Photosales
niJobfinder
niCarfinder
Home Delivery
Propertynews
Vatican didn't know either? Pull the other one, there's church bells on it
Thursday, 3 December 2009
It would be wrong to say that nothing has changed, but right to say not much. T
he Vatican will, even now, be pondering the latest dispatches from the battlefront in Ireland and pursing its lips with satisfaction that it hasn't taken more of a hit.
Hard pounding, Your Holiness, but we're coming through relatively unscathed.
The confidence of the Church that it won't suffer grievously from the suffering it has inflicted on children is most clearly expressed in the continuance of the cover-up. More brazen than ever, the conspirators are now hiding in clear sight.
There's scarcely a bishop in the 32 counties who hasn't issued a statement explaining how dismayed/distressed/shocked/bewildered he's been to discover the extent of the depravity perpetrated by fellow clerics. Some have widened their eyes in displays of wonderment: "I cannot begin to understand the mentality."
Do they take the people for fools? I suppose it's what they do.
Complaints of sexual abuse of children by clergy in Ireland have been in the public arena for at least 25 years. For the most part, not much heed was taken of complaints or complainants.
The response of state authorities, south and north, ranged from the inadequate to the inert. But, you could bet the Third Sunday Silver Collection that the Catholic Church itself has been paying attention throughout, tracking every complaint, monitoring reaction.
Now they tell us that they didn't have an inkling of the extent of the criminality until the day before yesterday. Pull the other one, your lordships, it's got church-bells on.
At the beginning of 1996, there were investigations of complaints of sexual abuse under way - however inadequate these were to turn out to be - in the dioceses of Achonry, Ardagh and Clonmacnois, Armagh, Cashel and Emly, Clonfert, Cloyne, Cork and Ross, Derry, Down and Connor, Dromore, Dublin, Elphin, Ferns, Galway, Kilmacduagh and Kilfenor, Kerry, Kildare and Leighlin, Killaloe, Kilmore, Limerick, Raphoe and Waterford and Lismore.
We are being asked to believe that at that time, and since, the bishops never discreetly inquired of one another during prayer breaks at their conclaves at Maynooth or All Hallows or whenever, 'How's that business with Fr So-and-so going?' or, 'Anymore word about that wee girl from such-and-such?' or, 'Is the mother in that other case still onside?'.
Never uttered a dicky-bird. Yeah, right.
The Church's enmeshment with the state helps explain the bishops' confidence that they can blather on regardless. On Tuesday, the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, claimed in the Dail that the Vatican had "acted in good faith" in refusing to cooperate with Judge Murphy.
No, it had not. It may have acted in accordance with diplomatic nicety, but the record shows that good faith and the Vatican are mutually exclusive when it comes to the abuse of children by priests. Cowen's abject performance spoke volumes about the deference of the southern state towards the Church in spite of all.
A state which had genuine concern for its children would have responded to last week's crime scene by taking decisive action to remove the Catholic bishops as patrons of primary schools. Three thousand of 3,200 primaries in the Republic have bishops as patrons. Can any less appropriate category of men be imagined to have such power over the moral formation of children? But not a single TD has urged any such thing.
Control of education is at the heart of the matter. A ferocious determination to secure the right to train the consciousness of the next generation dictated the Catholic hierarchy's attitude to the emerging Irish state in the early years of the last century: give us the children and we'll give you our backing against the British and help shore up your state.
The state was born in the embrace of the Church and has never fully recovered from its origins. Judging from its politicians at least. The Catholic Church is an all-Ireland body. It will require all-Ireland radical action to extirpate the evil it contains from within Irish society. The controversy still raging as I write, may soon recede. That's what Church rulers hope and believe will happen.
But it shouldn't be allowed to happen. The victims, as we keep hearing, must come first.
Consider this: a priest is transferred from the south to a parish in the north. The night before he arrives, the priests in the parochial house are visited by an emissary from the bishop, who tells them to "keep an eye" on their new colleague and specifically to ensure that he is not left alone with children. Over the next few months, he rapes two little girls. The family of one of his victims informs the bishop what's happened. He does nothing.
