Now We're Hearing About Sexual Abuse Covered Up In Dublin Ireland

[MithLuin]

[b]Socrates[/b], the word you are looking for is [i][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty]pederasty[/url][/i] - it describes a sexual relationship between a man and a post-pubescent teenage boy. When the man is an authority figure and the teenage boy is below the age of consent, this is clearly a crime.


[b]Anomaly[/b] wasn't just referring to the behavior of the Church in the 1960s, though. I agree that if sex abuse was something no one talked about or did anything about at that time, then there wasn't much in place for dealing with that situation. The Church was, unfortunately, a product of the times. My father knew a woman in college who was raped by multiple men after going to her boyfriend's house. When the police questioned her, they immediately picked up on the detail that [i]she[/i] went [i]there[/i]. The officer explained (compassionately, but still) that if this went to court, she would be painted as a silly sally by the defense. This was around 1970 in Detroit. Speaking out certainly took a lot of courage for the victims, and winning justice was an uphill battle. And that was just a 'normal' case of rape. Now imagine the accused is someone 'respected' by the community, and the backlash is even worse - much worse.

But the Irish bishops first shared information (on 17 abusive priests) with the civil authorities in 1995. 1995 is not 1975. I'm pretty sure the civil authorities were [i]asking[/i] for the information before then, and at least [i]some[/i] people knew there was a real problem that wasn't being dealt with.

I understand trying to handle things quietly, avoiding a scandal, etc. But only if you actually *deal* with the problem, and get the priest out of parishes. [I realize back in the day everyone thought 'treatment' would work...but when it didn't....] Certainly, people could have easily been unaware of the scope of the problem (even the bishops who were supposed to be in charge). And surely a good number of people thought the victims were lying. (Think about it - 1980s or earlier.) A traditional Church discipline for a troublesome priest was to ship him off to a monastery for at least a sabbatical, if not an extended stay. It serves the practical purpose of removing him from ministry. I don't know if this was tried in Ireland at all.

But...pretending a problem doesn't exist and ignoring victims is very bad, and it is reasonable that people should be upset to learn that the Irish church dealt with the problem in this way (apparently with the support of the Vatican, too).


Unfortunately, child sexual abuse is [i]very[/i] common. My sister was an ER nurse (only for a short time, too) and saw lots of kids who had been abused. IIRC, the most common perpetrator was mom's boyfriend.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='MithLuin' date='01 December 2009 - 09:55 PM' timestamp='1259726143' post='2012919']

I understand trying to handle things quietly, avoiding a scandal, etc. But only if you actually *deal* with the problem, and get the priest out of parishes. [I realize back in the day everyone thought 'treatment' would work...but when it didn't....] Certainly, people could have easily been unaware of the scope of the problem (even the bishops who were supposed to be in charge). And surely a good number of people thought the victims were lying. (Think about it - 1980s or earlier.) A traditional Church discipline for a troublesome priest was to ship him off to a monastery for at least a sabbatical, if not an extended stay. It serves the practical purpose of removing him from ministry. I don't know if this was tried in Ireland at all.

[/quote]
One of the issues that has been repeatedly raised is that some of the abuse issues came to the bishops attention through the confessional.

[MithLuin]

That does of course tie his hands.

But if there are records that are being made public now, I have to imagine that there was also information unrelated to sacramental confessions. Those wouldn't have been written down or recorded in any way. I don't know what a bishop is supposed to do when a victim makes an accusation and he knows it is true [i]because[/i] of information shared under the seal of confession. But when there are reports from multiple victims...well, certainly a bishop would have reason to act.



Oh, and as for 'silly sally' in my post, that was a fiddler issue. The police officer was referring to a disreputable woman.

[Socrates]

[quote name='MithLuin' date='01 December 2009 - 10:55 PM' timestamp='1259726143' post='2012919']
[b]Socrates[/b], the word you are looking for is [i][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty]pederasty[/url][/i] - it describes a sexual relationship between a man and a post-pubescent teenage boy. When the man is an authority figure and the teenage boy is below the age of consent, this is clearly a crime.


[b]Anomaly[/b] wasn't just referring to the behavior of the Church in the 1960s, though.
. . .
[/quote]
Pederasty is a sub-category of homosexual behavior. From the wikipedia link you gave: "Pederasty is the archetypal example of male age-structured homosexuality."
All pederasty is homosexual, though not all homosexuals are pederasts.

