Catholic Church Abuse.

[Andrew49]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] But, and this has been pointed out in various newspapers in letters and columns, it is unjust to portray the worldwide Catholic Church as a whole being responsible, institutional or otherwise. You never define what you mean by institution. Other institutional parts of the Church had no connection with these events. That's simply a fact. The Church is too big with too many composite parts to be subject to such lazy and malicious generalisations. [/FONT][/COLOR]

... apart from the Vatican!

When war refugee Maria Hrela found to her horror that her only son was being savagely abused in Artane Industrial School, she went right to the top with her complaint - to Pope Pius XII himself. And soon afterwards a Bishop arrived at the notorious north Dublin Detention Centre to check on how Bruno Hrela was being treated. The highly-unusual Vatican probe into conditions endured by Bruno at the harsh Industrial School over 50 years ago, figured in the inquiry into Institutional Abuse set-up by the Government.

Bruno talked about the horrific physical and sexual abuse meted out to him and other children at Artane during the 1950s. Bruno talks of how his Mum managed to spark of a high-level Vatican inquiry into his harsh treatment at the hands of the notorious Christian Brothers who owned and managed Artane Industrial School. Tragically after the Vatican inquiry Bruno's treatment worsened and he was savagely and unmercifully beaten by the Brothers because of his Mum's attempt to expose the savage treatment of children in Artane Industrial School.

Vatican Complicit In Child Abuse in Artane Industrial School

[Cato]

You might find, Sir, despite your moral clarity that honourable posters do not misrepresent other poster's views to the point of demonisation and defamation:

I didn't demonize you. It was a fair comment based on your posts on this subject. It's only defamation if it's not true. It was and is.

Furthermore, that 'quote' that you alleged came from me has been taken completely out of context, and did not refer to you specifically at all. However, if it stung you when you read it, I would suggest that you take heed of the old saying that "the truth hurts".

I'd imagine most decent people know that these crimes and their cover-up are as- if not more- abhorrent to me as they are to anyone else. And I wouldn't wish to go back to the church-state relations that existed then in a million years. But, and this has been pointed out in various newspapers in letters and columns, it is unjust to portray the worldwide Catholic Church as a whole being responsible, institutional or otherwise. You never define what you mean by institution. Other institutional parts of the Church had no connection with these events. That's simply a fact. The Chuch is too big with too many composite parts to be subject to such lazy and malicious generalisations. That and the fact that Catholic doctrine could in no way be responsible are the two straightforward enough points I made.

The blame for the cover up of the specific abuse in Ireland goes all the way to the Vatican and several Popes. This has been pointed out by Andrew and the Captain so often that I cannot believe that you are ignorant of it, but rather that you choose to ignore it.

There is a pattern, in every country where the abuse of children at the hands of catholic clergy or religious has occurred, in how the catholic church has dealt with the issue. They lie, they cover-up, they try to protect their assets, and eventually the truth is dragged kicking and screaming out of them. in every case the corruption stretches from the actual abuser through their immediate superior and right to Rome. This pattern of behavior is too consistent to simply be caused by chance. The entire Catholic Church institution right from the top in Rome down to every abuser within is implicated in this evil, wherever it has occurred (and it has occurred in many many places).

For someone to deny any of the above, they must either simply be ignorant of the facts, or if not ignorant then guilty of at best willfully ignoring them as an uncomfortable truth, or at worst acting as an apologist for evil. Which are you?

Feel free though to continue evaluating my emotional states and moral guilt which you seem mysteriously equipped to discern if you find that fulfilling or if it gives you some kind of psychological boost. I already told you I don’t feel self-pity but then again an honourable poster might accept the good faith of others. I appreciate you'll probably feel a burning need to get the last word, so I'll leave you to it.

Apart from the above being an example of a brain-fart, I cannot make any sense of it.

Oh and by the way I wasn't referring to Glennshane at all as an example of your excellent ad hominem abilities. So spare me your sermons. People in glass houses and all that.

Well occasionally one happens upon other trolls other than Glennshane, who also deserve similar treatment. You're borderline there.

Oh, and thanks for the last word.

PS You really take the rep system far too seriously. Relax, it's not the end of the world one way or another.

[Glennshane]

[QUOTE=Schuhart;1698307]

"You're absolutely right that the position of Northern Catholics has traditionally been a low priority in Southern politics. "

Thank you for your honesty.

"But I think you are falling into the trap of making two wrongs into a right."

It does, however, call into question the sincerity of those who are making so much noise about the abuse of children in Eire.

"To borrow your term, Prod tyranny doesn't justify sex abuse by Catholic religious."

I never claimed that it did. BUT crimes committed by Catholic religious does not change the fact that most of the crimes committed against Catholics in Ireland have been committed by Prods.

"Or, as I've been trying to suggest on a few threads, can you appreciate how sex abuse by Catholic religious can be used to support Prod tyranny."

Unfortunately, some journalists are trying to do just that.

"And, bear in mind, I'm not saying either view is right. But I'm most certainly saying both views exist."

The view that Prod tyranny was, and is justified, certainly exists. I very much doubt that any Catholic uses misconduct by Prods to justify sex abuse of Catholic children.

[Glennshane]

[QUOTE=Phinaeus;1679878]

"No priest or Christian Brother gave it to you "up the arse", you common little vulgarian."

Why are so many of these Eirefolk so vulgar? What do they hope to gain from it? Or are most of the posters immature teenage boys who are using vulgar language in an attempt to appear adult?

