Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' in applying child safety

by Frank Schnittger Wed Jul 13th, 2011 at 11:41:44 AM EST

Bishop John McGee is the only man ever to have served as private secretary to three Popes - Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, and Pope John Paul II. He was thus at the heart of the Vatican establishment for almost two decades before being made Bishop of Cloyne in 1987. Now a judicial report into child sexual abuse in his diocese has found that the Vatican was 'entirely unhelpful' in applying child safety in the Diocese and that Bishop McGee took little or no active interest in the management of clerical child sexual abuse cases until 2008, 12 years after the framework document on child safety guidelines was adopted by the Irish hierarchy despite Vatican opposition.

Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' in applying child safety

The Vatican was "entirely unhelpful" to any bishop who wanted to implement procedures for dealing with allegations of child sexual abuse in the Irish Catholic Church, a report has found.
The Commission of Investigation Report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne states that a decision by the Vatican to brand a framework document on child sexual abuse, agreed by the Irish Bishops Conference in 1996, as "not an official document" effectively gave individual Irish bishops "the freedom to ignore" the guidelines.
The Vatican response "can only be described as unsupportive especially in relation to the civil authorities," the commission said in its 341 page report.
The effect of this was "to strengthen the position of those who dissented from the official stated Irish Church policy", according to the report, which examines allegations made against 19 priests between 1996 and 2009.
The commission says the response of the diocese was "inadequate and inappropriate" and that the primary responsibility for the failure to implement the agreed child sexual abuse procedures lies with then Bishop of Cloyne John Magee, who resigned in March 2010.
"It is a remarkable fact that Bishop Magee took little or no active interest in the management of clerical child sexual abuse cases until 2008, 12 years after the framework document was adopted," the report says.
"It became clear during the course of this investigation that Bishop Magee had, to a certain extent, detached himself from the day to day management of child sexual abuse cases. Bishop Magee was the head of the diocese and cannot avoid his responsibility by blaming subordinates who he wholly failed to supervise."
It says that Bishop Magee wrongly told the government and the HSE that the Cloyne Diocese was reporting all allegations of clerical child sexual abuse to the authorities. It also said he deliberately misled people by creating two different accounts of a meeting with a priest accused of abuse.
The inquiry, led by Judge Yvonne Murphy, said the fact that some child sexual abuse allegations were not reported to gardai was the diocese's "greatest failure".

A history of clerical abuse inquiries

The report into the investigation into allegations of clerical child sex abuse in Cloyne is the fourth inquiry into the affairs of Catholic Church in Ireland to have been published within the past six years.
Murphy Report
---snip
Among the findings: Four successive archbishops of the Dublin Catholic Archdiocese handled allegations of child sexual abuse badly and with "denial, arrogance and cover-up" and did not report their knowledge of abuse to gardaí over a period of three decades.
The structures and rules of the Catholic Church facilitated the cover-up of abuse.
Ryan Report
---snip

Among the findings: Thousands of children suffered physical and sexual abuse over several decades in 216 residential institutions run by religious orders implicating over 800 priests, brothers, nuns and lay people.
The report criticised the Department of Education for failing to carry out its "statutory duty of inspection" out of deference towards the religious congregations.
Ferns Report
---snip
Among the findings: The report strongly criticised the handling of the Catholic Church of child sexual abuse over four decades having heard allegations by over 100 individuals against 21 priests among them Seán Fortune who was involved in a number of rapes and sexual assaults around the country over a period of two decades.
The report found former bishop of Ferns Brendan Comiskey "failed to recognise the paramount need to protect children, as a matter of urgency, from potential abusers" and accused him of providing erroneous information to one garda inquiry and failing to co-operate fully with another.

Needless to say, no one in authority has, or is likely to go to prison. Individual priests have been prosecuted successfully often despite the huge time lapse between the offences occurring and the prosecutions being brought. Of course many continued to abuse new victims whilst the authorities assiduously covered over their tracks. As a general rule, state action only followed extensive media exposure and the campaigning of victim advocacy groups.

If you have the stomach for it, a timeline of the clerical child abuse scandal is published here. Commercial insurance policies against being sued for Child abuse were taken out by most dioceses in 1986/7, so it is not as if the Bishops weren't aware they had a problem. As early as 1985, Fr Tom Doyle, a US canon law expert, warned of dire consequences if the scandal was not dealt with openly and effectively. He was ignored and removed from his position in the Vatican embassy in Washington...

In 1993 Pope John Paul II wrote to US bishops in response to the growing scandal: "I share your sadness and disappointment" and went on to say the child sex abuse problem concerns only a small group of priests. His spokesman, Joaquín Navarro-Valls, summed up the Vatican attitude: "One would have to ask if the real culprit is not a society that is irresponsibly permissive, hyperinflated with sexuality and capable of creating circumstances that induce even people who have received a sound moral formation to commit grave immoral acts."

So basically, guys and galls, it's your fault. Your permissive attitudes resulted in priests abusing children and the Vatican having to cover it all up. Shame on you.

Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' in applying child safety | 105 comments (105 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Personal accusation. (none / 0)

Bishop McGee was personally accused of "inappropriate behaviour" when he kissed an 18 year old on the forehead and told him he loved him. It was decided that the behaviour was inappropriate rather than abusive and was not construed as constituting grooming.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jul 13th, 2011 at 01:27:12 PM EST

Re: Personal accusation. (none / 1)

Grooming? Abusive?

Have we gone mad!?

Economics is politics by other means

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 13th, 2011 at 01:30:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Personal accusation. (none / 1)

I don't know the context. I added it as a comment to emphasise that the accusations against Magee are primarily not that he personally abused anyone. They are that he lied to the authorities and that he frustrated a slow and painful process of bring abusers to book.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jul 13th, 2011 at 02:45:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Southpark version (none / 1)

I can not find the right clip, but Southpark has an episode where the local catholic priest tries to do something about the allegations of rape of boys and as he moves up the hierarchy he is told that "yes, we must get the boys to shut up".

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Wed Jul 13th, 2011 at 03:24:14 PM EST

Seal of the confessional to be broken (none / 0)

Abuse allegations response 'inadequate, inappropriate'

The withholding of information about serious offences against a child will be made a criminal offence, Minister for Justice Alan Shatter announced yesterday following the publication of the report on the handling of sex abuse claims in the diocese of Cloyne.
Further measures, including a statutory child protection code, are to be announced by Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald tomorrow.
Bishop Gerard Clifford, auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of Armagh, this morning said evidence in the report showing that the Church's standing was prioritised over the victims of abuse was "the great disappointment".

