Irish child abuse: the particular sufferings of the disabled

Earlier this week, as David Sharrock reports, thousands marched through Dublin in protest at what is turning out to be one of the darkest chapters in the history of Ireland and the Roman Catholic Church. Soon after the Ryan report was published, David Sharrock, who writes for The Times in Ireland, wrote a powerful column. He reported the appearance of Michael O’Brien on the RTÉ show Questions and Answers, the Republic’s equivalent of the BBC’s Question Time. Michael listened patiently to the answers given by politicians to his question about whether the assets of religious orders found guilty by a commission report of systemic, endemic child abuse should be frozen. Then he let rip. 'I went to the commission and had seven barristers there questioning me, telling me that I was telling lies when I told them that I got raped of a Saturday, got a merciful beating after it and he then came along the following morning and put Holy Communion in my mouth.

'You are talking to a Fianna Fáil man, a former councillor and mayor that worked tooth and nail for the party. You got it wrong. Admit it and apologise, because you don’t know the hurt I have. My God, seven barristers throwing questions at us non-stop. I attempted to commit suicide. They brought a man over from Rome, 90-odd years of age, to tell me I was telling lies and that I wasn’t beaten for an hour non-stop by two of them from head to toe without a shred of cloth on my body.

'For God’s sake, try to give us some peace and not continue hurting us . . . Don’t say you can’t change it. You are the Government, you run this state. So for God’s sake, stop mealy-mouthing because I am sick of it.'

One of the aspects of the Ryan report that has not received much attention has been the suffering of children with disabilities. 

In an attempt to address this, Margaret Kennedy of Macsas has written this report for Articles of Faith.

Margaret writes:

'Ireland is in outrage following the publication of the Ryan report. This is understandable and right. For too long has child sexual abuse been hidden in this alleged ‘Garden of Eden of Catholicism’. More and more for reasons others have speculated upon Ireland seems to have had its very own unique deviance amongst Catholic Clergy. I leave the exploration of that to others.

'My concern is for the victims. After twenty-plus years in the field of disability and child protection I can spot the flaws in this document. Most of us by common sense can recognise that disabled children are especially vulnerable. They may be in institutions far from family. They may not understand what is happening to them therefore unable to tell. This will be compounded by speech difficulties or learning disability.

'The Ryan Commission was set up to study the abuses within industrial schools. Though the reports on disabled children did not concern industrial schools they were included after many reports to the commission. The report covers ‘Our Lady of Good Counsel, Glanmire, Cork, a learning disabled residence and school, and Renmore Galway, a school for learning disabled children, both run by the Brothers of Charity.

'Ryan covers 18 hospitals, not named, where there were allegations of abuse of sick or disabled children.

'It also covers three deaf schools, Mary Immaculate School for Deaf Children, boys, run by The Daughters of the Cross of Liege, St Josephs School for Deaf Boys, ‘Cabra’, run by the Christian Brothers and St Mary’s school for Deaf girls, Cabra, run by the Dominican Sisters.

'Chapter 13 covers special schools and residential services and records witness reports from 58 witnesses from 14 different special needs schools and residential services, not named. It is unclear whether these victims are different to the former mentioned.

'The abuse of disabled children does not engender the same media response as abuse of non-disabled children.

'We can speculate that openly discussing the very vulnerabilities of this group of children is painful for parents and there has been a tendency to believe such children will not be targeted, that somehow we ‘feel sorry for them’ and that their very impairments give added protection.

'Far from it. Deaf children are four times more likely to be sexually abused than hearing children, with 50 per cent of deaf children experiencing sexual abuse. For learning disabled children we can estimate 50-90 per cent of all learning disabled children and adults have experienced sexual abuse. These are American statistics since Britain and Ireland have not researched the prevalence of such abuse here. Anecdotal evidence suggests the figures are about right for Britain and Ireland also.

'So what did the Ryan inquiry find? It is difficult to summarise, the report being long and complex. However it is clear that many, many disabled children were sexually, physically and emotionally abused. In chapter 13 it notes that a higher proportion of disabled witnesses were in their 20s and 30s suggesting abuse was relatively recent, not ‘historical’.

'Many spent most of their childhood in institutions. Forty-one of 58 witnesses reported abuse over a 35 year period prior to 1970, 17 related to the 1970-1990s. There were 20 witnesses from the deaf boys school and 21 from the deaf girls schools comprising three pages in the report. Two and half pages describe the institution, with 20 lines allocated to the abuse there. Another chapter concerns another deaf school examined by written reports only, though 20 written statements were furnished. Despite the 20 written statements only four pages cover this school with one page taken up by two photographs of the institution, while one page only covers the abuse experienced.

'There is no reference to the 150 deaf people who submitted to the commission before the deadline but many more were not aware of the process and missed the deadline. Nor is there any reference to the 135 learning disabled victims from the Brothers of Charity Galway. So that it is apparent that the Ryan Report is discussing only the ‘tip of the iceberg’.

'It is clear the commission had great difficulty putting in place sufficient resources for deaf people to give evidence. Reference to these difficulties were noted by Ryan. The principle difficulty was in obtaining statements of complainant witnesses. Protracted correspondence and discussion failed to produce agreement as to arrangements for taking statements that would be considered satisfactory. It is unclear who was to be ‘satisfied’, the deaf victims or the commission and here lies the nub of the issue.

'From reports I’ve received, the commission apparently did not rise to the required standards of interpreting. This is far from satisfactory in an era where disability rights would allow for ‘the freedom of expression’ under Human Rights legislation. It certainly means there is a huge gap of knowledge to interview deaf abused victims, which needs to be addressed if they are to be protected today.

'Ryan seems reluctant to tell us more about these difficulties. The Ryan report fudges the issue on oral verses sign language use for deaf children in education by arguing this debate takes place elsewhere. This is despite the fact the European Union has requested all states to recognise the Sign Language of its Deaf citizens. The political right to a language has not been endorsed for Deaf people in Ireland so in essence this abuse can not been appraised objectively, even after the victims' evidence of forced oralism - only speaking, not signing. This is cowardice and an omission of justice.

'Thirty-one witnesses gave evidence concerning hospitals. Regarding Lota’s learning disabled victims, there are no statistics on number of witnesses. Chapter 13 does tell us that 37 witnesses were intellectually disabled but not the institution they came from. Nineteen witnesses were sensorally impaired but this is a different number given in the deaf chapters and does not say how many blind or visually impaired witnesses there were or from where.

'Two witnesses reported abuse in schools and residences for physically impaired children that were not named. The numbers of witnesses were 33 in relation to 18 unnamed hospitals, with four abused in other institutions as well. It is unclear exactly how many were interviewed. As for the abuse suffered by disabled children, all described unbearable fear of beatings, sex abuse, and were subjected to a variety of unimaginable horrors. Descriptions of physical abuse included being hit or beaten with sticks, brushes, kitchen implements, wooden coat hangers and rulers.

'They also reported having their heads held under water, being put in cold baths, having their hair cut and pulled, being forcibly fed, being locked in outhouses, sheds and isolated rooms.

'Witnesses with sensory impairments described the particular fear and trauma associated with being physically abused when they could not see or hear abusers approaching them. Deaf children described being punished for sign language use. Sexual abuse was evident in nearly all institutions where disabled children were. It is astonishing that the Brothers of Charity positioned a known sex offender from an English primary school in Ireland. It is not said whether this establishment was for learning disabled pupils. However the police were involved but the Brothers brought him back to Ireland and placed him with learning disabled children in Lota, in 1951, where he stayed until 1984.

'Was it that the Brothers of Charity believed abusing learning disabled children ‘did not matter’? Brother O’Shea told the committee the trajectory of this man’s history using interesting terminology as if coached by his legal team such as; “ I would feel that maybe…”, “my sense is…”, “we would have acted upon…”. “I suppose…” Such evidence is ‘weaselesque’.

'As for the Brothers of Charity Galway, this institution was completely omitted from this statutory Commission of Inquiry. The fact Dr McCoy produced a report on the Brothers Galway, which was a non-statutory review by the Western Health Board, now the western Health Service Executive HSE, seems to have allowed this establishment to slip out of the Ryan radar, which means that what happened there will not receive the due inspection that only a public inquiry can now deliver.

'This is a terrible omission as this institution had prolific sex-offending Brothers. One Brother abuser was spirited away from Galway to Belmont Waterford and thence to a learning disabled establishment in Britain where he was to become a ‘committed’ sex offender. He was convicted and jailed in Britain in 1999.

'Neither McCoy or Ryan sufficiently focused on the movement of Brother/Clergy/Nun offenders in its own right.

