusing children.
Frank Mulligan, 64, from Smithboro, pleaded guilty to the offences which took place between 1997 and 2002.
He is already serving a seven year sentence for abusing two other boys.
Mulligan was once one of Ireland's most respected and successful amateur boxing coaches, once training former world featherweight champion Barry McGuigan.
Sentencing him, the judge said the abuse was "a heinous crime".

Know a lad from the area this sc**bag is from and some of the tales he had would scare the shite outa ya.

6 1/2 years and he'll not see another 2/3 of them. Some justice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: shambo on December 01, 2009, 04:38:45 PM
yesterdays Irish News i noticed that it was 8/9 pages in before any talk about the child abuse with the clergy.

it must not be big enough news, they even had an article about Ian Junior saying that they will take the ones who want to leave the Chatholic church!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 01, 2009, 05:17:04 PM
Of course some may call it laughable but does anybody else feel at times like this that must be some secret body linked to the media/government which manages the "public interest" (whatever that is) and limits the damage which could be done by over exuberent campaigns against what would be considered critical social institutions?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 06:14:28 PM
Quote from: shambo on December 01, 2009, 04:38:45 PM
yesterdays Irish News i noticed that it was 8/9 pages in before any talk about the child abuse with the clergy.

it must not be big enough news, they even had an article about Ian Junior saying that they will take the ones who want to leave the Chatholic church!!!

Well that is truly pathetic. As bad as our Southern press can be at least they have the stones to stand up and shout this from the roof tops. Perhaps the northern media is afraid to show one side in a bad light versus the other side?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on December 01, 2009, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 06:14:28 PM
Quote from: shambo on December 01, 2009, 04:38:45 PM
yesterdays Irish News i noticed that it was 8/9 pages in before any talk about the child abuse with the clergy.

it must not be big enough news, they even had an article about Ian Junior saying that they will take the ones who want to leave the Chatholic church!!!

Well that is truly pathetic. As bad as our Southern press can be at least they have the stones to stand up and shout this from the roof tops. Perhaps the northern media is afraid to show one side in a bad light versus the other side?
Eh, the story was a few days old by yesterday - there was plenty of coverage in Saturday's paper.
It was released last Thursday, so I assume it was covered on Friday too.
Calm down there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: shambo on December 01, 2009, 11:13:05 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on December 01, 2009, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 06:14:28 PM
Quote from: shambo on December 01, 2009, 04:38:45 PM
yesterdays Irish News i noticed that it was 8/9 pages in before any talk about the child abuse with the clergy.

it must not be big enough news, they even had an article about Ian Junior saying that they will take the ones who want to leave the Chatholic church!!!

Well that is truly pathetic. As bad as our Southern press can be at least they have the stones to stand up and shout this from the roof tops. Perhaps the northern media is afraid to show one side in a bad light versus the other side?
Eh, the story was a few days old by yesterday - there was plenty of coverage in Saturday's paper.
It was released last Thursday, so I assume it was covered on Friday too.
Calm down there.

if the DUP were covering up paedos it would be front page for weeks!!! oh wait they did :P Kincora affair
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 01, 2009, 11:52:32 PM
Shambo-what the hell has that got to do with anything? Kinora was evil ... church coverup of child rapes is evil  Wats the big smiley face about?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on December 02, 2009, 01:04:10 AM
The Bishops have stated that they are putting systems in place to ensure this will not happen again. An idiotic statement, particularly from a group of Men with a firm grounding in Philosophy, Theology and sociology. Hopefully they will make it more difficult to happen again, but their insights into the nature of sinful man, should reveal to them that it most certainly will happen again, and they need to be vigilant and prepared to act swiftly. I have no confidence in the ability of any of the present incumbents to cope with future problems in this area.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 02, 2009, 08:48:19 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on December 02, 2009, 01:04:10 AM
The Bishops have stated that they are putting systems in place to ensure this will not happen again. An idiotic statement, particularly from a group of Men with a firm grounding in Philosophy, Theology and sociology. Hopefully they will make it more difficult to happen again, but their insights into the nature of sinful man, should reveal to them that it most certainly will happen again, and they need to be vigilant and prepared to act swiftly. I have no confidence in the ability of any of the present incumbents to cope with future problems in this area.

Presumably they mean that the cover up (or miss handling as they would like it to be called) would not happen again. For that to happen we would have to see a vatican down approach to the issue which is clearly not going to happen. If this disgraceful behaviour were to happen tomorrow in some other country in say South America, I believe it would all pan out exactly the same. The only thing that will stop it here is that the church knows it will not survive these scandals - self preservation as per usual.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 02, 2009, 09:27:47 AM
Yes to those that eat the alter rails, the institution is more important than the moral authority it possesses. This makes them as culpable as the protectors when you extrapolate the argument.

Alot of people are "simply" creatures of habit and do not possess the horse power to or they have a fear of thinking for themselves. They'll just want to get back to normality asap. Those who are religeous but do think for themselves I would guess will not go back if this is as far as the church is prepared to go and explore their spirituality elsewhere.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 02, 2009, 10:12:20 AM
Gerry Ryan show NOW !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on December 02, 2009, 10:14:48 AM
Have you a link? Is it radio 1 he's on?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 02, 2009, 10:27:39 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on December 02, 2009, 10:14:48 AM
Have you a link? Is it radio 1 he's on?


http://www.rte.ie/radio/liveplayer2_av.html?2_real,http://dynamic.rte.ie/av/live/radio/2fm.smil,real,200



Still on now.


Shocking IF true.


The priest who allegedly was responsible was sent to Botstwana of all places. Not Donegal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on December 02, 2009, 10:31:14 AM
Aye I got it orangeman.  Thanks.
Making the hair stand on the back of my neck!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 02, 2009, 10:49:58 AM
Can't listen to the radio here, can any of ye summarise?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on December 02, 2009, 11:21:50 AM
I only caught bits of it but they were on about the murder of Bernadette Connolly and about monastery van being seen in the area at the time, the suspected involvement of someone in the monastery, the file being shown to members of the clergy and about one of the priests (suspect) being moved to Botswana.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 02, 2009, 12:00:43 PM
Do they podcast or "listen again"on RTE?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 02, 2009, 08:56:46 PM
Is this bishop for real. Not in his nature to pass judgement??. Is that not what all priests and bishops do on a daily basis. That aside it is quite clear what Donal Murray did while bishop. He took a priest moved into his region from Wicklow where he abused kids. He(the priest) then began abusing kids in Donnecarney and threatened to kill them and their parents if they told anyone. When parents reported this to the Bishop he eventually launched an "investigation" (after ignoring the complaints firstly) which was described in the report as "totally inappropriate even by the standards of the day". The priest was then moved on again where he continued to abuse for another 10 years. It is quite cut and dry - the bishop put the church ahead of raping and molestation of 10 year old alter boys. Walsh may come across as a genuine sort of guy but his words of sorrow are worthless unless he does the right thing and requests to removes this man from the church - otherwise quite simply he is full of shit. As for Murray himself, a total sc**bag that hasn't even the courage to quit when an independant report has just effectively stated he knowingly harboured paedophilles. No amount of other "good work" balances out these acts.


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tearful-walsh-apologises--for-head-on-a-plate-remark-1960609.html

Tearful Walsh apologises for 'head on a plate' remark

Wednesday December 02 2009
THE Bishop of Killaloe Dr Willie Walsh broke down and cried on live radio yesterday after saying that he didn't want to pass judgment on others.

Dr Walsh broke down after stating: "Part of my nature is never really to judge anyone else. Part of the reason for that is that I am only too conscious of my own frailty and failures, so I don't want to pass judgment on anyone else."

An under-pressure Dr Walsh was responding to the fallout from his remarks on RTE radio, on Monday, when he warned against a desire to get "a head on a plate" over calls for the resignation of the Bishop of Limerick, Dr Donal Murray.

Yesterday, on Clare FM's 'Morning Focus' programme, presenter John Cooke was forced to take an early ad break to allow a weeping Dr Walsh compose himself.

Dr Walsh revealed that he has received a lot of phone calls from clerical sex abuse victims after his comments on Monday -- objecting to what he said.

"I'm very sorry for that and I apologise unreservedly for any hurt that I have caused, particularly to any victim," he said.

"The important thing here is the people who have suffered so much, and who are still carrying hurt," Dr Walsh added.

He admitted his remark about a "head on a plate" was "an unfortunate phrase".

He said: "What I thought I was calling for was a fair hearing, a balanced hearing.

"Obviously, other people think very differently. Other people saw that in some way maybe my condoning a failure to deal with this issue. I don't condone any failures to deal with this issue, but obviously, it came across the wrong way and caused hurt to some people."

"For that I apologise unreservedly; it is the last thing I would want to do."

Dr Walsh was away on business for the remainder of yesterday and was unavailable for further comment.

- Gordon Deegan

Irish Independent
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 02, 2009, 08:59:31 PM
F** Willie Walsh... he's crying for himself. Didn't cry too much when the report came out. I spit on the priest rapists and the bishops that covered it up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 03, 2009, 05:54:02 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on December 01, 2009, 02:12:52 PM
This boy must be kicking himself he didn't join the priesthood...
Boxing coach is jailed for abuse
Frank Mulligan
Mulligan is already serving a sentence for abusing children
A former boxing coach from County Monaghan has been sentenced to six and half years in jail for sexually abusing children.
Frank Mulligan, 64, from Smithboro, pleaded guilty to the offences which took place between 1997 and 2002.
He is already serving a seven year sentence for abusing two other boys.
Mulligan was once one of Ireland's most respected and successful amateur boxing coaches, once training former world featherweight champion Barry McGuigan.
Sentencing him, the judge said the abuse was "a heinous crime".


He should have put about 20 stone of weight on and avoided the clink like this bucko !!!


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8393463.stm
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Caid on December 03, 2009, 05:59:00 PM
More bad press for the CC:


A Catholic priest from County Cork has apologised for foul-mouthed comments he made about Irish tax officials.

Fr Tadgh O'Donovan had used very robust language in a newspaper interview to criticise officials after he was named as a tax defaulter.

He was included on a list of 76 defaulters published by Ireland's Revenue Commissioners on Tuesday.

Fr O'Donovan has apologised for his remarks, which he said were made "in the heat of the moment".

"I unreservedly withdraw what I said about them in relation to the timing of the publication of the list, the offensive allegation that they were responsible for suicides, the very intemperate tone and obscene language of my comments and the statement that the Revenue Commissioners were inconsiderate and inhumane," he said.

Fr O'Donovan added that he did not realise his remarks would be published.

Archbishop of Cloyne Dermot Clifford earlier demanded that Fr O'Donovan make a "a full and immediate apology".

The Revenue Commissioners revealed that the priest had made a settlement of 433,475 euros.

When the Irish Daily Star interviewed Fr O'Donovan about the matter he heaped abuse on the Revenue Commissioners.

It is not Fr O'Donovan's first disagreement with the tax authorities.

In March 2008, he was fined 6,000 euros at Cork Circuit Criminal Court on ten charges relating to his tax affairs - after agreeing a separate 213,000 euros settlement
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 03, 2009, 10:46:29 PM
Interesting comment from the times...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1203/1224259993544.html

Church and State relations


THE BISHOPS named in the Dublin diocese report must be made accountable for their behaviour. There is, nevertheless, a danger that in focusing in particular on the position of Bishop Donal Murray, we may miss a central point. Ultimate responsibility for the way in which the safety of children was so recklessly ignored does not lie with any individual bishop. It does not lie even with the Irish hierarchy as a whole. It lies with the Vatican.

We know this because the approach to allegations of child abuse was consistent, not simply between bishops or across Irish dioceses, but around the world. There was a way of doing things – keeping the crimes secret and moving the abusers on to another parish until the whole pattern began to repeat itself. It does not absolve Donal Murray from personal responsibility to say that he was part of this system. Equally, however, the mindset behind the system would not be fundamentally altered by his resignation.

It is in the light of the primary role of the Vatican that we must see the unwillingness of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and of the papal nuncio to respond to requests for information from the Murphy commission. The Taoiseach, in a painfully deferential statement in the Dáil, has endorsed these refusals as acts of "good faith" consistent with diplomatic norms. This submissiveness is entirely inappropriate to the leader of a republic, some of whose most vulnerable citizens have been grievously harmed by the policies and practices of the Holy See. It also shows either an unwillingness or an inability to grasp the nature of the scandal with which his Government is supposed to be dealing.

The Vatican does not do things lightly. When it refused to deal with the commission except through diplomatic contacts at the level of one state to another, it was not being precious. It was asserting a claim that is crucial to its efforts to avoid the consequences of its own policies. The insistence on being treated as a state rather than as a church is the key to its claim of sovereign immunity. The context for this claim is a case in the US in which the circuit court of appeals ruled that the Vatican could be sued by victims of an Irish priest. The US supreme court is currently considering whether to hear an appeal from the Vatican, which is hoping to avoid a wave of lawsuits from victims in the US.

It is quite disgraceful that the Taoiseach should play along with this manoeuvre by endorsing the Vatican's behaviour towards the commission. If the Vatican is indeed to be regarded simply as a foreign state, then it is a state that has colluded in the commission of vile crimes against Irish citizens. Those citizens have a right to expect their Government to mount at the very least a strong formal protest such as the withdrawal of our Ambassador to the Holy See. And if it is not to be regarded as a state, then it should be seen as an organisation with deep roots in this society and therefore answerable to the Irish people for its conduct. Either way, the Taoiseach's humbly supine posture is as insulting to the victims as it is humiliating to the Republic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 04, 2009, 11:04:22 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on December 02, 2009, 12:00:43 PM
Do they podcast or "listen again"on RTE?


Go to 43 minutes - from there onwards - also listen to the journalist who has investigated this case after Kerry is finished talking.


http://2fm.rte.ie/show/get_epg_schedule_item/11/2009-12-02
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 05, 2009, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.

Myles what has Celtic got to do with this?
When I post on here has fcuk all to do with you.
No never made a bollix of myself on here, I have stated my opinion on things which others have disagreed on (but sure you continue to "play the man").
FFS church funds/assets and compo have been mentioned all through this thread, maybe you should take your own biased head from your own hole!
As for Justice, that is something for the courts to decide on.
Finally - so because I have different views then you on the Church, I'm controlled - thanks for clearing that up for me.  ::)

You posted on this within the hour of posting on the "right I'm pissed thread" which tells me a little about the type of guy you are. Plus you tend to start up a load of meaningless threads on a Saturday night after a few scoops, no. Drink loosens the tongue they say but with you it loosens your fingers and a few screws in your head. I presume you are posting sober now so at least that is something.
There has hardly been a mention of compo since the latest report came out - except by you. And yes, you are controlled in my opinion based on the fact that you totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only.
Again playing the man.  ::)
Meaningless threads on a Saturday night - feck me I thought this was a discussion forum!
You know nothing about me, and can tell even less about my personna from this discussion forum, fyi.
I'll be interested to know where I made a "bollix" of myself??
Finally where did I - "totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only." - or is that you spoofing again?

P.s Still want to know the revelence of Celtic or what I said in my "late night post" that you disagreed with? Would it be where I said it was disgraceful or maybe when I said we want justice?

You wrote the following on the "right i'm pissed, are you?" thread.

"Not pissed tonight  , but here's a wee message for Myles, seeing as he ignored my last post on the - beat the Catholics thread - 

Catholic Templum silicis , quod mos barbaricus vos. "

Given the gravity of the issues on this thread I initially decided not to bother with a simpleton like you but against my better judgement I will explain my post in the small hope you might understand it.

Your first line posted (Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!) was offensive, insensitive to victims, childish and dismissive of this very important issue - the issue being the rape, molestation and abuse of innocent children by paedophille priests and the cover up of the same acts for decades by the bishops, cardinals and vatican. You then continued to dismiss the discussion by claiming "some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades" which is unfair as by and large people on here are commenting on the issues uncovered in 2 different independent reports!

You posted this idiotic post at 2-30am after being out drinking - correct? I have to ask myself what sort of person avoids this thread until the drink is on board and then comes on belittling it. Perhaps such a person would be better of slobbering on the Celtic thread like you normally do, that is the only reference I made to your beloved Celtic.

Where have you made a bollix of yourself? Well here for a start. Plus your idiotic drunken late night threads are also embarrassing and say more about the poster than the topics for the most part.

You totally ignore the bigger picture by failing to comment on the cover up and how it goes all the way to the center of power in the catholic church in the vatican. You say you want justice but you don't bother to say what that means. For example, would you agree that the papal nuncio should be expelled from the country for failing to even bother respond to a commission set up to examine abuse perpetrated by its member within this Sovereign Republic. Should all bishops be prosecuted for failing to pass information to the gardai? What is this justice you want? Justice and mealy mouthed statements about it being "disgraceful" mean nothing unless you support the actions required.

Finally, you go onto another thread and belittle the whole topic again by hilariously renaming this thread from "clerical abuse" to "beat the catholics". Quite frankly you are a pathetic excuse of an irishman and after typing all the above I know I am only wasting my time with a buffoon like you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 06, 2009, 04:43:26 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 05, 2009, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 01, 2009, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 01, 2009, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 29, 2009, 09:50:51 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 29, 2009, 02:01:43 AM
Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!

What happened was disgraceful and everyone wants justice, but some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades. Let the courts settle it. As for the compo, FFS have we all turned American!

Sorry for boring you with tales of abuse of children and cover ups from the vatican down. I know I should be over talking shite about Celtic or something more important. This has been out there most of the week and you have chosen to comment at 2-30am on Sunday morning after probably a skip of drink (haven't you made a bollix of yourself doing this before too). 2 lines dismissing the gravity of the thing. Maybe when you take your head out of your arse you might let us know about what this justice "everyone" wants is? Hardly anyone has mentioned compensation but only someone that thinks the corrupt catholic church is more important than the wrecked lives and lost innocence of children. People like you make me depressed about the future of this country such is the grip a bunch of clergy have on you. As I said before, you don't need the catholic church to follow the word of god or be a christian. I suggest you read the artcile posted above and ask yourself are you one of the people that the church controls.

Myles what has Celtic got to do with this?
When I post on here has fcuk all to do with you.
No never made a bollix of myself on here, I have stated my opinion on things which others have disagreed on (but sure you continue to "play the man").
FFS church funds/assets and compo have been mentioned all through this thread, maybe you should take your own biased head from your own hole!
As for Justice, that is something for the courts to decide on.
Finally - so because I have different views then you on the Church, I'm controlled - thanks for clearing that up for me.  ::)

You posted on this within the hour of posting on the "right I'm pissed thread" which tells me a little about the type of guy you are. Plus you tend to start up a load of meaningless threads on a Saturday night after a few scoops, no. Drink loosens the tongue they say but with you it loosens your fingers and a few screws in your head. I presume you are posting sober now so at least that is something.
There has hardly been a mention of compo since the latest report came out - except by you. And yes, you are controlled in my opinion based on the fact that you totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only.
Again playing the man.  ::)
Meaningless threads on a Saturday night - feck me I thought this was a discussion forum!
You know nothing about me, and can tell even less about my personna from this discussion forum, fyi.
I'll be interested to know where I made a "bollix" of myself??
Finally where did I - "totally ignore the bigger picture of what has happened here and prefer to lay sole blame with the paedophille priests only." - or is that you spoofing again?

P.s Still want to know the revelence of Celtic or what I said in my "late night post" that you disagreed with? Would it be where I said it was disgraceful or maybe when I said we want justice?

You wrote the following on the "right i'm pissed, are you?" thread.

"Not pissed tonight  , but here's a wee message for Myles, seeing as he ignored my last post on the - beat the Catholics thread - 

Catholic Templum silicis , quod mos barbaricus vos. "

Given the gravity of the issues on this thread I initially decided not to bother with a simpleton like you but against my better judgement I will explain my post in the small hope you might understand it.

Your first line posted (Jesus lads how many times can youse rehash this stuff!) was offensive, insensitive to victims, childish and dismissive of this very important issue - the issue being the rape, molestation and abuse of innocent children by paedophille priests and the cover up of the same acts for decades by the bishops, cardinals and vatican. You then continued to dismiss the discussion by claiming "some on here are just using this as an excuse for their anti catholic/church tirades" which is unfair as by and large people on here are commenting on the issues uncovered in 2 different independent reports!

You posted this idiotic post at 2-30am after being out drinking - correct? I have to ask myself what sort of person avoids this thread until the drink is on board and then comes on belittling it. Perhaps such a person would be better of slobbering on the Celtic thread like you normally do, that is the only reference I made to your beloved Celtic.

Where have you made a bollix of yourself? Well here for a start. Plus your idiotic drunken late night threads are also embarrassing and say more about the poster than the topics for the most part.

You totally ignore the bigger picture by failing to comment on the cover up and how it goes all the way to the center of power in the catholic church in the vatican. You say you want justice but you don't bother to say what that means. For example, would you agree that the papal nuncio should be expelled from the country for failing to even bother respond to a commission set up to examine abuse perpetrated by its member within this Sovereign Republic. Should all bishops be prosecuted for failing to pass information to the gardai? What is this justice you want? Justice and mealy mouthed statements about it being "disgraceful" mean nothing unless you support the actions required.

Finally, you go onto another thread and belittle the whole topic again by hilariously renaming this thread from "clerical abuse" to "beat the catholics". Quite frankly you are a pathetic excuse of an irishman and after typing all the above I know I am only wasting my time with a buffoon like you.

Myles again with all the personal abuse - says more about you then me lad!
I have stated that I think what has happened is abhorant and the perpitrators have to pay for their sins, but it's up to the relevant authorities to take action, can't be much clearer then that. Now you and I will not agree on other factors about the church so we'll leave it at that.
But seriously you have some fair points but the insults detract from your posts. And as for "late night threads" being embarassing, ffs its a discussion board, and it would be a pretty boring one without all sorts of thread topics, plus plenty seem happy emough to use them. Just avoid opening them if they piss you off so much.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on December 07, 2009, 12:16:47 PM
Is Bishop Murray of Limerick away over to Rome to hand in his resignation letter?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on December 07, 2009, 12:25:19 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on December 06, 2009, 04:43:26 PM
I have stated that I think what has happened is abhorant and the perpitrators have to pay for their sins, but it's up to the relevant authorities to take action, can't be much clearer then that. Now you and I will not agree on other factors about the church so we'll leave it at that.

Which would be far easier if there wasnt so much covering up
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on December 07, 2009, 01:30:08 PM
Don't now if anyone knows this man - A Columban, eco-warrior priest and a mad Tipp hurling fan but I've met him a few times and have always founs him to be a very decent fella. Here's his letter to the Times today. Nail on the head


Madam, – Dr Vincent Twomey, SVD, called on all the bishops mentioned in the Murphy report to resign immediately (December 3rd). The reason he gave is, "they are deemed guilty of putting the interests of the institution above the safety and welfare of children".

In 2001, every diocesan bishop in the Catholic Church around the the world received a letter from the then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, instructing them to refer complaints of clerical child sex abuse to the Congregation which would then decide how they should be dealt with. This directive from Rome, which effectively encouraged bishops to commit criminal offences in many jurisdictions, including Ireland, by not reporting the crime first to the police, certainly put the "interest of the institution above the safety and welfare of children." Will Dr Twomey be calling for Pope Benedict's resignation also? – Yours, etc,

Fr SEÁN McDONAGH,

Dalgan Park,

Navan,

Co Meath.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 07, 2009, 03:28:19 PM
Quote from: Declan on December 07, 2009, 01:30:08 PM
Don't now if anyone knows this man - A Columban, eco-warrior priest and a mad Tipp hurling fan but I've met him a few times and have always founs him to be a very decent fella. Here's his letter to the Times today. Nail on the head


Madam, – Dr Vincent Twomey, SVD, called on all the bishops mentioned in the Murphy report to resign immediately (December 3rd). The reason he gave is, "they are deemed guilty of putting the interests of the institution above the safety and welfare of children".

In 2001, every diocesan bishop in the Catholic Church around the the world received a letter from the then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, instructing them to refer complaints of clerical child sex abuse to the Congregation which would then decide how they should be dealt with. This directive from Rome, which effectively encouraged bishops to commit criminal offences in many jurisdictions, including Ireland, by not reporting the crime first to the police, certainly put the "interest of the institution above the safety and welfare of children." Will Dr Twomey be calling for Pope Benedict's resignation also? – Yours, etc,

Fr SEÁN McDONAGH,

Dalgan Park,

Navan,

Co Meath.

I'm not sure I quite understand Father McDonagh. Is he saying that,

a) of course Dr. Twomey should be also calling for the resignation of the Pope?

or

b) is he pointing out that if Dr. Twomey's logic is thought through further, then he would be also calling for the resignation of the Pope, which of course would be ridiculous.

I hope it is a).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 07, 2009, 03:36:58 PM
This appeared in yesterday's Indo and was the subject of a piece by Gerry Ryan last week :


By JIM CUSACK


Sunday December 06 2009

The well-known artist and former journalist Brighid McLaughlin has joined broadcaster Gerry Ryan in calling for the reopening of the investigation into the murder of 10-year-old Sligo girl Bernadette Connolly, which gardai said was stopped after high level intervention by the Catholic Church.

More than any other journalist, McLaughlin pursued the case of the little girl who was abducted, raped and murdered in Sligo in 1970.

Detectives involved in the case said they met a wall of silence when they tried to interview clergy, and later discovered that a copy of the murder file which named two priests as suspects was handed over to the Catholic hierarchy of the time.

A suspect in the 1970 case, Fr Columba from the Passionist Order, which had a house in the area, was sent to a mission in Africa during the early stages of the investigation and detectives were ordered to drop inquiries into possible clerical involvement in the rape and murder of the girl.

The publication of the Murphy report into abuse and cover-up in the Dublin Diocese, and the renewed appeals of Bernadette Connolly's sisters for the case to be re-examined, spurred Brighid McLaughlin to revisit the case, and she is writing to the Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy offering the extensive notes and files she retains on the case.

"I was most frustrated about what happened in the Bernadette Connolly case. I confronted Columba on his first visit to Ireland 28 years after the murder. He brazened it out and tried to stop me," she said yesterday.

Bernadette Connolly's sister, Kerrie Aldridge, appealed for the reopening of the case on Gerry Ryan's show last week, supported by her two other sisters, Patricia Connolly and Anne Guilfoyle.

The suspicions surrounding Fr Columba, who died in 2001, centred on his whereabouts at the time of the murder.

The Passionist Monastery van had been seen in the area at the time and the local garage owner told gardai that he had been called out to fill it with petrol on the evening of the murder. The murder occurred while most of the village of Collooney, where the Connollys lived, were glued to TV sets watching the return of the Apollo spacecraft from the Moon.

Last week a senior detective in the cases was quoted in the Evening Herald as saying: "I got this instruction to re-open the file, to bring Fr Columba in. I had been told that Fr Columba was in Mount Argus [the Passionist monastery in Dublin] and was told to prepare my interview. The night before I was told to forget about it, I was told this was coming right from the top,"

The Murphy report was critical of the actions of Garda Commissioner Daniel Costigan, who it found had intervened to prevent investigations into clerical abusers in Dublin. Retired gardai who spoke to the Sunday Independent last week concurred with the findings of Judge Murphy that certain gardai were effectively under the control of the Catholic Church.

One said: "Look, there is no point giving out. It was a totally different world. The Church was all-powerful; the word of a bishop was law in Ireland. Even if a young fella told his parents [about abuse by a priest] they would be afraid they would be excommunicated. They were frightened, they were very afraid.

"There was a sergeant down in Wicklow who had a case to do with the Church and abuse. He was nearly excommunicated. I remember in [the early Seventies] a guard in Dublin who wasn't afraid to take a case. He was nearly sacked. The sheer power of the Church . . . people have no idea now."

Another stated that the tide of Church power came to an end only in 1994 when the publicity over the case of the multiple rapist and abuser Fr Sean Fortune in Wexford was followed by a series of revelations about other priests.

The Fortune case was most prominently highlighted in the Sunday Independent at the time by Veronica Guerin, who devoted a large amount of time and energy in pursuing Bishop Brendan Comiskey about why Fortune was moved from parish to parish each time his abuse was exposed.

The then chief superintendent in Crime and Security at Garda Headquarters, Pat Byrne, who was later to become Garda Commissioner, was among the senior gardai to take a strong line against the Catholic hierarchy when they refused to disclose the whereabouts of three priests wanted for questioning, including Fr Thomas Naughton in Dublin, who was also moved from parish to parish to conceal his abuse.

Byrne, according to colleagues, was intent on issuing a warrant on senior clergy for misprision of felony, the offence of obstructing justice.

It was, according to Byrne's colleagues, only then when the hierarchy, faced with possible arrest, relented and began giving up the whereabouts of suspected abusers.

Naughton was subsequently sentence to three years' imprisonment for the sexual abuse of boys in his care.

- JIM CUSACK

Sunday Independent

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on December 07, 2009, 04:11:05 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 07, 2009, 03:28:19 PM
I'm not sure I quite understand Father McDonagh. Is he saying that,

a) of course Dr. Twomey should be also calling for the resignation of the Pope?

or

b) is he pointing out that if Dr. Twomey's logic is thought through further, then he would be also calling for the resignation of the Pope, which of course would be ridiculous.

I hope it is a).

The direct link between the Vatican, via the Council of the Doctrine of Faith (which the current Papa Benny ran at one stage) was made by the Fern's report and tested in the Irish High Court by Colm O'Gorman.  The High Court ruling actually opened the way to sue the Pope but I guess you'd need a lot of cash.  The crux of the case was a document that this Council produced (signed off by Pope John XXIII) called "Crimens Sollicitationis".  The Church lawyers argued that this was really to protect the confessional but the court ruled that it was in fact a secrecy guide for hiding these despicable crimes.

Given that they can't get the lad in Limerick to step down despite the Ryan report, I'd say they have little buisness going after Benny.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 07, 2009, 04:15:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on December 07, 2009, 04:11:05 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 07, 2009, 03:28:19 PM
I'm not sure I quite understand Father McDonagh. Is he saying that,

a) of course Dr. Twomey should be also calling for the resignation of the Pope?

or

b) is he pointing out that if Dr. Twomey's logic is thought through further, then he would be also calling for the resignation of the Pope, which of course would be ridiculous.

I hope it is a).

The direct link between the Vatican, via the Council of the Doctrine of Faith (which the current Papa Benny ran at one stage) was made by the Fern's report and tested in the Irish High Court by Colm O'Gorman.  The High Court ruling actually opened the way to sue the Pope but I guess you'd need a lot of cash.  The crux of the case was a document that this Council produced (signed off by Pope John XXIII) called "Crimens Sollicitationis".  The Church lawyers argued that this was really to protect the confessional but the court ruled that it was in fact a secrecy guide for hiding these despicable crimes.

Given that they can't get the lad in Limerick to step down despite the Ryan report, I'd say they have little buisness going after Benny.

Calling for his resignation is one thing, trying to go to court here to remove a head of state elsewhere is something altogether different. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on December 07, 2009, 04:36:07 PM
Quotea) of course Dr. Twomey should be also calling for the resignation of the Pope?

That would be my reading of it
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rossie mad on December 07, 2009, 06:10:58 PM
Just typing to say i held brief debates with two local preists over the last two weeks on the recent reports to emerge.

I had spoken to my local pp before on the matter of sex abuse in the church many times and although he had towed the party line in the past by taking the line of prayer and reflection which is needed as well in these situations his recent conversation with me was one of shock,a level of lonliness being felt and one of helplessness as well.

He listened to my thoughts on the church cleaning the ranks and portraying a better more modern image and although agreed with most of them in principal he did believe they would take much change and time for any to take place.

He was upset with the level of cover up that had taken place and was very honest in saying what about other major diocese with these events hanging over them?
He did agree that the church is at a major crossroads in the country and it will take a major shift in policy for it to take the right move.

He believes that the level of authority that his superiors had in the 60 years after the foundation of the state is having a very damaging effect on the modern church and that the invincibility the church felt it had physically was a contributing factor to these events.

He is a honest man and has done untold good for this parish and especially its youth.
He was a driving force behind all the sporting organisations in the parish for years as well as a big supporter of the youth of the parish and was very genourous personally to these organisations financially.I kinda of felt sorry for him.

my other conversation was with a younger preist with a big background in theology and church practices.

He was sympathyic to my views of change but said that to much would do harm to both the church and its followers.
He was aware that certain figures in the church should resign immediately but a mass clear out like i suggested was simply not workable because of the lack of personnell in the church.
When i suggested tackling the celibacy problem he didnt expect it to be discussed in this popes lifetime.

He did however concede that the church should bring in their own laws in terms of relationships with people in their parish and especially children such as constant supervision while in the vicinity of schools or sporting organisations as well as another adult being present in terms of altar boys/girls as well as altar boys not allowed into the sacrestan unless accompanied by a parent.
Also a strict mental assesment on all clergy being undertaken and any suspect members being placed in treatment centres or placed under supervision.

He was suprised that i challenged him on this issue and not many lay people did because of fear and was actually disappointed that they didnt.

He believes that dedicated church members should be asked of their views on these matters and any recommendations taken into account but he did concede that the old superiority complex the church has is stiffling it and wishes that it serves the people in their needs and not believe the people should serve it.

After these debates with these two men i believe tha these two preists may be in the miniority in the clergy in this country and change on a seismic level will probably not happen until the time the church finds itself on its knees.

Whatever change will happen in the near future remains to be seen
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 07, 2009, 11:28:38 PM
None of youse watching prime time?

The generational differences of opinion is fairly striking.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on December 08, 2009, 03:27:53 PM
http://www.nme.com/video/id/7KnGNOiFll4/search/scroobius (http://www.nme.com/video/id/7KnGNOiFll4/search/scroobius)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on December 08, 2009, 04:44:05 PM
Quote from: rossie mad on December 07, 2009, 06:10:58 PM
Just typing to say i held brief debates with two local preists over the last two weeks on the recent reports to emerge.

I had spoken to my local pp before on the matter of sex abuse in the church many times and although he had towed the party line in the past by taking the line of prayer and reflection which is needed as well in these situations his recent conversation with me was one of shock,a level of lonliness being felt and one of helplessness as well.

He listened to my thoughts on the church cleaning the ranks and portraying a better more modern image and although agreed with most of them in principal he did believe they would take much change and time for any to take place.

He was upset with the level of cover up that had taken place and was very honest in saying what about other major diocese with these events hanging over them?
He did agree that the church is at a major crossroads in the country and it will take a major shift in policy for it to take the right move.

He believes that the level of authority that his superiors had in the 60 years after the foundation of the state is having a very damaging effect on the modern church and that the invincibility the church felt it had physically was a contributing factor to these events.

He is a honest man and has done untold good for this parish and especially its youth.
He was a driving force behind all the sporting organisations in the parish for years as well as a big supporter of the youth of the parish and was very genourous personally to these organisations financially.I kinda of felt sorry for him.

my other conversation was with a younger preist with a big background in theology and church practices.

He was sympathyic to my views of change but said that to much would do harm to both the church and its followers.
He was aware that certain figures in the church should resign immediately but a mass clear out like i suggested was simply not workable because of the lack of personnell in the church.
When i suggested tackling the celibacy problem he didnt expect it to be discussed in this popes lifetime.

He did however concede that the church should bring in their own laws in terms of relationships with people in their parish and especially children such as constant supervision while in the vicinity of schools or sporting organisations as well as another adult being present in terms of altar boys/girls as well as altar boys not allowed into the sacrestan unless accompanied by a parent.
Also a strict mental assesment on all clergy being undertaken and any suspect members being placed in treatment centres or placed under supervision.

He was suprised that i challenged him on this issue and not many lay people did because of fear and was actually disappointed that they didnt.

He believes that dedicated church members should be asked of their views on these matters and any recommendations taken into account but he did concede that the old superiority complex the church has is stiffling it and wishes that it serves the people in their needs and not believe the people should serve it.

After these debates with these two men i believe tha these two preists may be in the miniority in the clergy in this country and change on a seismic level will probably not happen until the time the church finds itself on its knees.

Whatever change will happen in the near future remains to be seen


I don't think the church needs to bring in its own laws, it just needs to abide by the laws of the land like the rest of us.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 09, 2009, 11:22:49 PM
Irish bishops ask for forgiveness 

The Murphy report found church leaders had covered up child abuse
Irish bishops have asked to be forgiven for the "failure of moral leadership" identified by a report into clerical child abuse in Dublin archdiocese.

Catholic bishops issued the apology as they met for their winter general meeting at Maynooth in County Kildare.

The bishops said all normal business was suspended on the first day of their two-day conference, as they turned their "full attention" to the report.

The Murphy report found that church authorities had covered up child abuse.

Also known as the "Commission of Investigation Report into the Archdiocese of Dublin", the Murphy report stated that Catholic leaders had prioritised the preservation of the church's reputation above the welfare and safety of the children in their care.

'Shamed'

On Wednesday, the bishops issued a statement in which they said they were "deeply shocked by the scale and depravity of abuse" which was described in the report.

They also said that they were "shamed by the extent to which child sexual abuse was covered up in the archdiocese of Dublin".

The bishops added that they recognised the report's findings indicated a culture of cover-up was "widespread" in the church.

"We, as bishops, apologise to all those who were abused by priests as children, their families and to all people who feel rightly outraged and let down by the failure of moral leadership and accountability that emerges," they said.

At the Maynooth conference, the bishops agreed to ask the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church to engage with government departments and statutory authorities to ensure that the church's current policies in relation to safeguarding of children "represent best practice" and that allegations of abuse are "properly handled".

'Painful situation'

They will ask the board to work with civic authorities on both sides of the Irish border.

The bishops added that the Murphy report had raised "very important issues" for the Catholic Church in Ireland, including the functioning of their own conference and questions of how lay people could be "more effectively involved".

The statement said the bishops would give "further detailed consideration" to those issues.

The Pope has summoned the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady and the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, to Rome to brief him on the "painful situation of the church in Ireland" following the publication of the Murphy report.

They will meet with Pope Benedict on Friday.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 11, 2009, 02:31:15 PM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/pope-stops-short-of-outright-apology-for-clerical-abuse-437896.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/pope-stops-short-of-outright-apology-for-clerical-abuse-437896.html)

Pope stops short of outright apology for clerical abuse

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/pope-stops-short-of-outright-apology-for-clerical-abuse-437896.html#ixzz0ZOH6rnP5

Pope Benedict XVI today has expressed his "profound regret at the actions of some members of the clergy".

Following a meeting with Cardinal Sean Brady and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin in the Vatican regarding the Irish Commission of Investigation's Report into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin, the pontiff said that he "shares the outrage, betrayal and shame felt by so many of the faithful in Ireland", but did not use the words "sorry" or "apologise" in the statement issued.

Last Wednesday, the Irish Catholic Bishops' Conference formally apologised over abuse and mishandling of allegations in the Dublin Archdiocese.

The Vatican said after the 90-minute talks that the letter to the faithful of Ireland "will clearly indicate the initiatives that are to be taken in response to the situation."

The statement in full:

Today the Holy Father held a meeting with senior Irish Bishops and high-ranking members of the Roman Curia. He listened to their concerns and discussed with them the traumatic events that were presented in the Irish Commission of Investigation's Report into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin.

After careful study of the Report, the Holy Father was deeply disturbed and distressed by its contents. He wishes once more to express his profound regret at the actions of some members of the clergy who have betrayed their solemn promises to God, as well as the trust placed in them by the victims and their families, and by society at large.

The Holy Father shares the outrage, betrayal and shame felt by so many of the faithful in Ireland, and he is united with them in prayer at this difficult time in the life of the Church.

His Holiness asks Catholics in Ireland and throughout the world to join him in praying for the victims, their families and all those affected by these heinous crimes.

He assures all concerned that the Church will continue to follow this grave matter with the closest attention in order to understand better how these shameful events came to pass and how best to develop effective and secure strategies to prevent any recurrence.

The Holy See takes very seriously the central issues raised by the Report, including questions concerning the governance of local Church leaders with ultimate responsibility for the pastoral care of children.

The Holy Father intends to address a Pastoral Letter to the faithful of Ireland in which he will clearly indicate the initiatives that are to be taken in response to the situation.

Finally, His Holiness encourages all those who have dedicated their lives in generous service to children to persevere in their good works in imitation of Christ the Good Shepherd.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/pope-stops-short-of-outright-apology-for-clerical-abuse-437896.html#ixzz0ZOHDT8R4
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 11, 2009, 04:28:35 PM
They still just don't get what they have done do they. Maybe they'll get it if the coffers run dry and I certainly hope they do (although the pope being richest man in the world means his coffer will never run dry).
What do catholics think about this pathetic statement, he didn't even bother his arse read it himself instead getting his secretary to do it. Surely rape of children and cover up of it would demand a more personal approach, no?
How anyone could respect this shower is so far beyond my comprehension I can't put it in words.

Where is his defence or otherwise of the failure of the vatican to respond to the commission
What about the people still in the church that were named, what is he going to do about them
What about his own direction he issued to the bishops about how to handle clerical abuse as posted earlier
Compensation, surely he could spare a few million of his stolen gold?
Why not a statement to the media, is he too much a coward to stand and take questions on the role of the vatican and its servants.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 11, 2009, 04:30:59 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 11, 2009, 04:28:35 PM
They still just don't get what they have done do they. Maybe they'll get it if the coffers run dry and I certainly hope they do (although the pope being richest man in the world means his coffer will never run dry).
What do catholics think about this pathetic statement, he didn't even bother his arse read it himself instead getting his secretary to do it. Surely rape of children and cover up of it would demand a more personal approach, no?
How anyone could respect this shower is so far beyond my comprehension I can't put it in words.

Where is his defence or otherwise of the failure of the vatican to respond to the commission
What about the people still in the church that were named, what is he going to do about them
What about his own direction he issued to the bishops about how to handle clerical abuse as posted earlier
Compensation, surely he could spare a few million of his stolen gold?
Why not a statement to the media, is he too much a coward to stand and take questions on the role of the vatican and its servants.


Their arrogance knows no bounds.

No surprise here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 12, 2009, 05:02:43 PM
Nope-they don't get it at all. So much for this tool going to Rome to step down.. still clinging on for dear life and now defending his behaviour...

Under fire Bishop Donal Murray to await Vatican fate 
Donal Murray will remain in Rome to await developments regarding his future, his spokesman has said.
It is the first public comment on behalf of the bishop since he went to Rome on Sunday to discuss his future.
Bishop Murray was one of a number of bishops criticised in the Murphy Report into the handling of clerical sexual abuse in the Dublin archdiocese.
The spokesman said that Bishop Murray had an hour-long meeting with Vatican officials on Monday.
The Murphy Report said that while serving as auxiliary bishop of Dublin, Bishop Murray had badly mishandled allegations of clerical child abuse. It said his failure to deal properly with one priest suspected of being a paedophile was "inexcusable".
The spokesman for Bishop Murray said that he had been criticised in three cases but that in none of those cases did he have an allegation that a child was being sexually abused.
He added that in five other cases where Bishop Murray was the first to receive a complaint, the report did not criticise his responses and that his management of the remaining one of the nine cases was not criticised either.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 12, 2009, 07:46:18 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on December 12, 2009, 05:02:43 PM
Nope-they don't get it at all. So much for this tool going to Rome to step down.. still clinging on for dear life and now defending his behaviour... Under fire Bishop Donal Murray to await Vatican fate 
Donal Murray will remain in Rome to await developments regarding his future, his spokesman has said.
It is the first public comment on behalf of the bishop since he went to Rome on Sunday to discuss his future.
Bishop Murray was one of a number of bishops criticised in the Murphy Report into the handling of clerical sexual abuse in the Dublin archdiocese.
The spokesman said that Bishop Murray had an hour-long meeting with Vatican officials on Monday.
The Murphy Report said that while serving as auxiliary bishop of Dublin, Bishop Murray had badly mishandled allegations of clerical child abuse. It said his failure to deal properly with one priest suspected of being a paedophile was "inexcusable".
The spokesman for Bishop Murray said that he had been criticised in three cases but that in none of those cases did he have an allegation that a child was being sexually abused.
He added that in five other cases where Bishop Murray was the first to receive a complaint, the report did not criticise his responses and that his management of the remaining one of the nine cases was not criticised either.


Keepng out of the road of the cameras and journalists trying to ride ( sorry ) out the storm. Hoping that it will just all go away.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Square Ball on December 17, 2009, 11:15:49 AM
So the Bishop of Limerick is the first to resign, reports that a few others are to follow
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 17, 2009, 11:17:41 AM
Quote from: Square Ball on December 17, 2009, 11:15:49 AM
So the Bishop of Limerick is the first to resign, reports that a few others are to follow

I would use word 'resign' if he had done it after the report was made public. the bollox had no choice
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 17, 2009, 11:45:56 AM
I hope the rest follow suit.


They're being dragged along as usual.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Denn Forever on December 17, 2009, 01:17:27 PM
Murray has resigned and call on 4 other bishops named in the report to resign.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1217/abuse.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 17, 2009, 01:54:27 PM
They should be arrested and charged with complicity in the abuse of children. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 17, 2009, 02:28:33 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on December 17, 2009, 01:54:27 PM
They should be arrested and charged with complicity in the abuse of children.

No one in power ever gets arrested in Ireland, don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 17, 2009, 02:31:11 PM
It's like it's ok now he resigned. If anyone else covered up for paedophiles they'd be arrested whether they resigned their job or not. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 23, 2009, 05:52:41 PM
2 down !!


Second Irish bishop resigns over abuse scandal report 

The Catholic church in Ireland has been rocked by the abuse scandal
A second Irish bishop has resigned after a damning report which found that Catholic leaders concealed child abuse.

The Bishop of Kildare, Dr James Moriarty, announced he had offered his resignation to the Pope on Wednesday.

Despite previously insisting he should not resign, Bishop Moriarty said he accepted that he should have challenged Church handling of abuse by priests.

"I know that any action now on my part does not take away the suffering that people have endured," he said.

"I again apologise to all the survivors and their families.

"I have today offered my resignation as Bishop of Kildare and Leighlin to the Holy Father.

"I hope it honours the truth that the survivors have so bravely uncovered and opens the way to a better future for all concerned," he said in a statement.
The report subjected him to implied criticism for not doing enough to find out all detail about an alleged abuser.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on December 23, 2009, 06:35:48 PM
Quote from: orangeman on December 23, 2009, 05:52:41 PM
2 down !!


Second Irish bishop resigns over abuse scandal report 

The Catholic church in Ireland has been rocked by the abuse scandal
A second Irish bishop has resigned after a damning report which found that Catholic leaders concealed child abuse.

The Bishop of Kildare, Dr James Moriarty, announced he had offered his resignation to the Pope on Wednesday.

Despite previously insisting he should not resign, Bishop Moriarty said he accepted that he should have challenged Church handling of abuse by priests.

"I know that any action now on my part does not take away the suffering that people have endured," he said.

"I again apologise to all the survivors and their families.

"I have today offered my resignation as Bishop of Kildare and Leighlin to the Holy Father.

"I hope it honours the truth that the survivors have so bravely uncovered and opens the way to a better future for all concerned," he said in a statement.
The report subjected him to implied criticism for not doing enough to find out all detail about an alleged abuser.

To think that they are bending over backwards to make jp 2 a saint is repugnant in the extreme. He was responsible for the Church during much of these awful happenings around the world and they want a sainthood for the man?

The Catholic Church in Ireland have got their last penny from me, they are disgusting and this Pope is as inept and spineless as his predecessors.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 23, 2009, 08:20:00 PM
I'm glad these two have resigned but I would say the didn't do so with any dignity what so ever. If they had any dignity or repect for victims they would have done so immediately after the report was published. Murray spouted some crap about how he wanted his priests to decide which was code for stalling to see what way the wind would blow in Rome. Moriarty got a nasty public backlash in Carlow (and fair play to them) where parents were going to refuse to send their kids to confirmations if he attended. Make no mistake, the welfare of victims is not on these guys radars, its just meaningless words. Even so, it is better than them hanging on which no doubt some of the last 3 will try and do to the bitter end.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on December 23, 2009, 08:41:17 PM
myles, I am glad they both resigned also.  I believe they did the Church a disservice by their actions to begin with and it's only right they are no longer involved in decision-making positions

stew, I wouldn't be so sure that JPII knew everything that was going on in the Church worldwide at any one point in time.  That would be a tall order for anyone, never mind a Pope who would have other things to contend with which would be more important to the Church - I mean the spiritual welfare of the Church is any Pope's primary responsibility
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 24, 2009, 06:19:18 PM
When you need a calming influence and some words of wisdom, you can always trust Bishop Hegarty !!!!!!!!!!!!!





Derry bishop 'unsure' if resignations help 

Bishop Hegarty said resignations may not help the healing process
The Bishop of Derry, Dr Seamus Hegarty, has said he is unsure whether it would be helpful for more bishops to resign over the Murphy Report.

It is the first time the bishop has spoken since the report into clerical sex abuse in the Dublin archdiocese was published a month ago.


Two bishops, James Moriarty and Donal Murray, have already resigned.

Bishop Hegarty said he was "not sure" if more resignations would "contribute in any great way towards healing".

"In recent times I have been talking to victims who had been involved in court proceedings.

"They would say their experience in court was much more traumatic for them that the original sexual abuse," he said.

However, Marie Collins, who was abused as a child by a priest, has criticised the Bishop of Derry.

She said she "was appalled that any bishop could hold this point of view and could express it at this time". Ms Collins said "the idea that maybe you shouldn't report cases, it's not going to do the victim any good... that sort of justification just has no place at the present time".

Bishop Hegarty also said he would mention the resignations in his Christmas message.

In November he called on anyone who had been abused by a member of the clergy to go to the civil authorities.

The Murphy Report condemned the Catholic church for covering up decades of abuse of children.

The report also criticised the civil authorities for failing to investigate many of the crimes.

The Catholic church in Ireland has apologised.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 24, 2009, 06:33:00 PM

"In recent times I have been talking to victims who had been involved in court proceedings.

"They would say their experience in court was much more traumatic for them that the original sexual abuse," he said.


I'm sure he has been talking to tonnes of victims that hold this opinion ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 24, 2009, 06:43:16 PM
Hegarty is a low life and has been that way all along...
a few years ago...

Sex abuse levy 'to be abolished' 
Dr Hegarty admitted imposing a levy on all parishes 
Levies imposed on parishes to pay into a fund for victims of clerical sex abuse are to be abolished, the Catholic diocese of Derry has announced.
Bishop Seamus Hegarty and his diocesan priests have also decided to return all money already paid by parishioners.
It follows an emergency meeting in Derry to which the bishop was not invited.
He had faced criticism because he paid into the Stewardship Trust Fund without the knowledge of many parishioners.

Dr Hegarty told BBC Northern Ireland's Spotlight programme he was raising the money through a 3% levy imposed on all parishes.
Following the programme, Dr Hegarty issued a statement expressing "sincere regret at the disquiet" caused by his actions.

Priests in the diocese were invited to a meeting at the Iona Retreat Centre at Termonbacca in the city to discuss the controversy.
They were asked to attend by priests in charge of the four deaneries in the diocese.
Donations were being paid into a trust for victims of child sex abuse
In a statement following the meeting, Monsignor Joseph Donnelly said: "The bishop and priests of Derry diocese have decided to abolish the 3% levy on parishes for the Stewardship Fund and return to the parishes all monies that have already been paid."
He said the priests had been clear in the recommendations they made to the bishop.
"It came without due notice to the people or due consultation."
The bishop of Clogher Dr Joseph Duffy said 105,600 euros had been paid from the diocese into the Stewardship Trust.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 25, 2009, 11:16:10 AM
Seems that Bishop Hegarty is still out of touch :


Two more Catholic bishops resign 

Bishop Eamonn Walsh issued a statement read out at midnight Mass
Two more Irish Catholic bishops have resigned in response to a report which criticised how they handled allegations of abuse by clergy.

Eamonn Walsh and Raymond Field issued a joint statement which was read out at midnight Mass.

The pair, who were both auxiliary bishops of Dublin, said they hoped their resignations would help bring peace to the victims of sexual abuse.

Four out of five bishops criticised in the Murphy report have now resigned.

Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray resigned earlier this month after the report branded as "inexcusable" his failure to deal effectively with a priest suspected of being a paedophile.

On Wednesday it was revealed that James Moriarty, the Bishop of Kildare, has offered his resignation to Pope Benedict. It is expected to be formally accepted in mid-January.

Martin Drennan, the Bishop of Galway, is now the only one of the five bishops criticised in the Murphy report to remain in office.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on December 25, 2009, 06:57:21 PM
Bishop Walsh said in a statement in a local paper yesterday that he was found "Guilty by Association" and was proactive in preventing the abuse of children.  This morning I struggled to go to mass and the priest said we should question ourselves about having the audacity to judge others.  Needles to say, there was a little murmer of protest from one in the congregation!

I have sent this reply to the paper that printed the article. Forgive the long time to get through it but at least I feel better if I get it off my chest.

Dear Editor,

I refer to your recent article with regard to Bishop Eamonn Walsh in which it was implied by both your correspondent Mary Dennehy and Fr. Ben Moran  and by Eamonn Walsh himself that the Bishop was the victim of "Guilt By Association" and that both the Murphy Report and the Ferns Report concluded that the bishop acted proactively for the protection and safety of children.

We are now being told that people like myself are making assumptions without even reading the Murphy Report and at mass that I attended on Christmas day I was told from the altar that some of us had to question our own 'audacity' to judge others. I have read the Murphy Report, not once but a few times and the reason I read it a few times was because I could not believe what I was reading.

There is one very important finding in the Murphy Report and that is the difference between Canon Law and our State Law.  Until we all understand these differences we will readily accept seeing our Minister for Justice on Sky News complaining about the injustice of a hand ball by Thierry Henry instead of him seeking the imposition of jail sentences for those named in the report that was on his desk at the exact same time that he was so concerned about a game of soccer.

The Murphy Report stated that " The Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities have repeatedly claimed to have been, prior to the late 1990s, on a learning curve in relation to the matter of child sexual abuse. Having completed its investigation, the Commission does not accept the truth of such claims and assertions".   Being proactive under canon law is far removed from being proactive under state law.

The Commison also found  (1.15) that the Dublin Archdioces pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State.

In Canon Law the Statute of Limitations is five years and add to that the fact that if an abuser was determined to be a paeodphile it was accepted that he had an addiction and was moved to curative facilities with suitable accomodation and financial support instead of invoking our state laws to protect children from the savagery and depravity that was visited on their innocent lives.  Up to now the odds have been stacked against these children most of whom are now adults so please don't stack them any higher by giving incomplete and onesided overviews of any member of the clergy, whether they are 'Guilty by Association' or not.





Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 26, 2009, 12:49:54 AM
Quote from: Bud Wiser on December 25, 2009, 06:57:21 PM
Bishop Walsh said in a statement in a local paper yesterday that he was found "Guilty by Association" and was proactive in preventing the abuse of children.  This morning I struggled to go to mass and the priest said we should question ourselves about having the audacity to judge others.  Needles to say, there was a little murmer of protest from one in the congregation!

I have sent this reply to the paper that printed the article. Forgive the long time to get through it but at least I feel better if I get it off my chest.

Dear Editor,

I refer to your recent article with regard to Bishop Eamonn Walsh in which it was implied by both your correspondent Mary Dennehy and Fr. Ben Moran  and by Eamonn Walsh himself that the Bishop was the victim of "Guilt By Association" and that both the Murphy Report and the Ferns Report concluded that the bishop acted proactively for the protection and safety of children.

We are now being told that people like myself are making assumptions without even reading the Murphy Report and at mass that I attended on Christmas day I was told from the altar that some of us had to question our own 'audacity' to judge others. I have read the Murphy Report, not once but a few times and the reason I read it a few times was because I could not believe what I was reading.

There is one very important finding in the Murphy Report and that is the difference between Canon Law and our State Law.  Until we all understand these differences we will readily accept seeing our Minister for Justice on Sky News complaining about the injustice of a hand ball by Thierry Henry instead of him seeking the imposition of jail sentences for those named in the report that was on his desk at the exact same time that he was so concerned about a game of soccer.

The Murphy Report stated that " The Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities have repeatedly claimed to have been, prior to the late 1990s, on a learning curve in relation to the matter of child sexual abuse. Having completed its investigation, the Commission does not accept the truth of such claims and assertions".   Being proactive under canon law is far removed from being proactive under state law.

The Commison also found  (1.15) that the Dublin Archdioces pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State.

In Canon Law the Statute of Limitations is five years and add to that the fact that if an abuser was determined to be a paeodphile it was accepted that he had an addiction and was moved to curative facilities with suitable accomodation and financial support instead of invoking our state laws to protect children from the savagery and depravity that was visited on their innocent lives.  Up to now the odds have been stacked against these children most of whom are now adults so please don't stack them any higher by giving incomplete and onesided overviews of any member of the clergy, whether they are 'Guilty by Association' or not.

Excellent letter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 26, 2009, 09:53:00 AM
Quote from: Bud Wiser on December 25, 2009, 06:57:21 PM
Bishop Walsh said in a statement in a local paper yesterday that he was found "Guilty by Association" and was proactive in preventing the abuse of children.  This morning I struggled to go to mass and the priest said we should question ourselves about having the audacity to judge others.  Needles to say, there was a little murmer of protest from one in the congregation!

I have sent this reply to the paper that printed the article. Forgive the long time to get through it but at least I feel better if I get it off my chest.

Dear Editor,

I refer to your recent article with regard to Bishop Eamonn Walsh in which it was implied by both your correspondent Mary Dennehy and Fr. Ben Moran  and by Eamonn Walsh himself that the Bishop was the victim of "Guilt By Association" and that both the Murphy Report and the Ferns Report concluded that the bishop acted proactively for the protection and safety of children.

We are now being told that people like myself are making assumptions without even reading the Murphy Report and at mass that I attended on Christmas day I was told from the altar that some of us had to question our own 'audacity' to judge others. I have read the Murphy Report, not once but a few times and the reason I read it a few times was because I could not believe what I was reading.

There is one very important finding in the Murphy Report and that is the difference between Canon Law and our State Law.  Until we all understand these differences we will readily accept seeing our Minister for Justice on Sky News complaining about the injustice of a hand ball by Thierry Henry instead of him seeking the imposition of jail sentences for those named in the report that was on his desk at the exact same time that he was so concerned about a game of soccer.

The Murphy Report stated that " The Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities have repeatedly claimed to have been, prior to the late 1990s, on a learning curve in relation to the matter of child sexual abuse. Having completed its investigation, the Commission does not accept the truth of such claims and assertions".   Being proactive under canon law is far removed from being proactive under state law.

The Commison also found  (1.15) that the Dublin Archdioces pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State.

In Canon Law the Statute of Limitations is five years and add to that the fact that if an abuser was determined to be a paeodphile it was accepted that he had an addiction and was moved to curative facilities with suitable accomodation and financial support instead of invoking our state laws to protect children from the savagery and depravity that was visited on their innocent lives.  Up to now the odds have been stacked against these children most of whom are now adults so please don't stack them any higher by giving incomplete and onesided overviews of any member of the clergy, whether they are 'Guilty by Association' or not.

Well written Bud.

What we see here is a bishop trying to portray himself as the victim. Totally pathetic when you consider who the real victims were - raped and abused kids. Of course it was an enquiry that suggested Mr Walsh had a case to answer, not some bunch of anti catholic begrudgers, but enough of these pesky facts. Go for it Mr Walsh, keep whinging, i'm sure everyone feels real sorry for you ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on December 26, 2009, 01:06:14 PM
Thanks.

Had a good ould night last night, sore head this morning and here I am lying in bed when my little seven year old grandson arrives and climbs in beside me with his Nintendo DS.  I am lying there thinking, thank God he is in the full of his health, a lovely little fella and as I contemplated his innocence I am a little embarresed but not ashamed to say that my eyes filled up with a good few tears when I think of what them bastards did to those children. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 26, 2009, 01:46:15 PM
I am not a church member, so how church members are fed spin is just a curiosity for me.

As individuals, the bishops are entitled to their exit statements. It does not surprise me that they are still in almost total denial about the seriousness of their own past actions and are now assuming martyrdom. I'd guess after reading their statements that they have had to be kicked out and they went screaming.

If I were one the victims, probably I would be that bit more satisfied that they have been virtually dismissed. It means that officially the bishops have been taken somewhat to task and another official recognition/ acknowledgement/admission of the scale of the abuse inflicted has been registered.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 26, 2009, 02:41:06 PM
I read last week that one of the items on the agenda for churxh officials in Ireland from now on will the be the employment of additional media / PR experts to try and influence public opinion more positively.


Bud - you could get a job !!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 26, 2009, 08:46:55 PM
The Galway man refuses to walk the plank !


Bishop of Galway 'will not resign' after Murphy report 


A fifth bishop named in the Murphy report will not resign, a spokesman for his diocese has said.

There had been fresh calls for the Bishop of Galway to resign following a report which found that Catholic leaders concealed child abuse.

Bishop Martin Drennan is now the only serving bishop named in the Murphy report who is still in his post.

Bishops Eamonn Walsh and Raymond Field stepped down on Christmas Eve while two others resigned earlier this month.

Fr Sean McHugh said Bishop Drennan felt he had done nothing wrong, and that his situation was different to that of other bishops named in the Murphy report into clerical abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.

He claimed Dr Drennan had not been called to give evidence to the Murphy Commission, and had not been furnished with the part of the report which mentioned him by name.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on December 26, 2009, 09:07:17 PM
No doubt Drennan will 'resign' too and issue a mealy mouthed statement about doing it in the best interests of the victims and church and healing and blady f**ing blah... were really like the others he will be left with no choice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on December 26, 2009, 09:20:16 PM
Why does he have a choice? Can one of the Pope's people not just tell him to pack his bags?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Square Ball on December 26, 2009, 09:28:55 PM
as always Bud a well composed piece. can you post the reply if you get one?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on January 16, 2010, 12:38:17 AM
Remember this shower  :o  The Robinsons with a bit of help from Gerry Adams sure took the spotlight off the Bishop of Galway. Resign ye bollox ya!! 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 04, 2010, 04:50:48 PM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html)

Dublin Archbishop 'a source of division'
04/02/2010 - 11:27:55
A meeting of Dublin priests last month heard the Archbishop of Dublin described as a source of division.

The meeting of up to 25 priests was held in January to discuss the fallout from the Murphy Report into abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.

According to the Irish Catholic newspaper, which has seen minutes of the meeting, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was criticised heavily for his handling of the aftermath of the report's publication.

He has also been accused of having a dictatorial manner and a lack of compassion for the auxiliary bishops, the report said.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html#ixzz0eaQtsiDs


What about compassion for the victims of the Auxiliary Bishops inaction?

I really cannot believe how poorly the Church has behaved and continues to behave on this matter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on February 04, 2010, 05:22:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 04, 2010, 04:50:48 PM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html)

Dublin Archbishop 'a source of division'
04/02/2010 - 11:27:55
A meeting of Dublin priests last month heard the Archbishop of Dublin described as a source of division.

The meeting of up to 25 priests was held in January to discuss the fallout from the Murphy Report into abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.

According to the Irish Catholic newspaper, which has seen minutes of the meeting, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was criticised heavily for his handling of the aftermath of the report's publication.

He has also been accused of having a dictatorial manner and a lack of compassion for the auxiliary bishops, the report said.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-archbishop-a-source-of-division-444804.html#ixzz0eaQtsiDs


What about compassion for the victims of the Auxiliary Bishops inaction?

I really cannot believe how poorly the Church has behaved and continues to behave on this matter.

This is the one and probably the only time we will agree on anything, this is an absolute disgrace.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on February 16, 2010, 05:08:30 PM
Usual mealy mouthed tokenism from the Catholic Church....


  Survivors of clerical abuse have said that they are disappointed with the outcome of the meeting between the Irish Bishops and Pope Benedict XVI.

At the end of an unprecedented two-day Vatican summit with Irish Bishops, the Pontiff branded the sexual abuse of children and young people a "heinous crime and a grave sin."

The 24 senior clergy were summonsed over the past mishandling of child abuse scandals that rocked the Catholic church in Ireland.
Article Continues

Victims group 'One in Four' said they are also disappointed that the Pope has offered no explanation for the failure of the Vatican to cooperate with the Murphy Commission

"It is deeply insulting to survivors to suggest that they were abused due to failures of faith, rather than because sex offending priests were moved from parish to parish, and those in authority looked away while further children were sexually abused," said Executive Director Maeve Lewis.

The group said the Vatican has accepted no responsibility for its role in facilitating the sexual abuse of children, referring only to the Irish church, and only vague declarations of intent for the future are included.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 16, 2010, 07:06:49 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on February 16, 2010, 05:08:30 PM
Usual mealy mouthed tokenism from the Catholic Church....


  Survivors of clerical abuse have said that they are disappointed with the outcome of the meeting between the Irish Bishops and Pope Benedict XVI.

At the end of an unprecedented two-day Vatican summit with Irish Bishops, the Pontiff branded the sexual abuse of children and young people a "heinous crime and a grave sin."

The 24 senior clergy were summonsed over the past mishandling of child abuse scandals that rocked the Catholic church in Ireland.
Article Continues

Victims group 'One in Four' said they are also disappointed that the Pope has offered no explanation for the failure of the Vatican to cooperate with the Murphy Commission

"It is deeply insulting to survivors to suggest that they were abused due to failures of faith, rather than because sex offending priests were moved from parish to parish, and those in authority looked away while further children were sexually abused," said Executive Director Maeve Lewis.

The group said the Vatican has accepted no responsibility for its role in facilitating the sexual abuse of children, referring only to the Irish church, and only vague declarations of intent for the future are included.

Like I said before we need to break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican as we would with any other state who, as policy, protected criminals and hid them from the authorities while inadvertently facilitating their crimes. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on February 16, 2010, 07:10:38 PM
Surely you can't be shocked at this statement by the Vatican and their abject failure to deal appropriately with the Murphy investigation ??

Surely such arrogance is just what is to be expected from the leadership ? Sure aren't be well used to it by now ??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 16, 2010, 07:12:53 PM
Quote from: orangeman on February 16, 2010, 07:10:38 PM
Surely you can't be shocked at this statement by the Vatican and their abject failure to deal appropriately with the Murphy investigation ??

Surely such arrogance is just what is to be expected from the leadership ? Sure aren't be well used to it by now ??

I'm not shocked at all.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 16, 2010, 07:18:42 PM
Time for the Irish government to grow some balls and do exactly what muppet said above + withdraw any state grants and funding to any church building projects. Time for a 100% break of church and state.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on February 16, 2010, 07:20:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 16, 2010, 07:18:42 PM
Time for the Irish government to grow some balls and do exactly what muppet said above + withdraw any state grants and funding to any church building projects. Time for a 100% break of church and state.


+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on February 16, 2010, 07:54:32 PM
While i could easily support a case for breaking off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, the further suggestion that the State should withdraw aid to Church building programmes is just puerile nonsense
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tyssam5 on February 16, 2010, 08:17:41 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 16, 2010, 07:18:42 PM
Time for the Irish government to grow some balls and do exactly what muppet said above + withdraw any state grants and funding to any church building projects. Time for a 100% break of church and state.

Is gov money supplied to church for building projects? Did not know that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 16, 2010, 08:22:34 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on February 16, 2010, 07:54:32 PM
While i could easily support a case for breaking off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, the further suggestion that the State should withdraw aid to Church building programmes is just puerile nonsense

Care to explain why it is purile nonsense, what sort of a post is it to say that and give no explanation - are you a bishop? The tax payer is picking up the churches bills due to the abuse they caused and more importantly covered up. You think the tax payer should also give them money so they can build churches too? I say if people want to fund their local church fine, but the taxpayer in general should not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on February 16, 2010, 08:35:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 16, 2010, 08:22:34 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on February 16, 2010, 07:54:32 PM
While i could easily support a case for breaking off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, the further suggestion that the State should withdraw aid to Church building programmes is just puerile nonsense

Care to explain why it is purile nonsense, what sort of a post is it to say that and give no explanation - are you a bishop? The tax payer is picking up the churches bills due to the abuse they caused and more importantly covered up. You think the tax payer should also give them money so they can build churches too? I say if people want to fund their local church fine, but the taxpayer in general should not.


Makes a lot of sense to me.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hurler on the Bitch on February 16, 2010, 09:45:04 PM
The bottom line is that old Ratzinger has had the balls to confront this. Too many bishops guilty of staring at their shoes allowing this to happen. What the Pope has done is stuck the proverbial rocket up the Catholic Church in Ireland - you do recall that in his former life Ratzinger was the 'enforcer' behind the scenes and he has taken the Bishops over to Rome and read the Riot Act. Fair play to him as he - like his predecessors - could have done feck all. As for Brady .. trying to say this is a world-wide problem: that's a kop-out. The problem stated is that his Church stood and whistled as countless kids were brutally abused in Ireland. I have not passed a church door in five years and will not until a few big-wigs repent.

I see also that there is another priest on the front of the Irish News this morning - rape, buggery etc. And then your man Buckley with his Little Chef! Is there no end to the embarrassment?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: cicfada on February 16, 2010, 10:03:30 PM
There should be a commmission and resultant report  set up in every  diocese in the country to see how many perverts and nonces there are/have been in the Church!!!  No apology from the pope either, but then again he can never be wrong  in matters of the church  and every Catholic in the world has to accept his word!! Some organisation all right!!!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 16, 2010, 11:02:11 PM
Quote from: Hurler on the Bitch on February 16, 2010, 09:45:04 PM
The bottom line is that old Ratzinger has had the balls to confront this. Too many bishops guilty of staring at their shoes allowing this to happen. What the Pope has done is stuck the proverbial rocket up the Catholic Church in Ireland - you do recall that in his former life Ratzinger was the 'enforcer' behind the scenes and he has taken the Bishops over to Rome and read the Riot Act. Fair play to him as he - like his predecessors - could have done feck all. As for Brady .. trying to say this is a world-wide problem: that's a kop-out. The problem stated is that his Church stood and whistled as countless kids were brutally abused in Ireland. I have not passed a church door in five years and will not until a few big-wigs repent.

I see also that there is another priest on the front of the Irish News this morning - rape, buggery etc. And then your man Buckley with his Little Chef! Is there no end to the embarrassment?

My read of Ratzinger is the complete opposite of yours.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hurler on the Bitch on February 16, 2010, 11:12:58 PM
perhaps so .. but in hindsight .. the Catholic Church in Ireland has never had to endure such a total and public embarrassment from the highest - very highest - level . Say what you want but he made wee boys of the great and the good - and the world knows it!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on February 17, 2010, 12:07:45 AM
A victim of their abuse said on the radio this morning that the Papa should apologise in his Easter message to those that were molested, raped and beaten as children by the Catholic clergy in Ireland and to the Irish people.   Now that would be humility before the world... chance of it happening...nil. Sick cult.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 17, 2010, 04:10:32 PM
Quote from: Hurler on the Bitch on February 16, 2010, 09:45:04 PM
The bottom line is that old Ratzinger has had the balls to confront this. Too many bishops guilty of staring at their shoes allowing this to happen. What the Pope has done is stuck the proverbial rocket up the Catholic Church in Ireland - you do recall that in his former life Ratzinger was the 'enforcer' behind the scenes and he has taken the Bishops over to Rome and read the Riot Act. Fair play to him as he - like his predecessors - could have done feck all. As for Brady .. trying to say this is a world-wide problem: that's a kop-out. The problem stated is that his Church stood and whistled as countless kids were brutally abused in Ireland. I have not passed a church door in five years and will not until a few big-wigs repent.

I see also that there is another priest on the front of the Irish News this morning - rape, buggery etc. And then your man Buckley with his Little Chef! Is there no end to the embarrassment?

Sorry but i don't read this as Ratzinger doing anything else but hide it even deeper.
If Ratzinger had the balls that you say he has then he'd have insisted that all relevent documentation held by the church be handed over to the authorities either side of the border and to support any investigations fully to rid the church of its infestation.

Anything less is a cop out IMO.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bing Crosby . on February 17, 2010, 04:24:11 PM

Yesterday was a very bad day for the church in Ireland .
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 17, 2010, 05:32:10 PM
From the Vatican statement.
'The Holy Father also pointed to the more general crisis of faith affecting the church and he linked that to the lack of respect for the human person and how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors. He stressed the need for a deeper theological reflection on the whole issue, and called for an improved human, spiritual, academic and pastoral preparation both of candidates for the priesthood and religious life and of those already ordained and professed.'


Poppycock, pure and simple.
And this is a statement coming from the highest level of the Catholic hierarchy.
It would lead me to believe that there is a crisis in the church which has to do with a bankruptcy in rational and spiritual values from the top down. How else could such utter stupidity be passed down to the flock as an explanation?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 17, 2010, 06:47:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 17, 2010, 05:32:10 PM
From the Vatican statement.
'The Holy Father also pointed to the more general crisis of faith affecting the church and he linked that to the lack of respect for the human person and how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors. He stressed the need for a deeper theological reflection on the whole issue, and called for an improved human, spiritual, academic and pastoral preparation both of candidates for the priesthood and religious life and of those already ordained and professed.'


Poppycock, pure and simple.
And this is a statement coming from the highest level of the Catholic hierarchy.
It would lead me to believe that there is a crisis in the church which has to do with a bankruptcy in rational and spiritual values from the top down. How else could such utter stupidity be passed down to the flock as an explanation?

Its just the brainless waffling of someone completely out of touch with reality. I can't believe anyone would look to this clown for guidance.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on February 17, 2010, 07:17:56 PM
myles would it surprise you if I said I agree with what the Pope said?  :)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 17, 2010, 07:42:01 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 17, 2010, 07:17:56 PM
myles would it surprise you if I said I agree with what the Pope said?  :)
No, but heh, we made friends so lets not start a row again ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 17, 2010, 08:56:41 PM
From the Vatican statement.

Quote'The Holy Father also pointed to the more general crisis of faith affecting the church
The Faith is declining in Ireland and across the Catholic World.


Quoteand he linked that to the lack of respect for the human person
This weakening of the faith has lead to a lack of respect for the human person - I think this is very true.  I believe people have little or no respect for humankind any more.

Quoteand how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors
.
This in turn might help explain why child abuse happens

QuoteHe stressed the need for a deeper theological reflection on the whole issue, and called for an improved human, spiritual, academic and pastoral preparation both of candidates for the priesthood and religious life and of those already ordained and professed.
As a result people preparing for the religious life and those already ordained or religious should be vetted better from a human, spiritual, academic and pastoral perspective to ensure that they respect humankind.


I can't really see anything wrong with this response.
Nor can I see anything that merits the Pope being called a clown.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal on February 17, 2010, 09:03:56 PM
he's trying to imply that it's not the fault of the priests,but rather people without faith.he mightn't be covering it up,but he's trying to justify it.he is a clown.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on February 17, 2010, 09:41:24 PM
He's full of sh*t. Faith in what?... the Catholic Church  ::)  many people have walked away from the church and are still good, decent people. More decent than the ones who are in it that covered up the abuse.
The worst and most abuse was happening at the time the churches were packed. Faith in God does not have to entail being involved with that shower but Rathead and his minnions think they have the monopoly on God.  Holy Father?... holy f**     
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 10:58:58 AM
(http://www.theborg.info/Sheep%20and%20Shepard.gif)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 18, 2010, 11:05:16 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 17, 2010, 08:56:41 PM
From the Vatican statement.



Quoteand how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors
.

This in turn might help explain why child abuse happens

Now I'm beginning to be be really pissed off about the absolute lack of comprehension by the Catholic Church on the subject of Paedophilia and its protection.

You say "weakening of faith" might explain. The Vatican state that it significantly does explain. A significant explanation!

Faith?  One can have no faith in a doctrine but have absolutely no child abuse tendencies.

As far as I am concerned,, the abusers and their protectors kept their faith but they had no sense of the relevant moral values.
Faith is one thing, moral values are another.
Child abuse and the protection of,  is not a faith issue, for example, a faith issue to do with management of celibacy, the mere management of day to day "sinfully" perceived sexual desires and learning the negative (faith based) process of suppressing them (as opposed to accepting the natural process and learning the positive discipline of self control).

Paedophilia is not within the remit of having or not having faith.
Sexual desire is a natural phenomena. Paedophilia is a perversion, an addictive and overwhelming physical and mental desire to abuse the innocent child.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Doogie Browser on February 18, 2010, 11:10:56 AM
Watched a very good documentary on Cardinal O'Fiach on TG4 last night, I am sure it was a repeat.  The show left you in no doubt that they thought this was the major blemish on his career - the failure to do anything about abusive clergy.  In fact he promoted an abuser to the post of President of the Maynooth seminary after he was presented with an allegation of abuse about him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 11:43:03 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 17, 2010, 08:56:41 PM

Quoteand how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors
.
This in turn might help explain why child abuse happens


So just to be clear, do you need your faith Iceman to stop you fiddling with children? Is that the main thing holding you back from such desires? I wouldn't have thought so, but just set us straight of the differences between your idea of morality and faith.

FFS thats a vile comment considering the theocracy who had the sole responsibility to be an example and impart faith to the masses were the very ones guilty of the abuse.

Is the pope not implying that the child abusing priests (by giving into their evil desires in this life) even after all the indoctrination of theology in their training, still walked out the door of the seminary thinking their was no such thing as a god so they might as well enjoy their perversions while they had the chance? And will there be any psychoanalytical evaluations of trainee priests from now on just to make sure they are joining the orders with all the right intentions and not use the dog collar as a smoke screen and a sanctuary to live a perverted life?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 18, 2010, 12:18:18 PM
the next thing we'll get from the vatican is that they'll say a mass for the victims of systematic child abuse, a real father ted moment.

They're are so far detached from reality its unreal at times.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 18, 2010, 12:33:02 PM
Good posts Main Street and Skull. I was going to say something like that.

The church, even at the highest level seems still not to comprehend the very basics of the whole thing. They seem incapable of learning, even from their own experience, never mind from myriad other Watergate-type examples in history, that the crime is abominable, but the cover-up is even worse, and a million times worse when it further endangers the victims.

People can comprehend the evil of an individual, or even many individuals who can perpetrate vile crimes. Some, applying their religious indoctrination, can even find it in themselves to forgive them. What they can neither comprehend nor forgive is the aiding and abetting of these crimes by the church in putting its own interests and preservation before the welfare of the victims and worse, potential victims, who became actual victims as a direct result of this institutionalised conspiracy.

The church, after all, is the organisation that touts itself as the the unchallengable authority on good and right and morality and many of the victims and their families deposited their unquestioning trust in it on this basis. 

That's what the institutional church doesn't seem to even vaguely comprehend - that the outrage of the public is directed against the instutionalised cover-up and facilitation of further abuse more than the individual instances. But even still, the pope himself continues to address himself to the individual cases of abuse and, ludicrously, to waffle on about faith, without even a nod towards the seething anger that the institution he heads is morally bankrupt and criminally corrupt. It's chilling that after two days of discussion, presumably on the details of how the criminals were protected within the church, he doesn't even mention this central core of the issue.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AFS on February 18, 2010, 12:38:41 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 17, 2010, 08:56:41 PM
From the Vatican statement.

Quote'The Holy Father also pointed to the more general crisis of faith affecting the church
The Faith is declining in Ireland and across the Catholic World.

Quoteand he linked that to the lack of respect for the human person
This weakening of the faith has lead to a lack of respect for the human person - I think this is very true.  I believe people have little or no respect for humankind any more.

Quoteand how the weakening of faith has been a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors
.
This in turn might help explain why child abuse happens


This is nonsense. Faith is not a necessity for morality. Morality predates any type of religious faith, and probably predates humanity. You do not need a faith to know the difference between right and wrong.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 02:33:49 PM
Can Morals change? Or did they remain constant throughout history?

If Morals can change or slide then surely mankind needs some kind of guidance.  Whether you like it or not Faith in God and following His teachings has acted as that guide for 1000s of years for millions of people.  People who really lived out their faith and truly had/have a relationship with God for the most part stick to these morals and guidelines.

If the faith has weakened then people who could have normally followed these guidelines no longer have them.

The world is in a real mess.  I don't think pointing the finger at the Pope is going to solve anything.  I think if we leave everything up to mankind and his or her "definition" of morals then it is going to be in an even bigger mess.  I am glad I have a Church and a Faith to guide me.

I think the Pope's point was that as Faith declines so do morals.  With a lack of morals and what ever justification you have for whatever morals you do have, we're all in trouble.  We leave the door open for abuse on multiple levels - just because people thinks its ok.

You might not think it's ok - but obviously the people that are carrying out the abuse think it is......................
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 02:56:43 PM
The morals your talking about Iceman are those debatable grey areas, like too much cleavage, too short a skirt, bad language, homosexuality, consensual sex before marriage all the way up to should I wear a niqab

Child abuse is not in the same ball park and is not up for debate.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 03:44:38 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 02:56:43 PM
The morals your talking about Iceman are those debatable grey areas, like too much cleavage, too short a skirt, bad language, homosexuality, consensual sex before marriage all the way up to should I wear a niqab

Child abuse is not in the same ball park and is not up for debate.

According to you.

Tell that to the people doing it every day who think its ok.

Tell that to the 25 year old who is technically "abusing" his 17 year old girlfriend
Or the 12 year old who is legally married to her 40 year old husband in Afghanistan.

Your morals and my morals are not everyone's  skull......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 03:56:05 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 03:44:38 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 02:56:43 PM
The morals your talking about Iceman are those debatable grey areas, like too much cleavage, too short a skirt, bad language, homosexuality, consensual sex before marriage all the way up to should I wear a niqab

Child abuse is not in the same ball park and is not up for debate.

According to you.

Tell that to the people doing it every day who think its ok.

Tell that to the 25 year old who is technically "abusing" his 17 year old girlfriend
Or the 12 year old who is legally married to her 40 year old husband in Afghanistan.

Your morals and my morals are not everyone's  skull......

The 40 year old afghan is abusing a child. He may not think it because he is a thick as pig shit, but he is still abusing a child. The 25 year old I don't believe is. In fact does the law takes that position as well if I'm not mistaken. Who are these people who might consider molesting a 5 year old ok?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AFS on February 18, 2010, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 03:44:38 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 18, 2010, 02:56:43 PM
The morals your talking about Iceman are those debatable grey areas, like too much cleavage, too short a skirt, bad language, homosexuality, consensual sex before marriage all the way up to should I wear a niqab

Child abuse is not in the same ball park and is not up for debate.

According to you.

Tell that to the people doing it every day who think its ok.

Tell that to the 25 year old who is technically "abusing" his 17 year old girlfriend
Or the 12 year old who is legally married to her 40 year old husband in Afghanistan.

Your morals and my morals are not everyone's  skull......

The majority of paedophiles know their actions are wrong.

Quote from: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 02:33:49 PM
Can Morals change? Or did they remain constant throughout history?

If Morals can change or slide then surely mankind needs some kind of guidance.  Whether you like it or not Faith in God and following His teachings has acted as that guide for 1000s of years for millions of people.  People who really lived out their faith and truly had/have a relationship with God for the most part stick to these morals and guidelines.

If the faith has weakened then people who could have normally followed these guidelines no longer have them.

The morality of violence is fairly constant, to the extent that it's instinctive. There's no need for guidance.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 18, 2010, 06:31:04 PM

It was never acceptable to enslave a white man - but it was morally acceptable to enslave a black man.

Virginity is considered a high moral amoung Christians, but that doesn't apply to men.

Murder has generally always been considered wrong by all societies, but generally murder has never been considered wrong if it was outside a sort of circle of inclusion. If you're a woman, or a black, that specific society won't see their morals as applying to you.

I think this is true???



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 12:39:21 AM
Iceman your wasting your time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 09:46:35 AM
Sorry, but what has all of this got to do with the criminal and morally bankrupt activities of the Catholic church at official level in covering up and facilitating child abuse by its clergy?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 19, 2010, 09:57:45 AM
Hardy your'e wasting your time

Some boys just want to be left to chew the alter rails and not doubt too much
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 03:39:03 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 19, 2010, 09:57:45 AM
Hardy your'e wasting your time

Some boys just want to be left to chew the alter rails and not doubt too much
it has nothing to do with chewing the altar rails and more to do with correcting certain ill informed and ignorant people......

Peace
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 04:17:39 PM
Isn't it ironic that someone who bases his opinions and arguments on faith rather than reason can call others ill informed and announces that his own dogma, conviction or surmise "corrects" the opinions of others simply because he, or whatever entity forms his belief system says so?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 04:51:18 PM
Quote from: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 04:17:39 PM
Isn't it ironic that someone who bases his opinions and arguments on faith rather than reason can call others ill informed and announces that his own dogma, conviction or surmise "corrects" the opinions of others simply because he, or whatever entity forms his belief system says so?
I posted to defend a statement made by the pope which when you break it down has nothing that would cause offense and makes complete sense.  For this statement the Pope was labeled a clown and several other unsavory remarks.  I do not rely on faith if you look through my posts on this.
People need to start reading posts before seeing one thing and jumping to conclusions.

I do not want to take anything away from the topic but the Pope made a good point in his statement.  Thats all I have to say.....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 05:18:38 PM
The substantive issue - why, in your opinion, did the Pope not address the fundamental findings of the inquiry - that the church systematically covered up the abuse and facilitated it by moving abusers around and continuing to allow them access to potential victims?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 06:26:48 PM
Quote from: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 05:18:38 PM
The substantive issue - why, in your opinion, did the Pope not address the fundamental findings of the inquiry - that the church systematically covered up the abuse and facilitated it by moving abusers around and continuing to allow them access to potential victims?

The beauty of a discussion forum hardy is anyone can pick and choose what discussions and what topics they want to respond to.
I responded to an unnecessary attack on the Pope.  I don't really care to have any more conversations with you on the posted topic as there will never be a right answer for you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 06:45:04 PM
It's a free country - nobody's forcing you to respond to anything. It just seems a strange form of discussion to accuse people of being ill informed and ignorant, proclaim yourself as the "corrector" of their misinformed opinions and then flatly refuse to answer a simple question as to your opinion on the substantive point of the thread. Seems more like proclamation than discussion to me.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 06:56:30 PM
Quote from: Hardy on February 19, 2010, 06:45:04 PM
It's a free country - nobody's forcing you to respond to anything. It just seems a strange form of discussion to accuse people of being ill informed and ignorant, proclaim yourself as the "corrector" of their misinformed opinions and then flatly refuse to answer a simple question as to your opinion on the substantive point of the thread. Seems more like proclamation than discussion to me.

The answer is he didn't have an answer.  I don't think anything he could ever have said would be enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 06:59:05 PM
I called the pope a clown and I stand by it. Anyones response to a days discussion on the rape and cover up of rape by senior church members is to come out with the waffle he did is a clown. He didn't address one thing the victims (the most important people in this affair I would have thought) had to say. In fact I could call him much worse than a clown. Clearly he is either too detached or too senile to know the idiocy of his remarks.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on February 19, 2010, 07:32:28 PM
So if nothing he can do will ever be enough then he should do nothing?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 07:33:29 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

There would be finding fault than there is now.

Bottom line is, the pope or the cardinals or the bishops didn't give a shit about the victims and they still don't. All they're concerned about is the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 07:33:29 PM
There would be finding fault than there is now.

Bottom line is, the pope or the cardinals or the bishops didn't give a shit about the victims and they still don't. All they're concerned about is the Church.

I think that is too sweeping Pints.
Like it or not the Pope has to put the Church before the victims.  Its the sad reality.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: turk on February 19, 2010, 08:23:06 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 07:33:29 PM
There would be finding fault than there is now.

Bottom line is, the pope or the cardinals or the bishops didn't give a shit about the victims and they still don't. All they're concerned about is the Church.

I think that is too sweeping Pints.
Like it or not the Pope has to put the Church before the victims.  Its the sad reality.

No he doesn't! The victims are members of the Church too! The Church is more than just those ordained as clergy.
The response of the Vatican to this disgusting affair has been pathetic
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Well these are the type of things the victims want to hear. If the victims are happy then I would be prepared to say fair play to this pope (although I still have a problem with large aspects of the churches behaviour but credit would be given from me if it was due). But as you correctly put it, the pope cares more about his "organisation" than he does about raped children. However, if you believe that and still this is the guy you look to for moral and spiritual guidance then I think you have some serious problems.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 09:07:44 PM
Quote from: turk on February 19, 2010, 08:23:06 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 07:33:29 PM
There would be finding fault than there is now.

Bottom line is, the pope or the cardinals or the bishops didn't give a shit about the victims and they still don't. All they're concerned about is the Church.

I think that is too sweeping Pints.
Like it or not the Pope has to put the Church before the victims.  Its the sad reality.

No he doesn't! The victims are members of the Church too! The Church is more than just those ordained as clergy.
The response of the Vatican to this disgusting affair has been pathetic

When I say the Church I am not just talking about the Ordained Clergy - I'm talking about the parishioners and the infrastructure and everything that makes up the Church.
I am not disagreeing with you but I am being real.  Reality isn't always what we want but it's reality.  The reality of this matter is that the Pope has to put the Church first.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 19, 2010, 07:33:29 PM
There would be finding fault than there is now.

Bottom line is, the pope or the cardinals or the bishops didn't give a shit about the victims and they still don't. All they're concerned about is the Church.

I think that is too sweeping Pints.
Like it or not the Pope has to put the Church before the victims.
  Its the sad reality.
And there we have it.  That was the problem when allegations of abuse were being made, the church and it's reputation were put first. The Church is still being put first so have the church learned from any of this? Absolutely not, would the church do the same again and cover up sexual abuse, absolutely. Why hasnt the Pope apologised? because he's not sorry. The church comes first doesn't it. It's reputation comes before the lives of children.
Most right thinking people have a big problem with that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on February 19, 2010, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.


Made an example of them ? Seriously do you think they'll be bothered about having to take a plane load of boys over to Rome ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 20, 2010, 01:24:15 AM
Quote from: orangeman on February 19, 2010, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.


Made an example of them ? Seriously do you think they'll be bothered about having to take a plane load of boys over to Rome ?

Has it ever happened before? No.
Do the Irish clergy hierarchy have to hold their hands up and admit responsibility for a cover up. - Yes
Does the spiritual leader of over 1 billion people have to apologise for their actions - No, I think he has done enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on February 20, 2010, 08:37:11 AM
Delusional is the word. 

And I use to wonder how they were able to get away with it and cover it up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 20, 2010, 08:00:30 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 20, 2010, 08:37:11 AM
Delusional is the word. 

And I use to wonder how they were able to get away with it and cover it up.

POG I used to think you were just a grumpy aul hoor, now I realise your just a WUM.  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on February 20, 2010, 08:08:28 PM
and I think you're brainwashed, just like people where years ago.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 20, 2010, 09:23:48 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 20, 2010, 01:24:15 AM
Quote from: orangeman on February 19, 2010, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.


Made an example of them ? Seriously do you think they'll be bothered about having to take a plane load of boys over to Rome ?

Has it ever happened before? No.
Do the Irish clergy hierarchy have to hold their hands up and admit responsibility for a cover up. - Yes
Does the spiritual leader of over 1 billion people have to apologise for their actions - No, I think he has done enough.


I don't always agree with Pints but I couldn't agree more in this case.

I respect peoples right to be devout followers of any religion but no one can be above scrutiny, purely because of an exalted position, when the crime is abuse of children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 21, 2010, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.
IMO it isn't about repeating apologies ad infinitum, nothing more on that level will ease any more pain.
I was curious to see the Vatican statement to read of some substance behind the apologies.
The Vatican going on about the 'weakening of faith as a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors', rings similar to the Immortalists when one of their leaders died a mortal death some years ago. They claimed he had lost his faith shortly before his death.

I doubt if there will be any research that will find a morsel of hidden potential in the Vatican's wild guess as to the cause of the sexual abuse of minors, but can we totally discount the devious Satan working in mysterious ways to weaken the faith?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: turk on February 21, 2010, 02:35:36 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.

They got flown over to Rome for dinner? That will teach them!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 07:01:35 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 21, 2010, 12:01:10 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.
IMO it isn't about repeating apologies ad infinitum, nothing more on that level will ease any more pain.
I was curious to see the Vatican statement to read of some substance behind the apologies.
The Vatican going on about the 'weakening of faith as a significant contributing factor in the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors', rings similar to the Immortalists when one of their leaders died a mortal death some years ago. They claimed he had lost his faith shortly before his death.

I doubt if there will be any research that will find a morsel of hidden potential in the Vatican's wild guess as to the cause of the sexual abuse of minors, but can we totally discount the devious Satan working in mysterious ways to weaken the faith?
There was a letter read out today at Mass from Bishop Treanor which indicated that the Pope isn't finished with this issue and will be releasing a statement further down the line when he has had time to assess everything
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 21, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 07:01:35 PM
There was a letter read out today at Mass from Bishop Treanor which indicated that the Pope isn't finished with this issue and will be releasing a statement further down the line when he has had time to assess everything

I'm sure you and the other faithful can't understand why he might need to. He's done enough in your eyes
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 09:54:12 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 21, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 07:01:35 PM
There was a letter read out today at Mass from Bishop Treanor which indicated that the Pope isn't finished with this issue and will be releasing a statement further down the line when he has had time to assess everything

I'm sure you and the other faithful can't understand why he might need to. He's done enough in your eyes
I don't believe I have said that.  It's obviously very complicated for the Pope, he has lots of things to take into consideration so he is taking time and digesting before he says anything substantive on the issues.  If he is only using this form of words as a means of doing and saying nothing, then he would deserve all the criticism he gets.  What about giving the man a chance to do what he said he will do to the bishops?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on February 21, 2010, 09:55:35 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 09:54:12 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 21, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 21, 2010, 07:01:35 PM
There was a letter read out today at Mass from Bishop Treanor which indicated that the Pope isn't finished with this issue and will be releasing a statement further down the line when he has had time to assess everything

I'm sure you and the other faithful can't understand why he might need to. He's done enough in your eyes
I don't believe I have said that.  It's obviously very complicated for the Pope, he has lots of things to take into consideration so he is taking time and digesting before he says anything substantive on the issues.  If he is only using this form of words as a means of doing and saying nothing, then he would deserve all the criticism he gets.  What about giving the man a chance to do what he said he will do to the bishops?

He was the man in charge of the issue for most of the past 3 decades. How much more time does he need?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hurler on the Bitch on February 21, 2010, 11:00:00 PM
I today joined the Free Presbyterian church. No questionable hard-ons in that establishment for sure.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on February 22, 2010, 08:50:39 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 28, 2009, 02:29:16 PM

Donagh,

There may have been a time that the state knew what was going on but in recent times the church (or elements) within have been very evasive in their dealings with the state.  Either that or the Ryan and Fern reports are very very misleading.

Not everybody (victims in particular) would acknowledge that the church have conceeded the principle.   

Do you think that Cardinal Brady or Diarmuid Martin will not be "happy until they see the Church stripped of everything"?  Because they are unequivocal in their view of what the relevant orders should do.

I think you are correct in a sense that there is a swell of opinion against the worst offenders like the Christian Brothers but I think you'll find that this is because of recent behaviour as much as sins of the past.

I personally would be happy with the following:

1.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by the Brady and the Pope ackowledging the events and the churchs culpability.  I would like them to have some victims groups (1 in 4 etc.)  review the wording to avoid usage of terms such as "occasional lapses" etc.. to describe abuse.

2.  A reiteration of apology and acknowledgement by Taosisech Cowen and President McAleese.  It should also be reviewed as above.

3.  Removal of church management (of any denomination) of state-run institutions. 

4.  An issuing of papal decree with clear and unequivocal terms superceeding past decrees (Crimens Sollicitationis etc..) indicating that sexual abuse is handled as a crime by civil authorities.

5.  An audit of assets of religious orders named in Ryan report to determined their ability to pay compensation and set request compensation accordingly.  Legislation if necessary.

6. A criminal investiagation into the results of the Ryan report to prosecute sex offenders and those that aided them (within and without church).

7. If necessary a legal reform or constitional referendum on article 44 regarding rights of religious orders and property ensuring that the practice of placing property in trust is not abused to avoid compensation payments.

I don't any of the above will run the church into the ground.  In fact I suspect it would help grow their future numbers.

Here's a few suggestions that I had last May.  Don't think any of them have been acted on since.  For those interested the Fern's report and the judgement in the O'Gorman case make it quite clear that the Pope's distinction last week that this was a problem within Ireland is either incomplete or a lie.  This went all the way to him personally (in his previous role) and possibly all the way to Papal office.

But hopefully he used "misdirection" in his speech last week so at least he didn't commit a sin.

/Jim
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 22, 2010, 12:05:42 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 20, 2010, 01:24:15 AM
Quote from: orangeman on February 19, 2010, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on February 19, 2010, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2010, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on February 19, 2010, 07:08:01 PM
Iceman, this is an example of what he could have said...

- I am very sorry for the abuse of children in the care of the catholic church in Ireland
- I am very sorry that the church covered up this abuse.
- I am very sorry that the church put its reputation ahead of innocent childrens well being.
- I am very sorry that the church did not help with the investigations and I intend to make sure this will now happen and that we will make all information available.
- I will ensure that steps will be taken so that this will not happen again. I will do this by instructing all clergy worldwide that they must report suspected abusers to the police first and foremost and provide any information they have.
- I undertake to visit Ireland and meet the victims and apologise in person.
- I undertake to have investigations into abuse in other countries.
- I intend to expel any member of the church that abused children or covered up the abuse of children.

Any decent person in his position would have no problem saying this but not the pope it would seem.

If he said all this would it be enough?
I don't think it would be.
I think you and others would still find fault in it no matter what.

Think Paisley and "Sack cloth and Ashes" - it will never be enough.
Lads you can go round in circles all you like it isn't going to change anything.
Personally I would like the Irish Bishops or the Primate to acknowledge the hurt and horrors of the past this weekend, I don't think that the Pope need do anymore, he's already made an example of them by calling them to Rome.


Made an example of them ? Seriously do you think they'll be bothered about having to take a plane load of boys over to Rome ?

Has it ever happened before? No.
Do the Irish clergy hierarchy have to hold their hands up and admit responsibility for a cover up. - Yes
Does the spiritual leader of over 1 billion people have to apologise for their actions - No, I think he has done enough.

If the Irish bishops were following church policy in moving paedophiles around then yes the spiritual leader of over 1 billion people has to apolpgise.

IMO the reason you are not likely to hear any of the church hierarchy apologise or accept liability as that would leave them open to claims by the victims and if anything the Pope is more concerned by financial meltdown rather than anything to do with faith or morals.

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/ireland/abuse-victims-accuse-archbishop-of-closing-ranks-446966.html (http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/ireland/abuse-victims-accuse-archbishop-of-closing-ranks-446966.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: haveaharp on February 22, 2010, 12:12:54 PM
Is anyone still chewing the altar rails after all this ? I wouldnt set foot in a church again
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 02, 2010, 01:18:21 PM
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0302/abuse.html (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0302/abuse.html)

"Bishop Brennan said one-fifth of 'the road to justice' remained to be travelled and that to complete it, he would have to seek funding from parishes."

So throwing money at the problem is the way to "solve" this burning issue. Nothing about the churches collective conscience over this past 60 years. :-\ They have done their bit visiting the pope and all so now it's over to you lot  :-\

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 02, 2010, 01:28:26 PM
quote from the article;

'Over €750,000 had been spent treating offenders, which Dr Brennan called a long-term investment in protecting children.'

He could save a few bob by allowing the Guards and PSNI investigate to see whether the offenders have a case to answer and they'll receive all the treatment they need behind bars.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 03, 2010, 11:42:55 AM
Anyone who has anything to do with this shower of bastards can only at this point have lost their marbles. I can see no other logical reason that anyone would go to a catholic church anymore.

Read this, I think the last line sums up my opinion on this 100%. Let them go back to worshipping in a ditch if thats what it takes to see justice done.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/shane-dunphy-ferns-plea-for-abuse-money-left-me-shaking-with-rage-2086294.html

Shane Dunphy: Ferns' plea for abuse money left me shaking with rage

AFTER almost two decades working in the field of child protection, it is rare that I find myself actually trembling with rage, but yesterday morning on my usual commute to work, I experienced just such a paroxysm of emotion.

The cause for this anger was a news item which informed me that Dr Denis Brennan, the Bishop of Ferns, was inviting parishioners (and any individual priests who felt so inclined) to donate money to assist the church in footing a bill, the tally for which comes to more than €10m, to meet the legal costs of defending civil cases brought against the diocese in relation to clerical sexual abuse. In other words the Roman Catholic Church in Ferns is asking the victims of its own bitter failings to pay the price for the crime -- it is a request which beggars belief.

I grew up in Ferns. When I was eight, my class in primary school was moved to the local church for the year, while new classrooms were fitted for us in the local CBS. This was the first time I would realise that all was not as it should be. Several boys in my class were picked as altar boys to serve at the 10 o'clock Mass by the local curate. At eight years old, I could simply not understand why one of the boys in particular would come back to class after each Mass in tears. I wrote it off as nerves, or maybe that he was simply not a very good altar server, and had been chided for his liturgical failings.

It was many years later, when the priest in question was prosecuted as part of the Ferns Inquiry, that I understood what I had been seeing.

Much has been written about the social implications of clerical abuse in Ireland. The reports into clerical abuse in Ferns and Dublin have shown a distressing level of complicity within the wider community. How could the police, the health service, schools and many private citizens, have sat back and allowed such atrocities to happen? The priest who abused my friends was well-known as having a fondness for his altar boys, yet no one ever confronted him about it. And in its arrogance and lack of self-awareness, the church interpreted this as tacit approval.

Yet these are different times. Survivors and their families have had years to consider what was done, and to feel the anger they are entitled to feel.

WHEN I heard about Bishop Brennan's request, the image that immediately sprang to my mind was of a small, skinny, 13-year-old boy who was a friend of mine in my first year in secondary school. I'll call him Mike, though that was not his name. One day towards the end of the year, our class was brought to a local convent for a day's retreat. That evening, we were sent back to the school -- St Peter's College -- for a Mass and a candlelight ceremony. I played the guitar, and had left my instrument in its case back in the classroom, in the old part of the school, while we were away. I was sent to fetch it for the Mass, and Mike came with me.

The corridors were all in darkness and, as we were in the class, we heard footsteps approaching. Mike froze, went pale and pulled me into a large storage cupboard. I remember vividly that he was shaking with fear, tears coursing down his pallid cheeks.

When the steps had passed, I pulled away and stumbled back out into the room. "What was that all about?" I asked him, trying not to sound annoyed, as he was visibly upset. "That's Father ____", he said. "You don't want to get caught here by him. Not in the dark." I asked Mike why not, but he just shook his head and said he could not even begin to tell me.

That priest was also prosecuted. As I write this, I still see Mike's face and feel him beside me shaking with terror. Mike was a boarder in St Peter's. How many nights did he lie awake, terrified of what might happen to him? How many letters did he write home, begging not to have to stay another awful day in a place where predators stalked the hallways?

Bishop Brennan and his comrades suggest that Mike's family might like to make a contribution to their war chest. I think it is sickening and shameful that they should even dream of such a thing. Some say that the church in Ferns may go bankrupt without help. I say let it. Perhaps going back to the days of the Mass Rocks might teach them some humility.

Shane Dunphy is a child protection expert.

- Shane Dunphy

Irish Independent
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 03, 2010, 12:00:24 PM
Maybe this is a part of what Bishop of Ferns referred to when he described the recent talks in the Vatican as a "watershed moment" that would redefine the relationship between the Church and abuse victims.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 03, 2010, 12:11:11 PM
Some commentator suggested they should at least call it what it is - a rape tax.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 03, 2010, 04:41:32 PM
I've just read this story and have read the story told in different ways in other papers - this simply does not make any sense.


What planet are these boys living on ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on March 03, 2010, 05:48:17 PM
Bishop Brennan (well named) is a first rate ****. The in-laws have been trying to get him to deal with a matter for three or four years now and he just blankly refuses to see them or even acknowledge their correspondence. They've even made representations to the Vatican who have in turn instructed him to deal with the issue and he's still refusing to do anything.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 03, 2010, 07:06:35 PM
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/20/71226288_4bed47b736.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on March 11, 2010, 08:40:33 PM

ABUSE-SECRECY Mar-10-2010 (600 words) Backgrounder. xxxi

Vatican expects bishops to comply with civil laws on reporting abuse

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Vatican officials are concerned that the church's longstanding insistence on confidentiality in its treatment of priestly sexual abuse cases is being misinterpreted as a ban on reporting serious accusations to civil authorities.

As past episodes and accusations of abuse have come to light recently in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, media attention has focused in part on what kind of guidance or instructions local bishops received from the Vatican on how to handle such cases.

An increasingly widespread impression -- and a mistaken one, Vatican officials say -- is that Pope Benedict XVI himself, when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, ordered bishops not to inform civil authorities about accusations of sexual abuse by priests.

The issue surfaced March 8 when Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, said that as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the pope had in 2001 written a directive that said serious sex abuse cases "are not supposed to be divulged outside the church."

The minister's reference was to the 2001 document, "De delictis gravioribus" ("On more serious crimes"), which gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith juridical control over how the church handles cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests. It was seen inside the Vatican as an important tool in making sure perpetrators were discovered and brought to justice.

But much media attention has focused on the fact that the 2001 document said such cases were covered by "pontifical secret," which meant they would be handled in strict confidentiality. Critics saw that as a way for the church to hide accusations from civil authorities.

Vatican officials said it was important for people to know that the confidentiality imposed on the church's internal handling of abuse cases does not exempt bishops or others from reporting serious facts and accusations to civil authorities. They emphasized that the Vatican document dealt with how church law treats such cases, not as a substitute for civil law, which deals with the crime separately.

"The purpose of 'pontifical secret' here was to respect the rights of the accused and of the witnesses, including the victim, to confidentiality," said one informed Vatican official. He said civil law often has similar provisions to protect confidentiality when a potential crime is under investigation.

"But this is an ecclesiastical law. It does not affect the duty to obey civil law," he added.

The official said the Vatican has never given bishops directives against cooperation with competent civil authorities. On the contrary, he said, the Vatican expects local bishops to comply with laws that mandate reporting of sex abuse allegations.

For example, the U.S. bishops' norms on sexual abuse, which were revised and approved by the Vatican in 2002, stated clearly: "The diocese/eparchy will comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities and will cooperate in their investigation." In many cases, civil law mandates that church authorities report such allegations.

But even as the Vatican has made it clear that bishops are not above the law, it has not encouraged local bishops to act as volunteer reporting agents for the state every time an accusation of sexual abuse is made.

Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.

END
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 11, 2010, 09:27:30 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on March 11, 2010, 08:40:33 PM

ABUSE-SECRECY Mar-10-2010 (600 words) Backgrounder. xxxi

Vatican expects bishops to comply with civil laws on reporting abuse

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Vatican officials are concerned that the church's longstanding insistence on confidentiality in its treatment of priestly sexual abuse cases is being misinterpreted as a ban on reporting serious accusations to civil authorities.

As past episodes and accusations of abuse have come to light recently in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, media attention has focused in part on what kind of guidance or instructions local bishops received from the Vatican on how to handle such cases.

An increasingly widespread impression -- and a mistaken one, Vatican officials say -- is that Pope Benedict XVI himself, when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, ordered bishops not to inform civil authorities about accusations of sexual abuse by priests.

The issue surfaced March 8 when Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, said that as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the pope had in 2001 written a directive that said serious sex abuse cases "are not supposed to be divulged outside the church."

The minister's reference was to the 2001 document, "De delictis gravioribus" ("On more serious crimes"), which gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith juridical control over how the church handles cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests. It was seen inside the Vatican as an important tool in making sure perpetrators were discovered and brought to justice.

But much media attention has focused on the fact that the 2001 document said such cases were covered by "pontifical secret," which meant they would be handled in strict confidentiality. Critics saw that as a way for the church to hide accusations from civil authorities.

Vatican officials said it was important for people to know that the confidentiality imposed on the church's internal handling of abuse cases does not exempt bishops or others from reporting serious facts and accusations to civil authorities. They emphasized that the Vatican document dealt with how church law treats such cases, not as a substitute for civil law, which deals with the crime separately.

"The purpose of 'pontifical secret' here was to respect the rights of the accused and of the witnesses, including the victim, to confidentiality," said one informed Vatican official. He said civil law often has similar provisions to protect confidentiality when a potential crime is under investigation.

"But this is an ecclesiastical law. It does not affect the duty to obey civil law," he added.

The official said the Vatican has never given bishops directives against cooperation with competent civil authorities. On the contrary, he said, the Vatican expects local bishops to comply with laws that mandate reporting of sex abuse allegations.

For example, the U.S. bishops' norms on sexual abuse, which were revised and approved by the Vatican in 2002, stated clearly: "The diocese/eparchy will comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities and will cooperate in their investigation." In many cases, civil law mandates that church authorities report such allegations.

But even as the Vatican has made it clear that bishops are not above the law, it has not encouraged local bishops to act as volunteer reporting agents for the state every time an accusation of sexual abuse is made.

Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.

END

What a load of auld shite. I particularily like the last line which to me basically reads that once guilt has been determined by I presume church law then we can also turn to ordinary law.

So what happens to a bishop that refuses to follow these rules. Sure the pope has not even got around to accepting the resignation of the 3 irish bishops yet nor has he forced the 4th one to resign.

And what of the papal nuncio refusing to attend a commission in the sovereign country he is an ambassador to? The catholic church loves to release bullshit words and statements so the devouted will lap it up like kittens while the reality of what happens on the ground is totally different.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: GetOffThePitch on March 11, 2010, 10:21:38 PM
I too whilst condemning the whole sorry mess feel for the good priests who carry on with their daily, sacrificing work. The church is flavour of the month for putting the boot into(yes perhaps justifiably). Its just a pity there are real, genuine people of faith getting tarnished. Yes a lot of the blame must go to the church but that doesn't help those of faith
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 11, 2010, 10:53:27 PM
Here is the piece,
'Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.'

Fair enough. 

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.'
Objectively proven??
What are the criteria for an accustion to be objectively proven?  Where is all this done and by who?
There is nothing in the Charter about objective proof.
Here this emminent Cardinal is in direct confrontation with the Catholic Churchs' very own  'Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People'
from 2001 http://www.usccb.org/ocyp/charter.pdf (http://www.usccb.org/ocyp/charter.pdf)
where there is no such "objective proof" required

ARTICLE 4. Dioceses/eparchies are to report an allegation of sexual
abuse of a person who is a minor to the public authorities. Dioceses/
eparchies are to comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to
the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities
and cooperate in their investigation in accord with the law of the
jurisdiction in question.
Dioceses/eparchies are to cooperate with public authorities about
reporting cases even when the person is no longer a minor.
In every instance, dioceses/eparchies are to advise victims of their
right to make a report to public authorities and support this right.


Perhaps the Cardinal has got his articles mixed up ::)
because in Article 5 the internal tribunal investigation is only to do with the accused and the Church and completely separate from the legal obligations outlined in article 4.

'Diocesan/eparchial policy is to provide that for even a single act of
sexual abuse of a minor*—whenever it occurred—which is admitted
12 | charter for the protection of children and young people
or established after an appropriate process in accord with canon law,
the offending priest or deacon is to be permanently removed from
ministry and, if warranted, dismissed from the clerical state. In keeping
with the stated purpose of this Charter, an offending priest or deacon'
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 12, 2010, 01:49:14 PM
Quote from: GetOffThePitch on March 11, 2010, 10:21:38 PM
I too whilst condemning the whole sorry mess feel for the good priests who carry on with their daily, sacrificing work. The church is flavour of the month for putting the boot into(yes perhaps justifiably). Its just a pity there are real, genuine people of faith getting tarnished. Yes a lot of the blame must go to the church but that doesn't help those of faith

By our own religious decree we sin by what we do and also what we fail to do, so if anyone in the church knew of any wrongdoings then they have sinned in the eyes of god even if they didn't break any laws. So this speads the net of wrongdoing far wider than those paedophiles doing the actual abusing.
The good people in the church should be shouting a lot louder about this than they seem to be as they will be tarnished by association for right or wrong.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 12, 2010, 01:50:57 PM
amen
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 12, 2010, 11:01:26 PM
Does this story really surprise you ???



Pope Benedict's former diocese rehoused abuser priest 
 



Pope Benedict once unwittingly approved housing for a priest accused of child sex abuse, his former diocese has said.

The episode dates back to 1980 when he was archbishop of Germany's Munich and Freising diocese and known as Joseph Ratzinger.

However, a former deputy said he - not the future pope - made the decision to rehouse the priest, who later abused other children and was convicted.

Roman Catholic clergy have recently been linked to paedophilia scandals.

German Bishop Robert Zollitsch has apologised to victims of abuse. At a meeting with the German-born Pope on Friday he discussed accusations made in some 170 cases.

The Pope himself has defended celibacy among priests, saying it is a sign of "full devotion" to the Catholic Church.

'A bad mistake'

Following a report in the Munich-based newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, the diocese of Munich and Freising confirmed that Archbishop Ratzinger had let the priest, known only as H, stay at a vicarage in Munich for "therapy".

  The repeated employment of H in priestly spiritual duties was a bad mistake

Gerhard Gruber, former vicar-general in Munich and Freising
H had been suspected of forcing an 11-year-old boy to perform a sex act upon him in the northern city of Essen.

While he was in Munich, between February 1980 and August 1982, no wrongdoing was reported.

He was then transferred to the town of Grafing, where he was relieved of his duties in 1985 after allegations of child sex abuse, the diocese said.

In 1986, he was given an 18-month suspended jail sentence and a fine for sexually abusing minors, details of which were not given by the diocese.

Archbishop Ratzinger's former deputy, Gerhard Gruber, stressed that the man who now heads the Catholic Church was not made aware of H's alleged abuse history.

"The repeated employment of H in priestly spiritual duties was a bad mistake," Gerhard Gruber said in a statement.

"I assume all responsibility."

Speaking to the Associated Press, he added: "You have to know that we had some 1,000 priests in the diocese at the time.

"The cardinal [Joseph Ratzinger] could not deal with everything, he had to rely on his vicar-general [deputy]."

Vatican conference

Pope Benedict made his remarks about celibacy at a theological conference in the Vatican before meeting Bishop Zollitsch.


  I felt I was in a dark place, in solitary confinement

Norbert Denef


A childhood of abuse 
He defended "the value of sacred celibacy, which in the Latin Church is... required for ordination and is held in great regard by Eastern Churches".

Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn had called for an examination of priestly training, saying that the issue of celibacy needed to be looked at with "a great deal of honesty, both on the part of the Church and of society as a whole".

He later clarified his comments saying it would be wrong to say that celibacy was a prime cause of sexual abuse.

"If celibacy is the problem, then without celibacy there should be no sexual abuse but unfortunately this is not the case," he said.

"It has to be seen as a question of personal maturity, how someone relates to his personal development."


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 13, 2010, 12:53:09 PM
Yes, we can rely on the pope to do the right thing. Isn't it funny how in all the countries that have exposed abuse the perpetrators were always moved to a different parish or place. Its like there was some central organising body telling the church in the different countries that that is the way to handle an abuser. But sure that couldn't be true could it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on March 13, 2010, 09:21:55 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm)

Myles, you know how I feel about the church.  That's not going to change.  The church is a big part of my family's life and will continue to be.  I will make sure my son(s) are brought up as Catholics
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 13, 2010, 09:57:54 PM
Looks like the argument given is that there were so many priests involved in sexual abuse that it was not possible for the then Cardinal to be aware of every abuser, that a priest accused of forcing an 11 year old boy to have oral sex would not merit the slightest bit of attention from his Cardinal.

It might well be that the then Cardinal was not made aware of such a (small) detail.

The then Cardinal's deputy has stepped forward and offered a full mea culpa.
However this is not good enough
Either
a. The deputy would gladly take the bullet meant for the Pope.
or
b. the then Cardinal  was not directly involved but on his patch, according to Hierarchy, he was directly responsible for the low priority and the gross irresponsible manner in the way that a serious sex abuser operating as a priest was handled by the parish.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 13, 2010, 10:18:27 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on March 13, 2010, 09:21:55 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8565986.stm)

Myles, you know how I feel about the church.  That's not going to change.  The church is a big part of my family's life and will continue to be.  I will make sure my son(s) are brought up as Catholics

Your not a bad lad and I don't want to be having slagging matches but I have to differ with you on this strongly. Assuming we take the bible as the word of God as a starting point, I believe the catholic church is rotten at the core and puts its power and prestige above the welfare of little kids, just like your sons. I believe that many within this church at high levels are corrupting the word of God by there deeds. I also believe that you can pray to God without having to deal with the above corrupt influences. I believe there are many good people both lay and clergy within the catholic church that could still live by the word of God and indeed still spread the word of God without the need to belong to this now disgraced organisation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 13, 2010, 11:32:27 PM
Does this come as a major surprise ?.

Brady at meetings over Smyth abuse

Cardinal Sean Brady has confirmed that he represented the Church at meetings when two teenage victims of Fr Brendan Smyth signed an oath of silence about their complaints.

The complaints were being investigated by Cardinal Brady in his capacity as secretary to the Bishop of Kilmore in 1975.

Cardinal Daly said tonight he had been following his Bishop's orders and there were no guidelines for dealing with such investigations at that time.

In a statement, Cardinal Brady said he had believed the complaints he received and had provided the information he received to his then Bishop, Dr Francis McKiernan.

Brendan Smyth was one of the country's most notorious child abusers and delays in processing an extradition warrant for him from Northern Ireland in 1994 caused the collapse of the Fianna Fáil/Labour coalition government.

He is believed to have abused at least 20 children over a 40 year period.

Statement from Cardinal's office

'In 1975, Fr Sean Brady, as he then was, was the part-time secretary to the then Bishop of Kilmore, the late Bishop Francis McKiernan.

At the direction of Bishop McKiernan, Fr Brady attended two meetings: in the Dundalk meeting Fr Brady acted as recording secretary for the process involved and in the Ballyjamesduff meeting he asked the questions and recorded the answers given.

At those meetings the complainants signed undertakings, on oath, to respect the confidentiality of the information gathering process. As instructed, and as a matter of urgency, Fr Brady passed both reports to Bishop McKiernan for his immediate action.'
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 14, 2010, 09:56:14 AM
Quote from: orangeman on March 13, 2010, 11:32:27 PM
Does this come as a major surprise ?.

Brady at meetings over Smyth abuse

Cardinal Sean Brady has confirmed that he represented the Church at meetings when two teenage victims of Fr Brendan Smyth signed an oath of silence about their complaints.

The complaints were being investigated by Cardinal Brady in his capacity as secretary to the Bishop of Kilmore in 1975.

Cardinal Daly said tonight he had been following his Bishop's orders and there were no guidelines for dealing with such investigations at that time.

In a statement, Cardinal Brady said he had believed the complaints he received and had provided the information he received to his then Bishop, Dr Francis McKiernan.

Brendan Smyth was one of the country's most notorious child abusers and delays in processing an extradition warrant for him from Northern Ireland in 1994 caused the collapse of the Fianna Fáil/Labour coalition government.

He is believed to have abused at least 20 children over a 40 year period.

Statement from Cardinal's office

'In 1975, Fr Sean Brady, as he then was, was the part-time secretary to the then Bishop of Kilmore, the late Bishop Francis McKiernan.

At the direction of Bishop McKiernan, Fr Brady attended two meetings: in the Dundalk meeting Fr Brady acted as recording secretary for the process involved and in the Ballyjamesduff meeting he asked the questions and recorded the answers given.

At those meetings the complainants signed undertakings, on oath, to respect the confidentiality of the information gathering process. As instructed, and as a matter of urgency, Fr Brady passed both reports to Bishop McKiernan for his immediate action.'

McKiernan was "my" bishop when I was a lad and he was a righ p***k. Always thought he got of lightly with regard to his dealings with Smyth. Sean Brady is no better than him either.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 14, 2010, 12:14:36 PM
Whether it was his demeanour or his apparent resistance to distance himself from Dermot Martin, I've always held the view that Brady had something to hide and was never very comfortable talking about the abuses that went on in the church.



The question you have to ask yourself now is this : why issue this statement now about signing 2 abused teenagers up to an oath of silence ? It's not good enough to say that in 1975 nobody knew how to deal with the issue of abuse.


It turns out that Brady wasn't a hair better than the rest of them.

And now he's the gaffer !! Crazy stuff altogether.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 15, 2010, 01:19:33 PM
It seems that it's a world wide issue but has been met with the same silence from the boss in Rome :


German Catholics upset by Pope's 'silence'
Monday, 15 March 2010 13:03
German Catholic groups hit out today at what they see as the German-born Pope's silence over the paedophilia scandal rocking the country's Church.


The scandal 'affects people, whether they are religious or not,' said Dirk Taenzler, head of the Federation of German Catholic Youth, in the Berliner Zeitung daily. 'The Holy Father should make a statement about this.'


He added that the German Catholic Church, which has been hit by allegations of child sex abuse dating back decades on an almost daily basis in recent weeks, was in the midst of one of its 'biggest identity crises since 1945'.


AdvertisementChristian Weisner from the German chapter of reform movement We Are Church said meanwhile that Pope Benedict XVI 'has not yet realised the full extent of the insecurity' caused by the scandal.


'Many Catholics who are faithful to the Church regret the fact that Benedict XVI has failed to express a single word of sympathy,' Mr Weisner added.


The Catholic Church has been engulfed in a scandal since January when a Jesuit-run school in Berlin admitted systematic sexual abuse of pupils by two priests in the 1970s and 1980s.


Since then, there have been allegations at some two-thirds of the country's 27 dioceses as more victims come forward.


With the Catholic Church hit by similar scandals in other countries, Benedict has spoken out several times since the start of his papacy in 2005 on the issue, calling in February child abuse a 'heinous crime' and a 'grave sin'.

But he has yet to comment directly on the scandal rocking his home country, critics say.

One of those implicated is a boarding school attached to Regensburg cathedral's choir. The pope's elder brother, Georg Ratzinger, who ran the choir for 30 years, has denied all knowledge of sexual abuse.

On Friday the dioceses of Munich and Freising said that the Pope, when he was archbishop there, had approved in 1980 giving a suspected paedophilia priest Church housing in the diocese for 'therapy'.


Two years later, by which time the Pope had been transferred to the Vatican, the priest was given pastoral duties in the town of Graefing where he committed sexual abuses. He was given a suspended jail sentence in 1986.

The vicar-general at the time has assumed 'all responsibility' for the 'bad mistake'. The priest concerned is reportedly still employed by the Church.

Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi went on the offensive on Saturday.

'It is clearly evident that in the past few days there are some who have sought - with a dogged focus on Regensburg and Munich -elements to personally implicate the Holy Father in questions of abuse,' he said.

'It is clear that these efforts have failed,' he said on Radio Vatican.

'The Church's credibility has been badly shaken,' said Wolfgang Thierse, deputy speaker of the German parliament and a board member of the Central Committee of German Catholics.

'The Church should be more honest and more severe with itself, and that goes for the Pope too,' he said on public television.

More priests suspended in Austria on abuse charges

Meanwhile, a monastery in Upper Austria hit by accusations of sexual abuse announced today it had suspended two more of its clergy after further complaints, taking to five the suspensions in one week.


One of the padres accused of sexual abuse at the Kremsmuenster monastery apologised for his behaviour and said he 'never meant to be a sadist'.


'Father Alfons has been relieved of his duties ... and Father Petrus will also be suspended from his duties until the allegations have been fully investigated,' Abbot Ambros Ebhart said in a statement on the monastery's website.


A third padre, Father Benedikt, was suspended last week on the same charges while two other padres were suspended after allegations of physical abuse. The abuse is alleged to have been largely in the 1980s.


Father Petrus reports to the authorities today and the other two have agreed to work with the authorities and a special diocese committee on abuse, the statement said.

The number of complaints of sexual abuse by priests has been growing in Austria since cases came to light earlier this month.
In the wake of the snowballing scandal, the archbishop of Salzburg, Alois Kothgasser, called for a rethink of the Catholic Church's rule of priest celibacy.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 15, 2010, 01:59:33 PM
'Cardinal Brady said he had believed the complaints he received and had provided the information he received to his then Bishop, Dr Francis McKiernan'.

'Archbishop Ratzinger's former deputy, Gerhard Gruber, stressed that the man who now heads the Catholic Church was not made aware of H's alleged abuse history'.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Doogie Browser on March 15, 2010, 02:02:54 PM
I see that Jim Allister cnut has called for his head now  ???
I think he should walk, in fact I can see no reason why he should remain.

Best Cardinal we never had was Eddie Daly.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 15, 2010, 02:03:11 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 15, 2010, 01:59:33 PM
'Cardinal Brady said he had believed the complaints he received and had provided the information he received to his then Bishop, Dr Francis McKiernan'.

'Archbishop Ratzinger's former deputy, Gerhard Gruber, stressed that the man who now heads the Catholic Church was not made aware of H's alleged abuse history'.



Same shite, different country.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 15, 2010, 04:50:44 PM
No quite o
re the cleric in the dock
in one country the buck was passed on, in the other they are saying the buck stopped short.

   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 15, 2010, 10:49:29 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 15, 2010, 01:59:33 PM
'Cardinal Brady said he had believed the complaints he received and had provided the information he received to his then Bishop, Dr Francis McKiernan'.

'Archbishop Ratzinger's former deputy, Gerhard Gruber, stressed that the man who now heads the Catholic Church was not made aware of H's alleged abuse history'.

Absolutely hits the nail on the head.

One current Cardinal refuses to accept responsibility because he was an underling to the Bishop while the current Pope, who was a Bishop at the time, blames the underling. Similar circumstances, conflicting excuses, identical refusal to take responsibility.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 19, 2010, 03:46:24 PM
Letter sent to midwest Radio:

http://www.midwestradio.ie/MWR/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=6485&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=85 (http://www.midwestradio.ie/MWR/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=6485&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=85)


Whats new this week

18/03/2010
HUGE REACTION TO LETTER OF PHYSICAL ABUSE ON TOMMY MARREN SHOW
I was listening to your programme recently when you were discussing the bishops requests for the laity to pay for the sins of the clergy. During the programme some said that the nuns were just as bad and the memories of 72 years past came flooding back.

I came from a large, happy family who played and roamed the green fields of our farm. Sadly, my parents split up and parted and I found myself and my brother being sent to a home for destitute children run by nuns in the West of Ireland. The year was 1937. I would have been 12 years old on my next birthday and my younger brother was 6.

What a contrast to the green fields of home with the nuns marching up and down the corridor wearing long rosary beads, virtually down to the ground and on the righ hand side, clipped to the waist, was a leather strap. The strap was three feet long, three inches wide and about a quarter of an inch thick. I was so naïve. I thought it part of their uniform but to my horror a few short weeks in the home soon made me realise what it was for.

After school all the senior boys (including me) were made wax and polish the recreation hall which was about 60 feet by 20 feet. There were 6 boys in front on waxing duties and 6 following on to polish the wax floor. There was a nun standing over you in case you would raise your head. If you did raise your head you got a smash of the belt across the back and after two nights polishing my knees were in terrible pain.

I told one of the nuns and she said that by the time we had the job finished I would be "good and hard". That was the sympathy I got. The younger generation were on their knees polishing the corridors including my 6-year old brother and when the work would be over we were made wash our hands in cold water.

Then all the children were assembled in the recreation hall. There was a row of wooden chairs – I would say about 50 in all – where some of the children would just sit and gaze into space more than likely thinking of the homes they had left behind. I remember my brother and I were just four weeks in the home but to us it seemed like four years.

There is one vivid memory that I will bring to the grave of this awful time. One evening at about 7 pm we were all in little groups. I remember I and about 5 other boys were at one end of the hall and I remember they wanted to know why I was put in the home. There were other boys at the other end of the room just chatting. Seemingly a scuffle broke out amongst two of the younger boys and the remainder of the boys stood around the two fighting boys in a circle cheering on their favourite.

Suddenly, a nun appeared and began to viciously wave her leather strap. She started swinging out from over her shoulder right down on one of the boys involved in the fight. You could hear the screams of the boy 50 metres away. The nun kept screaming "I'll teach you a lesson. Our little group were the last to arrive. By now the circle was five children wide and I found it difficult to get near the child. When I did I saw a young terrified little child curled up like a baby in its mothers womb with his two little hands covering his face from the shower of belts being administered by the out-of-control nun.

His little back was facing towards me and I edged towards the front. To my horror I saw a mop of curly red hair and realised it was my brother. He was wearing a little vest and short trousers and as the nun rained the leather belt on his little arms and legs you could see the welts it was leaving.

As the nun swung the belt over her shoulder I made for it. Sadly, I only caught the tip and was not able to hold on. The nun had the belt wrapped around her wrist to apply maximum force. She made a grab for me but I ran to the side door and escaped a beating. As I ran outside I can vividly remember looking through the window and seeing the nun continue to beat my brother.

By this time is was about 7.10 pm. We were lost souls. We had no father to take our part and no mother to protect us. In shock I started to wander down the drive of the home with tears streaming down my face. I didn't know what to do or where to go. The only time I was away from home was to go to mass with my mother. That was 2 miles away so you can see how lost I really felt.

I kept walking until I came to a bridge with a big flow of water down below. Looking down I saw a ledge – about 9 inches wide – and I worked my way onto the ledge and leaned my back against the bridge wall and was facing towards the river. I thought no one would see me and I intended to stay there for the night. Suddenly, I heard a lady's voice saying "What are you doing down there? Come up right now or you'll get dizzy and get drowned". The kind lady waited until I was safe. She patted me on the head and told me to run home immediately to "your mother and father". Little did the kind lady know I had no home, no mammy or daddy and no future.

It was getting dark and I was getting nervous. I had no option but to return to the home. As I walked up the drive I could see the lights were still on in the hall. Peering through the window I could still see my little brother. All the other children were sitting on the wooden chairs around the perimeter of the hall in complete silence and my brother was being paraded around the hall with a cardboard sign around his neck with big capital letters on it saying "BITCH – FEMALE DOG".

The nun was standing in the middle of the room roaring at my brother to keep walking and waving her leather belt if he slowed down. During the time I watch my brother he fell at least 6 times and each time the nun would scream at him to get up and keep walking. Eventually a senior nun walked in and said to the nun that it was time for wash and bed. I thanked the Lord that my young brothers suffering was over. By now he had been flogged and marched for over two-and-a-half hours.

I entered the hall in shock and as he passed by me his little body was trembling. Although we came from a large family I never say any member of my family being beaten. If we did something wrong we were sat down and told never to do it again so this experience was a terrible shock for my brother.

I went straight to my dormitory. I was in the section that was assigned to the 10-14 year olds. There were 24 single beds – 12 on each side – and immediately inside the dormitory there was a room that was made up of 80% glass where the nun-in-charge slept. Just down the corridor there was a second dormitory where all the 6-9 year olds slept and this included my brother.

That night I could not sleep wondering whether my little brother would be alive the following morning. There was a clock directly over the entrance of the dormitory. There was always a light on in the corridor which shone on the clock. I watched every second waiting for morning to come. It was 3.00 am when I heard the sound of footsteps in the corridor and rattle of keys and beads which was unusual. As the nun past the entrance to the dormitory I saw a small middle-aged man wearing a hat and carrying a small suitcase. I realised I had seen him once before and I remember hearing on of the boys remark that he was a doctor who always came to see the "sick boys". My heart sank. Was my little brother dying I wondered.

Just after 3.30 am the nun and doctor past down to the main door. I heard the doctor wish the nun a good morning and mutter something about coming back again later in the morning. I was numb with fear and worry. I watched the clock tick slowly and eventually couldn't bear it any longer. Just before 5.00 am the only sound to be heard was the snoring of the nun in charge. I slid out of my bed and crawled along the passage way between the two rows of beds and headed for the corridor. Thanks God I got past the nun.

Then I crawled down the corridor to the dormitory where my little brother slept. Sadly, the nun in charge there never snored so I didn't know whither she was awake or not. I had to see my brother and was willing to take any punishment if I were caught. I got down on my tummy and dragged myself along the passageway between the two rows of beds. Finally, I got to my brothers bed and quickly slid under his blanket. I will never ever forget the heat from his body – it would have lit a cigarette. I gently put my hand on him and he jumped about six inches in the bed but did not wake. The welts on his arms were three inches high.

I suddenly noticed a little boy, about three beds down from where my brother lay, raise his head. I was afraid he might start to scream so I crawled down to his bed and whispered that I had come to see my little brother. Even though he was only nine he was better up on how things were in the home and he whispered to me that the doctor had come and put a needle in my brothers arm and that he immediately "went very quite". The boy told me that before the doctor came my brother was finding it hard to breath.

I noted that my brother had a plaster of paris on his wrist and the 9 year-old boy told me that when the nun was dragging him down the stairway he had held on to the railing with one hand and that the nun snapped the other hand and broke his wrist. I thanked the boy for telling me all that he had and I then crawled back up to my brothers bed. I leaned down and kissed him on the forehead with tears streaming down my face and with a heavy heart crawled back to my own bed again.

I remember wishing it was 7.00 am so that I could get out of bed. Eventually the bells sounded and when I went to the dining area I waited anxiously for my brother to arrive. How naïve I was. I was not to see my brother for 2 whole weeks and when I did see him the only thing I could recognise was his mop of red hair. That beating had scarred him both physically and mentally for the rest of his life.

I asked some of the boys why the nun had placed the placard around his neck and it seems that during the beating my brother said "Stop it you Bitch". When this happened the nun immediately left the hall and returned with the sign "BITCH – FEMALE DOG" and placed it around my brothers neck before making him walk around the dormitory for over 2 hours.

I often wonder how many young boys who hadn't even reached the age of 7 were dealt such beatings. I'm finding it very difficult to write this letter. I am being treated for Parkinson's disease and I also have a heart condition and cancer. I will be 84 years old shortly . My young brother never recovered from that cruel beating and died a young man of heartbreak and mental illness.

I would like you to read this letter on your programme as I think I owe it to my later brother to let people know what went on behind the closed doors of institutions in so called Holy Ireland. I have suffered enough and I am still suffering.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 19, 2010, 03:54:13 PM
84 years of age and having to write that.

Sad, sad story.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: fearbrags on March 19, 2010, 06:08:22 PM
How  can people be  so  cruel.That  put  me  in tears  and  i  rearly  ever cry
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 19, 2010, 06:26:00 PM
Quote from: fearbrags on March 19, 2010, 06:08:22 PM
How  can people be  so  cruel.That  put  me  in tears  and  i  rearly  ever cry


I've just read that again.

Unbelievable.  Would bring a tear to the eye.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: JimStynes on March 19, 2010, 07:39:39 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 19, 2010, 06:26:00 PM
Quote from: fearbrags on March 19, 2010, 06:08:22 PM
How  can people be  so  cruel.That  put  me  in tears  and  i  rearly  ever cry


I've just read that again.

Unbelievable.  Would bring a tear to the eye.

f**k sake man up lads.

Ive lost total faith in the catholic church, its just one big lie.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: red hander on March 19, 2010, 09:05:33 PM
I actually think if that nun was in front of me now I could strangle her with my bare hands without feeling a thing ... I'm glad I rejected all this bullshit when I was about 12 or 13.  Even at that age I seen enough of those b**tards in school and in church situations to do me a lifetime
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 19, 2010, 09:59:08 PM
If you read the report on the clerical abuse in the industrial schools, the report that this thread was opened about, you will read many many more stories like that and they would sicken any decent person to the pit of their stomach. Thankfully the church will never have that power in this country again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 19, 2010, 10:03:59 PM
Technically we (Roman Catholics) should be subjects of the Eastern Orthodox Church but for a forgery which gave power to what was then known as the Bishop of Rome.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on March 19, 2010, 11:29:32 PM
It is heart breaking what happened to so many children in this country and the devastation left in its wake. I'm sure many suicides and suicide attempts resulted in later years as well as alcoholism for people who were so brutalised and had no voice. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2010, 12:23:21 AM
By now I think everybody has heard this shambolic character called Msgr. Dooley, as it appears he can't keep his mouth shut. His purpose imo these last few days, has been to make us all aware of the extent and absurdity of the evil darkness under which all this abuse has been allowed to carry on over the past decades.
If the Vatican did have a hit squad they would have surely been sent on a mission to dispatch him to his everlasting extra hot resting place.

It is not going to end here. The Pope as Cardinal is next for ruthless scrutiny over his role as head of the Inquisition.
From what I can gather, the code of conduct for the clergy is pretty much taken from the credible American Bishops charter in 2001/ 2002. The Ratzinger/Vatican inspired code of conduct model is highly suspect.










Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jen Cui on March 20, 2010, 04:28:58 AM
priests riding kids, thats wrong
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 20, 2010, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2010, 12:23:21 AM
By now I think everybody has heard this shambolic character called Msgr. Dooley, as it appears he can't keep his mouth shut. His purpose imo these last few days, has been to make us all aware of the extent and absurdity of the evil darkness under which all this abuse has been allowed to carry on over the past decades.
If the Vatican did have a hit squad they would have surely been sent on a mission to dispatch him to his everlasting extra hot resting place.

They've done the less colourful equivalent and silenced him. Bishop Clifford was on Spotlight or Hearts and Minds the other night and said Dooley has been forbidden to comment to the media.

He provided a chilling insight into the thinking of "canon lawyers" - very bad PR.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on March 20, 2010, 10:28:27 AM
Quote from: Jen Cui on March 20, 2010, 04:28:58 AM
priests riding kids, thats wrong

Fairly crude contribution.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2010, 11:50:06 AM
That pastoral letter has come.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/abuse.html (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/abuse.html)
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/popeletter.pdf (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/popeletter.pdf)

Imo the standard should be
a. inadequate response to sexual abuse allegations,
b. inadequate sanctions placed on abusive priests,
c. The cover up allowing priests to continue abuse, is a crime of omission, in this case omission is just as
objectionable as a crime of commission.


A and B are addressed  and once accepted it should lead  to  C.
The Pope is waffling around the crime of omission, but I will read it more closely.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 20, 2010, 12:20:15 PM
The cover up culture is only obliquely referred to and only once, in the section addressed to the bishops:

It cannot be denied that some of you and your predecessors failed, at
times grievously, to apply the long-established norms of canon law to the
crime of child abuse. Serious mistakes were made in responding to
allegations. I recognize how difficult it was to grasp the extent and
complexity of the problem, to obtain reliable information and to make the
right decisions in the light of conflicting expert advice. Nevertheless, it must
be admitted that grave errors of judgement were made and failures of
leadership occurred. All this has seriously undermined your credibility and
effectiveness.


The process of shifting peadophiles around to facilitate continued rape and abuse is not mentioned at all.

Throughout, he refers to the requirements of canon law, with only one single reference to the civil law, again in the section addressed to bishops:

Besides fully implementing the norms of canon law in addressing cases of child abuse,
continue to cooperate with the civil authorities in their area of competence. Clearly,
religious superiors should do likewise.


Nowhere does he come out clearly and instruct priests, bishops and lay people that the primary requirement is to report child abuse to the police promptly and to ensure, above all, that abusers should be deprived, at all costs, of the opportunity to re-offend.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2010, 01:28:04 PM
Hardy wrote
QuoteNowhere does he come out clearly and instruct priests, bishops and lay people that the primary requirement is to report child abuse to the police promptly and to ensure, above all, that abusers should be deprived, at all costs, of the opportunity to re-offend.

The procedures to address a present day sex abuse cases are already outlined elsewhere and assumed as understood.

I am proceeding very slowly with this document.

Read paragraph 4 carefully

Basically the Pope is repeating that lack of faith not only in the sex abusers but amongst the congregation was part of the  context for sex abuse 
4. 'Fast-paced social
change has occurred, often adversely affecting people's traditional
adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental
and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as
frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected'.


and most bizzarly

'In particular, there was a well-intentioned but misguided tendency to avoid
penal approaches to canonically irregular situations.'


'It is in this overall
context that we must try to understand the disturbing problem of child
sexual abuse, which has contributed in no small measure to the weakening
of faith and the loss of respect for the Church and her teachings'.


In the Pope's eyes the overall context is the weakening faith of the congregation combined with the misplaced good intentions of the Bishops etc,  contributed to the sex abuse phenonomen.

I am open to receive other interpretations of chapter 4


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Myles Na G. on March 20, 2010, 03:34:04 PM
Dear Pope Benedict,

Go f##k yourself.

Yours sincerely,

Myles

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 20, 2010, 03:37:43 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2010, 01:28:04 PM
Hardy wrote
QuoteNowhere does he come out clearly and instruct priests, bishops and lay people that the primary requirement is to report child abuse to the police promptly and to ensure, above all, that abusers should be deprived, at all costs, of the opportunity to re-offend.

The procedures to address a present day sex abuse cases are already outlined elsewhere and assumed as understood.

I am proceeding very slowly with this document.

Read paragraph 4 carefully

Basically the Pope is repeating that lack of faith not only in the sex abusers but amongst the congregation was part of the  context for sex abuse 
4. 'Fast-paced social
change has occurred, often adversely affecting people's traditional
adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental
and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as
frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected'.


and most bizzarly

'In particular, there was a well-intentioned but misguided tendency to avoid
penal approaches to canonically irregular situations.'


'It is in this overall
context that we must try to understand the disturbing problem of child
sexual abuse, which has contributed in no small measure to the weakening
of faith and the loss of respect for the Church and her teachings'.


In the Pope's eyes the overall context is the weakening faith of the congregation combined with the misplaced good intentions of the Bishops etc,  contributed to the sex abuse phenonomen.

I am open to receive other interpretations of chapter 4

I would tend to see it similarly. I didn't read it all yet but I couldn't find the instruction of the religious to co-operate with authorities/police or with local law. I found a vague reference to 'properly convened tribunals' but he didn't elaborate on what he thought these might be.

More insulting was the the constant reference to 'the church in your country' as having been lacking. While he certainly apologises a number of time he blames everything from the church here to fast moving society and drifting away from the Gospel, but he never takes any responsibility nor does he suggest that the Vatican should take any responsibility.

At this stage it is extremely annoying that the only Law he refers to is Canon Law. Aside from ignoring our own sovereign right to have our own law respected, history shows some serious flaws in Canon Law.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: fearbrags on March 20, 2010, 04:54:23 PM
'Fast-paced social
change has occurred, often adversely affecting people's traditional
adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental
and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as
frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected'.

I  am   sure  in  the  slow paced society of  the  forties the  people  sustained their devotionial practices such as
frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats .
And  judging  by  your  letter from  the old man in  previous  page
We  saw  how  that  helped

What  a  load  of  bollax 
some  day  on  here  i  will  share  my last  experience  of confession in  knock  when  i  was home  on hollidays last  year
It  may not  have helped  that  it  was  my  first in  about 20 years  but  it  will be  my  last.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on March 20, 2010, 11:55:02 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on March 20, 2010, 03:34:04 PM
Dear Pope Benedict,

Go f##k yourself.

Yours sincerely,

Myles

co-signed the Fox
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on March 21, 2010, 12:45:51 AM
Knee jerk reactions to an edited version of the letter, which was read out at Masses, serves no purpose. I thought what we heard was a bit like the Curates Egg, with good and bad parts, but the bad parts may be dealt with more fully in the full version, until then we should reserve judgement. What i will be looking for is an indication of the beginning to the process of effective radical changes in Church structures and governance
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 21, 2010, 09:20:07 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on March 21, 2010, 12:45:51 AM
Knee jerk reactions to an edited version of the letter, which was read out at Masses, serves no purpose. I thought what we heard was a bit like the Curates Egg, with good and bad parts, but the bad parts may be dealt with more fully in the full version, until then we should reserve judgement. What i will be looking for is an indication of the beginning to the process of effective radical changes in Church structures and governance

My comments were made having read the full version, linked by Main Street above:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/popeletter.pdf (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0320/popeletter.pdf)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 21, 2010, 11:30:35 AM
Well Pangurban it was very difficult for me to get past Section 4. I only managed it this morning.

It came  as no surprise to me that this letter falls far short of any significant acceptance of responsibility for the crime or admission of a cover-up. Pope Benedict seeks to place almost all responsibility on the priests involved in child abuse  and he tries to divert blame for the role of the bishops, archbishops, and popes who kept the deviants in positions where their immoral and criminal activity was likely to be repeated.

Section 7 is the only place where he talks about "responsibility" for the crime. As such he points a finger
of blame at those who have already been convicted, thereby telling us nothing.

Section 11,
In this wordy section of the letter, Pope Benedict falls far short of accepting administrative responsibility for the child sex -abuse crimes
committed or any subsequent cover-up. He talks about "serious mistakes" and "failures of leadership", but he offsets that with "long
established norms of canon law", "how difficult it was to grasp the extent and complexity of the problem", "continuing to cooperate with
civil authorities", and so on. He calls for "decisive action carried out with complete honesty and transparency", but that is just bull.
The pope's letter itself does not reflect any kind of decisive action (other than writing a letter), and the words of the letter certainly
do not display either "complete honesty" or "transparency".

This letter is will not be well received throughout the world and I doubt that it will be well received by those Irish Catholics who are proactive on this whole sex abuse saga..



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Denn Forever on March 21, 2010, 08:51:05 PM
Not to make light of it but was the timing and publishing of this deliberate?

I say this as today's Gospel was Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 21, 2010, 08:59:52 PM
http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/update/bn080703.htm (http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/update/bn080703.htm)

Crimen Sollicitationis, worth a read.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on March 21, 2010, 09:57:53 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on March 20, 2010, 03:34:04 PM
Dear Pope Benedict,

Go f##k yourself.

Yours sincerely,

Myles

Pig and grunt come to mind!  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 21, 2010, 10:05:17 PM
Quote from: Take Your Points on March 21, 2010, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: Denn Forever on March 21, 2010, 08:51:05 PM
Not to make light of it but was the timing and publishing of this deliberate?

I say this as today's Gospel was Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Same thought occurred to me but I put it down to my own cynicism.  The Vatican did have time to plan the coincidence.  It was a matter of waiting for the Gospel to appear in the cycle. Rule nothing out.


Anything is possible with these lads. Anything !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 25, 2010, 09:11:25 PM
Excellent song and video about Clerical and Instutional abuse by Mickey Coleman.
Well worth a view folks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yeIOGSbSjM
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 26, 2010, 12:32:35 PM
Victim asks Cardinal Brady to withdraw defence


Friday, 26 March 2010 11:27


Cardinal Seán Brady has been urged to withdraw his defence in a legal battle with one of Fr Brendan Smyth's alleged victims.

The solicitor for the man says he was incredulous at recent expressions of remorse by the Primate and other church leaders when those statements were compared to Dr Brady's defence in the proceedings.

According to documents lodged in the High Court, the man is suing Cardinal Brady in his capacity as Archbishop of Armagh.

They say he was an altar-boy in Dundalk in the early 70s when Smyth sexually assaulted him in church, on a children's holiday in Co Cork and during a trip to Dublin for a Wombles concert.

The Cardinal's defence, which is dated February of last year and which is not sworn, denies that the acts alleged are grounds for suing him and asks for proof that they happened.

It also denies the man's claims that Dr Brady is the Catholic Church's representative here, that Smyth was his servant or agent and that the Cardinal owed the man any duty of care.

The alleged victim contends that the church called an ecclesiastical court to deal with the allegations and assured him and his father that Smyth would never be allowed to abuse children again.

The Cardinal denies calling such a court and giving such assurances.

Last month, the man's solicitor wrote to the Cardinal's solicitors, saying the defence was compounding the grievous wrongs perpetrated on his client.

He said it should be withdrawn to give practical expression to the Cardinal's recent statements of remorse about clerical sexual abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 26, 2010, 12:39:39 PM
The shit is getting very close to the fan
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on March 26, 2010, 12:55:14 PM
Time for a bit of levity...  :D

You couldn't make it up .... this is from The Times online report...

'Roger Boyes probes Vienna Boys' Choir

Catholic paedo scandal? The Times has the man for the job'
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lynchbhoy on March 26, 2010, 12:58:42 PM
plenty of clerical abuse going on in the civil service for donkeys years now
the passport office fiasco is only the tip of the iceberg !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 26, 2010, 01:49:14 PM
Brady wants 'just resolution' of abuse case


Friday, 26 March 2010 12:45


Cardinal Seán Brady has responded to a news report that he has been urged to withdraw his defence in a legal battle with one of Fr Brendan Smyth's alleged victims.

High Court documents show that the solicitor for the alleged victim says he was incredulous at recent expressions of remorse by the Primate and other church leaders when those statements were compared to Dr Brady's defence in the proceedings.

In a statement, Cardinal Brady said he wanted to work towards a just resolution of the case, conscious of the rights of all concerned.

He added that he had asked his legal representatives to engage today with the complainant's legal representatives with a view to progressing the case.
He said the matters concerned are the subject of ongoing legal proceedings, and in light of the instructions he had given to his legal representatives today, it would be inappropriate for him to offer any further comment at this time.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Mack the finger on March 27, 2010, 04:25:25 PM
Cardinal Brady was supposed to have celebrated confirmation at a parish in Armagh during the week.
The parents complained and threatened to protest if the Cardinal did arrive, and in the end he didn't.
This issue is tearing the church apart at a local level and it's increasingly obvious that the Cardinals postition
is now untenable. He may believe that he acted according to Canon law but people look and see a cover
up, of which the Cardinal is head. The devout may believe that the man did nothing wrong, but if the
church is to attract a new generation of followers it has to act quickly.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 27, 2010, 04:44:46 PM
Quote from: Mack the finger on March 27, 2010, 04:25:25 PM
Cardinal Brady was supposed to have celebrated confirmation at a parish in Armagh during the week.
The parents complained and threatened to protest if the Cardinal did arrive, and in the end he didn't.
This issue is tearing the church apart at a local level and it's increasingly obvious that the Cardinals postition
is now untenable. He may believe that he acted according to Canon law but people look and see a cover
up, of which the Cardinal is head. The devout may believe that the man did nothing wrong, but if the
church is to attract a new generation of followers it has to act quickly.


Seriously ??  There was rumours of this but I didn't think it would happen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Mack the finger on March 27, 2010, 06:12:16 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 27, 2010, 04:44:46 PM

Seriously ??  There was rumours of this but I didn't think it would happen.

Seemingly so, yes. I think it's very sad that its coming to this. The church has
seriously underestimated the anger that's out there surrounding this issue. I was
talking about this to my mother last night, a very devout woman, and I've
never heard her question so much. She still has her faith, she can separate it
from the church, but she wonders just how corrupt of an organisation the
Catholic church has become. There's a generation of people who never questioned
the church the way we do and can today, there just wasn't the freedom to do so.
And a lot of them are wondering what sort of organisation have they supported all these
years. I have a lot of sympathy for those who have faith and are trying to
understand how they feel about all of this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 28, 2010, 10:48:27 AM
Vatican cardinal calls for sex abuse 'housecleaning' 
The Vatican has been accused of failing to act quickly enough against abusers
A leading Vatican cardinal has called for "housecleaning" as paedophile priest scandals from Italy to Ireland pile pressure on Pope Benedict.

Walter Kasper, who heads the Catholic Church's ecumenical council, said the needs of victims should come first.

Defending the Pope, he told an Italian newspaper the Church needed a "culture of alertness and bravery".

Meanwhile suggestions that Ireland's Catholic leader will be forced to quit have been rejected by his spokesman.

Cardinal Sean Brady has apologised for his role in the handling of sex abuse cases, saying he wants to work towards a just resolution of a case being taken against him by a man who alleges he was abused by a priest.

There have been calls for the cardinal's resignation since it emerged he was present at two meetings in the 1970s when victims of Fr Brendan Smyth were sworn to silence about their ordeal.

Information provided by the victims was not passed on to police and Smyth went on to abuse many more children before finally being convicted, in both Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, of nearly 150 sex attacks on children.

'No turning back'


  There is no turning back on the path we are now on and that is good

Walter Kasper
Head of the Vatican's ecumenical council


Profile: The Vatican's watchdog
Can a pope resign? 
In his interview for daily Corriere della Sera, Cardinal Kasper said Pope Benedict had been the "first to feel the need for new and stricter rules".

As head of the Vatican watchdog, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger took action which led to a flood of cases of alleged sexual abuse by priests being processed.

"We need a culture of alertness and bravery, to do the housework," Cardinal Kasper said.

"There is no turning back on the path we are now on and that is good."

The Italian interview with the cardinal appeared on Saturday morning, hours after three deaf men, who say they were repeatedly sexually abused by priests as children in northern Italy, confronted a Church spokesman on prime-time TV.

The three former pupils of a Verona school for the deaf asked why their alleged abusers had not been punished and demanded justice.



The three alleged Verona victims talked to AP before going on TV

They did not go to the police because of the expiry of a 10-year statute of limitations.

They have asked the priests they accuse to waive the statute so a case can be opened but to date none have done so.

The spokesman for the Verona diocese, Fr Bruno Fasani, said he hoped Friday's confrontation had been constructive, but the three men refused to shake his hand.

Last month, the CDF ordered Verona's bishop, Monsignor Giuseppe Zenti, to interview former pupils of the school to determine if any action should be taken against priests.

The Verona case has echoes of one in the US state of Wisconsin where the CDF, which was then under Cardinal Ratzinger, told bishops in 1998 to shut down the Church trial of an elderly priest who allegedly molested 200 deaf boys at a school.

Speaking to the BBC this week, one of the alleged Wisconsin victims asked why the man who is now Pope Benedict had not acted against their alleged abuser.

The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano has denied there was a cover-up and denounced what it described as "an ignoble attempt to strike at Pope Benedict and his closest aides at any cost".



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on March 28, 2010, 11:00:44 AM
Quote
The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano has denied there was a cover-up and denounced what it described as "an ignoble attempt to strike at Pope Benedict and his closest aides at any cost".
I dont understand that line, obviously these idiots still think they are above any law.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 28, 2010, 01:42:29 PM
This is a few years old, but well worth a look if it has been missed.
BBC - Panorama: Sex Crimes and the Vatican (2006)

http://rapidshare.com/files/366086192/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part1.rar  (http://rapidshare.com/files/366086192/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part1.rar)
http://rapidshare.com/files/366086060/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part2.rar (http://rapidshare.com/files/366086060/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part2.rar)

It is a bit all over the place patching up a case against the Pope, nevertheless some direct witness is given by the canon law advocates and the active stonewalling by the church towards prosecution attempts to build a case.

The few chilling scenes in it with O'Grady testifying in court carry a haunting emotional shock warning.
I don't have words to describe Bishop Comiskey's cameo.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on March 28, 2010, 11:05:02 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 28, 2010, 01:42:29 PM
This is a few years old, but well worth a look if it has been missed.
BBC - Panorama: Sex Crimes and the Vatican (2006)

http://rapidshare.com/files/366086192/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part1.rar  (http://rapidshare.com/files/366086192/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part1.rar)
http://rapidshare.com/files/366086060/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part2.rar (http://rapidshare.com/files/366086060/BBC.Panorama-Sex.Crimes.and.the.Vatican.2006.part2.rar)

It is a bit all over the place patching up a case against the Pope, nevertheless some direct witness is given by the canon law advocates and the active stonewalling by the church towards prosecution attempts to build a case.

