“One Timothy Four” On The Church And The (Homosexual) Paedophile Scandal

Brutally Biased Corporation

Absolutely brilliant entry (some months old, but with all its freshness intact) of One Timothy Four about the various distortions of how the media and public opinion deal with the issue of the (homosexual) paedophile priest scandal. This article is notable because it comes from someone who, though in the meantime a full-fledged Catholic (and I mean real Catholic, not soi-disant one) had indirect but credible experience of the Anglican part of the matter. This is not to say that the Anglicans are particularly affected from the problem, or that the problem is exclusive competence of Christian denominations; only that it does help to put a thing or two in the right context.

Let us see the most salient phrases of this extremely interesting contribution:

there is good evidence (largely ignored by the media) that the sexual abuse of children in the Catholic Church and elsewhere grew in direct relationship to generalized sexual liberation

The BBC will never tell you this. The winds of “modernity” (or modernism) blowing after Vatican II carried with them a kind of “tolerance” bound not to stop in front of any sin. If we start saying in the seminaries that “it doesn’t help to see things in terms of sin” – I think this is another pearl of wisdom from our less-than-beloved Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent “Quisling” Nichols; but I smell a “fashionable” turn of phrase here – how can we be surprised if any kind of sin, even the worst, will be seen “not in terms of sin”? What is the concept of sin for, if not for the sin to be seen as such?

Growing up in the cofE, I can remember from a very young age being aware – thankfully not through personal experience – of Anglican clergy who had been allowed to quietly fall from grace because of ‘little boys’

(all emphases mine)

It would seem that this is not something suddenly exploded within the Church and before non-existent outside of Her.

And as an adult in the cofE, one continues to be aware on a slightly too regular basis of Anglican clergy who have been caught with child pornography on their computers or having been more directly involved in child sexual abuse.

This is not the golden past, this is the actual situation. Something the BBC never tells you anything about. Particularly if there’s a Pope coming, or some homo shouting “discrimination!”.

Limiting myself to my direct contemporaries at Anglican theological college, one has certainly been convicted of having child pornography on his computer and others have suffered directly and indirectly through Anglican clerical abuse. The one who has been caught is male, as most but not all abusers are, but also married (with children of his own) and is an enthusiast for women priests – so those who like to blame clerical abuse of children in the Catholic Church on priestly celibacy and negativity towards women need to think again, and stop using abuse to further other agendas.

This is very beautifully said. Abuse within the Anglican so-called church seems not to spare priestesses and to also affect married men with children. Oh well, this is the same that happens all over the world then! Very strange, I thought that in order to become a child abuser one had to have chosen celibacy…..

But the Anglican examples barely and only momentarily make the press, and – to throw the net wider – what about the widespread abuse of children and young people in secular care systems, and at the hands of the members of other caring professions where the breach of trust is surely every bit as heinous despite the fact the perpetrator does not wear a clerical collar?

Another very perceptive observation: not only are the Anglicans generally spared from the ire of the press, but for example the NHS seems to make headlines more for superbugs than for reasons related with their own people. The superbug allows the liberal press to attack the government at ease, the abuse issue would pose uncomfortable questions and demand a wider debate about the (homosexual) Catholic priest abuse issue, too.

The particular and real phenomenon of abuse by men who should never have been ordained as priests in the first place is being used: a) to distract us from the other many and varied forms of child abuse to which secular society continues to turn a blind eye; and b) as a generally useful and hefty stick with which to attempt to beat the Catholic Church into submission over other issues on which it and its teaching challenge secular society – such as describing homosexual inclination as a psychological and moral disorder.

Nothing to add here…..

…there is no excuse for using the abuse of children by particular Catholic priests to misdirect the attention of society away from its manifestation in institutions and contexts that are dear to the liberal heart but which haven’t shown anything like the same will as the Catholic Church now does to do something about child sexual abuse, and all because it doesn’t present a useful opportunity to bash the Pope.

…. or here.

A brilliant analysis. We should repeat these concepts and defend these arguments everytime the issue comes out among our friends and acquaintances either seriously misinformed or in the mood for an ego trip. In time, the wider public will start having a wider and more balanced perception of the problem.

Mundabor

Posted on October 1, 2010, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 25 Comments.

  1. Mundy

    thanks. I was abused by a priest as a child. It is a supreme irony that the bigoted media now subject the Church to a moral condemnation which became increasingly absent from the Church’s treatment of these men from the 1960’s onwards. In other words the Bishops treated the issue as a medical problem exclusively rather than a moral crisis of the individual.

