|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 24, 2017 21:33:58 GMT
Have read Jason Berry and Gerald Renner's VOWS OF SILENCE (2004) which juxtaposes the sidelining of Fr Thomas Doyle for trying to get the US bishops to act on clerical abuse, with the long career and glorification of the serial rapist and all-round criminal Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the Legionaries of Christ. Immediate impressions (1) Makes my blood boil once again. Never forget how many children were violated and how many creeps were covered up for and left to rape again. (2) Whatever shortcomings Fr Doyle may have in other respects, he genuinely hungered and thirsted for justice. If he (and victims) have got out of line in other areas the primary blame must always lie with the perverts and their enablers. (3) A large number of very distinguished Catholics got fooled up and down the line by Maciel, and their statements make painful reading. (Incidentally, the book slates Cardinal Ratzinger for not acting promptly against Maciel, though it mentions in passing a claim - later shown to be correct by his actions as Benedict XVI - that Ratzinger in fact wished to move against Maciel but was blocked by Cardinal Sodano, IP II's Secretary of State.) (4) The book is structured as a narrative rather than an argument, assuming rather than arguing for the view that orthodoxy is simply unbelievable and that pretending to believe it created the conditions for the cover-up. Hans Kung and Co are presented as super-geniuses and suffering saints, and the idea that there are such things as faith and authority independent of the subjective are treated as undemocratic and unAmerican in a way that reminds me of Paul Blanshard. (5) That said, while the Legion comes across as distinctly cult-like, some of its practices do sound suspiciously like certain pre-Vatican II interpretations of religious obedience.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 1, 2017 21:48:29 GMT
Marie Collins has resigned from the papal commission on clerical abuse, complaining that elements in the curia are dragging their feet. (A recent case where a prominent Italian priest, having been reinstated in the clerical state as an act of mercy, was convicted in civil courts of further abuse is probably relevant.) After so much suffering, the Roman authorities seem to be going backwards. I did think Pope Francis would handle this issue better and would build on what Pope Benedict did to prevent it happening again. www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2017/03/01/abuse-survivor-resigns-from-popes-panel-over-vatican-resistance/
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 24, 2017 21:38:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 8, 2017 19:49:48 GMT
Rod Dreher discusses the ongoing cost (and I don't mean financial) of the clerical abuse scandals and coverups, in the context of the claim by the notoriously thuggish President Duterte of the Philippines that he disregards church condemnation of his active promotion of vigilante killings because he was abused by a priest at school. www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/duterte-sex-abuse-street-justice/This from the combox is worth noting (and I have read SACRILEGE - it's unbearable): EXTRACT Lee Podles says: May 1, 2017 at 5:19 pm As Rod knows, for years I immersed myself in the cases of sexual abuse, sometimes working 18 hours a day or through the night. Putting my hands into a filing cabinet and taking out a case was like putting my hands into a septic tank. And the result – a book, Sacrilege, which no one wanted to read – too painful. As a cradle Catholic I never had to weigh the claims of one church against another and decide which one to join; for me there was only one church. The revelation of the corruption and cynicism and disregard for the suffering of the innocent, even at the highest levels, including John Paul II, who refused to think about the abuse that was reported to him, was disheartening, but not disillusioning, as I knew enough church history to know there had been similar or worse horrors. After reading about the Holocaust I wished I could resign from the human race; the Church is simply the new humanity that is being regenerated by Christ. It is in the process of regeneration, just as I am in the process of regeneration. Why God does things over time, why He took six days to make the world, why He took centuries to form the Jewish people, why He is taking millennia to form to the Church into His spotless Bride, I do not know, but that is the way He operates. I wonder why He did not create all rational creatures with the Beatific Vision so that we would never sin; but He allowed sin to enter the world for His own purposes. Perhaps at the Last Judgment when the entire history of the universe is revealed and God pronounces His judgment on it we will be able to see that He has done all things well. But now we walk in the darkness of faith trusting that our Creator is aiming at our ultimate good. [NFR: As Lee knows, I was one of the readers who could not make it through “Sacrilege”. As I recall, Lee quoted in detail from actual police reports. I had by that time already come through a hell of a lot more of that kind of thing that 99 percent of all people in the pews … and still, I was stopped cold by what I was reading. I can remember exactly where I was sitting — what the room looked like, what the quality of light in it was, etc. — when I closed the book only a few pages in, feeling that I had touched something so evil that it would kill a part of me to continue. Understand, *this wasn’t Lee’s fault.* He was simply reporting on what actually happened. Over the subsequent years, when Catholics have gotten on their high horse with me about losing my Catholic faith, I’ve often thought they should read “Sacrilege,” written by a faithful Catholic who remained a faithful Catholic, and see how well they do. But then, I wouldn’t wish that kind of encounter with the devil on anybody. All respect to you, Lee! I don’t know how you did it and came out the other side. — RD] END OF EXTRACT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 23, 2017 14:47:33 GMT
