Catholic Church Abuse.

[White Horse]

Point out any post of mine that displays 'blindness' or a 'fawning attitude towards State authorities'

Point taken. Not you, other posters.

[Kev408]

I give a f*ck. I think many thousands of Irish people give a f*ck. We need to show that, I'll grant you that.

This is not over until people like Kev408 KNOW that other people care.

I don't trust you either captain con o'sullivan. Any-one who rambles on about winston churchill as being a decent man during WW1 has to be somewhat drugged. Gallipolli, thousands of dead, churchill's subsequent demotion...You said:


"give a f*ck. I think many thousands of Irish people give a f*ck. We need to show that, I'll grant you that".

You'll 'grant' us that?

[wretchedwilbur]

I want to verbally explode, to enunciate those..people, to express exactly what I saw, to shed light on how lucky I was by only being beaten daily, the attempts, the sordid attempts to gain access to my boyhood. I was blessed I was a tyrant and those f*ckers only beat me but never sexually abused me. I saw what they did though. Naming them has proven useless. I feel less of a citizen than them but I never hurted anyone. Ah...'nuff said...no-one gives a f*ck really.

This has really moved me. Man , I feel really sorry for you.

I was born catholic but now I hate popes , bishops , foot-soldier dead-head priests . But , above all , I hate and loathe the "ordinary decent lay-catholics" without whom this hideousness would have crumbled long long ago. Any bratstad who crosses the threshold of a church this Sunday is an accomplice after-the-fact. If there really was a hell it would be reserved for gentle compliant holy good catholics. They're akin to the townspeople of Auschwitz in 1944 who carried on their ordinary business and pretended to themselves that there was no smell.

[White Horse]

I hate and loathe the "ordinary decent lay-catholics" without whom this hideousness would have crumbled long long ago. Any bratstad who crosses the threshold of a church this Sunday is an accomplice after-the-fact. If there really was a hell it would be reserved for gentle compliant holy good catholics. They're akin to the townspeople of Auschwitz in 1944 who carried on their ordinary business and pretended to themselves that there was no smell.

At least you are saying what others are trying to hide.

[Kev408]

This has really moved me. Man , I feel really sorry for you.

I was born catholic but now I hate popes , bishops , foot-soldier dead-head priests . But , above all , I hate and loathe the "ordinary decent lay-catholics" without whom this hideousness would have crumbled long long ago. Any bratstad who crosses the threshold of a church this Sunday is an accomplice after-the-fact. If there really was a hell it would be reserved for gentle compliant holy good catholics. They're akin to the townspeople of Auschwitz in 1944 who carried on their ordinary business and pretended to themselves that there was no smell.

Yeh, nice one. Anything to avoid captain con o'sullivans shyte. I wouldn't blame you exploiting this site - I don't think they're seeing it yet.

[wexfordman]

This has really moved me. Man , I feel really sorry for you.

I was born catholic but now I hate popes , bishops , foot-soldier dead-head priests . But , above all , I hate and loathe the "ordinary decent lay-catholics" without whom this hideousness would have crumbled long long ago. Any bratstad who crosses the threshold of a church this Sunday is an accomplice after-the-fact. If there really was a hell it would be reserved for gentle compliant holy good catholics. T[COLOR=Red]hey're akin to the townspeople of Auschwitz in 1944 who carried on their ordinary business and pretended to themselves that there was no smell[/COLOR].

Its an interesting comparison and certainly not without merit, and I place myself in the group of people who attend mass (occasionaly, and more out of duty than belief, you know weddings, christenings communions etc). Perhaps I am more culpable in that regard as I certainly dont attend out of any sense of duty or belief...

BUt what of those victims that still attend, what of the famailes, parents and siblings of victims who still attend services ?

[wretchedwilbur]

At least you are saying what others are trying to hide.

I know you don't agree with my sentiments WH. So I admire your constraint here.

Mainly today I just feel so very sad.

[wexfordman]

David Quinn
Irish Catholic
Jan 2009
State fails to live up to its own child protection standards - David Quinn | The Irish Catholic - Ireland's biggest and best-selling Catholic newspaper since 1888

Three recent reports by the HSE show that the State isn't implementing its own child protection standards properly and is demanding a higher standard of the Church than of itself

Last July three HSE reports were published that investigated how well, or how badly, the HSE has been implementing the requirements of Children First, which is the State's child protection policy since 1999

The reports were very poorly covered by the media and did not spark a national debate. Why not?

One of the big, and justified, criticisms of the Church has been of its past and possible present failings to deal with abuse allegations as they arise.
But the reports released in July found that only 27 percent of people involved in the implementation of Children First believe its ''guidelines in respect of allegations of abuse against employees and volunteers [are] being adhered to.''