He said there was a new realisation that the problem of abuse is something the church cannot solve by itself and he welcomed Mr Shatter's comments about the introduction of child protection legislation

Apparently a Priest who withholds information about child abuse obtained through the confessional will be liable to prosecution under the new code - thus breaking the last claim of the Church that Canon Law has priority over civil law.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 07:25:59 AM EST

Re: Seal of the confessional to be broken (4.00 / 3)

Hmm. That's not necessarily a good precedent to set.

Do psychologists, psychiatrists and the like also have an obligation to report crimes that come to their attention during the course of otherwise privileged discussions?

Now, I would argue that consulting a qualified psychologist is a healthier way to deal with mental and emotional distress than consulting a priest. But the latter is often used as a low-budget alternative to the former.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 09:10:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Seal of the confessional to be broken (4.00 / 3)

The code of practice varies between professionals and depends on the severity of the crime.

There's a very loose benchmark that depends on the likelihood of serious direct harm to self and others.

For serious crimes such as rape or murder, then reporting is likely, especially if there's a likelihood of further offences. I think most professionals would take sexual abuse very seriously and would be likely to report it unless there was an exceptional reason not to.

But for (say) drug taking, shop lifting or even petty burglary - probably not.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 10:04:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Seal of the confessional to be broken (none / 1)

I'm not sure that in practice it will make any difference - all the cases known to the Church (and later to the Authorities) became known because victims reported the abuse, not because the perpetrator confessed to them. The larger problem is that the Church authorities held that Priests were accountable to Canon Law over and above civil law and thus were under no obligation to report abuse to civil authorities regardless of how the facts became known to them.

It may be an over-reaction, but this is basically about asserting the primacy of civil law over Canon law - and of the Irish State over the Vatican. Personally I think that the welfare of children trumps the rights of adults to having private conversations with their lawyers/doctors/therapists/priests. I can't see the personal and societal benefit of giving privilege to such conversation at the expense of child victims. Professionals will just have to warn their clients that such conversations cannot be privileged. As I understand it, even currently a Barrister, as an officer of the court, cannot knowingly argue a falsehood to the court. It the guy confesses to his lawyer, the lawyer cannot then plead his innocence.

Within the context of RC theology, my understanding is that confession is about a penitent seeking forgiveness - a Priest would in any case have to advise self-reporting to the police if absolution is to be given. A penitent seeking to escape just punishment for his crimes isn't a true penitent in the first place. The difficulty for the RC Church will be that the Priest will now also be open to prosecution - especially where further offences occur. I could envisage some very difficult test cases, but in practice most Priests will simply advise a penitent not to say anything they are not prepared to face the music for.

Hardly anyone now goes to personal confession in any case - the practice has virtually died out.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 10:05:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Time to breal relations with a foreign state (none / 0)

Abuse allegations response 'inadequate, inappropriate'

The report found that the Bishop of Cloyne, John Magee, misled the minister for children by claiming the church's guidelines for handling abuse cases were being fully complied with. It also found he falsely told the Health Service Executive (HSE) that allegations of abuse were being reported to gardaí.
In fact, two-thirds of complaints made between 1996 and 2008 were not reported to the Garda and no complaint was passed to the HSE during this period.
The report accuses the Vatican, through its opposition to the Irish bishops' procedures for handling child sexual abuse, of giving comfort to dissenters within the church who did not want to implement them. In a secret letter to the bishops, Rome describes the 1996 rules as "merely a study document" and not official.
Senior Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi issued an emphatic "no comment" when asked about the Cloyne report. He did not rule out making a comment at a later date, by which time the Holy See would have had a chance to assess the report fully.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Eamon Gilmore said last night he would be calling the papal nuncio to a meeting over the findings.
Mr Shatter said the intervention by the then papal nuncio - whom he described as an ambassador from a foreign state - was unfortunate and unacceptable when the country had been assured the church had implemented new child protection guidelines.

Describing it as a matter of some seriousness, Mr Shatter said it was a matter for the Tánaiste to "have a conversation" with the nuncio. It is understood officials were keen to hold talks as early as today but no date for the meeting has been arranged.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 07:30:30 AM EST

The end of the learning curve... (none / 0)

Abuse allegations response 'inadequate, inappropriate'

The "learning curve" used to excuse the poor handling of complaints in earlier reports does not apply in Cloyne, the report points out. All of the allegations were made after 1996, when new procedures were put in place to deal with complaints.
As Ms Fitzgerald pointed out: "This is not a catalogue of failure from a different era. This is not about an Ireland of 50 years ago. This is about Ireland now."
Bishop Magee is described in the 341-page report as ineffective and faulted for taking little real interest in the implementation of the guidelines on child sexual abuse for 12 years. He assigned responsibility to Msgr Denis O'Callaghan, who was "uncommitted" to the guidelines, frustrated their implementation and acted in what he perceived were the best interests of the church.
"It is truly scandalous that people who presented a public face of concern continued to maintain a private agenda of concealment and evasion," Mr Shatter commented.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 07:40:21 AM EST

Re: Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' (none / 0)

Word is that the Vatican ambassador has been summoned and Rome has been accused of a role in the child abuse cover up.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 10:06:26 AM EST

Re: Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' (none / 1)

The meeting between the Foreign Minister, Eamon Gilmore, and the Papal Nuncio has happened, with the later undertaking to make the Vatican aware of the report ASAP and with Eamon Gilmore insisting that the Irish Government expects a response from the Vatican. Personally I'd like to see diplomatic relations broken off permanently. The Vatican represents a religion, not a people or a nation state in any normal sense of the term, and it is an anomaly for the State to give such formal recognition to one religion.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 10:14:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Interesting ... (4.00 / 2)

I live in a country which had no relations with the Vatican for its first two centuries of existence, so I am inclined to agree with you, except for one thing: Why does it matter at all that the Vatican represents a religion and not a nation state or a people? The institution of diplomatic relations has been around a lot longer than nation states have been, so it doesn't seem to follow that diplomatic relations have to follow a nation-state format any more than any other practical format for dealing with a transnational organization for which there may be significant domestic support or interest.