Lest we forget www.independent.ie/irish-news/brendan-smyths-evil-deeds-can-never-be-forgotten-35958053.htmlI have been reading quite a few accounts of Oxford Movement converts lately, and one of the major differences they saw between Rome and Anglicanism was that the former maintained the emphasis of the Early Church on asceticism through its religious orders and their involvement in works of charity, while the latter had nothing of the kind. (Later in the century religious orders were established within the Anglican church, and the influence of tractarianism -and of some forms of evangelicalism - led to a much greater direct involvement of Anglican parish clergy in the corporal works of mercy than had been customary.) How tragic that that apostolic witness has been obscured by such crimes and their cover-up. That is not the only tragedy, of course, but it is one we ought not to forget. BTW it seems from this report that "Anne the Lay Apostle" and her cronies have succeeded in buying the former Kilnacrott Abbey.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 18, 2017 19:43:48 GMT
Recently saw Aisling Walsh's 2003 film SONG FOR A RAGGY BOY - about an industrial school in 1939/40 - when there was a one-off screening at the Irish Film Institute. I didn't see it at the time it came out, and I am not sufficiently familiar with the literature on industrial schools to assess it fully (though I have read the memoir by Patrick Galvin on which it is based) but it may be worthwhile making a few observations. Nothing that I say about inaccuracies or oddities is intended to deny or downplay the horrible brutality and corruption of the industrial school system in this period. It is simply aimed at critical awareness of the distinction between a literary artefact and the historical material on which it is based. (1) I understand that Patrick Galvin was dissatisfied with the finished work (his original screenplay was heavily reworked, so that the screenwriting credit goes to Walsh and another writer. It would be interesting to see what was changed - I am not suggesting any sinister motive, by the way; any text has to be changed around to work on screen. Two obvious reasons that come to mind are (a) the film is transformed from an individual memoir to something which aims to encapsulate the system as a whole - thus, Galvin stated in interviews that while he witnessed and experienced horrific physical abuse he was never aware of sexual abuse while he was there, but the film has a sexually abusive Brother whose activities are known and tolerated by one other staff member. There is an incident in the memoir where a boy is beaten and seriously injured, but in the film he is actually beaten to death. Galvin was in Glencree reformatory (run by the Oblates of Mary Immaculate) but at one point early in the film a group of boys are shown rehearsing a brass band (suggesting Artane). (b) The film is much more centred than the memoir on the character of the Spanish Civil War veteran teaching in the school (played by Aidan Quinn) who is given a fairly standard Hollywood story arc about a charismatic teacher unlocking the potential of pupils who have been stifled by authoritarian schooling methods, and eventually confronting the school authorities themselves and making a permanent difference. The original character did make a significant difference to Galvin's experience and to his future life, but I recall him as being notably more marginal to the school's life in the memoir, while the role of the well-intentioned but ineffectual principal is downplayed (though the memoir does mention the new teacher as influencing the principal, who is somewhat burnt-out, to assert himself against the violent disciplinarian prefect. I should note that the film does show that some staff-members are well-intentioned (the sympathetic elderly doorkeeper is straight from the memoir, though the film omits his alcoholism, and does not highlight how the orders used the schools as dumping-grounds for problem members, which of course was a disgraceful approach) and introduces various moments of pleasure for the boys which coexist with the most abysmal horrors. (2) The film seems to be a bit vague about the authority structures, and to try - rather questionably - to link the bishops more directly to the running of the schools than I understand was in fact the case. Thus, the opening scene shows the local bishop visiting the school to administer confirmation (which would have happened; the bishop by the way is a fictional bishop rather than a historical individual) which implies pretty clearly that he chooses not to look too far below the polished surface. This IMHO is pretty much fair comment, since bishops must bear responsibility for allowing such institutions to operate in their dioceses. Much more questionable are elements which downplay the extent to which religious orders operated autonomously - thus the principal complains that the prefect was foisted upon him by the bishop when such appointments would have been made by the superiors of the religious order, and it is the bishop rather than an order superior who is called in after the boy's death to transfer the abusers elsewhere and arrange the cover-up. The film also seems vague about the difference between a laybrother and a priest - one character is always addressed as "Brother" but refers to his "ordination" rather than "profession", and at the end of the film he is described as having been "transferred to a parish in America" which implies he was a priest. (The reformatory attended by Galvin was run by the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, who had both priests and laybrothers; others were run by the Christian Brothers, who are wholly lay.) The bishop is also addressed as "Your Excellency" rather than "Your Lordship". This post is already quite long, so I'll post it now and may add some thoughts later.
[ADDENDUM - Oblates are groups of secular priests who place themselves at the disposal of the diocesan bishop, so the OMI may have been more answerable to the bishop influence than a genuine religious order - but, as I say, the film is not very clear on such matters.]
