Clerical abuse!

Started by D4S, May 20, 2009, 05:09:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

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?

The State
The Church
Split 50/50

ludermor

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'.

The Iceman

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.
I will always keep myself mentally alert, physically strong and morally straight

Main Street

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.

ardmhachaabu

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?
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

ardmhachaabu

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.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

ardmhachaabu

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.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

ardmhachaabu

Main Street, very brave of you.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

The Iceman

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.
I will always keep myself mentally alert, physically strong and morally straight

Farrandeelin

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.
Inaugural Football Championship Prediction Winner.

Maguire01

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.

ardmhachaabu

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.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

Myles Na G.

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.

pintsofguinness

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. 
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?

ardmhachaabu

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.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something

pintsofguinness

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? 
Which one of you bitches wants to dance?