# Current cleric report spiked?



## Chocks away (9 Nov 2009)

Does anyone else get the distinct impression that the sinister and unGodly hand of Opus Dei is the puppet master? Why not publish everything? What is there to hide?


----------



## Mpsox (9 Nov 2009)

My understanding is that the report would identify one priest who is currently going through the judicial system and could influence his trial (innocent til proven guilty etc). Life is not necessarily a Dan Brown novel


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Nov 2009)

I think it would nearly be best all round (subject to that legal concern), to get it into the public domain ASAP, let 2009 be an annus horribilus (as HRH might say).

Horrible deeds, but on the clerical side its a bit unfortunate that the guilty are largely escaping (dead, unidentified publicly) and innocent (the vast majority of decent honest priests) are left to carry the can for it. If civil or public servants feel unloved, can you imagine what it must be like for an honest priest at the moment.

That said the victims are top priority and church coffers should be prised open for them, & in the long run final analysis it may at least lead to a more mature church and state relationship, and more acceptable ambitions of the catholic church in Ireland (i.e. I think its fair to say that the 'social control' aspect of a homogenous catholic state is gone for good, & good riddance).


----------



## Arabella (10 Nov 2009)

I was taught that in Catholic church parlance, if you did not tell the full truth you told a lie - by omission. A lie = a sin, so the Church is sinning. If absolution is contingent on remorse, then surely - unless it changes it's tune - the Church should not get absolution. A lie of this magnitude could cause a schism. Causing a schism is grounds for excommunication. Has nobody told God? Or is someone lying to him?


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Nov 2009)

So, spiked no more. 

Yet another hammering for the church - sackcloth and ashes all round. Hopefully some good will come of it but its a roundly depressing issue. Awful as it is to say but I think we're nearly becoming immune to such scandals, there's no shock horror anymore, just more grinding down - I'd say at this stage every diocese probably needs a similar investigation - clear the decks, get it all out of the way. Bit like Irelands economic uncertainty, the failure to take decisive swift action just prolongs the impact and the fallout.

Must be a dark dark day to be a priest in Ireland, I'd say the level of disillusionment with the institution must be at an all time high.


----------



## RMCF (27 Nov 2009)

I think history will be able to look back over the downfall of the Church and pinpoint it to the last 50 years or so. 

No organisation can perform such evil and still hope to have the support of its people. The Church in this country is only surviving now because so many older people still cannot bring themselves to disown it. The falling attendances and lack of interest in vocations show that the middle aged and younger generations have already lost interest, and this is only going to grow in future, hastened by these revelations.

Bring it on I say.


----------



## Complainer (27 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> I think history will be able to look back over the downfall of the Church and pinpoint it to the last 50 years or so.
> 
> No organisation can perform such evil and still hope to have the support of its people. The Church in this country is only surviving now because so many older people still cannot bring themselves to disown it. The falling attendances and lack of interest in vocations show that the middle aged and younger generations have already lost interest, and this is only going to grow in future, hastened by these revelations.
> 
> Bring it on I say.


True, but at the end of the scale, look at all the folks rushing to get their kids into the parish schools and lining them up for communions and confirmations.


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Nov 2009)

While I'm not very religious, I think that christianity, of itself, is a good thing. The problem with the Catholic Church in Ireland is that, since the foundation of the State, it was all about power & social control. 

In the last 20 its been about scandal, disgrace, hypocrisy unveiled.

I absolutely believe in total separation of church & state, no role in education & health, no "catholicising" of our legislation - e.g. licencing laws on Good Friday. OK they did much good (& harm) years ago in health and education, but now the government has stepped in, is footing the bill, and should take full control.

Once that separation process is complete (only partially there, church still owns schools & hopsitals I gather), then the power & social control aspect will be fully gone, and religion can find its true home as a personal matter, celebrated in congregations, expressed in charity etc.

I dont think the wiping of religion from the developed world would be a good development (leaving aside the outdated sectarian aspect of Norn Iron, or the looper element of radical islam).


----------



## RMCF (27 Nov 2009)

Complainer said:


> True, but at the end of the scale, look at all the folks rushing to get their kids into the parish schools and lining them up for communions and confirmations.



As I mentioned on a post in another thread, I have a new baby arriving shortly.

I would love to make a stand and not get it baptised into this evil organisation now, instead letting it decide for itself when its old enough which religion (if any) it wants to follow. I'd rather the child was christian in attitude and respect everyone rather than have to be a Catholic immediately.

But the problem is the problem NOT baptising the child would cause. I can't imagine going to the in-laws or my own family and telling them the child's not getting baptised a Catholic. That would be the end of it. 

So perhaps thats why so many are still queuing up - cos its expected.


----------



## dockingtrade (27 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> I
> No organisation can perform such evil and still hope to have the support of its people.


 
No organisation can perform such evil and still EXIST. If this were a childrens charity it would be shut down. No one would want to be associated with it even the good ones in it.

This secrecy and dont say, dont ask bullsh*t attracted paedophiles to the catholic church becasue they knew they could get away with it. So these very policies the church adopted increased the abusing, it gave these people a channel to abuse with out consequence. The heiracry must have known that more and more abusers were joinging and which led to more and more victims. Look at the lenghts a paeophile will go to so they can abuse, so when the catholic church was there what did paedophiles do... they signed up.

I know theres good people doing good work in the catholic church, but I dont know how that can stay with it. Go away and form a new cult. This one needs to be exterminated up as far as the vatican. The vatican presided over this world wide abuse for years, it has to fall.


----------



## ivuernis (27 Nov 2009)

betsy og said:


> i absolutely believe in total separation of church & state, no role in education & health, no "catholicising" of our legislation - e.g. Licencing laws on good friday. Ok they did much good (& harm) years ago in health and education, but now the government has stepped in, is footing the bill, and should take full control.



+1


----------



## Complainer (27 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> As I mentioned on a post in another thread, I have a new baby arriving shortly.
> 
> I would love to make a stand and not get it baptised into this evil organisation now, instead letting it decide for itself when its old enough which religion (if any) it wants to follow. I'd rather the child was christian in attitude and respect everyone rather than have to be a Catholic immediately.
> 
> ...



I understand this approach, and I'm in the same boat partially - We had ours baptised to ensure access to the local school. Mrs Complainer claims to 'believe' but wouldn't be great for getting out of bed on a Sunday morning. We had an interesting dinner-table conversation recently with a 5-year-old, along the lines of;

"Mammy, do you believe in God?"
"Daddy, do you believe in God?"
"Mammy, we do believe, don't we"

So she is already conscious of the differences.


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Nov 2009)

dockingtrade said:


> . This one needs to be exterminated up as far as the vatican. The vatican presided over this world wide abuse for years, it has to fall.


 
I'm not sure it was specifically a magnet for paedophiles, how would they know say, in the 50's, that you could get away with this stuff?? Maybe an educated guess on their part, but still a grand claim. 

Re exterminating the whole shebang, is that like saying get rid of world football becuase you think FIFA is rotten? Why should any Germans or Japanese have been spared at the end of WWII?? Are you in favour of bombing the bejesus out of Gaza because there are some Hamas operating from there? - basically I'm saying you cant impose rough justice on huge numbers because a minority are at fault.

The catholic religion is not entrinsically evil, some of the people operating in it were/are, they must be ruthlessly dealt with and never be allowed to perpetrate evil again. BUT there's no reason to wind up the whole religion, just give it its proper place.


----------



## dockingtrade (27 Nov 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> I'm not sure it was specifically a magnet for paedophiles, how would they know say, in the 50's, that you could get away with this stuff?? Maybe an educated guess on their part, but still a grand claim.
> 
> Re exterminating the whole shebang, is that like saying get rid of world football becuase you think FIFA is rotten? Why should any Germans or Japanese have been spared at the end of WWII?? Are you in favour of bombing the bejesus out of Gaza because there are some Hamas operating from there? - basically I'm saying you cant impose rough justice on huge numbers because a minority are at fault.
> 
> The catholic religion is not entrinsically evil, some of the people operating in it were/are, they must be ruthlessly dealt with and never be allowed to perpetrate evil again. BUT there's no reason to wind up the whole religion, just give it its proper place.


 
The establishment new about it, covered it up and let it to continue. This is not just about  few bad apples within an organization. Im talking the about the organization, the establishment.  Does the Nazi party legally exist in Germany!!!! Read my post again Im talking about the organization, not the people.  The  comparisons you are making are absolutely riducluous.


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Nov 2009)

dockingtrade said:


> The establishment new about it, covered it up and let it to continue. This is not just about few bad apples within an organization. Im talking the about the organization, the establishment. Does the Nazi party legally exist in Germany!!!! Read my post again Im talking about the organization, not the people. The comparisons you are making are absolutely riducluous.


 
Well I gathered you wanted to get rid of the whole religion, not just the administrative structure currently overseeing it, maybe I mis-read you. 

If we take the example of the Nazi party, and with what limited knowledge I have of it I think they were dedicated to ruling the world as the Ayran race. So its kinda hard to repackage that into a new structure that would be acceptable - whereas you could disband FIFA and set up a new controlling body that would be acceptable.

Just like you could re-package a religion that purports to follow the example of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately (though I suppose there's no shortage of those already ).


----------



## dockingtrade (27 Nov 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> Well I gathered you wanted to get rid of the whole religion, not just the administrative structure currently overseeing it, maybe I mis-read you.
> 
> If we take the example of the Nazi party, and with what limited knowledge I have of it I think they were dedicated to ruling the world as the Ayran race. So its kinda hard to repackage that into a new structure that would be acceptable - whereas you could disband FIFA and set up a new controlling body that would be acceptable.
> 
> Just like you could re-package a religion that purports to follow the example of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately (though I suppose there's no shortage of those already ).


 
 fair enough..sometimes its hard to be clear with something so emotive.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (27 Nov 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> I dont think the wiping of religion from the developed world would be a good development (leaving aside the outdated *sectarian aspect of Norn Iron*, or the looper element of radical islam).