The family then writes to the cardinal, describing their daughter's experience in heart-rending terms and the effect, both on her, and her family. The cardinal acknowledges the letter, assuring the family that he will pray for them.
The rapist is moved out of the parish to a monastery in the south. When he is traced there and exposed, the bishop lies in public that the Church had earlier informed the civil authorities of the allegations. The priest is eventually jailed.
The bishop concerned has been among those seen in the past week explaining that the situation in his diocese regarding the handling of allegations of child sex abuse has always been tickety-boo.
- Text Size
Comments
53 Comments
As I have said before Paul came from a Hellenized background, he formed this 'religion' without having met Jesus & as he set about forming this project of his by denouncing Torah practices which had lots of strict rules to follow and asked of the follower a great commitment. This newer religion dreamed up by Paul provided acceptance to all with a fraction of the rules, therefore it was easy to follow and appealing, the whole 'death/resurrection' phenomenon was something which the Hellenized gentiles could relate to as it was prevalent in their relgions. Paul also by passed much of the OT in this religion. He made a direct (fradulent) link from Abraham to Christ to give it a history that some Jewish people could buy into. then the Roman Empire with all its connections and might adopt it as their own based on familiarity with their own practices, & it suddenly becomes the accepted religion of millions. Makes you think eh Evergreen, a major PR exercise or the 'Truth'?
Posted by In The Name Of The Fada | 17.12.09, 16:37 GMT
No I got your meaning on Santa Evergreen, I just thought it was a pretty childish attempt at deflecting away from my very legitimate question on your statement, which numerous comments further on, you still don't seem to be able to back up.I am not being selective on my interpretation on the bible, I am questioning it as laid out by Paul among others. That's hardly selective is it. If a statement of 'truth' is built on a lie then it deserves to be questioned.
Posted by In The Name Of The Fada | 17.12.09, 16:21 GMT
I as a person living in a county in Ireland that has had its fair share of clerical abuse agrees with every word that has been wrote, they were moved on, they did commit the same offense again, they did get away with it, they had the people who we all look up to cover it up and they left behind a generation of children who went through a horrific experience without a voice! They had nobody to turn to for help as who would believe them? I think its time we as Christians looked at where the blame should go, look at who we look up to and ask why? Give those people teir voice back and let them see that at last, somebody is listening to them!
Posted by Kate | 17.12.09, 00:30 GMT
Fada,
I would refer you to my posting of the 15th from which I quote :
"To the Bible thumpers - "if thine eye sin against thee pluck it out"
yet we are all sinners. Highly selective interpretation of the Bible, which makes a farce of much of your rantings"
I also refer you once again to Kierkegaard (see below) not to mention Socrates, Plato, Augustine, Descartes, Kant, and perhaps also in particular Philo.
As for "petty retorts" your snide books comment is not a bad example of same.
My comment on Santa and kids, which was lost on you, was an analogy to religion and humankind. It CAN bring happiness and meaning and may even be TRUE. Your problem is that you can't accept that, and I responded to it.
Let's leave it at that Fada. Peace be with you.
Beannachtai na Nollag duit, agus go neiri an bothar leat san athbliain.
Posted by Evergreen | 16.12.09, 23:02 GMT
@ Maggie Long, what's your point?Would you be happier if half the abuse victims had been girls because at least they'd have been raped by heterosexuals? Marriage is absolutely zero protection against paedophilia if that's what you're suggesting. The only way to stop this in future has already been outlined by Ultonian below, get the priests/clergy away from the kids. Plus throwing a few bishops in jail wouldn't do any harm.
Posted by Farrah | 16.12.09, 12:29 GMT
You have a very arrogant tone about you Evergreen to think that I am searching for the truth as laid out by the bible and have not found some kind of salvation. Who even brought up the topic of Santa Clause, I do not see its relevance to this debate, perhaps it is another tactic to evade my questioning (which is valid) to find out what your explanation is for Jesus' religion differing greatly from what you (supposidly) practice. BTW I have not spent time in a seminary or theological college. What I have done is buy books and read them (you should try it), which leads me to question supposed truths. That is a greater quest for truth than your definition as laid out by those contradictory gospels in the bible. Well if you are content to be spoon fed magnificent tales then so be it.