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 22, 2017 22:37:23 GMT
A few more observations: There are two scenes in which abusers are shown praying with apparent sincerity. In one scene the individual has got himself into a mess and may simply be clutching at straws to get himself out of trouble, but in the other the abuser seems sincerely remorseful about what he has just done, which doesn't stop him from doing it again. The purpose of these scenes may be to suggest that piety is not a possible solution but part of the problem (since it encourages them to engage in self-deception about the real nature and causes of their actions). There is also a scene in which it is implied that a visiting priest who is hearing confessions not only treats a boy who tells him he has been abused as a sinner (this is a well authenticated phenomenon), but breaks the seal and tells the abuser, who then takes it out on the boy. This of course would be a heinous crime if true, but I wonder if there are authenticated incidents of this (I really don't know) and if so, why the breach is not shown directly rather than implied. The constant presence of Catholic images overlooking scenes of brutality and abuse (in the main plot and the Spanish Civil War flashbacks), however painful, is unquestionably a fair cop. Images were omnipresent in such institutions for the purpose of exciting devotion, and much good they did. We simply have to come to terms with this, just as we have to come to terms with the existence of Alexander VI (Borgia) and the tenth-century Theophylact popes. The Spanish Republicans are certainly romanticised, and the fact that the Aidan Quinn character is called a communist is emphasised (though the film is hazy about whether he actually is one) - but it struck me that since the film is set in 1939-40, someone might have been expected to mention the Hitler-Stalin Pact and the partition of Poland between them.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 22, 2017 19:21:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 22, 2017 19:29:00 GMT
For a bit of balance on this subject - I said BALANCE, not denial; we should NEVER go down that road - here is a list of some of the Hollywood and related industries' abusers who have anti-Catholic records stream.org/anti-catholic-media-figures-loom-large-in-sex-abuse-scandal/ The list is not altogether accurate - I would say for example that the characterisation of PHILOMENA is grossly slanderous, in saying that she "abandoned" her baby when she was coerced into giving him up for adoption when she was in a terribly isolated and vulnerable position. But it's worth bearing in mind when we see attempts made to blame everything on the Sacrament of Confession or clerical celibacy.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 4, 2018 23:26:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Mar 2, 2018 20:51:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 28, 2018 21:45:54 GMT
I have been aware for years (you only had to look at certain Catholic blogs and discussion sites) that Cardinal McCarrick (former archbishop of Washington DC) was credibly believed to have abused seminarians (the power a bishop has over seminarians makes any such relationship inherently abusive) but that no-one could prove what so many people knew, so at first I was simply glad that the truth had got out and he was being exposed for what he was. It was disgusting over the years to see him praised for promoting vocations, fundraising etc. I'm still glad that the facade has cracked and McCarrick is getting some justice however belated: catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2018/07/28/mccarrick-resigned-from-the-college-of-cardinals-wherein-fr-z-rants/www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/07/28/pope-accepts-cardinal-mccarricks-resignation-as-cardinal/but the more I think about it the more tremendously depressing it is that this went on for so long; especially it is depressing to see how influential McCarrick was in the American church (some of Pope Francis' more surprising episcopal appointments/promotions are attributed to his influence) and what a large number of bishops and other influential people,in the US and in Rome, must have known and said or did nothing while the few who spoke out were ignored or worse. This person actually was the main spokesman for the US Bishops' conference during the big wave of scandals around 2002, and played a leading role in drawing up the official regulations about how bishops should respond to child abuse. Read about the horrors at Rod Dreher's blog if you can stomach it. This sort of abomination and the associated loss of the church's moral authority is one reason why so many who once were faithful have gone over to Barabbas: www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2018/07/28/set-aside-ideology-the-us-bishops-are-guilty-of-a-collective-failure/www.catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?id=1620
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 17, 2018 21:35:29 GMT
Horrendous revelations about clerical abuse and coverups in several Pennsylvania dioceses, in some respects (the willingness of law enforcement to oblige church authorities, the abuse of bluecollar workers' deference to priests) reminiscent of what we had in Ireland. Rod Dreher's blog makes horrendous reading, but I feel a duty to keep myself informed on this to make myself face up to it. Some of the comments suggest people who just made it through the Boston scandals are now giving up in despair.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Aug 18, 2018 18:08:59 GMT
Horrendous revelations about clerical abuse and coverups in several Pennsylvania dioceses, in some respects (the willingness of law enforcement to oblige church authorities, the abuse of bluecollar workers' deference to priests) reminiscent of what we had in Ireland. Rod Dreher's blog makes horrendous reading, but I feel a duty to keep myself informed on this to make myself face up to it. Some of the comments suggest people who just made it through the Boston scandals are now giving up in despair. I think people are fed up with this and very angry at the Bishops and Cardinals. I saw one suggestion in a comments box that put forward the idea of putting the administrative and financial running of dioceses under the control of laypeople, with the Bishops mainly undertaking pastoral duties. I suppose the idea would be that any indication of malpractice by a cleric or financial irregularity could no longer be easily swept aside by a Bishop.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2018 18:16:55 GMT
A man who is outraged by the revelations concerning the child sex abuse decides to tackle the issue head-on... by screaming and cursing at random Mass goers.
Then we have this lovely comment from a Holier-Than-Thou Protestant or Non-Denom:
"Perverts" - for trying to remove some psycho from a church for shouting at random people. Also, I have to love the "satanic evil ugly faces" remark. For people who think so highly of themselves spiritually, these anti-Catholic Protestants and Non-Denoms sure have penchant for lying about and slandering people.
|
|