I was responding to the common claim that the priestly sexual abuse "had nothing to do with homosexuality," which is clearly false, given the facts.

I'm sorry, I was having trouble with the keyboard yesterday. The third line in my post should have read: "This abuse followed the increase in homosexuality in seminaries starting in the 1960s." In other words, since the 60s, there was an increase in the number of homosexuals admitted to seminaries, and following this, there was an epidemic of priestly pederasty.

People argue by saying that "pedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality," yet most of the cases were [i]not[/i] true pedophilia - abuse of prepubescent children - but homosexual pederasty.

Blaming this pederasty on celibacy is absurd.
If, as is supposed, the priests in question were normal "straight" men bound by vows of celibacy but just unable to control their raging hormones, and seeking young vulnerable victims as outlets for their lust, teenage [i]girls[/i] would make up a much higher percentage of the abuse victims.
Yet the evidence is otherwise; the vast majority were boys, not girls, and not pre-pubescent children.

However, it is not politically correct to suggest that there is anything at all wrong with homosexuality, but it is politically correct to blame the Catholic Church and its disciplines.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='01 December 2009 - 07:54 AM' timestamp='1259668445' post='2012450']
Given the standard of moral behavior that should be established for people running and ministering in a "Church" that supposedly directly affects the eternal salvation of their followers, the "Church" has done little to properly address the perpetrators. Humans are prone to make mistakes and it's sad the % occurrence in priests compared to school workers is not significantly less. However, violators in the school system are dealt with more clearly, morally, and effectively. It is not a valid excuse to claim Bishops were just following the best advice at the time. The scandals in the US and Ireland are a direct result of the attitude of church leaders being above the same accountability of a common school teacher. Imagine if school superintendents pervasively transferred molesting teachers to another school...
[/quote]
But you see that is EXACTLY what the school districts have always done. If you said one word against the teacher you were facing an automatic lawsuit AND the wrath of the treachers unions.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='Socrates' date='02 December 2009 - 06:32 PM' timestamp='1259796732' post='2013388']
Pederasty is a sub-category of homosexual behavior. From the wikipedia link you gave: "Pederasty is the archetypal example of male age-structured homosexuality."
All pederasty is homosexual, though not all homosexuals are pederasts.

I was responding to the common claim that the priestly sexual abuse "had nothing to do with homosexuality," which is clearly false, given the facts.

I'm sorry, I was having trouble with the keyboard yesterday. The third line in my post should have read: "This abuse followed the increase in homosexuality in seminaries starting in the 1960s." In other words, since the 60s, there was an increase in the number of homosexuals admitted to seminaries, and following this, there was an epidemic of priestly pederasty.

People argue by saying that "pedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality," yet most of the cases were [i]not[/i] true pedophilia - abuse of prepubescent children - but homosexual pederasty.

Blaming this pederasty on celibacy is absurd.
If, as is supposed, the priests in question were normal "straight" men bound by vows of celibacy but just unable to control their raging hormones, and seeking young vulnerable victims as outlets for their lust, teenage [i]girls[/i] would make up a much higher percentage of the abuse victims.
Yet the evidence is otherwise; the vast majority were boys, not girls, and not pre-pubescent children.

However, it is not politically correct to suggest that there is anything at all wrong with homosexuality, but it is politically correct to blame the Catholic Church and its disciplines.
[/quote]

+1.

I agree fully, and I think my initial comment should have been more significantly fleshed out. Obviously pederasty is a direct result of homosexuality in terms of sexual action. However, what I should have stated more clearly is that the sexual abuse of children and prepubescents is not intrinsically an outshoot of someone who suffers from SSA. As you said, all pederasty is homosexual while not all homosexuals are pederasts. That is more where I was trying to go...that there is a perception of an automatic assignation of 'child abuser' to someone who has SSA, which of course is not true. However, you are correct in your core argument that it has to do with a primary degradation of holiness which leads to these issues.