'It would seem that various inequalities surface regarding disabled witnesses.

a) The confusion and failures on how to facilitate Deaf peoples’ evidence,

b) The anonymising of the institutions they were in except for some select few that were given individual chapters.

c) The omission of the real numbers of those who came forward but not included. The overall effect is to minimise the numbers of disabled victims and to protect the anonymous institutions.

d) The lack of analysis concerning the deliberate movement of offenders from one establishment to another. (A mapping exercise would have been helpful),

e) The lack of any analysis of learning disabled victims in Tingwall Hall Liverpool, who were abused by two brothers of Charity sent from Lota, and Galway. (Are not the Brothers of Charity and the Commission responsible for them too?)

f) Rigorous analysis was afforded institutions for non-disabled children, but not disabled schools.

It is not the place of this short article to re-visit the atrocities against disabled children as it is all contained in the report. What is necessary is to raise the profile of disabled adults who endured these schools and institutions for by their very impairments they may not have the opportunity to raise their voices themselves. That they were targeted and disregarded, and often deliberately put at risk by senior religious in the various orders, points to the depravity of both offender and the religious management entrusted with a ‘duty of care to protect’. We now have a duty to ensure that all schools and institutions for disabled children are at a level of humanity and safety that we demand.

Margaret Kennedy

Comments

[trevor sweeney]

please visit.....

http://www.freewebs.com/robbiedempsey61/

[trevor sweeney]

http://www.freewebs.com/robbiedempsey61/

[Lewis Winders]

Ruth, try not to let them get you down. Remember your Desiderata: "Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are a vexation to the spirit". (Okay, okay, there's also a bit about "Even the dull and the ignorant, they too have their story", but that was written by someone who'd never encountered some of the ferals on this blog!)

It's worth asking why homosexuality, of all aspects of human existence, excites such virulent opinions and abuse from some supposed Christians. Why no such venom when, say, paedophiles (Catholic or otherwise), murderers, fraudsters, drug dealers etc etc are mentioned?

The answer to that is the same as the answer to why some of them choose cowardly attacks on you (and others) as their outlet: they are very afraid, but they're not really sure of what.

[Alan Bird]

It seems that children with disabilities were the subject of a recent Irish parliamentary bill. It was apparently stripped of any meaning by the then minister, Mary Wallace and voted out. I sent her this email on 13 June. I have not had any reply.

To: Ms Mary Wallace TD
mary.wallace@oireachtas.ie
Dear Ms Wallace,
The author and victim of institutionalised abuse Paddy Doyle has a website called The God Squad. In it you can read newspaper and other articles about the child abuse system that prevailed over decades in Ireland.
One of the newspaper articles, entitled "I CAN remember a lot of the things that happened when I was eight years old." can be found here:-
http://www.paddydoyle.com/i-can-remember-a-lot-of-the-things-that-happened-when-i-was-eight-years-old/#more-375
It's a passionate, personal and heart-felt piece detailing the atrocities that Paddy Doyle and others were subject to. In it the author concludes:

"Every single amendment [of the National Disability Authority Bill] was resisted by Mary Wallace, the Junior Minister for Disability, and voted down by the Government. The reasons she gave for her opposition to further strengthening the Bill were so fatuous as to be laughable. You couldn't impose a condition that reports of the authority be debated by the Dáil or considered by the cabinet because the Dáil and cabinet are busy places. You don't need a procedure to enable someone who is neglected or abused to have their cases investigated, because such a procedure already exists in the Employment Equality Act (which only deals with people at work, and has no bearing on people in care - and whole sections of that Bill have been amended to exclude people with disabilities anyway). If Mary Wallace or her government colleagues watched States of Fear - if they know anything of the stories told by Paddy Doyle, Annie Ryan, and many others - she and they have learned nothing from the experience. Because they haven't, they've allowed the usual bureaucratic responses to dictate how we will behave in the future. They should be ashamed."

These are serious charges made in a serious and public forum. Could you please tell me what your response is?
Yours sincerely,
Alan Bird.

[j]

"I find your assumption surprising J. I have been consistent, over the years, in confirming that I am an Irish Anglican."

Sorry Kate, I couldnt remember. It was more the intelligent and humane thing that I was attempting to recognise. But in that case, I agree, where are they?

[Lewis Winders]

Apparently, capitalising one's words is the on-line equivalent of shouting, which of course has no place in a measured and mature debate.

Nevertheless, here we go: THIS IS NOT ABOUT PROTECTING YOUR CHURCH AND ITS EMPLOYEES, IT'S ABOUT PROTECTING THESE POOR BLOODY CHILDREN!

(Sigh). Thanks. Feeling a bit better now.

[Kate]

I find your assumption surprising J. I have been consistent, over the years, in confirming that I am an Irish Anglican.

The Church of Ireland is an autonomous province of the Anglican communion. We hold no allegiance to Rome.

[Kate]

"No one wants to 'speak for them', make suggestions for Justice for them, or explore what it is to be disabled and abused."
(Margaret Kennedy)

Sincere apologies. Whilst I absolutely agree with your conclusions, I am absorbed in studying this report; the myriad strands of dogma, immorality, sadism, corruption and collusion will take time to unravel.

You are correct, I have not focussed on 'disabled children'. Mainly because I find it difficult to separate or categorise the children who endured this abomination. I also have a sneaking fear that to concentrate on any one section of the abused will deflect attention from the overall pattern of elitist (religious and class) corruption.

I am mother of nine (four adopted) and now grandmother to five. Along with Richard, I would say that had any of this been done to one of mine, I would hope the police got to the abuser before I did. That is the mother speaking.

After a lifetime active in civil rights, peace and reconciliation, cross-community dialogue, education and counselling (mostly in NI but for the last seven years, in the South) I am gutted by evidence that nothing has changed. Grief, rage, and despair is compounded by the superior moralising of RC apologists.

What I have been trying to do is to illustrate the hellish web of religious, political, judicial, legal, class and financial greed. At every level of Irish society, the 'silence and secrecy' rule which underpinned the Church's power, has been adhered to.

I do not know how change can be effected. Already there are attempts to defuse anger by relegating Ryan's findings to 'times past'. Brian Cowen talked about "our history" in his speech repeating Bertie Ahern's 'apology' to the abused.

That "a higher proportion of disabled witnesses were in their 20s and 30s suggesting abuse was relatively recent, not ‘historical’", does not FIT the Fianna Fáil rhetoric.

The 'submissive deference' (Ryan) has not been dented. Bertie Ahern, Michael Woods and latterly Brian Cowan all sought to PROTECT the Church from financial reparations.

The reality Margaret is, there is no clear way to protect the vulnerable in an Ireland 'in hock' to the Roman Catholic Church. The process of indoctrination and 'Rome Rule' started in 1172 with the English invasion and a systematic destruction of the Irish Celtic Church.

Step two: conflation of Irish with Roman Catholic.
Step three: divide and rule. Court the Irish landed class. Keep the peasants poor, the women 'pregnant and in the kitchen'.
Step four: incorporate parts of the old Gaelic and Celtic cultures into Roman Catholicism.
Step five: oppose all attempts to liberate the 'common people'. While still claiming England to be the enemy.

The Hierarchy opposed the United Irishmen 1798
and all subsequent rebellions.
They opposed Jim Larkin and sided with the middle-class employers - 1913 Dublin lockout.
They opposed James Connelly and the 1916 Rising.

"Had Connelly lived, Maynooth would not rule Ireland today", from an aged Dublin taxi driver in 1975.

All Ryan has revealed is that even throughout the Celtic Tiger boom, Maynooth (the Hierarchy) continued to 'rule Ireland'.

The Department of Education is still refusing to reveal the number of primary schools 'owned' and controlled by the church whilst funded by the state. An independent estimate is 90%.

No politician will speak, except in praise, of the hospitals owned and controlled by the religious but funded by the state.

The Sisters of Charity and Mercy, two orders that figured prominently in the abuse report, were the unambiguous OWNERS of the two biggest hospitals in Dublin. Those institutions were entirely state funded; they are now owned by 'limited liability trusts' - set up when it was becoming apparent that reparation might be sought from the religious.

The sisters are the SOLE shareholders of those trusts. The sisters appoint the Board, which is "responsible to the shareholders". The Board "develops the hospital and its services in accordance with the principles and ethics of the Congregation of the Religious Sisters of Charity".

What was it Ryan said of the Sisters of Charity?

"A regime that was harsh and unpredictable with corporal punishment the common response to all misbehaviour. Incidents of sexual abuse ... Men ... appeared to have ready access to these small boys .. no awareness of the risks posed by this.

And from Professor John Crown, consultant oncologist - May 2009:

"The same class-driven corporatist paternalism that allowed systematic residential abuse to develop and go unchecked also informs our hospital services...."

Schools, hospitals, orphanages, residential homes for the disabled? Nobody knows HOW MANY the Church own. Nobody knows the precise wealth of the religious orders and the individual dioceses. It is impossible to get answers from government.

HOW to start the process of breaking the iron grip? I truly do not know. Perhaps the European Union?