For that matter, why should we presume that the nation state has a better claim to institutional authority than any other organization -- political, secular or otherwise? If that were the case, it would be hard to argue for expanding the authority of the EU, after all. The implicit claims of nation states that their citizens express greater loyalty to the state than to Rome, the UN, or any other transnational institutions, seems to belong to a proto-fascist discourse around "sovereignty" and like terms, and not to the discourse of progressives or liberals. There may be other arguments for cutting diplomatic ties to the Vatican, but nation-statehood doesn't seem like a good one.

by santiago on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 03:36:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting ... (4.00 / 2)

Ireland also has an ambassador to the UN which is not a Nation state. The nation state has a better claim to institutional democracy because it is a democracy. The EU is merely a transnational organisation to which member state have devolved some of their "sovereignty" or institutional authority by Treaty.

I could understand people arguing for (say) the primacy of Canon law in a state like Uganda which threatens homosexuals with execution. It is a case for which body of law has greater legitimacy and adherence.

However there are real difficulties if two different sets of laws apply to different people in the same state. What if a paedophile ring contained some clerical members who were tried under canon law, and others who were tried for similar offences under criminal law? I can't see this working in any state. See also my draft LTE below.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 03:48:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting ... (none / 1)

Ireland, and the nation states today of Europe, are certainly democracies, but since nation states as legal institutions came into being with the Treaty of Westphalia, that such states in Europe happen to also be democracies is both a very recent thing and possibly a completely accidental thing. Other nation states, including at least one great one -- China -- doesn't even pretend to be democratic, and it doesn't seem to matter at all regarding establishment of diplomatic relations. The set of governance activities that can be called "diplomatic relations" don't seem to have much to do with democracy, or with nation states.

But your last point is what I thought was interesting from your original comment -- the idea that there may be a problem if people have more than one code of rules to follow at the same time. You may be right, but I'm not sure, upon reflection, that any problem exists, or that it isn't already commonplace and maybe always has been. Soldiers and sailors, for example, have to follow both military codes as well as civil law, as do people with dual citizenship or foreigners residing abroad . Contradictions do occur, but it doesn't seem too problematic, really. Likewise, all corporate entities, such as businesses and other employers, also have internal rules, and in very large corporations these can be as significant as civil laws, particularly for international organizations where local rules aren't reliable enough for global governance of the organization.

It's clear from the historical record that the reason for the establishment of the Vatican as a nation-state was to preserve the Papacy's institutional independence from any state, notably Italy, once it finally became accepted only in the 20th century that the new European order would revolve, for the time being, around the framework of nation states. What isn't necessarily clear is how long that very recent framework will last, or whether it should, or how to engage politically (i.e., within the space of contesting power) with an organization that is much different and older, but still quite powerful given its membership and activity, than the newbie concepts of democracy and nation-statehood.

by santiago on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 04:44:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting ... (none / 1)

I am fully aware we are talking about various processes of historical evolution here, and that nothing is universal, eternal, and self-evidently the right way to go in all situations.

As will be clear from my LTE below, I am a partisan in this debate. I believe it is preferable in our current situation, for reasons of child welfare, democratic accountability, and personal responsibility that the criminal law should apply in cases of child abuse, and that whilst the Irish state is by no means blameless in this regard, it is preferable that it should be the institution charged and accountable for ensuring child abuse is minimised and punished where it occurs.

For one thing, fewer and fewer people in Ireland are now practising Catholics, and fewer still have any faith in the authority of the Vatican. Of course all sorts of other bodies (including Golf Clubs) will also have their own rules. The question is which rules have primacy on those rare occasions where there is a conflict between the two sets of rules. In the case of Ireland, that is the Irish Constitution (but subject to appeal to the European Court - another case of devolved authority).

You could argue that we are in a transition from Rome Rule to Brussels/Strasbourg rule and there are, of course, pros and cons to any transition. On balance I prefer democracy to theocracy which is what this debate is probably really all about..

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 05:15:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' (none / 1)

Or you could follow the practice of the Protestant or Orthodox countries of Northern or Eastern Europe and have an Irish Republican Church.

Economics is politics by other means

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 02:03:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' (none / 0)

In practice, what is happening, is that people are leaving the RC church in their droves and even those that remain are dismissive of Rome and sceptical if not downright condemnatory of their own hierarchy. Gone are the days when a Bishop had as much prestige and could expect more deference than a cabinet minister.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 04:59:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Napoleon managed to swing that (none / 0)

(a French National Catholic Church) basically because he had more divisions than the Pope did...

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 11:00:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Facilitators of abuse control Irish Primary ... (none / 1)

... education still, believe it or not.

Many in the rest of Europe probably are not aware of this but most primary schools in the Republic of Ireland are still 'sponsored' by the Catholic Church, which means they have an effective control over who is on their governing bodies, principals go in fear of the local parish priest, and they have direct control over religious and 'ethical' education. Time that in the rest of Europe would be spent on learning another language is spent preparing for Catholic rites of passage. I find this deeply worrying given their inability and/or unwillingness to control child abuse among their ranks, but I am in a distinct minority.

Which I think partly explains why the Irish population accepted and continue to accept the depredations of finance capital and their representatives and spokespeople in politics and the media with little protest - acceptance of abuse is a habit.

by Pope Epopt on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 11:58:30 AM EST

Facilitators of abuse control Primary Ed (4.00 / 2)

Time that in the rest of Europe would be spent on learning another language is spent preparing for Catholic rites of passage.

I think you're including in "the rest of Europe" the rest of the Catholic countries where similar practices to the irish ones you describe still occur.

In Spain there is a Concordate with the Holy See that still influences state educational policies. The right'wing People's Party (and the Basque and Catalan regional right-wing parties) have a strong Christian Democrat component and agitate for catholic education in schools. Spanish educational law keeps evolving with each new government and swinging with each change in the colour of said government.

When I was in primary school in the 1980s it was normal for "[Catholic] religion" to be taught in school for a couple of hours a week. It was possible to opt out of this, but only (rare) members of other religions or children of militant atheists did this. In my class, I remember two children left the classroom to study under the supervision of one of the Social Sciences teachers. The rest of us, some out of conformism, remained in the "religion" class.

In the early 90s in secondary school I had the option to study "religion" or "ethics". By that age, parents would allow free choice to their children and roughly half chose "ethics". This included any non-catholics. "Ethics" classes were taught by the philosophy teachers.

There is no religious requirement in public universities.

Per the Concordate, the church appoints and selects "religion" teachers, though the state pays their wages. This has resulted in widely publicised scandals when the bishops have fired a religion teacher for being divorced or something like that.