Thank you for that post, it allowed me to responsibly clarify my initial post.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='03 December 2009 - 12:14 AM' timestamp='1259813691' post='2013590']
But you see that is EXACTLY what the school districts have always done. If you said one word against the teacher you were facing an automatic lawsuit AND the wrath of the treachers unions.
[/quote]
I know otherwise, having numerous family and friends participating in and working within the 8th largest school district in the US, as well as family that was Superintendents of Schools in a major midwest city. That is/was not was always done, especially when it got elevated. I can understand a parish priest being reluctant to blow the whistle on a fellow assoc. pastor, or vis-versa. However, once it got to a Bishop or Cardinal, the level of responsiblity, obligation, and understanding as being higher in the managment protocol is much different.

And winnie, the straw man is yours, comparing John Couey and the Lumsford tragedy to the systemic coverups in the Church. Couey was not supposed to be living where he was, he violated the laws and had family help cover up for him. The Jessica Lumsford act brought penalties and liablities to those who aided predators avoid the current reporting laws, as well as made the tracking and reporting of predators more strict. Couey viloated the governemt rules. The Church did not even have the basic rules in place, but Bishops violated common sense and even the minimal following of the laws. They put the general reputation of the Church above the damage being done to individuals. Their lack put the Church at an even a poorer position and opened them up to the tremendous liability instead of doint the 'right thing' by the Church, the parishioners, and the victims.

And as far as whether or not it's homosexual, pedastry, or hetero, it's all the exact same thing. Keep your genitals to yourself if you're not married, sworn to celibacy, or in a position of authority. Period.

Edited December 4, 2009 by Anomaly

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='04 December 2009 - 09:14 AM' timestamp='1259936079' post='2014319']
And winnie, the straw man is yours, comparing John Couey and the Lumsford tragedy to the systemic coverups in the Church. Couey was not supposed to be living where he was, he violated the laws and had family help cover up for him. The Jessica Lumsford act brought penalties and liablities to those who aided predators avoid the current reporting laws, as well as made the tracking and reporting of predators more strict. Couey viloated the governemt rules. The Church did not even have the basic rules in place, but Bishops violated common sense and even the minimal following of the laws. They put the general reputation of the Church above the damage being done to individuals. Their lack put the Church at an even a poorer position and opened them up to the tremendous liability instead of doint the 'right thing' by the Church, the parishioners, and the victims.

And as far as whether or not it's homosexual, pedastry, or hetero, it's all the exact same thing. Keep your genitals to yourself if you're not married, sworn to celibacy, or in a position of authority. Period.
[/quote]
The analogy is fine. The state does the same thing as everyone else. Schools move accused sexual predators around. The state lets them out and pretends that a monitoring program is a magical elixir. This is human nature. You want to present the church as worse when really it did the same thing collectively that everyone else does.

[alleros]

Speaking from Ireland.. What you quote is the "party line " here now; and it is not acceptable.

Yes, this kind of abuse is in every part of society; but surely far worse coming from THE CHURCH.

Even one child abused?

And see the "Canadian Holocaust" and the work done by Kevin Annett there.

We all need to be above reproach if we claim to be in Jesus.

What is the true scandal here is that the hierachy sanctioned more and more abuse by the cover ups, and there is furore here now in every part of society.

For good coverage, see a site run by Irish priests.

[url="http://www.clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/"]http://www.clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/[/url]

Because of the total power the Church has here, state and the gardai deferred to the.

The Church here, sadly, is being seen to be rotten to the very core and many have totally lost trust in it now.

Ireland is a very small country, only 6 million, and 96 % Roman catholic. Even the priests who did not abuse knew what was going on, and the Bishops covered up.

As they did with the institutional abuse the Ryan report found earlier this year. Religious Orders torturing children in their care.

It is a very intense abuse at every level; so many children damaged and so many lives left in tatters, so that hardly an Irish family has been left unscathed.

Academic theories of why and how and what this is are not the issue here; so many would have been protected had the Bishops acted as Shepherds should. Instead they have behaved like ravening wolves.

So now the Church here is in tatters and divided and torn. By its own actions.

And now also the demand is out for every diocese to be subjected to the same investigation as Dublin has seen; and this will be done now and layer after layer of abuse uncovered.

And still the complacency we hear; well, it was only a few... Not true and so misleading. The heart of Jesus weeps and aches here.