    The one person I have read who seems to understand what has gone on is the Jewish writer Dr. Judith Reisman. Something of a ‘one trick pony’, she is well informed on the subject. Another important person is Fr. Gerald Fitzgerald, founder of the Servants of the Paraclete, who was brought down in a ‘coup’ (yes, you’ve guess it) at the time of the Second Vatican Council by his own order under pressure from a local bishop. Worthy of note also is Nebraka’s Bishop Bruskevitz who at least asks the right questions.

    • Thanks bmpc and I commend your honest and sincere attitude. I wonder how many among the liberals of the time (and the cofE of course) would have seen child abuse in the same way as too many bishop did. Not a few I’m afraid.
      Bruskewitz is, from what I hear, one of the best.

      M

  2. It interests me that the word which precisely and accurately describes what is going on here, ephebophilia (that is, the molesting of ADOLESCENT BOYS by homosexual men), is rarely, if ever at all mentioned. And this neglect of the right term is an important arrow in the enemy’s quiver. By using the misleading term “paedophilia” (which, as I understand it, comprises less than one-tenth of one per cent of the abuses) it skillfully diverts attention away from the central issue. It is, after all, a war of words, and we should be aware of the traps set for us to fall into, traps which, sadly, the hapless Vatican is all too willing to merrily dive into.

    That is why I personally never use the words “child sex abuse” when discussing this issue because although you can make a logical case out of the fact that a fifteen year old boy is still a child the phrase gives the casual reader an entirely different connotation, that of rapacious priests snatching five-year-old girls into their lairs. I recommend that one NEVER, not EVER, give in to these bastards by using their terms. It only strengthens their case if we do.

    With regard to Bishop Bruskewitz…it is always wonderful to find a priest, nun or Bishop who we can look upon as a hero. I rejoice at any number of Bishop Bruskewtiz’s words and actions. But I must also be, sadly, realistc: he needs prayer. He is a lovely man (he used to be the pastor of my parish here in Wisconsin) but he is unfortunately not above giving scandal to Catholics who understand that the Church is, in fact, the one, true Church founded by Christ. In the realm of his dealings with non-Catholic religions he has often given terrible, terrible scandal. So let us please pray for this man, that the good in him will ultimately drive out the bad.

  3. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7995510/Archbishop-of-Westminster-Pope-Benedict-is-a-man-of-real-poise-with-an-inner-peace.html

    “Should the Church one day accept the reality of gay partnerships? “I don’t know. There is in the Book of Nature an inherent connection between human sexuality and procreation; and those two things cannot ultimately be totally separate. People who are of a homosexual orientation say: ‘Well, hang on a minute. How is the Book of Nature written in me?’ The most important thing the Christian tradition says is, don’t see yourself simply as an isolated individual but as part of a wider family. The moral demands on all of us made by that tradition are difficult. That tradition says human sexuality is for an expression of total self-giving in fidelity in a way that is open to the creation of new life. Now, that’s tough, that’s a high ideal. I’m not sure many people have ever observed it in its totality, but it doesn’t mean to say it has no sense.”

    The old language – of mortal sin, for example – was, he says, a misguided attempt to motivate the faithful.

    “Fear is never a good motivation. The whole point of the Catholic journey is that it is a journey, and we try to hold together high ideals and understanding. That is the same for people who struggle in whatever way with their sexuality. It’s an aim.”

  4. Judith Reisman whom I mention above strikes me as a veritable hero(ine) on all of this and she rejects the label of ephebophilia:

    “Dr. Reisman pointed out that the media’s use of the term ephebophilia to describe the abuse by priests is an intentionally misleading manipulation of language. “The main problem has been priests having sex with boys. Ephebophilia can by definition be heterosexual or homosexual assault. What we see today are almost exclusively homosexual assaults of boys, ‘pederasty’, and it has a long history. Ephebophilia has no validity in terms of what is taking place in the Catholic Church.”

    “The idea that homosexuality is not about pederasty and abusing boys is not sustained by the data,” said Dr. Reisman. “One of the most notorious lesbian activists, Camille Paglia, noted how ridiculous it is that the American public is being conned into believing homosexuality is not about boys. Maintaining one’s youth through the sexual abuse of boys, that is the history of homosexuality going back to the ancient Greeks.”