Until the mid-90s the tug of war between the Spanish left and right was over whether the "religion" class or its "ethics" alternative would be compulsory or elective. Also, whether it would count towards the course average grade or not. For some time after I graduated from high school the situation was that those not taking "religion" would have a free hour of "supervised study" (usually in the school library", and "religion" would not be part of the average grade. This ended after the PP won the 1996 election.

I don't know quite what the situation is like now. Zapatero's government introduced a civics class called "education for citizenship" which the right wind attacked as socialist indoctrination, with some regional governments, schools and parents boycotting it.

Portugal, Italy and Poland are also under strong influence from the Catholic Church. I'm pretty sure they have Concordates, though the details may vary, as does Austria and EU accession country Croatia. Hungary and Romania are also catholic, as is Southern Germany, Belgium, Malta, and (sociologically despite its militantly secular state) France. Don't think Ireland is unique.

Economics is politics by other means

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 12:17:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Facilitators of abuse control Primary Ed (none / 1)

The Vatican has a full list here. For example, there's one with Germany from 1933.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 12:34:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Facilitators of abuse control Primary Ed (4.00 / 3)

Thanks for the perspective, Migeru - that's the value of this site.

However I don't see evidence of such direct control over appointment of all staff and members of governing bodies as still pertains here in Ireland. We never had an even nominally socialist party in power and every mainstream party is too chickenshit to challenge the conformism on this issue. Two hours a week seems quite slight compared with the staggering amounts of time and resources spent preparing for confirmation and communion classes here. The Catholic Church owns most of primary school buildings, believe it or not - despite the funding for schools coming exclusively from the state.

Nor does any other state have (yet - I hasten to add) the documented scourge of systematic child abuse facilitated and assiduously covered up a religious congregation to the degree that Ireland has undergone, with connivance of the state and local elites, and the silence of the general population.

by Pope Epopt on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 01:00:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rites of passage (none / 1)

Well, Catechesis in Spain is generally not done in schools, definitely not in public schools or as part of the curriculum in private religious schools; but in parishes, and the number of people who confirm is much lower than those taking their first communion.

So in Spain Catechesis has the character an extracurricular activity or "after-school club". But other countries could plausibly be doing the same as Ireland, I don't know for sure. For instance Malta (where there isn't even divorce yet), Italy (where the influence of the Vatican is that of a parallel state), or Poland. I'd be interested in knowing the details.

Economics is politics by other means

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 05:17:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rites of passage (none / 1)

In Denmark, the school sets aside a time slot (typically either the first in the morning or the last in the afternoon), but that's the end of its involvement.

I gave it a whirl for a few weeks, but while the priest was a nice enough chap the instruction was a complete waste of time.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 07:54:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Facilitators of abuse control Primary Ed (none / 0)

Nitpick: Romania is mostly Orthodox.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 12:30:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No place to hide (none / 0)

Papal Nuncio should be expelled - Flanagan - RTÉ News

Chairman of the Fine Gael parliamentary party Charlie Flanagan has called for the expulsion of the Papal Nuncio, following the revelations in the Cloyne Report.
Mr Flanagan, who is also a TD for Laois-Offaly, said the scandals uncovered showed the Vatican was guilty of a massive deceit.
He said that if any foreign government conspired with Irish citizens to break the law here, their ambassadors would be expelled and he believed the same standards should apply to the Papal Nuncio.
Earlier, Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore told the Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Guiseppe Leanza, that he wants a 'response' and an explanation from the Vatican as to why Irish church guidelines were ignored and allegations of abuse went unreported in the Diocese of Cloyne.
Speaking after the meeting, Mr Gilmore said it was 'absolutely unacceptable' that the Vatican had intervened in Ireland and discouraged priests from reporting crimes against innocent children.

The significance of this is that Fine Gael is traditionally the most conservative and obsequious of Irish parties and Charlie Flanagan represents a conservative rural constituency. There is now no place for the RC Church to hide - in Ireland of all places

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jul 14th, 2011 at 03:13:31 PM EST

Draft LTE (none / 0)

The debate about the Cloyne Report has quickly reduced in many instances to a debate around sacerdotal privilege, and particularly "the seal of the confessional". About the only relevance of this debate to what is documented in the Cloyne Report is the allegation that the Bishop of Cloyne prepared two reports on a particular child abuser: One for Rome in which he noted that the Priest has admitted the offence, and one for the Health Service Executive in which that admission was not included, allegedly on the grounds that this admission may have been part of a privileged conversation between the priest and his Bishop.

It is important that any ambiguity or confusion surrounding "privileged" conversations should be removed, both for the welfare of children and for the good conscience and reputation of those with responsibility for the welfare of children. Why should parents entrust their children to priests if they have no guarantee that their children's welfare is the priest's over-riding concern?

In practice, it may be rare for paedophiles to admit their crimes in the confessional or as part of "privileged" conversations, and they are even more unlikely to do so if they know that such an admission will be reported to the civil authorities. Although it is possible to imagine an emotive test case, the likelihood of prosecutions for the non-reporting of abuse seems remote if only because it is rare for evidence of such non-reporting to come to light.

However it is important that the primacy of the laws of the land over Canon law be firmly established. The crisis in the Roman Catholic Church has come about partly because Bishops and those in authority viewed their responsibilities to obey Canon Law as being superior to any responsibilities they owed to the Irish state. This led to the Vatican instructing Bishops and Priests to ignore their civil responsibilities and report only to Rome. This in turn led to offending priests being moved from one jurisdiction to another, and the prioritisation of the interests of the institution over the welfare of children.

If the Vatican has difficulty in accepting that the laws of the Irish state must apply in Ireland, it can always cut off diplomatic relations with Ireland. One state does not claim that it's laws over-ride those of another if it wants to maintain friendly diplomatic relations. It is in any case an anomaly that Ireland should maintain separate embassies with the Vatican and with Italy in Rome.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Jul 15th, 2011 at 10:42:52 AM EST

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

I think you might be assigning too much to "canon law" than is actually the case. Canon law is really just the bylaws of the church as an organization. It isn't a separate, parallel set of rules that prescribe different sanctions and benefits than civil law would do for the same offenses or actions. There is no means in canon law, to my knowledge, to sanction an individual for murder, bribery, theft, etc., other than to fire them from their present job. So I'm not sure that there is as much of a contradiction as you say.

Rather, it appears that the case in Ireland is that people are much more voluntarily deferential to Church officials than they are in most of the rest of the Catholic world. And policies tend to follow the biases of the people, even in non-democracies. Formally ejecting the church from the state's institutions did little to diminish the authority of the church in Latin America, for example. Why? Because people remained culturally Catholic and retained the same biases and values that are the principle causal factors in institutions and policies.