The few chilling scenes in it with O'Grady testifying in court carry a haunting emotional shock warning.
I don't have words to describe Bishop Comiskey's cameo.

'Disgusting'  is one word comes to mind. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 31, 2010, 11:37:41 PM
Catholic League head: Abuse not pedophilia because boys were 'post-pubescent'
The head of the influential Catholic League says that the priest who allegedly sexually abused 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin did not engage in pedophilia because 'the vast majority of the victims [were] post-pubescent."

Bill Donohue made the argument during a raucous debate on Larry King Live Tuesday night, during which he repeatedly pointed the finger to homosexuality -- rather than pedophilia -- as the cause of the church's sex abuse problems.

"You've got to get your facts straight," Donohue said, addressing sex abuse victim Thomas Roberts. "I am sorry. If Im the only one thats going to deal with facts tonight then that'll be it. The vast majority of the victims are post-pubescent. Thats not pedophilia, buddy. Thats homosexuality."

A rather surprised panel of commentators -- which included pop icon Sinead O'Connor -- then began to debate at what age, exactly, does sexual attraction to children cease to be pedophilia.

Donohue argued the age at which children become "post-pubescent" is around 12 or 13.


Click on this link to read the article in full, and then watch the 3 minute clip from the show where he springs this wild claim.
Is now a defence that is going to be used in the future by elements within the church?

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0331/catholic-league-boys-pubescent/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 01, 2010, 04:21:56 PM
As good a take on it all as I've read yet.

Brendan O'Neill
   
Why humanists shouldn't join in this Catholic-bashing

The reaction to the paedophile priest scandal is as guilty of scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism as the Catholic Church has ever been.


With all the newspaper headlines about predatory paedophiles in smocks, terrified altar boys and cover-ups by officials at the Vatican, it is hard to think of anything worse right now than a sexually abusive priest. Yet today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism, and one which also threatens to harm individuals, families, society and liberty.

When considering the problem of child sexual abuse by Catholic priests, it is important to distinguish between the incidents themselves, some of which were of course horrific, and the way in which those incidents are understood in today's political and cultural climate. The acts of sexual abuse themselves were no doubt a product of various problematic factors: the Catholic Church's culture of celibacy, its strange views on sex, the fact that in some institutions priests were given ultimate authority over young boys and girls. But the way in which those acts are understood today – as supremely damaging to individuals and the inevitable consequence of people 'deciding it is a good thing to abandon any commitment to fact and instead act on faith' – is powerfully informed by two problematic contemporary trends: the backward cult of victimhood and the dominant 'new atheist' prejudice against any institution with strong beliefs.

With all the current claims about Pope Benedict XVI himself being involved in a cover-up of child abuse by an American priest and a German priest, and newspaper reports using terms like 'stuff of nightmares', the 'stench of evil', and 'systematic rape and torture', anyone who tries to inject a bit of perspective into this debate is unlikely to be thanked. But perspective is what we need. Someone has to point out that for all the problems with the Catholic Church's doctrines and style of organisation – and I experienced some of those problems, having been raised a Catholic before becoming an atheist at 17 – the fact is that sexual abuse by priests is a relatively rare phenomenon.

Even in Ireland, whose image as a craic-loving nation has been replaced by the far-worse idea that it was actually a nation of priest rape, incidents of sexual abuse by priests were fairly rare. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, which was launched by the Irish government in 1999 and delivered its report last year, intensively invited Irish-born people around the world to report on incidents of abuse in Irish religious-educational reform schools, where the majority of clerical abuse is said to have occurred, between the period 1914 to 1999.  For that 85-year period, 253 claims of sexual abuse were made by males and 128 by females. It is important – surely? – to note that these are claims of sexual abuse rather than proven incidents, since the vast majority of them did not go to trial.

The number of sexual abuse claims in these institutions fell for the more recent period: for males, there were 88 claims from the pre-1960s, 119 from 1960 to 1969, 37 from 1970 to 1979, and nine from 1980 to 1989. The alleged sexual-abuse incidents ranged in seriousness from boys being 'questioned and interrogated about their sexual activity' to being raped: there were 68 claims of anal rape in reform institutions for boys from 1914 to 1999. Not all of the sexual abuse was carried out by priests. Around 65 per cent of the claims pertain to religious workers, and 35 per cent to lay staff, care workers, and fellow pupils.

Of course, one incident of child sexual abuse by a priest is one too many. But given the findings of Ireland's investigation into abuse in religious-educational institutions, is there really a justification for talking about a 'clinging and systematic evil that is beyond the power of exorcism to dispel'? As Ireland is redefined as a country in recovery from child sexual abuse, and the 'scandal of child rape' spreads further through Europe into Germany and Italy, it might be unfashionable to say the following but it is true nonetheless: very, very small numbers of children in the care or teaching of the Catholic Church in Europe in recent decades were sexually abused, but very, very many of them actually received a decent standard of education.

The discussion of a relatively rare phenomenon as a 'great evil' of our age shows that child abuse in Catholic churches has been turned into a morality tale – about the dangers of belief and of hierarchical institutions and the need for more state and other forms of intervention into religious institutions and even religious families. The first contemporary trend that has turned incidences of sexual abuse into a powerful symbol of evil is the cult of the victim, where today individuals are invited not only to reveal every misfortune that has befallen them – which of course is a sensible thing to do if you have been raped – but also to define themselves by those misfortunes, to look upon themselves as the end-products of having being emotionally, physically or sexually abused. This is why very public revelations of Catholic abuse started in America and Ireland before more recently spreading to other parts of Western Europe: because the politics of victimhood, the cult of revelation and redefinition of the self as survivor, is more pronounced and developed in America and Ireland than it is in continental Europe.

In Ireland, for example, the state has explicitly invited its citizens to redefine themselves as victims of authority rather than as active agents capable of moving on and making choices. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse discusses at length the 'debilitating' impact that abuse can have on individuals, to the extent that many of Ireland's social problems – including unemployment, poverty, drug abuse and heavy drinking – are now discussed as the products of Ireland's earlier era of abuse rather than as failings of the contemporary social system.

This, I believe, is why claims of sexual abuse in Ireland's religious-educational institutions were so much higher for the period of 1960 to 1969 (nearly half of all claims of sexual abuse against boys during the period of 1914 to 1989 were made for that decade). It is not because priests suddenly became more abusive in the 1960s than they had been in the far harsher Ireland of the 1940s and 50s, but because the people who attended the institutions during that period were in many ways the main targets of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. They would have been in their mid-40s to mid-50s when the commission began in 1999 and many of them had suffered long-term unemployment, health problems, and other disappointments. Reporting their misfortunes to the commission offered them the chance, not only of getting financial compensation, but also of validating their difficult life experiences as a consequence of their having been abused. In a grotesquely convenient marriage, the state redefined social problems as consequences of Catholic abuse and the individual redefined himself as a sufferer from low self-esteem who did not bear full responsibility for the course of his adult life. In such a climate, not only are incidents of abuse by priests more likely to surface, but they are also more likely to be heavily politicised, turned from undoubtedly distressing and possibly criminal acts into modern-day examples of evil capable of distorting society itself. Thus did the contemporary cult of victimhood ensure that Catholic abuse was blown out of proportion.

The second contemporary trend that has elevated something quite rare into a social disaster is the rise of the 'new atheism'. Now the dominant liberal outlook of our age – in particular in the media outlets that have most keenly focused on the Catholic abuse scandals: the New York Times, the Irish Times, and the UK Guardian – the new atheism differs from the atheism of earlier free-thinking humanists in that its main aim is not to enlighten, but to scaremonger about the impact of religion on society. For these thinkers and opinion-formers, the drip-drip of revelations of abuse in Catholic institutions offers an opportunity to demonise the religious as backward and people who possess strong beliefs as suspect.

Many contemporary opinion-formers are not concerned with getting to the truth of how widespread Catholic sexual abuse was, or what were the specific circumstances in which it occurred; rather they want to milk incidents of abuse and make them into an indictment of religion itself. They frequently flit between discussing priests who abuse children and the profound stupidity of people who believe in God. One commentator wildly refers to the Vatican's 'international criminal conspiracy to protect child-rapists' and says most ordinary Catholics turn a blind eye to this because 'people behave in bizarre ways when they decide it is a good thing to abandon any commitment to fact and instead act on faith'.

Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, unwittingly reveals what draws the new atheists towards the Catholic-abuse story: their belief that religion is itself a form of abuse. 'Odious as the physical abuse of children by priests undoubtedly is, I suspect that it may do them less lasting damage than the mental abuse of bringing them up Catholic in the first place', he argues. He admits that physical abuse by priests is rare, but only to flag up what he sees as a more serious form of abuse: 'Only a minority of priests abuse the bodies of the children in their care. But how many priests abuse their minds?' In this spectacularly crude critique of religion, no moral distinction is made between being educated by a priest and raped by one – indeed, the former is considered worse than the latter, since as one Observer columnist recently darkly warned: 'We have no idea what children are being taught in those classrooms...'

If 'bringing a child up Catholic' is itself abuse, there can only be one solution: external authorities must protect children not only from religious institutions but from their own religious parents, too. One new atheist has proposed an age of consent for joining a religion: 14. In an Oxford Amnesty Lecture popular amongst new atheists, a liberal academic argued that children 'have a human right not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people's bad ideas', and parents 'have no god-given licence to enculturate their children in whatever ways they personally choose'. Here, a simplistic leap is made from protecting children from paedophile priests to protecting them from their own parents, since in the new-atheist view strong beliefs and freedom of religion – which, yes, includes the freedom of parents to bring up their children as they see fit – are the real problem. They exaggerate the extent of Catholic sexual abuse in order to strengthen their prejudicial arguments.

Whatever you think of the Catholic Church, you should be concerned about today's abuse-obsession. Events of the (sometimes distant) past which nobody can change are being used to justify dangerous trends in the present. A new kind of society is being solidified on the back of exposing abusive priests, one in which scaremongering supersedes facts, where people redefine themselves as permanently damaged victims, where freedom of thought is problematised, and where parents are considered suspect for not adhering to the superior values of the atheistic elite. Seriously, radical humanists should fight back against this.

Brendan O'Neill is editor of spiked. Visit his personal website here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 01, 2010, 04:34:37 PM
QuoteIt is not because priests suddenly became more abusive in the 1960s than they had been in the far harsher Ireland of the 1940s and 50s, but because the people who attended the institutions during that period were in many ways the main targets of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. They would have been in their mid-40s to mid-50s when the commission began in 1999 and many of them had suffered long-term unemployment, health problems, and other disappointments. Reporting their misfortunes to the commission offered them the chance, not only of getting financial compensation, but also of validating their difficult life experiences as a consequence of their having been abused

Is this your opinion Ulick?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 01, 2010, 06:22:51 PM
that article is a load of shite

Quote

The acts of sexual abuse themselves were no doubt a product of various problematic factors: the Catholic Church's culture of celibacy, its strange views on sex, the fact that in some institutions priests were given ultimate authority over young boys and girls.

Bullshit!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 01, 2010, 06:42:47 PM
Ulick won't be giving his own opinion instead he trawls the net to find shite reports like this new one. That piece of shit is a disgrace. The man has no moral substance what so ever. Why don't you tell us what you think Ulick instead of posting this rubbish?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hedley Lamarr on April 02, 2010, 11:53:55 AM
1963 letter indicates former pope knew of abuse
By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: Apr 1, 2010 09:54 Updated: Apr 1, 2010 09:54

LOS ANGELES: The head of a Roman Catholic order that specialized in the treatment of pedophile priests visited with then-Pope Paul VI nearly 50 years ago and followed up with a letter recommending the removal of pedophile priests from ministry, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday.

In the Aug. 27, 1963, letter, the head of the New Mexico-based Servants of the Holy Paraclete tells the pope he recommends removing pedophile priests from active ministry and strongly urges defrocking repeat offenders.

The letter shows that the Vatican knew, or should have known, about clergy abuse in the US decades ago, said Anthony DeMarco, a plaintiff attorney in Los Angeles who provided the letter. The accusation comes as plaintiffs in Kentucky are attempting to sue the Vatican for negligence for allegedly failing to alert police or the public about priests who molested children.

Yet the problem was very well-known to Rome well before the 1960s. The 1917 code of canon law criminalized sexual abuse of minors. Five years later, the Vatican penned a document outlining detailed procedures for handling such cases. In 1962, that document was updated and has been used in many of the lawsuits by victims against US diocese and the Vatican itself.

The letter, written by the Rev. Gerald M.C. Fitzgerald, appears to have been drafted at the request of the pope and summarizes Fitzgerald's thoughts on problem priests after his Vatican visit.

The letter echoes other Fitzgerald writings about wayward priests.

Several news organizations, including the AP, reported last year that Fitzgerald was intent on buying an island where priests attracted to men and boys could be segregated, and even made a $5,000 down payment on a Caribbean island for that purpose.

"It is for this class of rattlesnake I have always wished an island retreat, but even an island is too good for these vipers," he wrote an acquaintance in 1957.

In 1960, he sent two priests from the Paracletes to the island of Tortola to investigate the location — but his dream of an island monastery dedicated to trouble priests ended when the new archbishop of Santa Fe overruled him, his successor, Rev. Joseph McNamara, has said in an affidavit.

A message left with the Paraclete order at one of their two existing facilities in Missouri was not returned. A number for the second facility was disconnected. The offices of the Vatican spokesman were closed late Wednesday.

Tod Tamberg, spokesman for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, defended the church and said it was unlikely Paul VI ever saw the 1963 letter.

"The fact of the matter is, the prevailing ideas at the time about how to deal with abusive behavior were not adequate," Tamberg said. "Clearly, society and the church have evolved new understandings of what causes sexually abusive behavior and how to deal with it." Fitzgerald opens the five-page letter by thanking the pope for an audience the day before and says he is summarizing his thoughts at the pope's request on the "problem of the problem priest" after 20 years working to treat them.

He tells Paul VI that treatment for priests who have succumbed to "abnormal, homosexual tendencies" should include psychiatric, as well as spiritual, counseling — but goes on to warn about the dangers of leaving those individuals in ministry.

The letter also touches on priests who have consensual affairs with women.

"Personally, I am not sanguine of the return of priests to active duty who have been addicted to abnormal practices, especially sins with the young," Fitzgerald wrote.

"Where there is indication of incorrigibility, because of the tremendous scandal given, I would most earnestly recommend total laicization," he wrote. "I say 'total' ... because when these men are taken before civil authority, the non-Catholic world definitely blames the discipline of celibacy for the perversion of these men." The letter proves that Vatican officials knew about clergy abuse decades ago and should have done more to protect children, plaintiff attorney DeMarco said.

The church has come under fire for transferring priests accused of sexual abuse to other parishes, rather than reporting the abuse to civil authorities and removing them from ministry.

The problem of clergy abuse has been known to Rome well before then. The 1917 code of canon law criminalized sexual abuse of minors. Five years later, the Vatican penned a document outlining detailed procedures for handling such cases. In 1962, that document was updated and has been used in many of the lawsuits by victims against US diocese and the Vatican itself.

Fitzgerald's letter shows the pope knew how pervasive and destructive the problem was, DeMarco said.

"He says the solution is to take them out of the priesthood period, not shuffle them around, not pass them from diocese to diocese." The letter was released in Los Angeles by attorneys who represented more than 500 victims of clergy abuse in their record-breaking $660 million settlement with the Archdiocese of Los Angeles in 2007.

Attorneys working on the Los Angeles cases found it among court papers related to clergy abuse cases filed in New Mexico in the late 1980s and early 1990s and fought to get it unsealed.

Thousands more pages of confidential priest personnel files from the Los Angeles cases were to be released as part of the 2007 settlement after a review by a retired judge overseeing the process. The review, however, has dragged on for nearly three years.

The letter released Wednesday is different from a 1957 letter made public last year in which Fitzgerald seeks help from the Bishop of Manchester, New Hampshire, in finding a placement for a priest leaving the treatment program.

Attorneys also released a 250-page, redacted transcript of the 2007 deposition of the Rev. Joseph McNamara, who took over the Paraclete order after Fitzgerald.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 02, 2010, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 01, 2010, 06:42:47 PM
Ulick won't be giving his own opinion instead he trawls the net to find shite reports like this new one. That piece of shit is a disgrace. The man has no moral substance what so ever. Why don't you tell us what you think Ulick instead of posting this rubbish?

Myles, maybe when you learn to engage in discussion like a grown-up I'll respond to you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 02, 2010, 02:37:48 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 01, 2010, 04:34:37 PM
Is this your opinion Ulick?

I can see the logic in his argument and it certainly rings true. I couldn't say it's also my opinion as I've no strong feelings either way. However as someone who would have quite a liberal social outlook, I am extremely uncomfortable with the current Catholic witchhunt. As the man says: "The reaction to the paedophile priest scandal is as guilty of scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism as the Catholic Church has ever been."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on April 02, 2010, 02:43:16 PM
Nothing funny about it, but this cartoon is in today's Le Monde:

(http://medias.lemonde.fr/mmpub/edt/ill/2010/04/02/h_11_ill_1327690_gorce_100204.gif?1270182469930)

"Come here to I show you the love of Jesus"

"No thanks, that makes my arse too sore."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lawrence of Knockbride on April 02, 2010, 02:44:40 PM
Sometimes people look so deep into something so simple that they miss the point. I don't care for the Catholic Church or any other Church but if a priest or any other person committed sexual abuse crimes then they should pay. And if anyone knowingly covered these up they should pay too. And I don't mean they should resign, like I said I couldn't give two shites who the bishop of anywhere is. They should be brought to justice like everyone else. Witchhunts will be the likely defence for sympathisers of the church, along with the fact that a lot of those abused are exaggerating what happened.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 02, 2010, 03:33:25 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 02, 2010, 02:37:48 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 01, 2010, 04:34:37 PM
Is this your opinion Ulick?

I can see the logic in his argument and it certainly rings true. I couldn't say it's also my opinion as I've no strong feelings either way. However as someone who would have quite a liberal social outlook, I am extremely uncomfortable with the current Catholic witchhunt. As the man says: "The reaction to the paedophile priest scandal is as guilty of scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism as the Catholic Church has ever been."

Quote from: muppet on April 01, 2010, 04:34:37 PM
QuoteIt is not because priests suddenly became more abusive in the 1960s than they had been in the far harsher Ireland of the 1940s and 50s, but because the people who attended the institutions during that period were in many ways the main targets of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. They would have been in their mid-40s to mid-50s when the commission began in 1999 and many of them had suffered long-term unemployment, health problems, and other disappointments. Reporting their misfortunes to the commission offered them the chance, not only of getting financial compensation, but also of validating their difficult life experiences as a consequence of their having been abused

Is this your opinion Ulick?

IMHO I think this comment is as sick as I've seen on the subject. He is saying that many of the victims were in fact failures in life who took out their frustration, sometimes for monetary gain, on the innocents in the church. He is directly accusing many of them of fabricating the whole thing.

Some man that fella. I am too angry to post anything more on that sc**bag.



.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 02, 2010, 03:38:19 PM
Bishop Noel Treanor on TV from St. Peter's cathedral apologising for the abuse and for its' cover up.



Bishop Noel is looking like the new leader.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 02, 2010, 09:45:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 02, 2010, 03:33:25 PM

IMHO I think this comment is as sick as I've seen on the subject. He is saying that many of the victims were in fact failures in life who took out their frustration, sometimes for monetary gain, on the innocents in the church. He is directly accusing many of them of fabricating the whole thing.

Some man that fella. I am too angry to post anything more on that sc**bag.


No he's not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 02, 2010, 10:18:19 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 02, 2010, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 01, 2010, 06:42:47 PM
Ulick won't be giving his own opinion instead he trawls the net to find shite reports like this new one. That piece of shit is a disgrace. The man has no moral substance what so ever. Why don't you tell us what you think Ulick instead of posting this rubbish?

Myles, maybe when you learn to engage in discussion like a grown-up I'll respond to you.

There is no point engaging with you cos you haven't the balls to come out and say what you really think. Your stance on this is a bit like Fine Fail and builders. They try to claim they are independent from all the shit thats going on yet everyone knows  they are not. I would be very suprised if you did not have bias towards keeping the good name of the church for some personal reason and so you trawl the net posting moronic articles that directly or indirectly deflect blame from the church. For f**k sake you had to even invent a new username, maybe cos you posted so much shite under the old one?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rufus T Firefly on April 02, 2010, 10:24:43 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 01, 2010, 04:21:56 PM
Brendan O'Neill
   
.........today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism......

Whilst this cannot be the case in every single reaction to the nightmare of sexual abuse (originating from the Catholic Church), there's no doubt in my mind that the words above ring true for much of what I have heard and read, including here.

Quote from: Mack the finger on March 27, 2010, 04:25:25 PM
Cardinal Brady was supposed to have celebrated confirmation at a parish in Armagh during the week. The parents complained and threatened to protest if the Cardinal did arrive, and in the end he didn't.

I hadn't heard this - can you tell me the name of the parish in question?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 03, 2010, 11:16:29 AM
Williams criticises Irish Catholic Church 'credibility' 
 

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland has lost "all credibility" over the way it had dealt with paedophile priests.Rowan Williams said the problems, which had been a "colossal trauma" for the Church, affected the wider public.

BBC religious affairs correspondent Robert Pigott said Dr Williams' words represent unusually damning criticism from the leader of another Church.

The Church in Ireland said the issue of abuse was being taken "very seriously".

It is the first time Dr Williams has spoken about the scandal.

Catherine Pepinster, editor of the Catholic weekly newspaper, The Tablet, said his comments were "very striking" and many Catholics would share his opinion.

The interview with Dr Williams will be broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Start the Week programme.

'Everybody's problem'

The issue has prompted increasing controversy about Pope Benedict's role in handling accusations of sex abuse, before he became Pope.

But his supporters say the Pope had introduced rules to protect children.

Dr Williams said: "I was speaking to an Irish friend recently who was saying that it's quite difficult in some parts of Ireland to go down the street wearing a clerical collar now.

"And an institution so deeply bound into the life of a society, suddenly becoming, suddenly losing all credibility - that's not just a problem for the Church, it is a problem for everybody in Ireland."


Catherine Pepinster

Responding to Dr Williams's comments, a spokesperson for the Catholic Church in Ireland said the Pope and the Irish bishops were addressing the issue of clerical abuse.

Last month, Pope Benedict XVI apologised to victims of child sex abuse by Catholic priests in Ireland.

In a pastoral letter he said there had been "serious mistakes" among bishops in responding to allegations of paedophilia.

The head of Ireland's Catholic Church, Cardinal Sean Brady, also apologised for his role in mishandling the case of a serial child abuser.

Cardinal Brady admitted he had been present at meetings where children signed vows of silence over complaints of sexual abuse against Father Brendan Smyth.

Ms Pepinster, editor of The Tablet, told the BBC his involvement had done massive harm to the Church in Ireland.

"I'm afraid that I think his resignation is necessary so that the Church in Ireland can move on - he is linked in people's minds so strongly to what has gone on," she said.

'The Nuremburg excuse'

She said suggestions that Cardinal Brady was just a young man at the time, only acting on the directions of superiors, were not acceptable.

"It sounds a bit like the Nuremburg excuse - I was only acting on orders - I think there comes a time when people have to listen to their own conscience."


  Crimes against children have indeed been committed and any Catholics who were aware of such crimes and did not act to report them, brings shame on us all

Cardinal Keith O'Brien
However, Ms Pepinster said she did not think the reputation of the Church in Ireland was irrevocably damaged.

"You have to remember the Church isn't just cardinals and bishops, the Church is ordinary people and they lead good lives."

Our correspondent said the Church's handling of abuse is likely to be an issue during the Pope's forthcoming visit to Britain in September, and Dr Williams' remarks will do nothing to dispel the controversy.

Speaking about the visit, Dr Williams said it was important that the Pope be given the chance to speak in Britain as a valued partner, but that was as, he put it, "about it".

He also predicted that few Anglicans would take up Pope Benedict's offer of conversion to Catholicism.

His comments came after Pope Benedict's personal preacher, the Rev Raniero Cantalamessa, compared criticism of the pontiff and Church over child abuse to "collective violence" suffered by the Jews.

Speaking at Good Friday prayers in St Peter's Basilica, attended by the Pope, Father Cantalamessa quoted a Jewish friend as saying the accusations reminded him of the "more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism".

The Vatican said this was not its official position and the comments were criticised by Jewish groups and those representing abuse victims.

On Sunday, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, is expected to apologise during his Easter address in Edinburgh to the victims of paedophile priests.

He will say: "Crimes against children have indeed been committed and any Catholics who were aware of such crimes and did not act to report them, brings shame on us all."

The Start the Week programme will be broadcast on BBC Radio 4 on Monday at 0900BST.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 03, 2010, 02:45:39 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 01, 2010, 04:21:56 PM
As good a take on it all as I've read yet.
Are you sure you have been reading widely?

QuoteBrendan O'Neill
   
Why humanists shouldn't join in this Catholic-bashing

The reaction to the paedophile priest scandal is as guilty of scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism as the Catholic Church has ever been.


However the Church is not being charged with scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism. Those 3 elements may well be an inseparable part of the Church.
The Church is being charged with a malicious cover up and the crime of omission.
The fundamental premise of the article is a peripheral issue.
Even the argument he presents is pap. To sum that argument up, the writer attempts to assign victimhood to the Church as an Institution, the ones  who covered up the abuse  as being the victim of atheist low standard bashing  BUT the writer interprets the sense of victimhood in the abused as being a retarded emotion.
Though anyone who has the slightest contact with an abuser's psychology should recognise that particular type of denial.

To giver just one example of pap used as part of his argument
The writer lists in his opinion problematic factors as a reason why abusers exist in the Church, namely celibacy and the  Catholic Church's strange view on sex  That opinion is generally rubbished. Rubbished as in total unsupported nonsense. Maybe this writer is inclined to subscribe authority to rubbished opinions.
The statistic of sexual abusers in the Catholic Church are on average no higher than other parts of society. There are abusers in the  Catholic Church just as they exist elsewhere in society. The special crime we apply to the Church as an institution is the malicious cover-up and the crime of omission in dealing with its quota of abusers.
In the US in between 1960 -1980,  some 5% of diocesan priest had allegations of sexual abuse thrown against them, some 60,000 kids were abused. As a single group the catholic priests who abused were serious enough players in the phenomena of sex abuse. The crime of the Church as an institution was the cover up.

Personally I have no interest in bashing people who follow the cult of Christ, whether it be in the Catholic Church or the Protestant faiths
Like many others I have no problem with differentiating between a hierarchy cover up and the faith people have in the same Church leaders.
I have no problem with understanding that such a person with such a faith can be acting with high integrity.

The Vatican has not accepted that the cover up was malicious and criminal.
Sex abuse was a crime the institutional cover up was also a crime.  As long as the Vatican waffles around concepts of the cover up being 'misplaced good intentions'  it will be bashed by both rational and irrational folk.
If the Vatican did accept that the cover up was malicious and criminal then it could face the Catholic bashing, united as a Church with faith in its doctrine. There are always cynical elements out there to bash faith followers, it is not a conspiracy, it is just a fact of human existence.
The hierarchy in Ireland could point to -  yes we have accepted there was a malicious cover up, yes we have accepted it was a crime, yes we have taken concrete steps to make amends and to prevent such abuse ever happening again.

That guidance for how to proceed has not come from the Vatican. Instead we only  have the US bishops and a smattering of other bishops and priests who acknowledge that the cover up was carried out with malicious intent and was also a crime of omission.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jen Cui on April 03, 2010, 05:02:27 PM
Check out the name of the reporter!!  (http://www.bootroom.org/smf/Smileys/default/rimshot.gif)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7065824.ece
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 09:13:13 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 03, 2010, 11:16:29 AM
Williams criticises Irish Catholic Church 'credibility' 
 

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland has lost "all credibility" over the way it had dealt with paedophile priests.Rowan Williams said the problems, which had been a "colossal trauma" for the Church, affected the wider public.

BBC religious affairs correspondent Robert Pigott said Dr Williams' words represent unusually damning criticism from the leader of another Church.

The Church in Ireland said the issue of abuse was being taken "very seriously".

It is the first time Dr Williams has spoken about the scandal.

Catherine Pepinster, editor of the Catholic weekly newspaper, The Tablet, said his comments were "very striking" and many Catholics would share his opinion.

The interview with Dr Williams will be broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Start the Week programme.

'Everybody's problem'

The issue has prompted increasing controversy about Pope Benedict's role in handling accusations of sex abuse, before he became Pope.

But his supporters say the Pope had introduced rules to protect children.

Dr Williams said: "I was speaking to an Irish friend recently who was saying that it's quite difficult in some parts of Ireland to go down the street wearing a clerical collar now.

"And an institution so deeply bound into the life of a society, suddenly becoming, suddenly losing all credibility - that's not just a problem for the Church, it is a problem for everybody in Ireland."


Catherine Pepinster

Responding to Dr Williams's comments, a spokesperson for the Catholic Church in Ireland said the Pope and the Irish bishops were addressing the issue of clerical abuse.

Last month, Pope Benedict XVI apologised to victims of child sex abuse by Catholic priests in Ireland.

In a pastoral letter he said there had been "serious mistakes" among bishops in responding to allegations of paedophilia.

The head of Ireland's Catholic Church, Cardinal Sean Brady, also apologised for his role in mishandling the case of a serial child abuser.

Cardinal Brady admitted he had been present at meetings where children signed vows of silence over complaints of sexual abuse against Father Brendan Smyth.

Ms Pepinster, editor of The Tablet, told the BBC his involvement had done massive harm to the Church in Ireland.

"I'm afraid that I think his resignation is necessary so that the Church in Ireland can move on - he is linked in people's minds so strongly to what has gone on," she said.

'The Nuremburg excuse'

She said suggestions that Cardinal Brady was just a young man at the time, only acting on the directions of superiors, were not acceptable.

"It sounds a bit like the Nuremburg excuse - I was only acting on orders - I think there comes a time when people have to listen to their own conscience."


  Crimes against children have indeed been committed and any Catholics who were aware of such crimes and did not act to report them, brings shame on us all

Cardinal Keith O'Brien
However, Ms Pepinster said she did not think the reputation of the Church in Ireland was irrevocably damaged.

"You have to remember the Church isn't just cardinals and bishops, the Church is ordinary people and they lead good lives."

Our correspondent said the Church's handling of abuse is likely to be an issue during the Pope's forthcoming visit to Britain in September, and Dr Williams' remarks will do nothing to dispel the controversy.

Speaking about the visit, Dr Williams said it was important that the Pope be given the chance to speak in Britain as a valued partner, but that was as, he put it, "about it".

He also predicted that few Anglicans would take up Pope Benedict's offer of conversion to Catholicism.

His comments came after Pope Benedict's personal preacher, the Rev Raniero Cantalamessa, compared criticism of the pontiff and Church over child abuse to "collective violence" suffered by the Jews.

Speaking at Good Friday prayers in St Peter's Basilica, attended by the Pope, Father Cantalamessa quoted a Jewish friend as saying the accusations reminded him of the "more shameful aspects of anti-Semitism".

The Vatican said this was not its official position and the comments were criticised by Jewish groups and those representing abuse victims.

On Sunday, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, is expected to apologise during his Easter address in Edinburgh to the victims of paedophile priests.

He will say: "Crimes against children have indeed been committed and any Catholics who were aware of such crimes and did not act to report them, brings shame on us all."

The Start the Week programme will be broadcast on BBC Radio 4 on Monday at 0900BST.

I wonder why he felt the need to apologise for what he said, I agree 100% with what he said about the catholic churches credibility. A leader in Rome that knew of at least 2 horrific abuse cases and did nothing and a leader in Ireland that makes little raped children sign non disclosure agreements. Anyone who thinks those 2 people can lead the church into a new era is deluded, these 2 will lead the catholic church further into the gutter where only the hardcore followers, who will ignore all evidence and reason, will continue to follow them. After all there are still people out there who believe Hitler was a top man so we should not be surprised similar minded people can ignore child rape cover up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 06:24:12 PM
What alternatives have you in place of Brady then Myles?

I think you'll find that a majority of the people left in the church who actually give a crap would be happy enough to see Brady go if there was somebody else to take his place.

You're great at calling on these boys to leave but none of you have any suggestions or solutions.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 06:54:03 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 06:24:12 PM
What alternatives have you in place of Brady then Myles?

I think you'll find that a majority of the people left in the church who actually give a crap would be happy enough to see Brady go if there was somebody else to take his place.

You're great at calling on these boys to leave but none of you have any suggestions or solutions.

The Irony Iceman. People who give a crap in the church would be happy to see Brady go but there is no one good enough to take his place?? Are you then suggesting that the other bishops in Ireland are actually worse than a guy that forces raped children to sign non disclosure agreements, a guy that the majority of people in the church want to see gone. I would have thought a guy like you would have a bit more time for at least some of the clergy in Ireland.

Well for what its worth Diarmuid Martin and Noel Treanor seem decent sorts to me and don't tippy toe around issues and seem to be somewhat in tune with what ordinary people think. But obviously you don't think they are up to the job - maybe they are too honest eh?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 05, 2010, 07:06:21 PM
We are a pretty pathetic society when you think about it.

We have only one person on the island capable of being Minister for Health and only one cleric capable of doing Sean Brady's job.

These people are obviously national treasures, we are lucky to have them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 07:08:31 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 06:54:03 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 06:24:12 PM
What alternatives have you in place of Brady then Myles?

I think you'll find that a majority of the people left in the church who actually give a crap would be happy enough to see Brady go if there was somebody else to take his place.

You're great at calling on these boys to leave but none of you have any suggestions or solutions.

The Irony Iceman. People who give a crap in the church would be happy to see Brady go but there is no one good enough to take his place?? Are you then suggesting that the other bishops in Ireland are actually worse than a guy that forces raped children to sign non disclosure agreements, a guy that the majority of people in the church want to see gone. I would have thought a guy like you would have a bit more time for at least some of the clergy in Ireland.

Well for what its worth Diarmuid Martin and Noel Treanor seem decent sorts to me and don't tippy toe around issues and seem to be somewhat in tune with what ordinary people think. But obviously you don't think they are up to the job - maybe they are too honest eh?

Again Myles you need to stop putting words in peoples mouths.

You're a real twister.

I don't tip toe around issues either but it doesn't mean I should be instated as CEO of the company I work at.  Its based on abilities.  There is nobody out there at the moment that can do a better job than Brady.  Despite the mistakes he made 30 years ago he is the best in Ireland to lead the Church forward. 
So you either give a crap because you go to Mass and receive the sacraments and are genuinely concerned for your own spiritual direction or you just enjoy something to complain about and like to be miserable.  Either way make some suggestions or you can't be taken seriously if all you do is complain
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 05, 2010, 07:12:54 PM
QuoteThere is nobody out there at the moment that can do a better job than Brady.  Despite the mistakes he made 30 years ago he is the best in Ireland to lead the Church forward. 
the church is in a worst state than I thought if there is no one better than someone who protects paedos....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 07:14:20 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 05, 2010, 07:12:54 PM
QuoteThere is nobody out there at the moment that can do a better job than Brady.  Despite the mistakes he made 30 years ago he is the best in Ireland to lead the Church forward. 
the church is in a worst state than I thought if there is no one better than someone who protects paedos....

Is there any forgiveness Pints?
Or do we hold on to this forever or until you have something else to complain about?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 05, 2010, 07:17:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 07:14:20 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 05, 2010, 07:12:54 PM
QuoteThere is nobody out there at the moment that can do a better job than Brady.  Despite the mistakes he made 30 years ago he is the best in Ireland to lead the Church forward. 
the church is in a worst state than I thought if there is no one better than someone who protects paedos....

Is there any forgiveness Pints?
Or do we hold on to this forever or until you have something else to complain about?
I can't forgive someone when I don't believe they're sorry.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 07:57:39 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 07:08:31 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 06:54:03 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 05, 2010, 06:24:12 PM
What alternatives have you in place of Brady then Myles?

I think you'll find that a majority of the people left in the church who actually give a crap would be happy enough to see Brady go if there was somebody else to take his place.

You're great at calling on these boys to leave but none of you have any suggestions or solutions.

The Irony Iceman. People who give a crap in the church would be happy to see Brady go but there is no one good enough to take his place?? Are you then suggesting that the other bishops in Ireland are actually worse than a guy that forces raped children to sign non disclosure agreements, a guy that the majority of people in the church want to see gone. I would have thought a guy like you would have a bit more time for at least some of the clergy in Ireland.

Well for what its worth Diarmuid Martin and Noel Treanor seem decent sorts to me and don't tippy toe around issues and seem to be somewhat in tune with what ordinary people think. But obviously you don't think they are up to the job - maybe they are too honest eh?

Again Myles you need to stop putting words in peoples mouths.

You're a real twister.

I don't tip toe around issues either but it doesn't mean I should be instated as CEO of the company I work at.  Its based on abilities.  There is nobody out there at the moment that can do a better job than Brady.  Despite the mistakes he made 30 years ago he is the best in Ireland to lead the Church forward. 
So you either give a crap because you go to Mass and receive the sacraments and are genuinely concerned for your own spiritual direction or you just enjoy something to complain about and like to be miserable.  Either way make some suggestions or you can't be taken seriously if all you do is complain

Did you read what I wrote?

I suggested 2 possible leaders of the church and that they did not tippy toe around issues like Brady (unless you are Brady your reply makes no sense)

So tell, me what incredible traits does the leader of the catholic church in Ireland require that it is so mpossible to find a suitable replacement that does not cover up for paedophilles?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: saffron sam2 on April 05, 2010, 10:09:13 PM
Why did Rowan Williams apologise? He spoke the truth.

Next time I see him dandering round Dromantine, I'll  ask him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 05, 2010, 10:41:34 PM
Quote from: saffron sam2 on April 05, 2010, 10:09:13 PM
Why did Rowan Williams apologise? He spoke the truth.

Next time I see him dandering round Dromantine, I'll  ask him.

I was reading in one of the papers today that he actually rang and said he regretted if his comments had caused any difficulties - maybe apology is the wrong word.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 05, 2010, 11:04:14 PM
If Brady is considered to be the best man to lead the Church after all of this, then God help us and God help the rest of the priests out there - they mustn't be up to much.


I seriously thought that the arrogance that he displayed throughout the various court cases and handlings would have diminished by this stage.

The period of reflection was useful.


What was he reflecting on ?. What advice did he take and from whom ?.

His mates ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hedley Lamarr on April 06, 2010, 08:31:13 AM
Ara Coeli, Cathedral Road, Armagh, BT61 7QY..............for those of you who feel you need to show support or disgust at Cardinal Brady and the Catholic church.

It's the big grey building between the Cathedral and St. Patrick's College/Grammar.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it.

the country as a whole doesn't share your opinion Pints. And I'm certainly not brainwashed.  I don't agree with a lot of things but I still have faith in God.

I can imagine you have been leaving us to it for a while.  Good luck to you.
I'm sure you'll come running back when you need confirmation for a child, or a wedding or a funeral - always the way......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 06, 2010, 02:39:38 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it.

the country as a whole doesn't share your opinion Pints. And I'm certainly not brainwashed.  I don't agree with a lot of things but I still have faith in God.

I can imagine you have been leaving us to it for a while.  Good luck to you.
I'm sure you'll come running back when you need confirmation for a child, or a wedding or a funeral - always the way......

Your post was fine until the last line .

Society in Ireland pushes people into church weddings, school confirmations etc. Try marrying a non-catholic and see how understanding your church is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 06, 2010, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it.

the country as a whole doesn't share your opinion Pints. And I'm certainly not brainwashed.  I don't agree with a lot of things but I still have faith in God.

I can imagine you have been leaving us to it for a while.  Good luck to you.
I'm sure you'll come running back when you need confirmation for a child, or a wedding or a funeral - always the way......
[/b][/size]



What's that supposed to mean ?.

Children get confirmed - that's one of the sacraments - Cardinal Brady was asked not officiate in one parish recently by the way. There must be something badly wrong with all those parents who made that request.

People get married - another sacrament. They could go to the registry office.

They end up getting buried and have a funeral mass - they could go to a council plot.



What about it ? Are you advocating cathoilcs who aren't happy with the way things are in the church right now, should not participate. Or would you rather they just shut up and put up ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 03:10:02 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 06, 2010, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it.

the country as a whole doesn't share your opinion Pints. And I'm certainly not brainwashed.  I don't agree with a lot of things but I still have faith in God.

I can imagine you have been leaving us to it for a while.  Good luck to you.
I'm sure you'll come running back when you need confirmation for a child, or a wedding or a funeral - always the way......
[/b][/size]



What's that supposed to mean ?.

Children get confirmed - that's one of the sacraments - Cardinal Brady was asked not officiate in one parish recently by the way. There must be something badly wrong with all those parents who made that request.

People get married - another sacrament. They could go to the registry office.

They end up getting buried and have a funeral mass - they could go to a council plot.



What about it ? Are you advocating cathoilcs who aren't happy with the way things are in the church right now, should not participate. Or would you rather they just shut up and put up ?.

I think we use the term Catholics a bit loosely.  I think the people who never go to Mass and only show up once a year for Christmas or Easter or when they need a sacrament should not participate then if Brady and this whole mess has affected them so much.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hedley Lamarr on April 06, 2010, 03:28:46 PM
"I think we use the term Catholics a bit loosely.  I think the people who never go to Mass and only show up once a year for Christmas or Easter or when they need a sacrament should not participate then if Brady and this whole mess has affected them so much."

I was baptised a Catholic....I had no choice
Confession......no choice
First Communion....no choice
Confirmation.....no choice

Wedding in a Catholic church..... my choice
Kids baptised......our choice

I believe in God and try to behave in a Christian way, but I do not attend mass or partake of any of the sacraments.

I choose to not participate in the Catholic church, life is all about choice.

The Catholic establishment chose to deny the truth for a long time and are now doing the "Pontius Pilate".

At the end of the day we will all have to answer for our actions.

PS Iceman are you Opus Dei by any chance? 




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on April 06, 2010, 03:44:44 PM
QuoteI believe in God and try to behave in a Christian way, but I do not attend mass or partake of any of the sacraments.

I choose to not participate in the Catholic church, life is all about choice

Was there a particular reason why you decided to have the kids baptised (I'm assuming in a Catholic ceremony)??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 06, 2010, 03:48:44 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do

Can I assume youse would be happy to see Catholic indocrination in schools taken out of the curriculum? No one is forcing it on anybody afterall [sarcasm]
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:54:51 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 06, 2010, 03:48:44 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do

Can I assume youse would be happy to see Catholic indocrination in schools taken out of the curriculum? No one is forcing it on anybody afterall [sarcasm]
presumably youd find another revenue stream to pay for these schools then ?

another alternative is to not send your kids to these catholic schools !

in Dublin in our area at least, parents who dont whinge elect to send their kids to 'educate together' schools

obv the options are not all over the country, but again there are options for boarding schools etc should you elect for that...
so no one is 'forcing ' anyone !!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hedley Lamarr on April 06, 2010, 03:55:57 PM
Quote from: Declan on April 06, 2010, 03:44:44 PM
QuoteI believe in God and try to behave in a Christian way, but I do not attend mass or partake of any of the sacraments.

I choose to not participate in the Catholic church, life is all about choice

Was there a particular reason why you decided to have the kids baptised (I'm assuming in a Catholic ceremony)??

I was a practising Catholic at the time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 03:59:01 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do

thanks lynchboy for taking it the way it was intended

And no am I definitely not a priest - married with two fantastic kids
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 04:06:58 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 03:59:01 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do
thanks lynchboy for taking it the way it was intended
And no am I definitely not a priest - married with two fantastic kids
the fact that you like UF C and MMA would indicate you were more like a christian brother and not a priest
having two kids doesnt rule that out either !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 06, 2010, 04:32:31 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:54:51 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 06, 2010, 03:48:44 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do

Can I assume youse would be happy to see Catholic indocrination in schools taken out of the curriculum? No one is forcing it on anybody afterall [sarcasm]
presumably youd find another revenue stream to pay for these schools then ?

another alternative is to not send your kids to these catholic schools !

in Dublin in our area at least, parents who dont whinge elect to send their kids to 'educate together' schools

obv the options are not all over the country, but again there are options for boarding schools etc should you elect for that...
so no one is 'forcing ' anyone !!

Oh so it's that type of "no one is "forcing" anyone"  :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 04:34:44 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 04:06:58 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 03:59:01 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:27:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".
except that iceman isnt a pharisee (or priest - though I could be wrong)...
there is an element of truth in what he says
if people dont want anything to do with the catholic church etc they are not forced into attending mass, getting married in catholic churches, funeral masses etc etc.. no one is forcing them
its not a case of judgement, but if folk dont like it - then get off the pot and leave the church and its ceremonies etc to those that do
thanks lynchboy for taking it the way it was intended
And no am I definitely not a priest - married with two fantastic kids
the fact that you like UF C and MMA would indicate you were more like a christian brother and not a priest
having two kids doesnt rule that out either !

Ha the Christian Brothers!
I'm a holy warrior!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 06, 2010, 04:32:31 PM
Oh so it's that type of "no one is "forcing" anyone"  :D
I presume that this '[sarcasm]' means that you dont/cant have a problem with this ?

its the same the world over , you do what you can do or what suits you or more so - 'what you can afford' !!

ie no one is forcing you to move to a bigger 4 bed house from your 3 bed house, apart from the small fact that you dont have any money and cant afford it !
lazy aspirational vs reality !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rufus T Firefly on April 06, 2010, 04:59:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".

And the flip side of that coin Hardy? Seems to be a hell of a lot more here than The Iceman making judgements - many of them ill informed.

That's why I am so convinced that Brendan O'Neill's line (below) is so apt in when considering the vitriol poured out both here and elsewhere against Cardinal Sean Brady;

.........today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism....

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 06, 2010, 04:59:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".

And the flip side of that coin Hardy? Seems to be a hell of a lot more here than The Iceman making judgements - many of them ill informed.

That's why I am so convinced that Brendan O'Neill's line (below) is so apt in when considering the vitriol poured out both here and elsewhere against Cardinal Sean Brady;

.........today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism....

The difference is that I, for my part, am not proclaiming a doctrine that prescribes the opposite.

As for O'Neill's statement, I haven't seen the context of it but he's surely not suggesting that we need to be more "liberal" in our reactions to clerics who abuse children? What could that mean?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rufus T Firefly on April 06, 2010, 05:40:14 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
The difference is that I, for my part, am not proclaiming a doctrine that prescribes the opposite.

This very thread is littered with statements of a judgemental nature, all of which could be challenged by an interjection such as yours. You have only chosen to do so with The Iceman.

Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
As for O'Neill's statement, I haven't seen the context of it but he's surely not suggesting that we need to be more "liberal" in our reactions to clerics who abuse children?

He surely is not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:52:16 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 06, 2010, 05:40:14 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
The difference is that I, for my part, am not proclaiming a doctrine that prescribes the opposite.
This very thread is littered with statements of a judgemental nature, all of which could be challenged by an interjection such as yours. You have only chosen to do so with The Iceman.


Sorry. I wasn't clear about what I was saying. The point of my intervention was to contrast the requirements of the faith Iceman openly espouses that we shouldn't judge others with what I perceived (though I may have been wrong) as judgement of others. Of course people are judging all over the place here. The difference is that they're not proclaiming themselves as adherents of a faith that prohibits it.

I'm all for judgement myself. How else are we to make decisions than by exercising judgement?

Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
Quote
As for O'Neill's statement, I haven't seen the context of it but he's surely not suggesting that we need to be more "liberal" in our reactions to clerics who abuse children?

He surely is not.

Good. But if he's not, his statement doesn't make much sense.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 06, 2010, 07:23:44 PM
Iceman you were asked if you were a member of Opus Dei. Did you see that?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 07:29:13 PM
I did see it and I am not a member
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 08:24:30 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 04, 2010, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 04, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
Meanwhile, the Bishop of Down and Connor has called on Catholics to show support for the church by attending Mass.

Is this code for something ?.
I've lost patience with these idiots, I think we should all stop talking about it, the country as a whole I mean, and leave them, the paedos, their apologists and the brainwashed to it.

the country as a whole doesn't share your opinion Pints. And I'm certainly not brainwashed.  I don't agree with a lot of things but I still have faith in God.

I can imagine you have been leaving us to it for a while.  Good luck to you.
I'm sure you'll come running back when you need confirmation for a child, or a wedding or a funeral - always the way......
The country as a whole doesnt share what opinion?  I have faith in God too but the thoughts of standing in a catholic church makes me feel sick to my stomach.

When I "need" confirmation for a child?  I wouldn't have my child confirmed or baptised if I had a choice and it wasn't a requirement of all the schools in the area and rather than sending a 4 year old to a boarding school (lynchbhoy) I'd use the church and have them baptised and confirmed.
Similar goes for a funeral.
As for a wedding, I couldn't care less if I was married in a church or not in fact I wouldn't be for it at all, even before all this, as in our parish you have to do a daft pre marriage course. i.e. some know it all preaching to you and a man that is not allowed to have a relationship with a woman never mind get married.

THe last time I was at mass the priest was crying about people bringing their children to get confirmed and all that and then not going to mass - why don't the church let go of their hold on society in Ireland and we'll see how many bother with baptisms and confirmations.

Rufus

QuoteThat's why I am so convinced that Brendan O'Neill's line (below) is so apt in when considering the vitriol poured out both here and elsewhere against Cardinal Sean Brady;

.........today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism....
What do you mean by that Rufus because to me that reads like you don't believe people are genuinely outraged with Brady and are using it as an excuse to have a go at the church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 08:24:30 PM

The country as a whole doesnt share what opinion?  I have faith in God too but the thoughts of standing in a catholic church makes me feel sick to my stomach.

When I "need" confirmation for a child?  I wouldn't have my child confirmed or baptised if I had a choice and it wasn't a requirement of all the schools in the area and rather than sending a 4 year old to a boarding school (lynchbhoy) I'd use the church and have them baptised and confirmed.
Similar goes for a funeral.
As for a wedding, I couldn't care less if I was married in a church or not in fact I wouldn't be for it at all, even before all this, as in our parish you have to do a daft pre marriage course. i.e. some know it all preaching to you and a man that is not allowed to have a relationship with a woman never mind get married.

THe last time I was at mass the priest was crying about people bringing their children to get confirmed and all that and then not going to mass - why don't the church let go of their hold on society in Ireland and we'll see how many bother with baptisms and confirmations.


The country as a whole doesn't share your opinion on the Church.
Nobody is forcing you to go to any church so you can keep your dinner down. 

Paddy and Joe go to a wedding mass.  Joe thinks it was the biggest pile of shite and Paddy thought it was an amazing and spectacular event.  They were both at the same wedding but had totally different experiences.  Its all about what we think is important and what we perceive and how we respond based on this.

You obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.

Lets just agree to disagree.  You be Joe and i'll be Paddy.

Peace
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 06, 2010, 09:02:54 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 06, 2010, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 08:24:30 PM

The country as a whole doesnt share what opinion?  I have faith in God too but the thoughts of standing in a catholic church makes me feel sick to my stomach.

When I "need" confirmation for a child?  I wouldn't have my child confirmed or baptised if I had a choice and it wasn't a requirement of all the schools in the area and rather than sending a 4 year old to a boarding school (lynchbhoy) I'd use the church and have them baptised and confirmed.
Similar goes for a funeral.
As for a wedding, I couldn't care less if I was married in a church or not in fact I wouldn't be for it at all, even before all this, as in our parish you have to do a daft pre marriage course. i.e. some know it all preaching to you and a man that is not allowed to have a relationship with a woman never mind get married.

THe last time I was at mass the priest was crying about people bringing their children to get confirmed and all that and then not going to mass - why don't the church let go of their hold on society in Ireland and we'll see how many bother with baptisms and confirmations.


The country as a whole doesn't share your opinion on the Church.
Nobody is forcing you to go to any church so you can keep your dinner down. 

Paddy and Joe go to a wedding mass.  Joe thinks it was the biggest pile of shite and Paddy thought it was an amazing and spectacular event.  They were both at the same wedding but had totally different experiences.  Its all about what we think is important and what we perceive and how we respond based on this.

You obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.

Lets just agree to disagree.  You be Joe and i'll be Paddy.

Peace

Welcome to the internet Jesus. Do you have broadband up there now?

Cool username by the way, I would never have guessed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 06, 2010, 09:07:25 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 05:28:46 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 06, 2010, 04:59:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 06, 2010, 03:21:35 PM
Funny, I thought one of the central tenets of Catholicism was "judge not and ye shall not be judged". I would respectfully suggest that your pronouncements upon who does and doesn't qualify to participate in church ceremonies is somewhat at odds with this ideal. It's a little reminiscent of the Pharisee and the Publican - "I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of men".

And the flip side of that coin Hardy? Seems to be a hell of a lot more here than The Iceman making judgements - many of them ill informed.

That's why I am so convinced that Brendan O'Neill's line (below) is so apt in when considering the vitriol poured out both here and elsewhere against Cardinal Sean Brady;

.........today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism....

The difference is that I, for my part, am not proclaiming a doctrine that prescribes the opposite.

As for O'Neill's statement, I haven't seen the context of it but he's surely not suggesting that we need to be more "liberal" in our reactions to clerics who abuse children? What could that mean?

Brendan O'Neill
"today's reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism."

"Allegations of sexual abuse" ???  We are way passed the allegation stage. Should abuse denial like that be made into a criminal offense? It directly insults the abused, ignores the proof and outrages any sense of human decency.

Anyway, is he suggesting that we need to be more liberal in our reaction to the sexual abuse cover up and the continued waffle of excuses coming from both the Irish Cardinal and the Vatican for the cover up policy?
He is definitely suggesting that such a reaction to the sex abuse cover up, is not informed, is not objective and is not based on principles of spirituality.

Apparantly Brendan O'Neill is as good as it gets for the cover-up apologists.

.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
[/quote]
And I admitted that
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on April 07, 2010, 03:12:44 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on April 06, 2010, 03:54:51 PM

presumably youd find another revenue stream to pay for these schools then ?


I was wondering about this aspect of the maintained schools in the North, how would you find out how much funds do they receive from the catholic church as opposed to the department of education or whatever their name is now?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that
[/quote]

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that?  ::) 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that  ::)
[/quote]

Fox you can call it dung all you like.  I have never made any secrets about my position on it all.  I said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.  This isn't Woolworths pick and mix or a buffet style lunch at Pizza Hut as far as I am concerned.

I don't know why I have to be labeled a fundamentalist for believing in the Sacraments or standing up for my faith.  I don't believe everything I am doing is the right and only way to do things.  I won't, however, sit back and say nothing when a completely contradictory statement is put out there as the norm.  You can believe in Jesus all you like - if you're not Baptized its no good to you. It's really hard to not come across as a Protestant or evangelical when it comes to things like this but talk to any priest or religious and you'll hear the same (hopefully).

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 07, 2010, 04:45:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that  ::)

Fox you can call it dung all you like.  I have never made any secrets about my position on it all.  I said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.  This isn't Woolworths pick and mix or a buffet style lunch at Pizza Hut as far as I am concerned.

I don't know why I have to be labeled a fundamentalist for believing in the Sacraments or standing up for my faith.  I don't believe everything I am doing is the right and only way to do things.  I won't, however, sit back and say nothing when a completely contradictory statement is put out there as the norm.  You can believe in Jesus all you like - if you're not Baptized its no good to you. It's really hard to not come across as a Protestant or evangelical when it comes to things like this but talk to any priest or religious and you'll hear the same (hopefully).
[/quote]

So in conclusion if people aren't as good as The Iceman 'it's no good to you'?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:47:18 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 04:45:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that  ::)

Fox you can call it dung all you like.  I have never made any secrets about my position on it all.  I said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.  This isn't Woolworths pick and mix or a buffet style lunch at Pizza Hut as far as I am concerned.

I don't know why I have to be labeled a fundamentalist for believing in the Sacraments or standing up for my faith.  I don't believe everything I am doing is the right and only way to do things.  I won't, however, sit back and say nothing when a completely contradictory statement is put out there as the norm.  You can believe in Jesus all you like - if you're not Baptized its no good to you. It's really hard to not come across as a Protestant or evangelical when it comes to things like this but talk to any priest or religious and you'll hear the same (hopefully).

So in conclusion if people aren't as good as The Iceman 'it's no good to you'?
[/quote]

you live up to your name lad - stop putting words in my mouth
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on April 07, 2010, 04:48:12 PM
QuoteI said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.

Just out of curiosity - where does your "all that goes with that" come from - the bible? the current doctrine of the catholic church?

Do you believe in all the doctrine of the catholic church, and if so how do you square it away when that doctrine changes?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:52:28 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 04:45:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that  ::)

Fox you can call it dung all you like.  I have never made any secrets about my position on it all.  I said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.  This isn't Woolworths pick and mix or a buffet style lunch at Pizza Hut as far as I am concerned.

I don't know why I have to be labeled a fundamentalist for believing in the Sacraments or standing up for my faith.  I don't believe everything I am doing is the right and only way to do things.  I won't, however, sit back and say nothing when a completely contradictory statement is put out there as the norm.  You can believe in Jesus all you like - if you're not Baptized its no good to you. It's really hard to not come across as a Protestant or evangelical when it comes to things like this but talk to any priest or religious and you'll hear the same (hopefully).


Thanks but I'll pass on that offer  ::) Some craic the way the clergy and churches think they have  the monopoly on God.  Jesus would probably tear their palaces down.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on April 07, 2010, 04:57:25 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:52:28 PM
Some craic the way the clergy and churches think they have  the monopoly on God. 

I'm interested in this - what do you mean? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:47:18 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 04:45:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that

Jees! you're a real one true and only church fundamentalist coming out with that dung. I believe in Jesus and not the sacraments. Are you going to forbid me from doing that  ::)

Fox you can call it dung all you like.  I have never made any secrets about my position on it all.  I said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.  This isn't Woolworths pick and mix or a buffet style lunch at Pizza Hut as far as I am concerned.

I don't know why I have to be labeled a fundamentalist for believing in the Sacraments or standing up for my faith.  I don't believe everything I am doing is the right and only way to do things.  I won't, however, sit back and say nothing when a completely contradictory statement is put out there as the norm.  You can believe in Jesus all you like - if you're not Baptized its no good to you. It's really hard to not come across as a Protestant or evangelical when it comes to things like this but talk to any priest or religious and you'll hear the same (hopefully).

So in conclusion if people aren't as good as The Iceman 'it's no good to you'?

you live up to your name lad - stop putting words in my mouth
[/quote]

Actually you live up to my name better than I do.

You claimed to live by the bible, then claimed it was the most accurate document until it's deficiencies were shown to you. You have stopped commenting on the Pope since I pointed out the Donation of Constantine was a forgery. Remember Galileo lived under house arrest, at the behest of the then Pope, for daring to suggest that the earth went around the sun.

The final make up of the bible was only decided in the 4th Century. Hardly eyewitnesses.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 05:05:53 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM

Actually you live up to my name better than I do.

Thank you.

Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
You claimed to live by the bible, then claimed it was the most accurate document until it's deficiencies were shown to you. You have stopped commenting on the Pope since I pointed out the Donation of Constantine was a forgery. Remember Galileo lived under house arrest, at the behest of the then Pope, for daring to suggest that the earth went around the sun.
I actually claimed that the Bible was accurate from a Bibliographic standpoint and I stand by that.
I didn't know I was supposed to keep commenting on The Donation of Constantine because you wanted me to.
What has Galileo got to do with anything?

Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
The final make up of the bible was only decided in the 4th Century. Hardly eyewitnesses.

Muppet it is nearly impossible to have a conversation or discussion with you.  You jump from one thing to another.  Maybe stop being a muppet and take things seriously for half a second
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 05:09:09 PM
Quote from: nifan on April 07, 2010, 04:48:12 PM
QuoteI said from the beginning that I believe in God and all that goes with that.

Just out of curiosity - where does your "all that goes with that" come from - the bible? the current doctrine of the catholic church?

Do you believe in all the doctrine of the catholic church, and if so how do you square it away when that doctrine changes?

How often does the doctrine change nifan in one generation to have any bearing on my faith.  Going back to your protestant roots I see..... Heard them all before lad.  I have a lot of protestant friends and I've been through all the points of discussion with them -nothing new.

That comes from the Bible and the Church to answer your question.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 05:05:53 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM

Actually you live up to my name better than I do.

Thank you.

Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
You claimed to live by the bible, then claimed it was the most accurate document until it's deficiencies were shown to you. You have stopped commenting on the Pope since I pointed out the Donation of Constantine was a forgery. Remember Galileo lived under house arrest, at the behest of the then Pope, for daring to suggest that the earth went around the sun.
I actually claimed that the Bible was accurate from a Bibliographic standpoint and I stand by that.
I didn't know I was supposed to keep commenting on The Donation of Constantine because you wanted me to.
What has Galileo got to do with anything?

Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
The final make up of the bible was only decided in the 4th Century. Hardly eyewitnesses.

Muppet it is nearly impossible to have a conversation or discussion with you.  You jump from one thing to another.  Maybe stop being a muppet and take things seriously for half a second

I am being quite serious on this thread.

Your position in all of the above is extremely literal and totally inflexible. I raise different issues to point out why some fundamental beliefs don't stand up to modern or even historical scrutiny.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:12:51 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 04:57:25 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 04:52:28 PM
Some craic the way the clergy and churches think they have  the monopoly on God. 

I'm interested in this - what do you mean?

I mean the priests and bishops often talk of people losing faith by not going to church. I still have faith in God but don't go to church. They don't have the monopoly on God. Certainly I lost faith in the church. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:16:12 PM
Absolutely fair enough but I'm not sure it's accurate to say they think they have a monopoly - the Church accepts that there are other non-Catholic faiths in existence that believe in the same God.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:16:12 PM
Absolutely fair enough but I'm not sure it's accurate to say they think they have a monopoly - the Church accepts that there are other non-Catholic faiths in existence that believe in the same God.   

They also assume everyone who leaves the church has lost faith in God...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on April 07, 2010, 05:21:04 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 05:09:09 PM
How often does the doctrine change nifan in one generation to have any bearing on my faith.  Going back to your protestant roots I see..... Heard them all before lad.  I have a lot of protestant friends and I've been through all the points of discussion with them -nothing new.

That comes from the Bible and the Church to answer your question.

I havent kept up to date on doctrine changes, but things like limbo being the obvious example given. You say you take everything, not pick and mix, but do you believe one day and not the next?

My protestant roots? I dont have any more belief in the strictures of any protestant church over those of the catholic church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:25:24 PM
...aye and cremation for a Catholic was wrong until the price of land caused a problem  ::)   pic and mix alrite.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:41:13 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:16:12 PM
Absolutely fair enough but I'm not sure it's accurate to say they think they have a monopoly - the Church accepts that there are other non-Catholic faiths in existence that believe in the same God.   

They also assume everyone who leaves the church has lost faith in God...

Oh, and you know this because...
Come on LRTF, you can do better than sweeping general statements like your last two, give me some proper substance to deal with.  In what way has "their" monopoly and that last assumption you refer to manifested themselves?  Ritual condemnation of people who don't go to mass any more?  Regular rants about non-attenders burning in the fire of hell? 
I know you're not a practicing Catholic but your intolerance of those who are borders on bigotry at times.       
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 07, 2010, 05:50:13 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:41:13 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:16:12 PM
Absolutely fair enough but I'm not sure it's accurate to say they think they have a monopoly - the Church accepts that there are other non-Catholic faiths in existence that believe in the same God.   

They also assume everyone who leaves the church has lost faith in God...

Oh, and you know this because...
Come on LRTF, you can do better than sweeping general statements like your last two, give me some proper substance to deal with.  In what way has "their" monopoly and that last assumption you refer to manifested themselves?  Ritual condemnation of people who don't go to mass any more?  Regular rants about non-attenders burning in the fire of hell? 
I know you're not a practicing Catholic but your intolerance of those who are borders on bigotry at times.       

Matthew 15:9  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. (http://bible.cc/matthew/15-9.htm) (King James Version)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:55:11 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:41:13 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 07, 2010, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Rois on April 07, 2010, 05:16:12 PM
Absolutely fair enough but I'm not sure it's accurate to say they think they have a monopoly - the Church accepts that there are other non-Catholic faiths in existence that believe in the same God.   

They also assume everyone who leaves the church has lost faith in God...

Oh, and you know this because...
Come on LRTF, you can do better than sweeping general statements like your last two, give me some proper substance to deal with.  In what way has "their" monopoly and that last assumption you refer to manifested themselves?  Ritual condemnation of people who don't go to mass any more?  Regular rants about non-attenders burning in the fire of hell? 
I know you're not a practicing Catholic but your intolerance of those who are borders on bigotry at times.       

OK Rois... you the man!  Show me one post where I have shown an intolerance of those who practice Catholicism. I have certainly hammered the hierarchy within the church for good reason but not those who practice their religion, which is their perogative.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 07, 2010, 07:13:00 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that
[/quote]
You can go f**k yourself, I've stuck to the topic and I've never got personal with you.
I know there's a right crowd of dickheads on here who can't disagree with you without bullshit and name calling, I wouldn't have had you down as one of them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 07, 2010, 07:13:00 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 06, 2010, 09:06:44 PM
QuoteYou obviously have no faith Pints or only a token faith that is of no importance to you.  If it was important to you then you would partake in the sacraments.
What the hell does that mean? You know nothing about me or my faith?
I dont believe in the sacraments, I dont believe you have to be baptised to be close to God or part of his family, same with confirmation, same with marriage.

You can't believe in Jesus and not believe in the Sacraments - He instituted them! You can't have faith and not believe in Baptism you don't make any sense at all!

Quote
You gripe on and on about everything and anything - that doens't mean that we should not complain when things go wrong - but thats all you do is complain - even when things go write.  I've yet to read a positive post from you.  You seem to have a permanent chip on your shoulder.  I don't want to turn this into a personal attack and i'm sorry thats where it went but enough is enough sometimes.
That's exactly what you've done. ...
And I admitted that
You can go f**k yourself, I've stuck to the topic and I've never got personal with you.
I know there's a right crowd of d**kheads on here who can't disagree with you without bullshit and name calling, I wouldn't have had you down as one of them.
[/quote]

the difficulty with this topic is its hard not get personal.  I can't argue against your comments without getting personal  - how else would I word it?? I expressed this in the actual post.  So its either I disagree with what you said by telling you what I believe or I stop discussing?  You may not go off topic but you always argue the negative and it gets depressing after a while.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on April 07, 2010, 07:44:49 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 29, 2009, 12:12:01 AM
I cut my stick with that shower long ago... wouldn't darken their door. Just weddings and funerals. Sick f**s. If it was any other outfit they'd be disbanded. Sad thing is tens of thousands will go to mass today and listen to their mealy mouthed bullshit and throw money on the plate. God love their wit. 


God bless the wit of those who still go to mass translates to me that they who continue to practice Roman Catholicism have no wit.  They are wrong to continue to practice? 



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 07, 2010, 07:47:24 PM
Quote

the difficulty with this topic is its hard not get personal.  I can't argue against your comments without getting personal  - how else would I word it?? I expressed this in the actual post.  So its either I disagree with what you said by telling you what I believe or I stop discussing?  You may not go off topic but you always argue the negative and it gets depressing after a while.
It's about playing the ball and not the man...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 07:51:38 PM
If the man keeps kicking the ball to the other team on purpose every time you eventually have to take him off.

I'll try to play the ball next time but I hope you get my point.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 07, 2010, 08:05:41 PM
I dont get your point, no.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 08:17:39 PM
OK let me play the ball

I find it extremely difficult to have a conversation with someone who views the world through Grey glasses.  Its hard when they only make negative comments and their outlook appears so negative that it would depress the life out of you.  Sometimes it gets to a point where you can't take it anymore and you need to say something.

Thats my point.

Its hard to play the ball in those cases lad - I cam either beat around the bush as above or tell you straight.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 07, 2010, 08:24:19 PM
aye, you're a hero.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 07, 2010, 08:26:08 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 07, 2010, 08:17:39 PM
OK let me play the ball

I find it extremely difficult to have a conversation with someone who views the world through Grey glasses.  Its hard when they only make negative comments and their outlook appears so negative that it would depress the life out of you.  Sometimes it gets to a point where you can't take it anymore and you need to say something.

Thats my point.

Its hard to play the ball in those cases lad - I cam either beat around the bush as above or tell you straight.

You are talking through your holy.  ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 07, 2010, 10:37:23 PM
I'll get GDA to lock this thread if you guys don't wise up.
Did you get lost on the way to the religious views thread?

More pressure sent Cardinal Brady's way, to own up to the cover up.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0407/1224267827851.html

Woman abused by Smyth wants Dr Brady to apologise

A WOMAN who was repeatedly sexually abused as a girl by Fr Brendan Smyth has called on Catholic primate Cardinal Seán Brady to apologise to her and to "walk the walk" over his handling of a church investigation into the paedophile priest.

"Samantha", who was abused by Smyth between 1974 and 1979, asked "how can he expect to head the church knowing that I was abused and raped because he didn't do what he should have done?"

She told The Irish Times : "All I want from him is two sentences, and spoken as a man not as a priest.

"I want him to say, 'Samantha, I'm really sorry that because I didn't go to the guards you went through four more years of torture at the hands of Brendan Smyth. For that I am truly sorry'."
Last month it emerged that in 1975 Cardinal Brady, then a canon lawyer in the diocese of Kilmore, took part in an investigation involving two young people who alleged abuse by Smyth.

He believed both were telling the truth and swore them to secrecy.
He reported his findings to the then bishop of Kilmore Francis McKiernan, who removed from Smyth any rights to exercise priestly ministry in the diocese. The bishop also reported the then Fr Brady's findings to Smyth's superiors at the Norbertine abbey in Kilnacrott, Co Cavan.

No one involved informed gardaí or any civil authorities. Smyth continued to abuse children until 1993
.
------
She called on "the guys on the ground [the priests] to speak out" on the sex abuse issue.

"Like Fr Brian D'Arcy, they should stand up for what they believe in," she said. She cried watching Fr D'Arcy on a recent Late Late Show when "he talked about humility, honesty and God's love" and when he said "I'm a nobody on the ground". It was "what everyone is supposed to be".


etc etc

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: D4S on April 08, 2010, 12:04:43 AM
I changed jobs and have not had the same access to this site for the last 6 months or so and have not really been a frequent user.  But having read through parts of this thread it seems to have seriously lost it's way.  I think we're all on the same boat at the end of the day in so far as being upset and appalled by the abuse of children by the church, and in agreement that the cover up was all handled disgustingly down the years.  All the fighting and backbiting between anonymous people on here really helps nobody, perhaps you should all use your energy elsewhere.  How would people feel about me deleting this thread?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 08, 2010, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: D4S on April 08, 2010, 12:04:43 AM
I changed jobs and have not had the same access to this site for the last 6 months or so and have not really been a frequent user.  But having read through parts of this thread it seems to have seriously lost it's way.  I think we're all on the same boat at the end of the day in so far as being upset and appalled by the abuse of children by the church, and in agreement that the cover up was all handled disgustingly down the years.  All the fighting and backbiting between anonymous people on here really helps nobody, perhaps you should all use your energy elsewhere.  How would people feel about me deleting this thread?

I don't think you should delete the thread. There is a lot of good information in it and even some good opinion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on April 08, 2010, 06:01:22 PM
D4S, I think the post above this one says it all

I see lrtf deleted his post, wish he would do that more often
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 10, 2010, 01:21:29 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8612457.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8612457.stm)

Pope Benedict hit by new Church child abuse allegations
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 10, 2010, 11:02:18 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 10, 2010, 01:21:29 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8612457.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8612457.stm)

Pope Benedict hit by new Church child abuse allegations


It's ok Skull - the Vatican have responded by saying that he has acted appropriately - no story here !!  ??? ;)


Vatican insists Benedict acted correctlySaturday, 10 April 2010 07:41
The Vatican has defended Pope Benedict against fresh allegations about his handling of clerical sex abuse cases.

The Associated Press News Agency claims that, as one of Pope John Paul's top officials in the early 1980s, the then Cardinal Josef Ratzinger resisted pleas to defrock a California-based priest who had sexually molested children, citing concerns including 'the good of the universal church'.

A Vatican spokesman said the Pope's response was not an attempt at a cover-up but made clear the need to study the case with more attention, taking into account the good of all involved.

According to the Agency, in 1981, the then Fr Stephen Kiesle, aged in his mid-thirties, asked to be defrocked after he had been convicted of molesting two boys.

AdvertisementFour years later, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to Kiesle's Bishop, John Cummins of Oakland - who backed a speedy defrocking - agreeing that the arguments supporting one were of 'grave significance' but adding that a very careful review and more time were needed.

He also warned that any such decision must take into account the 'good of the universal church' and the 'detriment' that it could provoke in the Church, 'particularly considering the (priest's) young age.'

In a memo to the Bishop, diocesan official Father George Mockel interpreted the Ratzinger letter to mean that: 'basically they are going to sit on it until Steve gets quite a bit older.'

AP says it took two more years to defrock Kiesle and during that time he continued to do volunteer work with children through the Church.

A Vatican spokesman told the News Agency the future Pope's response was not an attempt at a cover-up but made clear the need to study the case with more attention, taking into account the good of all involved.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 10, 2010, 02:34:51 PM
Is this a Vatican confirmation that,
yes Ratzinger knew,
he was part of encouraging a cover for (in his mind) the greater interest of the church
and that this was correct Vatican policy at the time?

Looks like the American bishops are getting fed up taking the rap for the Vatican and are leaking documents.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 03:01:24 PM
Quote from: Main Street on January 10, 1974, 10:57:29 PM
Looks like the American bishops are getting fed up taking the rap for the Vatican and are leaking documents.

Actually you could be spot on there but they're not out to get him because of the clerical abuse, I'd say it has more to do with the litergical and other reforms the Pope is introducing. These have been vigorously opposed by the US bishops who would generally be very liberal a la carte type Catholics.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 06:37:39 PM
Journalists abandon standards to attack the Pope
RSS Facebook By Phil Lawler | April 10, 2010 10:03 AM


We're off and running once again, with another completely phony story that purports to implicate Pope Benedict XVI in the protection of abusive priests.

The "exclusive" story released by AP yesterday, which has been dutifully passed along now by scores of major media outlets, would never have seen the light of day if normal journalistic standards had been in place. Careful editors should have asked a series of probing questions, and in every case the answer to those questions would have shown that the story had no "legs."

First to repeat the bare-bones version of the story: in November 1985, then-Cardinal Ratzinger signed a letter deferring a decision on the laicization of Father Stephen Kiesle, a California priest who had been accused of molesting boys.
Now the key questions:


• Was Cardinal Ratzinger responding to the complaints of priestly pedophilia? No. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which the future Pontiff headed, did not have jurisdiction for pedophile priests until 2001. The cardinal was weighing a request for laicization of Kiesle.

• Had Oakland's Bishop John Cummins sought to laicize Kiesle as punishment for his misconduct? No. Kiesle himself asked to be released from the priesthood. The bishop supported the wayward priest's application.

• Was the request for laicization denied? No. Eventually, in 1987, the Vatican approved Kiesle's dismissal from the priesthood.

• Did Kiesle abuse children again before he was laicized? To the best of our knowledge, No. The next complaints against him arose in 2002: 15 years after he was dismissed from the priesthood.

• Did Cardinal Ratzinger's reluctance to make a quick decision mean that Kiesle remained in active ministry? No. Bishop Cummins had the authority to suspend the predator-priest, and in fact he had placed him on an extended leave of absence long before the application for laicization was entered.

• Would quicker laicization have protected children in California? No. Cardinal Ratzinger did not have the power to put Kiesle behind bars. If Kiesle had been defrocked in 1985 instead of 1987, he would have remained at large, thanks to a light sentence from the California courts. As things stood, he remained at large. He was not engaged in parish ministry and had no special access to children.

• Did the Vatican cover up evidence of Kiesle's predatory behavior? No. The civil courts of California destroyed that evidence after the priest completed a sentence of probation-- before the case ever reached Rome.

So to review: This was not a case in which a bishop wanted to discipline his priest and the Vatican official demurred. This was not a case in which a priest remained active in ministry, and the Vatican did nothing to protect the children under his pastoral care. This was not a case in which the Vatican covered up evidence of a priest's misconduct. This was a case in which a priest asked to be released from his vows, and the Vatican-- which had been flooded by such requests throughout the 1970s -- wanted to consider all such cases carefully. In short, if you're looking for evidence of a sex-abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, this case is irrelevant.

We Americans know what a sex-abuse crisis looks like. The scandal erupts when evidence emerges that bishops have protected abusive priests, kept them active in parish assignments, covered up evidence of the charges against them, and lied to their people. There is no such evidence in this or any other case involving Pope Benedict XVI.

Competent reporters, when dealing with a story that involves special expertise, seek information from experts in that field. Capable journalists following this story should have sought out canon lawyers to explain the 1985 document-- not merely relied on the highly biased testimony of civil lawyers who have lodged multiple suits against the Church. If they had understood the case, objective reporters would have recognized that they had no story. But in this case, reporters for the major media outlets are far from objective.

The New York Times-- which touched off this feeding frenzy with two error-riddled front-page reports-- seized on the latest "scoop" by AP to say that the 1985 document exemplified:

    ...the sort of delay that is fueling a renewed sexual abuse scandal in the church that has focused on whether the future pope moved quickly enough to remove known pedophiles from the priesthood, despite pleas from American bishops.

Here we have a complete rewriting of history. Earlier in this decade, American newspapers exposed the sad truth that many American bishops had kept pedophile priests in active ministry. Now the Times, which played an active role in exposing that scandal, would have us believe that the American bishops were striving to rid the priesthood of the predators, and the Vatican resisted!

No, what is "fueling a renewed sexual abuse scandal" is a media frenzy. There is a scandal here, indeed, but it's not the scandal you're reading about in the mass media. The scandal is the complete collapse of journalistic standards in the handling of this story.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 10, 2010, 07:39:01 PM
Those bad journalists - their morals have all gone. All their fault.  :( :(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 08:04:53 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 10, 2010, 07:39:01 PM
Those bad journalists - their morals have all gone. All their fault.  :( :(
What's their fault?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 08:21:34 PM
Is there any chance you could post links to these stories you are pasting Ulick?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 10, 2010, 08:30:14 PM
Quote Had Oakland's Bishop John Cummins sought to laicize Kiesle as punishment for his misconduct? No. Kiesle himself asked to be released from the priesthood. The bishop supported the wayward priest's application.

Bishop Cummins - The timeline is in his earliest letter to Ratzinger, Bishop Cummins warned that returning Kiesle to ministry would cause more of a scandal than stripping him of his priestly powers.
"It is my conviction that there would be no scandal if this petition were granted and that as a matter of fact, given the nature of the case, there might be greater scandal to the community if Father Kiesle were allowed to return to the active ministry," Cummins wrote in 1982.



Quote• Was the request for laicization denied? No. Eventually, in 1987, the Vatican approved Kiesle's dismissal from the priesthood.

It was not denied, eventually after 5 years.  Meanwhile this fully frocked priest  continued working with children at the Pinole church,

Ratzinger directed Oakland Bishop John Cummins to provide Kiesle "as much paternal care as possible" while awaiting the Vatican ruling, according to a translation of the letter from Latin. That was a way of saying the bishop was responsible for ensuring Kiesle didn't reoffend,
California church officials wrote to Ratzinger at least three times to check on the status of Kiesle's case. At one point, a Vatican official wrote to say the file might have been lost and suggested resubmitting materials. Diocese officials considered writing Ratzinger again after they received his 1985 response to impress upon him that leaving Kiesle in the ministry would harm the church,


Quote Did the Vatican cover up evidence of Kiesle's predatory behavior? No. The civil courts of California destroyed that evidence after the priest completed a sentence of probation-- before the case ever reached Rome.

Did Kiesle abuse children again before he was laicized? To the best of our knowledge, No. The next complaints against him arose in 2002: 15 years after he was dismissed from the priesthood.

In the 5 years while the Vatican considered which scandal would be greater, to defrock a priest or keep him on,  a fully frocked Kiesle was back working with minors. He was not cured, there is no reason not to believe that he was anything less than a serious threat to those minors.
The California Court did throw out charges which exceeded the statute of limitiations. He was found guilty of sex abuse charges he committed in 1995.
Rick Simons, a Hayward attorney who has represented numerous clergy abuse victims, "Of all the perpetrators I met, which were probably a couple dozen, he was the most evil, remorseless sociopath of them all, just a terrible human being," said Simons. "He was so clearly without any degree of connection or remorse to any of these kids he molested. And there were a lot of them."


all info taken from
http://www.insidebayarea.com/top-stories/ci_14855089 (http://www.insidebayarea.com/top-stories/ci_14855089)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on April 10, 2010, 08:38:05 PM
My wife was speaking to a psychologist friend of ours recently, this person lectures at university level so he is aware of all developments in his field.  Anyway, he was telling her that the Catholic Church couldn't have been aware of the psychological profile of a paedophile up until the last 10-15 years.  That makes sense in a timeline to me because I had undergone psychological profiling in various tests I did to see if I was a suitable person for the Redemptorist order and for diocesan priesthood as well.

My point is this, if the church couldn't have been aware of the profile of a paedophile; various people, who made decisions (which we look at today as being wrong) to save the face of the church and seek assurances from different priests who were paedophiles 'not to do it again' did so at the time because they believed they were doing the right thing for the church.  I am not condoning any of it for a second, I have said on here before that the church was always going to come under heavy fire and that it was and is the fact that the issues concern children which makes it most alarming for people looking at the church from outside as well as from inside the church.  I have had several relatives in religious life, I believe they were all wonderful people who made a lot of change for good in a lot of people's lives. 

These attempts to blacken the entire church because of the actions of a few within it are only to be expected to be fair.  I disagree with those who do entirely.  The church is more than a clatter of paedophiles who became priests, much more.  I believe good will overcome the evil that has been perpetrated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on April 10, 2010, 10:05:14 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
Guaranteed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 10, 2010, 10:35:50 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on April 10, 2010, 10:05:14 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
Guaranteed

And what is is even more guaranteed is that there will be denials of wrong doing and anybody and everybody will get blamed, apart from themselves.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 11:15:46 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 08:21:34 PM
Is there any chance you could post links to these stories you are pasting Ulick?

Ulick has refused to tell us what his links to the catholic church are yet he continues to post articles such as the one above with putting in a link. Here is the link lads...

http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=632

As you can see it is from a totally unbiased independent organisation  ::) Maybe that is why the link is never posted.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:24:10 PM
Erm no I haven't. Am using a mobile device so I can't be arsed with the hassle of going back to copy in urls esp when you can Google it yourself. Besides, the article I posted should be able to stand on its own merits, which it does to shoot down this latest feeble smeer attempt.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 10, 2010, 11:26:03 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
what do you mean hindsight is a wonderful thing? What's that statement in response to?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 11:29:33 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:24:10 PM
Erm no I haven't. Am using a mobile device so I can't be arsed with the hassle of going back to copy in urls esp when you can Google it yourself. Besides, the article I posted should be able to stand on its own merits, which it does to shoot down this latest feeble smeer attempt.

So you have no catholic links but keep finding stories to back up your views from obscure catholic websites, use a mobile device which you can paste articles but which is too much hassle to paste the link. Ulick - I believe you are full of shit and don't have the courage to declare your interests in this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:45:35 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 10, 2010, 11:26:03 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
what do you mean hindsight is a wonderful thing? What's that statement in response to?
The article that Main Street posted which doesn't really add anything to the one I posted in response to the latest Pope coverup claim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:47:57 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 11:29:33 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:24:10 PM
Erm no I haven't. Am using a mobile device so I can't be arsed with the hassle of going back to copy in urls esp when you can Google it yourself. Besides, the article I posted should be able to stand on its own merits, which it does to shoot down this latest feeble smeer attempt.

So you have no catholic links but keep finding stories to back up your views from obscure catholic websites, use a mobile device which you can paste articles but which is too much hassle to paste the link. Ulick - I believe you are full of shit and don't have the courage to declare your interests in this.

Myles I've told you before, if you can't be civil and debate like a grown-up I won't be responding to you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on April 10, 2010, 11:54:36 PM
But you did.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on April 11, 2010, 12:00:48 AM
Quote from: ONeill on April 10, 2010, 11:54:36 PM
But you did.
Child.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 11, 2010, 12:14:01 AM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece)

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI

RICHARD DAWKINS, the atheist campaigner, is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain "for crimes against humanity".

Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.

The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on April 11, 2010, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on April 11, 2010, 12:00:48 AM
Quote from: ONeill on April 10, 2010, 11:54:36 PM
But you did.
Child.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 01:01:18 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:45:35 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 10, 2010, 11:26:03 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing unfortunatly there's still no smoking gun on the Pope, but I'm sure they'll have another go next week.
what do you mean hindsight is a wonderful thing? What's that statement in response to?
The article that Main Street posted which doesn't really add anything to the one I posted in response to the latest Pope coverup claim.
The article I posted contains facts which your article lied about.
Fact that Kiesle was allowed to work as a priest with minors  in the 5 year year period at he behest of and with the blessing of Ratzinger, while Ratzinger hummed and hawed over the balance of Church PR scandal effects.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 11, 2010, 02:33:04 AM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 01:01:18 AM
The article I posted contains facts which your article lied about.
Fact that Kiesle was allowed to work as a priest with minors  in the 5 year year period at he behest of and with the blessing of Ratzinger, while Ratzinger hummed and hawed over the balance of Church PR scandal effects.

But it doesn't address any of the main points. It was only found out later he was an abuser and there's nothing to suggest the Pope knew he was an abuser when he was a priest (if he was at all). This story is even more pathetic than the last - and again this is coming from someone wiith no love of the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 11, 2010, 09:18:12 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:47:57 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 10, 2010, 11:29:33 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 10, 2010, 11:24:10 PM
Erm no I haven't. Am using a mobile device so I can't be arsed with the hassle of going back to copy in urls esp when you can Google it yourself. Besides, the article I posted should be able to stand on its own merits, which it does to shoot down this latest feeble smeer attempt.

So you have no catholic links but keep finding stories to back up your views from obscure catholic websites, use a mobile device which you can paste articles but which is too much hassle to paste the link. Ulick - I believe you are full of shit and don't have the courage to declare your interests in this.

Myles I've told you before, if you can't be civil and debate like a grown-up I won't be responding to you.

I suppose if I were to post an article on the pope from this website it would be worth serious discussion.  ::)
http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html

I won't be civil to people with hidden agendas that are too cowardly to declare them. A guy that has no love of the church who trawls obscure catholic websites to paste stories in here? What a load of bollix. Maybe you should change your name again because your latest creation "Ulick" is fast becoming a joke.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 11, 2010, 01:41:45 PM
Mysterious letters appear about an old case involving the current Pope.

Media publish them and ask question about the role of the Pope in those cases.

Vatican issue immediate denial of any wrongdoing.

Blind attackers of the church point to above as evidence of cover-up.

Blind defenders of the church point to the above as evidence of unfounded church/Pope bashing.

Both sides claim victory.


The reality is that any objective observer would say there are some serious questions that should be answered openly if the church (and the Pope) is to maintain its integrity. The church should not construct its reactions to deal only with what it sees as the blind attackers. Its blind defenders do it no favours either attacking those otherwise well disposed to the church as 'a la carte' etc basically doing a George Dubya 'you are either with us or against us' but don't dare question us routine.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:20:49 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 11, 2010, 02:33:04 AM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 01:01:18 AM
The article I posted contains facts which your article lied about.
Fact that Kiesle was allowed to work as a priest with minors  in the 5 year year period at he behest of and with the blessing of Ratzinger, while Ratzinger hummed and hawed over the balance of Church PR scandal effects.

But it doesn't address any of the main points. It was only found out later he was an abuser and there's nothing to suggest the Pope knew he was an abuser when he was a priest (if he was at all). This story is even more pathetic than the last - and again this is coming from someone wiith no love of the Church.

"It was only found out later he was an abuser"

Who only found out later?  Ratzinger?  Are you just playing the total eejit now? Is this what is called blind faith?
If you want to be taken anyway seriously,  then show some attention to this  level of debate that demands respect for facts.
You are insulting my intelligence with that reply.

Are you honestly trying to say that the Ratzinger did not know Kiesle was a convicted sex abuser?
He was already a convicted sex abuse criminal, who had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of lewd conduct, when charged with tying up 2 boys in the rectory and molesting them. His Bishop had persuaded him to resign his priesthood. Ratzinger was the recipient of all documentation.
If Ratzinger did not know at the time of his lenghty time considering the documentation around the defrocking of Kiesle at the behest of a Bishop,  it would mean he was the greatest inept bumpkin ever to grace high office in the Vatican.
And we know Ratzinger is anything but that, he was on top of his office and directed by the Pope JP.
Ratzinger replied in 1985
"This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of 'grave significance"

grave significance? why so?  of course, grave significance in regard to the proven known character of the priest.
What else other than the fact that he was convicted child molester could have inspired Ratzinger to write 'grave significance'

Ratzinger goes on
"nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner."

The good of the Church over rides other considerations.


Full text of letter from Ratzinger to the Oakland Bishop letter 1985
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev. Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:51:09 PM
Remember the Fr Murphy case from a few pages back in this thread and the Canon Law lawyer Father Thomas Brundage?
Brundage had vehemently denied that there were any knowledge of any plans to end the tribunal into the case of the pedophile Fr Murphy.

The Milwaukee Sentinel has shot back with an arrow to the heart of Fr. Brundage's credibility.
http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/89802007.html

"This sort of thing would have stuck in my memory, because I would have been furious that Weakland would want me to stop the case," Brundage said in an interview with the Journal Sentinel on Thursday.
He speculated that (then-Archbishop) Weakland might have written the Aug. 19 letter to the deputy, then Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, but never told Brundage to end the trial because Murphy died two days later.

But on Friday, the Journal Sentinel learned that a letter seemingly written by Brundage to Weakland on Aug. 15, 1998, shows Brundage actually drafted Weakland's letter to Bertone.

It addresses Weakland, saying: "As you have requested I put together what might be a response to Archbishop Bertone's document regarding Fr. Murphy that he recently sent us. Here is a suggested response:"

The central part of the letter is virtually identical to Weakland's later letter to Bertone, except for minor changes in spelling and punctuation. And, though it does not include a handwritten signature, it ends with: "I hope this is of help Archbishop,

Rev. Thomas T. Brundage, Judicial Vicar, Archdiocese of Milwaukee."


Brundage said Friday that he has no memory of either letter. He voiced dismay at the apparent contradiction.
"I have no memory of ever being asked to abate the case," Brundage said.


The catholic Anchor has now printed an apology from Fr Brundage
http://catholicanchor.org/wordpress/?p=620 (http://catholicanchor.org/wordpress/?p=620)

Fair play to him for apologising  "for my mistake and for making a very complicated and painful case even more complicated and painful."
Unfortunatly for the Father this is a serious mistake and discredits the veracity of anything he remembers unless it is supported by documentation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 13, 2010, 03:36:04 PM
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Vatican-finally-tells-bishops-report.6221208.jp (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Vatican-finally-tells-bishops-report.6221208.jp)

Vatican finally tells bishops: report alleged pervert priests to the police


One really has to wonder why the church has been dragged kicking and screaming to do something that should have been done decades ago? Are they trying to get the media to call the dogs off in case there are more serious revelations exposed at vatican level? I would have my suspicions
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 13, 2010, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:20:49 PM

Who only found out later?  Ratzinger?  Are you just playing the total eejit now? Is this what is called blind faith?
If you want to be taken anyway seriously,  then show some attention to this  level of debate that demands respect for facts.
You are insulting my intelligence with that reply.

Are you honestly trying to say that the Ratzinger did not know Kiesle was a convicted sex abuser?
He was already a convicted sex abuse criminal, who had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of lewd conduct, when charged with tying up 2 boys in the rectory and molesting them.
His Bishop had persuaded him to resign his priesthood. Ratzinger was the recipient of all documentation.
If Ratzinger did not know at the time of his lenghty time considering the documentation around the defrocking of Kiesle at the behest of a Bishop,  it would mean he was the greatest inept bumpkin ever to grace high office in the Vatican.
And we know Ratzinger is anything but that, he was on top of his office and directed by the Pope JP.
Ratzinger replied in 1985
"This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of 'grave significance"

grave significance? why so?  of course, grave significance in regard to the proven known character of the priest.
What else other than the fact that he was convicted child molester could have inspired Ratzinger to write 'grave significance'

Ratzinger goes on
"nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner."

The good of the Church over rides other considerations.


Full text of letter from Ratzinger to the Oakland Bishop letter 1985
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev. Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 13, 2010, 04:47:33 PM
Ulick... it is strange you just blindly defend-defend-defend the one holy apostolic watever... sad for their victims but despite boys like you the truth will continue to come out. Their day has come  :o     
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 13, 2010, 05:12:44 PM
Isn't it ironic that there are calls for a "truth" type commission / enquiry regarding the conduct of the Roman Catholic church in their covering up and failure to act over child abuse ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on April 14, 2010, 01:04:18 PM
If the Vatican can forgive the Beatles..................

The Vatican has finally forgiven The Beatles after John Lennon claimed the band were "bigger than Jesus" in 1966.

An article in the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, praised the group, saying that due to the beauty of their songs the Jesus comment was "meaningless".

"It's true, they took drugs; swept up by their success, they lived dissolute and uninhibited lives," the article reads. "They even said they were more famous than Jesus. But, listening to their songs, all of this seems distant and meaningless."

The article adds: "Their beautiful melodies, which changed forever pop music and still give us emotions, live on like precious jewels." The band were described as "the longest-lasting, most consistent and representative phenomenon in the history of pop music".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 14, 2010, 01:16:35 PM
Does it actually say the Vatican 'forgives' the Beatles?  It ain't their place to 'forgive' them if indeed they need forgiveness. Just because the Catholic Church appoints themselves as God's spokeman on earth doesn't mean they are.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on April 14, 2010, 02:12:45 PM
I never did understand the furore over Lennon's remark. Media hype and the going-out-of-your-way-to-be-offended syndrome escalated it into one of the infamous statements of the century.

He didn't insult Jesus or claim the Beatles were better or more important - he said they were "bigger" than Jesus. I took that to mean more famous and it was probably true. Lennon's nose for publicity probably had a part in the selection of that particular sound bite too.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 14, 2010, 02:15:42 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 13, 2010, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:20:49 PM

Who only found out later?  Ratzinger?  Are you just playing the total eejit now? Is this what is called blind faith?
If you want to be taken anyway seriously,  then show some attention to this  level of debate that demands respect for facts.
You are insulting my intelligence with that reply.

Are you honestly trying to say that the Ratzinger did not know Kiesle was a convicted sex abuser?
He was already a convicted sex abuse criminal, who had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of lewd conduct, when charged with tying up 2 boys in the rectory and molesting them.
His Bishop had persuaded him to resign his priesthood. Ratzinger was the recipient of all documentation.
If Ratzinger did not know at the time of his lenghty time considering the documentation around the defrocking of Kiesle at the behest of a Bishop,  it would mean he was the greatest inept bumpkin ever to grace high office in the Vatican.
And we know Ratzinger is anything but that, he was on top of his office and directed by the Pope JP.
Ratzinger replied in 1985
"This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of 'grave significance"

grave significance? why so?  of course, grave significance in regard to the proven known character of the priest.
What else other than the fact that he was convicted child molester could have inspired Ratzinger to write 'grave significance'

Ratzinger goes on
"nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner."

The good of the Church over rides other considerations.


Full text of letter from Ratzinger to the Oakland Bishop letter 1985
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev. Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.


???

August 1978: Kiesle is arrested and pleads no contest to lewd conduct, a misdemeanor, for tying up and molesting two boys. Sentenced to three years of probation. His record is later expunged.


1978-1981: Takes extended leave of absence, attends counseling and reports regularly to probation officer.

July 1981: Oakland Bishop John Cummins sends Kiesle's file to the Vatican in support of the priest's petition for laicization, or defrocking.
November

1981: Vatican asks for more information.

1982: Kiesle moves to Pinole.

February 1982: Cummins writes to Joseph Ratzinger, then prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, providing additional information and warning of possible scandal if Kiesle is not defrocked.

September 1982: Oakland diocese official writes Ratzinger asking for update.

September 1983: Cummins visits Rome, discusses Kiesle case with Vatican officials.

December 1983: Vatican official writes Oakland to say Kiesle's file can't be found and they should resubmit materials.

January 1984: Cummins writes a Vatican official to inquire about status of Kiesle file.

1985: Kiesle  volunteers as a youth minister at St. Joseph's Church in Pinole.

September 1985: Cummins writes Ratzinger asking about status of Kiesle case.

November 1985: Ratzinger writes to Cummins about Kiesle case.

December 1985: A memo from diocese officials discusses writing to Ratzinger again to stress the risk of scandal if Kiesle's case is delayed.
1987: Kiesle is defrocked.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 14, 2010, 04:57:28 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 13, 2010, 04:47:33 PM
Ulick... it is strange you just blindly defend-defend-defend the one holy apostolic watever... sad for their victims but despite boys like you the truth will continue to come out. Their day has come  :o   

The only thing I'm trying to defend fox is journalist standards and showing this witch hunt against the Pope for what it is. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 14, 2010, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 14, 2010, 02:15:42 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 13, 2010, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:20:49 PM

Who only found out later?  Ratzinger?  Are you just playing the total eejit now? Is this what is called blind faith?
If you want to be taken anyway seriously,  then show some attention to this  level of debate that demands respect for facts.
You are insulting my intelligence with that reply.

Are you honestly trying to say that the Ratzinger did not know Kiesle was a convicted sex abuser?
He was already a convicted sex abuse criminal, who had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of lewd conduct, when charged with tying up 2 boys in the rectory and molesting them.
His Bishop had persuaded him to resign his priesthood. Ratzinger was the recipient of all documentation.
If Ratzinger did not know at the time of his lenghty time considering the documentation around the defrocking of Kiesle at the behest of a Bishop,  it would mean he was the greatest inept bumpkin ever to grace high office in the Vatican.
And we know Ratzinger is anything but that, he was on top of his office and directed by the Pope JP.
Ratzinger replied in 1985
"This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of 'grave significance"

grave significance? why so?  of course, grave significance in regard to the proven known character of the priest.
What else other than the fact that he was convicted child molester could have inspired Ratzinger to write 'grave significance'

Ratzinger goes on
"nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner."

The good of the Church over rides other considerations.


Full text of letter from Ratzinger to the Oakland Bishop letter 1985
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev. Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.


???

August 1978: Kiesle is arrested and pleads no contest to lewd conduct, a misdemeanor, for tying up and molesting two boys. Sentenced to three years of probation. His record is later expunged.


1978-1981: Takes extended leave of absence, attends counseling and reports regularly to probation officer.

July 1981: Oakland Bishop John Cummins sends Kiesle's file to the Vatican in support of the priest's petition for laicization, or defrocking.
November

1981: Vatican asks for more information.

1982: Kiesle moves to Pinole.

February 1982: Cummins writes to Joseph Ratzinger, then prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, providing additional information and warning of possible scandal if Kiesle is not defrocked.

September 1982: Oakland diocese official writes Ratzinger asking for update.

September 1983: Cummins visits Rome, discusses Kiesle case with Vatican officials.

December 1983: Vatican official writes Oakland to say Kiesle's file can't be found and they should resubmit materials.

January 1984: Cummins writes a Vatican official to inquire about status of Kiesle file.

1985: Kiesle  volunteers as a youth minister at St. Joseph's Church in Pinole.

September 1985: Cummins writes Ratzinger asking about status of Kiesle case.

November 1985: Ratzinger writes to Cummins about Kiesle case.

December 1985: A memo from diocese officials discusses writing to Ratzinger again to stress the risk of scandal if Kiesle's case is delayed.
1987: Kiesle is defrocked.

Like I said:


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 14, 2010, 08:28:48 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 14, 2010, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 14, 2010, 02:15:42 PM
Quote from: Ulick on April 13, 2010, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 11, 2010, 10:20:49 PM

Who only found out later?  Ratzinger?  Are you just playing the total eejit now? Is this what is called blind faith?
If you want to be taken anyway seriously,  then show some attention to this  level of debate that demands respect for facts.
You are insulting my intelligence with that reply.

Are you honestly trying to say that the Ratzinger did not know Kiesle was a convicted sex abuser?
He was already a convicted sex abuse criminal, who had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of lewd conduct, when charged with tying up 2 boys in the rectory and molesting them.
His Bishop had persuaded him to resign his priesthood. Ratzinger was the recipient of all documentation.
If Ratzinger did not know at the time of his lenghty time considering the documentation around the defrocking of Kiesle at the behest of a Bishop,  it would mean he was the greatest inept bumpkin ever to grace high office in the Vatican.
And we know Ratzinger is anything but that, he was on top of his office and directed by the Pope JP.
Ratzinger replied in 1985
"This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of 'grave significance"

grave significance? why so?  of course, grave significance in regard to the proven known character of the priest.
What else other than the fact that he was convicted child molester could have inspired Ratzinger to write 'grave significance'

Ratzinger goes on
"nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner."

The good of the Church over rides other considerations.


Full text of letter from Ratzinger to the Oakland Bishop letter 1985
Most Excellent Bishop
Having received your letter of September 13 of this year, regarding the matter of the removal from all priestly burdens pertaining to Rev. Stephen Miller Kiesle in your diocese, it is my duty to share with you the following:
This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.
It is necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time.
In the meantime your Excellency must not fail to provide the petitioner with as much paternal care as possible and in addition to explain to same the rationale of this court, which is accustomed to proceed keeping the common good especially before its eyes.
Let me take this occasion to convey sentiments of the highest regard always to you.
Your most Reverend Excellency
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.


???

August 1978: Kiesle is arrested and pleads no contest to lewd conduct, a misdemeanor, for tying up and molesting two boys. Sentenced to three years of probation. His record is later expunged.


1978-1981: Takes extended leave of absence, attends counseling and reports regularly to probation officer.

July 1981: Oakland Bishop John Cummins sends Kiesle's file to the Vatican in support of the priest's petition for laicization, or defrocking.
November

1981: Vatican asks for more information.

1982: Kiesle moves to Pinole.

February 1982: Cummins writes to Joseph Ratzinger, then prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, providing additional information and warning of possible scandal if Kiesle is not defrocked.

September 1982: Oakland diocese official writes Ratzinger asking for update.

September 1983: Cummins visits Rome, discusses Kiesle case with Vatican officials.

December 1983: Vatican official writes Oakland to say Kiesle's file can't be found and they should resubmit materials.

January 1984: Cummins writes a Vatican official to inquire about status of Kiesle file.

1985: Kiesle  volunteers as a youth minister at St. Joseph's Church in Pinole.

September 1985: Cummins writes Ratzinger asking about status of Kiesle case.

November 1985: Ratzinger writes to Cummins about Kiesle case.

December 1985: A memo from diocese officials discusses writing to Ratzinger again to stress the risk of scandal if Kiesle's case is delayed.
1987: Kiesle is defrocked.

Like I said:


He wasn't convicted of sexual abuse in 1985 when Ratzinger replied to the letter.

Ratzinger and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith didn't become responsible for the sexual abuse cases until 2001.

No he was a model citizen, no threat whatsoever.

"August 1978: Kiesle is arrested and pleads no contest to lewd conduct, a misdemeanor, for tying up and molesting two boys. Sentenced to three years of probation. His record is later expunged"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on April 14, 2010, 10:00:12 PM
Ulick, and others who are defending the indefensible, please take time to watch this movie, "Deliver Us From Evil".
Deliver Us from Evil is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s. The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

If you still believe that there is no cover up going on after watching this, then i'm sorry, there is no hope for you. Before you watch it, be prepared for some horrific stories of abuse and cover up. Right the whole way up to Benny in Rome. In particular, watch Cardinal Mahoney squirm and refuse to answer questions in police questioning. Plus, see how Mahoney and co gave Olive O' Grady a substantial pension in return for him not testifying against Mahoney. O'Grady was in jail at the time for 7 years for abusing children. Now why would the church reward a convicted child abuser?

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7745088455537169028&ei=_SrGS66UD9PH-Qbyl9CtAg&q=deliver+us+from+evil&hl=en#
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 14, 2010, 10:02:05 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on April 14, 2010, 10:00:12 PM
Ulick, and others who are defending the indefensible, please take time to watch this movie, "Deliver Us From Evil".
Deliver Us from Evil is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s. The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

If you still believe that there is no cover up going on after watching this, then i'm sorry, there is no hope for you. Before you watch it, be prepared for some horrific stories of abuse and cover up. Right the whole way up to Benny in Rome. In particular, watch Cardinal Mahoney squirm and refuse to answer questions in police questioning. Plus, see how Mahoney and co gave Olive O' Grady a substantial pension in return for him not testifying against Mahoney. O'Grady was in jail at the time for 7 years for abusing children. Now why would the church reward a convicted child abuser?

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7745088455537169028&ei=_SrGS66UD9PH-Qbyl9CtAg&q=deliver+us+from+evil&hl=en#

Ulick will soon be posting a movie refuting all these claims from the reputable website "www.welovecatholics.com"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 18, 2010, 01:06:00 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on April 14, 2010, 10:00:12 PM
Ulick, and others who are defending the indefensible, please take time to watch this movie, "Deliver Us From Evil".
Deliver Us from Evil is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s. The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

If you still believe that there is no cover up going on after watching this, then i'm sorry, there is no hope for you. Before you watch it, be prepared for some horrific stories of abuse and cover up. Right the whole way up to Benny in Rome. In particular, watch Cardinal Mahoney squirm and refuse to answer questions in police questioning. Plus, see how Mahoney and co gave Olive O' Grady a substantial pension in return for him not testifying against Mahoney. O'Grady was in jail at the time for 7 years for abusing children. Now why would the church reward a convicted child abuser?

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7745088455537169028&ei=_SrGS66UD9PH-Qbyl9CtAg&q=deliver+us+from+evil&hl=en#

Whooahh... what do you mean "Ulick, and others who are defending the indefensible" - what exactly is it you think I am defending?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 04:27:54 AM
You are beating your Head of a Brick Wall Ulick, with the lynch mob baying for blood, there is no point trying to reason with them. They never let facts get in the way of a good story, and are all to ready too believe the worst misquotes and misrepresentations of a gutter press. They care naught for victims, and are merely using them as a battering ram to attack what in their twisted thinking they perceive to be the Church. Heretics and Hypocrites the lot of them, come out from among them and dont lower your intellect to their level in a vain effort at reasonable debate
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 18, 2010, 12:32:55 PM
"Heretics and Hypocrites the lot of them, come out from among them and dont lower your intellect to their level in a vain effort at reasonable debate"

???

What a curious use of language used partly to defend the indefensible with a stone wall denial of the actions (the institutional cover up) by the office of the historical Inquisition, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The Christian socio-sentiment has always been much more dangerous than say the Jewish socio-sentiment, because the Christian point of view treated those who refused to accept the Christian faith as children of the devil (see 1 John 4:1-3), in contrast for example to the Jews who fundamentally acknowledged all human beings as the children of God, albeit they regarded themselves as the "first- born son"  :)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on April 18, 2010, 02:27:41 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 18, 2010, 12:32:55 PM
"Heretics and Hypocrites the lot of them, come out from among them and dont lower your intellect to their level in a vain effort at reasonable debate"

???

What a curious use of language used partly to defend the indefensible with a stone wall denial of the actions (the institutional cover up) by the office of the historical Inquisition, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The Christian socio-sentiment has always been much more dangerous than say the Jewish socio-sentiment, because the Christian point of view treated those who refused to accept the Christian faith as children of the devil (see 1 John 4:1-3), in contrast for example to the Jews who fundamentally acknowledged all human beings as the children of God, albeit they regarded themselves as the "first- born son"  :)
Do you not get the impression that Pangur might not be totally serious??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 18, 2010, 03:28:16 PM
It is possible :)

Such is the nature of the ultra zealot, blind to facts, defense of the Vatican and the CDF,  that a line between sarcasm and such dogma would need some demarcation for a gullible lad like myself.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 18, 2010, 05:00:58 PM
I dont think he's being sarcastic
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 18, 2010, 08:20:17 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on April 18, 2010, 05:00:58 PM
I dont think he's being sarcastic

Neither do I. Playing the ball and not the man is all. You could put all the evidence in the world in front of a lad like him and he'll claim some anti catholic conspiracy. Some people are just to entrenched in their views to listen to reason.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 18, 2010, 09:02:14 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence
no one is doing that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 09:17:07 PM
Get real Pints, read some of the comments on this and other related threads and you will see there are contributors with an agenda, too attack any manifestation of religion and catholicism in particular. They are fuelled by their own blind hatred, and devoid of any interest in victims,facts,truth or justice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 18, 2010, 09:33:48 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution.

There is EVERY chance that claiming gross incompeditence at Vatican level is just a convenient alibi Pangur. You cannot make that statement and stand over it. Some of us want proper disclosure and investigation before conclusions can be made. In time it is my belief that the reasons and motivations for the cover up will go right to the top.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 19, 2010, 12:11:44 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 09:17:07 PM
Get real Pints, read some of the comments on this and other related threads and you will see there are contributors with an agenda, too attack any manifestation of religion and catholicism in particular. They are fuelled by their own blind hatred, and devoid of any interest in victims,facts,truth or justice.
I don't think there's very many doing that and even if there are people like that it really takes nothing away from the fact that the church is behaving ridiculously and are doing a great job of destroying it themselves!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on April 19, 2010, 12:15:06 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 09:17:07 PM
Get real Pints, read some of the comments on this and other related threads and you will see there are contributors with an agenda, too attack any manifestation of religion and catholicism in particular. They are fuelled by their own blind hatred, and devoid of any interest in victims,facts,truth or justice.
Sounds like an accurate description of the Catholic Church. I would wager that most of these "haters" you refer to were/are Catholics amd therefore would have no reason to hate the Church for any reason than it's sinister deeds of some members of the clergy, and some would argue even more sinister coverup of these deeds. A coverup which appears to stretch from the Pope (past and present) down to local clergymen in Ireland.

Tell us why people are wrong to want answers, accountabilty, men behind bars, men defrocked, public inquiries, grovelling apologies? None of these will mend the lives of the thousands of people who were abused by members of the Catholic Church and in many cases with the full knowledge of their peers and superiors. The Church is not the buildings or the trappings of wealth the Catholic Church holds so dear. The Church is the people. It's plain for the world to see what the Catholic Church thought, and continues to think, of the people in it's pastoral care.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: pintsofguinness on April 19, 2010, 12:20:48 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on April 19, 2010, 12:15:06 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 09:17:07 PM
Get real Pints, read some of the comments on this and other related threads and you will see there are contributors with an agenda, too attack any manifestation of religion and catholicism in particular. They are fuelled by their own blind hatred, and devoid of any interest in victims,facts,truth or justice.
Sounds like an accurate description of the Catholic Church. I would wager that most of these "haters" you refer to were/are Catholics amd therefore would have no reason to hate the Church for any reason than it's sinister deeds of some members of the clergy, and some would argue even more sinister coverup of these deeds. A coverup which appears to stretch from the Pope (past and present) down to local clergymen in Ireland.

Tell us why people are wrong to want answers, accountabilty, men behind bars, men defrocked, public inquiries, grovelling apologies?
None of these will mend the lives of the thousands of people who were abused by members of the Catholic Church and in many cases with the full knowledge of their peers and superiors. The Church is not the buildings or the trappings of wealth the Catholic Church holds so dear. The Church is the people. It's plain for the world to see what the Catholic Church thought, and continues to think, of the people in it's pastoral care.

That's a question I'd love to hear the answer to from the apologists here, particularly the few who have never told us what they think and just proceed to have digs at those who are outraged as if there was something wrong with us for being angry!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rufus T Firefly on April 19, 2010, 12:46:46 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

Very well said. Excellent post. I doff my cap.

And if I might add, what I find particularly difficult to accept is the sneering manner in which a lot of these judgements and generalisations are handed down. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 19, 2010, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 19, 2010, 12:46:46 AM
Very well said. Excellent post. I doff my cap.

And if I might add, what I find particularly difficult to accept is the sneering manner in which a lot of these judgements and generalisations are handed down.

Not living in the real world are we Rufus? Maybe you and Pangur could answer Tony's questions above just to help us all understand why you feel the need to protect the church from scrutiny
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 19, 2010, 10:10:17 AM
Tearful Pope says sorry to clerical abuse victims


During his visit to Malta yesterday, the Pontiff looked exhausted as he momentarily fell asleep during Mass


THE Pope bowed to intense pressure yesterday and met a group of eight clerical sex abuse victims during his visit to Malta.

He expressed his "shame and sorrow" over what the men had suffered and insisted that the Catholic Church was doing "all in its power" to investigate similar allegations around the world.

The men, who claim they endured years of sexual abuse by Catholic priests at an orphanage on the island, said the Pope had tears in his eyes when he apologised to them for their ordeals.
The Pontiff (83) met the men in private at the residence of the papal nuncio, or Vatican ambassador, in Malta's historic capital, Valletta.

It represented the largest group of clerical sex abuse victims he has met, having encountered five American victims in Washington in April 2008 and five in Australia a few months later.

"He was deeply moved by their stories and expressed his shame and sorrow over what victims and their families have suffered," the Vatican said in a statement.

"He prayed with them and assured them that the church is doing, and will continue to do, all in its power to investigate allegations, to bring to justice those responsible for abuse and to implement effective measures designed to safeguard young people in the future."

The Vatican offered no further details of what measures would be implemented. Victims' advocacy groups have demanded that the Vatican take concrete steps to protect children and remove abusive priests, saying the Pope's expressions to date of solidarity and shame were meaningless unless actual action is taken.

A total of 10 Maltese men have alleged that priests molested them every day in the dormitory they shared at St Joseph Home orphanage between 1982 and 1990. Court proceedings have started against three priests, but the victims complain that the process is moving "at a snail's pace". A fourth accused priest has fled to Italy.

Joseph Magro (38) said: "It was a very emotional meeting. We were crying, the bishops were crying and the Pope had tears in his eyes. It is still very difficult for me, but I'm now at peace with the church."

He said the men received a call yesterday morning to come to the embassy and that the Pope spent a few minutes with each one of them.

A second victim, who wanted to be identified only as 'Emanuel', said: "The Pope was only in Malta for 26 hours and we really appreciated that he gave us half-an-hour of his time. But we will still fight in the courts for justice. A lot of Maltese people think we are only doing this to get money. We don't want money, we want justice. We don't want other people in the future to be hurt like we were."

Lawrence Grech, who led efforts to arrange the encounter, said the Pope told each of the men: "I am very proud of you for having come forward to tell your story."

- Nick Squires in Valletta

Irish Independent

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 19, 2010, 12:34:19 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up.

Yes everything leads to the CDF and everything coming out of the CDF was concerned with covering interests of the Church.

QuoteYes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up,

On the contrary, they were quite competent in dealing with supressing the sex scandals via the canon law advocates.
That was Vatican policy.

Quotemany individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution.

It is the 'proven beyond doubt' institutional cover up that stains the church. A cover up equal if not greater than the crime of those abusers who are convenient scapegoats.

QuoteMy problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities.

I think your problem either lies with your ability to gloss over evidence of proven Church institutional cover ups or your inability to to regard a cover-up as a crime.

QuoteThe Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting.
And the divinity of the Church is your belief. Do you tolerate people who don't share your beliefs? can you sincerely respect people who have other beliefs?

QuoteThat is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

I suggest you read the well documented reports of the sex abuse in Ireland and the USA.
Already in the USA, the Bishops as one voice have accepted that the whole Church in the USA was guilty of an prolonged and sustained institutionalised cover up and the institutionalised cover up was a despicable crime.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on April 20, 2010, 04:45:09 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

Is 'the Vatican' one of these faceless entities where the 'process' is at fault, not any individual?

I'll agree on the second point highlighted but unless they turn out the criminals the church is and has harboured, sometimes using diplomatic immunity then they've a load of road to travel.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 20, 2010, 04:55:09 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.

Not as many years as this abuse has been going on...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:56:03 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on April 20, 2010, 04:55:09 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 08:49:32 PM
I am here Myles, lets see the conclusive evidence linking the Pope to a cover up. Yes the Vatican were grossly incompetent, their responses to the scandal were immature and a PR balls-up, many individuals within the Church acted criminally and where this is proved there should be severe retribution. My problem lies with the fact that people like you and others on this Board are using the current scandal to attack and diminish the whole Church, rather than the individuals who failed to live up too their responsibilities. The Church is both Human and Divine, the human part by its very nature will always be found wanting. That is no reason to attack the majority of good clerics and people who are doing their best in difficult circumstances, and it does not justify trial by media based on emotion rather than evidence

Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.

Not as many years as this abuse has been going on...

Nobody is denying that but deflect my comment yet again
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on April 20, 2010, 05:02:11 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.

Theres a difference in simply stating condemnation and stating condemnation as well as demanding that the true extent of the problem be exposed. Your doing the former Iceman. You want it all to calm down and go away instead of seeking to find out the real extent of the problem in your church. What are you afarid of?
You, me an all the rest each have our agendas but it shouldn't overly cloud the debate. And as Tony mentioned in an earlier post.....

I would wager that most of these "haters" you refer to were/are Catholics amd therefore would have no reason to hate the Church for any reason than it's sinister deeds of some members of the clergy, and some would argue even more sinister coverup of these deeds. A coverup which appears to stretch from the Pope (past and present) down to local clergymen in Ireland.

Tell us why people are wrong to want answers, accountabilty, men behind bars, men defrocked, public inquiries, grovelling apologies? None of these will mend the lives of the thousands of people who were abused by members of the Catholic Church and in many cases with the full knowledge of their peers and superiors.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 05:08:19 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 20, 2010, 05:02:11 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.

Theres a difference in simply stating condemnation and stating condemnation as well as demanding that the true extent of the problem be exposed. Your doing the former Iceman. You want it all to calm down and go away instead of seeking to find out the real extent of the problem in your church. What are you afarid of?
You, me an all the rest each have our agendas but it shouldn't overly cloud the debate. And as Tony mentioned in an earlier post.....

I would wager that most of these "haters" you refer to were/are Catholics amd therefore would have no reason to hate the Church for any reason than it's sinister deeds of some members of the clergy, and some would argue even more sinister coverup of these deeds. A coverup which appears to stretch from the Pope (past and present) down to local clergymen in Ireland.

Tell us why people are wrong to want answers, accountabilty, men behind bars, men defrocked, public inquiries, grovelling apologies? None of these will mend the lives of the thousands of people who were abused by members of the Catholic Church and in many cases with the full knowledge of their peers and superiors.


I don't think I am doing the former but we can agree to disagree I guess.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting answers, accountability and men behind bars - I am all for it.
But is that all people want?  Some people are hijacking this to grind their own axes.  I doubt that all the former Catholics were affected by "sinister" acts - I would make the assumption that a lot of the former Catholics are former because they just didn't care for it. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 20, 2010, 05:11:48 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 05:08:19 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on April 20, 2010, 05:02:11 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 04:32:28 PM
Excellent post!

Pints you call for the "apologists" to answer you but the majority of people on both sides have made it clear how they feel and condemned the acts of abuse and the cover up.  There are a lot of people on here with their own agenda and this topic and thread highlights that even more.  Their feelings towards the Catholic Church have been apparent for the years I have frequented this board.

Theres a difference in simply stating condemnation and stating condemnation as well as demanding that the true extent of the problem be exposed. Your doing the former Iceman. You want it all to calm down and go away instead of seeking to find out the real extent of the problem in your church. What are you afarid of?
You, me an all the rest each have our agendas but it shouldn't overly cloud the debate. And as Tony mentioned in an earlier post.....

I would wager that most of these "haters" you refer to were/are Catholics amd therefore would have no reason to hate the Church for any reason than it's sinister deeds of some members of the clergy, and some would argue even more sinister coverup of these deeds. A coverup which appears to stretch from the Pope (past and present) down to local clergymen in Ireland.

Tell us why people are wrong to want answers, accountabilty, men behind bars, men defrocked, public inquiries, grovelling apologies? None of these will mend the lives of the thousands of people who were abused by members of the Catholic Church and in many cases with the full knowledge of their peers and superiors.


I don't think I am doing the former but we can agree to disagree I guess.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting answers, accountability and men behind bars - I am all for it.
But is that all people want?  Some people are hijacking this to grind their own axes.  I doubt that all the former Catholics were affected by "sinister" acts - I would make the assumption that a lot of the former Catholics are former because they just didn't care for it.

So do we need to have been molested and raped by priests to be totally disillusioned and sickened by the Catholic Church? For the record was on end of their brutality as were most who went to their schools.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 05:58:49 PM
I went to their schools too and so did most of the people I know.  We all don't hate the Church though.
Maybe your experience was different and warrants the hate.  But I think it should be directed at individuals not at the Catholic millions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 20, 2010, 06:01:23 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 20, 2010, 05:58:49 PM
I went to their schools too and so did most of the people I know.  We all don't hate the Church though.
Maybe your experience was different and warrants the hate.  But I think it should be directed at individuals not at the Catholic millions.

It ain't directed at Catholic millions... hysterical comment.   Jees! man... my mother goes to church and dozens of my friends.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 24, 2010, 03:41:59 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/23/belgian-bishop-admits-molesting-boy (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/23/belgian-bishop-admits-molesting-boy)

If the abuse was isolated to one country or region, I would lay the blame locally. When the abuse is world-wide I would lay the blame at the top.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on April 24, 2010, 10:14:08 PM
A cursory inspection of the current output of what is currently regarded as intelligent and spiritual leadership from the Vatican would lead many people to believe that it is morally and intellectually bankrupt as well as internally rotting. The Vatican has proved to be an ugly stain on the standard of spiritual and moral values.
It is just a question of how long Catholicism can survive.
Both the roots of the tree and its branches have contracted a terminal disease, the trunk has to die as well.
Although Catholicism still does influence many people, the Church day by day grows less attractive and year by year its power wanes. The simple truth is, that the irrational dogmas of Catholicism can no longer satisfy, or pacify this coming generation.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on April 24, 2010, 11:53:24 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 24, 2010, 10:14:08 PM
A cursory inspection of the current output of what is currently regarded as intelligent and spiritual leadership from the Vatican would lead many people to believe that it is morally and intellectually bankrupt as well as internally rotting. The Vatican has proved to be an ugly stain on the standard of spiritual and moral values.
It is just a question of how long Catholicism can survive.
Both the roots of the tree and its branches have contracted a terminal disease, the trunk has to die as well.
Although Catholicism still does influence many people, the Church day by day grows less attractive and year by year its power wanes. The simple truth is, that the irrational dogmas of Catholicism can no longer satisfy, or pacify this coming generation.
Somehow or other, I think the Catholic Church will survive alright.  Its history since the earliest days has been littered with similar controversies and scandals. While the deeds of the present sorry lot, who purport to lead the Church, would put all the devils in Hell to shame, the ordinary members will carry on with their daily lives. Those are the people who give meaning to the virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity and they practice their beliefs. Dogmas and red hats don't bother them too much.
There are far too many sincere, devout Christians out there to let the arrogance and incompetence of a pack of devious old men bring the Church to its knees. That has been the case throughout Church history and it will be the same again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardmhachaabu on April 25, 2010, 12:36:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 24, 2010, 11:53:24 PM
Quote from: Main Street on April 24, 2010, 10:14:08 PM
A cursory inspection of the current output of what is currently regarded as intelligent and spiritual leadership from the Vatican would lead many people to believe that it is morally and intellectually bankrupt as well as internally rotting. The Vatican has proved to be an ugly stain on the standard of spiritual and moral values.
It is just a question of how long Catholicism can survive.
Both the roots of the tree and its branches have contracted a terminal disease, the trunk has to die as well.
Although Catholicism still does influence many people, the Church day by day grows less attractive and year by year its power wanes. The simple truth is, that the irrational dogmas of Catholicism can no longer satisfy, or pacify this coming generation.
Somehow or other, I think the Catholic Church will survive alright.  Its history since the earliest days has been littered with similar controversies and scandals. While the deeds of the present sorry lot, who purport to lead the Church, would put all the devils in Hell to shame, the ordinary members will carry on with their daily lives. Those are the people who give meaning to the virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity and they practice their beliefs. Dogmas and red hats don't bother them too much.
There are far too many sincere, devout Christians out there to let the arrogance and incompetence of a pack of devious old men bring the Church to its knees. That has been the case throughout Church history and it will be the same again.
I don't know what your beliefs are Lar, I think you hit it on the head though, for me anyway
I will continue to practice my beliefs and will raise my boys as Catholics.  I am not seeking to put anyone down for having other beliefs.  That's their business, not mine.  Mine is to bear witness to my faith and not allow people to speak untruths about it unchallenged.  If people choose to not listen to the truth, that's their decision, not mine
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longrunsthefox on April 25, 2010, 11:46:55 AM
Anyone read about that snake Oliver O'Grady (priest who was moved and covered up by Catholic church in USA) in the Tribune today. Seems he turned up in  a church group in Holland and among other things organisnig childrens parties. Chilling. He is described as the Hannibal Lector of child abuse. Should be locked up for ever.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on April 25, 2010, 06:09:10 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on April 18, 2010, 09:17:07 PM
Get real Pints, read some of the comments on this and other related threads and you will see there are contributors with an agenda, too attack any manifestation of religion and catholicism in particular. They are fuelled by their own blind hatred, and devoid of any interest in victims,facts,truth or justice.

Exactly... it's too bad the same latitude can't be offered up for the faction of evil that exists within the Catholic church
with what is clearly evident and frequently found here for the evil faction in the name of Islam  :-X ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 11, 2010, 11:33:29 AM
More revelations from Archbishop Martin


Parishes to be vigilant on child protection
Tuesday, 11 May 2010 11:17
The Catholic Archbishop of Dublin has appealed publicly to all parishes in the Archdiocese to ensure all child protection measures are in place and in operation and that there is no let-up in the level of vigilance.

Read the full address

In an address at the headquarters of conservative church group the Knights of St Columbanus, Dr Diarmuid Martin said questions about safeguarding children should be on the agenda of every meeting of every parish pastoral council.

The Archbishop said he was personally disheartened and discouraged about the level of willingness within the Catholic Church to begin a process of renewal, following the recent revelations of clerical child abuse.

He said there were still 'strong forces' preventing the truth from emerging but that in future we would see a very different Catholic Church in Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 13, 2010, 08:03:02 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 11, 2010, 11:33:29 AM
More revelations from Archbishop Martin


Parishes to be vigilant on child protection
Tuesday, 11 May 2010 11:17
The Catholic Archbishop of Dublin has appealed publicly to all parishes in the Archdiocese to ensure all child protection measures are in place and in operation and that there is no let-up in the level of vigilance.

Read the full address

In an address at the headquarters of conservative church group the Knights of St Columbanus, Dr Diarmuid Martin said questions about safeguarding children should be on the agenda of every meeting of every parish pastoral council.

The Archbishop said he was personally disheartened and discouraged about the level of willingness within the Catholic Church to begin a process of renewal, following the recent revelations of clerical child abuse.

He said there were still 'strong forces' preventing the truth from emerging but that in future we would see a very different Catholic Church in Ireland.


I meant to post on this very comment earlier by Archbishop Martin. He seems to be one of the few to stick his head up and try and say something that none of his buddies want to hear. However, surely he should be going further than this. He needs to say loud and clear WHO these strong forces are and in what way they are preventing the truth. We are not talking about a little bit of Tax evasion we are talking about covering up child rapists a
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on August 12, 2010, 01:13:21 PM
Good old Pope refuses to accept resignations of 2 Bishops that covered up sexual abuse of children. Is there anyone left out there now that believes the church is looking after anything other than their own selfish interested. I expect Diarmuid Martin, the only man in a senior position with opinions remotely close to what the ordinary people think, will now be sidelined. Anyway, I thought it was only in a dictatorship that you could refuse to allow someone to resign, oh wait...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on August 12, 2010, 01:32:38 PM
Maybe if they'd have waited a bit longer before making this announcement they'd have gotten away with it.

The arrogance of those in power within the Church never fails to amaze me now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on August 12, 2010, 01:35:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 12, 2010, 01:13:21 PM
Good old Pope refuses to accept resignations of 2 Bishops that covered up sexual abuse of children. Is there anyone left out there now that believes the church is looking after anything other than their own selfish interested. I expect Diarmuid Martin, the only man in a senior position with opinions remotely close to what the ordinary people think, will now be sidelined. Anyway, I thought it was only in a dictatorship that you could refuse to allow someone to resign, oh wait...

He already has.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 12, 2010, 01:35:57 PM
It is really hardly to respect much less warm to this Pope.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on August 12, 2010, 11:15:24 PM
What reason did he give for rejecting their resignations? Crazy - how can these men show their faces in the diocese and expect life to go on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on August 13, 2010, 08:01:34 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on August 12, 2010, 11:15:24 PM
What reason did he give for rejecting their resignations? Crazy - how can these men show their faces in the diocese and expect life to go on.

No explanation was given. Sure why would he bother. Anyone that still has any time for the churches leaders at this stage is so blinkered that the pope could do and say anything and it would make no difference to them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on August 29, 2010, 09:20:22 AM
Belgian Cardinal admits abuse cover up bid
Sunday, 29 August 2010 07:36
The Catholic Church in Belgium has admitted that a Cardinal attempted to prevent a sex abuse victim from going public with their story.

The incident happened at a meeting last April when the former head of the Catholic Church in Belgium, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, asked the victim to delay making a public statement until the bishop who abused him had retired.

The Bishop later admitted to the abuse and resigned.

AdvertisementIn transcripts, published in De Standaard yesterday, Danneels suggested the victim should make no public statement about the abuse until Bishop Roger Vangheluwe retired the following year.

He told the victim he believed a public announcement would not serve the interests of the victim or the bishop, the transcripts said.

'I don't know if there will be much to gain from making a lot of noise about this, neither for you nor for him.'

Vangheluwe resigned after admitting having abused the victim for a number of years, both as a priest and a bishop.

Danneels retired in January and has been questioned as a witness in an investigation into sexual abuse by the church in Belgium
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on August 29, 2010, 03:00:58 PM
Isn't it an amazing coincidence how the bishops in Ireland, Germany, usa and now Belgium all react the same way to sexual abuse of children. It's almost as if they were following orders from a central command.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on December 06, 2010, 05:12:55 PM
http://www.click2houston.com/news/26006289/detail.html (http://www.click2houston.com/news/26006289/detail.html)

Priest Arrested At Adult Video Store
Father Alberto A. Maullon Charged With Indecent Exposure

POSTED: Friday, December 3, 2010
UPDATED: 4:25 pm CST December 3, 2010

EmailPrintHOUSTON -- A Houston area priest has taken a leave of absence from his parish after being arrested at an adult video store a few miles from his church.

The Houston Police Department Vice Squad had undercover officers inside two adult video stores along the Gulf Freeway in southeast Houston when they said they encountered Father Alberto A. Maullon, 52, of Southeast Harris County.

Vice officers involved in the sting told KPRC Local 2 Maullon was the only person in a private viewing booth area of the Big City Adult Book Store at 10105 Gulf Freeway Wednesday night.

An undercover officer approached and exchanged a nod with him, followed by the locked door being opened for the undercover officer.

One officer involved in the sting said at that point "he whipped his junk out" and started masturbating for the undercover officer.

The priest, who was named head of St. Paul the Apostle Catholic Church in Nassau Bay in 1991, was quickly arrested.

Officers said he identified himself as a priest as they were booking him. On his booking paperwork, he listed his address on Point Lookout Drive, the same street where the church is located.




The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston issued a statement about the arrest.

"Father Maullon has expressed deep sorrow for any pain or hurt caused by this event and has requested and been granted a leave of absence from his ministerial duties," a representative said.

"I ask you to join me in praying for St. Paul Parish and for Father Maullon as he addresses these very personal challenges with his priesthood," Cardinal Daniel DiNardo said.

Maullon posted a $1,000 bond and was released from jail Thursday. He's scheduled to appear before the judge in the Harris County Court at Law No. 4 on Dec. 9.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 06, 2010, 06:23:09 PM
Somewhat deranged activity between consenting adults but hardly abusive, never mind criminal.

The vice squad must be the pits for a US cop.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 06, 2010, 08:39:20 PM
I see the dancing priest got what he deserved today - 16 years in jail. sc**bag.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1206/walsht.html

A former Dublin priest has been sentenced to 16 years in prison for abusing three young boys in the 1970s and 1980s.
The final four years of the sentence were suspended.
Tony Walsh was convicted by a jury at the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court last month of indecently assaulting and raping a boy over five years when his victim was between seven and 12 years old.
Walsh, who was a member of the All Priests Show, last week pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting two other boys.
Judge Frank O'Donnell imposed prison sentences ranging from four years for indecent assault to 16 years for the most serious offence. The sentences will run concurrently.
Walsh's senior counsel, David Keane, said he had been instructed to ask for leave to appeal the conviction and sentence in relation to the offences for which Walsh was found guilty by the jury.
Leave to appeal was refused.
Following the sentencing, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin issued a statement saying he hoped that 'the finality of the legal process will help bring them some sense of justice, of healing, of closure and hope for the future'.
'I can only unreservedly apologise to the victims of this man for what they endured and for the way in which the diocese failed them.'
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lawrence of Knockbride on December 06, 2010, 10:14:48 PM
Anyone out there anywhere know why such a **** would get 4 years of his sentence suspended?
Oh and I hope you'll all be praying hard for Father Jerkoff in Houston.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 06, 2010, 10:26:53 PM
He probably got them suspended for admitting remorse or something. 16 yrs is quite a big sentence in comparison to what some of the other hoors got.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 07, 2010, 06:15:56 PM
Quote from: Lawrence of Knockbride on December 06, 2010, 10:14:48 PM
Anyone out there anywhere know why such a **** would get 4 years of his sentence suspended?
Perhaps because he pleaded guilty.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hound on December 07, 2010, 06:48:13 PM
Quote from: Main Street on December 07, 2010, 06:15:56 PM
Quote from: Lawrence of Knockbride on December 06, 2010, 10:14:48 PM
Anyone out there anywhere know why such a **** would get 4 years of his sentence suspended?
Perhaps because he pleaded guilty.
Nah, he pleaded guilty to some of the minor offences but not the major ones.

He got the 4 years off because some 'ologist did a report saying he was highly unlikely to re-offend.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lawrence of Knockbride on December 07, 2010, 07:18:42 PM
Maybe if he got 25 years he'd be even more unlikely to reoffend. He could still pray and repent in jail which would surely be his priority.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 10, 2010, 11:23:08 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-vatican-child-sex-abuse-investigation (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-vatican-child-sex-abuse-investigation)

WikiLeaks cables: Vatican refused to engage with child sex abuse inquiry
Leaked cable lays bare how Irish government was forced to grant Vatican officials immunity from testifying to Murphy commission
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 11, 2010, 01:30:36 AM
A room full of eunuchs would have more cohones than this government.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 21, 2010, 08:44:23 PM
Just when you thought they had reached the bottom you are shocked that they can keep going lower.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/pope-stirs-up-victim-fury-with-child-sex-comments-2468163.html


Pope stirs up victim fury with child sex comments


By John Cooney Religion Correspondent
Tuesday December 21 2010
VICTIMS of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict's claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn't considered an 'absolute evil' as recently as the 1970s.

In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered "normal" by society.

"In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children," the Pope said. "It was maintained -- even within the realm of Catholic theology -- that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a 'better than' and a 'worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself."

The Pope said abuse revelations in 2010 reached "an unimaginable dimension" which required the Catholic Church to accept the "humiliation" as a call for renewal.

Asking how sexual abuse exploded within the Church, the German Pontiff called on senior clerics "to repair as much as possible the injustices that occurred" and to help victims heal their hurts through a better presentation of the Christian message.

"We cannot remain silent about the context of these times in which these events have come to light," he said, citing the growth of child pornography "that seems in some way to be considered more and more normal by society," he said.

Outraged

But outraged Dublin victim Andrew Madden accused the Pope of not knowing that child pornography was actually the viewing of images of children being sexually abused, and should be named as such.

He said: "That is not normal. I don't know what company the Pope has been keeping for the past 50 years."

Pope Benedict also said sexual tourism in the third world was "threatening an entire generation". Angry abuse victims in America last night said that while some church officials have blamed the liberalism of the 1960s for the church's sex abuse scandals and cover-up catastrophes, Pope Benedict had come up with a new theory of blaming the 1970s. "Catholics should be embarrassed to hear their Pope talk again and again about abuse while doing little or nothing to stop it and to mischaracterise this heinous crisis," said Barbara Blaine, the head of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

"It is fundamentally disturbing to watch a brilliant man so conveniently misdiagnose a horrific scandal," she added.

"The Pope insists on talking about a vague 'broader context' he can't control, while ignoring the clear 'broader context' he can influence -- the long-standing and unhealthy culture of a rigid, secretive, all-male church hierarchy fixated on self-preservation at all costs. This is the 'context' that matters."

The latest controversy comes as the German magazine 'Der Spiegel' continues to investigate the Pope's role in allowing a paedophile priest to work with children in the 1980s when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Archbishop of Munich.

Anger

It also come only days after Irish abuse victims vented their anger and dismay at the Murphy Commission's disclosure that the Vatican initially rejected a verdict by a Dublin church tribunal to defrock the now jailed Fr Tony Walsh in 1993.

The Vatican proposed a 10-year confinement for Walsh in a monastery, even though he had been diagnosed by psychiatrists as a serial abuser.

It was only when Walsh was imprisoned shortly afterwards that Cardinal Desmond Connell begged the late Pope John Paul II to remove Walsh from the priesthood which was belatedly facilitated by Cardinal Ratzinger, by now the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith dealing with abuse cases.

In his address, Pope Benedict specifically insisted that the church needed to train prospective priests better so that abusers were not ordained, and he committed the church to help heal victims of paedophile priests.

- John Cooney Religion Correspondent
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 21, 2010, 09:59:11 PM
Der Spiegel is continuing some level of investigation into Ratzinger's time in Munich.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,731683,00.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,731683,00.html)
The archbishop of Munich, who rallied to  defend the Pope in spring of this year, has been promoted to Cardinal at the age of 57. In cardinal years, 57 is a mere baby. 

Ratzinger had claimed to not know about the activities of a paedophile priest in his charge and some lower clerk took the rap. Der Spiegel is persisting, they claim they have more indisputable evidence of Ratzinger being fully au fait with the paedophile/abuser  priest and had assigned him to pastoral duties, some 2 weeks after the priest had commenced therapy to help with his paedophilia..
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on December 22, 2010, 02:13:05 AM
This latest statement from the Pope, is embarrassing. Its pure sociological waffle and gobbledook. Like most rational catholics that lived through the sixties and seventies, i knew that child abuse and child pornography were evil.  As did all popes,priests and bishops since the time of the apostles. When a Pope stoops to portraying the culture of the times, rather than the word of God  and right reason, to explain or excuse heinous criminal behaviour by members of his clergy, his Church is seriously disordered and in trouble. Doubtless further clarification of this statement will be forthcoming, but in my view the damage has been done. We can only pray that the wiser counsels in the Church outside of the Vatican will prevail, and give authentic witness to our faith
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on December 22, 2010, 05:56:13 PM
Can anyone explain to me how Cardinal Brady sleeps at night?

http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183 (ftp://http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183)

I know a lot of the above is a reprise of previous revelations, but to sit and watch a clear outline of just what has been going on day after day, week after week, for years, decades even, whilst people like Brady knew exactly what was happening, but stood by and did nothing under the pretext that it was "someone elses responsibility", even when nothing was happening, is truly shocking.

And he calls himself a "Man of God"... >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 22, 2010, 08:40:30 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on December 22, 2010, 05:56:13 PM
Can anyone explain to me how Cardinal Brady sleeps at night?

http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183 (ftp://http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183)

I know a lot of the above is a reprise of previous revelations, but to sit and watch a clear outline of just what has been going on day after day, week after week, for years, decades even, whilst people like Brady knew exactly what was happening, but stood by and did nothing under the pretext that it was "someone elses responsibility", even when nothing was happening, is truly shocking.

And he calls himself a "Man of God"... >:(

Maybe, like the pope, self preservation is the only thing he is truly concerned about. I hope he is praying hard because the Jesus that is in the bible that I read will send him straight to hell along with the current pope.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on December 22, 2010, 11:13:17 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 22, 2010, 08:40:30 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on December 22, 2010, 05:56:13 PM
Can anyone explain to me how Cardinal Brady sleeps at night?

http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183 (ftp://http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134183)

I know a lot of the above is a reprise of previous revelations, but to sit and watch a clear outline of just what has been going on day after day, week after week, for years, decades even, whilst people like Brady knew exactly what was happening, but stood by and did nothing under the pretext that it was "someone elses responsibility", even when nothing was happening, is truly shocking.

And he calls himself a "Man of God"... >:(

Maybe, like the pope, self preservation is the only thing he is truly concerned about. I hope he is praying hard because the Jesus that is in the bible that I read will send him straight to hell along with the current pope.

Let's not forget the previous pope whom people are calling to be made a saint -

The pope who presided over a time when all these revelations, especially in America, were occuring;

and the vatican did not issue one word of apology during his reign/term.

Correction - they issued one apology, when they were forced to by an American court of law, as part of the settlement to the

victim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 27, 2010, 08:30:17 AM
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/religious-still-owe-state-euro500m-for-survivors-2474886.html

Religious still owe State €500m for survivors
Thousands wait despite abuse deals


By Katherine Donnelly
Monday December 27 2010
RELIGIOUS orders still owe the State more than €500m arising from the deal to compensate the thousands of children who were abused while living in their care.

The 18 congregations involved pledged a total of €680m in cash and property to cover half the cost of the settlement with the victims.

But so far, only €123m has actually been paid over, according to a new breakdown of figures. There were two separate deals between the State and the religious -- one in 2002 for €128m and another, in 2009, for €552m.

There was much criticism in 2002 that the religious orders were getting away too lightly, but the Government insisted that the €128m would cover half the cost of compensating victims. In the event, the final cost between legal fees and payments to victims has amounted to around €1.2bn.

Following the shocking revelations last year of the Ryan Report into child abuse in religious-run residential institutions, the Government renegotiated the settlement.

The 2009 deal involved an additional contribution of €349m in cash and property, as well as €203m for the new children's hospital, currently at the early stages of the planning process. But only €20m has been handed over and no property has been transferred.

According to recent figures, the religious have still to hand over:

€26m worth of property from the 2002 deal.
€236m in property and €92m in cash from the 2009 deal.
€203m for the new National Children's Hospital.
Labour education spokesman Ruairi Quinn said the public would be disappointed and angered at the slow pace of the payments.

"I hope that this does not represent an attempt by the religious congregations to renege on the agreement.

"The Government must now insist the pace of payments and transfers is accelerated, particularly given the horrendous economic problems we are facing."

He said the 2009 deal included €110m for a Statutory Fund for Survivors of Abuse to support their needs, but only €20m of that had been handed over.

Mr Quinn also said that failure to pay the €203m for the children's hospital ran the risk of further delaying the project.

Education Minister Mary Coughlan told Mr Quinn that the €26m outstanding from the 2002 deal related to properties that had physically transferred to the State, although the legal arrangements had not been completed.

Fear

She said many of the properties were held in complex legal structures, including trusts, which had resulted in a time-consuming transfer process.

She said she would be reporting to Government soon in relation to the €236m worth of property offers made in 2009.

Of the €92m cash outstanding from 2009, some orders are awaiting sight of the details of the fund, while others are awaiting confirmation of the charitable status of their contributions to the fund before handing over the money.

The Ryan Report uncovered details of sexual abuse and beatings by priests and nuns of thousands of children living in the institutions over almost four decades. It found children lived in "a climate of fear" and that sexual abuse was "endemic" in boys' institutions.

The abuse was compounded by a culture of cover-up, with offenders transferred to other locations where they were free to abuse again.

The Government set up the Residential Institutions Redress Board to deal with claims for compensation from victims. It has processed more than 14,000 cases.

- Katherine Donnelly
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 18, 2011, 04:56:06 PM
A Muslim cleric has been jailed by a Nottingham Court for 16 years for the sex abuse/rape of a young boy.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/cleric-jailed-for-raping-young-boy-15118577.html (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/cleric-jailed-for-raping-young-boy-15118577.html)

Appropriate or not, this sentence is extremely harsh when compared to other examples of 5 years jail time for christian clerics who faced the courts on equally and more serious charges of rape against a multitude of children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 18, 2011, 05:06:55 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2011, 04:56:06 PM
A Muslim cleric has been jailed by a Nottingham Court for 16 years for the sex abuse/rape of a young boy.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/cleric-jailed-for-raping-young-boy-15118577.html (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/cleric-jailed-for-raping-young-boy-15118577.html)

Appropriate or not, this sentence is extremely harsh when compared to other examples of 5 years jail time for christian clerics who faced the courts on equally and more serious charges of rape against a multitude of children.

Absolutely appropriate punishment, if only the same level of punishment was brought against the christian clerics
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 18, 2011, 06:46:05 PM
Rape is serious crime and child rape is the most serious of rape crimes, so I'd have no argument against 16 years, which effectively means at least 8 years.

It is just unfortunate that all the white, fat and ugly christian cleric multiple rapists were meted such leniency and did not have face the judicious Justice Linda Dobbs.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2011, 12:16:57 PM
Are the pennies finally dropping ? And a few days of fasting as well. That will help a lot !!

Irish bishops promise more support to abuse victims 

A document was given to mass-goers in NI on Saturday evening.

It updated them on what the bishops are doing to help victims and the ways they are improving child protection in the church.

Last March, Pope Benedict took the unprecedented step of writing a pastoral letter apologising to victims of Catholic Institutional Abuse.

Senior church officials were then sent to look at clerical abuse within the church in Ireland.

It was part of an apostolic visitation, announced by Pope Benedict in his pastoral letter.

To mark the first anniversary of the Pope's pastoral letter, Irish bishops have issued a "progress report" into what they are doing called 'Towards Healing and Renewal'.

A counselling service for victims and families will get an extra £9m in funding.

The church said it would provide more child protection training and would continue work closely with the police and social services over allegation of abuse.

Bishops will also set-a-side the first Friday of every month for prayer and fasting, to make amends for abuse and for the failure of leadership to respond to it effectively. [/size]
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2011, 12:20:57 PM
STOP PRESS - NOT PENNIES BUT £/ € s


The country's 26 Catholic dioceses are to fund half the cost of the Church's annual counselling bill for those abused as children by its personnel.


The hierarchy have promised to increase their contribution to an enhanced service by approximately €1.5 million over the next five years.

Until now, the service 'Faoiseamh', has been supported primarily by religious orders and congregations, some of which ran industrial schools.

The commitment to the new service, called 'Towards Healing', is contained in a statement by Cardinal Seán Brady which accompanied the bishops' Pastoral letter on abuse released this evening.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2011, 07:27:44 PM
QuoteBishops will also set-a-side the first Friday of every month for prayer and fasting

What does fasting mean in the  Catholic Church?
Only one full meal a day?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 26, 2011, 12:50:55 PM
The huge settlement reached yesterday against an order in the Catholic Church has just received bare bones coverage in Irish media. It is the latest in a litter of successful cases taken against the Catholic Church in the USA.
We are all too familiar with the common pattern of denial and cover up by the Catholic Church, take it as read that they tried their level best, from the top down, to cover up and obstruct with all their might, every step of the way.

The Oregon Province of the Society of Jesus is now in federal bankruptcy court in Portland, Oregon.  Insurers will pay $118 million, and the Jesuits' Pacific Northwest province will pay $48.1 million, to about 470 people who were sexually and psychologically abused as children by Jesuit priests from the 1940s to the 1990s,
In addition, the society will publicize the names of perpetrators, issue a written apology to victims, release their medical records to them and take steps to protect children from future sexual abuse.

The Northwest includes Alaska.
Attorney Manly told reporters that the settlement was "a small step for this country recognizing the holocaust that occurred to Native Americans at these boarding schools."
"What you had at these boarding schools was nothing less than a Slobodan Milosevic-style cultural assassination using rape as an offensive weapon to control people," he said. "They can deny it, they can pretend like it didn't happen, they can minimize it, but that's what it is."

Anchorage-based attorney Kenneth Roosa
"Alaska was essentially used as a dumping ground for pedophile priests for decades,". "It was a pedophile's paradise."

The high and mighty were implicated.
Seattle University President Stephen Sundborg was named in a lawsuit alleging that Jesuit leaders covered up the crimes of priests who sexually abused at least 43 Native Alaskan children during the span of four decades.
The lawsuit, filed in Alaskan Superior Court in the city of Bethel, in 2009 states that Sundborg had access to "Hell Files" -- private church documents detailing things priests had done that were "not good" -- when he was head of a Northwest order of Jesuits from 1990 to 1996.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on March 26, 2011, 06:46:57 PM
that these animals hid behind the name of Christ to perpertrate these vile acts on innocent children is incredible, this scum and the scum that protected them should never see the light of day, the Church, the Pope and all his bishops should be on their knees begging forgiveness and no matter how many millions they bring to the table, they all have ruined the lives of millions of children the world over and in many cases their families, may God curse everyone of them that were involved in any capacity whatsoever.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Groucho on March 26, 2011, 08:40:49 PM
I hope you all vote with your feet and your pocket >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 12, 2011, 02:53:37 PM
No Phoenix Park, Galway or Dundalk this time - 1979 it is estimated that 2/3 of the population went to see John Paul with 250,000 in the Park alone.


Croke Park has been chosen for the proposed papal visit in 2012  where it will be invitation only it seems.

Changed times.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 12, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 12, 2011, 02:53:37 PM
No Phoenix Park, Galway or Dundalk this time - 1979 it is estimated that 2/3 of the population went to see John Paul with 250,000 in the Park alone.


Croke Park has been chosen for the proposed papal visit in 2012  where it will be invitation only it seems.

Changed times.

What is the purpose of this visit? Presumably it will cost as much as when Obama or queen Elizabeth came. We are bankrupt so what is the payback for this? Maybe the pope is coming to lift the spirits of the people, its hardly to openly apologise for the rape of Irish children and the protection of rapists within the church!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on June 12, 2011, 11:46:45 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 12, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 12, 2011, 02:53:37 PM
No Phoenix Park, Galway or Dundalk this time - 1979 it is estimated that 2/3 of the population went to see John Paul with 250,000 in the Park alone.


Croke Park has been chosen for the proposed papal visit in 2012  where it will be invitation only it seems.

Changed times.
Lets see what he has to say first.

What is the purpose of this visit? Presumably it will cost as much as when Obama or queen Elizabeth came. We are bankrupt so what is the payback for this? Maybe the pope is coming to lift the spirits of the people, its hardly to openly apologise for the rape of Irish children and the protection of rapists within the church!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on June 13, 2011, 12:17:28 AM
He just wants to meet Joe Sheridan.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 01:13:55 PM
Quote from: Hardy on June 13, 2011, 12:17:28 AM
He just wants to meet Joe Sheridan.

I'm sure Joe will be freely available from next Sunday week ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 01:55:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 12, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
What is the purpose of this visit? Presumably it will cost as much as when Obama or queen Elizabeth came. We are bankrupt so what is the payback for this?

If he does come it'll be for the Eucharistic Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_Congress) and if you're bothered about the cost you'll be relieved to know that the number international visitors the Congress will attract should more than offset an costs to the state.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 13, 2011, 05:56:00 PM
Quote from: Hardy on June 13, 2011, 12:17:28 AM
He just wants to meet Joe Sheridan.

Larry told him to come.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 09:24:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 01:55:15 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 12, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
What is the purpose of this visit? Presumably it will cost as much as when Obama or queen Elizabeth came. We are bankrupt so what is the payback for this?

If he does come it'll be for the Eucharistic Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_Congress) and if you're bothered about the cost you'll be relieved to know that the number international visitors the Congress will attract should more than offset an costs to the state.

I'm bothered about the cost and I an bothered that the head of an organisation and a statelet that showed no respect for the rule of law in this republic and sought to obstruct it at every turn. I'd rather have queen Elizabeth.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 10:59:33 PM
Dublin-Monaghan is the only thing that springs to mind.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 10:59:33 PM
Dublin-Monaghan is the only thing that springs to mind.

The sad thing is I believe you. Some people don't deserve a republic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 10:59:33 PM
Dublin-Monaghan is the only thing that springs to mind.

The sad thing is I believe you. Some people don't deserve a republic.

Sorry, did I miss the Pope bombing us?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2011, 12:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 10:59:33 PM
Dublin-Monaghan is the only thing that springs to mind.

The sad thing is I believe you. Some people don't deserve a republic.

Sorry, did I miss the Pope bombing us?

Perhaps you should look for another thread to behave like a 5 year old. This one is about a serious topic - well at least most normal people would think so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on June 14, 2011, 01:33:49 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2011, 12:03:43 AM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 11:27:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 13, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Quote from: Ulick on June 13, 2011, 10:59:33 PM
Dublin-Monaghan is the only thing that springs to mind.

The sad thing is I believe you. Some people don't deserve a republic.

Sorry, did I miss the Pope bombing us?

Perhaps you should look for another thread to behave like a 5 year old. This one is about a serious topic - well at least most normal people would think so.

Eh? You asked why the Pope was coming, I explained. You expressed concern it would cost money, I explained why it probably wouldn't. You said you'd rather have the head of the British armed forces visit and in my innocence, I asked why.

Last time I'll help anyone on this Board...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 02, 2011, 09:51:00 AM
I won't bore you all with the details of this case as it follows the usual pattern you will have heard before, this is the victims impact statement...