  5. Yes Reisman is extraordinary and I am sure you’ve heard of Michael Rose. Fitzgerald is important because his correspondence was kept under lock and key for 40 years after his death in 1969. I came across him 30 years ago and was told then that his 24 hours consisted of 10 before the Blessed Sacrament, 10 working with the residents and 4 asleep. What I wasn’t told is that he had been booted out as leader of the order he had founded by a combination of the local bishop, trustees and his own followers during the Council. His methods were deemed “unscientific”. Millions of dollars of litigation the Servants of the Paraclete have virtually collapsed. Their role has been taken over by St. Luke’s Institue who have a branch in Manchester. This is another highly suspect organisation one of whose former directors died from AIDS. What the bishops can’t get is that many of those employed by these centres (as in the post-Fitzgerald Paracletes and St. Lukes) have no fidelity to the magisterium nor respect for the sacrality of the priesthood.

  6. Vincent Nichols clearly supports the Catholic Church’s teaching but the problem he has is trying to communicate it in keeping with B16’s recent call at Westminster. He doesn’t seem to be enjoying his current role but he may grow into it.

    • I disagree that Nichols supports Church teaching, bmcp.
      The homo masses are still there and he is clearly not against homosexual unions. He even boasts that he hasn’t opposed them. He goes so far as to imply one day he may be blessig homosexual couples. He even insinuates that Pope Benedict is of his opinion on homo “unions”. I have written about that in the past and Nichols has also unchained the ires of John Smeaton, the head of SPUC. If you use the search function (right columsn, below) you’ll discover a couple of very interesting things.

  7. The Murphy Report made note of the slackening standards in the 60s:

    “There is a two thousand year history of Biblical, Papal and Holy See statements showing awareness of clerical child sex abuse. Over the centuries, strong denunciation of clerical child sexual abuse came from Popes, Church councils and other Church sources. A list covering the period 153 AD to 2001 is included in an article by the Promoter of Justice in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. These denunciations are particularly strong on „offences against nature? and offences committed with or against juveniles. The 1917 code of canon law decreed deprivation of office and/or benefice, or expulsion from the clerical state for such offences. In the 20th century two separate documents on dealing with child sexual abuse were promulgated by Vatican authorities (see Chapter 4) but little observed in Dublin.

    […]The Commission is satisfied that Church law demanded serious penalties for clerics who abused children. In Dublin from the 1970s onwards this was ignored; the highest priority was the protection of the reputation of the institution and the reputation of priests. The moving around of offending clerics with little or no disclosure of their past is illustrative of this.”

    and:

    “As is shown in Chapter 4, canon law appears to have fallen into disuse and disrespect during the mid 20th century. In particular, there was little or no experience of operating the penal (that is, the criminal) provisions of that law. The collapse of respect for the canon law in Archdiocesan circles is covered in some detail in Chapter 4.”

  8. David Quinn wrote a very good article in Studies (Irish Jesuit magazine) about the Ryan Report. He attended most of the Inquiry’s hearings and felt compelled to give the report greater analysis, having realized that most media commentators had read no more than the summary.

    http://www.studiesirishreview.ie/j/page712

    Here are a few of the facts: 1,090 former residents reported to the Ryan commission; they named 800 alleged abusers in over 200 institutions.

    Boys: 50% of the physical abuse reports and 64% of the sexual abuse reports came from 4 institutions.

    Girls: 40% of the physical abuse reports came from 3 institutions; 241 women religious were named as physical abusers, but 4 of these were named by 125 witnesses and 156 sisters were named by only one witness each.

    Of the 800 religious and others named as abusers, 400 were named by only one person. Sixteen institutions had more than 20 complaints made against them.

  9. Quinn’s point about the discipline is also echoed by Fr Michael Hughes, archivist for the Oblates of Mary Immaculate congregation, and who had been involved with supervision at Daingean. According to the Irish Times ( ‘Living hell’ reformatory claim rejected; Wednesday, June 07, 2006): “He agreed there were gangs and a hierarchy among the boys with newcomers known as “fish”. He did not agree it was a situation which got out of control, though there were disturbances at times. “Discipline at the school was very severe for that very purpose, so staff could keep control. It was intended as protection for the children . . . these lads were not small boys.”

    He agreed the Brothers worked all year around, seven days a week with no day off until the 1970s, and that 20 of them were responsible for 150 boys.