I think we also need to ask at some point whether sexual abuse is really as heinous a crime, objectively, as we are initially inclined to think of it. A lot of your argument here seems predicated upon a presumption that sexual abuse is different from other alleged offenses, like terrorism is presumed to be as well, and that exceptions should be made in the normal administration of justice to be able or intervene sooner, or to not allow the normal possibility of forgiveness to occur without the intervention of the state that happens with most other non-capital offenses. Perhaps that is the case with sexual crimes, but I'm skeptical of it, even in the case of sexual abuse of children.

by santiago on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 12:40:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

The relevance of Canon Law here is that it was used by the Bishops to justify their non-reporting of sexual abuse crimes (and indeed sometimes to tell outright lies - via a quaint concept of "mental reservation" which apparently allows you to lie). They were also concerned to deal with abuse as a "Pastoral Matter" which involved offering counselling to the abuser and abused.

Vatican documents such as Crimen sollicitationis actually threatened the abused with excommunication if they revealed their abuse to outside bodies thus voluntary deference is hardly the issue here.

If you want the views fo a Canon Lawyer, see Cloyne facts expose the pathology of the church - The Irish Times - Sat, Jul 16, 2011

THE DIRECT ROLE of the Vatican in enabling and even directing the cover-up, stonewalling and obstruction of justice has been suspected for years. The report made a vitally important breakthrough by describing in concrete detail the essential role the Vatican played in the disgrace of the diocese.
The report points to two serious deficiencies in the Vatican response. The first is the papal nuncio's refusal to co-operate with the commission during the Dublin and Cloyne investigations, as well as his lukewarm response to the horrific contents of the report. The second and far more treacherous aspect is the direct attempt to sabotage the Irish bishops' 1996 policy document Child Sexual Abuse: Framework for a Church Response .
The commission found this document contained a "detailed and easy to implement set of procedures". Yet, before it could adequately be put into practice, the papal nuncio, Archbishop Luciano Storero, sent the Irish bishops a letter passing on the concerns of the Vatican's Congregation for the Clergy. The letter clearly reflected the reactionary attitude of Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, who was prefect at the time. He erroneously labelled the policy "merely a study document".

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 03:09:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

In almost the entire Catholic world, Church Canon Law is institutionally subservient to state civil law (I think this may even be true for the Vatican state). Canon Law is just the internal bylaws of the Church as an organization. There is no theology involved in canon law, and it is really no different, just older, than typical corporate bylaws used everywhere. Where subservience is not clearly the case, , such as in Argentina and Spain, it is because the state has declared it to be so at the Constitutional level of rulemaking -- the level of how to go about making rules about making rules -- which means it is still subservient, in the end, to state civil power. If such subservience is not the case in Ireland, the only reason must be that local Irish cultural norms provide people with more obedience or respect for the Church, a priori, than for the civil state, a pretty unique state of affairs today even in Catholic countries. Is this the case in Ireland, and is this what you are advocating that your countrymen change?

by santiago on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 04:07:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

I make no claims to be an expert on Canon Law - I simply note that it was invoked by the Vatican to require obedience from its Bishops and even from the victims of abuse and the Vatican made every effort to prevent the Irish Bishops from adopting a code of practice which required instances of child abuse to be reported to the civil authorities.

The Papal Nuncio refused to cooperate with the judicial investigation and the Vatican has refused to make available files known to be in their possession which would facilitate the investigation and prosecution of crimes - sometimes invoking diplomatic privilege, at other times the requirements of Canon Law.

Frankly I think the Irish state such end all diplomatic relations with the Vatican until such time as it ceases to require Irish citizens or persons resident in Ireland to do anything other than be fully law abiding Irish citizens and cooperates fully with enquiries into instances where that may have been the case.

Some Irish Bishops - e.g. Archbishop Marin - are as appalled at Vatican behaviour as anybody and have been anything but obsequious - and have been frustrated at every turn. I really don't know why you seek to minimise Vatican complicity in all of this or the gravity of what they have done. States have been invaded and destroyed for less. Right now the Vatican is becoming a pariah state - which I suggest is not in the interests of any sincere practising Catholics.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 04:24:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

I don't want to minimize Vatican complicity in this at all. I just want to be honest about the categories that we are using. I am as appalled at the news of Vatican complicity and what I see a case of really bad judgement as you are. But I don't think it is categorically any different than being appalled at similar kinds of things I see elsewhere in society, for example in the US Congress or other esteemed institutions of authority. For me, it means punish the people involved, not the institutions involved. But you seem to want to apply a categorical sanction against the Church and its relationship with Ireland itself instead of just against the people involved in bad judgement and criminal activities. I'm not convinced these scandals warrant that kind of sanction -- they are faults of individuals not of institutions.

by santiago on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:02:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (4.00 / 2)

European Tribune - Vatican 'entirely unhelpful' in applying child safety

The Vatican was "entirely unhelpful" to any bishop who wanted to implement procedures for dealing with allegations of child sexual abuse in the Irish Catholic Church, a report has found.
The Commission of Investigation Report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne states that a decision by the Vatican to brand a framework document on child sexual abuse, agreed by the Irish Bishops Conference in 1996, as "not an official document" effectively gave individual Irish bishops "the freedom to ignore" the guidelines.

How is this not the fault of the institution?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:26:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

It wasn't the rules of the Vatican that led to its alleged "unhelpfulness" in Ireland. It was people in the Vatican that did that, perhaps for evil, but also perhaps for good. If it were the rules and practices (that is what we mean by "institution") of the Vatican that were at fault, the Vatican would also have opposed similar efforts by bishops elsewhere at the time, but this is not the case. In the US, for example, the Vatican completely supported, applauded, and publicized the new policies by the US bishops, during the same time period, to immediately report allegations of sexual abuse by priests or other employees or contractors (priests are actually bonded contractors of their dioceses in the US) to the local police.

This means that something else was likely afoot in the Irish case, and the Vatican might very well have opposed something about what was going on there that was different than elsewhere. Organizing opposition to policy and law -- contesting power -- is a normal, if sometimes dramatic, part of the policy process, both internationally as well as within a state, so it seems like, at worst, this may be a case of poor personal judgement, not of institutional failure.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 01:08:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

In the US, for example, the Vatican completely supported, applauded, and publicized the new policies by the US bishops, during the same time period, to immediately report allegations of sexual abuse by priests or other employees or contractors (priests are actually bonded contractors of their dioceses in the US) to the local police.