A further 28% said they are being adhered to ''to some extent'' while 10% said they are not being adhered to at all. The rest didn't know.

A key recommendation of the Ferns report is that the Church liaise properly with the HSE and An Garda Síochána whenever an allegation comes to light.

The HSE is supposed to do something similar when an allegation involving one of its employees is brought to light. Is it? Only 13% said it is happening in the way it should. Half said it is happening ''to some extent'', in other words, not properly, with 14% saying it isn't happening at all.

A key part of the Church's response to child abuse is that its personnel be properly trained in child protection procedures.

The onus is on the State to do the same thing but only 35% of those surveyed for the HSE reports believe such training is happening in the way it should.

The Church is also required to show sensitivity towards those who make abuse allegations against clergy. Quite naturally, the same thing is expected of the State and the HSE. But a survey of individuals who have dealt with State child protection services found them to be ''powerful, unsympathetic and intimidating''.

Again comparing Church and State, the Church has often been correctly attacked for putting the interests of priests ahead of those of victims. Clericalism is blamed, that is, the tendency of clergy to look after their own.

But a very telling quote from the HSE reports shows this attitude is not restricted to the Church alone. It reads: ''In addition, it was suggested that colleagues are 'not comfortable' reporting on each other and that sometimes 'allegations and suspicions of child abuse may not be reported', thus allowing the behaviour to continue.

''Furthermore, it was noted that even where the abuse is reported to line managers, it is often not dealt with in a satisfactory manner because of an inherent conflict of interest for managers, between protecting the rights of the child and ensuring the employee is dealt with in a satisfactory way.''

When the HSE audit into the Church was released last week it was noted by many commentators that the Church had not completed Section 5 of the audit. This section had a list of questions relating to the number of allegations received by each diocese and how these allegations were dealt with.

What is very striking is that the HSE has not conducted a Section 5 audit of itself meaning we do not know how many HSE workers have been accused of child abuse. It isn't good enough for the State to demand this information from the Church but not from itself.

What the three HSE reports released last July make clear is that there are glaring inadequacies across the board in the area of child protection, in both Church and State, and also in voluntary organisations.

T[COLOR=Red]hey make clear that human nature is a constant and line managers and other personnel, whether bishops or priests or State employees, often react to allegations in the same way. That is, with a tendency to look after your own and a failure to handle abuse allegations with the required energy, conviction and competence[/COLOR].

No arguemnts there, whch is why mandatory reportting should be legally binding and failure to do so a criminal offence. That applies accross the board, it does not matter what uniform you wear when you go to work.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

I don't trust you either captain con o'sullivan. Any-one who rambles on about winston churchill as being a decent man during WW1 has to be somewhat drugged. Gallipolli, thousands of dead, churchill's subsequent demotion...You said:


"give a f*ck. I think many thousands of Irish people give a f*ck. We need to show that, I'll grant you that".

You'll 'grant' us that?

Over-interpretation, Kev. We may not agree about Churchill (I had reservations enough of my own along the lines you mention). My word 'grant' was ill-chosen. It was not meant to denote a concession but a turn of phrase which means that I disagreed with you that 'no-one cares'.

I do care. Just one last thing on Churchill, by the way, the debate was about Leadership, not morality or altruism or anyone's record during either WWI or WWII.

I agree fully with you regarding the behaviour of church authorities and the CB/SoM.

If I can do anything at all to show some of the people who suffered at the hands of sadists and sexual predators in the catholic church or their lickspittles in the government I care I can assure you I'll do it. Without any quarter asked or given.

Apologies for my poorly worded response to your post- it seems to have had the exact opposite effect to the one intended.

[cactusflower]

The idea of examining one's conscience has come up in this debate, and naturally so.

I went to a school run by an order. I got an education the state would not have been able to provide on its own. I saw no abuse and I find it hard to even imagine how different my life would have been without the work of that order.

Like everyone else, I have done nothing to thank the people who gave me that education.
Except now, and in a small way.
I am on here anonymously but in person, whenever the subject of abuse in schools comes up I point out those facts.

My conscience insists that I do.
I think anybody else in my position must feel the same.

In the current climate that takes a bit of courage.
But then, despite the impression given by the tv and newspapers, we are the overwhelming majority.

Are you serious ? You were entitled to an education. Society needed you to be educated and your teachers were either paid or given security for life.

What kind of an education did you get, that the State couldn't afford to provide ? Etiquette lessons ? Russian ? Ski-ing?

"You saw no abuse" and you are here to thank your teachers for that ?

Do you mean "thankyou for not raping/beating/mentally torturing me"?

Children are entitled to education and to have their persons respected. Please raise the bar of your expectations a little.