[j]

"WHERE are the ordinary, humane, intelligent Roman Catholics? Where are the distressed and questioning RC 'believers'?"

Well Kate, I thought you might be one of them. But you do seem to be on your own, and perhaps you're not Catholic- apologies if so.

Do Catholics not realise how much more we would respect them if they dealt with this terrible thing along the lines of their own teaching?

[Lewis Winders]

Richard Aluise and Margaret Kennedy, I don't have any grounding in Irish law either, but surely it's a fair assumption that the sexual abuse of children -- disabled, handicapped or otherwise -- is illegal.

What can be done to obtain justice for past wrongs is beyond me, but what can be done to ensure no future repetitions is obvious: change the culture of the Catholic Church.

Anyone in a position of authority who learns of an alleged sexual assault has only one valid response: pick up the 'phone and call the police. This is regardless of the age or gender of the alleged victim, and regardless of whether or not the authority figure places much store in the allegations.

If the allegations turn out to be baseless, at least they will have been professionally investigated, but if they turn out to be true then the wheels of justice are already turning.

Any organisation which values human rights and particularly those of children could not abide by any other strategy.

However, we see repeated attempts herein to -- at the very least -- ameliorate the activities of these abominable people. That is indicative of just how (for want of a better term) brainwashed they have become with the infallibility of their church's hierarchy.

THAT is the problem: it is cultural.

[j]

Margaret

I am sorry, I forget that I have been away for a while. Posters from a long time ago remember that I have two disabled children and did have (now dead) a severely disabled brother.

Its not just Ireland. I also have difficult choices to make in the future about whom I trust to care for my children. I know there will be low level exploitation- carers encouraging people to but DVDs that they can then "borrow" and the like. Sexual exploitation- yes, a worry, though not while they are little, as they still live with me. Teasing, isolation, mocking- all part of their lives, as is loneliness once they develop the ability to understand.

Little standalone houses of three or four people are more dangerous in my view than big homes where there is more variety of carer. I have worked for a Steiner home and they seemed decent. But I would not trust a catholic institution now as there appears to be no effective supervision or consequences of bad behaviour.

Presumably any child abuser in holy orders will weigh this up aginst his/her compulsion and decide to carry right on as before.

No crocodile tears from me, Pereb, they are the tears of a mother.

[Richard Aluise]

Margaret Kennedy

"So before I completely despair could someone please be more intelligent and say something about what we do about the abuse of disabled children in Ireland and how we call the ryan inquiry to account on their behalf."

Thank you for discussing once again the disabled. I have said numerous times that this is an issue that tears my heart in half.

Unfortunately, I am unaware of Irish law, so I can't begin to suggest how to call them to account. I have doubts that we can expect a system that hides perpetrators and protects them from justice will ever bring this issue to full account.

I am at a loss for words, and with every new post by a Catholic apologist heralding the magnificence of Catholic moral teaching rather than their outrage and determination to bring this type of all to familiar behavior within their church to an end, I am less and less inclined to believe that the systemic problems within the church and the government will ever change.

I wish I knew more about what can legally be done in Ireland to defend these innocent victims and bring this to a resolution that can help them live the rest of their lives at least knowing that someone stood beside them and that justice was served, in whatever small manner.

[Richard Aluise]

Lewis Winders

"To those herein who don't wish to face the enormity of these crimes, please re-visit the words of Michael O'Brien at the head of this blog. If you can read them without weeping, or at least wanting to, then you don't have to worry about going to heaven or hell, because you have no soul."

Thank you. Well said.

[Kate]

"We must discern however between the genuine tears of those, including myself and no doubt most Catholics, who are deeply anguished by the suffering of these children, and the buckets-full of crocodile tears shed by those who are looking for any reason to vent their fury and hatred against the Catholic Church." PererB

Does anybody believe this robotic repetition? PererB claims "genuine tears... anguish"! Only compassionate human beings are capable of such emotions.

The only tears PererB will shed are tears of anger against those who have brought his adulated religion into disrepute. I do NOT mean the perpetrators of abuse. I mean the victims. Do they not know that secrecy and silence is paramount!

The confidential Vatican document, obtained by CBS News, lays out a church policy that calls for absolute secrecy when it comes to sexual abuse by priests - anyone who speaks out could be thrown out of the church.

The policy was written in 1962 by Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani. Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases "in the most secretive way...restrained by a perpetual silence...and everyone {including the alleged victim) ...is to observe the strictest secret, which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office...under the penalty of excommunication."

So says the Vatican; so PererB is programmed. An automaton in total submission to dogma.

Just like the priest who told his congregation: "they weren't all angels you know; Daingean was a reformatory, they weren't in there for nothing"; he claimed "astonishment" when half the congregation walked out (RTE 1 Mon 16 June).

The Oblates of Mary Immaculate ran Daingean. The Ryan Report notes: The physical abuse of boys in Daingean was extreme. Floggings which were ritualised beatings should not have been tolerated in any institution and they were inflicted even for minor transgressions. Children who passed through Daingean were brutalised by the experience and some were damaged permanently.

Daingean was a 'reformatory'. Children from as young as three years of age were sent there to be 'reformed'. They were 'released' at 14 or 16, depending on the needs of the religious order in charge. All now have criminal records.

Letters seen by Ryan show that, the Christian Brothers in particular, pressurised the courts for MORE boys!

One survivor of Daingean, incarcerated at the age of three, has lately been found innocent of any crime. The High Court judged that he suffered illegal imprisonment, criminal abuse and long term psychological and physical damage.

PererB, in his vile accusations against all those not of the Roman Catholic faith; in his refusal to discuss the WHY and HOW of these abhorrent deeds, perfectly illustrates the mindsets of those perpetrating the abuse. His benighted idolatry convinces him that he, and his co-religionists, are elevated by 'devotion' above non-RCs, above the law of the land, and above 'common' codes of morality.

'J' is quite correct, for such as PererB, 'child rape is a small price to pay'; living children do not register in the face of frenzied fantasies of foetal dismemberment.

JPearce presciently observed, on another topic, that only the self-anointed 'Super religious' can get away with such self-deluded gibberish. A 'lesser' human being would be certified.

[Margaret Kennedy]

Since I wrote the article on disabled children referenced in the Commission inquiry report very few here seem able to discuss it!

No one wants to 'speak for them', make sggestions for Justice for them, or explore what it is to be disabled and abused.

You are all burying the disabled victims with discussions on the institutional church, arguing whether the RC Church is evil or not, abortion, etc. In fact this thread meant to be on the experience of DISABLED CHILDREN has become a political battle ground around catholicism and abortion.

I wrote my piece so that others may be aware of the plight of disabled children but very few...so far....seem that interested.

So before I completely despair could someone please be more intelligent and say something about what we do about the abuse of disabled children in Ireland and how we call the ryan inquiry to account on their behalf.

margaret

[Andrew, Venezuela]

Lewis Winders (16/06/09 - 12:09:42). Thank you for your honesty in recognising that your post was sent by "accident" to this thread, rather than to the "Cast into the Tiber" one !. I will say a few words of my own on this latter thread, which may be of interest to you, Kate, Richard and Robert.

The backlash, and the general disgust and repugnance, made so manifest by the revelations and the attempted cover up are NOT going to disappear as if by art of magic. I think there are just as many RCs as there are others who was been negatively affected by these revelations, and we must all hope that the perpetrators receive the full weight of the Civil and Criminal Laws for their actions.

"Love thy neighbour as thyself", indeed, does not seem to have been to the forefront of the actions and thoughts of these people. As a normal "pater familias" myself, I am glad I accept family planning, otherwise it would be dreadful to think that my own private football team plus all of its reserves might have ever been entrusted to the tender care of individuals such as those "brothers" and "sisters" involved, and about whom we are now starting to hear so much.

Will be in touch on the "Tiber" blog !.

Regards.

Andrew, Venezuela

[J Pearce]

"Where on God's earth did you dig up that disgraceful conclusion from?"

It appears particularly obvious to most people, PererB.

You pointedly refuse to condemn the institutional Church for its failure to prevent these incidents from ever occuring.

You pointedly support the whole "confession/repentance" mechanism which facilitates child abuse and encourages the abuser to repeat their crime - and also enables the Church authorities to cover up the fact that it is happening.

You fanatically focus upon abortion to the exclusion of any other topic, even when abortion is not the topic under discussion. This is a clear denial mechanism - denying the facts about institutional Roman Catholicism and its systemic abuse of children by obfuscating the issue.

By failing to even acknowledge the veracity and sheer scale of the issue, you tacitly condone it. This is not malicious fabrication. Its outright fact.

The irony is, you are as morally bankrupt as anyone else you care to malign for their beliefs. But you are far too sociopathically zealotous to recognise this.