Maybe recent revelations should cause us to rethink what was the real root cause of the Northern problem. We have been inclined to smugly dismiss slogans like "Home rule is Rome rule", or Paisley's ranting at paedo priests, or "the Pope is the Anti Christ" as evidence that the root cause was Protestant bigotry. Can we now understand why they were so adamant not to be forced into a suffocating catholic theocracy.


----------



## DB74 (27 Nov 2009)

Only if it can be shown that Paisley KNEW what was going on within the Catholic Church.


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Nov 2009)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Maybe recent revelations should cause us to rethink what was the real root cause of the Northern problem.


 
I can see their concern but remember that the north was a different animal since the plantations and throughout the time when the catholic church was banned (mass rocks 'n' all that). I'm not sure how the church interacted with the ruling British administration but lets just say I dont think it was ruling the roost. So from 1914 or so on, when our northern brethren were gearing up, I dont think it would have been a fear based on any compelling evidence. 

Paisley was just stirring it because it suited him - he wanted the North to remain british because thats where his loyalties lie (&fair enough), but I think he was doing all sectors a disservice by bringing religion explicitly into it.


----------



## The_Banker (27 Nov 2009)

DB74 said:


> Only if it can be shown that Paisley KNEW what was going on within the Catholic Church.


 

Maybe he could see what we couldn't? Irish society was so intertwined with Catholic ethos (it took over our whole lives) that we probably couldn't see the forest for the trees.


----------



## Bronte (27 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> But the problem is the problem NOT baptising the child would cause. I can't imagine going to the in-laws or my own family and telling them the child's not getting baptised a Catholic. That would be the end of it.
> 
> .


 
I don't mean to be rude but it's hard to belive in this day and age that you are an adult who can't stand up for your beliefs.  

Really what is wrong with people.  
_____________
You are all very naive if you think anything has or will change in the Church.  You only have to see a disgraced Bishop today saying that there should be nor more enquires and another Bishop saying it was a pity Rome didn't open their files.  Why doesn't he ask for the files.  

This whole thing is a complete abomination.


----------



## MrMan (27 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> As I mentioned on a post in another thread, I have a new baby arriving shortly.
> 
> I would love to make a stand and not get it baptised into this evil organisation now, instead letting it decide for itself when its old enough which religion (if any) it wants to follow. I'd rather the child was christian in attitude and respect everyone rather than have to be a Catholic immediately.
> 
> ...



So you you would enter your child into 'an evil organistaion' to have a quite life for yourself? 
I don't believe it to be an evil organisation, rather that evil men and women have used it to further their own needs.


----------



## VOR (27 Nov 2009)

Join here if you want action taken against the papal nuncio


----------



## Caveat (27 Nov 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> ...The problem with the Catholic Church in Ireland is that, since the foundation of the State, it was all about power & social control.
> 
> In the last 20 its been about scandal, disgrace, hypocrisy unveiled.
> 
> ...



I agree 100%.



Bronte said:


> I don't mean to be rude but it's hard to belive in this day and age that you are an adult who can't stand up for your beliefs.
> 
> Really what is wrong with people.



Whilst I accept the principle I think this is a bit harsh.  I'm not a parent but if I was, I can well imagine that RMCF's dilemma would also be an issue for me - and for many.  Also, as has been mentioned, for now at least, schooling may be problematic.


----------



## Chocks away (27 Nov 2009)

Caveat said:


> I agree 100%.
> 
> 
> 
> Whilst I accept the principle I think this is a bit harsh. I'm not a parent but if I was, I can well imagine that RMCF's dilemma would also be an issue for me - and for many. Also, as has been mentioned, for now at least, schooling may be problematic.


 
Yes it could be but only if the status quo survives.


----------



## Caveat (27 Nov 2009)

Chocks away said:


> Yes it could be but only if the status quo survives.



Of course, which obviously prompts the issue of 'doing something about it' etc and I don't disagree with that.

But people who have 4 year old kids now, today, generally probably don't have the time/luxury of revolution.

I suppose it's up to you and me then...

D'accord, Allons!!

(can you say that? )


----------



## Chocks away (27 Nov 2009)

En Francais? Oui!  I can also sing _On With The Motley from Pagliacci  But seriously, I'm too old for revolution but still believe in giving corruption a bloody good hiding. Providing I don't lose my house, of course. _


----------



## dockingtrade (27 Nov 2009)

MrMan said:


> I don't believe it to be an evil organisation, rather that evil men and women have used it to further their own needs.


 
but the organization allowed them to "futher their own needs".


----------



## Chocks away (27 Nov 2009)

dockingtrade said:


> but the organization allowed them to "futher their own needs".


Quad erat demonstrandum!


----------



## RMCF (28 Nov 2009)

MrMan said:


> I don't believe it to be an evil organisation, rather that evil men and women have used it to further their own needs.



How is it not an evil organisation?

Its people in charge/at the top knew about all this happening, yet did nothing to stop it. They moved the offenders about so that they simply had more 'fresh meat' to prey on, more children to abuse. If you know about evil, harbour it and let it continue to breathe then you yourself are evil. If you never touched a child, yet knew of others doing it and did nothing about it, then in my eyes, and in the eyes of many, you are as evil as the abuser yourself.

I know that there are good people in the CC, but the organisation itself is rotten to the core and so unChristian in its actions. Unfortunately all the good people have been tainted with the sins of the rather large minority.

And don't forget that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg here. If every single Catholic diocese in the world had an investigation done into it like we have seen here, I am sure the number of offending priests would run into the thousands, and the victim numbers into the tens of thousands, maybe more.


----------



## Lex Foutish (28 Nov 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> *I think it would nearly be best all round (subject to that legal concern), to get it into the public domain ASAP, let 2009 be an annus horribilus (as HRH might say).*
> 
> Horrible deeds, but on the clerical side its a bit unfortunate that the guilty are largely escaping (dead, unidentified publicly) and innocent (the vast majority of decent honest priests) are left to carry the can for it. If civil or public servants feel unloved, can you imagine what it must be like for an honest priest at the moment.
> 
> That said the victims are top priority and church coffers should be prised open for them, & in the long run final analysis it may at least lead to a more mature church and state relationship, and more acceptable ambitions of the catholic church in Ireland (i.e. I think its fair to say that the 'social control' aspect of a homogenous catholic state is gone for good, & good riddance).


 
I don't agree with your first bit above, Betsy. If I was a victim of one of the priests not named in the report, I'd want that abuser to rot in a prison cell for the rest of his life. If I thought that I wouldn't get justice, all because his name was put into the public domain and he got off, claiming the publicity would prevent him getting a fair trial, it would make my living nightmare even worse.

I agree with you about the honest priests, though. A priest friend of mine was spat at on a city street one day at the time of the Brendan Smyth scandal. They must be having a tough time at the moment.


----------



## jasconius (29 Nov 2009)

Every organisation has bad apples, but in this case there was no-one to take the ultimate rap. When he was a mere Cardinal, Ratzinger requested that all complaints be forwarded direct to the Vatican and that no local authorities were to be informed. Nothing was done except the occasional attempt to unfrock these guys. When you look at the situation in America, there are enormous numbers of these priests, many with Irish names, who also escaped the local authorities.

I too feel sorry for the innocent hundreds of priests who have to undergo the rumour mills and whispers of the ordinary people at large every day.


----------



## Betsy Og (29 Nov 2009)

Lex Foutish said:


> I don't agree with your first bit above, Betsy. If I was a victim of one of the priests not named in the report, I'd want that abuser to rot in a prison cell for the rest of his life. If I thought that I wouldn't get justice, all because his name was put into the public domain and he got off, claiming the publicity would prevent him getting a fair trial, it would make my living nightmare even worse.



I think you took me up wrong - when I said subject to the legal concern I meant once that was dealt with then publish ASAP.


----------



## Bronte (30 Nov 2009)

What is more evil to do the deed or to see it done and do nothing about it. This from those who preach about right and wrong. This from those who hate women and see them as the source of all evil. 

Evil, evil, evil. Every single last one of them. 

Show me where there is help and compassion and compensation to ALL the victims. Rather show me where these victims rot and die in hostels and psychiatric hospitals in Ireland and the UK or the streets. Many have died in shame where there should have been no shame and lives completely and utterly devastated.

Or show me where Bishops live in Palaces with many servants, with gold plated service and people kneeling to kiss their ring and priests living to old age well cared for in warm homes with money no object for their care.

If people still today think they cannot get a good education for their child unless they bow to the Church, then they become part of that completely evil organisation themselves and perpetuate it. The Church is only about two things, power and money. It's a long long way from This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ.


----------



## MrMan (30 Nov 2009)

RMCF said:


> How is it not an evil organisation?
> 
> Its people in charge/at the top knew about all this happening, yet did nothing to stop it. They moved the offenders about so that they simply had more 'fresh meat' to prey on, more children to abuse. If you know about evil, harbour it and let it continue to breathe then you yourself are evil. If you never touched a child, yet knew of others doing it and did nothing about it, then in my eyes, and in the eyes of many, you are as evil as the abuser yourself.
> 
> ...



Again I would reiterate that there were and are men and women who are rotten to the core, they are not the organisation, they used it for their own needs and others were compliant through trying to preserve a public face.


----------



## dockingtrade (30 Nov 2009)

MrMan said:


> Again I would reiterate that there were and are men and women who are rotten to the core, they are not the organisation, they used it for their own needs and others were compliant through trying to preserve a public face.