I live in dread of seeing that man. He stole my innocence, my childhood, my memories'

Saturday July 02 2011 "Like most young girls, I expected to get married and have children when I grew up. Most of my friends have done this, but when I was being abused this didn't seem possible for me anymore. This had such an effect on my that I tried to commit suicide in my teens. After years of boring repetitive jobs I realised that I wanted more and was capable of more. With help I applied for, and got a job as carer in a major hospital. For the first time in my life, I really applied myself to study, and despite my lack of basic education, I got my formal qualification. I worked very successfully in this role and loved my job. Then I received a major shock. I saw in the newspaper that he was charged and sent to jail for sexual abuse. It all came flooding back to me. I couldn't concentrate, I was thinking about it all the time. I found that in work I couldn't deal with anything that was in any way intimate with patients, such as washing or changing them. I became extremely stressed, developed health problems, and after some time, attempted suicide again. I have been lucky enough to have found a husband who is understanding and supportive. Nevertheless, I worry all the time about how our marriage can last. I find that I'm not capable of any kind of intimacy with my husband even though I really love him. Any time we try to be intimate, I keep remembering my abuser's face over me and we have to stop. I'm worried about how long he'll stay with me if this continues. Thoughts of my abuse come into my head every day. Every time I see my body I hate it. I have almost no self-esteem. I live in dread of people finding out what happened to me. I still feel guilt that I allowed the abuse to continue, even though my counsellors tell me that paedophiles are extremely cunning and expert at brainwashing their victims. I live in dread of seeing that man. He stole my innocence, my childhood, my memories, my chance of an education and prospects for the future. He ensured I would have difficulties with relationships for the rest of my life. His abuse puts my marriage at risk daily and denies me the chance of children. Whatever sentence is imposed on that man, he should realise that he has imposed a sentence on me that I will continue to serve until the day I die."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 05, 2011, 11:39:44 PM
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/minister-warns-church-on-abuse-irsquoll-send-in-the-bailiffs-2813555.html

National News

Minister warns Church on abuse: I'll send in the bailiffs



The Government has threatened to send in the bailiffs after only two of 18 religious orders responsible for horrific child abuse moved to breach a compensation shortfall of up to €375m. Despite the Catholic Church agreeing to cover half the €1.36bn bill for clerical child abuse claims, the congregations have refused to budge. In the clearest signal yet that the Government is determined to force payment, Education Minister Ruairi Quinn is to pressure the orders to sign up to laws allowing the state to seize assets. The Minister said he was disappointed at offers made since the 2009 Ryan Report revealed the shocking extent of decades-long sexual, physical and psychological abuse of the most vulnerable

"The congregations' total offers fall well short, by several hundred million, of the €680m contribution they should bear towards the cost of institutional residential child abuse," he said. "In April, I called on the orders to consider handing over appropriate school infrastructure as a way to make progress towards the 50:50 target contribution. I reiterate that call now." The Department of Education said the 18 orders of priests and nuns offered €128m in cash, property and counselling services as part of a controversial indemnity deal dating back to

This was increased in 2009 to €348.5m after the Ryan report called for the 50:50 split between state and church - a cash pot of more than €100m, which was boosted by property which the orders valued at €235.5m. Mr Quinn has warned the congregations that the state has use for only a quarter of the total properties offered - 12 sites, which the Government now values at just €60. The lack of offers from the congregations, combined with a the property crash, has created a massive shortfall in the compensation fund, running to 375.5 million euro. "Of the properties offered to the State, only 12 have been identified as of potential immediate benefit to the State and these will be pursued,"

The minister said he wants congregations to agree to allow the state to identify assets and property such as schools, nursing homes, playing fields and land and legally take possession of

There would be blocking orders on transferring title without prior consent of the Department, he

Officials said congregations are also being asked to transfer properties currently leased by the state or of specific interest. "I believe that this approach affords the congregations involved the opportunity to shoulder their share of the costs of responding to the horrendous wrongs suffered by children in their care, while at the same time, recognising the legitimate legacy of their contribution to Irish education," he said. Mr Quinn also said a €110m trust will also be set up to fund the Residential Institutions Statutory Fund to support the victims of institutional

The offers of property include 49 Christian Brothers' playing fields; Presentation Sisters' St Bernard's Group Home, Fethard, Tipperary; Sisters of Our Lady of Charity childcare facility at Gracepark Rd, Drumcondra, Dublin; and Sisters of St Clare primary school, Ballyjamesduff, Co

The Sisters of Mercy offered several schools St Joseph's VEC College, Carrick on Suir; the Adult Education Centre, Waterford; land at Convent Road, Cahir, Seamount Convent and College, Kinvara, Galway Scoil Mhuire Secondary and Mercy Primary School, Ennistymon, Clare; and the Old Primary School and Hall, Trim, Meath. The order also put forward the McAuley Centre, Kells, Meath; Beaumont Convalescent Home and grounds, north Dublin; 33 acres at the National Rehabilitation Hospital Dun Laoghaire; and St Anne's Lenaboy Castle, Taylor's Hill, Galway. The Government said it will propose long-term option on further Sisters of Mercy properties including two convents in Cork, two primary schools in Mayo, and schools in Longford, Leitrim and Meath. Mr Quinn has written to the 18 orders with his response to their offers and asked for meetings to pursue the massive shortfall. The Government said it has only received 20.6m euro (£18m) in cash to date.

Back about 20 pages on this thread someone said to give the church time to pay what is due, how much more do they need? Clearly compensating tge victims of abuse is not as big a priority as self preservation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 13, 2011, 04:03:40 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-14136923


no surprises really. Magee could have worked for News International !!!


The Cloyne Report has found that former Bishop John Magee falsely told the Government and the HSE that the Catholic Diocese was reporting all allegations of clerical child sexual abuse to the civil authorities.

It also found that the Bishop deliberately misled another inquiry and his own advisors by creating two different accounts of a meeting with a priest-suspect, one for the Vatican and the other for diocesan files.


Bishop John Magee, whose resignation was accepted by the Vatican last March, is criticised for his handling of allegations.

Between 1996 - when the Irish bishops introduced guidelines for mandatory reporting - and 2005, the diocese failed to report nine out of 15 complaints against priests, which 'very clearly should have been reported'.

The Commission of Inquiry has also raised concern that there is no evidence of a Garda investigation into two allegations of abuse against one priest.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Shamrock Shore on July 13, 2011, 05:02:50 PM
Can Magee not be arrested?

I'd have the hoor in chains along with every kiddie fiddler priest.

>:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 13, 2011, 06:23:32 PM
Is mcgee the guy cardinal Brady said didn't need to resign?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 13, 2011, 06:24:49 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking63.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking63.html)

Minster for Justice Alan Shatter said today he plans to introduce legislation to make it a criminal offence not to report the sexual abuse of a child or vulnerable adult.

Legislation scheduled for the autumn.

This is what the Minister for Justice should be doing, but it is incredible that this legislation doesn't already exist given our recent history.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 13, 2011, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 13, 2011, 06:24:49 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking63.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking63.html)

Minster for Justice Alan Shatter said today he plans to introduce legislation to make it a criminal offence not to report the sexual abuse of a child or vulnerable adult.


Proper order.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 13, 2011, 11:37:40 PM
The government should stop any grant payments to the catholic church right now as they haven't even paid the miserly amount they were supposed to. As for the general public - well yet again another report shows just how rotten this church is and how any person can go and be part of such a group is totally beyond me as is how any good intentioned priest could morally stay within the church when they could equally serve god outside it. How many more horror stories do people need to hear? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 14, 2011, 11:43:37 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 13, 2011, 11:37:40 PM
The government should stop any grant payments to the catholic church right now as they haven't even paid the miserly amount they were supposed to. As for the general public - well yet again another report shows just how rotten this church is and how any person can go and be part of such a group is totally beyond me as is how any good intentioned priest could morally stay within the church when they could equally serve god outside it. How many more horror stories do people need to hear?

The general public are now so used to these stories that nothing surprises them any more.  Yesterday's report called Magee a liar. And the general public didn't even bat an eye lid cos we're so used to it now. The church could come out now with all the remaining skeletons and we still wouldn't bat an eye lid. Clerical abuse ??? Sure that's old news now !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 14, 2011, 11:51:08 AM
Quote from: orangeman on July 14, 2011, 11:43:37 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 13, 2011, 11:37:40 PM
The government should stop any grant payments to the catholic church right now as they haven't even paid the miserly amount they were supposed to. As for the general public - well yet again another report shows just how rotten this church is and how any person can go and be part of such a group is totally beyond me as is how any good intentioned priest could morally stay within the church when they could equally serve god outside it. How many more horror stories do people need to hear?

The general public are now so used to these stories that nothing surprises them any more.  Yesterday's report called Magee a liar. And the general public didn't even bat an eye lid cos we're so used to it now. The church could come out now with all the remaining skeletons and we still wouldn't bat an eye lid. Clerical abuse ??? Sure that's old news now !

You are mainly right but the reaction is not that it is old news, more that they are beneath contempt so it is difficult to think of them any lower.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 14, 2011, 11:56:22 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 14, 2011, 11:51:08 AM
Quote from: orangeman on July 14, 2011, 11:43:37 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 13, 2011, 11:37:40 PM
The government should stop any grant payments to the catholic church right now as they haven't even paid the miserly amount they were supposed to. As for the general public - well yet again another report shows just how rotten this church is and how any person can go and be part of such a group is totally beyond me as is how any good intentioned priest could morally stay within the church when they could equally serve god outside it. How many more horror stories do people need to hear?

The general public are now so used to these stories that nothing surprises them any more.  Yesterday's report called Magee a liar. And the general public didn't even bat an eye lid cos we're so used to it now. The church could come out now with all the remaining skeletons and we still wouldn't bat an eye lid. Clerical abuse ??? Sure that's old news now !

You are mainly right but the reaction is not that it is old news, more that they are beneath contempt so it is difficult to think of them any lower.
[/b]

I'd agree with that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on July 14, 2011, 01:40:54 PM
I heard Enda Kenny complaining about Rome on the wireless there and Gilmore is meeting the Papal Nuncio.  Rather than tea, a chat and a copy of the report for the Pope, Gilmore should ask for his diplomatic seal and put him on the next plane to Rome.

It's true what posters here are saying that the muted response shows just how far this warped organisation has fallen in people's eyes.

It should give Ruari Quinn a clean run at them now, without the  bleating from the usual apologists......

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 14, 2011, 05:30:08 PM
Taoiseach Kenny doesn't mince his manure on the issue.

The Vatican's approach to clerical abuse inquiries in Ireland has been branded a disgrace by the Taoiseach today.
"I think this is absolutely disgraceful that the Vatican took the view that it did in respect of something that's as sensitive and as personal with such long-lasting difficulties for persons involved,"
"The law of the land should not be stopped by a collar or a crozier,"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 14, 2011, 05:58:34 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 14, 2011, 05:30:08 PM
Taoiseach Kenny doesn't mince his manure on the issue.

The Vatican's approach to clerical abuse inquiries in Ireland has been branded a disgrace by the Taoiseach today.
"I think this is absolutely disgraceful that the Vatican took the view that it did in respect of something that's as sensitive and as personal with such long-lasting difficulties for persons involved,"
"The law of the land should not be stopped by a collar or a crozier,"


Good words, but let's see him do something about it. Stop funding church building and kick the papal nuncios arse back where he came from.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 14, 2011, 09:17:15 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 14, 2011, 05:30:08 PM
Taoiseach Kenny doesn't mince his manure on the issue.

The Vatican's approach to clerical abuse inquiries in Ireland has been branded a disgrace by the Taoiseach today.
"I think this is absolutely disgraceful that the Vatican took the view that it did in respect of something that's as sensitive and as personal with such long-lasting difficulties for persons involved,"
"The law of the land should not be stopped by a collar or a crozier,"


Great stuff! About time those sinister middle-aged "virgins" got what was coming to them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 01:17:47 PM
Slipped from page 1 already! The silence of some on this board is deaffening. Maybe the old "it happened so long ago and their are fixes in place" excuse has worn a bit then when the latest revelations in this report site dates as recent as 2009.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on July 15, 2011, 01:34:45 PM
There are 74 pages on the issue.

Moaning cnut.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rouge_Diablo on July 15, 2011, 01:41:38 PM
I know its all been said before, but I just had to say something.




Happy now?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 01:45:32 PM
It's sickening and disgusting, and the Catholic Church is now despised in this country more than 'the Brits', which is some turnaround from say 20 years ago (even 10 years ago). If the Pope was to visit, he'd get a much worse reception from the public that the Queen did.

But there isn't a lot more that can be said - they've sunk so low and as people have said, they are beyond contempt at this stage.
It's good to see the Taoiseach talking straight on this - the law of the Catholic Church cannot be above the law of the land, it's ridiculous that that situation has been tolerated for so long.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 15, 2011, 02:12:16 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 01:45:32 PM
It's sickening and disgusting, and the Catholic Church is now despised in this country more than 'the Brits', which is some turnaround from say 20 years ago (even 10 years ago). If the Pope was to visit, he'd get a much worse reception from the public that the Queen did.

But there isn't a lot more that can be said - they've sunk so low and as people have said, they are beyond contempt at this stage.
It's good to see the Taoiseach talking straight on this - the law of the Catholic Church cannot be above the law of the land, it's ridiculous that that situation has been tolerated for so long.
[/quote
]

Croke Park will be a big enough venue I'd imagine unlike 1979 when all and sundry went to see John Paul.

Given the rollikings this goverment is giving out at the minute, the proposed visit next year might be put on hold until the dust setttles a bit.

Anyone else out there think that Sean Brady has come out of this very poorly and has been shown to be as big a liar as Magee and as, if not more devious and deceitful as the rest ?? In fact, he might just well be the conductor !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 03:27:54 PM
Franko - That is all you can muster on a thread about the rape of children and the cover up of this right from the top of the vatican down. You call me a moaning cnut. That tells us all a lot about you, in fact I suggest you put in an application to join the catholic church, you'd fit right in. The Cloyne report was published this week, long after most of the 74 pages on this thread were written. It outlines that the cover up of abuse was happening in 2009. It names bishop McGee that the great cardinal daly thought shouldn't bother resign as he could stay and fix the church. It names the papal nuncio and it names the vatican. If this is too harsh for you to deal with why don't you go over and comment on hot ladies thread instead of trying to make a personal attack on me.

This is a scandal 2nd to none in this country. It shows the catholic church for exactly what it is, a group only interested in power and influence. Everything else is secondary including little children. For me it also shows that the people of Ireland are so brainwashed from childhood by this church that they now worship a church instead of a God. I hope these horrific reports show people just what type of organisation they contribute to and maybe they will stop and think about what they are doing supporting it.

I was particularly interested to hear what the defenders of the catholic church think now when the cloyne report completely wrecks the idea that the church is really interested in mending its ways? That the Vatican worked against the laws of this republic. That sope bishops and cardinals in this country think they can stick 2 fingers up to the ideals of an Irish republic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: thejuice on July 15, 2011, 03:59:36 PM
Myself and herself are looking to get married in the next few years and to be honest I don't think I could put my foot inside the door of a church at the moment. Never liked the idea of just a registry wedding but it might have to do.

Pity we let them get away with so much for so long and that we let them exploit peoples faith to a point that they ran the place for so long.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on July 15, 2011, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 03:27:54 PM
Franko - That is all you can muster on a thread about the rape of children and the cover up of this right from the top of the vatican down. You call me a moaning cnut. That tells us all a lot about you, in fact I suggest you put in an application to join the catholic church, you'd fit right in. The Cloyne report was published this week, long after most of the 74 pages on this thread were written. It outlines that the cover up of abuse was happening in 2009. It names bishop McGee that the great cardinal daly thought shouldn't bother resign as he could stay and fix the church. It names the papal nuncio and it names the vatican. If this is too harsh for you to deal with why don't you go over and comment on hot ladies thread instead of trying to make a personal attack on me.

This is a scandal 2nd to none in this country. It shows the catholic church for exactly what it is, a group only interested in power and influence. Everything else is secondary including little children. For me it also shows that the people of Ireland are so brainwashed from childhood by this church that they now worship a church instead of a God. I hope these horrific reports show people just what type of organisation they contribute to and maybe they will stop and think about what they are doing supporting it.

I was particularly interested to hear what the defenders of the catholic church think now when the cloyne report completely wrecks the idea that the church is really interested in mending its ways? That the Vatican worked against the laws of this republic. That sope bishops and cardinals in this country think they can stick 2 fingers up to the ideals of an Irish republic.

Yeah yeah yeah... breathe you clown.

Did you expect the Cloyne Report to say anything different?  I'd say not.  And I'm sure neither did most of the rest of the posters on here.  That's why we haven't had another 10 pages of comments expressing shock and disgust.  We've seen it all before.  There's no need to comment again.

Do you think there's some sort of anti-victim GAABoard cover-up going on here or something???

Idiot.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
Good to see Kenny, Gilmore and Shatter coming in heavy on the Vatican State and its long interference in the Irish Republic. Hopefully the leaders of the other political parties will come out and condemn the cover-ups and vile lawbreaking and harm to Irish citizens by a foreign state. I see one of the Labour T.D.s is looking to get pre-Dáil session prayers removed, about time. If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 15, 2011, 05:31:13 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.
God takes the rap  ::)


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 05:44:44 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 15, 2011, 05:31:13 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.
God takes the rap  ::)

There should be no place for mention of any God in the constitution. This is supposed to a republic - people are free to believe in any god or none.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 06:43:35 PM
Quote from: Franko on July 15, 2011, 04:16:10 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 03:27:54 PM
Franko - That is all you can muster on a thread about the rape of children and the cover up of this right from the top of the vatican down. You call me a moaning cnut. That tells us all a lot about you, in fact I suggest you put in an application to join the catholic church, you'd fit right in. The Cloyne report was published this week, long after most of the 74 pages on this thread were written. It outlines that the cover up of abuse was happening in 2009. It names bishop McGee that the great cardinal daly thought shouldn't bother resign as he could stay and fix the church. It names the papal nuncio and it names the vatican. If this is too harsh for you to deal with why don't you go over and comment on hot ladies thread instead of trying to make a personal attack on me.

This is a scandal 2nd to none in this country. It shows the catholic church for exactly what it is, a group only interested in power and influence. Everything else is secondary including little children. For me it also shows that the people of Ireland are so brainwashed from childhood by this church that they now worship a church instead of a God. I hope these horrific reports show people just what type of organisation they contribute to and maybe they will stop and think about what they are doing supporting it.

I was particularly interested to hear what the defenders of the catholic church think now when the cloyne report completely wrecks the idea that the church is really interested in mending its ways? That the Vatican worked against the laws of this republic. That sope bishops and cardinals in this country think they can stick 2 fingers up to the ideals of an Irish republic.

Yeah yeah yeah... breathe you clown.

Did you expect the Cloyne Report to say anything different?  I'd say not.  And I'm sure neither did most of the rest of the posters on here.  That's why we haven't had another 10 pages of comments expressing shock and disgust.  We've seen it all before.  There's no need to comment again.

Do you think there's some sort of anti-victim GAABoard cover-up going on here or something???

Idiot.

You keep throwing insults at me, your only making a fool out of yourself. If you don't want to comment log out and f**k off.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 06:49:28 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
Good to see Kenny, Gilmore and Shatter coming in heavy on the Vatican State and its long interference in the Irish Republic. Hopefully the leaders of the other political parties will come out and condemn the cover-ups and vile lawbreaking and harm to Irish citizens by a foreign state. I see one of the Labour T.D.s is looking to get pre-Dáil session prayers removed, about time. If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.

Kenny could redeem himself some way in my eyes if he went the whole way on this and threw the papal nuncio out of the country or he will further let himself down by doing nothing only talk - we shall see. As for the other parties and correct me if I'm wrong but I've heard very little from them. The so called republican party (FF) have said what? As for the party i once belonged to (SF) they should be really going for the church now as they are clearly the enemy of any republic but maybe they are too scared of annoying what I can only describe as the hard line catholics that vote for them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 07:04:58 PM
Were would people Worship Myles if the entire Church was thrown out / disbanded or whatever it is you are calling for?

You solution provides no option for anyone with any faith or any desire to live that faith out. The Eucharist is the center of the RC Church. Without Priests that no longer exists.

I understand all of our disgust and hurt at all of this but any bit of news at all you use as an opportunity to further bash the Church, so much so that I doubt your motivation is to even highlight the abuse, but rather, to further tr**p the Church as a whole into the ground and toot your own anti-religion tune......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on July 15, 2011, 07:06:18 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
Good to see Kenny, Gilmore and Shatter coming in heavy on the Vatican State and its long interference in the Irish Republic. Hopefully the leaders of the other political parties will come out and condemn the cover-ups and vile lawbreaking and harm to Irish citizens by a foreign state.

I'd be impressed if it wasn't the easy shot these days. I'd have been impressed if they did it ten years ago.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 07:12:59 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 07:04:58 PM
Were would people Worship Myles if the entire Church was thrown out / disbanded or whatever it is you are calling for?

You solution provides no option for anyone with any faith or any desire to live that faith out. The Eucharist is the center of the RC Church. Without Priests that no longer exists.

I understand all of our disgust and hurt at all of this but any bit of news at all you use as an opportunity to further bash the Church, so much so that I doubt your motivation is to even highlight the abuse, but rather, to further tr**p the Church as a whole into the ground and toot your own anti-religion tune......

"any bit of news at all"!?
Is that seriously how you are describing the findings of the Cloyne report?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 15, 2011, 07:18:42 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
Good to see Kenny, Gilmore and Shatter coming in heavy on the Vatican State and its long interference in the Irish Republic. Hopefully the leaders of the other political parties will come out and condemn the cover-ups and vile lawbreaking and harm to Irish citizens by a foreign state. I see one of the Labour T.D.s is looking to get pre-Dáil session prayers removed, about time. If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.

And in your name.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 15, 2011, 07:19:47 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 07:12:59 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 07:04:58 PM
Were would people Worship Myles if the entire Church was thrown out / disbanded or whatever it is you are calling for?

You solution provides no option for anyone with any faith or any desire to live that faith out. The Eucharist is the center of the RC Church. Without Priests that no longer exists.

I understand all of our disgust and hurt at all of this but any bit of news at all you use as an opportunity to further bash the Church, so much so that I doubt your motivation is to even highlight the abuse, but rather, to further tr**p the Church as a whole into the ground and toot your own anti-religion tune......

"any bit of news at all"!?
Is that seriously how you are describing the findings of the Cloyne report?
How about letting myles answer the question he asked without picking 5 or 6 words out of an entire post to comment on? I think he made himself pretty clear how he
and the rest of us feel about it
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 07:24:31 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 15, 2011, 07:18:42 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
Good to see Kenny, Gilmore and Shatter coming in heavy on the Vatican State and its long interference in the Irish Republic. Hopefully the leaders of the other political parties will come out and condemn the cover-ups and vile lawbreaking and harm to Irish citizens by a foreign state. I see one of the Labour T.D.s is looking to get pre-Dáil session prayers removed, about time. If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.

And in your name.

Thats a saying from the 19'th century dinner tables of upperclass English society, at a time when one of the guests would read aloud from the newspaper. During the Great Irish Famine the reports of death and destitution in Mayo appeared to outnumber the rest, and the placename Mayo appeared in Famine related news so often that this saying was born in England, not Ireland. I use a little g not a big G.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 07:04:58 PM
Were would people Worship Myles if the entire Church was thrown out / disbanded or whatever it is you are calling for?

You solution provides no option for anyone with any faith or any desire to live that faith out. The Eucharist is the center of the RC Church. Without Priests that no longer exists.

I understand all of our disgust and hurt at all of this but any bit of news at all you use as an opportunity to further bash the Church, so much so that I doubt your motivation is to even highlight the abuse, but rather, to further tr**p the Church as a whole into the ground and toot your own anti-religion tune......

Are you capable of reading? If so can you point out where I said the whole church should be kicked out? But then maybe if i were personally interested in saving your church then maybe disbanding it and starting again might be a good idea. Follow the catholic teaching if you like but get the dead wood that pollute the organisation out of it. My main concern as an Irish republican is that to totally separate church from state. All religion should be practiced outside of school hours in the parent/pupils own time. No special relationships, no brainwashing kids in the class room and no putting paedophilles in charge and jail for life for anyone who covers it up.

And bit of news indeed. Have you no comment on the report accusing the vatican of obstructing the investigation? Any comment on the fact this happened up to 2009 when you and others were saying the great church had said sorry and were putting things right? Nothing to say on that at all. btw - I won't be debating (a stretch to call it that) with your idiot cheer leader as he knows as much of what goes on in ireland as he does about the north pole.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 07:56:33 PM
While the findings of the Cloyne report are undoubtedly shocking, what is equally as shocking is the political and media response which reveals how infantile a society we have become. While the largely anti-catholic media whip up a wave of hysteria, devoid of any balance or rational thought, our politicos respond with Knee Jerk proposals which clearly have not been thought through. Meanwhile on liveline and forums such as this, the great unwashed, most of whom have never darkened the Door of a Church, or entertained an original thought, jump on the Bandwagon to vent their spleen. We have our fair share of these idiots on this forum. Rupert Murdock and Tony O Reilly did not become millionaires by overestimating their stupidity.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 08:04:04 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 07:56:33 PM
While the findings of the Cloyne report are undoubtedly shocking, what is equally as shocking is the political and media response which reveals how infantile a society we have become. While the largely anti-catholic media whip up a wave of hysteria, devoid of any balance or rational thought, our politicos respond with Knee Jerk proposals which clearly have not been thought through. Meanwhile on liveline and forums such as this, the great unwashed, most of whom have never darkened the Door of a Church, or entertained an original thought, jump on the Bandwagon to vent their spleen. We have our fair share of these idiots on this forum. Rupert Murdock and Tony O Reilly did not become millionaires by overestimating their stupidity.

Excellent stuff! There it is folks for all to see. Breathtaking.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 15, 2011, 08:15:58 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 15, 2011, 05:44:44 PM
Quote from: Main Street on July 15, 2011, 05:31:13 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 05:17:47 PM
If we do eventually get a new constitution, god should be banished from it for good, his only place is in the fairytale section of the library.
God takes the rap  ::)

There should be no place for mention of any God in the constitution. This is supposed to a republic - people are free to believe in any god or none.

Mention of God in the constitution is a constitutional matter and has no relevance to do with clerical abuse.

And in any case, the mention of God in article 6 of the constitution is not anti-republican, the State is the authority on all matters.
The constitution does not discriminate against atheism, people have complete freedom to believe or not believe in God.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 15, 2011, 08:19:05 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 07:56:33 PM
While the findings of the Cloyne report are undoubtedly shocking,

You should have left it there.

You cannot blame people for being genuinely shocked at something you agree is shocking. You then go on attacking all criticism as either anti-Catholic or from the great unwashed who never darkened the door of a church.

Do you really believe that everyone criticising the church is either protestant or atheist? Do you think that only non-practising Catholics could condemn the protection of pedophiles?

The Church is defending itself at all costs. Those costs include the truth and the victims.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Myles you made yourself quite clear, your agenda is the separation of Church and State, the abuse and the cover up are simply props for your soap box. You display no genuine apathy.

I don't stand by the Church for any of what happened. But I still stand before God, I still want to meet God in the Eucharist and I cannot do that without the Priests and the Church.

Do we need a cleansing, a reorganisation, a fresh start? Absolutely! I want to be part of it and I will be part of it.
I am by no means rubbishing the results of any report, or washing over anything that happened. But if you're going to beat a drum at least march with your own band.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 08:39:23 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Myles you made yourself quite clear, your agenda is the separation of Church and State, the abuse and the cover up are simply props for your soap box. You display no genuine apathy.

I don't stand by the Church for any of what happened. But I still stand before God, I still want to meet God in the Eucharist and I cannot do that without the Priests and the Church.

Do we need a cleansing, a reorganisation, a fresh start? Absolutely! I want to be part of it and I will be part of it.
I am by no means rubbishing the results of any report, or washing over anything that happened. But if you're going to beat a drum at least march with your own band.

Bullshit. I stand for the defence of all irish citizens from torture, abuse and rape. These victims were Irish citizens first and foremost. My "agenda" is a seperation of church and state to protect the future children of this country. My agenda is the absolute tough punishment of anyone who does this to kids and equally anyone who tries to cover it up. I have nothing against anything else you say in your post except in this country you should be doing this in your own time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 15, 2011, 08:55:54 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 07:56:33 PM
While the findings of the Cloyne report are undoubtedly shocking, what is equally as shocking is the political and media response which reveals how infantile a society we have become.

Equally as shocking?

Where does body odour and idle gossip rank on your scale?  equally as shocking as the Cloyne report?



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 15, 2011, 08:58:25 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 07:04:58 PM
Were would people Worship Myles if the entire Church was thrown out / disbanded or whatever it is you are calling for?

You solution provides no option for anyone with any faith or any desire to live that faith out. The Eucharist is the center of the RC Church. Without Priests that no longer exists.

Matthew 6:6 - "But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."

Even if you are a person of faith, you've been had by these people claiming to act as the middle man between you and your almighty.  Collective public worship has no basis in scripture.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 09:00:21 PM
anyone can quote one line to tout whatever agenda they want Eamonn.....
tis you that has been had by the world
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 15, 2011, 09:02:06 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 07:56:33 PM
While the findings of the Cloyne report are undoubtedly shocking, what is equally as shocking is the political and media response which reveals how infantile a society we have become. While the largely anti-catholic media whip up a wave of hysteria, devoid of any balance or rational thought, our politicos respond with Knee Jerk proposals which clearly have not been thought through. Meanwhile on liveline and forums such as this, the great unwashed, most of whom have never darkened the Door of a Church, or entertained an original thought, jump on the Bandwagon to vent their spleen. We have our fair share of these idiots on this forum. Rupert Murdock and Tony O Reilly did not become millionaires by overestimating their stupidity.

How would you prefer to "balance" the discussion?  Would you like to hear these paedophiles justifying their sadistic and evil tendencies while an interviewer nods politely and "understands" why they did this?

Why do you find it so hard to condemn these child-raping sickos, Pangurban?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 15, 2011, 09:02:41 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 09:00:21 PM
anyone can quote one line to tout whatever agenda they want Eamonn.....

Now you're catching on, old boy!  ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 09:32:45 PM
EamonnCa1, I have no difficulty condemning these child abusing sickos, i hope they rot in hell. My problem lies with the public hysteria we are witnessing, which is being employed by cynical elements to condemn the Church and all it stands for. Rational debate has been rendered almost impossible. If the agenda is to drive the Church and its adherents, out of the marketplace and exclude them from all public debate, it will not succeed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 15, 2011, 09:42:01 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 08:39:23 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Myles you made yourself quite clear, your agenda is the separation of Church and State, the abuse and the cover up are simply props for your soap box. You display no genuine apathy.

I don't stand by the Church for any of what happened. But I still stand before God, I still want to meet God in the Eucharist and I cannot do that without the Priests and the Church.

Do we need a cleansing, a reorganisation, a fresh start? Absolutely! I want to be part of it and I will be part of it.
I am by no means rubbishing the results of any report, or washing over anything that happened. But if you're going to beat a drum at least march with your own band.

Bullshit. I stand for the defence of all irish citizens from torture, abuse and rape. These victims were Irish citizens first and foremost. My "agenda" is a seperation of church and state to protect the future children of this country. My agenda is the absolute tough punishment of anyone who does this to kids and equally anyone who tries to cover it up. I have nothing against anything else you say in your post except in this country you should be doing this in your own time.
Tough punishment me hole....if it were joe blow on the street you'd be in the
Front line crowing about rehabilitation and how the state let him down or looking into his  past for possible explanations for his actions ::)
You're clearly uncomfortable in your own skin so nothing surprises me as to your views of others.

Oh and "standing to defend all Irish citizens"
don't make me laugh ye fecking clown...sure you refuse
To stand on your own two feet here on the board
...hiding behind an ignore list :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 15, 2011, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 09:32:45 PM
EamonnCa1, I have no difficulty condemning these child abusing sickos, i hope they rot in hell. My problem lies with the public hysteria we are witnessing, which is being employed by cynical elements to condemn the Church and all it stands for. Rational debate has been rendered almost impossible. If the agenda is to drive the Church and its adherents, out of the marketplace and exclude them from all public debate, it will not succeed.

Do you also condemn the bishops who covered it up and the vatican who also covered it up as outlined in the Cloyne report? While the abusing of the children is horrific, in my opinion those who covered it up are equally as bad. Wouldn't you agree or am I just being hysterical?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 15, 2011, 10:35:03 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 09:32:45 PM
EamonnCa1, I have no difficulty condemning these child abusing sickos, i hope they rot in hell. My problem lies with the public hysteria we are witnessing, which is being employed by cynical elements to condemn the Church and all it stands for. Rational debate has been rendered almost impossible. If the agenda is to drive the Church and its adherents, out of the marketplace and exclude them from all public debate, it will not succeed.
The objective is not to "drive them out of all public debate". The objective is to drive them out of the institutions of the state, and rightly so. And it bloody well will succeed. Your attempt to portray the church as the martyr will not succeed, they're reaping what they've sown and they deserve it.

To condemn a child-raping and child-torturing paedophile is not "hysteria," it is the only rational thing a human being can do.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 15, 2011, 10:37:32 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 15, 2011, 09:42:01 PM
Tough punishment me hole....if it were joe blow on the street you'd be in the
Front line crowing about rehabilitation and how the state let him down or looking into his  past for possible explanations for his actions ::)

Really? Can you give me a link to a post from anyone on here (apart from religious apologists like yourself) who have defended paedophiles?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 10:58:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Myles you made yourself quite clear, your agenda is the separation of Church and State, the abuse and the cover up are simply props for your soap box. You display no genuine apathy.

I don't stand by the Church for any of what happened. But I still stand before God, I still want to meet God in the Eucharist and I cannot do that without the Priests and the Church.

Do we need a cleansing, a reorganisation, a fresh start? Absolutely! I want to be part of it and I will be part of it.
I am by no means rubbishing the results of any report, or washing over anything that happened. But if you're going to beat a drum at least march with your own band.

There is absolutely no harm in a person Atheist or Theist to want seperation of church and state and still be disgusted in what happened.

There is no reason a true Republic should have to use a deity as some kind of legitimising factor. I do not care if the U.K., the U.S.A. or any other country may do the same. Maybe its time for Ireland to be a leader in this case and help forge a true Republic legitmite because of its people not because of a deity.

Its also time for a foreign power like the Vatican to be removed from any place of influence in our Republic. The confessional of the Vatican church can not be exempt from Irish law. No other church be they other Church of Ireland, Presbyterian, Methodist, Islam, Judaism, Hindus etc. should be allowed to have similar power. It is this corrupt power that has tied the hands of our Gaurds and TD's for years, similary the Reformed Churchs had similar power strangling the freedoms of the people up North. Without this power how long do you think the Catholic and other churchs have been able to cover up their multitude of abuses of peoples liberties.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 11:03:28 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 15, 2011, 09:00:21 PM
anyone can quote one line to tout whatever agenda they want Eamonn.....
tis you that has been had by the world

"Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes"  ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 15, 2011, 11:05:34 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 15, 2011, 09:32:45 PM
EamonnCa1, I have no difficulty condemning these child abusing sickos, i hope they rot in hell. My problem lies with the public hysteria we are witnessing, which is being employed by cynical elements to condemn the Church and all it stands for. Rational debate has been rendered almost impossible. If the agenda is to drive the Church and its adherents, out of the marketplace and exclude them from all public debate, it will not succeed.

Drive the church (and all churches) from public debate - yes, drive its adherents out - no.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 16, 2011, 01:18:54 AM
An idiotic statement, its adherents as you call them are the Church. As for EamonCA 1 question, yes i unreservedly condemn all who conspired to cover up these outrages, up to and including the Vatican. Perhaps those of you calling for the separation of Church and State ( a proposal with which i do not any problem), could clarify if it is the Church or God they wish to isolate
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 01:31:33 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 16, 2011, 01:18:54 AM
An idiotic statement, its adherents as you call them are the Church. As for EamonCA 1 question, yes i unreservedly condemn all who conspired to cover up these outrages, up to and including the Vatican. Perhaps those of you calling for the separation of Church and State ( a proposal with which i do not any problem), could clarify if it is the Church or God they wish to isolate

No its not, the Church is the structures and administrators of the faith, the adherents are the believers/followers of that cult/faith.

Remove all churches, all deities, all toothfairies, all riversprites etc. from the Constitution of Ireland, from all the arms of the state and all its insitutions.

Its bad enough having a deity given such a special place in our States governance if it actually existed, but when it does not exist, never has existed and never will exist, well thats just an idiotic situation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 16, 2011, 02:03:25 AM
You are as well raving there as in Bed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 16, 2011, 02:41:39 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 16, 2011, 01:18:54 AM
An idiotic statement, its adherents as you call them are the Church. As for EamonCA 1 question, yes i unreservedly condemn all who conspired to cover up these outrages, up to and including the Vatican. Perhaps those of you calling for the separation of Church and State ( a proposal with which i do not any problem), could clarify if it is the Church or God they wish to isolate

What a bizarre question.

The catholic church (I assume that's the church you're talking about, there is more than one you know) has done a grand job of isolating itself.  I've wanted it to be removed from the institutions of the state for years before this scandal started breaking, the scandal has simply reinforced my point all the more.

I cannot isolate God because he doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 04:55:56 AM
QuoteI've wanted it to be removed from the institutions of the state for years before this scandal started breaking, the scandal has simply reinforced my point all the more.
Sure Eamonn...ever ahead of the game but always after the fact  :D
QuoteI cannot isolate God because he doesn't exist.
In you opinion though right? Or is this another one of these times
when you simply know better than everybody else  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 16, 2011, 05:44:14 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 04:55:56 AM
QuoteI've wanted it to be removed from the institutions of the state for years before this scandal started breaking, the scandal has simply reinforced my point all the more.
Sure Eamonn...ever ahead of the game but always after the fact  :D

Huh?

Quote
QuoteI cannot isolate God because he doesn't exist.
In you opinion though right?
Of course it's my opinion. Who else's opinion would it be? 

QuoteOr is this another one of these times
when you simply know better than everybody else  ::)

That would make some sort of sense if "everybody else" believed in god.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 04:31:37 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 16, 2011, 02:03:25 AM
You are as well raving there as in Bed

A well I have gained the first attribute of a prophet then.

Hey while we are talking about raving, your the one who believes that a carpenters son from the middle east could walk on water, induce mitosis in bread and fish, turn water into wine, rise from the dead among other quite mad suggestions. You also believe that another man could make an entire sea open up at command and then miracously cave back in to drown his enemies. That two entire cities where tured to salt because they misbehaved a little. Sorry who was the one who was raving again?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on July 16, 2011, 04:57:07 PM
You believe that Edna Kenny is an adequate political leader.

Raving indeed.  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:02:11 PM
Quote from: Franko on July 16, 2011, 04:57:07 PM
You believe that Edna Kenny is an adequate political leader.

Raving indeed.  ::)

At least he exists  ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:29:12 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Agreed - are they really republicans?? Their problem is that the 6 county nationalists have a large proportion of what i'd call hard core catholics. Its a tribal thing I think and I might add totally alien to the notion of republicanism. Its a reason but its no excuse. Adams should call for the papal nuncio to be expelled as a 1st.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on July 16, 2011, 06:37:31 PM
I've defended nothing. In fact I agree with most of the things you are saying in this thread.

But yeah, you do moan a lot.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 11:41:32 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.
Debate, sure you won't debate...like dixey you spit the dummy out and run to mummy at the mere sight of my name .
You're a coward and a self righteous laughing stock at this stage,
Hurry along and pm the Pied Piper so he can relay a reply to this through
nally or mayo ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: boojangles on July 16, 2011, 11:46:27 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

What has it got to do with Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein? Do you want every TD to publicly clarify his position or just Gerry Adams?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 16, 2011, 11:47:08 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 11:41:32 PM
Debate, sure you won't debate...like dixey you spit the dummy out and run to mummy at the mere sight of my name .
You're a coward and a self righteous laughing stock at this stage,
Hurry along and pm the Pied Piper so he can relay a reply to this through
nally or mayo ;D

Charming.

Got anything to say about clerical abuse?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 17, 2011, 12:17:07 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 16, 2011, 11:47:08 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 11:41:32 PM
Debate, sure you won't debate...like dixey you spit the dummy out and run to mummy at the mere sight of my name .
You're a coward and a self righteous laughing stock at this stage,
Hurry along and pm the Pied Piper so he can relay a reply to this through
nally or mayo ;D

Charming.

Got anything to say about clerical abuse?
Doh!...how did I leave you off of that relay team  ???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 17, 2011, 03:23:24 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 17, 2011, 12:17:07 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 16, 2011, 11:47:08 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 16, 2011, 11:41:32 PM
Debate, sure you won't debate...like dixey you spit the dummy out and run to mummy at the mere sight of my name .
You're a coward and a self righteous laughing stock at this stage,
Hurry along and pm the Pied Piper so he can relay a reply to this through
nally or mayo ;D

Charming.

Got anything to say about clerical abuse?
Doh!...how did I leave you off of that relay team  ???

No, I didn't think so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.

Myles I have not come up with any defenses. In fact the majority of people who have countered anything you have to say, have at first condemned the abuse and the abusers and the cover up. They have been equally disgusted at the findings of the report. BUT they have not agreed with you on your proposed solutions or the way in which you have approached even discussing a solution. You show little respect for anyone else or their beliefs unless they line up behind you.

You're a great man for stirring up the shit. You mask it behind republicanism but you're just an unhappy person who likes to moan.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 05:15:27 PM
Quote from: boojangles on July 16, 2011, 11:46:27 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

What has it got to do with Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein? Do you want every TD to publicly clarify his position or just Gerry Adams?

He seeks to position himself as the leader of the opposition. Surely in such a situation Gerry Adams and his party should make their position clear, are they Catholic Nationalists or Irish Republicans? Also does Gerry agree with mandatory reporting of child abuse? Have Sinn Fein made their position clear yet?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 18, 2011, 05:59:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.

Myles I have not come up with any defenses. In fact the majority of people who have countered anything you have to say, have at first condemned the abuse and the abusers and the cover up. They have been equally disgusted at the findings of the report. BUT they have not agreed with you on your proposed solutions or the way in which you have approached even discussing a solution. You show little respect for anyone else or their beliefs unless they line up behind you.

You're a great man for stirring up the shit. You mask it behind republicanism but you're just an unhappy person who likes to moan.

So you agree with the report then? So what do you reckon should be done with the papal nuncio, Irelands relationship with the Vatican and the likes of cardinal Brady and his buddies who cover things up. The word if the church surely counts for nothing now when they were themselves not doing what they said they would. Do you not think Ireland should at a minimum stop supporting these people? Let's here your ideas? Btw, I'm quite happy thanks for your concern.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 06:20:15 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Is there nothing you wouldn't try turn into party politics MGHU?

For the record:

"Mr O Caoláin said the Papal Nuncio should be called in to be told of the Government's anger on the issue.
He pledged Sinn Féin support for the Government's planned legislation on mandatory reporting."
RTÉ

"The Cloyne Report is a shocking indictment, above all, of the Catholic Church which ignored its own guidelines and procedures designed to protect children from child abuse. What is especially shocking is that this report brings the clerical sexual abuse scandal right up to 2009.
The Report finds that the Vatican 'gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O'Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy'.
This is a damning indictment of the role of the Vatican. The Vatican is not just a Church bureaucracy – it is a sovereign State with which the Irish State has diplomatic relations.
The Government should now demand an urgent and formal diplomatic meeting with the Papal Nuncio to account for the role of the Vatican in facilitating individual Irish bishops to ignore procedures designed to protect children from abuse.
I welcome the strong response of the Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald and the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to this Report. The commitment to place the Children First guidelines on a statutory basis and to legislate on the issue of soft information is very welcome.
The Report, while commending An Garda Síochána in most cases, is also critical of their role in three cases. The Minister for Justice must ensure that the lessons of this Report are learned by the Gardai. As in previous Reports, Cloyne highlights the disagreement between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE about the extent of the powers available to the HSE in relation to extra-familial abuse of children. It is unacceptable that this situation persists and it must be addressed."
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

"Sinn Féin's Mary Lou McDonald said the report was another chapter in the 'sordid story of the violation of children and the sheltering of abuse perpetrators by the (Catholic) church'.
Ms McDonald said it needed to be recognised that to date the State has failed children.
She welcomed the Government's commitment to legislate to boost protection of children, but asked the Tánaiste to do it with urgency."
RTÉ

"Of all the reports that there have been - from Ryan, Murphy, Ferns - I view the outcome of the Cloyne report as by far and away the most serious.
I think it has profound implications and I certainly think that the case that has been made for investigations in all dioceses makes a very compelling argument."
Martin McGuinness
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 18, 2011, 08:34:39 PM
MGHU its people like you who are ranting, and running around like headless Chickens, calling for this and that too be done, with no forethought or focus, who are distracting from the real issues and preventing anything meaningful from getting done. Some of the proposed actions emanating from our legislator, are so ludicrous they are laughable, and are clearly designed to pander too people like you by appearing to take action. While some serious legislation will be necessary, if it is not enforcable, it will be useless. So time and thought must be given in order to get it right. Even that will not solve the problem, as the fact is that legislation does not prevent wrongdoing. There is an inherent evil in some people that will always find expression, as it has in the past, will now, and in the future. There are no fixes, quick or otherwise, which will resolve this problem, in the Church or the wider society. Now is the time for cool heads, serious thought and long term planning
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 06:20:15 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Is there nothing you wouldn't try turn into party politics MGHU?

For the record:

"Mr O Caoláin said the Papal Nuncio should be called in to be told of the Government's anger on the issue.
He pledged Sinn Féin support for the Government's planned legislation on mandatory reporting."
RTÉ

"The Cloyne Report is a shocking indictment, above all, of the Catholic Church which ignored its own guidelines and procedures designed to protect children from child abuse. What is especially shocking is that this report brings the clerical sexual abuse scandal right up to 2009.
The Report finds that the Vatican 'gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O'Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy'.
This is a damning indictment of the role of the Vatican. The Vatican is not just a Church bureaucracy – it is a sovereign State with which the Irish State has diplomatic relations.
The Government should now demand an urgent and formal diplomatic meeting with the Papal Nuncio to account for the role of the Vatican in facilitating individual Irish bishops to ignore procedures designed to protect children from abuse.
I welcome the strong response of the Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald and the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to this Report. The commitment to place the Children First guidelines on a statutory basis and to legislate on the issue of soft information is very welcome.
The Report, while commending An Garda Síochána in most cases, is also critical of their role in three cases. The Minister for Justice must ensure that the lessons of this Report are learned by the Gardai. As in previous Reports, Cloyne highlights the disagreement between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE about the extent of the powers available to the HSE in relation to extra-familial abuse of children. It is unacceptable that this situation persists and it must be addressed."
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

"Sinn Féin's Mary Lou McDonald said the report was another chapter in the 'sordid story of the violation of children and the sheltering of abuse perpetrators by the (Catholic) church'.
Ms McDonald said it needed to be recognised that to date the State has failed children.
She welcomed the Government's commitment to legislate to boost protection of children, but asked the Tánaiste to do it with urgency."
RTÉ

"Of all the reports that there have been - from Ryan, Murphy, Ferns - I view the outcome of the Cloyne report as by far and away the most serious.
I think it has profound implications and I certainly think that the case that has been made for investigations in all dioceses makes a very compelling argument."
Martin McGuinness

So no word from the party leader then  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 18, 2011, 05:59:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.

Myles I have not come up with any defenses. In fact the majority of people who have countered anything you have to say, have at first condemned the abuse and the abusers and the cover up. They have been equally disgusted at the findings of the report. BUT they have not agreed with you on your proposed solutions or the way in which you have approached even discussing a solution. You show little respect for anyone else or their beliefs unless they line up behind you.

You're a great man for stirring up the shit. You mask it behind republicanism but you're just an unhappy person who likes to moan.

So you agree with the report then? So what do you reckon should be done with the papal nuncio, Irelands relationship with the Vatican and the likes of cardinal Brady and his buddies who cover things up. The word if the church surely counts for nothing now when they were themselves not doing what they said they would. Do you not think Ireland should at a minimum stop supporting these people? Let's here your ideas? Btw, I'm quite happy thanks for your concern.

Myles I don't have the answers, nobody does. Its too soon! The implications are so widespread. Like Pangurban said, cool heads are needed now and long term planning and serious discussion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 08:59:27 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 18, 2011, 08:34:39 PM
MGHU its people like you who are ranting, and running around like headless Chickens, calling for this and that too be done, with no forethought or focus, who are distracting from the real issues and preventing anything meaningful from getting done. Some of the proposed actions emanating from our legislator, are so ludicrous they are laughable, and are clearly designed to pander too people like you by appearing to take action. While some serious legislation will be necessary, if it is not enforcable, it will be useless. So time and thought must be given in order to get it right. Even that will not solve the problem, as the fact is that legislation does not prevent wrongdoing. There is an inherent evil in some people that will always find expression, as it has in the past, will now, and in the future. There are no fixes, quick or otherwise, which will resolve this problem, in the Church or the wider society. Now is the time for cool heads, serious thought and long term planning

So you opposed to the laws of the state taking priority over the club rules/cannon laws. You wish to protect the confessional box over the witness box. It is you that is being ludicrous if you think we will let Catholic Nationalism defeat Irish Republicanism.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 09:00:54 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 18, 2011, 05:59:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.

Myles I have not come up with any defenses. In fact the majority of people who have countered anything you have to say, have at first condemned the abuse and the abusers and the cover up. They have been equally disgusted at the findings of the report. BUT they have not agreed with you on your proposed solutions or the way in which you have approached even discussing a solution. You show little respect for anyone else or their beliefs unless they line up behind you.

You're a great man for stirring up the shit. You mask it behind republicanism but you're just an unhappy person who likes to moan.

So you agree with the report then? So what do you reckon should be done with the papal nuncio, Irelands relationship with the Vatican and the likes of cardinal Brady and his buddies who cover things up. The word if the church surely counts for nothing now when they were themselves not doing what they said they would. Do you not think Ireland should at a minimum stop supporting these people? Let's here your ideas? Btw, I'm quite happy thanks for your concern.

Myles I don't have the answers, nobody does. Its too soon! The implications are so widespread. Like Pangurban said, cool heads are needed now and long term planning and serious discussion.

A yes, the hope it will all blow over defence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 18, 2011, 09:16:04 PM
Such a typical response from you MGHU. Attributed views to people, which they dont hold and never expressed and then trying to ridicule them. You become more foolish with every post, and your  attempt to politicise the debate with reference to Irish Republicanism, { about which you appear to know very little}, is beneath contempt
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 09:49:53 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 18, 2011, 09:16:04 PM
Such a typical response from you MGHU. Attributed views to people, which they dont hold and never expressed and then trying to ridicule them. You become more foolish with every post, and your  attempt to politicise the debate with reference to Irish Republicanism, { about which you appear to know very little}, is beneath contempt

Of course it is political, if the likes of Archbishop McQuaid and those that came after him were not allowed to hijack the Irish state then much of this abuse would never have happened and most certainly would not have been so easily covered up. Pangurban it is you who comes across foolish in this debate. By the way I am pretty sure what true Irish Republicanism is about, it most certainly is not Irish Nationalism.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 10:25:28 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 06:20:15 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Is there nothing you wouldn't try turn into party politics MGHU?

For the record:

"Mr O Caoláin said the Papal Nuncio should be called in to be told of the Government's anger on the issue.
He pledged Sinn Féin support for the Government's planned legislation on mandatory reporting."
RTÉ

"The Cloyne Report is a shocking indictment, above all, of the Catholic Church which ignored its own guidelines and procedures designed to protect children from child abuse. What is especially shocking is that this report brings the clerical sexual abuse scandal right up to 2009.
The Report finds that the Vatican 'gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O'Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy'.
This is a damning indictment of the role of the Vatican. The Vatican is not just a Church bureaucracy – it is a sovereign State with which the Irish State has diplomatic relations.
The Government should now demand an urgent and formal diplomatic meeting with the Papal Nuncio to account for the role of the Vatican in facilitating individual Irish bishops to ignore procedures designed to protect children from abuse.
I welcome the strong response of the Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald and the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to this Report. The commitment to place the Children First guidelines on a statutory basis and to legislate on the issue of soft information is very welcome.
The Report, while commending An Garda Síochána in most cases, is also critical of their role in three cases. The Minister for Justice must ensure that the lessons of this Report are learned by the Gardai. As in previous Reports, Cloyne highlights the disagreement between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE about the extent of the powers available to the HSE in relation to extra-familial abuse of children. It is unacceptable that this situation persists and it must be addressed."
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

"Sinn Féin's Mary Lou McDonald said the report was another chapter in the 'sordid story of the violation of children and the sheltering of abuse perpetrators by the (Catholic) church'.
Ms McDonald said it needed to be recognised that to date the State has failed children.
She welcomed the Government's commitment to legislate to boost protection of children, but asked the Tánaiste to do it with urgency."
RTÉ

"Of all the reports that there have been - from Ryan, Murphy, Ferns - I view the outcome of the Cloyne report as by far and away the most serious.
I think it has profound implications and I certainly think that the case that has been made for investigations in all dioceses makes a very compelling argument."
Martin McGuinness

So no word from the party leader then  ::)

The party has clearly deisgnated their spokesperson for Children to be at the forefront for them on this issue. A bit of input from Adams would be nice too but Mayo but maybe if you were more interested in the actual issue instead of dragging a bit of party politics into it, it would be better suited. Besides, you claimed the party were silent on the issue; that they made no statements about it in general and no statement as to whether they supported mandatory reporting. That, as my last post demonstrated, was a crock of of sh|t. Something you are used to spouting.

(Which reminds me.... sorry to have to ask you again, but any chance of a response to my post here (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011) when I asked you about how you "fixed" something for me?)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 18, 2011, 11:00:12 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 18, 2011, 05:59:22 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 18, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 16, 2011, 05:24:52 PM
Mayo - might i suggest the debate on whether god exists or not be left to a different thread. Its a debate worth having of course but not here. Such a debate allows the sheep followers of the catholic church to do what they do best - waffle about things that may or may not have happened 2000 years ago. They are much more comfortable doing that. The Cloyne report is much more recent and more definite. Its finding cannot be argued about. It is here the church worshippers squirm as they come up with more and more ridiculous defences ( eg - Myles is a moan, its the medias fault etc etc). I say keep this debate on the straight and narrow and lets see if these people have anything worth saying.

Myles I have not come up with any defenses. In fact the majority of people who have countered anything you have to say, have at first condemned the abuse and the abusers and the cover up. They have been equally disgusted at the findings of the report. BUT they have not agreed with you on your proposed solutions or the way in which you have approached even discussing a solution. You show little respect for anyone else or their beliefs unless they line up behind you.

You're a great man for stirring up the shit. You mask it behind republicanism but you're just an unhappy person who likes to moan.

So you agree with the report then? So what do you reckon should be done with the papal nuncio, Irelands relationship with the Vatican and the likes of cardinal Brady and his buddies who cover things up. The word if the church surely counts for nothing now when they were themselves not doing what they said they would. Do you not think Ireland should at a minimum stop supporting these people? Let's here your ideas? Btw, I'm quite happy thanks for your concern.

Myles I don't have the answers, nobody does. Its too soon! The implications are so widespread. Like Pangurban said, cool heads are needed now and long term planning and serious discussion.

You don't have answers but you know all my answers are wrong??

Tell me, how long ago since clerical sex abuse and cover up became widely known? So maybe you can answer me how much time is required and when is it not "too soon". Enough time for all the perpetrators to die so we can all forget it ever happened? What evidence is there the church has taken any of these numerous reports serious and what evidence that they have ever been capable of self regulation. The only evidence is the exact opposite and you know it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 18, 2011, 11:05:42 PM
The religious orders have gotten "lawyered up" to fight off every legal action. They have hidden their assets in all manner of offshore accounts and complex arrangements of non-profit organisations. Anything to stop the victims getting any compensation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 11:38:11 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 10:25:28 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 06:20:15 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Is there nothing you wouldn't try turn into party politics MGHU?

For the record:

"Mr O Caoláin said the Papal Nuncio should be called in to be told of the Government's anger on the issue.
He pledged Sinn Féin support for the Government's planned legislation on mandatory reporting."
RTÉ

"The Cloyne Report is a shocking indictment, above all, of the Catholic Church which ignored its own guidelines and procedures designed to protect children from child abuse. What is especially shocking is that this report brings the clerical sexual abuse scandal right up to 2009.
The Report finds that the Vatican 'gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O'Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy'.
This is a damning indictment of the role of the Vatican. The Vatican is not just a Church bureaucracy – it is a sovereign State with which the Irish State has diplomatic relations.
The Government should now demand an urgent and formal diplomatic meeting with the Papal Nuncio to account for the role of the Vatican in facilitating individual Irish bishops to ignore procedures designed to protect children from abuse.
I welcome the strong response of the Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald and the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to this Report. The commitment to place the Children First guidelines on a statutory basis and to legislate on the issue of soft information is very welcome.
The Report, while commending An Garda Síochána in most cases, is also critical of their role in three cases. The Minister for Justice must ensure that the lessons of this Report are learned by the Gardai. As in previous Reports, Cloyne highlights the disagreement between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE about the extent of the powers available to the HSE in relation to extra-familial abuse of children. It is unacceptable that this situation persists and it must be addressed."
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

"Sinn Féin's Mary Lou McDonald said the report was another chapter in the 'sordid story of the violation of children and the sheltering of abuse perpetrators by the (Catholic) church'.
Ms McDonald said it needed to be recognised that to date the State has failed children.
She welcomed the Government's commitment to legislate to boost protection of children, but asked the Tánaiste to do it with urgency."
RTÉ

"Of all the reports that there have been - from Ryan, Murphy, Ferns - I view the outcome of the Cloyne report as by far and away the most serious.
I think it has profound implications and I certainly think that the case that has been made for investigations in all dioceses makes a very compelling argument."
Martin McGuinness

So no word from the party leader then  ::)

The party has clearly deisgnated their spokesperson for Children to be at the forefront for them on this issue. A bit of input from Adams would be nice too but Mayo but maybe if you were more interested in the actual issue instead of dragging a bit of party politics into it, it would be better suited. Besides, you claimed the party were silent on the issue; that they made no statements about it in general and no statement as to whether they supported mandatory reporting. That, as my last post demonstrated, was a crock of of sh|t. Something you are used to spouting.

(Which reminds me.... sorry to have to ask you again, but any chance of a response to my post here (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011) when I asked you about how you "fixed" something for me?)

Can ya let me know the dates those statements were made and were they prior to my question?

Just wondering is there are reason why the leader of a party feels he does not have the authority to speak out on the matter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 11:47:41 PM
Pangurban just wondering what you think the Catholic (or any other sects) place is in public life in the Irish state &/or the Island of Ireland?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on July 19, 2011, 12:33:48 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 11:38:11 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 10:25:28 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 18, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 18, 2011, 06:20:15 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 16, 2011, 05:25:38 PM
When will Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams let us know their opinion on the clerical abuse scandal and their opinion on mandatory reporting? Their silence is deafening.

Is there nothing you wouldn't try turn into party politics MGHU?

For the record:

"Mr O Caoláin said the Papal Nuncio should be called in to be told of the Government's anger on the issue.
He pledged Sinn Féin support for the Government's planned legislation on mandatory reporting."
RTÉ

"The Cloyne Report is a shocking indictment, above all, of the Catholic Church which ignored its own guidelines and procedures designed to protect children from child abuse. What is especially shocking is that this report brings the clerical sexual abuse scandal right up to 2009.
The Report finds that the Vatican 'gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O'Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy'.
This is a damning indictment of the role of the Vatican. The Vatican is not just a Church bureaucracy – it is a sovereign State with which the Irish State has diplomatic relations.
The Government should now demand an urgent and formal diplomatic meeting with the Papal Nuncio to account for the role of the Vatican in facilitating individual Irish bishops to ignore procedures designed to protect children from abuse.
I welcome the strong response of the Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald and the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter to this Report. The commitment to place the Children First guidelines on a statutory basis and to legislate on the issue of soft information is very welcome.
The Report, while commending An Garda Síochána in most cases, is also critical of their role in three cases. The Minister for Justice must ensure that the lessons of this Report are learned by the Gardai. As in previous Reports, Cloyne highlights the disagreement between the Office of the Minister for Children and the HSE about the extent of the powers available to the HSE in relation to extra-familial abuse of children. It is unacceptable that this situation persists and it must be addressed."
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

"Sinn Féin's Mary Lou McDonald said the report was another chapter in the 'sordid story of the violation of children and the sheltering of abuse perpetrators by the (Catholic) church'.
Ms McDonald said it needed to be recognised that to date the State has failed children.
She welcomed the Government's commitment to legislate to boost protection of children, but asked the Tánaiste to do it with urgency."
RTÉ

"Of all the reports that there have been - from Ryan, Murphy, Ferns - I view the outcome of the Cloyne report as by far and away the most serious.
I think it has profound implications and I certainly think that the case that has been made for investigations in all dioceses makes a very compelling argument."
Martin McGuinness

So no word from the party leader then  ::)

The party has clearly deisgnated their spokesperson for Children to be at the forefront for them on this issue. A bit of input from Adams would be nice too but Mayo but maybe if you were more interested in the actual issue instead of dragging a bit of party politics into it, it would be better suited. Besides, you claimed the party were silent on the issue; that they made no statements about it in general and no statement as to whether they supported mandatory reporting. That, as my last post demonstrated, was a crock of of sh|t. Something you are used to spouting.

(Which reminds me.... sorry to have to ask you again, but any chance of a response to my post here (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011) when I asked you about how you "fixed" something for me?)

Can ya let me know the dates those statements were made and were they prior to my question?

Just wondering is there are reason why the leader of a party feels he does not have the authority to speak out on the matter.

You asked your question on July 16th...

The first quote I gave was from July 13th.
http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/21203 (http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/21203)

The second quote was also from July 13th.
http://m.rte.ie/news/2011/0713/cloynetracker.html (http://m.rte.ie/news/2011/0713/cloynetracker.html)

The third quote was from July 15th.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0714/cloyne.html (http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0714/cloyne.html)

The final quote was from July 14th.
http://www.u.tv/News/Call-for-Cloyne-style-abuse-inquiry/a5086c67-4047-4178-ba6e-e43f62b66174 (http://www.u.tv/News/Call-for-Cloyne-style-abuse-inquiry/a5086c67-4047-4178-ba6e-e43f62b66174)

Or I could mention other quotes, such as from Sandra McLellan TD, who on July 13th, spoke of how the Cloyne Report highlighted a disgraceful litany of concealment and evasion by the Catholic Church.
http://www.youghalonline.com/tag/of/ (http://www.youghalonline.com/tag/of/)

So to answer your question as to when SF will "let us know" their opinion on this report, the answer is.... three days before you asked the question.


(And sorry to have to ask you yet again, but any chance of a response to my post here (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011) when I asked you about how you "fixed" something for me?)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 19, 2011, 01:02:01 AM
Well fair enough Nally Stand, if I was incorrect I apologise. It does seem strange however that Gerry Adams appears to have not made a statement on the matter. I am open to correction.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on July 19, 2011, 01:28:49 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 19, 2011, 01:02:01 AM
Well fair enough Nally Stand, if I was incorrect I apologise. It does seem strange however that Gerry Adams appears to have not made a statement on the matter. I am open to correction.

Just wanted to correct a distorted point.

(speaking of you being open to correction, any comment to add here yet?) (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
In answer to your question MGHU, i see the Catholic Churches place within Irish Society as being the same as any group, with the same rights,priveleges and responsibilities. I would draw no distinction between them any other groups eg. GAA, ICA,FCA, FF,FG or any grouping you care to mention. Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements. I realise that this answer does not address the roles previously delegated to them by the State, in education and health care, but the debate on these issues has already begun, and it is up to the people to determine what the future arrangements will be
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 05:48:49 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements.

...especially priests lecturing about marriage.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 19, 2011, 03:21:49 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 05:48:49 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements.

...especially priests lecturing about marriage.

Lads this thread started off discussing Clerical Abuse and has turned into so much more. Eamonn's comment above being another prime example of a small group of people who continue to hijack threads with their own agenda's, not really interested in debating or discussing the issue at hand but more intent to wind people up with well positioned statements.
This is not a thread on Religion and State, it is not a party political broadcast, nor is it a opportunity to take a pop at people's faith.

Yet again many of you display absolutely no apathy for abuse victims or no regard for the seriousness of this discussion. If you did you wouldn't be hijacking it with your own childish agendas to score points and wind people up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 19, 2011, 03:37:56 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on July 19, 2011, 01:28:49 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 19, 2011, 01:02:01 AM
Well fair enough Nally Stand, if I was incorrect I apologise. It does seem strange however that Gerry Adams appears to have not made a statement on the matter. I am open to correction.

Just wanted to correct a distorted point.

(speaking of you being open to correction, any comment to add here yet?) (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19685.msg982011#msg982011)

Have not opened that link, for the very reason that you get a bit stakerish in debates. I have acknowledged SF response to the report and I welcome it. I am a bit concerned that the leader of the party has no input, but if it is unimportant in this debate you can understand why I may presume this is unimportant in other debates on this board.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 19, 2011, 03:40:25 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
In answer to your question MGHU, i see the Catholic Churches place within Irish Society as being the same as any group, with the same rights,priveleges and responsibilities. I would draw no distinction between them any other groups eg. GAA, ICA,FCA, FF,FG or any grouping you care to mention. Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements. I realise that this answer does not address the roles previously delegated to them by the State, in education and health care, but the debate on these issues has already begun, and it is up to the people to determine what the future arrangements will be

That was actually a good response Pangurban and one I personally could mostly live with. I do think sporting and religious organisations should try as much as possible to stay out of the governance of a state or its insitutions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 09:10:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 19, 2011, 03:21:49 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 05:48:49 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements.

...especially priests lecturing about marriage.

Lads this thread started off discussing Clerical Abuse and has turned into so much more. Eamonn's comment above being another prime example of a small group of people who continue to hijack threads with their own agenda's, not really interested in debating or discussing the issue at hand but more intent to wind people up with well positioned statements.
This is not a thread on Religion and State, it is not a party political broadcast, nor is it a opportunity to take a pop at people's faith.

Yet again many of you display absolutely no apathy for abuse victims or no regard for the seriousness of this discussion. If you did you wouldn't be hijacking it with your own childish agendas to score points and wind people up.

1 - A comment about the qualifications of priests or having a pop at their claim to a position of 'moral authority' in society is very relevant to the topic of clerical abuse, so my post isn't off-topic at all.

2 - Please learn the difference between apathy, empathy and sympathy. It would be a lot easier to discuss matter with you if it was clear which word you mean to use. 'Apathy' is the opposite of what you seem to think it means.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 20, 2011, 03:27:47 PM
Enda Kenny puts the boot into the Vatican :


Taoiseach Enda Kenny has strongly criticised the Vatican for what he said was an attempt to frustrate the Cloyne inquiry, accusing it of downplaying the rape of children to protect its power and reputation.

Mr Kenny was speaking during Dáil statements on the report.

Never before has a Taoiseach used such language in criticising the Catholic Church.

Mr Kenny told the Dáil that the Cloyne Report highlighted the dysfunction, disconnection, elitism, and narcissism that dominate the culture of the Vatican to this day.

The rape and torture of children had been downplayed or 'managed' to uphold, instead, the primacy of the institution, which are its power, standing and 'reputation'.

The hierarchy had proved either unwilling or unable to address what he called the horrors uncovered in successive reports a failure which he said must be devastating for so many good priests.

Mr Kenny said that the Catholic Church needed to be truly and deeply penitent for the wrongdoing it perpetrated hid and denied.

He said that instead of listening to evidence of humiliation and betrayal, the Vatican's reaction had been to parse and analyse it, with the eye of a canon lawyer.

Mr Kenny said this position was the polar opposite of the radicalism, the humility and the compassion that the Church had been founded on.

Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin said what was done was not just to avoid scandal - it involved the wilful refusal to respect basic moral and legal responsibilities.

Mr Martin said no-one had any excuse for not knowing what to do when there was even a suspicion of child abuse.

Sinn Féin's Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin had said the report shows it had learned nothing since the Fr Brendan Smith scandal.


An all-party motion on the Cloyne report condemning the Vatican's role in child protection is being debated in the Dáil.

The motion 'deplores the Vatican's intervention which contributed to the undermining of child protection frameworks and guidelines of the Irish state and the Irish bishops.'

One of the main findings of the report was that the diocese failed to report nine out of 15 complaints made against priests, which 'very clearly should have been reported'.

Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi, speaking in a personal capacity, has said that there was nothing in the advice given by the papal nuncio in 1997 to encourage bishops to break Irish laws.


He said that the Vatican's advice to Irish bishops on child protection policies could not be interpreted as an invitation to cover up abuse cases.

Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, Minister for Justice Alan Shatter said the comments were disingenuous and he said he expected a more considered, formal response from the Vatican.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 20, 2011, 04:03:41 PM
QuoteOne of the main findings of the report was that the diocese failed to report nine out of 15 complaints made against priests, which 'very clearly should have been reported'.

In any organisation with a responsibility to notify an authority of an event, this would be incredibly damning. Given that the events required to be notified are serious sexual crimes on children this is beyond any reasonable argument. The Church seems to have no shame whatsoever.

QuoteVatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi, speaking in a personal capacity, has said that there was nothing in the advice given by the papal nuncio in 1997 to encourage bishops to break Irish laws.

This man answers a question no one has asked. It seeks to pass the book and wash its hands of not only the problem but apparently of the actions of its Irish hierarchy. If the Church cannot accept its direct responsibility for these crimes against children how can it preach, for example, our collective responsibility for original sin? Hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 20, 2011, 04:27:38 PM
Well done to Enda for saying what needs to be said, now lets follow it up with some action. Michael Martin had his chance before to be clear and outspoken on this issue, its too late saying it now just because Enda did. He and FF let the catholic church away with murder. Lets see Enda Kick the papal nuncio out of this country, remove our embassy from the Vatican, freeze all payments (grants or otherwise) to the church and start siezing their assets if they don't cough up what they owe (ie only 50% of monies payable to the victims). Time to put this organisation in its place, at the same level as other religions somewhere well below the elected representatives of this country.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 20, 2011, 06:22:18 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 20, 2011, 04:27:38 PM
Well done to Enda for saying what needs to be said, now lets follow it up with some action. Michael Martin had his chance before to be clear and outspoken on this issue, its too late saying it now just because Enda did. He and FF let the catholic church away with murder. Lets see Enda Kick the papal nuncio out of this country, remove our embassy from the Vatican, freeze all payments (grants or otherwise) to the church and start siezing their assets if they don't cough up what they owe (ie only 50% of monies payable to the victims). Time to put this organisation in its place, at the same level as other religions somewhere well below the elected representatives of this country.
+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 20, 2011, 08:26:13 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 09:10:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 19, 2011, 03:21:49 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 19, 2011, 05:48:49 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 19, 2011, 01:35:58 AM
Of course like any other Church, by virtue of their calling, there is a greater obligation and responsibility on them to provide moral leadership and advice, but there is no obligation on any citizen to listen to or heed their pronoucements.

...especially priests lecturing about marriage.

Lads this thread started off discussing Clerical Abuse and has turned into so much more. Eamonn's comment above being another prime example of a small group of people who continue to hijack threads with their own agenda's, not really interested in debating or discussing the issue at hand but more intent to wind people up with well positioned statements.
This is not a thread on Religion and State, it is not a party political broadcast, nor is it a opportunity to take a pop at people's faith.

Yet again many of you display absolutely no apathy for abuse victims or no regard for the seriousness of this discussion. If you did you wouldn't be hijacking it with your own childish agendas to score points and wind people up.

1 - A comment about the qualifications of priests or having a pop at their claim to a position of 'moral authority' in society is very relevant to the topic of clerical abuse, so my post isn't off-topic at all.

2 - Please learn the difference between apathy, empathy and sympathy. It would be a lot easier to discuss matter with you if it was clear which word you mean to use. 'Apathy' is the opposite of what you seem to think it means.

2. My bad on apathy. I should have wrote empathy.Maybe if I seen it a bit more from you I would understand what it is ;)

1. The qualifications of clergy in general or whether or not, in general, they have any claim to a 'moral authority' is not relevant in this discussion. Specific priests, based on their actions, can be labeled. But everyone cannot be painted with the same brush.

And I am happy to hear and agree with all that Enda Kenny said.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lawnseed on July 20, 2011, 08:52:46 PM
hold your horses lads before you all become the enda fan club again like you did about a hundred days ago.. lets just see exactly where enda is coming from, could it be that the main reason mr kenny and his cohorts are gettiin lippy is because he wants to draw attention away from his own governments short comings and possibly the fact that thus far the catholic church have only come up with a couple of million toward the victoms fund. (we need the cash) the irish government have had access to this information for years various politicians have chose to ignore it.. the reason they have choosen to speak out now is because they feel the voting public have an appetite for it.. not because its the right thing to do. imo the reason  politicians havent come out before is because they were afraid of the catholic church.. afraid of its power and influence.. where do these guys head when they are looking for support.. they stand outside the church imagine if a priest went out and chased them? they'd be fukd.. they wouldnt get a dozen votes. but now its safe to slag off the church but only the crowd in rome of course our crowd are ok.. cause they have relations who can vote.. cant say too much we might offend someones brother etc.. politicians/clergy/bankers apart form signing your passport photos not much use at all  :-\
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 20, 2011, 09:06:47 PM
I'm no fan of Kenny but at least he had the balls to come out with it. Not like a lot of our poilitical leaders who were mealy mouthed at best.

Now the floodgates have opened. It's a very, very significant day in Ireland. Never before has the Irish govt come out so publicly and castigated the Vatican.

Whatever Kenny's motives are / were, fair dues to him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 20, 2011, 09:21:05 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 20, 2011, 09:06:47 PM
I'm no fan of Kenny but at least he had the balls to come out with it. Not like a lot of our poilitical leaders who were mealy mouthed at best.

Now the floodgates have opened. It's a very, very significant day in Ireland. Never before has the Irish govt come out so publicly and castigated the Vatican.

Whatever Kenny's motives are / were, fair dues to him.

I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the speech. I've heard nothing like that about the Vatican before from anyone in authority. I'd see Kenny as very conservative so that sort of language is unexpected.

Listening to Micheál Martin it must become obvious to the FF party that they will have to replace him with young blood not associated with the last 15 years. He was part of the Government that did the cosy deal on compensation and he was a Minister for Education when some of the abuse was going on. He is a serious liability because he has no credibility.

I was glad to see O'Caolan making the SF speech today (he spoke well) and not Adams.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on July 20, 2011, 09:43:52 PM
Every 5-7 years, priests get moved from one parish to another.

I've never heard any explanation as to how and why they choose to move a priest or how they decide the destination.

I can understand its good to stop a priest getting too familar with his congregation, but at the same time it is a cruel thing to do - loosing all your friends and working colleagues.

What do youse think? (Church bashers need not respond)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 20, 2011, 09:50:19 PM
Quote from: Orior on July 20, 2011, 09:43:52 PM
Every 5-7 years, priests get moved from one parish to another.

I've never heard any explanation as to how and why they choose to move a priest or how they decide the destination.

I can understand its good to stop a priest getting too familar with his congregation, but at the same time it is a cruel thing to do - loosing all your friends and working colleagues.

What do youse think? (Church bashers need not respond)

This thread is about Clerical abuse, if you want to discuss the lonliness of being a priest (which i'm sure it undoubtedly is) you should start a new thread on it.

Edit - I was just reading through some of the earlier pages of this thread to prove to myself how since 2009 nothing much has changed and I came across your 1st posts. Have a look at them on P18 & 19. Its all a big joke to you Orior isn't it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 20, 2011, 09:56:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 20, 2011, 09:21:05 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 20, 2011, 09:06:47 PM
I'm no fan of Kenny but at least he had the balls to come out with it. Not like a lot of our poilitical leaders who were mealy mouthed at best.

Now the floodgates have opened. It's a very, very significant day in Ireland. Never before has the Irish govt come out so publicly and castigated the Vatican.

Whatever Kenny's motives are / were, fair dues to him.

I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the speech. I've heard nothing like that about the Vatican before from anyone in authority. I'd see Kenny as very conservative so that sort of language is unexpected.

Listening to Micheál Martin it must become obvious to the FF party that they will have to replace him with young blood not associated with the last 15 years. He was part of the Government that did the cosy deal on compensation and he was a Minister for Education when some of the abuse was going on. He is a serious liability because he has no credibility.

I was glad to see O'Caolan making the SF speech today (he spoke well) and not Adams.

I agree with both Orangeman and Muppet. Lawnseed - you are being very cynical. I too am no fan of FG but you have to acknowledge Kenny said perfectly what the average joe is thinking and for once a leader in the country told the vatican who was in charge around here. Fair play to him. This is one example of a clear different approach by FG, I just hope they take action now You weaken your own position by looking for flaws in Kenny where there are none. I am also in agreement about O Caolain. He was removed as party leader by SF and in my opinion that was a mistake. He is more tuned in on the affairs in the South than Adams. However, it is my turn to be cynical and say the reason Adams doesn't speak much on this issue is because he risks being called a hypocrite so he will steer well clear.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 20, 2011, 10:18:26 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on July 20, 2011, 08:52:46 PM
hold your horses lads before you all become the enda fan club again like you did about a hundred days ago.. lets just see exactly where enda is coming from, could it be that the main reason mr kenny and his cohorts are gettiin lippy is because he wants to draw attention away from his own governments short comings and possibly the fact that thus far the catholic church have only come up with a couple of million toward the victoms fund. (we need the cash) the irish government have had access to this information for years various politicians have chose to ignore it.. the reason they have choosen to speak out now is because they feel the voting public have an appetite for it.. not because its the right thing to do. imo the reason  politicians havent come out before is because they were afraid of the catholic church.. afraid of its power and influence.. where do these guys head when they are looking for support.. they stand outside the church imagine if a priest went out and chased them? they'd be fukd.. they wouldnt get a dozen votes. but now its safe to slag off the church but only the crowd in rome of course our crowd are ok.. cause they have relations who can vote.. cant say too much we might offend someones brother etc.. politicians/clergy/bankers apart form signing your passport photos not much use at all  :-\

Lawnseed, is this more of your opposition for opposition sake?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 20, 2011, 10:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 20, 2011, 08:26:13 PM
1. The qualifications of clergy in general or whether or not, in general, they have any claim to a 'moral authority' is not relevant in this discussion.

Oh but it is, and here's why. 

For decades the clergy claimed to be the experts on all matter moral (they still do, in fact) and the people listened. It was that misplaced trust in the moral authority of the catholic church that gave it such a free reign and kept it immune from accountability. That is what led to the mess that was created. 

State institutions providing public services are supposed to be accountable and people should not feel intimidated about speaking up and flagging up any wrongdoing. Now if state-funded institutions are run by an organisation that has convinced its members that it is working on behalf of the almighty and enjoys unquestioned authority, that is a huge obstacle to accountability.  Peoples' deeply held religious beliefs hold them back from even considering that there might be something wrong with the system, to say nothing of blowing the whistle on it.

And if the church has such a strong hold on everyone all the way up through the police and up to top level politicians, accountability will be non-existent and you end up with institutions becoming a magnet for perverts, rapists, and other assorted sickos who sign up in the knowledge that they'll get away with murder.

Hence it is a blind faith in the moral authority of the catholic church that led to all of this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 20, 2011, 10:26:13 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on July 20, 2011, 08:52:46 PM
the reason they have choosen to speak out now is because they feel the voting public have an appetite for it.. not because its the right thing to do.

You think Enda Kenny thinks doesn't think it's wrong to allow a system to exist in which children get raped? I think that's a bit harsh.

In any case I thought that politicians in a democracy were supposed to do what the voters want them to do.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 21, 2011, 03:19:26 AM
Yesterday Enda became a leader, now lets see where he leads
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on July 21, 2011, 09:45:30 AM
QuoteYesterday Enda became a leader, now lets see where he leads

Lets see him comment on the financial crisis at the heart of the ECB etc etc with the same vigour and I'll be convinced. But I won't hold my breath. I'm delighted with what he said yesterday but..... ( my cynical side says that it was very opportunistic - hopefully I'm wrong)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on July 21, 2011, 10:00:43 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 21, 2011, 03:19:26 AM
Yesterday Enda became a leader, now lets see where he leads

Quote from: Declan on July 21, 2011, 09:45:30 AM
QuoteYesterday Enda became a leader, now lets see where he leads

Lets see him comment on the financial crisis at the heart of the ECB etc etc with the same vigour and I'll be convinced. But I won't hold my breath. I'm delighted with what he said yesterday but..... ( my cynical side says that it was very opportunistic - hopefully I'm wrong)

Both these comments sum my feelings up exactly.  It was a brave move to take but there are many other issues that Kenny must now lead on.  The thing is that while his individual star continues to rise his party is still sitting stagnant and the general feeling is that many of the pre-election promises are not being met.

I also see where lawnseed is coming from.  He is cynical but cynicism is not a bad thing when assessing politicians.  He may have believed in every single word he said, and he may have had the best of intentions in getting the messgae for the victims across but he also saw an amazing opportunity to gain serious kudos with the voting public.  As lawseed said he attacked Rome but never really hit out at the "local" church as hard as he should have.  It is like the US policy of focusing on Foreign policy to detract from domestic problems, "blame the people away over there in Rome and people will not see where the issue ultimately arose".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on July 21, 2011, 12:27:12 PM
Leadership my arse. The spin doctors know which way the wind blows. Although what Kenny said needed to be said and it may seem churlish to cavil about it, ten or twenty or more years ago was when it needed to be said. Far from showing leadership, this is the government scrambling to catch up with the people. There's nothing controversial in what he said and saying anything less would have caused outrage. "There go the people. I am their leader. I must follow them".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on July 21, 2011, 12:37:40 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 21, 2011, 12:27:12 PM
Leadership my arse. The spin doctors know which way the wind blows. Although what Kenny said needed to be said and it may seem churlish to cavil about it, ten or twenty or more years ago was when it needed to be said. Far from showing leadership, this is the government scrambling to catch up with the people. There's nothing controversial in what he said and saying anything less would have caused outrage. "There go the people. I am their leader. I must follow them".

I agree with you Hardy but remember it is not that long ago that many rural areas in ireland were controlled by the priest with the blackthorn stick and some places still have the same deference to the church.  Words mean nothing, what needs to now happen is that the Government take the correct moves to make the people who are cupable pay, both through the Court system and in their pockets.  Time for the worlds largest company to open it's coffers and see the victims right.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 21, 2011, 01:29:31 PM
I am not familiar with what Taoiseach Kenny has said in the past on this issue. Maybe there is political gain for him in making such an unprecedented overt attack on the criminal activities of the Vatican, I don't know but I have my doubts.
Usually the right wing indulge in tirades against the jews/knackers/dole scroungers/foreigners/crime.

The main people who directly suffered were the children and their families. For the first time the elected leader of this country has read the appropriate prepared script which unreservedly condemned the Catholic Church to the highest level, for their part in the rape of these children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 20, 2011, 10:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 20, 2011, 08:26:13 PM
1. The qualifications of clergy in general or whether or not, in general, they have any claim to a 'moral authority' is not relevant in this discussion.

Oh but it is, and here's why. 

For decades the clergy claimed to be the experts on all matter moral (they still do, in fact) and the people listened. It was that misplaced trust in the moral authority of the catholic church that gave it such a free reign and kept it immune from accountability. That is what led to the mess that was created. 

State institutions providing public services are supposed to be accountable and people should not feel intimidated about speaking up and flagging up any wrongdoing. Now if state-funded institutions are run by an organisation that has convinced its members that it is working on behalf of the almighty and enjoys unquestioned authority, that is a huge obstacle to accountability.  Peoples' deeply held religious beliefs hold them back from even considering that there might be something wrong with the system, to say nothing of blowing the whistle on it.

And if the church has such a strong hold on everyone all the way up through the police and up to top level politicians, accountability will be non-existent and you end up with institutions becoming a magnet for perverts, rapists, and other assorted sickos who sign up in the knowledge that they'll get away with murder.

Hence it is a blind faith in the moral authority of the catholic church that led to all of this.

There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.

I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 21, 2011, 02:45:30 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 20, 2011, 10:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 20, 2011, 08:26:13 PM
1. The qualifications of clergy in general or whether or not, in general, they have any claim to a 'moral authority' is not relevant in this discussion.

Oh but it is, and here's why. 

For decades the clergy claimed to be the experts on all matter moral (they still do, in fact) and the people listened. It was that misplaced trust in the moral authority of the catholic church that gave it such a free reign and kept it immune from accountability. That is what led to the mess that was created. 

State institutions providing public services are supposed to be accountable and people should not feel intimidated about speaking up and flagging up any wrongdoing. Now if state-funded institutions are run by an organisation that has convinced its members that it is working on behalf of the almighty and enjoys unquestioned authority, that is a huge obstacle to accountability.  Peoples' deeply held religious beliefs hold them back from even considering that there might be something wrong with the system, to say nothing of blowing the whistle on it.

And if the church has such a strong hold on everyone all the way up through the police and up to top level politicians, accountability will be non-existent and you end up with institutions becoming a magnet for perverts, rapists, and other assorted sickos who sign up in the knowledge that they'll get away with murder.

Hence it is a blind faith in the moral authority of the catholic church that led to all of this.

There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.

I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.

  :o :o Unbelievable.

(http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/stick-man-banging-head.gif)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on July 21, 2011, 04:57:07 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM
There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.

I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.

Fair enough but when it comes to the shower that run the Church heed the old adage:

Do As I Say Not As I Do

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 21, 2011, 05:44:53 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM
There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.
AFAIK, there are no more child sex abusers in the Catholic church than in other institutions.
What spread it out through the church was the criminal complicity.
This is no few bad apple scenario that afflict most organisations. here the complicity was greater than the crime itself and spread through to the top of a decadent Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on July 21, 2011, 05:50:04 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM

There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.

I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.

Do you think in the decades gone by, before the rise against the church in Ireland, as can be seen on this thread, that the Church as a institution took advantage of a society to strengten its position and status through control?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 07:29:08 PM
Quote from: Puckoon on July 21, 2011, 05:50:04 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM

There are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.

I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.

Do you think in the decades gone by, before the rise against the church in Ireland, as can be seen on this thread, that the Church as a institution took advantage of a society to strengten its position and status through control?
Absolutely. The Church as an institution is the key term here though.
My interpretation of the Church is not just the people that make it up, but more the teachings from a Biblical and Moral perspective, rather than the actions of those in its ranks. Like a poster above said.
"Do as I say not as I do"

I still believe what the Church teaches comes from God and what they actually do, at times, comes from men.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 21, 2011, 07:37:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PM
I will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority.

Jesus wept!  ::)

Quote
My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.

I don't doubt it, mate. I don't doubt it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on July 21, 2011, 07:40:50 PM
Yes - so could you agree then that a radical overhaul of the structures, and the place in society of the church can happen, and should happen - and it technically shouldnt impact your personal practice of religion at all - the good men and women of the church will still come to the fore? The institution is rotten to the core (even with the good people in the institution), it couldn't not be having existed for so long through a basis of fear and control - and it goes beyond the abuse of the children. There are calls from your "side" for calmness, and planning and long term strategy - but to me it just sounds like if we leave this alone we might be able to sweep it under the carpet. Not suggesting that is your strategy btw.

The church, if it is to exist should be the people en masse (pardon the pun), not the few who make up the official structures weilding the power. It always should have been the people - but I don't think it ever was.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 21, 2011, 07:41:28 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 07:29:08 PM
I still believe what the Church teaches comes from God and what they actually do, at times, comes from men.

Ah, the old "everything good that happens is because of God and everything bad that happens is the fault of men" defence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 21, 2011, 07:44:55 PM
Quote from: Puckoon on July 21, 2011, 07:40:50 PM
The church, if it is to exist should be the people en masse (pardon the pun), not the few who make up the official structures weilding the power. It always should have been the people - but I don't think it ever was.

That's why it's such a declining force.  This top-down authoritarian approach is out of touch with modern values. People don't take any crap anymore. Dictators aren't respected, they always get pulled down in the end.

Contrast that with the fragmented non-centralised nature of Islam which is spreading like weeds everywhere.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 07:47:21 PM
Quote from: Puckoon on July 21, 2011, 07:40:50 PM
Yes - so could you agree then that a radical overhaul of the structures, and the place in society of the church can happen, and should happen - and it technically shouldnt impact your personal practice of religion at all - the good men and women of the church will still come to the fore? The institution is rotten to the core (even with the good people in the institution), it couldn't not be having existed for so long through a basis of fear and control - and it goes beyond the abuse of the children. There are calls from your "side" for calmness, and planning and long term strategy - but to me it just sounds like if we leave this alone we might be able to sweep it under the carpet. Not suggesting that is your strategy btw.

The church, if it is to exist should be the people en masse (pardon the pun), not the few who make up the official structures weilding the power. It always should have been the people - but I don't think it ever was.

I could agree to that Puck and I do believe that is what needs to happen. I also believe though that it is people like me who actually have a faith and a vested interest in how I am able to practice my faith and how this is facilitated by the Church, that should be involved in this overhaul. Not people like Eamonn et al who have no interest in leaving anything behind
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 21, 2011, 08:27:04 PM
Your right iceman, people like you should be at the centre of rebuilding your church. I can't speak for Eamonn but I just want the church removed from special relationships with government, removed from schools, hospitals and practiced in peoples own time.  I also want it held accountable for what it has done by the laws of the land. After that I couldn't care less if it doubled its membership or whether it died completely.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 08:34:56 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 21, 2011, 08:27:04 PM
Your right iceman, people like you should be at the centre of rebuilding your church. I can't speak for Eamonn but I just want the church removed from special relationships with government, removed from schools, hospitals and practiced in peoples own time.  I also want it held accountable for what it has done by the laws of the land.

I agree with this bit.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 21, 2011, 10:11:14 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 21, 2011, 08:27:04 PM
Your right iceman, people like you should be at the centre of rebuilding your church. I can't speak for Eamonn but I just want the church removed from special relationships with government, removed from schools, hospitals and practiced in peoples own time.  I also want it held accountable for what it has done by the laws of the land. After that I couldn't care less if it doubled its membership or whether it died completely.
I agree with all that except I'd like to see it (and all religion) die completely. Superstition has long outlived any usefulness it may have had.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 21, 2011, 10:45:26 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 21, 2011, 10:11:14 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on July 21, 2011, 08:27:04 PM
Your right iceman, people like you should be at the centre of rebuilding your church. I can't speak for Eamonn but I just want the church removed from special relationships with government, removed from schools, hospitals and practiced in peoples own time.  I also want it held accountable for what it has done by the laws of the land. After that I couldn't care less if it doubled its membership or whether it died completely.
I agree with all that except I'd like to see it (and all religion) die completely. Superstition has long outlived any usefulness it may have had.

Post no. 666 from Eamonnca1... :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on July 22, 2011, 12:48:53 AM
You mean MORE catastrophic than the consequences of blind adherence to authoritarian religious domination that have delivered, for just one example, three hundred years or more of division, murder, mayhem and hatred? Wow! I don't want to live in the post-religious Ireland if it's going to be worse than that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 22, 2011, 12:49:41 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society

For those who have an inability to conceive other realities/think for themselves thats probably true enough for the masses who have invested too much in their faith. But do you not think that the CC is taking advantage of that reality rather than doing what is right regardless of what it costs them? The next generation will not give the CC the time of day because of what we know about their behaviour as an institution (the elderly will stick it out). There can be other mechanisms developed to teach children about morals and ethics to help societies develop the correct mindset in the young generation. The energy from the flock is not there to repair the CC. They are mostly all sheep who don't have it in them to fight for their faith.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 12:55:41 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society

The Church of Rome took primacy under the Norman invader, it took control under the British Master, it worked for both.

Religion is a crutch for a man who can walk. Cast down that crutch and run.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Absolutely spot on... I'll take and try to live by my faith any day rather than turn in to rudderless, intolerant and downright hateful human beings
like we have amongst us, No mention at all to the monumental contributions the catholic church offers to the most needy of people around the world
...no no, just focus on the rotten apples and spit insults from high up on their soap boxes, Pathetic! ::)
There is no one disagreeing here about what should be done to the perpetrators... but the degree of hatefulness simply wont let ye leave it at that  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:01:30 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Absolutely spot on... I'll take and try to live by my faith any day rather than turn in to rudderless, intolerant and downright hateful human beings
like we have amongst us, No mention at all to the monumental contributions the catholic church offers to the most needy of people around the world
...no no, just focus on the rotten apples and spit insults from high up on their soap boxes, Pathetic! ::)
There is no one disagreeing here about what should be done to the perpetrators... but the degree of hatefulness simply wont let ye leave it at that  ::)

Why do you need a fairytale to give you direction? You don't need deities to give you positive morals. Is religion for people who fear that they could not control their darkside without the fear of hell and the promise of heaven. There is no heaven, there is no hell, do right be your fellow man and woman, by your community, by your nation, by your fellow creatures on this planet, by the future of this planet not because you have to but because you want to yourself, because surely that is what a person should do.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 01:17:40 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:01:30 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Absolutely spot on... I'll take and try to live by my faith any day rather than turn in to rudderless, intolerant and downright hateful human beings
like we have amongst us, No mention at all to the monumental contributions the catholic church offers to the most needy of people around the world
...no no, just focus on the rotten apples and spit insults from high up on their soap boxes, Pathetic! ::)
There is no one disagreeing here about what should be done to the perpetrators... but the degree of hatefulness simply wont let ye leave it at that  ::)

Why do you need a fairytale to give you direction? You don't need deities to give you positive morals. Is religion for people who fear that they could not control their darkside without the fear of hell and the promise of heaven. There is no heaven, there is no hell, do right be your fellow man and woman, by your community, by your nation, by your fellow creatures on this planet, by the future of this planet not because you have to but because you want to yourself, because surely that is what a person should do.
Funny the word tolerant played no part in that little rant  :-\
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:44:47 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 01:17:40 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:01:30 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Absolutely spot on... I'll take and try to live by my faith any day rather than turn in to rudderless, intolerant and downright hateful human beings
like we have amongst us, No mention at all to the monumental contributions the catholic church offers to the most needy of people around the world
...no no, just focus on the rotten apples and spit insults from high up on their soap boxes, Pathetic! ::)
There is no one disagreeing here about what should be done to the perpetrators... but the degree of hatefulness simply wont let ye leave it at that  ::)

Why do you need a fairytale to give you direction? You don't need deities to give you positive morals. Is religion for people who fear that they could not control their darkside without the fear of hell and the promise of heaven. There is no heaven, there is no hell, do right be your fellow man and woman, by your community, by your nation, by your fellow creatures on this planet, by the future of this planet not because you have to but because you want to yourself, because surely that is what a person should do.
Funny the word tolerant played no part in that little rant  :-\

Mmmmm because tolerance has been a keystone of religion throughout time.

By the way, here is a definition of tolerance, I like the example they give.

tol·er·ance
noun /ˈtäl(ə)rəns/ 
tolerances, plural

The ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with
- the tolerance of corruption

Here is a definition of tolerate

tol·er·ate
verb /ˈtäləˌrāt/

Accept or endure (someone or something unpleasant or disliked) with forbearance
- how was it that she could tolerate such noise?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on July 22, 2011, 01:47:05 AM
Some talk about rebuilding as if it was that easy. They forget that some offending priests had absolute rule over parishes. Their waywardness/evilness affected generations.

Please don't let anyone defend the Vatican/Irish Church on this. Their failure to deal with the monstrous activities within their ranks was a greater evil than anything I've read of. Unless you have close contact with those affected you'll never know the extend of their negligence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 01:48:16 AM
Two motorists are on the motorway, both are obeying the speed limit. 

The first one is obeying the speed limit because he's afraid he'll get caught by cops and have to pay a fine, and he thinks that if there were no speed limits then he wouldn't be able to control himself and would drive at over 100MPH.

The second is obeying the speed limit because he understands that exceeding it will greatly increase the liklihood that an accident will occur.  He sees the potential consequences of speeding in terms of the safety of himself and other road users, hence he refrains from doing it.

Which one has the better moral compass?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 01:51:13 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society

Pass the sick bag.  Religion is not a genetic trait, it is a meme.  People figured out how to get by in large groups and large communities for hundreds of thousands of years before a tribe of middle eastern goat-herders supposedly reached the foot of Mt Sinai and got their orders from on high.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 01:54:20 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM

...no no, just focus on the rotten apples

Rotten apples? "Och sure it was only a handful of them."

There were bad apples all right, but the barrel itself was rotten and the man responsible for maintaining it simply stirred the rotten apples around in the hope that they'd go away rather than pulling them out.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 02:12:24 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 01:54:20 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM

...no no, just focus on the rotten apples

Rotten apples? "Och sure it was only a handful of them."

There were bad apples all right, but the barrel itself was rotten and the man responsible for maintaining it simply stirred the rotten apples around in the hope that they'd go away rather than pulling them out
.
And point to where you're getting any argument here... perhaps there isn't one, ah but sure we'll make one,
that way we can get the boot in to debates insults that go well beyond this thread title  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 02:23:14 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:44:47 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 01:17:40 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 01:01:30 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AM
Is their something in the Irish psyche which causes us to swing from one extreme too the other. There are many examples in History, this Church controversy being the most recent. Anger directed at Rome and the Church hierarchy in Ireland is right and justifiable, as is calls for root and branch reform. There is no justification for the extreme anti-catholic agenda currently being fostered by all the usual suspects, aided and abetted by large sections of our bought and paid for media. The views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Absolutely spot on... I'll take and try to live by my faith any day rather than turn in to rudderless, intolerant and downright hateful human beings
like we have amongst us, No mention at all to the monumental contributions the catholic church offers to the most needy of people around the world
...no no, just focus on the rotten apples and spit insults from high up on their soap boxes, Pathetic! ::)
There is no one disagreeing here about what should be done to the perpetrators... but the degree of hatefulness simply wont let ye leave it at that  ::)

Why do you need a fairytale to give you direction? You don't need deities to give you positive morals. Is religion for people who fear that they could not control their darkside without the fear of hell and the promise of heaven. There is no heaven, there is no hell, do right be your fellow man and woman, by your community, by your nation, by your fellow creatures on this planet, by the future of this planet not because you have to but because you want to yourself, because surely that is what a person should do.
Funny the word tolerant played no part in that little rant  :-\


Mmmmm because tolerance has been a keystone of Religion daisy chain making, lets all hold hands and be friends but only when it suits humanitarians throughout time.




Fixed that for you ;)

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 02:27:27 AM
Insults?  Where? Please wait until someone resort to ad hominem on their opponent before you start accusing someone of ad hominem attacks.

When you refer to "rotten apple" then it's perfectly clear that you're resorting to the "few bad apples" defence, the idea that it was only a handful of rogue priests. But that was not the case. The management of the organisation colluded with with these people, covered up their crimes, intimidated victims and witnesses, and worst of all moved these sickos around so that they could carry on raping and torturing children.

Sorry if the truth hurts, but the fact is that the top levels of the organisation were complicit in these atrocities and were not the work of a few "bad apples". It was institutionalised abuse that was sanctioned and approved by the management.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 02:48:19 AM
If for instance there were 1000 priests guilty of said crimes in ireland and that's probably quite generous, then add to that the bishops and cardinals
up through the echelons in the Vatican to the pope himself who were aware of it...does that mean that the Catholic church as a whole and
the good it does around the world should be abolished  ???

For the sheer size of the Church the world over yes I'd consider those rotten apples...and that includes the Pope >:(
Clearly anything other than debating the punishment for those involved for these terrible crimes is insulting to me and others !
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 22, 2011, 03:40:13 AM
Those arguing for the Church need to think about their argument.

They are attacking people who used to go to Catholics schools with them, went to mass with them and received the sacraments with them. They are trying to paint them as rabid anti-Catholics. These are descendants of people who refused food while starving during the famine because it required becoming a jumper (to Protestantism).

The Church leadership would need to wake up very quickly or it will be consigned to history in this country.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 08:04:18 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 02:48:19 AM
If for instance there were 1000 priests guilty of said crimes in ireland and that's probably quite generous, then add to that the bishops and cardinals
up through the echelons in the Vatican to the pope himself who were aware of it...does that mean that the Catholic church as a whole and
the good it does around the world should be abolished  ???

For the sheer size of the Church the world over yes I'd consider those rotten apples...and that includes the Pope >:(
Clearly anything other than debating the punishment for those involved for these terrible crimes is insulting to me and others !

Try not to take it personally then.

I'm making two arguments. 

1 - For the crimes against humanity committed by the organisation, it should be banished from all state institutions, deprived of any state support in any of its endeavours, have all of its trappings and cosy little perks taken out of state broadcasting (Angelus, televised Mass), the criminals should be held to account and justice should be served both in criminal law (rapists and torturers imprisoned along with those who colluded with them, supported them, assisted them and covered their tracks) and in civil law (compensation for any survivors).

2 - As with all religions it has outlived its usefulness and is not a suitable basis for social cohesion.  Belief in the invisible man in the sky is not necessary to live a good life.  Religion has such a negative influence in this world that the sooner people wake up to its folly the better. FYI I don't favour forcibly outlawing religion or supressing it, because unfortunately that has a bad habit of making it even stronger. Better to let it wither on the vine as people become better educated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 08:07:36 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 03:40:13 AM
Those arguing for the Church need to think about their argument.

They are attacking people who used to go to Catholics schools with them, went to mass with them and received the sacraments with them. They are trying to paint them as rabid anti-Catholics. These are descendants of people who refused food while starving during the famine because it required becoming a jumper (to Protestantism).

The Church leadership would need to wake up very quickly or it will be consigned to history in this country.

I sat through many's a mass myself.

I also find it interesting that catholics who feel strongly about their belief system are described as "devout".  Atheists or anyone favouring a secular society are often described as 'rabid' or 'militant'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 08:08:35 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 03:40:13 AM
Those arguing for the Church need to think about their argument.

They are attacking people who used to go to Catholics schools with them, went to mass with them and received the sacraments with them. They are trying to paint them as rabid anti-Catholics. These are descendants of people who refused food while starving during the famine because it required becoming a jumper (to Protestantism).

The Church leadership would need to wake up very quickly or it will be consigned to history in this country.
I don't need to paint anybody as anything, they're doing quite the
job of it on their own.
Its actually the few of us here that still hang on to the bit of faith
we were brought up with that are being attacked and ridiculed
at every turn  >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 22, 2011, 09:00:01 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 08:08:35 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 03:40:13 AM
Those arguing for the Church need to think about their argument.

They are attacking people who used to go to Catholics schools with them, went to mass with them and received the sacraments with them. They are trying to paint them as rabid anti-Catholics. These are descendants of people who refused food while starving during the famine because it required becoming a jumper (to Protestantism).

The Church leadership would need to wake up very quickly or it will be consigned to history in this country.
I don't need to paint anybody as anything, they're doing quite the
job of it on their own.
Its actually the few of us here that still hang on to the bit of faith
we were brought up with that are being attacked and ridiculed
at every turn  >:(

There's nothing wrong with having faith in a God - that's entirely your own business.
But the Catholic Church organisation is entirely different. They are beyond all defence in my opinion. It is a rotten institution - at it's core and from the top down. I wish it would crumble and be done with forever.
A smaller, more democratic and open 'Irish Catholic Church' could replace it in this country for those who would still like to practic as a Catholic (and something similar in other countries worldwide). That Church would be free from the evils of the current Church, and could attempt to reclaim some moral authority.
I don't see why Catholics here in Ireland or in any other country should take their guidance from out-of-touch, bureaucratic, elderly, power-hungry administrators in Rome who shield paedophiles and obstruct civil law in other countries in order to protect the power and wealth that they have. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Groucho on July 22, 2011, 09:22:00 AM
When the Pope sells one of the many paintings in the Vatican and gives the proceeds to the poor/starving in Africa........
then people might believe that they practice what they preach.......I'll not hold my breath.

 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 22, 2011, 10:16:48 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 22, 2011, 09:00:01 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 22, 2011, 08:08:35 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 03:40:13 AM
Those arguing for the Church need to think about their argument.

They are attacking people who used to go to Catholics schools with them, went to mass with them and received the sacraments with them. They are trying to paint them as rabid anti-Catholics. These are descendants of people who refused food while starving during the famine because it required becoming a jumper (to Protestantism).

The Church leadership would need to wake up very quickly or it will be consigned to history in this country.
I don't need to paint anybody as anything, they're doing quite the
job of it on their own.
Its actually the few of us here that still hang on to the bit of faith
we were brought up with that are being attacked and ridiculed
at every turn  >:(

There's nothing wrong with having faith in a God - that's entirely your own business.
But the Catholic Church organisation is entirely different. They are beyond all defence in my opinion. It is a rotten institution - at it's core and from the top down. I wish it would crumble and be done with forever.
A smaller, more democratic and open 'Irish Catholic Church' could replace it in this country for those who would still like to practic as a Catholic (and something similar in other countries worldwide). That Church would be free from the evils of the current Church, and could attempt to reclaim some moral authority.
I don't see why Catholics here in Ireland or in any other country should take their guidance from out-of-touch, bureaucratic, elderly, power-hungry administrators in Rome who shield paedophiles and obstruct civil law in other countries in order to protect the power and wealth that they have.

If faith mean't that much to folk then I like you would expect there to be a some form of militant/anti establishment catholicism rising up but it isn't. Simple truth is down to the fact that too many who like to consider themselves as devout catholics are sheep.

On Eamonnca's point...if the GAA administration up to the highest levels protected numerous child abusers, silenced victims and subsequently thwarted their attempts for proper juctice, my relationship with the GAA as an institution would be over. I would expect other right thinking members to do the same and get that institutuion to crumble to the ground before new beginnings could be created. Can some of the devout point out to me why that would be the wrong thing to do?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 22, 2011, 01:06:10 PM
If you look back over the thread you can see the different stages of grief well represented here:

Denial:
Anger:
Bargaining:
Depression:
Acceptance:

Most posters can quickly be put into one of the above, mainly the first 2 or 3. That suggests our discussion is along more predictable lines that people here think.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 02:27:59 PM
Eamonn there have been plenty of insults and jibes. You have made your point clear so why even continue to contribute to the conversation?
I think most people are in agreement that there needs to be reform and most people recognize that the majority of those contributing to this conversation/debate will not be part of that reform.
You want all religion dead and buried. Good for you. Now slither on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 22, 2011, 02:31:49 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html)

Fr Thomas Patrick Doyle OP, a US Dominican priest with a doctorate in canon law, is a renowned and outspoken advocate for church abuse victims

Good article.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMThere are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.
No doubt.

Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMI will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.
Surely the problem with that is that this scandal is no longer a case of individuals  within an institution behaving atrociously?

Rather, as the Cloyne Report clearly demonstrates, it is that that institution, through all its offices, orders and highest officials, at every level including right to the very top, willingly and knowingly colluded with the aforementioned individuals, over decades and throughout the world, so that those individuals were able to rape, bugger and otherwise abuse countless thousands of children and their families.
Indeed, so widespread was this abuse, and so willing was the institution to wield its formidable power in defence of its image and reputation etc, that whole communities and societies, nation states even, were horribly corrupted and distorted.

Martin Luther finally concluded that "Enough is Enough" at the sight of the Church selling "Indulgences" out of self-interest, yet you seem prepared to countenance the same Church when it colludes in the rape of children, again out of self-interest, then denies what it has done, even when presented with damning (literally!) evidence.

What might it take for you finally to say "Enough!", or is there nothing the Church could do to make you think again?

P.S. The thought occurs that you may be unable to accept the example of (the heretic) Luther as a fit analogy; therefore you might consider instead the Cleansing of the Temple by Jesus, when he took a whip (literally) to those officers of the Church who had defiled it (Matthew 21:12-13)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:09:18 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 22, 2011, 12:20:58 AMThe views expressed here by Iceman, are much closer to the real sentiments of the silent majority, who recognise the importance of religion in Irish society. It is part of our History,Culture,so deeply embedded in our DNA that rejection of it would leave us completely rudderless and have catostrophic consequences for our civil society
Does that last observation mean that you believe non-Catholic countries like eg New Zealand or Sweden to be "rudderless" and "catastrophically" damaged civilly?

And if so, where does that leave countries like Germany or Switzerland, which have a mixture of Catholic and Protestant Provinces/Cantons? Do their citizens consult or discard their "moral compass" as appropriate, when they move from one to the other?  ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:13:17 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 02:31:49 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html)

Fr Thomas Patrick Doyle OP, a US Dominican priest with a doctorate in canon law, is a renowned and outspoken advocate for church abuse victims

Good article.
How ironic that a Priest who is known for advocating on behalf of abused children shoud be described as "outspoken"...  :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 22, 2011, 04:20:06 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:13:17 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 22, 2011, 02:31:49 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0722/1224301127607.html)

Fr Thomas Patrick Doyle OP, a US Dominican priest with a doctorate in canon law, is a renowned and outspoken advocate for church abuse victims

Good article.
How ironic that a Priest who is known for advocating on behalf of abused children shoud be described as "outspoken"...  :o

When he is considered 'outspoken' and his adversaries are considered 'devout' that tells you what you need to know.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:41:48 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMThere are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.
No doubt.

Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMI will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.
Surely the problem with that is that this scandal is no longer a case of individuals  within an institution behaving atrociously?

Rather, as the Cloyne Report clearly demonstrates, it is that that institution, through all its offices, orders and highest officials, at every level including right to the very top, willingly and knowingly colluded with the aforementioned individuals, over decades and throughout the world, so that those individuals were able to rape, bugger and otherwise abuse countless thousands of children and their families.
Indeed, so widespread was this abuse, and so willing was the institution to wield its formidable power in defence of its image and reputation etc, that whole communities and societies, nation states even, were horribly corrupted and distorted.

Martin Luther finally concluded that "Enough is Enough" at the sight of the Church selling "Indulgences" out of self-interest, yet you seem prepared to countenance the same Church when it colludes in the rape of children, again out of self-interest, then denies what it has done, even when presented with damning (literally!) evidence.

What might it take for you finally to say "Enough!", or is there nothing the Church could do to make you think again?

P.S. The thought occurs that you may be unable to accept the example of (the heretic) Luther as a fit analogy; therefore you might consider instead the Cleansing of the Temple by Jesus, when he took a whip (literally) to those officers of the Church who had defiled it (Matthew 21:12-13)

I don't mind your reference to Luther. I have a fair understanding of his intent and what he stood for and the escalation from discontent to reformation. I think this is something different. Does everyone just break away and start another Church? And then if there is something we don't like, start another and another until we have 100 more denominations and even more places for things to go wrong?
If enough is enough then what next?

I am a big fan of fixing what is broken. Not abandoning and looking for another ship.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:51:36 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:41:48 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 22, 2011, 04:00:19 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMThere are evil people everywhere, in every institution. It is saddening and shocking that so many of them hid within the ranks of the Catholic Church and took advantage of the Church's status in society.
No doubt.

Quote from: The Iceman on July 21, 2011, 02:35:53 PMI will continue to look to the Church as the moral authority. My understanding of what Church is may be different than yours.
Surely the problem with that is that this scandal is no longer a case of individuals  within an institution behaving atrociously?

Rather, as the Cloyne Report clearly demonstrates, it is that that institution, through all its offices, orders and highest officials, at every level including right to the very top, willingly and knowingly colluded with the aforementioned individuals, over decades and throughout the world, so that those individuals were able to rape, bugger and otherwise abuse countless thousands of children and their families.
Indeed, so widespread was this abuse, and so willing was the institution to wield its formidable power in defence of its image and reputation etc, that whole communities and societies, nation states even, were horribly corrupted and distorted.

Martin Luther finally concluded that "Enough is Enough" at the sight of the Church selling "Indulgences" out of self-interest, yet you seem prepared to countenance the same Church when it colludes in the rape of children, again out of self-interest, then denies what it has done, even when presented with damning (literally!) evidence.

What might it take for you finally to say "Enough!", or is there nothing the Church could do to make you think again?

P.S. The thought occurs that you may be unable to accept the example of (the heretic) Luther as a fit analogy; therefore you might consider instead the Cleansing of the Temple by Jesus, when he took a whip (literally) to those officers of the Church who had defiled it (Matthew 21:12-13)

I don't mind your reference to Luther. I have a fair understanding of his intent and what he stood for and the escalation from discontent to reformation. I think this is something different. Does everyone just break away and start another Church? And then if there is something we don't like, start another and another until we have 100 more denominations and even more places for things to go wrong?
If enough is enough then what next?

I am a big fan of fixing what is broken. Not abandoning and looking for another ship.
To answer your question (bold), I would normally say "No".

But I do not see the "Moneychangers" being "whipped out of the Temple", nor any sign of it - quite the contrary, in fact, since the Popes/Cardinals/Archbishops/Bishops etc who have colluded in child rape for decades, clearly seem to see themselves as being as strongly in control of the Church as ever. Indeed, they continue to argue that they are  the Church.

Therefore if you and your fellow adherents cannot or will not do whatever it takes* to drive them out, then imo you are just as surely collding in crime as they.

* - I do not consider your verbal condemnation, no matter how unequivocal, to be adequate to exculpate you from the charge of collusion, since it is clearly having zero impact on the "bad apples" who continue to run the institution.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:58:28 PM
EG there has been mention already for the need for discussion, cool heads and time.
There cannot be a knee jerk reaction - it is near impossible.

Jesus may have cleared the temple but he also appointed a man who betrayed him as the Head of the Church (Peter).

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 22, 2011, 05:10:40 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:58:28 PM
EG there has been mention already for the need for discussion, cool heads and time.
There cannot be a knee jerk reaction - it is near impossible.

Jesus may have cleared the temple but he also appointed a man who betrayed him as the Head of the Church (Peter).

Iceman...you know that is coded language for "I intend to sit it out and do F all and we'll see how it pans out"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 06:41:07 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 02:27:59 PM
Eamonn there have been plenty of insults and jibes. You have made your point clear so why even continue to contribute to the conversation?
That's a bit of an odd thing to say. You've made your point clear too, so why do you continue to contribute to the conversation?

QuoteI think most people are in agreement that there needs to be reform and most people recognize that the majority of those contributing to this conversation/debate will not be part of that reform.
You want all religion dead and buried. Good for you. Now slither on.

Charming.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on July 22, 2011, 06:50:53 PM
A woman read a letter on Liveline today (I know, but this one made sense). It was from her twin sister in New York. They had been born in a Magdalene laundry and taken from their mother (without warning) after seven weeks of breastfeeding. Their mother never saw them again, or knew where they had been taken, until they were 23 years old and went looking for her. Among other things, the letter said the following (in paraphrase):

I'm fed up hearing about the good priests and religious. Good people don't remain members of an institution that harbours child molesters, kept slaves, kidnapped children from their mothers and still obstructs investigation of these crimes. There are many secular charitable organisations in which good people can realise their vocations to do good for their fellow man, rather than compromise their integrity by retaining their membership of a corrupt organisation.

I thought it was an interesting perspective on the debate we're having here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 07:04:35 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:58:28 PM
EG there has been mention already for the need for discussion, cool heads and time.
There cannot be a knee jerk reaction - it is near impossible.
Why is there a need for time? Why wait?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 07:06:26 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 22, 2011, 05:10:40 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:58:28 PM
EG there has been mention already for the need for discussion, cool heads and time.
There cannot be a knee jerk reaction - it is near impossible.

Jesus may have cleared the temple but he also appointed a man who betrayed him as the Head of the Church (Peter).

Iceman...you know that is coded language for "I intend to sit it out and do F all and we'll see how it pans out"

as opposed to stirring shit on gaa message boards and doing F all yourself? Skull you've been the same from you joined the board - a young crow.
Full of shit
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 22, 2011, 07:48:10 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 22, 2011, 06:50:53 PM
A woman read a letter on Liveline today (I know, but this one made sense). It was from her twin sister in New York. They had been born in a Magdalene laundry and taken from their mother (without warning) after seven weeks of breastfeeding. Their mother never saw them again, or knew where they had been taken, until they were 23 years old and went looking for her. Among other things, the letter said the following (in paraphrase):

I'm fed up hearing about the good priests and religious. Good people don't remain members of an institution that harbours child molesters, kept slaves,       kidnapped children from their mothers and still obstructs investigation of these crimes. There are many secular charitable organisations in which good people can realise their vocations to do good for their fellow man, rather than compromise their integrity by retaining their membership of a corrupt organisation.

I thought it was an interesting perspective on the debate we're having here.

It is a carbon copy of what I've been saying on here for a long time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 08:43:54 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 07:06:26 PM
as opposed to stirring shit on gaa message boards and doing F all yourself? Skull you've been the same from you joined the board - a young crow.
Full of shit

Charming. You must have missed the Sermon on the Mount.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 08:49:18 PM
Never claimed to be perfect or the next Jesus.
Just because I try to walk the path doesn't mean I am not able to step off now and again.

But then you "morally straight and guided by your own compass" boys can choose to do whatever you want because "you're not really hurting anyone"

Get used to the heat Eamonn......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 09:09:02 PM
Surely Sean Brady should see that it's time for him as leader of the church in Ireland to admit at least to himself if not the public that he as much as anyone involved in this scandal, has been a large part of the massive cover up of child abuse for decades and that the future of the church in Ireland would be better served by allowing someone else to take over the reins and allow a new man to take control and lead the church to a renewal ?.

But given his appalling record of defending those who were up to their necks in abuse, this is unlikely to happen.

The same should apply to Sean Brady's counterparts in every diocese throughout Ireland and indeed the whole world.

New leaders should be appointed and the old boys who were complicit should be kicked out and exposed. As long as Sean Brady and men like him remain in power, the church will never undergo the change that is necessary to ensure its future well being.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 08:49:18 PM
Never claimed to be perfect or the next Jesus.
Just because I try to walk the path doesn't mean I am not able to step off now and again.

But then you "morally straight and guided by your own compass" boys can choose to do whatever you want because "you're not really hurting anyone"

Get used to the heat Eamonn......

Are You using your hell to threaten Eamonn are ya?   :o

We are not afraid of superstition or your imaginary friends.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 22, 2011, 10:05:17 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 22, 2011, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 08:49:18 PM
Never claimed to be perfect or the next Jesus.
Just because I try to walk the path doesn't mean I am not able to step off now and again.

But then you "morally straight and guided by your own compass" boys can choose to do whatever you want because "you're not really hurting anyone"

Get used to the heat Eamonn......

Are You using your hell to threaten Eamonn are ya?   :o

We are not afraid of superstition or your imaginary friends.

HAHA! Quality!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 09:09:02 PM
Surely Sean Brady should see that it's time for him as leader of the church in Ireland to admit at least to himself if not the public that he as much as anyone involved in this scandal, has been a large part of the massive cover up of child abuse for decades and that the future of the church in Ireland would be better served by allowing someone else to take over the reins and allow a new man to take control and lead the church to a renewal ?.

But given his appalling record of defending those who were up to their necks in abuse, this is unlikely to happen.

The same should apply to Sean Brady's counterparts in every diocese throughout Ireland and indeed the whole world.

New leaders should be appointed and the old boys who were complicit should be kicked out and exposed. As long as Sean Brady and men like him remain in power, the church will never undergo the change that is necessary to ensure its future well being.
The problem for the church is that there are no new boys to take over.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 10:47:32 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 08:49:18 PM
But then you "morally straight and guided by your own compass" boys can choose to do whatever you want because "you're not really hurting anyone"
Just to be clear, who's hurting who?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 10:59:10 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 09:09:02 PM
Surely Sean Brady should see that it's time for him as leader of the church in Ireland to admit at least to himself if not the public that he as much as anyone involved in this scandal, has been a large part of the massive cover up of child abuse for decades and that the future of the church in Ireland would be better served by allowing someone else to take over the reins and allow a new man to take control and lead the church to a renewal ?.

But given his appalling record of defending those who were up to their necks in abuse, this is unlikely to happen.

The same should apply to Sean Brady's counterparts in every diocese throughout Ireland and indeed the whole world.

New leaders should be appointed and the old boys who were complicit should be kicked out and exposed. As long as Sean Brady and men like him remain in power, the church will never undergo the change that is necessary to ensure its future well being.
The problem for the church is that there are no new boys to take over.


Surely there have to be potentially younger leaders out there untainted by all this scandal ? They all cannot be guilty ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 11:01:13 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 10:59:10 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 09:09:02 PM
Surely Sean Brady should see that it's time for him as leader of the church in Ireland to admit at least to himself if not the public that he as much as anyone involved in this scandal, has been a large part of the massive cover up of child abuse for decades and that the future of the church in Ireland would be better served by allowing someone else to take over the reins and allow a new man to take control and lead the church to a renewal ?.

But given his appalling record of defending those who were up to their necks in abuse, this is unlikely to happen.

The same should apply to Sean Brady's counterparts in every diocese throughout Ireland and indeed the whole world.

New leaders should be appointed and the old boys who were complicit should be kicked out and exposed. As long as Sean Brady and men like him remain in power, the church will never undergo the change that is necessary to ensure its future well being.
The problem for the church is that there are no new boys to take over.


Surely there have to be potentially younger leaders out there untainted by all this scandal ? They all cannot be guilty ?.
Not saying they're all guilty at all - just that there appears to be a lack of 'new blood' in the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on July 22, 2011, 11:56:45 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 11:01:13 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 10:59:10 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on July 22, 2011, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: orangeman on July 22, 2011, 09:09:02 PM
Surely Sean Brady should see that it's time for him as leader of the church in Ireland to admit at least to himself if not the public that he as much as anyone involved in this scandal, has been a large part of the massive cover up of child abuse for decades and that the future of the church in Ireland would be better served by allowing someone else to take over the reins and allow a new man to take control and lead the church to a renewal ?.

But given his appalling record of defending those who were up to their necks in abuse, this is unlikely to happen.

The same should apply to Sean Brady's counterparts in every diocese throughout Ireland and indeed the whole world.

New leaders should be appointed and the old boys who were complicit should be kicked out and exposed. As long as Sean Brady and men like him remain in power, the church will never undergo the change that is necessary to ensure its future well being.
The problem for the church is that there are no new boys to take over.


Surely there have to be potentially younger leaders out there untainted by all this scandal ? They all cannot be guilty ?.
Not saying they're all guilty at all - just that there appears to be a lack of 'new blood' in the Church.

When even Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has reservations about the 'cabals' within the Catholic church ignoring the new guidelines on reporting child abuse it's hard for any of the rest of us to place any faith in the same church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on July 23, 2011, 12:07:17 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

Certainly I believe the guards inability to investigate some cases that were brought to them also needs looked at and Enda would be well served getting wired into them as well.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 23, 2011, 12:11:59 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 07:06:26 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 22, 2011, 05:10:40 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 04:58:28 PM
EG there has been mention already for the need for discussion, cool heads and time.
There cannot be a knee jerk reaction - it is near impossible.

Jesus may have cleared the temple but he also appointed a man who betrayed him as the Head of the Church (Peter).

Iceman...you know that is coded language for "I intend to sit it out and do F all and we'll see how it pans out"

as opposed to stirring shit on gaa message boards and doing F all yourself? Skull you've been the same from you joined the board - a young crow.
Full of shit
Quote from: The Iceman on July 22, 2011, 08:49:18 PM
Never claimed to be perfect or the next Jesus.
Just because I try to walk the path doesn't mean I am not able to step off now and again.

:)
How many child abusing priests thought those very same thoughts I wonder.

And what you call shit stirring is what I call challenging debate. You simply lack the capacity to hold your temper when unpalatable truths are presented to you. The bible seems to have taught you nothing. Resorting to ad homenum attacks exposes just how threadbare your arguments really are
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on July 23, 2011, 12:19:51 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that
Some hands are dirtier than others. The priests and brothers that abused the children committed a crime and should be punished. The church hierarchy that knew that crimes were being committed and wilfully covered up these crimes should pay. Government officials and guards that protected the church should pay. Lay people who may have suspected wrongdoing but were in thrall of the church in a time when the local priest was the most powerful man in the parish are in a different category altogether. To suggest otherwise is bullshit.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on July 23, 2011, 12:27:51 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on July 23, 2011, 12:19:51 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that
Some hands are dirtier than others. The priests and brothers that abused the children committed a crime and should be punished. The church hierarchy that knew that crimes were being committed and wilfully covered up these crimes should pay. Government officials and guards that protected the church should pay. Lay people who may have suspected wrongdoing but were in thrall of the church in a time when the local priest was the most powerful man in the parish are in a different category altogether. To suggest otherwise is bullshit.

I confess to almighty God, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do; and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.


I'm not so sure as you Tony. Certainly you would be rowing against a strong tide, but I don't know how you could sleep at night if you had any evidence that was concrete and didn't attempt to do something about it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on July 23, 2011, 12:40:52 AM
Quote from: johnneycool on July 23, 2011, 12:27:51 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on July 23, 2011, 12:19:51 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that
Some hands are dirtier than others. The priests and brothers that abused the children committed a crime and should be punished. The church hierarchy that knew that crimes were being committed and wilfully covered up these crimes should pay. Government officials and guards that protected the church should pay. Lay people who may have suspected wrongdoing but were in thrall of the church in a time when the local priest was the most powerful man in the parish are in a different category altogether. To suggest otherwise is bullshit.

I confess to almighty God, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do; and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.


I'm not so sure as you Tony. Certainly you would be rowing against a strong tide, but I don't know how you could sleep at night if you had any evidence that was concrete and didn't attempt to do something about it.
Youse can talk around it all you want, the people buggering the children and those covering it up are the guilty parties here, not the lay people who suspected something was amiss with a priest or brother. I'm not referring to these goons nowadays that are aware of the facts and still fundraise for the priests and hold vigils for them. I'm talking about Ireland of the 50s and 60s when there was nowhere to turn to.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 23, 2011, 12:59:18 AM
It should be fairly obvious by now (even to the goons) that Catholicism needs to be physically dragged kicking  and screaming from where its at at the minute. But the goons are still tipping their hats to these bastards
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 01:03:33 AM
OK Tony, what about the Magistrates, Social Workers, and Parents who sent these young people to the Industrial Schools and Laundries, the inspectors who failed to inspect, the wider Irish public who never questioned the morality of these incarcerations. We were all part of a smug society, immersed in a false religiosity, incapable of rational independent thought, and do you what, little has changed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 23, 2011, 01:14:00 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

Nice try. 

You can choose not to put money into the collection basket of a Sunday. Try opting out of paying your taxes and see how far you get with that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 24, 2011, 12:42:46 PM
Once the arrests started in News International, Rupert Murdock made it over to give testimony to an MPs Committee hearing (weak as it was).

Any sign of Rome sending senior representatives over, 17 years after Brendan Smith?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 24, 2011, 04:20:00 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 23, 2011, 01:14:00 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

Nice try. 

You can choose not to put money into the collection basket of a Sunday. Try opting out of paying your taxes and see how far you get with that.
[/b]

+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 24, 2011, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 24, 2011, 12:42:46 PM
Once the arrests started in News International, Rupert Murdock made it over to give testimony to an MPs Committee hearing (weak as it was).

Any sign of Rome sending senior representatives over, 17 years after Brendan Smith?

Well to be fair, they did send boys in frocks from Rome over to the enquiries to tell the survivors that they were telling lies when giving accounts of themselves being raped and beaten.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: 5 Sams on July 24, 2011, 09:29:24 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 24, 2011, 12:42:46 PM
Once the arrests started in News International, Rupert Murdock made it over to give testimony to an MPs Committee hearing (weak as it was).

Any sign of Rome sending senior representatives over, 17 years after Brendan Smith?

They cant even find the Bishop of Cloyne FFS.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 09:22:42 AM
"The numbers of members of the clergy who have been in touch in the last few days to say it is about time somebody spoke out about these matters in a situation like you are, has astounded me."
Mr Kenny received a standing ovation after he finished delivering the annual lecture at the opening session of the summer school.

Imagine the changes that might have occurred if these all these "morally decent" clergy who have sat in collective silence for decades had had the moral conviction to speak out 20 years ago?

They must have enjoyed all those years of cool calm meditative reflection whilst they did nothing in all that time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 25, 2011, 11:02:13 AM
The Vatican with recalled the Papal Nuncio.
I don't know a lot about diplomatic protocol, but I presume this is a pretty significant development.

The Papal Nuncio has been recalled to Rome in the wake of the publication of the Cloyne report.

The report accused the Vatican of being "entirely unhelpful" to Irish bishops in their attempts to put proper child safeguarding procedures in place.

Taoiseach Enda Kenny made a strong speech in the Dáil last week condemning the response of the Vatican to the mismanagement and the implementation of child safety guidelines by Cloyne clerical authorities.

The Taoiseach said last night he had received 2,500 messages of support from around the world after his verbal attack on the Vatican.

Mr Kenny said many of the messages of goodwill came from Catholic priests.

The Government is still waiting for a response from the Vatican after the Taoiseach accused the Catholic Church hierarchy of dysfunction, disconnection and elitism.

Mr Kenny said the Vatican had attempted to frustrate an inquiry in a sovereign democratic Republic.

However, the Taoiseach said support for his remarks has been "overwhelming".

Read more: http://breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-recalls-irelands-papal-nuncio-514121.html#ixzz1T6sBJJLd
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 09:22:42 AM
"The numbers of members of the clergy who have been in touch in the last few days to say it is about time somebody spoke out about these matters in a situation like you are, has astounded me."
Mr Kenny received a standing ovation after he finished delivering the annual lecture at the opening session of the summer school.

Imagine the changes that might have occurred if these all these "morally decent" clergy who have sat in collective silence for decades had had the moral conviction to speak out 20 years ago?

They must have enjoyed all those years of cool calm meditative reflection whilst they did nothing in all that time.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh Skull.

Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

+1

Most of the people in Gaoth Dobhair had an idea about Fr Greene and did feck all about it - they guilty?
I remember as a young lad being down in the Ostan swimming pool and someone saying "Fr Greenes coming", it was a race for the towels!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 01:04:21 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 09:22:42 AM
"The numbers of members of the clergy who have been in touch in the last few days to say it is about time somebody spoke out about these matters in a situation like you are, has astounded me."
Mr Kenny received a standing ovation after he finished delivering the annual lecture at the opening session of the summer school.

Imagine the changes that might have occurred if these all these "morally decent" clergy who have sat in collective silence for decades had had the moral conviction to speak out 20 years ago?

They must have enjoyed all those years of cool calm meditative reflection whilst they did nothing in all that time.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh Skull.

Ermmm....Damned if they do ??? You've lost me. Our supposed moral guardians (the clergy) done nothing apart from take instruction from their masters over the past 20 years. And that involved them sitting in silience on this issue for years barr the odd well scripted letter from on high when the powers that be felt they needed to. Is that not about right

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

+1

Most of the people in Gaoth Dobhair had an idea about Fr Greene and did feck all about it - they guilty?

Yes if what youre saying is true, I'd say there many an elderly adult who carries massive guilt over not speaking out. The CC had such an stranglehold on these communities people lost their moral compasses. No?
Maintain your faith is one thing. Following a church which is lead by morally corrupt individuals whilst being an easy get out for you and many others is still a separate issue to your faith is it not?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 01:58:59 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 01:04:21 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 25, 2011, 09:22:42 AM
"The numbers of members of the clergy who have been in touch in the last few days to say it is about time somebody spoke out about these matters in a situation like you are, has astounded me."
Mr Kenny received a standing ovation after he finished delivering the annual lecture at the opening session of the summer school.

Imagine the changes that might have occurred if these all these "morally decent" clergy who have sat in collective silence for decades had had the moral conviction to speak out 20 years ago?

They must have enjoyed all those years of cool calm meditative reflection whilst they did nothing in all that time.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh Skull.

Ermmm....Damned if they do ??? You've lost me. Our supposed moral guardians (the clergy) done nothing apart from take instruction from their masters over the past 20 years. And that involved them sitting in silience on this issue for years barr the odd well scripted letter from on high when the powers that be felt they needed to. Is that not about right

Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: Pangurban on July 23, 2011, 12:03:53 AM
If as some posters here imply, all members of the Church are guilty, whether through commission,omission, neglect or collusion, should the same criteria not be applied to the state, and, as they are citizens of that state, also apply to them. There are no clean hands here, and some of you atheists and church bashers should remember that

+1

Most of the people in Gaoth Dobhair had an idea about Fr Greene and did feck all about it - they guilty?

Yes if what youre saying is true, I'd say there many an elderly adult who carries massive guilt over not speaking out. The CC had such an stranglehold on these communities people lost their moral compasses. No?
Maintain your faith is one thing. Following a church which is lead by morally corrupt individuals whilst being an easy get out for you and many others is still a separate issue to your faith is it not?

Why would you doubt the veracity of what I say?
I have known dozens of Priests and only one was involved in clerical abuse (raping children to put it another way). The other priests almost to a man made massive positive differences to the communities they ministered, in some cases they changed those communities forever, for the better.
The clergy who were involved in abuse should be outted and punished to the full letter of the law, but wether you like it or not, this was only a tiny percentage of the total clergy in Ireland, you are tarring all with the one brush.
To say they knew what was going on and kept silent, therefore are guilty is a moot point as we can only speculate, unless you are a priest?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 25, 2011, 09:30:31 PM
With regards to who is to blame, am I right in saying the following?

That in the Ferns cases, a mother went to a priest regarding the abuse her son was suffering. The priest went with the complaint to the guards, who passed it to their sergeant, who in turn reported it to Dublin.
After this the trail went cold.

If this is correct, then it would suggest that the state has been included in the whole awful chapter, not abuse itself, but the cover-up side of things.

I suppose how could the two not be intertwined, taking into account the church's role in the constitution of Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on July 25, 2011, 10:00:49 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 25, 2011, 11:02:13 AM
The Vatican with recalled the Papal Nuncio.
I don't know a lot about diplomatic protocol, but I presume this is a pretty significant development.

The Papal Nuncio has been recalled to Rome in the wake of the publication of the Cloyne report.

The report accused the Vatican of being "entirely unhelpful" to Irish bishops in their attempts to put proper child safeguarding procedures in place.

Taoiseach Enda Kenny made a strong speech in the Dáil last week condemning the response of the Vatican to the mismanagement and the implementation of child safety guidelines by Cloyne clerical authorities.

The Taoiseach said last night he had received 2,500 messages of support from around the world after his verbal attack on the Vatican.

Mr Kenny said many of the messages of goodwill came from Catholic priests.

The Government is still waiting for a response from the Vatican after the Taoiseach accused the Catholic Church hierarchy of dysfunction, disconnection and elitism.

Mr Kenny said the Vatican had attempted to frustrate an inquiry in a sovereign democratic Republic.

However, the Taoiseach said support for his remarks has been "overwhelming".

Read more: http://breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-recalls-irelands-papal-nuncio-514121.html#ixzz1T6sBJJLd


I'll not sleep a wink tonight
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 26, 2011, 08:06:09 AM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-hits-out-at-excessive-reactions-after-cloyne-report-514138.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-hits-out-at-excessive-reactions-after-cloyne-report-514138.html)

The Vatican spokesman said the principal aim of the recall was to make it easier for its Secretary of State and other officials to prepare the Holy See's official response to the Government in the wake of the Cloyne report into the mishandling of child sex abuse claims.

"The recall of the Nuncio, being a measure verily adopted by the Holy See, denotes the seriousness of the situation and the Holy See's desire to face it objectively and determinately," he said.

"Nor does it exclude some degree of surprise and disappointment at certain excessive reactions."

Fr Benedettini added: "The recall of the Nuncio should be interpreted as an expression of the desire of the Holy See for serious and effective collaboration with the (Irish) Government."


Excessive reactions?

There is not even the slightest hint of remorse in the above. Telling yer man to come to Rome is supposed to show us they mean business this time but we are excessive and out of order for giving out about the 14 year delay.

There are threads here expecting our Government to reverse the habits of a lifetime and stand up to people we owe billions to. It is hard to expect that sort of backbone when we can't even stand up to an organisation who shelter people who molested Irish children and who give us the two fingers when we demand their co-operation.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 11:45:35 AM
Quote from: muppet on July 26, 2011, 08:06:09 AM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-hits-out-at-excessive-reactions-after-cloyne-report-514138.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-hits-out-at-excessive-reactions-after-cloyne-report-514138.html)

The Vatican spokesman said the principal aim of the recall was to make it easier for its Secretary of State and other officials to prepare the Holy See's official response to the Government in the wake of the Cloyne report into the mishandling of child sex abuse claims.

"The recall of the Nuncio, being a measure verily adopted by the Holy See, denotes the seriousness of the situation and the Holy See's desire to face it objectively and determinately," he said.

"Nor does it exclude some degree of surprise and disappointment at certain excessive reactions."

Fr Benedettini added: "The recall of the Nuncio should be interpreted as an expression of the desire of the Holy See for serious and effective collaboration with the (Irish) Government."


Excessive reactions?

There is not even the slightest hint of remorse in the above. Telling yer man to come to Rome is supposed to show us they mean business this time but we are excessive and out of order for giving out about the 14 year delay.

There are threads here expecting our Government to reverse the habits of a lifetime and stand up to people we owe billions to. It is hard to expect that sort of backbone when we can't even stand up to an organisation who shelter people who molested Irish children and who give us the two fingers when we demand their co-operation.

I think that every passing day makes whatever "Rome and the Bishops" may have to say increasingly irrelevant. "Rome and the bishops" is a phrase I heard many times during the course of a conversation I held with a 75 years old priest yesterday.
I had gone to a town in rural Cavan to attend a funeral service.
The local community turned out in force.
On the hottest day of the year, Protestant, Catholic and every people of every colour and creed were there to pay their respects to the deceased and to demonstrate their support for his family. The heat in the church was stifling and the service was over two hours long.  Several hundred had to wait outside and they suffered as much as their friends and neighbours inside.
Not a single individual left the church grounds while the ceremony was being conducted.
I know this because I had to go and sit in my car with the engine running and the air conditioning turned on. Plenty of others had to do the same thing but everybody stayed on to the end.
It seemed that the Catholic Church is alive and well in this community.
However, the three priests who officiated were geriatrics. The youngest told me he was more than 75 years old when I got talking to him after the burial had taken place and the crowds began to leave the grounds. The other two had tottered into the sacristy to throw of their ceremonial trappings and to collapse onto the nearest chairs. My new found friend had lasted the course with difficulty and was only too glad of a helping hand as I had stepped forward and offered him one to guide him back into the church and the merciful shade.
The poor man was heartbroken not only from the heat but also because he knew full well that the old order was changing at a frightening speed. He would have attended the funeral services in any event—a member of his congregation had died suddenly and he wanted to do his duty.
But he had to officiate simply because there was no younger and fitter priest available to deputise for him. Like the numbers attending church services, there are fewer and fewer of them around.
"Rome and the bishops" have lost contact with the people and the results are to be seen all around him. During the course of our ten minute walk, those buckos got some abuse in a rich Cavan brogue!
As an afterthought when he was back in the shade and I had turned to leave him, he added; "Sure they are oul' codgers like myself. Maybe we do need a change."
Maybe we do indeed and maybe it won't make much difference whether we have change or not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 26, 2011, 01:45:33 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 01:58:59 PMI have known dozens of Priests and only one was involved in clerical abuse (raping children to put it another way). The other priests almost to a man made massive positive differences to the communities they ministered, in some cases they changed those communities forever, for the better.
The clergy who were involved in abuse should be outted and punished to the full letter of the law, but wether you like it or not, this was only a tiny percentage of the total clergy in Ireland, you are tarring all with the one brush.
To say they knew what was going on and kept silent, therefore are guilty is a moot point as we can only speculate, unless you are a priest?
Isn't that the point (bold), GDA?

That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

Which prompts the question as to why these otherwise decent, upstanding Clergy didn't speak out publicly? As I see it, there can be only one reason, namely that they witnessed how the Church, right up to the very top, was so much more concerned for its own reputation than its morality, that it suppressed, denied, colluded with and even facilitated the continuance of this abuse.

And therefore individual non-abusing Clergy concluded that to speak out, and thereby risk besmirching the reputation of the Church publicly, would make no great difference, other than to harm their own personal chances of advancement within the Church.

And that is why this scandal is so grievous - it is not just a case of "a few bad apples spoiling the barrel etc". Rather, that argument simply no longer applies, since the institution itself  has been conclusively demonstrated to be inherently corrupt at every level, in very many Dioceses, in very many Countries, over decades.

Worse still, even now after the stench of corruption has escaped into the wider world, the reaction of the institution is still to deny, evade, deflect, cover-up and obfuscate, when the only acceptable reaction should encompass genuine repentance, a plea for forgiveness and a determination to do everything possible to purge the Church of this evil, so that it could never occur again.

Worst of all (imo), is that no-one, whether Believer or Heathen, can have any real confidence that any of that last will occur...  >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on July 26, 2011, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 11:45:35 AM
On the hottest day of the year, Protestant, Catholic and every people of every colour and creed were there to pay their respects to the deceased and to demonstrate their support for his family. The heat in the church was stifling and the service was over two hours long.  Several hundred had to wait outside and they suffered as much as their friends and neighbours inside.
Not a single individual left the church grounds while the ceremony was being conducted.

It seemed that the Catholic Church is alive and well in this community.
Or maybe people attended as a mark of respect for the deceased? I don't see this as any indication of the health of the church. I know plenty of people who would have no religious beliefs but would still attend the funeral of a friend or family member. And they'd stay to the end.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 26, 2011, 08:34:43 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 01:58:59 PM
Why would you doubt the veracity of what I say?
I have known dozens of Priests and only one was involved in clerical abuse (raping children to put it another way). The other priests almost to a man made massive positive differences to the communities they ministered, in some cases they changed those communities forever, for the better.
The clergy who were involved in abuse should be outted and punished to the full letter of the law, but wether you like it or not, this was only a tiny percentage of the total clergy in Ireland, you are tarring all with the one brush.
To say they knew what was going on and kept silent, therefore are guilty is a moot point as we can only speculate, unless you are a priest?
I don't doubt the veracity of what you say but that's a separate issue. The relevant overwhelming evidence points to that most of  hierarchy, from Bishops upwards to the top of the Vatican, were well aware of what went on. The criminal policy coordinated from the Vatican was carried out with a disciplined vigor, an intense effort right up to a few years ago to cover up the crimes (perpetuating the abuses), stonewalling police investigations and denying the abused the right of moral/legal recourse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 09:53:09 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on July 26, 2011, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 11:45:35 AM
On the hottest day of the year, Protestant, Catholic and every people of every colour and creed were there to pay their respects to the deceased and to demonstrate their support for his family. The heat in the church was stifling and the service was over two hours long.  Several hundred had to wait outside and they suffered as much as their friends and neighbours inside.
Not a single individual left the church grounds while the ceremony was being conducted.

It seemed that the Catholic Church is alive and well in this community.
Or maybe people attended as a mark of respect for the deceased? I don't see this as any indication of the health of the church. I know plenty of people who would have no religious beliefs but would still attend the funeral of a friend or family member. And they'd stay to the end.
Exactly.
Notice that I began the sentence you bolded with "It seemed.."

But the reality is very different; the presence of three old priests doddering about the place is evidence of that. I'm not sure where the others were brought in from but the man I spoke to was the only one from the parish.
This decent man is heartbroken by the fact that most of those who attended the church service won't show their faces in a church again until another funeral or wedding ceremony is held.
The drop off in priests' numbers is more than matched by the decline of church-going parishioners and this rural parish just mirrors the reality of what is happening throughout the land.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 26, 2011, 11:50:12 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 09:53:09 PM
This decent man is heartbroken by the fact that most of those who attended the church service won't show their faces in a church again until another funeral or wedding ceremony is held.
The drop off in priests' numbers is more than matched by the decline of church-going parishioners and this rural parish just mirrors the reality of what is happening throughout the land.

So the church in that community is not so alive and well after all then. Is it a similar picture around the country?  I remember there being one mass on a Saturday night and about two on a Sunday morning in each of the two chapels in my old parish and they'd both be full.  I hear that nowadays they have one in one church on the Saturday night and one in the other church the following morning and neither is filled.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 27, 2011, 11:40:42 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 26, 2011, 11:50:12 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 26, 2011, 09:53:09 PM
This decent man is heartbroken by the fact that most of those who attended the church service won't show their faces in a church again until another funeral or wedding ceremony is held.
The drop off in priests' numbers is more than matched by the decline of church-going parishioners and this rural parish just mirrors the reality of what is happening throughout the land.

So the church in that community is not so alive and well after all then. Is it a similar picture around the country?  I remember there being one mass on a Saturday night and about two on a Sunday morning in each of the two chapels in my old parish and they'd both be full.  I hear that nowadays they have one in one church on the Saturday night and one in the other church the following morning and neither is filled.
Without a doubt, it is.
I live in the parish of Donnycarney on Dublin's Northside. You could say it's a middle-aged, middle-class area. There were three fulltime priests at work here until recently. Now, there is only one and I'm told he will soon have to cover the needs of the adjoining parish of Fairview as well.
The road I live on is quite long; there are 128 houses on it. No more than 20 adults could be described as regular mass goers. They are almost exclusively OAPs. I'm quite sure of my figures here.  I often give a lift to a few of them to the church when a funeral service is being held. 
In my native parish of Swinford in East Mayo, the fall off in church goers is not as dramatic as is the case in Donnycarney but it is quite substantial all the same. The drift way from the church began long before the clerical abuse scandal hit the headlines but the ongoing drip by drip revelations have certainly speeded it up.
From what I see and hear, I've no doubt that the parishes I have mentioned are by no means unique in this regard.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 27, 2011, 03:02:44 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 26, 2011, 01:45:33 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 01:58:59 PMI have known dozens of Priests and only one was involved in clerical abuse (raping children to put it another way). The other priests almost to a man made massive positive differences to the communities they ministered, in some cases they changed those communities forever, for the better.
The clergy who were involved in abuse should be outted and punished to the full letter of the law, but wether you like it or not, this was only a tiny percentage of the total clergy in Ireland, you are tarring all with the one brush.
To say they knew what was going on and kept silent, therefore are guilty is a moot point as we can only speculate, unless you are a priest?
Isn't that the point (bold), GDA?

That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

Which prompts the question as to why these otherwise decent, upstanding Clergy didn't speak out publicly? As I see it, there can be only one reason, namely that they witnessed how the Church, right up to the very top, was so much more concerned for its own reputation than its morality, that it suppressed, denied, colluded with and even facilitated the continuance of this abuse.

And therefore individual non-abusing Clergy concluded that to speak out, and thereby risk besmirching the reputation of the Church publicly, would make no great difference, other than to harm their own personal chances of advancement within the Church.

And that is why this scandal is so grievous - it is not just a case of "a few bad apples spoiling the barrel etc". Rather, that argument simply no longer applies, since the institution itself  has been conclusively demonstrated to be inherently corrupt at every level, in very many Dioceses, in very many Countries, over decades.

Worse still, even now after the stench of corruption has escaped into the wider world, the reaction of the institution is still to deny, evade, deflect, cover-up and obfuscate, when the only acceptable reaction should encompass genuine repentance, a plea for forgiveness and a determination to do everything possible to purge the Church of this evil, so that it could never occur again.

Worst of all (imo), is that no-one, whether Believer or Heathen, can have any real confidence that any of that last will occur...  >:(

Hi EG, you've raised a few points I'd like to comment on.


That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

I guess the fact is that most of them were not and many others failed to accept the reality when they became aware that some of their colleagues were abusive.
The Church was and still is organised along very strictly hierarchical lines. The same could be said about Irish society in general up to comparatively recent times.
The guard was expected to follow his sergeant's instructions to the letter, without pausing to ask a question or to raise an objection. The teacher in the classroom lived in fear of the school inspector and the curate didn't give any back chat to the parish priest. The PP in turn danced to his bishop's tune and so on and on...
The same top down system of authority applies to religious congregations as well. On a much lighter note, I often think of the way the Sisters of Mercy operated at one time  in my native town.
The Mother Superior of the local convent was Assistant Matron at the local hospital, while the Matron, in turn, was her assistant at the convent. Those two ladies hated each other and, as their roles switched twice daily, stories of what each made the other do while she had the whip hand, are still remembered in the area.
Authority was all. Period.
During the course of my career as a Primary schoolteacher I was in regular contact with Christian Brothers, some of whom were in the same line of work. I also met Patrician and Marist Brothers from time to time.
All of them shared a common trait; a defining characteristic. I never thought of this until recently but, to a man, they were on their guard whenever a fellow member of their congregation was present.
Life in their monasteries /community houses or wherever they lived must have been extremely stressful at the best of times!
It seems that all were afraid that colleagues might carry tales back to the Boss. Many of the class teachers I met would have spent periods working in Industrial Schools. It turns out that some were active child abusers. Neither I nor lay teachers who taught alongside them ever suspected this.
The religious authorities had one very effective way to keep their underlings in check. They made sure those who left would find it almost impossible to pick up a worthwhile job in the outside world.
For starters, those who left would be outcasts in their own neighbourhoods---bringing shame on the family's good name etc.
Also, they would be totally unsuited for any sort of secular work. Their overlords saw to that. People who take up teaching have to spend a probationary period of two years before they can secure a permanent post.  (Pension rights, holiday pay, order of seniority of the staff etc.)
But for brothers and nuns, the situation was a bit more complicated than that. (Still is, AFAIK.)
Lay teachers generally gain their first and second years diplomas in, naturally enough, their first and second years of teaching.
Not so with the religious brigade. The holding of the Second Diploma examination (Inspectorial visit) can be delayed for years.
Their superiors decide the timing; invariably, the educational authorities will agree.
By the time some of those unqualified teachers gain their second diploma, they will have become so isolated from the real world that leaving their order is no longer a viable option.

Now, I am not attempting to defend the behaviour of non-abusive priests and religious who won't speak up now—the time for Omerta, the Irish version, is over. But all were 'groomed' in a fashion also. Their superiors saw to that and they in their time underwent the same indoctrination process.
It's time for this circle of evil to be broken.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 27, 2011, 04:18:45 PM
Remember this guy...

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2009/01/priest-completes-walk-of-atonement-over.html

How come no other priests walked with him?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

QuoteThe DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by leftist and Islamist enemies at home and abroad.

::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

If I thought it had any bearing on the reason I posted it, i'd tell ye
but what do ye say we just stay on topic, sore as it is ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 27, 2011, 09:04:15 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

If I thought it had any bearing on the reason I posted it, i'd tell ye
but what do ye say we just stay on topic, sore as it is ;)

Well if we are being pedantic you said at least child abuse makes for scandal in the Catholic Church. It doesn't. That is the problem. They seem to have ignored it for 30 years. It is a scandal in Ireland and many other countries, but it certainly doesn't appear to register as scandalous to the Vatican.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 27, 2011, 09:12:06 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 27, 2011, 03:02:44 PM
That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

I guess the fact is that most of them were not and many others failed to accept the reality when they became aware that some of their colleagues were abusive.
The Church was and still is organised along very strictly hierarchical lines. The same could be said about Irish society in general up to comparatively recent times.
The guard was expected to follow his sergeant's instructions to the letter, without pausing to ask a question or to raise an objection. The teacher in the classroom lived in fear of the school inspector and the curate didn't give any back chat to the parish priest. The PP in turn danced to his bishop's tune and so on and on...
The same top down system of authority applies to religious congregations as well. On a much lighter note, I often think of the way the Sisters of Mercy operated at one time  in my native town.
The Mother Superior of the local convent was Assistant Matron at the local hospital, while the Matron, in turn, was her assistant at the convent. Those two ladies hated each other and, as their roles switched twice daily, stories of what each made the other do while she had the whip hand, are still remembered in the area.
Authority was all. Period.
During the course of my career as a Primary schoolteacher I was in regular contact with Christian Brothers, some of whom were in the same line of work. I also met Patrician and Marist Brothers from time to time.
All of them shared a common trait; a defining characteristic. I never thought of this until recently but, to a man, they were on their guard whenever a fellow member of their congregation was present.
Life in their monasteries /community houses or wherever they lived must have been extremely stressful at the best of times!
It seems that all were afraid that colleagues might carry tales back to the Boss. Many of the class teachers I met would have spent periods working in Industrial Schools. It turns out that some were active child abusers. Neither I nor lay teachers who taught alongside them ever suspected this.
The religious authorities had one very effective way to keep their underlings in check. They made sure those who left would find it almost impossible to pick up a worthwhile job in the outside world.
For starters, those who left would be outcasts in their own neighbourhoods---bringing shame on the family's good name etc.
Also, they would be totally unsuited for any sort of secular work. Their overlords saw to that. People who take up teaching have to spend a probationary period of two years before they can secure a permanent post.  (Pension rights, holiday pay, order of seniority of the staff etc.)
But for brothers and nuns, the situation was a bit more complicated than that. (Still is, AFAIK.)
Lay teachers generally gain their first and second years diplomas in, naturally enough, their first and second years of teaching.
Not so with the religious brigade. The holding of the Second Diploma examination (Inspectorial visit) can be delayed for years.
Their superiors decide the timing; invariably, the educational authorities will agree.
By the time some of those unqualified teachers gain their second diploma, they will have become so isolated from the real world that leaving their order is no longer a viable option.

Now, I am not attempting to defend the behaviour of non-abusive priests and religious who won't speak up now—the time for Omerta, the Irish version, is over. But all were 'groomed' in a fashion also. Their superiors saw to that and they in their time underwent the same indoctrination process.
It's time for this circle of evil to be broken.

I think I mentioned this early on in the thread but none of us on here can really understand the oaths of obedience that clergy take. Add that to what was said above (good post btw) and we don't have excuses for people but at least we have some understanding as to why so many didn't speak up.

The circle of evil does need to be broken. Unfortunately there isn't an big supply of people stepping forward to fill the roles that the old and guilty brigade would have to vacate.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 27, 2011, 10:24:22 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 09:04:15 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

If I thought it had any bearing on the reason I posted it, i'd tell ye
but what do ye say we just stay on topic, sore as it is ;)

Well if we are being pedantic you said at least child abuse makes for scandal in the Catholic Church. It doesn't. That is the problem. They seem to have ignored it for 30 years. It is a scandal in Ireland and many other countries, but it certainly doesn't appear to register as scandalous to the Vatican.

Its a sickening and disgusting act what that article says if its true. However, not sure how relevant it is to this thread unless we are trying to show that all religions are corrupt at their core which I would totally agree with.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 27, 2011, 10:28:17 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 27, 2011, 09:12:06 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 27, 2011, 03:02:44 PM
That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

I guess the fact is that most of them were not and many others failed to accept the reality when they became aware that some of their colleagues were abusive.
The Church was and still is organised along very strictly hierarchical lines. The same could be said about Irish society in general up to comparatively recent times.
The guard was expected to follow his sergeant's instructions to the letter, without pausing to ask a question or to raise an objection. The teacher in the classroom lived in fear of the school inspector and the curate didn't give any back chat to the parish priest. The PP in turn danced to his bishop's tune and so on and on...
The same top down system of authority applies to religious congregations as well. On a much lighter note, I often think of the way the Sisters of Mercy operated at one time  in my native town.
The Mother Superior of the local convent was Assistant Matron at the local hospital, while the Matron, in turn, was her assistant at the convent. Those two ladies hated each other and, as their roles switched twice daily, stories of what each made the other do while she had the whip hand, are still remembered in the area.
Authority was all. Period.
During the course of my career as a Primary schoolteacher I was in regular contact with Christian Brothers, some of whom were in the same line of work. I also met Patrician and Marist Brothers from time to time.
All of them shared a common trait; a defining characteristic. I never thought of this until recently but, to a man, they were on their guard whenever a fellow member of their congregation was present.
Life in their monasteries /community houses or wherever they lived must have been extremely stressful at the best of times!
It seems that all were afraid that colleagues might carry tales back to the Boss. Many of the class teachers I met would have spent periods working in Industrial Schools. It turns out that some were active child abusers. Neither I nor lay teachers who taught alongside them ever suspected this.
The religious authorities had one very effective way to keep their underlings in check. They made sure those who left would find it almost impossible to pick up a worthwhile job in the outside world.
For starters, those who left would be outcasts in their own neighbourhoods---bringing shame on the family's good name etc.
Also, they would be totally unsuited for any sort of secular work. Their overlords saw to that. People who take up teaching have to spend a probationary period of two years before they can secure a permanent post.  (Pension rights, holiday pay, order of seniority of the staff etc.)
But for brothers and nuns, the situation was a bit more complicated than that. (Still is, AFAIK.)
Lay teachers generally gain their first and second years diplomas in, naturally enough, their first and second years of teaching.
Not so with the religious brigade. The holding of the Second Diploma examination (Inspectorial visit) can be delayed for years.
Their superiors decide the timing; invariably, the educational authorities will agree.
By the time some of those unqualified teachers gain their second diploma, they will have become so isolated from the real world that leaving their order is no longer a viable option.