  10. UCD Professor of History, Diarmaid Ferriter, also notes something similar in his book The Transformation of Ireland (page 517):

    “Though it was not fashionable to admit it towards the end of the century, many of the members of religious orders had worked hard under difficult conditions to educate and provide for vulnerable children…one can have some sympathy with the contention of Patrick Touher, an inmate of Artane Industrial School, that ‘on the whole the [Christian] Brothers were doing their best, within limited circumstances in hard times and with frightening numbers. they too shared in the hard rigid life. They had no luxuries, nothing to look forward to, except more of the same’.”

  11. Breenan, Rev MJ. “Ecclesiastical History of Ireland”. Dublin: John Coyen Press, 1840.

    The advantages which during this century Ireland has derived from the several communities of religious females is truly incalculable. Among these, the nuns of the Presentation order and the Sisters of Charity may be particularly noted. The Presentation order owes its foundation to Miss Nagle, a devout lady residing in Cork throughout the year 1780, while its constitutions were arranged by the Very Rev. Laurence Callanan, a saintly and learned Franciscan of that city, and were patronized by that zealous and Venerable Prelate, the Right Rev. Doctor Moylan. Besides these usual vows, these religious bind themselves to the glorious and most useful duty of conveying the blessings of moral education to the poor.

    […]

    [referring to Sisters of Charity]

    The inestimable value of this order may be ascertained from the fact that the averaged number of sick poor visited in their dwellings by these ladies amount to upwards of seven hundred annually: moreover the public Hospitals of Jervis-street, of Baggot-street and the Hospital of Incurables in Donnybrook are regularly visited by the members of this institute; and to complete the climax of their invaluable services, the prisons of Newgate, Kilmainham, Grange Gormanlane and the Victoria Asylum for females discharged from prison are constantly attended by these ladies for the purpose of imparting instruction to the female inmates, while their attendance at the last named institution is specially required by his Grace, Doctor Murray, in consequence of a request to that effect emanating from the governors and directors thereof.

    The Order of the “Sisters of Mercy” was established in Dublin, in 1831, by Sister Mary Catherine M’Auley, a benevolent lady residing in that city. Interested for the education of the poor and moved with feelings of compassion at the sufferings of the sick and indigent, a community of pious ladies had been already (in 1827) formed under her guidance. She afterwards made her profession in company with two other religious in the Presentation Convent at George’s Hill, and in 1831, under the sanction of the Holy See and by the directions of his Grace, Doctor Murray, they removed to their establishment in Baggot-street, for the purpose of resuming the all-important duties of their institute. Gratuitous education, the protection of young females of good character, and the visitation and relief of the sick poor constitute the noble objects to which the time and attention of these truly meritorious ladies bound by perpetual vows are devoted. Besides the countless number of sick poor visited and relieved in their own dwellings, these religious attend regularly at Mercer’s Hospital, Sir Patrick Dunn’s Hospital and St Mary’s Asylum, Drumcondra. In many other parts of Ireland their invaluable services have become the subject of universal admiration. They have Convents in Tullamore, Charleville, Carlow, Cork, Limerick, Naas, galway Wexford and Birr, besides those of Booterstown, Kingstown, and one in London, all subject to the Ordinary of each respective diocess*. There are also at present in Baggot-street seven novices for establishments to be immediately formed, one in Birmingham and the other in Newfoundland.

  12. The tender solicitude evinced by these religious Sisters of Charity and of Mercy in administering to the wants of the sick poor must entitle them to the gratitude of every friend of humanity; their unceasing and fearless attention during the late awful visitation of cholera can never be forgotten by the citizens of Dublin. Divested altogether of self-will and guided by a spirit of holy obedience, these ladies with Christian heroism approached the abode of pestilence, they took their station around the bed of death, martyrs-like they braved the contagion and while friends and relatives fled from this mansion of terror, the endearing Sisters of Charity and of Mercy were there to be found, administering medicinal relief and pouring the balm of consolation of the afflicted heart of the suffering, expiring victim of cholera. With justice, therefore, are these communities considered a national blessing; their numbers are rapidly increasing throughout the kingdom, while their vast utility can never be sufficiently appreciated.

    *One hundred and ninety members have embraced this institute since its foundation in 1831. The prisons and hospitals of the different towns above mentioned are regularly visited by those religious, they impart gratutious education to upwards of three thousand female children and about sixty destitute females are sheltered and supported in the House of Mercy, in Baggot-street, Dublin.