 

Im lost on this one. 
Someone runs the organization, the organization has procedures & structures for it to be an organization. It was this structure that allowed offenders to offend and attracted pure evil in to the organization. Where would a paedophile go to have unlimted access to kids and if when caught nothing really happen, what organization?? let me think!
As i said before if a childrens charity had that level offenders in it and the heiracry knew about it, that ORGANIZATION wouldnt exist today and its heirarcy would be up against serious charges.


----------



## Bronte (30 Nov 2009)

Did the level of abuse in the North even come close to the South?  I don't think it did.  

Anyone an expert on Canon Law?  Does it's rules mean that you do not have to obey Civil Law ?


----------



## Bronte (30 Nov 2009)

MrMan said:


> Again I would reiterate that there were and are men and women who are rotten to the core, they are not the organisation, they used it for their own needs and others were compliant through trying to preserve a public face.


 
I don't get how you cannot see that it is the organisation that is rotton to the core.  Where is the Pope and Papal Nuncio with their apolgies and compensation to the victims?  They are the core.


----------



## Shawady (30 Nov 2009)

Bronte said:


> Anyone an expert on Canon Law? Does it's rules mean that you do not have to obey Civil Law ?


 
I was wondering this too. Why do they keep mentioning Canon law. Surely if abusing a child is against the law it is a crime no matter what. How could anyone use Canon law as some sort of excuse?


----------



## VOR (30 Nov 2009)

Bronte said:


> Anyone an expert on Canon Law? Does it's rules mean that you do not have to obey Civil Law ?


 
I am far from an expert on Canon Law so here's what the Church has to say:

"Finally, lest there be any confusion, and contrary to oft peddled misinformation, there is no conflict between Canon Law and the Civil Law in this country and there is nothing in Canon Law which inhibits or prohibits the citizen's right to exercise those rights which he or she enjoys under the constitution of Ireland. In fact, Canon Law urges the observance of Civil Law except when it is clear that it 'is contrary to divine law' (Canon 22) as has happened for example in totalitarian societies, such as Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. This principle is reminiscent of St Thomas More's famous statement: 'I die the King's good servant but God's first.' "

[broken link removed]


----------



## The_Banker (30 Nov 2009)

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/bishop-murphy-report-findings-misread-436337.html

_Bishop of Killaloe Willie Walsh today hit out over calls for a colleague to resign in the wake of a sickening report into clerical child sex abuse and cover-ups._
_Bishop Walsh refused to back growing demands for senior clergy named and shamed to stand down and claimed damning findings were being misread.._​ 
They are still at it.... Why should the Bishop resign... We have just read the report wrong.... We "children" should just accept that the church is there to help us and we are sheep and they are our shepards. 
This is just adding salt to the wound. ​


----------



## Betsy Og (30 Nov 2009)

Surprised at Willie Walsh as usually he's very forthright no nonsense. Bishop Murray should either come out figthing and challenge the report, or else accept its findings - i.e. "inexcusable" - and resign.

Murray's "If I have....", is infuriating. How can you apologise if you're not accepting you did wrong?? This is too serious a matter for people not to go. Leaving it up to the congregation is a cop out - people who know him think he's a nice fella, well thats fair enough but when monumental mistakes are made there have to be consequences. 

They are in danger of making the situation must worse by underreacting. I'd also echo the sentiment that what is the Vatican doing about this??, is it all just flag waving and kissing the tarmac, or shouldnt they be getting the finger out when their church is falling into serious disrepute.


----------



## The_Banker (30 Nov 2009)

15 priests and a number of lay people have come out tonight demanding that Bishop Murray doesn't resign.

Only in Ireland.


----------



## Purple (7 Dec 2009)

In the light of the instructions to bishops by the Vatican to subvert Irish law (by dealing with accusations of criminal acts under cannon law rather than Irish law), should the state now break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, withdraw our ambassador, close out embassy there and expel the Papal Nuncio?


----------



## Mpsox (7 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> In the light of the instructions to bishops by the Vatican to subvert Irish law (by dealing with accusations of criminal acts under cannon law rather than Irish law), should the state now break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, withdraw our ambassador, close out embassy there and expel the Papal Nuncio?


 
Yes, but even without the Murphy report, why the heck do we have an embassy in the Vatican and one in Rome as well anyway? Purely on cost savings, we should be closing one of them.


----------



## Purple (7 Dec 2009)

Mpsox said:


> Yes, but even without the Murphy report, why the heck do we have an embassy in the Vatican and one in Rome as well anyway? Purely on cost savings, we should be closing one of them.


I agree.


----------



## Chocks away (7 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> In the light of the instructions to bishops by the Vatican to subvert Irish law (by dealing with accusations of criminal acts under cannon law rather than Irish law), should the state now break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, withdraw our ambassador, close out embassy there and expel the Papal Nuncio?


I'm sure that if the vatican found out that one of it's members did not believe in God/virgin birth/infallability, then that member would be excommunicated, ie expelled from the organisation. Their papal nuncio does not adhere to or believe the laws of our land, so, should be chucked out forthwith. As for sending the encyclicals in latin ????? I wonder if they would accept multiples of Semunciae for saying mass


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> In the light of the instructions to bishops by the Vatican to subvert Irish law (by dealing with accusations of criminal acts under cannon law rather than Irish law), should the state now break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican, withdraw our ambassador, close out embassy there and expel the Papal Nuncio?


 
What politician has enough backbone to do this?  Has the government ordered the papal nuncio to respond immediately to the commission?

How many posters on here are still doing the false membership of the Catholic Church for their inlaws and places at good schools?

What Church member named in the report has done the right thing.  

I can't think of any organisation that is more evil than the Catholic Church. I actually can't.


----------



## Mpsox (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> What Church member named in the report has done the right thing.


 
He's not named in the report but I've said this before on here, and I'll say it again, i think Diarmaid Martin deserves a huge amount of credit for what he has done since he came back to Ireland.


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

Chocks away said:


> I'm sure that if the vatican found out that one of it's members did not believe in God/virgin birth/infallability, then that member would be excommunicated, ie expelled from the organisation.


 
No no no, they don't expel them for that.  They expel them for things like being with a woman, for that is the truly evil deed.  Doing it with a man is fine though. Also fine is raping children, abusing children, fathering children and abandoning them, bringing their lovers to have abortions no you won't be expelled for that.  You'll be forgiven for those crimes, the rape of multiple innocent children shall be covered up and forgiven says the Lord, indeed you shall be moved somewhere else so you can rape again and again, you shall be hidden away and the child shall be known as a liar, the one who led you on for the devil was in the child.


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

Mpsox said:


> He's not named in the report but I've said this before on here, and I'll say it again, i think Diarmaid Martin deserves a huge amount of credit for what he has done since he came back to Ireland.


 
Do you not see that Martin has been very carefully selected?  

What exactly is he to be credited with?


----------



## MrMan (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> No no no, they don't expel them for that.  They expel them for things like being with a woman, for that is the truly evil deed.  Doing it with a man is fine though. Also fine is raping children, abusing children, fathering children and abandoning them, bringing their lovers to have abortions no you won't be expelled for that.  You'll be forgiven for those crimes, the rape of multiple innocent children shall be covered up and forgiven says the Lord, indeed you shall be moved somewhere else so you can rape again and again, you shall be hidden away and the child shall be known as a liar, the one who led you on for the devil was in the child.




I know that you are quoting the Lord as saying these things, but do you not think that it was evil and weak men that allowed these things. To say it is the word of the Lord is to say that all priests are evil and allow such things to happen. Is that what you believe to be true? Do you think that every last priest is evil by association and would also allow these things things to happen?
I can think of far more evil organisations, especially given that this organisation doesn't promote what happened even if the top men did allow it.


----------



## Purple (8 Dec 2009)

I couldn't give a toss about the nature of the organisation or bishops resigning etc. A foreign country has attempted to usurp the primacy of the law of the land in this country in an effort to frustrate the investigation of heinous criminal acts. That is an attack on the sovereignty of this republic by a foreign power if we don’t act then the Unionists in Northern Ireland will have been shown to be right; Dublin rule is Rome Rule.
Why is there any discussion about bishops resigning? Whether a bishop or bishops resign is irrelevant. Does anyone think that if a swimming instructor covered up the rape of a child we would accept his resignation as an appropriate redress? I want to see these men in prison, let them wear their black robes and silk hats in Mountjoy if they want, just leave them there ‘till they die.


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

MrMan said:


> Do you think that every last priest is evil by association and would also allow these things things to happen?
> .


  But they DID allow these things to happen, and they covered it up.  They perpetuated it.  It makes them as evil as those that did it.


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> Does anyone think that if a swimming instructor covered up the rape of a child we would accept his resignation as an appropriate redress? I want to see these men in prison, let them wear their black robes and silk hats in Mountjoy if they want, just leave them there ‘till they die.


 
My understanding is that not reporting a rape of a child is not a crime any more, so what would you jail them for? It was removed from the statue books in the last few years. According to VOR on another thread, the misprision of felony was removed from the statute books in 1998 by Nora Owen.

Anyone know what would happen if an ordinary citizen or a person in charge (teacher/principal/priest) covered up the rape of a child. What offence if any would this be?


----------



## Tinker Bell (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> But they DID allow these things to happen, and they covered it up. They perpetuated it. It makes them as evil as those that did it.


I agree with this. But the whole thing about confessing (in a dark box) and being absolved should be scrapped. That lets the church off the hook nicely. You commit a crime, you do the time. The church should not undermine the authority of the state. A "state" within a state has a very destabilising effect. These "great men of the cloth" have been shown to be lowdown cowards once stripped of their Godly aura.