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='29 November 2009 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1259552458' post='2011690']
Sex abuse is everywhere and in all occupations. Statistically [not much comfort to those involved] you are safer with priests than people from many other occupations such as school teachers or even your own family. Most sex offenders are married men. 2% of catholic priests were involved in some sex scandal.
BTW San diego has over 900 registered.
[/quote]

[alleros]

Speaking from Ireland.. What you quote is the "party line " here now; and it is not acceptable.

Yes, this kind of abuse is in every part of society; but surely far worse coming from THE CHURCH.

Even one child abused?

And see the "Canadian Holocaust" and the work done by Kevin Annett there.

We all need to be above reproach if we claim to be in Jesus.

What is the true scandal here is that the hierachy sanctioned more and more abuse by the cover ups, and there is furore here now in every part of society.

For good coverage, see a site run by Irish priests.

[url="http://www.clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/"]http://www.clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/[/url]

Because of the total power the Church has here, state and the gardai deferred to the.

The Church here, sadly, is being seen to be rotten to the very core and many have totally lost trust in it now.

Ireland is a very small country, only 6 million, and 96 % Roman catholic. Even the priests who did not abuse knew what was going on, and the Bishops covered up.

As they did with the institutional abuse the Ryan report found earlier this year. Religious Orders torturing children in their care.

It is a very intense abuse at every level; so many children damaged and so many lives left in tatters, so that hardly an Irish family has been left unscathed.

Academic theories of why and how and what this is are not the issue here; so many would have been protected had the Bishops acted as Shepherds should. Instead they have behaved like ravening wolves.

So now the Church here is in tatters and divided and torn. By its own actions.

And now also the demand is out for every diocese to be subjected to the same investigation as Dublin has seen; and this will be done now and layer after layer of abuse uncovered.

And still the complacency we hear; well, it was only a few... Not true and so misleading. The heart of Jesus weeps and aches here.

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='29 November 2009 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1259552458' post='2011690']
Sex abuse is everywhere and in all occupations. Statistically [not much comfort to those involved] you are safer with priests than people from many other occupations such as school teachers or even your own family. Most sex offenders are married men. 2% of catholic priests were involved in some sex scandal.
BTW San diego has over 900 registered.
[/quote]

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' date='04 December 2009 - 10:23 AM' timestamp='1259936604' post='2014323']
The analogy is fine. The state does the same thing as everyone else. Schools move accused sexual predators around. The state lets them out and pretends that a monitoring program is a magical elixir. This is human nature. You want to present the church as worse when really it did the same thing collectively that everyone else does.
[/quote]LOL. A few points:
-The Church did not do the same thing as everyone else as they had NO monitoring, reporting, or disciplinary program. Couey had been turned in, convicted, and if he followed the rules, neighbors would have known. Did the Church ever have a reporting system to notify the congregation or even the pastor?

-So your excuse for the Church's actions is 'no apparent governing authority', or everyone else did it so it's okay?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='04 December 2009 - 01:53 PM' timestamp='1259952831' post='2014435']
LOL. A few points:
-The Church did not do the same thing as everyone else as they had NO monitoring, reporting, or disciplinary program. Couey had been turned in, convicted, and if he followed the rules, neighbors would have known. Did the Church ever have a reporting system to notify the congregation or even the pastor?[/quote]
Okay. The church is the only group that has reacted that way. Everywhere else, sexual predators are neither hidden, moved or permitted access to their prey once caught.
[quote]
-So your excuse for the Church's actions is 'no apparent governing authority', or everyone else did it so it's okay?
[/quote]
I haven't given any excuses, I've merely tried to bring you to something resembling truth instead of reactionary drivel. I never said it was okay and never said anything implying it was. You want the Church to be worse than the world. I say that in this sense it is the [i]same [/i]as this world. If you can't see the parallel in moving an accused (or guilty) priest elsewhere and releasing a known dangerous rapist back into the world then I doubt any amount of discussion will help because you've decided CHURCH BAD!
The only way to deal with sexual predators is to forever remove them from their prey. I prefer execution to reduce the chances of escape, but life in prison (meaning they die before their bodies are removed from the cell and dumped in large pits and covered with lye) will probably have to suffice. Sadly, most people don't seem to share this view.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' date='04 December 2009 - 08:51 PM' timestamp='1259974286' post='2014563']
Okay. The church is the only group that has reacted that way. Everywhere else, sexual predators are neither hidden, moved or permitted access to their prey once caught.

