|
Post by hazelireland on Dec 18, 2008 18:21:57 GMT
Hibernicus,
I agree here, I am trying to avoid using the scandals as a tool in the atheism side of things.
Gabriel here wanted it to be silenced, to keep this gross breaking of the law in the confessional unpunished. Even guillaume here asked that we do not discuss it because it gives the atheists a tool to attack the church.
I honestly think that now that the awfulness HAS happened and HAS been made public that this is now an opportunity for the church. Instead they attempt to silence it and hide it.
We all know priests were moved out of the jurisdictions where they could be prosecuted. We all know of the letter in Latin from the pope threatening excommunication for anyone who spoke of their trauma. We all know of people like on this board who want it silenced rather than discussed.
But why? Is this not a chance for the church to make a wonderful example and impress everyone, theists and atheists alike?
Were they to ensure their own guilty clergy were presented for individual fair trials, were they to stand up and apologize unreservedly in person to all affected, were they to publicly announced the new stringent and effective measures they will put in place to ensure no one will ever be adversely affected in this way again.....
were they to do all this then I would stand in awe of the church and their fortitude and honesty.
They should retreat, withdraw and regroup. Cure the cancer within themselves and return as a force to be reckoned with.
Instead we see them do no such thing and indeed some of them even making attacks on Disney for taking advantage of children when they have shown they have NO RIGHT OR CREDENTIALS whatsoever to be dictating morality in the area of children.
So no, this should not descend into an Atheist V Theist debate. This should be where the theist side regroup and clean up their own houses before commenting on the state of other peoples houses. It is their chance to show they CAN be the moral guiding star that they claim to be. It pains me to see them refusing to take it.
|
|
|
Post by hazelireland on Dec 19, 2008 8:06:54 GMT
Has anyone who is a) not a troll and b) can use the quote function got anything to add here?
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 29, 2008 11:44:15 GMT
Now that Jibril has been banned as he so richly deserved, let us start the discussion again. For the reasons given in an earlier post I suggest atheists keep their contributions on this thread to a minimum; if any of them wish to start their own thread on the scandals I will respond there. The subject has been in the news again since our last debate with the publication of the Cloyne report - and, for the benefit of those like Guillaume who think we ought not to debate it, a real tsunami of debate is going to come down the pike when the horrors contained in the official reports on clerical abuse in the Dublin archdiocese and on abuse in residential institutions are released. There is a point which Hazel raised earlier to which I wish to reply (and if Hazel wishes to respond to this specific post on this thread I have no objection) - he claims the Church ought to withdraw from intervention in public affairs and cleanse itself before returning to the public arena. Certainly it ought to cleanse itself and I hope that this thread may make some contribution to doing so, but it cannot withdraw from public affairs any more than I can withdraw from being alive until I have cleansed myself of my sins, or the police force can suspend operations until it has cleansed itself of corruption, or the American school system can be shut down until teachers top seducing their pupils. (Mark Shea regularly reports such cases under the heading "If only teachers could marry! If only Women could be teachers!" Lest he be accused of trivialising the issue, may I point out that he reports cases of priests being successfully prosecuted for abuse, or bishops resigning over the issue under the heading "Let the Great Enema Continue". He also reports instances of courageous leadership or defence of unpopular doctrines by bishops under the heading, "Episcopal Spine Alert", but this heading is very rarely required. ) Even under an Alexander VI or a tenth-century Pornocracy, the Church's work must go on. Should St. Francis of Assisi have refused to follow God or propagate his friars until simony was eradicated and clerical chastity made universal? To stand up for truth is itself a means of purification.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 29, 2008 11:46:43 GMT
And let me go on record; based on the facts currently in the public domain, I think John Magee should resign as Bishop of Cloyne. He has not lived up to his own guidelines; he has not made full reports to the authorities (the Gardai) and thereby hindered their investigation of possible crimes; he may have allowed abusers to abuse further victims; and by giving scandal he has hindered the divine mission of the Church. Let the Great Enema continue.