----------



## Sunny (8 Dec 2009)

I have my suspicions that you are going to see a Papal visit been announced shortly. I would hope that the Irish people make their views known that he is not welcome until the Vatican come clean about their involvement in the disgusting and illegal actions both here in Ireland and in other Countries. At this stage, I would be more willing to go onto the streets to welcome the Queen than the Pope!


----------



## dockingtrade (8 Dec 2009)

the church is in decline because years of this stuff, its greed, the level brutality, the abject contradicitons in its teachings, sh&t like limbo (oh that wasnt really true sorry about that). Some people ask wahy such a savage attack on the catholic church... can they not see why. This report insnt out of the blue and there are many more to come. Look down through the years and the widespread child abuse and brutallity. Its the beginning of the end for the church and supporters of the church have to see why that is the case. Did anyone see the frontline last night and that lady in the front row , Mary I think... I think she put a few more nails in the coffin and accelerated its decline.


----------



## The_Banker (8 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> I couldn't give a toss about the nature of the organisation or bishops resigning etc. A foreign country has attempted to usurp the primacy of the law of the land in this country in an effort to frustrate the investigation of heinous criminal acts. That is an attack on the sovereignty of this republic by a foreign power if we don’t act then the Unionists in Northern Ireland will have been shown to be right; Dublin rule is Rome Rule.
> Why is there any discussion about bishops resigning? Whether a bishop or bishops resign is irrelevant. Does anyone think that if a swimming instructor covered up the rape of a child we would accept his resignation as an appropriate redress? I want to see these men in prison, let them wear their black robes and silk hats in Mountjoy if they want, just leave them there ‘till they die.


 

Spot on.


----------



## Mpsox (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> Do you not see that Martin has been very carefully selected?
> 
> What exactly is he to be credited with?


 
By facilitiating getting all of this out in the open, by not being obstructive and obtusive like his predecesors and being the first bishop in Dublin in a century to both do the right thing and to seem genuinely remorseful for it. If his predecesors had acted like him, this could and would have been stopped decades ago.


----------



## Mpsox (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> My understanding is that not reporting a rape of a child is not a crime any more, so what would you jail them for? It was removed from the statue books in the last few years. According to VOR on another thread, the misprision of felony was removed from the statute books in 1998 by Nora Owen.
> 
> Anyone know what would happen if an ordinary citizen or a person in charge (teacher/principal/priest) covered up the rape of a child. What offence if any would this be?


 
Al Capone was imprisoned for tax evasion, not for everything else he did. If they cannot be imprisioned for not reporting a rape, is there other legislation they could be prosecuted under? Health and safety, corporate governance? Any legal minds out there with any thoughts on that?


----------



## haminka1 (8 Dec 2009)

No organization should have the kind of power Catholic Church had in Ireland. These were people who believed that if they represent a being that's almighty, it makes them almighty themselves. And they still believe it, I don't believe any tears of humility they shed right now anymore than I'd believe a crocodile is really weeping. And if they really do, it's not because of the victims but because they feel sorry for themselves.
I talked to several young priests and I was genuinely surprised about their level of arrogance - they seriously consider themselves and the Church above any secular law and if you dare criticize anything about it, they'd call you atheist and nihilist. It is like they live in an ivory tower of ignorance and isolation from the outside world.
How far have we come if an organisation which is supposed to represent our believes is more or less an isolated organisation, approachable through diplomatic channels only. These people are supposed to serve God, not another state. When it suits them, it's about "we are here for the people", when it doesn't, it's about "your government should talk to our diplomats". Strange.


----------



## Purple (8 Dec 2009)

mpsox said:


> by facilitiating getting all of this out in the open, by not being obstructive and obtusive like his predecesors and being the first bishop in dublin in a century to both do the right thing and to seem genuinely remorseful for it. If his predecesors had acted like him, this could and would have been stopped decades ago.


 +1


----------



## Purple (8 Dec 2009)

One of the most disturbing things about this whole thing for me is that I find myself agreeing with [broken link removed]!


----------



## Bronte (8 Dec 2009)

Mpsox said:


> By facilitiating getting all of this out in the open, by not being obstructive and obtusive like his predecesors and being the first bishop in Dublin in a century to both do the right thing and to seem genuinely remorseful for it.


 
I think you should really think about what you are praising him for.  

Personally I see nothing praiseworthy.  Quite the opposite.


----------



## Arabella (8 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> One of the most disturbing things about this whole thing for me is that I find myself agreeing with [broken link removed]!


The article is refreshing in it's originality. I imagine the next stage is a lovebombing of the Irish faithful by Rome. This, however, should be rebuffed. Again our politicians have been found wanting. Me Feiners one and all. Now that they've seen how the land lies a few are making noises. They have no cojones. At least the eunuchs of old performed a service.


----------



## MrMan (8 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> But they DID allow these things to happen, and they covered it up. They perpetuated it. It makes them as evil as those that did it.


 

When you say 'they' you can only mean the ones who are actually guilty or are you saying that every priest is guilty by association, it's not clear from your post ( to me at least).


----------



## Bronte (9 Dec 2009)

MrMan said:


> When you say 'they' you can only mean the ones who are actually guilty or are you saying that every priest is guilty by association, it's not clear from your post ( to me at least).


 
Those that raped and abused children are clearly guilty but so too are the very many who knew about it.  Once a child raping priest was caught nothing was done to him.  Those working with these rapists, the priest in charge of that priest or brother, the superior, the superiors bishop, the bishops staff, the file sent to the Papal Nuncio and the Pope all colluded in the cover up.  Nothing was done to help the raped children, no regard was given to the pain and turmoil of these children and the lives ruined by the events that happened to them.  If this is not a complete systematic evil than I don't know what is evil.  

Remember that these men ran and run whole parts of Irish society.  Not one of them seems to this day to have the moral courage to come out with the truth, to tell us they did wrong, that they perpetuated the evil that is child rape, that they moved the priests around knowing what they would do.  That they treated the raped children abonomiable, that they didn't and don't care about children.  They only care about the Church and the protection of that Church, that is more important than an innocent child.  Surely that is more evil than anything any right thinking human could think of.


----------



## Mpsox (9 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> I think you should really think about what you are praising him for.
> 
> Personally I see nothing praiseworthy. Quite the opposite.


 
Why?


----------



## Bronte (9 Dec 2009)

Mpsox said:


> Why?


 

Because you are praising him for doing something that he should be doing anyway.


----------



## The_Banker (9 Dec 2009)

Having watched the media reports over the last two weeks since the release of the Murphy Report I have changed my position somewhat. I initially called for the Bishop of Limerick to resign and then for all the Bishops named in the Murphy Report to resign.
I have now come to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter one iota if they resign or don’t resign. They will just be replaced by other people with like minded agendas who answer to Rome rather than the laws of Ireland.

These Bishops should now be put before the courts of Ireland and be held accountable for there crimes. Essentially by moving priests for one parish to another, thus enabling the criminals to find more victims, they are as guilty (to my mind) of not reporting crimes and causing the suffering and distress of new victims when it could have been avoided.

I watched the Six-One news last night and after a brief interview with Willie Walsh they showed a priest crying into the camera saying “he was a good man and we all love him”. To be honest it looked pathetic and was embarrassing to watch. But it showed me the mind set of the Catholic Church. If we love each other and put our faith in God then everything will be alright. That is not good enough for 21st Century Ireland.

To my mind, nothing short of criminal prosecutions for the enablers of child rape will suffice.


----------



## Purple (9 Dec 2009)

The_Banker said:


> Having watched the media reports over the last two weeks since the release of the Murphy Report I have changed my position somewhat. I initially called for the Bishop of Limerick to resign and then for all the Bishops named in the Murphy Report to resign.
> I have now come to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter one iota if they resign or don’t resign. They will just be replaced by other people with like minded agendas who answer to Rome rather than the laws of Ireland.
> 
> These Bishops should now be put before the courts of Ireland and be held accountable for there crimes. Essentially by moving priests for one parish to another, thus enabling the criminals to find more victims, they are as guilty (to my mind) of not reporting crimes and causing the suffering and distress of new victims when it could have been avoided.
> ...



Yep;



Purple said:


> I couldn't give a toss about the nature of the organisation or bishops resigning etc. A foreign country has attempted to usurp the primacy of the law of the land in this country in an effort to frustrate the investigation of heinous criminal acts. That is an attack on the sovereignty of this republic by a foreign power if we don’t act then the Unionists in Northern Ireland will have been shown to be right; Dublin rule is Rome Rule.
> Why is there any discussion about bishops resigning? Whether a bishop or bishops resign is irrelevant. Does anyone think that if a swimming instructor covered up the rape of a child we would accept his resignation as an appropriate redress? I want to see these men in prison, let them wear their black robes and silk hats in Mountjoy if they want, just leave them there ‘till they die.


----------



## Mpsox (9 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> Because you are praising him for doing something that he should be doing anyway.


 
I'm praising him for doing something which no one else was prepared to do. Agree that all of the bishops and catholic heircarchy should be doing things anyway.


----------



## MrMan (9 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> Those that raped and abused children are clearly guilty but so too are the very many who knew about it. Once a child raping priest was caught nothing was done to him. Those working with these rapists, the priest in charge of that priest or brother, the superior, the superiors bishop, the bishops staff, the file sent to the Papal Nuncio and the Pope all colluded in the cover up. Nothing was done to help the raped children, no regard was given to the pain and turmoil of these children and the lives ruined by the events that happened to them. If this is not a complete systematic evil than I don't know what is evil.
> 
> Remember that these men ran and run whole parts of Irish society. Not one of them seems to this day to have the moral courage to come out with the truth, to tell us they did wrong, that they perpetuated the evil that is child rape, that they moved the priests around knowing what they would do. That they treated the raped children abonomiable, that they didn't and don't care about children. They only care about the Church and the protection of that Church, that is more important than an innocent child. Surely that is more evil than anything any right thinking human could think of.