  13. This Baptist-abuse victim points to the disparity in record keeping between the denominations:

    http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2009/11/church-records.html

    ….“Church records.”

    That’s always the trump card for those who make this argument to me.

    I point to the data gathered by the Associated Press from the companies that insure the major Protestant groups. It’s data that shows, over a 10 to 20 year period, a consistent average of 260 sex abuse reports per year involving Protestant clergy and staff. Baptists are the largest of the Protestant groups reported in that data.

    This 260 per year average for Protestants “is a higher number than the annual average of 228 ‘credible accusations’ brought against Catholic clerics.”

    Though this 260 to 228 comparison is far from perfect, it does raise some troubling questions. As a FOX News commentator noted: In the Catholic context, the 228 per year number “includes all ‘credible accusations,’ not just those that have involved insurance companies, and still is less than the number of Protestant cases.”

    By the same token, I can’t help but wonder if the 260 per year number would be even greater if the largest Protestant denomination — the Southern Baptists — would bother to assess ‘credible accusations’ in the way Catholics do. As it is, the only numbers that get reported for Baptists are cases that are likely on the verge of a lawsuit . . . and yet the Protestant number is still bigger.

    The 228 per year Catholic number derives from a study that the Catholic Church commissioned from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. It was a study that mined the Catholic Church’s own records and that looked at clergy abuse reports through 2002.

    But more current “church records” show that the numbers are even higher, I’m told.

    There it is again — the trump card. Catholics have “church records” because Catholic canon law requires record-keeping.

    But “church records” stacked up against “no church records” doesn’t equal bigger numbers.

    It means nothing more than that one group kept records and the other didn’t.

    Personally, I don’t understand why some people seem so intent on persuading me that Catholic clergy are “the worst.” I don’t believe it, but more importantly, I haven’t seen any data to support that conclusion….

    http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2010/02/flummoxed-by-finger-pointing.html

    …And make sure to notice . . . Der Spiegel got its numbers by delving into records kept by the dioceses themselves. The dioceses revealed “their own figures.”

    Meanwhile, Baptist leaders refuse to even bother with keeping records on Baptist clergy.

    For Catholics, “it’s our religion” means Catholic bishops must keep records on priests. Catholic canon law requires it.

    For Baptists, “it’s our religion” means Baptist leaders don’t keep any records at all on their clergy. They claim that Baptist belief in local church autonomy precludes denominational record-keeping.

    When a German magazine publicizes church records of 94 priests and laity who are “suspected” of abuse, Baptists point their fingers. Meanwhile, in Baptistland, there exists not even the possibility of any records on “suspected” abuse, because Baptist leaders flat-out refuse to assess credible accusations much less to keep track of them.

    […]
    Here’s the Catholic pattern: keep it quiet, cover it up, transfer the accused cleric to another church, and keep an in-house record.

    Here’s the Baptist pattern: keep it quiet, cover it up, allow the accused minister to move to another church, and keep NO record. Is this better?….

  14. This is also supported by Philip Jenkins, Professor of History and Religious Studies at Pennsylvania State University:

    “No evidence indicates that Catholic or celibate clergy are more (or less) involved than their non-celibate counterparts. Some of the worst cases of persistent serial abuse by clergy have involved Baptist or Pentecostal ministers, rather than Catholic priests. Every denomination and faith tradition has had its trail of disasters . . . .

    “Sexual misconduct appears to be spread fairly evenly across denominations, though I stress the word appears. Astonishingly, Catholic priests are literally the only profession in the country for whom we have relatively good figures for the incidence of child abuse and molestation. For these other groups, we have to depend on the volume of news stories and largely impressionistic evidence, but based on this, there do not appear to be significant differences in the amount of misconduct. If someone wants to claim that the Catholic priesthood is more prone to abusive behavior than other groups, then the burden of proof is upon that person…. In order to establish a case proving priestly depravity, we would need to compare like samples of clergy from different denominations, with comparable systems of processing complaints and keeping records. No such studies have ever been attempted. As a result, the Catholic connection to abuse or pedophilia remains no more than an unproven assumption . . . .

    “As reported cases of priestly abuse proliferated during 2002, the media became increasingly intolerant of protests that the Catholic angle of the affair was being exaggerated. If that’s so, they demanded, why is it we only hear about Catholic molestation stories? Actually, there are several answers to this question, which reflect the intertwined workings of the media and the courts. . . .