Posted by In The Name Of The Fada | 16.12.09, 11:29 GMT
Why is it Evergreen when someone tries to point out to the faithful/brainwashed/plain dumb (delete as appropriate) they always resort to the most un-Christian type behaviour by resorting to petty retorts. Now I think you are quite sure as I am that I wasn't there when Jesus uttered these words. Now can you tell me if Jesus twice asked His Father to remove the cup of wrath He was about to drink in the Garden of Gethsemane as reported in the bible? Can you shed a little of your light on this given that Jesus was alone? Who was there to record these words? It's a puzzler that isnt it, but its in the bible so it MUST be true. Also you have been pretty evasive in relation to my question Evergreen.How did Paul "pull it all together"? As for 'whislting bitterly' I think you are the one who is bitter here my friend, I am merely pointing out facts while you are content to be unquestioning and blindly follow fairytales that dont stand up to scrutiny.
Posted by In The Name Of The Fada | 16.12.09, 11:17 GMT
Maggie Long
Thank you for the advice which I regard as well meaning. We Catholics will emerge stronger and better from this nightmare.
Now how about the same "instruction" to the teacher, police, vicar, etc training colleges ?.
Peace be with you.
Posted by Fair Play | 16.12.09, 11:07 GMT
Fada
Since you were apparently there at the time, tell me, did Jesus say "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church" or not ? I am interested to find out.
Posted by Evergreen | 16.12.09, 01:20 GMT
The Roman church was always going to be a open door for sexual predators! The church laid down the first rule that anyone who wished to be a priest do not have any relationship with women only in a spiritual manner! The stats suggest that most of the victims were boys thus making it a playgound for paedophile homosexuals! The way forward is to monitor the activities of potential priests when they are in training with the police and church working together
Posted by Maggie Long | 15.12.09, 22:19 GMT
Fada
You've either been to your local library or spent time in a seminary or other theological college. Either way you are at best whistling bitterly in a hurricane,and not just to me but to tens of millions. The bottom lined is that I am at peace with myself in my beliefs.
Read Soren Kierkegaard, one of the first Existentalists. "The thing is to find a truth which is true for ME, to find the idea for which I can live and die". It seems YOUR search is not yet over but good luck with it. And no, I do not believe in Santa, but I believe in the joy in kids faces about him.
Peace to you at Christmas, or "Happy Holiday" if you prefer.
Posted by Evergreen | 15.12.09, 21:31 GMT
As with all these discussions recently there has beena tendency to shoot the messanger. Eamon is right the state bought the church and vice versus with education.
In a modern stste why should any church run education? The quickest and most powerful way of putting the church in its rightful place is by taking it out of the wrong place - in education.
North and South would benefit if all churches were removed from their as of right places.
THe church shold preach its religion and faith teachers should educate - doctors cure - policemen police - politicians legislate.
While we allow the church North or South to interfere in areas outside religion abuses of power will occur.
Separateion of church and state please Lord answer our prayers
Posted by Ultonian | 15.12.09, 16:34 GMT
@ In The Name Of... lol, why are you even bothering mate? You can't use facts or logic to convince the faithful, the whole point of religion is to exploit and encourage ignorance.
@ David McCann, you're speaking for yourself here. "It is hard for any Irishman to imagine a "Priest of God" tried before a civil court for a crime - especially a court which follows British rules." Well I can easily imagine it, shame the authorities are so compromised it hardly ever happens! And what on earth British rules have to do with it I've no idea but I'd be interested to find out. Personally the way this whole thing has unfolded makes me seriously question whether a United Ireland is desirable in any respect. The police need to start throwing these rapist priests (and some of their own corrupt officers) in jail!