 I don't think anyone disagrees about what should be done to those you describe in your post, I just don't agree that the organisation as a whole is evil or that every priest would react in the same way.


----------



## Bronte (9 Dec 2009)

Mpsox said:


> I'm praising him for doing something which no one else was prepared to do. .


 
No that is not correct, he was given this job to do, it's called damage limitation. He was very very carefully selected.  He may not even know this himself.


----------



## Sunny (9 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> No that is not correct, he was given this job to do, it's called damage limitation. He was very very carefully selected. He may not even know this himself.


 
Thats unfair. I am sure the guy is not looking for credit but even the abuse victims charities all admit that he has done alot of good under very difficult circumstances. He has been more outspoken against the failures of the Church than plenty of other people within that organisation including his bosses in Rome.


----------



## Bronte (9 Dec 2009)

There is nothing that the Church does that is not carefully planned.  You are very naive if you think otherwise.  They are a study in Machiavellian thinking.


----------



## Sunny (9 Dec 2009)

Bronte said:


> There is nothing that the Church does that is not carefully planned. You are very naive if you think otherwise. They are a study in Machiavellian thinking.


 
I judge things as I see them not as on the basis of paranoia or conspiracy theories. I go by what I read from the people that matter i.e. victims themselves and if someone like Christine Buckley says Diarmuid Martin was a driving force of reform and Marie Collins says he was doing an excellent job then I am prepared to take him and his efforts at face value. I don't hold him accountable for what the rest of his organisation does or doesn't say.


----------



## johnd (9 Dec 2009)

There is a general feeling in certain circles that Diarmid Martin's job in Ireland is done and he is now in line for a new job in Rome. His nickname, in church circles, is Martin De Tours because of his fondness for travel. He was appointed to oversee these investigations and then move on to better things. Wait and See


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Dec 2009)

I dont think the chruch is a savvy as poeple are making out. I've some dealings with the church (other than as a fairly regular massgoer) and its a bit of a parallel universe. I detect a fair bit of resentment at the "meejah" with their liberal agenda, and maybe a sense that the media are luvvin it to be able to kick the church.

For instance, if Bishop Murray/the organisation really had his/its finger on the pulse he would have resigned on the publication of the report. They might resent feeling obliged to make him a "sacrificial lamb" to public revulsion, but they'd know he was on the skids anyway and dragging it out only riles the "mob" further and damages the church further (if thats possible since its pretty much on the floor at the minute).

The smart move would have been an "Oprah" style interview, tender your resignation, accept that you failed in some ways - and fire in all the excuses, clarifications, blame spreading you want so that you dont have to blacken yourself altogether. Its easier to accept an excuse etc. from someone who's taken their medicine, that someone who's grappling to remain in their position when its untenable.

Some of the stuff in the last week or two had me thinking "Dont tell me they STILL havent learned from past mistakes."


----------



## Sunny (9 Dec 2009)

johnd said:


> There is a general feeling in certain circles that Diarmid Martin's job in Ireland is done and he is now in line for a new job in Rome. His nickname, in church circles, is Martin De Tours because of his fondness for travel. He was appointed to oversee these investigations and then move on to better things. Wait and See


 
I don't have a problem with that as long as the abuse victims are happy with the job he did while he was here.


----------



## Purple (9 Dec 2009)

Question: If there was a referendum to take all state run (but church owned) schools into state ownership and remove the Catholic church completely from their management function (basically get them out of our primary and secondary school system) would posters support or oppose it?


----------



## Sunny (9 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> Question: If there was a referendum to take all state run (but church owned) schools into state ownership and remove the Catholic church completely from their management function (basically get them out of our primary and secondary school system) would posters support or oppose it?


 
Not sure to be honest. Would need to know more about the various pros and cons. Offhand, I would be supportive. I think single religion schools are too insular. If people want to bring their Children up in a certain religion and be taught about that religion, they should bring back Sunday School.


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Dec 2009)

Would vote in favour of total separation of church & state in a referendum.

As regards property, would you have to effectively CPO them?, you cant just "snatch" property, and remember its church property.

Maybe the state has some equity since it, presumably, paid for the buildings on the land, and certainly the upkeep.


----------



## The_Banker (9 Dec 2009)

Purple said:


> Question: If there was a referendum to take all state run (but church owned) schools into state ownership and remove the Catholic church completely from their management function (basically get them out of our primary and secondary school system) would posters support or oppose it?


 

I would vote yes. If there were any issues with owership of land/schools and the church wanted compensation then that would have to be counter acted by laws etc... But I reckon it would be complicated.

My sister sends her kids to an "educate together" school. The children are thought about all religions in an educational way and they are not indoctrinated into anyone faith the way I was when I was going to school.
That would be a model I would prefer but obviously this would take a lot of planning and preparation. Not something any government in the history of the state was good at.

Just as a question to any parent here of kids in primary school.... Do kids still pray in school?
I am 40 this month and I left primary school in 1981 and all we seemed to do was pray. It wasn't a school run by brothers and nuns but obviously had a catholic board of management and ethos.
We prayed at the start of the day, said the Angleus at noon, prayed before lunch, prayed after lunch and prayed before going home. If someone was sick we prayed for them. The teacher questioned us from time to time so see if we prayed before we went to bed and told us only animals in the jungle didn't so we were no better than animals if we didn't. I have since found out that our teacher then (we had him from infants to confirmation class) was a member of the Knights of Colombanus so I may have been unlucky as my sisters who went to a convent didn't do as much prayer as we did. The teacher regulary spoke in absolute awe of the catholic church, so much so that when I left and went into secondary school I was shocked when we didn't pary. I was completely brainwashed as an 11/12 year old kid. I fully expected to go to hell for being a sinner.

We had this female teacher in secondary school who was present one day when the Bishop was visiting and "welcoming" us to our new school. He put out his hand for her to kiss his ring but instead she grabbed his hand and shook it. After he left she turned to us and said "Did you see that <..er> trying to get me to kiss his ring?"... I was in shock for weeks, convinced she was going to burn!


----------



## Bronte (3 May 2012)

Isn't it terribly sad that a man who would preach morals does not have any.


----------



## thedaras (3 May 2012)

Very well put Bronte..
Most of them make me sick,so I am biased on this issue anyway.


----------



## Vanilla (3 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> Isn't it terribly sad that a man who would preach morals does not have any.



  Cardinal Brady said:

"With many others who worked regularly with children in 1975, I regret  that our understanding of the full impact of abuse on the lives of  children as well as the pathology and on-going risk posed by a  determined paedophile was so inadequate. "

Speaks for itself.


----------



## Bronte (3 May 2012)

It does speak for itself in that nobody knew better than the Church the nature of paedophila.  They are the actual experts on it.  They held a kangaroo cannon court and decided what to do with Smyth, their decision as with others was to move him on.  The court only came about because it came to the attention of the boys father.  And how clever they were to not allow the father attend his own 14 year old child's court case.  And what power and deference they got from the dad as he actually complied with them.  Such an abuse of power as beggers belief.

And well done to the BBC and McIntyre in particular.  How come RTE doesn't do such programmes.  Oh yes, they cannot now they have been silenced by the errors they made recently.  Wonder was it an error or a very clever trap.


----------



## Firefly (3 May 2012)

Vanilla said:


> Cardinal Brady said:
> 
> "With many others who worked regularly with children in 1975, *I regret that our understanding of the full impact of abuse on the lives of children* as well as the pathology and on-going risk posed by a determined paedophile was so inadequate. "
> 
> Speaks for itself.


 
I'm flummuxed at this. I should think it would be pretty easy for the Cardinal to imagine how he would have been impacted had he himself been abused in this way


----------



## Sunny (3 May 2012)

What I don't understand is how any adult in any century could sit in a room and listen to that story from a 14 year old boy, hear him warn about others in danger and then just forget about it once the story was passed on without ensuring that the information was acted on. I wouldnt be able to sleep until i was sure the children were safe. It's sick. He is sick. The church is sick. Time for all these people to retire in shame.


----------



## Firefly (3 May 2012)

Sunny said:


> What I don't understand is how any adult in any century could sit in a room and listen to that story from a 14 year old boy, hear him warn about others in danger and then just forget about it once the story was passed on without ensuring that the information was acted on. I wouldnt be able to sleep until i was sure the children were safe. It's sick. He is sick. The church is sick. Time for all these people to retire in shame.


 
I've said it before...by all means go to church, but stop putting money in the collection basket. Rome will stand up and notice then.


----------



## dereko1969 (3 May 2012)

As was stated previously the RC Church only recognises Canon Law, they are a 5th column in this state.

I was only the notary sounds very like I was only obeying orders.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (3 May 2012)

Obeying orders or not.

The man was a priest .... he should have acted upon good moral conscience.

I have no time for priests .... they are all a pack of ......

(An aside .... I know of a parish priest who told a woman in her 80's to stay at home from morning mass .... why? .............  wait for it .... because she was praying too loudly. She is obeying him. She's staying at home.)


----------



## The_Banker (4 May 2012)

According to this mornings press and news reports Brady wants to resign but the Vatican are refusing is request.
If a cardinal resigns then the story goes around the world. Right now it is limited to just Ireland (north and south). 

Self interest shines through once again.

As an aside and slightly off topic... Does anyone think there could be a falling out between the Catholic Church in Ireland and the vatican? I have noticed more and more priests coming out lately and speaking their minds against the Vatican and the hierarchy.
While it wouldnt affect me as a non believer, I would enjoy seeing it happen.