"You're trying to cash in on the compo gravy train and became enraged by the fact that I rumbled your little scam. "

While there is a lot of truth in what you suggest, please do not lurch to the other extreme to assume that all the complaints were motivated by hopes for compensation? One must be moderate in all things and be careful about believing everything one hears or reads. Suspend judgement until the hysteria subcides and more facts become available. Let the Birmingham 6 case and the Nora Wall case be warnings.

P.S. I find being on the same side as you very stange - rather like the war-time alliance between the USA and the Soviet Union.

[Andrew49]

* Sr Callida was an incompetent manager who exhibited a lack of basic management skills including rostering, proper record keeping, communicating with staff and children, consistency and avoiding favouritism. Each of these deficiencies would have represented a serious flaw in a Resident Manager but, taken together, they constituted a disastrous mixture.

* She consumed alcohol in front of the children to excess and she was drunk and incapable on occasion.

* Her behaviour was unpredictable and irrational; she bullied the staff and occasionally beat the children.

* Sr Callida exposed children to additional risk by going away unannounced leaving the children in the charge of junior staff who had no way of contacting her and also by permitting male outsiders to have access to the home and to stay overnight even when she was not there.

* It was wrong for the Resident Manager to have children sleeping in her bedroom and for her and the Sister with whom she was conducting a relationship to take children away for weekends to hotels to stay in ‘family rooms’.

* Congregation witnesses admitted to some knowledge of Sr Callida’s behaviour, but did not feel they could do anything about it, and the situation drifted on over 12 years until it developed into a crisis.

* There was no proper supervision of the Manager.

* The Community did not have the interests of the children as their priority. Any action taken by the Congregation focused exclusively on the Resident Manager. The children were not considered.

* The Health Board neglected its supervisory function in respect of children for whom it was responsible. One of its senior Health Board officials permitted his friendship with the Resident Manager, to cloud his judgment, and he failed to recognise gross failures of management as a result. No proper reviews were carried out by the Board’s social workers.

* The children in Cappoquin were let down and endangered by each of the institutions and agencies in whose care they were placed, by the persons in positions of authority over them, and by persons in supervisory roles. They were fortunate to have care workers who were more dedicated to their tasks and more committed to the interest of the children than their superior
[SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]
Sr Callida[/COLOR] is a pseudonym for [COLOR=Red]Nora Wall[/COLOR][/SIZE]

[Cato]

Andrew, to misquote a line, you have the truth, they just cannot handle it!

Keep trying though. Eventually something might stick in their heads. I have to say that the level of brainwashing some of these guys have been put through, and its level of success is almost impressive.

[Glennshane]

According to The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse sexual, physical and psychological abuse was endemic in virtually every institution involved with childcare run by the Catholic Church.
As described by the Commission there was widespread cruelty and punishment being inflicted on children under the Church's protection, those members of religious orders and of the Catholic Hierarchy who were not directly involved with perpetrating abuse must certainly have known or suspected what was going on around them yet kept silent in order we are led to believe to avoid bringing scandal on the Church.
We've heard in the past various Bishops, etc. use the excuse that they did not understand the pervasive nature of child sexual abuse and the damage it caused to victims when dealing with complaints relating to abuse by members of the clergy but these were educated people and denying ignorance of the damage caused by sexual abuse is frankly unbelievable.
Some might accept that in the past attitudes to corporal punishment were different, that priests, brothers and nuns acting in "loco parentis" behaved no differently than many fathers and mothers even though the Commission paints a picture of a regime of physical punishment way beyond what could have been the norm even then.
When was there in any strata of society a situation where child sexual abuse was acceptable yet it appears that a blind eye was turned by a majority of the institutional Church.

Was it a 100% majority? What is meant by the "institutional church"? Is it the hierarchy? Is it the clergy? Is it all members of the church?

[Limerick Lad]

[SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]
Sr Callida[/COLOR] is a pseudonym for [COLOR=Red]Nora Wall[/COLOR][/SIZE]

When the conclusions of the Ryan Report regarding "Sr Callida" were being discussed on Liveline I suspected that they were alluding to her.

[Abacus]

A lot of these tit-for-tat exchanges about opposing religions serve to reinforce in me the belief that savants programmed and controlled by religion in large numbers will always attract enough support to maintain a quandary of their making.

Suppose we could just say "a plague on all your houses" and take the religious part of the equation right out of it, what then would separate them ?

This is all about beliefs that may or may not be true but one thing is way beyond belief and that is that all the diverse beliefs can't be true. In fact the vast bulk of them must be wrong so why is the Great One tantalising us with a multiplicity of beliefs ? Almighty sadism ? What's in it for Him or maybe it's a Her ?

Mankind is ill served by people who live and die by things that are just not true.
However, something that feeds directly into all that is the undoubted rise of fundamentalist religions which is quite a different bag of trouble altogether and one which will in time concern all of us and that, imho, is an absolute certainty.
At that stage, if still above the daisies, I will probably warm again to the Church of Rome.

Newton's Law : 'Every action has an equal and opposite reaction'

[Andrew49]

When the conclusions of the Ryan Report regarding "Sr Callida" were being discussed on Liveline I suspected that they were alluding to her.

One reason why it's vital that original documents/original statements given to the Commission from former 'residents' not be shredded. The few lines in the Ryan Commission Report referring to 'Sister Callida' are appalling enough but set against the full statements ............. !