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Dec 30, 2008 13:00:37 GMT
And let me go on record; based on the facts currently in the public domain, I think John Magee should resign as Bishop of Cloyne. He has not lived up to his own guidelines; he has not made full reports to the authorities (the Gardai) and thereby hindered their investigation of possible crimes; he may have allowed abusers to abuse further victims; and by giving scandal he has hindered the divine mission of the Church. Let the Great Enema continue. I'm afraid I agree. I am sorry for the bishop himself and I am sure he intended no harm, but if the facts are as reported then he will continue to give scandal as long as he remains in his position.
|
|
|
Post by Noelfitz on Dec 30, 2008 13:21:14 GMT
Hibernicus
You wrote: "a real tsunami of debate is going to come down the pike when the horrors contained in the official reports on clerical abuse in the Dublin archdiocese and on abuse in residential institutions are released."
I am afraid I have to agree.
The sexual and physical abuse of children is a scandal. Easy answers are difficult.
I heard on TV last night about Cathal O'Shannon saying he remembers his first day at a Christian Brothers school by the roars of a pupil being beaten.
Many of us remember the beatings carried out by religious in our schools.
Should Bishop Magee resign? Can he be forced out?
I am reminded of the complaint by Cardinal Cullen on the difficulty of getting rid of a bishop such as Bishop Moriarty of "hell is not hot enough or eternity long enough for these miscreants (Fenians)" fame.
Even though he was secretary to three Popes, Bishop Magee seems not to be very astute, as the controversy about altar rails in Cobh showed.
Perhaps the best thing for ordinary Catholics to do is pray for a solution and not to do anything that would inflame the situation or damage the Church. Discernment is needed.
.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 30, 2008 13:46:07 GMT
A couple of points. We are not talking about measured corporal punishment (for the record, I believe the total ban on it in schools was a mistake, which damaged discipline and thereby hurt shy and weak pupils) but about (a)sexual abuse (b) unmeasured, unrestrained violence, used to relieve the teacher's anger and break the pupil's will, and often occurring in circumstances where the pupil had no recourse to help (either because he was resident in an instituion, or because parent, senior teachers etc automatically assumed the teacher must be in the right). I agree prayer is needed, but so is discussion - saying nothing when the storm is raging all around us will do even more damage to the Church and ultimately to ourselves. We need to come to terms with this, both for its own sake and because we ought not to leave the task of explanation and atonement to the Church's internal and external enemies. Should the Bible not have included Job's complaints of his unmerited suffering, or described the corruption of many priests and kings?
|
|
|
Post by Noelfitz on Dec 30, 2008 15:59:27 GMT
Hibernicus,
The violence I saw in school was, at times, "unmeasured, unrestrained violence, used to relieve the teacher's anger and break the pupil's will". I have never discussed this and do not intend to now.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 15, 2009 16:49:34 GMT
Then don't discuss it - but there are other people who find discussion helpful. What you are saying is that because you don't want to discuss the issue no-one else should be allowed to either. If this causes you any distress, please stay off this thread and let others talk it out for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Noelfitz on Jan 15, 2009 21:03:32 GMT
Hibernicus
Thank you for your reply.
Yesterday I had lunch with six school friends from over 50 years ago.
We did talk about some teachers (priests and lay-men) who were sadists and recalled their brutality. One of these priests when he was dying talked about his teaching days with a very anti-Catholic former student. The priest totally denied he was so sadistic.
Is it really helpful to discuss the fact that some years ago Irish teachers were often sadistic and brutal?
One of my school-friends played a leading role in the abolition of corporal punishment in Irish schools.
I really do not see why crimes should be reported to the clergy, the HSE or the media. If a crime is committed I would imagine it is up to the Garda to investigate.