----------



## blueband (4 May 2012)

as far as i know he is due to officially retire in just two years anyway, so its unlikely the vatican will accept he resignation now.


----------



## Liamos (4 May 2012)

PaddyBloggit said:


> Obeying orders or not.
> 
> The man was a priest .... he should have acted upon good moral conscience.
> 
> ...


 
I thinks its very unfair to say that priests are all a pack of.......  

I know many decent priests who work very hard but find themselves tarred with the same brush as these child abusers.


----------



## Vanilla (4 May 2012)

Liamos said:


> I thinks its very unfair to say that priests are all a pack of.......
> 
> I know many decent priests who work very hard but find themselves tarred with the same brush as these child abusers.



I agree with you in that I have met priests who appear to be decent, fair, hardworking and trustworthy. But...it seems that catholic priests have a devotion to the Vatican/canon law/their own heirarchy which comes before what we would expect morally and that can't be right.


----------



## Firefly (4 May 2012)

Vanilla said:


> I agree with you in that I have met priests who appear to be decent, fair, hardworking and trustworthy. But...it seems that catholic priests have a devotion to the Vatican/canon law/their own heirarchy which comes before what we would expect morally and that can't be right.


 
That's the thing for me too...what did the "good" priests do when all this came out?


----------



## thedaras (4 May 2012)

I heard Pat Kenny say that the questioning of the young boy about the abuse,could mean that the church hadn't a clue about the effect of the questioning..

I think that the questions asked of that young boy,showed a complete and utter disregard for the child,it showed how arrogant they were.

Who in their right mind,would want to be a member of any group that have these people in it?
I dont buy the argument that people remain in the catholic church so they can change things,the most effective  way to change the church is to stop giving them money,money that is used to support these people..eww they really make my blood boil..


----------



## Liamos (4 May 2012)

And well done to the BBC and McIntyre in particular. How come RTE doesn't do such programmes. Oh yes, they cannot now they have been silenced by the errors they made recently. Wonder was it an error or a very clever trap.[/QUOTE]

You're obviously a fan of conspiracy theories.


----------



## The_Banker (4 May 2012)

It would be interesting to know if the government have any plans for involvement in the forthcoming Eucharistic Congress this summer.

(ie Government ministers meeting Vatican officials as they step off planes etc..)

If they have then they should take a serious step back.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (4 May 2012)

Liamos said:


> I thinks its very unfair to say that priests are all a pack of.......
> 
> I know many decent priests who work very hard but find themselves tarred with the same brush as these child abusers.



In my job I have very close dealings with priests and the parish and I have dealt with many good/bad/indifferent priests in my time but I've come to the realisation that the party line is their mantra and christian values etc. are overlooked if necessary.

Some priests that I thought were the salt of the earth turned out not to be. The latest parish priest I'm dealing with hasn't got a humane bone in his body. He makes very disparaging remarks about the children I teach/their families and he is in no way compassionate towards people.

Just for the record ... when I said a pack of ... I didn't mean child abusers I meant more like shysters ..... for many different reasons - the priest who lacks basic compassion (a priest who can confide in me whilst whispering out loud that he doesn't like a certain child in my class within earshot of said child etc. ), the priest who tells an 80 year old woman to stay at home from mass, the priest who is a regular dink driver .... and so on.

I have no time for priests anymore (as a collective) because of the far from priestly views and traits they show.

While I was growing up I saw/was taught that priests were infallible and I was led to believe that priests were one group guaranteed a place in heaven ... 'tis far from heaven's gate a lot of them are I'm afraid.

Cardinal Brady, if he had any sense of moral duty, would have resigned long ago. But no ... he'll hang on and the Vatican will back him. Power, power, power .... so unlike the This post will be deleted if not edited immediately I teach about in my religion class.

I was raised a Catholic but I have no more feeling for it anymore. I do my duty in school - I teach religion and I prepare the children for the sacraments as would be expected of me ... but personally I'll take my chances when I die ... if there is a God he can judge me on my deeds and not on whether I was a good, loyal member of his club on earth .... a club run by shysters that I don't want to be part of.


----------



## oldnick (5 May 2012)

I would recommend that if there are people out there who believe in a god or gods and think that This post will be deleted if not edited immediately was a pretty decent bloke who made some very sensible points then they should become Protestants. 
There's a wide variety of Protestants - from High Church Anglicans who do all sorts of mumbo-jumbo Roman Catholic type stuff (Crossing themselves, swinging smelly stuff around, lots of gaudy outfits, idols etc) to the most austere Presbyterian/Methodist  - no ornaments, one sombre black outfit for priests -sorry,ministers.

Really, with such a wide choice of types of worship, there is no reason for so-called Christians to remain in the R.C. Church -and if some Irish people can't stomach the idea of attending Protestant services for atavistic historic reasons ther's now a few Orthodox churches available -really colourful and as incomprehensible as when the R.C. priests did their stuff in Latin.


----------



## Guest105 (5 May 2012)

Cardinal Brady should do the honorable thing and just go, he will be forced out in any event.  The longer he  sits at the helm of his organisation the more damage he will do by him refusing to go.

He has absolutely no credibility left.


----------



## Purple (5 May 2012)

oldnick said:


> I would recommend that if there are people out there who believe in a god or gods and think that This post will be deleted if not edited immediately was a pretty decent bloke who made some very sensible points then they should become Protestants.
> There's a wide variety of Protestants - from High Church Anglicans who do all sorts of mumbo-jumbo Roman Catholic type stuff (Crossing themselves, swinging smelly stuff around, lots of gaudy outfits, idols etc) to the most austere Presbyterian/Methodist  - no ornaments, one sombre black outfit for priests -sorry,ministers.
> 
> Really, with such a wide choice of types of worship, there is no reason for so-called Christians to remain in the R.C. Church -and if some Irish people can't stomach the idea of attending Protestant services for atavistic historic reasons ther's now a few Orthodox churches available -really colourful and as incomprehensible as when the R.C. priests did their stuff in Latin.



I love your posts on religion, they always make me smile.
If I was a Christian I'd be a Protestant (church of Ireland).


----------



## oldnick (5 May 2012)

Actually Purple you don't have to be a Christian or even believe in gods to join your local  CoI church. In  Ireland, more than in many countries,  the church is often the local community centre. We all need social intercourse and if one does not worship at the God of Golf shrine ,the church is a great alternative. 
The service has usually three or four songs  and the loud sound of the choir hides the fact that one has a crap voice, so there's no need to just mouth the words -it is really quite good fun to join in.

The sermons don't last too long -any clever priest knows that long boring sermons reduce the size of his/her flock !(Notice -the "her" bit.It's great -there are women priests here).
Afterwards, everyone has coffee and biscuits and chats . The priest is usually married with a family and ,as I say, can be a woman. The odds  are that he/she is far less likely to have raped little children than your average RC priest. And you know that  most of the congregation are decent middle-class people, none of whom vote for Sinn Fein- so from a social and political perspective you'd fit in.

Above all, nobody goes down every morning to church worshipping idols, swinging their rosary beads and plastering ash on their foreheads. Any sign of excessive religious zeal would be anathema to the average CoI congregant. Nutters like that tend to get born again and become bloody evangelicals.

So, Purple -and anyone else looking for a bit of social life on a Sunday- do pop along to your local CoI church. There's a lot of exRCs doing just that.


----------



## Teatime (5 May 2012)

This good priests tarred by tiny majority argument gets on my nerves.

Where were all the good priests when evil was prospering? They all knew there was a problem decades ago. Where was the internal agitation to sort out the abuse? Any other organisation would have internal revolts until such problems were resolved. They all facilitated the abuse by their silence or their acceptance of the 'moving-on' policy for dodgy priests.
How many priests stood up in public and admitted the Roman CC had a serious problem? What were they afraid of? Surely protecting little children goes above all other considerations for a priest. Cloyne shows us that they still wont report abuse if they can get away with it. They were afraid to relinquish their power and the Vatican corporation has them all tightly bound. 

Daly had 30 years as a bishop/cardinal to sort out the reporting of child abuse but there is little evidence that he did anything. His work-to-rule excuse absolutely sickens me. Resign, you're a disgrace.


----------



## Guest105 (5 May 2012)

oldnick said:


> Actually Purple you don't have to be a Christian or even believe in gods to join your local  CoI church. In  Ireland,



How does one go about becoming a member?  Is there an initiation ceremony or some sort of joining ritual?  I am thinking of joining in London if I did it in Ireland some of my connservative Catholic family would probably disown me.


----------



## oldnick (5 May 2012)

Cashier -I'd like to say that one takes a picture of the Pope and stamps, spits or worse on it. 
But in reality, it's no different than entering a RC church except there are no gymnastics on entering- such as crossing oneself or kneeling. And don't look around for idols, weeping or otherwise, nor confession boxes . Otherwise it's just the same. 

There's no shaking of hands with germ carrying strangers, (i don't know if you RCs do this during your normal service but during the twenty de rigeur funerals that everyone attends annually down here I always seem to be shaking hands with some old woman sitting next to me, not always my wife) . 
Finally,there's less communions, no bell tinkling,  and more singing. Join !

Don't worry if you err . Many ex-Catholics do at first , mumbling in Latin, claiming the Virgin Mary is giving them some message, and whipping out their rosaries. But as a quarter of my local congregation are exRcs that's fine- occasional lapses into popery are forgive.  Even our priest is an exRC -and a married woman.

The Anglican church is very broad and accepts  many varieties of worship, behaviour, genders, sexual proclivities -and degrees of religious belief, such as mine which are none.

So, Cashier,  go along and act in any way you like, except, well,  don't be over friendly - the English influence means that a little reserve is well regarded in strangers. Excessive jolliness may mean one of those African clapping and dancing churches is more appropriate.