Now, I am not attempting to defend the behaviour of non-abusive priests and religious who won't speak up now—the time for Omerta, the Irish version, is over. But all were 'groomed' in a fashion also. Their superiors saw to that and they in their time underwent the same indoctrination process.
It's time for this circle of evil to be broken.

I think I mentioned this early on in the thread but none of us on here can really understand the oaths of obedience that clergy take. Add that to what was said above (good post btw) and we don't have excuses for people but at least we have some understanding as to why so many didn't speak up.

The circle of evil does need to be broken. Unfortunately there isn't an big supply of people stepping forward to fill the roles that the old and guilty brigade would have to vacate.

There doesn't have to be an influx of people, Iceman. I only recently discovered that the only sacraments that are the sole responsibility of the local priest, according to Canon Law, are - anointing of the sick, Confession (Penance) and the Eucharist.
As told to me by the parish priest.
I have read quite a few of your posts, and commend the defence of your beliefs. I think the natural progression away from priests controlling everything to involving decent lay people to be included in, eg, preaching, daily reflection, Marriage, Funeral could be a step in the right direction.
It would certainly make the Church more real to people and more of a guidance, less a command.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 09:04:15 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

If I thought it had any bearing on the reason I posted it, i'd tell ye
but what do ye say we just stay on topic, sore as it is ;)

Well if we are being pedantic you said at least child abuse makes for scandal in the Catholic Church. It doesn't. That is the problem. They seem to have ignored it for 30 years. It is a scandal in Ireland and many other countries, but it certainly doesn't appear to register as scandalous to the Vatican.
This isn't what you'd label a scandal ???
Yes, they spent 30 years running from it, not changing laws to condone it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: fearbrags on July 27, 2011, 11:05:37 PM
IMHO The Garda Siochana have got off very lightly with respect to child abuse
The church has being  hammered and rightly so
And from what I see the garda are not improving even in cases that the church is not involved
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 27, 2011, 11:05:58 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 10:34:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 09:04:15 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 27, 2011, 08:38:45 PM
Quote from: Tyrones own on July 27, 2011, 07:24:27 PM
Atleast child abuse makes for a scandal in the Catholic Church!

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/26/new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage/

Absolutely disgusting.

What were you searching for that led you to that?

If I thought it had any bearing on the reason I posted it, i'd tell ye
but what do ye say we just stay on topic, sore as it is ;)

Well if we are being pedantic you said at least child abuse makes for scandal in the Catholic Church. It doesn't. That is the problem. They seem to have ignored it for 30 years. It is a scandal in Ireland and many other countries, but it certainly doesn't appear to register as scandalous to the Vatican.
This isn't what you'd label a scandal ???
Yes, they spent 30 years running from it, not changing laws to condone it.

Misunderstanding here.

I took you literally. The Church don't appear to accept it as a scandal, i.e. it isn't a scandal in the Catholic Church. The rest of us most certainly do think it is a scandal.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 27, 2011, 11:17:51 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on July 27, 2011, 03:02:44 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 26, 2011, 01:45:33 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on July 25, 2011, 01:58:59 PMI have known dozens of Priests and only one was involved in clerical abuse (raping children to put it another way). The other priests almost to a man made massive positive differences to the communities they ministered, in some cases they changed those communities forever, for the better.
The clergy who were involved in abuse should be outted and punished to the full letter of the law, but wether you like it or not, this was only a tiny percentage of the total clergy in Ireland, you are tarring all with the one brush.
To say they knew what was going on and kept silent, therefore are guilty is a moot point as we can only speculate, unless you are a priest?
Isn't that the point (bold), GDA?

That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

Which prompts the question as to why these otherwise decent, upstanding Clergy didn't speak out publicly? As I see it, there can be only one reason, namely that they witnessed how the Church, right up to the very top, was so much more concerned for its own reputation than its morality, that it suppressed, denied, colluded with and even facilitated the continuance of this abuse.

And therefore individual non-abusing Clergy concluded that to speak out, and thereby risk besmirching the reputation of the Church publicly, would make no great difference, other than to harm their own personal chances of advancement within the Church.

And that is why this scandal is so grievous - it is not just a case of "a few bad apples spoiling the barrel etc". Rather, that argument simply no longer applies, since the institution itself  has been conclusively demonstrated to be inherently corrupt at every level, in very many Dioceses, in very many Countries, over decades.

Worse still, even now after the stench of corruption has escaped into the wider world, the reaction of the institution is still to deny, evade, deflect, cover-up and obfuscate, when the only acceptable reaction should encompass genuine repentance, a plea for forgiveness and a determination to do everything possible to purge the Church of this evil, so that it could never occur again.

Worst of all (imo), is that no-one, whether Believer or Heathen, can have any real confidence that any of that last will occur...  >:(

Hi EG, you've raised a few points I'd like to comment on.


That is, if you (and other members of the Laity) were aware of these abusive Priests, then one might expect the other (non-abusing) Clergy also to have been aware - as successive Inquiries prove.

I guess the fact is that most of them were not and many others failed to accept the reality when they became aware that some of their colleagues were abusive.
The Church was and still is organised along very strictly hierarchical lines. The same could be said about Irish society in general up to comparatively recent times.
The guard was expected to follow his sergeant's instructions to the letter, without pausing to ask a question or to raise an objection. The teacher in the classroom lived in fear of the school inspector and the curate didn't give any back chat to the parish priest. The PP in turn danced to his bishop's tune and so on and on...
The same top down system of authority applies to religious congregations as well. On a much lighter note, I often think of the way the Sisters of Mercy operated at one time  in my native town.
The Mother Superior of the local convent was Assistant Matron at the local hospital, while the Matron, in turn, was her assistant at the convent. Those two ladies hated each other and, as their roles switched twice daily, stories of what each made the other do while she had the whip hand, are still remembered in the area.
Authority was all. Period.
During the course of my career as a Primary schoolteacher I was in regular contact with Christian Brothers, some of whom were in the same line of work. I also met Patrician and Marist Brothers from time to time.
All of them shared a common trait; a defining characteristic. I never thought of this until recently but, to a man, they were on their guard whenever a fellow member of their congregation was present.
Life in their monasteries /community houses or wherever they lived must have been extremely stressful at the best of times!
It seems that all were afraid that colleagues might carry tales back to the Boss. Many of the class teachers I met would have spent periods working in Industrial Schools. It turns out that some were active child abusers. Neither I nor lay teachers who taught alongside them ever suspected this.
The religious authorities had one very effective way to keep their underlings in check. They made sure those who left would find it almost impossible to pick up a worthwhile job in the outside world.
For starters, those who left would be outcasts in their own neighbourhoods---bringing shame on the family's good name etc.
Also, they would be totally unsuited for any sort of secular work. Their overlords saw to that. People who take up teaching have to spend a probationary period of two years before they can secure a permanent post.  (Pension rights, holiday pay, order of seniority of the staff etc.)
But for brothers and nuns, the situation was a bit more complicated than that. (Still is, AFAIK.)
Lay teachers generally gain their first and second years diplomas in, naturally enough, their first and second years of teaching.
Not so with the religious brigade. The holding of the Second Diploma examination (Inspectorial visit) can be delayed for years.
Their superiors decide the timing; invariably, the educational authorities will agree.
By the time some of those unqualified teachers gain their second diploma, they will have become so isolated from the real world that leaving their order is no longer a viable option.

Now, I am not attempting to defend the behaviour of non-abusive priests and religious who won't speak up now—the time for Omerta, the Irish version, is over. But all were 'groomed' in a fashion also. Their superiors saw to that and they in their time underwent the same indoctrination process.
It's time for this circle of evil to be broken.

LnP, great post, very interesting. Ta
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 27, 2011, 11:25:33 PM
Yes an interesting perspective of a very ugly world
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 27, 2011, 11:48:58 PM
Just found this quote on Wikipedia:

During the Medieval music era (500–1400), the only European repertory that survives from before about 800 is the monophonic liturgical plainsong of the Roman Catholic Church, the central tradition of which was called Gregorian chant

Looks like I have got something else to thank the church for...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 28, 2011, 08:59:28 AM
Yet another example of how disconnected from the general public the clergy in this country are:

http://www.thejournal.ie/heil-herr-kenny-parish-priest-compares-taoiseach-to-hitler-188175-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink (http://www.thejournal.ie/heil-herr-kenny-parish-priest-compares-taoiseach-to-hitler-188175-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink)

'Heil Herr Kenny': Parish priest compares Taoiseach to Hitler


ENDA KENNY HAS been compared to Adolf Hitler in a Mass bulletin issued by a parish priest.

The weekend parish newsletter in Togher, Co Louth was responding to the Taoiseach's stinging criticisms of the Vatican last week. In an article headlined "Heil Herr Kenny!" Fr Thomas Daly wrote: "The last European leader to make such a blistering attack on the Pope was the ruthless German dictator Adolf Hitler."

According to the Drogheda Independent, it also suggested there was now a "No Pope here" policy in Ireland and compared it to loyalist areas in the North, adding: "Perhaps we might try and find a way to build new bridges with the "Shankhill Road people" (sic).

    A 'No Pope Here' sign on the Dáil gates would definitely be a draw for Shankhill Road people and marchers from Portadown!

The article has drawn criticism in the local area. One resident told reporter Michelle O'Keeffe for the Irish Times: "Everybody in the area is talking about it. It is a bit much comparing the leader of Ireland to Hitler – the article went too far."

However, Fr Daly yesterday told the Irish Daily Star (print edition) that the "Heil Herr Kenny" headline had been misinterpreted. "I regret the headline and the misunderstandings that might have arisen out of it," he said. "I am not comparing Enda Kenny to Hitler."

He added that he fully supports the child protection measures recommended in the Cloyne Report.

Enda Kenny told the Irish Daily Mirror (print edition): "I think that priest's comment does not deserve the dignity of a comment from me."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:26:47 AM
That priest needs a right kick up the hole, he seems to forget that the man in his article that ever got closest to Hitler was his Hitler Youth Pope in Rome (Yes I know all young Germans had to join).

Some of the comments in the Irish Times from Church defenders are sickening beyond belief, it seems to be the Taoiseachs or other Politicians fault, the Gaurds fault, the courts fault, the social workers fault, the E.U.'s fault, Ireland's fault, the teachers fault, everybodys fault except "the good priests". Are these the same ones going around calling the elected Taoiseach of Ireland Heir Furher when all he is doing is facing down a foreign power which has clearly shown itself to be an enemy of the Irish Republic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:33:41 AM
What procedure exists if individual churches (i.e. the building and its regular worshipers), parish, or diocese to break away and start their own reformed Roman Catholic or Irish Catholic church, presuming they wish to keep all their current beliefs and rictuals etc. but just without the existing hierarchy. Who owns the buildings? Could a parish legally take over a church building if the majority of babtised/christened in that parish wished to break away from Rome?

Personally I'd turn the churches, chapels, mosques, temples into museums, theatres, schools, places for civic marriages, public spaces etc. but thats a different argument.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on July 28, 2011, 10:25:27 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:33:41 AM
What procedure exists if individual churches (i.e. the building and its regular worshipers), parish, or diocese to break away and start their own reformed Roman Catholic or Irish Catholic church, presuming they wish to keep all their current beliefs and rictuals etc. but just without the existing hierarchy. Who owns the buildings? Could a parish legally take over a church building if the majority of babtised/christened in that parish wished to break away from Rome?

Personally I'd turn the churches, chapels, mosques, temples into museums, theatres, schools, places for civic marriages, public spaces etc. but thats a different argument.

Opinions please on this news story:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8643527/Vatican-excommunicates-Chinese-bishop-Joseph-Huang-Bingzhang-appointed-by-Beijing.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 28, 2011, 10:27:54 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:26:47 AM
That priest needs a right kick up the hole, he seems to forget that the man in his article that ever got closest to Hitler was his Hitler Youth Pope in Rome (Yes I know all young Germans had to join).

Some of the comments in the Irish Times from Church defenders are sickening beyond belief, it seems to be the Taoiseachs or other Politicians fault, the Gaurds fault, the courts fault, the social workers fault, the E.U.'s fault, Ireland's fault, the teachers fault, everybodys fault except "the good priests". Are these the same ones going around calling the elected Taoiseach of Ireland Heir Furher when all he is doing is facing down a foreign power which has clearly shown itself to be an enemy of the Irish Republic.

Doesn't surprise me this type of thing. Some of these boys think they can do and say what they like. A good while ago priests were given a letter to read at mass in relation to the whole clerical abuse scandal (i forget was it from the vatican or from the bishops). The guy in our local church sneeringly handed out a photocopy to everyone who entered the church. He didn't discuss it, he didn't mention it in his sermon. He has not once spoke of the sex abuse as obviously he doesn't regard it as an issue. He talks plenty about what people put into the basket mind you. Anyway, up until that point our house contributed our dues to the local church (mostly due to my wife wishes) but after that event they have not got one penny from us and they won't ever do again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 10:31:35 AM
"A number of mass-goers walked out of Saturday mass at the Black Abbey, Kilkenny City, after" Priest "called Alan Shatter, Minister for Justice, a "Jewish, non-practicing, atheist"."

http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?s=d3fdb1d21fe52b39048e4c3776bd5ff6&t=8983 (http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?s=d3fdb1d21fe52b39048e4c3776bd5ff6&t=8983)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 28, 2011, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 10:31:35 AM
"A number of mass-goers walked out of Saturday mass at the Black Abbey, Kilkenny City, after" Priest "called Alan Shatter, Minister for Justice, a "Jewish, non-practicing, atheist"."

http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?s=d3fdb1d21fe52b39048e4c3776bd5ff6&t=8983 (http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?s=d3fdb1d21fe52b39048e4c3776bd5ff6&t=8983)

"Jewish non practicing atheist" - I'm going to have to go for a lie down and try to figure out what that means. Seems some of the "good priests" are blowing the head gasket. Its easy to see how the likes of these guys would not pass on info on paedo priests if they had it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on July 28, 2011, 11:01:29 AM
The reaction of some of the priests round the country are par for the course. We shouldn't be surprised.

I remember a local priest getting up only a few years ago and went off on a rant and said that it was the parents who were doing all the child abusing and that the church were only doing a wee bit of abusing and basically what was all the fuss about. The congrgation were aghast at what he was saying with a good few getting up and walking out in disgust.


The thing that concerned me most that he was a very senior priest in the diocese who I thought might just have known better.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 11:01:56 AM
Quote from: BarryBreensBandage on July 28, 2011, 10:25:27 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:33:41 AM
What procedure exists if individual churches (i.e. the building and its regular worshipers), parish, or diocese to break away and start their own reformed Roman Catholic or Irish Catholic church, presuming they wish to keep all their current beliefs and rictuals etc. but just without the existing hierarchy. Who owns the buildings? Could a parish legally take over a church building if the majority of babtised/christened in that parish wished to break away from Rome?

Personally I'd turn the churches, chapels, mosques, temples into museums, theatres, schools, places for civic marriages, public spaces etc. but thats a different argument.

Opinions please on this news story:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8643527/Vatican-excommunicates-Chinese-bishop-Joseph-Huang-Bingzhang-appointed-by-Beijing.html

As far as I understand there is an Official Catholic and an Official Protestant Church with the Chineese State as its head. Then there is the Catholic Church with the Pope in Rome as its head and the various Protestant denominations with their various heads or internal structures.

I disagree with the Chineese state forcing Roman Catholic Bishops to attend what is in fact a different denomination, the Chineese Catholic Church, I also disagree with the Pope excumincating a Bishop of what is in fact a different denomincation to the one he is head of.

As a human being I oppose religion, as a democrat I defend an individuals right to religion (except when that right impinges on the rights of others or the good of the nation). I also have the right too point out how idiotic religion is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 28, 2011, 06:26:58 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 11:01:56 AM
Quote from: BarryBreensBandage on July 28, 2011, 10:25:27 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 28, 2011, 09:33:41 AM
What procedure exists if individual churches (i.e. the building and its regular worshipers), parish, or diocese to break away and start their own reformed Roman Catholic or Irish Catholic church, presuming they wish to keep all their current beliefs and rictuals etc. but just without the existing hierarchy. Who owns the buildings? Could a parish legally take over a church building if the majority of babtised/christened in that parish wished to break away from Rome?

Personally I'd turn the churches, chapels, mosques, temples into museums, theatres, schools, places for civic marriages, public spaces etc. but thats a different argument.

Opinions please on this news story:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8643527/Vatican-excommunicates-Chinese-bishop-Joseph-Huang-Bingzhang-appointed-by-Beijing.html

As far as I understand there is an Official Catholic and an Official Protestant Church with the Chineese State as its head. Then there is the Catholic Church with the Pope in Rome as its head and the various Protestant denominations with their various heads or internal structures.

I disagree with the Chineese state forcing Roman Catholic Bishops to attend what is in fact a different denomination, the Chineese Catholic Church, I also disagree with the Pope excumincating a Bishop of what is in fact a different denomincation to the one he is head of.

As a human being I oppose religion, as a democrat I defend an individuals right to religion (except when that right impinges on the rights of others or the good of the nation). I also have the right too point out how idiotic religion is.

The Vatican has absolved itself from any wrongdoing in Ireland regarding child abuse blaming the 'local Church' and in particualr the local bishops. It also has still to comment on the Cloyne report.

Meanwhile in China it is at war insisting only it (the Vatican) has the authority to appoint bishops anywhere. It has responded to this particular outrage within a week but is still silent of Cloyne.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0728/1224301495730.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0728/1224301495730.html)

Total costs (to the Irish State - Muppet) so far of the four statutory inquiries? €133.8 million, with more to come.

None of this would have been necessary had the Catholic Church here and in Rome co-operated fully in establishing the truth. Instead, those that could be were dragged, kicking and screaming, into disclosing what they desperately wanted to keep hidden. So, in Ferns, abuse files on five further priests which should have been presented to the inquiry remained unavailable until an accidental discovery in the summer of 2005 – when the Ferns draft report was already completed. A "regrettable error on the part of the diocese . . ." said apostolic administrator to Ferns diocese, canon lawyer, barrister-at-law and Dublin auxiliary bishop Eamon Walsh. Four years later, Rome declined his resignation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on July 29, 2011, 01:01:13 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 28, 2011, 08:59:28 AM
Yet another example of how disconnected from the general public the clergy in this country are:

http://www.thejournal.ie/heil-herr-kenny-parish-priest-compares-taoiseach-to-hitler-188175-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink (http://www.thejournal.ie/heil-herr-kenny-parish-priest-compares-taoiseach-to-hitler-188175-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink)

'Heil Herr Kenny': Parish priest compares Taoiseach to Hitler


ENDA KENNY HAS been compared to Adolf Hitler in a Mass bulletin issued by a parish priest.

The weekend parish newsletter in Togher, Co Louth was responding to the Taoiseach's stinging criticisms of the Vatican last week. In an article headlined "Heil Herr Kenny!" Fr Thomas Daly wrote: "The last European leader to make such a blistering attack on the Pope was the ruthless German dictator Adolf Hitler."

According to the Drogheda Independent, it also suggested there was now a "No Pope here" policy in Ireland and compared it to loyalist areas in the North, adding: "Perhaps we might try and find a way to build new bridges with the "Shankhill Road people" (sic).

    A 'No Pope Here' sign on the Dáil gates would definitely be a draw for Shankhill Road people and marchers from Portadown!

The article has drawn criticism in the local area. One resident told reporter Michelle O'Keeffe for the Irish Times: "Everybody in the area is talking about it. It is a bit much comparing the leader of Ireland to Hitler – the article went too far."

However, Fr Daly yesterday told the Irish Daily Star (print edition) that the "Heil Herr Kenny" headline had been misinterpreted. "I regret the headline and the misunderstandings that might have arisen out of it," he said. "I am not comparing Enda Kenny to Hitler."

He added that he fully supports the child protection measures recommended in the Cloyne Report.

Enda Kenny told the Irish Daily Mirror (print edition): "I think that priest's comment does not deserve the dignity of a comment from me."
I know it was over 50 years ago, but Kenny's comments are a refreshing change from that of a Fine Gael predecessor, John Costello, when the Holy Mother Church in Ireland was being assailed by another bunch of Heathens:

"In 1956, the blasphemy law was put to more creative use. A pair of impudent Jehovah's Witnesses had the gall to hand out their pamphlets on the public streets of Clonlara, before being beaten to a pulp by Father Patrick Ryan and his devout parishioners. The priest and parishioners were charged for the attack, but immediately given probation. The Jehovah's Witnesses, by contrast, were required to post bond of £300 each, or face three months in jail – even though they were never charged with any offense.

An outrage? Yes, but not in the way you might think. Bishop Joseph Rodgers furiously wrote to Ireland's prime minister that 'I find it hard to credit that the attorney general, had he been fully aware of the pernicious and blasphemous literature distributed and sold in my diocese by these self-styled Jehovah's Witnesses, would have proceeded against one of my priests for upholding and defending the fundamental truths of our treasured Catholic faith. Your attorney general prosecutes one of my priests for doing what I, and all good Catholics here, regard as his bounden duty and right. The matter cannot rest.' The prime minister sympathetically replied that he fully appreciated 'the just indignation aroused among the clergy and the people by the activities of the Jehovah's Witnesses.'
"

P.S. Whenever the Jehovahs come to my door, I find the easiest way to get them to go away is to tell them "I'm Catholic" - it works a treat. I had always thought this was because they accept they cannot expect to get anywhere with Catholics, especially Irish ones. But on reflection, I hope it's not because they're still frightened!  :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 29, 2011, 01:14:13 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on July 29, 2011, 01:01:13 AM
Whenever the Jehovahs come to my door, I find the easiest way to get them to go away is to tell them "I'm Catholic"

I love it when they come to the door; I could argue with them all day.  I swear I'm going to make an unbeliever out of one of them. One of these days!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 29, 2011, 02:41:46 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14334385 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14334385)

28 July 2011 Last updated at 18:55 Share this pageEmail Print Share this page

Vatican nuncio to Ireland moving to Czech Republic

Papal Nuncio Giuseppe Leanza is being transferred to the Czech Republic. Continue reading the main story

The Vatican's nuncio to Ireland is to be transferred to the Czech Republic.

The Pope recalled Archbishop Giuseppe Leanza following criticism of the Catholic Church by the Taoiseach Enda Kenny.

The remarks followed the publication of the Cloyne report into the church's mishandling of cases of clerical sex abuse in County Cork.

In a blistering attack, Mr Kenny accused the church of putting its reputation ahead of child rape victims.

After the recall, vice-director of the Vatican press office Father Ciro Benedettini said the nuncio's recall "should be interpreted as an expression of the desire of the Holy See for serious and effective collaboration with the (Irish) government".

He added that it "denotes the seriousness of the situation and the Holy See's desire to face it objectively and determinately.

"Nor does it exclude some degree of surprise and disappointment at certain excessive reactions."

Irish Deputy Prime Minister Eamon Gilmore said the decision to recall the nuncio was a matter for the Holy See.

"The government is awaiting the response of the Holy See to the recent report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne and it is to be expected that the Vatican would wish to consult in depth with the Nuncio on its response."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on July 29, 2011, 10:07:42 AM
Good to see a Catholic publication coming out and telling it like it is

http://www.thejournal.ie/catholic-newspaper-applauds-taoiseachs-vatican-speech-188997-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink (http://www.thejournal.ie/catholic-newspaper-applauds-taoiseachs-vatican-speech-188997-Jul2011/?utm_source=shortlink)

A CATHOLIC PUBLICATION has said that Taoiseach Enda Kenny's speech about the Vatican "captured the anger of a generation".

The Irish Catholic has its front page entirely dedicated to an editorial on the speech this week, in which it states that "the time for hollow apologies is over".

The editorial, titled Time for Penitence, states that "most remember an arrogant authoritarian Irish church and a privileged clerical caste that obsessed over sexuality and hell fire and neglected the tender compassion of Christ".

Kenny's speech "resonated with a younger generation", said the editorial, and was an "emotional roar from much of Catholic Ireland to the Vatican for action now".

The paper concludes that the Irish church "needs someone to grab it, shake it up and make it fit for purpose", saying that Irish Catholics "love their church and want it back".

While the Irish Catholic may have praised the Taoiseach for his speech, others were not so impressed.

According to the Political World forum, some mass-goers walked out of mass last Saturday at the Black Abbey in Kilkenny City after the priest called Minister for Justice Alan Shatter a "Jewish, non-practicing, atheist".

As reported yesterday on TheJournal.ie, a Co Louth parish priest compared the Taoiseach to Hitler in a mass bulletin earlier this week.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on July 29, 2011, 10:30:06 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 29, 2011, 02:41:46 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14334385 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14334385)

28 July 2011 Last updated at 18:55 Share this pageEmail Print Share this page

Vatican nuncio to Ireland moving to Czech Republic

Papal Nuncio Giuseppe Leanza is being transferred to the Czech Republic. Continue reading the main story

The Vatican's nuncio to Ireland is to be transferred to the Czech Republic.

The Pope recalled Archbishop Giuseppe Leanza following criticism of the Catholic Church by the Taoiseach Enda Kenny.

The remarks followed the publication of the Cloyne report into the church's mishandling of cases of clerical sex abuse in County Cork.

In a blistering attack, Mr Kenny accused the church of putting its reputation ahead of child rape victims.

After the recall, vice-director of the Vatican press office Father Ciro Benedettini said the nuncio's recall "should be interpreted as an expression of the desire of the Holy See for serious and effective collaboration with the (Irish) government".

He added that it "denotes the seriousness of the situation and the Holy See's desire to face it objectively and determinately.

"Nor does it exclude some degree of surprise and disappointment at certain excessive reactions."

Irish Deputy Prime Minister Eamon Gilmore said the decision to recall the nuncio was a matter for the Holy See.

"The government is awaiting the response of the Holy See to the recent report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne and it is to be expected that the Vatican would wish to consult in depth with the Nuncio on its response."

Good to see the Vatican moving someone on to another "parish" again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: gallsman on July 29, 2011, 06:25:56 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 29, 2011, 10:07:42 AM
According to the Political World forum, some mass-goers walked out of mass last Saturday at the Black Abbey in Kilkenny City after the priest called Minister for Justice Alan Shatter a "Jewish, non-practicing, atheist".

As reported yesterday on TheJournal.ie, a Co Louth parish priest compared the Taoiseach to Hitler in a mass bulletin earlier this week.

Good f**king god, when will they ever get the message?!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on July 29, 2011, 11:31:28 PM
Quote from: gallsman on July 29, 2011, 06:25:56 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on July 29, 2011, 10:07:42 AM
According to the Political World forum, some mass-goers walked out of mass last Saturday at the Black Abbey in Kilkenny City after the priest called Minister for Justice Alan Shatter a "Jewish, non-practicing, atheist".

As reported yesterday on TheJournal.ie, a Co Louth parish priest compared the Taoiseach to Hitler in a mass bulletin earlier this week.

Good f**king god, when will they ever get the message?!

I feel a tiny bit sorry for the Priests, Nuns or Brothers etc. who must be going mad screaming at the wall with the idiots who don't get it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Bud Wiser on August 02, 2011, 08:13:10 PM
Have a listen to this that a friend of mine has recorded.
http://soundcloud.com/michele-ann-kelly/run-for-cover (http://soundcloud.com/michele-ann-kelly/run-for-cover)

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on August 02, 2011, 08:40:33 PM
Quote from: Bud Wiser on August 02, 2011, 08:13:10 PM
Have a listen to this that a friend of mine has recorded.
http://soundcloud.com/michele-ann-kelly/run-for-cover (http://soundcloud.com/michele-ann-kelly/run-for-cover)

Powerful stuff.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on August 05, 2011, 10:58:42 PM
Just reading The Students Catholic Doctrine 1943 edition (St Colmans College Derry)

Page 209
III Duties of Inferiors Towards Superiors

We must obey our Bishops and Pastors since God has placed them over us, and will demand of them an account for our souls, if perchance by their neglect we have remained in our sins. We must follow their commands and instructions with a ready obedience, that we may please God, and be a subject of joy and comfort to them in their heavy and responsible tasks. We should never fail in our love for them, nor in our outward actions be ever wanting in the reverence and respect that is their due. If by speaking ill of them we were to lower their character in the eyes of others, we should be guilty of a grave sin against justice and religion, and be the cause of serious scandal.


I can see why Iceman is coming from after reading that paragraph

I can also see how childabusing priests thought they could do what they done and think they could get away with it (many did) after reading that paragraph

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 05, 2011, 11:01:59 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on August 05, 2011, 10:58:42 PM
Just reading The Students Catholic Doctrine 1943 edition (St Colmans College Derry)

Page 209
III Duties of Inferiors Towards Superiors

We must obey our Bishops and Pastors since God has placed them over us, and will demand of them an account for our souls, if perchance by their neglect we have remained in our sins. We must follow their commands and instructions with a ready obedience, that we may please God, and be a subject of joy and comfort to them in their heavy and responsible tasks. We should never fail in our love for them, nor in our outward actions be ever wanting in the reverence and respect that is their due. If by speaking ill of them we were to lower their character in the eyes of others, we should be guilty of a grave sin against justice and religion, and be the cause of serious scandal.


I can see why Iceman is coming from after reading that paragraph

I can also see how childabusing priests thought they could do what they done and think they could get away with it (many did) after reading that paragraph

The paragraph is only relevent if it claims to supersede the law of the land. Otherwise it is a club rulebook.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on August 06, 2011, 12:23:48 AM
If lawyers taught RE in those days I'd accept the relevance of that (truthful) point muppet
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 06, 2011, 12:42:57 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on August 06, 2011, 12:23:48 AM
If lawyers taught RE in those days I'd accept the relevance of that (truthful) point muppet

The point being they might claim they had to follow the rules, but as citizens they were obliged to obey the law. Like the rest of us.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on August 06, 2011, 12:50:29 AM
I love how they refer to their internal rule book as "cannon law". Shower of pretentious ballixes - who do they think they are?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on August 06, 2011, 12:55:05 AM
Of course muppet, but the level of authority (power) that they created for themselves created the monster. Also I don't really think you could really say that the law of the land has held these boys to account?  Above the law it would seem

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 06, 2011, 01:12:41 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on August 06, 2011, 12:55:05 AM
Of course muppet, but the level of authority (power) that they created for themselves created the monster. Also I don't really think you could really say that the law of the land has held these boys to account?  Above the law it would seem

Agreed but the law of this particular land is (to put it politely) lacking clarity on how to deal with people of standing, e.g. bankers, Doctors (Neary?) solicitors (Lynn?), politicians, clergy etc.

If the law is 'of the people' then the people make it very easy for the above.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 17, 2011, 03:58:01 PM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-reveals-irish-priest-files-516881.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/vatican-reveals-irish-priest-files-516881.html)

QuoteThe Vatican said that the documentation proved that it had only learned of the accusations against Ronan in 1966, after the abuse against Mr Doe occurred.

Don't know anything about this case but the above quote from the Vatican seems to typify the problem. It appears to be saying that this documentation proves they (Church) didn't know about the particular abuse by the relevent priest until 1966, after it had happened. Of course it doesn't say why they waited until a court order, 45 years later, to release the documents.

I'm afraid this further highlights decades of moral preaching by a leadership with no morals.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on August 17, 2011, 10:48:39 PM
Dublin archdiocese close to 'financial collapse'

The Catholic archdiocese of Dublin is close to a "state of financial collapse", according to a leaked consultation document from its Council of Priests.

The document blames a decrease in collections and declining participation at mass.

It also cites the cost of settlements made to clerical abuse victims.

The document, published by the Irish Catholic, says cash reserves built up by the diocese have been spent.

It suggested that all central administration posts must be assessed and pay cuts, in line with Irish public service pay reductions, must be considered by diocesan agencies and parish workers.

The document proposed the possibility of a parish based levy on Catholic families, which could raise up to 3m euros (£2.6m) a year.

A spokeswoman for the archdiocese confirmed the existence of the document. She said it was aimed at addressing the economic realities facing the archdiocese.

She said to make no changes would have serious financial consequences.

It is understood that members of the Council of Priests, which advises the archdiocese, are considering the document and will speak with priests at parish level and report back on their findings at a meeting in September.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 03, 2011, 11:57:20 AM
Finally a considered response from Rome :

The Vatican has issued its response to criticism of it by the Government following the release of the Cloyne Report.

The Vatican issued the 20-page response addressed to the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Eamon Gilmore.

The statement from the Vatican says "it has significant reservations that the speech made by Enda Kenny TD in the Dáil on the 20th of July, in particular, the accusation that the Holy See attempted to frustrate an inquiry in a sovereign democratic republic, is unfounded."

The statement added that the Holy See wishes to make it quite clear that it in no way hampered or sought to interfere in any inquiry into cases of child sexual abuse in the Diocese of Cloyne.

Furthermore, the Vatican says that at no stage did the Holy See seek to interfere with Irish Civil law or impeded the civil authority in the exercise of its duties.

The Holy See observes that there is no evidence cited anywhere in the Cloyne Report, to support the claim that its (i.e. the Vatican's) supposed intervention contributed to the undermining of the child protection framework and guidelines of the Irish State.


The Cloyne Report scrutinized how both Church and State authorities handled complaints and allegations of child sexual abuse made against 19 priests working under Bishop John Magee in the Co Cork diocese between 1996 and 2009.


It found that Bishop Magee falsely told the Government and the HSE that the Catholic Diocese was reporting all allegations of clerical child sexual abuse to the civil authorities.


The response from the Vatican was prompted by scathing criticism levelled against it by Taoiseach Enda Kenny in the Dáil in July in which he castigated what he termed "the dysfunction, disconnection and elitism" in the Vatican.

The Vatican also responded to claims in the Cloyne Report that it referred to a Framework Document, drawn up by Irish Bishops, on how to deal with allegations of child sexual abuse as "not an official document..but merely a study document."

It says that taken out of context the comments in the letter from Archbishop Storero to Irish Bishops "could be open to misinterpretation, giving rise to understandable criticism."

It says this description was "not a dismissal of the serious efforts undertaken by Irish Bishops to address the grave problem of child sexual abuse."

Rather the congregation "wished to ensure that nothing contained in the Framework Document would give rise to difficulties should appeals be lodged to the Holy See."

The Vatican also refutes the claim that Irish Bishops sought recognition from Rome for the Framework Document but it was not forthcoming.

It says Irish Bishops did not, under Canon Law, seek 'recongnito' for the Framework Document, therefore the Holy See cannot be criticised for failing to grant what was never requested in the first place.

However, according to the Vatican, this would not have prevented applying the Framework Document in individual Dioceses
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 03, 2011, 04:45:38 PM
Quote from: orangeman on September 03, 2011, 11:57:20 AM
Finally a considered response from Rome :

The Vatican has issued its response to criticism of it by the Government following the release of the Cloyne Report.

The Vatican issued the 20-page response addressed to the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Eamon Gilmore.

The statement from the Vatican says "it has significant reservations that the speech made by Enda Kenny TD in the Dáil on the 20th of July, in particular, the accusation that the Holy See attempted to frustrate an inquiry in a sovereign democratic republic, is unfounded."

The statement added that the Holy See wishes to make it quite clear that it in no way hampered or sought to interfere in any inquiry into cases of child sexual abuse in the Diocese of Cloyne.

Furthermore, the Vatican says that at no stage did the Holy See seek to interfere with Irish Civil law or impeded the civil authority in the exercise of its duties.

The Holy See observes that there is no evidence cited anywhere in the Cloyne Report, to support the claim that its (i.e. the Vatican's) supposed intervention contributed to the undermining of the child protection framework and guidelines of the Irish State.


The Cloyne Report scrutinized how both Church and State authorities handled complaints and allegations of child sexual abuse made against 19 priests working under Bishop John Magee in the Co Cork diocese between 1996 and 2009.


It found that Bishop Magee falsely told the Government and the HSE that the Catholic Diocese was reporting all allegations of clerical child sexual abuse to the civil authorities.


The response from the Vatican was prompted by scathing criticism levelled against it by Taoiseach Enda Kenny in the Dáil in July in which he castigated what he termed "the dysfunction, disconnection and elitism" in the Vatican.

The Vatican also responded to claims in the Cloyne Report that it referred to a Framework Document, drawn up by Irish Bishops, on how to deal with allegations of child sexual abuse as "not an official document..but merely a study document."

It says that taken out of context the comments in the letter from Archbishop Storero to Irish Bishops "could be open to misinterpretation, giving rise to understandable criticism."

It says this description was "not a dismissal of the serious efforts undertaken by Irish Bishops to address the grave problem of child sexual abuse."

Rather the congregation "wished to ensure that nothing contained in the Framework Document would give rise to difficulties should appeals be lodged to the Holy See."

The Vatican also refutes the claim that Irish Bishops sought recognition from Rome for the Framework Document but it was not forthcoming.

It says Irish Bishops did not, under Canon Law, seek 'recongnito' for the Framework Document, therefore the Holy See cannot be criticised for failing to grant what was never requested in the first place.

However, according to the Vatican, this would not have prevented applying the Framework Document in individual Dioceses

How come it took them so long to come up with this crap?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on September 04, 2011, 03:16:33 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on September 03, 2011, 04:45:38 PM
How come it took them so long to come up with this crap?

The truth rolls off the tongue, creating straw men takes time.

That response is for the deluded who don't question anything. It doesn't even attempt to persuade doubters, they seem to have given up on that.

The Vatican's response is only concerned with the Cloyne report. I would guess that most people felt Kenny was speaking out of frustration with the behaviour of the The Vatican for the last 3 decades (I think he actually mentioned that in his speech) and not simply Cloyne. However it doesn't suit the Vatican to deal with that so they try to put the spotlight on minor technical issues. Thus they entirely and deliberately miss the point that members of the organisation for which they are responsible, abused children and yet again one of their brethren, acting in a position of responsibility on their behalves, failed to alert the authorities here.

Look at this rubbish:

"not an official document..but merely a study document."

"....Irish Bishops did not, under Canon Law, seek 'recongnito' for the Framework Document, therefore the Holy See cannot be criticised for failing to grant what was never requested in the first place."

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: NetNitrate on September 04, 2011, 03:41:10 PM
The Vatican clearly showing themselves to be a hostile state. Gov should tell Vatican that their ambassador is not welcome back. That shower couldn't lie straight in bed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 04, 2011, 08:09:57 PM
Obviously the whole thing was scrutinised by the makey uppy cannon lawyer to make sure it was complete drivel that made its way to the Irish republic. Time for Enda to take action, enough words have been spoken.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 04, 2011, 10:18:14 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on September 04, 2011, 08:09:57 PM
Obviously the whole thing was scrutinised by the makey uppy cannon lawyer to make sure it was complete drivel that made its way to the Irish republic. Time for Enda to take action, enough words have been spoken.

What do you reckon he should do now ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 05, 2011, 08:28:19 PM
Quote from: orangeman on September 04, 2011, 10:18:14 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on September 04, 2011, 08:09:57 PM
Obviously the whole thing was scrutinised by the makey uppy cannon lawyer to make sure it was complete drivel that made its way to the Irish republic. Time for Enda to take action, enough words have been spoken.

What do you reckon he should do now ?

To the vatican - don't fill the vacant ambassador post and tell papal nuncio to return to Rome.

To local religion

- No more grants to build the palaces that pass as churches
- Take property from church to pay their dues to the raped victims
- Take back all schools from any church control

I could go further but I think the above is easily achieved with the right will.
Title: Ferns Preist says Irish Mammys are just as much to blame for coverup of abuse
Post by: muppet on September 18, 2011, 01:57:03 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0917/1224304268112.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0917/1224304268112.html)

I guess he is merely following the example set by The Vatican by obfuscating.
Title: Re: Ferns Preist says Irish Mammys are just as much to blame for coverup of abuse
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on September 18, 2011, 02:03:42 PM
Quote from: muppet on September 18, 2011, 01:57:03 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0917/1224304268112.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0917/1224304268112.html)

I guess he is merely following the example set by The Vatican by obfuscating.

Step back, the Roman Catholic Church V the Mammies of Ireland, there can only be one winner and it ain't the boys in the skirts.

With the Orange Order being their usual twatish selfs, organised religion is going to be majorly K.O.'d on our native Isle.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on September 19, 2011, 10:46:18 AM
The Priest is on RTE radio now.

He accused the Mammies of 'failing miserably' regarding the covering up of abuse, until forced to withdraw the 'miserably' bit by the interviewer.

He denied trying to divert blame away from the Church (and thus onto the mothers) and defended his actions by arguing that he pays taxes in Ireland and that we are arguing too much amongst ourselves.

To be as polite as I can be, he came across very poorly.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 19, 2011, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: muppet on September 19, 2011, 10:46:18 AM
The Priest is on RTE radio now.

He accused the Mammies of 'failing miserably' regarding the covering up of abuse, until forced to withdraw the 'miserably' bit by the interviewer.

He denied trying to divert blame away from the Church (and thus onto the mothers) and defended his actions by arguing that he pays taxes in Ireland and that we are arguing too much amongst ourselves. To be as polite as I can be, he came across very poorly.


I listened to that this morning and simply couldn't believe that was coming out with that stuff -  he also said at one point that he wasn't a foreign national ( whatever he meant by that ??? ).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on September 19, 2011, 05:16:53 PM
There was me thinking that all the people with this opinion were ones with silly hats. What does it say about the newspaper that published this garbage?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 09, 2011, 12:53:32 PM
News yesterday in the IT
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1209/1224308799476.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1209/1224308799476.html)
that
'A SWORN statutory inquiry should be set up to investigate sex abuse complaints and concerns about former archbishop of Dublin John Charles McQuaid, the One in Four group has said.'

But there are no details of the witness statements which led the One in Four group to press the claim.

McQuaid has already been proven in the Murphy commission as being complicit in the rape of children by clerics. A crime if not greater - at least equal to that of the rapist.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 17, 2011, 03:52:45 PM
Depressing carbon copy of Ireland happening in Holland. Amazing how the exact same cover ups happen in all these countries but the centre of the church on Rome knows nothing. What were some of these bastards up to in the 3rd world countries is what id like to know without any law to stop them.

20,000 children suffered abuse by Dutch priests

By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels Saturday December 17 2011 ABOUT 20,000 children have been sexually abused by 800 Roman Catholic priests or lay workers in Holland since 1945, an independent inquiry has estimated. The investigation received 1,800 reports of sexual abuse by clergy or volunteers within Dutch Catholic dioceses, congregations and religious orders. At least 105 of the alleged abusers are still alive. Children involved in church organisations were twice as likely as non-Catholics to be exposed to abuse and the "mild, severe or very severe sexual behaviour" was covered up by senior clergy. "The problem of sexual abuse was known in the orders and dioceses of the Dutch Catholic Church," the inquiry by Wim Deetman, a former Dutch minister, concluded. "No adequate action was taken, nor was sufficient attention devoted to victims." Based on a survey of more than 34,000 people, the Deetman report estimated that one-in-five children in Catholic school institutions between 1945 and 1985 suffered abuse. Allegations of abuse by the Salesian Fathers at the Don Rua boarding school in Heerenberg in the 1960s led to the wider investigation, in March 2010, of paedophile assaults within the church, a process mirrored in Belgium, Ireland, Germany, Australia, Canada and the US. Archbishop of Utrecht Wim Eijk apologised to victims in the wake of the inquiry. He said the report "fills us with shame and sorrow". The commission began work last year. As evidence of abuse emerged, the Dutch Catholic Church last month set up a compensation system. The total bill could be more than €4.8m. Scandals More than 2,000 people have now registered abuse with the church and Dutch authorities and a number of cases will be taken to court. "To prevent scandals, nothing was done: it was not acknowledged, there was no help, compensation or aftercare for the victims," said Mr Deetman. "There was a policy of not hanging out the dirty washing. There is a cultural silence." Guido Klabbers, from the Klokk group of child abuse victims, said: "Everyone can be shocked that this history has come in this magnitude. Everyone can be taken aback that the church has lied about this." The inquiry did not find a direct link between the Catholic requirement for clerical celibacy and the abuse of children but Mr Deetman did conclude that "sexual need" was a factor. "We do not consider it impossible that a number of cases would not have happened if celibacy was voluntary," he said. The inquiry concluded that the covered-up child sex abuse was not unique to the Catholic Church. Another Dutch commission is investigating the role of social services in placing children in institutions where they were open to abuse. (© Daily Telegraph, London) - Bruno Waterfield in Brussels
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on December 17, 2011, 07:37:33 PM
Quote from: Main Street on December 09, 2011, 12:53:32 PM
News yesterday in the IT
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1209/1224308799476.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/1209/1224308799476.html)
that
'A SWORN statutory inquiry should be set up to investigate sex abuse complaints and concerns about former archbishop of Dublin John Charles McQuaid, the One in Four group has said.'

But there are no details of the witness statements which led the One in Four group to press the claim.

McQuaid has already been proven in the Murphy commission as being complicit in the rape of children by clerics. A crime if not greater - at least equal to that of the rapist.

Wow! Haven't been following this too closely since emigrating, so its amazing to see even the "great" and influential John Charles McQuaid implicated! Just a shame that the country didn't face up to this shit years ago when men like him were still alive.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on December 17, 2011, 08:42:24 PM
I'm sure St Peter had a full account though  ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on March 05, 2012, 12:22:33 AM
60 Minutes in the US is doing a piece on this tonight
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 11:30:50 AM
Just listen and everyhing will be alright !!!

The Vatican has published its report on the child abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in Ireland.

It recommends that Irish diocesan authorities and those of religious institutes should continue to devote time to listening to victims and providing support for them and their families.

The findings are based on an apostolic visitation to the four archdioceses, religious congregations and seminaries.


The report found that the current guidelines on child protection were being followed.

It said Archbishops had given assurances that any newly-discovered cases of abuse were brought before the competent civil authority and the congregation for the doctrine of the faith.

The report said that it must be acknowledged that within the Christian community innocent young people were abused by clerics and religious to whose care they had been entrusted, while those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively.

It said that in delivering its findings, the Holy See re-echoes the sense of dismay and betrayal that the Pope expressed in his letter to Catholics in Ireland two years ago, "regarding the sinful and criminal acts that were at the root of this particular crisis".


Primate of All Ireland Cardinal Sean Brady welcomed the publication of the findings of the visitation.

Cardinal Brady said the church expressed a heartfelt plea for forgiveness from victims and from God for the terrible sins and crimes of abuse.


He also emphasised that the visitation was pastoral in nature and was intended to assist the Irish church on its path of renewal.

Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin said the extent of the child abuse crisis was shattering and that the children who had been abused should be foremost in our minds.

Admission criteria for seminaries

The report on the visitation also proposed more consistent admission criteria for seminaries and in-depth formation on child protection for priests as part of their academic programme.

It proposed that seminary buildings should be exclusively for seminarians and those preparing them for the priesthood.

On the religious congregations, the report found that all religious institutes should perform an audit of their personnel files, if such an audit has not yet been carried out.

Commenting on the findings, Sr Marianne O'Connor of CORI, acknowledged that there had been a slowness to understand the impact of child abuse.

Sr O'Connor insisted that the religious orders and the church were heartfelt in their apology for the abuse crisis.

She said there was a focus on ensuring child safety procedures were in place, and on the ongoing support of victims.


Pope Benedict promised report

The report was promised two years ago by Pope Benedict XVI in his letter to Catholics in Ireland.

The Pope expressed horror and dismay in the wake of the Ryan and Murphy reports, which revealed a 70-year history child abuse by a significant number of priests, brothers and nuns and cover-ups by their religious superiors.

The Pope assigned six teams to formally assess the implications of the abuse scandals in each of the country's four archdioceses, in religious orders and congregations based in Ireland and abroad.

Some of the teams met victims and concerned Catholics in advertised locations, as well as individual survivors behind closed doors.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 11:30:50 AM


The Vatican has published its report on the child abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in Ireland.

The report said that it must be acknowledged that within the Christian community innocent young people were abused by clerics and religious to whose care they had been entrusted, while those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively.

It said that in delivering its findings, the Holy See re-echoes the sense of dismay and betrayal that the Pope expressed in his letter to Catholics in Ireland two years ago, "regarding the sinful and criminal acts that were at the root of this particular crisis".

I acknowledge the absence of the full report, so I might be mistaken (I allow for that minuscule possibility).

'regarding the sinful and criminal acts that were at the root of this particular crisis'  refers to sexual abusers who are regarded as the root of the crises

'those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively'
These mild words of admonition I presume refers to the criminal cover up of the sex abuse, the perpetuation of the sex abuse by shoving the offender to another posting to carry on the abuse. Getting the abused to swear to documents of secrecy, interrogating the abused and protecting the abuser,  actively hindering any police investigation by refusing to hand over documents until severe legal pressure was applied, or absolute exposure of an untenable position was reached. Not to mention the absolute complicity in the hierarchy of the cover-up schemes,  a complicity going right up to the Vatican -  in particular The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, when they sent out their canon law experts to limit exposure and damage to the Church. Persecution of priests/nuns who did try to bear witness against these sordid crimes.

What other serious issues (more serious?) did this Church investigation find that concerned them enough to include it in the report?
According to the Vatican radio press release http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889 (http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889)
'Since the Visitators also encountered a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, Religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention, directed principally towards improved theological formation. It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal.'

I can't wait to read what these serious issues are about  ::)


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 20, 2012, 02:40:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM
What other serious issues (more serious?) did this Church investigation find that concerned them enough to include it in the report?
According to the Vatican radio press release http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889 (http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889)
'Since the Visitators also encountered a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, Religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention, directed principally towards improved theological formation. It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal.'

I can't wait to read what these serious issues are about  ::)

I wonder did the tendency to put local law above Canon Law feature among these theological opinions?

The article above is obviously paraphrasing the report, but there seems to be no offer to surrender all the relevent files on child abuse to Ireland or any of the other countries. That, for me, is the starting point for the Church regarding child abuse and until they do it they are in denial.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 03:17:33 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 20, 2012, 02:40:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM
What other serious issues (more serious?) did this Church investigation find that concerned them enough to include it in the report?
According to the Vatican radio press release http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889 (http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889)
'Since the Visitators also encountered a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, Religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention, directed principally towards improved theological formation. It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal.'

I can't wait to read what these serious issues are about  ::)

I wonder did the tendency to put local law above Canon Law feature among these theological opinions?

The article above is obviously paraphrasing the report, but there seems to be no offer to surrender all the relevent files on child abuse to Ireland or any of the other countries. That, for me, is the starting point for the Church regarding child abuse and until they do it they are in denial.
The tendency,  rather the imposed practice was to give priority to canon law with local law a distant second, a mere inconvenience to the practice of good canon law.
The Catholic Church now follows regular  practice/guidelines when a sexual abuse allegation is made.
I have no reason to doubt that this is now the standard adopted approach.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 20, 2012, 03:24:07 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 03:17:33 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 20, 2012, 02:40:49 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM
What other serious issues (more serious?) did this Church investigation find that concerned them enough to include it in the report?
According to the Vatican radio press release http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889 (http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889)
'Since the Visitators also encountered a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, Religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium, this serious situation requires particular attention, directed principally towards improved theological formation. It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal.'

I can't wait to read what these serious issues are about  ::)

I wonder did the tendency to put local law above Canon Law feature among these theological opinions?

The article above is obviously paraphrasing the report, but there seems to be no offer to surrender all the relevent files on child abuse to Ireland or any of the other countries. That, for me, is the starting point for the Church regarding child abuse and until they do it they are in denial.
The tendency,  rather the imposed practice was to give priority to canon law with local law a distant second, a mere inconvenience to the practice of good canon law.
The Catholic Church now follows regular  practice/guidelines when a sexual abuse allegation is made.
I have no reason to doubt that this is now the standard adopted approach.

Until they hand over the files they are not respecting local laws. They still haven't done it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 03:27:55 PM
Muppet - the files will never be handed over. I think everybody undertstands that. It's damage limitation from here on in. So it's a case of saying the right things now and coming across as being contrite. It's all a PR exercise now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 20, 2012, 03:35:52 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 03:27:55 PM
Muppet - the files will never be handed over. I think everybody undertstands that. It's damage limitation from here on in. So it's a case of saying the right things now and coming across as being contrite. It's all a PR exercise now.

Certainly doesn't make it right and in a lot of peoples eyes saying the right things isn't going to wash.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 20, 2012, 04:53:58 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM

'those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively'

Is this seriously all the report has to say about the central issue - the cover-up and facilitation of continued abuse?

Those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively!!! Is that it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Billys Boots on March 20, 2012, 05:02:17 PM
QuoteThose who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively!!! Is that it?

Did you really expect anything different?  If it looks like a shirker, talks like a shirker and acts like a shirker, than chances are ...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 07:18:11 PM
Quote from: Hardy on March 20, 2012, 04:53:58 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 20, 2012, 02:06:02 PM

'those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively'

Is this seriously all the report has to say about the central issue - the cover-up and facilitation of continued abuse?

Those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively!!! Is that it?
I haven't seen the full report but I understand that this was not a focussed investigation.
According to the link I posted earlier http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889 (http://www.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=572889)

The Visitation was pastoral in nature; the Holy Father's intention was that it should "assist the local Church on her path of renewal"
It was not intended to replace or supersede the ordinary responsibility of Bishops and Religious Superiors, nor to interfere "with the ordinary activity of the local magistrates, nor with the activity of the Commissions of Investigation established by the Irish Parliament, nor with the work of any legislative authority, which has competence in the area of prevention of abuse of minors"


Nevertheless, I wouldn't hold my breadth waiting for any further voluntary elaboration of this terse wooly statement 'Those who should have exercised vigilance often failed to do so effectively'




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 09:11:24 PM
No heads will roll.

A "judicious public relations move" is how a church insider described it to RTE religious affairs editor Joe Little today.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 20, 2012, 09:32:42 PM
Whats wrong with ye lads, did ye honestly think these nasty bastards would have anything other than weasel words in their report. At this stage people have just been overloaded with the whole clerical abuse. People are tired of hearing about it and this report (or lack of a report) will go unnoticed I imagine. Previously, even though I have been no fan of religion, I have supported fund raising for local church as a matter of courtesy. However, now I would not give them the steam of my piss. This religion is nothing but evil and governed by evil unrepentant dirt bags like Sean Brady. If Irish people want to in doctrine their kids into this then i despair.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 09:42:07 PM
It's like the cops investigating themselves.

The pity is that there are plenty of extremely good and decent priests out there who have all been tainted by the evil actions of others. How the man at the top, Cardinal Sean Brady, who had a hand in covering up the abuse, is still in post is mind boggling. He's brazened it out well - fair dos to him - he's good.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 20, 2012, 09:49:48 PM
The report talks about dissident opinions and dissident views.

Lovely.

Poor Bishop Mc Areavey on Primetime was asked about the dissidents who were mentioned in the report and who they were - the poor man got into a real muddle, first of all appearing to know what was meant by the dissidents but then changed his mind and said he didn't know who or what the term dissident referred to.

The show still goes on. Keep the head down, brazen her out and we'll keep blaming the dissidents.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Thefisherking on March 20, 2012, 10:46:24 PM
Just read this this evening, I found it repulsive. The same lack of state leadership pandering to a self riteous cabal.

Utterly sickening.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/dutch-roman-catholic-church-castrated-at-least-10-boys-3054852.html (http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/dutch-roman-catholic-church-castrated-at-least-10-boys-3054852.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 21, 2012, 11:33:57 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 20, 2012, 09:32:42 PM
Whats wrong with ye lads, did ye honestly think these nasty b**tards would have anything other than weasel words in their report. At this stage people have just been overloaded with the whole clerical abuse. People are tired of hearing about it and this report (or lack of a report) will go unnoticed I imagine. Previously, even though I have been no fan of religion, I have supported fund raising for local church as a matter of courtesy. However, now I would not give them the steam of my piss. This religion is nothing but evil and governed by evil unrepentant dirt bags like Sean Brady. If Irish people want to in doctrine their kids into this then i despair.
On the contrary, I had no expectations. Based on previous church statements, it would have been foolish to have expectations.
And not just based on previous church statements but also the Cloyne report.
We have had a couple of independent reports, which excellently documented the pattern of abuse in the Cloyne and Dublin dioceses.

In the Cloyne report   bottom of page 350
The strongest words I could find to describe the cover-up conspiracy

The Diocese is vulnerable to be seen as complicit in this by not taking action to remove these people from the priesthood.

Maybe someone else can put a value on that statement. I interpret that to be lacking conviction. The Cloyne report gave detailed account to the coverup but fell short of stating that this was deliberate and complicit,  but rather more due  to a lack of understanding of the abuser problem (the voracious deceptive sex abuse predator)  that faced the diocese.

In the conclusions, page 351

2. Children have been placed at risk of harm within the Diocese of Cloyne
through the inability of that Diocese to respond appropriately to the information that
came to it regarding child protection concerns involving the clergy. It failed to act
effectively to limit the access to children by individuals against whom a credible
complaint of child sexual abuse was made.

3. The competence of those involved in this area of work in the Diocese has to
be questioned. Risk has not been recognised and responded to appropriately.

4. Put simply, the responses of the Diocese could be described as ill advised,
and too little, too late
. However, the events that these cases focus on are very significant to those involved



Put simply according to the Cloyne report  the responses of the diocese (outlined in horrific and shocking detail), were "ill advised".



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 21, 2012, 11:52:53 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 21, 2012, 11:33:57 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 20, 2012, 09:32:42 PM
Whats wrong with ye lads, did ye honestly think these nasty b**tards would have anything other than weasel words in their report. At this stage people have just been overloaded with the whole clerical abuse. People are tired of hearing about it and this report (or lack of a report) will go unnoticed I imagine. Previously, even though I have been no fan of religion, I have supported fund raising for local church as a matter of courtesy. However, now I would not give them the steam of my piss. This religion is nothing but evil and governed by evil unrepentant dirt bags like Sean Brady. If Irish people want to in doctrine their kids into this then i despair.
On the contrary, I had no expectations. Based on previous church statements, it would have been foolish to have expectations.
And not just based on previous church statements but also the Cloyne report.
We have had a couple of independent reports, which excellently documented the pattern of abuse in the Cloyne and Dublin dioceses.

In the Cloyne report   bottom of page 350
The strongest words I could find to describe the cover-up conspiracy

The Diocese is vulnerable to be seen as complicit in this by not taking action to remove these people from the priesthood.

Maybe someone else can put a value on that statement. I interpret that to be lacking conviction. The Cloyne report gave detailed account to the coverup but fell short of stating that this was deliberate and complicit,  but rather more due  to a lack of understanding of the abuser problem (the voracious deceptive sex abuse predator)  that faced the diocese.

In the conclusions, page 351

2. Children have been placed at risk of harm within the Diocese of Cloyne
through the inability of that Diocese to respond appropriately to the information that
came to it regarding child protection concerns involving the clergy. It failed to act
effectively to limit the access to children by individuals against whom a credible
complaint of child sexual abuse was made.

3. The competence of those involved in this area of work in the Diocese has to
be questioned. Risk has not been recognised and responded to appropriately.

4. Put simply, the responses of the Diocese could be described as ill advised,
and too little, too late
. However, the events that these cases focus on are very significant to those involved



Put simply according to the Cloyne report  the responses of the diocese (outlined in horrific and shocking detail), were "ill advised".

Point 4, the bit not in bold seems to imply that the poor and ill advised response from the Diocese was down to an individual, most probably a bishop or Arch-bishop and not some covert church policy directed from Rome to mount a cover up for the good name of the Church irrespective of the evil being perpetrated by these men of the cloth.
Is it not a bit of a stretch of the imagination that all the Bishops/Cardinals in Ireland, the US and god knows wherever else all seemed to individually respond in a similar manner? It's also a bit incredible that at no point did some of these Bishops/Cardinals etc never informed Rome of these atrocities carried out?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 21, 2012, 06:55:42 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 21, 2012, 11:52:53 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 21, 2012, 11:33:57 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 20, 2012, 09:32:42 PM
Whats wrong with ye lads, did ye honestly think these nasty b**tards would have anything other than weasel words in their report. At this stage people have just been overloaded with the whole clerical abuse. People are tired of hearing about it and this report (or lack of a report) will go unnoticed I imagine. Previously, even though I have been no fan of religion, I have supported fund raising for local church as a matter of courtesy. However, now I would not give them the steam of my piss. This religion is nothing but evil and governed by evil unrepentant dirt bags like Sean Brady. If Irish people want to in doctrine their kids into this then i despair.
On the contrary, I had no expectations. Based on previous church statements, it would have been foolish to have expectations.
And not just based on previous church statements but also the Cloyne report.
We have had a couple of independent reports, which excellently documented the pattern of abuse in the Cloyne and Dublin dioceses.

In the Cloyne report   bottom of page 350
The strongest words I could find to describe the cover-up conspiracy

The Diocese is vulnerable to be seen as complicit in this by not taking action to remove these people from the priesthood.

Maybe someone else can put a value on that statement. I interpret that to be lacking conviction. The Cloyne report gave detailed account to the coverup but fell short of stating that this was deliberate and complicit,  but rather more due  to a lack of understanding of the abuser problem (the voracious deceptive sex abuse predator)  that faced the diocese.

In the conclusions, page 351

2. Children have been placed at risk of harm within the Diocese of Cloyne
through the inability of that Diocese to respond appropriately to the information that
came to it regarding child protection concerns involving the clergy. It failed to act
effectively to limit the access to children by individuals against whom a credible
complaint of child sexual abuse was made.

3. The competence of those involved in this area of work in the Diocese has to
be questioned. Risk has not been recognised and responded to appropriately.

4. Put simply, the responses of the Diocese could be described as ill advised,
and too little, too late
. However, the events that these cases focus on are very significant to those involved



Put simply according to the Cloyne report  the responses of the diocese (outlined in horrific and shocking detail), were "ill advised".

Point 4, the bit not in bold seems to imply that the poor and ill advised response from the Diocese was down to an individual, most probably a bishop or Arch-bishop and not some covert church policy directed from Rome to mount a cover up for the good name of the Church irrespective of the evil being perpetrated by these men of the cloth.
Is it not a bit of a stretch of the imagination that all the Bishops/Cardinals in Ireland, the US and god knows wherever else all seemed to individually respond in a similar manner? It's also a bit incredible that at no point did some of these Bishops/Cardinals etc never informed Rome of these atrocities carried out?

Just an amazing coincidence I suppose. Sure the man with a direct line to god would never put such an unwritten policy in place, would he?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 21, 2012, 07:04:14 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 21, 2012, 11:52:53 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 21, 2012, 11:33:57 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 20, 2012, 09:32:42 PM
Whats wrong with ye lads, did ye honestly think these nasty b**tards would have anything other than weasel words in their report. At this stage people have just been overloaded with the whole clerical abuse. People are tired of hearing about it and this report (or lack of a report) will go unnoticed I imagine. Previously, even though I have been no fan of religion, I have supported fund raising for local church as a matter of courtesy. However, now I would not give them the steam of my piss. This religion is nothing but evil and governed by evil unrepentant dirt bags like Sean Brady. If Irish people want to in doctrine their kids into this then i despair.
On the contrary, I had no expectations. Based on previous church statements, it would have been foolish to have expectations.
And not just based on previous church statements but also the Cloyne report.
We have had a couple of independent reports, which excellently documented the pattern of abuse in the Cloyne and Dublin dioceses.

In the Cloyne report   bottom of page 350
The strongest words I could find to describe the cover-up conspiracy

The Diocese is vulnerable to be seen as complicit in this by not taking action to remove these people from the priesthood.

Maybe someone else can put a value on that statement. I interpret that to be lacking conviction. The Cloyne report gave detailed account to the coverup but fell short of stating that this was deliberate and complicit,  but rather more due  to a lack of understanding of the abuser problem (the voracious deceptive sex abuse predator)  that faced the diocese.

In the conclusions, page 351

2. Children have been placed at risk of harm within the Diocese of Cloyne
through the inability of that Diocese to respond appropriately to the information that
came to it regarding child protection concerns involving the clergy. It failed to act
effectively to limit the access to children by individuals against whom a credible
complaint of child sexual abuse was made.

3. The competence of those involved in this area of work in the Diocese has to
be questioned. Risk has not been recognised and responded to appropriately.

4. Put simply, the responses of the Diocese could be described as ill advised,
and too little, too late
. However, the events that these cases focus on are very significant to those involved



Put simply according to the Cloyne report  the responses of the diocese (outlined in horrific and shocking detail), were "ill advised".

Point 4, the bit not in bold seems to imply that the poor and ill advised response from the Diocese was down to an individual, most probably a bishop or Arch-bishop and not some covert church policy directed from Rome to mount a cover up for the good name of the Church irrespective of the evil being perpetrated by these men of the cloth.
Is it not a bit of a stretch of the imagination that all the Bishops/Cardinals in Ireland, the US and god knows wherever else all seemed to individually respond in a similar manner? It's also a bit incredible that at no point did some of these Bishops/Cardinals etc never informed Rome of these atrocities carried out?
Unless the commission had evidence of a coordinated path of action from Rome downwards or even from Cardinal to Bishop, there is no way it should speculate.
You may or may not be aware that the Murphy Report documented the requests vainly made to the Vatican to provide specific information relating to the Dublin diocese. And Wikileaks documented just how much the Vatican appreciated the attention.

The Murphy report is one outstanding enquiry and a credit to the legal team involved. We actually don't need any more evidence other than what is contained in that report. All in all, a bargain for an expenditure of €3.6m.
The methodical approach in that report has given us an overview and a template by which we ordinary folk can understand the nature of the beast. The report surgically strips bare the institution, rips to shreds the facades of denials, the moral rot of 'mental reservation', the complicity of the hierarchy and some in higher echelons of the Gardai.

And if one was under the mistaken impression that the Church cooperated, the Murphy reports records how it wasted 4 months breaking the resistance of O'Connell on handing over some 5,000 documents.
The report found that the vast majority of priests turned a blind eye, the bishops complicit and 3 of 4archbishops directing policy with the last archbishop O'Connell, a reluctant and at times a hostile witness.

Maybe the Murphy report conclusion is worth repeating :)

The Commission has no doubt that clerical child sexual abuse was covered up by the Archdiocese of Dublin and other Church authorities over much of the period covered by the Commission‟s remit. The structures and rules of the Catholic Church facilitated that cover-up. The State authorities facilitated the cover up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all and allowing the Church institutions to be beyond the reach of the normal law enforcement processes. The welfare of children, which should have been the first priority, was not even a factor to be considered in the early stages. Instead the focus was on the avoidance of scandal and the preservation of the good name, status and assets of the institution and of what the institution regarded as its most important members – the priests


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 25, 2012, 03:32:29 PM
Did anyone try to convince him otherwise and if so did he even listen ?? Says a lot.


Cardinal Brady will continue to lead church


Cardinal Brady said he would continue to his job to the the best of his ability



The leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland has said he will continue his work following a Vatican report into the handling of clerical sex abuse.

The report said "innocent young people" had been abused by clerics in whose care they had been entrusted.

Speaking to the Sunday Sequence, Cardinal Sean Brady said he was leading the church through a time of reform.

"I will continue to try to do that to the best of my ability," said the Primate of Ireland.

Cardinal Brady said he did not know if he was the best person to lead the church, but no one had convinced him otherwise.

"This report is an opportunity for all of us to express sorrow, which we definitely do," he said.

"But also to determine to lead where Christ wants us to go."

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 29, 2012, 08:55:00 PM
Don't think there was any child porn involved thankfully, but looks to me like another priest hiding away from the truth...

http://www.ulsterherald.com/2012/03/29/priest-inadvertently-showed-explicit-images-during-school-presentation-to-parents/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 21, 2012, 12:04:56 AM
Priest in 'indecent images' row in Pomeroy exonerated

It is understood a meeting in Pomeroy to discuss the investigation of a parish priest has been told he has been exonerated.

Father Martin McVeigh has been under investigation after indecent images were shown to a public meeting in a primary school three weeks ago.

Parents from the school met representatives from the Archdiocese of Armagh on Friday evening.

Fr McVeigh remains parish priest but is taking a temporary leave of absence.

It is understood that parents and parishioners were told during the meeting that Fr McVeigh had been found guilty of no crime following a church investigation.

They also heard that the PSNI had found no crime had been committed and that social services said there were no child protection issues.


Those present were told Fr McVeigh will continue as parish priest.

The Catholic Church said a further meeting would be held.

In a statement, the Archdiocese of Armagh said Fr McVeigh, at his own request, has asked for temporary leave and Cardinal Sean Brady had agreed to his request without prejudice to any of the parties involved.

An investigation was launched after the indecent pictures were "inadvertently" shown during the meeting for parents in preparation for First Holy Communion at St Mary's School on 26 March.

One child was also present.

The parents claimed the images were projected onto the screen from a memory stick the parish priest had inserted into a computer before the presentation.

The parents said Fr McVeigh quickly removed the memory stick.

The priest said he had no knowledge of the offending imagery.

Following the incident Cardinal Sean Brady said the PSNI had indicated that no crime had been committed.

Parishioners had wanted Fr McVeigh to attend Friday's meeting.

The Catholic Church described the meeting as inconclusive and said a further meeting would be held.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on April 21, 2012, 12:25:51 AM
How did the indecent images get onto the memory stick that Fr McVeigh had inserted into the computer?
Were the images of adults only or were children involved?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 21, 2012, 08:55:25 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 21, 2012, 12:25:51 AM
How did the indecent images get onto the memory stick that Fr McVeigh had inserted into the computer?
Were the images of adults only or were children involved?

There's been no suggestion there were children in the photos. Gay porn I think.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on April 21, 2012, 09:20:55 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 21, 2012, 08:55:25 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 21, 2012, 12:25:51 AM
How did the indecent images get onto the memory stick that Fr McVeigh had inserted into the computer?
Were the images of adults only or were children involved?

There's been no suggestion there were children in the photos. Gay porn I think.

Well if those in the pictures were over the age of consent and the pictures were not shown to minors, this is the wrong thread for this incident.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:43:14 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 21, 2012, 08:55:25 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 21, 2012, 12:25:51 AM
How did the indecent images get onto the memory stick that Fr McVeigh had inserted into the computer?
Were the images of adults only or were children involved?

There's been no suggestion there were children in the photos. Gay porn I think.

Thats sound so, carry on everyone!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 21, 2012, 09:52:13 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:43:14 AM
There's been no suggestion there were children in the photos. Gay porn I think.

Thats sound so, carry on everyone!
[/quote]

I didn't say it was okay, just clarifying the point about pictures of children. Gay porn or heterosexual porn, it was inappropriate none the less. I'd expect to get into trouble myself if they popped up during a presentation, but still wouldn't be a police matter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 12:47:24 PM
But as we all now know cannon law is way more important than normal law. What does cannon law say about priests with gay porn i wonder.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 21, 2012, 04:51:58 PM
Sounds like a messy affair.

Statement was read to the parishioners last night saying how well the priest had served the parish and appears to have been withdrawn after protests from parishioners.

The memory stick it was explained appears to have been destroyed before it could be analysed by church authorities.

Not good.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
Memory stick? Ah that it explains it because when cannon law was written there was no such thing as memory sticks and since god has not given any direct updates to the pope on the use of memory sticks then no law was subsequently written. Now had the gay porn images been discovered on a scroll of some description, well that priest may have been moved parishes or some other equally tough punishment
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 22, 2012, 11:05:44 PM
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez-nuns-20120422,0,7617042.column (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez-nuns-20120422,0,7617042.column)

From:

Last year church officials paid $144 million to settle abuse allegations and cover legal bills, and although many of the cases went back decades, church auditors have warned of "growing complacency" about protecting children today.

So who's in trouble with the Vatican?

Nuns.

You know, the thousands of women who took vows of poverty to work with the poor, the sick and disabled.

Why?

They're just not toeing the line, says the Holy See. Instead of frittering away so much time on "issues of social justice," they should be speaking out against contraception and homosexuality. They should also muzzle themselves on the ordination of women and other "radical feminist themes."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 22, 2012, 11:12:43 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 22, 2012, 11:05:44 PM
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez-nuns-20120422,0,7617042.column (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez-nuns-20120422,0,7617042.column)

From:

Last year church officials paid $144 million to settle abuse allegations and cover legal bills, and although many of the cases went back decades, church auditors have warned of "growing complacency" about protecting children today.

So who's in trouble with the Vatican?

Nuns.

You know, the thousands of women who took vows of poverty to work with the poor, the sick and disabled.

Why?

They're just not toeing the line, says the Holy See. Instead of frittering away so much time on "issues of social justice," they should be speaking out against contraception and homosexuality. They should also muzzle themselves on the ordination of women and other "radical feminist themes."


Makes sense alright. Ignore the obvious and put up a maddive smokescreen to try and cloud your vision. Age old tactic. They've got it nearly off to perfection at this stage ( or so they think ).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on April 22, 2012, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
Memory stick? Ah that it explains it because when cannon law was written there was no such thing as memory sticks and since god has not given any direct updates to the pope on the use of memory sticks then no law was subsequently written. Now had the gay porn images been discovered on a scroll of some description, well that priest may have been moved parishes or some other equally tough punishment

What about being innocent until proved guilty?

Was the laptop and memory stick shared by others?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Never beat the deeler on April 23, 2012, 04:04:51 AM
Quote from: Orior on April 22, 2012, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
Memory stick? Ah that it explains it because when cannon law was written there was no such thing as memory sticks and since god has not given any direct updates to the pope on the use of memory sticks then no law was subsequently written. Now had the gay porn images been discovered on a scroll of some description, well that priest may have been moved parishes or some other equally tough punishment

What about being innocent until proved guilty?

Was the laptop and memory stick shared by others?

Guilty of what, exactly?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: shezam on April 23, 2012, 06:41:37 PM
Quote from: Orior on April 22, 2012, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
Memory stick? Ah that it explains it because when cannon law was written there was no such thing as memory sticks and since god has not given any direct updates to the pope on the use of memory sticks then no law was subsequently written. Now had the gay porn images been discovered on a scroll of some description, well that priest may have been moved parishes or some other equally tough punishment

What about being innocent until proved guilty?

Was the laptop and memory stick shared by others?


+1

Yes and Yes! There more to the story than meets the eye!!

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 23, 2012, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: shezam on April 23, 2012, 06:41:37 PM
Quote from: Orior on April 22, 2012, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on April 21, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
Memory stick? Ah that it explains it because when cannon law was written there was no such thing as memory sticks and since god has not given any direct updates to the pope on the use of memory sticks then no law was subsequently written. Now had the gay porn images been discovered on a scroll of some description, well that priest may have been moved parishes or some other equally tough punishment

What about being innocent until proved guilty?

Was the laptop and memory stick shared by others?


+1

Yes and Yes! There more to the story than meets the eye!!

I hope users of that memory stick had protection.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on April 23, 2012, 10:02:45 PM
According to Radio Ulster this evening, the memory stick was destroyed by the priest himself. The stolen laptop story is suspicious. The Church appears, yet again, to have made a real mess in handling this.

As a general point, I have no real problem if a priest wants to have gay porn, apart from the hypocrisy of it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on April 23, 2012, 10:09:26 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on April 23, 2012, 10:02:45 PM
According to Radio Ulster this evening, the memory stick was destroyed by the priest himself. The stolen laptop story is suspicious. The Church appears, yet again, to have made a real mess in handling this.

As a general point, I have no real problem if a priest wants to have gay porn, apart from the hypocrisy of it.

Yes I heard that on the radio as well. What a stupid thing to do. If you want to point the finger at yourself, then destroy the evidence. Dip stick.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 02:34:48 PM
Poor Brian Darcy getting the heat now from Rome.




Father Brian D'Arcy, one of Ireland's best known priests, has been censured by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Vatican, according to the Tablet newspaper.

Fr D'Arcy, a broadcaster and newspaper columnist, is making no comment.

It is understood that his column is now run past a church censor, though none has been changed as a result.

The disciplining of Fr D'Arcy brings the number of Irish priests silenced by Rome to six.

The action against the priest was taken by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) last year after an anonymous complaint.

Fr D'Arcy has spoken out against mandatory celibacy for priests, church teaching on contraception and has been a vocal critic of the handling of clerical sexual abuse. In the wake of the Murphy Report into clerical abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin Fr D'Arcy called for reformation of church structures and accused the Holy See of using legal procedures to shield itself from criticism over its handling of abuse.

The action came after Fr Ottaviano D'Egidio, the Passionist Superior General, was summoned by Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the CDF, 14 months ago.

"Some time ago the CDF was in touch with our General about some of Brian's views and since then Brian has been co-operating to ensure that he can continue to make a contribution to the religious journalism that he is involved in," Fr Pat Duffy, the Irish provincial of the Passionists told the Tablet.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on April 26, 2012, 05:38:45 PM
Interesting to see that the Church in Rome can sanction a local priest after all. Presumably this sanction is issued under Canon Law or some other ancient internal procedure. It is also interesting to note that the office issuing that sanction is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Vatican. This function was set up to protect 'the integrity' of the faith in the 16th Century.

I find it repulsive that for decades the above process was unable to act properly upon complaints of pedophile priests. It is not credible for the Vatican to point to the local Church and say 'their fault' on child abuse while acting quickly against D'Arcy. It is hard to escape the conclusion that defending the 'integrity' was interpreted as covering up rather than what we would understand as natural justice.

And who was the last Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith? Joseph Ratzinger (November 25, 1981 - April 2, 2005)



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 26, 2012, 06:46:21 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 02:34:48 PM
Poor Brian Darcy getting the heat now from Rome.




Father Brian D'Arcy, one of Ireland's best known priests, has been censured by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Vatican, according to the Tablet newspaper.

Fr D'Arcy, a broadcaster and newspaper columnist, is making no comment.

It is understood that his column is now run past a church censor, though none has been changed as a result.

The disciplining of Fr D'Arcy brings the number of Irish priests silenced by Rome to six.

The action against the priest was taken by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) last year after an anonymous complaint.

Fr D'Arcy has spoken out against mandatory celibacy for priests, church teaching on contraception and has been a vocal critic of the handling of clerical sexual abuse. In the wake of the Murphy Report into clerical abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin Fr D'Arcy called for reformation of church structures and accused the Holy See of using legal procedures to shield itself from criticism over its handling of abuse.

The action came after Fr Ottaviano D'Egidio, the Passionist Superior General, was summoned by Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the CDF, 14 months ago.

"Some time ago the CDF was in touch with our General about some of Brian's views and since then Brian has been co-operating to ensure that he can continue to make a contribution to the religious journalism that he is involved in," Fr Pat Duffy, the Irish provincial of the Passionists told the Tablet.

There goes the only reason to buy the Sunday World. Used to get it the odd time just to be amazed at the how far away from Catholic doctrine a man can get whilst still claiming to be a priest.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 11:40:46 PM
Amazing how perverted some lads were all down the years whilst still claiming to be priests.

Even more amazing was the silence from the seats of power in Armagh and Rome ( they ignored the enquiries requests for information from Irish authorities ) whilst all the while they knew exactly what was going on, lads were simply moved around so that more innocent children could become victims, and when the abuse came to light, they were simply moved on again and again.

How dare Brian Darcy speak out !. It's reassuring that all of a sudden Rome and the bishops in Ireland are now able to listen and do something about such a bad man as Brian Darcy and the other bad priests who have the temerity to raise their heads above the parapet.

Better late than never.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on April 27, 2012, 12:11:22 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 11:40:46 PM
Amazing how perverted some lads were all down the years whilst still claiming to be priests.

Even more amazing was the silence from the seats of power in Armagh and Rome ( they ignored the enquiries requests for information from Irish authorities ) whilst all the while they knew exactly what was going on, lads were simply moved around so that more innocent children could become victims, and when the abuse came to light, they were simply moved on again and again.

How dare Brian Darcy speak out !. It's reassuring that all of a sudden Rome and the bishops in Ireland are now able to listen and do something about such a bad man as Brian Darcy and the other bad priests who have the temerity to raise their heads above the parapet.

Better late than never.

What makes you think Darcy is being reprimanded over the sex abuse abuse scandals and not his frequent deviations from Catholic dogma in his weekly columns?   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 27, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 27, 2012, 12:11:22 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 11:40:46 PM
Amazing how perverted some lads were all down the years whilst still claiming to be priests.

Even more amazing was the silence from the seats of power in Armagh and Rome ( they ignored the enquiries requests for information from Irish authorities ) whilst all the while they knew exactly what was going on, lads were simply moved around so that more innocent children could become victims, and when the abuse came to light, they were simply moved on again and again.

How dare Brian Darcy speak out !. It's reassuring that all of a sudden Rome and the bishops in Ireland are now able to listen and do something about such a bad man as Brian Darcy and the other bad priests who have the temerity to raise their heads above the parapet.

Better late than never.

What makes you think Darcy is being reprimanded over the sex abuse abuse scandals and not his frequent deviations from Catholic dogma in his weekly columns?

I didn't make that claim. Merely pointing out that Rome ( and you can include Armagh here too ) can speak out loudly, can take decisive action but only when it suits. For all other times, there's silence, denial, relocation packages etc.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on April 27, 2012, 01:41:40 PM
I think Brian D'arcy is a decent man and just like orangeman I find it pathetic, but not surprising, that the church has to be dragged kicking and screaming to own up to their raping and covering up of rape of young children but yet can act so swiftly when a priest says something they don't like. I don't know how anyone could give these lads the time of day.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 29, 2012, 04:34:06 PM
Stand by your man -


He said the memory of what he described as "this awful episode" would remain with him always.

"I deeply regret my failure to check, in advance, my presentation I had no knowledge of any offending imagery existing in it," Fr McVeigh said.

"After the images were inadvertently shown, I immediately removed the memory stick from the laptop. In my shock and upset and in my concern to ensure that the images would never be shown again, I destroyed it later that evening."

The priest added: "I appreciate that the incident was very serious in nature and caused much anxiety and distress, particularly to those who were present on the evening in question and I apologise unreservedly for the hurt caused."

"I want to assure you, however, that I was not responsible for the presence of the offending images and in this respect I ask you to accept my innocence."

The Archbishop of Armagh, Cardinal Seán Brady, has said he has accepted Fr McVeigh's request to take sabbatical leave on the understanding that he returns to the parish on its completion.

Cardinal Brady also said the diocese would now work to ensure that procedures and policies were put in place for the proper monitoring and use of computers in parishes.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on April 29, 2012, 06:37:58 PM
I think the problem is that the church would have treated this presentation thing in the same way as child abuse, when it of little importance by way of comparison. The fact that it is being discussed in this thread suggests that some here are equally confused about the importance of things, perhaps for the opposite reasons.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orangemac on April 29, 2012, 09:33:32 PM
I think what concerns most people is the reaction to this rather than the event itself. It is possible that someone else had downloaded these images but the whole thing stinks.

How can people accept that "the new procedures" line will solve everything. There was a computer that went missing, the priest destroyed the memory stick. Did the investigation determine who else may have had access to the computer?

Would you let your child serve on the altar in this parish?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theticklemister on April 29, 2012, 09:41:09 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 27, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 27, 2012, 12:11:22 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 11:40:46 PM
Amazing how perverted some lads were all down the years whilst still claiming to be priests.

Even more amazing was the silence from the seats of power in Armagh and Rome ( they ignored the enquiries requests for information from Irish authorities ) whilst all the while they knew exactly what was going on, lads were simply moved around so that more innocent children could become victims, and when the abuse came to light, they were simply moved on again and again.

How dare Brian Darcy speak out !. It's reassuring that all of a sudden Rome and the bishops in Ireland are now able to listen and do something about such a bad man as Brian Darcy and the other bad priests who have the temerity to raise their heads above the parapet.

Better late than never.

What makes you think Darcy is being reprimanded over the sex abuse abuse scandals and not his frequent deviations from Catholic dogma in his weekly columns?

I didn't make that claim. Merely pointing out that Rome ( and you can include Armagh here too ) can speak out loudly, can take decisive action but only when it suits. For all other times, there's silence, denial, relocation packages etc.

A bit like the GAA then!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on April 30, 2012, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: Orangemac on April 29, 2012, 09:33:32 PM
I think what concerns most people is the reaction to this rather than the event itself. It is possible that someone else had downloaded these images but the whole thing stinks.

How can people accept that "the new procedures" line will solve everything. There was a computer that went missing, the priest destroyed the memory stick. Did the investigation determine who else may have had access to the computer?

Would you let your child serve on the altar in this parish?

What? You seem to be very confused.  This is a case of pornography inadvertently being displayed to an unsuspecting audience. It's trivial. The question of whether it was owned by the priest or planted by some malfeasant or prankster is of no particular importance other than to the social reputation of the priest and his standing among his community. It has nothing at all to do with child safety.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on May 01, 2012, 10:50:39 PM
Quote from: Hardy on April 30, 2012, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: Orangemac on April 29, 2012, 09:33:32 PM
I think what concerns most people is the reaction to this rather than the event itself. It is possible that someone else had downloaded these images but the whole thing stinks.

How can people accept that "the new procedures" line will solve everything. There was a computer that went missing, the priest destroyed the memory stick. Did the investigation determine who else may have had access to the computer?

Would you let your child serve on the altar in this parish?



What? You seem to be very confused.  This is a case of pornography inadvertently being displayed to an unsuspecting audience. It's trivial. The question of whether it was owned by the priest or planted by some malfeasant or prankster is of no particular importance other than to the social reputation of the priest and his standing among his community. It has nothing at all to do with child safety.

+ 1000000
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on May 01, 2012, 11:02:35 PM
The Shame of the Catholic Church on BBC1 at the moment
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 01, 2012, 11:12:53 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17894419#?utm_term=BBC&utm_content=Newsline&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

New claims over Cardinal Brady's role in sex abuse inquiry

A BBC investigation has uncovered fresh revelations about the role of the Catholic primate of all-Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, in the failure to protect children from child abuse.

The BBC's This World programme revealed he had the names and addresses of children who were being abused or were at risk of abuse by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth but failed to ensure they were being protected.

The investigation centres on a secret church inquiry in 1975 when a 14-year-old was questioned about abuse.

In 1975, Cardinal Brady was a priest and teacher in County Cavan in the Republic of Ireland, when he was sent by his bishop to investigate a claim of child sexual abuse by a fellow priest.

That priest was later exposed as Ireland's most prolific paedophile, Father Brendan Smyth.

The first child to tell his parents about the abuse was 14-year-old Brendan Boland.

Smyth took him and other children on trips across Ireland, abusing them in guesthouses along the way.

The man tasked with the secret church investigation that followed would later become the most senior priest in Ireland.

Sean Brady's role in the affair was exposed in 2010, when he was forced to admit that he had been present when the abused boy was questioned.

He claimed, however, that the boy's father had accompanied him, and described his own role as that of a note-taker.

However, the BBC This World investigation has uncovered the notes Cardinal Brady took while the boy was questioned.

The child's father was not allowed in the room, and the child was immediately sworn to secrecy.

Interviewed
What Cardinal Brady failed to tell anyone in 2010 was that Brendan Boland had also given him and his colleagues the precise details of a group of children who were being abused by Smyth.

Cardinal Brady did interview one of them and swore him to secrecy.

None of the children's parents or the police were told, leaving one boy, his sister and dozens of other children exposed to Smyth's sex attacks for a further 13 years.

Cardinal Brady did consider his position as Primate of all-Ireland when his role in the secret inquiry was first exposed.

The Catholic Church has said that "the sole purpose of the oath" signed by Brendan Boland in Cardinal Brady's presence was "to give greater force and integrity to the evidence given by Mr Boland against any counter claim by Fr Brendan Smyth".

The church also points out that in 1975, "no state or church guidelines for responding to allegations of child abuse existed in Ireland."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 01, 2012, 11:19:16 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 01, 2012, 11:12:53 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17894419#?utm_term=BBC&utm_content=Newsline&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

New claims over Cardinal Brady's role in sex abuse inquiry

A BBC investigation has uncovered fresh revelations about the role of the Catholic primate of all-Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, in the failure to protect children from child abuse.

The BBC's This World programme revealed he had the names and addresses of children who were being abused or were at risk of abuse by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth but failed to ensure they were being protected.

The investigation centres on a secret church inquiry in 1975 when a 14-year-old was questioned about abuse.

In 1975, Cardinal Brady was a priest and teacher in County Cavan in the Republic of Ireland, when he was sent by his bishop to investigate a claim of child sexual abuse by a fellow priest.

That priest was later exposed as Ireland's most prolific paedophile, Father Brendan Smyth.

The first child to tell his parents about the abuse was 14-year-old Brendan Boland.

Smyth took him and other children on trips across Ireland, abusing them in guesthouses along the way.

The man tasked with the secret church investigation that followed would later become the most senior priest in Ireland.

Sean Brady's role in the affair was exposed in 2010, when he was forced to admit that he had been present when the abused boy was questioned.

He claimed, however, that the boy's father had accompanied him, and described his own role as that of a note-taker.

However, the BBC This World investigation has uncovered the notes Cardinal Brady took while the boy was questioned.

The child's father was not allowed in the room, and the child was immediately sworn to secrecy.

Interviewed
What Cardinal Brady failed to tell anyone in 2010 was that Brendan Boland had also given him and his colleagues the precise details of a group of children who were being abused by Smyth.

Cardinal Brady did interview one of them and swore him to secrecy.

None of the children's parents or the police were told, leaving one boy, his sister and dozens of other children exposed to Smyth's sex attacks for a further 13 years.

Cardinal Brady did consider his position as Primate of all-Ireland when his role in the secret inquiry was first exposed.

The Catholic Church has said that "the sole purpose of the oath" signed by Brendan Boland in Cardinal Brady's presence was "to give greater force and integrity to the evidence given by Mr Boland against any counter claim by Fr Brendan Smyth".

The church also points out that in 1975, "no state or church guidelines for responding to allegations of child abuse existed in Ireland."

Yeah, I believe you
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 01, 2012, 11:21:45 PM
A shame to cavan and Ireland that Brady. If there is a hell he'll be going there soon.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 01, 2012, 11:25:51 PM
Brady should f**k right off. I saw him a few months glad-handing people up the town in Armagh. sc**bag.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 01, 2012, 11:32:48 PM
Don't think he'll be able to hang on after this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 01, 2012, 11:33:46 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 01, 2012, 11:12:53 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17894419#?utm_term=BBC&utm_content=Newsline&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


The church also points out that in 1975, "no state or church guidelines for responding to allegations of child abuse existed in Ireland."

So that made it ok to say nothing, do nothing and make those affected swear an oath of secrecy
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 01, 2012, 11:47:25 PM
Yet more evidence that Brady is up to his neck in cover ups of abuse.

No wonder he became Cardinal and Primate of All Ireland.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 01, 2012, 11:54:18 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 01, 2012, 11:47:25 PM
Yet more evidence that Brady is up to his neck in cover ups of abuse.

No wonder he became Cardinal and Primate of All Ireland.
Should be gone by the weekend.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
I hate this trial by reporters thing. And then being hung out to dry in front of a crowd of wolves wanting to tear the man apart.

If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 02, 2012, 12:16:31 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
I hate this trial by reporters thing. And then being hung out to dry in front of a crowd of wolves wanting to tear the man apart.

If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

If responsibly done, it's investigative reporting which results in your second sentence actually occurring. That way, there's no dilution or backhanded activity.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 02, 2012, 12:53:47 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
I hate this trial by reporters thing. And then being hung out to dry in front of a crowd of wolves wanting to tear the man apart.

If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

Did you watch the show?

I thought Darragh dealt with the facts surrounding the cases he covered, and to have the victims in the said cases speak to him and recall their experiences really backed up the show's credibility.

This isn't really a case anymore on what "Law" was broken. The facts in black and white prove that Brady was up to his neck in the cover up of abuse, and he needs to stand down.

This week we have seen Martin McVeigh take a break because he showed naked pictures of men to a group in Pomeroy.

Brady covered up sexual abuse of young boys by Brendan Smyth, and he should stand down immediately.

How can he head up the church in Ireland and know that his silence and cover up led to further abuse?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: JUst retired on May 02, 2012, 07:18:19 AM
To think they silenced Fr.Brian,and allow this to happen. Where is our church going? >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 10:00:56 AM
what's that saying about evil and the inactions of good people?

The Catholic Church was such a powerful organisation I think they felt like they had the right to do what they wanted and any sign of weakness or wrong doing was hidden away by second nature so as to preserve the "image" of infallibility.
The entire organisation of the Church is corrupt top to bottom if you ask me, and Brady is simply a small part in a big machine. IMO, he's completely in the wrong. I think that show last night showed that not only was he in a position to help put a stop to this monster and failed to do anything, but he has continually lied in public about his role.
In politics, he'd be hung out to dry. But the church being the church he'll probably be allowed to continue and there'll be a statement of no wrong doing on their behalf.
Their statement about their being no guidelines I think is purely protecting themselves from any sort of legal action as in their eyes they didn't break any law.

But it's total bullshit.

It's becoming clearer and clearer that the Catholic Church is more interested in its own survival and public image than it is in the well being of it's members or indeed in the principles of Christianity. How much money is the Church worth? They have to protect their cash!

I thought the documentary was balanced and was empathetic towards the victims of abuse and indeed towards those clergy who have all been tarred with the same brush.
Will anything come from it is the big question. I'd like to see a public enquiry against the church with those individuals responsible being held to account in the courts.

Lets just say I'm in no way inclined to return to mass any time soon nor to expose my children to that mindset. It's difficult because I still want them to be brought up as Catholic and receive their sacraments but on the other hand I feel that by doing so is in some way condoning the behaviour of the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on May 02, 2012, 10:05:40 AM
The Church is now a sorry group of tired old men. There is no energy to cope with the backlash of their total dominance and oppression of Irish Society since the begining of the twentieth Centuary. Most are just wading out their time hoping that these sorry episodes will pass over and fade. The biggest thing in their favour is that most Bishops and Cardinals are old men when they take up their station. Which means that most involved in these scandals are dead and there is no one to chase!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:13:51 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 10:00:56 AM
what's that saying about evil and the inactions of good people?

The Catholic Church was such a powerful organisation I think they felt like they had the right to do what they wanted and any sign of weakness or wrong doing was hidden away by second nature so as to preserve the "image" of infallibility.
The entire organisation of the Church is corrupt top to bottom if you ask me, and Brady is simply a small part in a big machine. IMO, he's completely in the wrong. I think that show last night showed that not only was he in a position to help put a stop to this monster and failed to do anything, but he has continually lied in public about his role.
In politics, he'd be hung out to dry. But the church being the church he'll probably be allowed to continue and there'll be a statement of no wrong doing on their behalf.
Their statement about their being no guidelines I think is purely protecting themselves from any sort of legal action as in their eyes they didn't break any law.

But it's total bullshit.

It's becoming clearer and clearer that the Catholic Church is more interested in its own survival and public image than it is in the well being of it's members or indeed in the principles of Christianity. How much money is the Church worth? They have to protect their cash!

I thought the documentary was balanced and was empathetic towards the victims of abuse and indeed towards those clergy who have all been tarred with the same brush.
Will anything come from it is the big question. I'd like to see a public enquiry against the church with those individuals responsible being held to account in the courts.

Lets just say I'm in no way inclined to return to mass any time soon nor to expose my children to that mindset. It's difficult because I still want them to be brought up as Catholic and receive their sacraments but on the other hand I feel that by doing so is in some way condoning the behaviour of the church.

You have to think of the Church and your religion as 2 different things. I still go to mass for me, not the priest or the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 02, 2012, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 27, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Quote from: Ulick on April 27, 2012, 12:11:22 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 26, 2012, 11:40:46 PM
Amazing how perverted some lads were all down the years whilst still claiming to be priests.

Even more amazing was the silence from the seats of power in Armagh and Rome ( they ignored the enquiries requests for information from Irish authorities ) whilst all the while they knew exactly what was going on, lads were simply moved around so that more innocent children could become victims, and when the abuse came to light, they were simply moved on again and again.

How dare Brian Darcy speak out !. It's reassuring that all of a sudden Rome and the bishops in Ireland are now able to listen and do something about such a bad man as Brian Darcy and the other bad priests who have the temerity to raise their heads above the parapet.

Better late than never.

What makes you think Darcy is being reprimanded over the sex abuse abuse scandals and not his frequent deviations from Catholic dogma in his weekly columns?

I didn't make that claim. Merely pointing out that Rome ( and you can include Armagh here too ) can speak out loudly, can take decisive action but only when it suits. For all other times, there's silence, denial, relocation packages etc.
That's the impression I get,  Rome takes decisive censorious action against a priest with access to media, is charged with deviating from dogma,
reportedly deviating from dogma on such issues as  'how the Vatican dealt with the issue of women priests; why US Catholics were leaving the church; why the church had to take responsibility for clerical child sex abuse; and homosexuality'.
Yet pedophiles were protected 'in house' for decades and the further abuse of children by those same pedophiles was facilitated by that Church hierarchy.

I haven't read anything by Darcy nor am I even curious to do so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

I listened to Alan Shatter this morning talk about legislation coming with regard to with-holding information.   I guess that implies that there isn't legislation stating that with-holding information is a crime.   Equally making someone sign an oath of secrecy seems like an effort to interfere with the law.  These strike me as strange but I don't know the law

However at the very least one must question the judgement of Brady and anyone else involved in this court.   Surely to God, haven taken this evidence someone would have the gumption to make some provision to warn the parents of the kids in danger.  I don't think saying "it was not in my role description" is adequate moral defence here.  I really don't see his position as Primate as tenable anymore. 

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 02, 2012, 10:30:09 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:13:51 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 10:00:56 AM
what's that saying about evil and the inactions of good people?

The Catholic Church was such a powerful organisation I think they felt like they had the right to do what they wanted and any sign of weakness or wrong doing was hidden away by second nature so as to preserve the "image" of infallibility.
The entire organisation of the Church is corrupt top to bottom if you ask me, and Brady is simply a small part in a big machine. IMO, he's completely in the wrong. I think that show last night showed that not only was he in a position to help put a stop to this monster and failed to do anything, but he has continually lied in public about his role.
In politics, he'd be hung out to dry. But the church being the church he'll probably be allowed to continue and there'll be a statement of no wrong doing on their behalf.
Their statement about their being no guidelines I think is purely protecting themselves from any sort of legal action as in their eyes they didn't break any law.

But it's total bullshit.

It's becoming clearer and clearer that the Catholic Church is more interested in its own survival and public image than it is in the well being of it's members or indeed in the principles of Christianity. How much money is the Church worth? They have to protect their cash!

I thought the documentary was balanced and was empathetic towards the victims of abuse and indeed towards those clergy who have all been tarred with the same brush.
Will anything come from it is the big question. I'd like to see a public enquiry against the church with those individuals responsible being held to account in the courts.

Lets just say I'm in no way inclined to return to mass any time soon nor to expose my children to that mindset. It's difficult because I still want them to be brought up as Catholic and receive their sacraments but on the other hand I feel that by doing so is in some way condoning the behaviour of the church.

You have to think of the Church and your religion as 2 different things. I still go to mass for me, not the priest or the church.

Valid point, but it can be a bit galling to be told how to live a good life by a bunch of hypocrites.

IMO you don't need to darken the door of the most holy roman catholic church or any other organized religion to have religious faith in a god.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 10:44:33 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:13:51 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 10:00:56 AM
what's that saying about evil and the inactions of good people?

The Catholic Church was such a powerful organisation I think they felt like they had the right to do what they wanted and any sign of weakness or wrong doing was hidden away by second nature so as to preserve the "image" of infallibility.
The entire organisation of the Church is corrupt top to bottom if you ask me, and Brady is simply a small part in a big machine. IMO, he's completely in the wrong. I think that show last night showed that not only was he in a position to help put a stop to this monster and failed to do anything, but he has continually lied in public about his role.
In politics, he'd be hung out to dry. But the church being the church he'll probably be allowed to continue and there'll be a statement of no wrong doing on their behalf.
Their statement about their being no guidelines I think is purely protecting themselves from any sort of legal action as in their eyes they didn't break any law.

But it's total bullshit.

It's becoming clearer and clearer that the Catholic Church is more interested in its own survival and public image than it is in the well being of it's members or indeed in the principles of Christianity. How much money is the Church worth? They have to protect their cash!

I thought the documentary was balanced and was empathetic towards the victims of abuse and indeed towards those clergy who have all been tarred with the same brush.
Will anything come from it is the big question. I'd like to see a public enquiry against the church with those individuals responsible being held to account in the courts.

Lets just say I'm in no way inclined to return to mass any time soon nor to expose my children to that mindset. It's difficult because I still want them to be brought up as Catholic and receive their sacraments but on the other hand I feel that by doing so is in some way condoning the behaviour of the church.

You have to think of the Church and your religion as 2 different things. I still go to mass for me, not the priest or the church.

That's what I am doing....the actual institution of Mass is a Church based ritual developed by the Catholic Church and I feel that participating in Mass is validating the behaviour of the church as a whole. Perhaps it is just me, but find it difficult to agree with what the Church say on one hand and disagree on the other. Church and Religion are one and the same are they not? Is it not Faith that is important?
I've recently found out that where I live there is an interfaith church. A lot of people from mixed marriages would attend. Seriously considering going down that route.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:47:42 AM
I see religion and the church as very different things. To me it is the church that is warped and steeped in this mess, religion does not belong to the church. My religion belongs to me.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 10:47:50 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 01, 2012, 11:32:48 PM
Don't think he'll be able to hang on after this.

The man has no shame.

He's hell bent on retaining his position and leading his flock.

He should go - and go now - or else the people should head over to Armagh and put him out of it.

He's not living on the same planet.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on May 02, 2012, 10:58:56 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:47:42 AM
I see religion and the church as very different things. To me it is the church that is warped and steeped in this mess, religion does not belong to the church. My religion belongs to me.

Spot on!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 02, 2012, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: From the Bunker on May 02, 2012, 10:58:56 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:47:42 AM
I see religion and the church as very different things. To me it is the church that is warped and steeped in this mess, religion does not belong to the church. My religion belongs to me.

Spot on!

But was it not this warped church that taught you these religious beliefs? Do you not think it's entirely possible/probable they put their warped slant on those teachings for their own reasons?
Religion and church can be separated to a certain extent, but it's far from black and white.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Club Rossa on May 02, 2012, 11:24:07 AM
If Brady had any decency,which i doubt he has,he should resign with immediate effect.
Shocking stuff altogether.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 11:50:23 AM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

As an individual he made a decision that following some archaic rules was a better idea than using information he had to protect kids from a rapist.

If the church can't see that a man of such poor judgement is not the one to lead the Irish Catholic Church to a better future then they are beyond rescue.

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 02, 2012, 11:52:56 AM
Folks think of Sharia law and how it is administered in fundamentalist Muslim countries and then you have some idea of what Ireland was like pre 1980s. I'm old enough to remember it and to speak out against the church wasn't on anyone's radar never mind a card carrying member like Brady. Not excusing the lack of action on his behalf just contextualising it.
I remember having a row with my own parents about an incident that happened with a local young neighbour of mine that was "hushed" up not by the clerical authorities but by the local pillars of the civil community and when they told me how it had been dealt with I could understand it more while still being repulsed by it. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 02, 2012, 11:56:53 AM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

Yes, probably Brady was not the architect of the masterplan. However  do you think it is just a coincidence that Brady rode his chariot to the top of the tree here? That such a journey was facilitated by his intelligent and obedient participation in carrying out such dastardly conspiracy or his progress was made in spite of such a participation?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 02, 2012, 12:21:03 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 11:50:23 AM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

As an individual he made a decision that following some archaic rules was a better idea than using information he had to protect kids from a rapist.

If the church can't see that a man of such poor judgement is not the one to lead the Irish Catholic Church to a better future then they are beyond rescue.

/Jim.

Brady didn't actually abuse any children, but to allow a known child rapist to carry on with his evil doings and even indirectly aid him by placing him in other unsuspecting parishes really should go against the morals of any human being, let alone a man of the cloth.
I'm sorry, but I don't care how misguided any organisation could be in self preservation I couldn't do what Brady helped to do. I'd have walked away if asked to do what he did.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 02, 2012, 12:36:29 PM
Brady was a grown and well educated man when he made a child put his hand on the bible and swear to secrecy. For Brady to portray this imagine of him being a wee shy secretary who had to do what he was told doesn't wash. Meanwhile Smith was then let go to proceed and rape numerous other children for years after! God only knows how many lives were wrecked (and subsequent suicides) because of Smith and the coverups. Not only should he resign but he should also be dragged through the courts along with his cohorts!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 02, 2012, 12:44:28 PM
Just heard Bradys statement on Radio Ulster. He is not for going, and still stands by his "I was only a humble notary bullshit excuse"

This man is totally deluded, and it's high time he was forced out.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 12:51:24 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

Brady said this prayer below EVERY day from the time he became a priest. The rest of us said it once a week if even. But when we were being brought to confessions on the first Friday of the month, the priest emphasised how important it was to tell God about the sins that we had committed by not doing the right thing and by not acting when we should have acted. I remember this clearly.
Is he, you or anybody else really trying to tell us that he didn't realise that what he did was wrong and that he covered up Smith and co which allowed hundreds of young innocents to have thier lives ruined ? To claim he was simply a note taker when the evidence clearly shows he was much, much more than a secretary shows that the man is living on a different planet. Mc Intyre is to be commended for his "manhunt" if that's what you want to call it.

I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 02, 2012, 01:05:55 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 12:51:24 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

Brady said this prayer below EVERY day from the time he became a priest. The rest of us said it once a week if even. But when we were being brought to confessions on the first Friday of the month, the priest emphasised how important it was to tell God about the sins that we had committed by not doing the right thing and by not acting when we should have acted. I remember this clearly.
Is he, you or anybody else really trying to tell us that he didn't realise that what he did was wrong and that he covered up Smith and co which allowed hundreds of young innocents to have thier lives ruined ? To claim he was simply a note taker when the evidence clearly shows he was much, much more than a secretary shows that the man is living on a different planet. Mc Intyre is to be commended for his "manhunt" if that's what you want to call it.

I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God

I suppose it becomes just another rhyme after a while.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tbrick18 on May 02, 2012, 01:13:55 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
It's a very poor portrayal of Brady there last night now I have to say.
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.

It's a very sad affair the whole thing and in a way I feel sorry for him.
(This doesn't come close to how we must all feel for the victims of these cases).

There's a lot of it has happened. but on this individual case around Cardinal Brady, we must all remember he has not committed any 'act' against a young one, that is first and foremost.

The BBC are going hell for leather in trying to get Brady ousted in some kind of mad fanatical pursuit. I have it on good authority that what has been happening is as close to a manhunt (by the BBC) on Brady. That surely would be all well and good if he was an actual perpetrator of abuse.

Now as for what Brady has actually done and don't be getting me wrong, because the way they went about covering this up is inexcusable, but Brady, and this is what 38 years ago now, would have been very green behind the ears back then and not very high in power in the whole Church setup back then. But I am suspecting he is taking the kick here for all those who were above him at the time. He is in a big hole here and no-one else is around now to answer, he is having to answer now for his own actions alright. But....fcuk it, I don't know, none of us know, only him.

Those who were abused at the time know who carried out the acts. Brady made sure they were sworn to silence but are we all that niaive to think he was head honcho or something, and was the one came up with that great masterplan away back then. He would've had no real sway back then I'd think, someone else above him at the time had to force him down this route, had to.
I can't be sure but I just think the BBC are on a big drive to get the main man at the helm of the Catholic Church in Ireland hung, drawn and quartered to get their big story.

Brady didnt abuse any children directly but he was certainly implicit in facilitating the abuse of children by is actions, or lack thereof.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he a teacher? He should have been fully aware of the impact this could have on a child and he would also have been aware of how to persuade a child to do his bidding due to his training. For me this makes his role all the more vicious.
I for one hope he is hung out to dry, along with anyone and everyone else who contributed to the cover up which undoubtedly let to more children being abused.
As for the BBC being on a Manhunt, McIntyre lived in an area of Donegal where abuse took place and his uncle was a priest. If anything he made a point out of showing that there are many good people in the clergy, but evidence is evidence. If it points to Brady and he happens to be the head of the Irish Catholic Church why shouldn't it be highlighted? It just makes it all the more sickening to me that someone so involved in such a cover up can rise (sink?) to such levels.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 01:17:51 PM
Irish Justice Minister Alan Shatter said the programme's revelations were "tragic and disturbing".

Abuse victims' campaigner Marie Collins, who was raped at the age of 13 by a hospital chaplain in Dublin, said Cardinal Brady should resign.

"I'm amazed no bishops have come out and said he should go," she said.

"We have priests and theologians being silenced by the Vatican - they can act against people whose views they feel are liberal, but they will not act against someone who not only endangered children but let them be abused.

"If Cardinal Brady came out and espoused the view that women should be ordained, he'd be gone within hours."



Gary O'Sullivan, editor of the Irish Catholic newspaper, said Cardinal Brady had questions to answer.

"If a child can see the need to save other children, how come priests, ministers of Christianity, cannot have the same awareness?" he said.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 01:19:02 PM
http://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A%2D2%3A135%3A02%2D05%2D2012%3A


right now !!

Sickening.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 01:21:08 PM
My good God.


I'm starting to feel sorry for Brady now - he's clearly not a well man still trying to deny that he didn't do anything wrong but was happy that others were going to deal with it - it wasn't his "role".

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 02, 2012, 01:24:18 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 02, 2012, 11:52:56 AM
Folks think of Sharia law and how it is administered in fundamentalist Muslim countries and then you have some idea of what Ireland was like pre 1980s. I'm old enough to remember it and to speak out against the church wasn't on anyone's radar never mind a card carrying member like Brady. Not excusing the lack of action on his behalf just contextualising it.
I remember having a row with my own parents about an incident that happened with a local young neighbour of mine that was "hushed" up not by the clerical authorities but by the local pillars of the civil community and when they told me how it had been dealt with I could understand it more while still being repulsed by it.

Everyone is ignoring Declan's post, which sets the context perfectly. He was a bit player in these awful incidents.

I truely believe that he is a good and decent man.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 01:28:12 PM
RTE must be part of this "manhunt" as well ?.

Being decent and good doesn't come into this.

There are plenty of people who have committed great criminal acts who would have come across as decent and good.


Why didn't he tell the parents of those he knew were being abused as he was in charge in Cavan at the time ?  He was a teacher for God's sake.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Abble on May 02, 2012, 01:31:31 PM
Would he possibly have been given assurances that the abusers were to be dealt with and those who were supposed to handle that never stuck to their word ? was he just a frontman and those in the background never acted ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 02, 2012, 01:32:07 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17921673

The Catholic primate of all-Ireland has said that he will not resign as Church leader despite revelations in the BBC's This World show.

It found Cardinal Sean Brady had names and addresses of those being abused by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth.

However, he did not pass on those details to police or parents.

Cardinal Brady said he accepted he was part of "an unhelpful culture of deference and silence in society, and the Church".

"With others, I feel betrayed that those who had the authority in the Church to stop Brendan Smyth failed to act on the evidence I gave them," he said.

"However, I also accept that I was part of an unhelpful culture of deference and silence in society, and the Church, which thankfully is now a thing of the past."

The cardinal said he was "shocked, appalled and outraged" by Smyth and said he had trusted that those with the authority to act in relation to Smyth would treat the evidence seriously and respond appropriately.

He accused the BBC of exaggerating his authority in the programme.

"The commentary in the programme and much of the coverage of my role in this inquiry gives the impression that I was the only person who knew of the allegations against Brendan Smyth at that time and that because of the office I hold in the Church today I somehow had the power to stop Brendan Smyth in 1975.

"I had absolutely no authority over Brendan Smyth. Even my Bishop had limited authority over him. The only people who had authority within the Church to stop Brendan Smyth from having contact with children were his Abbot in the Monastery in Kilnacrott and his Religious Superiors in the Norbertine Order."


He added that he had worked with others in the Church to put these new procedures in place and looked forward to continuing that vital work in the years ahead.

Senior Vatican Prosecutor Monsignor Charles Scicluna has defended Cardinal Brady.

"My first point is that Fr Brady was a note taker in 1975, he did what he should have done. He forwarded all the information to the people that had the power to act," he said.

"My second point is that in the interest of the Church in Ireland, they need to have Cardinal Brady as the archbishop of Armagh because he has shown determination in promoting child protection policies. You need to have leaders who have learned the hard way and are determined to protect children."

The BBC investigation centres on a secret church inquiry in 1975 when a 14-year-old boy was questioned about abuse.

Smyth abused him and others in guesthouses on trips across Ireland.

In 1975, Cardinal Brady was a priest and teacher in County Cavan in the Republic of Ireland, when he was sent by his bishop to investigate a claim of child sexual abuse by a fellow priest.

That priest was later exposed as Ireland's most prolific paedophile, Father Brendan Smyth, who died in prison in 1997, one month into a 12 year prison sentence.

The first child to tell his parents about the abuse was 14-year-old Brendan Boland.

The man tasked with the secret church investigation that followed would later become the most senior priest in Ireland.

Sean Brady's role in the affair became clear in 2010, when it became known that he had been present when the abused boy was questioned.

He claimed, however, that the boy's father had accompanied him, and described his own role as that of a note-taker.

However, the BBC This World investigation has uncovered the notes Cardinal Brady took while the boy was questioned.

The child's father was not allowed in the room, and the child was immediately sworn to secrecy.

What Cardinal Brady failed to tell anyone in 2010 was that Brendan Boland had also given him and his colleagues the precise details of a group of children, some of whom, were being abused by Smyth.

Cardinal Brady did interview one of them and swore him to secrecy.

This World spoke to all of the children who Brendan Boland had identified; they all told the programme that to the best of their knowledge none of their parents or families were warned in any way about the paedophile Brendan Smyth.


The investigation centres on a secret church inquiry in 1975 when a 14-year-old boy was questioned about abuse, as Mark Simpson reports.
Four of them had been abused by Smyth. Two of them continued to be abused after the 1975 inquiry.

One of them - originally from Belfast - told the programme that Smyth continued to abuse him for another year.

He also said Smyth abused his sister for a further seven years and then in turn, his four younger cousins, up to 1988.

Cardinal Brady did consider his position as Primate of all-Ireland when his role in the secret inquiry was first exposed.

The Catholic Church has said that "the sole purpose of the oath" signed by Brendan Boland in Cardinal Brady's presence was "to give greater force and integrity to the evidence given by Mr Boland against any counter claim by Fr Brendan Smyth".

The church also points out that in 1975, "no state or church guidelines for responding to allegations of child abuse existed in Ireland".


The Catholic Church has been knocked off its pedestal in Ireland, and its leader is battling to hold onto his own position.

Cardinal Sean Brady has been under pressure for some time. But he has always made it clear he will not resign, unless there is specific proof that his failure to act allowed clerical child abuse to take place.

Clearly, he does not believe the evidence in the BBC documentary meets that criterion.

However, with the media spotlight on his past, the Catholic primate is struggling to shift the focus to the present and the future.

That is a very uncomfortable position, for any church leader.

Irish Justice Minister Alan Shatter said the programme's revelations were "tragic and disturbing".

Abuse victims' campaigner Marie Collins, who was raped at the age of 13 by a hospital chaplain in Dublin, said Cardinal Brady should resign.

"I'm amazed no bishops have come out and said he should go," she said.

"We have priests and theologians being silenced by the Vatican - they can act against people whose views they feel are liberal, but they will not act against someone who not only endangered children but let them be abused.

"If Cardinal Brady came out and espoused the view that women should be ordained, he'd be gone within hours."

Gary O'Sullivan, editor of the Irish Catholic newspaper, said Cardinal Brady had questions to answer.

"If a child can see the need to save other children, how come priests, ministers of Christianity, cannot have the same awareness?" he said.

"If he wants to stay in this leadership position, he should show leadership and come out and answer these questions because this culture of silence failed children."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 02, 2012, 02:22:47 PM
It doesn't matter a bloody damn if he had power over Smyth or not!
This is a so-called man of God who knew one of his colleagues was raping children. His defence for doing nothing about it is that it wasn't in his job spec. It's not in my job spec either, but if I found out a colleague of mine was raping children, you can be guaranteed I'd be straight to the Gardaí about it.
Not alone did he know Smyth was raping children, he knew of other children also being abused. Again, saw no reason to do anything about it.
He (along with others throughout) actually kept this from the children's parents. It's completely sick!

And this man is supposed to be the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland. What a stinking cesspit of an organisation.
Makes me so fcking angry.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 02, 2012, 02:26:24 PM
While hadn't a major role in the debacle, there is no doubt that Brady made a serious error of judgement in the past, something he does not deny.  Indeed he has probably learned from this and is the least likely person to allow it again.

The question is whether someone is excluded from office because of a past mistake? Both first ministers in NI have a questionable past and certainly kept company with people doing unacceptable things. In the Republic the cabinet several stickies, has a drunk driver, another who readily admits he was wrong in the Bridget McCole case.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 02:27:53 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2012, 02:22:47 PM
It doesn't matter a bloody damn if he had power over Smyth or not!
This is a so-called man of God who knew one of his colleagues was raping children. His defence for doing nothing about it is that it wasn't in his job spec. It's not in my job spec either, but if I found out a colleague of mine was raping children, you can be guaranteed I'd be straight to the Gardaí about it.
Not alone did he know Smyth was raping children, he knew of other children also being abused. Again, saw no reason to do anything about it.
He (along with others throughout) actually kept this from the children's parents. It's completely sick!

And this man is supposed to be the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland. What a stinking cesspit of an organisation.
Makes me so fcking angry.

Don't be so angry - just put it into context and everything will be ok.

In all sincerity put like that, the man should be chased, not allowed to resign. Chased.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 02:29:59 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 02, 2012, 02:26:24 PM
While hadn't a major role in the debacle, there is no doubt that Brady made a serious error of judgement in the past, something he does not deny.  Indeed he has probably learned from this and is the least likely person to allow it again.

The question is whether someone is excluded from office because of a past mistake? Both first ministers in NI have a questionable past and certainly kept company with people doing unacceptable things. In the Republic the cabinet several stickies, has a drunk driver, another who readily admits he was wrong in the Bridget McCole case.

Big difference is they're not our moral guardians.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 02, 2012, 02:39:02 PM
Tubberman your anger is completely justified.

QuoteIt's not in my job spec either, but if I found out a colleague of mine was raping children, you can be guaranteed I'd be straight to the Gardaí about it.

Unfortunately the likelihood in Ireland of the 1970s is that they would have been part of the cover-up as well
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Abble on May 02, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
going by the bbc's update i wasn't far wrong

"Would he possibly have been given assurances that the abusers were to be dealt with and those who were supposed to handle that never stuck to their word ? was he just a frontman and those in the background never acted ?"

the BBC should now redirect their investigations and go after those responsible for the cover-up in the first place, they (in my mind) are the real perpetrators and almost as bad those responsible for the abusing, not Brady.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 02, 2012, 03:36:56 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
going by the bbc's update i wasn't far wrong

"Would he possibly have been given assurances that the abusers were to be dealt with and those who were supposed to handle that never stuck to their word ? was he just a frontman and those in the background never acted ?"

the BBC should now redirect their investigations and go after those responsible for the cover-up in the first place, they (in my mind) are the real perpetrators and almost as bad those responsible for the abusing, not Brady.

Even if he was the frontman, it wouldn't have taken him long to work out that he'd been told a pack of lies by his superiors, so he then proceeded to do nothing? He was a grown man FFS.
If one priest had come out with hard evidence which Brady had back then it would have given these allegations a lot more credibility than joe soap saying so, but Brady hadn't the swingers to do the right thing for gods children.

Certainly his then superiors who instigated the cover up have serious questions to answer and many may have passed on to be judged at the pearly gates, but its the lack of support from the current church both in Ireland and Rome which drags this issue on and the Catholic church worldwide won't cleanse itself of this plague until it starts telling the truth and giving external investigators access to all evidence it has on the matter.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on May 02, 2012, 03:52:42 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
going by the bbc's update i wasn't far wrong

"Would he possibly have been given assurances that the abusers were to be dealt with and those who were supposed to handle that never stuck to their word ? was he just a frontman and those in the background never acted ?"

the BBC should now redirect their investigations and go after those responsible for the cover-up in the first place, they (in my mind) are the real perpetrators and almost as bad those responsible for the abusing, not Brady.

That is correct but since then Abble Brady has become Primate of Ireland and therefore the most powerful authority in the church in the country.  Given the knowledge he had available to him surely he had a legal and moral obligation to come forward with that information?  Instead he has hidden behind the mantra that he was only a small cog when in reality he could have been the real leader against this despicable cover up.  In my eyes his hads are as dirty as the abusers.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 02, 2012, 03:58:17 PM
He says that he did all that was expected of him by passing the information onto his boss. Surely he was very aware for 13 years after the interviews that Smith was still free and very likely to be still roaming the country and raping children. Did that thought never cross his mind in 13 fecking years??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggysego on May 02, 2012, 04:40:59 PM
Sean Brady did take the evidence from a young Brendan Boland, including the names and addresses of other young children who were suspected of being sexually abused by Brendan Smyth.

The Church did nothing to protect Boland or other children from future abuse from Smyth. Smyth continued to abuse more children up until 1988.

I refuse to believe that Brady did not know the whereabouts of Smyth and there was a wider cover-up of his actions.

Brady should have went to the RUC or Gardi with his information. Instead, he sat on his information and was promoted by the Catholic Church in Ireland by fast tracking him through the ranks, which has now taken him to the highest post in Ireland.

Brady, Conway and the rest of the men behind the cover-up have forever tainted the Church in Ireland and have casted mis-trust over the many 100s of good Priests and Bishops working within the Church here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 02, 2012, 04:48:40 PM
I just read Brady's statement and it disgusts me.

While there might be an argument for his actions being viewed in the context of the 1970s, his failure to resign will be viewed in the context of all that we know now, in 2012. He simply doesn't get that and evidently neither does Rome.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 02, 2012, 04:55:26 PM
I listened to that RTE at One interview with Brady.
Pretty bad when he resorts to using the Nuremberg defence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 02, 2012, 05:48:30 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 03:15:45 PM
the BBC should now redirect their investigations and go after those responsible for the cover-up in the first place, they (in my mind) are the real perpetrators and almost as bad those responsible for the abusing, not Brady.
I'd imagine that if they were Brady's superiors at the time, they're now dead. They're definitely not in a leadership position.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 02, 2012, 05:49:58 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 02, 2012, 02:26:24 PM
The question is whether someone is excluded from office because of a past mistake? [/quote
It depends on the nature/magnitude of the mistake. In this case, i'd say yes. He has no moral authority or credibility.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 02, 2012, 05:55:08 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.
Are you serious? Why would you want to shake his hand? Why would you want him to shake your child's hand?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 02, 2012, 09:01:16 PM
Last nights show is on now on BBC 2 if anyone missed it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 02, 2012, 09:45:12 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 02, 2012, 09:01:16 PM
Last nights show is on now on BBC 2 if anyone missed it.
Watching it again to see if I missed anything in Brady's defence. What an absolute ****!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ross matt on May 02, 2012, 10:23:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 01:24:18 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 02, 2012, 11:52:56 AM
Folks think of Sharia law and how it is administered in fundamentalist Muslim countries and then you have some idea of what Ireland was like pre 1980s. I'm old enough to remember it and to speak out against the church wasn't on anyone's radar never mind a card carrying member like Brady. Not excusing the lack of action on his behalf just contextualising it.
I remember having a row with my own parents about an incident that happened with a local young neighbour of mine that was "hushed" up not by the clerical authorities but by the local pillars of the civil community and when they told me how it had been dealt with I could understand it more while still being repulsed by it.

Everyone is ignoring Declan's post, which sets the context perfectly. He was a bit player in these awful incidents.

I truely believe that he is a good and decent man.

He might well be but as they saying goes all it takes for evil to prosper if for good men to do nothing.  As muppet said whatever about the hush hush attitude of those times it has to be viewed in the context of what we know now.... the widespread rape of young vunerable children by those who were as you say were pillars of soceity. He simply has to go... decent man or not..... or whether he even gets the point or not.  His resignation would be a tiny but nonetheless symbolic act of justice for or at least acknowledgement of the unthinkable suffering of those innocent victims many of who are now today broken adults.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ross matt on May 02, 2012, 10:24:25 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 02, 2012, 04:48:40 PM
I just read Brady's statement and it disgusts me.

While there might be an argument for his actions being viewed in the context of the 1970s, his failure to resign will be viewed in the context of all that we know now, in 2012. He simply doesn't get that and evidently neither does Rome.
+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ross matt on May 02, 2012, 10:26:37 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 02, 2012, 05:55:08 PM
Quote from: Abble on May 02, 2012, 11:41:08 AM
I was at mass Sunday week ago where he said it and blessed us all coming out of the Cathedral, handshakes for me and my 3yr old and all. I knew of this past he had and all but still didnt want to miss a chance for my young one to be greeted by His Eminence.
Are you serious? Why would you want to shake his hand? Why would you want him to shake your child's hand?

Abble your attitude defies belief. Like Maguire asked... are you serious???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: BarryBreensBandage on May 02, 2012, 10:30:28 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 02, 2012, 10:47:42 AM
I see religion and the church as very different things. To me it is the church that is warped and steeped in this mess, religion does not belong to the church. My religion belongs to me.

EC - In my opinion, I regard this as a difference between faith and religion, and that religion and the Church are one.

As for Cardinal Brady, the fact is that when this broke in 2010, he declared that if it came to light that other children were abused due to his inaction, he would consider resigning.

Fast forward to 2012, and these fresh allegations are made; no denial from him, no threats of legal action from the Church in defence of Cardinal Brady (always a good yardstick as to how guilty people are), no defence of the man and
yet he refuses to consider his position.

Cardinal Brady should resign - he is not a man of his own word and his credibility is shot.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 02, 2012, 11:53:06 PM
In 1970 people knew that raping children was a heinous crime. It's not 1670 we are talking about. Brady is a piece of shit and its that simple
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rufus T Firefly on May 03, 2012, 12:48:36 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.

Great post.

Abble, fair play too for putting your head above the parapet.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 03, 2012, 01:55:16 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.
Use of corporal punishment in schools started to diminish from 1970 onwards.
A rape in 1975 is just as serious as a rape in 2012. That's why a rapist can be prosecuted now for a crime of rape committed in 1975.
Under the law it's just as serious, but rules of evidence may work against prosecution or chances of conviction. Certainly rules of evidence are nigh impossible to satisfy when it comes prosecuting those who facilitated the rape of children. However,  from a moral viewpoint, there is no context for mitigating factors when it comes to a rape committed 35 - 30 - 25 - 20 years ago. Neither is time a mitigating factor for those who facilitated that rape.

I am absolutely astonished that Brady can be regarded as a man who acted according to the standard moral of the time. I can well  remember 1975, it was not the dark ages.  Any human being with a morsel of morals would have been outraged at the rape of a child in 1975. Why do you think the church wanted it suppressed? It was all kept in house, why did Brady facilitate in swearing the abused children into secrecy?
He was what? 35 years old? 10 years in the priesthood,  and he is saying  'I was a mere notetaker' attempting to diminish his responsibility

Crimes of rape were committed and Brady was part of a tribunal that conspired to cover it up.
Brady was a silencer, not just a part of the masses who trusted the teachers or who trustingly deferred to the church, neither was he a victim like the family of an abused, he was an active participant, an integral part of the cover up campaign.

Brady's statement minimising his role, contradicts the evidence of the abused on three obvious points.  He is accused of conducting at least one interview personally, swearing a kid into silence and he's accused of lying about interviewing a kid without his parent being present.
I don't trust Brady's statement at all.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: NetNitrate on May 03, 2012, 01:55:58 AM
Would Brady be cardinal today if he did the right thing in his 30s and reported abuse to police and parents? And how come senior figures in the church have and had difficulty knowing what the morally correct thing to do is or was, resorting to no laws in place or a different era. Yet they were very quick with judgement if a woman got pregnant out of wedlock, banishing fallen women into convents and sending the child to America for adoption. They were quick to label McGahern's novel The Dark sinful with its scenes of sexual abuse by the clergy. How well they had an informed opinion on the like of that back in the 60s yet no regard at all for the children being raped by the clergy in real life. Someone like McGahern wasnt fit to teach yet the predatory priests were still fit to preach. Even the devil won't want these phuckers.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 03, 2012, 04:13:38 AM
If we were able to leave our justifiable outrage and anger aside, remove personalities from the debate, and approach the issue from a purely acedemic and philosophical standpoint, we might just be surprised where our reasoning would take us.     Anyone with experience of work within any kind of institution would know the imperative of passing problems up through the change of command to the point where action can be taken by the appropiate person. In most organisations today responsibility is collective and includes a duty of loyalty to the employing authority. Problems are expected to be discussed and hopefully dealt with in-house, but the individual employee will not necessarily be appraised of the outcome of any subsequent action. Sometimes individuals have to make difficult choices  whether to stick to agreed and approved procedures within their organisations structures or go on a solo run. In different ways we have all at some time faced this dilemna, and made choices based on our own rationale. This experience should have taught us that it is never easy, and to be wary of rushing to judgement on others, without knowing the full facts about the limitations and self doubt they laboured under.
As an aside i believe that Dr.Brady should resign, for the greater good of the Church, this does imply any judgement on his character or actions
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ross matt on May 03, 2012, 07:52:28 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 03, 2012, 04:13:38 AM
If we were able to leave our justifiable outrage and anger aside, remove personalities from the debate, and approach the issue from a purely acedemic and philosophical standpoint, we might just be surprised where our reasoning would take us.     Anyone with experience of work within any kind of institution would know the imperative of passing problems up through the change of command to the point where action can be taken by the appropiate person. In most organisations today responsibility is collective and includes a duty of loyalty to the employing authority. Problems are expected to be discussed and hopefully dealt with in-house, but the individual employee will not necessarily be appraised of the outcome of any subsequent action. Sometimes individuals have to make difficult choices  whether to stick to agreed and approved procedures within their organisations structures or go on a solo run. In different ways we have all at some time faced this dilemna, and made choices based on our own rationale. This experience should have taught us that it is never easy, and to be wary of rushing to judgement on others, without knowing the full facts about the limitations and self doubt they laboured under.
As an aside i believe that Dr.Brady should resign, for the greater good of the Church, this does imply any judgement on his character or actions

But is that not the point Pangurban? It wasn't "any kind of institution"... it was the church and he a man of God who is now a senior member of it. Surely he and it should be judged according to the standards and values of which they preach? They betrayed the trust of the most faithful of their flock by preying on the most vunerable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 03, 2012, 09:00:52 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 03, 2012, 04:13:38 AM
If we were able to leave our justifiable outrage and anger aside, remove personalities from the debate, and approach the issue from a purely acedemic and philosophical standpoint, we might just be surprised where our reasoning would take us.     Anyone with experience of work within any kind of institution would know the imperative of passing problems up through the change of command to the point where action can be taken by the appropiate person. In most organisations today responsibility is collective and includes a duty of loyalty to the employing authority. Problems are expected to be discussed and hopefully dealt with in-house, but the individual employee will not necessarily be appraised of the outcome of any subsequent action. Sometimes individuals have to make difficult choices  whether to stick to agreed and approved procedures within their organisations structures or go on a solo run. In different ways we have all at some time faced this dilemna, and made choices based on our own rationale. This experience should have taught us that it is never easy, and to be wary of rushing to judgement on others, without knowing the full facts about the limitations and self doubt they laboured under.
As an aside i believe that Dr.Brady should resign, for the greater good of the Church, this does imply any judgement on his character or actions

I understand to an extent what you are getting at, but this isn't just some lad stealing stationary or the likes, it's the raping of children which is a serious criminal act. Brady was sent to investigate it and by his own admission believed the stories one of the youngsters told him, but was part of the conspiracy to silence and hide it to keep the good name of the church. He was far more than a notary as he called himself. Who formulated and asked the questions?
Even yesterday and after listening to a priest on Vincent Brown last night, the church talks about the designated person within the church who's meant to deal with these issues. The people meant to deal with these issues should be the gardai or PSNI, not bandied about some Bishops residence until a decision is made based on canon law. The Church still doesn't seem to get that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 09:05:02 AM
Sean Brady is the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland. What is that role supposed to mean? Does it not make him the man who upholds and maintains and symbolises church and moral teachings in this country? If not, will someone tell me if his role is simply administrative?

If it's the former, how is it in any way sustainable to have someone in that role who previously knew about the rape of children and not only did nothing to prevent it, but actually aided in covering it up, and by so doing aided the continuation of that abuse?

It's morally unforgiveable and I can't see how there is any acceptable argument for him continuing in his current role.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on May 03, 2012, 09:05:46 AM
Honestly if it was you involved - even as note taker - would you not be following up to ensure someone like this ended in jail. I dont think i could talk to these children then go about my business without knowing what happened afterwards. And if nothing happened he should have spoke out.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggysego on May 03, 2012, 09:27:33 AM
Another question needs to be asked.

Why in the 1990s, when Brendan Smyth was in court, didn't Sean Brady come forward with everything he knew? His role? He names and addresses of other children he had in his procession?

He sat back in the shadows and didn't hoped his name wouldn't come up as back of the cover up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 03, 2012, 09:29:14 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 09:05:02 AM
Sean Brady is the leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland. What is that role supposed to mean? Does it not make him the man who upholds and maintains and symbolises church and moral teachings in this country? If not, will someone tell me if his role is simply administrative?

If it's the former, how is it in any way sustainable to have someone in that role who previously knew about the rape of children and not only did nothing to prevent it, but actually aided in covering it up, and by so doing aided the continuation of that abuse?

It's morally unforgiveable and I can't see how there is any acceptable argument for him continuing in his current role.

Spot on. Regardless of his level or power at the time I would question his personal judgement if he thought passing on the information was enough.

He says he believes he done the right thing at the time. I don't buy that. He done the right thing with regards to pleasing his elders and obviously looked after himself and the Church and that is why he is so high up today... He did not do the right thing for the Children and look after them.

Shame on him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 03, 2012, 09:32:28 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.
The priests weren't stealing a fiver from the collection. They systematically raped hundreds of children, devastating their lives. If Brady doesn't believe he is in any way complicit in that, then he is worse than I thought.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 03, 2012, 09:37:35 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 03, 2012, 04:13:38 AM
If we were able to leave our justifiable outrage and anger aside, remove personalities from the debate, and approach the issue from a purely acedemic and philosophical standpoint, we might just be surprised where our reasoning would take us.     Anyone with experience of work within any kind of institution would know the imperative of passing problems up through the change of command to the point where action can be taken by the appropiate person. In most organisations today responsibility is collective and includes a duty of loyalty to the employing authority. Problems are expected to be discussed and hopefully dealt with in-house, but the individual employee will not necessarily be appraised of the outcome of any subsequent action. Sometimes individuals have to make difficult choices  whether to stick to agreed and approved procedures within their organisations structures or go on a solo run. In different ways we have all at some time faced this dilemna, and made choices based on our own rationale. This experience should have taught us that it is never easy, and to be wary of rushing to judgement on others, without knowing the full facts about the limitations and self doubt they laboured under.
As an aside i believe that Dr.Brady should resign, for the greater good of the Church, this does imply any judgement on his character or actions

Whilst passing this information up the chain of command is probably the first act in most organizations, it's not enough! In the following 13 years as he got promotion after promotion did he never think -  hold on I've never heard of Smyth being in court? where is he now? has he still access to children? He was very high up in the Church in Ireland in the mid 80's and for him to claim he didn't know Smyth was still a active priest only insults our intelligence. As a man of god his primary aim should be protection of the innocent, not self preservation of the church!
Now that Brendan Boland has called for Brady's resignation and said that if he stays it further abuse of himself and other victims, I don't think Brady can sit tight and brave this one out. He'll be gone within the week.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 03, 2012, 09:42:50 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

I listened to Alan Shatter this morning talk about legislation coming with regard to with-holding information.   I guess that implies that there isn't legislation stating that with-holding information is a crime.   Equally making someone sign an oath of secrecy seems like an effort to interfere with the law.  These strike me as strange but I don't know the law


It would appear while not a crime in the Republic, failure to report a crime is an offence under section 5 of the Criminal Law (Northern Ireland) Act 1967.   Time for the PSNI to step in?

/Jim
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 03, 2012, 09:44:10 AM
Brady has and is doing serious damage to the church every day he stays in office. Time for him to go.

It's mind boggling how he thinks ( and Rome and the rest ) that he should remain in office and that this will in som way benefit the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 10:10:49 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 03, 2012, 09:42:50 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

I listened to Alan Shatter this morning talk about legislation coming with regard to with-holding information.   I guess that implies that there isn't legislation stating that with-holding information is a crime.   Equally making someone sign an oath of secrecy seems like an effort to interfere with the law.  These strike me as strange but I don't know the law


It would appear while not a crime in the Republic, failure to report a crime is an offence under section 5 of the Criminal Law (Northern Ireland) Act 1967.   Time for the PSNI to step in?

/Jim


There's a prima facie case to answer, almost certainly. You'd imagine the PSNI would feel obligated to investigate. And if not, surely it's almost certain someone will make a complaint, thus forcing a criminal investigation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 03, 2012, 09:32:28 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 03, 2012, 12:24:19 AM
One thing's for sure - the 1970s and 80s (not to mention the decade and centuries before) were a completely different place with its own set of moral judgements. It wasn't just the priests who kept quiet. Parents and lay people involved with the Church, who equally should have known better, said nothing. School masters physically and mentally tortured children at school whilst the other teachers and parents of the same children turned a blind eye to it all. There are many who will look back (and I'm sure many on here) and now acknowledge that what they silently accepted as part of life was wrong and if they could travel back in time they would have shouted stop.

In terms of Brady - I think there's a strong element of truth to his version. The Maynooth doctrine did mess with their heads in terms of acting morally esp in cases of sexual abuse. In 2012 we think we'd be whistle blowers in his position. You simply cannot say that though. However, Brady (like many other church issues in recent months) has handled this extremely badly. Instead of using the blame-shift card, which may be legit, he should be asking for forgiveness and publicly recognising the devastation they caused.
The priests weren't stealing a fiver from the collection. They systematically raped hundreds of children, devastating their lives. If Brady doesn't believe he is in any way complicit in that, then he is worse than I thought.

Of that there is no doubt. What I find interesting is in discovering how society at the time dealt with this and these types of scandals. Priests and 'the master' were held in such high esteem, almost to the point of infallibility. I was lucky to know someone who was able to see through the adoration. She went toe-to-toe with anyone she thought was doing something wrong. This was in the early 80s and I can tell you that she received little support as it was best not to 'rock the boat' in educational circles as results were good. I know of children who spent most mornings living in fear of what may happen that day in school. I know of one child who vomited regularly before school. The community knew about it but only 1 or 2 raised their heads. That was the mid-80s.

It's no wonder the clergy had an overinflated notion of their importance in society and how they were revered. I'm not attempting to explain why abuse happened or was covered up. I'm just trying to understand why the indignation shown in 2012 didn't seem to occur in 1975 or 1985 (or maybe it did but wasn't heard.) Did any of the parents or family know of this abuse? Surely others outside the clergy were privy to this information. I only watched snippets of it so interested in finding out if that was addressed.

I'm not an ex-boy scout so I don't know much about that area but I was reading lately of the on-going sex abuse cases in the States. Since the 40s, over 5000 scout teachers (or whatever they're called) have been thrown out of the Boys' Scout Organisation for sexual abuse; it's believed at the rate of one every other day, even yet. Their rationale for hiding the info on these cases was because they felt it would encourage other perverts to join the scouts. The mind boggles.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 03, 2012, 10:22:57 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 10:10:49 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 03, 2012, 09:42:50 AM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 02, 2012, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 12:12:19 AM
If Cardinal Brady has broken a law(s) then it should be taken up by the police, and then to court.

I listened to Alan Shatter this morning talk about legislation coming with regard to with-holding information.   I guess that implies that there isn't legislation stating that with-holding information is a crime.   Equally making someone sign an oath of secrecy seems like an effort to interfere with the law.  These strike me as strange but I don't know the law


It would appear while not a crime in the Republic, failure to report a crime is an offence under section 5 of the Criminal Law (Northern Ireland) Act 1967.   Time for the PSNI to step in?

/Jim


There's a prima facie case to answer, almost certainly. You'd imagine the PSNI would feel obligated to investigate. And if not, surely it's almost certain someone will make a complaint, thus forcing a criminal investigation.
I'd equate Brady's culpability with that of the getaway driver, after an armed robbery.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Abble on May 03, 2012, 10:27:49 AM
Brendan Boland calling for Brady's resignation isn't going to solve anything though.
Why doesn't he just walk into a police station and get the ball rolling, he knows there is a case to answer and the only way for the full and absolute truth to come out is to start that process asap.
If that was me in Brendan Bolands shoes, I for one, would not be content at just calling for a resignation, this is what the BBC and all and sundry now want too. But at the end of the day what would BB get out of that. Surely he must suspect, now at his age and he's a bit smarter about things, that there is a very real possibility Brady had others above him running this....(its almost going mafia-like this, and you can almost feel that Brady is afraid to speak out about others involved). 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 03, 2012, 10:45:59 AM
Forget about the BBC agenda, people have been calling for Brady's resignation for years for his active role in the conspiracy of silence.
No legal case could be built against Brady, resignation would be as good as it gets for the abused.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign? As I remember, Brady's appointment came from nowhere over the heads of the "magic circle" of the Irish Bishops Conference which has ran the Catholic Church in Ireland since Vatican II (early '60s). Seems a little strange to me watching the Church's longtime critics take their aim at Brady as the establisment man when when in reality his direct appointment by JP2 was most likely an attempt to reform the "establishment".

Anyhow, here's Jude sticking his head over the parapet as well:



Cardinal Brady - should he stay or should he go?
http://www.judecollins.com/

Talking about child abuse and the Catholic clergy, if you don't follow the majority line, is to take your head in your hands these days. But here goes.

The airwaves and the headlines are presently dominated by the Cardinal Brady affair from 1975. Fr Sean Brady as he then was took notes at a meeting with a young boy who had alleged sexual abuse – and, there are claims Fr Brady also was involved in gathering evidence regarding the case. There are calls from right, left and centre now for him to resign from his position as head of the Catholic Church in Ireland because of this.

OK. I'll say this three times so no one misses it. Sexual abuse of children is a disgusting, perverted action. For clergy of the Catholic Church to engage in it is shameful beyond words. It is more than understandable that those who suffered in that way should be emotionally wounded for life and they have my full sympathy. (I know those are three different statements but I expect you get my drift.)

That  said, let's consider the facts. Is this a legal matter? That is to say, did Fr Brady in 1975 break the law of the land? If he did, like anyone who breaks the law, he should be brought before the courts, tried and a decision made by a judge and jury as to his guilt or innocence.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm going to assume he hasn't broken the law of the land, since those most opposed to him don't highlight any legal charge. If it's not a legal matter, two things remain – one a question of morality, the other a question of leadership.

Morality first. Did Fr Sean Brady in 1975, by acting as notary and (possibly) gathering evidence on the case, act in an immoral fashion? There's only one person knows the answer to that, and that's Sean Brady. We can speculate that he knew this, he should have that, but in terms of his moral guilt, there's only one question: did he act in accordance with his conscience, or did he act contrary to his conscience? I don't know the answer to that, you don't know the answer to that. Only Sean Brady knows the true answer.

The second question is that of leadership. There have been calls on all sides for Cardinal Brady to resign and allow someone else to lead the Catholic Church in Ireland. Many of the people making the calls are non-Catholics, or  former Catholics, or even in some cases people who have consistently been hostile to the Catholic Church.  It seems to me astonishing that those people should now feel such concern that the Catholic Church is well-led by an appropriate clergyman – i.e., someone other than Brady.  Surely who leads the Catholic Church in Ireland is a matter for the Catholic Church in Ireland – and I don't, repeat  don't mean the Catholic clergy in Ireland. I mean the Catholic Church in Ireland, comprised of all those people who are sincere Catholics.  I've been casting around for a parallel to the calls from those outside the Catholic Church for a change in leadership and the only one I can think of is the Orange Order's attitude to residents' groups. Remember when they used to (they still may) refuse to talk to the groups because they didn't like the spokesperson the group had identified? Quite rightly, the groups said it was their business who they appointed as their spokesperson.  Something similar applies here. It may be that Cardinal Sean Brady is not the best person to lead the Catholic Church in Ireland. It may be that he is.  In either case, it's a matter for members of the Catholic Church to decide, not those who consider it irrelevant, those who once thought it important but no longer do so, or those who detest it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hound on May 03, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
Jude Collins definition of morality seems straight out of the same dictionary used by terrorists. If you're own conscience is clear, then you're grand!

I can see sense in the sentiment of the last paragraph in that it should be the members of the Catholic church in Ireland who decide who is their leader. But I think he missed the glaring obvious point that the Catholic Church is nothing like the GAA! Members don't have votes. They don't even have a say.

The comparison between the Orange Order and Catholic Church up north is very apt.  It seems there's a helluva lot who treat them like football teams. No matter what they do they feel obliged to keep following blindly
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 03, 2012, 11:12:00 AM
Forget about the 'I was just the notetaker' claim.
Brady was the senior canon law expert  n that in-house inquisition, in fact the only canon law advocate.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0503/1224315510225.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0503/1224315510225.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 03, 2012, 11:13:40 AM
QuoteBrendan Boland calling for Brady's resignation isn't going to solve anything though.
Why doesn't he just walk into a police station and get the ball rolling

Am I correct that Brendan Boland or his parents did not make any report to the Gardai at the time either?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 03, 2012, 11:20:41 AM
Cardinal Brady is a decent, honest and devout man. He surrendered his freedom to preach the Word. Those people baying for his blood have no idea of the suffering and torment that he has gone through during his time as a clergyman.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 11:21:56 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 03, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
The comparison between the Orange Order and Catholic Church up north is very apt.  It seems there's a helluva lot who treat them like football teams. No matter what they do they feel obliged to keep following blindly

Think you may have missed the point Hound, he's comparing the Orange Order to the current critics of the Catholic Church, as in why should the Church pay any heed to those who would criticise and dictate to them no matter what action they take. This thread is littered with knee-jerk reactionists who seem to either know f**k all about the internal mechanisms of the Church and its organisation, tensions and factions within it, prevailing culture then and now, or simply don't care, lest it prevents them from taking another blind kick.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 11:34:52 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 11:21:56 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 03, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
The comparison between the Orange Order and Catholic Church up north is very apt.  It seems there's a helluva lot who treat them like football teams. No matter what they do they feel obliged to keep following blindly

Think you may have missed the point Hound, he's comparing the Orange Order to the current critics of the Catholic Church, as in why should the Church pay any heed to those who would criticise and dictate to them no matter what action they take. This thread is littered with knee-jerk reactionists who seem to either know f**k all about the internal mechanisms of the Church and its organisation, tensions and factions within it, prevailing culture then and now, or simply don't care, lest it prevents them from taking another blind kick.

It concerns everyone in the country when people in the organisation were responsible for committing and covering up widespread and prolonged child rape.
People outside the Church aren't getting involved in doctrinal matters, as that has no impact on them. Raping children is not a doctrinal issue.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 11:34:52 AM
It concerns everyone in the country when people in the organisation were responsible for committing and covering up widespread and prolonged child rape.
People outside the Church aren't getting involved in doctrinal matters, as that has no impact on them. Raping children is not a doctrinal issue.

If he was "responsible for committing and covering up widespread and prolonged child rape" then he should be in front of the courts. Whether that happens or not is not a matter or responsibility for the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 03, 2012, 11:52:02 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 03, 2012, 11:20:41 AM
Cardinal Brady is a decent, honest and devout man. He surrendered his freedom to preach the Word. Those people baying for his blood have no idea of the suffering and torment that he has gone through during his time as a clergyman.

FFS!! He made a raped child swear on a bible never to repeat the accusations and then done next to feck all to stop 13 more years of rape!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 11:52:29 AM
I agree with Jude Collins's last paragraph. I have no position on, or interest in the question of Brady's suitability for his role in the Catholic church. That is a matter for them.

However, I don't need to be an expert on the arcane machinations of the Church, from "mental reservation" to the library of hypocrisy that is "canon law" to know that Brady needs to have his collar felt by the constabulary. By his own admission, he neglected to inform the authorities of a heinous crime and his indifference or negligence directly facilitated the rape of children that persisted for at least a further thirteen years from the date of his first knowledge of it.

Yes, the church was all-powerful. As O'Neill says, until quite recent times, people were in almost mortal fear of its power, to the extent that they dared not stand up to it. This was a manifestation of true evil.

The organisation was infinitely more powerful than governments, which were so in its thrall that it didn't even occur to them that its more extremely evil machinations even needed to be resisted, never mind quelled. Quite the contrary; they accorded it special privileges. (That's why it wouldn't have made a whit of difference to the plight of Brendan Boland or his fellow victims had the monster Smith, unleashed by the Church to do as he wished to children across the country, been reported to the guards. They wouldn't have prosecuted a "man of the cloth".)

But for Brady to roll out the Nuremberg defence, as someone here appropriately put it, and portray himself as a victim of the system is pathetic. He was an instrument of it. He was no mere note-taker, as we are now learning. He was a canon lawyer, investigating the allegations. His job was to verify the evidence. When you hear the questions the three-man committee asked  a fourteen-year-old boy being interrogated on his own without a supporting adult being present, your stomach turns.

In my view, his pathetic squirming is unwittingly doing a service to society as it opens people's eyes even further to the evil the church embodied and continues to defend. It helps to ensure that this miserable outfit will never again be allowed to rampage through society and families, imposing its arbitrary judgements on decent people for whom it held nothing but contempt.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 03, 2012, 11:59:14 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 11:21:56 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 03, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
The comparison between the Orange Order and Catholic Church up north is very apt.  It seems there's a helluva lot who treat them like football teams. No matter what they do they feel obliged to keep following blindly

Think you may have missed the point Hound, he's comparing the Orange Order to the current critics of the Catholic Church, as in why should the Church pay any heed to those who would criticise and dictate to them no matter what action they take. This thread is littered with knee-jerk reactionists who seem to either know f**k all about the internal mechanisms of the Church and its organisation, tensions and factions within it, prevailing culture then and now, or simply don't care, lest it prevents them from taking another blind kick.

Not withstanding the "knee-jerk reactionists" on this thread we have victims (even those who try to stay onside with church ala Marie Collins) who are criticising him.

The facts is that there are many lay Catholics who maybe "know f**k all" about the internal mechanisms of the Church etc..." and indeed maybe too young to remember the culture of the past but just see that reporting rape to civil authorities is the most natural thing in the world to do.   Having Brady on the 6-One news doing verbal gymnastics about rules and regulations just alienates them.

People have pointed out how many people claimed to be Catholics in the last census.  I suspect that these are substantial part of the current critics rather than the atheist, humanists, trendys etc... that maybe taking a pop for other reasons.

The Church might save Brady but lose that constituency.  In that case the Church will be the big loser.

/Jim.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 03, 2012, 12:01:53 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 03, 2012, 11:20:41 AM
Cardinal Brady is a decent, honest and devout man. He surrendered his freedom to preach the Word. Those people baying for his blood have no idea of the suffering and torment that he has gone through during his time as a clergyman.

Your joking. Right?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: guy crouchback on May 03, 2012, 12:05:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 11:52:29 AM
I agree with Jude Collins's last paragraph. I have no position on, or interest in the question of Brady's suitability for his role in the Catholic church. That is a matter for them.

However, I don't need to be an expert on the arcane machinations of the Church, from "mental reservation" to the library of hypocrisy that is "canon law" to know that Brady needs to have his collar felt by the constabulary. By his own admission, he neglected to inform the authorities of a heinous crime and his indifference or negligence directly facilitated the rape of children that persisted for at least a further thirteen years from the date of his first knowledge of it.

Yes, the church was all-powerful. As O'Neill says, until quite recent times, people were in almost mortal fear of its power, to the extent that they dared not stand up to it. This was a manifestation of true evil.

The organisation was infinitely more powerful than governments, which were so in its thrall that it didn't even occur to them that its more extremely evil machinations even needed to be resisted, never mind quelled. Quite the contrary; they accorded it special privileges. (That's why it wouldn't have made a whit of difference to the plight of Brendan Boland or his fellow victims had the monster Smith, unleashed by the Church to do as he wished to children across the country, been reported to the guards. They wouldn't have prosecuted a "man of the cloth".)

But for Brady to roll out the Nuremberg defence, as someone here appropriately put it, and portray himself as a victim of the system is pathetic. He was an instrument of it. He was no mere note-taker, as we are now learning. He was a canon lawyer, investigating the allegations. His job was to verify the evidence. When you hear the questions the three-man committee asked  a fourteen-year-old boy being interrogated on his own without a supporting adult being present, your stomach turns.

In my view, his pathetic squirming is unwittingly doing a service to society as it opens people's eyes even further to the evil the church embodied and continues to defend. It helps to ensure that this miserable outfit will never again be allowed to rampage through society and families, imposing its arbitrary judgements on decent people for whom it held nothing but contempt.

i totally agree with everything you have said above, however in relation to the highlighted sentence  i think there may be one exception,  if it was another priest or priests who went to the guards with the report or with the victim when reporting, then i have no doubt the guards would have investigated it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 12:14:03 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 11:34:52 AM
It concerns everyone in the country when people in the organisation were responsible for committing and covering up widespread and prolonged child rape.
People outside the Church aren't getting involved in doctrinal matters, as that has no impact on them. Raping children is not a doctrinal issue.

If he was "responsible for committing and covering up widespread and prolonged child rape" then he should be in front of the courts. Whether that happens or not is not a matter or responsibility for the Church.

And there's no problem with him leading the Catholic Church in Ireland unless he's convicted in a courtroom?
The Church is all of a sudden going to take it's lead from the law of the land? Strange, seeing as it has seen itself far above the law of the land since the foundation of the state, and probably far before that.