[PererB]

L.Winders
"If you can read them without weeping, or at least wanting to, then you don't have to worry about going to heaven or hell, because you have no soul"

We must discern however between the genuine tears of those, including myself and no doubt most Catholics, who are deeply anguished by the suffering of these children, and the buckets-full of crocodile tears shed by those who are looking for any reason to vent their fury and hatred against the Catholic Church.

[Lewis Winders]

Richard Aluise, I couldn't agree more. What IS it about this particular church which causes so many of its clergy to commit these abominable crimes (notwithstanding the many who behave with propriety and do much good work), and which apparently sees its own continued existence and other vested interests as being more important than the well-being of these children?

I've often thought that nothing could be more horrific than to be a child suffering such abuse at the hands of those who have been charged with their protection, and from whom there is no escape. I now realise that there is something worse: being a handicapped child enduring this hell on earth.

To those herein who don't wish to face the enormity of these crimes, please re-visit the words of Michael O'Brien at the head of this blog. If you can read them without weeping, or at least wanting to, then you don't have to worry about going to heaven or hell, because you have no soul.

[iain rae]

The Irish people have been betrayed by pious priests and its government cover up. The game is up for the Catholic Church in Ireland. Deference is over and justice must be done ,a crime is a crime no matter which God you choose .

[PererB]

J
"I understand your views on abortion, but you appear to arguing that child rape is a small price to pay. Maybe you think it is, but its not a necessary price, is it?"

Where on God's earth did you dig up that disgraceful conclusion from?

Certainly from nothing I ever said.

Does this malicious fabrication represent the last desperate throes of a frantic and foundering atheistic effort to discredit me in my rightful and seemingly successful defence of the Church?

Small or necessary price to pay for what? Both abuse and abortion are heinous crimes.

Fortunately the abuse of thousands will be punished.

Disgracefully the murder of billions will not.

[Richard Aluise]

Lewis Winders

My apologies if I kept the off-topic discussion alive a little too long. I didn't intend to become a wedge on the blog. Sometimes, blog threads head toward slightly tangential topics.

Back to topic. Child abuse was ignored in this case by both the RCC authorities and those in the government, as it has been in so many other cases in the US and other areas. While each church has its scandals, I am unaware of any other specific church or group that has the sheer number of abuse scandals as the RCC. I stand to be corrected if someone knows of scandals of this magnitude in other arenas. As noted earlier, even Mother Teresa, whose good work continues today in the orders she founded, had a priest spiritual adviser who was convicted and sentenced for abuse.

My concern regards the response of some of the Roman Catholics who post here. I think this might be a wise time for them humbly to reflect on the causes of the problem, even if that requires painful examination of their own church. This is not a time to discuss the moral teachings of their Church. This issue isn't about what the Roman Catholic Church teaches. It's about abuse that was ignored by the RC authorities. In some cases, the abusers were not only ignored, they were protected, even by some outside of Ireland. It would be refreshing to see even one Roman Catholic state that they are sad for this situation and that from within they will try to root out the causes of this problem in their church. No moral high ground, no connections to abortion, no redirection of the issue at hand. Simple humility with constructive suggestions of what they can do to make their church a place where this will never happen again.

It is very painful for me to think of abuse of the disabled (or anyone else), since, as I have stated, I have a severely disabled child.

Thanks to all of you for the wonderful exchanges. I do enjoy them, even if I have contributed to taking the discussions off topic! My apologies once again.

[Kate]

Why am I not surprised that this thread has now been been deflected into esoteric discussions on the nature of Roman Catholicism versus the rest?

Lewis Winders has written:

"Could we possibly keep abortion to the abortion blog, and not use it as a "your crime is worse than my crime" Get-Out-Of-Hell-Free card every time someone criticises the RCC for a totally-unrelated activity?"

Before diverting the debate away from the Irish Child abuse topic with a cross-thread question on RCC versus Anglican dogma and practice.

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with LW's comments on the scholarship of Richard Aluise and Andrew, Venezuela (which I have read with enjoyment), AND whilst greatly appreciating the courteous and rational input of Lewis Winders himself, can he not SEE that this distraction is precisely what fundamentalist Roman Catholics seek?

Note the instantaneous knee-jerk doctrinal assertions from RIW. Note the disparaging and inhumane apologetics from PererB. Note the absence of engaged, rational concern from proselytising Roman Catholic regulars.

Note the tedious (and historically inaccurate) post-colonial transference and exculpation from Chris Gillibrand on 'Irish Catholic Child Abuse: was English rule ultimately to blame?'

WHERE are the ordinary, humane, intelligent Roman Catholics? Where are the distressed and questioning RC 'believers'?

The apologists are immune to the reign of terror imposed on a newly emerging nation. Immune to religious fascism which reduced religion to mere social engineering and control.

A Church which obliterated God in favour of harsh, dogmatic moralising. A Church which had more interest in legislating for people's relationships and capitalising on an unforgiving God (according to the lights of Roman dogma).

Are there NO warning bells ringing anywhere? A Church which used religious belief to corrupt and control a government and judiciary. A central authority (the Vatican) which anointed its 'thought police' with the absolute right to control and live off poor families.

It would seem that 'devout' Roman Catholicism means agreeing to a lobotomy. The majority posting here seek only to minimise the damage to Mother Church. All are intent on distracting the 'other' (non-Roman Catholic) gaze away from a cesspit of fascism, sadism, and root and branch financial corruption.

That objective is best served by the introduction of abstract debates, whether abortion or the 'primacy and authority of the Bishop Of Rome'.

Ireland is again celebrating the life and work of James Joyce, banned for over 60 years by the Roman Catholic Church. And no wonder they banned him. Had the people had access to his work, we might have avoided the hell on Earth endured by victims of rampant clerical abuse. The writer's penetrating eye saw the Church's total control over people's private lives and the affairs of State for the malign and sick phenomenon it has now been proven to be.

[j]

Not to worry Lewis, we worked it out..I am hoping though that we can get back on topic.

pereb, I understand your views on abortion, but you appear to arguing that child rape is a small price to pay. Maybe you think it is, but its not a necessary price, is it? The catholic church could be against child rape and still against abortion. Nothing stops them from hauling these people to justice and still being against abortion.

Or do you think that admitting any criticism of the church opens the door to raging atheist abortionists?

Because actually I am afraid that it is the defence of the church in this situation that weakens it. Admitting past sins, displaying christian virtues in dealing with it, displaying love, compassion and charity to the victims and justice and repentence- that's what this atheist expected to see from the church.

I am stunned that no attempt at all is being made by the church even to appear to live by its own teachings.

Definitely undermines their authority to teach on abortion, sorry.

[Lewis Winders]

No sooner do I criticise others for posts which are off-topic than I encounter the beam in mine own eye. My question to Richard and Andrew was supposed to be in response to their recent posts on the "Cast into the Tiber and told to swim" blog.

Is my faux pas the result of divine intervention and retribution? Well, I'm not sure, but I'm certainly a bit more wary now than I was before. However, regardless of all that, my apologies to my fellow bloggers, and to the long-suffering Ms Gledhill.

[PererB]

Macsmithy
"the number of teenage pregnancies where priests are the fathers runs into the thousands"

And the number of terminated pregnancies where the abortionists are the murderers runs into billions.

[Robert Ian Williams]

The Anglican appeal to the early Church is as flawed as the Presbyterian or the Mormon appeal for that matter. All groups who are outside the Church have to make these claims....but history is against them.

The Councils of the Church on careful examination taught the primacy and authority of the Bishop Of Rome as the successor of the Apostle Peter. That is why at Nicea the Pope's legate presided and at Chalcedon the Fathers of the Council proclamed Peter has spoken through Leo.

[macsmithy]

When all is said and done, reaction to the RC authorities' handling of this centuries-old and global problem of child sex abuse - and specifically its methodical cover-up by criminal means - is found in the ever-emptying pews and ever-closing seminaries. Amen to that.

More and more people are doing two things - giving up religious belief completely as they now see it for the primitive, superstitious and dangerous mumbo-jumbo that it is, or retaining their faith but deciding their covenant with their chosen god is a personal one, and needs no alleged guidance or sanction from the motley crew of hypocrites and charlatans that make up organised religions' hierarchies, of which the most pernicious is the Vatican.

In a bizarre twist, though, the media continues to give people like Murphy-O'Connor acres of column inches to lecture the rest of us about morality, and even to the other cretinous cardinals and bishops who say it's all the fault of homosexuals, blithely igorning the fact that nuns have also been jailed for sex abuse and the number of teenage pregnancies where priests are the fathers runs into the thousands.

You really couldn't make this stuff up.

[Andrew, Venezuela]

Lewis Winders (15/06/09 - 13:39:01). Thank you very much for your post addressed to Richard Aluise and me. I see that Richard has already replied to you, and I am in agreement with most of what he said.

Your mention of "yea" and "nay" with respect to the mutual recognition of Anglican and RC ordinations will, I think, have been answered elsewhere in other posts and threads in "Articles of Faith".