Please know that in London very few English people go to Anglican churches and, depending on where you live, you may end up with a Jamaican accent.

Why not go to your nearest CoI church tomorrow morning? Depending where you live you may see me there. I'll be the one looking like he's reading the Bible during the sermon ,whilst actually posting AAM on my blackberry.


----------



## Complainer (6 May 2012)

PaddyBloggit said:


> In my job I have very close dealings with priests and the parish and I have dealt with many good/bad/indifferent priests in my time but I've come to the realisation that the party line is their mantra and christian values etc. are overlooked if necessary.
> 
> Some priests that I thought were the salt of the earth turned out not to be. The latest parish priest I'm dealing with hasn't got a humane bone in his body. He makes very disparaging remarks about the children I teach/their families and he is in no way compassionate towards people.
> 
> ...



This is possible the most interesting post on this thread. I guess most people assume that when teachers are teaching this stuff, they do actually take it to heart. But it seems the reality is a bit different.

Is there anything you can do within your school to make it a bit more inclusive? I'm not talking about changing the ethos (though there's a bit of that coming down the line), but just make sure that the non-Catholic children get fully included in school events and activities? I've seen one school doing the 'If your child is not going to the Mass, then send them to school at 11am, not 9am' thing, which seems to be designed to 'punish' non-Catholic families, and particularly working parents.


----------



## Bronte (7 May 2012)

cashier said:


> I am thinking of joining in London if I did it in Ireland some of my connservative Catholic family would probably disown me.


 
Maybe it is you who should disown them?


----------



## Bronte (7 May 2012)

Complainer said:


> but just make sure that the non-Catholic children get fully included in school events and activities? I've seen one school doing the 'If your child is not going to the Mass, then send them to school at 11am, not 9am' thing, which seems to be designed to 'punish' non-Catholic families, and particularly working parents.


 
And Complainer that is exactly what is going on in Irish schools and non Catholics have no choice but to put up with it. It has affected nieces and nephews of mine. 

Another niece was fully included by the teacher, and the local priest was most surprised when he called to ask questions about communion etc to discover that the non Catholic knew more than the other children. Her parents ensured that she understood what it was about. My impression about religion for a lot of Irish families is that the kids think communion is about a white dress and money.


----------



## Complainer (7 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> And Complainer that is exactly what is going on in Irish schools and non Catholics have no choice but to put up with it. It has affected nieces and nephews of mine.



Funnily enough, I hear mixed feedback on how common this practice is. It happens in my daughter's school, but a few teachers tell me they've never come across this happening - see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76107502

There is always a choice. This stuff will only happen as long as people stay quiet about it. Parents need to speak to principals and Board of Management members to get these non-inclusive practices changed.


----------



## Bronte (7 May 2012)

That's awful Complainer, telling kids not to come to school until 11 because they are not Catholic. Message loud and clear to those parents. Lily the teacher is lovely, what a kind Christian woman, just what kids need. 

Re boards of management, in the case of the niece above and the awful experience, parent was a member of the parents association (or whatever it's called).


----------



## Liamos (8 May 2012)

oldnick said:


> The odds are that he/she is far less likely to have raped little children than your average RC priest.


 
Can any poster just make statements like this without being checked?


----------



## Latrade (8 May 2012)

Sometimes Oldnick's posts are like an episode of the Simpsons where you have to read them several times to make sure you catch all the jokes. 

And within all that, I think nick has a solid message: if the RC church's ethos is differing from yours, then leave the Church. The current media and popularist drive for church reform is misguided. If I only liked a handful of Beatles songs, but hated all the rest, then I wouldn't call myself a Beatles fan. If you can only agree with some of the RC church's messages but disagree with all the rest, then perhaps you're not a RC. It's a cop out to your own values expecting a Church to waterdown its stance just so perople can be comfortable still having their token crutch of saying they're catholic when quite clearly they are not. You either stay on message and defend the church's stance and influence on sexuality, canon law, abortion, education, healthcare all society's problems stemming from secularisation or you get off that ship.

Religion seems a lot like politics, in that people will always support FF (FG, Labour, SF or whoever) irrespective of how corrupt, self-serving and inept those in power prove to be. 

Brady won't resign and he shouldn't. He acted fully within canon law which is what is more important to him and those he leads and those he is led by. So in the eyes of the Pope and therefore God, he's done absolutely nothing wrong. Sure, it sticks in the craw that an insitution can put its own laws above those of the State and above the innate moral code of every living human and be completely immune. It's a service that I'm sure the Gardai and the Government would also provide to any Muslim Cleric who puts Sharia Law above that of the state.


----------



## Firefly (8 May 2012)

Teatime said:


> This good priests tarred by tiny majority argument gets on my nerves.
> 
> Where were all the good priests when evil was prospering? They all knew there was a problem decades ago. Where was the internal agitation to sort out the abuse? Any other organisation would have internal revolts until such problems were resolved. They all facilitated the abuse by their silence or their acceptance of the 'moving-on' policy for dodgy priests.
> How many priests stood up in public and admitted the Roman CC had a serious problem? What were they afraid of? Surely protecting little children goes above all other considerations for a priest. Cloyne shows us that they still wont report abuse if they can get away with it. They were afraid to relinquish their power and the Vatican corporation has them all tightly bound.
> ...


 
+1m


----------



## Sunny (8 May 2012)

oldnick said:


> The priest is usually married with a family and ,as I say, can be a woman. The odds are that he/she is far less likely to have raped little children than your average RC priest.


 


Liamos said:


> Can any poster just make statements like this without being checked?


 
I agree. The comment is completely uncalled for. Most child abuse takes place in the family home by married family men. Being married with a family doesn't make you any less likely to be a child sex offender than any other demographic. 

Being a man doesn't automatically mean you are likely to abuse children. Being a priest doesn't either.


----------



## truthseeker (8 May 2012)

Sunny said:


> I agree. The comment is completely uncalled for. Most child abuse takes place in the family home by married family men. Being married with a family doesn't make you any less likely to be a child sex offender than any other demographic.
> 
> Being a man doesn't automatically mean you are likely to abuse children. Being a priest doesn't either.



Sunny - perhaps Im misreading, but I dont think the comment re odds less likely to have raped a child is related to the comment of the priest usually being married with children. Thats not how I read it anyway.

The actual facts would suggest paedophilia is a bigger problem in Protestant churches:



> Source: Pedophiles and Priests, Anatomy of a Crisis, Oxford University Press, 1996, Paperback Edition, 2001
> 
> It seems what while .2 to 1.7 percent of Catholic clergy have been guilty of pedophilia (or sexual abuse particularly of boys, p.80-82), a whopping 10 percent of Protestant ministers have been found guilty of sexual misconduct with a 2 or 3 percent pedophilia rate (p. 50-52).



Strangely there seems to be little or no media coverage of this.

If you do even a quick google you will find that the above source seems to be backed up by many online sources. I havent actually come across a study that shows that RC priests are more likely to be abusers than any other ministers/rabbis/sports coaches/teachers etc..

It would appear the media has certainly generated a false prejudice towards RC priests in this regard.


----------



## Bronte (8 May 2012)

Latrade said:


> Brady won't resign and he shouldn't. He acted fully within canon law


 
So to take this further, and I'm not at all sure he acted within canon law, if he acted within canon law and did nothing wrong and this was to happen today to one of our children and Brady does nothing but hold a meeting with our 14 year old child, without our presence, and ask our child the most obscene questions I've heard of being asked an innocent 14 year old (I cannot read the all of the report as the questions alone make me sick - but I will get around to it) and then does nothing that's all right then, because that is actually what you are saying. And if you're saying that, well then all members of the organisation are negligent and culpable in the cover up by being part of it and it is a totally immoral and corrupt organisation. We are talking about he rape of many many innocent children, a most heinous crime if ever there was one. The defense of cannon law you see as a correct defense to allowing a paedophile carry on.  What kind of Church is that.  

I'm not religious but one think for sure, This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ didn't think like that.


----------



## Bronte (8 May 2012)

Liamos said:


> Can any poster just make statements like this without being checked?


 
Well now we have report after report of Roman catholic priests and what they did and plenty of convictions, off the top of my head I don't recall one, not one Protestant clergyman.  In addition the Roman catholic that bastion of care and concern for children are actually in charge of most schools in the country.


----------



## Sunny (8 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> Well now we have report after report of Roman catholic priests and what they did and plenty of convictions, off the top of my head I don't recall one, not one Protestant clergyman. In addition the Roman catholic that bastion of care and concern for children are actually in charge of most schools in the country.


 
Search other Countries.


----------



## truthseeker (8 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> Well now we have report after report of Roman catholic priests and what they did and plenty of convictions, off the top of my head I don't recall one, not one Protestant clergyman.  In addition the Roman catholic that bastion of care and concern for children are actually in charge of most schools in the country.



Bronte - you have missed my last post:
According to studies, child abuse is *more* common among Protestant ministers:
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1261970&postcount=120


----------



## Complainer (8 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> Re boards of management, in the case of the niece above and the awful experience, parent was a member of the parents association (or whatever it's called).



Just to clarify - the Board of Management and the Parents Association are very different things. The Board of Management are the Board of the school - they are the legal Board of the school, and are responsible for setting school policies etc. The Parents Association usually help out with fundraising and other events. A good Parents Association can also act as a channel of communications to the school (principal or Board of Management or both), but has no real power itself.


----------



## Purple (8 May 2012)

Complainer said:


> Just to clarify - the Board of Management and the Parents Association are very different things. The Board of Management are the Board of the school - they are the legal Board of the school, and are responsible for setting school policies etc. The Parents Association usually help out with fundraising and other events. A good Parents Association can also act as a channel of communications to the school (principal or Board of Management or both), but has no real power itself.