I'd have thought 'morals', the concept of 'right v wrong' and 'conscience' might have come into it, but it seems the Church doesn't pass much heed on such things.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 12:16:43 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 03, 2012, 11:59:14 AM
Not withstanding the "knee-jerk reactionists" on this thread we have victims (even those who try to stay onside with church ala Marie Collins) who are criticising him.

The facts is that there are many lay Catholics who maybe "know f**k all" about the internal mechanisms of the Church etc..." and indeed maybe too young to remember the culture of the past but just see that reporting rape to civil authorities is the most natural thing in the world to do.   Having Brady on the 6-One news doing verbal gymnastics about rules and regulations just alienates them.

People have pointed out how many people claimed to be Catholics in the last census.  I suspect that these are substantial part of the current critics rather than the atheist, humanists, trendys etc... that maybe taking a pop for other reasons.

The Church might save Brady but lose that constituency.  In that case the Church will be the big loser.

/Jim.

Jim, all I was doing was simply pointing out that Brady is quite possibly the man best placed and most capable to reform the old culture, but the Church critics are using him as a proxy for their attacks on the Church. Brady doesn't have supreme authority over the Church in Ireland, he's merely President of the Bishops Conference each of whom are pretty much automomus in their own diocese. Brady has influence within the Conference to set the agenda but the nature of the acronistic Church structures inevitably mean reform is slow. The Irish Bishops Conference oversaw the vast majority of the abuse scandals and covered them up. Brady as someone with first hand experience and knowledge of the abuse has been Primate at a period when the Church has slowly begun to accept it's responsibility and introduce reforms to ensure it can't happen again. I'm suggesting the two are not unconnected and this ties in with the nature of his original appointment (over the heads of the 'magic circle').
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 12:22:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 03, 2012, 11:20:41 AM
Cardinal Brady is a decent, honest and devout man. He surrendered his freedom to preach the Word. Those people baying for his blood have no idea of the suffering and torment that he has gone through during his time as a clergyman.

What about the suffering and torment that the victims went through following Brady's involvement in the cover up? What about the 30+ victims of Smyth's abuse following Brady's initial involvement in the case? Brady is guilty of covering up abuse in Ireland, and for that, he should stand down, and if possible, face a court of law for his actions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 03, 2012, 12:23:59 PM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 03, 2012, 12:05:17 PM

i totally agree with everything you have said above, however in relation to the highlighted sentence  i think there may be one exception,  if it was another priest or priests who went to the guards with the report or with the victim when reporting, then i have no doubt the guards would have investigated it.

That's the bit that gets me, I suppose we'll never know, but surely that guilt must be weighing heavily on the man if he has a conscience at all.

Then again the institution which is the church is his life and that takes precedence!

Question to some of the more enlightened than myself, but in Canon law did Brendan Smyth break any of its laws?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 12:33:56 PM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 03, 2012, 12:05:17 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 11:52:29 AM
I agree with Jude Collins's last paragraph. I have no position on, or interest in the question of Brady's suitability for his role in the Catholic church. That is a matter for them.

However, I don't need to be an expert on the arcane machinations of the Church, from "mental reservation" to the library of hypocrisy that is "canon law" to know that Brady needs to have his collar felt by the constabulary. By his own admission, he neglected to inform the authorities of a heinous crime and his indifference or negligence directly facilitated the rape of children that persisted for at least a further thirteen years from the date of his first knowledge of it.

Yes, the church was all-powerful. As O'Neill says, until quite recent times, people were in almost mortal fear of its power, to the extent that they dared not stand up to it. This was a manifestation of true evil.

The organisation was infinitely more powerful than governments, which were so in its thrall that it didn't even occur to them that its more extremely evil machinations even needed to be resisted, never mind quelled. Quite the contrary; they accorded it special privileges. (That's why it wouldn't have made a whit of difference to the plight of Brendan Boland or his fellow victims had the monster Smith, unleashed by the Church to do as he wished to children across the country, been reported to the guards. They wouldn't have prosecuted a "man of the cloth".)

But for Brady to roll out the Nuremberg defence, as someone here appropriately put it, and portray himself as a victim of the system is pathetic. He was an instrument of it. He was no mere note-taker, as we are now learning. He was a canon lawyer, investigating the allegations. His job was to verify the evidence. When you hear the questions the three-man committee asked  a fourteen-year-old boy being interrogated on his own without a supporting adult being present, your stomach turns.

In my view, his pathetic squirming is unwittingly doing a service to society as it opens people's eyes even further to the evil the church embodied and continues to defend. It helps to ensure that this miserable outfit will never again be allowed to rampage through society and families, imposing its arbitrary judgements on decent people for whom it held nothing but contempt.

i totally agree with everything you have said above, however in relation to the highlighted sentence  i think there may be one exception,  if it was another priest or priests who went to the guards with the report or with the victim when reporting, then i have no doubt the guards would have investigated it.


Good point - that's probably true.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 12:43:04 PM
A reflection on the dilemma of Cardinal Brady: Malachi O'Doherty

http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2012/05/a-reflection-on-the-dilemma-of-cardinal-brady-malachi-odoherty/

Most of us, if we had been priests of Fr Sean Brady's age in the 1970s would have done as he did. The priest takes an oath of obedience to his bishop. Brady was assigned by his bishop to investigate a fellow cleric who was raping children and to report back. He did everything that was expected of him by the only authority to which he had pledged himself answerable. He ascertained that the odious Brendan Smyth was indeed a paedophile priest making use of children for his sexual gratification. And he spoke to two boys who had been used in that way and he believed them. Then he swore them to secrecy.

All of this, in the practical secular view of a later age was what we would now call collusion in the cover up of a vile crime and the manipulation of victims for the protection of an offender and of the institutional church to which that offender belonged. But what was it in the mind of Sean Brady? It was the exercise of unquestioning obedience and loyalty. It was an outward expression of his faith in the power of the church to do the right thing.

No more could possibly be expected of Brady other than perhaps that he be a person of a type we rarely see, someone of heroic indvidual conscience. You don't get many of them in churches.

Sean Brady was not a hero on the day he made two boys kneel and swear to keep secret the name of a rapist; he was an obedient priest. And the failing that has to be identified is not in him but in the very system by which he was expected to swear obedience to superiors who were no wiser or more principled than himself. With that oath of obedience a priest divests himself of his conscience and his citizenship and, as this case demonstrates, makes himself untrustworthy. Once he has decided that he will do as he is told by another, then he is no more reliable or admirable than that other. He has agreed to be the tool of an insitution and of its representatives in the hierarchy over him, people who have now been exposed as conniving and dangerous.

So, should Sean Brady resign as head of the church in Ireland, when any other priest of his generation would have done the same as he did? Nothing distinguishes him from his brother priests or they from him.

And that is precisely the problem. As head of the church, though not the direct boss over those other priests, Sean Brady is best placed to make clear that the docile enslavement of priests, to an institution which always knows best, is over. He has said that he wants to stay in his job to mend the church and heal the damage caused but he could do far more good by acknowledging that a priest is answerable to the whole of society and the law, not just to a hierarchy or even to a flock, a congregation. By leaving he would accept that he is properly answerable to the civil order and the secular society which has basic legal principles and expectations of those who hold office. It is civic order to which he owes an apology.

He may have met the standards of a church which expected only that he do as he was told but he failed – as all sworn priests in his position would inevitably fail – to recognise his wider responsibilities to the rest of us. He should not resign to declare himself guilty of shameless management of coverup. In a sense he has almost nothing to be ashamed of there anyway because he acted within the limits his church imposed on him.

If we don't think we would ourselves have been up to such a brave act of rebellion we shouldn't criticise him for not managing it either.

But he should resign as the man who should now better understand than anybody how dangerous tthe church's limitations are. he should resign as a declaration of the responsibility of priests to the wider society they thought they had the right to ignore. Faced with this challenge in the past, Sean Brady said that he would listen to church-going Catholics and take his guidance from them. That is where he went wrong, and it is not far removed from what was most wrong in what he did to those boys for it amounts to wilfully ignoring the standards that a wider society expects of people, particularly of people in power.

There can no longer be a hermetically sealed Catholic church whose priests refer only to their own authority and moral codes. That is what many priests themselves are saying and being silenced for saying. Sean Brady is only the most conspicuous victim of the way in which the church abuses its priests, stripping them of the right and responsibility to hear guidance from anywhere but above, even from their own consciences. It is time he owned up to the damage that has been done to him and through him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 03, 2012, 12:54:32 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 12:43:04 PM
A reflection on the dilemma of Cardinal Brady: Malachi O'Doherty

http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2012/05/a-reflection-on-the-dilemma-of-cardinal-brady-malachi-odoherty/

Most of us, if we had been priests of Fr Sean Brady's age in the 1970s would have done as he did. The priest takes an oath of obedience to his bishop. Brady was assigned by his bishop to investigate a fellow cleric who was raping children and to report back. He did everything that was expected of him by the only authority to which he had pledged himself answerable. He ascertained that the odious Brendan Smyth was indeed a paedophile priest making use of children for his sexual gratification. And he spoke to two boys who had been used in that way and he believed them. Then he swore them to secrecy.

All of this, in the practical secular view of a later age was what we would now call collusion in the cover up of a vile crime and the manipulation of victims for the protection of an offender and of the institutional church to which that offender belonged. But what was it in the mind of Sean Brady? It was the exercise of unquestioning obedience and loyalty. It was an outward expression of his faith in the power of the church to do the right thing.

No more could possibly be expected of Brady other than perhaps that he be a person of a type we rarely see, someone of heroic indvidual conscience. You don't get many of them in churches.

Sean Brady was not a hero on the day he made two boys kneel and swear to keep secret the name of a rapist; he was an obedient priest. And the failing that has to be identified is not in him but in the very system by which he was expected to swear obedience to superiors who were no wiser or more principled than himself. With that oath of obedience a priest divests himself of his conscience and his citizenship and, as this case demonstrates, makes himself untrustworthy. Once he has decided that he will do as he is told by another, then he is no more reliable or admirable than that other. He has agreed to be the tool of an insitution and of its representatives in the hierarchy over him, people who have now been exposed as conniving and dangerous.

So, should Sean Brady resign as head of the church in Ireland, when any other priest of his generation would have done the same as he did? Nothing distinguishes him from his brother priests or they from him.

And that is precisely the problem. As head of the church, though not the direct boss over those other priests, Sean Brady is best placed to make clear that the docile enslavement of priests, to an institution which always knows best, is over. He has said that he wants to stay in his job to mend the church and heal the damage caused but he could do far more good by acknowledging that a priest is answerable to the whole of society and the law, not just to a hierarchy or even to a flock, a congregation. By leaving he would accept that he is properly answerable to the civil order and the secular society which has basic legal principles and expectations of those who hold office. It is civic order to which he owes an apology.

He may have met the standards of a church which expected only that he do as he was told but he failed – as all sworn priests in his position would inevitably fail – to recognise his wider responsibilities to the rest of us. He should not resign to declare himself guilty of shameless management of coverup. In a sense he has almost nothing to be ashamed of there anyway because he acted within the limits his church imposed on him.

If we don't think we would ourselves have been up to such a brave act of rebellion we shouldn't criticise him for not managing it either.

But he should resign as the man who should now better understand than anybody how dangerous tthe church's limitations are. he should resign as a declaration of the responsibility of priests to the wider society they thought they had the right to ignore. Faced with this challenge in the past, Sean Brady said that he would listen to church-going Catholics and take his guidance from them. That is where he went wrong, and it is not far removed from what was most wrong in what he did to those boys for it amounts to wilfully ignoring the standards that a wider society expects of people, particularly of people in power.

There can no longer be a hermetically sealed Catholic church whose priests refer only to their own authority and moral codes. That is what many priests themselves are saying and being silenced for saying. Sean Brady is only the most conspicuous victim of the way in which the church abuses its priests, stripping them of the right and responsibility to hear guidance from anywhere but above, even from their own consciences. It is time he owned up to the damage that has been done to him and through him.

Insightful. Shows how warped the inner working of the Catholic Church were and to a large extent still are.
Priests primary duty of care is to the Church, and for 'the Church', read the Vatican/Cardinals/Bishops, whoever is in power above the priest.
They serve the Church first and the 'ordinary' lay Catholics are a much lower priority, if they register at all.
As long as the Church was protected, anything/anyone else that suffered was collateral damage.
But it's simply not good enough to use that an excuse for what went on.

This is the organisation that people still try to defend, and take their moral guidance from.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on May 03, 2012, 01:22:46 PM
QuoteJim, all I was doing was simply pointing out that Brady is quite possibly the man best placed and most capable to reform the old culture

If there was an ruc member who was proven to be actively involved in the cover up of colusion - albeit under orders and not the top dog - would people be entitled to question if he was suitable to be chief constable?

Could it be argued hed be the best person to reform the old culture?

And could we all comment not knowing the " organisation, tensions and factions within it, prevailing culture then and now"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 01:34:57 PM
Quote from: nifan on May 03, 2012, 01:22:46 PM
QuoteJim, all I was doing was simply pointing out that Brady is quite possibly the man best placed and most capable to reform the old culture

If there was an ruc member who was proven to be actively involved in the cover up of colusion - albeit under orders and not the top dog - would people be entitled to question if he was suitable to be chief constable?

Could it be argued hed be the best person to reform the old culture?

And could we all comment not knowing the " organisation, tensions and factions within it, prevailing culture then and now"

nifan, a more realistic parallel is probably the appointment of John Stalker. Outside cop appointed to oversee the clean-up investigation. Look how that worked out.

To go back to your RUC analogy, I don't think any of the f**kers should be allowed anywhere near the PSNI - but should or will the PSNI pay any heed to my opinion?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 03, 2012, 02:00:37 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 03, 2012, 12:01:53 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 03, 2012, 11:20:41 AM
Cardinal Brady is a decent, honest and devout man. He surrendered his freedom to preach the Word. Those people baying for his blood have no idea of the suffering and torment that he has gone through during his time as a clergyman.

Your joking. Right?

No I'm not. I'm saddened and concerned at the effect this torade of abuse will have on both the man, and the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 02:41:24 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 03, 2012, 02:00:37 PM
I'm saddened and concerned at the effect this torade of abuse will have on both the man, and the Church.

Orior, are you really seriously happy to stand over the cheapening of the term "abuse" in this particular context?  I think you need to take a long look a the hierarchy of abuse and its effects.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Declan on May 03, 2012, 02:44:18 PM
That's a very good article from Malachi O'Doherty

Quotei totally agree with everything you have said above, however in relation to the highlighted sentence  i think there may be one exception,  if it was another priest or priests who went to the guards with the report or with the victim when reporting, then i have no doubt the guards would have investigated it.


Good point - that's probably true.

But if the bishop went to his Super you know what would happen
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 03, 2012, 02:45:25 PM
That's true too.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on May 03, 2012, 03:29:18 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 01:34:57 PM
nifan, a more realistic parallel is probably the appointment of John Stalker. Outside cop appointed to oversee the clean-up investigation. Look how that worked out.

I dont get what you mean here - in what way is stalker a more realistic parallel?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Shamrock Shore on May 03, 2012, 03:36:15 PM
The cardinal should have resigned two years ago when this part of the whole sorry tale broke first.

However the Vatican pull the strings here and I am sure even if he wanted to the Cardinal would not be 'let' resign. For two reasons in my opinion.

1. For the head of the Irish church to resign would be awful bad 'PR' for the Holy See
2. It would mean that they would have to give top job to Diarmuid Martin. He's not flavour of the month over in Rome but it would seem his cough has softened/been softened of late so maybe he is being assimilated, Borg-like, back into the fold.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 03, 2012, 05:52:57 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
So he's still bowing to his superiors rather than doing what he feels is right? If you want to resign, you'll resign.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 03, 2012, 05:54:13 PM
Quote from: Hound on May 03, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
Jude Collins definition of morality seems straight out of the same dictionary used by terrorists. If you're own conscience is clear, then you're grand!
I though the same thing myself. I thought morality, for someone so religious, was pretty much defined.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 03, 2012, 05:56:25 PM
Quote from: Main Street on May 03, 2012, 10:45:59 AM
Forget about the BBC agenda, people have been calling for Brady's resignation for years for his active role in the conspiracy of silence.
No legal case could be built against Brady, resignation would be as good as it gets for the abused.
I'm no legal expert, but for those children that were abused after Brady and his colleagues had been informed that they were in danger - could they not take a civil case against Brady?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 03, 2012, 06:44:01 PM
Just watching "This World - The Shame of the Catholic Church" on BBC i-player.

Vile.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 07:59:05 PM
Quote from: nifan on May 03, 2012, 03:29:18 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 01:34:57 PM
nifan, a more realistic parallel is probably the appointment of John Stalker. Outside cop appointed to oversee the clean-up investigation. Look how that worked out.

I dont get what you mean here - in what way is stalker a more realistic parallel?

Read my previous posts regarding the 'magic circle'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 03, 2012, 09:39:09 PM
You know the argument is lost when not a single remotely sensible argument is offered in his defense.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Fear ón Srath Bán on May 03, 2012, 09:45:03 PM
RTE 1 now, another interview with Brendan Boland, poor, poor lad.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: SLIGONIAN on May 04, 2012, 12:09:42 AM
This is where the state really angers me, why isnt brady behind bars? Secondly if theres no legal way of doing it in the current system then make fcking new law to throw him behind fcking bars.

This sc**bag knew his slience would get him promoted ffs, theres the karma in this world, thats why he shut up, the note taking is a cover up for his real role which was revealed the other night as investigator.

His greed for power silenced what little of his conscience he had. Jees how anyone can believe in god and catholic church totally bemuses me. angers me.. tbh..in todays world,,, jesus got mad when there was on market on church grounds it says in the bible, the only time he lost his temper, where was he the last 50 yrs in Irish churches ffs when he was needed most, where was jesus in the minds of all those priests who chose silence knowing what was going on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 12:39:21 AM
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/police-urged-to-probe-abuse-claims-16153220.html

Police should investigate the latest child sex abuse allegations to hit the Catholic Church, Amnesty International has said.

The human rights group said the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) should see if information on abuse was not acted upon.

This comes after Catholic Primate Cardinal Sean Brady defended himself against criticism, insisting he had passed on details of abuse to Church authorities, and claimed others had failed to act as he expected.

Amnesty's Northern Ireland programme director Patrick Corrigan said: "The protection of the rights of children is one of the most precious responsibilities carried by the state.

"Following the very serious allegations carried in this BBC programme, it now falls to the relevant state authorities to investigate whether any criminal laws have been breached.

"In short that means that the PSNI must investigate whether individuals failed to report a crime, an offence under Section 5 of the Criminal Law (NI) Act 1967, and whether any other offences - such as perverting the course of justice or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice - have been committed under Northern Ireland law."

He said authorities in Northern Ireland had to investigate the claims to show no institution is above the law.

This came as Stormont First Minister Peter Robinson said he was deeply disturbed by the latest child sex abuse controversy. But he said the future of Cardinal Brady as Primate was a matter for the Church alone.

Mr Robinson said: "The most recent reports about child abuse within the Catholic Church are deeply disturbing. No one could fail to be moved as victims tell of the traumatic abuse they suffered.

"Today my thoughts are with the many victims who have never received justice and who still live with the mental and physical scars. I assure them of my continued support as they seek answers and justice."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: SLIGONIAN on May 04, 2012, 12:09:42 AM
This is where the state really angers me, why isnt brady behind bars? Secondly if theres no legal way of doing it in the current system then make fcking new law to throw him behind fcking bars.

This sc**bag knew his slience would get him promoted ffs,
theres the karma in this world, thats why he shut up, the note taking is a cover up for his real role which was revealed the other night as investigator.

His greed for power silenced what little of his conscience he had. Jees how anyone can believe in god and catholic church totally bemuses me. angers me.. tbh..in todays world,,, jesus got mad when there was on market on church grounds it says in the bible, the only time he lost his temper, where was he the last 50 yrs in Irish churches ffs when he was needed most, where was jesus in the minds of all those priests who chose silence knowing what was going on.

Don't talk nonsense. This happened in 1975. Brady wasn't made Bishop until twenty years later.

"His greed for power"
Tell me, what power exactly does he have?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 01:12:20 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

The hyperbole doesn't help or indeed contribute to sensible discussion Dixie.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 01:32:36 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 01:12:20 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

The hyperbole doesn't help or indeed contribute to sensible discussion Dixie.

Considering that abuse by priests has been recorded all over the world, and covered up by priests, bishops, cardinals, and the current pope, I stand by my claims that that it /was/is a worldwide pedophilia ring.

If you were to take the time to watch the documentary that I posted you will see for yourself how far up the tree the abuse and cover up went.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardchieftain on May 04, 2012, 01:44:30 AM
The paedophile apologists on this thread make me sick.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 03:09:56 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

Suffer little children, and protect the church all costs.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 04, 2012, 06:39:33 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

Thanks for that, my eyes have been opened to the reality that it is the Most Holy Roman Catholic Church who are the real victims here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 04, 2012, 07:36:23 AM
I finished up with religion and the Roman Catholic Church when the Brendan Smyth story was first  revealed. The thought that learned theologically trained individuals at the upper echelons of that institution decided that the churchs reputation had to be protected rather than children from pedophile priests blew me away. Excuse the lot of us humanist who's tone is a wee bit overly aggressive. Just if we don't make a hoo doo over it, the concern is that the sheep that almost all of the devout still are, will allow these scandals to keep fading away to nothing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 01:32:36 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 01:12:20 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

The hyperbole doesn't help or indeed contribute to sensible discussion Dixie.

Considering that abuse by priests has been recorded all over the world, and covered up by priests, bishops, cardinals, and the current pope, I stand by my claims that that it /was/is a worldwide pedophilia ring.

If you were to take the time to watch the documentary that I posted you will see for yourself how far up the tree the abuse and cover up went.

I have watched it but as I say you do yourself no favours when spouting such nonsense.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: nifan on May 04, 2012, 08:26:54 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

Im no lynch mob, but if someone was involved in cover up of such things within any organisation - religious or not then I would feel they should be gone, and they should be under further scrutiny. I was in the scouts anbd the duke of ed growing up - if the leader of either of these organisations was found to have covered up abuse it would be the same - some people need to realise that everything isnt about secularists "baying" for the catholic church - I really dont care if it exists or not - plenty of catholics feel the sane way.

An error in judgement is a massive understatement for what he did.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on May 04, 2012, 08:33:30 AM
Quote from: ardchieftain on May 04, 2012, 01:44:30 AM
The paedophile apologists on this thread make me sick.

Disgusting remark and I'd challenge you to point out who exactly you mean.

I've kept out of this thread as I have no "judgement" to make but that comment is completely out of order. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: screenmachine on May 04, 2012, 09:12:09 AM
Maybe slightly off point here but does anyone think that they changed some of the prayers at mass to try and re-brand the church to an extent after all the negative media stories?

Some of the changes are ridiculous and there seems to be a word or two changed here or there for the sake of changing it.  I just don't see the point in the changes and they seemed to start happening after the negative press they received.

There's still always some crater gets it wrong every Sunday:

'The Lord be with you'
'And also with you. Crap, and with you're spirit, sorry Father.'

Load of balls.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Leo on May 04, 2012, 09:29:52 AM
Did Fr Brady continue to teach in St Pat's Cavan after Brendan Smith was "confined" to Kilnacrott abbey - they are all of 15 miles apart!!

And wasn't the choice of investigator from so another church institution close to the abbey interesting?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tbrick18 on May 04, 2012, 09:32:05 AM
Quote from: nifan on May 04, 2012, 08:26:54 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

Im no lynch mob, but if someone was involved in cover up of such things within any organisation - religious or not then I would feel they should be gone, and they should be under further scrutiny. I was in the scouts anbd the duke of ed growing up - if the leader of either of these organisations was found to have covered up abuse it would be the same - some people need to realise that everything isnt about secularists "baying" for the catholic church - I really dont care if it exists or not - plenty of catholics feel the sane way.

An error in judgement is a massive understatement for what he did.

I've heard this quoted a few times now about all this criticism of the church is coming from non-catholics/ex-catholics/catholic detractors, but I can say as a Catholic that I for one think the Church is a total disgrace in how it has behaved and as a Catholic I believe that Brady has lost any moral authority he is deemed to have in his position. An I can say I know more Catholics who think the same way, than those who dont. Should he resign? Of course he should and he should admit to his mistakes.
If he, or anyone else for that matter, has broken the law they should be prosecuted through the courts. that's not a slant at the Catholic church per se, but my opinion on anyone who did not disclose information to the authorities which could have prevented the  vile abuse of dozens of innocent children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AQMP on May 04, 2012, 09:35:56 AM
In most cases I'm not in favour of judging historical events and facts by the standard of today's morality e.g. being of a certain age, in the late 1960s/early 1970s I never once thought there was much wrong with the The Black & White Minstrel Show (other than the singing and dancing of course) and enjoyed Al Jolson's rendition of "Swannee River" on more than one occasion without considering myself (or him) a racist.  Looking back now the reaction is "what the hell was the BBC thinking?!"

Therefore I can see the point Sean Brady is making when he says that in the context of 1975 and the culture of deference to the Church hierarchy he did the "right" thing or he did all that was required of him.  In the 60s and 70s I was educated by Christian Brothers at primary school and went to a secondary school run by Redemptorist priests and the first inkling I had of child abuse in the Church probably came in the early 90s.  Don't get too uptight, there's a but coming...

However in 1975, Brady would have known that not only was what went on against the criminal law, but in theological terms, it was also a pretty grave or mortal "sin".  As a priest not only had he a responsibility to the Church but also a responsibility to protect (at least one) baptised member of the Church from severe physical and mental threat.  Brady got his priorities the wrong way round as a human being.

If I were in his position now I would slip quietly off to Rome to inform the Pope I was retiring on ill-health grounds.

PS..screenmachine, I think there's something in the change of wording of the mass...give the sheep something else to talk about apart from child abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 04, 2012, 09:38:49 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Tally Ho the lynch mob is in full cry, and what an unedifying spectacle it is. Some of the hate filled diatribes against the Cardinal and Church in some posters less than eloquent contributions, reveal their bigotry and real agenda. Whilst claiming concern for victims, they are unable to conceal their glee at the denigration and vilification of a fellow human being. Some of these posters claim to be humanists. God help humanity. I wonder which of them is in a position of moral rectitude, that would permit them to throw the first stone. Yes, the Cardinal made a serious error of judgement. Yes he should resign. But there is no need for hanging,drawing and quartering.    As for the wider Church, have no fear, the impotent, secularist rabble have been baying at the Gates for 2000yrs, they will never prevail. Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

But according to him  he didn't make any error of judgement and in the same position today would do the same thing. He was only a pawn in the process he says. He answers first and foremost to canon law then and now. Maybe a few trips to the courts for Bishops and Cardinals would bring Rome to its senses. The Catholic church has removed any of its servants to have a will of their own, just as Fr Brian Darcy. If there ever was a true dictatorship then the most holy roman catholic church is it.

I really hope there is a period of repentance on this issue as there hasn't been one as yet and this 'scandal' has been going on for well over a decade.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 04, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
Some of you may be aware of this story.

At the secondary school I went to, there were rumours that the principal (a priest) was doing things that he shouldnt. By that I mean asking boys about what they do with their girlfriends, and wandering through the dormitories at night.

I first heard these stories in third year when he became principal. If I heard about them, then I'm sure the teaching staff heard the stories as well.

Should the 60 or so teaching staff resign now for not reporting this?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:02:59 AM
Reporting what? Who did he rape?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:36:02 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:02:59 AM
Reporting what? Who did he rape?

All I'm saying is that he crossed the line. Should I hang my head in shame for not reporting it to the RUC?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

I am a member of the Catholic church. Does that make me a pedophile or a pedophile sympathiser/protector?

The Church has many many problems that need addressed but to term it as a ''pedophilia ring'' is a serious insult to the 99.99% of its members that are in it in good faith.

If you wish to be taken seriously you should retract that comment.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:46:15 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:36:02 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:02:59 AM
Reporting what? Who did he rape?

All I'm saying is that he crossed the line. Should I hang my head in shame for not reporting it to the RUC?

You seem to be confused between serious crime and gossip. There is no crime to report in what you describe. Do you seriously see a parallel between this and Brady's failure to report the actual rape of actual children?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 04, 2012, 10:52:05 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 02, 2012, 01:24:18 PM
Quote from: Declan on May 02, 2012, 11:52:56 AM
Folks think of Sharia law and how it is administered in fundamentalist Muslim countries and then you have some idea of what Ireland was like pre 1980s. I'm old enough to remember it and to speak out against the church wasn't on anyone's radar never mind a card carrying member like Brady. Not excusing the lack of action on his behalf just contextualising it.
I remember having a row with my own parents about an incident that happened with a local young neighbour of mine that was "hushed" up not by the clerical authorities but by the local pillars of the civil community and when they told me how it had been dealt with I could understand it more while still being repulsed by it.

Everyone is ignoring Declan's post, which sets the context perfectly. He was a bit player in these awful incidents.

I truely believe that he is a good and decent man.

Like Declan I can remember those times well and he is dead right about the fundamentalist nature of Irish society back in the 70s.
I sat my Leaving Cert in '67 so I am old enough to vouch that the mindset of  Irish society back then was very far removed from that of the present day.
It was indeed a time of universal deference to authority as Brady himself put it.

What people who are not old enough to remember the times we speak of cannot possibly understand is the fact that most people were quite happy to do as they were told and to accept their subservient place in the order of things.
Those who chose to speak out met with little approval from those around them; clergy or laity.
So I can accept that Fr John B Brady felt he was fulfilling his duties when he passed on the results of his investigation to his superior and took no further action on the matter concerned.
If, as the man says, he was a mere note taker and did all he was expected to, I would attach no blame to him for what subsequently happened. The fact that Smyth was left free to carry on his evil actions for many years would not have been his concern at that time..
But, for me at any rate, it's a classic case of then and now.

I can accept with difficulty the morality of his actions in 1975. I cannot do so now.

For one thing, it transpires that he has downplayed the importance of his role in those interrogations of Smyth's victims.
In plain English, I feel Brady lied about his part in those proceedings.

Even so, I could still feel some pity for him- he probably felt he was acting in good faith back then and after finally surviving all the intrigues and pitfalls on his way to his coveted red cap, he could hardly relish the prospect of surrendering it and retiring in disgrace.
A venal old man but hardly a criminal.
But his actions in recent times and his failure to say anything when the controversy over Smyth's activities first broke cast a different light on his true feelings-or so it seems to me.
Smyth's victims deserve justice and if that means that some of those who stood idly by, and by extension aided him in his nefarious activities, are called to account in a court of law, then so be it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:46:15 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:36:02 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 10:02:59 AM
Reporting what? Who did he rape?

All I'm saying is that he crossed the line. Should I hang my head in shame for not reporting it to the RUC?

You seem to be confused between serious crime and gossip. There is no crime to report in what you describe. Do you seriously see a parallel between this and Brady's failure to report the actual rape of actual children?

I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 11:16:10 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

I am a member of the Catholic church. Does that make me a pedophile or a pedophile sympathiser/protector?

The Church has many many problems that need addressed but to term it as a ''pedophilia ring'' is a serious insult to the 99.99% of its members that are in it in good faith.

If you wish to be taken seriously you should retract that comment.

As I have previously stated, right across the world, priests sexually abused thousands of  boys and girls. Their crimes were covered up by fellow priests, bishops, cardinals, and the current pope.

If that isn't a world wide pedophilia ring, then what would you call it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 11:16:10 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 03, 2012, 10:08:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cYv9wKH7CE

This disturbing documentary exposes the Vaticans cover up of child abuse!

Deliver Us from Evil (2006) is a documentary film directed by Amy J. Berg which tells the true story of Irish Catholic priest Oliver O'Grady, who sexually abused potentially hundreds of children between the late 1970s and early 1990s in California.

The film won the Best Documentary Award at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival and was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

Just another example of the world wide pedophilia ring that is the Catholic Church.

I am a member of the Catholic church. Does that make me a pedophile or a pedophile sympathiser/protector?

The Church has many many problems that need addressed but to term it as a ''pedophilia ring'' is a serious insult to the 99.99% of its members that are in it in good faith.

If you wish to be taken seriously you should retract that comment.

As I have previously stated, right across the world, priests sexually abused thousands of  boys and girls. Their crimes were covered up by fellow priests, bishops, cardinals, and the current pope.

If that isn't a world wide pedophilia ring, then what would you call it?

You are tarring all with the one brush. There are too many good Catholic people and indeed priests. Is it fair on them to label them pedos because of the failures of others?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 04, 2012, 11:50:33 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 04, 2012, 02:56:18 AM
Following a period of reform, readjustment and repentance, the Church will recover its strenght and courage to be a light in the wilderness

Things are already on the up.  Take Cardinal Law for example.  9 years ago he only got on a plane with 3 hours to spare before State Troopers arrived at his door looking for him.

Six months back he celebrated his 80th birthday bash at a 4 star restaurant in Rome where the band entertained over a 100 guests! (Google it to read about the splendour).

Granted the baying mob of secularists and their extradition requests meant he couldn't join the Pope when he visited America but we are getting there....

You reckon as a member of the Congregations for the Oriental Churches, the Clergy, Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, Evangelisation of Peoples, Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Catholic Education, Bishops as well as the Pontifical Council for the Family that he believes he has a day of judgement coming?

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 04, 2012, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
You are tarring all with the one brush. There are too many good Catholic people and indeed priests. Is it fair on them to label them pedos because of the failures of others?

As a Catholic do you put money in the basket?  Money that, other than Easter and Christmas priest collections, goes to central diocesan, national and Rome funds.  Money that is used to defend perverts and move them around the place.

I used to share your belief about the tarring with a brush but the longer this goes on, the more I feel that the guilt by association argument grows stronger.  Equally the circle of association widens.  My wife is Catholic and this is something we are now starting to discuss at home.  Particularly because our kids are baptised as Catholics too. 

/Jim.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 04, 2012, 12:42:21 PM
You are tarring all with the one brush. There are too many good Catholic people and indeed priests. Is it fair on them to label them pedos because of the failures of others?

For 20 years now we have been fed a steady news feed on the worldwide sexual abuse of boys and girls by priests. At the same time we hear a lot about the "Good Priests".

Over the past few days, how many of these "Good Priests" have you seen or heard come forward and publicly stand side by side with the abused and call on Brady to resign for his part in the cover up and further abuse of others?

Until these "Good Priests" come forward, i'm sorry, I don't see too much good about them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 12:44:11 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on May 04, 2012, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 04, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
You are tarring all with the one brush. There are too many good Catholic people and indeed priests. Is it fair on them to label them pedos because of the failures of others?

As a Catholic do you put money in the basket?  Money that, other than Easter and Christmas priest collections, goes to central diocesan, national and Rome funds.  Money that is used to defend perverts and move them around the place.

I used to share your belief about the tarring with a brush but the longer this goes on, the more I feel that the guilt by association argument grows stronger.  Equally the circle of association widens.  My wife is Catholic and this is something we are now starting to discuss at home.  Particularly because our kids are baptised as Catholics too. 

/Jim.

No. I stopped putting money in baskets a long time ago for this very reason. I give money to our priests from time to time directly. I trust both of them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hound on May 04, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
A child told him that he was raped by a priest, and that the priest was also raping other children.
He made the child swear an oath of secrecy never to repeat what he told him.
The priest continued to abuse children for years after that.

The shades of grey is certainly in the eye of the beholder!

But its the blind attitude of Orior and similar that has given priests, bishops, cardinals etc such power of hundreds of years. The evil ones (and nobody will dispute there have been been evil popes) take full advantage because of the stupidity of "blind faith" the priests, bishops and cardinals try to brainwash us Catholics all with.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 04, 2012, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Hound on May 04, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
A child told him that he was raped by a priest, and that the priest was also raping other children.
He made the child swear an oath of secrecy never to repeat what he told him.
The priest continued to abuse children for years after that.

The shades of grey is certainly in the eye of the beholder!

But its the blind attitude of Orior and similar that has given priests, bishops, cardinals etc such power of hundreds of years. The evil ones (and nobody will dispute there have been been evil popes) take full advantage because of the stupidity of "blind faith" the priests, bishops and cardinals try to brainwash us Catholics all with.

Of course the perpetrators of the actual crimes should and mostly have been prosecuted.

But we're talking here about a gopher or lackey. They lackey was being directed by what was in essence the Internal Investigation Branch of the Catholic Church. There are lots of heroic films on TV about Police Internal Investigation Branch and often how they are corrupt they often are. This hunt is focussed on the lackey, and chastising him because he didnt have the courage to be a whistle blower in the 1970's. The hunt completely ignores the good he had acheived in his life.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 04, 2012, 01:55:08 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 01:41:57 PM
Of course the perpetrators of the actual crimes should and mostly have been prosecuted.

But we're talking here about a gopher or lackey. They lackey was being directed by what was in essence the Internal Investigation Branch of the Catholic Church. There are lots of heroic films on TV about Police Internal Investigation Branch and often how they are corrupt they often are. This hunt is focussed on the lackey, and chastising him because he didnt have the courage to be a whistle blower in the 1970's. The hunt completely ignores the good he had acheived in his life.

Unreal. A doctorate in canon law is now being called a simple lackey in regards to his role, but now he's a suitable individual to be the moral compass for all catholics in Ireland.

There is something suitable about the title though

Noun   1.   lackey - a male servant (especially a footman)
flunkey, flunky
servant, retainer - a person working in the service of another (especially in the household)
           2.   lackey - a person who tries to please someone in order to gain a personal advantage

ass-kisser, crawler, sycophant, toady
apple polisher, bootlicker, fawner, groveler, groveller, truckler - someone who humbles himself as a sign of respect; who behaves as if he had no self-respect
adulator, flatterer - a person who uses flattery
goody-goody - a person who behaves extremely well in order to please a superior
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tbrick18 on May 04, 2012, 02:08:55 PM
For just one second, lets take the church out of this and imagine that a child reports to a trusted adult that they are being abused in the worst possible manner.
That adult then swears that child to secrecy and doesn't report the issue to the police or warn the parents of the child in question.
The abuser continues to abuse that child and many others over the course of years.
Has that adult committed a crime?
My understanding is yes they have. There is a law as far as I know which states that you must come forward with information which can prevent a crime if you have such information, and if you dont come forward you are liable to prosecution.
Now, if that is the law and its applied to the general public, why should a priest (or an organisation such as a church) not be subject to the same law?
The fact that this was an investigation on behalf of the church is irrelevant as to whether or not Brady, or any of the other two priests or bishops involved should have reported it to the authorities. IMO their lack of action was a crime as regards to the law of the land. Now they are trying to say that they shouldn't be subject to those particular laws as they followed the instruction of their superiors.
The law must be applied equally to all and the fact that the people in question followed the instructions of their organisation doesnt excuse them from following the law of the land.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 04, 2012, 02:19:51 PM
QuoteFor just one second, lets take the church out of this and imagine that a child reports to a trusted adult that they are being abused in the worst possible manner.
That adult then swears that child to secrecy and doesn't report the issue to the police or warn the parents of the child in question.

Two things. Firstly the parents of the person interviewed this week did not report the issue to the police or warn the parents of other children. Are they guilty, according to your definition?

Also there is much talk of being sworn to secrecy. Has anyone seen the exact wording of this? Clearly the person was asked to swear to respect to the confidentiality of the inquiry, but were they prohibited from discussing things that happened before the inquiry? I don't know this, but have others talking about this actually seen the form of words used. For instance, in a annulment tribunal or suchlike you might be asked to respect the confidentiality of the process, but does that mean that you cannot tell other people that your wife deserted you or whatever (once again I don't know).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 04, 2012, 02:37:38 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Hound on May 04, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
A child told him that he was raped by a priest, and that the priest was also raping other children.
He made the child swear an oath of secrecy never to repeat what he told him.
The priest continued to abuse children for years after that.

The shades of grey is certainly in the eye of the beholder!

But its the blind attitude of Orior and similar that has given priests, bishops, cardinals etc such power of hundreds of years. The evil ones (and nobody will dispute there have been been evil popes) take full advantage because of the stupidity of "blind faith" the priests, bishops and cardinals try to brainwash us Catholics all with.

Of course the perpetrators of the actual crimes should and mostly have been prosecuted.

But we're talking here about a gopher or lackey.
They lackey was being directed by what was in essence the Internal Investigation Branch of the Catholic Church. There are lots of heroic films on TV about Police Internal Investigation Branch and often how they are corrupt they often are. This hunt is focussed on the lackey, and chastising him because he didnt have the courage to be a whistle blower in the 1970's. The hunt completely ignores the good he had acheived in his life.

This is unreal! He was a 36 year old canon lawyer who obviously was well thought of with the powers that be in the church! For 13 years did he never think why Smyth was not up before the courts and was he still raping children? He had the power to stop it but didn't! End of story!
What gets me really cross is that a 13/14 year old who was previously repeatedly raped by a priest was taken into a locked room with 3 priests and asked all sorts of sick questions. The wee fella must've been in complete fear. Really really sick!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 04, 2012, 02:45:03 PM
Quote from: qwerty on May 04, 2012, 02:37:38 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Hound on May 04, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
A child told him that he was raped by a priest, and that the priest was also raping other children.
He made the child swear an oath of secrecy never to repeat what he told him.
The priest continued to abuse children for years after that.

The shades of grey is certainly in the eye of the beholder!

But its the blind attitude of Orior and similar that has given priests, bishops, cardinals etc such power of hundreds of years. The evil ones (and nobody will dispute there have been been evil popes) take full advantage because of the stupidity of "blind faith" the priests, bishops and cardinals try to brainwash us Catholics all with.

Of course the perpetrators of the actual crimes should and mostly have been prosecuted.

But we're talking here about a gopher or lackey.
They lackey was being directed by what was in essence the Internal Investigation Branch of the Catholic Church. There are lots of heroic films on TV about Police Internal Investigation Branch and often how they are corrupt they often are. This hunt is focussed on the lackey, and chastising him because he didnt have the courage to be a whistle blower in the 1970's. The hunt completely ignores the good he had acheived in his life.

This is unreal! He was a 36 year old canon lawyer who obviously was well thought of with the powers that be in the church! For 13 years did he never think why Smyth was not up before the courts and was he still raping children? He had the power to stop it but didn't! End of story!
What gets me really cross is that a 13/14 year old who was previously repeatedly raped by a priest was taken into a locked room with 3 priests and asked all sorts of sick questions. The wee fella must've been in complete fear. Really really sick!!

But that was the way life was in the 1970's. There wasnt the army of social workers, the raft of help lines, nor the internet to see if the same thing was happening elsewhere.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: qwerty on May 04, 2012, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 02:45:03 PM
Quote from: qwerty on May 04, 2012, 02:37:38 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 01:41:57 PM
Quote from: Hound on May 04, 2012, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 10:58:24 AM
I'm trying to point out that there are a hundred shades of grey.
A child told him that he was raped by a priest, and that the priest was also raping other children.
He made the child swear an oath of secrecy never to repeat what he told him.
The priest continued to abuse children for years after that.

The shades of grey is certainly in the eye of the beholder!

But its the blind attitude of Orior and similar that has given priests, bishops, cardinals etc such power of hundreds of years. The evil ones (and nobody will dispute there have been been evil popes) take full advantage because of the stupidity of "blind faith" the priests, bishops and cardinals try to brainwash us Catholics all with.

Of course the perpetrators of the actual crimes should and mostly have been prosecuted.

But we're talking here about a gopher or lackey.
They lackey was being directed by what was in essence the Internal Investigation Branch of the Catholic Church. There are lots of heroic films on TV about Police Internal Investigation Branch and often how they are corrupt they often are. This hunt is focussed on the lackey, and chastising him because he didnt have the courage to be a whistle blower in the 1970's. The hunt completely ignores the good he had acheived in his life.

This is unreal! He was a 36 year old canon lawyer who obviously was well thought of with the powers that be in the church! For 13 years did he never think why Smyth was not up before the courts and was he still raping children? He had the power to stop it but didn't! End of story!
What gets me really cross is that a 13/14 year old who was previously repeatedly raped by a priest was taken into a locked room with 3 priests and asked all sorts of sick questions. The wee fella must've been in complete fear. Really really sick!!

But that was the way life was in the 1970's. There wasnt the army of social workers, the raft of help lines, nor the internet to see if the same thing was happening elsewhere.
Ahh, so that makes it ok then...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 04, 2012, 02:52:14 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 02:45:03 PM
Quote from: qwerty on May 04, 2012, 02:37:38 PM

What gets me really cross is that a 13/14 year old who was previously repeatedly raped by a priest was taken into a locked room with 3 priests and asked all sorts of sick questions. The wee fella must've been in complete fear. Really really sick!!

But that was the way life was in the 1970's. There wasnt the army of social workers, the raft of help lines, nor the internet to see if the same thing was happening elsewhere.



Orior, for a normally sensible contributor, you're all over the place on this. You come across as one of those people whose blind faith will not countenance the possibility of a cleric having behaved criminally, or even immorally.

Now you seem to be arguing that Brady bears no responsibility for participating in the sick interrogation process inflicted on that boy because there was no social worker to stop him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 02, 2012, 10:47:50 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 01, 2012, 11:32:48 PM
Don't think he'll be able to hang on after this.

The man has no shame.

He's hell bent on retaining his position and leading his flock.

He should go - and go now - or else the people should head over to Armagh and put him out of it.

He's not living on the same planet.
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 04:37:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Aye, I can just picture him reading the Irish Times over his coffee with one ear out for Joe Duffy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:41:42 PM
The reaction from Rome shows how out of touch it is from the ordinary priest and person in the ordinary Irish Parish. I look with envy on the Anglican Church and see how they have found ways to embrace married clergy, women clergy and Gay Christians. I cherish my Catholic faith and do not want to renounce it but I do renounce the right of conservatives with in it led by Pope Benedict to dictate how it should go forward. There will be no priests in a few years they'll all be dead. The church appoints lay readers, funeral ministers etc befor it would embrace change which would mean a renewal in the priest hood.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on May 04, 2012, 04:42:15 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

What was asked of him was intrinsically and morally wrong - and you would have expected a man (he's 4 years older than I am now btw, that doesn't make him young) with his supposed moral fiber to know that what he was being asked to do, and what he did, was contrary to what governs right and wrong. It was a corrupt and evil practice back then, it has been a corrupted and tarnished organization ever since in this regard undoubtedly - and there is very little in the church's actions and words on this very issue that has even the slightest trace of following Jesus in it. It's more akin to Pontious Pilate than Jesus Christ regarding this sorry episode.

By remaining in his position currently he is serving only to further polarize what is left of the Catholic faith and serve the stubbornness of the German Shephard. His personal torment and anguish (if he geniunely has any), I have a little compassion for - more perhaps than he showed to the youngsters he should have protected.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:42:43 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 04:37:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Aye, I can just picture him reading the Irish Times over his coffee with one ear out for Joe Duffy.
you can be sure he was listening to Nolan.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 04:48:07 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him.
And clearly keeping your head below the parapet and remaining a priest is more important that preventing the abuse of children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 04, 2012, 04:57:50 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Maybe if he drew courage from the terrified 14 year old abused child he was taking notes from, he might have done the right thing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 05:07:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 04:37:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Aye, I can just picture him reading the Irish Times over his coffee with one ear out for Joe Duffy.
Do you seriously think he's not being kept abreast with how this is being reported?

Also, type Cardinal Brady into Google News - CNN International, New York Times, Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters, Associated Press, Chicago Tribune, Montreal Gazette... the list goes on - and obviously that's on top of the Irish and UK press, and the fact that the documentary went out across the UK on BBC2. If you think he needs to be reading the Irish Times or listening to Joe Duffy, you're well off the mark.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 04, 2012, 05:21:05 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.

+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on May 04, 2012, 05:38:12 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 04, 2012, 05:21:05 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.

+1

+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 04, 2012, 06:00:40 PM
Quote from: From the Bunker on May 04, 2012, 05:38:12 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 04, 2012, 05:21:05 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.

+1

+1

+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 05:07:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 04:37:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Aye, I can just picture him reading the Irish Times over his coffee with one ear out for Joe Duffy.
Do you seriously think he's not being kept abreast with how this is being reported?

Also, type Cardinal Brady into Google News - CNN International, New York Times, Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters, Associated Press, Chicago Tribune, Montreal Gazette... the list goes on - and obviously that's on top of the Irish and UK press, and the fact that the documentary went out across the UK on BBC2. If you think he needs to be reading the Irish Times or listening to Joe Duffy, you're well off the mark.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 05:07:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 04:37:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 04, 2012, 04:23:52 PM
The Irish Times today quotes Fr Brian D'Arcy as saying Cardinal Brady wanted to resign two years ago and the Vatican said no, same probably applies now. The Fuhrer doesn't want to be seen bending to the media. Worst thing ever happened was the election of the German as Pope. Some of the vitriol on here against Cardinal Brady whilst understandable is unfair. There is no way a young priest in 1975 could have put his head above the parapet and remained a priest and in fairness he did what was asked of him. Unfortunately in my opinion his acquiescence makes him unfit to lead the Church.

Aye, I can just picture him reading the Irish Times over his coffee with one ear out for Joe Duffy.
Do you seriously think he's not being kept abreast with how this is being reported?

Also, type Cardinal Brady into Google News - CNN International, New York Times, Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters, Associated Press, Chicago Tribune, Montreal Gazette... the list goes on - and obviously that's on top of the Irish and UK press, and the fact that the documentary went out across the UK on BBC2. If you think he needs to be reading the Irish Times or listening to Joe Duffy, you're well off the mark.

Small beer in comparsion to what he has on his plate. Whomever is handling this on the Vatican side will report to the CDF not the Pope and even then its unlikely to be very far up their list of priorities. Ireland's measly little community of 4 million or so Catholics doesn't often cut the mustard above the worldwide Catholic community of over a billion. After the recent Visitations, the Vatican is well aware of the state of the Irish Church and what needs to be done. No one is going to fret much about this.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:40:25 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
Small beer in comparsion to what he has on his plate. Whomever is handling this on the Vatican side will report to the CDF not the Pope and even then its unlikely to be very far up their list of priorities. Ireland's measly little community of 4 million or so Catholics doesn't often cut the mustard above the worldwide Catholic community of over a billion. After the recent Visitations, the Vatican is well aware of the state of the Irish Church and what needs to be done. No one is going to fret much about this.
I don't believe that for a minute. This story has been reported across the world - it's not just a local story. Adverse publicity on a global level will be on his radar.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
Well the Church has denied that it happened in 2010, so it can't possibly have happened then.
And sure why would they refuse his resignation if Ireland is such a small and insignificant part of the Church? Sure it wouldn't make any difference to them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:04:37 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:40:25 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 06:29:21 PM
Small beer in comparsion to what he has on his plate. Whomever is handling this on the Vatican side will report to the CDF not the Pope and even then its unlikely to be very far up their list of priorities. Ireland's measly little community of 4 million or so Catholics doesn't often cut the mustard above the worldwide Catholic community of over a billion. After the recent Visitations, the Vatican is well aware of the state of the Irish Church and what needs to be done. No one is going to fret much about this.
I don't believe that for a minute. This story has been reported across the world - it's not just a local story. Adverse publicity on a global level will be on his radar.

Aye, so you said, New York, Sydney and Montreal. Now if you'd have said Rio, Manilla and Mexico City I'm sure Fr Lambardi might sit up and take notice. At the end of the day there is nothing new in this from the Vatican perpective.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
Well the Church has denied that it happened in 2010, so it can't possibly have happened then.
And sure why would they refuse his resignation if Ireland is such a small and insignificant part of the Church? Sure it wouldn't make any difference to them.

Since when did you believe anything from the Church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
Well the Church has denied that it happened in 2010, so it can't possibly have happened then.
And sure why would they refuse his resignation if Ireland is such a small and insignificant part of the Church? Sure it wouldn't make any difference to them.

Since when did you believe anything from the Church?
I was being sarcastic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:52:57 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
Well the Church has denied that it happened in 2010, so it can't possibly have happened then.
And sure why would they refuse his resignation if Ireland is such a small and insignificant part of the Church? Sure it wouldn't make any difference to them.

Since when did you believe anything from the Church?
I was being sarcastic.

Really?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 08:20:23 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:52:57 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 04, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 04, 2012, 06:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 03, 2012, 10:55:19 AM
Anyone considered Brady may have been refused permission to resign?
Well the Church has denied that it happened in 2010, so it can't possibly have happened then.
And sure why would they refuse his resignation if Ireland is such a small and insignificant part of the Church? Sure it wouldn't make any difference to them.

Since when did you believe anything from the Church?
I was being sarcastic.

Really?
Really.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 10:26:38 PM
The attached gives a fairly decent insight into how those in the highest positions within the Catholic Church dealt with whistleblowers in the past. The McGennity incident happened in 1985, 10 years after the Brady/Boland event so what must things have been back then like then. While not in any way condoning what Brady did, it does give some indication as to the culture of fear which existed within the Church.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ledwith
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 10:30:27 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.

I'm sorry but if your faith is dependent on the boys who graduated in Maynooth then it's not a strong faith.

Brady and the clergy are just men. They're not called.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 10:58:25 PM
But we're not children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 04, 2012, 11:04:51 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 10:55:05 PM
Quote from: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 10:30:27 PM
Quote from: winghalfun on May 04, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I need some words of encouragement or some act of contrition very soon because I cannot hold on much longer to what I previously held very dear.

I am clinging on by my finger nails and the grip is slowly loosening day by day. I just hope that my stronger Christian faith (stronger than any blind faith in a priest/bishop/cardinal/pope) will cushion me when I do fall.

I will not launch any personal attack on Cardinal Brady because I still profess to uphold Christian values of love and forgiveness which if truth be told he probably desires more than we will ever know.

He should resign for his own sake, for the sake of the wider Irish catholic church but most importantly for the sake of the victims.

I'm sorry but if your faith is dependent on the boys who graduated in Maynooth then it's not a strong faith.

Brady and the clergy are just men. They're not called.
I'm not sure it's that easy. Your faith is based on what you have been taught by these boys. If you are now going to question these 'fraudsters' then everything you have learned from them is up in the air.

-I have faith.

-What in?

-God.

-Why?

-The Priest toul me one Sunday that he exists and that he loves me.

-What do you think of the Priest?

-He's a lying cnut. No time for him at all.

-Right........

I'm not sure myself and Hardstation agree all that often, but lad he is on the money here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:11:29 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:05:31 PM
Quote from: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 10:58:25 PM
But we're not children.
We didn't find faith in God all by ourselves.

We found out about Santa that way too. Then we got more edumacated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:24:38 PM
Can First Communion be used in the same concept as Santa? It'll do them more good than harm is my rationale at that age.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:34:33 PM
Lads you appear to be getting mixed up here. Are you saying that God does not exist?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:35:06 PM
But I mean from a father to child. I don't feel aggrieved atall that I went through the FC and Confirmation craic. Looking back, it was a bit like Santa. I'm thinking of doing it because it ties in with the concept of comfort and helps them to understand, at a simplistic level, life and death. (until they can make up their own minds). 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:36:15 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:34:33 PM
Lads you appear to be getting mixed up here. Are you saying that God does not exist?

You seem to be of the simplistic belief that no catholic faith = God doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:38:47 PM
No, far from it. I gave up on the Catholic Church some time ago. I still believe there is a God but I don't see the Catholic Church as the only way of getting to Him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:40:34 PM
I don't understand your previous post then.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:45:53 PM
Well you were making comparisons with believing in Santa and that's what confused me
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 04, 2012, 11:49:32 PM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:47:30 PM
Quote from: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:35:06 PM
But I mean from a father to child. I don't feel aggrieved atall that I went through the FC and Confirmation craic. Looking back, it was a bit like Santa. I'm thinking of doing it because it ties in with the concept of comfort and helps them to understand, at a simplistic level, life and death. (until they can make up their own minds).
Ah right, have you now. Hard one for me to answer, as I don't have kids but the school and the child's friends will have a bigger bearing on it than the parents or the Church. The kid will usually want to do it and I'd say dead on. If the kid says "I don't want to", I would not tell them that they have to.
Is FC optional?! :-\
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 04, 2012, 11:53:31 PM
Yep.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 04, 2012, 11:55:30 PM
Did not know that. Have times changed or has it always been optional?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on May 05, 2012, 12:01:18 AM
The crimes which the Catholic Church has committed in this country over the years, and indeed the power that it held over the people, are unbelievable. The story of the 1943 Cavan Industrial School fire is one example. The awful part of this sorry story is the case of the McKiernan sisters who perished in the fire. They had been placed in the Industrial school by the local priest who came to their house 2 weeks after their mother died to take them away on the grounds that it was not appropriate for their father to look after them.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/scannal/cavanfire.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:11:56 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 04, 2012, 11:55:30 PM
Did not know that. Have times changed or has it always been optional?

I can't find any online confirmation of that. Can a catholic school expel a child because they won't do FC? I'd be surprised.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on May 05, 2012, 12:14:28 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:56:35 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 04, 2012, 11:55:30 PM
Did not know that. Have times changed or has it always been optional?
If you don't turn up, they don't have much choice....
How can the "Catholic" part of attending a CCMS school be optional? It was the school did all the running when I was a buck, has this changed too?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:45:53 PM
Well you were making comparisons with believing in Santa and that's what confused me
That was a simplified version of the debate.

A child will believe in Santa because their ma tells him/her that he exists.
A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists.

It then comes down to trust.

A child will trust his/her ma.
A Catholic will trust his/her Church.

This brings us to what we first disagreed with -

If the Catholic no longer trusts his/her Church, all they were taught by his/her Church is up in the air.

No - that's not my take. Santa and the RC faith are both heavily parentally lead. Your school/church only feed off that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:16:09 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 05, 2012, 12:14:28 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:56:35 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on May 04, 2012, 11:55:30 PM
Did not know that. Have times changed or has it always been optional?
If you don't turn up, they don't have much choice....
How can the "Catholic" part of attending a CCMS school be optional? It was the school did all the running when I was a buck, has this changed too?

I'm aware of parents with children in CCMS schools (for geographical reasons) who refused FC participation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:20:48 AM
Hardstation, you believe because you are told to believe?

Havent you worked it out yourself?

I understand that a priest is only a medium or messenger of the Word in which we believe. And the Church the grouping of believers. So giving up on your religion should have nothing to do with priests. Rather, it is an abandonment of your belief.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:29:36 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:25:25 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:20:48 AM
Hardstation, you believe because you are told to believe?
Erm, yes.

Had I grown up never hearing about God, I would have worked it out on my own?

What planet do you live on?

Correct. If you lived in the jungle on your own, then you wouldnt have heard of religion. Thats why the Church employs messengers.

*Touches floor*

Hardstation, I'm on planet Carpet Earth
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 05, 2012, 12:33:08 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:29:36 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:25:25 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:20:48 AM
Hardstation, you believe because you are told to believe?
Erm, yes.

Had I grown up never hearing about God, I would have worked it out on my own?

What planet do you live on?

Correct. If you lived in the jungle on your own, then you wouldnt have heard of religion. Thats why the Church employs messengers propagandists/brainwashers/ indoctrin(e)ators   ;)

*Touches floor*

Hardstation, I'm on planet Carpet EarthOrk
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:37:40 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:29:36 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:25:25 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 05, 2012, 12:20:48 AM
Hardstation, you believe because you are told to believe?
Erm, yes.

Had I grown up never hearing about God, I would have worked it out on my own?

What planet do you live on?

Correct. If you lived in the jungle on your own, then you wouldnt have heard of religion. Thats why the Church employs messengers.


Wouldn't have heard of anything apart from jungle noises. Wouldn't have heard of Banshees, Limbo, the cosmos, Armagh results, Michael Bolton.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:46:28 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:42:23 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:45:53 PM
Well you were making comparisons with believing in Santa and that's what confused me
That was a simplified version of the debate.

A child will believe in Santa because their ma tells him/her that he exists.
A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists.

It then comes down to trust.

A child will trust his/her ma.
A Catholic will trust his/her Church.

This brings us to what we first disagreed with -

If the Catholic no longer trusts his/her Church, all they were taught by his/her Church is up in the air.

No - that's not my take. Santa and the RC faith are both heavily parentally lead. Your school/church only feed off that.
You are mixing things up. The Catholic I refer to is an adult (like winghalfun), not a child.

How can an adult with reasonable intelligence accept this - A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists. ?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on May 05, 2012, 12:56:53 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:46:28 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:42:23 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:45:53 PM
Well you were making comparisons with believing in Santa and that's what confused me
That was a simplified version of the debate.

A child will believe in Santa because their ma tells him/her that he exists.
A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists.

It then comes down to trust.

A child will trust his/her ma.
A Catholic will trust his/her Church.

This brings us to what we first disagreed with -

If the Catholic no longer trusts his/her Church, all they were taught by his/her Church is up in the air.

No - that's not my take. Santa and the RC faith are both heavily parentally lead. Your school/church only feed off that.
You are mixing things up. The Catholic I refer to is an adult (like winghalfun), not a child.

How can an adult with reasonable intelligence   accept this - A Catholic will believe in God  because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists. ?

I think thats whats called an Oxymoron.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 01:00:43 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:54:44 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:46:28 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 05, 2012, 12:42:23 AM
Quote from: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: hardstation on May 04, 2012, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on May 04, 2012, 11:45:53 PM
Well you were making comparisons with believing in Santa and that's what confused me
That was a simplified version of the debate.

A child will believe in Santa because their ma tells him/her that he exists.
A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists.

It then comes down to trust.

A child will trust his/her ma.
A Catholic will trust his/her Church.

This brings us to what we first disagreed with -

If the Catholic no longer trusts his/her Church, all they were taught by his/her Church is up in the air.

No - that's not my take. Santa and the RC faith are both heavily parentally lead. Your school/church only feed off that.
You are mixing things up. The Catholic I refer to is an adult (like winghalfun), not a child.

How can an adult with reasonable intelligence accept this - A Catholic will believe in God because the Catholic Church tells him/her that he exists. ?
Any other reason why someone might believe in God other than somebody telling him/her that? Sure, if nobody toul ye, you'd never have heard of God.

So those with brain damage from birth are doomed?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 01:05:53 AM
Tyrone'12.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 05, 2012, 01:18:18 AM
You would hear more intelligent discussion in a kindergarten, than we have had in the previous three pages here
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 05, 2012, 01:34:12 AM
I am too in awe of your intellect and grasp of language to respond
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on May 05, 2012, 01:37:39 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 05, 2012, 01:34:12 AM
I am too in awe of your intellect and grasp of language to respond

A Christian acknowledgement of ineptitude. He will be pleased.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 05, 2012, 04:14:08 AM
Yes, its clear that you donated your Brain to science before you were done using it. If i were to give a Penny for your thoughts, i would expect change. If there were two people talking and one looked bored, you would be the other one. You set low personal standards of debate and consistently fail to achieve them. Your persistently stupid and inane comments across all topics on this forum obviously arise from a delusion of adequacy. When your IQ reaches 50 you should sell
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on May 05, 2012, 08:05:05 AM
Clearly struggling to deal with the abuse directed toward the institution. You should make better use of that intellect pangur and start being a voice for change from within your own parish. Like almost all of the devout though, very quick to snap at those who hate the catholic institution but nothing toward a bunch of corrupt minded self interested lackies have left it in the state its in today. The silence from within its ranks highlight how good a job they've done taking away the voices of the sheep. How long are you prepared to remain subservient?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 05, 2012, 09:31:27 AM
Guys a little perspective please. It is quite clear from the posts on here that a large number of you have lost faith in God and the Church, an understandable enough position in todays world. You need to ask yourself though have you lost faith because of the actions of of some senior clergy or are you retrospectively using this as an excuse...and I'm not making a judgement just asking the question. There are and have been many ordinary decent clerics who have demonstrated the true meaning of their vocation, many more than the number of abusers and cover ups. Fr Aidan troy, Fr Brian D'Arcy, Fr Pat McCafferty, Fr (Bishop) Edward Daly to name a few better known. At a guess I would say that a great number of those expressing these opinions are in their 20/30's even early 40's. It is impossible to judge the events of 30 years ago if you haven't lived through them. The bottom line is judged from here and now the actions of bishops and the Church in covering up abuse is totally unacceptable. But that's judged my the mores of today. At the time of these incidents a large number of factors came into play, but the one over riding factor was the institutional Church's requirement to keep up appearances. Leaders in the Church made decisions which were understandably human in trying to protect the institution whilst being totally unjustifiable on the level of any Christian Faith. The upshot of all this scandal is that many Bishops in Ireland and even more priests have come to realize the need for the Church to be open and protective of it's congregation, the penny hasn't dropped with Benedict yet and it probably will take his successor to move things on. i believe in God, not because of what I have been told, because I have faith. I believe in the traditions of the Catholic Church. I despise much of what Benedict stands for and consider him a poor choice as Pope not least because of his Nazi connections. I am a liberal Catholic like the vast majority, more Anglican in outlook than orthodox Catholic. I see the difference between that and a human fallible hierarchy. You can see parallels in all organizations whether religious or secular. The point I'm making is this, it is ok not to believe in God as this is a personal matter, it is ok to despise and criticize the Churches action on abuse. But don't use one to justify the other. If you truly believed in God you would understand that often he lets bad things happen. I am not in any way condoning coverups or the conservative nature of the Hierarchy. I believe that Christ would have no problem with married or women priests, he would have had no problem with Gay or Lesbian christians and sooner or later the Church will catch up. A bit like Gerry and Martin with the IRA you need to start change from with in. Anyone can stand outside and throw stones (or snowballs!). This doesn't really do justice to my position and no doubt many will attack aspects of the content, but I try to avoid longish posts.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 05, 2012, 10:04:53 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
Some of you may be aware of this story.

At the secondary school I went to, there were rumours that the principal (a priest) was doing things that he shouldnt. By that I mean asking boys about what they do with their girlfriends, and wandering through the dormitories at night.

I first heard these stories in third year when he became principal. If I heard about them, then I'm sure the teaching staff heard the stories as well.

Should the 60 or so teaching staff resign now for not reporting this?

Say one of the teachers was a leading participant (one of three) in an in-house inquiry into the allegations of abuse, conducted him/herself the way Brady did,  swear kids to secrecy, forbid parents to be present, record testimony, all with the absolute priority to preserve the good name of the school, ignore evidence about other children who were abused, not inform their parents and then went on to be the leading person  in his/her profession. Even in the context of 1975, such an active participation in such a conspiracy, was a morally dispicable act. Furthermore, having attempted to minimise the role he/she played in that conspiracy,  then yes that person has proved themselves to be immoral and untrustworthy to be a person entrusted with such a responsibility and remaining in that position is a gross insult to the abused.

Do not confuse a certain level of public ignorance about the issue of abuse in 1975, with the actions of those who conspired with cunning deliberation and deceit to keep people ignorant.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 05, 2012, 11:43:49 AM
(http://i648.photobucket.com/albums/uu206/Hardyarse/celticrat1.png)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 05, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
Some of you may be aware of this story.

At the secondary school I went to, there were rumours that the principal (a priest) was doing things that he shouldnt. By that I mean asking boys about what they do with their girlfriends, and wandering through the dormitories at night.

I first heard these stories in third year when he became principal. If I heard about them, then I'm sure the teaching staff heard the stories as well.

Should the 60 or so teaching staff resign now for not reporting this?
Orior, I can readily accept your comparison of Fr Brady's actions with those of the teaching staff you refer to.
I'll say once more with feeling that commentators of a younger generation than mine cannot hope to understand the mindset of "ordinary" people of those times. (70s and before)
I would say that most of the teaching staff of your school would not have taken action of any sort.
Have grown up in this culture of deference to authority, especially authority with a Roman collar, I really hadn't a clue as to what was going on until the lurid details of Brendan Smyth's activities began to be made public.
I'd imagine that many on that staff would refuse to believe what the priest was up to... They would simply refuse to accept reality for they had been conditioned to back away from challenging Authority.
There certainly would have been an element of fear of retribution in their decisions not to act.  Not too many people were prepared to take on the might of the Catholic Church.
In the event of some brave soul deciding to speak out, he or she would not know where to go to lodge a complaint. I don't think anyone would consider going to the police authorities or to directly approach the parents involved.
The seriousness of the allegations allied to the difficulty of providing proof would have deterred them- I have no doubt of this.
So I can accept, admittedly with a bit of difficulty, that Fr Brady's failure to take action at that time was by no means unusual.
But he is no longer Fr Brady. He is now Cardinal Brady, the Primate of All Ireland and he says he is genuinely sorry for the wrongs that paedophile priests carried out on innocent children in the past. (Or words to that effect.)
Still, he has been part of a widespread culture of obfuscation and deceit that exists in all sections of the Hierarchy right up to the very top.
He sat on his hands while the Smyth controversy raged and there is no evidence to suggest that he would have freely disclosed anything he knew about Smyth's depredations and of his own failure to do anything other than pass the buck.

Now, going back to the teachers in your school at the time in question...
Let us say that many years have since passed.
People, teachers included, no longer need fear the belt of the crozier; the public and the police authorities are fully aware of what has been going on and are outraged; there is overwhelming evidence that the school principal was but one of hundreds who abused their positions of authority in schools throughout the land and indeed throughout the world; many of the teachers have attained positions of authority in the educational system and need no longer fear retribution.
Taking all of the above into account, would you now condone the actions of those who refused to cooperate with investigations going on at the present time?

I certainly would not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 05, 2012, 12:49:50 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 05, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
Some of you may be aware of this story.

At the secondary school I went to, there were rumours that the principal (a priest) was doing things that he shouldnt. By that I mean asking boys about what they do with their girlfriends, and wandering through the dormitories at night.

I first heard these stories in third year when he became principal. If I heard about them, then I'm sure the teaching staff heard the stories as well.

Should the 60 or so teaching staff resign now for not reporting this?
Orior, I can readily accept your comparison of Fr Brady's actions with those of the teaching staff you refer to.
I'll say once more with feeling that commentators of a younger generation than mine cannot hope to understand the mindset of "ordinary" people of those times. (70s and before)
Orior's story has no comparison to Brady's actions. No resemblance at all. Facile in the extreme.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 05, 2012, 03:27:50 PM
Quote from: Main Street on May 05, 2012, 12:49:50 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on May 05, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: Orior on May 04, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
Some of you may be aware of this story.

At the secondary school I went to, there were rumours that the principal (a priest) was doing things that he shouldnt. By that I mean asking boys about what they do with their girlfriends, and wandering through the dormitories at night.

I first heard these stories in third year when he became principal. If I heard about them, then I'm sure the teaching staff heard the stories as well.

Should the 60 or so teaching staff resign now for not reporting this?
Orior, I can readily accept your comparison of Fr Brady's actions with those of the teaching staff you refer to.
I'll say once more with feeling that commentators of a younger generation than mine cannot hope to understand the mindset of "ordinary" people of those times. (70s and before)
Orior's story has no comparison to Brady's actions. No resemblance at all. Facile in the extreme.
I take it you were not old enough to have an awareness of what passed for normal behaviour back in those days.
Believe me, the difference in so many ways between peoples' attitudes and beliefs of that period and ours would be impossible to describe.
I am giving Fr John B Brady every possible benefit of the doubt when I say I can understand his reluctance to rock the boat back in 1975.
I make no allowances whatever for Cardinal Sean Brady  who has been part of a tightly organised conspiracy to protect paedophile priests from being brought to justice and who failed to make any serious effort to prevent those who abused children going about their evil work.
If the Church leadership had not condoned and facilitated those acts I have no doubt the numbers of abusing priests and the number of children who were abused would have been far, far less.
The likes of Smyth and Greenan knew they had a licence to abuse and made full use of same. So did many hundreds of others. 
I repeat that I can accept that the then Fr Brady was doing his duty according to the convention of the times but I also say he has had ample opportunity since to make some sort of amends and he is making a damn bad job of doing so.
I would also add that Brady strikes me as a determined careerist who knew that rocking the boat would stop his progress up the promotion ladder

I had a somewhat similar secondary school experience to Orior when I spent several years in a boarding school in Roscommon back in the early 890s.
Right from the start I knew that the old bastard in charge had a terrible temper and a serious drink problem but I didn't know why older children warned the newcomers never to be sent to the infirmary on one's own if at all possible. Terrible things happened there if you did but we were never told what those things were.
Luckily for me, I was never sent there and I managed too avoid his fists while at that school but others were not so lucky.
I'm certain at least some of the teachers knew what this creature was up to but nobody intervened because there was little in the way of practical intervention that anyone could do.
Whistle blowing wouldn't suit the temper of the times and kids had to suffer in silence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 05, 2012, 04:06:15 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 05, 2012, 09:31:27 AM
Guys a little perspective please. It is quite clear from the posts on here that a large number of you have lost faith in God and the Church, an understandable enough position in todays world. You need to ask yourself though have you lost faith because of the actions of of some senior clergy or are you retrospectively using this as an excuse...and I'm not making a judgement just asking the question. There are and have been many ordinary decent clerics who have demonstrated the true meaning of their vocation, many more than the number of abusers and cover ups. Fr Aidan troy, Fr Brian D'Arcy, Fr Pat McCafferty, Fr (Bishop) Edward Daly to name a few better known. At a guess I would say that a great number of those expressing these opinions are in their 20/30's even early 40's. It is impossible to judge the events of 30 years ago if you haven't lived through them. The bottom line is judged from here and now the actions of bishops and the Church in covering up abuse is totally unacceptable. But that's judged my the mores of today. At the time of these incidents a large number of factors came into play, but the one over riding factor was the institutional Church's requirement to keep up appearances. Leaders in the Church made decisions which were understandably human in trying to protect the institution whilst being totally unjustifiable on the level of any Christian Faith. The upshot of all this scandal is that many Bishops in Ireland and even more priests have come to realize the need for the Church to be open and protective of it's congregation, the penny hasn't dropped with Benedict yet and it probably will take his successor to move things on. i believe in God, not because of what I have been told, because I have faith. I believe in the traditions of the Catholic Church. I despise much of what Benedict stands for and consider him a poor choice as Pope not least because of his Nazi connections. I am a liberal Catholic like the vast majority, more Anglican in outlook than orthodox Catholic. I see the difference between that and a human fallible hierarchy. You can see parallels in all organizations whether religious or secular. The point I'm making is this, it is ok not to believe in God as this is a personal matter, it is ok to despise and criticize the Churches action on abuse. But don't use one to justify the other. If you truly believed in God you would understand that often he lets bad things happen. I am not in any way condoning coverups or the conservative nature of the Hierarchy. I believe that Christ would have no problem with married or women priests, he would have had no problem with Gay or Lesbian christians and sooner or later the Church will catch up. A bit like Gerry and Martin with the IRA you need to start change from with in. Anyone can stand outside and throw stones (or snowballs!). This doesn't really do justice to my position and no doubt many will attack aspects of the content, but I try to avoid longish posts.

Apples, that is a great post.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 05, 2012, 04:35:44 PM
Quote from: ziggy90 on May 05, 2012, 04:06:15 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 05, 2012, 09:31:27 AM
Guys a little perspective please. It is quite clear from the posts on here that a large number of you have lost faith in God and the Church, an understandable enough position in todays world. You need to ask yourself though have you lost faith because of the actions of of some senior clergy or are you retrospectively using this as an excuse...and I'm not making a judgement just asking the question. There are and have been many ordinary decent clerics who have demonstrated the true meaning of their vocation, many more than the number of abusers and cover ups. Fr Aidan troy, Fr Brian D'Arcy, Fr Pat McCafferty, Fr (Bishop) Edward Daly to name a few better known. At a guess I would say that a great number of those expressing these opinions are in their 20/30's even early 40's. It is impossible to judge the events of 30 years ago if you haven't lived through them. The bottom line is judged from here and now the actions of bishops and the Church in covering up abuse is totally unacceptable. But that's judged my the mores of today. At the time of these incidents a large number of factors came into play, but the one over riding factor was the institutional Church's requirement to keep up appearances. Leaders in the Church made decisions which were understandably human in trying to protect the institution whilst being totally unjustifiable on the level of any Christian Faith. The upshot of all this scandal is that many Bishops in Ireland and even more priests have come to realize the need for the Church to be open and protective of it's congregation, the penny hasn't dropped with Benedict yet and it probably will take his successor to move things on. i believe in God, not because of what I have been told, because I have faith. I believe in the traditions of the Catholic Church. I despise much of what Benedict stands for and consider him a poor choice as Pope not least because of his Nazi connections. I am a liberal Catholic like the vast majority, more Anglican in outlook than orthodox Catholic. I see the difference between that and a human fallible hierarchy. You can see parallels in all organizations whether religious or secular. The point I'm making is this, it is ok not to believe in God as this is a personal matter, it is ok to despise and criticize the Churches action on abuse. But don't use one to justify the other. If you truly believed in God you would understand that often he lets bad things happen. I am not in any way condoning coverups or the conservative nature of the Hierarchy. I believe that Christ would have no problem with married or women priests, he would have had no problem with Gay or Lesbian christians and sooner or later the Church will catch up. A bit like Gerry and Martin with the IRA you need to start change from with in. Anyone can stand outside and throw stones (or snowballs!). This doesn't really do justice to my position and no doubt many will attack aspects of the content, but I try to avoid longish posts.

Apples, that is a great post.

You tell us that unless we lived through the 70's we wouldn't understand etc, then you say you detest Benedict because of his Nazi connections (wasn't he indoctrined into hitler youth as a child, he hardly had much choice), did you live through 1940's nazi germany yourself to truly understand his position at the time?

I don't buy this bullshit about the 70's. Brady and all his buddies knew that raping a child was the most darkest evil sin that was possible yet I am expected to believe he was in a school 10 miles from Brendan Smyth and he felt it was all taken care off and anyway he was only a priest and could do nothing?? If that is the make up of the people in the catholic church then its no wonder it is the corrupt evil organisation it is. There is no excuse and there was no excuse then for making a 14 year old boy sign an NDA and for not reporting a child rapist to the Gardai. There was no problem in denouncing other sinners like single mothers or homosexuals from the alter after all.

It boils down to this for me. I can understand people believing in God, believing Jesus was the son of god and the bible is his message to man on how to live life. You can have all that belief outside any church. But why do people insist on being a member of a church that at the highest levels have covered up child rapists and destroyed 1000's of lives. Why do priests, many of them no doubt decent, allow themselves to be a part of this organisation and allow themselves to be tainted by it? Can they not preach the word of God outside the church?? My suspicion is along the lines of what you said Apples - "I believe in the traditions of the catholic church". What that implies to me is that the church to people is like supporting your team, or being part of some cultural movement - the "my people right or wrong" argument. Logically being a christian (As defined by the bible) and being part of the catholic church currently is a hypocritical position. You are giving money to an organisation that owes this state 100's of millions for their evil actions and at the same time has billions at its finger tips in priceless paintings and stolen gold. Why are people so afraid to confront this truth? Do people believe the church is sincere at rooting out all this evil - I don't, not for a minute. I can only imagine what was going on in places like Africa where there was limited law and order, a heaven for a paedophile. Has the vatican started looking into this yet, more important to censor priests in Ireland instead I presume.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 05, 2012, 04:49:24 PM
QuoteMy suspicion is along the lines of what you said Apples - "I believe in the traditions of the catholic church". What that implies to me is that the church to people is like supporting your team, or being part of some cultural movement - the "my people right or wrong" argument.

Not only that, but he is probably a member of the GAA, an organisation that has named one of its stadia after a paedophile and others after people in this infamous Catholic church. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on May 05, 2012, 06:09:34 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 05, 2012, 04:49:24 PM
QuoteMy suspicion is along the lines of what you said Apples - "I believe in the traditions of the catholic church". What that implies to me is that the church to people is like supporting your team, or being part of some cultural movement - the "my people right or wrong" argument.

Not only that, but he is probably a member of the GAA, an organisation that has named one of its stadia after a paedophile and others after people in this infamous Catholic church.

Who was that?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on May 05, 2012, 06:12:55 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 05, 2012, 09:31:27 AM
Guys a little perspective please. It is quite clear from the posts on here that a large number of you have lost faith in God and the Church, an understandable enough position in todays world. You need to ask yourself though have you lost faith because of the actions of of some senior clergy or are you retrospectively using this as an excuse...and I'm not making a judgement just asking the question. There are and have been many ordinary decent clerics who have demonstrated the true meaning of their vocation, many more than the number of abusers and cover ups. Fr Aidan troy, Fr Brian D'Arcy, Fr Pat McCafferty, Fr (Bishop) Edward Daly to name a few better known. At a guess I would say that a great number of those expressing these opinions are in their 20/30's even early 40's. It is impossible to judge the events of 30 years ago if you haven't lived through them. The bottom line is judged from here and now the actions of bishops and the Church in covering up abuse is totally unacceptable. But that's judged my the mores of today. At the time of these incidents a large number of factors came into play, but the one over riding factor was the institutional Church's requirement to keep up appearances. Leaders in the Church made decisions which were understandably human in trying to protect the institution whilst being totally unjustifiable on the level of any Christian Faith. The upshot of all this scandal is that many Bishops in Ireland and even more priests have come to realize the need for the Church to be open and protective of it's congregation, the penny hasn't dropped with Benedict yet and it probably will take his successor to move things on. i believe in God, not because of what I have been told, because I have faith. I believe in the traditions of the Catholic Church. I despise much of what Benedict stands for and consider him a poor choice as Pope not least because of his Nazi connections. I am a liberal Catholic like the vast majority, more Anglican in outlook than orthodox Catholic. I see the difference between that and a human fallible hierarchy. You can see parallels in all organizations whether religious or secular. The point I'm making is this, it is ok not to believe in God as this is a personal matter, it is ok to despise and criticize the Churches action on abuse. But don't use one to justify the other. If you truly believed in God you would understand that often he lets bad things happen. I am not in any way condoning coverups or the conservative nature of the Hierarchy. I believe that Christ would have no problem with married or women priests, he would have had no problem with Gay or Lesbian christians and sooner or later the Church will catch up. A bit like Gerry and Martin with the IRA you need to start change from with in. Anyone can stand outside and throw stones (or snowballs!). This doesn't really do justice to my position and no doubt many will attack aspects of the content, but I try to avoid longish posts.

That doesn't make any sense....everything you believe about God is something you were told (if you have mainstream religious beliefs).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 05, 2012, 06:47:22 PM
Originally everything I knew about God was related to me by my God-Fearing parents. Later on my knowledge of him was taught to me by Priests and teachers, since then MY belief in him has been strengthened by my own thoughts. I think this is what is called faith.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 05, 2012, 08:27:20 PM
Good post Apples. The Church as an institution is both divine and human. The human part is and always has been susceptible to corruption. The core duty is to protect and transmit the truth contained within the Gospel message. There is therefore an obligation on all church members to protect and defend the message, but not necessarily the messenger. Popes,Cardinals,Bishops and laity are human people with all the weak frailities and tendency to sin. The best any of us can do is preach the Gospel, but only using words when absolutely necessary. Example is the best teacher
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: thejuice on May 07, 2012, 09:40:27 AM
I had a rather surprising conversation with a woman from home yesterday. For the first time in a long time that she can remember she didn't go to mass on Sunday. This was a woman who did a lot of fundraising for getting the local church redecorated and was always at the church gates doing charity work or something along those lines.

But yesterday she decided that while her faith in god hasn't diminished, her faith in the catholic church and Rome has gone. She decided that she would no longer lift a finger to help the church again. She felt that if she and others like her didn't stop "propping up" the church it will never change.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 07, 2012, 01:15:25 PM
Politicians have shown a lack of "statesmanship" over the position of Cardinal Sean Brady, according to the Auxiliary Bishop of Down and Connor.

Bishop Donal McKeown said he was disappointed no-one had "dared to suggest that we might lift the focus from that narrow resignation question".

Writing on his Facebook page, he said: "How many of us, who have lived in the NI glasshouse, are in a position to throw stones?

"That sort of comment would have been painfully honest, and helped us to face our very messy past.

"There are many of our leaders whose lives show that, just because you have a past, doesn't mean that you don't have a future."

Three out of the four main parties in the Republic of Ireland and the Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness have called on Cardinal Brady to consider his position, following last week's BBC documentary accusing him of failing to act on allegations of abuse that he discovered as part of an investigation as a young priest.

Bishop McKeown told BBC Radio Ulster on Monday that his remarks were designed to be provocative and he was directing them at himself as much as other individuals.

"Children have been damaged in many ways across society, and if you confront all those ways as a society rather than focusing on just one element, then I think we would be able to live the next 10 years, with all these anniversaries coming up, constructively rather than in a silly and partisan way," he said.

"It's hard to take criticism of Cardinal Brady from many people who during the Troubles were involved in state bodies, paramilitary bodies or who shared platforms with those organisations, who did huge damage to children and their families.

"What I'm trying to say is, have we anyone who can help us see the big picture rather than just be driven by what's a comparatively narrow question on Cardinal Brady?"

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 07, 2012, 04:23:03 PM
Wise words there from the Bishop. I think we should extend this to all criminals, forgive everyone ask no questions and continue on regardless. Anything but take responsibility for anything. Do you have to have have the IQ of a field mouse to become a Bishop in this country?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Myles Na G. on May 07, 2012, 04:41:39 PM
Christians expect us to believe in a god who is with us, a god who sends us the holy spirit to give us wisdom and courage, and the sacraments to help us on our journey through life. We are told to pray, so that we gain the wisdom that tells us the difference between right and wrong and the courage to do the right thing. Then we hear that one of the princes of the church doesn't seem to know that it is wrong to stand idly by and do nothing while children are raped and abused. Where was his sense of right and wrong, his courage to do the right thing? What happened to the holy spirit? Was he asleep? This stuff about the culture of deference is just so much bullshit. Child abuse is wrong and if you happen to be the individual who knows it's going on, it falls to you to do something about it. You shouldn't have to be a canon lawyer to know that much. Throughout the church hierarchy, all over the world, so called religious men and women failed to do the right thing on so many occasions. They spend half their lives on their knees praying, the other half urging the rest of us to do the same, but when it comes to the crucial moment, they seem to know less about what's right and wrong than the average person in the street.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 07, 2012, 06:50:19 PM
Good post Myles na g
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on May 07, 2012, 08:35:21 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17982360 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17982360)

Yiz have probably already seen this on the news this weekend/today.

"That's what we would call progress, not liberalism".

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 07, 2012, 09:06:46 PM
Talks cheap And these Priests know full well that the Church is not a democracy
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on May 07, 2012, 09:13:21 PM
You are right of course. It's currently more on a par with a tyranny. One of the priests in there at least has his finger on the pulse. The church will be left behind if they don't step it up.

You can't keep your head in the sand forever, lest some liberal reformer type hits you a good boot in the hole.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 07, 2012, 09:29:29 PM
Doubtless they will feel a little better about themselves, as we all do when we get the opportunity to air our grievances, but i am certain nothing will change, at least in the short term. Unless they are prepared to contemplate an open schism with the Church, which i dont believe they are, then the present exercise is futile
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 07, 2012, 09:40:54 PM
BBC news at lunchtime were reporting 1000 priests attending that conference. From that clip, at least half in the room were women. What gives?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 07, 2012, 10:20:13 PM
He's for sitting tight.


Cardinal Brady apologises to abuse victim Brendan Boland

Cardinal Sean Brady has said he wants to personally apologise to a man who was abused as a 14-year-old boy by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth.


He said he had no intention of stepping aside but hoped an assistant - with succession rights - would be quickly appointed to his archdiocese.

Speaking to Irish broadcaster RTE on Monday, Cardinal Brady said he wanted to "apologise without hesitation" to Brendan Boland "and to any victim".

"I offered that apology last Christmas, I offered to come and see him in person," he said.

"He wanted a public apology, it didn't happen, but I repeat now that I publicly apologise to him."

The 72-year-old said he wanted to apologise personally "at the earliest opportunity".


The cardinal said he intended to remain as primate "until I'm 75, or unless the Holy See indicated it didn't want me to stay".


He said there was absolutely no indication from the Vatican that it wanted him to resign.

Last week, a BBC documentary uncovered new revelations about an internal Church investigation into clerical child sex abuse in 1975.

It said a teenage boy who had been sexually abused by Fr Brendan Smyth gave the names and addresses of other children who were at risk from the paedophile priest to Cardinal Brady, who at that time was a 36-year-old priest.

He passed the allegations to his superiors but did not inform the police or the children's parents.

Fr Smyth continued to sexually assault one of the boys for a year after that.

He also abused the boy's sister for seven years, and four of his cousins, up until 1988.

"Definitely the parents should have been informed. That's quite clear," Cardinal Brady told RTE.

But Cardinal Brady accused the documentary makers of exaggerating his role. He said he had been present simply to take notes, and that he had reported to more senior clergy whom he expected to take appropriate action.

Cardinal Brady previously apologised over the issue during Mass on St Patrick's Day in 2010.

He said: "I have listened to reaction from people to my role in events 35 years ago.

"I want to say to anyone who has been hurt by any failure on my part that I apologise to you with all my heart.

"I also apologise to all those who feel I have let them down.

"Looking back I am ashamed that I have not always upheld the values that I profess and believe in."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Leo on May 07, 2012, 10:43:53 PM
Cardinal Brady says he never met or spoke to Brendan Smith
Cardinal Brady taught for 13 years in Cavan town, 15 miles from the infamous Kilnacrott Abbey.
A former student of the school, who was abused by Smith, says Smith was a frequent visitor to the school.
Cavan must be a mighty big place.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 07, 2012, 10:51:45 PM
Quote from: Leo on May 07, 2012, 10:43:53 PM
Cardinal Brady says he never met or spoke to Brendan Smith
Cardinal Brady taught for 13 years in Cavan town, 15 miles from the infamous Kilnacrott Abbey.
A former student of the school, who was abused by Smith, says Smith was a frequent visitor to the school.
Cavan must be a mighty big place.

It is possible that Fr. Brady never spoke or met Brendan Smyth so I'd accept what Cardinal Brady is saying. I can't see him wanting to get caught out over something as fundamental as that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 08, 2012, 01:15:17 AM
I'm surprised that the call by the archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Diarmuid Martin, for an independent investigation into allegations of clerical child abuse has not had more media attention.
Archbishop Martin said a commission should be set up to examine all accusations against Brendan Smyth.
Such a commission, if it ever gets off the ground, could come up with some very interesting findings.

You can read about it here:
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/archbishop-martin-calls-for-abuse-probe-550434.html#ixzz1uEQnaxIe (http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/archbishop-martin-calls-for-abuse-probe-550434.html#ixzz1uEQnaxIe)

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 08, 2012, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 07, 2012, 09:40:54 PM
BBC news at lunchtime were reporting 1000 priests attending that conference. From that clip, at least half in the room were women. What gives?

What I found interesting about the clips of the attendance was that I only saw one person under thirty and nobody else who was under 60.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 08, 2012, 11:13:36 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 08, 2012, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 07, 2012, 09:40:54 PM
BBC news at lunchtime were reporting 1000 priests attending that conference. From that clip, at least half in the room were women. What gives?

What I found interesting about the clips of the attendance was that I only saw one person under thirty and nobody else who was under 60.
That in itself should tell the church it has a problem, even those most likely to follow it's teachings more faithfully...older people are saying time for change. Is there no way parishes can take control and secede as CoE parishes have?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 11:26:56 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 08, 2012, 11:13:36 AM
That in itself should tell the church it has a problem, even those most likely to follow it's teachings more faithfully...older people are saying time for change. Is there no way parishes can take control and secede as CoE parishes have?

"secede as CoE parishes have" - what's this?

"That in itself should tell the church it has a problem". Maybe but these priests are the people that have overseen the decline of the Catholic Church in this country, so maybe they should be looking to themselves as to the reasons why this has happend. Have they failed in their duty of teaching the 'faith' to their parishioners? By faith, I meaning the teachings of the Magisterium, not the homespun pseudo bollocks Brian Darcy puts out in the local gutter rag.

One thing to consider. Why is it that vocations in the mainstream Church are falling while at the same time traditionalist groups such as FSSP, ICRSS, IGS, and SSPX are inundated and don't have enough seminary places to keep up with demand?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 08, 2012, 12:24:57 PM
I am not a subscriber to the Sunday World so can't comment on Brian D'Arcy's work. What I can't square with my Christian Faith is why the Church can't let Priests marry, what other than tradition stands in the way of women priests and where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong? I also can't square the Churches teaching that Homosexuality is evil...Why would God make people Gay if they are intrinsically evil. I ask my self what would Christ do? He certainly wouldn't abuse Children, his disciples were married and I can't see him condemning a normal man to a life of suppressed desires and sexuality. as for the groups you mention they are fanatics and small in number that is why they are oversubscribed. I asked out of curiosity if it is possible for whole parishes to upsticks and secede (as in break away) from the CoR as parishes in the CoE have done.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 12:33:15 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 11:26:56 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 08, 2012, 11:13:36 AM
That in itself should tell the church it has a problem, even those most likely to follow it's teachings more faithfully...older people are saying time for change. Is there no way parishes can take control and secede as CoE parishes have?

"secede as CoE parishes have" - what's this?

"That in itself should tell the church it has a problem". Maybe but these priests are the people that have overseen the decline of the Catholic Church in this country, so maybe they should be looking to themselves as to the reasons why this has happend. Have they failed in their duty of teaching the 'faith' to their parishioners? By faith, I meaning the teachings of the Magisterium, not the homespun pseudo bollocks Brian Darcy puts out in the local gutter rag.

One thing to consider. Why is it that vocations in the mainstream Church are falling while at the same time traditionalist groups such as FSSP, ICRSS, IGS, and SSPX are inundated and don't have enough seminary places to keep up with demand?


Who and what are those groups you mention? Genuinely interested.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 08, 2012, 12:24:57 PM
I am not a subscriber to the Sunday World so can't comment on Brian D'Arcy's work. What I can't square with my Christian Faith is why the Church can't let Priests marry, what other than tradition stands in the way of women priests and where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong? I also can't square the Churches teaching that Homosexuality is evil...Why would God make people Gay if they are intrinsically evil. I ask my self what would Christ do? He certainly wouldn't abuse Children, his disciples were married and I can't see him condemning a normal man to a life of suppressed desires and sexuality. as for the groups you mention they are fanatics and small in number that is why they are oversubscribed. I asked out of curiosity if it is possible for whole parishes to upsticks and secede (as in break away) from the CoR as parishes in the CoE have done.

"What I can't square with my Christian Faith is why the Church can't let Priests marry, what other than tradition stands in the way of women priests and where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong?  I also can't square the Churches teaching that Homosexuality is evil...Why would God make people Gay if they are intrinsically evil."

Those are questions to which every Catholic should know the answer but the fact that few do, is a failing not necessarily of the Church but of the priests, who's duty it is to teach their congregation Church doctrine. Your (might I say Protestant) reflex to go look for supporting evidence in the bible, for example, about women priests is a complete misunderstanding of how the Church position is established. Catholic dogma is derived not just from the Bible but also from Tradition i.e. from belief passed down through the years and declared as binding by the Magisterium. If you want to question the ban on women priests in the Catholic Church then the Bible is not necessarily the place to start.

"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?

"I also can't square the Churches teaching that Homosexuality is evil...Why would God make people Gay if they are intrinsically evil." Firstly, the Catholic Church does not teach that a persons sexual orientation is "intrinsically" linked to the person as a whole, so again you are misrepresenting Catholic dogma. The Church believes that homosexual acts are sinful not the person. In much the same way it believes that sex up the bum, masturbation or otherwise ejaculation outside of the body is sinful for married couples. Committing one of these acts is sinful, but no more makes the homosexual person evil than it makes the married person evil for having a w**k.

"I ask my self what would Christ do? He certainly wouldn't abuse Children, his disciples were married and I can't see him condemning a normal man to a life of suppressed desires and sexuality." I don't buy the link between clerical chastity and child abuse as there have been as many cases of child abuse from clerics in other Churches which allow their pastors to marry. Perhaps you have read something I'm not aware off?

"as for the groups you mention they are fanatics and small in number that is why they are oversubscribed." Nonsense. You say they are fanatics, because they keep with Catholic Tradition and actually teach Catholic Church doctrine and dogma. Perhaps if the rest of the clergy were as well versed in Catholic teaching as these traditionalist clerics then the faithful would actually understand their Church's position on modern issues. In two years of attending traditionalist Mass and sermons, I learned more about Catholic Church teaching than 35 years going to Mass in the mainstream Church were the priests are more focused on being everyone's mate instead of actually telling them what they're doing might be sinful or contrary to Church teaching. I don't necessarily agree with that doctrine, but at least the traditionalist priests will outline and explain the Catholic position. When was the last time you heard a priest at Novus Ordo Mass tell and explain Church teaching on homosexuality, homosexual acts, clerical celibacy, contraception or marital relations? Personally, I'd never heard it, until I attended a Tridentine Mass.

"parishes to upsticks and secede (as in break away) from the CoR as parishes in the CoE have done." People left the Church of England to join the Catholic Ordinariate. They did this as individuals (or in cases as a group lead by their pastor) because they believe Catholic doctrine and practice more in tune with their beliefs than the Church of England. There is nothing stopping Catholics from going the other way if they wish. In fact I'm sure the Church of England and Church of Ireland would welcome disillusioned Catholics with open arms, though they may find it a case of the faraway field being greener. But hey, if it's just a matter of hanging out with some fellow trendy liberal Christians who don't really believe in that much other than a divine spiritual being then it could be a good move.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 01:33:12 PM
f**king Hell Ulick. You seem to know your stuff.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:42:04 PM
Quote from: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 12:33:15 PM
Who and what are those groups you mention? Genuinely interested.

Mostly groups who adhere more rigidly to Catholic tradition and dogma. Many will still say the old Latin Mass and practice customs and traditions which have mostly died out in the mainstream Church in Ireland. The Irish Latin Mass Society is probably the first place to look if you are interested in the traditionalists (http://www.latinmassireland.org/). Of the groups I mentioned:

FSSP: Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter
ICRSS: Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, based in Limerick and serving Munster.
SSPX: Society of Saint Pius X in Ireland (Main house and church in Athlone, church in Dublin and weekly Mass in Belfast, Cork, Newry, Tipp and Kerry. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:56:58 PM
Quote from: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 01:33:12 PM
f**king Hell Ulick. You seem to know your stuff.

Thanks ziggy but if I can get that much from three or four sermons, what were all these "liberal" Irish priests doing during their six years at Maynooth?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 02:05:59 PM
Thanks for that Ulick. I can clearly remember the Latin Mass and a lot of older traditions that are no longer adhered to. I live in Birmingham so those links aren't much use to me. Do you happen to know of any Traditionalists around the English Midlands?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on May 08, 2012, 02:19:08 PM
One of my memories of the Latin mass...

Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison

Never knew what it meant until they brought in the English version.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 08, 2012, 02:19:08 PM
One of my memories of the Latin mass...

Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison

Never knew what it meant until they brought in the English version.

I always thought it was

Ciaran a licence

Christy a licence

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 02:43:34 PM
Quote from: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 02:05:59 PM
Thanks for that Ulick. I can clearly remember the Latin Mass and a lot of older traditions that are no longer adhered to. I live in Birmingham so those links aren't much use to me. Do you happen to know of any Traditionalists around the English Midlands?

Ziggy, as with over here a lot depends on the disposition of the local Bishop and there is still some resistance in the English and Welsh Conference. The Latin Mass Society has this section for East Midlands though I'm not sure if it's much use to you:

http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/east-midlands
http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/birmingham_and_the_black_country_rep
http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/hertfordshire_and_northampton_diocese_rep
http://www.sspx.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=72&Itemid=55

I don't really know much about the tradys in England apart from Fr Horgan, a Columban missionary currently based in Solihull. He comes over to Ireland to help out around Christmas and Easter. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 02:53:08 PM
Quote from: Orior on May 08, 2012, 02:19:08 PM
One of my memories of the Latin mass...

Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison

Never knew what it meant until they brought in the English version.

Pays to invest in a missal which has the translation. Biggest problem over here now is finding a pre-1962 Irish missal i.e. which also gives the Mass and prayers for Irish feast days and saints. Most of them were burned in the 70s. Strangely it's easier to find the pre-1962 Gaelic missal.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 03:18:08 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 02:43:34 PM
Quote from: ziggy90 on May 08, 2012, 02:05:59 PM
Thanks for that Ulick. I can clearly remember the Latin Mass and a lot of older traditions that are no longer adhered to. I live in Birmingham so those links aren't much use to me. Do you happen to know of any Traditionalists around the English Midlands?

Ziggy, as with over here a lot depends on the disposition of the local Bishop and there is still some resistance in the English and Welsh Conference. The Latin Mass Society has this section for East Midlands though I'm not sure if it's much use to you:

http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/east-midlands
http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/birmingham_and_the_black_country_rep
http://www.lms.org.uk/around-the-country/hertfordshire_and_northampton_diocese_rep
http://www.sspx.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=72&Itemid=55

I don't really know much about the tradys in England apart from Fr Horgan, a Columban missionary currently based in Solihull. He comes over to Ireland to help out around Christmas and Easter.

I only live a stones throw away from Solihull. You don't happen to know what Parish he works in? I'm going to send you a PM.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 03:22:53 PM
He's a missionary so doesn't have a parish as such. I can get you a contact number though and he can fill you in on the situation locally. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?
Since when? The Pope's comments in November 2010? Can you show me where this is defined in Catholic teaching?
And even then, is it not still regarded as a sin and merely a 'lesser evil'?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:50:37 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"I also can't square the Churches teaching that Homosexuality is evil...Why would God make people Gay if they are intrinsically evil." Firstly, the Catholic Church does not teach that a persons sexual orientation is "intrinsically" linked to the person as a whole, so again you are misrepresenting Catholic dogma. The Church believes that homosexual acts are sinful not the person. In much the same way it believes that sex up the bum, masturbation or otherwise ejaculation outside of the body is sinful for married couples. Committing one of these acts is sinful, but no more makes the homosexual person evil than it makes the married person evil for having a w**k.
Does that mean that Catholics confess to having a w**k in Confession? They do penance for having a w**k?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 08, 2012, 06:37:19 PM
QuoteKýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison
Kýrie, eléison

it's all Greek to me.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 07:38:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?
Since when? The Pope's comments in November 2010? Can you show me where this is defined in Catholic teaching?
And even then, is it not still regarded as a sin and merely a 'lesser evil'?

Humanae Vitae, 1968, but then as most of us here were born Catholic, raised Catholic and taught by good liberal Catholic priests, we all knew that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 08, 2012, 07:46:30 PM
'No healing until cardinal resigns', abuse victim Brendan Boland says


Brendan Boland, one of the victims of paedophile priest Father Brendan Smyth, has said his healing and that of other victims cannot begin while Cardinal Sean Brady remains as Catholic Primate of all-Ireland.

He was responding to a public apology made by Dr Brady.

In it, the cardinal admitted he should have passed on information to parents given to him in 1975 by Mr Boland.

That information warned Fr Smyth was a danger to other children.

In a statement on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Boland thanked the cardinal for the apology and said that one day he hoped to find the strength to accept his offer of a face-to-face meeting.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on May 08, 2012, 07:54:41 PM
Ulick, how do all these wise men in the Church know what God thinks? Why listen to any of them over your own judgement on all these matters?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 08:02:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 07:38:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?
Since when? The Pope's comments in November 2010? Can you show me where this is defined in Catholic teaching?
And even then, is it not still regarded as a sin and merely a 'lesser evil'?

Humanae Vitae, 1968, but then as most of us here were born Catholic, raised Catholic and taught by good liberal Catholic priests, we all knew that.
Had never heard of it - can you quote it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 08:06:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 08:02:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 07:38:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?
Since when? The Pope's comments in November 2010? Can you show me where this is defined in Catholic teaching?
And even then, is it not still regarded as a sin and merely a 'lesser evil'?

Humanae Vitae, 1968, but then as most of us here were born Catholic, raised Catholic and taught by good liberal Catholic priests, we all knew that.
Had never heard of it - can you quote it?

Sure go read it yourself, never know you might learn something.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 08:11:32 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on May 08, 2012, 07:54:41 PM
Ulick, how do all these wise men in the Church know what God thinks? Why listen to any of them over your own judgement on all these matters?

All I'm doing is pointing out actual Catholic doctrine to those who are misrepresenting it whether willfully or through ignorance. I've not expressed my own beliefs anywhere nor said whether or not I agree with the Church doctrine.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 08, 2012, 08:12:41 PM
Ulick, you are very learned in all things church related. I can tell you have a degree in mumbobumbobolloxology direct from the vatican which is even less useful than an arts degree.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on May 08, 2012, 08:14:59 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 08:11:32 PM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on May 08, 2012, 07:54:41 PM
Ulick, how do all these wise men in the Church know what God thinks? Why listen to any of them over your own judgement on all these matters?

All I'm doing is pointing out actual Catholic doctrine to those who are misrepresenting it whether willfully or through ignorance. I've not expressed my own beliefs anywhere nor said whether or not I agree with the Church doctrine.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 08:55:43 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 08:06:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 08:02:53 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 07:38:13 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 08, 2012, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 08, 2012, 01:24:31 PM
"where in the Bible does it say that using condoms to prevent aids is wrong". Catholics are allowed to use barrier contraception if there is a risk of passing on a disease to the husband or wife. Every Catholic knows that surely?
Since when? The Pope's comments in November 2010? Can you show me where this is defined in Catholic teaching?
And even then, is it not still regarded as a sin and merely a 'lesser evil'?

Humanae Vitae, 1968, but then as most of us here were born Catholic, raised Catholic and taught by good liberal Catholic priests, we all knew that.
Had never heard of it - can you quote it?

Sure go read it yourself, never know you might learn something.
I'm very happy to learn something. But i've read it and can't see what you're claiming to be there. It would be appreciated therefore, if you could point it out.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 08, 2012, 11:25:12 PM
At least one of those groups Ulick named, is a bit dodgy and not in communion with Rome. I dont want to name them, as many of their adherents are sincere and genuine if a little misguided
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Boy Wonder on May 09, 2012, 12:00:20 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 08, 2012, 08:12:41 PM
Ulick, you are very learned in all things church related. I can tell you have a degree in mumbobumbobolloxology direct from the vatican which is even less useful than an arts degree.

Pearls and swine comes to mind.

Enjoying your contribution Ulick  ;)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 12:05:03 AM
Needs to be read in context but in essence Humanae Vitae does not define or make distinctions between contraceptives but contraceptive acts.

Section 14 includes the definition of contraception which is also found in the Catholic Catechism (2370): "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible". In other words any act, before, during or after intercourse which is intended to prevent the creation of life.

Section 15 goes on to say that acts which have a contraceptive effect are allowed so long as the intention is not to impede the possibility of creation of life.

Ecclesia autem illas medendi rationes haud illicitas existimat, quae ad morbos corporis curandos necessariae sunt, etiamsi exinde oriatur procreationis impedimentum, licet praevisum, dummodo ne hoc impedimentum ob quamlibet rationem directo intendatur.

Which in your link is:
Lawful Therapeutic Means
15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

Humanae Vitae sets out the definition of contraception (within marriage) as the intention to prevent conception during intercourse. If the intention of the contraceptive act is not prevent conception such as in cases where they are intended to prevent the spread of disease then there is nothing to say they are illicit.

Rhonheimer explains it better in The Suppository:

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284 (http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284)

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 08, 2012, 11:25:12 PM
At least one of those groups Ulick named, is a bit dodgy and not in communion with Rome. I dont want to name them, as many of their adherents are sincere and genuine if a little misguided

Pangurban, before this month is out that particular group will not only be in full communion with Rome, but will most likely have a Personal Prelature direct from Ben16. You heard it here first  ;)

Edit: and most likely without the sedevacantist bampot convert from Anglicism.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Pangurban on May 09, 2012, 12:24:38 AM
I doubt that Ulick, unless there has been a serious revision in their current thinking
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 09, 2012, 01:09:36 AM
QuoteIn fact I'm sure the Church of England and Church of Ireland would welcome disillusioned Catholics with open arms, though they may find it a case of the faraway field being greener.

I reckon a crowd from the Garvaghy Road could join Drumcree, it might lead to more inter-faith dialogue.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 09, 2012, 07:31:44 AM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 09, 2012, 12:00:20 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 08, 2012, 08:12:41 PM
Ulick, you are very learned in all things church related. I can tell you have a degree in mumbobumbobolloxology direct from the vatican which is even less useful than an arts degree.

Pearls and swine comes to mind.

Enjoying your contribution Ulick  ;)

Pearls before swine surely? Its actually a very suitable passage to demonstrate the arrogance of the catholic church and so is quite apt to appear on this thread.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 09, 2012, 08:23:43 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 12:05:03 AM
Needs to be read in context but in essence Humanae Vitae does not define or make distinctions between contraceptives but contraceptive acts.

Section 14 includes the definition of contraception which is also found in the Catholic Catechism (2370): "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible". In other words any act, before, during or after intercourse which is intended to prevent the creation of life.

Section 15 goes on to say that acts which have a contraceptive effect are allowed so long as the intention is not to impede the possibility of creation of life.

Ecclesia autem illas medendi rationes haud illicitas existimat, quae ad morbos corporis curandos necessariae sunt, etiamsi exinde oriatur procreationis impedimentum, licet praevisum, dummodo ne hoc impedimentum ob quamlibet rationem directo intendatur.

Which in your link is:
Lawful Therapeutic Means
15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

Humanae Vitae sets out the definition of contraception (within marriage) as the intention to prevent conception during intercourse. If the intention of the contraceptive act is not prevent conception such as in cases where they are intended to prevent the spread of disease then there is nothing to say they are illicit.

Rhonheimer explains it better in The Suppository:

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284 (http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284)
Section 15 referes to "therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases". Contraceptives are a means of prevention - they cure nothing.
I read that section to mean, for example, a cancer treatment that results in the woman/man being infertile.

What that philosopher says is neither here nor there. It's one interpretation. And you really shouldn't need a philosopher's interpretation to understand the Vatican's teachings - it should be in black and white and clear to understand. You'd also expect it to be clear in the Vatican's subsequent statements and responses on the matter, not just some vague, ambiguous reference from 1968. I can't find anything.

The fact remains the Vatican has not 'allowed' what you're saying they have. The following extract, for example, comes from a Catholic newspaper after the Pope's 2010 statement:
Had the Pope given as an example a serodiscordant married couple, instead of a prostitute (whether male or female is not currently clear) he would really have said something dramatic; and answered a question which many senior churchmen have asked and the Vatican has declined to answer.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 09, 2012, 09:30:10 AM
Quote from: Pangurban on May 08, 2012, 11:25:12 PM
At least one of those groups Ulick named, is a bit dodgy and not in communion with Rome. I dont want to name them, as many of their adherents are sincere and genuine if a little misguided

So who is in communion with Rome as even the mainstream church doesn't tell Rome everything and has hid the child abuse scandal from the holy see for decades, allegedly.

JP II must be turning in his tomb at the thought of what was happening during his reign,
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 10:14:35 AM
Many including Ulick are quoting tradition and not doctrine based on the gospels to support the ongoing practices within the Church of Rome which has seen numbers of believers and priests dwindle. It is time the Church started to review its position otherwise it will wither and die. Just a point at no stage have I said that there is a corelation between celibacy and abuse. Rather easy unregulated access to children is the main reason many paedophiles in the past joined the priesthood. I am a mass going Catholic, I want to see married priests at the very least, that was a tradition that changed!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 10:35:49 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 09, 2012, 08:23:43 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 12:05:03 AM
Needs to be read in context but in essence Humanae Vitae does not define or make distinctions between contraceptives but contraceptive acts.

Section 14 includes the definition of contraception which is also found in the Catholic Catechism (2370): "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible". In other words any act, before, during or after intercourse which is intended to prevent the creation of life.

Section 15 goes on to say that acts which have a contraceptive effect are allowed so long as the intention is not to impede the possibility of creation of life.

Ecclesia autem illas medendi rationes haud illicitas existimat, quae ad morbos corporis curandos necessariae sunt, etiamsi exinde oriatur procreationis impedimentum, licet praevisum, dummodo ne hoc impedimentum ob quamlibet rationem directo intendatur.

Which in your link is:
Lawful Therapeutic Means
15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

Humanae Vitae sets out the definition of contraception (within marriage) as the intention to prevent conception during intercourse. If the intention of the contraceptive act is not prevent conception such as in cases where they are intended to prevent the spread of disease then there is nothing to say they are illicit.

Rhonheimer explains it better in The Suppository:

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284 (http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284)
Section 15 referes to "therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases". Contraceptives are a means of prevention - they cure nothing.
I read that section to mean, for example, a cancer treatment that results in the woman/man being infertile.

What that philosopher says is neither here nor there. It's one interpretation. And you really shouldn't need a philosopher's interpretation to understand the Vatican's teachings - it should be in black and white and clear to understand. You'd also expect it to be clear in the Vatican's subsequent statements and responses on the matter, not just some vague, ambiguous reference from 1968. I can't find anything.

The fact remains the Vatican has not 'allowed' what you're saying they have. The following extract, for example, comes from a Catholic newspaper after the Pope's 2010 statement:
Had the Pope given as an example a serodiscordant married couple, instead of a prostitute (whether male or female is not currently clear) he would really have said something dramatic; and answered a question which many senior churchmen have asked and the Vatican has declined to answer.

Maguire, you're splitting hairs, what you've posted is one interpretation. We could go round in circles about it all day but to be honest it would be rather tedious. Fact is the Magisterium has not said it is illicit for married couple to use condoms were there is risk of passing on a disease. Now I've posted Church doctrine that justifies that their use. If you want to continue, it is then up to you to show me actual Church doctrine which says it is banned in such circumstances i.e. not some cut and paste from a newspaper.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 10:44:40 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 10:14:35 AM
Many including Ulick are qouting tradition and not doctrine based on the gospels to support the ongoing practices within the Church of Rome which has seen numbers of belivers and priests dwindle. It is time the Church started to review its position otherwise it will wither and die. Just a point at no stage have I said that there is a corelation between celibacy and abuse. Rather easy unregulated access to children is the main reason many paedophiles in the past joined the priesthood. I am a mass going Catholic, I want to see married priests at the very least, that was a tradition that changed!

Applesisapples, if knew anything about the religion you purport to follow of even read my previous post you should now know that Catholic doctrine is not solely based on the Bible. If it were I assume we'd all be running around poking each others eyes out until we were all blind. You have not posted any evidence as a link between the dwindling number of believers/priests and "ongoing practices within the Church of Rome", so at this stage that view is still open to debate. However, I'm pretty sure that even if you did, I could quite easily counter it with something that links the dwindling number of believers to the growth in "liberal" practices and lack of teaching by these particular priests you are so fond off. You go on then to again make the link between celibacy and child abuse but where is the evidence?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: thejuice on May 09, 2012, 11:17:40 AM
Just seen these lads.

http://itccs.org/2012/05/04/catholic-church-faces-disruption-and-banishment-as-irish-cardinal-set-to-resign/

Are their demands/threats being taken seriously?

QuoteThe following concrete actions by the Church are required if justice is to be won for its victims and if the crimes it has committed and continue to cover up are to end.

If the Church fails to abide by these basic commandments of humanity and the law, we will take permanent action to end its criminal regime.

1.       The Church must issue full reparations to all of its victims, including by paying for all of their medical and counseling bills, the cost of their rehabilitation and retraining, and for any of their disabilities and losses.

2.       The Church must surrender for a proper burial, without conditions and at its own expense, the remains of all those who died in its institutions or while under its care.

3.       The Church must return all land and property taken from its victims, and restore all of the wealth generated by its exploitation of them as children, including the wealth created from their unpaid or low paid labor.

4.       The Church must surrender without conditions all of the evidence of its crimes against children, and all of those persons responsible for committing these crimes and concealing them, including its highest officials. The Church must fully disclose this evidence and participate without conditions in all public investigations into its crimes.

5.       The Church and its guilty parties cannot hide behind so-called diplomatic immunity or other privileges to evade justice and avoid prosecution. The Vatican must end its official cover up and annul its policy known as Crimen Sollicitationis, which compels Catholic clergy to conceal crimes committed against children in their parishes.

6.       The Church must immediately expel and defrock all known child raping priests, officials and employees in its ranks, and defrock any clergy who harms a child or conceals such harm.

7.       All clergy and Church officials must agree to be licensed and monitored as public servants, and take a legally binding, public oath to protect without conditions the rights and sanctity of children and disclose any harm done to them.

8.       The Church must forgo and withdraw from all of the tax exemptions, financial concordats and agreements, and other special privileges presently granted to it under the laws of nations.

9.       The Vatican must agree to the annulment of its status as a so-called state, and free its congregations and dioceses from its authority so that they may act according to the wishes and needs of their respective communities and their faith, and not the political and financial requirements of the Vatican.

10.   All of the wealth accumulated by the Church and the Vatican Bank through land theft and conquest, and from tax exemptions, concordats, and from its operations around the world that have harmed children through the exploitation of their labor, such as the Magdalene Laundries and Indian residential schools, must be returned to its victims and to the poor in general through a direct, public redistribution of that wealth, as Christ himself commands.

QuoteWe have been instructed to inform the Bishops of Ireland, as we have notified the Vatican, that they have until September 15, 2012, to agree to these demands and implement these ten measures.

If they fail to commence to do so by midnight of that date, we will enact the following measures:

1.       The Roman Catholic Church will be formally and forever banished from our communities, and measures will be taken to legally and practically prevent it from operating;

2.       Roman Catholic churches, agencies and offices around the world will be permanently disrupted and occupied as part of an ongoing campaign of non-violent civil disobedience; and

3.       Our International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State will reconvene its court, and will seek the immediate detaining for questioning of the highest officials of the Roman Catholic Church, including Pope Benedict, on charges of obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, and crimes against humanity.

It is time for all people of conscience within the Church to choose who they will serve: a self-governing, criminal church system that sets itself above the law and God – or its suffering victims, and justice.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 12:03:22 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 10:44:40 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 10:14:35 AM
Many including Ulick are quoting tradition and not doctrine based on the gospels to support the ongoing practices within the Church of Rome which has seen numbers of believers and priests dwindle. It is time the Church started to review its position otherwise it will wither and die. Just a point at no stage have I said that there is a corelation between celibacy and abuse. Rather easy unregulated access to children is the main reason many paedophiles in the past joined the priesthood. I am a mass going Catholic, I want to see married priests at the very least, that was a tradition that changed!

Applesisapples, if knew anything about the religion you purport to follow of even read my previous post you should now know that Catholic doctrine is not solely based on the Bible. If it were I assume we'd all be running around poking each others eyes out until we were all blind. You have not posted any evidence as a link between the dwindling number of believers/priests and "ongoing practices within the Church of Rome", so at this stage that view is still open to debate. However, I'm pretty sure that even if you did, I could quite easily counter it with something that links the dwindling number of believers to the growth in "liberal" practices and lack of teaching by these particular priests you are so fond off. You go on then to again make the link between celibacy and child abuse but where is the evidence?
That is exactly my point, it based on tradition and traditions can and should change. it was as I pointed out once the tradition to allow priests to marry. It was once the tradition for men and women to be segregated, it was once the tradition to call out the amount of money each parishioner gave at mass, it was once tradition that only priests could give out communion, it was once tradition that the laity could not touch the host....etc...Traditions can change, the bible can be interprated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 09, 2012, 12:28:30 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 12:03:22 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 10:44:40 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 10:14:35 AM
Many including Ulick are quoting tradition and not doctrine based on the gospels to support the ongoing practices within the Church of Rome which has seen numbers of believers and priests dwindle. It is time the Church started to review its position otherwise it will wither and die. Just a point at no stage have I said that there is a corelation between celibacy and abuse. Rather easy unregulated access to children is the main reason many paedophiles in the past joined the priesthood. I am a mass going Catholic, I want to see married priests at the very least, that was a tradition that changed!

Applesisapples, if knew anything about the religion you purport to follow of even read my previous post you should now know that Catholic doctrine is not solely based on the Bible. If it were I assume we'd all be running around poking each others eyes out until we were all blind. You have not posted any evidence as a link between the dwindling number of believers/priests and "ongoing practices within the Church of Rome", so at this stage that view is still open to debate. However, I'm pretty sure that even if you did, I could quite easily counter it with something that links the dwindling number of believers to the growth in "liberal" practices and lack of teaching by these particular priests you are so fond off. You go on then to again make the link between celibacy and child abuse but where is the evidence?
That is exactly my point, it based on tradition and traditions can and should change. it was as I pointed out once the tradition to allow priests to marry. It was once the tradition for men and women to be segregated, it was once the tradition to call out the amount of money each parishioner gave at mass, it was once tradition that only priests could give out communion, it was once tradition that the laity could not touch the host....etc...Traditions can change, the bible can be interprated.

It was once the tradition that non baptised children who died were buried in unconsecrated ground.

It was once the tradition that mothers had to be 'churched' after giving birth before they could enter the doors let alone take part in the sacraments.

Thankfully some 'traditions' have fallen by the wayside, some more to go though!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 09, 2012, 01:38:54 PM
What about the place they used to call "Limbo" ?

It turns out now there is or was no such place.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on May 09, 2012, 02:02:41 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 09, 2012, 01:38:54 PM
What about the place they used to call "Limbo" ?

It turns out now there is or was no such place.
No it's just in limbo...uh no maybe...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 09, 2012, 02:28:07 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 09, 2012, 01:38:54 PM
What about the place they used to call "Limbo" ?

It turns out now there is or was no such place.
Nah, Purgatory was just a money making scam where you could 'buy' plenary indulgences to shorten your spell there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 09, 2012, 03:21:12 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on May 09, 2012, 02:28:07 PM
Quote from: orangeman on May 09, 2012, 01:38:54 PM
What about the place they used to call "Limbo" ?

It turns out now there is or was no such place.
Nah, Purgatory was just a money making scam where you could 'buy' plenary indulgences to shorten your spell there.

Ah, the good old plenary indulgence where there was like a buy one get two free offer for the month of November when things were slow coming up to the Christmas period.
Those were the days !.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 09, 2012, 06:04:57 PM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 10:35:49 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 09, 2012, 08:23:43 AM
Quote from: Ulick on May 09, 2012, 12:05:03 AM
Needs to be read in context but in essence Humanae Vitae does not define or make distinctions between contraceptives but contraceptive acts.

Section 14 includes the definition of contraception which is also found in the Catholic Catechism (2370): "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible". In other words any act, before, during or after intercourse which is intended to prevent the creation of life.

Section 15 goes on to say that acts which have a contraceptive effect are allowed so long as the intention is not to impede the possibility of creation of life.

Ecclesia autem illas medendi rationes haud illicitas existimat, quae ad morbos corporis curandos necessariae sunt, etiamsi exinde oriatur procreationis impedimentum, licet praevisum, dummodo ne hoc impedimentum ob quamlibet rationem directo intendatur.

Which in your link is:
Lawful Therapeutic Means
15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

Humanae Vitae sets out the definition of contraception (within marriage) as the intention to prevent conception during intercourse. If the intention of the contraceptive act is not prevent conception such as in cases where they are intended to prevent the spread of disease then there is nothing to say they are illicit.

Rhonheimer explains it better in The Suppository:

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284 (http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/2284)
Section 15 referes to "therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases". Contraceptives are a means of prevention - they cure nothing.
I read that section to mean, for example, a cancer treatment that results in the woman/man being infertile.

What that philosopher says is neither here nor there. It's one interpretation. And you really shouldn't need a philosopher's interpretation to understand the Vatican's teachings - it should be in black and white and clear to understand. You'd also expect it to be clear in the Vatican's subsequent statements and responses on the matter, not just some vague, ambiguous reference from 1968. I can't find anything.

The fact remains the Vatican has not 'allowed' what you're saying they have. The following extract, for example, comes from a Catholic newspaper after the Pope's 2010 statement:
Had the Pope given as an example a serodiscordant married couple, instead of a prostitute (whether male or female is not currently clear) he would really have said something dramatic; and answered a question which many senior churchmen have asked and the Vatican has declined to answer.

Maguire, you're splitting hairs, what you've posted is one interpretation. We could go round in circles about it all day but to be honest it would be rather tedious. Fact is the Magisterium has not said it is illicit for married couple to use condoms were there is risk of passing on a disease. Now I've posted Church doctrine that justifies that their use. If you want to continue, it is then up to you to show me actual Church doctrine which says it is banned in such circumstances i.e. not some cut and paste from a newspaper.
Well done on avoiding the substantive points of my post. And you're the one who posted one interpretation. I posted a newspaper report - not a mainstream paper, but a Catholic one - to support the point that if they can't see your interpretation, and the Church in general and the Vatican in particular doesn't make that interpretation known, then how are Catholics in places like Africa with HIV going to come to that interpretation? Surely if your interpretation was correct, then the current Pope (and his predecessor) would have no issue in spelling it out.

Anyway, I think we should run the risk of becoming tedious to reach some clarity on this.

You based your argument on section 15 saying that contraception in such a case was allowed. That section relates to thereputic means to cure disease. This has nothing to do with using condoms to avoid transmission of disease. Now, having seen the error in that line of argument, you've shifted to saying that contraception in such a case is not not allowed (i.e. not explicitly disallowed).

The previous paragraph is as follows:
Unlawful Birth Control Methods
Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.


The sections in bold, I would read as saying that contraception is not allowed, even in the case of a serodiscordant married couple.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 18, 2012, 02:01:51 PM
Not exactly a vote of confidence -


Just 20 out of a total of 150 priests in the Armagh archdiocese turned up to a recent gathering organised in support of Cardinal Sean Brady.

The figure was revealed by The Irish Catholic newspaper.

Several priests in the diocese told the paper the lack of support was indicative of low morale among the clergy there.

A spokesman for Dr Brady told The Irish Catholic the poor turnout may have been because of short notice.

About 13% of the priests who were invited attended the gathering which was described as a "prayer gathering of support for Cardinal Brady" in the Synod Hall in St Patrick's Cathedral, Armagh, last Friday.

One priest told the paper he felt the poor turnout "was a sign that priests of the diocese are very fed up. Many are just doing their own thing because they think it is rudderless at the top".

Another attributed the small uptake for the event to "a great deal of apathy among priests of the diocese. It certainly isn't helped by everything that's going on at the moment," he said, referring to the controversy around Cardinal Brady's handling of allegations against Fr Brendan Smyth.

However, another priest said he felt the low morale was as a result of other issues.

He felt that "many priests" were "very unhappy that there are priests in this diocese, against whom allegations [of abuse] have been made, who have been cleared by the civil authorities, but not returned to ministry".

"A lot of priests feel sore about that," he said.

Cardinal Brady's spokesman pointed out that the event was not the annual gathering for clergy and "because of the short notice it was expected to be a small gathering".

He said it had been organised "a few days before".

Cardinal Brady told The Irish Catholic, the event was "a most beautiful and moving experience".

"I am very grateful for all the prayerful support that I have received."

Earlier this month, a BBC documentary revealed that in 1975, a 14-year-old boy who had been sexually abused by a paedophile priest, Fr Brendan Smyth, gave the then Fr Brady the names and addresses of other children who had been abused.

It said Fr Brady did not pass on the details to the police or parents.

In response, the Catholic primate of all Ireland said he would not resign as Church leader despite revelations in the BBC's This World show.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 18, 2012, 06:05:08 PM
Can you believe this ?

The deputy first minister raised the possibility of prosecuting Cardinal Sean Brady, it has emerged.

Martin McGuinness did so at a 3 May executive meeting amid revelations the cardinal failed to report child sex abuse to police almost 40 years ago.

He formally asked Justice Minister David Ford to consult the police to see if a prosecution was possible under the Criminal Law Act (NI) 1967.


It makes it an offence to withhold information about a crime.

The meeting took place two days after the BBC's This World Programme revealed fresh details about Cardinal Brady's role in the Brendan Smyth affair and his part in the failure to inform the police or parents about the abuse by the paedophile priest.

In public, Mr McGuinness has been an outspoken critic of the Roman Catholic primate of all Ireland, saying he should consider his position.

But it has now emerged he raised the subject at executive level.

According to one well-placed source: "He formally asked David Ford as justice minister... to consult with the PSNI and if necessary its RUC predecessor to see if prosecution was possible in this case."

It is understood the justice minister agreed to pass on the executive's concerns to the chief constable and the relevant Dublin authorities, but stressed it was an operational matter for the police.

Sources have also told the BBC that an executive press release on the matter was not issued as parties could not agree to the wording.

It is understood Sinn Fein wanted to confine the wording to child sex abuse but the SDLP, Alliance and DUP insisted on a reference to all crime.

"In the end they abandoned it," the source said.
A spokesman for the executive had no comment as its business is private.

There was no immediate comment from Sinn Fein.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 18, 2012, 06:19:06 PM
Now Martin clarifies matters - which appears to be a bit different to what the earlier report claimed.



Martin McGuinness sought co-operation in Smyth inquiry

Sinn Fein has said the deputy first minister pressed the justice minister to ensure police co-operated with a cross-border inquiry into the crimes of paedophile priest Brendan Smyth.

A spokesman for Martin McGuinness denied he asked the justice minister to consult police about the possibility of prosecuting Cardinal Sean Brady.

It was over his part in the failure to inform police about the abuse in 1975.

Sources told the BBC Mr McGuinness raised the Smyth case on 3 May.

This followed revelations in a BBC This World programme that the cardinal had the names and addresses of children being abused by Smyth, but did not ensure their safety.

The well-placed sources said that at an executive meeting, Mr McGuinness asked asked the justice minister David Ford to formally ask the PSNI about the possibility of prosecution, given the 1967 Act which makes it an offence not to report a crime.

But Sinn Fein said Mr McGuinness did not mention the cardinal but asked Mr Ford to ensure the PSNI cooperated with if there was to be a cross-border inquiry, as called for by Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 18, 2012, 08:08:29 PM
QuoteIt makes it an offence to withhold information about a crime.

So McGuinness has never withheld information about a crime?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on May 19, 2012, 11:39:50 AM
It seems that the priests in his own diocese aren't too happy with the antics of Cardinal Brady:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/underfire-cardinal-suffers-snub-from-his-own-priests-3111528.html (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/underfire-cardinal-suffers-snub-from-his-own-priests-3111528.html)

Under-fire cardinal suffers snub from his own priests

CARDINAL Sean Brady has suffered a new blow after the majority of priests in his diocese snubbed a meeting organised as a show of support for the embattled leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland.
Just 20 of 150 priests in the Armagh Archdiocese invited to attend a prayer gathering in support of Dr Brady actually showed up -- with many privately voicing concerns about his leadership.
The poor turn-out at the meeting is the most overt response by rank-and-file priests to new allegations surrounding Cardinal Brady's handling of abuse allegations made against notorious paedophile Fr Brendan Smyth.
Allegations
It follows calls by a number of government ministers for the cardinal to consider his position.
Catholic Church insiders said Dr Brady had been keeping a low profile for the past fortnight after the allegations emerged in a BBC 'This World' documentary.
Despite defending his position in the immediate aftermath of the programme, the cardinal has rarely been seen out in public since and has not been presiding at confirmation ceremonies. Dr Brady had claimed he received a lot of support from within the church to stay on in his role as Primate of All Ireland.
However, the revelation that so few priest attended the prayer meeting suggests that his analysis may not be the correct one.
The BBC documentary revealed how in the mid-1970s the then Fr Brady had been informed by 14-year-old abuse victim Brendan Boland that other children were being abused by Smyth.
Mr Boland gave the names and addresses of other children in danger from Smyth.
But despite being given this information, the then Fr Brady and his superiors did nothing to warn the parents of Smyth's victims.
As well as disquiet over Dr Brady's role in the Smyth affair, other factors also played a part in the poor attendance, according to priests in the diocese.
Priests in Armagh who were contacted complained of low morale.
One said he felt that the poor turnout "was a sign that priests of the diocese are very fed up. Many are just doing their own thing because they think it is rudderless at the top."
A spokesman for Cardinal Brady claimed the poor attendance last Friday week was due to "short notice".

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on May 19, 2012, 11:44:24 AM
Quote from: armaghniac on May 18, 2012, 08:08:29 PM
QuoteIt makes it an offence to withhold information about a crime.

So McGuinness has never withheld information about a crime?

Define a crime?

Anyway, what McGuinness did or didn't do in 30 years of conflict has nothing to do with child rapists and the protection of child rapists by brady and his chums. Debate the issues and start another thread on McGuinness if you want to discuss him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Cold tea on May 21, 2012, 08:23:53 AM
Does denying children of parents because they have been murdered in the name of war not enter under the child protection radar.  McGuinness would need to think a little before crying about the poor children, many of whom suffered immense heartache and serious traumatic abuse because of what he did or didnt do in 30 years of conflict.  Brady on the evidence we have followed his orders and reported the matter to his Bishop, and McGuinness wants him to resign - he should look in the mirror.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 09:22:46 AM
FFS  ::) ...and if McGuinness said nothing about Brady you'd be tearing stripes out of him for that too ::) Martin McGuinness and the IRA were not the cause of the war you speak and as I am writing this reply on the exact 31st anniversary of the deaths of Ray McCreesh and Patsy O'Hara on Hunger Strike, I would like to state that nor for that matter were they criminals as armaghniac suggests. So lads, change the record and try to stay on the topic of the thread.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 10:00:26 AM
58:53
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Cold tea on May 21, 2012, 10:26:45 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 09:22:46 AM
FFS  ::) ...and if McGuinness said nothing about Brady you'd be tearing stripes out of him for that too ::) Martin McGuinness and the IRA were not the cause of the war you speak and as I am writing this reply on the exact 31st anniversary of the deaths of Ray McCreesh and Patsy O'Hara on Hunger Strike, I would like to state that nor for that matter were they criminals as armaghniac suggests. So lads, change the record and try to stay on the topic of the thread.

If McGuinness has said nothing about Brady I doubt it would have been mentioned on here.  The fact that he calling for his resignation because he followed orders reeks of hypocrisy from a man with his past, and for the record Brady didn't cause that bastard Smith to rape those poor children, yes he was totally ineffectual in stopping him but he didn't cause him to do it.  The topic is clerical abuse – all those involved should be shot as far as I am concerned including anyone involved in a cover up, but let's not kid ourselves of McGuinness's motives for calling for his resignation, the anti-catholic brigade has built up a lot of momentum in the media and oul Marty is jumping on it as he jumps on anything with a bit of momentum, as for him trying to get Brady prosecuted - you couldnt make it up!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 10:41:14 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on May 21, 2012, 10:26:45 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 09:22:46 AM
FFS  ::) ...and if McGuinness said nothing about Brady you'd be tearing stripes out of him for that too ::) Martin McGuinness and the IRA were not the cause of the war you speak and as I am writing this reply on the exact 31st anniversary of the deaths of Ray McCreesh and Patsy O'Hara on Hunger Strike, I would like to state that nor for that matter were they criminals as armaghniac suggests. So lads, change the record and try to stay on the topic of the thread.

If McGuinness has said nothing about Brady I doubt it would have been mentioned on here.  The fact that he calling for his resignation because he followed orders reeks of hypocrisy from a man with his past, and for the record Brady didn't cause that b**tard Smith to rape those poor children, yes he was totally ineffectual in stopping him but he didn't cause him to do it.  The topic is clerical abuse – all those involved should be shot as far as I am concerned including anyone involved in a cover up, but let's not kid ourselves of McGuinness's motives for calling for his resignation, the anti-catholic brigade has built up a lot of momentum in the media and oul Marty is jumping on it as he jumps on anything with a bit of momentum, as for him trying to get Brady prosecuted - you couldnt make it up!

And now he is jumping on the anti-Catholic bandwagon? Despite being a committed practicing Catholic, who in his own words "loves" his Church"? Someone once described by a cellmate in Portlaoise as a man who's "whose devotion to his religion was as intense as his politics"? Don't make me laugh. No point in shouting about how angry this news makes you and yet expecting the joint head of the administration in the six counties to say nothing about the entire scandal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 10:00:26 AM
58:53

Was that too long? I suppose, unlike you, I don't spend every waking minute of my life on an internet discussion board. An average of 4.862 per day every day since November 10, 2006?? Get a life man!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 21, 2012, 11:17:00 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 10:00:26 AM
58:53

Was that too long? I suppose, unlike you, I don't spend every waking minute of my life on an internet discussion board. An average of 4.862 per day every day since November 10, 2006?? Get a life man!
Which is not that much more than yourself with a average of 3.36 post per day since Jan 16 2010. Get a life man.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 11:28:12 AM
You could operate a little more efficiently, that's all. Just write a script that monitors posts for key words and phrases - I don't need to give you the list - and sends you a text or rings a bell. Actuallly, go with the bell - suitably Pavlovian.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 11:39:28 AM
Quote from: ludermor on May 21, 2012, 11:17:00 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 10:00:26 AM
58:53

Was that too long? I suppose, unlike you, I don't spend every waking minute of my life on an internet discussion board. An average of 4.862 per day every day since November 10, 2006?? Get a life man!
Which is not that much more than yourself with a average of 3.36 post per day since Jan 16 2010. Get a life man.

1.644 since 2007, to be precise. (Only .3 off your good self. Get a life man!)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 11:40:45 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 11:28:12 AM
You could operate a little more efficiently, that's all. Just write a script that monitors posts for key words and phrases - I don't need to give you the list - and sends you a text or rings a bell. Actuallly, go with the bell - suitably Pavlovian.

Like you seem to have done when my username appears? Flattering  ;)

But i'm not that way inclined.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Cold tea on May 21, 2012, 11:42:06 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 09:22:46 AM
So lads, change the record and try to stay on the topic of the thread.

Jesus wept!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on May 21, 2012, 11:47:39 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 11:39:28 AM
Quote from: ludermor on May 21, 2012, 11:17:00 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 21, 2012, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: Hardy on May 21, 2012, 10:00:26 AM
58:53

Was that too long? I suppose, unlike you, I don't spend every waking minute of my life on an internet discussion board. An average of 4.862 per day every day since November 10, 2006?? Get a life man!
Which is not that much more than yourself with a average of 3.36 post per day since Jan 16 2010. Get a life man.

1.644 since 2007, to be precise. (Only .3 off your good self. Get a life man!)
That is correct but you were very slow ( or posting under a different name) for the first 3 years ( only posting 8 time) and since Jan 16 2010 you have averaged 3.36 to be percise ( its not that difficult to work out)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 06:53:36 PM
Fair play to Sean Brady. Fairly contrite here.

Cardinal Sean Brady says Catholic Church abuse failures shameful

Cardinal Sean Brady has said it is "a matter of deep shame" that the Catholic Church did not always respond properly to victims of child abuse.

The Catholic primate of all Ireland was delivering a homily at the 50th International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin.

He said he wanted to ask for the forgiveness of abuse victims.

He said the church had "first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain".

Cardinal Brady referred to a stone that sits in a place of honour before the altar at the Congress Arena.

"It will serve as a reminder of those children and young people who were hurt by a Church that first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain," he said.

"The words of the Gospel echo in my mind: 'It is not the will of your Father that any of these little ones should be lost'.

"May God forgive us for the times when we as individuals and as a Church failed to seek out and care for those little ones who were frightened, alone and in pain because someone was abusing them.

"That we did not always respond to your cries with the concern of the Good Shepherd is a matter of deep shame."

He said the Church prayed for healing and peace "for those whose suffering continues".

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2012, 07:31:36 PM
He'll be contrite if he goes to jail which is where he should be. His apologies are hollow and meaningless now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 07:45:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2012, 07:31:36 PM
He'll be contrite if he goes to jail which is where he should be. His apologies are hollow and meaningless now.

He's not going anywhere near jail and is not going to lose his position at the head of the church.

Maybe he does now realise at long last, the error of his ways and has acknowledged the error of his ways and should be forgiven and time to draw a line in the sand ?.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on June 14, 2012, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 07:45:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2012, 07:31:36 PM
He'll be contrite if he goes to jail which is where he should be. His apologies are hollow and meaningless now.

He's not going anywhere near jail and is not going to lose his position at the head of the church.

Maybe he does now realise at long last, the error of his ways and has acknowledged the error of his ways and should be forgiven and time to draw a line in the sand ?.

Yes, lets forget that he covered up child abuse and played a serious role, for which he was well rewarded.

Brady should rot in prison as far as i'm concerned.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 11:22:43 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on June 14, 2012, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 07:45:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 14, 2012, 07:31:36 PM
He'll be contrite if he goes to jail which is where he should be. His apologies are hollow and meaningless now.

He's not going anywhere near jail and is not going to lose his position at the head of the church.

Maybe he does now realise at long last, the error of his ways and has acknowledged the error of his ways and should be forgiven and time to draw a line in the sand ?.

Yes, lets forget that he covered up child abuse and played a serious role, for which he was well rewarded.

Brady should rot in prison as far as i'm concerned.
[/b]

We all know that's not going to happen, let alone lose his position as head of the churh in Ireland.

Stakes are too big. If he can be taken out, then the sky's the limit. It won't happen.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on June 15, 2012, 11:25:34 AM
Quote from: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 06:53:36 PM
Fair play to Sean Brady. Fairly contrite here.

Cardinal Sean Brady says Catholic Church abuse failures shameful

Cardinal Sean Brady has said it is "a matter of deep shame" that the Catholic Church did not always respond properly to victims of child abuse.

The Catholic primate of all Ireland was delivering a homily at the 50th International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin.

He said he wanted to ask for the forgiveness of abuse victims.

He said the church had "first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain".

Cardinal Brady referred to a stone that sits in a place of honour before the altar at the Congress Arena.

"It will serve as a reminder of those children and young people who were hurt by a Church that first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain," he said.

"The words of the Gospel echo in my mind: 'It is not the will of your Father that any of these little ones should be lost'.

"May God forgive us for the times when we as individuals and as a Church failed to seek out and care for those little ones who were frightened, alone and in pain because someone was abusing them.

"That we did not always respond to your cries with the concern of the Good Shepherd is a matter of deep shame."

He said the Church prayed for healing and peace "for those whose suffering continues".

He'll be presenting himself and all the documented evidence held by the Catholic church to his nearest Garda or PSNI police station any day now I presume?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 15, 2012, 01:15:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on June 15, 2012, 11:25:34 AM
Quote from: orangeman on June 14, 2012, 06:53:36 PM
Fair play to Sean Brady. Fairly contrite here.

Cardinal Sean Brady says Catholic Church abuse failures shameful

Cardinal Sean Brady has said it is "a matter of deep shame" that the Catholic Church did not always respond properly to victims of child abuse.

The Catholic primate of all Ireland was delivering a homily at the 50th International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin.

He said he wanted to ask for the forgiveness of abuse victims.

He said the church had "first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain".

Cardinal Brady referred to a stone that sits in a place of honour before the altar at the Congress Arena.

"It will serve as a reminder of those children and young people who were hurt by a Church that first betrayed their trust and then failed to respond adequately to their pain," he said.

"The words of the Gospel echo in my mind: 'It is not the will of your Father that any of these little ones should be lost'.

"May God forgive us for the times when we as individuals and as a Church failed to seek out and care for those little ones who were frightened, alone and in pain because someone was abusing them.

"That we did not always respond to your cries with the concern of the Good Shepherd is a matter of deep shame."

He said the Church prayed for healing and peace "for those whose suffering continues".

He'll be presenting himself and all the documented evidence held by the Catholic church to his nearest Garda or PSNI police station any day now I presume?

Not a chance.


Any small chance there ever was of that happening is now past.

Time for him to reinvent himself and the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on June 16, 2012, 12:36:52 PM
I have tos say as a practicing Catholic, I have lost faith in all but a couple of Church Leaders, Bishops Martin, Treanor and McAreavy being exceptions. This Mea Culpa act of Brady's might fool the usual alter lickers but cuts no ice with the majority. Time for a root and branch overhaul. We need young married priests both male and female. Time also to go back to our Celtic roots and ditch the Furher in Rome.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 16, 2012, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 16, 2012, 12:36:52 PM
I have tos say as a practicing Catholic, I have lost faith in all but a couple of Church Leaders, Bishops Martin, Treanor and McAreavy being exceptions. This Mea Culpa act of Brady's might fool the usual alter lickers but cuts no ice with the majority. Time for a root and branch overhaul. We need young married priests both male and female. Time also to go back to our Celtic roots and ditch the Furher in Rome.

So you are going to be a practicing catholic who aspires to return to their Celtic roots (i.e. paganism) and wants to ditch the pope. You are a strange fellow!

As for Brady. Weasel words at this stage mean nothing and frankly I can't believe anyone would consider them genuine. This is a man that made abused children sign an NDA and up to very recently was portraying himself as no more than a note taker - which was another lie was it not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 17, 2012, 10:21:33 PM
Here - have a read of this shite, fresh from that meeting of clowns in Dublin... (http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/sex-abuse-undermined-church-pope-3140678.html)

Allow me to paraphrase...

Some bad priests, lost their way and abused children. This was bad.

Even worse, the have undermined the greatness of the church.

No mention of the bishops, cardinals and maybe popes that knew and covered it up, probably to ensure the great church wasn't undermined. No mention of the suffering of the victim - little innocent children. If this is the ass-hole at the head of this rotten organisation then there is no hope for it.



Sex abuse undermined church: Pope


The Pope has told Irish Catholics that priests who abused children in their care have undermined the credibility of the church


Paedophile priests who abused those in their care undermined the credibility of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI has said.

In a pre-recorded address to almost 80,000 pilgrims in Dublin, the pontiff said the legacy of Irish Catholicism has been shaken by the clerical sexual abuse of children, adding it remained a mystery how clergy could commit such sins.


The Pope told the congregation attending the closing Mass of the 50th International Eucharistic Congress their forebears in the church in Ireland knew how to strive for holiness and constancy in their personal lives, and how to preach the joy that comes from the Gospel.

"Thankfulness and joy at such a great history of faith and love have recently been shaken in an appalling way by the revelation of sins committed by priests and consecrated persons against people entrusted to their care," said Pope Benedict in an eight-minute recorded message to the crowd, which included Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Irish President Michael D Higgins.

"Instead of showing them the path towards Christ, towards God, instead of bearing witness to his goodness, they abused people and undermined the credibility of the Church's message.

"How are we to explain the fact that people who regularly received the Lord's body and confessed their sins in the sacrament of Penance have offended in this way? It remains a mystery. Yet evidently, their Christianity was no longer nourished by joyful encounter with Jesus Christ: it had become merely a matter of habit."

Thousands of pilgrims from around the world have attended the week-long Congress, which has been dubbed the "spiritual Olympics" of the Catholic Church. The last time the event was held in Ireland was in 1932 when the Catholic Church held a firm grasp over the Irish people and close to a million people packed the Phoenix Park for the final public mass.

But in recent years the Catholic Church in Ireland has been rocked by several State inquiries which revealed decades of abuse and cover-ups by church hierarchy and State authorities. Cardinal Sean Brady, head of the church in Ireland, has also dismissed several calls for his resignation over his role in a secret inquiry into a dangerous paedophile priest in 1975.

Pope Benedict's address was the first time he spoke directly to Catholics in Ireland since he penned an open letter to mass-goers in 2010 in which he apologised to victims of abuse.

Despite the huge drop in support for the church, up to 20,000 people a day visited the RDS, which was transformed into a eucharistic village for the eight-day festival of faith and culture. It featured 223 keynote speakers and 160 workshops including talks, addresses, group reflections, meetings, concerts and plays.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on June 17, 2012, 11:02:26 PM
''In a pre-recorded address to almost 80,000 pilgrims in Dublin, the pontiff said the legacy of Irish Catholicism has been shaken by the clerical sexual abuse of children, adding it remained a mystery how clergy could commit such sins.''

A Mystery he says, yeah it sure was a mystery, kept hidden by your boys from us common folk.

(http://tikigod784.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/fatther-ted-down-with-this-sort-of-thing.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on June 18, 2012, 09:56:17 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 16, 2012, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 16, 2012, 12:36:52 PM
I have tos say as a practicing Catholic, I have lost faith in all but a couple of Church Leaders, Bishops Martin, Treanor and McAreavy being exceptions. This Mea Culpa act of Brady's might fool the usual alter lickers but cuts no ice with the majority. Time for a root and branch overhaul. We need young married priests both male and female. Time also to go back to our Celtic roots and ditch the Furher in Rome.

So you are going to be a practicing catholic who aspires to return to their Celtic roots (i.e. paganism) and wants to ditch the pope. You are a strange fellow!

As for Brady. Weasel words at this stage mean nothing and frankly I can't believe anyone would consider them genuine. This is a man that made abused children sign an NDA and up to very recently was portraying himself as no more than a note taker - which was another lie was it not.
Obviously not up on church history, the Celtic Christian Church predated Roman interference.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on June 27, 2012, 01:39:02 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466)

Thought I'd throw this in here - Fr Eugene Boland, brother of Strabane parish priest Declan, found not guilty of all charges of indecent assault. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 27, 2012, 01:41:06 PM
Quote from: Rois on June 27, 2012, 01:39:02 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466)

Thought I'd throw this in here - Fr Eugene Boland, brother of Strabane parish priest Declan, found not guilty of all charges of indecent assault.

Delighted for him.

This man went through hell and back.

Hope he's back prompto.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 27, 2012, 01:59:01 PM
BUSTED ( pardon the pun )


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


Bishop giving more than hugs it seems - only human after all !



The Pope has accepted the resignation of an Argentine bishop after the publication of pictures showing him embracing a woman on a Mexican beach.

Bishop Fernando Bargallo, 57, was photographed in the sea, hugging a woman in a bikini.

He initially said she was a childhood friend, but later admitted to having had "amorous ties" with her.

Bishop Bargallo was in charge of the diocese of Merlo-Moreno, in the province of Buenos Aires.

The scandal broke last week, when an Argentine television station broadcast pictures of Monsignor Bargallo on holiday at a beach resort in Mexico in the company of a woman.

'Childhood friend'

In one of the pictures, he is seen half-submerged in the water, embracing a woman in a bikini.

Shortly after the pictures were published, Monsignor Bargallo gave a public statement saying that the woman was a childhood friend, whom he had known all of his life.

He said the situation in which he had been photographed was "imprudent, as it could lead people to jump to the wrong conclusion".

He asked his flock to forgive him for "the ambiguity of the pictures" and urged them to view the photos "in the context of a long friendship".

But later that same week, Monsignor Bargallo convened the priests of his diocese and told them he had had "amorous ties" with the woman and would resign.

The Vatican said he would be replaced by Monsignor Alcides Jorge Pedro Casaretto.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on June 27, 2012, 02:12:15 PM
Little boys, sweep it under the carpet.

Grown woman, resigning matter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 27, 2012, 02:25:15 PM
Quote from: dec on June 27, 2012, 02:12:15 PM
Little boys, sweep it under the carpet.

Grown woman, resigning matter.

Which is precisley the reason why this thread exists.

There was far too much of that went on for far too long.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on June 27, 2012, 03:09:33 PM
They obviously learnt nothing from the Bishop Len Brennan affair!

/Jim
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Nally Stand on June 27, 2012, 09:06:04 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 27, 2012, 01:41:06 PM
Quote from: Rois on June 27, 2012, 01:39:02 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466)

Thought I'd throw this in here - Fr Eugene Boland, brother of Strabane parish priest Declan, found not guilty of all charges of indecent assault.

Delighted for him.

This man went through hell and back.

Hope he's back prompto.

+1.

He's an absolute gentleman.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on June 30, 2012, 10:38:51 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 18, 2012, 09:56:17 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 16, 2012, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 16, 2012, 12:36:52 PM
I have tos say as a practicing Catholic, I have lost faith in all but a couple of Church Leaders, Bishops Martin, Treanor and McAreavy being exceptions. This Mea Culpa act of Brady's might fool the usual alter lickers but cuts no ice with the majority. Time for a root and branch overhaul. We need young married priests both male and female. Time also to go back to our Celtic roots and ditch the Furher in Rome.

So you are going to be a practicing catholic who aspires to return to their Celtic roots (i.e. paganism) and wants to ditch the pope. You are a strange fellow!

As for Brady. Weasel words at this stage mean nothing and frankly I can't believe anyone would consider them genuine. This is a man that made abused children sign an NDA and up to very recently was portraying himself as no more than a note taker - which was another lie was it not.
Obviously not up on church history, the Celtic Christian Church predated Roman interference.
I know that's why I said ditch the poe and return to our roots!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omagh_gael on July 01, 2012, 09:42:34 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on June 27, 2012, 09:06:04 PM
Quote from: orangeman on June 27, 2012, 01:41:06 PM
Quote from: Rois on June 27, 2012, 01:39:02 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-18606466)

Thought I'd throw this in here - Fr Eugene Boland, brother of Strabane parish priest Declan, found not guilty of all charges of indecent assault.

Delighted for him.

This man went through hell and back.

Hope he's back prompto.

+1.

He's an absolute gentleman.

+2
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on January 21, 2013, 01:28:46 PM
Despite all that has happened, Pope is not for moving...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21120754 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21120754)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on February 22, 2013, 08:53:17 PM
We've had a few weeks of The Magdalene Laundries apologies from the Government saga! I was just wondering did our good old Catholic Church wade in at some time in the past with an apology and talk of compensation, or are they just hiding and keeping stum. They know these were our Concentration camps for the vulnerable. People go on about the Taliban and other fundamentalist groupings.  But Catholicism in Ireland to me was one of the most dangerous religious movements that has ever existed. It actually disgusts me to call myself Catholic or to have any relationship with it at the moment.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on February 22, 2013, 09:18:21 PM
They haven't paid what they agreed to pay in compensation to date so what they say is meaningless. What amazes me is that anyone gives them a penny or passes any heed to any 'moral' position they take on subjects like abortion. I'd ask the auld dog outside his opinion before I'd listen to a bishop or pope.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on February 23, 2013, 04:24:22 PM
Seen on TG4 documentary on Wednesday night that In 1993 at High Park Magdalene Laundry, Drumcondra, the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity applied for an exhumation licence for the remains of 133 women who had been enslaved in their laundry. The nuns were selling the land to make money. During the exhumation the remains of a further 22 women were discovered. Death certificates were provided for only 75 of the 133 women on the original application. Unbelievably, the Department of the Environment, without asking any questions, put through an additional licence. All but one of the women's bodies were then cremated and reburied in Glasnevin Cemetery in a mass grave. One of the Crane workers interviewed said many of the exhumed remains had plaster paris on them.


A Report done by the IHRC came to the conclusion:
That the burial, exhumation and cremation of known and unknown women and girls who resided in Magdalene Laundries in 1993 at High Park, Drumcondra, raises serious questions for the State in the absence of detailed legislation governing the area and any requirement that all bodies be identified and accounted for in such communal plots. Questions arise as to whether there are death certificates for all those buried in those locations, and whether their remains were properly preserved and reinterred. Similar questions may arise in relation to other communal plots.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omagh_gael on February 23, 2013, 11:50:46 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21563345
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on February 24, 2013, 01:08:11 AM
The plot thickens Omagh Gael. Where does it stop, and is there any Cardinal heading out to vote who isn't involved in child abuse or cover ups?