There is a certain amount of editorialising going on here, as the Vatican also engaged in a systematic operation to siphon off the assets of subsidiaries and then cut them off from the organisation before their victims could bring civil suit.

Or, to be a little more precise, while they talked a mean game they were busy pulling a Bhopal.

This means that something else was likely afoot in the Irish case,

Alternative hypothesis: They thought they could get away with it in Ireland.

Organizing opposition to policy and law -- contesting power -- is a normal, if sometimes dramatic, part of the policy process,

And indeed that is what Frank is suggesting - contesting power. Specifically, making sure that the Vatican can never again contest its absolute subservience of the Irish branch of the catholic church to the democratic Irish state.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 02:57:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

The Papal Nuncio acts on behalf of the Vatican state when he encourages Bishops not to observe the criminal or civil law and when he refuses to cooperate with judicial investigations of crimes. Charles Flanagan, chairman of the (v. conservative) Fine Gael party and representing a conservative rural constituency has called for his expulsion. That is a sanction not against the individual (Archbishop Leanza) but a sanction directed at the Vatican. Incidental Charles Flanagan is the son of Oliver Flanagan - noted ultra conservative catholic, anti-semite and Papal Knight.

By all means go after culpable individuals as well - in which case you would also have to go after the current Pope.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:50:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Which is why I would likely oppose such an action if anyone proposed such a sanction in my home country. The sanction is misdirected and has more to do with contesting power with the Church and with Rome (a perfectly acceptable thing to do, in general) than it does with obtaining justice for victims and prevention of further tragedies. (And I wouldn't likely want to end up on the same side as an antisemitic rightist in any case.)

Rome apparently has a powerful influence in Irish society, more so than in most other places, even Catholic ones. It is natural that people in the business of power -- namely leading government, business, and civil society leaders -- would feel constrained at times by the power of the Church and the Vatican and would use any opportunity that arises in public discourse to challenge that power and thereby increase their own.

I guess that's what I see in this story, differently than you do: I don't see anything that really addresses the social justice involved here. Instead I just see use of the abuse scandals to challenge the power of the Church in Irish society. I don't have a dog in that particular fight in Ireland, but I do have concern in general as a human being for the social justice of the matter. So unless there is a direct connection between weakening the power of the Vatican or the Church in Irish politics and providing benefits for past and future victims of sexual abuse AND for reducing the threats of state power to personal freedom, I don't see any reason to go after the Vatican regarding this story.

In fact, given the vitriol I see in Irish political discourse against the Church and the Vatican, such as proposing laws that eliminate the privacy of the confessional, I'm inclined to support the Vatican in its challenge against Irish state power because it looks to me like the power of the state over people's personal lives might be getting out of hand there.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 01:36:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

For me, it means punish the people involved, not the institutions involved.

I.G. Farben and the British East India Company would beg to differ.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 02:51:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

Canon Law is just the internal bylaws of the Church as an organization. There is no theology involved in canon law, and it is really no different, just older, than typical corporate bylaws used everywhere.

I would suggest that if a corporation systematically partakes in organised crime then it is de facto, if not de jure declaring its intent to place its internal by-laws above those of the state. The fact that it is not officially attempting a coup d'etat by explicitly declaring itself to be above the law is not normally considered an extenuating circumstance.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 02:51:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

PS (none / 0)

I'm actually quite shocked at your suggestion that the sexual abuse of children is necessarily all that serious a crime. There have been numerous instances of lives being ruined by it - partly because the victims were frightened into not reporting it for many years, and partly because they never had access to counselling. But the attitude that "they'll get over it" is actually what allowed the abuse to be so widespread, because no effective sanctions were never exercised by the Church, and of course the Civil Authorities were never informed. The incidence of subsequent suicides, alcohol abuse, broken marriages, inability to have children etc. is so common that I am appalled by your comment.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 03:15:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 1)

It not that it's not a serious crime. It most certainly is. It is that it is not necessarily any more serious that other kinds of physical and psychological assault, all of which are serious crimes, morally and physiologically, as well as legally. Why should sexual crimes be treated by law in a manner differently from other kinds of physical assault?

by santiago on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 03:54:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 1)

If a guy physically assaults another no one - the Church included - has any problem with them being brought to justice for it. However if a Priest in a position of authority sexually assaults a minor under their authority all of a sudden it becomes "a pastoral matter" and everything is swept under the carpet.

Sexual assaults by revered adults (including parents) on minors do tend to have lifelong psychological effects on them in the way (say) a severe physical beating may not, but not even that is the point. It is the church which has treated sexual crimes completely differently, not the criminal law.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 04:05:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 1)

What the law provides for, through implementation rather than legislation, is a fiscal limit on state power to intervene in personal or private matters. Because of limited resources allocated to them, prosecutors can only prosecute or even report a tiny minority of the crimes that actually occur. Every time one spouse strikes another, for example, or a girl hits a boy who humiliated her, a serious crime has been committed, but this doesn't mean that the law requires that the police be called. Instead the good judgement of the individuals involved in the incident is relied upon to determine the severity of the issue and the need for more serious intervention by the state.

At the time of many of these sexual abuses, priests, like civil educational and care-giving authorities everywhere, were also hitting kids and applying other forms of corporal punishment, sometimes quite severely, and it was generally allowed to go on without state intervention, even after it became illegal, because there was still no general consensus that it was really all that bad of a way to do things. We now have different understandings of the severity of such offenses, and an understanding that civil authorities should be invoked either through lawsuits or criminal justice. But that doesn't change the fact that just because a wrong has occurred doesn't mean the state needs to be invoked for every offense, even serious ones.

Think of it this way: in the US, and probably elsewhere, there has been an explosion of media coverage since the church scandals of female teachers getting sent to prison for having sexual affairs with teenaged boys, and they are branded, often legally and for life, as sexual offenders as a result. Female teachers having sex with post-puberty male students is probably not a new phenomenon, but it is a newly criminalized phenomenon as far as implementation of policy goes. But is this really an honest and just way to categorize the relationship between the rapist/teacher and the student -- often big, strong, athletic students who boast to their friends about the encounter? Or is it rather just a social construction of the times that ends up criminalizing human activities that have probably been going on forever and could be dealt with in better ways than criminal action?