Bishops, priests, teachers, etc. should be treated like everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Jan 15, 2009 22:47:22 GMT
If a crime is committed I would imagine it is up to the Garda to investigate. Bishops, priests, teachers, etc. should be treated like everyone else. Agreed. I have had a debate about this with a very holy old priest friend of mine. His attitude epitomises the old view that led to these problems — the focus was on the state of the offending priest's soul and on his repentance and salvation, which involved keeping it within the Church. It is astonishing to us, nowadays, to discover how unaware people were of the effects on the children who were victims. But if I may offer a personal anecdote: when I was at secondary school in Cork in the early 1970s, a middle-aged man wearing an overcoat and black gloves came right up to the window of our classroom and stood staring in at us. The teacher looked uncomfortable but for us it was a great joke — one of my classmates shouted "Look at the old queer!" and we all laughed. No one seemed to feel threatened. He was just a figure of fun.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 4, 2009 14:06:14 GMT
Another horror is coming down the line. Apparently the Legionaries of Christ have now accepted that their founder, Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, fathered a child who is now in her 20s and embezzled Legion funds to provide for her. As you may be aware, for a long time accusations circulated about Fr. Maciel; several of his early associates claimed he had pressurised them into homosexual relations with him. These accusations appear to have drawn little attention under John Paul II, who showed favour to Maciel (partly because the Legion have been such a fast-growing order at a time of diminishing vocations, and have worked successfully among Hispanics in America; a LC priest was adviser on Mel Gibson's THE PASSION film) and several prominent Catholics including the late Fr RJ Neuhaus believed Maciel had been maligned. Under our present Holy Father a new investigation was held, and when Fr. Maciel was faced with canonical proceedings he retired from ministry while still proclaiming his innocence. He died shortly afterwards. The LCs have also been accused in the past of having cult-like features with excessive emphasis on obedience and a personality cult of Maciel. (A fourth vow of obedience in which LCs pledge themselves to voice criticisms only to their superior or his superior has been revoked by the Vatican.) I tend to take a certain interest in this because when I was a teenager I considered joining the LCs and from time to time I regret I didn't - largely because they were the only order of those canvassing in our school who asked you to make a here and now decision and that this was important, rather than telling you "no hassle, think about it, you don't need to decide when you're older". The LCs have a house in Leopardstown; only yesterday the IRISH TIMES printed a picture of LC seminarians throwing snowballs. Has anyone here had any experience of the LC and their lay affiliate, Regnum Christi? Here are some links for those who wish to follow up the story: patrickmadrid.blogspot.com/2009/02/this-is-no-time-for-happy-face-stickers.htmlamywelborn.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/way-truth-and-life/http://blog.beliefnet.com/pontifications/2009/02/father-maciel-is-he-your-daddy.html
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 22, 2009 13:34:36 GMT
I hope to make some posts on the industrial schools report next week. I think the disclosures made by this report are even more disturbing than coverage would suggest. Let me start by saying that I think Archbishop Vincent Nichols' remarks about the religious orders requiring courage to take responsibility for the crimes committed was a dreadful blunder (to say the least) whether he was referring to the actual abusers (as some reports have it) or to the orders as collective persons (as some of his defenders are saying - cf the ongoing argument over this on Damian Thompson's HOLY SMOKE blog). The reason is that it lacks proportion - the first priority should be the victims, not the religious orders or individual abusers.
|
|
|
Post by hazelireland on May 22, 2009 13:59:34 GMT
It is a very long report, I am trawling through it slowly and trying to remain emotionless and clear as I do so, which involves a lot of breaks to calm down.
Still, better to read it than rely on the media to tell you whats in it.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 25, 2009 9:20:40 GMT
Having looked at Damian Thompson's blog more carefully, I may have done Archbishop Nichols a slight injustice. He gives the archbishop's full statement and it takes the form of : one sentence how terrible it is, one sentence about what it takes for the religious orders to face up to this, long statement about what needs to be done for the victims. The coverage focussed on the second sentence. I think that was misjudged in this context, but the archbishop's primary focus was clearly on the victims and we are talking about an out-of-context soundbite. Here is the link to Thompson's blog entry. Follow subsequent entries to see Thompson's comments on the media response. blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2009/05/20/archbishop_nicholss_response_to_the_irish_child_abuse_report_is_perfectly_judged
|
|