I see Dolan was well grilled this week by investigators on behalf of victims in Wisconsin.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/dolan-deposed-article-1.1269202
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on February 24, 2013, 09:59:34 AM
I'm surprised that anyone is surprised and even more surprised that some people hold this organisation in high esteem. Its a steaming dung heap of an organisation run by gross hypocrites and propped up at grass roots by priests with their heads buried in the sand, priests with no principles what so ever. If they were men of God they would have left this church long ago.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 10:48:54 AM
They stay for the edible paper disc that IS the body of christ

Without that these people (the stupid flock) are nothing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on February 24, 2013, 11:14:31 AM

I know I have posted this link before, but if anyone has the time, this documentary is a must see. Plus, you will see video from interviews of Cardinal Mahony where he refuses to answer questions regarding his involvement in the cover up and how he moved O'Grady from parish to parish.

Mahony was stripped of his titles just recently after it was revealed how he knew all along what was going on, and how he covered it up. However, he is still allowed to travel to Rome to pick the next Pope.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/deliver-us-from-evil/


Filmmaker Amy Berg recounts a harrowing story of child abuse and how a serial child molester went free for the better part of two decades in this documentary. Oliver O'Grady was a Catholic priest who served in a number of parishes in Southern California during the 1970s and '80s. O'Grady was also a habitual child molester who abused dozens of youngsters who were entrusted to his care, and while his superiors in the church were aware of O'Grady's crimes as early as 1973, they opted to simply move him from one congregation to another rather than turn him in to authorities or strip him of his ordination.

In Deliver Us From Evil, a number of O'Grady's victims and their families discuss his crimes and the repercussions they feel to this day. O'Grady himself also appears in the film, speaking candidly about his career as a sexual predator and recounting his misdeeds in detail. (After finally being convicted of child sexual abuse, O'Grady served time in prison and now lives in Ireland, where he is still looked after by Catholic clergy.)

Berg also offers a look into the history of the Catholic Church and how its leadership has often protected those within the hierarchy at the expense of their worshipers. Deliver Us From Evil was named Best Documentary Feature at the 2006 Los Angeles Film Festival.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 11:33:25 PM
Cardinal Keith O'Brien
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on February 25, 2013, 01:01:40 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 10:48:54 AM
They stay for the edible paper disc that IS the body of christ

Without that these people (the stupid flock) are nothing.

Cannibalism, eh?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on February 25, 2013, 12:00:38 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 11:33:25 PM
Cardinal Keith O'Brien

He has resigned

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572724 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572724)

QuoteBritain's most senior Roman Catholic cleric, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, is stepping down as Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh.

It follows allegations - which he contests - of inappropriate behaviour towards priests dating from the 1980s.

In a statement, he apologised to those he had offended during his ministry.

The cardinal confirmed he would not take part in the election for a successor to the Pope - leaving Britain unrepresented in the election.

The Scottish Catholic Church says Pope Benedict has accepted his resignation.

Cardinal O'Brien said in a statement he had already tendered his resignation, due to take effect when he turned 75 next month, but that Pope Benedict "has now decided that my resignation will take effect today".

He said the pontiff would appoint an apostolic administrator to govern the archdiocese in his place until his successor is appointed.

The cardinal also said: "I have valued the opportunity of serving the people of Scotland and overseas in various ways since becoming a priest.

"Looking back over my years of ministry: For any good I have been able to do, I thank God. For any failures, I apologise to all whom I have offended.

"I do not wish media attention in Rome to be focussed on me - but rather on Pope Benedict XVI and on his successor.

"However, I will pray with them and for them that, enlightened by the Holy Spirit, they will make the correct choice for the future good of the Church."

The resignation of Britain's most senior Roman Catholic cleric in the wake of allegations of improper behaviour creates a crisis for the Church in Scotland, and represents a heavy blow to the wider Church as it battles to shore up its reputation ahead of the papal election or "conclave".

The conclave is already expected to be difficult in the circumstances created by Pope Benedict's unprecedented resignation.

The Vatican is also struggling to deal with reports of internal corruption and mismanagement.

Cardinal O'Brien's resignation is also a personal tragedy for himself.

Allegations made
His role as Britain's only representative in the papal election next month would have been one of his last acts before he retired.

He said in a BBC interview on Friday that he found the responsibility of helping to choose a successor to Pope Benedict "almost frightening".

The Observer reported that the three priests and one former priest - from the diocese of St Andrews and Edinburgh - complained to the Pope's representative to Britain, nuncio Antonio Mennini, in the week before 11 February, when Pope Benedict announced his resignation, of what they claimed was the cardinal's inappropriate behaviour towards them in the 1980s.

The former priest claims Cardinal O'Brien made an inappropriate approach to him in 1980, after night prayers, when he was a seminarian at St Andrew's College, Drygrange.

The complainant says he resigned as a priest when Cardinal O'Brien was first made a bishop.

He reportedly says in his statement: "I knew then he would always have power over me. It was assumed I left the priesthood to get married. I did not. I left to preserve my integrity."

A second statement from another complainant says he was living in a parish when he was visited by O'Brien, and inappropriate contact took place between them.

A third complainant alleges dealing with what he describes as "unwanted behaviour" by the cardinal in the 1980s after some late-night drinking.

And the fourth complainant claims the cardinal used night prayers as an excuse for inappropriate contact.

Cardinal O'Brien missed celebrating Sunday Mass in St Mary's Cathedral in Edinburgh, which marked Pope Benedict's eight years in office, ahead of the pontiff stepping down this week.

Outspoken views
In resigning his post at the head of the Scottish Catholic Church, Cardinal O'Brien blights the end of an illustrious career only a few weeks before he was due to retire.

The development is understood to have been prompted by a concern to protect the Church from further destabilizing speculation during the papal election.

That process is already overshadowed by allegations against a number of the cardinals who are taking part, over their connection with their handling of the Church's sex abuse scandal.

Cardinal O'Brien will be remembered in particular as a forthright defender - occasionally in outspoken and colourful terms - of Catholic teaching on abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality.

Last week Cardinal O'Brien said he believed priests should be able to marry if they wished to do so.

He said the new Pope could consider whether the Roman Catholic Church should change its stance on some issues, not of divine origin.

"For example the celibacy of the clergy, whether priests should marry - Jesus didn't say that," he said.

The cardinal was named Bigot of the Year last year by gay rights charity Stonewall for his stance on gay marriage.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 25, 2013, 12:07:52 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on February 25, 2013, 12:00:38 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 11:33:25 PM
Cardinal Keith O'Brien

He has resigned

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572724 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572724)

QuoteBritain's most senior Roman Catholic cleric, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, is stepping down as Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh.


The cardinal was named Bigot of the Year last year by gay rights charity Stonewall for his stance on gay marriage.

very much a case of the boy 'doth protest too much' there if there ever was one.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 25, 2013, 10:37:19 PM
Just mental, 4 priests??? WTF

So what is the offence? Is he just gay and had sex with other gay priests or did he abuse them?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on February 25, 2013, 10:45:25 PM
Doesn't read like a crime (assuming the allegations are true) rather that he is gay. All he is likely guilty off is being a hypocrite.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 25, 2013, 10:53:50 PM
Well it's 30 years ago, he might well have been 'cured' and moved on with his life or just managed to control his sexual preferences in a more discerning fashion.
But I doubt it, seeing as he shows all the classic signs of a repressed inhabitant of the closet, the belligerent homophobe.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 25, 2013, 11:10:36 PM
Kiss my ring has a new meaning now!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: cadence on February 26, 2013, 12:22:01 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 25, 2013, 11:10:36 PM
Kiss my ring has a new meaning now!!

they really need to learn how to take things in proportion the catholic church, it's just an inappropriate relationship with a clerical member... what's wrong with that?   


 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: cadence on February 26, 2013, 12:30:21 AM
Quote from: Main Street on February 25, 2013, 10:53:50 PM
Well it's 30 years ago, he might well have been 'cured' and moved on with his life or just managed to control his sexual preferences in a more discerning fashion.
But I doubt it, seeing as he shows all the classic signs of a repressed inhabitant of the closet, the belligerent homophobe.

internalised homophobia. never a pretty sight.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on February 26, 2013, 12:38:10 AM
Quote from: Main Street on February 25, 2013, 10:53:50 PM
Well it's 30 years ago, he might well have been 'cured' and moved on with his life or just managed to control his sexual preferences in a more discerning fashion.
But I doubt it, seeing as he shows all the classic signs of a repressed inhabitant of the closet, the belligerent homophobe.


Cured of what??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: cadence on February 26, 2013, 05:43:37 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on February 26, 2013, 12:38:10 AM
Quote from: Main Street on February 25, 2013, 10:53:50 PM
Well it's 30 years ago, he might well have been 'cured' and moved on with his life or just managed to control his sexual preferences in a more discerning fashion.
But I doubt it, seeing as he shows all the classic signs of a repressed inhabitant of the closet, the belligerent homophobe.


Cured of what??

indeed.
old school psychiatry used to consider homosexuality a mental disorder and curable...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology

a belief that was latched onto recently by the religious right, "pray away the gay"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/19/psychiatrist-admits-gay-cure-study-flawed

of course, you have to believe that homosexuality is a negative thing in the first place, then make a daft assumption that it is a mental disorder and another daft assumption that it can be cured, and thereafter another daft assumption that you have evidence to prove your cure.

the psychiatrists involved supporting this were the ones who needed sectioning. the mental distress of gay people brought up in homophobic communities needs to be seen in light of the oppression they experience. soe psychiatrists are totally clueless and blind to the social factors of mental illness.   

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 26, 2013, 08:21:42 AM
Quote from: Itchy on February 25, 2013, 10:45:25 PM
Doesn't read like a crime (assuming the allegations are true) rather that he is gay. All he is likely guilty off is being a hypocrite.

Surely there's the odd sin in there as well, which would be more offensive to the church itself.

How many hail marys would he need to say to get out of this one with the big man?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on February 26, 2013, 09:26:55 AM
Oh dear, it continues to roll and roll. At least they know there are still enough ejits willing to fund their rotten church - even in a recession!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 26, 2013, 10:24:17 AM
Blindingly obvious that the blind cannot see that they are slavishly dependent on the institution rather than the god.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 26, 2013, 01:27:32 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on February 26, 2013, 08:21:42 AM
Quote from: Itchy on February 25, 2013, 10:45:25 PM
Doesn't read like a crime (assuming the allegations are true) rather that he is gay. All he is likely guilty off is being a hypocrite.

Surely there's the odd sin in there as well, which would be more offensive to the church itself.

How many hail marys would he need to say to get out of this one with the big man?
A few quid in the plate should cover it. Keep the receipt for the gates!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 03, 2013, 10:30:00 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21649475

Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the former leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, has admitted his sexual conduct has at times "fallen beneath the standards expected of me".
He apologised and asked forgiveness from those he had "offended".
In a statement, he also apologised to the Church and the people of Scotland.

The cardinal resigned last Monday after three priests and a former priest had made allegations of improper behaviour against him dating back to the 80s.
Cardinal O'Brien was Britain's most senior Roman Catholic cleric until he stood down as the Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh.

In announcing his resignation, he also said he would not take part in the election for a successor to Pope Benedict XVI, known as the conclave.
Sunday's further statement, issued through the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, read: "In recent days, certain allegations which have been made against me have become public. Initially, their anonymous and non-specific nature led me to contest them.
"However, I wish to take this opportunity to admit that there have been times that my sexual conduct has fallen below the standards expected of me as a priest, archbishop and cardinal.
"To those I have offended, I apologise and ask forgiveness. To the Catholic Church and people of Scotland, I also apologise.
"I will now spend the rest of my life in retirement. I will play no further part in the public life of the Catholic Church in Scotland."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 03, 2013, 11:50:46 PM
I could argue that Cardinal O'Brien's statement should not be posted in a thread about clerical abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2013, 12:20:47 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 03, 2013, 11:50:46 PM
I could argue that Cardinal O'Brien's statement should not be posted in a thread about clerical abuse.
So, you could make an argument that the recent statement admitting fallen standards by an ex-cardinal, in response to allegations of abuse by some of his underlings, should not be in the clerical abuse thread?
I await your argument.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on March 04, 2013, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 03, 2013, 11:50:46 PM
I could argue that Cardinal O'Brien's statement should not be posted in a thread about clerical abuse.

Why Not?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2013, 01:10:50 PM
Maybe he had an affair with a woman i.e. a consenting adult. But that would be deemed as not meeting the standards expected of him and does not fall into the category of clerical abuse.

But until we hear more detail of the accusation then it is only speculation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2013, 04:12:21 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2013, 01:10:50 PM
Maybe he had an affair with a woman i.e. a consenting adult. But that would be deemed as not meeting the standards expected of him and does not fall into the category of clerical abuse.

But until we hear more detail of the accusation then it is only speculation.
Seeing as he referred directly to these charges in the statement,  far from denying them, he comes 99.9 close to acknowledging them, therefore it is with 99.9% certainty that the low standards he was referring to, refer to the aforementioned allegations.

"In recent days, certain allegations which have been made against me have become public. Initially, their anonymous and non-specific nature led me to contest them.
However, I wish to take this opportunity to admit that there have been times that my sexual conduct has fallen below the standards expected of me as a priest, archbishop and cardinal."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2013, 04:48:56 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?
Read this BBC article linked a few posts earlier

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21649475 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21649475)

Yes, the allegations came from 4 men, his underlings.
The Vatican were involved with retiring him early.






Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on March 04, 2013, 08:19:36 PM
The guardian quotes one of the priests who left because of O'Briens "drunken fumblings". I think we are on the right thread.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on March 04, 2013, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?

I heard a few others giving it this hypocritical stuff over the weekend but I still don't understand. In what way is it hypocritical? He hasn't to my knowledge gotten married, to man or woman, so how is it hypocritical for him to say it's wrong in his opinion?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2013, 08:43:35 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on March 04, 2013, 08:19:36 PM
The guardian quotes one of the priests who left because of O'Briens "drunken fumblings". I think we are on the right thread.

If that is the case, then fair enough. Doesn't sound like consenting adults of the opposite sex. Whoops, sorry, I meant gender.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on March 04, 2013, 09:04:18 PM
Quote from: Ulick on March 04, 2013, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?

I heard a few others giving it this hypocritical stuff over the weekend but I still don't understand. In what way is it hypocritical? He hasn't to my knowledge gotten married, to man or woman, so how is it hypocritical for him to say it's wrong in his opinion?

Ulick - what is the catholic church's teaching on practicing homosexual acts?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 04, 2013, 09:49:57 PM
Let's not forget the position of power this man knew he had over his  priests. See how they talk about the power of the hierarchy. I'm sure in those days he knew stories never got out and he could try and force himself knowing the power of his position might (and probably did) get him what he was after.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on March 04, 2013, 09:57:02 PM
I heard some guy on the Nolan Show this morning defending him and suggesting that he may have forgotten his previous sexual misbehaviour. Now I'm no Jimmy Mageeas regards the old long term memory but I'm pretty sure I'd never forget anything like that
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on March 04, 2013, 10:15:56 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 04, 2013, 09:04:18 PM
Quote from: Ulick on March 04, 2013, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?

I heard a few others giving it this hypocritical stuff over the weekend but I still don't understand. In what way is it hypocritical? He hasn't to my knowledge gotten married, to man or woman, so how is it hypocritical for him to say it's wrong in his opinion?

Ulick - what is the catholic church's teaching on practicing homosexual acts?

Is this related to "gay marriage"?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on March 04, 2013, 10:17:47 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 04, 2013, 09:04:18 PM
Quote from: Ulick on March 04, 2013, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 04, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
But are the allegations of improper conduct of a sexual nature involving men? If so that would make his comments on gay marriage hypocritical in the extreme. If he has had an affair with a woman then it may explain his comments on married clergy, it would also call into question the motives behind the revelations, was the vatican involved?

I heard a few others giving it this hypocritical stuff over the weekend but I still don't understand. In what way is it hypocritical? He hasn't to my knowledge gotten married, to man or woman, so how is it hypocritical for him to say it's wrong in his opinion?

Ulick - what is the catholic church's teaching on practicing homosexual acts?
Practice makes perfect. Or whatever that is in Latin.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on March 04, 2013, 10:18:50 PM
 To be a priest and preach catholic doctrine and then to partake in homosexual acts with men is hypocritical. Is that so hard to see?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2013, 10:29:04 PM
Don't be polluting the abuse thread with debate.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.

You said he was a hypocrite because of his stance on gay marriage. Now if he had said one thing and done another i.e. condemned gay marriage and then gotten married that would make him a hypocrite, but he hasn't, has he?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 05, 2013, 11:29:19 AM
Quote from: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.

You said he was a hypocrite because of his stance on gay marriage. Now if he had said one thing and done another i.e. condemned gay marriage and then gotten married that would make him a hypocrite, but he hasn't, has he?

Would it not be a fair argument to say that he used his public position as a smokescreen to hide (even from himself) his internal desires and this was the driver rather than any secondary belief that he might have in relation to gays marrying.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 05, 2013, 11:46:33 AM
Quote from: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.

You said he was a hypocrite because of his stance on gay marriage. Now if he had said one thing and done another i.e. condemned gay marriage and then gotten married that would make him a hypocrite, but he hasn't, has he?
You may have a point within the constructed context of gay marriage.
In another context, the ex-Cardinal railed against civil partnership,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9121424/We-cannot-afford-to-indulge-this-madness.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9121424/We-cannot-afford-to-indulge-this-madness.html)
"Those of us who were not in favour of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved"
the relationships he is referring to, are homosexual relationships.
Maybe he has an opinion that such relationships are not harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, if their relationships were not recognised as a civil partnership. But there is no good reason evident to grant him the benefit of the doubt.
He is railing against homosexuals living together in a relationship.
Possibly he feels that homosexuals should only indulge in casual relationships, again it would be extremely doubtful that was his intention.

If a person feels compelled to call him a hypocrite, they have a classic example of one, in ex-Cardinal O'Brien.
Maybe any old  immoral rogue and a homosexual as well, can use a high position in the catholic hierarchy, preach against homosexual relationships and it's not regarded as hypocrisy within the catholic church.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 03:19:49 PM
Quote from: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.

You said he was a hypocrite because of his stance on gay marriage. Now if he had said one thing and done another i.e. condemned gay marriage and then gotten married that would make him a hypocrite, but he hasn't, has he?
In my book he was, knowing that he desired carnal knowledge of other men makes his stance on gay marriage hypocritical. dress it up whatever way you, I have to say I am getting sick of the churches continuously shooting itself in the foot.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stew on March 05, 2013, 04:04:40 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 25, 2013, 01:01:40 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on February 24, 2013, 10:48:54 AM
They stay for the edible paper disc that IS the body of christ

Without that these people (the stupid flock) are nothing.

Cannibalism, eh?

Since you and skully baby are athiests you would probably not know that God himself uttered those words, look it up, it's in the Bible! :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 06:09:58 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 03:19:49 PM
Quote from: Ulick on March 05, 2013, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2013, 10:36:26 AM
It is hypocritical for a person who has engaged in a sexual assault or on wanted sexual advances to take the ardent moralistic stance he took. He has no moral authority to do so.

You said he was a hypocrite because of his stance on gay marriage. Now if he had said one thing and done another i.e. condemned gay marriage and then gotten married that would make him a hypocrite, but he hasn't, has he?
In my book he was, knowing that he desired carnal knowledge of other men makes his stance on gay marriage hypocritical. dress it up whatever way you, I have to say I am getting sick of the churches continuously shooting itself in the foot.

Then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the term "hypocrite".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 05, 2013, 08:22:18 PM
http://www.sconews.co.uk/latest-edition/14858/scotland-fails-homosexual-people/

Cardinal O'Brien said "These measures were not in the best interests of our society," he said. "The empirical evidence is clear, same-sex relationships are demonstrably harmful to the medical, emotional and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, no compassionate society should ever enact legislation to facilitate or promote such relationships, we have failed those who struggle with same-sex attraction and wider society by our actions."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 05, 2013, 10:46:23 PM
Unless, unknown to every  natural and supernatural being, he was somehow transubstantiated from a rampant abusive gay to a living saint, 
he does embody the very definition of a first class hypocrite.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 06, 2013, 11:54:16 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 05, 2013, 10:46:23 PM
Unless, unknown to every  natural and supernatural being, he was somehow transubstantiated from a rampant abusive gay to a living saint, 
he does embody the very definition of a first class hypocrite.
+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Seamus on March 10, 2013, 04:29:38 AM
UNREPENTANT: Kevin Annett and Canada's Genocide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mbjHz-9ViE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mbjHz-9ViE)

A must see documentary.

The Court Verdict of February 25th will hopefully go a long way in Kevin's fight for justice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 14, 2013, 03:32:28 PM
How does he think people will take him seriously and how does he keep his face straight ?

Cardinal Seán Brady has said he believes that Pope Francis will continue the policy of Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul to address clerical child sex abuse in Ireland.

He said that policy was to face the facts of what happened, take care of the victims, ensure that it does not happen again and do justice to all.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 14, 2013, 05:09:59 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 14, 2013, 03:32:28 PM
How does he think people will take him seriously and how does he keep his face straight ?

Cardinal Seán Brady has said he believes that Pope Francis will continue the policy of Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul to address clerical child sex abuse in Ireland.

He said that policy was to face the facts of what happened, take care of the victims, ensure that it does not happen again and do justice to all.

This is all true, if you only see the Religious who did the misbehaving as the victims. The rest of us probably see it completely differently.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on April 05, 2013, 03:36:46 PM
Same "old vague pledges" or more than this ?


Pope Francis calls for action on clerical sex abuse The remarks were made in the new Pope's first public statement on the clerical sex abuse issue Continue reading the main story


Pope Francis has called for "decisive action" in the fight against sex abuse of minors by priests.

He told Bishop Gerhard Mueller, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith - the Vatican watchdog that deals with sex abuse cases - to ensure perpetrators were punished.

It was the Argentine Pope's first public statement on clerical sex abuse.

A leading sex abuse survivors' group has responded with scepticism, saying "actions speak louder than words".

The new Pope was elected last month, replacing Pope Emeritus Benedict, who became the first pope in 600 years to resign.

When first elected, Benedict XVI promised to rid his Church of the "filth" of clerical sex abuse, but critics accused him of covering up abuse in the past and failing to protect children from paedophile priests.

Victims of sex abuse by clergy had called for a strong response from the new pontiff to the crisis that has rocked the Church.

'Old vague pledges'

In his remarks on Friday, Pope Francis said combating the crisis, which has mired the Church in scandal from the US, Ireland and Europe to Australia, was important for the credibility of the Church.

A Vatican statement said the Pope had urged Bishop Mueller to "act decisively as far as cases of sexual abuse are concerned, promoting, above all, measures to protect minors, help for those who have suffered such violence in the past (and) the necessary procedures against those who are guilty".

In 2011, the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith called on bishops' conferences around the world to submit guidelines for helping victims; protecting children; selecting and training priests and religious; dealing with accused priests; and collaborating with local authorities.

Three-quarters of the 112 bishops' conferences have sent in such guidelines, with most of those yet to respond coming from Africa, the Vatican says.

The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP) responded to the statement by calling for actions rather than words.

"We can't confuse words with actions," SNAP Outreach Director Barbara Dorris told the BBC. "When we do, we hurt kids.

"We must insist on new tangible action that helps vulnerable children protect their bodies, not old vague pledges that help a widely-discredited institution protect its reputation."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: All of a Sludden on May 20, 2013, 03:48:01 PM
Quote from: orangeman on April 21, 2012, 12:04:56 AM
Priest in 'indecent images' row in Pomeroy exonerated

It is understood a meeting in Pomeroy to discuss the investigation of a parish priest has been told he has been exonerated.

Father Martin McVeigh has been under investigation after indecent images were shown to a public meeting in a primary school three weeks ago.

Parents from the school met representatives from the Archdiocese of Armagh on Friday evening.

Fr McVeigh remains parish priest but is taking a temporary leave of absence.

It is understood that parents and parishioners were told during the meeting that Fr McVeigh had been found guilty of no crime following a church investigation.

They also heard that the PSNI had found no crime had been committed and that social services said there were no child protection issues.


Those present were told Fr McVeigh will continue as parish priest.

The Catholic Church said a further meeting would be held.

In a statement, the Archdiocese of Armagh said Fr McVeigh, at his own request, has asked for temporary leave and Cardinal Sean Brady had agreed to his request without prejudice to any of the parties involved.

An investigation was launched after the indecent pictures were "inadvertently" shown during the meeting for parents in preparation for First Holy Communion at St Mary's School on 26 March.

One child was also present.

The parents claimed the images were projected onto the screen from a memory stick the parish priest had inserted into a computer before the presentation.

The parents said Fr McVeigh quickly removed the memory stick.

The priest said he had no knowledge of the offending imagery.

Following the incident Cardinal Sean Brady said the PSNI had indicated that no crime had been committed.

Parishioners had wanted Fr McVeigh to attend Friday's meeting.

The Catholic Church described the meeting as inconclusive and said a further meeting would be held.


Is Clogherhead like it used to be?



A priest who flashed gay porn images onto a screen at a First Communion meeting has been appointed to a new parish in County Louth.

Fr Martin McVeigh shocked parents when the images appeared at the meeting of primary school parents in Pomeroy, County Tyrone, last year.

Now parishioners in Clogherhead in County Louth have been told that Fr McVeigh is their new parish priest – and some aren't happy with the appointment.

The Irish Sun newspaper reports that several parishioners have raised concerns over Fr McVeigh's new job just a year after his controversial faux pas.

The cleric took a sabbatical after insisted the photos, contained on a memory stick, were not his.

One County Louth parishioner told the Irish Sun: "He wants us to give him a chance and he seems to be sincere but we are still very angry at the way this happened."

Cardinal Sean Brady has told the parishioners of his decision to appoint Fr McVeigh to the role which he will take up later this month.

The report adds that Church spokesman Martin Long declined to say whether the appointment to Clogherhead would continue if the parishioners were unhappy.

When the gay porn incident came to light, Fr McVeigh said he had failed to check the computer in advance of his presentation.

He said: "In my shock and to ensure that the images would never be shown again, I destroyed the memory stick that evening."

Fr McVeigh has already attended a meeting with locals in the seaside Louth village where he maintained his innocence and again insisted that he had no idea where the gay porn images had come from.

The paper says it understood that Fr Paul Clayton-Lea, who had been the parish priest in Clogherhead and who is extremely popular, will officiate at the forthcoming First Holy Communion and Confirmation days.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Maguire01 on May 20, 2013, 10:00:25 PM
Don't think that belongs in this thread.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2013, 12:50:57 AM
Of course it does,
think of the parents!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2013, 01:47:50 AM
So now the god squad is reduced to splitting hairs over the meaning of the word "hypocrite." I think we've won.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 21, 2013, 08:40:11 AM
He said: "In my shock and to ensure that the images would never be shown again, I destroyed the memory stick that evening."

Aye right, ten Hail Marys and 5 Our fathers for that porkie.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Denn Forever on May 21, 2013, 10:05:30 PM
Documentery on TV3.  Always the same.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on May 21, 2013, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Denn Forever on May 21, 2013, 10:05:30 PM
Documentery on TV3.  Always the same.
Mea Maxima Culpa,  I think it was nominated for an Oscar.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 27, 2013, 07:48:36 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XHYFiAH4hY&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XHYFiAH4hY&feature=player_embedded)

The Vatican has thankfully denied reports that the above was an 'Exorcism'.

But what was it then?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 27, 2013, 10:44:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 27, 2013, 07:48:36 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XHYFiAH4hY&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XHYFiAH4hY&feature=player_embedded)

The Vatican has thankfully denied reports that the above was an 'Exorcism'.

But what was it then?
Looks like he prayed over the fella and the lad's reaction was based on some kind of experience. Who knows what he felt or why he expressed it that way. He did appear to have some ailments and illnesses.....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 27, 2013, 11:06:16 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/27/cardinal-george-pell-abuse-cover-up_n_3341302.html

Cardinal George Pell Admits Abuse Cover-Up To Protect Australian Catholic Church


Fear of scandal prompted the cover-up of child sex abuse allegations within the Catholic Church, Australia's top-ranking Cardinal George Pell admitted Monday.

Pell, speaking at an inquiry by Victoria's parliament into child sex abuse in the state, denied being personally involved in the cover-up of paedophile priests, but said it was clear it happened.

"The primary motivation would have been to respect the reputation of the church," he told the inquiry into the abuse of children by religious and non-government bodies.

"There was a fear of scandal."

Pell, one of eight cardinals selected by Pope Francis to advise him on reforming the Catholic Church's opaque administration, was speaking on the final day of the probe.

It has already heard that about 620 children were criminally abused by Catholic clergy from the 1930s onwards.

Victims, including children as young as seven or eight who were raped by priests, have told of their experiences at the hearing, which comes ahead of a national royal commission into institutional responses to child sex abuse.


"I am fully apologetic and absolutely sorry," Pell, who is Archbishop of Sydney and formerly archbishop of Melbourne, said at the start of his evidence.

"That is the basis for everything which I'll say now."

Last week Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart told the inquiry the church had been slow to act against paedophile priests and Pell admitted it had dealt with child sex abuse "very imperfectly".

"I would agree that we've been slow to address the anguish of the victims and dealt with it very imperfectly," he said.

The Catholic Church in Australia, as in other parts of the world, has endured a long-running controversy over its response to past abuses by priests.

Pell said the church had been aware of the emerging issue of sex abuse from the late 1980s, but had failed to comprehend the scale of the problem.

"If we'd been gossips, which we weren't... we would have realised earlier just how widespread this business was," he said.

"I don't think many, if any, persons in the leadership of the Catholic Church knew what a horrendous widespread mess we were sitting on."

Pell said the fact that paedophile priests had been moved to other parishes had had disastrous consequences.

"There's no doubt about it that lives have been blighted," he said. "There's no doubt about it that these crimes have contributed to too many suicides."

As well as the Victoria and national investigations, there is also a special commission of inquiry in New South Wales into similar allegations of abuse in the Hunter Valley north of Sydney.

Copyright (2013) AFP. All rights reserved.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 28, 2013, 12:34:54 PM
Cardinal Dolan admits his archdiocese pays up for contraception and abortion insurance

The archdiocese of New York has been paying for the supply of contraception and abortion services to thousands of its unionized employees for over a decade according to a new report.

Some 3,000 full-time workers at ArchCare, also known as the Catholic Health Care System, receive coverage for contraception and voluntary pregnancy termination through their membership in 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, a powerful health care workers union.

The New York Times has reported that the diocese headed by America's leading cleric Cardinal Timothy M.Dolan has been reluctantly funding contraception and abortion coverage for years.

Cardinal Dolan has spearheaded the fight against a provision of the new healthcare law that requires employers, including some that are religiously affiliated, to cover birth control in employee health plans.

He insists that requiring some religiously affiliated employers to pay for contraception and abortion services would be an unprecedented, and intolerable, government intrusion on religious liberty.

But his own diocese has been paying for such coverage for thousands of its unionized employees for over a decade.

The report adds that Archdiocese of New York has previously acknowledged that some local Catholic institutions offer health insurance plans that include contraceptive drugs to comply with state law; now, it is also acknowledging that the archdiocese's own money is used to pay for a union health plan that covers contraception and even abortion for workers at its affiliated nursing homes and clinics.

Spokesman for the Archdiocese of New York Joseph Zwilling said: "We provide the services under protest."

The confirmation comes as Cardinal Dolan consistently rejects compromises offered by the Obama administration to exempt many religious institutions from the provision.

Last February, the American bishops opposed a proposal that would have allowed employees of those non-exempt religious institutions to receive contraceptive coverage through policies paid for directly by insurance companies.

The report adds that New York Archdiocese is also suing the federal government to stop the mandate.
Cardinal Dolan said then: "There remains the possibility that ministries may yet be forced to fund and facilitate such morally illicit activities." said at the time.

The current process whereby the archdiocese covers its own health workers came into effect long before Cardinal Dolan became Archbishop of New York.

ArchCare operates seven nursing homes and a variety of other health facilities and gives its 1199 union employees the same coverage they would get at over 100 other non-profit hospitals or nursing homes in the New York area.

That's ArchCare voluntarily belongs to the League of Voluntary Hospitals and Homes, a multi-employer organization that negotiates with the union every few years for a joint labor contract.



http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Cardinal-Dolan-admits--his-archdiocese--pays-up-for-contraception-and-abortion-insurance-209144371.html#ixzz2UaPQ2aMH
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 31, 2013, 02:27:17 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/senior-cleric-urges-irish-society-to-rethink-proposed-abortion-laws-1.1412421 (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/senior-cleric-urges-irish-society-to-rethink-proposed-abortion-laws-1.1412421)

Meanwhile, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has refused to comment on the call by a senior Vatican official for Oireachtas members who are Catholics to resign rather than support abortion legislation. Msgr Jacques Suaudeau, scientific director of the Pontifical Academy for Life at the Vatican, said if Catholic TDs "are faithful to your conviction, then you have to get out.

"If a politician is being forced to be a formal co-operator with abortion, you leave the party, you get out," he told the Irish Catholic. Politicians could not just claim they were doing their jobs when voting for abortion, in a similar way to how Nazi officers said they were just following orders.

Act is evil

"If an act is evil and you receive an order to do it then you cannot do it," he said. "Sometimes people forget Nuremberg. You cannot cover yourself with the cover of party discipline."


Now Sean Brady supporters, tell us that it was ok to follow Canon Law (party discipline) and swear abused children to an oath of silence regarding Brendan Smyth's abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 03:30:31 AM
I don't think anyone was really supporting him. Support isn't a fair enough assessment of people comments. Just because we agree with the message he is passing on about abortion doesn't mean we support him. More twisting from you muppet.
Great comments in the above message. If Enda is Catholic then be Catholic. At least have the balls to say you're not and vote whatever way you want. No spines.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 31, 2013, 08:21:53 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 31, 2013, 02:27:17 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/senior-cleric-urges-irish-society-to-rethink-proposed-abortion-laws-1.1412421 (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/senior-cleric-urges-irish-society-to-rethink-proposed-abortion-laws-1.1412421)

Meanwhile, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has refused to comment on the call by a senior Vatican official for Oireachtas members who are Catholics to resign rather than support abortion legislation. Msgr Jacques Suaudeau, scientific director of the Pontifical Academy for Life at the Vatican, said if Catholic TDs "are faithful to your conviction, then you have to get out.

"If a politician is being forced to be a formal co-operator with abortion, you leave the party, you get out," he told the Irish Catholic. Politicians could not just claim they were doing their jobs when voting for abortion, in a similar way to how Nazi officers said they were just following orders.

Act is evil

"If an act is evil and you receive an order to do it then you cannot do it," he said. "Sometimes people forget Nuremberg. You cannot cover yourself with the cover of party discipline."


Now Sean Brady supporters, tell us that it was ok to follow Canon Law (party discipline) and swear abused children to an oath of silence regarding Brendan Smyth's abuse.

Ah muppet,
     you're forgetting one thing, When Sean Brady made those young lads sign vows of silence under fear of excommunication he was doing Gods work, this isn't just any ordinary organisation and hence the Nuremberg defence isn't relevant as the Holy Catholic Church is above the law.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 31, 2013, 09:53:31 AM
Monsignor speaks with the authority of considerable expertise. The Nuremberg Defence is for amateur liars. The pros use Mental Reservation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 31, 2013, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 03:30:31 AM
I don't think anyone was really supporting him. Support isn't a fair enough assessment of people comments. Just because we agree with the message he is passing on about abortion doesn't mean we support him. More twisting from you muppet.
Great comments in the above message. If Enda is Catholic then be Catholic. At least have the balls to say you're not and vote whatever way you want. No spines.

So in the first part of your post are you saying you do not support Brady, or that you do? Or that you don't him, but support his 'message'? Or is there another flaky cop out you can hide behind?

As for the 'great comments'?

The unbelievable hypocrisy of attacking anyone for following orders, while issuing orders is staggering. This is the organisation that still refuses to reveal the parishes in the US that Brendan Smyth, a man of unquestionable evil, worked in. Brady of course was only following orders that time.

No spines? You are joking right? If the Church stands up for victims of child abuse instead of protecting itself they may have the moral gravitas to talk about spines, but right now it doesn't.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 31, 2013, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 03:30:31 AM
I don't think anyone was really supporting him. Support isn't a fair enough assessment of people comments. Just because we agree with the message he is passing on about abortion doesn't mean we support him. More twisting from you muppet.
Great comments in the above message. If Enda is Catholic then be Catholic. At least have the balls to say you're not and vote whatever way you want. No spines.

So in the first part of your post are you saying you do not support Brady, or that you do? Or that you don't him, but support his 'message'? Or is there another flaky cop out you can hide behind?

As for the 'great comments'?

The unbelievable hypocrisy of attacking anyone for following orders, while issuing orders is staggering. This is the organisation that still refuses to reveal the parishes in the US that Brendan Smyth, a man of unquestionable evil, worked in. Brady of course was only following orders that time.

No spines? You are joking right? If the Church stands up for victims of child abuse instead of protecting itself they may have the moral gravitas to talk about spines, but right now it doesn't.
I don't support Brady but I'm putting up with it until someone better is appointment instead of moaning about something over which I have no control. Muppet the frigging champion of the people and the abused.
The Church has every right to tell non-conforming members to leave. There shouldn't be any argument there. It doesn't matter if you think it is hypocritical or not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 31, 2013, 04:10:53 PM
Cardinal: Abortion is bigger sin than priest abuse

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/28/cardinal_abortion_is_worse_scandal_than_priest_abuse/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on May 31, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
As said before, the church are champions of the unborn child yet seem to not give a flying .. to those abused at childhood
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 08:36:28 PM
The Church isn't saying that at all.
It's saying abortion is a greater sin. It isn't saying abuse is not a sin but that abortion is a graver sin.
Not sure why everything has to be twisted all the time....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Leo on May 31, 2013, 11:05:03 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 08:36:28 PM
The Church isn't saying that at all.
It's saying abortion is a greater sin. It isn't saying abuse is not a sin but that abortion is a graver sin.
Not sure why everything has to be twisted all the time....

This is whataboutery gone mad..
Child abuse by clergy?
What about abortion?
So easily we remove the enormous evil of systematic child abuse (and institutionalised cover-up) to be replaced by a debating point in the "hierarchial" machinations of the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on June 01, 2013, 12:28:25 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 08:36:28 PM
The Church isn't saying that at all.
It's saying abortion is a greater sin. It isn't saying abuse is not a sin but that abortion is a graver sin.
Not sure why everything has to be twisted all the time....

Is there such a concept as a 'graver' mortal sin?
I would like to think that if someone with a gun was going to shoot me, I wouldn't hang around long enough to find out what sort of firearm he intended using.
Derringer or machine gun; I think the end result would be the same.
In the same fashion, all those who die in a state of mortal sin will be cooked for eternity according to believers.
I feel clerical abusers and abortionists would end up sharing the same oven.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 01, 2013, 12:42:49 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 31, 2013, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 03:30:31 AM
I don't think anyone was really supporting him. Support isn't a fair enough assessment of people comments. Just because we agree with the message he is passing on about abortion doesn't mean we support him. More twisting from you muppet.
Great comments in the above message. If Enda is Catholic then be Catholic. At least have the balls to say you're not and vote whatever way you want. No spines.

So in the first part of your post are you saying you do not support Brady, or that you do? Or that you don't him, but support his 'message'? Or is there another flaky cop out you can hide behind?

As for the 'great comments'?

The unbelievable hypocrisy of attacking anyone for following orders, while issuing orders is staggering. This is the organisation that still refuses to reveal the parishes in the US that Brendan Smyth, a man of unquestionable evil, worked in. Brady of course was only following orders that time.

No spines? You are joking right? If the Church stands up for victims of child abuse instead of protecting itself they may have the moral gravitas to talk about spines, but right now it doesn't.
I don't support Brady but I'm putting up with it until someone better is appointment instead of moaning about something over which I have no control. Muppet the frigging champion of the people and the abused.
The Church has every right to tell non-conforming members to leave. There shouldn't be any argument there. It doesn't matter if you think it is hypocritical or not.

Pardon me for 'moaning' about raped children. The Church's hierarchy is non-conforming to its own doctrine to a far greater extreme than a person casting a vote in a referendum. Will they leave?

Here is another problem. You talk about the Church as if it is a club, and as if the head of the club can throw out whoever it wants for breaking the rules of the club. That would be fine, if it weren't claiming to be God's one true religion. That may even be fine if it weren't claiming a lineage which it accepts itself is false.

Don't get me wrong, Jesus was a great man and prescribed a code, by which if we all abided the world, the world would be a magical place. You don't have to look beyond the Church's behaviour on child abuse to see that code being breached.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on June 01, 2013, 01:52:54 AM
It would make sense to have a hierarchy of sins alright.


What planet are these lads on ?

Next thing thry'll tell us is that there was no donkey at the birth of Jesus and that it all was made up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2013, 12:13:17 PM
A hierarchy of mortal sins, hmm. Sounds like the pope should bring in a penalty points system for sins. I am no expert but based on my observations the penalty points system should be something like this, where 12 points means straight to hell.

Raping Children - 1 point
Covering up rape of children (inc signing NDA's with children) - 1 point
Owning or sharing (intentionally or not) Gay porn - 2 points
Having sex with a man or a woman (for priests only) - 3 points
Rape of an adult - 4 points
Sex before Marriage (excluding children) - 4 points
Murder - 5 points
Disagreeing with doctrine (in general) - 6 points
Putting law of land above cannon law - 7 points
Being Gay - 8 points
Using contraception - 9 points
Getting a Divorce - 10 points
Supporting any level of abortion - 11 points
Carrying out abortions! - 12 points

They should probably note that some mortal sins have since been downgraded by God, no points shall be given to you for the following (although you may be frowned upon).

- Not going to mass every week
- Eating meat on a Friday
- Not kissing the bishops ring at every opportunity
- Working on the sabbath

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on June 01, 2013, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2013, 12:13:17 PM
A hierarchy of mortal sins, hmm. Sounds like the pope should bring in a penalty points system for sins. I am no expert but based on my observations the penalty points system should be something like this, where 12 points means straight to hell.

Raping Children - 1 point
Covering up rape of children (inc signing NDA's with children) - 1 point
Owning or sharing (intentionally or not) Gay porn - 2 points
Having sex with a man or a woman (for priests only) - 3 points
Rape of an adult - 4 points
Murder - 5 points
Disagreeing with doctrine (in general) - 6 points
Putting law of land above cannon law - 7 points
Being Gay - 8 points
Supporting any level of abortion - 10 points
Carrying out abortions! - 12 points

They should probably note that some mortal sins have since been downgraded by God, no points shall be given to you for the following (although you may be frowned upon).

- Not going to mass every week
- Eating meat on a Friday
- Not kissing the bishops ring at every opportunity
- Working on the sabbath
What about a fella having contraceptive sex before marriage with a woman separated from her husband?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2013, 07:51:10 PM
Tony. I forgot some of those sins but I have updated my list. I assume you are talking about yourself and your other half. Bad news I am afraid...

Sex before Marriage (excluding children) = 4 points. I you were having sex with children it would not be so bad but with a woman, tut tut.
Using contraception = 9 points. Only one step down from abortion. Every used condom holds within a million lives that will never be thanks to your selfishness.
Getting a Divorce = 10 points. What god joins man cannot separate.

So you and your lady friend have 23 points between you. I believe that means one of you has to go to hell and the other has 1 point to play with for the rest of their life.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on June 01, 2013, 08:32:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2013, 07:51:10 PM
Tony. I forgot some of those sins but I have updated my list. I assume you are talking about yourself and your other half. Bad news I am afraid...

Sex before Marriage (excluding children) = 4 points. I you were having sex with children it would not be so bad but with a woman, tut tut.
Using contraception = 9 points. Only one step down from abortion. Every used condom holds within a million lives that will never be thanks to your selfishness.
Getting a Divorce = 10 points. What god joins man cannot separate.

So you and your lady friend have 23 points between you. I believe that means one of you has to go to hell and the other has 1 point to play with for the rest of their life.
My missus has never been previously married but horrifically is a prod! I may get straight into Brady's confessional box! It's either that or burning in the pits of hell with the other animals that have used condoms during consensual sex with an adult.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on June 01, 2013, 11:23:43 PM
Just enough religion to hate and not enough to love.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 02, 2013, 04:51:26 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on June 01, 2013, 08:32:21 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 01, 2013, 07:51:10 PM
Tony. I forgot some of those sins but I have updated my list. I assume you are talking about yourself and your other half. Bad news I am afraid...

Sex before Marriage (excluding children) = 4 points. I you were having sex with children it would not be so bad but with a woman, tut tut.
Using contraception = 9 points. Only one step down from abortion. Every used condom holds within a million lives that will never be thanks to your selfishness.
Getting a Divorce = 10 points. What god joins man cannot separate.

So you and your lady friend have 23 points between you. I believe that means one of you has to go to hell and the other has 1 point to play with for the rest of their life.
My missus has never been previously married but horrifically is a prod! I may get straight into Brady's confessional box! It's either that or burning in the pits of hell with the other animals that have used condoms during consensual sex with an adult.

Marrying a protestant!, thats way off the scale.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on June 02, 2013, 04:53:16 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on June 01, 2013, 11:23:43 PM
Just enough religion to hate and not enough to love.

Think you have that back to front. Any cursory glance at history would teach you that. Me, I don't hate anyone and don't practice any religion. Its your friends in the catholic church that help people to hate by showing people differences between them and others that are not really there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on June 10, 2013, 11:34:39 PM
Anyone watching Secrets of the House of God on BBC 4.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hereiam on June 11, 2013, 12:04:46 AM
Watched it. Rotten to the very core
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on June 11, 2013, 10:45:52 AM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on June 10, 2013, 11:34:39 PM
Anyone watching Secrets of the House of God on BBC 4.

I caught the last half hour of it. Very interesting I thought was that all these reports of the abuses of the deaf kids in Wisconsin who did complain at the time seemed to go nowhere, but it transpired that the Bishop at the time, can't remember his name had asked for guidance and assistance in removing this Father Murphy from his role but got nothing back from Cardinal Ratzingers office, the doctrine of the faith and would render them helpless.

Now this is in contradiction to Pope Benedicts line where these Bishops were acting alone in covering it up.

Another aspect of this which rang true in the Fr Brendan Smyth episode, is that the church holds the priesthood up as above human, almost angel like I think was a term used in the documentary and within this mentality they pulled ranks in coverup mode right up until their death. Like Smyth, this father Murphy was afforded a full priest burial even though the churchs own physiological reports had him as good as confess to abusing the youngsters, as he was 'fulfilling their sexual needs' as they experimented with their sexuality was the way he but it, 'putting their sins of the flesh on him', where he'd say a few prayers, go to confessions and all's right with the world.

Sick, sick individual who'll be stoking the fires of hell if such a place exists.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 11, 2013, 07:07:52 PM
Watched it on BBC Player.

Same old story everywhere. Protect the organisation, discredit the victims, deny the victims, attack the victims and but always - f*ck the victims. The now infamous Oath of Silence rears its evil head again too.

Those deaf people are a remarkable bunch and should be celebrated everywhere by Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

For a final act it would be great to see 100,000 victims of clerical abuse march on St. Peter's Square.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Count 10 on July 05, 2013, 12:41:10 PM
Sickening beyond belief >:(


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/opinion/cardinal-dolan-and-the-sex-abuse-scandal.html?_r=0


Cardinal Dolan and the Sexual Abuse Scandal

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Published: July 3, 2013


 

     
Tragic as the sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church has been, it is shocking to discover that Cardinal Timothy Dolan, while archbishop of Milwaukee, moved $57 million off the archdiocesan books into a cemetery trust fund six years ago in order to protect the money from damage suits by victims of abuse by priests.



Related

Dolan Sought to Protect Church Assets, Files Show (July 2, 2013)








Cardinal Dolan, now the archbishop of New York, has denied shielding the funds as an "old and discredited" allegation and "malarkey." But newly released court documents make it clear that he sought and received fast approval from the Vatican to transfer the money just as the Wisconsin Supreme Court was about to open the door to damage suits by victims raped and abused as children by Roman Catholic clergy.

"I foresee an improved protection of these funds from any legal claim and liability," Cardinal Dolan wrote rather cynically in his 2007 letter to the Vatican. The letter was released by the Milwaukee Archdiocese as part of a bankruptcy court fight with lawyers in 575 cases of damage claims. The archdiocese filed for bankruptcy protection in 2011. The law bars a debtor from transferring funds in a way that protects one class of creditors over another.

The release of about 6,000 pages of documents provided a grim backstage look at the scandal, graphically detailing the patterns of serial abuse by dozens of priests who were systematically rotated to new assignments as church officials kept criminal behaviour secret from civil authority.

It is disturbing that the current Milwaukee leader, Archbishop Jerome Listecki, said last week that the church underwent an "arc of understanding" across time to come to grips with the scandal — as if the statutory rapes of children were not always a glaring crime in the eyes of society as well as the church itself.

Cardinal Dolan was not a Milwaukee prelate during most of the abuse cases, but he faced a costly aftermath of troubles and warned the Vatican in 2003: "As victims organize and become more public, the potential for true scandal is very real." The documents showed how the Vatican slowly took years to allow dioceses to defrock embarrassing priests. Yet the same bureaucracy approved Cardinal Dolan's $57 million transfer just days after the Wisconsin court allowed victims' damage suits.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on July 05, 2013, 12:52:10 PM
Now we know why Dolan was a front runner to become Pope.......
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 05, 2013, 08:57:14 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on July 05, 2013, 12:52:10 PM
Now we know why Dolan was a front runner to become Pope.......

Yea but you need to listen to his message....

On other stuff....

Nothing to see here.................
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 10, 2013, 04:13:14 PM
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/priest-who-said-he-was-an-angel-of-god-jailed-for-abusing-18-boys-29405049.html (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/priest-who-said-he-was-an-angel-of-god-jailed-for-abusing-18-boys-29405049.html)

Priest who said he was an 'angel of God' jailed for abusing 18 boys

CONOR GALLAGHER – 09 JULY 2013

In some instances he threatened the boys with damnation if they reported what he did


A FORMER priest who had been on the run in Brazil for almost a decade has been jailed for 10 years for abusing 18 boys over three decades.

Peter Kennedy (74), a former member of the Kiltegan Fathers order, committed the abuse across five different counties as he was moved from parish to parish.

On one occasion he told a boy that he was an "angel of God and God didn't mind what he did".

Some of the children went to their parents about the abuse but the situation was not reported to gardai or the church authorities. When one boy told his mother what had happened she slapped him and said "how dare you say that about a priest".

Another boy was repeatedly abused when Kennedy visited the family home to pray with the child's dying father and administer the last rites. While molesting him, Kennedy told the victim that "if he was a nice boy his father would be okay".

In 2003, Kennedy was involved in one of the largest sexual abuse settlements ever seen in Ireland, which resulted in a victim of his being awarded €325,000.

But afterwards he went to London to work as a taxi driver before fleeing to Brazil using a British passport. He rem- ained there for eight years before being deported to the UK in 2011.

From there he was returned to Ireland to face these charges.

Kennedy was a missionary in Africa before serving in several parishes in Ireland. He would use his position as a priest to gain access to the boys and molest them.

In some instances he threatened them with damnation if they reported what he did.

Kennedy, with a former address in Ballinahown, Westmeath, pleaded guilty to 27 counts of indecent assault in various areas of the country between 1968 and 1986.

Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that some of these charges were "sample counts" representing more than one instance of abuse.

After hearing the evidence, Judge Martin Nolan commented that by his count there were more than 100 instances. One victim alone told gardai he was abused about 100 times.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on July 29, 2013, 10:59:21 AM
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/no-clergy-to-be-prosecuted-after-threeyear-probe-29436105.html

No clergy to be prosecuted after three-year probe



NOT a single Catholic bishop or priest will be prosecuted for covering up the scandal of clerical sex abuse over several decades at the end of a three-year Garda investigation.

The enormous and time-consuming investigation involved a team of 12 to 14 detectives who interviewed more than 800 witnesses over three years.

The probe was launched in 2009 after the Murphy report on clerical abuse in the Dublin archdiocese revealed how the Catholic priests and bishops colluded with state authorities and gardai to shield paedophile priests.

Detectives were unable to build a case against surviving clergy for secretly moving paedophiles from parish to parish during the Eighties and Nineties because covering up for child abusers was not a specific offence at the time.

New laws, such as reckless endangerment of children and defilement of a child, were passed only six years ago, while withholding information on child abuse became a criminal offence last year.

Senior Garda sources confirmed to the Sunday Independent this weekend that the case was now closed, without a single member of the clergy facing prosecution.

"Unless new evidence emerges or someone comes forward, the investigation is done and dusted," a senior source said.

The then Garda Commissioner, Fachtna Murphy, launched the inquiry in 2009, saying its focus was to establish whether the failings of the Church and state authorities "amounted to criminal behaviour".

He appointed an assistant commissioner, John O'Mahony, to report back on possible crimes, with a view to forwarding them to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Sources said Dublin Archdiocese, under Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, co-operated fully and opened up the files to the investigation team.

More than 800 people were interviewed, including serving and retired priests, bishops and cardinals, along with victims of abuse and members of An Garda Siochana.

Sources said the investigation was complicated by the absence of laws relating to the reporting of sexual crimes and child abuse in the period under investigation. Some key clerical witnesses were elderly and infirm, and there were also instances in which some of the victims were reluctant to revisit the abuse they had suffered as children.

The investigation was later broadened out to include allegations of collusion and cover-up in the Cloyne diocese in Cork.

Files were sent to the DPP in "a number of cases" in relation to both Dublin and Cloyne. But the DPP decided not to prosecute in any of the cases and the investigation has been shut down.

The Murphy report cited numerous instances in which senior clerics failed to act on information on clerical abusers. It found that the Catholic hierarchy hid decades of child abuse to protect the Church's reputation, in some cases with the collusion of gardai.

Cardinal Desmond Connell was among four archbishops criticised for not handing over information to authorities on abusers. The report found that he was "slow to recognise" the seriousness of clerical sex abuse, and allowed priests to remain in ministry even though he was aware of complaints against them.

The final chapter of the Murphy report, which was finally published last weekend after being held up by legal proceedings, revealed an "inappropriate relationship" between gardai and the Catholic Church.

While the criminal investigation into the cover-up of child abuse is closed, the Garda watchdog has launched its own inquiry into how members of the force handled child abuse investigations.

The Garda Ombudsman launched the investigation "in the public interest" last year, on foot of the commission of inquiry into child abuse in the Cloyne diocese.

The report found that in one case, files and statements relating to a complaint of abuse against a priest were never found. It appeared that a second complaint against the priest was not investigated.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: gallsman on July 29, 2013, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
The Church has every right to tell non-conforming members to leave. There shouldn't be any argument there. It doesn't matter if you think it is hypocritical or not.

I've stayed off this thread but your endless torrent of superior, self-appointed crusader shite sickens me.

Members of the church have the right to voice their opinion on its governance and teachings and, where appropriate, suggest reforms that they believe are needed. It doesn't matter if you're stupid enough to think being a Catholic is about doing what the Church tells you and accepting it as, pun intended, gospel.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: haveaharp on July 29, 2013, 12:21:37 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 10, 2013, 04:13:14 PM
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/priest-who-said-he-was-an-angel-of-god-jailed-for-abusing-18-boys-29405049.html (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/priest-who-said-he-was-an-angel-of-god-jailed-for-abusing-18-boys-29405049.html)

Priest who said he was an 'angel of God' jailed for abusing 18 boys

CONOR GALLAGHER – 09 JULY 2013

In some instances he threatened the boys with damnation if they reported what he did


A FORMER priest who had been on the run in Brazil for almost a decade has been jailed for 10 years for abusing 18 boys over three decades.

Peter Kennedy (74), a former member of the Kiltegan Fathers order, committed the abuse across five different counties as he was moved from parish to parish.

On one occasion he told a boy that he was an "angel of God and God didn't mind what he did".

Some of the children went to their parents about the abuse but the situation was not reported to gardai or the church authorities. When one boy told his mother what had happened she slapped him and said "how dare you say that about a priest".

Another boy was repeatedly abused when Kennedy visited the family home to pray with the child's dying father and administer the last rites. While molesting him, Kennedy told the victim that "if he was a nice boy his father would be okay".

In 2003, Kennedy was involved in one of the largest sexual abuse settlements ever seen in Ireland, which resulted in a victim of his being awarded €325,000.

But afterwards he went to London to work as a taxi driver before fleeing to Brazil using a British passport. He rem- ained there for eight years before being deported to the UK in 2011.

From there he was returned to Ireland to face these charges.

Kennedy was a missionary in Africa before serving in several parishes in Ireland. He would use his position as a priest to gain access to the boys and molest them.

In some instances he threatened them with damnation if they reported what he did.

Kennedy, with a former address in Ballinahown, Westmeath, pleaded guilty to 27 counts of indecent assault in various areas of the country between 1968 and 1986.

Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that some of these charges were "sample counts" representing more than one instance of abuse.

After hearing the evidence, Judge Martin Nolan commented that by his count there were more than 100 instances. One victim alone told gardai he was abused about 100 times.



Thats about as sick as it gets. How anyone can ignore these issues while still chewing the altar rails of a Sunday needs their head examining.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Ulick on July 29, 2013, 01:24:05 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on July 29, 2013, 12:21:37 PM
Thats about as sick as it gets. How anyone can ignore these issues while still chewing the altar rails of a Sunday needs their head examining.

Do they still have altar rails? I thought they were abandoned along with kneeling, communion on the tongue and celibacy.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on July 29, 2013, 05:00:45 PM
Quote from: gallsman on July 29, 2013, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
The Church has every right to tell non-conforming members to leave. There shouldn't be any argument there. It doesn't matter if you think it is hypocritical or not.

I've stayed off this thread but your endless torrent of superior, self-appointed crusader shite sickens me.

Members of the church have the right to voice their opinion on its governance and teachings and, where appropriate, suggest reforms that they believe are needed. It doesn't matter if you're stupid enough to think being a Catholic is about doing what the Church tells you and accepting it as, pun intended, gospel.

I'm not trying to be superior - I'm trying to bring another side to the argument / discussion.
I don't understand how my comment, still included above, would upset you?

The Church was founded by Christ. The teachings of the Church are not new laws that are passed every year by collective vote. Members are not polled to decide whether or not this should happen or that. Catholics believe the teachings are passed down through the councils over the centuries by the Power of the Holy Spirit (who Catholic believe is God). So if Catholics believe in God and His Church then they follow it's teachings.....

I don't know how to communicate that any other way.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 29, 2013, 05:23:18 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 29, 2013, 05:00:45 PM
The Church was founded by Christ.

No it wasn't
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 29, 2013, 05:34:46 PM
Quote from: Ulick on July 29, 2013, 01:24:05 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on July 29, 2013, 12:21:37 PM
Thats about as sick as it gets. How anyone can ignore these issues while still chewing the altar rails of a Sunday needs their head examining.

Do they still have altar rails? I thought they were abandoned along with kneeling, communion on the tongue and celibacy.
Kissing a bishop's ring is no longer necessary if you want to get on in life.
Any of them who hankers for the "Good Ol' Days" will have a DIY job on his hands if he can get around to it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ardchieftain on July 29, 2013, 07:49:39 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

Have to strongly agree with these sentiments.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Boy Wonder on July 29, 2013, 10:20:06 PM
Quote from: ardchieftain on July 29, 2013, 07:49:39 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

Have to strongly agree with these sentiments.

The above gives a good indication of the IQs of these 2 posters.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on July 29, 2013, 10:30:58 PM
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on July 29, 2013, 10:20:06 PM
Quote from: ardchieftain on July 29, 2013, 07:49:39 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

Have to strongly agree with these sentiments.

The above gives a good indication of the IQs of these 2 posters.

Whatever about the posters having a low IQ, this kind of thing makes no contribution. It is a bit like those who say that anyone flying the tricolour is an apologist for the La Mon bombing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Eamonnca1 on July 29, 2013, 11:34:51 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

I'm not sure if I agree with that. I'd say habit, peer pressure and routine are bigger motivators of people who still go to the pineapple.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on July 30, 2013, 12:26:02 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 29, 2013, 11:34:51 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

I'm not sure if I agree with that. I'd say habit, peer pressure and routine are bigger motivators of people who still go to the pineapple.
These days. maybe the diploma certifying that such and such a person has achieved a state of grace comes with a breakfast cereal, but any person who sincerely wants to participate in the act of communion, are attempting to participate themselves in a personal communion with Christ, nothing  to do with the hand that serves the wafer.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 30, 2013, 12:53:19 AM
Quote from: Main Street on July 30, 2013, 12:26:02 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on July 29, 2013, 11:34:51 PM
Quote from: All of a Sludden on July 29, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
In my opinion any adult who receives communion as a member of the Roman Catholic church is an apologist for child sexual abuse and the facilitation of such abuse.

I'm not sure if I agree with that. I'd say habit, peer pressure and routine are bigger motivators of people who still go to the pineapple.
These days. maybe the diploma certifying that such and such a person has achieved a state of grace comes with a breakfast cereal, but any person who sincerely wants to participate in the act of communion, are attempting to participate themselves in a personal communion with Christ, nothing  to do with the hand that serves the wafer.

That's put very well. I share  your point of view.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on July 30, 2013, 01:05:04 AM
Is it indoctrination which stops them seeing that this "sacrament" is just an interpreted human construct? I think the majority follow eamonnca1's reasoning.....peer pressure with whole families too heavily invested in the practice of going to mass. There's a serious amount of going through the motions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 30, 2013, 10:25:21 AM
Quote from: theskull1 on July 30, 2013, 01:05:04 AM
Is it indoctrination which stops them seeing that this "sacrament" is just an interpreted human construct? I think the majority follow eamonnca1's reasoning.....peer pressure with whole families too heavily invested in the practice of going to mass. There's a serious amount of going through the motions.
You may very well be right but, for me, if they do so in good conscience and believe they are communing with Christ, they have every right to do so.
I don't share their beliefs but I have no definitive proof that they are wrong.
I'm somewhat sceptical when someone claims that God made the world but Stephen Hawking's theory that matter keeps appearing from nowhere is just as hard to accept.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704206804575467921609024244.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704206804575467921609024244.html)






Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 11, 2013, 06:35:47 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on July 29, 2013, 05:00:45 PM
Quote from: gallsman on July 29, 2013, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on May 31, 2013, 04:02:02 PM
The Church has every right to tell non-conforming members to leave. There shouldn't be any argument there. It doesn't matter if you think it is hypocritical or not.

I've stayed off this thread but your endless torrent of superior, self-appointed crusader shite sickens me.

Members of the church have the right to voice their opinion on its governance and teachings and, where appropriate, suggest reforms that they believe are needed. It doesn't matter if you're stupid enough to think being a Catholic is about doing what the Church tells you and accepting it as, pun intended, gospel.

I'm not trying to be superior - I'm trying to bring another side to the argument / discussion.
I don't understand how my comment, still included above, would upset you?

The Church was founded by Christ. The teachings of the Church are not new laws that are passed every year by collective vote. Members are not polled to decide whether or not this should happen or that. Catholics believe the teachings are passed down through the councils over the centuries by the Power of the Holy Spirit (who Catholic believe is God). So if Catholics believe in God and His Church then they follow it's teachings.....

I don't know how to communicate that any other way.

That is not completely accurate.

The Roman Papacy is based on a document known as the Donation of Constantine.

The Catholic Church acknowledged in the 15th Century that the above document was a forgery, probably created in the 8th or 9th centuries.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05118a.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05118a.htm)

The reality is that Roman Catholics worship the Roman Pope because of the above forgery. If we stuck to thr true lineage we should probably be members of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

I always wondered at the word 'Orthodox' in its title.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 24, 2013, 02:16:51 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23807189 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23807189)

Cardinal Keith O'Brien 'blocked church sex abuse report', says archbishop

Cardinal Keith O'Brien was President of the Conference of Scottish Bishops

The former archbishop of Glasgow has said Cardinal Keith O'Brien blocked a report into sex abuse in the church.

Writing to the Tablet, Emeritus Archbishop of Glasgow Mario Conti said Cardinal O'Brien, who has admitted sexual misconduct with other priests, prevented the investigation.

Other Scottish bishops had agreed the inquiry should go ahead.

However, the Catholic paper's deputy editor said the church should have proceeded with an audit anyway.

Elena Curtis said: "Cardinal O'Brien was one bishop and there would have been no reason why the other bishops couldn't have proceeded with an independent audit without him."

'Low credibility'
Alan Draper, an academic who was appointed in mid-1990s to advise the Church on sexual abuse and how to respond to it, said he was surprised by Archbishop Conti's claims.

"What does that tell you about the other bishops? Where is their personal integrity?

"Were they not prepared to say 'the survivors and victims are demanding these sorts of reviews', we're going ahead with it?

"Until they do that, they'll continue to have very low credibility among the laity."

The Catholic Church has said an audit of abuse cases in the past six years is to be published soon, and that it will engage in any process which allows "lessons to be learned".

Archbishop Conti told the Catholic paper he was confident the percentage of priests involved in abuse was small.

Commenting on the continuing investigation into allegations of sexual and physical abuse at Fort Augustus School, Archbishop Conti said he would have alerted the proper authorities if the allegations had been made to him while he was Bishop of Aberdeen.

He held that post from 1977 to 2002.

Meanwhile a senior Liberal Democrat peer has called for an independent inquiry into allegations of abuse at Fort Augustus Abbey School. Lord Carlile also called for prosecutions to be considered.

Safeguarding
Archbishop Conti, in his letter to the Tablet, said: "It was the intention of all but one member of the bishops' conference to commission an independent examination of the historical cases we had on file in all of our respective dioceses and publish the results but this was delayed by the objection of the then-President of the Conference; without full participation of all the dioceses the exercise would have been faulty."

He pointed out that historical cases are now being examined, adding: "I understand that in the light of the criticisms the Church has been facing, these audits will now be published.

"I think they will go some way towards confirming Bishop Joseph Devine of Motherwell's remarks that the percentage of priests involved in abuse is 'tiny', and in demonstrating the seriousness and competence with which the Church in Scotland has been dealing with safeguarding in all its implications for many years."

Without the participation of all the dioceses a 'National Audit' was not possible so the analysis was stopped"

Catholic Church statement
Archbishop Conti's letter also addresses allegations of abuse at the Benedictine school at Fort Augustus.

He said the school was not "under the jurisdiction" of the church in Scotland because of its position as a Benedictine community.

He insisted, however, that this would not have prevented him from acting if the allegations had been brought to him as the senior church figure in the area.

Archbishop Conti added: "If any of these allegations had been made to me while I was Bishop of Aberdeen from 1977 to 2002, I would have alerted the proper authorities to them."

A statement from the Catholic Church in Scotland said: "Archbishop Conti's letter refers to a decision taken in 2011 by the Bishops' Conference of Scotland to commission an independent academic analysis of statistics relating to abuse and allegations of abuse over a 60 year period from 1952 to 2012.

"This project, with the cooperation of each of the eight dioceses in Scotland, started and ran until 2012, at which time, the then President of the Conference, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, withdrew from the project.

"Without the participation of all the dioceses a 'National Audit' was not possible so the analysis was stopped."

Pointing out that the Bishops' Conference decided in 2013 to publish audits by the National Safeguarding Office, it added: "The Church remains willing to engage in any process which allows lessons to be learned and survivors to be supported."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on August 25, 2013, 10:39:48 PM
I see Archbishop Diarmuid Martin is being seen positively by the new pope and it is rumoured he's going to be assigned to a department in the Vatican.


Good to see him getting recognition.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on December 05, 2013, 04:58:28 PM

The Vatican is to set up a special committee to improve measures to protect children against sexual abuse within the Catholic Church.

"Up until now there has been so much focus on the judicial parts of this but the pastoral part is very, very important. The Holy Father is concerned about that," Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley said, referring to Pope Francis.

The commission of experts would "study these issues and bring concrete recommendations" for the Pope and the Vatican.

Cardinal O'Malley was speaking on the third and final day of a series of closed-door meetings between Pope Francis and a special commission of eight cardinals who are discussing the Vatican's troubled administration.

The commission, named a month after the pope's election, underlined his determination to push through reforms of the Vatican's top-heavy administration and tackle festering scandals like the issue of sexual abuse of children by priests
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on January 12, 2014, 03:34:04 PM
They have learned nothing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/archbishop-jozef-wesolowski-extradition_n_4577241.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/archbishop-jozef-wesolowski-extradition_n_4577241.html)

Archbishop Jozef Wesolowski will not be extradited to his native Poland, despite accusations of sex abuse there and in the Dominican Republic, where he served as papal nuncio until his August 2013 dismissal.

The Warsaw Office of the Prosecutor reported the the Vatican had tersely replied to their extradition request, saying that "Archbishop Wesolowski is a citizen of the Vatican, and Vatican law does not allow for his extradition," according to Catholic Culture.

Polish TV channel N24 commented that "The Holy See's response is concise and fits in a half-page. The letter's authors noted that the Vatican is investigating the Catholic hierarch about the alleged practice of pedophilia," according to Dominican Today.

The Vatican recalled Wesolowski to Rome before Dominican prosecutors announced their investigation, though it said that it was cooperating with prosecutors. Wesolowski is the highest-ranking Vatican official to be investigated for sex abuse, and his case raises questions of sovereignty when it comes to prosecution.

At the time of the recall, Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi denied that the Vatican was trying to shield Wesolowski.

According to The Tablet, Wesolowski is currently believed to be living in the Vatican.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on January 12, 2014, 10:35:53 PM
Quote from: muppet on January 12, 2014, 03:34:04 PM
They have learned nothing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/archbishop-jozef-wesolowski-extradition_n_4577241.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/archbishop-jozef-wesolowski-extradition_n_4577241.html)

Archbishop Jozef Wesolowski will not be extradited to his native Poland, despite accusations of sex abuse there and in the Dominican Republic, where he served as papal nuncio until his August 2013 dismissal.

The Warsaw Office of the Prosecutor reported the the Vatican had tersely replied to their extradition request, saying that "Archbishop Wesolowski is a citizen of the Vatican, and Vatican law does not allow for his extradition," according to Catholic Culture.

Polish TV channel N24 commented that "The Holy See's response is concise and fits in a half-page. The letter's authors noted that the Vatican is investigating the Catholic hierarch about the alleged practice of pedophilia," according to Dominican Today.

The Vatican recalled Wesolowski to Rome before Dominican prosecutors announced their investigation, though it said that it was cooperating with prosecutors. Wesolowski is the highest-ranking Vatican official to be investigated for sex abuse, and his case raises questions of sovereignty when it comes to prosecution.

At the time of the recall, Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi denied that the Vatican was trying to shield Wesolowski.

According to The Tablet, Wesolowski is currently believed to be living in the Vatican.[/i]


No change.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on January 13, 2014, 12:11:03 AM
Quote from: muppet on January 12, 2014, 03:34:04 PM
The Warsaw Office of the Prosecutor reported the the Vatican had tersely replied to their extradition request, saying that "Archbishop Wesolowski is a citizen of the Vatican, and Vatican law does not allow for his extradition," according to Catholic Culture.

They're only obeying their laws  ::)

As bare faced as ever
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on January 13, 2014, 12:29:47 AM
Francis is making all the right soundings and hop just when you think that real change is in the offing, along comes this story.

What a shame.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on January 13, 2014, 01:05:01 AM
Quote from: hardstation on January 13, 2014, 12:20:05 AM
Disgusting.
About the same as someone stealing your heating oil...

Disappointed in the new Pope. Had high hopes for him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on January 13, 2014, 09:41:04 AM
Quote from: orangeman on January 13, 2014, 12:29:47 AM
Francis is making all the right soundings and hop just when you think that real change is in the offing, along comes this story.

What a shame.

If it had of been an ordinary cleric then maybe, but an Archbishop?? He was never going to be put back into the judicial system for a trial!!

Big blot on Francis' copy book there..
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on January 13, 2014, 10:54:30 AM
Just a blot?

Just another one who makes the right noises to appease a disgruntled flock but morals and principles go out the window if the wrong boy is rumbled.

Papacy is a synonym for duplicity
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on January 13, 2014, 11:05:21 AM
It's ok to feed the babies in the Sistine chapel all the same.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on January 17, 2014, 12:25:59 AM
United Nations child protection experts pushed Vatican delegates today to reveal the scope of the decades-long sexual abuse of minors by Roman Catholic priests that Pope Francis called "the shame of the Church".
The delegates, answering questions from an international rights panel for the first time since the scandals broke more than two decades ago, denied allegations of a Vatican cover-up and said it had set clear guidelines to protect children from predator priests.
But members of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, and abuse victims attending the session in Geneva, demanded far more transparency on crimes that have rocked the Church, from the United States to Europe and Australia.
"The best way to prevent abuses is to reveal old ones - openness instead of sweeping offences under the carpet," Kirsten Sandberg, chairwoman of the 18-strong UN committee, told the Vatican delegation. "It seems to date your procedures are not very transparent."
Ms Sandberg repeatedly pressed the officials to open up Vatican archives on cases of sexual abuse and pay compensation to young people raped or sodomised by priests.
"We will take your questions seriously but we are not in a position to answer now," Vatican delegation head Archbishop Silvano Tomasi told her at the end of the day-long session.
The Vatican angered victim support groups last month by refusing to answer the committee's written questions in advance, saying its inquiries were confidential and that responsibility for dealing with abusers lay with local bishops. Barbara Blaine, president of the US-based Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP), said the Vatican response fell far short of what victims wanted. "What we want to see is the Vatican punish bishops who covered up sex crimes, and we want them to turn over information they have about crimes to police," she said. "The Vatican attempted to relegate the issue to the past and claim it is a new era," said Pam Spees, an attorney for the US-based Center for Constitutional Rights.
Victims accuse bishops of covering up crimes and switching priests to other parishes to avoid prosecution. Courts have ordered dioceses to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, bankrupting a string of them in the United States. Pope Francis told worshippers at morning Mass in the Vatican today that abuse scandals had "cost us a lot of money, but (paying damages) is only right." He said bishops, priests and lay people were responsible for this "shame of the Church".
In December, the pontiff ordered the formation of a team of experts to look into the sexual abuse of minors in the Church, in his first major step to tackle the issue. Vatican officials long played down the abuse scandal as a limited problem, but shocking revelations in the United States, Ireland and then several European countries have turned it into a crisis in recent years.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 06, 2014, 12:36:50 AM
Why are the flock not asking for this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26044852 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26044852)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on February 06, 2014, 01:03:04 AM
How dare the UN interfere in the Vaticans business of protecting child abusing preists
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on May 28, 2014, 05:05:01 PM
http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html)

http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on May 29, 2014, 01:21:10 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 28, 2014, 05:05:01 PM
http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html)

http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html)

Jesus help us.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: guy crouchback on May 29, 2014, 09:31:58 AM
i don't know what to say to that first report. i wanted to post a reply but i am simply lost for words its beyond belief if its true even if its half true. did these woman's lives and their babies lives mean so little to society that they could to all intent and purposes be eradicated?

i say society because we the people, our parents and our grandparents allowed this to happen. we can blame the church and of course they are the main culprits no doubt about it and we can blame the governing class for allowing themselves to be controlled and used so completely by the church but at the end of the day nobody shouted stop.
we could send brigades to fight on both sides of the Spanish civil war, but nobody could stand up for Irish babies that were  being exterminated because they may have been morally corrupt at birth in the eyes of those who were supposed to care for them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tubberman on May 29, 2014, 09:47:35 AM
Quote from: orangeman on May 29, 2014, 01:21:10 AM
Quote from: muppet on May 28, 2014, 05:05:01 PM
http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Mass-grave-of-up-to-800-dead-babies-exposed-in-County-Galway-.html)

http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html (http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Nuns-join-Irish-bankers-in-avoiding-justice-over-Magdalene-payments.html)

Jesus help us.

He didn't do much to help those poor children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on May 29, 2014, 10:14:31 AM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 29, 2014, 09:31:58 AM
i don't know what to say to that first report. i wanted to post a reply but i am simply lost for words its beyond belief if its true even if its half true. did these woman's lives and their babies lives mean so little to society that they could to all intent and purposes be eradicated?

i say society because we the people, our parents and our grandparents allowed this to happen. we can blame the church and of course they are the main culprits no doubt about it and we can blame the governing class for allowing themselves to be controlled and used so completely by the church but at the end of the day nobody shouted stop.
we could send brigades to fight on both sides of the Spanish civil war, but nobody could stand up for Irish babies that were  being exterminated because they may have been morally corrupt at birth in the eyes of those who were supposed to care for them.


Well put, guy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Mike Sheehy on May 29, 2014, 02:02:03 PM
Quote from: guy crouchback on May 29, 2014, 09:31:58 AM
i don't know what to say to that first report. i wanted to post a reply but i am simply lost for words its beyond belief if its true even if its half true. did these woman's lives and their babies lives mean so little to society that they could to all intent and purposes be eradicated?

i say society because we the people, our parents and our grandparents allowed this to happen. we can blame the church and of course they are the main culprits no doubt about it and we can blame the governing class for allowing themselves to be controlled and used so completely by the church but at the end of the day nobody shouted stop.
we could send brigades to fight on both sides of the Spanish civil war, but nobody could stand up for Irish babies that were  being exterminated because they may have been morally corrupt at birth in the eyes of those who were supposed to care for them.

Well said. These days, worldwide (but especially in Ireland)  its always somebody elses fault.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 29, 2014, 03:27:30 PM
I dont know about many others, but our parents had little to no idea that grown men could sexually abuse young children. At least today parents can teach their children about it and make them aware of what to look out for.

Child abuse and.the subsequent cover ups wasnt just confined to the church.

http://fiannaiochta.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/grand-niece-of-provo-legend-endured-horrific-sexual-abuse/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on May 29, 2014, 04:14:53 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 29, 2014, 03:27:30 PM
I dont know about many others, but our parents had little to no idea that grown men could sexually abuse young children. At least today parents can teach their children about it and make them aware of what to look out for.

Child abuse and.the subsequent cover ups wasnt just confined to the church.

http://fiannaiochta.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/grand-niece-of-provo-legend-endured-horrific-sexual-abuse/

I'd disagree entirely on that statement, they knew only too well it could and was happening, it was an evil that no one dared speak off.
Even now the older generation are prepared to turn a blind eye and live in denial of things such as pedophilia, rape, domestic abuse, even sex outside marriage in the terms that 'that sort of thing never went on in my day', it bloody did, but no one spoke of it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on May 29, 2014, 04:32:16 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on May 29, 2014, 04:14:53 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 29, 2014, 03:27:30 PM
I dont know about many others, but our parents had little to no idea that grown men could sexually abuse young children. At least today parents can teach their children about it and make them aware of what to look out for.

Child abuse and.the subsequent cover ups wasnt just confined to the church.

http://fiannaiochta.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/grand-niece-of-provo-legend-endured-horrific-sexual-abuse/

I'd disagree entirely on that statement, they knew only too well it could and was happening, it was an evil that no one dared speak off.
Even now the older generation are prepared to turn a blind eye and live in denial of things such as pedophilia, rape, domestic abuse, even sex outside marriage in the terms that 'that sort of thing never went on in my day', it bloody did, but no one spoke of it.

If nobody dared speak of it, how could people in general know it was happening?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on May 29, 2014, 04:51:45 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on May 29, 2014, 04:14:53 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on May 29, 2014, 03:27:30 PM
I dont know about many others, but our parents had little to no idea that grown men could sexually abuse young children. At least today parents can teach their children about it and make them aware of what to look out for.

Child abuse and.the subsequent cover ups wasnt just confined to the church.

http://fiannaiochta.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/grand-niece-of-provo-legend-endured-horrific-sexual-abuse/

I'd disagree entirely on that statement, they knew only too well it could and was happening, it was an evil that no one dared speak off.
Even now the older generation are prepared to turn a blind eye and live in denial of things such as pedophilia, rape, domestic abuse, even sex outside marriage in the terms that 'that sort of thing never went on in my day', it bloody did, but no one spoke of it.

So you are saying our parents knew about abuse going on and decided not to mention it to us?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: guy crouchback on May 30, 2014, 09:44:40 AM
nobody  knew the full extent of any of it that's for sure, but plenty of people knew something of it. i have never bought the argument that ordinary pepole could not have even begun to grasp it, as the notion of sexual abuse was so alien as to be incomprehensible, that always struck me as complete BS.

the Magdalene girls were on occasion paraded around galway with there hair cut short wearing tattered clothes ( in the guise of being brought from A to B but it made a point too). i know this because my mother was in university their and they used to see them. the college girls  thought of them as pathtic downtrodden things, but they were the same age as them they came form the same towns and villages as them  if they had looked closer they might have even known them once. they never looked too closely though because they didn't want to know.

that i can forgive because we all know what its like when you are 18,19 20, but how come 5 or 10 years later when they were doctors and lawerys and teachers and civil servants they did nothing, even when Nell MC cafferty and them all were on the march (and fair play to them) how come no one marched on the Magdalene laundries.

my mother and her college pals love to remember the night they marched on and burned down the British embassy, its a pity they didn't target their rightous anger elsewhere when they were finished in merrion square.

having said that talk is cheap, this weekend ill be at home with my family enjoying the bank holiday. i have a niggling feeling that there might be a state sanctioned internment camp being operated from the old mosney complex in Meath. over the last few years every now again some pretty worrying stories emerge about what might be going on in there and there are loads of children there too. what am i doing about it, posting on a gaa discussion board.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on September 28, 2014, 09:52:32 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/pope-sends-clear-strong-message-on-sex-abuse-1.1943306

Francis is making a stand.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on September 28, 2014, 10:19:02 AM
Quote from: orangeman on September 28, 2014, 09:52:32 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/pope-sends-clear-strong-message-on-sex-abuse-1.1943306

Francis is making a stand.

QuoteSignificantly, the Holy See has already rescinded his diplomatic status, leaving the way open for his extradition to Poland and the Dominican Republic, should those countries opt to press paedophile charges.

Finally.

A good start.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on December 22, 2014, 10:01:12 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30577368 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30577368)

Pope Francis has sharply criticised the Vatican bureaucracy in a pre-Christmas address to cardinals, complaining of "spiritual Alzheimer's" and "the terrorism of gossip".

He said the Curia - the administrative pinnacle of the Roman Catholic Church - was suffering from 15 "ailments", which he wanted cured in the New Year.

Pope Francis - the first Latin American pontiff - also criticised "those who look obsessively at their own image".

He has demanded reform of the Curia.

There was silence at the end of the Pope's speech.

Addressing the Curia on Monday, Pope Francis said some power-hungry clerics were guilty of "cold-bloodedly killing the reputation of their own colleagues and brothers".

He compared the performance of the church's civil servants to that of an orchestra playing "out of tune" because they fail to collaborate and have no team spirit.

Clearly Pope Francis is meeting opposition among the nearly 3,000 strong staff of the Italian-dominated Curia.

He had never worked in Rome before his election as pope last year, and - as a Vatican outsider from the other end of the world - is clearly frustrated by the slow-moving and creaking Vatican bureaucracy.

He is trying to reform it with the help of a new group of cardinal advisers he has called in from every continent to draw up a new Vatican constitution.

Before his election in March 2013, the pontiff encountered internal opposition to some of the reforms he wants to carry out.

He has set up a series of specialist bodies to fight corruption and poor management, appointing a team of advisers.

The Pope also launched a clean-up of the Vatican Bank, officially known as the Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR). The IOR has long had a poor reputation, after a succession of scandals.

Some of Curia's 15 'ailments':
Spiritual Alzheimer's
Feeling immortal or immune
Suffering from existential schizophrenia
Committing terrorism of gossip
Becoming spiritually and mentally hardened

Pope Francis has also suggested that the Curia's power - concentrated in Rome for centuries - could be diluted to some extent by giving Catholic bishops around the world a bigger say in Church doctrine.

The pontiff himself did not work in the Curia before he was elected.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on December 23, 2014, 01:16:29 PM
Goodman Fran!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: deiseach on December 23, 2014, 02:07:30 PM
Quote from: muppet on December 22, 2014, 10:01:12 PM
There was silence at the end of the Pope's speech.

;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on December 23, 2014, 05:44:27 PM
Liking the cut of Francie's jib. Unfortunately he is no spring chicken as he seems like the sort of Pope required to clear out the old guard.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gaffer on December 23, 2014, 05:49:51 PM
He'd be well advised to employ his own cooks from here on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: mylestheslasher on December 26, 2014, 12:15:21 PM
Seems even the new pope agrees with many of us that the vatican is a corrupt little dump that all manner of evil has been buried. He'd better watch his back.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 23, 2015, 05:38:52 PM
https://www.minnpost.com/business/2015/02/several-catholic-dioceses-declared-bankruptcy-eve-sexual-abuse-trials#.VQ1otlR9zPg.twitter (https://www.minnpost.com/business/2015/02/several-catholic-dioceses-declared-bankruptcy-eve-sexual-abuse-trials#.VQ1otlR9zPg.twitter)

And on it goes......

...Declaring bankruptcy allows the church time to negotiate settlements with victims, organize its assets in a reorganization plan and ensure that victims get some sort of financial compensation for the alleged abuse.

But many see bankruptcy as a way to stop lawsuits that would force church officials to publicly testify about how they handled – or avoided – allegations of child abuse.

"The archdiocese was scared of officials getting on the witness stand and answering difficult questions about how they handled sexual abuse. So they avoided the issue and declared bankruptcy," said Noaker, the attorney. "That's not the sign of an organization committed to transparency and helping children."

Bankruptcies are federal filings that automatically freeze civil lawsuits until the bankruptcy is complete – which can take years – and bar any future lawsuits. Suits are frozen while the archdiocese inventories its assets and establishes a trust from which victims are then paid. Legally, a trial can continue after the bankruptcy is complete, but that is extremely rare.....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on August 28, 2015, 03:07:38 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34083390 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34083390)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on January 25, 2016, 10:30:39 PM
Nothing but the same old story

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/tyrone-priest-was-frozen-out-by-church-for-informing-on-colleague-over-child-porn-34392956.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 25, 2016, 10:41:31 PM
Tony will be along to explain this one on a bit.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 25, 2016, 10:46:05 PM
And, then again, not quite the same old story.  A priest broke the code of silence and willingly cooperated with the civil authorities.  Now, that's news.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: FL/MAYO on January 25, 2016, 11:30:03 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on January 25, 2016, 10:30:39 PM
Nothing but the same old story

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/tyrone-priest-was-frozen-out-by-church-for-informing-on-colleague-over-child-porn-34392956.html
I live in this diocese, I only heard about this today via a message from Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 26, 2016, 02:03:39 AM
The good tyroneman.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: FL/MAYO on January 26, 2016, 01:00:06 PM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 25, 2016, 11:30:03 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on January 25, 2016, 10:30:39 PM
Nothing but the same old story

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/tyrone-priest-was-frozen-out-by-church-for-informing-on-colleague-over-child-porn-34392956.html
I live in this diocese, I only heard about this today via a message from Ireland.

Front page news this morning, probably because it was in Irish newspapers.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 26, 2016, 05:02:15 PM
I was reading a Swiss newspaper today. You will never guess. A home for orphans. A man aged 75 who was raped by priests from age 10 to 16. They denied it for years and called him a liar and a pervert. Yesterday the order apologised. He said they destroyed dozens of lives. Just like in Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 06:11:05 PM
The Priest informed the authorities,which was the right thing to do,but was he frozen out for not following Church protocols for informing?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on January 26, 2016, 06:20:53 PM
Watched the movie "Spotlight" about the abuse in Boston, and the major cover up by the top in the Catholic Church.

Well worth watching if you can get a chance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x4Rmi-Z4O0
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 26, 2016, 06:47:39 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 06:11:05 PM
The Priest informed the authorities,which was the right thing to do,but was he frozen out for not following Church protocols for informing?

Dunno Tony. The parents are probably to blame.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 26, 2016, 07:24:14 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 06:11:05 PM
The Priest informed the authorities,which was the right thing to do,but was he frozen out for not following Church protocols for informing?

Are you saying 'The right thing to do' does not match up with Church protocols for informing.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 07:29:22 PM
I'm saying the Catholic Church has robust procedures nowadays for dealing with child abuse,procedures which have been independently endorsed.But the main point is, that whether colleagues shunned him or not,a priest brought these to the attention of the authorities, so the reaction of his colleagues is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 26, 2016, 09:31:51 PM
The reaction of his colleagues is, of course, relevant. It demonstrates that they were complicit in the cover-up culture, and that their reaction was the norm.  Apparently the robust protocol is keep your trap shut whatever the human cost.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 09:55:57 PM
Firstly I salute this Priest.He absolutely did the right thing.But he was shunned by from what I gather were a few individuals acting of their own accord and not according to Church policy.In Ireland if an allegation is made against any priest,the priest is stood down until a full investigation takes place.

The Pope cannot control every single cleric throughout the world.Abuse by a fellow priest was fully revealed by another priest,that is progress and should be applauded,and no emphasis placed on the actions of misguided fools.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on January 26, 2016, 09:57:58 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 06:11:05 PM
The Priest informed the authorities,which was the right thing to do,but was he frozen out for not following Church protocols for informing?

Make up your mind :-\
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 26, 2016, 10:54:44 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 09:55:57 PM
Firstly I salute this Priest.He absolutely did the right thing.But he was shunned by from what I gather were a few individuals acting of their own accord and not according to Church policy.In Ireland if an allegation is made against any priest,the priest is stood down until a full investigation takes place.

The Pope cannot control every single cleric throughout the world.Abuse by a fellow priest was fully revealed by another priest,that is progress and should be applauded,and no emphasis placed on the actions of misguided fools.


'Fr Gallagher disregarded the instruction to put Fr Palimattom on a plane to Bangalore.
Instead, he interviewed Fr Palimattom along with a retired police officer, who was one of his parishioners.

Fr Gallagher said he immediately called the Sheriff's Department of the West Palm Beach police, following rules set down by the American Church after hundreds of child sex abuse scandals.

Locks at his parochial house were changed
He was placed on medical leave by his bishop in the Diocese of Palm Beach, Florida.

He has written to bishops and cardinals in Ireland and America about the case - as well as Vatican officials - and has, so far, been unable to get a satisfactory response.'


Tony accuses the bishop in Florida, the Cardinal in USA and vatican officials of being misguided fools when most people would attribute their actions of being criminally culpable. Their actions are designed to protect the church from the actions of the self confessed pedophile and punish the person who would protect the children from this monster.
The misguided fools as Tony would call them are actually the stuff of scum without an iota of moral integrity.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 26, 2016, 11:07:26 PM
Quote from: Main Street on January 26, 2016, 10:54:44 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 09:55:57 PM
Firstly I salute this Priest.He absolutely did the right thing.But he was shunned by from what I gather were a few individuals acting of their own accord and not according to Church policy.In Ireland if an allegation is made against any priest,the priest is stood down until a full investigation takes place.

The Pope cannot control every single cleric throughout the world.Abuse by a fellow priest was fully revealed by another priest,that is progress and should be applauded,and no emphasis placed on the actions of misguided fools.


'Fr Gallagher disregarded the instruction to put Fr Palimattom on a plane to Bangalore.
Instead, he interviewed Fr Palimattom along with a retired police officer, who was one of his parishioners.

Fr Gallagher said he immediately called the Sheriff's Department of the West Palm Beach police, following rules set down by the American Church after hundreds of child sex abuse scandals.

Locks at his parochial house were changed
He was placed on medical leave by his bishop in the Diocese of Palm Beach, Florida.

He has written to bishops and cardinals in Ireland and America about the case - as well as Vatican officials - and has, so far, been unable to get a satisfactory response.'


Tony accuses the bishop in Florida, the Cardinal in USA and vatican officials of being misguided fools when most people would attribute their actions of being criminally culpable. Their actions are designed to protect the church from the actions of the self confessed pedophile and punish the person who would protect the children from this monster.
The misguided fools as Tony would call them are actually the stuff of scum without an iota of moral integrity.

Ah but what were the parents at when this was going on? It is also likely that the bishop, Cardinal and Vatican representative are suffering from the terrible disease known as mental reservation which afflicts many clergymen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 11:20:50 PM
In reality they are probably not bad men in any way.Like a lot of humans faced with a problem under pressure,they opt sadly for the easy way out.That is typical of Americans, do first and figure it out later.Thankfully  the priest in question has obviously learned from the mistakes made in his native Ireland and reacted with haste and in the thoroughly proper manner.

He deserves great credit as a truly exemplary Catholic,in common with the vast majority of his fellow catholic clerics across the globe.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 26, 2016, 11:55:47 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on January 26, 2016, 09:31:51 PM
The reaction of his colleagues is, of course, relevant. It demonstrates that they were complicit in the cover-up culture, and that their reaction was the norm.  Apparently the robust protocol is keep your trap shut whatever the human cost.
Yeah and God couldn't care less about lower class kids who were systematically raped by priests all over Europe.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on January 27, 2016, 12:21:19 AM
John Gallagher tells his story in full on Liveline today (from 00:40:00):
http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10519457%3A53%3A26%2D01%2D2016%3A (http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10519457%3A53%3A26%2D01%2D2016%3A)

Amazing testimony and compelling listening. If his story is true (and if it's not, he would make some storyteller) the official church is still operating on the same old basis as ever - cover up, protect the perpetrator, protect the institution, attack, ostracise (and effectively excommunicate) the whistleblower and the victims are still expendable. Except now it's even more sinister as we know now for sure they know what they're doing and they're doing it in the full knowledge of the criminality it represents. And the whole construct of reform, remorse and renewal is a complete sham.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 27, 2016, 12:40:07 AM
Quote from: Hardy on January 27, 2016, 12:21:19 AM
John Gallagher tells his story in full on Liveline today (from 00:40:00):
http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10519457%3A53%3A26%2D01%2D2016%3A (http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10519457%3A53%3A26%2D01%2D2016%3A)

Amazing testimony and compelling listening. If his story is true (and if it's not, he would make some storyteller) the official church is still operating on the same old basis as ever - cover up, protect the perpetrator, protect the institution, attack, ostracise (and effectively excommunicate) the whistleblower and the victims are still expendable. Except now it's even more sinister as we know now for sure they know what they're doing and they're doing it in the full knowledge of the criminality it represents. And the whole construct of reform, remorse and renewal is a complete sham.
the church has always been about power. people are expendable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 06:44:08 AM
Funny that.Hardly a week goes by,that I don't read and hear on tv/radio that a priest has been stood down,pending investigations of allegations made against him.Also each parish has a lay child protection officer,and the Irish church's Child Protection Policies have been independently verified as the most robust in Europe.

Hardly a week goes by either when I don't similarly read or hear of some pervert who masqueraded as a priest or Christian Brother is in the Courts receiving,rightly,a long jail sentence.

That would suggest to me that things have improved immensely.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 27, 2016, 07:12:28 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 06:44:08 AM
Funny that.Hardly a week goes by,that I don't read and hear on tv/radio that a priest has been stood down,pending investigations of allegations made against him.Also each parish has a lay child protection officer,and the Irish church's Child Protection Policies have been independently verified as the most robust in Europe.

Hardly a week goes by either when I don't similarly read or hear of some pervert who masqueraded as a priest or Christian Brother is in the Courts receiving,rightly,a long jail sentence.

That would suggest to me that things have improved immensely.
The cover ups and the lies were systematic . Just reading about the diocese of Fribourg in Switzerland. Teenagers were raped, beaten, denied food, and systematically humiliated. It was orphans of poor families. Church representatives denied everything and threatened legal action against those who brought up the topic. It was just touching without intent. There was no sin. They went to confession and were forgiven. Grotesque.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on January 27, 2016, 08:59:54 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 06:44:08 AM
Funny that.Hardly a week goes by,that I don't read and hear on tv/radio that a priest has been stood down,pending investigations of allegations made against him.Also each parish has a lay child protection officer,and the Irish church's Child Protection Policies have been independently verified as the most robust in Europe.

Hardly a week goes by either when I don't similarly read or hear of some pervert who masqueraded as a priest or Christian Brother is in the Courts receiving,rightly,a long jail sentence.

That would suggest to me that things have improved immensely.

Things have improved to the extent that clerics and bishops can be thwarted in their cover-up attempts more readily than before. Things have improved because law enforcement is onto these bastards. Listen to the law enforcement official on the clip I linked and then tell me about the level of "co-operation" extended by the church at clerical and episcopal level.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 27, 2016, 09:01:08 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 11:20:50 PM
In reality they are probably not bad men in any way.Like a lot of humans faced with a problem under pressure,they opt sadly for the easy way out.

The easy way out as you put it is not a defense or even an explanation, it is a crime in the USA.

'it is unlawful to willfully or maliciously engage in enabling child sexual abuse by causing, procuring or permitting a willful or malicious act of child sexual abuse of a child under the age of eighteen (18) by another.
Punishment:
Enabling child sexual abuse is punishable by up to life imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections, or by up to one (1) year imprisonment in a county jail and/or a fine between $500 and $5,000.'


Enabling child abuse is defined in the law as,
'means the causing, procuring or permitting of a willful or malicious act of child sexual abuse, as defined by paragraph 6 of subsection B ..... of a child under the age of eighteen (18) by another. As used in this subsection, "permit" means to authorize or allow for the care of a child by an individual when the person authorizing or allowing such care knows or reasonably should know that the child will be placed at risk of sexual abuse as proscribed by this subsection'.


Quote
That is typical of Americans, do first and figure it out later.
Ethnic stereotyping?
The evidence is overwhelming  that the crime of  enabling child abuse is not just typically American.

QuoteThankfully  the priest in question has obviously learned from the mistakes made in his native Ireland and reacted with haste and in the thoroughly proper manner.
He deserves great credit as a truly exemplary Catholic,in common with the vast majority of his fellow catholic clerics across the globe.

Rather, thankfully he had the moral courage to stubbornly act in the interests of the child against the force of a determined criminal cover-up by his superiors, his bishop, his cardinal and the suits in the vatican who all actively chose to prevent him from acting to save a child from the  clutches of a pedophile,
or  chose to ignore the priest's persecution.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 27, 2016, 09:06:03 AM
What's the difference between ISIS and the Catholic Church?  Both use rape and torture to control people all in the name of some God, both are indistinguishable abhorrent organisations who are inevitably only interested in money and self preservation. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on January 27, 2016, 09:06:52 AM
Quote from: seafoid on January 27, 2016, 07:12:28 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 06:44:08 AM
Funny that.Hardly a week goes by,that I don't read and hear on tv/radio that a priest has been stood down,pending investigations of allegations made against him.Also each parish has a lay child protection officer,and the Irish church's Child Protection Policies have been independently verified as the most robust in Europe.

Hardly a week goes by either when I don't similarly read or hear of some pervert who masqueraded as a priest or Christian Brother is in the Courts receiving,rightly,a long jail sentence.

That would suggest to me that things have improved immensely.
The cover ups and the lies were systematic . Just reading about the diocese of Fribourg in Switzerland. Teenagers were raped, beaten, denied food, and systematically humiliated. It was orphans of poor families. Church representatives denied everything and threatened legal action against those who brought up the topic. It was just touching without intent. There was no sin. They went to confession and were forgiven. Grotesque.
Indeed. But your story is in the past tense. The point is that the abuse, cover-up and thwarting of law enforcement are STILL going on. 2016. Decades of revelations, thousands of convictions and continuous exposés notwithstanding.

Child Protection Policies me arse. The approach still appears to be, "you don't have to tell them everything"; "we usually just put them on a plane back to where they came from"; "you're fired and banned from the sacraments" (this not to the perpetrator but to the priest the (god)fathers regard as a grass).
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on January 27, 2016, 03:41:29 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 26, 2016, 07:29:22 PM
I'm saying the Catholic Church has robust procedures nowadays for dealing with child abuse,procedures which have been independently endorsed.But the main point is, that whether colleagues shunned him or not,a priest brought these to the attention of the authorities, so the reaction of his colleagues is irrelevant.
So by your standards then the IRA dealt with Maria Cahill in an appropriate manner? I would say that his freezing out was more to do with his white English speaking ethnic background than it was to do with protocol.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 04:55:48 PM
Oh dear,Anti Catholics out in force,orgasmic,after one example of a priest being frozen out,in the USA,by a handful of misguided colleagues,because he did the right thing.

I happen to believe that the vast majority of priests would do what this cleric did,and as for ridiculing current Church policies,why are priests stood down day and daily,pending investigations of allegations of abuse by statutory agencies?

But hey,don't let facts get in the way of your innate prejudices.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 27, 2016, 07:32:15 PM
Tony, don't let the facts get in the way of your innate bias.

Pathetic, too, that you play the anti-Catholic card when people bring up legitimate and reasonable points.

And speaking of facts, what evidence, beyond "I Believe", do you have that most priests would have acted as Fr. Gallagher did.  Do you happen to have a long list of whistleblowers who are revealing or have revealed the names of known pedophiles to the police?  Silence is Golden is the motto, it seems.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 27, 2016, 07:48:08 PM
The Anti-Catholic bu77sh1t gets bandied about when some call this situation as it is and puts some heat on the mob. Ok, it's just one (known) case. But for an organisation that is supposed to have high moral principles, there should be zero tolerance.  Like all former crimes the biggest crime is this Dioceses complete disdain at  the priests actions. Most posters here are standing up and felling sorry for said priest. If that is anti-Catholic then what is pro-Catholic? The Catholic Church has lost it's way and it's people.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 07:53:20 PM
I admire what the priest did.I think the vast majority of priests would have done likewise.If the modern day procedures are ineffective or as is claimed only for show, why are priests regularly being stood down pending investigations if allegations are made against them? Whatever about failures in the past there is no cover up at any institutional level in the contemporary Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on January 27, 2016, 08:02:57 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on January 27, 2016, 07:32:15 PM
Do you happen to have a long list of whistleblowers who are revealing or have revealed the names of known pedophiles to the police? 

"Known" pedophiles? Surely the Police already know about these?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 27, 2016, 08:11:17 PM
Armaniac, by "known", I mean known to their fellow priests, of course.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 27, 2016, 08:18:24 PM
"There is no cover-up at any institutional level in the contemporary Catholic Church."  That, Tony, is a leap of faith of Olympic gold medal proportions.  And you KNOW this how?  Even in the face of all the evidence in this singular Fr. Gallagher case? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: annapr on January 27, 2016, 08:50:31 PM
Have you watched Spotlight yet Tony?  Great movie about the child abuse that was rampant in the Catholic Church in Boston.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 09:18:11 PM
"Was" being the operative word.Can someone provide a list of priests in modern times who knew about child abuse recently but didn't inform the authorities?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on January 27, 2016, 09:45:57 PM
(http://spheretechnologysolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/head-in-sand.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 10:32:40 PM
One isolated case which a member of the Church brought to light? The problem exactly is what?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 27, 2016, 10:34:15 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 10:32:40 PM
One isolated case which a member of the Church brought to light? The problem exactly is what?
Contempt for the victims of clerical rape
And the lies used to shut them up
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 27, 2016, 10:42:51 PM
No, Tony, that's not the way it goes.  You assert that there's no cover-up, so it's your responsibility to prove it.  Since you are so dead certain that all is grand now, you must KNOW, not believe, of clerics who have reported pedophile colleagues to the CIVIL authorities.  Or perhaps you KNOW that pedophelia has been completely eliminated and thus there are no cases to report.  The Fr. Gallagher case shows that's it's still going on, and the response of the Church indicates that the code of Omertà is still the status quo.  Gabe has you with your head in the sand, but I would suggest an entirely different orifice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on January 27, 2016, 10:59:24 PM
Tony you're in complete denial.  Here's a list of sex offenders from within just one Diocese in Washington - where I currently reside. Have a look at the names (mostly Irish priests btw) the years they served and abused and the locations (it would seem some venues where dens of abuse and for it to happen on that scale there would have to be depraved groups of men hiding in the church).  One Diocese in one corner of America - think about all over the world...

http://www.seattlearchdiocese.org/Assets/SEP/7043_DisclosureListUpdated.pdf (http://www.seattlearchdiocese.org/Assets/SEP/7043_DisclosureListUpdated.pdf)

The Church continues to screw up. Things are improving but the case in FL only highlights that they're not fixed and the policies are not being followed by corrupt people or the policies and the people are corrupt. I will not defends any of this and you are wrong to do so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 11:22:55 PM
There are paedophiles in the church,just as there are paedophiles in every profession,not all of whom will be detected,and some of whom will slip through the net,with the aid of misguided or equally perverted colleagues,unfortunately.But the Church has learned lessons and robust,but not infallible, procedures are now in place,and there is no officially endorsed code of silence or closing of ranks.One isolated case proves nothing,the amount of priests being stood down proves everything.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 28, 2016, 12:42:36 AM
Well, that's a huge weight off my mind.  Tony assures me there's no code of silence or closing of ranks.  His word is Gospel, in my book.  It must be a brutal burden to be omniscient.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 28, 2016, 12:55:06 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 10:32:40 PM
One isolated case which a member of the Church brought to light? The problem exactly is what?
The argument of that so and so is an isolated case,  is offered at the end of court case, after the defendant has been investigated. the evidence tested in court and has been found guilty and it is offered in order to mitigate the sentence of the court.
It is not offered beforehand to prevent or deflect an investigation.

There was one child rape by a pedophile  in  County  so and so, ah sure it's just an isolated incident, one rape in the whole county, so we will take no criminal action, just move the poor pedophile to another town where different children will be at risk.

And you say that was just a mistake when in fact it is a serious criminal act to permit children be knowingly put at risk to a (confessed) pedophile.
The problem is Tony, not that this might be an isolated case but that you chose to regard a deliberate decision to put children at risk  to a pedophile, as a mere mistake.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 07:03:51 AM
The fact is a cleric correctly informed the authorities.The bizarre scenario of blaming the global Catholic Church for the attitude of a few of his colleagues,and suggesting that the cover up of child abuse in the church is still rife,without any further evidence,is I'm afraid a symptom of irrational anti catholicism
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on January 28, 2016, 07:47:03 AM
It's ok though - you can counter irrational anti catholicism with your irrational catholicism ;D

(Disclaimer i am not saying everyone's catholicism is irrational just yours based on what you spout :))
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Newbridge Exile on January 28, 2016, 07:54:00 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 07:03:51 AM
The fact is a cleric correctly informed the authorities.The bizarre scenario of blaming the global Catholic Church for the attitude of a few of his colleagues,and suggesting that the cover up of child abuse in the church is still rife,without any further evidence,is I'm afraid a symptom of irrational anti catholicism
They were not just colleagues,   it was his superiors I.e. The Bishop adopting this attitude, ,   other priests in the same position will look at this and possibly think twice about doing what Father Gallagher rightly did when they see ramifications for them
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 28, 2016, 08:40:25 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 27, 2016, 11:22:55 PM
There are paedophiles in the church,just as there are paedophiles in every profession,not all of whom will be detected,and some of whom will slip through the net,with the aid of misguided or equally perverted colleagues,unfortunately.But the Church has learned lessons and robust,but not infallible, procedures are now in place,and there is no officially endorsed code of silence or closing of ranks.One isolated case proves nothing,the amount of priests being stood down proves everything.
There are more paedophiles in the Church. It attracts them. And celibacy isn't relevant in the real world.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Celibacy is the choice of the vast majority of good.priests and all singletons and has been since time began.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 28, 2016, 12:10:40 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Celibacy is the choice of the vast majority of good.priests and all singletons and has been since time began.
celibacy attracts perverts
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: blewuporstuffed on January 28, 2016, 12:15:58 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Celibacy is the choice of the vast majority of good.priests and all singletons and has been since time began.
Eh?  :-\
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 28, 2016, 12:49:29 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Celibacy is the choice of the vast majority of good.priests and all singletons and has been since time began.

Surely it is a pre-requisite to becoming a priest - hardly a choice, they get wedding rings as they are ahem married to God, so please please tell me how it is a choice?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 28, 2016, 01:00:37 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Celibacy is the choice of the vast majority of good.priests and all singletons and has been since time began

https://www.futurechurch.org/brief-history-of-celibacy-in-catholic-church (https://www.futurechurch.org/brief-history-of-celibacy-in-catholic-church)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 28, 2016, 01:41:28 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 07:03:51 AM
The fact is a cleric correctly informed the authorities.The bizarre scenario of blaming the global Catholic Church for the attitude of a few of his colleagues,and suggesting that the cover up of child abuse in the church is still rife,without any further evidence,is I'm afraid a symptom of irrational anti catholicism
Eh no,   you asked what the problem was, I told you that the problem was with you,  you regarding the persecution of the actions of the priest to bring this pedophile to task  was a mistake. A mere mistake !! when in fact it is a serious criminal act to enable an admitted active pedophile to put children at risk from his evil ways.
You do understand the difference between a mistake and a criminal act?

Do you have an increasing difficulty to read and comprehend  what's written in a post, using that part of your rational mind to comprehend what's written? I do not ask you to agree but just comprehend.  You give me the impression that you have an inability to use your intellect in a rational manner, that  you have flipped over to predominantly hysterical emotional reactions, manufacturing arguments that do not exist, seeing conspiracy motives that do not exist. And it is a condition which is progressively getting worse.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 04:56:29 PM
The (relatively few) clerics ostracising the priest are mistaken and misguided, but not facilitators of child abuse. Perhaps they were sendng the pervert hme to be dealt with by his own order. Child abuse facilitators are human traffickers etc, not those incapable of learning from past mistakes and those who mishandled situations in the past.

The key point is a good priest did his Christian duty, those who ostracise him a largely immaterial in the grand scheme of things
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 28, 2016, 05:19:40 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 04:56:29 PM
The (relatively few) clerics ostracising the priest are mistaken and misguided, but not facilitators of child abuse. Perhaps they were sendng the pervert hme to be dealt with by his own order. Child abuse facilitators are human traffickers etc, not those incapable of learning from past mistakes and those who mishandled situations in the past.

The key point is a good priest did his Christian duty, those who ostracise him a largely immaterial in the grand scheme of things

I disagree. Those who ostracise him set a tone that can influence other Priests against doing the same moral duty of informing. It also shows that they have more regard for the group than the moral issue at hand.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 28, 2016, 08:11:08 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 04:56:29 PM
The (relatively few) clerics ostracising the priest are mistaken and misguided, but not facilitators of child abuse. Perhaps they were sendng the pervert hme to be dealt with by his own order. Child abuse facilitators are human traffickers etc, not those incapable of learning from past mistakes and those who mishandled situations in the past.

The key point is a good priest did his Christian duty, those who ostracise him a largely immaterial in the grand scheme of things

So what is the catholic church it didn't traffic children to be abused but rather trafficked abusers about the country and the world knowing they would abuse children where ever they were sent?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Rubbish.Like most human beings faced with a complex problem they instinctively moved the problem on,hoping someone else would deal with it,not thinking through the full implications.Mistaken,misguided but not facilitating child abuse.

The fact is a catholic cleric had the courage to deal with the problem head on,so regardless of the reaction of a few out of touch clerics around him,a church member did what was right.Thats what I call a result.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 28, 2016, 09:54:15 PM
Tony, did you actually listen to the interview that Hardy posted?

Fr. Gallagher wasn't just spurned by a handful of fearful colleagues.  He was victimized by his bishop, stripped of his right to say Mass and administer Communion, stripped of his income and place of abode, and given the cold shoulder by higher-ups, all the way to the Vatican.  This incident, and the Church's response, is very, very disheartening, and makes a mockery of the "Zero Tolerance" policy.  If the Church were being honest, they should reinstate this good man and remove from office those who obstructed him and banished him.  Sadly, this further damages the perception of the Church as an institution, making it appear as little more than a collection of liars.  No one in the Church has stood up for him, he says.  Very depressing.

I'm curious to know the reaction of the parishioners.  Perhaps FL/MAYO has more information.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:14:51 PM
I would certainly like to know more details on this.Did the priest in question jump the gun,hunting for glory.Had his superiors policies in place which they were following? It is incredulous after all the bad press,that anyone within the Church would willingly risk further damaging the church's reputation by not acting in the right fashion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 28, 2016, 11:27:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:14:51 PM
I would certainly like to know more details on this.Did the priest in question jump the gun,hunting for glory.Had his superiors policies in place which they were following? It is incredulous after all the bad press,that anyone within the Church would willingly risk further damaging the church's reputation by not acting in the right fashion.

There has to be a problem with this Gallagher priest. Either that or the parents were to blame. One thing we can all agree on is the Vatican, cardinals and bishops were 100% honest and decent in the matter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 11:37:01 PM
You would have to admit,anyone,and in particular a Cardinal in the modern church trying in any way to conceal child abuse in this day and age would need to be unbelievably stupid.I certainly welcome the fact that the priest informed the authorities,but am not aware of the full facts.Could he have been frozen out for another reason altogether and has an axe to grind? You know the way nationalist politicians cried "Sectarianism" when unionists quite rightly refused to sanction a new leisure facility in Dungiven until clarity on funding was forthcoming,but the same unionists were happy to reverse the decision and sanction the project today when full funding was assured?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on January 29, 2016, 12:42:55 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Rubbish.Like most human beings faced with a complex problem they instinctively moved the problem on,hoping someone else would deal with it,not thinking through the full implications.Mistaken,misguided but not facilitating child abuse.

The fact is a catholic cleric had the courage to deal with the problem head on,so regardless of the reaction of a few out of touch clerics around him,a church member did what was right.Thats what I call a result.

If that's the case, the church hierarchy must have been packed with people of below average intelligence if they had no clue that a child abusing priest might hurt other kids if moved on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on January 29, 2016, 12:50:46 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on January 25, 2016, 10:30:39 PM
Nothing but the same old story

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/tyrone-priest-was-frozen-out-by-church-for-informing-on-colleague-over-child-porn-34392956.html

f**k me!  >:(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 29, 2016, 12:51:17 AM
I don't know much about it either, apart from the interview that Hardy posted, an Internet article, and what's posted on here, but following Fr. Gallagher's action, the perp confessed, was jailed and was subsequently deported to India.  So, what I do know is true.

Interesting, then, Tony, that your first reaction is to cast a sinister shadow over the priest and give all sorts of leeway to the church, though the latter of the two, as far as we know, is the only one that has covered up a veritable Everest of child abuse.

A little humility on your part might restore a smidgin of respect for your opinions.  Casting imagined aspersions on the priest is shameful, however, and you would be better served believing him, who has exhibited a moral backbone, as opposed to giving credence to an institution that has repeatedly shown the moral firmness of Jelly.

Until I am presented with evidence to the contrary, I'm siding with the priest.  You remind me of the lawyer who seeks to humiliate and destroy the rape victim, and will say anything to get his slimy client off.

As a Catholic, I am heartbroken by the abuse that has occurred, but even more so, if that's possible, by clerics complicit in cover-ups. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 29, 2016, 01:34:01 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 10:14:51 PM
I would certainly like to know more details on this.Did the priest in question jump the gun,hunting for glory.Had his superiors policies in place which they were following? It is incredulous after all the bad press,that anyone within the Church would willingly risk further damaging the church's reputation by not acting in the right fashion.
The story has been repeated ad nauseaum here  and finally you express that you might want to know more ::)
Just deny it straight out Tony, save yourself the bluff of appearing to want  to  "know more details".
You have your particular reputation to maintain.
I certainly would be worried  for the state of the universe if you suddenly claimed to know the difference between a mere mistake and a serious criminal action.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 29, 2016, 08:31:08 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 28, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Rubbish.Like most human beings faced with a complex problem they instinctively moved the problem on,hoping someone else would deal with it,not thinking through the full implications.Mistaken,misguided but not facilitating child abuse.

The fact is a catholic cleric had the courage to deal with the problem head on,so regardless of the reaction of a few out of touch clerics around him,a church member did what was right.Thats what I call a result.

What bullshit they moved these monsters on to save their corrupt religion and knew full well these evil men would continue to rape, torture and abuse young, innocent, vulnerable children.  To say they had courage to deal with the problem head on is like saying the BBC has the courage now to take sexual assault charges serious following the Saville ordeal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 29, 2016, 01:53:29 PM
I have already commended the priest for his actions.And if he has been frozen out because of these then those other so called clerics should be excommunicated.But I am just wondering if this is the full story?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: FL/MAYO on January 30, 2016, 12:34:35 AM
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/crime-law/disapointed-diocese-issues-lengthy-defense-to-whis/nqFJC/
Diocese issues lengthy defense to whistleblower's claims
Posted: 6:50 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 28, 2016
EmailFacebookTwitterShareThis
By Jorge Milian - Palm Beach Post Staff Writer


For the second time this week, the Diocese of Palm Beach issued a powerful rejection of claims made by a priest that he had been "frozen out" of the church after informing authorities that a colleague showed pornographic material to a minor.

Widening its defense against the assertions of Father John Gallagher, the Palm Beach Gardens-based diocese on Thursday defended its record in reporting and combating sexual abuse by priests since 2002, when the second bishop in four years departed over a sex scandal.

+'Disapointed' diocese issues lengthy defense to whistleblower's claims photo MELANIE BELL
Bishop Gerald Barbarito, of the Diocese of Palm Beach, leads the St. Edward Catholic Church consecration in January 2015. Assisting him ... Read More
"As a Catholic Church, we apologize for the grave harm that has been inflicted on any victims by clergy or church personnel. Words alone cannot express our sorrow, shame and disappointment for the past," the statement said. "The church is indebted to victims of abuse who have come forward. Their witness has allowed the healing process to begin and has made the church safer for all families."

Citing a national training program, the diocese said since 2002 it has had 30,000 clergy, religious and lay people complete the "Protecting God's Children" workshop and said it put the same number through background screening.

The statement headlined "Disheartened diocese provides multi-page response to allegations made by Fr. Gallagher," said the diocese reveals allegations of sexual abuse to the state attorney's office and followed protocol in the case cited by Gallagher involving a visiting priest from India, Jose Palimattom.

+'Disapointed' diocese issues lengthy defense to whistleblower's claims photo ALLEN EYESTONE
Father John Gallagher thumbs through documents he has collected since blowing the whistle on a pedophile priest. Gallagher says has been ... Read More
Gallagher, however, said he had been locked out of his parochial house at Holy Name of Jesus Christ Catholic Church in West Palm Beach several months after the January 2015 incident involving Palimattom, who was convicted. He said he was passed over for promotion at Holy Name and transferred to a Stuart church after he refused to put the priest on a plane rather than report him to law enforcement. Gallagher could not be reached Thursday for comment.

Earlier this week, the diocese responded to the charges by saying that Gallagher was a liar in "need of professional assistance."

"Father Gallagher was not in any way demoted or removed because of the incident," the diocese said Thursday.

+'Disapointed' diocese issues lengthy defense to whistleblower's claims photo PBSO
Father Jose Palimattom, booking photo by PBSO, after his arrest in January 2015.
It was Gallagher who "ignored" church protocol for reporting sexual abuse against a minor, the statement said. Those guidelines mandate that sexual abuse allegations be immediately reported to an abuse hotline and then to the diocese.

The diocese also said Gallagher invited Palimattom, whose screening made no mention of past sexual abuse. After his arrest, Palimattom told investigators he had been reprimanded for a relationship with a minor male in India.

Diocese strikes back against priest's assertions
Whistleblower priest claims Palm Beach Diocese forced him out
Staff writer Joe Capozzi contributed to this story.
In this Section
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 05:26:32 AM
I suspected there was more to this.I'll not hold my breath waiting for the anti Catholics to admit they were wrong,and retract their comments.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 06:24:54 AM
Symptoms of incurable anti-Catholicism.

Believe a priest when he says child abuse in church is still being covered up- otherwise don't believe a word he says on any other subject.

React angrily and irrationally  to a statement from one individual priest when he says he was frozen out for exposing child abuse,without establishing the full facts.

Get orgasmic when you read about unverified allegations of child abuse in the Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 30, 2016, 10:05:50 AM
Does that statement not just prove Father Gallaghers point? The bit where they say that he needs help! Throw mud at the whistleblower, always works when you have gullible fools like Tony Fearon about.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 10:18:51 AM
Yawn.Read the story.Fr Gallagher had an axe to grind,probably about his missed "promotion"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on January 30, 2016, 10:34:50 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 10:18:51 AM
Yawn.Read the story.Fr Gallagher had an axe to grind,probably about his missed "promotion"

You are really desperate to believe in the church Tony. Would your whole world collapse if you accepted the truth? Perhaps you need to seek help?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 11:59:37 AM

I have fully acknowledged the Church's failings in the past and have condemned them.

But examine the evidence in this specific case,and the faint possibility of any cleric being stupid enough to even try and conceal abuse of children in this day and age,even if they were inclined to try.Sadly it seems that Fr Galllagher is akin to a disgruntled employee.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 11:59:37 AM

I have fully acknowledged the Church's failings in the past and have condemned them.

But examine the evidence in this specific case,and the faint possibility of any cleric being stupid enough to even try and conceal abuse of children in this day and age,even if they were inclined to try.Sadly it seems that Fr Galllagher is akin to a disgruntled employee.

What do you call this day and age, 2016, last 5 years, last 10 years, last 20 years, last 30 years?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 01:56:19 PM
This day and age is here and now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 02:07:26 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 01:56:19 PM
This day and age is here and now.

You are full of mad dogs shite.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 02:26:49 PM
Loss of argument response! Catholic Church is now squeaky clean and has been in recent years in dealing with child abuse,showing both commitment to reform and learning lessons from the past.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 02:43:34 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 02:26:49 PM
Loss of argument response! Catholic Church is now squeaky clean and has been in recent years in dealing with child abuse,showing both commitment to reform and learning lessons from the past.

Ill ask again what is recent years 2016, last 5 years, last 10 years, last 20 years, last 30 years?  So you are saying the past doesn't matter as long as no member of the Catholic is caught today raping, torturing, abusing young children, their conscious and your's as an upstanding Christian individual are clear?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Man Marker on January 30, 2016, 02:54:44 PM
I genuinely dread to think what is happening in the underdeveloped world where no safeguarding is in place and abusers pretending to be religious men have unregulated access to children
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 03:24:40 PM
Quote from: Man Marker on January 30, 2016, 02:54:44 PM
I genuinely dread to think what is happening in the underdeveloped world where no safeguarding is in place and abusers pretending to be religious men have unregulated access to children

Tony has said that the prevalent rampant rape, torture and abuse of very young children does not happen in this day and age, find some comfort in his words, he is after all a man of God, a humble Christian servant here to do Gods work which is dictated to him through such holy figures as Sean Brady.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Man Marker on January 30, 2016, 06:07:22 PM
Quote from: No wides on January 30, 2016, 03:24:40 PM
Quote from: Man Marker on January 30, 2016, 02:54:44 PM
I genuinely dread to think what is happening in the underdeveloped world where no safeguarding is in place and abusers pretending to be religious men have unregulated access to children

Tony has said that the prevalent rampant rape, torture and abuse of very young children does not happen in this day and age, find some comfort in his words, he is after all a man of God, a humble Christian servant here to do Gods work which is dictated to him through such holy figures as Sean Brady.

I am a practising Catholic, however I don't have my head in the sand, nor was my comment directly at the catholic clergy but all religious faiths. It's the Tonys of the world that colluded due to their innocent blind faith.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on January 30, 2016, 06:08:08 PM
Just read the long and detailed statement provided by the Diocese of Palm Beach (thanks for the link FL/MAYO).  If indeed, events occurred as the statement describes them, then I have to say that the Church should not be faulted and that it acted properly and promptly, and in accordance with its own protocol and the demands of the law.

I truly hope that's the case because, frankly, the news of yet another abuse cover-up in the aftermath of the church's Zero Tolerance policy statements was simply devastating.  I sincerely hope that the diocesan statement is correct and not itself a cover-up crafted by its legal team.

Now I await further news about this case.  I'd love to read an investigative report from a reliable disinterested party to set my mind at ease, and I do hope that the diocesan report is a full and honest report of the Fr. Gallagher incident.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on January 30, 2016, 08:12:44 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 02:26:49 PM
Catholic Church is now squeaky clean and has been in recent years in dealing with child abuse,showing both commitment to reform and learning lessons from the past.

This isn't the joke thread

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 30, 2016, 08:16:21 PM
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--pTD2EbSP--/197nyeov6mq0wjpg.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 10:05:25 PM
Catholic Church is now squeaky clean,in terms of dealing with child abuse allegations,show me a shred of evidence to the contrary.

More importantly will those who jumped so readily onto Fr Gallagher's bandwagon,confirming their own inherent prejudices,admit they were wrong?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 10:05:25 PM
Catholic Church is now squeaky clean,in terms of dealing with child abuse allegations,show me a shred of evidence to the contrary.

More importantly will those who jumped so readily onto Fr Gallagher's bandwagon,confirming their own inherent prejudices,admit they were wrong?

You keep saying now - what is now, today and today alone - what about the f**ker who married me and I am not an old person - so now you mean from 30/01/16 the catholic church is squeaky clean - are you for real?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 11:05:03 PM
The f..ker who married you? What's her name? I am saying that from recent years the Church has robust procedures for dealing with child abuse allegations which see priests regularly stood down,the moment an allegation is made,to all full investigations to proceed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Aaron Boone on January 30, 2016, 11:09:14 PM
I'll be at 11am mass Sunday in Mount Argus, Dublin.  Fr. Brian D' from Fermanagh practised there and it's a very serious Dublin-city place to worship.

I have kids. At Mount Argus, there are great people and great controls.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 30, 2016, 11:30:07 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 11:05:03 PM
The f..ker who married you? What's her name? I am saying that from recent years the Church has robust procedures for dealing with child abuse allegations which see priests regularly stood down,the moment an allegation is made,to all full investigations to proceed.

You are one sick individual, I reported that comment to the mods but was presented with The last topic report from your IP was less than 60 seconds ago. Please try again later. - a statement which never goes away - so if its your world boss as it appears to be based on your posts fair play, I think you are a sick perverted individual akin to the bastard who performed the ceremony at my wedding.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omaghjoe on January 31, 2016, 12:06:40 AM
I dont know if Tony half the time is serious, a WUM, or maybe a retrospective WUM, but if its either of the later two its worked in spectacular fashion on the newbie. ;D ;D ;D

No wides maybe you should look up Tony's history, he has a particular funny escapade around the 03 AI final and then he let everyone know about it, posters regularly remind him know about it...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 08:52:11 AM
No wides."The f...ker who married me" is a highly derogatory term,whether it's applied to your spouse or to the person who officiated at the wedding ceremony.That makes you a hypocrit.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on January 31, 2016, 10:15:08 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 08:52:11 AM
No wides."The f...ker who married me" is a highly derogatory term,whether it's applied to your spouse or to the person who officiated at the wedding ceremony.That makes you a hypocrit.

Tony play the ball not the man. Your desire to defend the church is your right but not to denigrate someone else on here and their family. If the 'f**ker' that he referred to posted your message then fine. You wouldn't appreciate it if someone made a similar comment about your wife now would you?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 10:48:08 AM
Ah ffs it was a joke,a play on words! If f..ker was all my wife called me I'd be a happy man!😂😂
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on January 31, 2016, 11:10:33 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 10:48:08 AM
Ah ffs it was a joke,a play on words! If f..ker was all my wife called me I'd be a happy man!😂😂

But if I called your wife a f**ker would you be happy?  I know what would happen if it was said to me about my wife. It was snide and disrespectful Tony and you should apologise and delete it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 31, 2016, 11:40:08 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 08:52:11 AM
No wides."The f...ker who married me" is a highly derogatory term,whether it's applied to your spouse or to the person who officiated at the wedding ceremony.That makes you a hypocrit.

The individual who married me is now a convicted pedophile, I stand by the term I used to describe this individual.   
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on January 31, 2016, 11:41:42 AM
And we all know I mean officiated at my wedding so there is no ambiguity.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on January 31, 2016, 12:29:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 30, 2016, 10:05:25 PM
Catholic Church is now squeaky clean,in terms of dealing with child abuse allegations,show me a shred of evidence to the contrary.

More importantly will those who jumped so readily onto Fr Gallagher's bandwagon,confirming their own inherent prejudices,admit they were wrong?

Yeah, of course. Based on all prior knowledge and known precedent there is no vestige of a reason to doubt an official statement from a Catholic diocese.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 31, 2016, 12:54:22 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on January 30, 2016, 06:08:08 PM
Just read the long and detailed statement provided by the Diocese of Palm Beach (thanks for the link FL/MAYO).  If indeed, events occurred as the statement describes them, then I have to say that the Church should not be faulted and that it acted properly and promptly, and in accordance with its own protocol and the demands of the law.

I truly hope that's the case because, frankly, the news of yet another abuse cover-up in the aftermath of the church's Zero Tolerance policy statements was simply devastating.  I sincerely hope that the diocesan statement is correct and not itself a cover-up crafted by its legal team.

Now I await further news about this case.  I'd love to read an investigative report from a reliable disinterested party to set my mind at ease, and I do hope that the diocesan report is a full and honest report of the Fr. Gallagher incident.
If you read the statement carefully it says nothing. It just denies and throws mud at Gallagher.
Could have been wriiten by a Tony Fearon alais  in Florida which is why he swallows it wholesale.

from the church statement
"Father Gallagher was not in any way demoted or removed because of the incident,"

Why was he demoted and frozen out then? was he 5 minutes late in holding confessions?
Apparently the Church also says he wasn't demoted and moved, rather he was given a new appointment with residence  ;D

from the church statement
'It was Gallagher who "ignored" church protocol for reporting sexual abuse against a minor, the statement said. Those guidelines mandate that sexual abuse allegations be immediately reported to an abuse hotline and then to the diocese'.

Gallagher had immediately reported the pedophile  to the authorities via the abuse hotline PBSO, was he 5 minutes late in reporting it to the diocese?

The church say they never changed the locks,  therefore Gallagher must have come with the wrong keys? ::)

In response to previous church denials  here's another article which Gallagher's actions  hold much more credibility and are well supported by other sources.
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/whistleblower-priest-claims-palm-beach-diocese-for/nqCHJ/


The diocese also released two statements it put out about Palimattom's arrest in January 2015. They make no mention of Gallagher's role.
David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests, said he is familiar with Gallagher's saga and believes the diocese retaliated against a whistleblower.
"It's part of a long continuing pattern where church officials shoot the messenger and put their careers ahead of the safety of kids," Clohessy said.

Mike Gauger, PBSO's chief deputy, did not respond to messages from The Post, but he gave Gallagher glowing praise in a letter to Cardinal O'Malley on July 20 for helping prosecute Palimattom. O'Malley served eight months as Palm Beach bishop in 2002 and 2003 and heads a pontifical commission for the protection of minors set up by Pope Francis in 2014.

"Over the last 44 years of law enforcement experience I have witnessed other events where church staff was not forthright in providing information to our investigators and actually impeded our investigation by their lack of cooperation," Gauger said.
"I would expect that Father Gallagher's immediate cooperation should be recognized by the Catholic Church and he receive accolades for his compliance with criminal investigators.''

Knowing the stress he has gone through, Gallagher said, he still would call law enforcement if another case came to his attention.
"I do not regret my decision. I do not regret protecting a minor or protecting the people under my care," he said.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 31, 2016, 01:21:44 PM
The Catholic Church deny that Gallagher was demoted
however
http://www.diocesepb.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.details&ArticleId=7149&returnTo=2015-press-releases

new priest assignments may 18 - 2015
Father John Gallagher
From Parochial Administrator of Holy Name of Jesus Parish in West Palm Beach
To Parochial Vicar of St. Joseph Parish in Stuart

A PA functions as pastor,  a vicar is a pastor's underling. Usually a PA is appointed Pastor.

From the church's own definitions
When a parish is "vacant," meaning that the pastor has retired, been transferred to another assignment, or is incapable of exercising his duties as a pastor, the bishop must appoint as soon as possible a parochial administrator. In general, an administrator has the same duties and scope of authority as a pastor; however, these may be limited by the bishop. The bishop in time may decide to appoint the administrator as the pastor.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 07:32:41 PM
Ffs,with the modern day scrutiny on account of past mistakes it would be an act of complete lunacy for anyone in the Church to even contemplate covering up child abuse in the present day.

A bit of humility and acknowledgement of the progress made,from the anti Catholic constituency,wouldn't go amiss.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on January 31, 2016, 07:38:28 PM
134 pages with at least 50 by t fearon
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 31, 2016, 08:57:28 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 31, 2016, 07:32:41 PM
Ffs,with the modern day scrutiny on account of past mistakes it would be an act of complete lunacy for anyone in the Church to even contemplate covering up child abuse in the present day.

A bit of humility and acknowledgement of the progress made,from the anti Catholic constituency,wouldn't go amiss.
The appalling vista logic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on February 01, 2016, 10:58:38 AM
I have no time for Tony's blind faith in the Church for various reasons. Nor do I believe that every priest and bishop in the Church covered up and colluded in child abuse. Some of the vitriol on here from posters taking every opportunity to put the boot in to the Church is as bad as the "mad dog shite" that Tony is supposedly infected with. In relation to Father Gallagher I suspect that there is more to it than he is saying. There are always three sides to a story the truth being the third. It would be informative to see an unbiased assessment of what went on in West Palm Beach.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 01, 2016, 12:09:14 PM
Educate yourself, do your own research and read the evidence.
The Florida church are up to all the old Catholic Church tricks, every devious ruse is being used to cover their tracks and blacken Gallagher with half truths and lies.
The clues ring louder than Big Ben.

Tony is becoming more deranged as time passes by. Here  his strategy is to avoid examining the facts by roguishly retreating under British establishment's  "appalling vista" scenario.
And it should also be noted that Tony also has an obsessive fixation with Thatcherite economic morals.

Who could have guessed, that over all these years, he really yearned to be a British establishment lickspittle ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on February 01, 2016, 12:27:33 PM
He openly wants to stay British yet stand to attention at the GAA matches looking at what he perceives to be a foreign flag.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 01, 2016, 06:59:49 PM
Yawn,I have no desire to stay with Britain,but like the rest of you I am stuck here,primarily due to the fact that the 26 counties and its people do not want unity,therefore I am willing to think outside the box in order to make the best out of constitutional reality.

There is no way anyone with half a brain cell,in the Catholic Church,even if they were so inclined out of some sense of misguided devotion,would even contemplate trying to cover up child abuse.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 01, 2016, 08:15:42 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 01, 2016, 06:59:49 PM
..............
There is no way anyone with half a brain cell,in the Catholic Church,even if they were so inclined out of some sense of misguided devotion,would even contemplate trying to cover up child abuse.
That's the appalling vista argument again, a proven defective argument that was  used to defend the realm against evidence that it was corrupt.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on February 02, 2016, 11:12:54 AM
the state has paid 1 bn, religious orders 211m in compensation to all the people who were raped in the name of god.
joe taxpayer will take another one for the team. Of course.
The abuse continues
  http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/orders-paid-sixth-of-bill-for-childrens-home-abuse-34410142.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 02, 2016, 11:45:30 AM
Tony -here is one for you.

If the governments in play in Ireland put in place statutes to the following effect:

Any individual or organisation seeking to be involved in the governance of education must sign-up to the following principles and be prepared to undergo periodic and frequent assessment against these principles:


  • Must 100% comply with any police or legally constituted inquiry into child abuse (e.g. the prompt handover of all related files)
    Must instruct its members to fully comply with all such inquiries (e.g. must pass over all information irrespective of the means by which that information was acquired)
    Must not engage in any financial transaction designed to place assets beyond the reach of a successful litigant/court sanction
    Must immediately reverse any such transaction that has already taken place.
    Must undertake to pass on all knowledge of abuse immediately and directly to the relevant policing authority (irrespective of how that knowledge was acquired). This includes abuse already taken to date and any future abuse.

I think any reasonable person would agree that these are fairly basic thresholds and would only be a starting point. Tony could the Catholic Church sign up to this? And if they didn't - would there be any role for their officials in the governance of schools? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on February 02, 2016, 12:00:11 PM
Recent disclosures about the HSE indicate that organisational coverups seem endemic and that the State isn't much better able to organise its affairs without using the Church. None of this justifies anything in the past, but I wonder if some here accept the same guilt as voters as they seem to expect everyone in the Church to have because of the actions of a few.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 02, 2016, 12:09:25 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on February 02, 2016, 12:00:11 PM
Recent disclosures about the HSE indicate that organisational coverups seem endemic and that the State isn't much better able to organise its affairs without using the Church. None of this justifies anything in the past, but I wonder if some here accept the same guilt as voters as they seem to expect everyone in the Church to have because of the actions of a few.

Electing a liar is a mistake. Electing an incompetent fool is a mistake. Re-electing them is even worse.

But as for the church mu comments are not directed against the individuals perpetrating the abuse (the same rules apply yo them as any other child rapist) but are directed at the institutional failings in not doing anything about the abuse, not doing enough to address the abuse, taking action to cover up the abuse, taking action to cover up what was known about the abuse, taking action to belittle the abuse, taking action to shelter assets from the abuse. The standards I have asked for the church to sign up to are basic and I would really love to see if they could sign up to them. If they didn't they would be finished imho
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on February 02, 2016, 01:00:28 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on February 02, 2016, 12:00:11 PM
Recent disclosures about the HSE indicate that organisational coverups seem endemic and that the State isn't much better able to organise its affairs without using the Church. None of this justifies anything in the past, but I wonder if some here accept the same guilt as voters as they seem to expect everyone in the Church to have because of the actions of a few.

What on earth  are you talking about?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 02, 2016, 06:12:19 PM
Of course you're right Armaghmaniac.Horrendous as was the child abuse caused by relatively few perverts masquerading as clerics,and the heinous way this was mishandled by the Church,the refusal of the British and Irish governments to reveal what they know about atrocities like the Dublin bombings,where hundreds of innocent lives were lost,is much worse,morally and physically,yet I don't see any threads here about corrupt government
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on February 02, 2016, 07:14:55 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 02, 2016, 06:12:19 PM
Of course you're right Armaghmaniac.Horrendous as was the child abuse caused by relatively few perverts masquerading as clerics,and the heinous way this was mishandled by the Church,the refusal of the British and Irish governments to reveal what they know about atrocities like the Dublin bombings,where hundreds of innocent lives were lost,is much worse,morally and physically,yet I don't see any threads here about corrupt government

Nor anyone defending them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on February 02, 2016, 08:22:26 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 02, 2016, 06:12:19 PM
Of course you're right Armaghmaniac.Horrendous as was the child abuse caused by relatively few perverts masquerading as clerics,and the heinous way this was mishandled by the Church,the refusal of the British and Irish governments to reveal what they know about atrocities like the Dublin bombings,where hundreds of innocent lives were lost,is much worse,morally and physically,yet I don't see any threads here about corrupt government
Relatively FEW? 1.4 BN EURO is more than a handful.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 03, 2016, 03:14:07 PM
Let's not forget other independent evidence to support Fr Gallagher's accusations of a church authorised cover-up and persecution of him for whistleblowing, the real vista.

Evidence from - a sainted nun -.
4 weeks after his demotion, while lying in hospital -   heart issue
Gallagher asked Dominican nun Sister Ann Monahan to retrieve files on the Fr Palimattom scandal from his office at the Holy Name of Jesus Christ church.

She managed to do this, but when she returned later, she was stopped by church officials and the keys to the building taken off her.
"I was told to leave. When I protested, I was told 'you're fired'," Sister Monahan (84) said.
"I'm a Dominican and our motto is 'The Truth' and that is all Father John ever did as a priest, tell the truth.
"I've been a nun for 67 years and I felt I was treated badly and Father John was treated very badly indeed. I find it hard to forgive them (the Church) for what happened."
She has now been officially retired.

--------
The catholic church in Florida does have a colourful promiscuous  reputation, with rampant gay sex and "come sit on my lap" invitations to youthful and handsome seminarians by rectors.

In that environment, cover-ups would be stock and trade.
It was an open secret that the vast majority of the Archdiocese's pastors were active homosexuals
In 2011 a loyal conservative Catholic group, Christifidelis,  compiled a report  named "Miami Vice" about widespread and longstanding pattern of homosexual conduct among Miami archdiocesan leaders. Archbishop Favalora, was accused  of running the Miami Archdiocese like some sort of gay sex mafia.
St. John Vianney College Seminary, located in Southwest Dade, "a kind of gay Hogwarts with palm trees" that has a long history of gay sex scandals and hookups between horny young students
the report can be read here in jpg format.
http://gawker.com/5825254/the-catholic-churchs-secret-gay-cabal (http://gawker.com/5825254/the-catholic-churchs-secret-gay-cabal)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 03, 2016, 03:40:20 PM
Minnesota July 15 2014
Church lawyer details cover-up claims on sex abuse (http://news.yahoo.com/church-lawyer-details-cover-claims-sex-abuse-155640481.html)

A canon lawyer alleging a widespread cover-up of clergy sex misconduct in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has made her most detailed claims yet, accusing archbishops and their top staff of lying to the public and of ignoring the U.S. bishops' pledge to have no tolerance of priests who abuse.

Affidavit-of-Jennifer-Haselberger (http://www.andersonadvocates.com/Posts/News-or-Event/1855/Affidavit-of-Jennifer-Haselberger.aspx)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on February 03, 2016, 04:04:48 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 03, 2016, 03:40:20 PM
Minnesota July 15 2014
Church lawyer details cover-up claims on sex abuse (http://news.yahoo.com/church-lawyer-details-cover-claims-sex-abuse-155640481.html)

A canon lawyer alleging a widespread cover-up of clergy sex misconduct in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has made her most detailed claims yet, accusing archbishops and their top staff of lying to the public and of ignoring the U.S. bishops' pledge to have no tolerance of priests who abuse.

Affidavit-of-Jennifer-Haselberger (http://www.andersonadvocates.com/Posts/News-or-Event/1855/Affidavit-of-Jennifer-Haselberger.aspx)

Quote from: T Fearon on February 01, 2016, 06:59:49 PM
Yawn,I have no desire to stay with Britain,but like the rest of you I am stuck here,primarily due to the fact that the 26 counties and its people do not want unity,therefore I am willing to think outside the box in order to make the best out of constitutional reality.

There is no way anyone with half a brain cell,in the Catholic Church,even if they were so inclined out of some sense of misguided devotion,would even contemplate trying to cover up child abuse.

Must be lies! ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 03, 2016, 04:40:32 PM

Tony accuses many in the church hierarchy of having less than one half a brain cell. ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 03, 2016, 06:27:17 PM
Oh dear.It is amazing what disgruntled employees will do.They even claim that a major broadcasting company had a bias against Catholics,who anonymously post criticism, while employed by them,online,not too far from home ::)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 03, 2016, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 03, 2016, 06:27:17 PM
Oh dear.It is amazing what disgruntled employees will do.They even claim that a major broadcasting company had a bias against Catholics,who anonymously post criticism, while employed by them,online,not too far from home ::)
Oh dear Tony, yet again you have fallen hook line and sinker, both feet in a mire of your own making.   When will you ever realise the folly of supporting the continued enabling of child molestation. Your "appalling vista" and the "Nuremberg defense"  just don't convince anybody.

One year after Jennifer's  unimpeachable affadavit was published
Archbishop Nienstedt resigns after Twin Cities archdiocese charged with failing children.
National catholic reporter
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/archbishop-nienstedt-resigns-week-after-diocese-charged-failing-children (http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/archbishop-nienstedt-resigns-week-after-diocese-charged-failing-children)


'Catholic Church cannot be trusted', court orders
http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/settlement-reached-st-paul-minneapolisarchdiocese-civil-case (http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/settlement-reached-st-paul-minneapolisarchdiocese-civil-case)
Settlement reached in St. Paul-Minneapolis archdiocese civil case

The agreement gives local authorities oversight for three years of archdiocesan procedures aimed at protecting children from sexual abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on February 03, 2016, 08:31:07 PM


Quote from: T Fearon on February 01, 2016, 06:59:49 PM


There is no way anyone with half a brain cell,in the Catholic Church,even if they were so inclined out of some sense of misguided devotion,would even contemplate trying to cover up child abuse.


All lies main street!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 03, 2016, 10:45:34 PM
As far as I can see these are audits to ensure compliance,which all organisations face at one time or another.That is a million miles away from not reporting child abuse and a billion miles away from facilitating it,as the array of anti Catholics on this board outrageously allege.

The Church should welcome and encourage independent audits,which as far as I can see they do.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 04, 2016, 12:33:02 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 03, 2016, 10:45:34 PM
As far as I can see these are audits to ensure compliance,which all organisations face at one time or another.That is a million miles away from not reporting child abuse and a billion miles away from facilitating it,as the array of anti Catholics on this board outrageously allege.

The Church should welcome and encourage independent audits,which as far as I can see they do.
The point is Tony, the Church miserably failed the audit (as you call it), others would call it a fully fledged investigation, complete with court tested evidence and the matter deemed to be proven beyond doubt that the church failed the "audit".
They failed it so bad that  they were ordered to be supervised for 3 years. and the archbishop had to resign.
The church. as an institution was deemed too incompetent and corrupt  to monitor itself in 2015
They were found by the court not to have  reported  child abuse and they deliberately left children to be abused or/and at risk of abuse  by known pedophiles.


So when you write,  "the Church should welcome and encourage independent audits",  I understand that to mean that  that the Minnesota church should not have tied the court up in knots for a year denying the findings of an independent audit, should not have denied that they were criminally responsible,  and resisting  the inevitable lengthy court supervision??

or is it possible that you do not accept the Minnesota court findings, that  you deny the criminal  actions by  Minnesota catholic church over a 3 year period 2011 2012 2013,  that you deny they failed to implement basic child abuse safety measures, that you deny they sought to pervert the course of justice by protecting known pedophiles and knowingly put children at risk of being abused by these pedophiles?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: omaghjoe on February 04, 2016, 06:30:54 AM
This is/was a serious blight on the church and the measures that have been put in place need to work

So as far as our two esteemed posters goes...

Main St... Do you believe that the church is improving its child protection measures or do you think that it is destined to be be a haven for pedophiles no matter what it it does because of its past? Also your wrong about Administrator usually becoming a pastor/PP, I don't know the stats on it so can only speak from experience but I've been in 3 different parishes where an administrator was appointed and ended up with a different pastor/PP. However I would agree that would at least appear to be a demotion, although on paper it actually isnt, and it happens to curates/vicars pretty regular.

Tony... Would you be blindly defending the church if these measures where shown not to work, anyway? Honestly? Also shouldn't the church be open to criticism of their child protection measures so that they can be tweaked and ensure that no child is ever in danger while in the care of the church ever again?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 04, 2016, 07:20:37 AM
1.Failure to implement procedures is incompetent and negligent,but not a sign of malice.

2.I agree that the church,in every part of the world should implement all statutory procedures and more of its own,to prevent child abuse and facilitate the identification of all potential child abusers and have them drummed out.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 04, 2016, 03:45:03 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 04, 2016, 07:20:37 AM
1.Failure to implement procedures is incompetent and negligent,but not a sign of malice.
You deny it is malicious,  when failure to implement  procedures is not just a sign of malice , it is a criminal act of malice. And it is an indisputable criminal act when the court finds against the church after thoroughly examining it's failure to implement procedures, knowingly leaving children at risk to being abused  by pedophiles.

You have  poured scorn and ridicule on the 82 year old nun whose evidence supported Gallagher, you have poured scorn and ridicule on Jennifer Haselberger, the canon lawyer for the church, whose accusation were later totally vindicated in the courts. And now you still  deny her evidence and now also deny  the court judgement. You vehemently deny all  actions that society has on its side  to protect children from pedophiles.
You deny the witnesses, the evidence, the prosecution and  the court judgements.

Your actions here are evidence  that you have no issue with pedophiles, as the enabling of that particular abuse does not really bother you in the slightest and you are screaming to let priests who enable pedophiles to abuse, not have any comebacks in the slightest.
You are in fact enabling pedophilia.

Quote2.I agree that the church,in every part of the world should implement all statutory procedures and more of its own,to prevent child abuse and facilitate the identification of all potential child abusers and have them drummed out.
Utter hypocrisy.



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on February 04, 2016, 05:48:20 PM
You are only too willing to see paedophilia everywhere as far as the Catholic Church is concerned.The fact is non implementation of procedures is stupid,careless and grossly negligent,but not in itself evidence of malice.

I don't believe anyone is misguidedly trying to cover up child abuse in the church today,and if there is evidence to convict anyone of such,by all means let the authorities investigate and bring to court anyone against whom strong evidence is found.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 03, 2016, 05:14:27 AM
Yet another disgusting episode of child abuse by priests and cover up by the Bishops.

Pennsylvania Diocese Leaders Knew of Sex Abuse for Decades, Grand Jury Says

Over four decades, at least 50 priests and other church employees molested hundreds of children in a small Roman Catholic diocese in central Pennsylvania, and in many cases their superiors knew of the abuses but did not remove the priests or notify law enforcement, according to a grand jury report released on Tuesday.

But none of the findings will result in prosecution, according to State Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane, whose office led the investigation, because the statutes of limitations on all alleged crimes have expired.

The report names a dozen priests who admitted — to church officials, to the grand jury or both — that they had molested children, and other cases where church records made clear that their superiors believed they were guilty. None were taken to law enforcement, and in cases where police or prosecutors learned of allegations, the report says, church officials worked to hush them up.

"They placed their desire to avoid public scandal over the well-being of innocent children," the report says.

The Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown is only the most recent to be the target of an investigation and a report by a grand jury or attorney general for shielding priests who abused children. But the numbers it cites are striking for a diocese that claims fewer than 100,000 Catholics.

There have been public allegations in the past against some of the priests named in the report, including the Rev. Joseph D. Maurizio Jr., who is to be sentenced on Wednesday in a case that drew international attention. Father Maurizio, who raised money for an orphanage in Honduras, was convicted in federal court in September of sexually abusing boys at the orphanage, money laundering and possessing child pornography.

Bishop Joseph Adamec, former leader of the diocese, learned of allegations against Father Maurizio in 2009, according to the grand jury report and the charity that sponsored the orphanage. But Bishop Adamec and his successor, Bishop Mark L. Bartchak, kept Father Maurizio on as pastor at a church in Central City, Pa., until shortly before his arrest in 2014.

Given that record, Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of BishopAccountability.org, said she was puzzled that the grand jury report did not hold Bishop Bartchak accountable, as well.

In a statement, the diocese said it had "cooperated fully with authorities throughout the investigation, and will continue to do so."

The report offers a scathing picture of Bishop James Hogan, who led the diocese from 1966 to 1986, and died in 2005, as a leader who repeatedly persuaded the police and prosecutors to drop criminal cases against priests, failed to discipline people he knew were abusers, and responded to complaints about predatory priests by relocating them to jobs where they could molest again.

It contains serious, but less harsh, criticism of his successor, Bishop Adamec, who retired in 2011 but retains his title. It cites a few priests who were allowed to continue ministry for years after the diocese learned of allegations against them, including three who remain active priests, and notes that the diocese turned none of the priests in to the police or prosecutors.

The records indicate that with over half the priests, the diocese did not learn of alleged abuse until decades had passed, when no legal action was possible.

The bishop's lawyer, David Berardinelli, released a response describing the grand jury report as one-sided and unfair. It notes that unlike his predecessors, Bishop Adamec frequently suspended accused pedophile priests, often soon after learning of the allegations, and asked the church hierarchy to defrock them. Those he allowed to remain in active ministry have had "no new allegation of abuse of a minor" since then.

Pope Francis called last year for the Vatican to create a tribunal on judging bishops accused of negligence, but the Vatican has yet to do so. Last month, Francis said in a news conference that bishops who kept abusive priests in ministry should resign.

The report names 35 priests, most of them now dead, who have been accused of child molestation, and cites other abusers who are not named. The information is based mostly on documents taken from diocesan offices in 2014 under a search warrant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/us/pennsylvania-diocese-leaders-knew-of-sex-abuse-for-decades-grand-jury-says.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 03, 2016, 11:51:16 AM
CLERICAL CHILD SEX ABUSE: Diocese By Diocese

Added on October 29, 2005
abuse.jpg

Achonry

Three priests have had allegations of child sexual abuse made against them. None has been convicted of such offences. One is dead; the other two are retired and neither of them is involved in ministry in the diocese.

Ardagh & Clonmacnois

Complaints against five priests have been received since 1950. All five are deceased.

Armagh

Allegations of child sex abuse have been made against eight priests. The allegations date back to the 1950s and some of those accused are now dead. The archdiocese said that no priest against whom there was concern relating to child protection was still in active ministry.

Cashel & Emly

The diocese received allegations against two priests. Neither of them is still working in the diocese.

Clogher

The diocese was unable to answer a series of questions submitted by The Irish Times.

Clonfert

Allegations of abuse were made against two priests, one of whom was subsequently convicted of child abuse. Neither priest is still working in the diocese.

Cloyne

Allegations of sex abuse have been made against 11 priests over the last 20 years. One of these priests is currently in a restricted ministry, meaning that he is in the parish but is not involved with schools and is not allowed to interact with young people.

The case was brought to the attention of garda?, but they determined that it did not fall into the category of child abuse.This is because the person who made the allegation was not a minor at the time of the alleged abuse.

Cork & Ross

Twelve priests in the Cork diocese have had allegations made against them relating to events which allegedly occurred between 1975 and 1995. Four priests have been convicted in the courts.

Two priests against whom allegations have been made are still working in the diocese. Both of these cases were investigated by garda? and the men were cleared. The diocesan spokesman said one of them, to the best of his knowledge, had stood down during the investigation.

Derry

Twenty-six priests have been investigated for child sex abuse over the last 50 years. Nine of them are dead. Two were prosecuted and one was convicted. One priest facing a recent allegation of abuse has been given leave of absence from ministry.

Four priests had allegations made against them withdrawn. In three other cases the complainant would not identify the alleged offender and in another instance the priest involved was a victim of mistaken identity.

The diocese said that one priest stood down following a complaint. He was professionally assessed and found to pose no risk.

Another priest who made a settlement with a complainant is no longer in active ministry. Neither is another priest alleged to have abused outside Ireland.

Down & Connor

Three priests serving in the Diocese of Down and Connor against whom allegations have been made are still in ministry.

The diocese confirmed that one of them is still the subject of a police investigation relating to more than 20 years ago.The facts of the case have been considered by the diocese's independent child protection panel, which had advised the bishop that the priest could remain in ministry.

The diocese said that the other two cases were reported to the police and the priests stepped down. There were no prosecutions and the priests were returned to ministry after assessment.

A total of 15 priests serving in the diocese have been subject to accusations of child abuse dating back to the 1940s.

Dromore

In Dromore, which takes in Newry and Portadown, allegations of sexual abuse have been made against five priests "living and dead". A spokesman said that there was no priest in the diocese about whom there were concerns relating to child protection. The Irish Times was unable to establish from the diocese whether any priests against whom allegations had been made were still in active ministry and whether the allegations had been investigated by the police.

Dublin

Allegations have been made, or concerns raised, regarding 67 priests in the Dublin archdiocese. Some allegations date back to the 1940s. The figure includes cases where the allegations were found to be false, where the priest was wrongly identified or where the evidence proved inconclusive.