Pedophilia is different than sexual abuse and should be treated differently. Likewise, statutory sexual abuse is different than forcible rape and should be treated differently because the harm done to victims is different. Add in the issues of homosexuality and implicit power and it becomes more difficult still to honestly separate abuse from consent, but such separation should still be attempted through the judgement of those involved in order to really determine whether the blunt power of the state should be involved. The problem with judgement is that it can often err, but we accept that err on the side of non-intervention by the state as the cost of having a freer society than we would have if the state had to be invoked for every infraction, all of the time, like something out of George Orwell.

by santiago on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 04:50:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 1)

Corporal punishment has been banned in Ireland since 1982 and has been a criminal offence since 1996. This is not a case of Irish society suddenly moving the goalposts after the event. The Vatican actively sought to prevent the implementation of the 1996 Irish Bishops guidelines on Child abuse and Bishop McGee even claimed to have implemented them when in fact he had not. The Cloyne report dealt with serious cases of sexual child abuse which occurred as late as 2008and which were not reported to the Authorities...

I'm sorry Santiago, but when it comes to children there should be no discretion in this matter as otherwise they have no one to advocate on their behalf. The authorities can always rule that a particular incident was insufficiently serious to warrant prosecution - as they did in the case of an accusation against Bishop McGee himself.

However the competent authority for deciding whether a prosecution is warranted is not the Church but the police/social services, and ultimately the Attorney General, based on the book of evidence supplied to him by the police and social services. This is a professional matter, not something at the discretion of the superiors of the priest (or any other person) concerned.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:38:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 0)

I'd side with you on a preferential treatment of children involved in such matters, given their much reduced power in society, except for one thing: as psychologists often have to tell people, children lie, alot, and they exaggerate alot too. So we can't just presume because a child is involved that we can reduce any protection for the rights of accused people. There is always just too much ambiguity involved in accusations of sexual misconduct, with children as with anyone else. This alone is a good enough reason to keep the state out of matters until absolutely necessary.

And it is completely arbitrary to propose, a priori, that the state is the more competent authority to determine whether or not prosecution is warranted rather than than the Church or other group with professional expertise in the care of children. We can't even presume that the state is independent in such matters. Even where the law may require it,it's a simple fact of life that the law requires lots of things we don't do, usually for perfectly good reasons, so it is still virtually always left up to the judgement of the actual people most directly in alleged or real incidents on whether or not to invoke the state. Furthermore, laws and policies are always in the process of being contested by people, often by simply deciding not to follow the law, also usually for perfectly good reasons -- that's how governance works, after all. That's how power is contested in society.

The scandal has made it a priority in the Church, and elsewhere in society, to put a higher priority and sensitivity on complaints of sexual misconduct than it had done so in the past. I'm suggesting that not all of this is a good thing. As much for children (and teens or young adults as is more often the case in the thousands of lawsuits brought against priests and others) as for the rest of us, a society that is focused too much on policing itself for sexual misdeeds is not a free society at all, and we should rather be willing to accept the costs of occasional tragedies in order to remain free of an omnipotent state.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 12:39:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS (none / 1)

So we can't just presume because a child is involved that we can reduce any protection for the rights of accused people.

It's not about restricting the rights of the accused. If the prosecution can not make a compelling case in court, nobody should be sentenced. It's about restricting the discretionary power of enforcing officials to not prosecute the case to the full extent of the law. Something that needs to be done whenever there is a serious discrepancy in power between the accused and the accuser. You can't allow the prosecutor discretionary power to not prosecute when the accused is a police officer, for instance.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 03:16:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

santiago:

It isn't a separate, parallel set of rules that prescribe different sanctions and benefits than civil law would do for the same offenses or actions. There is no means in canon law, to my knowledge, to sanction an individual for murder, bribery, theft, etc., other than to fire them from their present job. So I'm not sure that there is as much of a contradiction as you say.

Well, the members of the religion (not just clergy) can be punished with at least "just penalty" and excommunication.

Code of Canon Law - IntraText

Can. 1366 Parents or those who take the place of parents who hand offer their children to be baptized or educated in a non Catholic religion are to be punished with a censure or other just penalty.
Can. 1367 A person who throws away the consecrated species or takes or retains them for a sacrilegious purpose incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; moreover, a cleric can be punished with another penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state.

Excommunication is today not the death sentence it once was, but it is still pretty hard for throwing away the sacred cookies.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:23:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Victims of clerical sexual abuse who reported the abuse to the Church authorities where threatened with excommunication of they reported the abuse to anyone else - yes CHILD ABUSE VICTIMS - yet no paedophile priest has (to my knowledge) been excommunicated, and many have not even been defrocked.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Jul 16th, 2011 at 05:53:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

And you can be kicked out of your local bowling club too if you're problematic enough for your friends, but it's still in an entirely different category than the kinds of things that actual state power can organize to be done to you.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 12:50:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Sorry Santiago, but to a true believing Catholic there is nothing worse that can happen to them than ex-communication. Burning in the fires of hell for eternity is only not a problem if you aren't a believer. This scandal has struck at the heart of the Catholic faith in Ireland, it's effect of civil society has been much more limited - chiefly to the victims of the abusers.

You can paint this entire scandal as a power struggle between Church and state if you want, but if that is even partly the case, it has been the Church fighting against its own side and destroying its own belief base.

If the state can be faulted, it is that it has been entirely too differential to the Church and has not adequately discharged its own duty of care to its citizens and children out of fear and respect for the power of the Church.

I don't see this as a power struggle between Church and State, but as one for the human rights of children and the most vulnerable in society. If the Church had been on the right side of that fight, I would have supported it. You, on the other hand, seem to be fighting for the rights of the Church no matter how damnable its crimes and seek to recast its institutional failings as those of a few individuals. In that I think you are on the wrong side of history, but more problematically, on the wrong side of justice and truth.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 05:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Clergy doing right thing is about timing not morality - Analysis, Opinion - Independent.ie

Primate Sean Brady insists the long-awaited report into the mishandling of child sex abuse allegations by the diocese of Cloyne is "another dark day" in the history of the Irish Church. In this, as in so much else, he is entirely wrong. Any day on which light is cast on the obscure, murky workings of the Church is a day of illumination rather than darkness. That what it reveals is so utterly vile and contemptible is another matter altogether.
A previous such occasion, of course, was when Sean Brady's own involvement in the cover-up of priestly perversion was revealed in 2009, when the faithful discovered how he had, 30 years earlier as part of an internal investigation into allegations against notorious paedophile Fr Brendan Smyth, made children sign oaths not to tell anyone that they had been abused.
Smyth, one of the most repulsive characters ever to wear priestly garb, went on to abuse dozens more innocents before being finally arrested; but even then, Primate Brady refused to take full responsibility by resigning, claiming that he was, in effect, only following orders, and that this was how things were back then. He also claimed that the current climate was a "totally different one to that of the past".