As to your very good comment on "many other churches", I would go a step further and extend this to "many other faiths" (e.g. Buddhists, Hindues, Jews) and to "agnostics and atheists" whose members show visible evidence of "loving their neighbours". Each individual faith or 'system' offers its own "rewards" to its followers. My own "reward" has been seeing people benefitting from something which I may have been able to do to help them.

Basic, and "proper", Catholic teaching relates to the 2 sacraments (baptism and the Eecharist) for which there is scriptural evidence of their having been instituted by Christ: the former because he was baptised at the hands of St. John the Baptist, and the latter because of what was said and done during "the Last Supper". The 5 other "lesser sacraments" are so-called because of some reported relationship between Christ and them (e.g. matrimony), not because he instituted them.

A church, of whatever denomination, is more than just a 'building': the term comes from the Greek word "ekklesia" (translated into Latin as "ecclesia"), and means a gathering or congregation (Richard: would you care to elaborate further on the meaning of "ekklesia" in Greek ?).

As to the diffferences in 'nomenclature' between Anglicans and RCS, they are really not all that important in practice, since both denominations (as well as the Orthodox and other Churches) are all "Catholics". The following example may be helpful in uderstanding that concept, although I would ask you not to confuse "snakes" with "denominations" !. At the mention of the word "snake", most people would disappear as quickly as their legs could carry them. Those who stay behind, at a safe distance, could probably identify the "snake" as being a non-venomous grass snake, a king snake etc., or as a venomous coral snake, a rattlesnake etc. The former can be treated with respect but not too much fear, whereas the latter must be treated with both fear and respect. There are some very nasty "venomous snakes" around in this world, as you may already know !. I would never question the "validity" of the ordination of a Baptist or a Presbyterian minister, for example,. within the rules and regulations of the corresponding denominations. I would certainly address them both as "Rev.", although "Fr." might not be all that advisable.....

Your point about "the clergy" is interesting. In my own, very personal, opinion that term could be extended in its broadest sense to included certain committed but non-ordained individuals who may have a licence to do what they do (e.g. a Lay Reader). Richard may be in a much better to position to clarify this followinjg point, but I understand that in the Orthodox Churches one can 'confess' to a lay person, be assured that the sins will be forgiven, and then be recommended to speak to a priest in order to receive Absolution, i.e. the lay person can "hear" the confession, but can not "absolve".

Even though some people may give the opposite impression, not all "Catholics" are narrow-minded individuals who are incapable of seeing beyond "black and white diktats" in practice. You may find that the vast majority are extremely broad-minded in these matters.

Hope these comments may be of interest.

Kindest regards.

Andrew, Venezuela

[Richard Aluise]

Lewis Winders

Thank you for your comments.

My own discussion regarding "validity" of Anglican orders was more addressed to the Roman Catholics of the blog who adhere to very legalistic terms to describe sacraments and orders. I don't subscribe to their terminology, but I was rather making the point that it is far too legalistic a notion to say that this priesthood or that priesthood is "invalid" or "illicit".

I believe that Christ did establish a Church with a teaching structure, those higher in authority instructing the new Christians in the basics of the faith, and then overseeing (episcopos in Greek, which literally means overseer) and guarding the teachings of that faith. This is very scriptural, as numerous posts on these blogs have attested, quoting the various Pauline passages that relate to priests and bishops.

I think that any Church with a Eucharistic worship that adheres to the teachings of the early Church can fall into that category, including (sorry Geoffrey) Anglicans. The key is the adherence to early Church teachings.

This is why I agree so wholeheartedly with Andrew regarding study of the early councils in the Church. They demonstrate what was handed to them by the apostles.

Last I checked, papal infallibility wasn't there.

[Lewis Winders]

Richard Aluise, and Andrew of Venezuela, thank you for your interesting, measured and scholarly posts to date. I don't have your depth of scholarship, and what little I did have has trickled out through my ears as the years have advanced, but nevertheless I have a question -- albeit a simple, and possibly even simplistic one -- for you.

Your posts have addressed the question of whether or not Anglican clergy are "valid". You quote an RCC decision which, not surprisingly, said "No", and an Anglican response which, equally predictably, said "Yes". So far, so subjective. But, on two grounds, I challenge the significance of the point.

Firstly, if loving God and loving one's neighbour as oneself are the primary keys to salvation, and both churches (and many others) are doing this in accordance with Christ's teachings, surely the result for both parties will be the same: Anglicans and Catholics will reap their heavenly reward without distinction.

Secondly, why are the clergy per se important? Christ didn't say "Get your priests to do this in remembrance of me", he charged his lay followers with doing it. He didn't mention (to my recollection) other so-called sacraments such as confession to a member of the clergy, and in fact (quite apart from the fact that it was the clergy who had him killed), he exhorted his followers to be better than the clergy. He didn't say a Pharisee was necessary when marrying or burying or baptising someone, and he effectively said that a church (in terms of a domicile) was a spiritual rather than a physical requirement.

So the question is: why is the difference between Anglicans and Catholics important?

[j]

Can I add this from Robert IW

"As for child abuse....the Cathlolic Church stands against it"

that's the problem, RIW. The Catholic Church doesnt stand against it. If it did, if the church insisted on a fair and accountable trial, people would have much more sympathy with the argument that a few bad men do not pollute an institution.

[J Pearce]

Has it ever occurred to the Catholic apologists on this thread, wailing like little children against all the "nasty" comments levelled at their religious insititution, that perhaps there are entirely valid reasons to abhor the RCC? For an institution that claims to represent God on Earth, do they not intellectually grasp the jarring disjoin between this lofty presumption and:

a) the hundreds of thousands (I not millions?) of murdered innocent victims of Roman Catholic imperialism down the centuries,

b) the raping and looting of indigenous societies that occurred which has resulted in the amassed wealth the RCC boasts today,

c) the voluminous amount of evidence from all around the world, which proves beyond any doubt that Roman Catholic insititutions and the implementation of Roman Catholic dogma has resulted in the systemic abuse of the innocent and vulnerable for centuries,

d) the unadulterated, unapologetic raging hypocrisy at the heart of Roman Catholicism, which looks to defend the indefensible and offload the ills of the world onto everyone else but themselves.

Unlike the much maligned secularists and atheists on the this blog, who generally acknowledge the messy and problematic morality of, say, abortion (which seems to be the only stick that Roman Catholic zealots seem able to use to beat them with) and weigh up the medical facts with real world moral dilemmas, it seems those Roman Catholic apologist zealots complaining about this mythical "persecution" (a favoured diversionary tactic) utterly fail to grasp, on an intellectual and moral level, the sheer weight of evidence illustrating the heart of darkness at the core of modern Roman Catholicism.

It is this deliberate, amoral ignorance which entirely vindicates the critical and damning commentary on Roman Catholicism. Its about time the faithful took their collective heads out of their asses and took a long, hard look at their supposed superioir morality. The absolute truth is, its no better than anything else humanity has managed so far.

[j]

Kate is quite right. And the Catholic Church holds the power to deal with the entire problem.

Saying that libel laws are powerful and that nothing prevents these abused survivors from risking individual civil action is cynical.

If the authority of their church means anything to these religious orders, then the Pope should easily be able to instruct them to co-operate with a fair criminal trial (outside Ireland if local feeling makes that wise) with no sins of dishonesty or omission. Whether the secular law can force it is indeed in question, but those in holy orders are answerable to the church as well.

Why dont they do it?

Because relying on hugely expensive individual civil action by a lot of little people, probably impoverished in some caes, is a lot less likely to result in any action.

So, does the Pope not care, or does he not in fact have the respect and obedience of this flock?

[Jason Mead]

PererB

"Unfortunately there are those who, in a stage-managed display of outrage and disgust, shed buckets-full of crocodile tears for abused children, and yet in the same breath, proclaim with glee that the murder of millions of unborn babies is a very good and necessary thing for the happiness of society."

Says the very man who brought up abortion on this particular thread.

Comparing like with unlike is the bona fide hallmark of an utter moron and yet here you are doing precisely that.

The abortion of an unwanted foetus can in no way be compared to the real suffering of actual children that have been physically and sexually abused by Paedophile priests.

"Such persons will jump at any opportunity, irrespective of its cause, to vent their longstanding hatred and abhorrence of the Catholic Church. Some of the comments on this and other AoF threads are disgraceful"

So no one has the right to loath the Catholic church especially when it has been aiding and abetting paedophiles?

The most disgraceful comments on AoF have come from yourself so maybe you should stop chucking stones and examine your own conduct.

[Cam]

I have a relative who once lived in a residence in NYC on East 16th St called The Bernard Fineson Rsidence. The manager Curtis Walker is a notorious sex abuser and drug addict. He's had unsolicited sex with dozens of DD males since his hiring. I can't prove it but I know that this goes on in other group homes as well. This ais a group home for the severely retarded so most of them simply didn't understand the activities they engaged in or the psychological consequenses of their actions. Is there any way to protect the DD population from this systematic abuse?