Yea, but in many schools the principle and the parish priest run the show.


----------



## oldnick (8 May 2012)

Truthseeker -what an inappropriate name you have !

As an atheist I have no compunction about decrying clergy of any religion.
And it's not because I'm a Protestant atheist that I doubt the veracity of your statement that Protestant ministers abused children more than RC priests.

As you surely must know, the recent debate on RC clerical child abuse is not the abuse per se but how that it has been hidden/covered up by the RC church. We are hearing daily how the power, the hold of the RC church over most of its flock was such that even when a case of abuse was reported to authorities, press and even parents it was hushed up. 

It may well be the case - as your quoted source states - that up to 1.7% of RC priests were found guilty of child abuse cf to 10 % of Protestant clergy. To me, (and yes I'm prejudiced against RC clergy), that suggests that for every Catholic priest actually found guilty there were many more who committed abuse . And,above all, many more senior clerics who covered it up.

Protestant churches, of which there are many different sects, had far less control or sway over their members in the same period the study was made 1970-1997. So, if the local, usually married, vicar buggered a choirboy I suspect -with no proof on my part - that he would be far less likely to get away with it than Father O'Reilly.

I repeat that these are my prejudiced feelings - and perhaps I'm wrong. So, perhaps I should be the "truthseeker" and learn a bit more.


----------



## Purple (8 May 2012)

Yes, it's about the cover up.
Let's not get into a debate about which type of Christianity is worst/best; to me it's all just mumbo-jumbo, let's just say that Catholics do control better and Protestants win the prize both both the most bigoted and the least bigoted (Free presbitarian & COI). Yes, it's a mixed bag.


----------



## oldnick (8 May 2012)

Purple. You are being absolutely sensible. I'm being emotional. So forgive me continuing my rant...

Mr Phillip Jenkins, author of the report which purports to claim that 10% of Protestant clergy were guilty of child abuse , is quoted on many sites as stating _" i have no idea where this figure of ten percent comes from..... I would very much doubt that the figure is a fraction of one percent"_

I seems that someone once claimed this unbelievable figure was in the report and it has been often repeated -as it has been on AAM by Sunny and then Truthseeker.

Yes, Purple you're right. All priests  espouse mumbo-jumbo, but I believe that the most evil of the lot in this country are the Roman Catholic ones. And yet they have so much power here right down to controlling our childrens education. 

I usually combat my dislike of them with attempts at humour in my posts. Not tonight.


----------



## Latrade (9 May 2012)

Bronte said:


> So to take this further, and I'm not at all sure he acted within canon law, if he acted within canon law and did nothing wrong and this was to happen today to one of our children and Brady does nothing but hold a meeting with our 14 year old child, without our presence, and ask our child the most obscene questions I've heard of being asked an innocent 14 year old (I cannot read the all of the report as the questions alone make me sick - but I will get around to it) and then does nothing that's all right then, because that is actually what you are saying. And if you're saying that, well then all members of the organisation are negligent and culpable in the cover up by being part of it and it is a totally immoral and corrupt organisation. We are talking about he rape of many many innocent children, a most heinous crime if ever there was one. The defense of cannon law you see as a correct defense to allowing a paedophile carry on. *What kind of Church is that*.
> 
> I'm not religious but one think for sure, This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ didn't think like that.


 
And the bolded text is exactly my point. If you signed up or were inculcated or chose to believe in the Catholic version of Christianity then you signed up for canon law and you have to understand that Brady has done nothing wrong. Simply because the Pope says so. I don't for one second say I support that or agree with it, just that if you are a Catholic, you have agreed the Church and the Pope are essentially above the state law and operating under a different authority. 

If, as a Catholic, that makes you angry or upset (don't get me wrong I am sickened with anger), then you have to understand that this wrong (the treatment and handling of the abuse, not the abuse itself) is at the core of the faith and stems from a series of individuals who directly interpret God's word. 

It is then simple; if you disagree with that and other interpretations of God's will, then Catholicism isn't the faith for you. Christianity may be in general, but the Catholic version possibly not. Calls for modernisation and liberalisation of the RC Church are misguided, there can be no such thing as a moderate church (and that goes for all the Abrahamic faiths), the bible as a whole doesn't have that flexibility. So you're either in with all the nasty, hateful stuff alongside the nicer stuff and talking donkeys or you're not. 

As an apathetic atheist, I'd disagree with Oldnick, I don't think any one faith is more or less evil than another. I don't think one group of humans with a centralised source of authority and lack of accountability is more or less evil than any other. They've all done their good and they've all done their bad. 

As to the abuse figures in the report, I call bull on it simply because there's no indication where they came from and because no other study seems to refer or use them.


----------



## Sunny (9 May 2012)

oldnick said:


> Mr Phillip Jenkins, author of the report which purports to claim that 10% of Protestant clergy were guilty of child abuse , is quoted on many sites as stating _" i have no idea where this figure of ten percent comes from..... I would very much doubt that the figure is a fraction of one percent"_
> 
> I seems that someone once claimed this unbelievable figure was in the report and it has been often repeated -as it has been on AAM by Sunny and then Truthseeker.


 
Where did I repeat the figure? It is probably as ridiculous as your claim that the average Roman Catholic Priest is a child rapist. I simply said that while Ireland may not have had the same levels of child abuse stories amoung Protestant clergy, the same cannot be said in other Countries are have the Protestant Religion as their main religion. By the way, I have no time for religion full stop. I just don't believe in tarring every priest with the same brush just because of the actions of a few and because of the actions of their superiors and organisation. It's like saying every Islamic Preacher is a terrorist or supports terrorism.

Kevin Reynolds shows the dangers of presuming the worst of everyone because of the actions of a few.


----------



## Latrade (9 May 2012)

Sunny said:


> I just don't believe in tarring every priest with the same brush just because of the actions of a few and because of the actions of their superiors and organisation. It's like saying every Islamic Preacher is a terrorist or supports terrorism.
> 
> Kevin Reynolds shows the dangers of presuming the worst of everyone because of the actions of a few.


 
It's fair to tar a priest, rabbi or whoever when they don't act to stop or uncover the acts when they have knowledge or when their faith is used to justify it.

What we also learned from Kevin Reynolds is that if you're wrongly accused by RTE of certain acts you will be compensated €200K+. If you're an actual victim of abuse and lifelong suffering, you will be compensated €65K and have had the vast majority of your life as a pariah and being called a liar. 

I know from previous discussion you aren't defending a Church or even supporting RC over any other faith, the only thing I disagree on is that there just aren't enough from the Church speaking out against how it has been handled. They either agree with the handling, don't care enough to speak out or put their positions and careers ahead of their moral voice.


----------



## Purple (9 May 2012)

I have always found it ironic that a Church that extols the virtue of martyrs, people who died because they were not willing to sacrifice their principles, is so willing to sacrifice so many innocent lives in order to protect its institutions. I’m not talking about fanciful stories of Daniel in the lion’s den, I’m talking about men like Maximilian Colby. His faith and example are in complete contrast to the current Pope (the man who was in charge of the cover-up internationally before he became Pope) and most of the current hierarchy of the RC Church.
Maybe dying for your faith is more important than “doing onto others as you would wish to be done onto you” or “loving your neighbour as yourself”. I forget who said those words but he mustn’t have been that important as Christianity has ignored him for most of the last two thousand years.


----------



## oldnick (9 May 2012)

Sunny -a thousand pardons for missquoting you. 
 I was referring to Truthseekers reference to post 120 which first contained the comments about Protestant minsiters.Your comments were in there but made no such reference. Very sorry. The calumny was entirely from one person.

I generally agree with your comments that one shouldn't tar everyone with the same brush, though I'm having difficulty with RC priests.  It's not so much that RC priests are all child abusers -of course they're not and I've never said it.
It's the RC Church's cover-up and virtual protection of the child-abusers that sickens me.
And as long as the "good" RC priests  to carry on in that Church as if nothing has happened then whatver good deeds they may perform they will be tarred with the same brush.


----------



## Liamos (9 May 2012)

Why is it that most of the people on here are atheists who couldn't care less about the Church and religion, but just can't stop talking about it?


----------



## Purple (9 May 2012)

Liamos said:


> Why is it that most of the people on here are atheists who couldn't care less about the Church and religion, but just can't stop talking about it?


Because they are an influential international organisation that instructed Irish citizens to give pre-eminence to the laws of a foreign state over the laws of this country in an effort to cover-up the rape of children and in doing so facilitated the rapists ad abusers in continuing their actions for decades more. 
I have a great deal of time for most of the priests I know; they are torn apart by the conflicting forces of what’s right and what their Church tells them to do. I consider the Vatican as a hostile state and would very much welcome it if we, Ireland, broke off diplomatic relations with them until such time as the Pope was extradited to Ireland to face criminal charges (with his minions) for perverting the course of justice.


----------



## Latrade (9 May 2012)

Liamos said:


> Why is it that most of the people on here are atheists who couldn't care less about the Church and religion, but just can't stop talking about it?


 
Pretty much what Purple says. Give me a State where a religion doesn't have such influence directly and indirectly and we'll stop going on about it. Whether it's the "ethics" committee of a hospital, education, or even the level of influence that has to have gone into politicians and gardai to cover up child abuse, it's one set of beliefs having an undue influence and harm on my life and my family's. 

If Church policy didn't affect me or those who didn't want to be influenced by it, then I'd happily not talk about it. 

The more important question is in light of all the revelations about Church conduct, why don't more religious people talk about it, or is silent acceptance endemic in the faithful masses as well as the clergy?


----------