    “Structural and bureaucratic reasons also help explain the number of Catholic cases that appear in the news. Much of the evidence comes from civil lawsuits involving priests and their dioceses. The proliferation of specifically Catholic lawsuits does not mean that priests are more likely to have offended, but rather that a centralized church with good record keeping and extensive property holdings is a much more valuable legal target than a small decentralized congregation. Catholic clergy lead the list of known abuse cases because they are relatively easy to sue and because civil lawsuits produce a wealth of internal church documents. . . .

    “To some extent, the media concentration on Catholic abuse cases represents a kind of self-fulfilling expectation. Because priests are considered likely to offend, any cases that come to light can be fitted into a prepared package of images and issues: the media has a lot of experts handy and know what questions to ask, and those all deal with Catholic themes. If a non-Catholic case comes to light (as it often does), it is usually treated as an isolated case of individual depravity, rather than an institutional problem. . . . Journalists find writing stories much easier when they know from the start exactly what the finished product is going to look like. The more Catholic cases are treated in this way, the more the accumulation of sensational cases confirms the media expectation about the Catholic nature of the problem.”

    Pedophiles and Priests at p. 51 (1996), and The New Anti-Catholicism at pp. 142-44 (2003).

  15. The Irish Bishops commissioned the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland to undertake a comprehensive research study on clerical sexual abuse. The study Time to Listen was praised by the Murphy Report: “In this Commission’s view this was a very valuable contribution to the debate on child sexual abuse by clergy”.

    Bishop O’Mahony, a retired auxiliary bishop, criticized “the acceptance by media and current diocesan policy that a ‘cover-up’ took place” in his Letter to Members of the Council of Priests. He points to a police investigation, in 2003, which found no sign of interference with evidence and no attempt to obstruct the course of justice. He was also annoyed at certain statements made by Diarmuid Martin because: “You were out of the Diocese for 31 years and had no idea how traumatic it was for those of us who had to deal with allegations without protocols or guidelines or experience in the matter of child sex abuse.”

    This was also expressed in Bishop Eamonn Walsh’s (who done sterling work in cleaning up the ultra-liberal Chomiskey’s mess in Ferns) Letter to the priests of 3 deaneries in Dublin:

    http://www.iol.ie/~fuller/BishopEamonnWalshLetterToDublinPriestsOf3Deaneries17December2009.pdf
    In the course of my work with you, if I was approached on a matter of a confidential
    nature, or if I had a concern which had been expressed to me, I brought this to the
    attention of the Archbishop. Archbishop Connell took a very conscientious line in respecting a person’s reputation, and on any other matter he deemed confidential.
    Information given in this way was not shared at meetings with others present. The
    result was that discussions were often held where the full facts of the subject under
    discussion, were not known to all participants. Sometimes the Archbishop himself
    would not have full information. It is very regrettable that clear pathways of
    communication were not effected until after the introduction of the Framework
    Document in 1996. Poor communication led to long-term disastrous consequences.
    This resulted in some offending priests being given appointments on the basis of
    medical assessment, and other professional advice, which indicated that they were fit
    for ministry and/or fit to remain in existing appointments. All of this was done in
    good faith but with appalling consequences.
    The Report covers the years 1976 – 2004. Within that period there have been major
    advances in the understanding of the nature of paedophilia, and the impact of child
    sexual abuse. The absence, particularly during the early years, of the range and
    level of expertise now available meant that bad decisions were made. This does not
    excuse them, but puts them into the context of a different time.
    While there is no mandatory reporting of complaints for child sexual abuse in Irish
    law, the Archdiocese committed to mandatory reporting since 1996. I am on record
    as advocating this approach since 1990.
    When I was appointed Apostolic Administrator in Ferns I piloted, with the Diocesan
    Team, the inter-agency meetings whereby the diocese, HSE and Gardai met to share
    information so as to inform best practice in dealing with child sexual abuse. The
    Ferns Report commended this pilot scheme and recommended that it be replicated
    throughout the country. Legislation has yet to be passed to give support to this. It is
    the practice at present in the Dublin Archdiocese. My actions as Auxiliary Bishop and
    as Apostolic Administrator could not be described as those of ‘cover-up’.

  16. From this excellent article at Church and State magazine, (organ of old Campaign to Seperate Church and State):

    http://current-magazines.atholbooks.org/readers/full_article.php?article_id=41&&title=The%20Church%20And%20Its%20Critics

    “[…]So the Pope came and he was received with mindless adulation, lay and clerical, with only two noticeable expressions of dissent—this magazine and the Bishop of Cork, who is now taken to be a by-word for obscurantist reaction, Con Lucey.