The Cloyne report reveals that that past is not yet behind us - it deals with abuse and cover-up right up to 2008.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 05:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

What the Vatican appears to be contesting is the power of the Irish state, not a coverup of sexual abuse. The Vatican is contending that it would still be a better judge of when the state should be invoked than the state itself. This may or may not be true, given its poor record of such judgements in Ireland and elsewhere, but it is a morally valid basis for contesting the power of the state -- that the onerous and blunt power of the state should not be invoked too quickly in allegations of sexual misdeeds of clergy or other private individuals, even when it regards children.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 02:25:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

I'm sorry, I live in a democracy rather than a catholic theocracy, a democracy which contains an increasing proportion of non- catholics and non practising Catholics. (The "special position" of the Catholic Church was removed from the constitution in 1973).

Even amongst practising Catholics, only a small minority would want to be ruled by the Church rather than the state - as is (in part) evidenced by widespread rejection of Church teaching on celibacy, divorce, contraception. The Church's role in education, health care and every other facet of Irish life is becoming increasingly marginal - and for many, perhaps even most citizens, its complete withdrawal from secular life cannot come quickly enough.

If this does come down to a power struggle between the Vatican and the Irish state as you suggest, then the Vatican faces an absolute and totally humiliating defeat. The Vatican would be very wise not to cast the debate in such terms.

I appreciate there is a libertarian anti-state tradition in the USA which is not present in Ireland to any great extent. People here may argue about who should govern, and how, but not about the need for government or its scope. If anything the Government tends to be criticised for inaction rather than excessive intervention.

This, I think, is why I find your argument here so strange - it is not an argument will hear in Ireland from the Church itself - except perhaps from a v. small group of zealots who would be as critical of their Bishops as anyone else - if perhaps on different grounds.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 03:42:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

I'm not sure that the defeat that you forecast is so eminent. To believe that, you have to assume that although the constitutional position of the church was removed in 1973, rules and practices supporting the position of the church in Irish society somehow managed to continue without the support of a sufficiently powerful coalition of interests. From what we know of how public policy works, that just doesn't happen, especially in a democracy.

The Church must have it's authoritative position because it has enjoyed, and continues to enjoy, substantial political support in Ireland. That support may be declining, and its decline may be hastened by the scandals and continuing revelations about it, but it would be naive to presume that Irish society doesn't support the Church. In other words, the coalition of interests supporting the Church in Ireland today is still the dominant coalition. That may change, but it is very unlikely to be a major shift.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 06:18:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 1)

Since it was a dominant coalition it is still the dominant coalition?

Sounds like one of Zenon's paradoxes. If the support is in decline over an extended period of time, it will at some point in time no longer be the dominant coalition. I do not see how you can conclude that it is right now the dominant coalition.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 03:49:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Especially as the Government is now in full frontal attack mode challenging even the "seal of the confessional" and RC control of schools and shows no sign of losing public support for doing so.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 05:29:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

It makes a perfect case study -- will the dominant coalition prevail or not? A big part of this is identifying the elements of the challenging coalition. Do they have enough unity and share enough of the same core values and beliefs to be able to remain together long term? Or is this just a temporary collusion of interests, which would allow the Church's supporters, which are certainly more united and share similar core values and beliefs, to just return from the hills like the Taliban when the dust settles down and when the crazy fascist politicians are back to fighting with the progressives they had allied with only briefly just to fight the Church.

by santiago on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 03:12:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

I have a real problem with your reducing to a political power struggle a struggle between the advocates of child protection and the advocates of ecclesiastical power and privilege as some kind of interesting laboratory experiment. It's like Fox News providing "balanced" coverage by giving equal time to climate change deniers, creationists, abortion is murder, and libertarians advocating legalisation of paedophilia as they do to the opponents of such views.

Of course at a simplistic level, all arguments and struggles can crystallise around two "sides" but that does not give them moral equivalence or an equality of factual evidence in their favour.

You in fact condemn the RC Church by its own tenets if you reduce the argument to those terms and their is a struggle going on within the RC church (led by a minority -in terms of power if not numbers - and including Archbishop Martin) who would like to re-align the Church behind the advocates of child protection.

There will be a national referendum seeking to write the rights of children explicitly into the Constitution next year which - depending on the wording - will be endorsed by 90%+ of the people. If the Church follows your lead it will end up on the minority side of that argument and be utterly crushed.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 04:29:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Draft LTE (none / 0)

Yeah, that's exactly how it works. You know it's not the dominant coalition any more when actual policy shifts sharply against it in a number of domains in which it has interests, which, after everything that has gone on for over a decade, still hasn't happened.

It might happen, after this episode especially, but it's loss will likely be gradual, with periodic resurgence, as has been the case for at least a few decades now, not a tectonic shift as Frank was suggesting.

by santiago on Mon Jul 18th, 2011 at 02:53:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

power of the state (none / 0)

No, I'm not fighting for the rights of the church, but I am fighting against an increase in the power of the state to police sexual misdeeds. It is ironic that the Church, of all groups, would end up on the same side of a fight to keep the state out of personal sexual affairs, i.e., the right of individuals to engage in socially unacceptable sexual activities, but, as the Spanish say, asi es.

It is true that as a result of keeping the state out of private sexual affairs there may be more possibilities of occasional incidences of tragedies, such as abuse of children, but I do not agree that such incidences are so grave that they warrant any increase in the authority of the state to intervene in the private affairs of individuals or of civil society, including religious organizations.

by santiago on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 02:20:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: power of the state (none / 1)

In Ireland you would be in a minority of one. I have NEVER heard anyone make the argument here that the state is too engaged in protecting children from sexual abuse. The state HAS decriminalised homosexuality, promoted contraception, and encouraged civil unions as it has distanced itself from the Church - but it was the Church which had promoted those restrictions on sexual freedom, not the state.

Indeed we may be about the elect a (Protestant) gay campaigner to the Presidency who's life's work has been to liberalise Irish social and sexual laws. The notion that the Church guarantees greater personal freedom in sexual matters has been the subject of many a comedy routine in Ireland.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jul 17th, 2011 at 03:56:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Top Diaries

Recent Diaries