[Kate]

"in a stage-managed display of outrage and disgust, shed buckets-full of crocodile tears for abused children, and yet ... proclaim with glee that the murder of millions of unborn babies is a very good and necessary thing ...

...any opportunity, irrespective of its cause, to vent their longstanding hatred and abhorrence of the Catholic Church." (pererB)

Shocking and inhumane statements. Please stop playing the 'oppressed, persecuted Catholic' card; it butters no parsnips.

Stop presenting arrogant doctrinal absolutes and try engaging your brain with the basic tenets of the Christian Faith.

This is deeply offensive, self-interested nonsense, particularly to those of other denominations and none, whose professional skills and energies have been directed (almost exclusively) towards the mental and emotional welfare of Roman Catholic people.

Endemic child abuse, rape and torture pererB, is NOT "any" old "opportunity" to take a swipe at the Catholic Church. This is about claiming the right to express an opinion on systemic abuse and torture of tens of thousands of children by an institution which elevates itself above all other Christian denominations.

It matters not, where or by whom, such abuse and deceit is perpetrated; on such a scale it must be scrutinized, acknowledged, investigated and abhorred. That it is endemic in Roman Catholic religious orders - Canada, US, Australia and Ireland - SHOULD invoke concern in all decent and humane people but, most specifically in those Catholics who profess a 'superior' relationship with Christ.

[Richard Aluise]

I find it troubling that Catholic apologists use this issue not as a wake-up call, in all humility examining their own Church's policies, but rather as a time to make a brief statement of their general distaste for abuse, then jumping to a platform to herald in the most triumphal manner the Church's moral teachings in other areas. The old saying "actions speak louder than words" comes to mind.

We have a Church that teaches priests should be celibate, but priests, bishops and Cardinals (even Popes in the past) who do not live it. We have a Church that teaches abuse is abhorrent, yet the authorities, including some in the Vatican, who hid and protected the abusers with abject disregard for the victims.

I am disheartened by what I read here from Catholics, but it confirms what I already knew. Catholicism has veered way off track over the centuries.

[PererB]

L.Winders
"Could we possibly keep abortion to the abortion blog, and not use it as a "your crime is worse than my crime" Get-Out-Of-Hell-Free card every time someone criticises the RCC for a totally-unrelated activity?"

Unfortunately there are those who, in a stage-managed display of outrage and disgust, shed buckets-full of crocodile tears for abused children, and yet in the same breath, proclaim with glee that the murder of millions of unborn babies is a very good and necessary thing for the happiness of society.

Such persons will jump at any opportunity, irrespective of its cause, to vent their longstanding hatred and abhorrence of the Catholic Church. Some of the comments on this and other AoF threads are disgraceful.

[Margaret Kennedy]

'Social workers today have the same power as the priests - that is more power than the Queen, yet few people know this'

Thus says Portia...

As a former social worker, this statement is complete rubbish. nonesense!

Social workers get blamed for everything and I'm utterly sick of the scapegoating and this belief the social worker has all this power.

In all child protection decisions there is a multi-disciplinary pannel of teachers, social workers, health visitors, police, GP's and others involved with the child in question.

Family courts are judged to be confidential to protect the child and such a decision was made by law nothing to do with social workers.

So Portia, give the real facts...

Portia,

[Lewis Winders]

Robert Ian Williams: "Vengeance is mine, saitheth the Lord. I will repay. No one escapes the judgement and justice of God."

Well maybe, but for my money I'd rather we did the justice thing here on Earth, and in this life, just in case this putative god does not in fact exist. And if he does, surely he'll take their earthly punishment into account when meting out his own.

[Lewis Winders]

Oops! My apologies, Robert Ian Williams for omitting the "Robert" when I quoted you earlier on.

[Lewis Winders]

Ian Williams: "...the vile anti-catholicism that now permeates this blog...

"As for child abuse....the Cathlolic Church stands against it (despite the independent actions of some of its members) and the worst form of child abuse remains murdering the defenceless unborn child in the womb."

These two issues are not unconnected, but first a plea. Could we possibly keep abortion to the abortion blog, and not use it as a "your crime is worse than my crime" Get-Out-Of-Hell-Free card every time someone criticises the RCC for a totally-unrelated activity? (And if murdering [your term] an unborn child is worse than murdering a born one, or indeed an adult, your values are somewhat intriguing.)

The connection between the two issues is the church's attitude towards these crimes and the effect that attitude has had on the attitude of many people towards the church. Certainly similar crimes have been committed by non-Catholic religious people, and even non-religious people, but no other organisation seems to have institutionalised such abuse to this extent and then expended so much energy on denial and concealment.

A church which really did "stand against" child abuse would have immediately excommunicated those responsible, dismissed them from their orders, and reported their behaviour to the police. Instead we have cover-up after cover-up, paedophiles moved to other localities where they are again in a position to prey upon unprotected children, and authorities outside the church itself (e.g. Catholic police and politicians) prevailed upon not to prosecute or otherwise intervene.

That has the inevitable outcome of a loss of respect for the church to varying degrees by those who are quite rightly just as disgusted with the church's lack of sympathy for these children as they are with the initial crimes. If the church could only learn how to say "we were wrong" and take responsibility for its own actions and those over whom it exercises control, there would be much less anti-Catholic sentiment in the world.

[Kate]

Sorry this is so long Ruth BUT, it is terribly important that apologists be confronted.

Interesting the 'spin' put out by Shane O'Neill. I am studying the Commission on Child abuse report. It is horrific. Whether a child is able-bodied or disabled, that child is powerless and vulnerable. That child has a RIGHT to the best of care and love - particularly from those who parade piety.

The report reveals corruption and denial at all levels - Church, government, social services, education, like German citizens of Auschwitz, saw no evil, heard no evil and did no evil'! Also, since Irish law has been invoked, it reveals collusion by members of the judiciary in the illegal practice of incarcerating children who had committed no crime, had no legal representation and no idea of what they had done wrong.

"Under Irish law, no man can be presumed guilty until a court decides he is." (Shane O'Neill)

Correct. And...."The vast majority of the abusers pseudo-named in this report have never been tried." Again correct.

Why is that? Answer: They have not been "tried" because the religious orders REFUSED to co-operate with the commission unless every abuser accused was given anonymity.

Such is the nature of theocracy and its collaborators. 'Strange the crooked timber of humanity' (Mary Kenny).

The investigation was blocked (for years) by legal action on behalf of the Christian Brothers (for which taxpayers are now footing the bill). It seems we are liable because: 'The Church has no money' (Bertie Ahern 24 May 2009) and 'It [compensation] is entirely a matter for the Church' (Michael Woods TD, ex-Minister for Education June 2009).

The Department of Education, which: ignored all reported abuse, failed to monitor and inspect the industrial schools, covered-up when information began emerging 20 years ago; ALSO refused to co-operate. The first High Court judge (appointed in 2000) resigned, making public, the 'obstruction' by civil servants in the Department of Education.

Judge Ryan is her successor. He agreed to anonymity in full awareness that the report would never see the light of day unless he did so.

Shane O'Neill ignores the facts of obstruction and denial: "The modus operandi of the Commission were contingent on the assumption that all the self-declared victims were telling the truth...."

Yes? Why not? What happened to - innocent until proven guilty? Why do you doubt the veracity of hurt and broken people whilst arguing it is the 'right' of the accused to be viewed as 'innocent'? Who has proved the victims 'guilty' of deception or false witness?

You are also insinuating that 'victim' witness statements were the ONLY evidence provided to the Commission. Have your read Ryan?

The FACTS belie such premises. Judge Ryan studied documents retrieved from the congregations; documents retrieved from the Vatican; records 'buried' in the Department of Education; evidence from 'concerned' care workers, letters of complaint (dating back to 1949) from children's parents, and, he listened to admissions of guilt, from members of religious orders, under guarantee of anonymity.

"... and as we have seen in other instances, that can be an unwarranted and dangerous assumption if used to inflict civil punishment against the accused, especially when offers of compensation are involved."

Which "instances" might those be? The ONE Mercy nun acquitted by a court of law, revealed in Ryan to have engaged in drunken, immoral and violent behaviour? Anonymous in Ryan, she is arrogant enough to subsequently 'out' herself in an interview with a national newspaper.

This is all about deflection and implication. In referring to the possibility that witnesses told lies because they sought financial recompense, you are conflating two separate processes - Ryan and the infamous Redress Board.

There were NO "offers of compensation" available to the Ryan commission. Only the Redress Board (2002), set up by Bertie Ahern to protect the religious congregations as more and more evidence against them emerged, is able to "offer compensation".

