Horrific child abuse in Catholic Irish schools

[Skeptic Ginger]

A sad reflection on humanity when so many of those who can abuse, do.

 

[rjh01]

Let us be fair towards the RCC. It is not they who are solely guilty. It is also society for failing to deal with the mistreatment of children for any reason. Until the 1980s it was legal to inflict GBH on children in your care (that means parents and teachers). It was done openly for it was legal and people could see nothing wrong with it.

 

[Darat]

Let us be fair towards the RCC. It is not they who are solely guilty. It is also society for failing to deal with the mistreatment of children for any reason. Until the 1980s it was legal to inflict GBH on children in your care (that means parents and teachers). It was done openly for it was legal and people could see nothing wrong with it.

No sorry this does not wash, all that was allowed was corporal punishment, and that is not what the report means by the word abuse, this is the definition of abuse that it was using:

The expression “abuse” is defined in section 1(i) of the Principal Act, as amended by section 3 of the 2005 Act, as:-

(a) the wilful, reckless or negligent infliction of physical injury on, or failure to prevent such injury to, the child,
(b) the use of the child by a person for sexual arousal or sexual gratification of that person or another person,
(c) failure to care for the child which results, or could reasonably be expected to result, in serious impairment of the physical or mental or development of the child or serious adverse effects on his or her behaviour or welfare, or
(d) any other act or omission towards the child which results, or couldr easonably be expected to result, in serious impairment of the physical or mental health or development of the child or serious adverse effects on his behaviour or welfare, and cognate words shall be construed accordingly.

What this report found was abuse that was illegal at the time. (And even if the law of the land had not defined their barbaric treatment of children as abuse and wrong at the time their own "canon laws" did. )

It was RCC people that carried out the abuse and it was the RCC organisations that covered it up at the time. The RCC organisations knew at the time it was wrong and they took incredible steps to ensure that the wrong-doing did not come to light, and they have continued to take such steps even toady and that is why none of the abusers have been named.

 

[arthwollipot]

"But it wasn't the Catholic Church who was doing the abusing, it was just a few Christian Brothers! Bad Apples!"

What's the bet that this piece of dren will hit the airwaves soon?

 

[rjh01]

Cover-up? How many people can know about something without a leak? I think they discussed this in CT sub forum and came up with a single digit answer. Somebody who knows more than me can tell me I am wrong. Because this shows that you can have a conspiracy involving 1000s of people covered up for years.

In this case thousands of people knew and participated in the crimes, either as victims, criminals, people who covered up the crime or failed to detect it when it was their job to detect it. Not to mention parents or other relatives who cared about them.

Something is wrong here. 1,000s of people who knew about a crime and it not hit the press for decades? That is too hard to believe. Is that because no-one cared about these children?

 

[Darat]

Cover-up? How many people can know about something without a leak? I think they discussed this in CT sub forum and came up with a single digit answer. Somebody who knows more than me can tell me I am wrong. Because this shows that you can have a conspiracy involving 1000s of people covered up for years.

...snip...

It may seem incredible but if you read the report (even just the executive summary) you will see that it did indeed happen.

In this case thousands of people knew and participated in the crimes, either as victims, criminals, people who covered up the crime or failed to detect it when it was their job to detect it. Not to mention parents or other relatives who cared about them.

Something is wrong here. 1,000s of people who knew about a crime and it not hit the press for decades? That is too hard to believe. Is that because no-one cared about these children?

The report does address all of your points.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Quibble, they weren't Catholic Irish schools, they were Irish Catholic schools. The schools were teaching the Irish Catholicism, not Catholics Irishicity.

I think the root of the problem is that as long as people are going to treat life like a testing ground or prologue for the real world of the afterlife, they're going to behave badly. That's not just a Catholic failing, it's a common one to religions. Any time you focus on what comes next, eternity, imaginary worlds, you take away the importance of the here-and-now. I suspect a lot of the perpetrators rationalized away their actions by considering them transient, and that the damage to their victims was equally unimportant because life is short and insignificant compared to eternity in the afterlife, magic, etc. Frankly, devout religions focused on an afterlife have a lot in common with psychiatric disorders, the dissociative ones where people live in imaginary worlds or have delusions of grandeur.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

"But it wasn't the Catholic Church who was doing the abusing, it was just a few Christian Brothers! Bad Apples!"

What's the bet that this piece of dren will hit the airwaves soon?

It probably won't, as Christendom, like Israel, the US, and so on, isn't deemed holy by the doctrine of Political Correctness. It's when, say, Islam is criticised that the criticism has to be followed by a disclaimer such as "of course we know 99% of them aren't like this". Attacking the RCC can be done freely.

Cover-up? How many people can know about something without a leak? I think they discussed this in CT sub forum and came up with a single digit answer. Somebody who knows more than me can tell me I am wrong. Because this shows that you can have a conspiracy involving 1000s of people covered up for years.

This sort of thing happens way too often, facilities treating stigmatized kids and/or adults horribly and everyone turning a blind eye. As far as I know, this was a facility for "troublemakers" and kids of single parents deemed incapable of taking care of their children. Think of the abuses commited in, say, psychiatric hospitals over the years, with everyone turning a blind eye. This could be more of the same thing.

That, and that the RCC does everything it can to cover this kind of events up.

As I saw asked on another forum, how will the Vatican weasel its way out of this one?

This is nothing, given the RCC's track record. If they can weasel their way out of all the other horrors they've made themselves guilty of, they'll survive this one.

 

[mikeyx]

My friend, who was sexually abused by her father, went to her teacher, a nun, for help. What did the nun do? She sexually abused my friend. My friend sued the Catholic Church and won. My mom, a devout Roman Catholic said in disgust, "Yeah, she got her million."