I haven't given any excuses, I've merely tried to bring you to something resembling truth instead of reactionary drivel. I never said it was okay and never said anything implying it was. You want the Church to be worse than the world. I say that in this sense it is the [i]same [/i]as this world. If you can't see the parallel in moving an accused (or guilty) priest elsewhere and releasing a known dangerous rapist back into the world then I doubt any amount of discussion will help because you've decided CHURCH BAD!
The only way to deal with sexual predators is to forever remove them from their prey. I prefer execution to reduce the chances of escape, but life in prison (meaning they die before their bodies are removed from the cell and dumped in large pits and covered with lye) will probably have to suffice. Sadly, most people don't seem to share this view.
[/quote]All you've done is justify the Church's failures by denying them or equivocating them to being the same as everyone else. There is NO similarity between the actions State of Florida with John Couey and Bishops covering up known sexual molestors. Couey was identified to the public, punished, and tasked to be monitored. Bishops covering up for molesting priests does not identify them to the public, did not punish them, and did not task them to be monitored.

You are fundamentally intellectualy dishonest in your defense for the Church, and instead, more interested in dismissing criticism from anyone who does not profess slavish deference to the Catholic Church. Your stance that sexual predators should only be executed is either clumsy sarcasm presented as wit, or an example of unintended hypocrasy. To use that standard as showing that the Church and State both fail society equally in order to defend the failures of the Church and dismiss my criticism is an epic failure of logic.

[add]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='05 December 2009 - 01:06 PM' timestamp='1260032783' post='2014974']
All you've done is justify the Church's failures by denying them or equivocating them to being the same as everyone else. There is NO similarity between the actions State of Florida with John Couey and Bishops covering up known sexual molestors. Couey was identified to the public, punished, and tasked to be monitored. Bishops covering up for molesting priests does not identify them to the public, did not punish them, and did not task them to be monitored.

You are fundamentally intellectualy dishonest in your defense for the Church, and instead, more interested in dismissing criticism from anyone who does not profess slavish deference to the Catholic Church. Your stance that sexual predators should only be executed is either clumsy sarcasm presented as wit, or an example of unintended hypocrasy. To use that standard as showing that the Church and State both fail society equally in order to defend the failures of the Church and dismiss my criticism is an epic failure of logic.
[/quote]

say whats with your avatar, is it a self portrait or something else

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
[quote name='Terra Firma' date='30 November 2009 - 07:58 AM' timestamp='1259589531' post='2011898']
A great treatment on this topic is George Weigel's "The Courage to be Catholic." He persuasively argues that the crisis (in the U.S. at least) was primarily homosexual in nature, and that the pedophilia aspect of it was played up by the news media while the homosexual aspect was played down.

According to Weigel, the bigger picture, though, is that it was a crisis of fidelity. Such a problem transcends national boundaries.

The book is a great resource. I highly recommend it.
[/quote]
that book is amazing. i practically highlighted every paragraph.

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='30 November 2009 - 08:26 AM' timestamp='1259591164' post='2011910']
The bottom line here is, the Church, in the USA, handled sex abuse cases according to the protocol, recommended by the professionals at that time. Other institutions followed the same suit, but because they Catholic Church is who she is, the scandal made the headlines while others were kept silent.


Jim[/quote]
thanks Jim. well said.

[quote name='Anomaly' date='01 December 2009 - 05:54 AM' timestamp='1259668445' post='2012450']
Given the standard of moral behavior that should be established for people running and ministering in a "Church" that supposedly directly affects the eternal salvation of their followers, the "Church" has done little to properly address the perpetrators. Humans are prone to make mistakes and it's sad the % occurrence in priests compared to school workers is not significantly less. However, violators in the school system are dealt with more clearly, morally, and effectively. It is not a valid excuse to claim Bishops were just following the best advice at the time. The scandals in the US and Ireland are a direct result of the attitude of church leaders being above the same accountability of a common school teacher. Imagine if school superintendents pervasively transferred molesting teachers to another school...
[/quote]
actually the AP did a study on abuse in public schools - which was ignored by most MSM papers and news outlets. i will see if i can find it and post it here.