A spokeswoman for the archdiocese said that it was unable to provide a breakdown of the figures, or give details of how many priests had been suspended or how many who had been the subject of allegations were currently in ministry.

The archdiocese said that all allegations of abuse were discussed by the diocese's child protection service, the Garda and the Health Service Executive.

"If that group feels that the accused priest constitutes a risk to children, then the priest concerned is asked to stand aside immediately until the investigation is completed."

Elphin

The Bishop of Elphin, Dr Christopher Jones, said that 16 allegations of child abuse have been made against priests in the diocese.

He said that of these allegations there had been "reasonable suspicion" in relation to nine diocesan priests. Of the nine priests investigated, two are deceased and seven are out of ministry.

The diocese said that all allegations of child abuse had been reported to the health board and the Garda. Allegations in relation to three priests were referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions, but no prosecutions have taken place.

Ferns

The way church and State authorities handled abuse allegations against 21 priests were examined fully by the Ferns inquiry, which reported this week. None of these priests is still in active ministry. Five other priests currently in ministry have had allegations made against them. The view of an inter-agency group involving diocesan advisers, the health services and the Garda was that no child protection issues were involved.

Galway, Kilmacduagh & Kilfenora

Complaints were made against six diocesan priests and a diocesan spokesman said there may be "one or two" who remain in ministry.

"The reason would be because, after a thorough investigation, there was found to be no foundation to the allegations," he said.

However, he could not say for definite whether the investigation was conducted by the Garda, as he did not have this information to hand.

He pointed out that since 1996, and the publication of the church's framework document on the issue, all allegations received by the diocese had been referred to the Garda.

Kerry

Eleven allegations have been made against priests in the Kerry diocese going back over a 50-year period.

Four of these priests were dead, two were laicised at their own request and two were dismissed from the priesthood by the Pope in the last year and a half.

The Bishop of Kerry, Dr Bill Murphy, said: "I don't have any information that garda? and the Southern Health Board don't have. We have passed on everything".

Kildare & Leighlin

Allegations have been made against one priest. The diocese said that there were no priests currently in ministry against whom allegations had been made.

Killala

The Diocese of Killala received one anonymous allegation concerning a priest who had already died.

No other complaints have been made.

What the diocese describes as a "concern" expressed to the bishop was investigated by the Garda and dismissed.

Killaloe

A total of 25 complaints have been made against 10 priests, with the first incident complained of allegedly taking place in 1957. One priest is currently the subject of a Garda investigation relating to a period prior to his becoming a priest. This priest is currently outside the ministry. Once the diocese had been informed of the case by the Garda it asked him to step down.

A further "one or two" priests from religious orders, who are now deceased, had complaints made against them.

In these instances, the file would have been handed over directly to their religious order, according to a diocesan spokesman.

Kilmore

One priest against whom allegations of child sex abuse were made is still serving in the diocese after a Garda/health board investigation found there were no grounds for criminal proceedings. Five priests in the diocese, includingFather Brendan Smyth, have had allegations made against them. Three of the priests stepped down from ministry while the allegations were being investigated, while one had already left at the time of the allegation. Only one returned to active ministry following the investigation.

Two of the priests, including Father Smyth, are deceased. Father Smyth, who was attached to the Norbertine order, is the only priest in the diocese to have been convicted of child sexual abuse offences.

Limerick

Allegations have been made against 10 priests since 1960. Three are now deceased and one case is before the courts. The DPP has decided not to proceed with two other cases. There have been no convictions.

The diocese says no priest under investigation is in active ministry.

Meath

The diocese did not respond to queries submitted by The Irish Times. The Bishop of Meath, Dr Michael Smith, said on LMFM Radio during the week that one priest in the diocese had stood down when there were grounds for believing that there was substance to allegations made against him. He said that in another case a complainant withdrew an allegation against a priest.

Ossory

The diocese has not so far responded to questions from The Irish Times.

Raphoe

Allegations of child sexual abuse have been made against 10 priests in the Diocese of Raphoe dating back over 40 years.

Seven of these priests stood aside from ministry. One is still serving, but the diocese said that there were no reasonable suspicions that would give rise to a child protection question.

Tuam

In his statement this week, the Archbishop of Tuam, Dr Michael Neary, did not give details of the number of allegations of child sexual abuse which had been made against priests in his diocese. However, he said that "tragically there have been significant instances of such abuse".

He said that last year an independent review of all complaints received by the diocese found that they had been managed very well and in accordance with the norms and guidance applicable at the time.

Waterford & Lismore

Seven priests have had allegations made against them, all of which were reported to the civil authorities.

One priest is in a "limited ministry" in the diocese. This means that he is not in a public ministry and is not in contact with children. The allegations against this priest were reported to the Garda and investigated fully, with the priest stepping aside during this process, according to a diocesan spokesman.

Compiled by Martin Wall, John Downes, Kitty Holland and Ali Bracken


? The Irish Times



There have been 3 proper investigations since the above was produced: Ferns, Dublin and Cloyne. There should be a national investigation at this stage. At the very least Cork & Ross, Derry, Down & Connor, Elphin, Kerry, Killaloe, Kilmore (Fr. Brendan Smyth!), Raphoe and possibly Limerick (although the accused are all dead) should have investigations similar to the first 3, while Meath, Ossory & Tuam refused to provide the requested info for the above article to the Irish Times, which would warrant further examination imho.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 03, 2016, 03:12:17 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 03, 2016, 05:14:27 AM
Yet another disgusting episode of child abuse by priests and cover up by the Bishops.

Pennsylvania Diocese Leaders Knew of Sex Abuse for Decades, Grand Jury Says

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/us/pennsylvania-diocese-leaders-knew-of-sex-abuse-for-decades-grand-jury-says.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
Thanks for that Dixie.
The notorious Bishop John Hogan who is mentioned  in the NYT article as being a powerful figure.
a  quote from the NYT article
"The report offers a scathing picture of Bishop James Hogan, who led the diocese from 1966 to 1986, and died in 2005, as a leader who repeatedly persuaded the police and prosecutors to drop criminal cases against priests, failed to discipline people he knew were abusers, and responded to complaints about predatory priests by relocating them to jobs where they could molest again."

I take note of what powerful means in the case of Hogan.
All this abuse  happened in the Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown
Reading through the grand jury report https://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/MainSite/Content/Related_Content/PressReleases/GJ%20Diocese%20Report.pdf (https://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/MainSite/Content/Related_Content/PressReleases/GJ%20Diocese%20Report.pdf)


Page 103
In Johnstown, the bishop selected the mayor, all community leaders were handpicked by the bishop.
Then the  mayor would send candidates for town sheriff to be interviewed by one of the bishop's underlings and who ever the underling selected, was appointed sheriff.


Under oath Monsignor Saylor was asked  by
Mr Dye: When these officers came to you tasked with enforcing the criminal law, investigating crimes, when they would come to you, the President Judge, this officer, the sheriff, are they saying hey, you guys need to get this lot under control? is that their message?

reply
Monsignor Saylor: That was their message, yeah, Now remember that included the President Judge of Blair County (Thomas Peoples)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 03, 2016, 10:37:46 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 04, 2016, 07:20:37 AM
1.Failure to implement procedures is incompetent and negligent,but not a sign of malice.

2.I agree that the church,in every part of the world should implement all statutory procedures and more of its own,to prevent child abuse and facilitate the identification of all potential child abusers and have them drummed out.
Will you campaign for point 2? Stand up in your church and condemn abusers? Stand up in your church and call out abusers? Call out the cover up artists? Call out those who had the opportunity to  stop the abuse and did nothing? Call out those who had the opportunity to stop the abuse and pushed it on to another parish and another victim? Call out these scum? End this anal rape? End this abuse?

This is critical. If anyone claims to be moral and does not fulfill this then they are a mere hyporcrite.

If anyone believes in an eternal life and did or does nothing to stop this abuse then presumably their eternal reward begins and ends with a shower of vomit from St peter?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 10:41:52 PM
I do not need to campaign.I believe compliance is now universal,and any persons not compliant or lax should be dealt with mercilessly
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 03, 2016, 10:46:54 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 10:41:52 PM
I do not need to campaign.I believe compliance is now universal,and any persons not compliant or lax should be dealt with mercilessly

If i asked you to stand up in your congregation, step forward to the alter or pulpit, take the microphone, and condemn those who had the chance to end abuse but passed it on to another victim you would have no difficulty in doing it. I live in your parish. I do not attend Mass but would gladly do so to confirm to this forum your actions,
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 03, 2016, 10:52:04 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 10:41:52 PM
I do not need to campaign.I believe compliance is now universal,and any persons not compliant or lax should be dealt with mercilessly

As should people who blame parents or kids for the abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 11:22:53 PM
What is this all about? In the past the Church has drastically failed victims,as have victim's parents who negligently and unbelievably failed to ascertain the reasons why their young offspring were being summoned to meetings with clerics (I can find no rationale for this failure I'm afraid,I know if I was summoned to such a meeting,my parents,as devout Catholics as you could meet,would have made it their business to find out what the hell was going on).

But the past is the past,lessons have been learned on all sides,and I am confident robust child procedures are in place now,so this conversation is pointless,as would my grabbing microphones in any church,and I rarely attend the same church two weeks in succession.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on March 03, 2016, 11:46:04 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 11:22:53 PM
What is this all about? In the past the Church has drastically failed victims,as have victim's parents who negligently and unbelievably failed to ascertain the reasons why their young offspring were being summoned to meetings with clerics (I can find no rationale for this failure I'm afraid,I know if I was summoned to such a meeting,my parents,as devout Catholics as you could meet,would have made it their business to find out what the hell was going on).

But the past is the past,lessons have been learned on all sides,and I am confident robust child procedures are in place now,so this conversation is pointless,as would my grabbing microphones in any church,and I rarely attend the same church two weeks in succession.

You are beginning to sound like Michael Martin. Have you ever though of joining Fianna Fail?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 12:37:56 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 03, 2016, 11:22:53 PM
What is this all about? In the past the Church has drastically failed victims,as have victim's parents who negligently and unbelievably failed to ascertain the reasons why their young offspring were being summoned to meetings with clerics (I can find no rationale for this failure I'm afraid,I know if I was summoned to such a meeting,my parents,as devout Catholics as you could meet,would have made it their business to find out what the hell was going on).

But the past is the past,lessons have been learned on all sides,and I am confident robust child procedures are in place now,so this conversation is pointless,as would my grabbing microphones in any church,and I rarely attend the same church two weeks in succession.

This is beyond sick at this stage. You are now an abuser as far as I am concerned. Your continued abuse of the families of victims is hideous in the extreme.

Anyone with half a brain, or half a memory of their youth, knows that when your parents entrusted you to a school, you were under the duty of care of that school. Your parents couldn't possibly have been responsible for anything that went on in that school without their knowledge. The same applies to any activities whereby the Church was entrusted with the care of children AND THAT TRUST WAS ABUSED.

The children were scared into not telling their parents because:

a) the abusers like Smyth told the children that they would go to hell if they said anything;
b) cowards like Sean Brady made the children sign oaths of secrecy under the threat of excommunication of they opened their mouths;
c) there were many more gutless f*cks like Tony Fearon who would desperately try to mitigate the damage done to the Church by the likes of Smyth and Brady;

In conclusion the parents didn't know because these men of God waved Hell in front of their abused children, to terrify them into not telling.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on March 04, 2016, 12:58:18 AM
Hmmm, Fr. Cozzens officiated at my wedding.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.
 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 04, 2016, 02:28:04 PM
Paedophilia is more of a power thing
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 04, 2016, 03:29:36 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on March 04, 2016, 12:58:18 AM
Hmmm, Fr. Cozzens officiated at my wedding.
and what is wrong with that?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Oraisteach on March 04, 2016, 03:53:16 PM
Not a bit, apples.  He was terrific and very accommodating. Chaplain at the local university.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 04, 2016, 03:58:30 PM
Quote from: Oraisteach on March 04, 2016, 03:53:16 PM
Not a bit, apples.  He was terrific and very accommodating. Chaplain at the local university.

Good to hear. The introduction of articles about Gay priests though to a thread on abuse is wrong, I know you didn't introduce it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....

This is fair enough Iceman as long as you also disapprove when, for example, the Vatican makes the connection: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/world/europe/15vatican.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/world/europe/15vatican.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:25:25 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 04, 2016, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....

This is fair enough Iceman as long as you also disapprove when, for example, the Vatican makes the connection: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/world/europe/15vatican.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/world/europe/15vatican.html?_r=0)
I'm disapproving not having the conviction. why bring something in to the mix if you're not going to stand on it? whats the point then?
Why wasn't he shot down by the normal brigade?
Can gay men be priests? good priests? real priests?
I just find it interesting that he went nearly unchallenged by the normal folks who would champion gay rights (which has to include the right to be a priest if that is the life they are called to).....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 04:38:36 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....
I did bring a topic on homosexuality into a thread about clerical abuse and clearly  said in the first line that  I am not making a connection.
It's not my first inclination  to adjust my approach in order not to stimulate prejudice in the minds of bigots and  the uneducated. 
I just thought people like Tony (anti gay but pro pedophile enabling)  should be aware of the 50% possibility that he is being served by a gay priest.
And personally, I probably would be much more inclined towards an openly gay priest.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:42:46 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 04:38:36 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....
I did bring a topic on homosexuality into a thread about clerical abuse and clearly  said in the first line that  I am not making a connection.
It's not my first inclination  to adjust my approach in order not to stimulate prejudice in the minds of bigots and  the uneducated. 
I just thought people like Tony (anti gay but pro pedophile enabling)  should be aware of the 50% possibility that he is being served by a gay priest.
And personally, I probably would be much more inclined towards an openly gay priest.
what does that even mean?

in a role where chastity is one of the vows - what difference does it make what their sexuality is? openly gay? openly straight? what difference does it make in a priestly role? how are priests openly anything? I'm note sure I get where you're headed with any of this?

calling people bigots and uneducated doesn't further your point....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 05:03:04 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
please explain
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 05:03:51 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:42:46 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 04:38:36 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....
I did bring a topic on homosexuality into a thread about clerical abuse and clearly  said in the first line that  I am not making a connection.
It's not my first inclination  to adjust my approach in order not to stimulate prejudice in the minds of bigots and  the uneducated. 
I just thought people like Tony (anti gay but pro pedophile enabling)  should be aware of the 50% possibility that he is being served by a gay priest.
And personally, I probably would be much more inclined towards an openly gay priest.
what does that even mean?

What that means is
I don't have any contact with priests in their clerical roles  and generally have no contact with a priest at all, but if in a social context there were 2 priests and I had to chose one to have a chat with 
and one of them was totally comfortable with his homosexuality, I would probably be much more inclined to chose him.
Maybe it's to do with a positive image of homosexuals that I have in my head. And /or  if a priest was comfortable with his homosexuality in a bastion of gay hate, I probably would love to pursue a conversation with that priest. I am just that way, sociable, curious and s great conversationalist.

Quotein a role where chastity is one of the vows - what difference does it make what their sexuality is? openly gay? openly straight? what difference does it make in a priestly role? how are priests openly anything? I'm note sure I get where you're headed with any of this?

calling people bigots and uneducated doesn't further your point....

Thank you for sharing that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 05:11:10 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.

You are not anti-gay, but you would discriminate against homosexual priests and you have also claimed before that you would disown a gay family member.

Imagine if you were anti-gay!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on March 04, 2016, 05:40:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.

Presumably the same way that any heterosexual would be attracted to the priesthood?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 04, 2016, 05:54:51 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 05:03:04 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
please explain
he must be thinking in terms of vaginas
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it



Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it

This is all correct. We have had a few high profile cases in Ireland involving children's swimming coaches.

Pedophiles finds ways of getting access to children, just as pedophile priests did.

But Iceman, after that you attack critics of the Church's response. This can appear as if you are defending the Church's response, which I don't think you are. If the swimming authorities carried on in the same fashion, moving known pedophiles around for decades and refusing to co-operate with the authorities, they would be savagely condemned, and rightly so. But claiming that those critics were trying to stop people swimming would be missing the point completely.

The Church hierarchy brought this upon themselves, they continue to disappoint (most diplomatic word I could find considering the horrific crimes involved) in their response and until they practice what they preach and confess everything they know to the authorities, they simply have no credibility as far as I am concerned. The people involved in hiding this stuff have no business pretending to run a religion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 07:28:55 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 04, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it

This is all correct. We have had a few high profile cases in Ireland involving children's swimming coaches.

Pedophiles finds ways of getting access to children, just as pedophile priests did.

But Iceman, after that you attack critics of the Church's response. This can appear as if you are defending the Church's response, which I don't think you are. If the swimming authorities carried on in the same fashion, moving known pedophiles around for decades and refusing to co-operate with the authorities, they would be savagely condemned, and rightly so. But claiming that those critics were trying to stop people swimming would be missing the point completely.

The Church hierarchy brought this upon themselves, they continue to disappoint (most diplomatic word I could find considering the horrific crimes involved) in their response and until they practice what they preach and confess everything they know to the authorities, they simply have no credibility as far as I am concerned. The people involved in hiding this stuff have no business pretending to run a religion.

Perhaps your understanding of religion and my understanding of faith are just not the same?
I need the Church because without the church there are no Priests and without Priests there is no Eucharist and without the Eucharist then there is really nothing......
I freely admit and agree with you that we have and continue to be failed by the Church.  My point is I'm doing what I can on the ground, from within to ensure it doesn't happen on my watch in my church in my parish.  Championing a thread on a gaaboard isn't really going to change anything.  Maybe you've donated to victims funds, or offered support to someone who has been abused - and if that's the case then great thank you.  But if this is it for you and others then it's not enough and your intentions are not as true as you might care to admit.
There are victims of clerical abuse in my family circle.  It did not change who Jesus was or who Priests are - but it changed the institution of the Church and my own responsibility as part of that....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 07:54:28 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 07:28:55 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 04, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it

This is all correct. We have had a few high profile cases in Ireland involving children's swimming coaches.

Pedophiles finds ways of getting access to children, just as pedophile priests did.

But Iceman, after that you attack critics of the Church's response. This can appear as if you are defending the Church's response, which I don't think you are. If the swimming authorities carried on in the same fashion, moving known pedophiles around for decades and refusing to co-operate with the authorities, they would be savagely condemned, and rightly so. But claiming that those critics were trying to stop people swimming would be missing the point completely.

The Church hierarchy brought this upon themselves, they continue to disappoint (most diplomatic word I could find considering the horrific crimes involved) in their response and until they practice what they preach and confess everything they know to the authorities, they simply have no credibility as far as I am concerned. The people involved in hiding this stuff have no business pretending to run a religion.

Perhaps your understanding of religion and my understanding of faith are just not the same?
I need the Church because without the church there are no Priests and without Priests there is no Eucharist and without the Eucharist then there is really nothing......
I freely admit and agree with you that we have and continue to be failed by the Church.  My point is I'm doing what I can on the ground, from within to ensure it doesn't happen on my watch in my church in my parish.  Championing a thread on a gaaboard isn't really going to change anything.  Maybe you've donated to victims funds, or offered support to someone who has been abused - and if that's the case then great thank you.  But if this is it for you and others then it's not enough and your intentions are not as true as you might care to admit.
There are victims of clerical abuse in my family circle.  It did not change who Jesus was or who Priests are - but it changed the institution of the Church and my own responsibility as part of that....

Then you and your family have my deepest sympathy.

I grew up a Catholic and was educated in Catholic schools, including boarding school. I was educated by Brothers and Priests. I am not aware that any of them was ever accused of abusing anyone and I have the greatest regard for what they did for the children under their care. There were many mistakes, but afaik no abuse as it would be understood in the context of this thread.

My problem is with the behaviour of the Church hierarchy in the past, present and no doubt in the future. It is the same modus operandi all over the world and it all leads back to the Bishops, Cardinals and The Vatican. Deny, obfuscate, hide behind legal proceedings & make life difficult for the victims. Thus continuing the abuse.

Everything the above men taught me about God tells me He would abhor the crime of clerical child abuse and He would abhor the Church hierarchy's reaction to it. So I no longer connect the two. It is completely illogical to me that these men, who call themselves men of God, are really men of God. If I believed in Satan, which I don't, I would see them far more likely to be aligned with him.

Sorry if that offends, it isn't meant to. But as I say, I can see no logical connection between men who cover up child abuse and protect the abusers, and the God they claim to represent.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 08:27:28 PM
It doesn't offend at all.  Everything I know about Jesus tells me He is still here, within the Church, that the Holy Spirit is still here alive and kicking and calling us all to change.
Jesus took up some rope and made a whip and over turned tables and cast people out of His Father's house who were ruining it.  That's what needs to happen. But it happens from within.  Jesus didn't stand outside the temple with a megaphone and protest that the church was bad and that everyone should leave......

I appreciate the respectful tone you have taken too btw - thanks
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 08:38:08 PM
Iceman I don't see how questioning the (as far as I am concerned) incomprehensible decision of parents allowing their young offspring to attend meetings with priests unaccompanied or without establishing the purpose of such meetings can be construed as vile abuse of parents.By any standards in any era,it is a dereliction of duty on a par with the mishandling of child abuse back in the day by Church authorities.

If those parents are alive today they must be surely suffering pangs of conscience.Also I don't accept that the Church even as far back as the 70s was this great big monster that commanded unswerving respect,awe and fear from everyone (and if it did it was those who accorded it such respect that are to blame).I grew up in the 70s and recall plenty of disputes between laity and clerics,not least at school were any soft priest among the teaching staff were quickly identified and pushed to the limit by students.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 08:45:35 PM
I would hazard a guess those same students pushed you to your limits Tony and I'm sorry if that was the case but it might explain a lot of your continual trolling on here.
You are not doing the Church any service and certainly not representative of the thinking of Catholics.
I'm ashamed of your comments and you should be too....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 08:48:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 08:45:35 PM
I would hazard a guess those same students pushed you to your limits Tony and I'm sorry if that was the case but it might explain a lot of your continual trolling on here.
You are not doing the Church any service and certainly not representative of the thinking of Catholics.
I'm ashamed of your comments and you should be too....

I was about to reply to him, but this is far more succinct than anything I could muster. Bravo Iceman.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 04, 2016, 09:53:36 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 04, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it

This is all correct. We have had a few high profile cases in Ireland involving children's swimming coaches.

Pedophiles finds ways of getting access to children, just as pedophile priests did.

But Iceman, after that you attack critics of the Church's response. This can appear as if you are defending the Church's response, which I don't think you are. If the swimming authorities carried on in the same fashion, moving known pedophiles around for decades and refusing to co-operate with the authorities, they would be savagely condemned, and rightly so. But claiming that those critics were trying to stop people swimming would be missing the point completely.

The Church hierarchy brought this upon themselves, they continue to disappoint (most diplomatic word I could find considering the horrific crimes involved) in their response and until they practice what they preach and confess everything they know to the authorities, they simply have no credibility as far as I am concerned. The people involved in hiding this stuff have no business pretending to run a religion.
Agreed, the management of the response was abysmal. They betrayed their most loyal "customers". So many late middle aged catholics turned away in disgust. The media work was useless.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 10:00:25 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it
The issues with the church are with the persistent chronic denial of the crime of pedophile enabling ,which is also  as immoral as pedophilia itself. In recent discussions on this thread we have seen strong evidence of persecution of witnesses and  a whistleblower priest  in Florida  by the catholic church hierarchy going right up to the cardinal. Is that not worthy of discussion?
We have seen evidence of  the catholic church persistently  denying it was still enabling pedophile priests in St Paul and the courts had to enforce external  supervision on their activities for a period of 3 years , 3 years probation. The Catholic Church were judged in the highest court of the land to have lied through their teeth in Minneapolis.
This is the clerical abuse thread, a phenomenon  which has directly  devastated the lives of tens of thousands  and hundreds of thousands in the family circle. This is where we discuss those issues. Clerical abuse deserves a thread  of its own.
I am not part of an organisation where I would need to be trained to protect children from pedophiles. But I have had plenty of experience with pedophiles in the church and one in particular in the GAA world. Not that I was abused but those close to me.  And yes I am disgusted by pedophile enablers, they are the real cowards, the hypocrites and a moral rot in our society.
You sound a bit sanctimonious to me Iceman.

Do you have issues with a priest being comfortable with his homosexuality?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 04, 2016, 10:13:49 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2016, 09:53:36 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 04, 2016, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it

This is all correct. We have had a few high profile cases in Ireland involving children's swimming coaches.

Pedophiles finds ways of getting access to children, just as pedophile priests did.

But Iceman, after that you attack critics of the Church's response. This can appear as if you are defending the Church's response, which I don't think you are. If the swimming authorities carried on in the same fashion, moving known pedophiles around for decades and refusing to co-operate with the authorities, they would be savagely condemned, and rightly so. But claiming that those critics were trying to stop people swimming would be missing the point completely.

The Church hierarchy brought this upon themselves, they continue to disappoint (most diplomatic word I could find considering the horrific crimes involved) in their response and until they practice what they preach and confess everything they know to the authorities, they simply have no credibility as far as I am concerned. The people involved in hiding this stuff have no business pretending to run a religion.
Agreed, the management of the response was abysmal. They betrayed their most loyal "customers". So many late middle aged catholics turned away in disgust. The media work was useless.

In my extended family and the estate where I grew up the numbers that have walked away would be shocking.

A retired family member of mine sings at mass almost every Sunday, but she said to me that she wanted to stand outside protesting at the treatment of the Florida priest. I talked her out of it as unfortunately protestors are seen simply as cranks, thanks to the behaviour of other protestors on other issues. But for her 25 years ago the notion of protesting against the Church would have seemed insane.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 10:17:23 PM
Muppet I doubt any member of your family would have to go as far as protesting outside a Church to be considered a crank!😂😂
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 10:50:20 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 10:00:25 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 06:29:36 PM
Not sure how many of you have participated in child protection training - I think it's something everyone should do. Part of the training involves interviews with predators  -real stories, real examples, real profiles.  They are attracted to roles/jobs that put them close to their victims. They are often found in churches - priests, ministers, youth workers. Also in lots of other organisations that give them access - schools, care centers, scouting organisations - there is no coincidence here.

Sadly these predators have found their way in to these organisations, gained our trust and abused our children - all under our watch. Not just Catholic's watch, or Christian's watch but all of our watch.
The church failed us all in it's response. And continue to do so in man many locations and ways. 

It's no secret that many of you have other issues with the church, or axes to grind. As much as you go after Tony for his abhorrent and continuing abuse of the parents of these victims - there are just as many on here who use the victims to grind their own axes with the church.  I say this because your goal is to have Catholics leave the Church rather than stay and help fix it.  If your intentions were truly about the victims I don't think many of you would be so adamant about that or calling for parishioners to stand up in Mass and condemn everyone....

My goal is to protect children  - to ensure it doesnt happen again in my parish - to work with other people within the church to effect change - I can shout and sling mud all I want o the gaaboard or I can roll up my sleeves and do something about it
The issues with the church are with the persistent chronic denial of the crime of pedophile enabling ,which is also  as immoral as pedophilia itself. In recent discussions on this thread we have seen strong evidence of persecution of witnesses and  a whistleblower priest  in Florida  by the catholic church hierarchy going right up to the cardinal. Is that not worthy of discussion?
We have seen evidence of  the catholic church persistently  denying it was still enabling pedophile priests in St Paul and the courts had to enforce external  supervision on their activities for a period of 3 years , 3 years probation. The Catholic Church were judged in the highest court of the land to have lied through their teeth in Minneapolis.
This is the clerical abuse thread, a phenomenon  which has directly  devastated the lives of tens of thousands  and hundreds of thousands in the family circle. This is where we discuss those issues. Clerical abuse deserves a thread  of its own.
I am not part of an organisation where I would need to be trained to protect children from pedophiles. But I have had plenty of experience with pedophiles in the church and one in particular in the GAA world. Not that I was abused but those close to me.  And yes I am disgusted by pedophile enablers, they are the real cowards, the hypocrites and a moral rot in our society.
You sound a bit sanctimonious to me Iceman.

Do you have issues with a priest being comfortable with his homosexuality?
what would lead you to believe that?

I'm not trying to be sanctimonious at all and you're free to discuss whatever you want. I was just trying to break the circle or the back and forth.  We can talk all day but what are you doing?
Protecting children from pedophiles is always someone else's job? I think it's on all of us. I take responsibility that it happened and I didn't know or didn't see it or read the signs or that we trusted someone so much just because they were a priest... I suspect it happened more and led to the untimely death of another close friend from alcoholism.  That's the thing about being part of the Church, the body of Christ. It's on all of us.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 05, 2016, 08:24:08 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 04, 2016, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 04, 2016, 09:25:42 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2016, 12:49:47 AM
Though this is  not at all to imply a connection between gay clergy  and the catholic church pedophilia plague and their enablers.
I just find this type of research immensly amusing.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

Some Catholic clergy say most priests are gay
According to Father James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at Boston College,.
"It's an empirical fact that lots of men are gay who are priests. And they are very good priests," he says. "I would also observe that the numbers of gay men and women in the church ministry is probably larger than the general population, precisely because they are not seeking marriage."

The notion that many Catholic priests are quietly gay is not new. In the 2000 book "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," Rev. Donald B. Cozzens suggested that the priesthood was increasingly becoming a gay profession. Cozzens estimated that as much as 58 percent of priests were gay, and that percentages were even higher for younger priests. His numbers matched previous estimates by sociologists who put the numbers of gay priests between 10 and 60 percent.

Father Gary Meier, a gay, St. Louis-based Catholic clergymen, says there's a wide range of statistics out there on gay priests, but jokes that in his experience, "30 percent are gay, 30 percent are straight, and 30 percent are in denial."


IMO 'vocations' to the clergy would always have had a high closet gay percentage, I don't find this surprising at all.

Young lad, growing up in rural Ireland, possibly of farming stock, a wee bit effeminate, he'd have been earmarked for the priesthood by his mother early days and dispatched to a seminary as soon as possible.

Its a big thing having a priest in the family in Ireland, well it was in our not too distant past.

And I'm not making a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia, they're two very different things.


then why point it out?
It's funny the PC brigade on here would shoot down anyone else on any other topic for even highlighting someone was gay.... what difference does it make? Can gay men not be called to the Priesthood? Do Gay men not have vocations? Are they different because they are gay?

I have 2 friends currently in seminary - I can tell you they are not gay - one of them was engaged before he "got the call" and the pair of them have had their fair share of girls. Today it is harder than ever to even get in to seminary.  There is a full psych evaluation and many are turned away because the Church is finally taking the time to ensure the calling is real. 

You can't bring homosexuality in to a conversation about clerical abuse (pedophilia) and then say you're not making a connection.....

Like Mainstreet I knew this was the wrong thread for this particular topic which in my mind highlights the hypocrisy of the church on homosexuality when quite a few within it have homosexual tendencies.
As for the vow of celibacy it's a nonsense whether homosexual or heterosexual.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 05, 2016, 02:05:30 PM
The whole Catholic Church is rotten at the top, at the middle and at the bottom. They have continually failed victims, and still do.

Until everyone connected with cover ups and abuse is sacked then there is no hope.

I only go to church on the rare occasion, for a funeral or an anniversary.

A couple of weeks ago I was at an anniversary mass and I left whenever people started the
"through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault" response.
What are people at fault for? And when did this come into the mass?

The people at fault are the bloody church and the perverted bastards that they allowed to rape and rape
at will wherever they went, and with complete protection from the top.

The new Pope has been full of plenty of talk, but very little action.

There is no hope for the Catholic church as long as they stay in denial about the abuse they carried out on children
all over the world, and the fact that they covered it up and continue to do so.

And anyone who makes excuses for them or blames the children or parents is as guilty as the rapists.

I have a personal experience as a young teenager of an adult taking advantage of me and grooming me.
I had no idea until many years later how wrong it was as back then we never knew the seriousness of sexual abuse
of young boys by adults. I never got to challenge him as he died not long after that.

The only satisfaction or closure I get is that he died a painful death, and every so often I go to his grave and piss on it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 02:13:52 PM
Is Margaret Byrne,CEO of Sunderland FC and Armagh native,a paedophile enabler?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 05, 2016, 02:22:45 PM
Is that is a like for like comparison  ???

Are waiting for the law to convict and not even telling the law the same thing? Not quite...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 02:29:48 PM
She failed to disclose what she knew and allowed a now convicted paedophile to continue his career and earn hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: easytiger95 on March 05, 2016, 02:34:20 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 02:29:48 PM
She failed to disclose what she knew and allowed a now convicted paedophile to continue his career and earn hundreds of thousands of pounds.

If she is, she is far, far more likely to resign as CEO of a shareholder run company, than a bishop, archbishop or cardinal, as messers Brady and Pell show.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 02:55:27 PM
Sounds like she has been confronted with a difficult scenario and has prevaricated not knowing quite what do to,in spite of having loads of contemporary reference points and templates,not available to Sean Brady in the mid 70s.Unlike Sean Brady she also seems to have gone awol,at least he faced the anti Catholic media
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 05, 2016, 03:00:39 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 02:55:27 PM
Sounds like she has been confronted with a difficult scenario and has prevaricated not knowing quite what do to,in spite of having loads of contemporary reference points and templates,not available to Sean Brady in the mid 70s.Unlike Sean Brady she also seems to have gone awol,at least he faced the anti Catholic media

Did Byrne get the victims to sign Oaths of Silence?

If she did, she should be prosecuted, just like Brady should be prosecuted.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 03:03:32 PM
Fact is a hard bitten driven young professional woman,in the contemporary era,has mishandled child abuse allegations and allowed a now convicted paedophile  to continue his career,earning thousands of pounds and,presumably,to have access potentially to her club's young fan base,in spite of knowing far more than Sean Brady knew.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 05, 2016, 03:08:57 PM
She knew what he had admitted to police. She didn't keep it a secret from the law.

She should have sacked him for knowing that but she didn't withold, or get information witheld,  from the law.

Ludicrous and pathetic comparison as usual using a terrible topic to try and point score.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 03:23:08 PM
She didn't even tell the team manager ffs! She saw all the texts yet allowed him to continue his career,without his team mates or fans knowing.If a nun did this,40 years ago,the anti Catholics here would be apoplectic.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 05, 2016, 04:01:18 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 03:23:08 PM
She didn't even tell the team manager ffs! She saw all the texts yet allowed him to continue his career,without his team mates or fans knowing.If a nun did this,40 years ago,the anti Catholics here would be apoplectic.

How come you want her to resign, but not a single cleric who helped cover up abuse, who got children to sign oaths of silence, who moved people they knew to be pedophiles to new parishes and new children to abuse?

Why do you want only her to resign but defend Brady and co?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Did I say I wanted her to resign? I asked if she was a paedophile enabler.The point I was trying to make is,even today,child abuse allegations are very difficult to deal with,even in the case where the recipient of the allegations is a high powered well paid Chief Executive.How much more difficult must it have been for a young priest to decide what to do,when he received allegations from young boys (not the Police with whatsapp texts like Ms Byrne) way back in the mid 1970s.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 04:11:39 PM
And remember Brady reported his findings immediately to his superiors,unlike Ms Byrne.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 05, 2016, 04:38:48 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 04:11:39 PM
And remember Brady reported his findings immediately to his superiors,unlike Ms Byrne.
They did nothing. Johnson gets between 4 and 10 years for sexual abuse of a child. Brady's priests got moved.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 05, 2016, 05:09:07 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 04:10:02 PM
Did I say I wanted her to resign? I asked if she was a paedophile enabler.The point I was trying to make is,even today,child abuse allegations are very difficult to deal with,even in the case where the recipient of the allegations is a high powered well paid Chief Executive.How much more difficult must it have been for a young priest to decide what to do,when he received allegations from young boys (not the Police with whatsapp texts like Ms Byrne) way back in the mid 1970s.

I never heard of Margaret Byrne until you tried to use her to defend Sean Brady's silencing of victims of sexual abuse by Brendan Smyth.

Read that again. 'Sean Brady's silencing of victims of sexual abuse by Brendan Smyth'. And that is what you are defending?

Sean Brady was older than Bynre is now when he silenced those children and then did nothing about Smyth. By then he held a Doctorate in Canon Law. He also was supposed to be a man of God.

You pretend he was a raw tadpole, fresh out of priest nursery school. Which is simply more lies to cover up the other lies, which had to be there to cover up the abuse. Also, while I know nothing of Byrne, I doubt if she hid her involvement behind legal proceedings for over a decade. I doubt if she became CEO of Sunderland because the previous one has resigned over his handling of a pedophile, all the while knowing she had failed to deal with that same pedophile herself.

But then, Brady has one thing that Byrne doesn't. She can't promise Tony Fearon his eternal reward, such that he will abandon any dignity, conscience or integrity he may have had in order to get that reward, for himself. He will come on internet boards and continue to abuse the families of victims of sexual abuse by clerics, all because he thinks his God will reward him for this.

Tony, you might need to think this through a bit better.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 05, 2016, 05:38:24 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 03:23:08 PM
She didn't even tell the team manager ffs! She saw all the texts yet allowed him to continue his career,without his team mates or fans knowing.If a nun did this,40 years ago,the anti Catholics here would be apoplectic.

Team manager, the law. Yeah i can see where you draw comparisons ::)

The girl may never get over this, it will scar her family, the poor girlfriend of johnston, then there is his family and a child who will come into the world and find out his father is /was a paedophile. All those lives scarred. But sure make comparisons away to point score.

The opinions you hold and the point scoring you do are really not very christian at all.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 05, 2016, 07:49:16 PM
Tony still justifying the church paedo coverups... sometimes me think you protest too much lad  ???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 05, 2016, 08:36:26 PM
Anyone who disses Sean Brady is anti catholic but where is that on the Protestant scale?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 05, 2016, 10:55:01 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 05, 2016, 08:36:26 PM
Anyone who disses Sean Brady is anti catholic but where is that on the Protestant scale?

Sean Brady has done more damage to Catholicism in Ireland than all of his critics on this board. Who exactly is the real anti-Catholic?

As far as I know, Brendan Smyth was never defrocked by his superiors, including the Primate of All-Ireland for his last year in jail.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 11:07:06 PM
They had probably given up on him at that stage and knew there would be no point.

Interesting though that a high powered young female chief executive gets a bye ball (pardon the pun) for mishandling child abuse in the modern era yet Sean Brady is hammered for his alleged mishandling of abuse allegations forty years ago when he was a young priest with no influence, and remember,unlike Margaret Burns,he told other people in his organisation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 05, 2016, 11:17:59 PM
It's not interesting. Nor is using child abuse to try to point score and "win" arguments. It's deplorable.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 05, 2016, 11:29:28 PM
It is interesting and appalling to see the lengths to which anti Catholics will stoop to peddle their illogical hatred and intolerance,and singling out a young priest 40 years ago,while the likes of Gerry Adams and Margaret Byrne get a free pass. :(
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 08, 2016, 11:49:01 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
You are certainly homophobic based on this post alone.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on March 08, 2016, 12:27:16 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 08, 2016, 11:49:01 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
You are certainly homophobic based on this post alone.

Why wouldn't a homosexual be attracted to the priesthood in the same way a heterosexual person would be?

Can't a homosexual get a calling?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 08, 2016, 02:12:10 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on March 08, 2016, 12:27:16 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 08, 2016, 11:49:01 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 04, 2016, 04:44:06 PM
I am not anti gay or pro paedophile enabling as I suspect you well know.There is no room for homosexual priests,how would any homosexual even be attracted to the priesthood.
You are certainly homophobic based on this post alone.

Why wouldn't a homosexual be attracted to the priesthood in the same way a heterosexual person would be?

Can't a homosexual get a calling?
Not in the world of a born again Catholic, you need to be pure of thought, word and deed...oh wait paedophiles, cover-ups....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 08, 2016, 04:36:44 PM
Margaret Byrne resigns saying that she made a serious mistake.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 08, 2016, 06:23:07 PM
Quote from: orangeman on March 08, 2016, 04:36:44 PM
Margaret Byrne resigns saying that she made a serious mistake.

At least she realised her mistake, admitted it and did the right thing by resigning.

Cardinal Cahal Daly did the right thing too.

His replacement......... not so much.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
Yawn.For your information

1.Margaret Byrne (was forced by her billionaire boss to) resign because she was head of the organisation when she failed to act decisively on hearing paedophile allegations against an employee.

2.Sean Brady was a junior priest 40 years ago when he recorded as then unsubstantiated allegations against a priest made by young boys.

3.Sean Brady reported his findings to his superiors.

4.Margaret Byrne did not report allegations to other members of the organisation she headed up.

5.Margaret Byrne as CEO had the power and authority to act decisively

6.Sean Brady as a junior priest had no power to act decisively.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 07:32:12 PM
You are right about one thing. They are not remotely comparable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 08, 2016, 08:16:24 PM
Margaret Byrne resigned because Johnson was allowed to play football despite her being aware of his dangerous contact with a minor.

Sean Brady didn't resign, even though Brendan Smyth was allowed to persist in raping and abusing up to 2 hundred more children despite Brady being aware of his dangerous contact with at least 5 minors. Brady didn't even tell the parents of the other 4, and silenced the 2 victims he spoke to.

Byrne didn't spend 11 years fighting a victim in the courts to protect herself.

And to my knowledge Byrne didn't say anything like this:

"If I found myself in a situation where I was aware that my failure to act had allowed or meant that other children were abused, well then, I think I would resign."


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:23:59 PM
But Brady did act! He told his superiors,they are the ones to blame.Margaret Byrne told no one in her organisation,that's the key difference,and she was CEO.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 08:29:49 PM
The police already knew.

You know the law. The ones who protect people and punish criminals. Yes those ones.

You are right - she handled it very badly but it is in no way comparable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:33:52 PM
I know.CEO of multi million pound operation,and female to boot,fails to suspend paedophile while junior priest tells all he heard to his superiors immediately.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 08, 2016, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
1.Margaret Byrne (was forced by her billionaire boss to) resign because she was head of the organisation when she failed to act decisively on hearing paedophile allegations against an employee.
This statement is correct but misses the point. The particular accusation that she was aware off was already known to and being investigated by the only proper authority. Her inaction was her failure to sack the player. No abuse resulted from her inaction.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
2.Sean Brady was a junior priest 40 years ago when he recorded as then unsubstantiated allegations against a priest made by young boys.
This statement might be true but it deliberately misses all the relevant points. Junior in rank but specialist in canon law. Brady believed the accusations. The accusations were deadly serious. The potential consequences of a failure to act were predictable and horrific. The only proper action was to report the accusations to the police. The failure to so is 100% inexcusable. Where was the man's intelligence? Where was his morality? The accusations against Smyth went on. What did Brady do?
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
3.Sean Brady reported his findings to his superiors.
Factually correct but not excusable. Imagine if Byrne was aware of the specific accusations before the police and told the club chairman but not the police do you honestly think a single person would have said that that was ok?
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
4.Margaret Byrne did not report allegations to other members of the organisation she headed up.
And she should have. Johnson would have been sacked earlier but it did not impact on legal due process
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
5.Margaret Byrne as CEO had the power and authority to act decisively
Yes - she could have ended his pay and protected brand Sunderland.
Brady could have helped stop kids being anally raped and having progressively larger candles inserted into them on a daily basis until they were ready to be anally raped
You see the difference.
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
6.Sean Brady as a junior priest had no power to act decisively.
This is a lie. He could have rang the Gardai. Stop lying.
You were and remain a horrific human being


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 08:54:38 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:33:52 PM
I know.CEO of multi million pound operation,and female to boot,fails to suspend paedophile while junior priest tells all he heard to his superiors immediately.

Twist it whatever way you want. Neither are excusable despite your continued attempts to excuse one.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:59:59 PM
I am not excusing the Catholic church's historic mishandling of child abuse,but if I was a young priest charged with a horrific task of recording allegations of child abuse,back in 1975,and I reported accurately my findings to my superiors,I would have a clear conscience.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 08, 2016, 09:06:36 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 08:54:38 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:33:52 PM
I know.CEO of multi million pound operation,and female to boot,fails to suspend paedophile while junior priest tells all he heard to his superiors immediately.

Twist it whatever way you want. Neither are excusable despite your continued attempts to excuse one.

He reported it to HIS superiors. And no one else.

He failed the victims and their families. He failed to stop Smyth. By silencing the victims he spoke to, he made it far more likely that nothing would happen to Smyth and his abuse could continue.

He then covered it up for years and years, so that the easily led could claim this all happened years ago, as if that is a defence. The reason it didn't come to light at the time was down to people like Sean Brady. Children were raped and he could have stopped it.

As for Byrne, she screwed up, but at least she had the decency to recognise that and resign. But no children were raped because of her inaction.

And remember, Brady had a Doctorate in Canon Law, had been ordained 11 years at that stage, and was older than Byrne is now. Arguing that he was young and somehow couldn't have known that he should do more to stop a man who raped children, is not much of an argument.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 08, 2016, 09:07:08 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:59:59 PM
I am not excusing the Catholic church's historic mishandling of child abuse,but if I was a young priest charged with a horrific task of recording allegations of child abuse,back in 1975,and I reported accurately my findings to my superiors,I would have a clear conscience.

Absolute nonsense.

Report it to the police. If you reported it to your superiors you would ask them what they had done. If you had any suspicion that they had done nothing or shifted the problem on you would go the police, If the abuser was moved on and had access to new victims you would revisit the wisdom of silencing earlier victims. If you had failed to any of this and later became aware of large-scale, serial and horrific allegations against the same perpetrator you would act then. You would comply with and not attempt to frustrate any attempt at justice for victims and the perpetrator. Well if you had any decency that is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 08, 2016, 09:11:20 PM
Tony
Before posting on this matter ask yourself a simple question "If I know this statement to be a lie should I go ahead and post it".

If you could adhere to just this one thing many of your posts would still be horrific and lacking in any form of decency, morality, rational thought or compassion but less so and crucially there would less of them
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 09:27:53 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:59:59 PM
I am not excusing the Catholic church's historic mishandling of child abuse,but if I was a young priest charged with a horrific task of recording allegations of child abuse,back in 1975,and I reported accurately my findings to my superiors,I would have a clear conscience.

You are making excuses - not for the catholic church but for an individual.

The fact that you would have a clear conscience says more about you than it does about anything else.

If you try hard enough you can rationalise anything. You could rationalise what the sunderland ceo did if you put your mind to it but it would just be excuses. Again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 09:42:15 PM
Sean Brady was vilified by all and sundry for his actions as a young priest 40 years ago,as if he was Cardinal then.It is my view that he told his superiors,this does not constitute inaction,an attempt to cover up or anything else.He has every right to live with a clear conscience.Undoubtedly he would have done things differently today,as Margaret Byrne should have done,knowing now what he didn't know then.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 08, 2016, 09:51:30 PM
You are right - it is your view.

Undoubtedly he would have done things differently today is again your view.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 08, 2016, 10:01:06 PM
This is very confusing. Why would he do things differently today if there was nothing wrong with how he did things then?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 10:31:57 PM
We all do things differently as we learn from experience.There is no excuse today for anyone,on hearing allegations of abuse,not immediately informing the authorities.The basic problem in the 70s,in informing the authorities is that it often made no difference,as was the case of another cleric allegedly involved in the Claudy bombing,who was never questioned but moved across the border by the authorities.

Sean Brady was not in any way responsible for Brendan Smyth or his long career of abuse,many others were though
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 08, 2016, 10:45:32 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 10:31:57 PM
We all do things differently as we learn from experience.There is no excuse today for anyone,on hearing allegations of abuse,not immediately informing the authorities.The basic problem in the 70s,in informing the authorities is that it often made no difference,as was the case of another cleric allegedly involved in the Claudy bombing,who was never questioned but moved across the border by the authorities.

Sean Brady was not in any way responsible for Brendan Smyth or his long career of abuse,many others were though

He silenced the 2 victims that he spoke to.

He told no one, other than people with vested interests that conflicted with the interests of the children. He had the chance to stop one of the greatest monsters in the history of this island, and not only did he fail, but he silenced those who may have been able to stop Smyth.

If he has a clear conscience then there is something seriously wrong.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 11:00:16 PM
He didn't silence anyone. Did he remove their tongues? Did their parents not question why they were summonsed to a meeting and what happened at that meeting? For what it's worth,swearing children to an oath of silence was a bizarre part of canon law,which was never justified,for whatever reason,even misguidedly to keep them quiet while the church completed its investigations.But you have to separate the person from what he did which he naively believed to be right at the time.Is there any one of us that can reflect on the handling of situations a long time ago and not cringe?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 08, 2016, 11:11:29 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 10:31:57 PM
We all do things differently as we learn from experience.There is no excuse today for anyone,on hearing allegations of abuse,not immediately informing the authorities.The basic problem in the 70s,in informing the authorities is that it often made no difference,as was the case of another cleric allegedly involved in the Claudy bombing,who was never questioned but moved across the border by the authorities.

Sean Brady was not in any way responsible for Brendan Smyth or his long career of abuse,many others were though
Quite frankly Tony, you deny and pour scorn those in Florida  who gave evidence against pedophile enabling. Instead you supported their persecution.
You deny prosecutions  in Minneapolis brought against the CC about pedophile enabling and deny legal judgements made against the CC for their complete lack of standards to take action against pedophile enabling in that state.
Your words  are squeamish. You're even an embarrassment to the opus dei faction of the CC.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 09, 2016, 01:48:31 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 11:00:16 PM
He didn't silence anyone. Did he remove their tongues? Did their parents not question why they were summonsed to a meeting and what happened at that meeting? For what it's worth,swearing children to an oath of silence was a bizarre part of canon law,which was never justified,for whatever reason,even misguidedly to keep them quiet while the church completed its investigations.But you have to separate the person from what he did which he naively believed to be right at the time.Is there any one of us that can reflect on the handling of situations a long time ago and not cringe?

You would disown a family member because of something written by an unknown author 2,500 years ago. But you want to forget about hiding sex abusers and silencing witnesses 40 years ago?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 06:41:01 AM
I have said on many occasions the church's mishandling of child abuse in the past was woeful.Senior Church people,like Bishop John Mc Areavey have admitted that the impact on victims was not even considered or indeed understood and that shamefully the priority was the protection of the Church's reputation.

But the savage vilification of Sean Brady in particular is equally disgraceful.He reported what he heard,as a Junior Priest,to his superiors,in the belief that they would act accordingly.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 09, 2016, 07:48:51 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 08, 2016, 10:01:06 PM
This is very confusing. Why would he do things differently today if there was nothing wrong with how he did things then?

I agree.

Do you mean if he was the same age today as he was then or do you mean if he had to deal with it at current age tony?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 10:46:00 AM
Today he would be guided by the robust policies in place but if they weren't in place he might well inform statutory authorities judging that his previous communication to in house seniors was ineffective.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 09, 2016, 11:42:20 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 07:29:52 PM
Yawn.For your information

1.Margaret Byrne (was forced by her billionaire boss to) resign because she was head of the organisation when she failed to act decisively on hearing paedophile allegations against an employee.

2.Sean Brady was a junior priest 40 years ago when he recorded as then unsubstantiated allegations against a priest made by young boys.

3.Sean Brady reported his findings to his superiors.

4.Margaret Byrne did not report allegations to other members of the organisation she headed up.

5.Margaret Byrne as CEO had the power and authority to act decisively

6.Sean Brady as a junior priest had no power to act decisively.
Even conceding your point number six, he wasn't exactly a dynamo when he had the clout to do something.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 09, 2016, 11:51:05 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:59:59 PM
I am not excusing the Catholic church's historic mishandling of child abuse,but if I was a young priest charged with a horrific task of recording allegations of child abuse,back in 1975,and I reported accurately my findings to my superiors,I would have a clear conscience.
Tony I see the logic of your argument in relation to a point. However he was a minister of the gospel, a priest follower of a man who exposed the hypocrisy of the ruling Jewish priesthood. He purported to advise mere ordinary Catholics to follow in that man's footsteps but was guilty of not doing so himself. He put his career and preferment over the safety of children. And who knows by his inaction put himself forward as a trusted company man and in line for his promotions. To say otherwise is to condone the crime of concealment perpetrated by the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 09, 2016, 12:35:37 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 06:41:01 AM
I have said on many occasions the church's mishandling of child abuse in the past was woeful.Senior Church people,like Bishop John Mc Areavey have admitted that the impact on victims was not even considered or indeed understood and that shamefully the priority was the protection of the Church's reputation.

But the savage vilification of Sean Brady in particular is equally disgraceful.He reported what he heard,as a Junior Priest,to his superiors,in the belief that they would act accordingly.

Noble words from McAreavey, but real action on the ground, especially in terms of handing over documents sought by the various investigations, would be far more noble.

But Brady hasn't even come close to noble words, let alone noble actions. An apology 40 years late, after being forced by the courts to release documents that changed his story from 'notary' to 'investigator', has no value. 

Brady is extremely fortunate in my opinion that he is not investigated properly. He recently claimed he didn't even know there was a Gárda investigation into Smyth. How could he not know, when he was conducting an investigation himself? Even if his role was a completely selfish one to protect the Church and nothing else, surely it was vital to find out if the Gárdaí knew? If he he had an ounce of consideration for the victims surely he should have check to see if the Gárdaí were aware?

I'm afraid Brady's actions speak louder than words. He deserves all of the (reasonable) criticism that comes his way in my opinion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 09, 2016, 01:25:06 PM
Come to think of it, if (no link from Fearon as usual) McAreavey said this then it would show there is still a serious problem:

QuoteSenior Church people,like Bishop John Mc Areavey have admitted that the impact on victims was not even considered or indeed understood and that shamefully the priority was the protection of the Church's reputation.

IF this is true then he has admitted that the Church had nothing to with connecting God and His people, in fact it had nothing to do with either. It merely served itself.

'...the priority was the protection of the Church's reputation...'. That is crystal clear. Only a few decades ago. So this would mean that for almost 2,000 years the priority of the Church was itself.

However I suspect that what he actually said will turn out to be slightly different. Any chance of that link Tony please?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 03:13:00 PM
He said it during a sabbatical in the last year or so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 05:38:47 PM
Apples the Catholic Church is not a career,there is no money,status,ego involved,it's a vocation and ministry.I think even Popes and Cardinals would prefer to avoid these high offices if they had a choice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 10, 2016, 03:17:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 05:38:47 PM
Apples the Catholic Church is not a career,there is no money,status,ego involved,it's a vocation and ministry.I think even Popes and Cardinals would prefer to avoid these high offices if they had a choice.
Jesus Tony you are naive.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on March 10, 2016, 03:36:50 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 05:38:47 PM
Apples the Catholic Church is not a career,there is no money,status,ego involved,it's a vocation and ministry.I think even Popes and Cardinals would prefer to avoid these high offices if they had a choice.

Jez Tony, Next you'll be telling us they don't have genetals!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on March 10, 2016, 03:40:12 PM
there's probably been 40 pages of discussion and 100 pages of tony going around in circles with everyone making the same points over and over again.
Can Tony perhaps be locked out of the thread or the board?  this is all getting old....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 10, 2016, 03:48:41 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 05:38:47 PM
Apples the Catholic Church is not a career,there is no money,status,ego involved,it's a vocation and ministry.I think even Popes and Cardinals would prefer to avoid these high offices if they had a choice.

Yet they are one of the richest organisations in the world.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 10, 2016, 04:53:19 PM
Quote from: No wides on March 10, 2016, 03:48:41 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 09, 2016, 05:38:47 PM
Apples the Catholic Church is not a career,there is no money,status,ego involved,it's a vocation and ministry.I think even Popes and Cardinals would prefer to avoid these high offices if they had a choice.

Yet they are one of the richest organisations in the world.

And yet some of them won't even resign when everyone wants them to.

Go figure!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on March 10, 2016, 05:18:19 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on March 10, 2016, 03:40:12 PM
there's probably been 40 pages of discussion and 100 pages of tony going around in circles with everyone making the same points over and over again.
Can Tony perhaps be locked out of the thread or the board?  this is all getting old....

I said this 20 pages ago but it seems that Tony's WUMming knows no bounds and others just can't resist an argument.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 07:30:51 PM
So it's censorship for those who don't subscribe to anti catholicism?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 10, 2016, 07:53:04 PM
How much does it cost to become a saint, maybe the money was just resting in their accounts - yeah they all do it for a vocation my hole.

Pope imposes new rules for saint-making after 'abuses' of system.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35775405 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35775405)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 07:56:42 PM
The Pope is infallible and entitled to amend any systems or doctrine he considers fraudulent.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 10, 2016, 08:05:29 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 07:56:42 PM
The Pope is infallible and entitled to amend any systems or doctrine he considers fraudulent.

Pity JP the second didn't amend the system of clerical abuse cover up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 08:47:14 PM
Yawn
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on March 10, 2016, 08:51:34 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 07:56:42 PM
The Pope is infallible and entitled to amend any systems or doctrine he considers fraudulent.

Where does this infallibility come from?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 09:27:08 PM
He is divinely inspired.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 10, 2016, 10:14:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 09:27:08 PM
He is divinely inspired.

This fella too?

Pope Sergius III  ordered the murder of another pope and started the "pornocracy".

Sergius III was Pope from 897 to 911, and has been the only pope known to have ordered the murder of another pope and the only one known to have fathered an illegitimate son who later became pope; his pontificate has been described as "dismal and disgraceful."

The pontificate of Sergius III was remarkable for the rise of what papal historians call a "pornocracy," or rule of the harlots, a reversal of the natural order as they saw it, according to Liber pontificalis and a later chronicler who was also biased against Sergius III. This "pornocracy" was an age with women in power: Theodora, whom Liutprand characterized as a "shameless whore... [who] exercised power on the Roman citizenry like a man" and her daughter Marozia, the mother of Pope John XI (931–935) and reputed to be the mistress of Sergius III.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 10:38:03 PM
No,those Popes who abused their position sinfully cannot be regarded as divinely inspired.The concept of divine inspiration and infallibility only applies when the Pope is acting in accordance with God's will.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on March 10, 2016, 11:02:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 09:27:08 PM
He is divinely inspired.

How do you know this? Is it in the good book?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 11:11:11 PM
Faith my friend faith,and his direct lineage to St Peter
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Clov on March 10, 2016, 11:14:15 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 11:11:11 PM
Faith Guesswork my friend faith guesswork, and his direct lineage to St Peter

Fixed that for you
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on March 10, 2016, 11:19:02 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 11:11:11 PM
Faith my friend faith,and his direct lineage to St Peter

In what way does direct lineage from St. Peter bestow infallibility? I'm trying to understand how the church arrived at this conclusion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 11, 2016, 12:41:20 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 07:56:42 PM
The Pope is infallible and entitled to amend any systems or doctrine he considers fraudulent.

If he considers a previously used system or doctrine 'fraudulent, then presumably his predecessors were all frauds. Has he just send them all to hell?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 11, 2016, 01:00:39 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 10, 2016, 10:14:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 09:27:08 PM
He is divinely inspired.

This fella too?

Pope Sergius III  ordered the murder of another pope and started the "pornocracy".

Sergius III was Pope from 897 to 911, and has been the only pope known to have ordered the murder of another pope and the only one known to have fathered an illegitimate son who later became pope; his pontificate has been described as "dismal and disgraceful."

The pontificate of Sergius III was remarkable for the rise of what papal historians call a "pornocracy," or rule of the harlots, a reversal of the natural order as they saw it, according to Liber pontificalis and a later chronicler who was also biased against Sergius III. This "pornocracy" was an age with women in power: Theodora, whom Liutprand characterized as a "shameless whore... [who] exercised power on the Roman citizenry like a man" and her daughter Marozia, the mother of Pope John XI (931–935) and reputed to be the mistress of Sergius III.


Quote from: T Fearon on March 10, 2016, 10:38:03 PM
No,those Popes who abused their position sinfully cannot be regarded as divinely inspired.The concept of divine inspiration and infallibility only applies when the Pope is acting in accordance with God's will.

OK. I'm happy to work on understanding the principle at play. If they were mad, bad or dodgy they were not divinely inspired. Otherwise, they were. But I don't understand God's MO here. Why did he put the mad, bad and dodgy ones in charge? Surely that was going to screw up the whole infallibility thing. If you're God, it can't be that hard to make sure the infallible bloke is not some loopy psychopath with other issues thrown in.

What about this tulip?

John XII was Pope from 955 to 964. In 963, Holy Roman Emperor Otto I summoned a council, levelling charges that John had ordained a deacon in a stable, consecrated a 10-year-old boy as bishop of Todi, converted the Lateran Palace into a brothel, raped female pilgrims in St. Peter's, stolen church offerings, drunk toasts to the devil, and invoked the aid of Jove, Venus, and other pagan gods when playing dice.

He was deposed, but returned as pope when Otto left Rome, maiming and mutilating all who had opposed him. In 964, he was apparently beaten by the husband of a woman with whom he was having an affair, dying three days later without receiving confession or the sacraments.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
One of the mysteries of creation.You might ask why God the creator of all humanity,creates murderers,rapists paedophiles etc in secular walks of life.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 11, 2016, 07:35:35 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
One of the mysteries of creation.You might ask why God the creator of all humanity,creates murderers,rapists paedophiles etc in secular walks of life.

And Popes to cover up pedophilia activity?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ludermor on March 11, 2016, 08:02:28 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 08, 2016, 08:33:52 PM
I know.CEO of multi million pound operation,and female to boot,fails to suspend paedophile while junior priest tells all he heard to his superiors immediately.
You have said this a few times, Johnson is not a paedophile.
From Wiki ''Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.[1][2] As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13''
By all accounts this girl looked older than she was so was far from prepubescence . Thats not to excuse what Johnston done or make him less of a sc**bag.
And you definition of Brady being a 'junior priest' is right up there with the discussion in the UK about Junior Doctor where any doctor who is not a consultant is classed as a junior doctor. You make it sound like he was an apprentice!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 11, 2016, 10:21:30 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
One of the mysteries of creation.You might ask why God the creator of all humanity,creates murderers,rapists paedophiles etc in secular walks of life.

Very good. Slowly, slowly you'll get there.

This carry-on of this character seems to suggest that the tendency toward paedophilia goes back a long way.

Alexander VI (one of the Borgias) was Pope from 1492 to 1503.

Pope Alexander took over much of Italy by force with the help of his son Cesare (yes, his son). He had a racy relationship with his daughter Lucrezia (some say her son was his). And he liked to throw big parties, bordering on orgies, that usually culminated with little naked boys jumping out of large cakes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: screenexile on March 11, 2016, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 11, 2016, 10:21:30 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
One of the mysteries of creation.You might ask why God the creator of all humanity,creates murderers,rapists paedophiles etc in secular walks of life.

Very good. Slowly, slowly you'll get there.

This carry-on of this character seems to suggest that the tendency toward paedophilia goes back a long way.

Alexander VI (one of the Borgias) was Pope from 1492 to 1503.

Pope Alexander took over much of Italy by force with the help of his son Cesare (yes, his son). He had a racy relationship with his daughter Lucrezia (some say her son was his). And he liked to throw big parties, bordering on orgies, that usually culminated with little naked boys jumping out of large cakes.


Have you never watched "The Borgias"??

Good show and Lucrezia . . .

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/11/14/article-0-1594C1DF000005DC-896_634x510.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: deiseach on March 11, 2016, 10:54:39 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 11, 2016, 10:21:30 AM
Very good. Slowly, slowly you'll get there.

(https://i.imgflip.com/10niaq.jpg)

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Denn Forever on March 11, 2016, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 06:54:50 AM
One of the mysteries of creation.You might ask why God the creator of all humanity,creates murderers,rapists paedophiles etc in secular walks of life.

I thought that God gave us free will but Eve abused it and was thrown out of heaven.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 11, 2016, 11:57:35 AM
Jesus said that Scripture was infallible.

Nowhere in Scripture is the infallibility of Peter or his successors mentioned.

In fact the primacy of the Bishop of Rome is highly dubious, for example, there isn't any evidence that St. Peter was ever in Rome and we know the Bishop of Rome used a forgery to back his claim for primacy around 800AD.

Anyway back to Fearon. When asked about Pope Francis changing the rules regarding the creation of saints, Tony cited Papal Infallibility (by saying the Pope is 'divinely inspired').

Pope Francis didn't cite Papal Infallibility in this case so it doesn't apply. In fact there have been only 3 cases where it has ever been cited:

1854 Pope Pius IX declared Immaculate Conception;
1870 Vatican I infallibly declared Papal Infallibility to be true;
1950 Pope Pius XII declared Mary's Assumption into Heaven;

Here is a quote from John Paul II (NB: he said it before he was Pope): "....any change on the birth control issue would destroy the principle of papal infallibility, and that infallibility was the fundamental principle of the Church upon which all else rests."

That last quote would appear to diminish the role of Jesus as a fundamental basis of the Church. Or the Bible. Or anything other than the Papacy.




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on March 11, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

Well that's it then lads.  Pack up your things and go, this debate is done.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Franko on March 11, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

Well that's it then lads.  Pack up your things and go, this debate is done.

Why do you keep doing this?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 03:13:24 PM
Keep doing what? Demanding some respect for those who have religous beliefs? Its hardly unreasonable is it?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 11, 2016, 03:14:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 03:13:24 PM
Keep doing what? Demanding some respect for those who have religous beliefs? Its hardly unreasonable is it?

;D ;D ;D

I was asking Franko why he keeps telling us to stop.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 11, 2016, 03:47:23 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 03:13:24 PM
Keep doing what? Demanding some respect for those who have religous beliefs? Its hardly unreasonable is it?

Like the respect you showed to the children who were abused or their parents, you can lick the altar rails all you want, but you are the most unchristian half wit on this board.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 04:10:19 PM
Will someone explain to me how it is responsible parenting in any era to drive one's young children to a meeting with clergy,let them attend the meeting unaccompanied without finding out what the hell its all about?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 11, 2016, 04:20:14 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 04:10:19 PM
Will someone explain to me how it is responsible parenting in any era to drive one's young children to a meeting with clergy,let them attend the meeting unaccompanied without finding out what the hell its all about?

You mean like Confessions?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 04:33:16 PM
I think you know thats nonsensical.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 11, 2016, 04:35:38 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 11, 2016, 04:20:14 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 04:10:19 PM
Will someone explain to me how it is responsible parenting in any era to drive one's young children to a meeting with clergy,let them attend the meeting unaccompanied without finding out what the hell its all about?

You mean like Confessions?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AhNowRef on March 11, 2016, 05:30:57 PM
Jesus H .. Havent been on here for a while but I see the Catholic church's answer to Donald Trump is still spouting piss & shite  ... No actually thats a major insult to Trump..

WUM or Genuine .. either way T Fearon you truly are a complete and absolute sc**bag ...  For the other posters here, Im afraid he's also just too stupid or too f**ked up to debate with as he will ignore all points made and just keep repeating his nonsensical & heinous Paedo facilitation protection stance .... as you have seen, his points dont even have to make sense  :-X

God help the church with little monsters like him running around in it ..

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 11, 2016, 08:35:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

And you can believe what you like but if it is mere faith and not backed up by any evidence then you have to get use to people not taking you/your point seriously. You will also have to get used to relinquishing the historic privilege that faith enjoyed. But you will just label that anti catholic or some such drivel 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 10:22:46 PM
No problem with people disbelieving etc but surely some respect should be shown for those who do.Beliefs can neither be proved or disproved,if they could they would be either fact or fiction
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 11, 2016, 10:39:46 PM
Your views with regard to parents etc deserve no respect. They're deplorable. That is in no way disrespecting religion or your faith- just you.

You can't come out with the things you come out with on these subjects and expect respect.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 04:45:19 AM
Look,remove the anti Catholic blinkers and consider dispassionately this scenario,in the cold light of day.You are a parent of a young primary school child,and your child is summoned (extraordinary scenario you would surely concur) to a meeting,without any explanation whatsoever,by clerics,police,lay school teachers,or indeed any other adult grouping you care to name.

Would you as a parent not firstly wonder, and secondly make it your business to find out what it's all about? Would you not at least insist  on accompanying your young child  to the meeting? Would you not at the very least,either before or after the meeting,ask your child repeatedly,what it was all about,until he or she told you?

I simply cannot fathom how any parent,in any era,could accept an invitation for their child to attend a meeting of an adult grouping,without explanation,actually drive  them to same meeting,wait outside the door of that meeting,drive their child home from that meeting,without at some point,demanding to know what the hell is going on.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Arthur_Friend on March 12, 2016, 07:31:35 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 04:45:19 AM
Look,remove the anti Catholic blinkers and consider dispassionately this scenario,in the cold light of day.You are a parent of a young primary school child,and your child is summoned (extraordinary scenario you would surely concur) to a meeting,without any explanation whatsoever,by clerics,police,lay school teachers,or indeed any other adult grouping you care to name.

Would you as a parent not firstly wonder, and secondly make it your business to find out what it's all about? Would you not at least insist  on accompanying your young child  to the meeting? Would you not at the very least,either before or after the meeting,ask your child repeatedly,what it was all about,until he or she told you?

I simply cannot fathom how any parent,in any era,could accept an invitation for their child to attend a meeting of an adult grouping,without explanation,actually drive  them to same meeting,wait outside the door of that meeting,drive their child home from that meeting,without at some point,demanding to know what the hell is going on.

Remind me,  who was terrorising the child in the meeting again? The parents or the priests?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 07:51:46 AM
All the more reason for the parents to ensure their children weren't "terrorised" by insisting that they too attend the meeting, or at least find out the purpose of the meeting
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 12, 2016, 08:43:26 AM
Your anti catholic nonsense every time you are challenged is just that - nonsense. I come from a devout catholic family and have full respect for my family's faith and religion. Most people on here would come from similar backgrounds i suspect.

I also respect that they can see the flaws in the church and individuals involved.

Your opinions deserve no respect. So little humanity and empathy in them.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 12, 2016, 08:48:43 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 07:51:46 AM
All the more reason for the parents to ensure their children weren't "terrorised" by insisting that they too attend the meeting, or at least find out the purpose of the meeting

Are you beginning to see why we call it a 'cover up'?

Of course the parents asked. But Smyth and co chose their victims from the devout (i.e. vulnerable). They were believers and did what the Church told them.

Brendan Boland's father attended his son's 'interview', but still wasn't let into the room. Outside the room, Sean Brady gave the father an oath that Smyth wouldn't bother children again. Boland's father believed him. He later realised that was a mistake and went to the Gárdaí.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 09:33:15 AM
If I as a parent wasn't let in I wouldn't have allowed my child to attend the meeting.If Mr Boland's father was given an oath by the Church,that means he too knew about Smyth but like the Church,didn't go to the Police either.If it's inexcusable that Sean Brady didn't tell the Police it is also inexcusable for a parent who was aware of the abuse not to tell them either.I am sorry if this annoys people but the parents must accept a large part of the responsibility for this sorry mess.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on March 12, 2016, 10:26:09 AM
Of course T Fearon is correct. The Parent(s) should have been more Forthright with their concerns (if they had any). Many I fear were blinded by their faith and their trust in the Catholic Organisation. The point is that the Catholic Church is first and foremost the biggest holders of the blame at every level. They used their Power, Fear,  Influence, Trust and standing in society to maintain and hide these horrible crimes of Rape and sexual abuse. To pass the parcel of blame onto parents is a Cop out.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 12, 2016, 11:49:08 AM
What Tony completely fails to grasp is that while some parents would have strung Smyth up on the nearest tree at the first sign of trouble, the point is that Smyth would not have dared touch a child from such families. He, and the other monsters, targeted vulnerable children of parents that would either completely trust the Church or were in no position to challenge the Church.

Either way the Church protected the Smyth's of this world and not the abused children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 12:16:26 PM
So we have different classes of parents now,those who act responsibly and those cowered by fear of people wearing a clerical collar? And Brendan Smyth was able to control his paedophile instincts until he got to know and discern which type of parents his victims belonged to? What utter tosh.

The people ultimately responsible for paedophilia, in the Church,the BBC or in any other walk of life are the paedophiles themselves.That this was grossly mishandled in decades past by the guardians of the institutions and in some cases by the parents of victims is beyond question.But to lead a campaign of vitriol against one priest,not involved in paedophilia, just because he happened to occupy a position of Cardinal,a half lifetime later is scandalous.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: No wides on March 12, 2016, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 12:16:26 PM
So we have different classes of parents now,those who act responsibly and those cowered by fear of people wearing a clerical collar? And Brendan Smyth was able to control his paedophile instincts until he got to know and discern which type of parents his victims belonged to? What utter tosh.

The people ultimately responsible for paedophilia, in the Church,the BBC or in any other walk of life are the paedophiles themselves.That this was grossly mishandled in decades past by the guardians of the institutions and in some cases by the parents of victims is beyond question.But to lead a campaign of vitriol against one priest,not involved in paedophilia, just because he happened to occupy a position of Cardinal,a half lifetime later is scandalous.

You really are a vile individual the church facilitated Smyth moving him around Ireland giving him fresh new victims, these bastards know the children to target, vulnerable kids who maybe have issues at home.  You seriously are a horrible, vile, unchristian fuckwit, I take it you have no kids to busy licking the altar rails and posting vile on here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 02:41:11 PM
Resort to personal abuse when you have no valid argument.Mishandling child abuse is not facilitating it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on March 12, 2016, 06:58:19 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 12, 2016, 08:48:43 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 07:51:46 AM
All the more reason for the parents to ensure their children weren't "terrorised" by insisting that they too attend the meeting, or at least find out the purpose of the meeting

Are you beginning to see why we call it a 'cover up'?

Of course the parents asked. But Smyth and co chose their victims from the devout (i.e. vulnerable). They were believers and did what the Church told them.

Brendan Boland's father attended his son's 'interview', but still wasn't let into the room. Outside the room, Sean Brady gave the father an oath that Smyth wouldn't bother children again. Boland's father believed him. He later realised that was a mistake and went to the Gárdaí.

Clearly, in a particularly sick mind, Mr. Boland is the monster in this scenario as the holy Brady did everything he could to protect his child from him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 12, 2016, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: No wides on March 12, 2016, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 12:16:26 PM
So we have different classes of parents now,those who act responsibly and those cowered by fear of people wearing a clerical collar? And Brendan Smyth was able to control his paedophile instincts until he got to know and discern which type of parents his victims belonged to? What utter tosh.

The people ultimately responsible for paedophilia, in the Church,the BBC or in any other walk of life are the paedophiles themselves.That this was grossly mishandled in decades past by the guardians of the institutions and in some cases by the parents of victims is beyond question.But to lead a campaign of vitriol against one priest,not involved in paedophilia, just because he happened to occupy a position of Cardinal,a half lifetime later is scandalous.

You really are a vile individual the church facilitated Smyth moving him around Ireland giving him fresh new victims, these b**tards know the children to target, vulnerable kids who maybe have issues at home.  You seriously are a horrible, vile, unchristian fuckwit, I take it you have no kids to busy licking the altar rails and posting vile on here.

always wonder as well at Tony's comments on church paedophilia... sick mindset
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 12, 2016, 08:47:21 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 12:16:26 PM
So we have different classes of parents now,those who act responsibly and those cowered by fear of people wearing a clerical collar? And Brendan Smyth was able to control his paedophile instincts until he got to know and discern which type of parents his victims belonged to? What utter tosh.

The people ultimately responsible for paedophilia, in the Church,the BBC or in any other walk of life are the paedophiles themselves.That this was grossly mishandled in decades past by the guardians of the institutions and in some cases by the parents of victims is beyond question.But to lead a campaign of vitriol against one priest,not involved in paedophilia, just because he happened to occupy a position of Cardinal,a half lifetime later is scandalous.

But then this isn't quite the full story is it?

This man silenced 2 child victims who were willing to point the finger at a monstrous pedophile.
He then took high office, replacing a man who resigned because of his failure to act properly against the same pedophile.
While in high office his organisation fought for over a decade to conceal his own failure to deal with this monster BEFORE his predecessor's failure. Even his taking the job on those grounds is absolutely galling.
He insisted (even seeking and getting an apology from the Indo) that his role was merely as a 'notary' (something Fearon shouted from the rooftops) until the courts finally forced the Church to hand over his notes. The notes proved he was an 'investigator'. Why did he not tell the truth?

Then all the while he lectured us on moral issues from his highest of horses.

And when it all came out, he still didn't get it. Cahal Daly deserves respect, as he fell on his sword honourably and promptly. Brady clung to power when even a Fianna Fail Minister would have walked.

Then of course after the Murphy report, but crucially before the courts forced his involvement to be made public, he said this:

"If I found myself in a situation where I was aware that my failure to act had allowed or meant that other children were abused, well then, I think I would resign."

Well his failure to act decisively meant that there were over a 100 more events of abuse against children by Smyth. Worse than that, 3 children that had been named to him by Brendan Boland were abused after his failure to act to protect them. As were relatives of theirs.

And Tony's concern is more for this man than the child victims of sexual abuse.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 09:39:52 PM
Clung to power? Are you for real? The man wanted out of Dodge years ago but the Pope insisted he stayed until a suitable replacement was found.

I don't see what the issue here is.Both Sean Brady and Mr Boland's father,by your admission, were aware of allegations against Brendan Smyth.Neither went to the Police.If Sean Brady deserves vilification for this then logically Mr Boland does equally.

I happen to think though the situation both men faced in the mid 70s was far more complex.They were not aware of Smyth's monstrous long term activities and probably both believed that the actions they had taken would have been sufficient to stop Smyth.Both were let down by Church seniors at the time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 12, 2016, 10:39:00 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 09:39:52 PM
Clung to power? Are you for real? The man wanted out of Dodge years ago but the Pope insisted he stayed until a suitable replacement was found.

I don't see what the issue here is.Both Sean Brady and Mr Boland's father,by your admission, were aware of allegations against Brendan Smyth.Neither went to the Police.If Sean Brady deserves vilification for this then logically Mr Boland does equally.

I happen to think though the situation both men faced in the mid 70s was far more complex.They were not aware of Smyth's monstrous long term activities and probably both believed that the actions they had taken would have been sufficient to stop Smyth.Both were let down by Church seniors at the time.

Of course Brady clung to power. Even his departure was cringeworthy in the extreme where he insisted it was because of Canon Law, thus implying that it was for no other reason. Yet other Cardinals managed to man up and resign, for example the Scottish Cardinal. In fact Ratzinger, the Pope, resigned. Imagine that, the Pope resigned but Brady claimed he couldn't resign because the Pope wouldn't let him. Bloody superiors eh? Or bloody coward?

Your need to stick the knife into abused families is absolutely horrifying to many posters here and yet you persist with it. Many of them are parents and, while I know nothing about you, it is clear that you are not a parent. You couldn't possibly be and write the above. Children are entrusted into the care of others over and over every day, whether it is school, GAA, swimming lessons, babysitters, sleepovers etc, etc, etc.

If you shelter your child from all of the above, God help them. Good parents try to involve their kids in as much as possible. Sadly the horrors of clerical abuse has undermined that enormously, but most parents will still find a way to make sure their kids get involved in activities.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 10:56:05 PM
But you said Mr Boland was aware of abuse allegations against his child,but didn't go to the Police.You give him a free pass for this but crucify Sean Brady for the same failure.That is hypocrisy.If Brady is guilty so is Mr Boland,there is no other logic I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 13, 2016, 12:25:11 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 10:56:05 PM
But you said Mr Boland was aware of abuse allegations against his child,but didn't go to the Police.You give him a free pass for this but crucify Sean Brady for the same failure.That is hypocrisy.If Brady is guilty so is Mr Boland,there is no other logic I'm afraid.

Logic?  ;D

Brady gave an oath to Mr. Boland that no more children would be abused by Smyth. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

Mr. Boland made a mistake by trusting Brady. No question about that, now that we know what sort of man Sean Brady is.

Then, AND YOU KEEP IGNORING THIS, when the Bolands discovered Brady didn't honour his oath, THEY WENT TO THE POLICE.

The Bolands went to the police.

Sean Brady never went to the police. He never came clean about his role until forced to by the Bolands. And that was only after the Church fought for 11 years in the courts to hide his involvement.

Sean Brady did nothing for the children that he was informed were being abused, or at risk of abuse, by Brendan Smyth. When the Boland Dad realised this, he went to the Police.

He went to the police. How often do you have to be told?




Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 13, 2016, 02:15:40 PM
Headline in Le Monde today was child abuse by priests in France..
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 13, 2016, 02:39:06 PM
Do you not consider Brady genuinely thought something would have been done about Smyth on the basis of his report? If Sean Brady was criminally negligent why hasn't he been arrested by the Police?

I am perfectly clear that historical child abuse claims were woefully mishandled by the Church,but that doesn't equate with outrageous claims on this thread of facilitating paedophiles.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 13, 2016, 03:08:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2016, 02:39:06 PM
Do you not consider Brady genuinely thought something would have been done about Smyth on the basis of his report? If Sean Brady was criminally negligent why hasn't he been arrested by the Police?

I am perfectly clear that historical child abuse claims were woefully mishandled by the Church,but that doesn't equate with outrageous claims on this thread of facilitating paedophiles.
The church was untouchable in the 70s.Victims all had similar profiles. Weak, poor, unlikely to say anything. the church was more interested in  the status quo than in morality. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 13, 2016, 11:15:45 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 13, 2016, 02:39:06 PM
Do you not consider Brady genuinely thought something would have been done about Smyth on the basis of his report? If Sean Brady was criminally negligent why hasn't he been arrested by the Police?

I am perfectly clear that historical child abuse claims were woefully mishandled by the Church,but that doesn't equate with outrageous claims on this thread of facilitating paedophiles.

The oaths were illegal at the time. He should have been prosecuted on that alone.

He never made his involvement known to the Gardai, even when he was promoted because of other people's failure to deal with Smyth. The Church, with him at the helm, then did everything they could to prevent the revelation of his involvement and were successful until a few years ago.

The problem is that the Church were so successful in covering everything up that the law had changed, Smyth was dead and any investigation was long over, so sadly Brady appears to be in the clear.

But as a religious leader, he has not a shred of credibility as far I am concerned.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 14, 2016, 07:17:34 AM
There is not a person in this world who would willingly reveal skeletons in his cupboard,particularly a Cardinal knowing that the anti catholic media etc would have a field day.

The key thing in all of this is that Sean Brady reported accurately his findings to his Bishop.It was at this level that the victims were failed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 14, 2016, 07:43:15 AM
It is what you focus on as the key thing. It's like when you focus on facts but pick about one or two and ignore the rest.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on March 14, 2016, 09:25:00 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Franko on March 11, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

Well that's it then lads.  Pack up your things and go, this debate is done.

Why do you keep doing this?

Surely you recognised the sarcasm in that comment?

Though it's ironic that YOU would ask ME this question given the way this thread has been going.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 14, 2016, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Franko on March 14, 2016, 09:25:00 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Franko on March 11, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

Well that's it then lads.  Pack up your things and go, this debate is done.

Why do you keep doing this?

Surely you recognised the sarcasm in that comment?

Though it's ironic that YOU would ask ME this question given the way this thread has been going.

Why do you keep doing this?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on March 14, 2016, 10:26:08 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 14, 2016, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Franko on March 14, 2016, 09:25:00 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Franko on March 11, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 11, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
It all boils down to faith.

Well that's it then lads.  Pack up your things and go, this debate is done.

Why do you keep doing this?

Surely you recognised the sarcasm in that comment?

Though it's ironic that YOU would ask ME this question given the way this thread has been going.

Why do you keep doing this?

You didn't recognise the sarcasm then?  Ah well, sure you can consider yourself corrected and we'll say no more about it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 14, 2016, 10:52:09 AM
Ah I see. So you were making a joke.

Brilliant.



 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AhNowRef on March 14, 2016, 12:20:22 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 12, 2016, 10:56:05 PM
But you said Mr Boland was aware of abuse allegations against his child,but didn't go to the Police.You give him a free pass for this but crucify Sean Brady for the same failure.That is hypocrisy.If Brady is guilty so is Mr Boland,there is no other logic I'm afraid.

You are clearly insane !!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on March 14, 2016, 12:59:33 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 14, 2016, 10:52:09 AM
Ah I see. So you were making a joke.

Brilliant.





Thanks.  Glad to see you finally got there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 06:42:03 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/15/damning-report-reveals-church-of-england-failure-to-act-on-abuse

Looks like Sean Brady and Catholic Church isn't so bad after all
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 15, 2016, 06:43:41 PM
That's a ludicrous statement. If you do something bad and someone else does something worse are you not that bad?? ???
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 06:54:52 PM
Really the point I'm trying to make is that this vile stuff was not confined  to the Catholic Church,and as this thread is titled Clerical Abuse,it is appropriate that the problems faced by other churches should be highlighted
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 15, 2016, 07:19:33 PM
I am glad to see Tony welcoming a report into this heinous crime against children.

We need many more such reports, especially in Ireland.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 07:31:25 PM
Yes the problem was endemic in all institutions,and mishandled in all of them as well.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on March 15, 2016, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 07:31:25 PM
Yes the problem was endemic in all institutions,and mishandled in all of them as well.

All institutions? Hardly.

Maybe you meant all dioceses?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on March 15, 2016, 08:21:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 15, 2016, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 07:31:25 PM
Yes the problem was endemic in all institutions,and mishandled in all of them as well.

All institutions? Hardly.

Maybe you meant all dioceses?

Not just the Taigs
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/15/damning-report-reveals-church-of-england-failure-to-act-on-abuse
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 25, 2016, 01:00:14 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 15, 2016, 08:21:00 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 15, 2016, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 15, 2016, 07:31:25 PM
Yes the problem was endemic in all institutions,and mishandled in all of them as well.

All institutions? Hardly.

Maybe you meant all dioceses?

Not just the Taigs
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/15/damning-report-reveals-church-of-england-failure-to-act-on-abuse

It was never confined to catholic clergy but is there another organisation in the world that could rival the catholic church for the level of abuse or the level of cover up?

Maybe Tony and the like just hope that after shouting down any criticism as "anti-catholic" they can get a few years under the belt without any new abuse stories and then the past will be forgotten. We are now on the cusp of the Easter rising commemoration and how many times is Casement or  Pearse's own issues in this respect ever raised? Maybe it is possible to bury this stuff?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 26, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 25, 2016, 11:48:05 PM
I am not calling for anything to be buried.Let it all out in the open.A couple of weeks ago a guy was nominated for Taoiseach and he allegedly covered up his sibling's child abuse,and not a word about it,and certainly it didn't stop his nomination for the post of Taoiseach.

Child abuse has been happening sadly since time immemorial,in all organisations and in a lot of families.My main gripe has been with the exclusive vilification of Sean Brady,for his relatively minor role over 40 years ago, when, as is very clear,he heard unsubstantiated allegations of clerical abuse and reported these accurately and timeously to his Church superiors,in presumably,the belief that they would act accordingly.I can only conclude that this sustained and totally unwarranted vilification of this man alone,is a product of anti Catholicism.I can see no other logical reason.
I can see your frustration at other getting a buy ball. Certainly serious questions still to be need to be asked of Adams but if we are going into the situation of asking Gerry about his past those questions are not going to end with covering up child abuse. There is a real issue of selective memory. Is Casement the sort of individual we should name a stadium after? Should Pearse be honoured over these days? People it would seem prefer to forget these things.

But the absence of appropriate questions being asked of others does nothing to impact on Brady's guilt. If Brady had done in the north what he did in the south he would be a convicted criminal and would have went to prison. His actions at the time where those of morally bankrupt individual. His subsequent  actions will damn him forever. And rightly so
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 08, 2016, 06:58:33 PM
http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-as-pope-visit-nears-us-sex-victims-say-church-remains-obstacle-to-justice-2015-9?r=US&IR=T (http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-as-pope-visit-nears-us-sex-victims-say-church-remains-obstacle-to-justice-2015-9?r=US&IR=T)

The Catholic Church is fighting to block bills that would extend the statute of limitations for reporting sex abuse
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 08, 2016, 08:17:50 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 08, 2016, 07:41:04 PM
As usual it's all about the money. ::)

It is true that the Church is prioritising its money over victims, by objecting to allowing victims over the age of 23 take civil cases, but they are also objecting to them taking criminal cases as well. Thus they are denying victims of clerical abuse any justice at all. The abuse continues.

God's missionaries indeed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 08, 2016, 08:43:39 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 08, 2016, 08:33:27 PM
The Church should not have to foot the bill.As I have said before the people responsible for child abuse are the perverts who carried it out.Let the law take its course and sue the abusers.

I'll start with the last bit. I agree completely. Of course the Church had a duty of care to the children, which it frequently abandoned in favour of covering up abuse, so any reasonably fair court will push the Church if it is found in breach of that duty of care. So yes, let the courts decide. But of course the article above shows the Church lobbying against letting cases go to court.

As for the first bit, the whole basis of Catholicism starts with our collective responsibility for Original Sin. It is the entire basis of some of the sacraments and of our status as sinners before we are even born. We 'foot the bill' for Adam & Eve. The Church shouldn't be allowed off the hook for its breaches of its duty of care.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on June 08, 2016, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 08, 2016, 10:42:10 PM
I agree with you for once.Let those who committed the abuse pay the price.

Problem is, Tony, that those clerics who abused children did so in the full knowledge that their superiors knew what they were up to. By their inaction and downright connivance those in positions of authority facilitated the culture of passing acts of paedophilia off as mere sins with absolution and the freedom to continue as before the only @penalty' they had to face.
I don't hold Brendan Smyth totally responsible for the crimes he committed when it was obvious that he had serious psychiatric problems and was obviously incapable of thinking rationally.
For me, Sean Brady is, at the very least, at least as culpable as Brendan Smyth.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 08, 2016, 11:47:42 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 08, 2016, 11:35:44 PM
Complete tosh.The Church did not connive or facilitate paedophilia.It grossly mishandled accusations of same due to fear and embarrassment,which was wrong.True Smyth should have been drummed out of the Church by those with the power to do so (Sean Brady did not have that power) and handed to the Police (if that had made any difference given that the Police in the 70s moved a cleric across the border,suspected of involvement in a fatal bombing in the 70s).

Paedophiles alone are responsible for paedophilia,not the Catholic Church or Councils in Rotherham etc,and they alone should pay the price.

The Pope disagrees with you Tony:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-bishops-who-covered-up-for-abuse-guilty-of-wrongdoing/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-bishops-who-covered-up-for-abuse-guilty-of-wrongdoing/)

....."Those who covered this up are guilty," he said. "There are even some bishops who covered this up. It's something horrible."......

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 09, 2016, 12:34:32 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2016, 06:14:35 AM
"Covering up" due to shame,embarrassment, fear or panic,while absolutely wrong is not the same as connivance or facilitating child abuse

You feel the same about 'collusion'?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on June 09, 2016, 10:37:18 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2016, 08:16:08 PM
Collusion means complicity facilitating an act or plan.Covering up,out of shame fear embarrassment, after an event,while totally wrong and ultimately self defeating,is not connivance,collusion or facilitating.

Collusion, as defined by Irish Judge Peter Smithwick, and referenced by Dr. Michael Maguire who produced today's report on the RUC, is defined inter alia, as: '"While (collusion) generally means the commission of an act, I am also of the view that it should be considered in terms of an omission or failure to act.' *

There can be no doubt that such a definition applies to many of the hierarchy in the Catholic Church.

In 2004 Canadian Judge Peter Corry included the following in his definition of collusion: '..."to co-operate secretly: to have a secret understanding."....' *

That would appear to cover many of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church as well. Isn't it about time we had a proper enquiry into collusion between Church leaders and Church pedophiles?


* Quotes from the following article: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20682687 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20682687)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on June 09, 2016, 10:50:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2016, 08:16:08 PM
Collusion means complicity facilitating an act or plan.Covering up,out of shame fear embarrassment, after an event,while totally wrong and ultimately self defeating,is not connivance,collusion or facilitating.

of course it was church collusion... moving paedo priests to other areas to do the same...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: muppet on July 17, 2016, 01:58:44 PM
For anyone that hasn't seen this...

https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0 (https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0)


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on July 17, 2016, 03:41:49 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2016, 08:16:08 PM
Collusion means complicity facilitating an act or plan.Covering up,out of shame fear embarrassment, after an event,while totally wrong and ultimately self defeating,is not connivance,collusion or facilitating.
For once I agree with you Tony. It's perverting the course of justice and in England and Wales it is a common law offence, carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on July 17, 2016, 05:22:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 17, 2016, 01:58:44 PM
For anyone that hasn't seen this...

https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0 (https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0)
Christ
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: laoislad on July 17, 2016, 06:24:31 PM
Quote from: seafoid on July 17, 2016, 05:22:34 PM
Quote from: muppet on July 17, 2016, 01:58:44 PM
For anyone that hasn't seen this...

https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0 (https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1/posts/646772968803836:0)
Christ

+1

That was tough to read.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on July 25, 2016, 08:52:43 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on June 09, 2016, 08:16:08 PM
Collusion means complicity facilitating an act or plan.Covering up,out of shame fear embarrassment, after an event,while totally wrong and ultimately self defeating,is not connivance,collusion or facilitating.

Child abuse is a brutal system. Based on fear.


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/i-dont-have-to-be-afraid-of-him-brave-victim-who-snared-evil-cooke-haunted-by-little-girl-i-couldnt-save-34907175.html

He intimidated children into silence by continually threatening that they would be sent to a children's home if their parents found out.

The abuse stopped when Anne was 10. But the damage was done. Her education suffered, she was angry, she self-harmed and she drank. All the while, Cooke remained a malevolent presence, driving around in his Radio Dublin Jag, very often with children in the passenger seat.

Anne didn't tell her parents until she was 18, only then when the mother of another of Cooke's victims encouraged her.

 
Her father immediately booked her into the Rape Crisis Centre. But it was the mid-1980s and there was no talk at that time of reporting him to gardai.

Anne went to Kilmainham garda station off her own bat, with a friend. "I sat in a room, told them what Eamon Cooke was, told them he had abused me as a child."

Weeks later, Cooke showed up at the little grocery shop where she worked. She reached for a knife and told him to get out. The next time he stopped his Jaguar outside the shop, a girl of six in the passenger seat whom he sent in for cigarettes. He grinned "sickeningly" at Anne. "For years that girl haunted me," she wrote in her memoir"

Facilitating it so that the Church could have power was nuts.

Imagine raping a child with a crucifix.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/paedophile-priest-had-links-to-other-infamous-child-abusers-34870722.html

What would Jesus say ?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on July 30, 2016, 07:29:09 PM
Gareth O Callaghan is doing amazing work
https://www.facebook.com/gareth.ocallaghan.1

Most of the paedos in he 70s would appear to have been protected by power.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on July 30, 2016, 08:35:49 PM
This seems to be a mix of laity and so called perverts masquerading as clergy.I never liked Michael Cleary and that was before his double life came to public knowledge.I note the Gardai interviewed Walsh in 1995,which disproves the theory of Church protection never mind the ludicrous claim.of facilitation.The part of the Church with too much power was in the form of individual clerics like Cleary who seemed to run their own fiefdoms.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: laoislad on July 30, 2016, 08:39:38 PM
It's everyones fault apart from the Church.....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: T Fearon on July 30, 2016, 09:21:15 PM
It is not everybody's fault.As in every crime the overwhelming responsibility lies with the perpetrators.While allegations in the past (ie in the 70s, a half a lifetime ago) were at best mishandled by clergy in senior positions ( not the Church as an institution) out of some warped sense of trying to maintain the Church's reputation,this is not remotely even bordering on facilitation, no more than fir example some Gardai or RUC Special Branch turning a blind eye to paramilitary murders was facilitating Murder institutionally.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on July 30, 2016, 09:32:07 PM
Paedos were sheltered by the Church . Kids who brought abuse to the attention of priests were ignored. It is only now that the full scale of the horror is becoming known.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on July 30, 2016, 09:54:47 PM
Good man Tony. God forbid you ever open your eyes and see what is going on, your whole world will collapse. Thank god these people no longer run this country and idiots like Tony are less and less. I have a German friend who told me his Grandfather still won't hear a bad word said about Adolf, I immediately thought of you Tony.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 19, 2018, 11:39:51 PM
I appreciate that just when you thought you had already heard it all re clerical abuse, that nothing new could top what you already have witnessed, but this is a new compelling candidate for the GUBU award.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/pope-francis-accuses-clerical-abuse-victims-of-slandering-bishop-1.3361838 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/pope-francis-accuses-clerical-abuse-victims-of-slandering-bishop-1.3361838)

Pope Francis accuses clerical abuse victims of slandering bishop

Pope Francis has accused victims of Chile's most notorious paedophile of slander, in an astonishing end to a visit meant to help heal the wounds of a sex abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic Church its credibility in the country.

Francis said that until he sees proof that Bishop Juan Barros was complicit in covering up the sex crimes of the Reverend Fernando Karadima, such accusations against the bishop are "all calumny".

The pope's remarks drew shock from Chileans and immediate rebuke from victims and their advocates. They noted the accusers were deemed credible enough by the Vatican that it sentenced Karadima to a lifetime of "penance and prayer" for his crimes in 2011.

A Chilean judge also found the victims to be credible, saying that while she had to drop criminal charges against Karadima because too much time had passed, proof of his crimes was not lacking."As if I could have taken a selfie or a photo while Karadima abused me and others and Juan Barros stood by watching it all," tweeted Bishop Barros's most vocal accuser, Juan Carlos Cruz.
Truly crazy

"These people are truly crazy, and the pontiff talks about atonement to the victims. Nothing has changed, and his plea for forgiveness is empty."

The Karadima scandal dominated Francis's visit to Chile and the overall issue of sex abuse and church cover-up was likely to factor into his three-day trip to Peru that began late on Thursday.

Karadima's victims reported to church authorities as early as 2002 that he would kiss and fondle them in the Santiago parish he ran, but officials refused to believe them.

Only when the victims went public with their accusations in 2010 did the Vatican launch an investigation that led to Karadima being removed from ministry.

Francis had sought to heal the wounds by meeting this week with abuse victims and begging forgiveness for the crimes of church pastors. But on Thursday, he struck a defiant tone when asked by a Chilean journalist about Mr Barros.

"The day they bring me proof against Bishop Barros, I'll speak," Francis said. "There is not one shred of proof against him. It's all calumny. Is that clear?"

Anne Barrett Doyle, of the online database BishopAccountability.org, said it was "sad and wrong" for the pope to discredit the victims since "the burden of proof here rests with the church, not the victims – and especially not with victims whose veracity has already been affirmed.

"He has just turned back the clock to the darkest days of this crisis," she said in a statement. "Who knows how many victims now will decide to stay hidden, for fear they will not be believed?"
Claims

Indeed, Catholic officials for years accused victims of slandering and attacking the church with their claims. But up until the pope's words on Thursday, many in the church and Vatican had come to reluctantly acknowledge that victims usually told the truth and that the church for decades had wrongly sought to protect its own.

German Silva, a political scientist at Santiago's Universidad Mayor, said the pope's comments were a "tremendous error" that will reverberate in Chile and beyond.

Patricio Navia, political science professor at Diego Portales University in Santiago, said Francis had gone much further than Chilean bishops in acknowledging the sexual abuse scandal, which many Chileans appreciated.

"Then right before leaving, Francis turns around and says: 'By the way, I don't think Barros is guilty. Show me some proof'," Mr Navia said, adding that the comment will probably erase any goodwill the pope had won over the issue.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on January 19, 2018, 11:56:25 PM
The mask drops.... need to get Tony's paedophile hunters on the job.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on January 20, 2018, 12:30:57 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 20, 2018, 12:12:50 AM
Er,like his Holiness,I see no  evidence in the above article of the Bishop's complicity in the crimes of this pervert.But as usual anti Catholics are blind to logic and reason and are accusing the Pope of condoning sexual abuse,which he certainly is not doing.

Complicity in crime is a very serious allegation,and the Pope is entirely right to demand proof of such in this case.

you speak with fork tongue - one rule for the church abusers and another for those nabbed by the predator hunters
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on January 20, 2018, 12:51:23 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 20, 2018, 12:46:13 AM
No.A 89 year old evil monk from Coalisland was jailed the other day.I fully support this.

The abuse ceased in 1983 around the time he left the church... long time since he was a monk though seemed to get free rein  to abuse young boys when he was.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 08:54:22 AM
Learned what, exactly? That it needs to cover up better?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 20, 2018, 09:47:35 AM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 08:54:22 AM
Learned what, exactly? That it needs to cover up better?

They have learned that they can be caught now.

They have learned that now they have gone from a position of being one of the most trusted figures in Society to one that is over scrutinised!

Thems the breaks!

I feel sorry for the decent few Priests that are left with this mess.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on January 20, 2018, 10:18:43 AM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 08:54:22 AM
Learned what, exactly? That it needs to cover up better?

Learnt that children grow up and have long memories
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 12:26:17 PM
Shuffling paedos around, from parish to parish, to avoid convictions = being complicit, in any right thinking person's interpretation.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: J70 on January 20, 2018, 01:54:36 PM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 12:26:17 PM
Shuffling paedos around, from parish to parish, to avoid convictions = being complicit, in any right thinking person's interpretation.

No shit!

That's a jaw-dropping assertion from Tony!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 20, 2018, 01:57:21 PM
The article in the IT is not required to present any evidence to  implicate Biship Barro in the cover up.  The evidence for that lies elsewhere. The IT is reporting the news story. Should people want to refute the basis for the story  on the grounds that they see no evidence in the article, then that denial has no merit.

The Catholic Herald called the appointment of the bishop "disastrous appointment of Bishop Barros could spell trouble for Pope Francis".

Article in Catholic journal  (ironically)  called Crux,    by John Allen the editor
https://cruxnow.com/church/2015/03/27/pope-francis-may-be-nearing-a-tipping-point-on-sexual-abuse/

"five members of the pope's own anti-abuse commission have expressed "concern and incredulity" that Bishop Juan Barros has been given command of the Diocese of Osorno in Chile, despite his public record of defending the country's most notorious abuser priest"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on January 20, 2018, 02:39:21 PM
The pope states "there is not one shred of proof against him. It's all calumny"

That's a very interesting choice of words. 

People don't bring proof, they bring evidence and guilt is established based on the balance of probabilities after examination of the merits of all the evidence.
Yet the Pope exclaims that it's all calumny, slanderous statements made to damage the bishop.
How exactly does the Pope shift from seeing no proof of guilt, to determining that it's all lies and slander? All lies, means every piece of evidence is a lie.
How did the Pope determine that ALL the evidence offered were lies? He accuses the abused of maliciously lying through their teeth in order to slander the bishop.
Perhaps the pope is afflicted with the delusion that he is God's representative on earth and everything he believes  has the status of absolute truth in all matters.

Ironic though that a catholic cleric would want to see proof before believing something.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: From the Bunker on January 20, 2018, 02:49:55 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 20, 2018, 10:02:07 AM
Bullshit.Like all other organisations they have statutory child protection procedures.I agree that they are over scrutinised,by themselves,leaving many priests feeling abandoned by the Church when an as yet unfounded allegation is made against them.

Incidentally the above article is about totally unproven allegations against a Bishop about complicity.Whatever mistakes Church authorities made in the past in their handling of Child Abuse allegations,they were certainly not complicit.

Ah, it does not matter now whether he is innocent, he will always be guilty in the Public eyes (sadly)! The trust is lost! The bad smell from previous bad judgments and the above the law feel that the clergy had in the past has left a sour taste in the public's mouth. It will take a generation for this to pass over. By then it's hard to know at what level the Catholic Church will be operating.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 02:50:21 PM
Bloody South Americans......nothing but trouble.  Sooner we get back to electing Italian popes the better.  The church has gone completely down the tubes from they started putting people from strange lands & nations into the vatican hot seat. Next Pope should run on a "Latin Mass & buggery" ticket....good old traditional values.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 04:10:23 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on January 20, 2018, 09:16:10 AM
Yawn zzzzzz.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: HiMucker on January 20, 2018, 04:20:13 PM
Jesus I didn't know professional soccer clubs were supposed to be our moral guardians?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: playwiththewind1st on January 20, 2018, 04:40:19 PM
They might as well try, as the church of rome ain't been so good at it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 07, 2018, 06:44:29 PM
Not great news for the College!  BBC Spotlight programme coming up.  Severe amount of cover up going on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314)

Note that the BBC hasn't connected that the President of St Colman's was the school's Principal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 07, 2018, 07:00:14 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 07, 2018, 06:44:29 PM
Not great news for the College!  BBC Spotlight programme coming up.  Severe amount of cover up going on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314)

Note that the BBC hasn't connected that the President of St Colman's was the school's Principal.

I wonder how the claimants got together - I certainly was never asked - so I guess it was a network of boarders.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Franko on February 07, 2018, 07:00:49 PM
This is another example of the BBC and their incitement of mob justice.  This information should be handed over to the authorities and they should be let carry out a proper investigation.

Signed,

T. Fearon.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 07, 2018, 10:44:05 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 07, 2018, 06:44:29 PMNot great news for the College!  BBC Spotlight programme coming up.  Severe amount of cover up going on.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42979314)
Note that the BBC hasn't connected that the President of St Colman's was the school's Principal.

"BBC reporter Mandy McAuley has been investigating this story for several months for a forthcoming BBC NI Spotlight programme"

Anyone know how to view BBCNI programs from the US, is there a way around the geoblocking?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 08, 2018, 08:31:38 PM
A victim of the President(Headmaster) of St Colman's Newry speaks out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42991175 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42991175)

What a brave man to come forward and to the public to highlight the abuse and the cover up.

From BBC:

Mr Faloon recalls raising the matter with the then Bishop of Dromore, Francis Brookes.
"He suggested I steer away from outside counselling services as they could be steering me in the wrong direction, and could lead me in the wrong direction," claims Mr Faloon. As a result, he says that Bishop Brookes arranged for him to complete counselling sessions with a nun.
Mr Faloon recalls meeting a nun "six or seven times" at an empty building that was similar to a "small office block". "We would go into a room down a corridor," he said. "The room had simply two chairs and an empty desk. Absolutely no other furniture." During the second last meeting with the nun, Mr Faloon says she told him that "given time, God will forgive you".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 08, 2018, 08:39:18 PM
Quote from: dec on February 07, 2018, 10:44:05 PM

"BBC reporter Mandy McAuley has been investigating this story for several months for a forthcoming BBC NI Spotlight programme"

Anyone know how to view BBCNI programs from the US, is there a way around the geoblocking?

Use a VPN. Plenty of firms offering this software which allows you to connect to a server to hide your location.

https://www.bestvpn.com/best-usa-vpn/ (https://www.bestvpn.com/best-usa-vpn/)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: snoopdog on February 08, 2018, 08:59:46 PM
He had left the year or 2 before I went to the school. But is a cover up by the church anything new. I believe it was public knowledge b4 he died around Hilltown yet the current bishop still officiated at his funeral.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 08, 2018, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: snoopdog on February 08, 2018, 08:59:46 PM
He had left the year or 2 before I went to the school. But is a cover up by the church anything new. I believe it was public knowledge b4 he died around Hilltown yet the current bishop still officiated at his funeral.

Aye but.... signed Tony McFearon
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 08, 2018, 10:27:48 PM
Quote from: snoopdog on February 08, 2018, 08:59:46 PM
He had left the year or 2 before I went to the school. But is a cover up by the church anything new. I believe it was public knowledge b4 he died around Hilltown yet the current bishop still officiated at his funeral.

No the church cover up is the traditional first action and the first step in the cover up is to blame the victim and then move the offender to another part of the church where they can continue to abuse. Finally, the last thing to do is to ensure that no one follows basic safeguarding measures nor informs the civil authorities.

There is no doubt that the late Bishop Brookes is guilty of the cover up but the current Bishop McAreavey can no longer get away with yet another apology for his role in relation to child abuse and the victims within his diocese.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/bishop-bares-soul-on-how-he-caused-hurt-to-his-priests-failed-to-understand-abuse-victims-and-struggled-to-cope-with-the-murder-of-michaela-mcareavey-29717507.html (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/bishop-bares-soul-on-how-he-caused-hurt-to-his-priests-failed-to-understand-abuse-victims-and-struggled-to-cope-with-the-murder-of-michaela-mcareavey-29717507.html)

http://www.irishnews.com/paywall/tsb/irishnews/irishnews/irishnews//news/northernirelandnews/2018/02/08/news/bishop-regrets-saying-funeral-mass-of-priest-who-sexually-abused-pupils-1251521/content.html (http://www.irishnews.com/paywall/tsb/irishnews/irishnews/irishnews//news/northernirelandnews/2018/02/08/news/bishop-regrets-saying-funeral-mass-of-priest-who-sexually-abused-pupils-1251521/content.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 08, 2018, 11:00:33 PM
(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/601/1*2Xia60KgHqhEx9TnT9naIg.jpeg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 08, 2018, 11:11:26 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 08, 2018, 11:03:58 PM
It's not whataboutery, it's fact.Should the current British Monarchy be held accountable for slavery centuries ago.While not condoning past failures time moves on and more and more protective measures are put in place.

Too easy
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 08, 2018, 11:54:28 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 08, 2018, 11:03:58 PM
It's not whataboutery, it's fact.Should the current British Monarchy be held accountable for slavery centuries ago.While not condoning past failures time moves on and more and more protective measures are put in place.

You moved from one whataboutery straight into another! You stupidness knows no bounds
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 09, 2018, 12:05:15 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 08, 2018, 08:31:38 PM
"He suggested I steer away from outside counselling services as they could be steering me in the wrong direction, and could lead me in the wrong direction,"... arranged for him to complete counselling sessions with a nun... During the second last meeting with the nun, Mr Faloon says she told him that "given time, God will forgive you".

They were all involved in the cover up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 09, 2018, 10:01:56 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 08, 2018, 10:58:09 PM
This man is dead almost 20 years.His crimes were not properly addressed at the time by the Church,just like the crimes of employees of the BBC in the same era weren't properly addressed,nor those of a multitude of sports coaches across the globe etc etc

While not excusing those who failed years ago,lessons have been learned and the Church has robust procedures to deal with allegations of abuse in the modern era.

The abuser died 16 years ago but the damage done to his victims will never end for those poor people.  Many of those who knew about his abuse and covered it up or even just knew about and did not nothing (I think your church calls that sins of omission) are still in position and well and truly alive.  The bishop of the diocese knew of the abuse yet lauded the predator at his funeral and believes that an apology is sufficient when by his own admission his behaviour towards abuse victims was far from satisfactory.

BTW where does the modern era start for you.  The abuse by this person went on during your lifetime and on those who are younger than you!

Where is your evidence that the so called 'robust procedures' to deal with 'allegations of abuse in the modern era' are working?  Are you relating nothing in the media about clerical abuse carried out in recent years with the procedures preventing such abuse?  Many of those who carried out clerical abuse before what you term as the modern era are still alive and living in communities.

Do you think abuse by clergy ended when safeguarding officials were appointed in parishes and dioceses?  How do you account for the number of clergy who are absent from parishes with no explanation and canon law still trumping civil law? 

Where is the safeguarding action by Catholic church being applied to the growing number of vulnerable adults in our ageing population?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dire Ear on February 09, 2018, 11:16:39 AM
http://nativescomunity.info/2018/01/31/catholic-archbishop-id-rather-go-to-prison-than-report-child-abuse-to-police/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 10, 2018, 12:57:01 AM
http://nativescomunity.info/2017/12/16/nun-arrested-for-helping-five-priests-rape-deaf-children/

This one is worse!!  I'm  Glad all the robust measures are in place to stop this stuff that happened 20 years ago, oh wait no, this was recently ffs! If only the highest ranking of clergy was from this country, oh wait!

Deaf children Ffs!! Unreal
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 10, 2018, 10:49:34 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 05:41:07 AM
Quote from: snoopdog on February 08, 2018, 08:59:46 PM
He had left the year or 2 before I went to the school. But is a cover up by the church anything new. I believe it was public knowledge b4 he died around Hilltown yet the current bishop still officiated at his funeral.

"cover up by the church" and "public knowledge" used in successive sentences! Do you realise how ridiculous this is?

Your Church's 'cover up' continues because it ignores its civil responsibility to turn over allegations and evidence to the civil authorities and refuses to inform authorities in social care of its knowledge and findings.

Your Church has learned how to play the game better, it has safeguarding officers in place but they must report to the bishops or parish priests and do not have the autonomy to report to the civil authorities. They are toothless, ineffective, window dressing and often used as the civilian arm the parish priest or bishop. See recent story in Irish News  http://www.irishnews.com/paywall/tsb/irishnews/irishnews/irishnews//news/2018/01/02/news/omagh-church-safeguarding-row-silences-children-s-choir-1223121/content.html (http://www.irishnews.com/paywall/tsb/irishnews/irishnews/irishnews//news/2018/01/02/news/omagh-church-safeguarding-row-silences-children-s-choir-1223121/content.html)

Your Church now realises that it is the mainstream media that it must control to protect its interests. Yes it does isolate priests when allegations are made but it does nothing to investigate and report to the authorities so it does nothing to protect the vulnerable.  It is still concerned only with protecting the reputation of the institution and not dealing with the victims, the alleged perpetrators or the abusers.

The hidden victims are now the many vulnerable elderly, the last group who still hold the clergy in reverence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 10, 2018, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 01:25:59 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/02/09/news/priest-warned-abuse-victim-he-would-be-ruined-if-he-spoke-out-1252366/

What's this? The victim told his parents and police about Finnegan when he was 17 and Finnegan still alive,but they did nothing??????

Scoring points on priest raping kids Tony is a new low for you! You're a twisted f**ker
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on February 10, 2018, 01:47:27 PM
Sadly it isn't a new low. The gutter has been reached many times before.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 10, 2018, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 01:25:59 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/02/09/news/priest-warned-abuse-victim-he-would-be-ruined-if-he-spoke-out-1252366/

What's this? The victim told his parents and police about Finnegan when he was 17 and Finnegan still alive,but they did nothing??????

Should you not be over on the death thread making jokes about the latest tragedies?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 10, 2018, 01:57:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 01:25:59 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/02/09/news/priest-warned-abuse-victim-he-would-be-ruined-if-he-spoke-out-1252366/

What's this? The victim told his parents and police about Finnegan when he was 17 and Finnegan still alive,but they did nothing??????

And you know this for definite?

Of course you don't know the heartache of these parents or what they attempted to do for their son.  You can be sure that they would have experienced the same knock backs that their son experienced from the bishop.  So, do not attempt to blame the parents for something you know nothing about. 

Better to realise that you are an apologist for clerical abuse and cover up of such crimes by your Church's hierarchy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 10, 2018, 02:10:26 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 02:03:37 PM
I am no apologist for child abuse.Just pointing out that Sean Brady and the Church were lambasted for not informing the police.Sadly in this case the Police were informed but did nothing

And so Sean should have been lambasted and arrested for withholding information on a person who raped kids
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on February 10, 2018, 02:25:47 PM
Don't know why you boys bother to argue with this nut job.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 10, 2018, 03:22:00 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 10, 2018, 05:39:05 AM
The term "nun arrested" suggests to me that the robust procedures are working.I also listened to a priest from Kerry on Joe Duffy recently describing how in recent years when an allegation (totally false as it turned out) was made against him the official Church disowned him immediately,leaving him very bitter but determined to carry on with his ministry and vocation.That's a far cry from mistakenly trying to protect the Church's reputation by trying to manage this vile phenomenon in house.

5:39am   wtf!!  something not right here  :o
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on February 12, 2018, 10:21:25 AM
I was in St Colaman's when Malachy Finnegan was principle, he was undoubtedly an alcoholic and rumours abounded about his fondness for boys. I took them at the time to be the sort of schoolboy innuendo that boys throw about. Though I have to say I am not surprised that there is substance to the rumours. I do believe though that John McAreavy is trying his best to deal with these issues. It is worth noting that Finnegan was not prosecuted but that the Church found evidence that there was substance to the accusations. I don't hold with Tony's view on the Church and how it has approached abuse, however they are belatedly trying to tackle what is increasingly becoming historic situations.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 12, 2018, 07:44:07 PM
(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/601/1*2Xia60KgHqhEx9TnT9naIg.jpeg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on February 13, 2018, 12:06:54 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 12, 2018, 07:28:34 PM
I have never condoned perverts masquerading as priests and hope they all rot in hell.I do not like anti catholics however accusing the Church of facilitating this and particularly blaming  Sean Brady for Brendan Smyth's existence. As we've seen recently with Oxfam today even organisations try stupidly to protect their reputation by keeping things in house.

I was at Mass in Lurgan on Saturday night and a letter was read out by the Bishop expressing his sincere apologies for Finnegan and his victims and pointed out all the contacts for reporting suspected child abuse today.I have no doubt of the sincerity of the remorse and determination to protect children at all times today
Bishop McAreavey seemed content to condone perverts masquerading as priests when he celebrated Malachy Finnegans funeral mass
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on February 13, 2018, 08:57:32 AM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on February 13, 2018, 12:06:54 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 12, 2018, 07:28:34 PM
I have never condoned perverts masquerading as priests and hope they all rot in hell.I do not like anti catholics however accusing the Church of facilitating this and particularly blaming  Sean Brady for Brendan Smyth's existence. As we've seen recently with Oxfam today even organisations try stupidly to protect their reputation by keeping things in house.

I was at Mass in Lurgan on Saturday night and a letter was read out by the Bishop expressing his sincere apologies for Finnegan and his victims and pointed out all the contacts for reporting suspected child abuse today.I have no doubt of the sincerity of the remorse and determination to protect children at all times today
Bishop McAreavey seemed content to condone perverts masquerading as priests when he celebrated Malachy Finnegans funeral mass
He made a mistake and apologised, which is more by the way than Sean Brady has done. He also has a record of confronting abuse from clerics within his charge.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 13, 2018, 03:59:29 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on February 13, 2018, 08:57:32 AM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on February 13, 2018, 12:06:54 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 12, 2018, 07:28:34 PM
I have never condoned perverts masquerading as priests and hope they all rot in hell.I do not like anti catholics however accusing the Church of facilitating this and particularly blaming  Sean Brady for Brendan Smyth's existence. As we've seen recently with Oxfam today even organisations try stupidly to protect their reputation by keeping things in house.

I was at Mass in Lurgan on Saturday night and a letter was read out by the Bishop expressing his sincere apologies for Finnegan and his victims and pointed out all the contacts for reporting suspected child abuse today.I have no doubt of the sincerity of the remorse and determination to protect children at all times today
Bishop McAreavey seemed content to condone perverts masquerading as priests when he celebrated Malachy Finnegans funeral mass
He made a mistake and apologised, which is more by the way than Sean Brady has done. He also has a record of confronting abuse from clerics within his charge.

Bishop John McAreavey is a company man and a canonical lawyer by training.  By his own admission he has taken the standard Church view of clerical abuse and not treated victims properly.  By his training, he believes that Canon Law trumps civil law every time and that there is no compulsion to report clerical abuse to the civil authorities to allow investigations and possible convictions or even to social care authorities who can ensure that such abusers are kept apart from vulnerable people.

This situation regarding the principal of a diocesan school and priest in the Catholic church is not the first occasion where he admits to failing with victims of clerical abuse by putting the reputation of the organisation above the care for the victim and the punishment of the abuser in civil law.

As reported in the Belfast Telegraph:

BY LIAM CLARKE
November 1 2013

Bishop Dr John McAreavey has admitted that he has failed many of his priests and that he has not always had the right attitude to the victims of clerical sexual abuse.

Asked if his primary response had been to protect the Church rather than the plight of the victim or survivor of abuse, he said: "There is no question of that. Yes. A number of times in the past year friends of mine have quoted back things to me I have said 10 or 15 years ago that they remember, that I have forgotten.

"It is no pride to me that I have made a long and difficult journey. I just didn't see this whole thing from the perspective of the victims."

Dr McAreavey made his comments in a frank interview with the Irish Catholic magazine conducted by Martin O'Brien, a leading Catholic commentator.


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 13, 2018, 04:39:30 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/2018/02/13/news/winter-olympic-boss-reveals-fr-malachy-finnegan-physical-abuse-1254520/

The leader of the Irish Winter Olympics team has spoken about his experience at the hands of a Co Down based priest later exposed as a child abuser. Co Down native Dominic McAleenan revealed that he was physically abused by former priest Fr Malachy Finnegan...

Mr McAleenan, who now lives in Sweden, is currently in South Korea with Team Ireland at the Winter Olympics. He has used Facebook to reveal how the former priest beat him viciously with a cane, hugged him during the sign of peace during Mass and asked questions about "impure thoughts". The incidents all happened while he attended St Colman's College before switching schools. He explained that on one occasion as a punishment for ringing a school bell the priest "slapped me across the face so my ear was ringing, dragged me into his office.

"He had a cupboard with double doors, he opened it and it was like something out of a sadomasochist horror story. "He had canes and straps and well anyway." Mr McAleen says he was then struck by the cane wielding priest. "(The) first strike hit my thumb followed by another five and I can tell you they were brutal full force whacks and he looked f***ing possessed". The 48-year-old said he was left with a sprained thumb and that after the cane attack the priest said "'let us offer each other the sign of peace', he hugged me and my hands are still under my arms".
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 13, 2018, 04:48:51 PM
Quote from: dec on February 13, 2018, 04:39:30 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/2018/02/13/news/winter-olympic-boss-reveals-fr-malachy-finnegan-physical-abuse-1254520/

The leader of the Irish Winter Olympics team has spoken about his experience at the hands of a Co Down based priest later exposed as a child abuser. Co Down native Dominic McAleenan revealed that he was physically abused by former priest Fr Malachy Finnegan...

Mr McAleenan, who now lives in Sweden, is currently in South Korea with Team Ireland at the Winter Olympics. He has used Facebook to reveal how the former priest beat him viciously with a cane, hugged him during the sign of peace during Mass and asked questions about "impure thoughts". The incidents all happened while he attended St Colman's College before switching schools. He explained that on one occasion as a punishment for ringing a school bell the priest "slapped me across the face so my ear was ringing, dragged me into his office.

"He had a cupboard with double doors, he opened it and it was like something out of a sadomasochist horror story. "He had canes and straps and well anyway." Mr McAleen says he was then struck by the cane wielding priest. "(The) first strike hit my thumb followed by another five and I can tell you they were brutal full force whacks and he looked f***ing possessed". The 48-year-old said he was left with a sprained thumb and that after the cane attack the priest said "'let us offer each other the sign of peace', he hugged me and my hands are still under my arms".

There was so much of that went on, crazed priests, 'christian' brothers and lay teachers beating children
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 13, 2018, 10:47:41 PM
Yer mates are on Spotlight Tony... more Catholic coverup
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on February 13, 2018, 11:03:59 PM
.... BBC bias ...... blah blah blah 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:07:55 PM
This is grim. These cnuts make me sick as do those who covered up for them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 13, 2018, 11:08:12 PM
McAreavey should be made to resign... and arrested
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:18:35 PM
McAreavey another weasel like Brady.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:23:27 PM
Astounded that McAreavey is still on the St. Colman's Board of Governors.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 13, 2018, 11:32:45 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:23:27 PM
Astounded that McAreavey is still on the St. Colman's Board of Governors.

St Colmans are doing everything in their power to put this behind them, and identify any other victims or perpetrators.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:41:10 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 13, 2018, 11:32:45 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:23:27 PM
Astounded that McAreavey is still on the St. Colman's Board of Governors.

St Colmans are doing everything in their power to put this behind them, and identify any other victims or perpetrators.
They can't do both and it's nor is it the point. Similar to Sean Brady he knew what was going on and is using the same excuse that he told his superiors. I'm sure he's a good man and they were different times etc. but sitting on the BoG is a bit dicey imo.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 13, 2018, 11:47:54 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 13, 2018, 11:37:37 PM
Painful viewing alright.Bishop Mc Areavey guilty of serious if not unbelievable errors of misjudgement.The anti Catholics will have a field day of course and ignore the fact that the Police were informed about this monster in the mid 90s but also did nothing.

anti coverup and anti paedophiles will have a field day.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONARAGGATIP on February 14, 2018, 08:49:49 AM
that was very tough watching last night, shocking, although after all that has went on in this country I don't why I was shocked. probably as so close to home.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 14, 2018, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:41:10 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 13, 2018, 11:32:45 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:23:27 PM
Astounded that McAreavey is still on the St. Colman's Board of Governors.

St Colmans are doing everything in their power to put this behind them, and identify any other victims or perpetrators.
They can't do both and it's nor is it the point. Similar to Sean Brady he knew what was going on and is using the same excuse that he told his superiors. I'm sure he's a good man and they were different times etc. but sitting on the BoG is a bit dicey imo.

In my experience, the BoG of many schools are usually hand picked and completely ineffectual.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bennydorano on February 14, 2018, 09:43:42 AM
Some strange set ups with Boards of Governors,  in some cases it's like a status symbol that is doled out to those who have pleased the local Clergy. Is there not some sort of pre-requisite?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Minder on February 14, 2018, 09:43:53 AM
Quote from: Orior on February 14, 2018, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:41:10 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 13, 2018, 11:32:45 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 13, 2018, 11:23:27 PM
Astounded that McAreavey is still on the St. Colman's Board of Governors.

St Colmans are doing everything in their power to put this behind them, and identify any other victims or perpetrators.
They can't do both and it's nor is it the point. Similar to Sean Brady he knew what was going on and is using the same excuse that he told his superiors. I'm sure he's a good man and they were different times etc. but sitting on the BoG is a bit dicey imo.

In my experience, the BoG of many schools are usually hand picked and completely ineffectual.

He will be easy to replace then
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 14, 2018, 10:25:55 AM
Quote from: bennydorano on February 14, 2018, 09:43:42 AM
Some strange set ups with Boards of Governors,  in some cases it's like a status symbol that is doled out to those who have pleased the local Clergy. Is there not some sort of pre-requisite?

Yes,
be nice to the local PP and maybe have a nice generic job like work in a bank or a teacher.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rosnarun on February 14, 2018, 11:10:24 AM
anyone old enough would not be at all surprised by the physical abuse . it was not even hidden and in the majority of cases the parents were fully aware and they was in all schools national secondary vocational etc. as it was just the way things were done up until the early 80's .
I would not confuse this with sexual abuse at all which a lot of people could not even comprehend let alone implicitly approve of.
I often wonder did priest see it as more normal than other people from their secret knowledge gain in the confessional . though it becoming clearer that abuse by priest is similar to abuse in all other area of society with family members being the largest offenders by a mile.
it was more the handling of the cases that's the real black stain on the church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: TheOptimist on February 14, 2018, 01:36:54 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

What I found strange was the Church were sending him to be "corrected" in England and not to the police.

I also find your post strange!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 14, 2018, 01:39:24 PM
Quote from: TheOptimist on February 14, 2018, 01:36:54 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

What I found strange was the Church were sending him to be "corrected" in England and not to the police.

I also find your post strange!

Is this your first time encountering Tony?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: TheOptimist on February 14, 2018, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on February 14, 2018, 01:39:24 PM
Quote from: TheOptimist on February 14, 2018, 01:36:54 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

What I found strange was the Church were sending him to be "corrected" in England and not to the police.

I also find your post strange!

Is this your first time encountering Tony?

First time engaging him just. Doesn't make it any less strange though. Maybe he should speak to a nun about it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:01:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

This shows your complete ignorance of the power of the abuser this situation.  The abuser has groomed the victim, abused him, convinced the victim that it is he who is doing wrong and made it impossible to break away.  Abuse is about power over the victim and on the evidence of last night's programme Finnegan was well practised in controlling the victim.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:14:09 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on February 14, 2018, 09:43:42 AM
Some strange set ups with Boards of Governors,  in some cases it's like a status symbol that is doled out to those who have pleased the local Clergy. Is there not some sort of pre-requisite?

None at all. All appointments to the Board are at the gift of a number of different parties.  On a 9 person Board, 4 will be appointed by the trustees and in a Catholic school trustees will be Church based; one will be voted on by the teachers; one will be voted on by the parents; and the remaining three by either the Education Authority or in the case of grammar schools the Minister for Education.

Many appointed do not understand the legal responsibilities they have assumed either individually or collectively and for the actions of previous Boards that are reconstituted every four years.  Will the diocese of Dromore continue to take the hits for any other abuse claims coming to the fore as a result of recent developments or will the Board of Governors of the school become the focus of legal action by victims?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 14, 2018, 02:43:11 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:14:09 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on February 14, 2018, 09:43:42 AM
Some strange set ups with Boards of Governors,  in some cases it's like a status symbol that is doled out to those who have pleased the local Clergy. Is there not some sort of pre-requisite?

None at all. All appointments to the Board are at the gift of a number of different parties.  On a 9 person Board, 4 will be appointed by the trustees and in a Catholic school trustees will be Church based; one will be voted on by the teachers; one will be voted on by the parents; and the remaining three by either the Education Authority or in the case of grammar schools the Minister for Education.

Many appointed do not understand the legal responsibilities they have assumed either individually or collectively and for the actions of previous Boards that are reconstituted every four years.  Will the diocese of Dromore continue to take the hits for any other abuse claims coming to the fore as a result of recent developments or will the Board of Governors of the school become the focus of legal action by victims?

I.... I...... I......  no, I'd better not. Let it go Orior.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 14, 2018, 06:19:42 PM
You should get one of your favourite pedo hunter groups to investigate it
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 14, 2018, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on February 14, 2018, 06:19:42 PM
You should get one of your favourite pedo hunter groups to investigate it

Tony's loyalist heroes investigating his catholic church heroes...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 07:33:25 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 06:14:59 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:01:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

This shows your complete ignorance of the power of the abuser this situation.  The abuser has groomed the victim, abused him, convinced the victim that it is he who is doing wrong and made it impossible to break away.  Abuse is about power over the victim and on the evidence of last night's programme Finnegan was well practised in controlling the victim.

Bullshit.The victims allegedly were scared of him.But one travelled some distance every Saturday to take his phone calls and a weekly £10 payment when he had the opportunity to sever all connections.Bizarre bordering on complicity.
Tony again blaming the victims.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Taylor on February 14, 2018, 07:40:41 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 06:14:59 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:01:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

This shows your complete ignorance of the power of the abuser this situation.  The abuser has groomed the victim, abused him, convinced the victim that it is he who is doing wrong and made it impossible to break away.  Abuse is about power over the victim and on the evidence of last night's programme Finnegan was well practised in controlling the victim.

Bullshit.The victims allegedly were scared of him.But one travelled some distance every Saturday to take his phone calls and a weekly £10 payment when he had the opportunity to sever all connections.Bizarre bordering on complicity.

Complicity.....shame on you. Shame on you
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: TheOptimist on February 14, 2018, 08:04:03 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 06:14:59 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:01:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

This shows your complete ignorance of the power of the abuser this situation.  The abuser has groomed the victim, abused him, convinced the victim that it is he who is doing wrong and made it impossible to break away.  Abuse is about power over the victim and on the evidence of last night's programme Finnegan was well practised in controlling the victim.

Bullshit.The victims allegedly were scared of him.But one travelled some distance every Saturday to take his phone calls and a weekly £10 payment when he had the opportunity to sever all connections.Bizarre bordering on complicity.

Your deflecting Tony. And are shameless in doing so.

The priest was a sick paedo, the church covered it up as usual. The church has shamed themselves time after time and it all has opened peoples eyes to the fact that the whole thing is BS.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 14, 2018, 08:10:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 06:14:59 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 14, 2018, 02:01:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 01:31:46 PM
Anyone else think it a bit strange one of Finnegan's victims took phone calls from him every Saturday and payments when Finnegan was in England supposedly getting therapy and resumed a sexual relationship with him when he came back to Ireland?

This shows your complete ignorance of the power of the abuser this situation.  The abuser has groomed the victim, abused him, convinced the victim that it is he who is doing wrong and made it impossible to break away.  Abuse is about power over the victim and on the evidence of last night's programme Finnegan was well practised in controlling the victim.

Bullshit.The victims allegedly were scared of him.But one travelled some distance every Saturday to take his phone calls and a weekly £10 payment when he had the opportunity to sever all connections.Bizarre bordering on complicity.

Nasty. Plain nasty
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 14, 2018, 08:23:50 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 08:21:47 PM
Nasty or not,it's a fact and one that is hard to understand

A bit like you
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on February 14, 2018, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 08:21:47 PM
Nasty or not,it's a fact and one that is hard to understand

its hard to understand because, presumably, you've never been in that situation. Neither have I. I don't understand it either and don't want to, but it doesnt in any way shape or form make what happened any less vile - the abuse and the cover up
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 14, 2018, 09:50:17 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 14, 2018, 08:21:47 PM
Nasty or not,it's a fact and one that is hard to understand

I agree that the degree of control that an abuser has over a victim is hard to understand. Only a victim can really understand that and even then they can only really explain it to another victim.

But something being difficult to explain doesn't give you the right to be nasty about it. Being nasty was something you chose to do

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 10:00:07 PM
Tony has form in condemning the victims and their parents whereas he hasn't been as vociferous in his condemnation of the Church. Brainwashed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on February 15, 2018, 12:57:54 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 12:04:49 AM

Not brainwashed but curious.Young primary kids being terrified yes,but a guy at grammar school well into his teens going out of his way to take phone calls from his abuser (and money of course) every Saturday and then allowing him to resume his nefarious activities on his return stretches credulity.

When I was at grammar school a lot of the teachers were ridiculed by the lads,including priests,there was a couple of science teachers,disciplinarians,that you wouldn't have messed with, but lads generally would have stood up for themselves and not allowed anyone to manipulate them

This class of person was careful not to abuse one of" the lads generally", but rather to pick on someone with some vulnerabilities.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 15, 2018, 09:10:24 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 10:00:07 PM
Tony has form in condemning the victims and their parents whereas he hasn't been as vociferous in his condemnation of the Church. Brainwashed.

Not brainwashed but curious.Young primary kids being terrified yes,but a guy at grammar school well into his teens going out of his way to take phone calls from his abuser (and money of course) every Saturday and then allowing him to resume his nefarious activities on his return stretches credulity.

When I was at grammar school a lot of the teachers were ridiculed by the lads,including priests,there was a couple of science teachers,disciplinarians,that you wouldn't have messed with, but lads generally would have stood up for themselves and not allowed anyone to manipulate them

My understanding from the media is that the victim whom T Fearon is attacking was not abused within St Colman's college but was an altar boy in Hilltown at the age of 10 when the abuse began by Finnegan as the local priest after he had been moved from St Colman's College by Bishop Brookes. 

Therefore, this attack on the victim, as posted above, by T Fearon has no relevance to the type of poor attitude of the 'College Boys' in Armagh toward their teachers as described by T Fearon that was well known at the time he went to that school.

From Irish News:

A MAN who was sexually abused by a priest as a child said the cleric warned it would "ruin" his life if he spoke out. Sean Faloon from Hilltown was a 10-year-old altar boy when he was first abused by Fr Malachy Finnegan.

Fr Finnegan, who died in 2002, also abused boys at St Colman's College in Newry. He taught at the school from 1973 to 1976 and was school president between 1976 and 1987. The first of 12 abuse allegations was reported to the Diocese of Dromore in 1994. The diocese has settled a claim with one of the victims.

Mr Faloon told the BBC that Fr Finnegan abused him for eight years from 1989. He said Fr Finnegan, who was never prosecuted for sexual abuse, began hugging him after Mass. "Then, at a later date that became kissing and it progressed from there over the next year or so to full sexual contact," he said. Mr Faloon said Fr Finnegan would call at his house after Mass and tell his parents he needed help to "lift boxes from the wardrobe".

"He told me if I ever came out about what was going on, or told anybody, it would ruin me for the rest of my life," he said.

The abuse against Mr Faloon came to light when, at the age of 17, he told his GP. Mr Faloon's family and police were later informed. He told the BBC he never made a formal complaint against Fr Finnegan because he felt he was "too young to deal with the hassle"."I wanted to deal with normal 17-year-old life," he said.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 15, 2018, 09:33:27 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 10:00:07 PM
Tony has form in condemning the victims and their parents whereas he hasn't been as vociferous in his condemnation of the Church. Brainwashed.

Not brainwashed but curious.Young primary kids being terrified yes,but a guy at grammar school well into his teens going out of his way to take phone calls from his abuser (and money of course) every Saturday and then allowing him to resume his nefarious activities on his return stretches credulity.

When I was at grammar school a lot of the teachers were ridiculed by the lads,including priests,there was a couple of science teachers,disciplinarians,that you wouldn't have messed with, but lads generally would have stood up for themselves and not allowed anyone to manipulate them

You're some hypocritical bollox Tony,
     In one breath you can't fathom how a teenage would be scared out if his wits by an adult systematically abusing him and throwing the wee fella a tenner at the end of the dirty deed and then try and justify the acts of a 39 year old man with degrees in Canon law hanging out of him as only being a notary reporting to him superiors.

If there's any christianity in you then you are doing a good job of suppressing it by the comments you make on numerous threads on this DB.
If that's what going to mass and attending the sacraments does to you then I think you'd be better off not attending and making a mockery of them.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lurganblue on February 15, 2018, 10:05:15 AM
The church is not doing enough IMO. Bishop McAreavy has a lot to answer for with regards to the Finnegan disgrace.  They need to stop being shrouded in secrecy and start throwing people under the bus so to speak.

https://www.irishnews.com/news/2017/11/22/news/lurgan-priest-monsignor-hamill-resigns-after-historical-complaint-probe-1193484/ (https://www.irishnews.com/news/2017/11/22/news/lurgan-priest-monsignor-hamill-resigns-after-historical-complaint-probe-1193484/)

Only a few weeks ago we had this information relayed to us during mass in Lurgan.  I was stunned when we as a congregation were then asked to say a prayer for the Monsignor fs.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 15, 2018, 10:14:28 AM
Quote from: lurganblue on February 15, 2018, 10:05:15 AM
The church is not doing enough IMO. Bishop McAreavy has a lot to answer for with regards to the Finnegan disgrace.  They need to stop being shrouded in secrecy and start throwing people under the bus so to speak.

https://www.irishnews.com/news/2017/11/22/news/lurgan-priest-monsignor-hamill-resigns-after-historical-complaint-probe-1193484/ (https://www.irishnews.com/news/2017/11/22/news/lurgan-priest-monsignor-hamill-resigns-after-historical-complaint-probe-1193484/)

Only a few weeks ago we had this information relayed to us during mass in Lurgan.  I was stunned when we as a congregation were then asked to say a prayer for the Monsignor fs.

But that action was just that, throwing one person under the bus for show while so much abuse is left undisturbed by the Church in this diocese.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 15, 2018, 10:56:20 PM
?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on February 16, 2018, 09:33:33 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 08:37:27 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 15, 2018, 09:10:24 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 10:00:07 PM
Tony has form in condemning the victims and their parents whereas he hasn't been as vociferous in his condemnation of the Church. Brainwashed.

Not brainwashed but curious.Young primary kids being terrified yes,but a guy at grammar school well into his teens going out of his way to take phone calls from his abuser (and money of course) every Saturday and then allowing him to resume his nefarious activities on his return stretches credulity.

When I was at grammar school a lot of the teachers were ridiculed by the lads,including priests,there was a couple of science teachers,disciplinarians,that you wouldn't have messed with, but lads generally would have stood up for themselves and not allowed anyone to manipulate them

My understanding from the media is that the victim whom T Fearon is attacking was not abused within St Colman's college but was an altar boy in Hilltown at the age of 10 when the abuse began by Finnegan as the local priest after he had been moved from St Colman's College by Bishop Brookes. 

Therefore, this attack on the victim, as posted above, by T Fearon has no relevance to the type of poor attitude of the 'College Boys' in Armagh toward their teachers as described by T Fearon that was well known at the time he went to that school.

Ffs how many times where we told that things would ruin our lives but went on regardless.I just don't understand nor accept the alleged power these monsters masquerading as priests had,nor frankly do I believe it.The only people I feared growing up was my parents,mainly due to the fact that I knew if I stepped out of line a hiding would be forthcoming

From Irish News:

A MAN who was sexually abused by a priest as a child said the cleric warned it would "ruin" his life if he spoke out. Sean Faloon from Hilltown was a 10-year-old altar boy when he was first abused by Fr Malachy Finnegan.

Fr Finnegan, who died in 2002, also abused boys at St Colman's College in Newry. He taught at the school from 1973 to 1976 and was school president between 1976 and 1987. The first of 12 abuse allegations was reported to the Diocese of Dromore in 1994. The diocese has settled a claim with one of the victims.

Mr Faloon told the BBC that Fr Finnegan abused him for eight years from 1989. He said Fr Finnegan, who was never prosecuted for sexual abuse, began hugging him after Mass. "Then, at a later date that became kissing and it progressed from there over the next year or so to full sexual contact," he said. Mr Faloon said Fr Finnegan would call at his house after Mass and tell his parents he needed help to "lift boxes from the wardrobe".

"He told me if I ever came out about what was going on, or told anybody, it would ruin me for the rest of my life," he said.

The abuse against Mr Faloon came to light when, at the age of 17, he told his GP. Mr Faloon's family and police were later informed. He told the BBC he never made a formal complaint against Fr Finnegan because he felt he was "too young to deal with the hassle"."I wanted to deal with normal 17-year-old life," he said.


you don't understand because, presumably, you've never been in that situation. Neither have I. I don't understand it either and don't want to, but it doesnt in any way shape or form make what happened any less vile - the abuse and the cover up
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 05:29:08 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 15, 2018, 12:04:49 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on February 14, 2018, 10:00:07 PM
Tony has form in condemning the victims and their parents whereas he hasn't been as vociferous in his condemnation of the Church. Brainwashed.

Not brainwashed but curious.Young primary kids being terrified yes,but a guy at grammar school well into his teens going out of his way to take phone calls from his abuser (and money of course) every Saturday and then allowing him to resume his nefarious activities on his return stretches credulity.

When I was at grammar school a lot of the teachers were ridiculed by the lads,including priests,there was a couple of science teachers,disciplinarians,that you wouldn't have messed with, but lads generally would have stood up for themselves and not allowed anyone to manipulate them

T Fearon if you are even remotely interested in trying to understand how abusers gain a hold over their victims then watch this video:
https://t.co/E3upZz47DH (https://t.co/E3upZz47DH)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 11:47:17 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 11:40:30 AM
So when does this "hold" end? When the victims grow up and smell the money? What about my experience on the periphery of this in 1978, when as a student working in a leisure centre I saw a full time work "colleague" arrested,charged,convicted and imprisoned for abusing two young brothers in the changing rooms.Do you know why this happened? Very simple.Abused young boys told their parents,who immediately told the police.Good children,good parenting,that's what it's all about,and that was in the 1970s.

So the parents of all those children abused by Barry Bennell were not good parents, the parents of those children abused by Brendan Smyth were not good parents and the parents of those children abused by Malachy Finnegan were all bad parents, incapable of good parenting.

Not sure if you have been blessed with any children of your own but the vast majority of parents do their best to look after their children to the best of their ability.  The issue with abuse by these people is that they were in positions of trust where they preyed on children.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 17, 2018, 12:05:50 PM
Tony if your job is to become the most deplorable person on the board, then well done! I feel you get a kick out of the posts you make on child rape.

Empathy seems lost on you, you have Asperger's or just a sick WUM, either way you'll have no luck with that outlook on life
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: laoislad on February 17, 2018, 12:48:01 PM
Would disowning one of your own kids because they happened to be Gay be classed as good parenting in your world?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: michaelg on February 17, 2018, 12:50:15 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 11:40:30 AM
So when does this "hold" end? When the victims grow up and smell the money? What about my experience on the periphery of this in 1978, when as a student working in a leisure centre I saw a full time work "colleague" arrested,charged,convicted and imprisoned for abusing two young brothers in the changing rooms.Do you know why this happened? Very simple.Abused young boys told their parents,who immediately told the police.Good children,good parenting,that's what it's all about,and that was in the 1970s.
So if abused young people do not tell their parents, they are "bad children"?  Said it before, you are an awful human being.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 01:01:33 PM
Zzzzz.They are not bad children.Just unfortunate.Children need to know from an early age that their parents are their rock and refuge and encouraged to tell their parents everything.

Except the when parents are handing their children over to a person of trust, 'in loco parentis' and when the parents are also being groomed and to an extent also abused by the person in trust which has been the case in virtually all cases of clerical abuse where the abuser has used his position in the community.  This abuse of trust is further extended within your Church to the hierarchy who have covered up the abuse not only by moving the abuser but by using their positions to prevent parents from gaining justice for their children, e.g. the Brady-Smyth case.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on February 17, 2018, 04:48:05 PM
Quote from: michaelg on February 17, 2018, 12:50:15 PM
So if abused young people do not tell their parents, they are "bad children"?  Said it before, you are an awful human being.

This. Under his own name too. The man is a danger to himself.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Newbridge Exile on February 17, 2018, 04:57:24 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 17, 2018, 12:05:50 PM
Tony if your job is to become the most deplorable person on the board, then well done! I feel you get a kick out of the posts you make on child rape.

Empathy seems lost on you, you have Asperger's or just a sick WUM, either way you'll have no luck with that outlook on life
100% agree , as twisted a individual I have had the misfortune to come across ( and not just on this  discussion board )
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on February 17, 2018, 05:11:00 PM
Quote from: Newbridge Exile on February 17, 2018, 04:57:24 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 17, 2018, 12:05:50 PM
Tony if your job is to become the most deplorable person on the board, then well done! I feel you get a kick out of the posts you make on child rape.

Empathy seems lost on you, you have Asperger's or just a sick WUM, either way you'll have no luck with that outlook on life
100% agree , as twisted a individual I have had the misfortune to come across ( and not just on this  discussion board )

Exactly. What if someone who was involved in one of these abuse cases read here- how would they feel reading that.  It isn't outside the realms of possibility.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 17, 2018, 05:17:32 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on February 17, 2018, 05:11:00 PM
Quote from: Newbridge Exile on February 17, 2018, 04:57:24 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 17, 2018, 12:05:50 PM
Tony if your job is to become the most deplorable person on the board, then well done! I feel you get a kick out of the posts you make on child rape.

Empathy seems lost on you, you have Asperger's or just a sick WUM, either way you'll have no luck with that outlook on life
100% agree , as twisted a individual I have had the misfortune to come across ( and not just on this  discussion board )

Exactly. What if someone who was involved in one of these abuse cases read here- how would they feel reading that.  It isn't outside the realms of possibility.

I don't understand how whoever runs this board allows many of Tony's comments... I dont think he can help it, seems to be driven by ego and attention seeking with no sensitivity at all
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONARAGGATIP on February 17, 2018, 06:48:34 PM
I have not been long on the board but have read from the sidelines for a long time. Mr Fearon seems to hijack the majority of threads he posts in. I don't even think he believes what he posts, anything for a reaction, quite similar to the paedo hunter groups he claims to support. Quite sad really. I will pray for his soul.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 17, 2018, 07:16:58 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!

Excellent if it's true... can a priest do confirmation?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 17, 2018, 07:34:39 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!
Is Bishop McAreavey the focus of the anger because he had known in his heart since 2002, some short time after he said that mass, that Finnegan had sexually abused boys but he did not take appropriate action?  That the pace of investigation has been glacial?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 07:51:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 17, 2018, 07:16:58 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!

Excellent if it's true... can a priest do confirmation?
I'm no expert on this matter, but I was speaking to one of the parents and that's what I was told, it'll be interesting to see if any other parishes follow suit, and the reasoning behind it is obviously the fact that McAreavey knew what Finnegan had been guilty of and took no action, fair play to the parents, did he think the letter that was read out at mass last week and an apology would sort everything
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 17, 2018, 08:06:23 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 07:51:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 17, 2018, 07:16:58 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!

Excellent if it's true... can a priest do confirmation?
I'm no expert on this matter, but I was speaking to one of the parents and that's what I was told, it'll be interesting to see if any other parishes follow suit, and the reasoning behind it is obviously the fact that McAreavey knew what Finnegan had been guilty of and took no action, fair play to the parents, did he think the letter that was read out at mass last week and an apology would sort everything

well done to those parents.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on February 17, 2018, 10:42:27 PM
I can't even get an answer to a simple question on this thread because you fools all sucked into Tony's agenda,
quelle folie!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on February 17, 2018, 10:48:25 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 10:10:37 PM
Zzzzzzzz.The only consolation I take is that this thread is not in any way representative of Public Opinion in the real world.That's why Bishop Mc Areavey (who apologised for errors of judgement honestly and did not deny he made any) remains on the Board of Governors of St Colmans and Sean Brady gets standing ovations at Armagh Finals.

They are,like scores of others,mere footnotes in the utterly depraved lives of Brendan Smyth and Malachy Finnegan.

You're full of it and have no idea of what public opinion in the real world is
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 11:06:53 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 07:52:58 PM
More hypocrisy.What if relatives of Sean Brady or Bishop Mc Areavey read this Board? To blame these two men for the monstrosities that were Brendan Smyth and Finnegan is outrageous.Just as is the case with the BBC,Professional Soccer and just about every other organisation paedophiles escaped justice and ruined lives due to a multitude of failings at all levels.

One of the great sins of your Church is the sin of omission.

In Catholic teaching, an omission is a failure to do something one can and ought to do. If an omission happens deliberately and freely, it is considered a sin.

Therefore, by failing to inform the civil authorities of abuse or failing to deal correctly with the abuser or doing whatever is required to ensure the abuser could not repeat offend, the bishops you mention have committed sins of omission. Therefore within the rules of your Church the clerical hierarchy have seriously sinned.

How do you explain this away?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rawhide on February 17, 2018, 11:10:18 PM
I know of one such parent that Tony blames. This parent was born into a catholic home, a poor home, opportunities back in the late 40's were few and far between, not every catholic got the chance to get educated at third level back then, instead she had to leave school at 14 to bring what ever income into the family home she could. At school she, like every other child was brow beaten into believing everything in the Catholic Church was sacred, the priest was infallible, salute the priest when you met them, their minds were systematically manipulated to the point where they were brain washed that the Catholic Church was infallible. Then we have the paedophilic priests who are treated the same as 'safe priests' because of this brainwashing as children in our catholic school system of the 40's which has more or less remained the same up until recently where inspections and audits as well as educated parents ensures better practise and standards. These are the parents that Tony refers to, the parents who were a sponge  for a brainwashing system that conditioned these children who later became parents to not ever question the morality of the pedestal  priest, because they simply did not know any better. The church depended on these people who had little hope of a better life but clung unto 'hope' Hope of a better place in the next world.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 11:14:30 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 10:10:37 PM
Zzzzzzzz.The only consolation I take is that this thread is not in any way representative of Public Opinion in the real world.That's why Bishop Mc Areavey (who apologised for errors of judgement honestly and did not deny he made any) remains on the Board of Governors of St Colmans and Sean Brady gets standing ovations at Armagh Finals.

They are,like scores of others,mere footnotes in the utterly depraved lives of Brendan Smyth and Malachy Finnegan.

Bishop McAreavey is on the Board of Governors because he appointed himself onto the Board because he is the current bishop of Dromore.  He can only be removed by resigning as Bishop or being removed as bishop by the Archbishop - neither of which will happen.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rawhide on February 17, 2018, 11:35:48 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 11:25:43 PM
Quote from: Rawhide on February 17, 2018, 11:10:18 PM
I know of one such parent that Tony blames. This parent was born into a catholic home, a poor home, opportunities back in the late 40's were few and far between, not every catholic got the chance to get educated at third level back then, instead she had to leave school at 14 to bring what ever income into the family home she could. At school she, like every other child was brow beaten into believing everything in the Catholic Church was sacred, the priest was infallible, salute the priest when you met them, their minds were systematically manipulated to the point where they were brain washed that the Catholic Church was infallible. Then we have the paedophilic priests who are treated the same as 'safe priests' because of this brainwashing as children in our catholic school system of the 40's which has more or less remained the same up until recently where inspections and audits as well as educated parents ensures better practise and standards. These are the parents that Tony refers to, the parents who were a sponge  for a brainwashing system that conditioned these children who later became parents to not ever question the morality of the pedestal  priest, because they simply did not know any better. The church depended on these people who had little hope of a better life but clung unto 'hope' Hope of a better place in the next world.

You are in effect describing my own parents.They had no education,and believed in everything the Church said.But even though they were uneducated they were not brainwashed and would have let nobody take them for fools.Your dismissal of that generation is arrogant and condescending and does not reflect well on you.They had lives tougher than anything we could imagine but got on with it,not like the current educated snowflake generation.I don't think even the most ardent anti Catholic believes the Church facilitated child abuse.Without doubt the handling of the matter was woeful within the Church,as it was everywhere else,BBC,Professional football etc.Maybe we can all just agree that thankfully things are a hell of a lot better today,in terms of protection of the vulnerable.

No Tony, you like me were fortunate that one of these paedophilic priests were either not placed into our schoools, parishes, or if they were they didn't prey on us, sad to say it had feck all to do with our parents.
You could argue pure luck
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:33:48 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 11:40:30 AM
So when does this "hold" end? When the victims grow up and smell the money?

Even you couldn't deny that you are a viciously unpleasant moron
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:44:29 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 04:49:35 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 01:01:33 PM
Zzzzz.They are not bad children.Just unfortunate.Children need to know from an early age that their parents are their rock and refuge and encouraged to tell their parents everything.

Except the when parents are handing their children over to a person of trust, 'in loco parentis' and when the parents are also being groomed and to an extent also abused by the person in trust which has been the case in virtually all cases of clerical abuse where the abuser has used his position in the community.  This abuse of trust is further extended within your Church to the hierarchy who have covered up the abuse not only by moving the abuser but by using their positions to prevent parents from gaining justice for their children, e.g. the Brady-Smyth case.

Did the parents as well as Sean Brady not know? If they did why did they not go to the Police? Why didn't they all do what those two young brothers from Portadown did? TELL THEIR PARENTS

Are these questions of the parents supposed to excuse Brady'a abuse facilitating actions?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:49:27 AM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!

An example of good parenting that nobody could disagree with.

It's time for parents to look at their schools. Who is on the board of governors and why? What is their qualification? What is their track record? Clearly anybody involved in the cover up of child abuse or failure to act to protect children should be removed from the role as unfit
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:51:43 AM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 07:51:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 17, 2018, 07:16:58 PM
Quote from: Targetman on February 17, 2018, 06:52:20 PM
A delegation of parents of P7 pupils at St.Patricks primary school in Hilltown met Bishop McAreavey and told him they didn't want him confirming their children, the parish priest Fr Byrne is now confirming them, they also expressed their wish to see the parochial house flattened!!

Excellent if it's true... can a priest do confirmation?
I'm no expert on this matter, but I was speaking to one of the parents and that's what I was told, it'll be interesting to see if any other parishes follow suit, and the reasoning behind it is obviously the fact that McAreavey knew what Finnegan had been guilty of and took no action, fair play to the parents, did he think the letter that was read out at mass last week and an apology would sort everything

Certainly other parishes have done the same in respect of other clerics. This was the basis of Brady being removed from the confirmation circuit. Parents they didn't want him
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:56:10 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 07:52:58 PM
More hypocrisy.What if relatives of Sean Brady or Bishop Mc Areavey read this Board? To blame these two men for the monstrosities that were Brendan Smyth and Finnegan is outrageous.Just as is the case with the BBC,Professional Soccer and just about every other organisation paedophiles escaped justice and ruined lives due to a multitude of failings at all levels.