This is from the outside looking in, but a few years back, a few towns over there is a very old school Polish Catholic community in said town, and there was a hub ub regarding a troubled Puerto Rican girl who went to a visiting Polish padre who did the unthinkable to the girl, and what of what you describe here followed. the Church called her all the usual names, and all the Old School Catholics called her all the usual names and one might even go so far as to say they used her ethnic background against her as well. I was never born catholic and I'll never be catholic.

 

[fishbob]

Quibble, they weren't Catholic Irish schools, they were Irish Catholic schools. The schools were teaching the Irish Catholicism, not Catholics Irishicity.

I think the root of the problem is that as long as people are going to treat life like a testing ground or prologue for the real world of the afterlife, they're going to behave badly. That's not just a Catholic failing, it's a common one to religions. Any time you focus on what comes next, eternity, imaginary worlds, you take away the importance of the here-and-now. I suspect a lot of the perpetrators rationalized away their actions by considering them transient, and that the damage to their victims was equally unimportant because life is short and insignificant compared to eternity in the afterlife, magic, etc. Frankly, devout religions focused on an afterlife have a lot in common with psychiatric disorders, the dissociative ones where people live in imaginary worlds or have delusions of grandeur.

You think they really believe the crap they peddle?
Is the self-delusion that strong?

Nah - you are probably right.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Faith and bugger-ah!

 

[Madalch]

I wish I could say this sort of thing surprised me, but in fact, this is highly reminiscent of the Duplessis Orphans scandal we've had here in Québec. As I saw asked on another forum, how will the Vatican weasel its way out of this one?

The same way they survived the "Christian Brothers" stuff in Newfoundland.

Actually, I think they'll weather it better in Ireland, since they seem to have had their punishment capped at 175 million- a paltry cost compared to what the Church probably owns in Ireland. At least in Newfoundland, they had to resort to selling off their land, rather than dipping into petty cash.

 

[fuelair]

But they are good Christians......

Why yes, yes they are. My point exactly. And their god is a loving god. And feces flow uphill.

 

[fuelair]

Faith and bugger-ah!

So yeh spaiks the Irish dos yeh, me lad?

 

[Darat]

Cover-up? How many people can know about something without a leak? I think they discussed this in CT sub forum and came up with a single digit answer. Somebody who knows more than me can tell me I am wrong. Because this shows that you can have a conspiracy involving 1000s of people covered up for years.

In this case thousands of people knew and participated in the crimes, either as victims, criminals, people who covered up the crime or failed to detect it when it was their job to detect it. Not to mention parents or other relatives who cared about them.

Something is wrong here. 1,000s of people who knew about a crime and it not hit the press for decades? That is too hard to believe. Is that because no-one cared about these children?

I've been reading more and more of the report and it is truly incredible the scale of what happened and was allowed to happen, for example:

...snip...

6.20

Cases of sexual abuse were managed with a view to minimising the risk of public disclosure and consequent damage to the institution and the Congregation. This policy resulted in the protection of the perpetrator. When lay people were discovered to have sexually abused, they were generally reported to the Gardai. When a member of a Congregation was found to be abusing, it was dealt with internally and was not reported to the Gardaı´.

The damage to the children affected and the danger to others were disregarded. The difference in treatment of lay and religious abusers points to an awareness on the part of Congregational authorities of the seriousness of the offence, yet there was a reluctance to confront religious who offended in this way. The desire to protect the reputation of the Congregation and institution was paramount. Congregations asserted that knowledge of sexual abuse was not available in society at the time and that it was seen as a moral failing on the part of the Brother or priest.

...snip...

6.21

The recidivist nature of sexual abuse was known to religious authorities.

The documents revealed that sexual abusers were often long-term offenders who repeatedly
abused children wherever they were working. Contrary to the Congregations’ claims that the
recidivist nature of sexual offending was not understood, it is clear from the documented cases
that they were aware of the propensity for abusers to re-abuse. The risk, however, was seen by
the Congregations in terms of the potential for scandal and bad publicity should the abuse be
disclosed. The danger to children was not taken into account.

 

[rjh01]

Just read the summary. Looks like what I said above, no one in authority cared about what happened to the children. If they had then this would have been exposed a long time ago. This is not just individuals abusing children or even the church. It is the state abusing the children, by failing to detect the abuse and allowing it to continue. Hence the church found it easy to cover up the abuse.

 

[shecky]

America's Catholic hero scumbag, Bill Donohue, weighs in on the story: the media is making too much out of it. Because, you know, 82 percent of the incidents took place before 1970, many of the victims are over 70, and besides, everyone beat/molested/broke kids back in those days.

Would someone kick this guy in the balls already? Is it really too much for him to just come out and say, "Yes, this was a really dark spot in the Church's history".

 

[rjh01]

There are valid ways for the church to defend what happened. What Bill says is not one of them. By saying what he does I think he is sinking the church deeper into the mess. This is not something the church made a mistake and now know better. They made a mistake and are attempting to shoot the messenger. The messenger must then be telling the truth about the current not past church.

Edit. He does admit that 12% of the abuse was rape (vaginal or anal intercourse). This is a lot of cases. I wonder if safe sex was used? Or did they also spread STD?

 

[Darat]

There are valid ways for the church to defend what happened.

...snip...

Please name one!

 

[rjh01]

Children in those days did not have any rights as human beings and people could in practice do what we wanted with them. The evidence for this is that no-one even looked for abuse of any type. Read conculsion 6 on page 19 of the Executive summary for what I mean. The church is very sorry for what it did and here is a bucket of money as compensation for what happened.

Almost anything would be better than the defence in the link.