    The Taoiseach was Cork City politician Jack Lynch, who had won an overall majority in 1977 in an election campaign which was unusually Catholic clericalist for Fianna Fail. But, two years later, the Pope did not visit the second city in the state because the Bishop did not invite him. And, some time later, Lucey retired and went off to be a missionary in Africa. He did not ever explain his failure to invite the Pope to Cork, but it is not hard to see a reason for it.

    Vatican 2 Catholicism undermined and trivialised the earnest Catholicism of Pius IX on which the Irish Church had formed itself, in association with the developing national movement, since the mid-19th century. That phase of development was not exhausted in Ireland when it was halted by Vatican 2. It was still filling itself out when it was ordered to stop. If the original impulse given by the triumph of Anti-Vetoism in the Veto Controversy was running out of momentum, there would have been evidence of this in the appearance of a sceptical intelligentsia to dispute certain areas of ground with the Hierarchy, and by so doing to provide for an evolutionary transition to a new relationship of Church and State.

    What happened instead was that the new Church formed in Ireland in the mid-19th century—by O’Connell’s Roman colleague, Cardinal Cullen—was stopped in its tracks by the Vatican, while there was still no social development against it to take its place. The Vatican 2 changes had to be imposed on Ireland. And their imposition devalued the values to which the generations then in their prime had dedicated themselves.

    Religious development in Ireland, with which social development was connected, was suddenly written off as an aberration. My Lord Bishop suddenly became Bishop Jack or Bishop Jim. Communion and Confirmation became occasions for display of fashion. Hell was abolished—and Heaven along with it, for all that was said to the contrary. And convents and monasteries were deprived of meaning.

    The ersatz intelligentsia, which is now kicking the Church because it is down, did nothing to bring it down. It was the Vatican that undermined it. But that is an inadmissible thought in the fashion of the moment because the futile scepticism which is the outcome of Vatican 2 must have it that Vatican 2 was a good thing. (The creature must love its creator.)[…]”

  17. [I have heard people who studied psychology decades ago report being taught that sexual abuse did not have a severe emotional impact on the child. Freud, mystified by finding such a high incidence of abuse among his subjects, also taught that a child was simply projecting his guilt about sexual issues onto adults. ]

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1231/1224261476404.html

    Letter to the Editor of the Irish Times; Thursday, December 31, 2009

    Madam, – Niall O’Donohoe (December 7th) referred to Prof Neil O’Doherty’s lecture in 1980 concerning sexual abuse of children and the resulting severe criticism Prof O’Doherty received for even suggesting such things were happening in Ireland of that time.

    Now I feel strongly that it is in the context of that time and later that this issue should be studied and not the partially media driven witch-hunt and scapegoating of auxiliary bishops of Dublin past and present. Truth and justice is not served in such scapegoating.

    As was revealed, of course serious errors of judgment were made by the church authorities, but they were made in the context of the time. This is not by way of making excuses for the great damage that so many suffered by these crimes of depravity committed by men who totally betrayed the scared trust given to them at ordination.

    Less than 20 years ago most educated people had never heard of the word paedophilia. As far as I am aware, professional and statutory bodies did not know how to deal with the problem when it arose. The judiciary would give out suspended sentences with a warning to offenders. The social services and Garda would often ignore information given to them of allegations in their area. They were extremely hesitant to intrude into the privacy of a family where such abuse might be happening.

    The psychological/psychiatric professions sent offenders on treatment programmes and would often certify such people back to their location, or ministry in the case of priests, not realising that a very high percentage reoffended.

    Finally. the Department of Education more often than not ignored very abusive teachers in primary and secondary schools throughout the country for decades and teachers’ unions likewise did very little to remove such teachers.

    It was only about 15 years ago, when survivors of abuse felt free to tell their stories and be heard in the process, that it finally dawned on society – and not just the church – how appalling a crime sexual abuse is and the great damage it has caused.

    Of course one can say the leaders in the Catholic Church should have known better, but in the context of the time they unfortunately did not. They failed – as other professions likewise failed. If bishops have to resign, then, in justice, leaders of other professions and statutory bodies who made serious errors of judgment in this matter should likewise resign. – Yours, etc,

    DR GP LEWIS,

    Ramleh Park,

    Milltown, Dublin 6.

%d bloggers like this: