American Democrats didn't get to cry "hate speech" when the Banana Republicans went after Clinton with every propaganda trick in the book - including a couple of pages they'd written themselves. Nike doesn't get to cry "persecution" when its political enemies bash it over the head with a child-labour scandal. Shell doesn't get to piss and moan about bias when people point out that it's funding civil wars in Africa.
And, incidentally, as long as the Catholic Church insists on peddling homophobia, and supporting far-right idiots, I'm one of those political enemies who are willing to use any sex scandals as a blunt instrument to beat it into submission.
When they stop playing politics, I'll stop using political tactics against them. But right now they're playing a shell game where they're a religious group here, a business there and a political action network over yonder.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
Santiago asks whether there is any evidence that child abuse is more prevalent in Catholic run institutions than others and the answer in the case of Ireland is yes - but I couldn't prove that on a larger global scale especially when you consider the scale of child labour abuse in India etc. It is a reasonable question for research.
Secondly, he seemed to argue that the way the Catholic Church covered up instances of abuse was no different to cover-ups elsewhere - and again I argued that the formalised, centralised and consistent nature of the policies applied - silencing of victims, transfer of offenders, non-cooperation with civil authorities what unique in scale, longevity, and consistency across many different jurisdictions.
Thirdly he implied that the vast majority of allegations were simply mischievous and false and pointed to the small proportion of successful prosecutions as evidence for this. I argued that this had more to do with the culture of deference and silence, the power of the Church in Ireland, the connivance of professionals whose jobs depended on Church patronage, the vulnerability of victims, the difficulty of surmounting the evidential hurdles, and the policy of making secret out of court settlements to prevent successful prosecutions and the attendant publicity. Added to this is the fact that most victims don't want to go to court at all, just want to forget the whole thing, have buried it deep in the subconscious, and remain scared, scarred and damaged by their experience. An acknowledgement of wrongdoing and an apology would have done so much to help healing in those instances.
Fourthly, he argued, that it was all an anti-catholic conspiracy invented by political opponents in the same way as anti-Semitic mythologies were invented by Jew haters. You are in danger of playing into that narrative if you simply use the child abuse issue as another stick with which to beat the Church with regardless of the merits of the argument. What bothered me about that argument was actually almost the reverse: his denial of the seriousness of the child abuse prevalence within the Church and the way it was managed by those in Authority was almost akin to Holocaust Denial in my eyes. It was almost like he was saying that Hitler wasn't really an anti-Semite at all: it was just a few bad apples in the Nazi party who should have been managed better. The Hitler in this case, was not of course any one individual, but an attitude towards children that they could be used or abused more or less as those in authority wanted.
I don't want to over-state the case or over use the analogy, but when Santiago started talking about conspiracies against the Catholic Church I found it reminiscent of the Holocaust denial narrative. How many dead Jewish bodies did they actually find in Auschwitz anyway? What evidence do we have that Hitler knew what was going on? How many Nazis were actually convicted of Mass murder? Some of the Jews were probably criminals anyway... you get my drift
Children are no angels, and times were hard. In many ways the Irish state abrogated its responsibilities to the Catholic Church. The training and resources many of the Church institutions had were pitifully inadequate. In part the Church created the problems by ostracising unmarried parents and mothers. But it also inherited problems created by imperial domination, famine, class inequality, war and civil war.
So I'm not really into the blame game. I want the problem fixed and will oppose anyone who puts their interests above the best interests of children. The Catholic Church has almost been destroyed by this crisis in Ireland. Now we have to pick up the pieces and manage the fall-out. Its not going to be easy for anyone. There is such a legacy of pain and suffering which will be with us for generations to come. notes from no w here
But I think it would be wrong to use the child abuse issue as just another stick to bash the Church with in support of a larger agenda.
It's not just another issue to bash the Church over the head with. However, my point was that it is also another issue to be used to bash the Church over the head with, and people don't get to cry foul when it's used as such.
Certainly in the context of this diary, the question is whether the Catholic Church is more culpable that other non-Catholic religious/secular organisations in terms of the incidence of child abuse.
santiago's objection seems to be that the Church is no more culpable than other organisations in similar positions of power - that is, if you have any reasonably tightly knit old boys' network that cuts across several layers of formal jurisdiction, you'd expect it to abuse its power.
That's a fair point, as far as the specific Irish issue goes - replacing the Church but not the institutional system of authoritarian childcare, incestuous (you should pardon the term) political old boys' clubs and assorted nepotism would probably not make the abuse go away. Forcing the Church to comply with civilised standards of childcare and breaking up the clubby relationships between judges, police officers, childcare professionals, politicians and pundits would probably solve the problem without necessarily requiring the Church to be removed from childcare functions. The Church may be politically opposed to such a reorganisation because it is politically in favour of authoritarianism, nepotism and legal impunity for its own membership. But that's not a particularly confessional issue - secular far-right extremists run on the same kind of platform.
There are other good reasons to want to remove the Church from childcare functions, such as secularism and freedom of and from religion (and the fact that the Church lends political support to authoritarian thuggery). But in the particular matter of child abuse the difference between a confessional organisation and a non-confessional organisation with a similarly authoritarian structure and power is likely to be slight.
Of course, the fact that it is hard to find a non-confessional organisation with the kind of power that the Catholic Church makes the question somewhat hypothetical. Your best bet would be to look among (other) transnational corporations. But they are less intimately involved with childcare, so the abuse you find there is likely to be of a different kind - allowing foremen to rape factory workers, murdering union organisers, employing slave labour, poisoning the local water supply, and so on and so forth.
I don't think that's the case among groups of similar power and organisation. (Other) transnational corporations play the same kind of legal shell games, with the difference being mostly that they don't whine quite as much when they get caught.
Fourthly, he argued, that it was all an anti-catholic conspiracy invented by political opponents in the same way as anti-Semitic mythologies were invented by Jew haters. You are in danger of playing into that narrative if you simply use the child abuse issue as another stick with which to beat the Church with regardless of the merits of the argument.
I understand your point about the rhetorical demerits of playing into that narrative, but on the factual merits of the case, it's bullshit to compare the Catholic Church with Jewish minorities. (Given the role of the Catholic Church in whipping up antisemitism, it's also rather tasteless, but that's politics for you.)
A more apt comparison in terms of power, political aspirations and organisational structure (and the degree of persecution complex and paranoia) would be comparing the Catholic Church to the Israeli military-industrial complex. We don't accept the propaganda that bashing Israel or the Israel Likud lobby is equivalent to antisemitism, and we shouldn't accept the propaganda that bashing the Catholic clergy is equivalent to fomenting hate against the Catholic laity.
So I'm not really into the blame game. I want the problem fixed and will oppose anyone who puts their interests above the best interests of children.
And on that specific issue, I will have to defer to your superior knowledge of the local conditions, which is why I don't really touch upon the specific Irish questions. I hope you'll keep educating me and the rest of ET on those matters. I assure you that I'm hearing your recommendations, and they sound intuitively reasonable. But I can't claim the necessary local knowledge to comment on them in more specific terms.
we shouldn't accept the propaganda that bashing the Catholic clergy is equivalent to fomenting hate against the Catholic laity.
Agreed, and your Likud analogy is perhaps more apt than my Holocaust denial one. But I'm not even bashing the Catholic Clergy in general - many were entirely innocent of child abuse or complicity in its cover up. What I am concerned with is that there seems to have been a globalised system, supported by episcopal appointments being made made on the basis of proclivity to supine obedience, direct reporting to Rome, and clearly laid out guidelines for how to deal with allegations of child abuse - keep all investigations in-house, don't inform the civil authorities, silence he victims, move on the offenders to avoid scandal, protect the good name and assets of the institution at all costs - that were consistently applied across many jurisdictions.
I can accept Santiago's point that one might have qualms about reporting an instance of abuse to the civil authorities in (say) Uganda, particularly if they implement the death penalty for homosexuality - at the behest, inter alia - of protestant fundamentalist groups in the US. But that really doesn't excuse not reporting cases were prima facie evidence of abuse has been established and where there is a danger that the suspect might re-offend.
The Irish police are notoriously discrete when it come to dealing with people in positions of influence, and the courts still notoriously lenient on offenders. There really was no excuse for not reporting in Ireland. The odds are still stacked against the victim who still does not have independent representation or advice in court unless they can afford private legal fees...
Bashing the Catholic Church in Ireland now is a bit like kicking a half dead dog. The Catholic Church used to be a state within a state. Now its a belief system almost without a home.
Cardinal Brady 'ashamed' over failure to uphold values - The Irish Times - Wed, Mar 17, 2010
The Catholic Primate Cardinal Séan Brady said today he "will reflect on what he has heard from those who have been hurt by abuse."In his St Patrick's Day homily at Armagh Cathedral this morning, Dr Brady said he was "ashamed" by the fact that he has not always upheld the values that he professes and believes in.There has been calls on the cardinal to consider his position after it emerged at the weekend that he had conducted canonical inquiries into allegations of child sex abuse by Fr Brendan Smyth 35 years ago, involving two young people, without reporting the allegations to civil authorities.Speaking today, the cardinal apologised again to victims of clerical child sex abuse."This week a painful episode from my own past has come before me. I have listened to reaction from people to my role in events thirty five years ago," he said."I want to say to anyone who has been hurt by any failure on my part that I apologise to you with all my heart. I also apologise to all those who feel I have let them down. Looking back I am ashamed that I have not always upheld the values that I profess and believe in," he added.In his homily the cardinal said there was a need to take responsibilty for any mismangement or cover-up of child abuse."We must humbly continue to deal with the enormity of the hurt caused by abuse of children by some clergy and religious and the hopelessly inadequate response to that abuse in the past," said Dr Brady."For the sake of survivors, for the sake of all the Catholic faithful as well as the religious and priests of this country, we have to stop the drip, drip, drip of revelations of failure," he added.
The Catholic Primate Cardinal Séan Brady said today he "will reflect on what he has heard from those who have been hurt by abuse."
In his St Patrick's Day homily at Armagh Cathedral this morning, Dr Brady said he was "ashamed" by the fact that he has not always upheld the values that he professes and believes in.
There has been calls on the cardinal to consider his position after it emerged at the weekend that he had conducted canonical inquiries into allegations of child sex abuse by Fr Brendan Smyth 35 years ago, involving two young people, without reporting the allegations to civil authorities.
Speaking today, the cardinal apologised again to victims of clerical child sex abuse.
"This week a painful episode from my own past has come before me. I have listened to reaction from people to my role in events thirty five years ago," he said.
"I want to say to anyone who has been hurt by any failure on my part that I apologise to you with all my heart. I also apologise to all those who feel I have let them down. Looking back I am ashamed that I have not always upheld the values that I profess and believe in," he added.
In his homily the cardinal said there was a need to take responsibilty for any mismangement or cover-up of child abuse.
"We must humbly continue to deal with the enormity of the hurt caused by abuse of children by some clergy and religious and the hopelessly inadequate response to that abuse in the past," said Dr Brady.
"For the sake of survivors, for the sake of all the Catholic faithful as well as the religious and priests of this country, we have to stop the drip, drip, drip of revelations of failure," he added.
Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin has also called for the opening of Church files to obviate the need for the state to extend the Murphy (Dublin) enquiry to all dioceses in Ireland. There have already been similar enquiries in two other dioceses - Ferns and Cloyne. With an ageing an declining clergy in any case, there may be very few men left standing if all the files are indeed opened. notes from no w here
You should pardon the reference to venereal disease and its long term consequences... Align culture with our nature.