Posted by Farrah | 15.12.09, 16:01 GMT
Evergreen, You say that "Paul pulled it all together", pulled what together exactly?And he pulled it together based on what? Did you ever think to question why the religion Paul came up with was so different from what Jesus and his immediate followers practiced. Paul was a Hellenized Jew who was not Torah observant, perhaps because he was not born in Jerusalem, his view on religion was influenced by the various religions that were about in the era of Pax Romana. He admitted himself he had little contact with the direct followers of Jesus.So how did a man who had no contact with Jesus, little contact with his direct followers (his own admission) and the fact that his beliefs greatly differed with that of what Jesus practiced "pull it all together"? Also how am I "highly selective and highly embittered" when I have presented facts to you to point out your mistake in saying that "Catholicism was founded by Jesus Christ" when it plainly wasnt. I am interested to find out.
Posted by In The Name of The Fada | 15.12.09, 10:49 GMT
There is no forgiveness for the sake of reconciliation without first a conviction. As a victim however, I can forgive for the sake of my own healing. This relieves me of the need to involve myself with Church again. If the Catholic church wants to be reconciled to me it must be convicted of its systemic power structure and have its power base which creates peodaphilia replaced.
This cannot happen from within the heirachy of the church - no one organisation can be thier own prosecutor and sentancing judge. The pope cannot, as a head of this system, apologise. To me he is a criminal on the run cheekily taunting me, his victim, by telephoning the press.
Posted by Dave Mc | 15.12.09, 03:50 GMT
It is hard for any Irishman to imagine a "Priest of God" tried before a civil court for a crime - especially a court which follows British rules. The pope needs to intervene in the criminal process by turning these criminal priests back into "ordinary" men and handing - along with his opology - all his records of transfers to the Police.
Then the pope needs to get rid of centralised governance of his church in order to prevent a repitition of these events.
This is systemic crime, much more than the crime of individuals within the system of Church government.
Posted by David McCann | 15.12.09, 03:26 GMT
In the Name of the Fada
No doubt you will say that Jesus never said to Peter "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church". Were you there at the time Fada ? Admit it, you don't know for sure either way no more than I do. What I do know for sure is that you are highly selective and highly embittered which may be impairing your sense of fairness.
Religion, which brings meaning and comfort to hundreds of millions, is NOT the problem. ABUSE of it is. A hatchet is meant for cutting wood. If I attack my neighbour with mine, is it the hatchet's fault ?
To the Bible thumpers - "if thine eye sin against thee pluck it out"
yet we are all sinners. Highly selective interpretation of the Bible, which makes a farce of much of your rantings.
Peace and prosperity to ALL at Christmas and in 2010.
Beannachtai na Nollag daoibh go leir !
Posted by Evergreen | 15.12.09, 02:37 GMT
In the Name of the Fada
That was quite the rant. Sorry but I'm afraid you have not convinced me that there is no connection between Christianity and Christ - and yes I realize that Paul "pulled it all together". Try your hand at the rest of humankind. Surely someone will agree with you. Some soured seminarians ( like yourself ?) perhaps.
Much of the identity of our great Western civilization is based on the spirit of Christianity....etc etc
Either way, reading his teachings, not a bad "Brand Name" (Christ) is it ?
But what's the point in going on..
Posted by Evergreen | 14.12.09, 22:44 GMT
Paedpohiles become priests, priests don't become paedophiles. Sooner or later the church needs to revisit the celibacy rules. If priests could marry, and i siupct many would and the enrollment would increase, more importantly the pedophies would have no place to hide.
Posted by martin | 14.12.09, 17:53 GMT
These people need the full force of the law applied, why hasn't that happened? I expected paedophile priests but I'd hoped the law in the Republic would be less obviously corrupt! Forget apologies and letters of acknowledgement, I'd like to see arrests and prosecutions by those charged with (and paid well for) up-holding the law!
As for everyone knocking Rev Cotton, why should he apologise for staying on topic? It's the Catholic Church we're talking about here! It's Pappy and the rest of the so called holy men who've been shown to have betrayed the children. Other churches undoubtedly will have similar issues but that's not really what's on discussion here is it?
If I criticise the Catholics do I have to criticise the rest of Christendom in the same breath just to be 'fair'?
Posted by Farrah | 14.12.09, 12:53 GMT
53 Comments