They are being blamed for their own actions. Those actions are being judged to be horrific.

When somebody's actions allows an abuser to continue to abuse its fair ro call out the abuser and the facilitator. It's not complex. Only the anti-logic brigade would fail to realise this
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 08:59:49 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 10:10:37 PM
Zzzzzzzz.The only consolation I take is that this thread is not in any way representative of Public Opinion in the real world.That's why Bishop Mc Areavey (who apologised for errors of judgement honestly and did not deny he made any) remains on the Board of Governors of St Colmans and Sean Brady gets standing ovations at Armagh Finals.

They are,like scores of others,mere footnotes in the utterly depraved lives of Brendan Smyth and Malachy Finnegan.
Let's invite Brady to this years final.
Let McAreavey make a cameo appearance at confirmation in Hilltown.

And the media report the public reception

Let St Colmans make a statement on the fitness and probity of their Board of Governors
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 09:05:20 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 17, 2018, 11:14:30 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 17, 2018, 10:10:37 PM
Zzzzzzzz.The only consolation I take is that this thread is not in any way representative of Public Opinion in the real world.That's why Bishop Mc Areavey (who apologised for errors of judgement honestly and did not deny he made any) remains on the Board of Governors of St Colmans and Sean Brady gets standing ovations at Armagh Finals.

They are,like scores of others,mere footnotes in the utterly depraved lives of Brendan Smyth and Malachy Finnegan.

Bishop McAreavey is on the Board of Governors because he appointed himself onto the Board because he is the current bishop of Dromore.  He can only be removed by resigning as Bishop or being removed as bishop by the Archbishop - neither of which will happen.

If in the course of an interview for a position at St Colmans you admitted that you knew of an abuser but did nothing what would be the outcome? Would it hinge on whether or not you had said sorry?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 09:19:33 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 09:13:45 AM
Are you trying to break the record for most moronic posts in ten minutes? The Church has to have an input into the running of its own schools.Similarly the Church,not the parents,chooses who will administer its own sacraments,not the other way round.

If parents no longer want their children to have a catholic education,and the huge benefits that brings both academically and spiritually,let them withdraw their children and put them into an integrated or state school.

So in summary you argue that McAreavey will officiate in Hilltown and the parents will lump it and that any parent who objects to someone who fails to act on child abuse issues being involved in a school should and in fact will be told to withdraw their child from the school.

I suppose time will tell.

Look up the word moronic. Prepare yourself for some self reflection
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dubh driocht on February 18, 2018, 09:27:58 AM
Quote from: hardstation on February 18, 2018, 12:39:10 AM
I think it is impossible for anyone to know how they would react in such circumstances. Including the demeanour they would display to other people.
Tony, I am in the minority on the board who find some of your posts valuable in that you actually think for yourself and don't follow the party line. However in this debate you have got it completely wrong and Hardstation has got it completely right. I don't know you but knew your late brother; a super guy. It's clear you had good, strong,articulate parents. Not everyone did.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 18, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 11:13:43 AM
But the demonisation of individuals like Sean Brady and Bishop Mc Areavey for mistakes they made years ago (and they were let down by the system) gets on my goat.

Bishops McAreavey and Brady are just two examples of where hierarchy did not just 'make mistakes' they were unlike Jesus in that they were complying with Canon Law, a Church defined doctrine, instead of 'doing the right thing', otherwise defined by the Catholic Church as a sin of Omission. Canon Law is a device used by the Church for its self protection and it is still being put ahead of natural justice by the Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 18, 2018, 01:39:24 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 12:21:42 PM
Is that why it has by independent verification the most robust child and vulnerable adult protection procedures anywhere in the contemporary era which sees Priests automatically stood down when a mere allegation is levelled at them?

1. Stop deflecting to avoid the point I have made about the Bishops and the sin of omission.

2. Historic cases of abuse do not disappear because new structures have been implemented and those victims are every bit as relevant as any victim during this period with new structures.  Your Church has continually dragged its feet in relation to the victims of historic abuse in N.Ireland dioceses, usually waiting until the abuser or the victim has died.

3. Quote the body that 'independent verification the most robust child and vulnerable adult protection procedures anywhere in the contemporary era' so that we may read their report.

4. The standing down of the alleged abuser is far from unique as it is a standard feature of safeguarding procedures already in place.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:43:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 11:13:43 AM
DD.Thanks for those comments.For the record I abhor Brendan Smyth,Finnegan and all the other perverts who have done untold damage to victims and to my Church.It is clear since the revelations of Savile 6 years ago that child abuse was rampant and woefully mishandled by all organisations.They followed the natural human instinct of self protection and this blinded them to any realisation far less concern for the plight of victims.This was totally wrong.

There is no safety in numbers defence for the church. All these organisations are condemned. The bigger the scale the greater the condemnation. This is logical.

If any of the organisations want an ongoing involvement with children the scrutiny will be greater. This is logical.

If any of these organisations claim to have moral authority or a role to play in moral instruction then the condemnation will be greater. This is also logical.

Only the anti logic brigade will have a difficulty with this
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:45:59 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 11:13:43 AM
But the demonisation of individuals like Sean Brady and Bishop Mc Areavey for mistakes they made years ago gets on my goat.

Are there any individuals outside the church who have kids open to ongoing abuse that you think deserve a bye ball?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:47:00 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 12:21:42 PM
Is that why it has by independent verification the most robust child and vulnerable adult protection procedures anywhere in the contemporary era which sees Priests automatically stood down when a mere allegation is levelled at them?

Post the independent verification
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:49:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 02:45:29 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:43:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 11:13:43 AM
DD.Thanks for those comments.For the record I abhor Brendan Smyth,Finnegan and all the other perverts who have done untold damage to victims and to my Church.It is clear since the revelations of Savile 6 years ago that child abuse was rampant and woefully mishandled by all organisations.They followed the natural human instinct of self protection and this blinded them to any realisation far less concern for the plight of victims.This was totally wrong.

There is no safety in numbers defence for the church. All these organisations are condemned. The bigger the scale the greater the condemnation. This is logical.

If any of the organisations want an ongoing involvement with children the scrutiny will be greater. This is logical.

If any of these organisations claim to have moral authority or a role to play in moral instruction then the condemnation will be greater. This is also logical.

Only the anti logic brigade will have a difficulty with this

Bullshit.A handful of perverts do not reflect or invalidate the church,the
vast majority of its Priests or right to offer moral guidance and instruction

You are losing this debate on and off this site
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on February 18, 2018, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 02:45:29 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on February 18, 2018, 02:43:01 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 11:13:43 AM
DD.Thanks for those comments.For the record I abhor Brendan Smyth,Finnegan and all the other perverts who have done untold damage to victims and to my Church.It is clear since the revelations of Savile 6 years ago that child abuse was rampant and woefully mishandled by all organisations.They followed the natural human instinct of self protection and this blinded them to any realisation far less concern for the plight of victims.This was totally wrong.

There is no safety in numbers defence for the church. All these organisations are condemned. The bigger the scale the greater the condemnation. This is logical.

If any of the organisations want an ongoing involvement with children the scrutiny will be greater. This is logical.

If any of these organisations claim to have moral authority or a role to play in moral instruction then the condemnation will be greater. This is also logical.

Only the anti logic brigade will have a difficulty with this

Bullshit.A handful of perverts do not reflect or invalidate the church,the
vast majority of its Priests or right to offer moral guidance and instruction

Tony, I hate that the church as a whole gets tatted with the actions of the pervert priests and those that covered it up. But let's be clear on one thing. It is more than a handful. Fully admitting the extent of the problem is a start
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 18, 2018, 07:28:44 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 02:40:58 PM
1.Sin of omission could be argued as could the case that Brady honestly informed his superiors and expected them to act effectively. Police knew about Finnegan but also did nothing.

2.Agreed.A victim of Finnegan's received a six figure compensation award.Two young girls who lost both parents at La Mon received £4k.

3.Are you saying the Church's current Protection Procedures are not up date or fit for purpose?

4.I didn't say it was unique but it dispels your statement that Canon Law protects abusers in the modern day.

While the alleged offender is stood down, two things happen:

1. If any action is taken it proceeds at a glacial pace with no referral to civil authorities and the main activity is to manage the media fallout to protect the reputation of the Church. Foot dragging of the worst order occurs.

2. No action is taken and the alleged abuser is left in limbo at least for years and what looks left indefinitely, there are numerous examples of this across the country.

This is not proper safeguarding procedures nor is it any form of natural justice for alleged abuser or the victims.

Still waiting on you to post the source of the independent verification of the Church's safeguarding procedures?

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on February 18, 2018, 10:29:51 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 09:03:21 PM
Well why then are the statutory authorities not all over it and the Church being pulled apart for non compliance?
Fair question, Tony.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Aaron Boone on February 18, 2018, 10:46:06 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on February 18, 2018, 10:29:51 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 09:03:21 PM
Well why then are the statutory authorities not all over it and the Church being pulled apart for non compliance?
Fair question, Tony.

If there were 'likes' on this website, the T Fearon profile would not be a lone ship.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on February 19, 2018, 07:26:38 AM
It is. I always thought there should have been prosecutions and why there hasn't been i do not know.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 19, 2018, 08:29:03 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on February 18, 2018, 10:29:51 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 09:03:21 PM
Well why then are the statutory authorities not all over it and the Church being pulled apart for non compliance?
Fair question, Tony.

Because firstly the paperwork meets minimum safeguarding standards and the Church has used its legal resources to ensure that it cannot be sued by victims as all procedures are in place. However, while the alleged offender is stood down, two things happen:

1. If any action is taken it proceeds at a glacial pace with no referral to civil authorities and the main activity is to manage the media fallout to protect the reputation of the Church. Foot dragging of the worst order occurs. Look at the Finnegan case to see how long it took for the Church to deal with the matter and reach some conclusion for one victim of the many who have come forward.

2. No action is taken and the alleged abuser is left in limbo at least for many years and what looks left indefinitely, there are numerous examples of this across the country.  In every diocese there are priests who have been removed from frontline duty with no explanation and have been put into apparent exile for years.  However, in some cases the priest has refused to leave the parochial house and the parish is not informed what has been happening in reaching a conclusion.

This is not proper safeguarding procedures nor is it any form of natural justice for alleged abuser or the victims. However, it meets minimum standards as far as preventing any legal action against the Church being taken.

Still waiting on you to post the source of the independent verification of the Church's safeguarding procedures? You are still deflecting, any longer and it looks like you just made it up.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on February 19, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 19, 2018, 07:10:49 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 19, 2018, 08:29:03 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on February 18, 2018, 10:29:51 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 18, 2018, 09:03:21 PM
Well why then are the statutory authorities not all over it and the Church being pulled apart for non compliance?
Fair question, Tony.

Because firstly the paperwork meets minimum safeguarding standards and the Church has used its legal resources to ensure that it cannot be sued by victims as all procedures are in place. However, while the alleged offender is stood down, two things happen:

1. If any action is taken it proceeds at a glacial pace with no referral to civil authorities and the main activity is to manage the media fallout to protect the reputation of the Church. Foot dragging of the worst order occurs. Look at the Finnegan case to see how long it took for the Church to deal with the matter and reach some conclusion for one victim of the many who have come forward.

2. No action is taken and the alleged abuser is left in limbo at least for many years and what looks left indefinitely, there are numerous examples of this across the country.  In every diocese there are priests who have been removed from frontline duty with no explanation and have been put into apparent exile for years.  However, in some cases the priest has refused to leave the parochial house and the parish is not informed what has been happening in reaching a conclusion.

This is not proper safeguarding procedures nor is it any form of natural justice for alleged abuser or the victims. However, it meets minimum standards as far as preventing any legal action against the Church being taken.

Have you recent evidence of the Church not following policy and procedures?

Another thing why should the Church be liable for the  actions of perverts masquerading as Priests? Were Peter Sutcliffe's employers open to be sued because he raped and killed winning while lorry driving?

No they weren't.
If it was proved that they knew very well what he was doing and decided to do nothing about it, you would have another scenario. Furthermore, if it was transpired that his employers moved him from one place to another in order to obstruct the course of justice and refused actively to co-operate with the police but rather tried to obstruct them at every turn, a case could be made that they were guilty by association. (Not sure of the legal term here. Owen??)
To cap it all, if his employers approached his victims or their relatives and offered cash settlements in return for their decision not to press changes, the b**tards would/ should stand in the same dock as Sutcliffe.

PS I have read that Brady forked out a total of 55 million euro in out of court settlements in order to prevent cases going to court. Care to comment on that?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 19, 2018, 08:57:19 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 19, 2018, 07:10:49 PM

Quote from: Owen Brannigan
Because firstly the paperwork meets minimum safeguarding standards and the Church has used its legal resources to ensure that it cannot be sued by victims as all procedures are in place. However, while the alleged offender is stood down, two things happen:

1. If any action is taken it proceeds at a glacial pace with no referral to civil authorities and the main activity is to manage the media fallout to protect the reputation of the Church. Foot dragging of the worst order occurs. Look at the Finnegan case to see how long it took for the Church to deal with the matter and reach some conclusion for one victim of the many who have come forward.

2. No action is taken and the alleged abuser is left in limbo at least for many years and what looks left indefinitely, there are numerous examples of this across the country.  In every diocese there are priests who have been removed from frontline duty with no explanation and have been put into apparent exile for years.  However, in some cases the priest has refused to leave the parochial house and the parish is not informed what has been happening in reaching a conclusion.

This is not proper safeguarding procedures nor is it any form of natural justice for alleged abuser or the victims. However, it meets minimum standards as far as preventing any legal action against the Church being taken.


Have you recent evidence of the Church not following policy and procedures?

Another thing why should the Church be liable for the  actions of perverts masquerading as Priests? Were Peter Sutcliffe's employers open to be sued because he raped and killed winning while lorry driving?

I am not saying that the Catholic Church is not following procedures.My point is that the Catholic Church is following the minimum legal requirement in policy and procedures but is being entirely unchristian in avoiding the spirit of them. See Points 1 & 2 above. 

Clergy in the Catholic Church are not considered to be employee of this Church.  Priests are self employed as far as tax and employment issues are concerned and their employment rights are therefore curtailed. 

However, the High Court has decided that the Catholic Church has vicarious liability for those it appoints to carry out its work in parishes.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jul/12/catholic-church-loses-apeal-liability (https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jul/12/catholic-church-loses-apeal-liability)

Vicarious liability is a form of a strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability or duty to control" the activities of a violator.

Knowledge is not an element of vicarious liability. The law has developed the view that some relationships by their nature require the person who engages others to accept responsibility for the wrongdoing of those others.


Therefore, under civil law, when a bishop appoints a priest to his ministry he assumes vicarious liability for all actions by that priest.  Therefore, the Catholic Church has paid out hundreds of thousands to victims and will pay much more into the future.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 02:07:34 PM
Parent power beginning to emerge:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/parents-dont-want-bishop-confirming-kids-after-he-said-funeral-mass-for-pervert-priest-36634737.html (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/parents-dont-want-bishop-confirming-kids-after-he-said-funeral-mass-for-pervert-priest-36634737.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 23, 2018, 06:13:08 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 02:07:34 PM
Parent power beginning to emerge:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/parents-dont-want-bishop-confirming-kids-after-he-said-funeral-mass-for-pervert-priest-36634737.html (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/parents-dont-want-bishop-confirming-kids-after-he-said-funeral-mass-for-pervert-priest-36634737.html)

Are St Colmans content that their Board of Governors have child protection at the heart of everything they do?

Will the parents sit quietly
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 23, 2018, 06:30:21 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

Take your message to them then. Is that not you are called to do? Please arrange a recording
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: maddog on February 23, 2018, 06:32:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

We will see about that when there is no money in wool.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on February 23, 2018, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

aye but when the shepherd molests the sheep what do we do?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

The children of Derry diocese were not confirmed by a bishop for two years while the diocese was led by a parish priest in the absence of a bishop when Bishop Hegarty stepped down. 

So, there is no need for a bishop to carry out the sacrament of confirmation.  Canon 882 and 883 both state that a priest can confirm any person presented for the sacrament.

Surprised that a zealot like Tony didn't know that.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 24, 2018, 08:55:37 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

The children of Derry diocese were not confirmed by a bishop for two years while the diocese was led by a parish priest in the absence of a bishop when Bishop Hegarty stepped down. 

So, there is no need for a bishop to carry out the sacrament of confirmation.  Canon 882 and 883 both state that a priest can confirm any person presented for the sacrament.


My point is the Church decides who administers the sacraments not the laity.
Surprised that a zealot like Tony didn't know that.

Try typing your responses in the correct area so they do not appear to corrupt the posts of others. I will fix it below.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 24, 2018, 09:25:15 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

The children of Derry diocese were not confirmed by a bishop for two years while the diocese was led by a parish priest in the absence of a bishop when Bishop Hegarty stepped down. 

So, there is no need for a bishop to carry out the sacrament of confirmation.  Canon 882 and 883 both state that a priest can confirm any person presented for the sacrament.

Surprised that a zealot like Tony didn't know that.

My point is the Church decides who administers the sacraments not the laity.

And yet again you fall into the same trap of defining the Catholic Church as being its clergy and hierarchy. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with the current working definition of the Catholic Church:

The Catholic Church is primarily a worldwide group of Christians, but is also an institution. Within the Catholic Church there is a leadership structure. The leaders of the Catholic Church are not like kings and queens, but rather servant-leaders following the example of Jesus.

Servant-leaders put themselves at the service of those whom they lead unlike a king who lords himself over the people. The primary servant-leaders of the Catholic Church are all men who have undergone a ritual called Holy Orders in which they are ordained or commissioned into the priesthood.


The current Pope has tried to reinforce this tenet of the Catholic Church that its clergy and bishops are 'servant leaders' and the Church is the people who form it.

Your view of a Catholic Church where the people are ruled by an elite group who always know best is the root cause of the cover up of abuse by clergy and the scandal that has brought the Catholic Church in Ireland and in most western societies to its lowest ebb in thousands of years.

You would seem to belong to an era which has thankfully passed by in this country in the minds of most people but still exists among the elite of your Church who still have not turned to follow the Church's leader as being the servants of the Church members, just like Jesus.

Bishop McAreavey would be best to adopt a sincere stance as a servant leader and follow the wishes of the parishioners as they have clearly stated before considering whether he is now the problem.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 24, 2018, 12:24:34 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 24, 2018, 08:55:37 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

The children of Derry diocese were not confirmed by a bishop for two years while the diocese was led by a parish priest in the absence of a bishop when Bishop Hegarty stepped down. 

So, there is no need for a bishop to carry out the sacrament of confirmation.  Canon 882 and 883 both state that a priest can confirm any person presented for the sacrament.


My point is the Church decides who administers the sacraments not the laity.
Surprised that a zealot like Tony didn't know that.

Try typing your responses in the correct area so they do not appear to corrupt the posts of others. I will fix it below.

His technical incompetence aside this is the only one of Tony's "arguments" that I have any sympathy with. The church is has its set of rules, bizzare as they are. Sign up or move on. Of course the church won't pursue the required clarifications and excommunications as that would expose it as a tiny fringe pursuit it what it tries to claim is a catholic country, whatever that might mean
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 24, 2018, 12:53:37 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on February 24, 2018, 12:24:34 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 24, 2018, 08:55:37 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 23, 2018, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 23, 2018, 06:15:18 PM
The children should not be confirmed then..The shepherd leads the flock not the other way round

The children of Derry diocese were not confirmed by a bishop for two years while the diocese was led by a parish priest in the absence of a bishop when Bishop Hegarty stepped down. 

So, there is no need for a bishop to carry out the sacrament of confirmation.  Canon 882 and 883 both state that a priest can confirm any person presented for the sacrament.


My point is the Church decides who administers the sacraments not the laity.
Surprised that a zealot like Tony didn't know that.

Try typing your responses in the correct area so they do not appear to corrupt the posts of others. I will fix it below.

His technical incompetence aside this is the only one of Tony's "arguments" that I have any sympathy with. The church is has its set of rules, bizzare as they are. Sign up or move on. Of course the church won't pursue the required clarifications and excommunications as that would expose it as a tiny fringe pursuit it what it tries to claim is a catholic country, whatever that might mean

See my response to him above.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 24, 2018, 06:18:29 PM
I read it. But it's an attempt to introduce reason to Tony.

Tony wants adherence to the hierarchy and doctrine. I see where he is coming from in the latter. If he and the anti-logic brigade move with the zeitgeist for one second and admit that old doctrine was wrong then their world falls apart.

Heard a great one today that Tony will delight in.

Catholic ethos school organises school trip. It's a 2 day residential with a package of activities agreed with the host/facilitators. Long coach trip back. Late on in the process i.e. After the parents have paid for the package of activities one parent complains that the 3rd day is Sunday and no allowance for mass. The school is accused of being in breach of its ethos.

In the end the organising teacher has to extend the trip time to allow the return journey to arrive back to allow the coach to arrive back for Sunday evening mass. Parents are given the opportunity to collect the kids before or after the mass at the chapel. Pick up at the school has to be cancelled inconveniencing a number of families without access to a car. The teachers stay behind with the one child who attends the mass. They count 8 people at the mass and confirm that no other school kid attends.

Tony wants the other 57 kids and their families excommunicated and the school to ask them why they sent their kids to a catholic school. I agree with him. It's not al a carte FFS. If you was a be a catholic you gotta sign up to the batshit warts and all
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 24, 2018, 09:48:33 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 09:37:50 PM
Severe intellectual deficiency on this thread.

Same could be said for most of your posts
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 24, 2018, 09:55:07 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 09:37:50 PM
Severe intellectual deficiency on this thread.

The Catholic Church is run by clerics in a hierarchy (with the Pope as its head as a direct descendant of the Christ appointed St Peter, elected by divine guidance) as  they are scriptural experts as a result of training.The clerics instruct and guide the ordinary church members.You cannot have laity making decisions otherwise the Catholic Church will end up with more splits than heretical Protestantism,and the key beliefs will also be watered down or done away with.

Those who follow the guidance and instructions are not sheep or illogical beings,they do so because they accept the doctrine and divine mysteries.


If any lay person disagrees they are free to leave the Church and find another Church which aligns with their beliefs.

Hard to believe many would find fault with that.

You are either a catholic or your not. And by Tony'a definition there wouldn't be 500 Catholics in any county.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 27, 2018, 01:46:28 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 24, 2018, 09:37:50 PM
Severe intellectual deficiency on this thread.

The Catholic Church is run by clerics in a hierarchy (with the Pope as its head as a direct descendant of the Christ appointed St Peter, elected by divine guidance) as  they are scriptural experts as a result of training.The clerics instruct and guide the ordinary church members.You cannot have laity making decisions otherwise the Catholic Church will end up with more splits than heretical Protestantism,and the key beliefs will also be watered down or done away with.

Those who follow the guidance and instructions are not sheep or illogical beings,they do so because they accept the doctrine and divine mysteries.


If any lay person disagrees they are free to leave the Church and find another Church which aligns with their beliefs.

Again this is the pre-Vatican II view of the Catholic Church that you live in and by, Tony.  Since Vatican II the Catholic Church recognises that the Church is not its clergy, it is everyone who professes to be a Catholic.  Bishops and priests are servant leaders who do not rule over those with whom they are charged to provide spiritual direction and sacraments.  Unfortunately, too many clergy still have not adjusted to this role as servant leaders and still put Church structures and reputation above the care they must provide to the people in the Catholic Church.

As you would say any priest or bishop who disagrees with the servant leader role they are free to leave the Church and find another Church which aligns with their beliefs.

Canon Law states that any priest can confirm children as required.  Catholics can request any priest to provide them with the sacraments and are not held by Church convenience.

Bishops are just priests who have been given a specific responsibility for the spiritual wellbeing of Catholics in their dioceses and ensuring that the other priests are fulfilling their roles properly.

Time for you to move on to the Catholic Church led by Pope Frances who is battling to move his clergy on to their proper role in the footsteps of Jesus as servant leaders.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on February 27, 2018, 02:04:44 PM
Further revelations from Spotlight reporters this morning on the Nolan Show with additional reporting tomorrow morning.

Listen hear to Mandy McAuley:

https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports (https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports)

Spotlight has also found that the Church never reported the abuse it knew about to the PSNI/RUC.  BBC claims that Bishop McAreavey knew all about the abuse claims against Finnegan before becoming bishop when he was a Canon lawyer for the diocese and was working with/for his predecessor Bishop Brookes who was aware of the abuse allegations against Finnegan and had him moved for 'treatment' in England before having him back in the diocese.

Parishioners in Hilltown have been told their priest will no longer stay in the parochial house given the abuse that occurred there during Finnegan's time in the parish.

In addition, a group of Finnegan's victims are taking their case to the Police Ombudsman as the PSNI did not carry out investigations after being told about Finnegan's abuse of a child in 1996.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43211968 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43211968)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 27, 2018, 08:34:48 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 27, 2018, 02:04:44 PM

Listen hear to Mandy McAuley:

https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports (https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports)


And she is going to be back tomorrow with more on the story

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 27, 2018, 08:59:59 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 27, 2018, 06:17:15 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on February 27, 2018, 02:04:44 PM
Further revelations from Spotlight reporters this morning on the Nolan Show with additional reporting tomorrow morning.

Listen hear to Mandy McAuley:

https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports (https://audioboom.com/posts/6695336-bbcspotlightni-has-more-revelations-into-prolific-paedophile-priest-malachy-finnegan-mandy_mcauley-reports)

Spotlight has also found that the Church never reported the abuse it knew about to the PSNI/RUC.  BBC claims that Bishop McAreavey knew all about the abuse claims against Finnegan before becoming bishop when he was a Canon lawyer for the diocese and was working with/for his predecessor Bishop Brookes who was aware of the abuse allegations against Finnegan and had him moved for 'treatment' in England before having him back in the diocese.

Parishioners in Hilltown have been told their priest will no longer stay in the parochial house given the abuse that occurred there during Finnegan's time in the parish.

In addition, a group of Finnegan's victims are taking their case to the Police Ombudsman as the PSNI did not carry out investigations after being told about Finnegan's abuse of a child in 1996.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43211968 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43211968)

In other words reporting to the Police was useless
Is the "if you can't be guaranteed a good outcome just give up" attitude reflect church doctrine?

Or are you breaking away to a new doctrine and ergo being a man of principle and consistency formally leaving the Catholic Church and setting up a new church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: snoopdog on February 27, 2018, 09:27:59 PM
If there is strong evidence that bishops and others knowingly
put children at risk by placing these paedophiles in parishes and schools then they should face criminal charges and prison terms. An apology is not enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2018, 10:24:58 PM
And the parents Tony ya left them out, also the kids Tony! Hadn't been for those pesky kids
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 09:38:40 AM
We have been baptised, confirmed potificated at lectured taught by paedo protecting charlatans for all our lives. Why do we as a nation accept this. I'm finished with Catholicism.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on February 28, 2018, 10:00:36 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 27, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
Yes and the Police,lay teachers in St Colmans (bound to have known something) etc

how do you know they were bound to have known something
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 28, 2018, 10:03:29 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 09:38:40 AM
We have been baptised, confirmed potificated at lectured taught by paedo protecting charletons for all our lives. Why do we as a nation accept this. I'm finished with Catholicism.

Ah Bobby wasn't the worst, in fairness.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 10:05:03 AM
Quote from: Hardy on February 28, 2018, 10:03:29 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 09:38:40 AM
We have been baptised, confirmed potificated at lectured taught by paedo protecting charletons for all our lives. Why do we as a nation accept this. I'm finished with Catholicism.

Ah Bobby wasn't the worst, in fairness.

What does that mean?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on February 28, 2018, 10:12:24 AM
Jack was a  bit opinionated for sure.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnneycool on February 28, 2018, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 27, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
Yes and the Police,lay teachers in St Colmans (bound to have known something) etc

You are aware a certain Michael Harte worked in the same school as the very reverend Brendan Smyth?

Are you surmising that Micky knew and didn't tell? I don't know how you could know that!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on February 28, 2018, 01:36:04 PM
Charlton


Charleton


Charlatan
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 03:33:14 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2018, 01:36:04 PM
Charlton


Charleton


Charlatan

Fixed it for you. Wouldn't want an incorrect spelling getting in the way of a topic on priests raping kids now would we?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on February 28, 2018, 05:04:18 PM
I was just explaining Hardy's post for you. You asked what it was about.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: charlieTully on February 28, 2018, 06:40:54 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2018, 05:04:18 PM
I was just explaining Hardy's post for you. You asked what it was about.

Ah sorry.  Reply was more directed at him. My apologies
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 08:40:40 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 27, 2018, 10:13:15 PM
If Finnegan and Smyth etc were so rampant it beggars belief that this wasn't widely known by more than just the clergy.There should be an enquiry.For example the people who treated them medically definitely knew.

By all means have an inquiry.

Share the findings with the PPS

Child abusers should feel the full force of the law. Those who facilitated them by placing the into roles with access to vulnerable children should be prosecuted. Those who turned a blind eye should be prosecuted. Those that covered up should be prosecuted. Those that silenced witnesses or attempted to silence witnesses should be prosecuted.

The cultures that tolerated this sort of thing need to be dismantled and certainly removed from access to children and particularly vulnerable children.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 08:44:34 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 27, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
Yes and the Police,lay teachers in St Colmans (bound to have known something) etc

By all means have a good look at this.

Though the guilt of others won't make the clergy innocent just less lonely
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 08:46:14 PM
Come on, they were only following cannon law, and being a young priest (39!) he was easily swayed! Should have got a promotion for that.. oh wait :-X
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on February 28, 2018, 10:46:49 PM
On Nolan now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: screenexile on February 28, 2018, 10:51:32 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on February 28, 2018, 10:46:49 PM
On Nolan now.

Giving the church both barrels which it thoroughly deserves in this!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 10:55:24 PM
Hope Tony is watching!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on February 28, 2018, 11:02:20 PM
Disgusting behaviour, from the church!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:05:57 PM
A hard watch!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:14:13 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 11:12:04 PM
I am watching.Learning nothing new.

Yeah, same old cover up
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: thebar on February 28, 2018, 11:15:59 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:05:57 PM
A hard watch!

It sure is...its criminal what went on and alot of people have alot to answer for. Very sad for the victims.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:33:31 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 11:22:46 PM
Quote from: thebar on February 28, 2018, 11:15:59 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:05:57 PM
A hard watch!

It sure is...its criminal what went on and alot of people have alot to answer for. Very sad for the victims.

Agree 100%.Do you believe the Police or the Church.It is clear that a lot of people have a lot to answer for and not just clergy

So the clergy sent him away to a place to get fixed!! Unreal, even after knowing he was raping kids they still let him at it.. this long after Symth!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:35:18 PM
That's like saying Paul Murphys cousin is hiding a pervert! Who gives s f**k about John, he never knew so hopefully he's as annoyed as the next guy
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:38:26 PM
I know Bishop McAreavy to be a kind, honest and devout priest.

But Paul Gilmore is right - unfortunately the Bishop is guilty of negligence.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:42:00 PM
Mandy is up her own arse though
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hereiam on February 28, 2018, 11:42:10 PM
Terrible stuff altogether. Most of us served as alter boys when we were younger and can thank our lucky stars that nothing happened to us.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:42:17 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 08:54:10 PM
I do not advocate a pardon for anyone who was guilty of omission.But I still await in Sean Brady's case the intellectual rationale for blaming Sean Brady but absolving parents even though they were both privy to exactly the same information.

No pardon is easy.

Demand justice

Demand it

Go to the parochial house. Go to the school.

Ask the incumbent to reveal the truth or step aside
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:45:34 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 11:12:04 PM
I am watching.Learning nothing new.

None of it is new. Doesn't make it less shameful


The abuse is shameful

The cover up and blind eyes and facilitation is shameful. Utterly shamefull. Moral authority, such as it was SHOT
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:48:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 11:22:46 PM
Quote from: thebar on February 28, 2018, 11:15:59 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2018, 11:05:57 PM
A hard watch!

It sure is...its criminal what went on and alot of people have alot to answer for. Very sad for the victims.

Agree 100%.Do you believe the Police or the Church.It is clear that a lot of people have a lot to answer for and not just clergy

Make them answer

If the Catholic Church knew for 22 years without telling the police then the share of blame is not quite 50:50
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: balladmaker on February 28, 2018, 11:49:32 PM
The sole purpose of tonight's Nolan show was not to give victims a voice, the purpose was to take out Bishop McAreavey.  That sole objective will probably be realised in the coming days.

Shocking the lack of judgement in the Catholic Church, allowing a known paedophile to go unreported and back into direct contact with children!! Unforgivable.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:51:26 PM
Quote from: Hereiam on February 28, 2018, 11:42:10 PM
Terrible stuff altogether. Most of us served as alter boys when we were younger and can thank our lucky stars that nothing happened to us.

I remember one time as an alter boy getting a roasting for sniggering during a mass. But yes, I was one of the lucky ones.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:51:43 PM
Quote from: balladmaker on February 28, 2018, 11:49:32 PM
The sole purpose of tonight's Nolan show was not to give victims a voice, the purpose was to take out Bishop McAreavey.  That sole objective will probably be realised in the coming days.

Shocking the lack of judgement in the Catholic Church, allowing a paedophile to go unreported and back into direct contact with children!!
All true
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:53:39 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on February 28, 2018, 11:33:12 PM
I am wondering what John Mc Areavey is feeling tonight after all he's been through now having to watch his Uncle filleted as if he was the paedophile

I wonder what John S Parnell would have thought of it all
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:55:03 PM
Quote from: balladmaker on February 28, 2018, 11:49:32 PM
The sole purpose of tonight's Nolan show was not to give victims a voice, the purpose was to take out Bishop McAreavey.  That sole objective will probably be realised in the coming days.

Shocking the lack of judgement in the Catholic Church, allowing a known paedophile to go unreported and back into direct contact with children!! Unforgivable.

The show did not need Nolan's crap show biz act. The content and victims were enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:57:44 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:38:26 PM
I know Bishop McAreavy to be a kind, honest and devout priest
Kind to Finnegan's victims? Past and at the the time of the decisions future?

Honest to who? The parents of St Colman's pupils?

Devout? Devout about what exactly?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on February 28, 2018, 11:58:40 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:55:03 PM
Quote from: balladmaker on February 28, 2018, 11:49:32 PM
The sole purpose of tonight's Nolan show was not to give victims a voice, the purpose was to take out Bishop McAreavey.  That sole objective will probably be realised in the coming days.

Shocking the lack of judgement in the Catholic Church, allowing a known paedophile to go unreported and back into direct contact with children!! Unforgivable.

The show did not need Nolan's crap show biz act. The content and victims were enough.

Agreed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 28, 2018, 11:59:37 PM
I am not familiar with the full extent of the Nolan media empire, is there a TV show as well as the radio show?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on March 01, 2018, 12:05:19 AM
Maybe I'm wrong but Nolan takes away from the message. He seems to use the topic to put on a performance.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 01, 2018, 12:11:48 AM
Quote from: ONeill on March 01, 2018, 12:05:19 AM
Maybe I'm wrong but Nolan takes away from the message. He seems to use the topic to put on a performance.

He's a p***k of the highest order, I don't believe in one heartfelt message he tries to give, as its all about him, But the platform works , probably only watched him about 10 times over the years, very very rarely listen to him on radio but yes he's getting the message across. The spotlight reporter was doing my box in also, was all we we and I I shit
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on March 01, 2018, 12:25:48 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 12:17:17 AM

Monsters and all that Smyth and Finnegan were

I'm glad you admit some priests were monsters. It's a big step for you.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 12:58:43 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 12:47:22 AM
Ffs show me where I have ever even attempted to in any way excuse these monsters? Go on,trawl through my posts and find one even. I don't regard them as priests even.That in itself would be blasphemy

It's utterly monstrous to move an abuser on from place A to place B. It's utterly monstrous to leave in abuser in Place A. It's utterly monstrous to turn a bind eye to an abuser. You have tried to excuse monsters through lie and deflection. I will speak at your funeral. I will remind all present
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 08:28:55 AM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:39:13 AM
I have not tried to excuse this.It was totally wrong.I have and will continue to object to the nasty vilification of Sean Brady and Bishop Mc Areavey as if they alone were solely responsible for Smyth and Finnegan.

Name one person who said either of those 2 individuals were solely responsible?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 01, 2018, 10:42:09 AM
I went to St Colman's for 7 years. I knew many good priests when I was there. Finnegan was President for my last few years. He was a scruffy individual an a drunk. Loads of rumours about him being fond of the boys. I am not aware though of him being prolific or unnecessarily
violent as is being portrayed. I think perhaps spotlight and Nolan are over egging it. I have defended Bishop McAreavy in the past here but the revelations now of his knowledge and it would appear a failure to disclose information to his fellow governors makes his position untenable.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 01, 2018, 10:44:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 01, 2018, 10:42:09 AM
I went to St Colman's for 7 years. I knew many good priests when I was there. Finnegan was President for my last few years. He was a scruffy individual an a drunk. Loads of rumours about him being fond of the boys. I am not aware though of him being prolific or unnecessarily
violent as is being portrayed. I think perhaps spotlight and Nolan are over egging it. I have defended Bishop McAreavy in the past here but the revelations now of his knowledge and it would appear a failure to disclose information to his fellow governors makes his position untenable.

Trauma caused by paedo priest being over egged  :o

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 01, 2018, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 01, 2018, 10:42:09 AM
I went to St Colman's for 7 years. I knew many good priests when I was there. Finnegan was President for my last few years. He was a scruffy individual an a drunk. Loads of rumours about him being fond of the boys. I am not aware though of him being prolific or unnecessarily
violent as is being portrayed. I think perhaps spotlight and Nolan are over egging it. I have defended Bishop McAreavy in the past here but the revelations now of his knowledge and it would appear a failure to disclose information to his fellow governors makes his position untenable.

As mentioned on the show last night, we were all very resilient in those days. When something bad happened, we just picked ourselves up and carried on - just like Sean from Hilltown. We didn't have Social Media to whip up outrage or disgust. Same thing with shootings and explosions. Sean and Paul suppressed it. Speaking up was not possible. And when someone did, both the church hierarchy and police dropped it. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Taylor on March 01, 2018, 11:13:50 AM
When it was revealed that McAreavey felt it was better not to make a scene at the 150 year anniversary as Finnegan showed up unexpectedly would have been believable until they said at the end McAreavey officiated at Finnegans funeral.

This shows McAreavey didnt give a flying f**k about any previous indiscretions.

The bit about the photos on the wall at the school - no big deal - there are far more important things at play here.

Nolan and yer one were far more interested in making it about them and how they would keep this going than the actual victims.

McAreavey has to step down. At worst negligent - at best complicit and actually oversaw Finnegan being protected.

PSNI have to give answers as well
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: quit yo jibbajabba on March 01, 2018, 11:17:45 AM
Quote from: Taylor on March 01, 2018, 11:13:50 AM
When it was revealed that McAreavey felt it was better not to make a scene at the 150 year anniversary as Finnegan showed up unexpectedly would have been believable until they said at the end McAreavey officiated at Finnegans funeral.

This shows McAreavey didnt give a flying f**k about any previous indiscretions.

The bit about the photos on the wall at the school - no big deal - there are far more important things at play here.

Nolan and yer one were far more interested in making it about them and how they would keep this going than the actual victims.

McAreavey has to step down. At worst negligent - at best complicit and actually oversaw Finnegan being protected.

PSNI have to give answers as well

But but, Nolan gave such a long pause at this bit, surely that means its really important?!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 01, 2018, 11:25:39 AM
Quote from: quit yo jibbajabba on March 01, 2018, 11:17:45 AM
Quote from: Taylor on March 01, 2018, 11:13:50 AM
When it was revealed that McAreavey felt it was better not to make a scene at the 150 year anniversary as Finnegan showed up unexpectedly would have been believable until they said at the end McAreavey officiated at Finnegans funeral.

This shows McAreavey didnt give a flying f**k about any previous indiscretions.

The bit about the photos on the wall at the school - no big deal - there are far more important things at play here.

Nolan and yer one were far more interested in making it about them and how they would keep this going than the actual victims.

McAreavey has to step down. At worst negligent - at best complicit and actually oversaw Finnegan being protected.

PSNI have to give answers as well

But but, Nolan gave such a long pause at this bit, surely that means its really important?!

Indeed, if the school had not removed his image, then Nolan would not have given it a second thought.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 01, 2018, 11:26:12 AM
Quote from: quit yo jibbajabba on March 01, 2018, 11:17:45 AM
Quote from: Taylor on March 01, 2018, 11:13:50 AM
When it was revealed that McAreavey felt it was better not to make a scene at the 150 year anniversary as Finnegan showed up unexpectedly would have been believable until they said at the end McAreavey officiated at Finnegans funeral.

This shows McAreavey didnt give a flying f**k about any previous indiscretions.

The bit about the photos on the wall at the school - no big deal - there are far more important things at play here.

Nolan and yer one were far more interested in making it about them and how they would keep this going than the actual victims.

McAreavey has to step down. At worst negligent - at best complicit and actually oversaw Finnegan being protected.

PSNI have to give answers as well

But but, Nolan gave such a long pause at this bit, surely that means its really important?!

That wasnt a long pause, he was just struggling to breathe the fat turd
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Rois on March 01, 2018, 05:45:06 PM
Bishop McAreavey has resigned. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on March 01, 2018, 05:49:36 PM
Quote from: Rois on March 01, 2018, 05:45:06 PM
Bishop McAreavey has resigned.
The right thing to do in the circumstances.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 06:06:45 PM
Only annoying thing is that shock jock Nolan will be taking the credit
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 01, 2018, 06:09:14 PM
Is right he resigned, sad that Brady didn't do the same.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:13:04 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 06:06:45 PM
Only annoying thing is that shock jock Nolan will be taking the credit

That is annoying.

But it's the only annoying thing.

I assume the St Colman's role was ex officio and the school gets rid of him without having to do anything.

In searching for replacements I assume both institutions will have the wit to do a background check on the candidates
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:23:27 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:13:04 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 06:06:45 PM
Only annoying thing is that shock jock Nolan will be taking the credit

That is annoying.

But it's the only annoying thing.

I assume the St Colman's role was ex officio and the school gets rid of him without having to do anything.

In searching for replacements I assume both institutions will have the wit to do a background check on the candidates

Not sure if he still is but he was Chairman of the Board of Governors. The damage to the reputation of the school has been huge from what I can gather.....but it was very much an open secret.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:26:05 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:23:27 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:13:04 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 06:06:45 PM
Only annoying thing is that shock jock Nolan will be taking the credit

That is annoying.

But it's the only annoying thing.

I assume the St Colman's role was ex officio and the school gets rid of him without having to do anything.

In searching for replacements I assume both institutions will have the wit to do a background check on the candidates

Not sure if he still is but he was Chairman of the Board of Governors. The damage to the reputation of the school has been huge from what I can gather.....but it was very much an open secret.

Tony will be along to perform a citizens arrest on you later
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 01, 2018, 06:33:52 PM
Eventually he makes the correct decision!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:34:02 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:26:05 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:23:27 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 06:13:04 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 06:06:45 PM
Only annoying thing is that shock jock Nolan will be taking the credit

That is annoying.

But it's the only annoying thing.

I assume the St Colman's role was ex officio and the school gets rid of him without having to do anything.

In searching for replacements I assume both institutions will have the wit to do a background check on the candidates

Not sure if he still is but he was Chairman of the Board of Governors. The damage to the reputation of the school has been huge from what I can gather.....but it was very much an open secret.

Tony will be along to perform a citizens arrest on you later

That would be fun .... I busted many's the man from tir na nOg in me days....he'd just join the long list ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: naka on March 01, 2018, 06:35:05 PM
Quote from: Orior on February 28, 2018, 11:38:26 PM
I know Bishop McAreavy to be a kind, honest and devout priest.


Orior I sat in mass one evening listening to him give a sermon in which he chatted about his year out travelling to Australia, California and china.
The couple beside me hadn't two pennies to rub together but still gave a tenner.
Then he started on about parishioners need to set up standing orders for their offerings
I thought like wtf
He should look  at father Ralph in newry and the other Dominicans to realise what a service is.
He had to go , because quite simply he kept quiet!  and allowed damage to go unhindered.

Funnily I remember being at the abbey in the 80s and the chant at the games against the college was always
"Flappy Finnegan is a homosexual "
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 01, 2018, 06:43:41 PM
I feel a bit sad for Bishop McAreavy.

He took joined the priesthood about over 50 years ago much to the joy of his extended family, friends and neighbours. He gave all of the things the rest of us take for granted. Like most other priests, he spent his life consoling people, praying for us all whilst handling the penance of abstinence.

He made a couple of bad management decisions, and now must suffer the consequences, without a wife or close family for support.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on March 01, 2018, 06:44:21 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/creepypasta/images/e/ec/Broken_record2.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120402003611)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Puckoon on March 01, 2018, 06:45:17 PM
You mean, like any rape or abuse victim who hasn't the courage to come forward? Or any impressionable adult who's been abused since they were 10? What exactly is it you are saying?

You're a vile piece of work Tony. Regardless of whether your on the wind up or not - that question is reprehensible. As Spike Milligan once said, You're a hero with cowards legs.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Are you serious?  Are you even gonna go there?  Have you any comprehension of the emotional damage that this man caused to the young lad?  At 10 years of age he was being fondled and groped. He was trapped by this vile evil man. I know you have no children tony so you have no comprehension how a young child reacts. This is one of the most vile things you have ever written.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on March 01, 2018, 06:48:36 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Are you serious?  Are you even gonna go there?  Have you any comprehension of the emotional damage that this man caused to the young lad?  At 10 years of age he was being fondled and groped. He was trapped by this vile evil man. I now you have no children to y so you have no comprehension how a young child reacts. This is one of the most vile things you have ever written.

Complicit?? Complicit??
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on March 01, 2018, 06:49:52 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Are you serious?  Are you even gonna go there?  Have you any comprehension of the emotional damage that this man caused to the young lad?  At 10 years of age he was being fondled and groped. He was trapped by this vile evil man. I now you have no children to y so you have no comprehension how a young child reacts. This is one of the most vile things you have ever written.
It fits into a long roll of dishonour
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on March 01, 2018, 06:52:59 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:51:44 PM
It is a simple and valid question.

It is not. It's an ignorant and snide aspersion.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 01, 2018, 06:58:15 PM
Well that says it all really.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 07:06:18 PM
I've seen the devastation at first hand that child abuse causes. How could a young boy who had been sexually abused for years on a weekly basis from he  was 10  have the emotional capacity to form any opinion to make such a decision. You're a twisted man Tony. A very sad, twisted man. If that is what you see as a valid question then there is only one place that your beloved God will have you....biting in hell with the rest of your ilk. You are a child abuse apologist. Simple as that
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 01, 2018, 07:09:09 PM
There is something in us that makes us human. We have compassion and empathy and we look out for one another.

Having read this:
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

We know that whatever that human quality is Tony just doesn't have it. He is lesser. Put it another way he is a Cnut.

I know that means I committing the ad hominem crime but the vile, hateful excrement that this individual spouts confines him to the realm of the sub-human
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on March 01, 2018, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Never. What a horrible thing to say and just goes to show you for what you are
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 01, 2018, 07:15:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

No, you cannot lay any blame on the victims. That is just wrong.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: quit yo jibbajabba on March 01, 2018, 07:17:57 PM
So am i right in saying Fearon blamed the parents in the Brady saga and now the victims in this one. Just to be clear?

Youre either a wum or a **** of the highest order. Either way youre a **** i suppose
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 01, 2018, 07:18:41 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Colleen_Stan#Imprisonment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Colleen_Stan#Imprisonment)

Read this Fearon.

Stan said that her faith in God and belief of escape helped her survive;[15] her greatest fear was of "The Company", which Cameron "reinforced" daily.[16] To avoid painful punishments, Stan tried to comply with his commandments,[17] which later led to her being allowed to go out to jog, work in the yard, and care for the family's children in the mobile home. Even with an open door, neighbors and a telephone, she made no attempt to escape as—according to Stan—her fear of "The Company" kept her from seeking help.[18] Additionally, Stan was allowed to visit her family by herself in 1981[12] but did not reveal her situation because of her fear and the possible consequences.[12] Her family thought she was involved in a cult because of her homemade clothes, lack of money and absence of communications over the years; they did not want to pressure her fearing she would go away forever. The next day, Stan returned with Hooker as her boyfriend.[12] At the trial Stan explained that she was happy due to visiting her family, who were therefore able to take a photograph of the pair happily smiling together.[19]
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: TabClear on March 01, 2018, 07:20:09 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 01, 2018, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Never. What a horrible thing to say and just goes to show you for what you are

That I had to reread that even knowing it was Fearon who typed it says it all. You have come out with some sick, despicable comments on here but that is pathetic. sc**bag
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 01, 2018, 07:33:27 PM
Can you imagine if one of the victims reads that? Can't hide behind his excuse for jokes about people who die saying they're relatives are so far away they won't read it. That is bad stuff.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Newbridge Exile on March 01, 2018, 07:40:23 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 01, 2018, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Never. What a horrible thing to say and just goes to show you for what you are
Is anyone really surprised though? ,  there are no depths to which  he wont sink
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 01, 2018, 08:23:30 PM
Jesus you are a boring Cnut Tony! The story of the swimming pool! f**k you're like a broken record.. let's face it you'll never get it! Thankfully you have no one to pass on your life skills and reasoning.. one less Fearon to watch out for
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 01, 2018, 08:28:35 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 08:17:34 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 01, 2018, 07:15:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

No, you cannot lay any blame on the victims. That is just wrong.

Orior it was a rhetorical question, and one which I thought was very fair to be honest.Of course I expected abuse from the intolerant,who will hear no words of criticism for anyone only Catholic Bishops, who also have families including in Bishop Mc Areavey's case a nephew who had his first wife murdered with little or no hope for justice.I am prepared to concede that my judgement is continually benchmarked by the incident I was aware of back in my student days while working in a leisure centre,and two young primary school age brothers were abused by a permanent member of staff.They told their parents, the parents immediately told the Police,arrest and conviction followed swiftly, and this was in 1978.

Shame on you Tony using the murder of Michaela Mc Areavey to justify your obnoxious comments about victims of abuse
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 01, 2018, 08:29:37 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 08:17:34 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 01, 2018, 07:15:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

No, you cannot lay any blame on the victims. That is just wrong.

Orior it was a rhetorical question, and one which I thought was very fair to be honest.Of course I expected abuse from the intolerant,who will hear no words of criticism for anyone only Catholic Bishops, who also have families including in Bishop Mc Areavey's case a nephew who had his first wife murdered with little or no hope for justice.I am prepared to concede that my judgement is continually benchmarked by the incident I was aware of back in my student days while working in a leisure centre,and two young primary school age brothers were abused by a permanent member of staff.They told their parents, the parents immediately told the Police,arrest and conviction followed swiftly, and this was in 1978.
Why do you keep making reference to John McAreavey?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 01, 2018, 08:31:52 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 01, 2018, 08:29:37 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 08:17:34 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 01, 2018, 07:15:52 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

No, you cannot lay any blame on the victims. That is just wrong.

Orior it was a rhetorical question, and one which I thought was very fair to be honest.Of course I expected abuse from the intolerant,who will hear no words of criticism for anyone only Catholic Bishops, who also have families including in Bishop Mc Areavey's case a nephew who had his first wife murdered with little or no hope for justice.I am prepared to concede that my judgement is continually benchmarked by the incident I was aware of back in my student days while working in a leisure centre,and two young primary school age brothers were abused by a permanent member of staff.They told their parents, the parents immediately told the Police,arrest and conviction followed swiftly, and this was in 1978.
Why do you keep making reference to John McAreavey?

Yeah I pulled him before, still hasn't brought it up. I'm sure Mcareavey had other family
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 01, 2018, 08:32:02 PM
When anyone calls you out for what you are you label them intolerant anti catholics.

I am not anti catholic in any way but am intolerant of people who say disgusting things.

Keep it going though with that line as it avoids debate.

You called out a 10 year old as being complicit. A ten year old who's life was turned upside down at such a young age his entire life would have been scarred.

That is low. How can anyone debate with someone who's mind works in such a way that they even think that? You have clearly thought itto be raising the question.

Or maybe it is another cry for attention?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 01, 2018, 08:49:53 PM
Thicker than some and not as thick as others ;D

No need to be offensive. Wait isn't it you who tries to be as passively offensive as you can all the time and then call out people for being offensive if they lose the rag to you.

Your "rhetorical" question does not read as you think it does. Or maybe everyone just thinks you are a bit of a monster so assumes the worst meaning possible based on past history?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on March 01, 2018, 08:54:33 PM
Quote from: Newbridge Exile on March 01, 2018, 07:40:23 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 01, 2018, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?

Never. What a horrible thing to say and just goes to show you for what you are
Is anyone really surprised though? ,  there are no depths to which  he wont sink

I think this is a new low. Even for him
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on March 01, 2018, 11:23:42 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?
That's bound to be libellous. I hope someone brings this to the victim's attention.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: orangeman on March 01, 2018, 11:50:59 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 01, 2018, 07:06:18 PM
I've seen the devastation at first hand that child abuse causes. How could a young boy who had been sexually abused for years on a weekly basis from he  was 10  have the emotional capacity to form any opinion to make such a decision. You're a twisted man Tony. A very sad, twisted man. If that is what you see as a valid question then there is only one place that your beloved God will have you....biting in hell with the rest of your ilk. You are a child abuse apologist. Simple as that

+1


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: GJL on March 02, 2018, 12:25:55 AM
Quote from: longballin on March 01, 2018, 11:38:45 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on March 01, 2018, 11:23:42 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?
That's bound to be libellous. I hope someone brings this to the victim's attention.

why does whoever runs this board allow this?

That is what I was thinking. It is the most disgusting thing I've seen on here and that is saying something.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Newbridge Exile on March 02, 2018, 07:15:02 AM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on March 01, 2018, 11:23:42 PM
Quote from: T Fearon on March 01, 2018, 06:42:32 PM
I see that one of Finnegan's victims,the one with the highest profile and recipient of a record six fugure payout claims the abuse lasted for 8 years after it started when he was 10.That would mean it was going on when he was 18.At what age does one become in effect complicit by not resisting or reporting to the Police yourself?
That's bound to be libellous. I hope someone brings this to the victim's attention.
+1
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 02, 2018, 08:42:23 AM
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.   

Fearon is so locked in to his ideology, it's obvious to all he's completely trapped. I hope his god is happy with his creation and how he is selling the faith.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 02, 2018, 09:21:39 AM
St.Colmans getting it in the neck from Nolan now!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 02, 2018, 10:09:01 AM
So Tony deleted that message. No apology or any acknowledgement of wrongdoing, must have got scared of getting in bother. Sound familiar? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: quit yo jibbajabba on March 02, 2018, 10:18:20 AM
 ;D ;D ;D

such a shame that others have quoted him in their comments  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 02, 2018, 10:36:35 AM
Quote from: quit yo jibbajabba on March 02, 2018, 10:18:20 AM
;D ;D ;D

such a shame that others have quoted him in their comments  ;D ;D ;D

Maybe that's why they quoted him
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Newbridge Exile on March 02, 2018, 10:37:30 AM
Why did you delete your message Fearon?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 02, 2018, 10:49:12 AM
Why have you deleted your message Tony?  Have some conviction in what you believe in?  Surely that's the bedrock of religion,  having steadfast belief in your faith, no matter what challenges are raised against them?  Or are you just a coward like Brady was and McAreavey was and all the other child abuse apologists that you have faith in?? 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 02, 2018, 11:54:52 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.

I'm loathe to report anyone but so did I. He also suggested a victim was complicit in the abuse. That was way beyond the pale.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 12:03:03 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 02, 2018, 11:54:52 AM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.

I'm loathe to report anyone but so did I. He also suggested a victim was complicit in the abuse. That was way beyond the pale.

Good stuff. I'm sure others reported it as well given how low he stooped once again.

Lets hope he is banned as well.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 02, 2018, 01:29:17 PM
Finally.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 02, 2018, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.

That is fine, and I agree. I agree. But to play devil's advocate, what's your opinion on free speech?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 02, 2018, 02:59:30 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 02, 2018, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.

That is fine, and I agree. I agree. But to play devil's advocate, what's your opinion on free speech?

Grand, free speech meaning I can call you whatever I want and expect to get away with, that type of free speech?

Interesting
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 02, 2018, 03:11:31 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 02, 2018, 02:59:30 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 02, 2018, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 11:52:20 AM
I reported Tony's message to the Mods and asked them to not only delete the message, but to ban him from the GAA Board. There should be no room on here for apologists of child abuse. He is a very sick individual and it's long past time that he was banned.

That is fine, and I agree. I agree. But to play devil's advocate, what's your opinion on free speech?

Grand, free speech meaning I can call you whatever I want and expect to get away with, that type of free speech?

Interesting

There is no such thing as 'free speech ', maybe in the states but we are clearly governed by libel and slander laws here that protect against abuse of free speech. What was written by Fearon was verging in libellous as it wouldn't take a great leap to suggest that he believed that the victim
Was complicit as he got older. That was downright horrid and is symptomatic of a very sick mind.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Shamrock Shore on March 02, 2018, 03:23:43 PM
Anytime I read court cases here of abuse, esp in family situations, the abuse starts young and can go on till the victim is in his/her early 20s. Never once has a defence barrister said "ah shur, the alleged victim must be part of it as well so there is blame on both sides".

There is only one (or two) guilty parties in all these cases. And that is the perpetrator and his facilitators.

Not the victim and not the victim's family.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 02, 2018, 03:31:19 PM
Personally I support the argument that if you're in pursuit of the truth, you have to risk being offensive. Tony's not trying to learn anything from the opinions of others here. He's only interested in pushing his dogma and protecting what he cherishes. The naughty step won't teach him much, but it has to be done every now and then
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 02, 2018, 04:13:48 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 02, 2018, 03:31:19 PM
Personally I support the argument that if you're in pursuit of the truth, you have to risk being offensive. Tony's not trying to learn anything from the opinions of others here. He's only interested in pushing his dogma and protecting what he cherishes. The naughty step won't teach him much, but it has to be done every now and then

Bit worse than the naughty step. The victim he referred to was identifiable... the court house steps be more appropriate
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ziggysego on March 02, 2018, 05:20:55 PM
Tony, I felt physically ill reading those comments. They are sick and beyond the pale.

You consider yourself a God fearing man and aren't shy in pointing out the failings of others. However there is nothing Christian or moral in what you're saying here. In no way is the victim to blame for the crimes against him. In no way is it right to defend the Church for covering it up.

It is morally and criminally wrong and goes against everything God says.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Farrandeelin on March 02, 2018, 05:44:47 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on March 02, 2018, 05:20:55 PM
Tony, I felt physically ill reading those comments. They are sick and beyond the pale.

You consider yourself a God fearing man and aren't shy in pointing out the failings of others. However there is nothing Christian or moral in what you're saying here. In no way is the victim to blame for the crimes against him. In no way is it right to defend the Church for covering it up.

It is morally and criminally wrong and goes against everything God says.

This. I could not believe what I had read last night.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 02, 2018, 06:15:11 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on March 02, 2018, 05:44:47 PM
Quote from: ziggysego on March 02, 2018, 05:20:55 PM
Tony, I felt physically ill reading those comments. They are sick and beyond the pale.

You consider yourself a God fearing man and aren't shy in pointing out the failings of others. However there is nothing Christian or moral in what you're saying here. In no way is the victim to blame for the crimes against him. In no way is it right to defend the Church for covering it up.

It is morally and criminally wrong and goes against everything God says.

This. I could not believe what I had read last night.

Tony's posts should not be deleted. He has broken no law and he has the right to post it.

There is the risk that a vulnerable individual will read Tony's posts and feel personally attacked. This is hugely regrettable.

The appropriate reaction is not to ban Tony or delete his posts but to tear his posts apart and highlight how unrepresentative of humanity Tony is.

Tony is a horrific individual, undeserving of any sympathy. There are basic standards. If you meet those standards you get to eat with the humans. Tony dines alone.

I wouldn't ban him from here but if he came into my workplace I would ask him to leave. He would not be served
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: laoislad on March 02, 2018, 06:23:43 PM
Looks like he has deleted all his recent posts on this thread and  not just that disgusting one from last night.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 02, 2018, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: laoislad on March 02, 2018, 06:23:43 PM
Looks like he has deleted all his recent posts on this thread and  not just that disgusting one from last night.

Maybe he "believes" we will all just forget his contributions
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 02, 2018, 06:35:34 PM
He could follow McAreavey's lead, issue an apology and expect normality to resume!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 02, 2018, 07:12:40 PM
Quote from: laoislad on March 02, 2018, 06:23:43 PM
Looks like he has deleted all his recent posts on this thread and  not just that disgusting one from last night.
Hi post from last night was not the first time he used the exact same argument to shift the blame to the victim in fact he was much more explicit on previous occasions without the same level of outcry.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on March 02, 2018, 08:56:47 PM
Some time ago, in a thread about Sean Brady, some poster put up a picture of Jewish children in a concentration camp. I can't remember the point the poster was attempting to make but I will never forget Fearon's response.
According to him, these children could not possibly be in a death camp because they were all smiling. He claimed that the photo was most likely taken at a football game in the 50s or thereabouts.
Now, I'm not quite sure of where Fearon grew up but I doubt very much that children there were kept behind barbed wire fences when they went to see a football match!

In my innocence, I used to think that he was just trolling, looking for attention but there and then I realised I was dealing with a very sick, twisted individual indeed.
He is more to be pitied than mocked and maybe all of those; my good self included, who rose to the bait time and time again, should feel ashamed of ourselves.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 02, 2018, 09:35:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 02, 2018, 08:56:47 PM
Some time ago, in a thread about Sean Brady, some poster put up a picture of Jewish children in a concentration camp. I can't remember the point the poster was attempting to make but I will never forget Fearon's response.
According to him, these children could not possibly be in a death camp because they were all smiling. He claimed that the photo was most likely taken at a football game in the 50s or thereabouts.
Now, I'm not quite sure of where Fearon grew up but I doubt very much that children there were kept behind barbed wire fences when they went to see a football match!

In my innocence, I used to think that he was just trolling, looking for attention but there and then I realised I was dealing with a very sick, twisted individual indeed.
He is more to be pitied than mocked and maybe all of those; my good self included, who rose to the bait time and time again, should feel ashamed of ourselves.

My attitude towards his pontificating has been to provide him a logical argument and evidence as well as turning his use of Catholic teaching against him. Better to take him on than ban him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 02, 2018, 09:52:03 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 02, 2018, 08:03:17 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 02, 2018, 06:15:11 PMTony's posts should not be deleted. He has broken no law and he has the right to post it.

There is the risk that a vulnerable individual will read Tony's posts and feel personally attacked. This is hugely regrettable.

The appropriate reaction is not to ban Tony or delete his posts but to tear his posts apart and highlight how unrepresentative of humanity Tony is.

Tony is a horrific individual, undeserving of any sympathy. There are basic standards. If you meet those standards you get to eat with the humans. Tony dines alone.

I wouldn't ban him from here but if he came into my workplace I would ask him to leave. He would not be served

This board works very much in the mould of dealing with having someone's unwelcome presence at a workplace or any private club. It is not a totally open place that is legally protected for anyone to express themselves. It's the right of those who are responsible for this website to decide who can post on it and what they can post. There is no "freedom of speech" here. If the admin/mods feel that a poster's presence is not conductive to the good of the community, or could cause them legal trouble, they can kick them to the curb with almost no comeback legally available to the poster.

It is also incorrect to affirm that no law has been broken in the same way that it is incorrect to affirm that the comments have broken the law. That is for a court of law to decide. A measured and reasoned opinion based on case law on both sides of the border would suggest that the comments in question could be libellous. Given how plaintiff-friendly libel and slander laws are on both sides of the border, it would also perhaps be a concern to this website's owners as they would be deemed publishers, and also nominally the website hosts (though as the servers and company are based in the USA, the US SPEECH Act would almost certainly protect them).

If I was the owner of this forum/website I'm not going to put my balls on the line to allow a stranger make potentially defamatory comments that could see me sued to bankruptcy.

The mods very much have the right to delete. That's not the same as saying it's the right thing to do.

If tony is allowed to post his poison and plenty of others expose it for the poison it is then I couldn't see any legal problems for the site
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on March 02, 2018, 10:08:37 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 02, 2018, 09:35:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 02, 2018, 08:56:47 PM
Some time ago, in a thread about Sean Brady, some poster put up a picture of Jewish children in a concentration camp. I can't remember the point the poster was attempting to make but I will never forget Fearon's response.
According to him, these children could not possibly be in a death camp because they were all smiling. He claimed that the photo was most likely taken at a football game in the 50s or thereabouts.
Now, I'm not quite sure of where Fearon grew up but I doubt very much that children there were kept behind barbed wire fences when they went to see a football match!

In my innocence, I used to think that he was just trolling, looking for attention but there and then I realised I was dealing with a very sick, twisted individual indeed.
He is more to be pitied than mocked and maybe all of those; my good self included, who rose to the bait time and time again, should feel ashamed of ourselves.

My attitude towards his pontificating has been to provide him a logical argument and evidence as well as turning his use of Catholic teaching against him. Better to take him on than ban him.
I understand what you are saying but this man is not prepared to listen to anything you might say or post or whatever. There is no logical engagement in his approach. I mean you can postulate what you like but the replies are never meant to answer any points you may have made. It's almost as if he had a random quote generator to hand when he goes to post a reply. He's getting the attention he craves and that's about the height of it. You'll have noticed that if you sift through his posts, the same phrases and non sequiturs keep turning up with no deviation and no attempt to logicality rebut any point you may have made. I also won't ban him and make a martyr  for him to look at inn his mirror. I'd ignore him and I do, most of the time anyway. :D
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: give her dixie on March 02, 2018, 10:53:32 PM
As far as I was concerned Tony has been going way over the line on this and any given number of posts relating to child abuse.
He is heartless and shows not one shred of compassion, as clearly could been seen when talking about the children abused by Smith and covered up by Brady and the church. His victim blaming knew no bounds in that case.

Over the past couple of weeks everybody has been talking about this story regarding Flannagan, and all sickened once again
by more stories of abuse and cover ups. Following Mc Areavys retirement yesterday, in my view, Tony took a cheap shot of diverting the conversation away from the news and stooped to another low. As can be seen from all the replies, everyone was disgusted with what he said. And he said it in his own name..........

It was at this point I reported it, and I see I wasn't the only one. Thankfully his posts have been removed, and I still stand by my call for him to be banned. He destroys too many good threads, and every time it's all about him. He seeks and craves attention non stop.

There are many good people here on this board who contribute in a positive way and keeps the board healthy and interesting. We don't need to spend any time with someone devoid of humanity and common decency on particular topics.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bamboo on March 02, 2018, 11:11:23 PM
I've asked him before and he never responded but seeing as he's using his own name here and is likely to be known by some, would he make the same remarks on Facebook? Twitter? Round the dinner table?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 03, 2018, 07:34:52 AM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 02, 2018, 10:27:32 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 02, 2018, 09:52:03 PM
If tony is allowed to post his poison and plenty of others expose it for the poison it is then I couldn't see any legal problems for the site
I'd suggest doing a search of the interwebs concerning Irish and Northern Ireland libel, slander and/or defamation laws. Many websites in Ireland and abroad have been shutting down comments sections on their websites over concerns that they are leaving themselves open to litigation.

The most notable recent case is the Irish Independent closing its comments section on news stories back in October.
https://www.imediaethics.org/irish-independent-ends-online-comments-draconian-libel-awards/ (https://www.imediaethics.org/irish-independent-ends-online-comments-draconian-libel-awards/)
https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/74wf1j/irish_independent_suspends_online_comments_citing/

A good number of GAA message boards & discussion boards over the years have shut because users on them wouldn't stop posting some very dodgy posts. An Fear Rua is one, OrchardCounty.com is certainly another. This board has done quite well to last as long as it has done IMO.

This article from the Examiner is worth reading, explaining how website owners, along with website hosts (depending on the country the server the website is hosted on is based), have in recent times been deemed accountable in courts, all the way up to the ECHR, for the content posted by their site users.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/internet-defamation-who-is-legally-responsible-for-online-comments-266171.html

Given general jurisdiction of the quote in question being from a poster assumed resident in NI, the decision two years ago of the Phil Flanagan - Tom Elliot libel case is perhaps the most publicly relevant, though in this case only the originator of the libellous message was sought after, the website (Twitter) wasn't.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-35266927
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sinn-f%C3%A9in-mla-to-pay-damages-over-defamatory-tweet-1.2490187
https://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2016/february/twitter-libel-case-shows-northern-ireland-is-more-claimant-friendly-than-the-rest-of-the-uk-say-experts/

I'm not buying any of that.

We have a thread where are posts announcing the guilt of named individuals of rape. That's not libel then? They are doing so during a criminal trial  - is that not contempt of court?

Tony's posts are deleted but the content of those posts and who posted them remains on this site where others have quited them. Does that somehow give the site a protection against the libel laws they fear?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: skeog on March 03, 2018, 12:53:44 PM
John Mc Areavey facing some stinging criticism for his staunch defence of Uncle Bishop John Mc Areavey.I would say some people would be having a rethink about his charitable foundation.He is deluded if he thinks his Uncle was being treated unfairly by the media victims of the abuse are the people who need justice.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on March 03, 2018, 01:59:02 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 03, 2018, 12:53:44 PM
John Mc Areavey facing some stinging criticism for his staunch defence of Uncle Bishop John Mc Areavey.I would say some people would be having a rethink about his charitable foundation.He is deluded if he thinks his Uncle was being treated unfairly by the media victims of the abuse are the people who need justice.

He is to charity what Willie Frazer is to charity, judging by his comments yesterday.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Minder on March 03, 2018, 04:14:03 PM
Not sure why John McAreavey thought his input was needed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 03, 2018, 04:16:39 PM
"He has always acted with people's best intentions at heart" quote from John McAreavey, try telling that to the victims of Finnegan!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Minder on March 03, 2018, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 03, 2018, 04:16:39 PM
"He has always acted with people's best intentions at heart" quote from John McAreavey, try telling that to the victims of Finnegan!

Yeah that was absolutely ridiculous
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Farrandeelin on March 03, 2018, 05:31:17 PM
Where the hell did deiseach disappear to?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Taylor on March 03, 2018, 06:48:53 PM
The problem recently on the board is that some posters go running to mods or revert to insults if someone else's opinion doesn't match theirs.

This is one of the few discussion forums worth posting on and fair play to those that are in charge  :P
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 03, 2018, 07:36:30 PM
Quote from: Taylor on March 03, 2018, 06:48:53 PM
The problem recently on the board is that some posters go running to mods or revert to insults if someone else's opinion doesn't match theirs.

This is one of the few discussion forums worth posting on and fair play to those that are in charge  :P

only person I ever reported to Mods was Fearon and if you think his comments last night is no more than someone else's  opinion you're as deluded as him
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 03, 2018, 07:54:53 PM
Quote from: hardstation on March 03, 2018, 07:49:58 PM
Ach now you're exaggerating. Fearon didn't say anything last night.

  night before... right enough  he vanished last nite after hitting the delete button a few times
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 04, 2018, 08:25:36 AM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 03, 2018, 05:11:27 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 03, 2018, 07:34:52 AM

I'm not buying any of that.

Did you even read any of the links I supplied?

Quote from: smelmoth on March 03, 2018, 07:34:52 AMWe have a thread where are posts announcing the guilt of named individuals of rape. That's not libel then? They are doing so during a criminal trial  - is that not contempt of court?

Tony's posts are deleted but the content of those posts and who posted them remains on this site where others have quited them. Does that somehow give the site a protection against the libel laws they fear?
The owners of this website are the only people who can answer as to why they feel such posts are permitted/remain on this site. IANAL.

And yes, some comments posted by users on the said threads concerning ongoing legal cases could be not so much libellous, but be in contempt of court. For reference, the ongoing case involved in the "Ulster Rugby Trial" thread is not allowed to be discussed on prominent forums like boards.ie whilst the trial is ongoing, and most online news websites which allow user comments that report on ongoing trials usually don't allow comments to be left on pages covering such cases.

If you feel that your position is correct, I am more than happy to read the relevant links supplying evidence or arguments from people involved in this field to support your POV.

What I will say is that as someone whom in the past has created multiple websites, both GAA & non-GAA related, I've regularly read up carefully about what legal responsibilities I carry as a website creator, owner or contributor. I mentioned earlier about An Fear Rua, this was from a statement the site's owner made when he closed its forum...

Quote from: Liam CahillThere is a sense that they can just register under a pseudonym, pay nothing towards the upkeep of the site or towards an insurance against libel matched by a total lack of any attempt to even understand – let alone accept – that I have a right, and a duty, to administer this site in accordance with the law and in the interests of everyone who used it.

https://www.thejournal.ie/an-fear-rua-closed-591514-Sep2012/

Relevant thread discussing the AFR board closure on this forum linked below.

http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=22171.0

Yes I did read your links.

My point is that it does not in any way seem likely that the reason for deleting Tony's posts was the libel laws. My reason for saying do is that other posts that sail as close to if not closer to that particular wind have not been deleted. This disparity would need explanation and it manifestly has not bee explained.

Your point is that the libel laws are tough on website operators and you post a load of links.

Now as for your links:
Total number of links to legal decisions against website operators: Nil
Total number of links to financial penalties against website operators: Nil
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:40:46 AM

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:40:46 AM

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!

I also respect David McKeown's view, but I will not cast Bishop McAreavy as a bigot until David's view has been triangulated. What I am saying is that they clearly must tend to their own flock.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:52:48 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:40:46 AM

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!

I also respect David McKeown's view, but I will not cast Bishop McAreavy as a bigot until David's view has been triangulated. What I am saying is that they clearly must tend to their own flock.

I've no problem with tending to their own flock, but if as David has said is true, then he'd be a bigot and apologist for a rapist
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 12:30:53 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:52:48 AM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 04, 2018, 11:40:46 AM

Having opinions and being human is all well and good, but dealing with him being bigot and not referring to others (like the prodestant clergy at Holy Cross) to look at as some sort of excuse would be better!


So much for the turning the other cheek and love thy neighbour!

I also respect David McKeown's view, but I will not cast Bishop McAreavy as a bigot until David's view has been triangulated. What I am saying is that they clearly must tend to their own flock.

I've no problem with tending to their own flock, but if as David has said is true, then he'd be a bigot and apologist for a rapist

If.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: David McKeown on March 04, 2018, 12:59:42 PM
Absolutely if is the key word. Really only people who were there and heard the comments know the truth provided they remember. I was there and know what was said. I remember the blazing row I had with the bishop over it on the last occasion and I remember my mothers involvement in the aftermath. I though am an almost anonymous name on a message board (yes I do use my real name to ensure there's never a temptation to say something I wouldn't say in real life) and therefore wouldn't expect anyone to believe what I say. For me though I believe what I say because I was there, I lost what was left of my faith and respect for the Catholic Church after my last meeting with the Bishop and I doubt I will ever change my mind about him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 01:10:51 PM
Fair enough.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

Yes, "Stiffy", and his brother played corner back for Armagh. In my day there was:

Fr Cushnahen - "the wee cush" - big on discipline, loved the cane and had a reputation for beating the hell out of borders
Fr Stevenson - "Stiffy"
Fr Boyle - "wee boyle"
Fr Cunningham - "cuddly bum"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 04, 2018, 02:26:19 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

Yes, "Stiffy", and his brother played corner back for Armagh. In my day there was:

Fr Cushnahen - "the wee cush" - big on discipline, loved the cane and had a reputation for beating the hell out of borders
Fr Stevenson - "Stiffy"
Fr Boyle - "wee boyle"
Fr Cunningham - "cuddly bum"

Holy sweet f**k... I'd say there's more to come out of this yet just in these nicknames!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Tony Baloney on March 04, 2018, 02:30:59 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 04, 2018, 02:26:19 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 07:27:17 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 03, 2018, 06:54:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.

That is untypical and very strong input from you David and given that it is from you it carries considerable weight and casts another light on the bishop.

As I say it's from personal experience of a number of meetings with the man in the early noughties and a number of references he made about it being us against them which when I questioned him he confirmed meant Catholics against protestants. He made plenty of other comments in a similar vein. I had/have very little time for the man.

That is interesting. We always hear about clergy working together but of course they are humans like ourselves and can have opinions. For example, I thought the protestant clergy could have done a lot more during the Holy Cross trouble. But then, perhaps clergy have to look after their own flock first.

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

Yes, "Stiffy", and his brother played corner back for Armagh. In my day there was:

Fr Cushnahen - "the wee cush" - big on discipline, loved the cane and had a reputation for beating the hell out of borders
Fr Stevenson - "Stiffy"
Fr Boyle - "wee boyle"
Fr Cunningham - "cuddly bum"

Holy sweet f**k... I'd say there's more to come out of this yet just in these nicknames!!!
LOL yes Stiffy and Cuddly Bum aren't helpful nicknames for priests.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 04, 2018, 03:36:30 PM
Wait till Nolan hears this!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: quit yo jibbajabba on March 04, 2018, 04:13:55 PM
"And their nicknames were.......... cuddly bum..... aaaaaand............ 10minute pause.......STIFFY!!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 04, 2018, 05:34:41 PM
Quote from: quit yo jibbajabba on March 04, 2018, 04:13:55 PM
"And their nicknames were.......... cuddly bum..... aaaaaand............ 10minute pause.......STIFFY!!!!
Shouldn't laugh but ffs can't do anything else, over to you Mandy Mc Auley!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on March 04, 2018, 06:08:11 PM
Fr Boyle was 'The wee Billy' Fr Cushnehan was 'The wee skut'. Cunningham was just a complete sadistic cnut
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 04, 2018, 07:32:59 PM
From John McAreavey on Twitter:

(https://i.imgur.com/D18BkS6.jpg)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Minder on March 04, 2018, 09:37:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.

Ego more than naive I would say, not sure why he thought his input was needed
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:46:24 PM
Quote from: Minder on March 04, 2018, 09:37:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.


Ego more than naive I would say, not sure why he thought his input was needed

I suppose he thought he'd get a positive response defending his uncle but was way out of line...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 09:49:28 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:46:24 PM
Quote from: Minder on March 04, 2018, 09:37:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.


Ego more than naive I would say, not sure why he thought his input was needed

I suppose he thought he'd get a positive response defending his uncle but was way out of line...

Any word from Mickey Harte yet?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: theskull1 on March 04, 2018, 10:22:02 PM
Godwins rule can now be used
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 04, 2018, 10:30:20 PM
Quote from: theskull1 on March 04, 2018, 10:22:02 PM
Godwins rule can now be used

Ha!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 05, 2018, 11:27:51 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.
Tell us how he is a sectarian bigot?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 05, 2018, 11:35:50 AM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on March 04, 2018, 06:08:11 PM
Fr Boyle was 'The wee Billy' Fr Cushnehan was 'The wee skut'. Cunningham was just a complete sadistic cnut
All the Stevensons at St Colmans were called stiffy, from the Irish Stíofán, The Billy and Fr Cushnehan, I never saw being violent, but Jon Joe Cunningham) was fond of the cane.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 05, 2018, 11:51:50 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 05, 2018, 11:27:51 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2018, 02:30:49 PM
I don't know the full background of the abuse and Bishop McAreavey's role but on a personal level I am glad the bishop has now resigned. My personal experience with the man is that he was a sectarian bigot who should not have had the role he had. Now I haven't spoken to him in 15 years and things may have changed in the interim but I don't think he even deserved the time of the day.
Tell us how he is a sectarian bigot?

I think he did already
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 05, 2018, 12:25:42 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:46:24 PM
Quote from: Minder on March 04, 2018, 09:37:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.


Ego more than naive I would say, not sure why he thought his input was needed

I suppose he thought he'd get a positive response defending his uncle but was way out of line...

John's tweet had 98 comments, a large percentage of which are negative. The tweet also has 382 Likes.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 05, 2018, 12:39:54 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 05, 2018, 12:25:42 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:46:24 PM
Quote from: Minder on March 04, 2018, 09:37:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:26:20 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2018, 09:22:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 04, 2018, 09:15:26 PM
John would have been better to say nothing. He got torn apart on Twitter.
I don't think he understood how visceral the feeling about the church and child rape is.

Don't want to add to it but was more than naive of him.


Ego more than naive I would say, not sure why he thought his input was needed

I suppose he thought he'd get a positive response defending his uncle but was way out of line...

John's tweet had 98 comments, a large percentage of which are negative. The tweet also has 382 Likes.

All from Tony
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 05, 2018, 06:08:39 PM
https://twitter.com/NewryDemo/status/970720199858098182

"We are breaking a big story in the Malachy Finnegan scandal in this week's Newry Democrat - on sale tomorrow morning."

Something actually big, or just media hyperbole?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 05, 2018, 07:17:13 PM
Quote from: dec on March 05, 2018, 06:08:39 PM
https://twitter.com/NewryDemo/status/970720199858098182

"We are breaking a big story in the Malachy Finnegan scandal in this week's Newry Democrat - on sale tomorrow morning."

Something actually big, or just media hyperbole?

If it is genuinely something big then well done to the ND. We need journalists to play their role on lifting the lid. Kudos, journalistic awards, increased circulation and revenue will follow.

But using this subject matter to trail the title is less than classy.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 05, 2018, 10:52:53 PM
Section 5 of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 makes it an offence not to report to the police any person involved in an arrestable offence.

The question has to be asked why this law has not been applied to all previous sex abuse cases within the Catholic Church and, if, as reported, Finnegan's behaviour in St Colman's was known about by all pupils and staff, will this law not apply to staff who turned a blind eye?  Would the clerical staff in the school during the period when Finnegan worked there as teacher and headmaster be particularly open to this law?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 05, 2018, 10:56:48 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 05, 2018, 10:52:53 PM
Section 5 of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 makes it an offence not to report to the police any person involved in an arrestable offence.

The question has to be asked why this law has not been applied to all previous sex abuse cases within the Catholic Church and, if all reported regarding Finnegan's behaviour in St Colman's was known about by all pupils and staff are true, will this law not apply to staff who turned a blind eye?  Would the clerical staff in the school during the period when Finnegan worked their as teacher and headmaster be particularly open to this law?

Well I'm glad the peelers didn't ask me any questions about activities of the locals during the troubles! There would have been a serious amount of people in jail!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 06, 2018, 01:19:12 AM
https://www.dromorediocese.org/diocesan-information/

Chapter

Prebendaries:

Saint Colman and Lann
Very Rev. Canon Francis Kearney PP, Annaclone
Drumeragh
Very Rev. Canon Francis Boyle PP, Saval
Lanronan
Aghaderg
Very Rev. Canon Liam Stevenson PP, Seapatrick
Clonallon
Very Rev. Canon Michael Hackett
Kilmycon
Very Rev. Canon John Kearney Adm, Warrenpoint
Canon Penitentiary
Very Rev. Canon Francis Brown Adm, Newry
Downaclone
Very Rev. Canon Gerard McCrory PP, Magheradroll, Canon Theologian

Would I be right that Boyle, Stevenson, Hackett, Brown and McCrory are all ex St Colmans?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 06, 2018, 01:41:01 AM
I believe so. Fr Hackett also managed Lissummon GFC for a year or two.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on March 06, 2018, 09:08:45 AM
They're all ex St Colman's
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 06, 2018, 02:06:45 PM
Quote from: dec on March 05, 2018, 06:08:39 PM
https://twitter.com/NewryDemo/status/970720199858098182

"We are breaking a big story in the Malachy Finnegan scandal in this week's Newry Democrat - on sale tomorrow morning."

Something actually big, or just media hyperbole?

I assume this is the big story

http://www.newrydemocrat.com/articles/news/63522

"Mr Winters, a former pupil of St Colman's College, says he was groomed by Malachy Finnegan when he was at the school. Now he represents victims of the paedophile priest.

TOP Human Rights lawyer Kevin Winters has spoken exclusively to the Newry Democrat about how paedophile priest, Malachy Finnegan attempted to groom him."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 06, 2018, 02:32:47 PM
Quote from: dec on March 06, 2018, 02:06:45 PM
Quote from: dec on March 05, 2018, 06:08:39 PM
https://twitter.com/NewryDemo/status/970720199858098182

"We are breaking a big story in the Malachy Finnegan scandal in this week's Newry Democrat - on sale tomorrow morning."

Something actually big, or just media hyperbole?

I assume this is the big story

http://www.newrydemocrat.com/articles/news/63522

"Mr Winters, a former pupil of St Colman's College, says he was groomed by Malachy Finnegan when he was at the school. Now he represents victims of the paedophile priest.

TOP Human Rights lawyer Kevin Winters has spoken exclusively to the Newry Democrat about how paedophile priest, Malachy Finnegan attempted to groom him."

Hoovering up the rest of the cases no doubt!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 06, 2018, 09:32:31 PM
Has it not all got something to do with the libel laws?

Where has Fionntamhnach gone?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 07, 2018, 04:10:12 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

The Irish News with some breaking news
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/03/07/news/priest-in-charge-of-dromore-diocese-is-former-head-of-school-where-malachy-finegan-abused-pupils-1271879/

Brendan Hughes 07 March, 2018 01:00
THE priest temporarily in charge of the Diocese of Dromore following the resignation of its bishop over the Malachy Finegan scandal is a former head of the school where the cleric sexually abused pupils. Canon Liam Stevenson and the Catholic Church last night did not address questions about his role, including when he first became aware of allegations against Finegan...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 08, 2018, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: dec on March 07, 2018, 04:10:12 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

The Irish News with some breaking news
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/03/07/news/priest-in-charge-of-dromore-diocese-is-former-head-of-school-where-malachy-finegan-abused-pupils-1271879/

Brendan Hughes 07 March, 2018 01:00
THE priest temporarily in charge of the Diocese of Dromore following the resignation of its bishop over the Malachy Finegan scandal is a former head of the school where the cleric sexually abused pupils. Canon Liam Stevenson and the Catholic Church last night did not address questions about his role, including when he first became aware of allegations against Finegan...
This is absolute shit stirring nonsense from the IN. The onus was on the Bishop to deal with this not Fr Stevenson.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Syferus on March 08, 2018, 11:31:14 AM
Is that Fearon character gone for good so?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 08, 2018, 11:49:20 AM
Hopefully
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 08, 2018, 01:43:43 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 08, 2018, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: dec on March 07, 2018, 04:10:12 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

The Irish News with some breaking news
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/03/07/news/priest-in-charge-of-dromore-diocese-is-former-head-of-school-where-malachy-finegan-abused-pupils-1271879/

Brendan Hughes 07 March, 2018 01:00
THE priest temporarily in charge of the Diocese of Dromore following the resignation of its bishop over the Malachy Finegan scandal is a former head of the school where the cleric sexually abused pupils. Canon Liam Stevenson and the Catholic Church last night did not address questions about his role, including when he first became aware of allegations against Finegan...
This is absolute shit stirring nonsense from the IN. The onus was on the Bishop to deal with this not Fr Stevenson.

I think the point being made is that those within St Colman's had a responsibility to deal Finnegan when he was employed by the school.  The Priest teachers and headmaster will carry a responsibility if they were aware of Finnegan's behaviour towards the pupils, particularly those as boarders.  Did any of them receive complaints from students or did they observe Finnegan's behaviour towards the pupils?  Was Canon Stevenson a former president of the college?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: trueblue1234 on March 08, 2018, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: Syferus on March 08, 2018, 11:31:14 AM
Is that Fearon character gone for good so?

Think so. Just two more to go and all will be right with the GAAboard world.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Syferus on March 08, 2018, 03:38:51 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 08, 2018, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: Syferus on March 08, 2018, 11:31:14 AM
Is that Fearon character gone for good so?

Think so. Just two more to go and all will be right with the GAAboard world.

Don't be so down on yourself.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnnycool on March 08, 2018, 04:02:55 PM
Quote from: dec on March 07, 2018, 04:10:12 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

The Irish News with some breaking news
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/03/07/news/priest-in-charge-of-dromore-diocese-is-former-head-of-school-where-malachy-finegan-abused-pupils-1271879/

Brendan Hughes 07 March, 2018 01:00
THE priest temporarily in charge of the Diocese of Dromore following the resignation of its bishop over the Malachy Finegan scandal is a former head of the school where the cleric sexually abused pupils. Canon Liam Stevenson and the Catholic Church last night did not address questions about his role, including when he first became aware of allegations against Finegan...

A bit of an own goal by the diocese or whoever appointed this lad Stevenson when they're still right in the teeth of this scandal.
Are Church authorities that detached from the real world?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orchard park on March 08, 2018, 04:09:37 PM
is he a brother of Denis Stevenson the ever so polite corner back from Armagh
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 08, 2018, 04:24:27 PM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 08, 2018, 04:02:55 PM
Quote from: dec on March 07, 2018, 04:10:12 PM
Quote from: dec on March 04, 2018, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 04, 2018, 11:25:32 AM

Glad to hear that Fr Stevenston has been asked to step in.

That would be the same Father Stevenson that was a teacher at St Colman's for almost all the time the Finnegan was there.

The Irish News with some breaking news
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/03/07/news/priest-in-charge-of-dromore-diocese-is-former-head-of-school-where-malachy-finegan-abused-pupils-1271879/

Brendan Hughes 07 March, 2018 01:00
THE priest temporarily in charge of the Diocese of Dromore following the resignation of its bishop over the Malachy Finegan scandal is a former head of the school where the cleric sexually abused pupils. Canon Liam Stevenson and the Catholic Church last night did not address questions about his role, including when he first became aware of allegations against Finegan...

A bit of an own goal by the diocese or whoever appointed this lad Stevenson when they're still right in the teeth of this scandal.
Are Church authorities that detached from the real world?

His appointment was a consequence of his recent elevation to the second in command in the diocese as Vicar General when he was moved to Lurgan to replace Mons Hamill who had a complaint of historical nature upheld by Bishop McAreavey and was removed from being vicar general and parish priest of Lurgan at the end of last year. 

By simply allowing the vicar general to take over rather than putting in an administrator with no possible connection to Finnegan (an administrator has been put in place in other dioceses when the bishop has left his post) is a tactical error by the Church and may well cause embarrassment in the media as the PSNI move in to investigate the historic abuse when Finnegan was employed in the school. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 08, 2018, 05:48:35 PM
Quote from: Orchard park on March 08, 2018, 04:09:37 PM
is he a brother of Denis Stevenson the ever so polite corner back from Armagh

yes
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: maddog on March 09, 2018, 10:35:05 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)

Wtf?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 09, 2018, 11:07:54 PM
Quote from: maddog on March 09, 2018, 10:35:05 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)

Wtf?
This is unbelievable coming from anyone never mind a cardinal, no wonder the Catholic Church is in the state it is!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 10, 2018, 09:51:41 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)

If this fella is still in office by close of the Australian working day what does it say about the Catholic Church?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: smelmoth on March 10, 2018, 10:47:23 AM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 10, 2018, 10:43:42 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/archbishop-pedophilia-spiritual-encounter/

Basically, YourNewsWire is full of shit on a level of "fake news" that makes it as trustworthy as Infowars.

Fair point
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: imtommygunn on March 10, 2018, 11:45:16 AM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 10, 2018, 10:43:42 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/archbishop-pedophilia-spiritual-encounter/

Basically, YourNewsWire is full of shit on a level of "fake news" that makes it as trustworthy as Infowars.

I am kind of glad to read that to be honest.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 10, 2018, 11:49:47 AM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on March 10, 2018, 10:43:42 AM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 09, 2018, 10:31:32 PM
http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/ (http://yournewswire.com/catholic-archbishop-pedophilia-god/)
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/archbishop-pedophilia-spiritual-encounter/

Basically, YourNewsWire is full of shit on a level of "fake news" that makes it as trustworthy as Infowars.

As usual the man from the town with the most expensive public toilets is correct:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/archbishop-pedophilia-spiritual-encounter/ (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/archbishop-pedophilia-spiritual-encounter/)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 12, 2018, 11:08:04 AM
Mary McAleese on Rte radio says that her young brother was abused by that animal Finnegan
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 12, 2018, 11:12:57 AM
Why is Father Burns being hounded out of Hilltown?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 12, 2018, 11:24:19 AM
Fr. Byrne, I wouldn't say he's being hounded out, apparently he received an abusive or threatening letter in the post, as much as I know
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 12, 2018, 01:36:07 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 12, 2018, 11:08:04 AM
Mary McAleese on Rte radio says that her young brother was abused by that animal Finnegan

Some care needs to be taken as her statement was based on a letter to Belfast Telegraph by her brother but he doesn't claim that Finnegan abused him physically or sexually other than he knew about it going on in the college:

(https://i.imgur.com/lCHZZ7G.jpg?1)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 12, 2018, 01:40:52 PM
From RTE twitter:

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/973150464576573440 (https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/973150464576573440)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: armaghniac on March 12, 2018, 01:47:29 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 12, 2018, 01:36:07 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 12, 2018, 11:08:04 AM
Mary McAleese on Rte radio says that her young brother was abused by that animal Finnegan

Some care needs to be taken as her statement was based on a letter to Belfast Telegraph by her brother but he doesn't claim that Finnegan abused him physically or sexually other than he knew about it going on in the college:


She said that she hadn't known about it before the letter, but is she saying that the only thing she currently knows about it is the letter?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 12, 2018, 01:53:40 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 12, 2018, 01:47:29 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 12, 2018, 01:36:07 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 12, 2018, 11:08:04 AM
Mary McAleese on Rte radio says that her young brother was abused by that animal Finnegan

Some care needs to be taken as her statement was based on a letter to Belfast Telegraph by her brother but he doesn't claim that Finnegan abused him physically or sexually other than he knew about it going on in the college:


She said that she hadn't known about it before the letter, but is she saying that the only thing she currently knows about it is the letter?

Her brother makes no claim against Finnegan as a direct abuser of any nature, he complains that Finnegan as headmaster allowed physical abuse to occur and this was carried out by others employed by the school but without being stopped by the headmaster.

From the letter, her brother is making allegations of being physically abused by other members of staff.  Mary McAleese is extending this to include Finnegan abusing her brother even though he says otherwise.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 13, 2018, 10:23:03 AM
A call to those involved with St Colman's?

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/mary-mcaleeses-brother-calls-for-gentlemen-of-st-colmans-newry-to-reveal-what-they-know-of-fr-finnegan-abuse-36699543.html (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/mary-mcaleeses-brother-calls-for-gentlemen-of-st-colmans-newry-to-reveal-what-they-know-of-fr-finnegan-abuse-36699543.html)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Taylor on March 13, 2018, 12:19:40 PM
Sexual abuse aside I cant imagine there were too many schools which were ran by priests/christian brothers where physical abuse wasnt rife prior to 87/88?

Think it changed around that time whereby you were no longer allowed to hit schoolkids
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 12:34:23 PM
Quote from: Taylor on March 13, 2018, 12:19:40 PM
Sexual abuse aside I cant imagine there were too many schools which were ran by priests/christian brothers where physical abuse wasnt rife prior to 87/88?

Think it changed around that time whereby you were no longer allowed to hit schoolkids

I would agree there. It was very rife in the Abbey the few years before I started in 1987 and continued on after that. A certain Brother who was in the top portakabins had a purple plastic hurl he would use sometimes, dodgy as hell and his next door neighbour brother would batter us with a leather strap. In my older brothers time it was very common, even among the lay members of staff.  I have no doubt that there was also some other stuff went on (brother with the purple hurl was suspected for many years) but as it was a day School only the opportunities were not there as much.

What I would say is when I studied A Level irish we went to a retired brothers room for extra work on our literature. We loved it as one of the lads smoked and he and the brother would smoke away together in secret. We also on one or two occasions shared a whiskey with him. It was all straight forward when I was there but there was a chance that things could have been viewed differently had it become apparent what was going on. I never heard any questions being raised about this particular brother but you just never know....
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 13, 2018, 01:57:36 PM
Quote from: Taylor on March 13, 2018, 12:19:40 PM
Sexual abuse aside I cant imagine there were too many schools which were ran by priests/christian brothers where physical abuse wasnt rife prior to 87/88?

Think it changed around that time whereby you were no longer allowed to hit schoolkids

As I only attended CB schools, I cannot confirm but would still have thought that prior to 1987, when corporal punishment became illegal, physical abuse was common in all schools.  Prior to 1987, physical violence in schools was still illegal but was accepted by most pupils as part of attending schools.  This level of violence by adults against children was also reflected in the playground where brutal fights were common place.

Prior to 1987, parents rarely made formal or informal complaints about violence against their children as they had been conditioned to such violence against pupils being the norm.

While being slapped with rulers, leather straps, etc (including the wooden wedges used to secure gym wall bars and climbing frames) was accepted by all, there were plenty of extreme examples of this being used sadistically by some teachers.  As BC1 noted above, the use of other 'weaponry' and especially fists was commonplace.

As a pupil I would have found a lot of the lay staff being more violent and sadistic than the Brothers.

Thankfully, the removal of corporal punishment in 1987 made schools less violent but it never removed the violence completely. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!

Got it in two Targetman!!!  You must have been in my brothers year above him....presuming you made it to 7th year
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: johnnycool on March 13, 2018, 02:55:13 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 13, 2018, 01:57:36 PM
Quote from: Taylor on March 13, 2018, 12:19:40 PM
Sexual abuse aside I cant imagine there were too many schools which were ran by priests/christian brothers where physical abuse wasnt rife prior to 87/88?

Think it changed around that time whereby you were no longer allowed to hit schoolkids

As I only attended CB schools, I cannot confirm but would still have thought that prior to 1987, when corporal punishment became illegal, physical abuse was common in all schools.  Prior to 1987, physical violence in schools was still illegal but was accepted by most pupils as part of attending schools.  This level of violence by adults against children was also reflected in the playground where brutal fights were common place.

Prior to 1987, parents rarely made formal or informal complaints about violence against their children as they had been conditioned to such violence against pupils being the norm.

While being slapped with rulers, leather straps, etc (including the wooden wedges used to secure gym wall bars and climbing frames) was accepted by all, there were plenty of extreme examples of this being used sadistically by some teachers.  As BC1 noted above, the use of other 'weaponry' and especially fists was commonplace.

As a pupil I would have found a lot of the lay staff being more violent and sadistic than the Brothers.

Thankfully, the removal of corporal punishment in 1987 made schools less violent but it never removed the violence completely.

FFS I remember perusing through one of my teachers EDCO stationary books in the late 80's and there was two pages full of various leather straps and so forth for dishing out the beatings. Most teachers had some equipment or other in the desk.

Seems mad now, but was taken as the norm back then.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: naka on March 13, 2018, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!

Got it in two Targetman!!!  You must have been in my brothers year above him....presuming you made it to 7th year
.

never had an issue with getting a dig as it was par for the course as was getting digs at home with the brush from my ma.
dick of course was dodgy but everyone knew that and stayed well clear,
tommy bo was a decent brother nothing untoward, he lent me money to buy a pair of football boots in 87 cos my mother couldn't afford them. we had a mc rory quarterfinal  and I was keeper with a ripped boot .
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 03:18:36 PM
Quote from: naka on March 13, 2018, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!

Got it in two Targetman!!!  You must have been in my brothers year above him....presuming you made it to 7th year
.

never had an issue with getting a dig as it was par for the course as was getting digs at home with the brush from my ma.
dick of course was dodgy but everyone knew that and stayed well clear,
tommy bo was a decent brother nothing untoward, he lent me money to buy a pair of football boots in 87 cos my mother couldn't afford them. we had a mc rory quarterfinal  and I was keeper with a ripped boot .

Them boots did you no harm Naka, 87 was a good year at the Abbey !!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 03:20:59 PM
Quote from: naka on March 13, 2018, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!

Got it in two Targetman!!!  You must have been in my brothers year above him....presuming you made it to 7th year
.

never had an issue with getting a dig as it was par for the course as was getting digs at home with the brush from my ma.
dick of course was dodgy but everyone knew that and stayed well clear,
tommy bo was a decent brother nothing untoward, he lent me money to buy a pair of football boots in 87 cos my mother couldn't afford them. we had a mc rory quarterfinal  and I was keeper with a ripped boot .

I'd agree about Tommy Bo and he was the brother who let us have the whiskey. He was always great to us. Nannery beat us regular with the strap and as you say Dick was dodgy as hell. But then you had some viscious lay teachers who were happy enough to let you know the story.

Know now who you are!!!  Year before I started but as targetman said the boots worked wonders!!!  I wasn't at those games as my brother had fallen out with Val. He probably would have played but pride got in the way!!!  Wasn't the last time he fell out with our family either!!!
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: naka on March 13, 2018, 05:02:40 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 03:20:59 PM
Quote from: naka on March 13, 2018, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 13, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Targetman on March 13, 2018, 02:03:01 PM
I left the Abbey in 87 and of course there were teachers who would have given you a dig with either the strap or fist, just thought it was par for the course, Tommy Bo must have been giving out the fegs and whiskey, Dick Dargan (dodgy)!!

Got it in two Targetman!!!  You must have been in my brothers year above him....presuming you made it to 7th year
.

never had an issue with getting a dig as it was par for the course as was getting digs at home with the brush from my ma.
dick of course was dodgy but everyone knew that and stayed well clear,
tommy bo was a decent brother nothing untoward, he lent me money to buy a pair of football boots in 87 cos my mother couldn't afford them. we had a mc rory quarterfinal  and I was keeper with a ripped boot .

I'd agree about Tommy Bo and he was the brother who let us have the whiskey. He was always great to us. Nannery beat us regular with the strap and as you say Dick was dodgy as hell. But then you had some viscious lay teachers who were happy enough to let you know the story.

Know now who you are!!!  Year before I started but as targetman said the boots worked wonders!!!  I wasn't at those games as my brother had fallen out with Val. He probably would have played but pride got in the way!!!  Wasn't the last time he fell out with our family either!!!
yip think its fair to say your fella would have played.but  he did alright in the long run.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on March 14, 2018, 11:08:39 PM
Nolan you are a tosser.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 14, 2018, 11:13:11 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 14, 2018, 11:08:39 PM
Nolan you are a t**ser.

He is but not the biggest culprit in all this... the Catholic Church is.  McCann is right, McAreavey should be answering police questions.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 14, 2018, 11:13:44 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 14, 2018, 11:08:39 PM
Nolan you are a t**ser.

Putting it up to Dromore diocese and Colman's again and they have played into his hands by making bland statements in the hope it will go away. 

BTW Martin O'Brien well fit for Nolan while McCann is in his element.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 14, 2018, 11:16:10 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 14, 2018, 11:13:44 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 14, 2018, 11:08:39 PM
Nolan you are a t**ser.

Putting it up to Dromore diocese and Colman's again and they have played into his hands by making bland statements in the hope it will go away. 

BTW Martin O'Brien well fit for Nolan while McCann is in his element.

Man in audience called out O'Brien, came across as an apologist for church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Targetman on March 14, 2018, 11:18:30 PM
Canons Brown and Stevenson on Nolan's radar now
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 16, 2018, 02:01:10 PM
Nolan put another Newry victim on air:

https://audioboom.com/posts/6727642-i-was-frightened-of-refusing-to-go-with-him-caller-shares-their-story-of-abuse-at-the-hands-of-paedophile-priest-fr-seamus-reid-warning-contains-graphic-content (https://audioboom.com/posts/6727642-i-was-frightened-of-refusing-to-go-with-him-caller-shares-their-story-of-abuse-at-the-hands-of-paedophile-priest-fr-seamus-reid-warning-contains-graphic-content)

https://audioboom.com/posts/6727641-emotional-testimony-from-a-victim-who-was-abused-by-paedophile-priest-fr-seamus-reid-as-an-11-year-old-boy-warning-contains-graphic-content (https://audioboom.com/posts/6727641-emotional-testimony-from-a-victim-who-was-abused-by-paedophile-priest-fr-seamus-reid-as-an-11-year-old-boy-warning-contains-graphic-content)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 16, 2018, 03:51:30 PM
The Seamus Reid story broke a couple of years

http://www.irishnews.com/news/2015/03/31/news/child-sex-abuse-claims-against-late-priest-says-church-119569/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: stiffler on March 22, 2018, 06:19:00 PM
I see on the news another ex st Colmans teacher Patrick carton was found guilty of indecent assaults on students on occasions as recently as 2007.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 22, 2018, 06:45:13 PM
Quote from: stiffler on March 22, 2018, 06:19:00 PM
I see on the news another ex st Colmans teacher Patrick carton was found guilty of indecent assaults on students on occasions as recently as 2007.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43500697
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 24, 2018, 11:14:13 AM
Conor Murphy comes forward to tell his story about Finnegan in St Colman's:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/sinn-feins-conor-murphy-speaks-about-abuse-at-the-hands-of-fr-finnegan-36735012.html (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/sinn-feins-conor-murphy-speaks-about-abuse-at-the-hands-of-fr-finnegan-36735012.html)

Then he uses the interview to call out those who taught in the school, managed the school, inspected the school and those in a position of power for not doing anything about Finnegan or his legacy. 

Seemed to miss the point that he was in a position of power for the last twenty years as an MLA, MP and Minister in the assembly and didn't ask any of his colleagues to step forward with an inquiry into clerical abuse or abuse in schools to run along side the inquiry into abuse of those in institutional homes.

Then Paul Quinn's family heard his interview and didn't miss in their criticism.

https://twitter.com/breegequinn?lang=en (https://twitter.com/breegequinn?lang=en)





Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 26, 2018, 06:51:24 PM
Pope has achieved Bishop McAreavey's resignation and appointed another former bishop to stand in for him until a replacement is appointed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43542915 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43542915)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 27, 2018, 03:35:31 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43548304
Quote
"The police have set up a dedicated team to investigate the circumstances of the child abuse carried out by the late paedophile priest, Fr Malachy Finegan...The investigation has several aims, including establishing when the authorities first became aware of the abuse allegations, what information was reported to police and what action was taken to protect children and young people at that time. Officers also want to find out if past pupils from St Colman's College were abused by anyone other than Fr Finegan during his 20-year tenure at the Catholic grammar school. The PSNI said the team would try to establish if there was any "living offender" and "take action" against them."

Widening the scope beyond Finnegan is probably a good idea. However if they are widening the scope I don't think it should be restricted to just St. Colman's.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 28, 2018, 09:54:30 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

Not sure what age you are but memories of 35/40 years ago are very vivid. Isn't that long ago to remember especially for events so traumatic... needs to be taken out by the roots.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: brokencrossbar1 on March 28, 2018, 09:55:41 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

It might not be how you recall it but it seems to be the abiding memory of many. The attitude that you have expressed there is one of the reasons why abuse was allowed to continue because people were 'uncomfortable ' about speaking up. I know I was in the Abbey and am probably about 10 years to young to have witnessed much physical abuse but I know it happened from talking to lads who were at the school and they also have spoken of the stories coming from Violet Hill. If it happened, which it seems to have, then don't hide behind legalise and take it on the chin. I would say the same if the same stories came out about the Abbey.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 11:46:21 AM
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on March 28, 2018, 09:55:41 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

It might not be how you recall it but it seems to be the abiding memory of many. The attitude that you have expressed there is one of the reasons why abuse was allowed to continue because people were 'uncomfortable ' about speaking up. I know I was in the Abbey and am probably about 10 years to young to have witnessed much physical abuse but I know it happened from talking to lads who were at the school and they also have spoken of the stories coming from Violet Hill. If it happened, which it seems to have, then don't hide behind legalise and take it on the chin. I would say the same if the same stories came out about the Abbey.
I am not saying that there was no corporal punishment, there was, and I witnessed the same guy get a whack around the ear by two different teachers. both lay men. I did not witness the wide spread violence that is being portrayed. I do not doubt that Finnegan abused. He was an uncouth drunken embarrassment to any profession let alone the priesthood. I also am aware that he asked inappropriate questions of boys, obviously in grooming mode, and I would say given his drunkeness he most likely dished out beatings. All I'm saying is in 7 years I did not witness violence on the scale now being alleged. The school community was such that it would have been well known. That said by the standards of today a lot of the corporal punishment would not be acceptable. Certainly even 10 years ago when my kids were in secondary education I would not have tolerated anyone hitting them in any way. My da's attitude would have been you must have done something to deserve it.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 28, 2018, 12:27:12 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

There were severe beatings dished out by mad men which was way beyond so-called 'corporal punishment.' As for deserving it, any adult who hits a child is a coward and would shit himself if confronted by an adult. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Therealdonald on March 28, 2018, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 12:27:12 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

There were severe beatings dished out by mad men which was way beyond so-called 'corporal punishment.' As for deserving it, any adult who hits a child is a coward and would shit himself if confronted by an adult.

Think thats a bit strong Longball. I got a few clips in secondary school, made sure I knew not to do it again.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 28, 2018, 05:20:27 PM
Quote from: Therealdonald on March 28, 2018, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 12:27:12 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

There were severe beatings dished out by mad men which was way beyond so-called 'corporal punishment.' As for deserving it, any adult who hits a child is a coward and would shit himself if confronted by an adult.

Think thats a bit strong Longball. I got a few clips in secondary school, made sure I knew not to do it again.

Strong or not if a teacher laid a hand on a child of mine...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Therealdonald on March 28, 2018, 05:25:42 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 05:20:27 PM
Quote from: Therealdonald on March 28, 2018, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 12:27:12 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

There were severe beatings dished out by mad men which was way beyond so-called 'corporal punishment.' As for deserving it, any adult who hits a child is a coward and would shit himself if confronted by an adult.

Think thats a bit strong Longball. I got a few clips in secondary school, made sure I knew not to do it again.

Strong or not if a teacher laid a hand on a child of mine...

Yeah but its a different time now. I'd be the same.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 05:39:44 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.

Corporal punishment illegal from 1897.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

Colman's was not alone in being a school where the corporal punishment was occasionally excessive. 

Memories of violence in school of over 50 years ago have not faded for me. They are just as real and vivid today as they were for me between 1962 and 1977.

I attended CB primary and secondary schools and I vividly remember being beaten excessively and others being given even worse treatment at the hands of both Christian Brothers and lay teachers.  In fact the lay teachers in these school often outdid the Brothers when it came to excessive punishment.

Schools were places of violence in the 60s and 70s when I attended school both in terms of the teachers excessively beating children and pupils fighting in the playground. 

In the 80s when I began teaching I saw less excessive corporal punishment but more violence in the school yard.  This was probably because teachers did not get the same overall view of the school as pupils travelling from class to class and much of the excessive violence of corporal punishment went on behind closed doors.

The situation in Colman's is opening a can of worms for all schools.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Lar Naparka on March 28, 2018, 05:51:13 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.
Not in the Republic.
It was abolished in the early 80s, (IIRC, 198I)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 28, 2018, 05:54:45 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

Colman's was not alone in being a school where the corporal punishment was occasionally excessive. 

Memories of violence in school of over 50 years ago have not faded for me. They are just as real and vivid today as they were for me between 1962 and 1977.

I attended CB primary and secondary schools and I vividly remember being beaten excessively and others being given even worse treatment at the hands of both Christian Brothers and lay teachers.  In fact the lay teachers in these school often outdid the Brothers when it came to excessive punishment.

Schools were places of violence in the 60s and 70s when I attended school both in terms of the teachers excessively beating children and pupils fighting in the playground. 

In the 80s when I began teaching I saw less excessive corporal punishment but more violence in the school yard.  This was probably because teachers did not get the same overall view of the school as pupils travelling from class to class and much of the excessive violence of corporal punishment went on behind closed doors.

The situation in Colman's is opening a can of worms for all schools.

True - there was brutal violence dished out by lay teachers and the clerics. of course there were many good ones as well, This shite that it did us no harm when you see the level of alcoholism and messed up lives in Ireland. Having said that home wasn't much fun for many kids either.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 06:26:26 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 28, 2018, 05:51:13 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 28, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Wasn't corporal punishment basically de rigueur in the 80s and 90s? I would never have connected that with 'abuse' which is much more insidious. Certainly in our school we got regular clippings, but generally we deserved it and there was no hard feelings afterwards.
Not in the Republic.
It was abolished in the early 80s, (IIRC, 198I)

Bejaysus they forgot to tell our lads so.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 07:58:02 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 05:54:45 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

Colman's was not alone in being a school where the corporal punishment was occasionally excessive. 

Memories of violence in school of over 50 years ago have not faded for me. They are just as real and vivid today as they were for me between 1962 and 1977.

I attended CB primary and secondary schools and I vividly remember being beaten excessively and others being given even worse treatment at the hands of both Christian Brothers and lay teachers.  In fact the lay teachers in these school often outdid the Brothers when it came to excessive punishment.

Schools were places of violence in the 60s and 70s when I attended school both in terms of the teachers excessively beating children and pupils fighting in the playground. 

In the 80s when I began teaching I saw less excessive corporal punishment but more violence in the school yard.  This was probably because teachers did not get the same overall view of the school as pupils travelling from class to class and much of the excessive violence of corporal punishment went on behind closed doors.

The situation in Colman's is opening a can of worms for all schools.

True - there was brutal violence dished out by lay teachers and the clerics. of course there were many good ones as well, This shite that it did us no harm when you see the level of alcoholism and messed up lives in Ireland. Having said that home wasn't much fun for many kids either.

100% correct.  The level of violence in the classroom was mirrored by violence in the school yard and beyond.  We are only beginning to understand the effects of violence in society during the troubles and the personal effects of institutional violence will take a lot of research to uncover.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: longballin on March 28, 2018, 08:12:51 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 07:58:02 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 28, 2018, 05:54:45 PM
Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 28, 2018, 05:49:33 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 28, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
I have to say I am uncomfortable with what is becoming a bit of a witch hunt against St Colman's, relying on memories from 35/40 years ago. It is also not appropriate to judge historic events by todays standards. I have no doubt that Finnegan was guilty of abuse, but the wee spread use of violence that is being insinuated is not how I remember it.

Colman's was not alone in being a school where the corporal punishment was occasionally excessive. 

Memories of violence in school of over 50 years ago have not faded for me. They are just as real and vivid today as they were for me between 1962 and 1977.

I attended CB primary and secondary schools and I vividly remember being beaten excessively and others being given even worse treatment at the hands of both Christian Brothers and lay teachers.  In fact the lay teachers in these school often outdid the Brothers when it came to excessive punishment.

Schools were places of violence in the 60s and 70s when I attended school both in terms of the teachers excessively beating children and pupils fighting in the playground. 

In the 80s when I began teaching I saw less excessive corporal punishment but more violence in the school yard.  This was probably because teachers did not get the same overall view of the school as pupils travelling from class to class and much of the excessive violence of corporal punishment went on behind closed doors.

The situation in Colman's is opening a can of worms for all schools.

True - there was brutal violence dished out by lay teachers and the clerics. of course there were many good ones as well, This shite that it did us no harm when you see the level of alcoholism and messed up lives in Ireland. Having said that home wasn't much fun for many kids either.

100% correct.  The level of violence in the classroom was mirrored by violence in the school yard and beyond.  We are only beginning to understand the effects of violence in society during the troubles and the personal effects of institutional violence will take a lot of research to uncover.

true and very often those who say 'it didn't do us any harm' are full of rage
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on May 19, 2018, 10:56:19 PM
Oh dear, Dromore diocese in trouble again?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-44185874 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-44185874)
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Insane Bolt on May 20, 2018, 07:55:50 AM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-latin-america-44169484

Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on May 20, 2018, 08:14:21 AM
Quote from: Insane Bolt on May 20, 2018, 07:55:50 AM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-latin-america-44169484

While the Chile situation is particularly bad, the Irish Church is not far behind in its actions and inactions in relation to abuse.

When the Pope called the Irish bishops together in the last year for a similar meeting they did not have the same integrity to offer their resignations and he didn't ask for them.  What a waste of an opportunity to turn the Irish Church around.

Only an immediate root and branch reform can turn the Irish Church from oblivion in the next 15/20 years when the current batch of clergy in their 70s and 80s are no longer here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Insane Bolt on May 20, 2018, 10:26:14 AM
In order for the church to survive in Ireland and a lot of Europe I feel they need to allow women priests and for priests to marry. The 'rules' against this are man made.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on May 20, 2018, 11:05:43 AM
Quote from: Insane Bolt on May 20, 2018, 10:26:14 AM
In order for the church to survive in Ireland and a lot of Europe I feel they need to allow women priests and for priests to marry. The 'rules' against this are man made.

All of the rules and regulations in the Catholic Church are 'man made'.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on May 20, 2018, 04:46:35 PM
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/dromore-priest-steps-aside-pending-psni-investigation-1.3502017

The Catholic Diocese of Dromore has said it is cooperating fully with a PSNI investigation into an historical safeguarding allegation against a priest.
Canon Francis Brown has "voluntarily stepped aside from all public ministry" while the allegation was being investigated by officers, the diocese said.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-priest-unaware-of-details-of-safeguarding-allegation-made-against-him-36927442.html

On Sunday a statement was released on behalf of Canon Brown, administrator of the Newry parish. He said: "I have been informed by Bishop Philip Boyce, the Apostolic Administrator for the Diocese, that an allegation of an historic nature has been made against me. The details of the allegation have not so far been made known to either myself or The Diocese.
"The complaint has been made recently and I understand that some time is required to have it investigated. "Naturally, I have agreed therefore to step aside from my role as Administrator of the Parish for the time being to allow the investigation to be completed.
"In accordance with the agreed protocol I shall not be involved in ministry during that period of time. I wish to reassure all of my parishioners, my fellow priests, deacon and religious that I look forward to a thorough and expeditious examination of this matter and I expect to return to my work in the parish in the near future.
"I hope that you will remember me in your thoughts and prayers in the weeks ahead and I look forward to returning soon to again serve you in the Parish of Newry."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-44190496

A priest based in Newry, County Down, has confirmed he has stepped aside from public ministry while a historical allegation against him is investigated.
Canon Francis Brown, administrator of Newry Cathedral Parish, has issued statement saying he expects to return to work when the investigation is over.
Earlier, the PSNI said they were investigating "an historical allegation of abuse against a member of clergy in the Diocese of Dromore". The complaint was made in April.
Canon Brown is originally from Hilltown, County Down. He is a former president of St Colman's College, a boy's secondary school in Newry.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on May 30, 2018, 03:41:20 PM
Quote from: dec on March 22, 2018, 06:45:13 PM
Quote from: stiffler on March 22, 2018, 06:19:00 PM
I see on the news another ex st Colmans teacher Patrick carton was found guilty of indecent assaults on students on occasions as recently as 2007.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43500697

13 years in jail
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on May 30, 2018, 07:43:01 PM
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/05/24/news/concerns-raised-over-how-catholic-diocese-of-dromore-handled-allegation-made-against-newry-cathedral-administrator-1337041/

CONCERNS have been raised over how the Catholic diocese of Dromore has handled an allegation made against the administrator of Newry Cathedral. It was revealed last weekend that Canon Francis Brown had stepped aside from public ministry while the allegation against him was investigated. However, it was claimed today that the priest remained in ministry in the diocese for six weeks after being made aware of the accusation.

The Nolan Show on BBC Radio Ulster reported Canon Brown was told about the allegation by a member of the public at the beginning of March 2018 and again a number of weeks later. It was reported he refused to make his diocese aware of the allegation and said it was not his responsibility to refer himself to Church authorities. However, diocesan guidelines state when someone makes a complaint they should be provided with contact details of the designated liaison person as the disclosing person may wish to ask questions later.

While the nature of the allegation had been previously unclear, the Nolan Show claimed it had spoken to the alleged victim who said it was a "sexual abuse allegation" and relates to a period when the priest was in St Colman's College, Newry.

In a statemen the Dromore diocese said it was aware of the "suggestions and comments" made on the radio show. "The diocese also wishes to clarify that Canon Brown was advised of an allegation and agreed to step aside from all ministry within the diocese and associated bodies," it said. "While he may currently be named on some school websites as a member of the safeguarding team he has voluntarily stepped aside from all ministry and such publications are under revision. "This status will remain while the police investigation is ongoing."

It was also reported the priest continues to be listed as a contact for safeguarding issues for schools in the parish. But a CCMS spokesman said Canon Brown had "stepped aside from his roles as a school governor in St Clare's Abbey Primary School, Newry and St Joseph's High School, Newry" pending the outcome of the police investigation. "Arrangements are being made to replace him and all school literature is being updated to reflect the new governance structures at both schools." A solicitor for Canon Brown said he "categorically asserts that he has never at any time behaved inappropriately to any child or adult". "Police have not asked to meet with Canon Brown and, if they do make such a request, he will co-operate fully with them in any investigation which they undertake," they added.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on June 11, 2018, 04:06:25 PM
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ex-school-principal-goes-on-trial-for-sexual-abuse-of-nine-boys-1.3526723

A former primary school principal is to stand trial accused of sexual offences against nine boys, a judge ordered on Monday. Christian Brother Paul Dunleavy appeared before Belfast Magistrates' Court to face a total of 41 charges. The 82-year-old, with an address at the Province Centre, Griffith Avenue in Dublin, allegedly committed multiple counts of indecent assault and gross indecency towards a child. He is also accused of attempted buggery and inciting gross indecency. The charges span a ten-year period between 1969 and 1978. At the time, he taught at the now-closed St Colman's Abbey Primary School in Newry.

During a preliminary enquiry hearing he confirmed that he understood the allegations against him. Prosecutors submitted that he had a prima facie case to answer. District Judge Fiona Bagnall granted an application to have the accused returned for Crown Court trial on a date to be fixed, the Courts Service confirmed. He was released on continuing bail of £500 until those proceedings get underway.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-44442063

A former headmaster of a Newry primary school has appeared in court charged with 41 sexual offences against children. Christian Brother Paul Dunleavy, 82, with an address at the Province Centre on Dublin's Griffith Avenue, appeared in Laganside Magistrates' Court. The charges relate to the 1960s and 70s when Br Dunleavy was a teacher at St Colman's Abbey Primary School in Newry. They include accusations from nine boys. He was released on £500 bail.

The school closed in 2014 when it was merged with another school in the city. At Monday's brief hearing, Br Dunleavy confirmed that he understood the nature of the charges against him.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on August 14, 2018, 09:59:39 PM
300 priests - 1000+victims - been happening 70+ years

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/14/us/pennsylvania-catholic-church-grand-jury/index.html

Quote(CNN)A new grand jury report says that internal documents from six Catholic dioceses in Pennsylvania show that more than 300 "predator priests" have been credibly accused of sexually abusing more than 1,000 child victims.

"We believe that the real number of children whose records were lost or who were afraid ever to come forward is in the thousands," the grand jury report says.

"Priests were raping little boys and girls, and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing; they hid it all. For decades. Monsignors, auxiliary bishops, bishops, archbishops, cardinals have mostly been protected; many, including some named in this report, have been promoted. Until that changes, we think it is too early to close the book on the Catholic Church sex scandal."

The lengthy report, released Tuesday afternoon, investigates clergy sexual abuse in six dioceses dating back to 1947. Pennsylvania's two other dioceses, Philadelphia and Altoona-Johnstown, were the subjects of earlier grand jury reports, which found similarly damaging information about clergy and bishops in those dioceses.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: gallsman on August 15, 2018, 10:03:09 AM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on August 14, 2018, 09:59:39 PM
300 priests - 1000+victims - been happening 70+ years

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/14/us/pennsylvania-catholic-church-grand-jury/index.html

Quote(CNN)A new grand jury report says that internal documents from six Catholic dioceses in Pennsylvania show that more than 300 "predator priests" have been credibly accused of sexually abusing more than 1,000 child victims.

"We believe that the real number of children whose records were lost or who were afraid ever to come forward is in the thousands," the grand jury report says.

"Priests were raping little boys and girls, and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing; they hid it all. For decades. Monsignors, auxiliary bishops, bishops, archbishops, cardinals have mostly been protected; many, including some named in this report, have been promoted. Until that changes, we think it is too early to close the book on the Catholic Church sex scandal."

The lengthy report, released Tuesday afternoon, investigates clergy sexual abuse in six dioceses dating back to 1947. Pennsylvania's two other dioceses, Philadelphia and Altoona-Johnstown, were the subjects of earlier grand jury reports, which found similarly damaging information about clergy and bishops in those dioceses.

Another tough read.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: ONeill on August 15, 2018, 11:28:40 AM
"Also in Allentown, a priest who had abused several boys, according to the grand jury, was given a recommendation to work at Disney World."
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hereiam on September 12, 2018, 10:17:35 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45500072  (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45500072)

What are other countries not tellin
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Evil Genius on September 14, 2018, 12:46:16 AM
Quote from: Hereiam on September 12, 2018, 10:17:35 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45500072  (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45500072)

What are other countries not tellin
(Flying visit, so no time to dwell on this, but)
Heard this on the radio this morning:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bh5x24 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bh5x24)

Shocking.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on September 20, 2018, 02:12:37 PM
Former priest sentenced to 200 hours community service for indecently assaulting a boy

Downpatrick Court heard on Thursday morning that it was Curran's sixth conviction for abusing children.

What sort of community work should a paedophile be asked or allowed to do?

Surely this is case for appeal by Public Prosecution Service.

https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2018-09-20/former-priest-sentenced-to-200-hours-community-work-for-indecently-assaulting-a-boy/ (https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2018-09-20/former-priest-sentenced-to-200-hours-community-work-for-indecently-assaulting-a-boy/)


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: take_yer_points on October 07, 2018, 10:03:49 PM
Fr Gerard McAleer I believe...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45779109

A parish priest in the Archdiocese of Armagh has stood aside from his position due to concerns brought to the Diocese and reported to the Gardaí.

A statement from the Catholic Church was issued on Sunday afternoon.

It said the information received is historical and relates to a time prior to the man's ordination as a priest.

The statement added that the relevant statutory authorities in Northern Ireland have been informed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: sid waddell on October 07, 2018, 10:08:39 PM
Quote from: take_yer_points on October 07, 2018, 10:03:49 PM
Fr Gerard McAleer I believe...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45779109

A parish priest in the Archdiocese of Armagh has stood aside from his position due to concerns brought to the Diocese and reported to the Gardaí.

A statement from the Catholic Church was issued on Sunday afternoon.

It said the information received is historical and relates to a time prior to the man's ordination as a priest.

The statement added that the relevant statutory authorities in Northern Ireland have been informed.

Time for Mickey Harte to dust off the old character reference...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on October 07, 2018, 10:57:21 PM
Quote from: take_yer_points on October 07, 2018, 10:03:49 PM
Fr Gerard McAleer I believe...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45779109

A parish priest in the Archdiocese of Armagh has stood aside from his position due to concerns brought to the Diocese and reported to the Gardaí.

A statement from the Catholic Church was issued on Sunday afternoon.

It said the information received is historical and relates to a time prior to the man's ordination as a priest. The statement added that the relevant statutory authorities in Northern Ireland have been informed.

http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/10/07/news/parish-priest-and-former-long-time-tyrone-gaa-coach-fr-gerard-mcaleer-steps-aside-from-parish-role-after-historical-complaint-1452332/

A PARISH priest and former long-time coach with Tyrone GAA has stepped down from his parish role following a historical complaint. Fr Gerard McAleer, the PP of Donaghmore, has voluntarily stood aside following concerns relating to a time "prior to his ordination as a priest".
It is believed that Fr McAleer was ordained in the early 1980s.

The Tyrone priest is also well-known in education and sporting circles. A former principal of St Brigid's High School in Armagh and St Patrick's Academy in Dungannon, he was a close companion of Mickey Harte throughout many of Tyrone GAA's successes over recent decades.

The pair took over the county's minor side in 1991 and Fr McAleer served as assistant manager when Tyrone landed its first ever All-Ireland senior football title in 2003. Fr McAleer, believed to be in his early 60s, became parish priest in Donaghmore in the same year.

Parishioners in Donaghmore and neighbouring Galbally were informed of the news in an announcement read at Masses at the weekend. It is understood that Fr McAleer celebrated morning Mass in Donaghmore on Saturday but was not present for the vigil Mass later that evening.

The parish lies within the Archdiocese of Armagh, which released a statement but declined to name either the priest or the parish concerned. The Archbishop of Armagh is Eamon Martin, who as the Primate of All-Ireland is the head of the Catholic Church in Ireland.
The Archdiocese said that the priest had "voluntarily stood aside from his position because of concerns brought to the Diocese and reported to the Gardaí".
"The information received is historic and relates to a time prior to his time in ministry in the Archdiocese, and indeed prior to his ordination as a priest. The relevant statutory authorities in Northern Ireland have been informed."
The statement added that Archbishop Martin has appealed for prayers for all concerned while "stressing that the priest continues to be entitled to the natural right of every person to the presumption of innocence pending the completion of all relevant state and Church processes."

Gardai did not respond to requests for a comment
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: southtyronegael on October 08, 2018, 06:44:39 PM
hartes buddies starting to drop like flys. first bishop mc areavey now mc aleer.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bennydorano on October 08, 2018, 10:29:05 PM
Not a very likeable person from my own personal experiences in St Pats Armagh. Didnt strike me as very Christian.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: trailer on October 08, 2018, 10:34:22 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 08, 2018, 10:29:05 PM
Not a very likeable person from my own personal experiences in St Pats Armagh. Didnt strike me as very Christian.

He certainly was a strange being. However important to point out the allegations are not of a sexual nature and they relate to a time before he was ordained, over 40 years ago. Difficult to investigate this given how memories fade over time. 
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim Bob on October 08, 2018, 10:40:35 PM
Not of a sexual nature ? Where was this stated?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: bennydorano on October 08, 2018, 10:56:33 PM
Funny i said today it wouldn't surprise me if the accusations were of a non sexual nature and quite possibly could be physical abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: southtyronegael on October 08, 2018, 10:59:14 PM
the statement released by the church does not say whether it was sexual or not.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: trailer on October 08, 2018, 11:48:08 PM
They're non sexual
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Jim Bob on October 09, 2018, 07:07:30 AM
Quote from: trailer on October 08, 2018, 11:48:08 PM
They're non sexual

How do you know for certain?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: trailer on October 09, 2018, 11:47:44 AM
Quote from: Jim Bob on October 09, 2018, 07:07:30 AM
Quote from: trailer on October 08, 2018, 11:48:08 PM
They're non sexual

How do you know for certain?

I'm reliably informed that is the case.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: GetOverTheBar on October 09, 2018, 01:33:34 PM
Was in St.Patricks Academy at the time McAleer was in charge.

Doubt its sexual, wouldn't surprise me one bit if it was physical as previously stated - not a very pleasant man I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: The Iceman on October 09, 2018, 02:25:07 PM
I remember him dishing out digs to lads, particularly boarders at school, all the time. He periodically would kick me if I had my legs stretched out under the desk. He put one lad in the bin for most of a class many times. He definitely was old school when it came to that kind of thing. Acted more like my Dad's school teachers from 60s and 70s than you would have expected in the 90s.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: el_cuervo_fc on October 09, 2018, 02:54:42 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on October 09, 2018, 02:25:07 PM
I remember him dishing out digs to lads, particularly boarders at school, all the time. He periodically would kick me if I had my legs stretched out under the desk. He put one lad in the bin for most of a class many times. He definitely was old school when it came to that kind of thing. Acted more like my Dad's school teachers from 60s and 70s than you would have expected in the 90s.

There was always a wickedness in him from memory and he wasn't afraid to remind of his boxing days.  A few of the boarders seemed to be singled out most of the time too.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: five points on October 09, 2018, 02:57:05 PM
If this is the new standard, every second male teacher from the 80s is for the chop now...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: GetOverTheBar on October 09, 2018, 03:12:21 PM
Apparently it's a financial irregularity at play here.

Can't help but think of the old 'but that money was just resting in my account' now.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on October 09, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Sounds like a lovely man with a perfect temperament to be a priest and to be involved in Tyrone football.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Therealdonald on October 09, 2018, 07:44:16 PM
Quote from: Itchy on October 09, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Sounds like a lovely man with a perfect temperament to be a priest and to be involved in Tyrone football.

Wouldn't believe everything you read on here.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: southtyronegael on October 09, 2018, 08:55:46 PM
Quote from: Itchy on October 09, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Sounds like a lovely man with a perfect temperament to be a priest and to be involved in Tyrone football.
mickey harte only keeps the finest of company.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Dougal Maguire on October 09, 2018, 09:01:27 PM
He was in my Parish for a while some years ago. A more aloof, head up my own arse, arrogant person I've yet to meet.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: 02 on October 09, 2018, 09:21:55 PM
Quote from: Therealdonald on October 09, 2018, 07:44:16 PM
Quote from: Itchy on October 09, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Sounds like a lovely man with a perfect temperament to be a priest and to be involved in Tyrone football.

Wouldn't believe everything you read on here.

Probably sound advice but in this case every word I've read is true unfortunately, he was hateful.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rrhf on October 10, 2018, 07:29:41 AM
You lads should go on rate myteacher.Com.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: TyroneOnlooker on October 10, 2018, 07:53:13 AM
Have to say my own experience of Fr McAleer in Academy days was of a fairly decent man. Aloof yes but sure what priest wouldn't seem aloof to a school of teenage boys. Loved the football and would have had a stern word if messing about. Never saw anything physical and would be very surprised if the allegations are of a sexual nature. Think many parishioners in Donaghmore would be fond of him too.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: rrhf on October 10, 2018, 09:02:39 AM
Fair play and agreed.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Hardy on October 11, 2018, 05:35:04 PM
Did all the Tyrone posters on the board go to the same school?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Smokin Joe on October 11, 2018, 08:32:34 PM
Quote from: Hardy on October 11, 2018, 05:35:04 PM
Did all the Tyrone posters on the board go to the same school?

Looks like they went to a different school to the Armagh ones that Fr McAleer taught at
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: trailer on October 11, 2018, 09:08:06 PM
He taught in St Patrick's Grammar Armagh and later became Principal of St Patrick's Academy in Dungannon replacing Father Faul.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: maddog on October 11, 2018, 09:44:32 PM
Wasn't he at st Brigids in Armagh as well for a time?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Smokin Joe on October 11, 2018, 09:52:59 PM
Quote from: maddog on October 11, 2018, 09:44:32 PM
Wasn't he at st Brigids in Armagh as well for a time?

Yeah, I think he left St Pat's and then went to Principal at St Brigid's.  I left St Pat's in 1995 and I think it was shortly after that he moved across the city.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Don Johnson on October 11, 2018, 10:12:38 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on October 09, 2018, 08:55:46 PM
Quote from: Itchy on October 09, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Sounds like a lovely man with a perfect temperament to be a priest and to be involved in Tyrone football.
mickey harte only keeps the finest of company.

What a pathetic c**k head you are.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: 02 on October 12, 2018, 12:01:53 AM
Quote from: Smokin Joe on October 11, 2018, 09:52:59 PM
Quote from: maddog on October 11, 2018, 09:44:32 PM
Wasn't he at st Brigids in Armagh as well for a time?

Yeah, I think he left St Pat's and then went to Principal at St Brigid's.  I left St Pat's in 1995 and I think it was shortly after that he moved across the city.

Yes think he moved in the late 90s. Funny how the Tyrone posters have a different view on him but in fairness he was extremely biased towards the Tyrone contingent at St. Pats, so I suppose he was ok if you weren't been put in bins or kicked for having your feet sticking out from under the desk etc...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: tonto1888 on October 12, 2018, 12:09:29 AM
Quote from: Smokin Joe on October 11, 2018, 09:52:59 PM
Quote from: maddog on October 11, 2018, 09:44:32 PM
Wasn't he at st Brigids in Armagh as well for a time?

Yeah, I think he left St Pat's and then went to Principal at St Brigid's.  I left St Pat's in 1995 and I think it was shortly after that he moved across the city.

It would have been. I started St Pats in 94 and I don't think he was at the school for a significant amount of time after I started
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on October 30, 2018, 10:09:19 PM
A few bad eggs  :-X - just in the last week alone

https://www.wjcl.com/article/former-savannah-priest-sentenced-to-20-years-in-prison-for-sex-crimes/24125874

https://nbc25news.com/news/local/catholic-priest-removed-from-fenton-church-following-sexual-harassment-allegation

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/former-catholic-priest-abused-36-children-including-five-year-old-girl-court-hears-20181029-p50cmy.html

https://www.thepostathens.com/article/2018/10/catholic-priest-sexual-battery-athens


Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on December 19, 2018, 10:58:43 PM
At least 700 priests and clergy members in Ill. alone

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/19/us/illinois-catholic-church-abuse-allegations/index.html
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on February 26, 2019, 12:57:17 AM
QuoteCardinal George Pell has been found guilty of sexual offences in Australia, making him the highest-ranking Catholic figure to receive such a conviction.

Pell abused two choir boys in the rooms of a Melbourne cathedral in 1996, a jury found. He had pleaded not guilty.

The verdict was handed down in December, but it could not be reported until now due to legal reasons.

Pell is due to be sentenced on Wednesday. His lawyers say they will appeal against the conviction.     
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: MoChara on February 26, 2019, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on February 26, 2019, 12:57:17 AM
QuoteCardinal George Pell has been found guilty of sexual offences in Australia, making him the highest-ranking Catholic figure to receive such a conviction.

Pell abused two choir boys in the rooms of a Melbourne cathedral in 1996, a jury found. He had pleaded not guilty.

The verdict was handed down in December, but it could not be reported until now due to legal reasons.

Pell is due to be sentenced on Wednesday. His lawyers say they will appeal against the conviction.     


Vatican treasurer supposedly the number 3 position in the entire church, that whole organisation was drunk on its own power and feeling on invincibility its good to take their past catching up with them
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: gallsman on February 27, 2019, 02:03:33 PM
Really wish Iceman was still around. If this was a senior Muslim cleric you'd have the likes of him, without a hint of irony, demanding to know why we're all so tolerant of such a rape cult.

f**king politicians like John Howard giving him glowing character references. Pell's lawyer, in arguing for a lower sentence described it as "vanilla sex"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on February 27, 2019, 02:30:52 PM
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick removed as a priest a couple of weeks ago

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/us/mccarrick-defrocked-vatican.html

Also in this last couple of weeks, the diocese of Brooklyn, which also covers Queens, released a list of over 100 priests who have credible accusations against them.

https://dioceseofbrooklyn.org/sex-abuse-crisis-response/list/
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on June 04, 2019, 07:08:10 PM
Quote from: dec on May 30, 2018, 07:43:01 PM
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/05/24/news/concerns-raised-over-how-catholic-diocese-of-dromore-handled-allegation-made-against-newry-cathedral-administrator-1337041/

CONCERNS have been raised over how the Catholic diocese of Dromore has handled an allegation made against the administrator of Newry Cathedral. It was revealed last weekend that Canon Francis Brown had stepped aside from public ministry while the allegation against him was investigated. However, it was claimed today that the priest remained in ministry in the diocese for six weeks after being made aware of the accusation.

...

This happened over a year ago and I haven't seen any updates

He is not listed among the priests in the Newry parish

http://www.newrycathedralparish.org/people-and-places/priests/

and a priest is still listed as "Acting Administrator: Fr. Desmond Loughran"
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Owen Brannigan on June 04, 2019, 10:09:13 PM
Quote from: dec on June 04, 2019, 07:08:10 PM
Quote from: dec on May 30, 2018, 07:43:01 PM
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/05/24/news/concerns-raised-over-how-catholic-diocese-of-dromore-handled-allegation-made-against-newry-cathedral-administrator-1337041/

CONCERNS have been raised over how the Catholic diocese of Dromore has handled an allegation made against the administrator of Newry Cathedral. It was revealed last weekend that Canon Francis Brown had stepped aside from public ministry while the allegation against him was investigated. However, it was claimed today that the priest remained in ministry in the diocese for six weeks after being made aware of the accusation.

...

This happened over a year ago and I haven't seen any updates

He is not listed among the priests in the Newry parish

http://www.newrycathedralparish.org/people-and-places/priests/

and a priest is still listed as "Acting Administrator: Fr. Desmond Loughran"

One of the major issues with clerical abuse is that the Church moves at a glacial speed in dealing with matters. Firstly, it will await any civil investigation by social services and/or police and then it will proceed according to Canon law which it believes supersedes civil law. Hence, any investigation will take years to be resolved. Totally ridiculous.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on August 19, 2019, 08:38:50 PM
http://www.newryreporter.com/pages/?title=CANON_CLEARED

Canon Francis Brown has been "unequivocally cleared" of any wrongdoing following a police probe into an allegation of an historical nature.
And the former Administrator of Newry Cathedral Parish expects to return to ministry in the very near future....

Meanwhile, a PPS decision not to prosecute a number of individuals following an 18-month police probe into abuse at St Colman's College has been described as "bitterly disappointing" for survivors of abuse.
The Reporter revealed in April that police had sent files on seven individuals to the PPS following its year-long investigation into Malachy Finegan and other abuse claims at the Newry school.
Over 30 people contacted a special police team that was set up following revelations of serial sexual abuse by Finegan during his tenure at St Colman's and as Parish Priest in Hilltown.
A PPS spokesperson said the Test for Prosecution has not been met in relation to files presented by police.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on September 18, 2019, 03:10:54 PM
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/18/news/concerns-raised-that-paedophile-priest-malachy-finegan-may-have-been-an-informer-1715181/

Concerns have been raised that alleged paedophile priest Malachy Finegan may have been an RUC informer. Finegan has been accused of sexual abuse across Co Down, including at St Colman's College in Newry where he taught from 1967. He also served was president of the school from 1976 to 1987.

The shocking revelations come just weeks after the Public Prosecution Service decided not to prosecute in eight cases following a police investigation linked to the activities of the former cleric. Kevin Winters, of KRW Law, last night confirmed that he has asked secretary of state Julian Smith on behalf on one of Finegan's alleged victims to establish an inquiry into the claims of abuse levelled against the priest and others. Finegan's long association with St Colman's College brought him into contact with thousands of school children from republican backgrounds across Co Down and south Armagh.

Last night Mr Winters said "a central part" of the application to Mr Smith "is the allegation that Finegan was some form of 'protected species' when it came to criminal inquiry into his conduct". "For many years there was anecdotal evidence only that he was some sort of low-level informant supplying information to the police on young fellas who might have been suspected republicans," he said. "Many lads at St Colman's college came from republican areas such as south Armagh. "That would have formed the basis for some sort of engagement with the RUC about what he knew on certain individuals."

The solicitor revealed that "mounting suspicion was crystallised" when he was informed by letter recently "that on the grounds of NCND (neither confirm nor deny) the PSNI would be unable to rebut the simple allegation that Finegan was an informant". Mr Winters has raised concerns about the PSNI's reliance on NCND saying the "policy is rolled out by the police when they want to protect the life of an alleged informant" and when there is a need to protect the lives of relatives if the person is dead. "I think its extraordinary that the police have seen fit to hide behind this blanket policy given that Finegan is dead nearly 20 years and he has obviously no surviving relatives," he said. "Questions have to be asked why this approach has been taken here."

The senior lawyer also raised the prospect that Finegan may have breached the confidential seal of confession - a sacrament of the Catholic Church. "It also raises a very disturbing issue on the usurping of the sanctity of the confessional box - for many over and above the immediate victims this is just too horrendous to contemplate," he said. He added that "the continued absence of any explanations for the systemic cover up on Finnegan's criminal activities the issuing of the NCND notice by the police may have inadvertently provided us with the answer. "To that end it's a case of the reasons staring us in the face all along."

High profile figures who attended St Colman's have in the past spoken of their own encounters with the alleged predator. Mr Winters, who is also a former pupil at the school, has spoken about his own "unsettling" experience of the former priest. The Dromore diocese has said the first allegation against the former priest surfaced in 1994, seven years after he left St Colman's College. Finegan, who died in 2002, was also a parish priest of Clonduff in Hilltown in Co Down, where it is alleged he carried out further serious sexual abuse.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 03, 2020, 12:23:50 AM
Rte documentary  monday  Redess  - Breaking the Silence --  excellent program.
In the pre program titles was the announcement that if you were upset by this program,  help lines were available.
But what for the people who were not upset by this program?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Itchy on March 03, 2020, 08:07:44 AM
Quote from: dec on September 18, 2019, 03:10:54 PM
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/18/news/concerns-raised-that-paedophile-priest-malachy-finegan-may-have-been-an-informer-1715181/

Concerns have been raised that alleged paedophile priest Malachy Finegan may have been an RUC informer. Finegan has been accused of sexual abuse across Co Down, including at St Colman's College in Newry where he taught from 1967. He also served was president of the school from 1976 to 1987.

The shocking revelations come just weeks after the Public Prosecution Service decided not to prosecute in eight cases following a police investigation linked to the activities of the former cleric. Kevin Winters, of KRW Law, last night confirmed that he has asked secretary of state Julian Smith on behalf on one of Finegan's alleged victims to establish an inquiry into the claims of abuse levelled against the priest and others. Finegan's long association with St Colman's College brought him into contact with thousands of school children from republican backgrounds across Co Down and south Armagh.

Last night Mr Winters said "a central part" of the application to Mr Smith "is the allegation that Finegan was some form of 'protected species' when it came to criminal inquiry into his conduct". "For many years there was anecdotal evidence only that he was some sort of low-level informant supplying information to the police on young fellas who might have been suspected republicans," he said. "Many lads at St Colman's college came from republican areas such as south Armagh. "That would have formed the basis for some sort of engagement with the RUC about what he knew on certain individuals."

The solicitor revealed that "mounting suspicion was crystallised" when he was informed by letter recently "that on the grounds of NCND (neither confirm nor deny) the PSNI would be unable to rebut the simple allegation that Finegan was an informant". Mr Winters has raised concerns about the PSNI's reliance on NCND saying the "policy is rolled out by the police when they want to protect the life of an alleged informant" and when there is a need to protect the lives of relatives if the person is dead. "I think its extraordinary that the police have seen fit to hide behind this blanket policy given that Finegan is dead nearly 20 years and he has obviously no surviving relatives," he said. "Questions have to be asked why this approach has been taken here."

The senior lawyer also raised the prospect that Finegan may have breached the confidential seal of confession - a sacrament of the Catholic Church. "It also raises a very disturbing issue on the usurping of the sanctity of the confessional box - for many over and above the immediate victims this is just too horrendous to contemplate," he said. He added that "the continued absence of any explanations for the systemic cover up on Finnegan's criminal activities the issuing of the NCND notice by the police may have inadvertently provided us with the answer. "To that end it's a case of the reasons staring us in the face all along."

High profile figures who attended St Colman's have in the past spoken of their own encounters with the alleged predator. Mr Winters, who is also a former pupil at the school, has spoken about his own "unsettling" experience of the former priest. The Dromore diocese has said the first allegation against the former priest surfaced in 1994, seven years after he left St Colman's College. Finegan, who died in 2002, was also a parish priest of Clonduff in Hilltown in Co Down, where it is alleged he carried out further serious sexual abuse.

Given that he is a child rapist I cant say I would be surprised that he informed to the police or shock/horror broke the confessional seal.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Harold Disgracey on March 03, 2020, 10:48:54 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 03, 2020, 12:23:50 AM
Rte documentary  monday  Redess  - Breaking the Silence --  excellent program.
In the pre program titles was the announcement that if you were upset by this program,  help lines were available.
But what for the people who were not upset by this program?

That was a powerful documentary. Shame on Fianna Fáil, shame on the Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Main Street on March 04, 2020, 10:48:45 PM
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on March 03, 2020, 10:48:54 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 03, 2020, 12:23:50 AM
Rte documentary  monday  Redess  - Breaking the Silence --  excellent program.
In the pre program titles was the announcement that if you were upset by this program,  help lines were available.
But what for the people who were not upset by this program?

That was a powerful documentary. Shame on Fianna Fáil, shame on the Catholic Church.
I have just watched the 2nd part,  the documentary (both parts)  is an outstanding achievement, one of the best I have ever seen. I had not realised what a  sham the redress boards and the various reports were for all those who were abused. The status quo certainly rallied to protect the church and deny the voice of the abused.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: FL/MAYO on March 05, 2020, 08:17:34 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2020, 10:48:45 PM
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on March 03, 2020, 10:48:54 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 03, 2020, 12:23:50 AM
Rte documentary  monday  Redess  - Breaking the Silence --  excellent program.
In the pre program titles was the announcement that if you were upset by this program,  help lines were available.
But what for the people who were not upset by this program?

That was a powerful documentary. Shame on Fianna Fáil, shame on the Catholic Church.
I have just watched the 2nd part,  the documentary (both parts)  is an outstanding achievement, one of the best I have ever seen. I had not realised what a  sham the redress boards and the various reports were for all those who were abused. The status quo certainly rallied to protect the church and deny the voice of the abused.

A person very close to me was in one of these homes until she was 6. She says she wasn't treated to badly ( even though they used to punish her by sticking needles into her body) and that the older children were treated way worse than she was. She received compensation, she donated it back to a Catholic charity because as she says she wasn't treated as badly as the others. The Catholic charity took her money without even asking where it had come from, she didn't have a penny to her name at the time.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 09:53:31 AM
Why was St Colmans Newry not demolished?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Orior on September 30, 2021, 10:01:06 AM
Quote from: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 09:53:31 AM
Why was St Colmans Newry not demolished?

Why - did we beat you in the MacRory Cup or Hogan Cup?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 10:05:03 AM
Quote from: Orior on September 30, 2021, 10:01:06 AM
Quote from: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 09:53:31 AM
Why was St Colmans Newry not demolished?

Why - did we beat you in the MacRory Cup or Hogan Cup?

You should listen to Nolan
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: lurganblue on September 30, 2021, 10:16:00 AM
Quote from: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 10:05:03 AM
Quote from: Orior on September 30, 2021, 10:01:06 AM
Quote from: Truth hurts on September 30, 2021, 09:53:31 AM
Why was St Colmans Newry not demolished?

Why - did we beat you in the MacRory Cup or Hogan Cup?

You should listen to Nolan

Nobody should
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: RedHand88 on September 30, 2021, 10:36:50 AM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on March 05, 2020, 08:17:34 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2020, 10:48:45 PM
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on March 03, 2020, 10:48:54 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 03, 2020, 12:23:50 AM
Rte documentary  monday  Redess  - Breaking the Silence --  excellent program.
In the pre program titles was the announcement that if you were upset by this program,  help lines were available.
But what for the people who were not upset by this program?

That was a powerful documentary. Shame on Fianna Fáil, shame on the Catholic Church.
I have just watched the 2nd part,  the documentary (both parts)  is an outstanding achievement, one of the best I have ever seen. I had not realised what a  sham the redress boards and the various reports were for all those who were abused. The status quo certainly rallied to protect the church and deny the voice of the abused.

A person very close to me was in one of these homes until she was 6. She says she wasn't treated to badly ( even though they used to punish her by sticking needles into her body) and that the older children were treated way worse than she was. She received compensation, she donated it back to a Catholic charity because as she says she wasn't treated as badly as the others. The Catholic charity took her money without even asking where it had come from, she didn't have a penny to her name at the time.

Ffs.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on March 21, 2022, 12:43:25 PM
I don't suppose there are a lot of Belfast Telegraph subscribers on here but if anyone can access the full text of this article could they post it

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/clerical-abuse-at-st-colmans-the-fear-was-constant-never-knowing-when-the-next-beating-would-be-41459985.html

Clerical abuse at St Colman's: 'The fear was constant, never knowing when the next beating would be

One of the victims of paedophile priest Fr Malachy Finegan opens up about the abuse he suffered
March 18 2022 06:00 AM

They were the elite of Catholic society, the sons of doctors, solicitors, and wealthy business families.
Many of the pupils had close links to the Church, priests, nuns and even bishops were common among the extended families of the boys who boarded at St Colman's College in Newry...
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Average Score on March 21, 2022, 01:00:01 PM
I am sure it will be nice and balanced written by Allison Morris.
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: Milltown Row2 on March 21, 2022, 01:08:15 PM
Quote from: Average Score on March 21, 2022, 01:00:01 PM
I am sure it will be nice and balanced written by Allison Morris.

What sort of balance are you looking for? "the lad deserved it"?  "They were cheeky shites so I gave them a slap" Or he didn't mean to sexually abuse him?
Title: Re: Clerical abuse!
Post by: dec on January 30, 2024, 02:48:42 PM
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northern-ireland/malachy-finegan-victim-to-receive-500000-in-damages-2E5YMVJ325E6RBXFFAYONXVUW4/

December 21, 2023 at 1:48PM GMT

A man who claimed a paedophile priest subjected him to years of sexual and physical abuse at a Co Down school is to receive £500,000 in damages, the High Court has heard.
The settlement was reached in an action over alleged historical assaults by the late Fr Malachy Finegan.
The plaintiff, who is not being named, sued the Diocese of Dromore and the board of governors at St Colman's College in Newry.
Proceedings centred on alleged attacks on him over a five year period while a pupil at the school during the 1980s.
A statement of claim said he was targeted and groomed by Finegan for the purposes of an abusive sexual, physical and emotional relationship.

He was sexually assaulted in a series of locations, including the vestry, priests' corridor and lounge, the nuns' chapel and the President's business office, according to court papers.
Finegan also allegedly choked the plaintiff, punched and slapped him on multiple occasions, and threatened him not to make any disclosure.
Lawyers for the man said he believes the priest surreptitiously put vodka in his fizzy drink before molesting him.
He lived in constant fear during his time as a student at the college, became suicidal and even considered burning down the priests' chapel.
It was alleged that the assaults became less frequent when Finegan moved on to abuse a younger boy as a replacement.

Since leaving the school the plaintiff has spent several years unable to work due to his psychological injuries and trauma.
The case is one of a number of actions focused on the activities of Finegan.
He taught and worked at St Colman's College from 1967 to 1987, spending the last decade as the school's president. The priest, who died on 2002, was accused of a long campaign of child sexual abuse but never prosecuted or questioned by police about claims made against him.
In 2018 it emerged that the Diocese of Dromore had settled a previous claim made by one of his alleged victims. At that stage the Board of Governors at St Colman's condemned the physical, sexual and emotional abuse inflicted by Finegan while he worked there. His image was also removed from the school's photographs.
Legal action against the defendants involved claims for negligence, assault, battery and trespass to the person.

In court on Thursday, counsel for the plaintiff, David Ringland KC, announced that his client is to receive £500,000 damages plus costs under the terms of the resolution.
No admission of liability was made by the defendants.
Outside court the man's solicitor, Claire McKeegan of Phoenix Law, said: "This settlement is a welcome vindication for our client who was repeatedly sexually abused as a young boy by the former president of St Colmans College.
"Malachy Finegan was a priest of the Catholic Church who resided in the college. For three decades he acted under the protective cloak of the church."
Ms McKeegan added: "For children like my client, there was no escape from his campaign of terror.
"The pain and suffering is lifelong for children who have been violated in this grotesque manner by those in positions of trust."