The canard that victims are 'dangerous', mostly old, potential liars, and motivated by money is, of course, precisely the argument presented by the religious orders (right up to five days before the release of the Ryan Report). The 'truth' is that the aftermath of torture and/or sexual abuse is ongoing depression and anxiety, poor educational and job prospects and (often) an inability to sustain 'normal' personal relationships.

But no, these things are smothered and disputed by ex-ministers, civil servants, social workers et al; those who stand indicted, at best of dereliction of duty, at worst as collaborators.

In summary: what you aver is that the accused have not been convicted in a criminal court and are therefore "innocent"; at the same time, the 'victims' are potential liars (perjurers) intent only on financial gain. Not trustworthy!

The Redress Board, was in fact, a confidence trick on victims. One survivor of Industrial Schools and Redress Board 'abuse', Michael O’Brien is quoted above:

"I went to the commission [Redress Board] and had seven barristers there questioning me, telling me that I was telling lies when I told them that I got raped of a Saturday, got a merciful beating after it and he then came along the following morning and put Holy Communion in my mouth."

Shane O'Neill makes no mention of the fact that Michael O'Brien CAN now face criminal charges for that public statement. Ahern's government slipped a criminality clause into the legislation required to set up the Redress Board.

The political class, imbued with a religious culture of secrecy, silence and duplicity, agreed that it be made a "criminal offence" for victims to speak in public about ANYTHING that takes place at Redress Board hearings. It is a criminal offence for victims to disclose even amounts awarded by the Redress Board! Such are the strange vagaries of Irish Law!

Theocracy does not make 'good' laws. The legislators in the Dáil require only a majority of one to effect new legislation. It is a sad fact that Fianna Fáil have occupied that comfortable position for the past 11 years. It also clear that, prior to the Celtic Tiger, all legislation in the Dáil conformed to the diktats of the Irish Hierarchy.

This week in the Seanad (Irish Senate) the following declarations were made under parliamentary privilege.

'Secret, sinister, right-wing Catholic organisations [have] escaped responsibility for their role in relation to the toleration of abuse of children in institutions run by religious orders'.
(Senator Joe Toole, Independent)

"I can give the House chapter and verse and name the people who stood in the way of 'Stay Safe' programmes, mandatory reporting of abuse, sexual education in schools... These people did the same here [Seanad] as they did in education, and high offices of State."
(Senator Terry Leyden FF)

"Under British rule, these abuses were not practised in Roman Catholic institutions and Protestants do not practise them... Our children [Roman Catholic] are protected in the North of Ireland because the State inspects without fear or favour. The responsibility [for this] belongs to the Republic."
(Senator Eoghan Harris, Independent).

Let us be clear: Ryan does not award compensation. Your premise of motivation for monetary gain is, not just flawed, but WRONG.

Money (compensation) is restricted to the context of the Redress Board; and one other (secret) deal (2002), 'struck' by the then Minister for Education, Michael Woods, which indemnified the religious orders and placed the burden of compensation on the Irish taxpayer.

Two 'tea and biscuits' meetings - Michael Woods and two nuns - and the Irish taxpayer is liable for IR1.3 billion Euro.

The unconstitutional nature of that deal has been questioned by independent constitutional lawyers. The religious orders were not required to provide any independent audits. The Attorney General, his legal team and the Dept of Finance were all excluded.

The Bill, rushed through the Dáil did not clarify that this was an "indemnity deal" nor that victims who spoke out after attending 'Redress' would be criminalised. It passed as an Institutional Redress Bill - in Bertie language: 'designed to protect the victims from having further distress at the hands of the legal process'.

And finally:

"... the Irish government has not immunified the accused religious from the prospect of a civil trial."

Really? That statement only became valid in the last TEN days. Prior to the Ryan Report and immediately after the publication of that Report, Fianna Fáil stood squarely behind their previous leader, Ahern's "deals".

From the Taoiseach down, they claimed those agreements could not "for legal reasons" be revisited; that included anonymity for, not only the accused who had not been "tried" but all those connected in any way to religious orders who HAD been "tried" and convicted.

The 'tune' has changed, only because of public outrage which gave them - in Irish terms - 'A grand kicking' in the recent local and European elections.

"The alleged victims are at liberty to reject statutory compensation agreements, and instead provide[sic] to sue their alleged abusers. But they must be able to substantiate [sic] their accusations in an Irish court, or else should prepare to face libel proceedings."

And thereby hangs the 'rub'! For "alleged victims" to "sue" they require evidence. Evidence which the government has deemed 'confidential'. Evidence which is held by the offending Religious Orders and government departments.

Evidence that the religious and government have fought through the courts to suppress. THAT is precisely what the confidentiality imperative of The Commission into Child Abuse' is all about. A 'Catch 22' situation with the 'victims' exactly where they always were - dismissed, denigrated and denied the basic 'right' of justice.

I am amazed at the use of the term "alleged victims" and worse, "alleged abusers". The implication/insinuation being: the Commission into Child Abuse, which found for the victims, has been misled?

[Jason Mead]

Robert,

"the worst form of child abuse remains murdering the defenceless unborn child in the womb"

There's moral relativity for you.

Actually the very worst form of child abuse is the physical, sexual assault of children.

These are actual children (many disabled) and the Catholic church has been involved in the aiding and abetting of Paedophile priests for many decades (possibly centuries) in very many countries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Even Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor has been accused of trying to cover it up (and Gordon Brown wants to give him a peerage):

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1180905.ece

In fact, the Catholic church and other faiths obsession with over populating the world and filling their orphanages with unwanted babies takes on an extremely grim perspective - Paedophile priests are only interested in a regular supply of fresh victims and converts to their cretinous cult.

Despite your over emotive rhetoric, Feotuses are not unborn children but a conglomerate of cellular tissue that has only the mere potential to become a child if left to gestate in a healthy womb for 9 months.

And that's all it is. It is no murder than disposing of Sperm or a woman having a period.

[Richard Aluise]

Margaret Kennedy

I only now read your post immediately preceeding my own. I did not realize until now that we made many of the same points. Thank you for your input, and I apologize for the duplication of points.

My son suffers a genetic disability, Prader Willi Syndrome. If ever at any time I discovered anyone mistreating him, I would ask everyone to pray that the authorities catch that person before I do.

Jesus taught us to regard God as our Father. What Father in his right mind would want one of their children harmed? What father (or mother) in his or her right mind would not come to the aid of their child? Those in the Church hierarchy had a responsibility to act in the place of the parent. It is all the more disturbing that these insidious actions were perpetrated by those who claim to believe in the Jesus who taught us to call God our Father. It is even more disturbing that the higher authorities did their utmost to hide these matters, much like a dysfunctional family hides sexual and physical abuse within the home.

In an earlier post, I asked Ruth, only half rhetorically, if she was aware of any other abuse of this magnitude, be it within the Catholic Church, another denomination or even a secular institution. Since the question was somewhat rhetorical, and the answer is clearly no, it seems to my limited judgement that the structures that facilitated this situation, both in the Church and the civil government, are seriously flawed.

What is being done to ensure that this global scale of abuse doesn't occur again? It seems that the Church merely gives promises of being more vigilant, yet the problem continues to rear its head in many corners. The government is ineffective.

With regard to Mother Teresa's work, which I highly regard, it is ironic that one of her spiritual advisors was himself a perpetrator.

http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/10/30/jesuit-advisor-to-mother-teresa-found-guilty-of-sexually-abusing-minors/

My heart aches for all who were abused, but especially the disabled, who are utterly unable to defend themselves.

[Robert Ian Williams]

Vengeance is mine, saitheth the Lord. I will repay.

No one escapes the judgement and justice of God.

[Richard Aluise]

Shane O'Neill and Robert Ian Williams

I am unaware of the finer points of Irish law. I am aware of the fragility and sanctity of human life - at all stages.

As I mentioned, I have a severely disabled child. I held my ten year old son in my arms as he died of a brain tumor, that is at least until the doctors arrived, pushed me aside and began all of their life saving techniques and apparatus. Not only should we protect the unborn from abortion and the aged from euthanasia. We should protect those who are already born from these types of criminals. The Catholic Church authorities in Ireland and elsewhere, possibly Rome, were involved in hiding these issues so they would not come to light and protecting the guilty from prosecution. No amount of good work done elsewhere in the world by the Catholic Church, and there is much, will ever make the damage done in Ireland go away.

For those about whom there might be any question regarding their guilt in this matter, I would entirely agree that their names should be protected. For those about whom there is prosecutable evidence of their guilt, they should immediately be brought to justice, following all of the appropriate Irish laws until their guilt is confirmed.

This appears to me to be an instance where the authorities in the Church were not only complicit by their silence and inaction, but they have dragged this out long enough for many of the perpetrators to have passed on to their eternal reward. If the Irish laws allow, those who were silent and complicit should also be brought to justice.

As a former Catholic who studied for the priesthood, this only confirms my reasons for finding my spiritual home elsewhere.

[Margaret Kennedy]

Robert Ian Williams uses an argument that many use when we challange clergy abusers & the hiararchy that protected them; "Many do good". That is right, many do good but this is not an argument that is useful when disabled children are sexually, physically and emotionally abused by clerics or indeed lay care workers.It is a 'diversion' argument, designed to make us feel guilt for calling to account those who should be called to account.

As for this gentleman's language, we no longer call disabled children 'handicapped' as this is prejoratiVe as it's origion was those who had the 'cap in hand- begging'.

nor do we discuss children born white/mixed race to black parents a 'throw-back'. She is a child.

There has been criticism of Mother Theresa's care of the dying in Calcutta, and it is disengenious to again argue....but many do good'.

As for abortion, the emotive discussion on its abhorrance cannot be linked to sexual, physical & emotional abuse of disabled children. Neither is worse than the other, there are no scales of 'awfulness'.

I happen to concentrate on disabled children who are born, are alive, are human and are being abused. For me that is an utter disgrace, whether perpetrated by clergy or lay person. The article was to discuss Ryan's unequal inquiry into abuse of disabled children. To highlight the abuse of disabled children and to call for justice.

Abortion, goodness of others, etc are not part of this discussion.

All other discussions are distractions.

Margaret Kennedy

[Portia Barrett]

Similar abuse is happening today to children in corporate care and the abusers are still protected by the secret family courts.

Social workers today have the same power as the priests - that is more power than the Queen, yet few people know this.

How can they know?

It is a secret....shhhhhhhhh

[Portia Barrett]

The dis-abled were seen as cursed by their God- you know that cruel God in the sky, that keeps the abusers safe.?

Does anyone else think now, Roman Church was just a brainwashing CULT, which indoctrinated us in every way in Ireland from birth to death?

We were so brainwashed in schools and church from birth, that for years we knew no better.

The Law courts in Ireland are controlled by Opus Dei- Roman Catholic heavy boys.

Roman Catholic church is a Patriarchal hierarchy designed to keep the masses living in fear and bondage.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm

Here we can see the torture methods used by the Roman Church over the centuries.

After you see the truth here of what they have been doing to human beings, on the say so of their invisible God, the readers may be speechless for the rest of the day.

http://arcticbeacon.com/books/Almanac_of_Evil.pdf

Here is the list of crimes against humanity committed by the Vatican and their hench men over the years.

So, when are these men and women of God going to be put in the dock and justice seen to be done.?

[Robert Ian Williams]

Yet the religious Orders have also done and do untold good looking after hadicapped children. I can think of a friend now who has a Downs syndrome son..who has been blessed by the work of a religious Order ministering to the child.

Indeed it was the Catholic religious orders who took in a little Afrikaner girl who was a throwback, and was born mixed race and rekjected by her family and community... the case of Sandra Lang..

It is Catholic nuns ministering to the dying on the streets of Calcutta.

I have been criticised on this blog for being anti-Protestant. I have had to examine my heart..but I do hope that in reading the vile anti-catholicism that now permeates this blog..that I have never sunk to the depth of the hatred that is manifested here.

As for child abuse....the Cathlolic Church stands against it ( despite the independent actions of some of its members) and the worst form of child abuse remains murdering the defenceless unborn child in the womb.

[Alan Bird]

I won't believe the catholic church has truly repented until I see a bishop in the dock charged with aiding and abetting criminal acts and conspiracy to perpetuate a criminal organisation.
And go to Paddy Doyle's website The God Squad to read an article called "I CAN remember a lot of the things that happened when I was eight years old." It can be found on http://www.paddydoyle.com/i-can-remember-a-lot-of-the-things-that-happened-when-i-was-eight-years-old/#more-375
There you will find the astonishing actions of the Irish Government, through its minister Mary Wallace, when they passed the National Disability Authority Bill.

[sheila oneill]

Yes, not questioned because the church has always been 'people you can trust' just as the county halls want their social workers to be seen 'people we should trust'.
Not so odd they both work so closely together?

[Shane O'Neill]

"The names of the perpetrators are protected."

There are good reasons why the abusers were not named. Under Irish law, no man can be presumed guilty until a court decides he is. The vast majority of the abusers pseudo-named in this report have never been tried. The modus operandi of the Ryan Commission were contingent on the assumption that all the self-declared victims were telling the truth, and as we have seen in other instances, that can be an unwarranted and dangerous assumption if used to inflict civil punishment against the accused, especially when offers of compensation are involved.

The particular and peculiarly confidential nature of the Ryan Commission was desirable because a high proportion of alleged victims did not want to want to go to court to substantiate their allegations, and the government devised this mechanism to assuage their inhibitory scruples. Irish libel laws are very strict, and anyone accused of a serious crime has ample legal recourses to challenge the verity of the imputation. As victims were understandably and insurmountably hesitant to face their accused in a court of law, this particular principle of granting anonymity to the accused was indispensibly essential.

Another impediment to naming the accused was the grave risk of creating an atmosphere of imputational frenzy which could have been invoked by the accused to render his trial inadmissible under the pretext of being unable to attain a fair trial.

Contary to what some believe, the Irish government has not immunified the accused religious from the prospect of a civil trial. The alleged victims are at liberty to reject statutory compensation agreements, and instead procede to sue their alleged abusers. But they must be able to substiantiate their accusations in an Irish court, or else should prepare to face libel proceedings. The American system of 'liberty of accusation' is immiscibly incongruent with Irish jurisprudence.

[Peter Palladas]

There is somewhere - memory sadly fails - an Italian Renaissance painting depicting a highly unusual Madonna and Child.

Mary looks as ever in awe, love and wonder at the Christ child she holds in her arms. The child though is different. His tongue is large and protruding, his eyes oddly slanted, his toes strangely aligned.

This is a Jesus with - as we would call him now - Down's Syndrome.

In that portrait was affirmed the beauty and the holiness of Christ in all human life.

We had it at Quarr and I will try to track it down. Would to God that image had hung in every Irish classroom.

[J Pearce]

As the parent of a disabled child, this reportage only serves to fuel my absolute disgust and venom against the Roman Catholic Church.

Of course, I do acknowledge that many - most - Roman Catholics are equally disgusted by the iniquitous behaviour of their corporate Church.

Nonetheless, it is entirely the fault of the Roman Catholic hierarchy - its system, its beliefs, its organisation - that has created the conditions in which the most vulnerable of all people are exploited and abused.

The Vatican and the Pope - indeed, various Popes - are directly to blame for this sick inhumanity.

Mere words cannot describe the venomous disgust I harbour towards institutional Roman Catholicism. If Jesus really existed, I have no doubt he would feel nothing but sickness at the institution that usurps his name.

[MrEdd@Malesurvivor.org]

RE: Earnest

"Why do religious orders get exemption from the law and be permitted to retain their assetts?"

Because the government run facilities in most places are even worse, and the government does not want to establish a precedent that would hold them just as liable when those facilities come to light.

[Richard Aluise]

The names of the perpetrators are protected. To me, this is unfathomable. Protecting victims, yes, but perpetrators? Unbelievable.

Ruth, are you aware of any other abuse scandal of this magnitude, be it involving the Catholic Church, any other church or even a secular entity? I'm just curious. As another said, words fail.

I cried reading about the abuse among the disabled. I have a seventeen year old son with Prader Willi Syndrome, diagnosed shortly after the death of my ten year old son from a brain tumor. I can't even bear the thought of anyone taking such advantage of innocence.

Forgive me while I go cry some more...

[Ernest]

Why do religious orders get exemption from the law and be permitted to retain their assetts?

Surely placing the Victim first rather than the abuser is the correct way of dealing with the whole issue.

It appears that the Government in Ireland are over-awed by the RC establishment, rather then independent from them.

It is time that this scandal was blown wide open and those responsible for it from the church heriarchy who condoned and covered it up to those who offended were brought to account for their actions.

Until they are, the issue will not go away and will continue associate the RC church with abuse, rather then their Mission to part of the Body of God here on earth.

[Jason Mead]

Appalling.

I sincerely hope that all the perpetrators are identified, prosecuted and punished with life sentences.

The assets of the religious orders in question should be immediately frozen.

Compensating the victims must also be forth coming.

"More and more for reasons others have speculated upon Ireland seems to have had its very own unique deviance amongst Catholic Clergy. I leave the exploration of that to others."

The joyless, self-loathing, sex-hating Catholic church and its dark theocracy of paedophile priests have an awful lot to answer for.

[j]

I am visiting to see what this blog thinks about this scandal.

We all agree that those who abused such innocent and vulnerable people cannot claim to be Christians.

What about those in authority over them?

Is it the clear, Christian duty of the Pope to insist that all those accused of child abuse come forward, co-operate fully and honestly with a criminal investigation, and accept the results of a fair trial (which may have to be held in the Hague)?

If not, why not?

[jane]

Thank you for also drawing this aspect of the scandal to our attention. words fail me ...