BBC Blog Network

User Profile

mccamleyc

Listed below are comments made by mccamleyc between Sunday, 29th November 2009 and Monday, 30th November 2009 (5 Hours Ago) .

«Newer
Older»

Dublin child abuse report published 8:20pm on 30 Nov 2009 Graham you are spot on in stating that conservative catholics are also horrified by child abuse. and conservative catholics understand more than liberal catholics how rubbish bishops can be at dealing with anything - most of them have failed to deal with any abuse in the church, be it of children, liturgical law or education - someone will now start typing "are you saying child abuse is the same as liturgical abuse?". No, not at all, but the mentality of inaction, failure to lead, lack of courage is a trait which has been prevalent among Irish bishops over the last forty years at least.

The problem with commentary on this is that there are agendas. Once you get past the child abuse and cover up is evil, then within the Church you have conservatives blaming liberal policies and useless bishops. liberals blaming conservative policies, including celibacy, and useless bishops. And then you get some blatantly opportunistic anti-catholic commentators from outside who are only interested in child abuse if priests are involved, you know the sort who will defend Roman Polanski, or think it's perfectly ok for GPs and clinics to hand out contraception to minors - which I notice no one is interested in addressing.

When I try to say things are more complex than "bishops bad, everyone else good" I'm accused of defending molesters. William's recent post about Bishop Murray is a good example of something - he mentions the parents were good Catholics and they wanted it sorted in house so to speak. What I'm saying is that that made it very difficult. Of course you would expect Murray to have done more, of course. But he wasn't a detective. he asks a molester a question and gets a lie.

Reading some of Smithy's comments you'd think I would be only too thrilled to have my children molested if it was for the good of the Church.
Irish cleric calls for expulsion of the papal nuncio 8:00pm on 30 Nov 2009 Usual Protestant anti-Catholic rant. The Catholic Church is not a "sister church" with his communion.

The Murphy commission made no serious attempt to engage with the Holy See - they refused to use the normal channels even after it was explained to them it would be appropriate. It actually looks like they tried to get no response from the Holy See.

The Commission should explain why it refused to use the appropriate channels.
Dublin child abuse report published 3:02pm on 30 Nov 2009 Well Smithy, single minded and vitriolic as ever. I don't think any of my posts on this topic have been aggressive, unless you count my remarks about Nell which have now been censored - if only it were as easy to shut her up.

I think unfortunately the inclination of parents to protect their own children can contribute to the problem. As I said in my earlier post, my inclination would be to avoid my child going through the justice system. My wife's inclination would involve baseball bats. Many parents would put aside the thought of future actions in favour of protecting their own.

Not sure why you would be afraid of holiness - it's hardly in opposition to justice. As I said before, people are going to be disappointed with the justice system - they might not like it but no bishop could be convicted of anything on the strength of this report. I'm not saying they didn't do things that were wrong or wicked, often stupid, dangerously so - but if you think the DPP is going to turn this into prosecutions I think you're mistaken. Perhaps it will be useful to some people bringing civil cases.

As for my cringing, well as the report says, this is what happens when people abandon the practice of canon law, which of course liberals like you espouse routinely. and when you tell that sexual morality has changed.
Dublin child abuse report published 12:35pm on 30 Nov 2009 Well now that you mention parents, Marcus, a question for you. What did parents who brought suspicions to bishops expect to get? I think they wanted extra-judicial action, not wanting to bring their children to the police and go that route. that may have been due to deference to the hierarchy or the simple desire to limit the exposure of their child. I know I wouldn't really be keen to have my kid questioned by police, in court etc if I could avoid it. I'm not for a moment blaming them, but that remains an issue. People want "something done about Fr X".

Can I ask a question - what would you do today if an adult told you in confidence that they had been abused, say by their uncle. You suggest they go to the police. They don't want to - it would kill their mother and destroy the family, they just needed to tell someone. So what do you do now? I'm really not trying to make some argumentative point and not saying all or many of the situations were like that (though some were). Do you just go straight to the police and report the conversation?
Dublin child abuse report published 10:48am on 30 Nov 2009 I wonder when the moderators will rule on my comment 26 which remains in "limbo".

Ah right, Marcus, not the subject in hand - one can imagine a bishop making that statement when someone tried to raise the issue of abuse - "thank you Fr Smith, but we're here to talk about the new translation of Eucharistic Prayer 4".

There is massive child abuse in this country, in fact all countries, aided and abetted by organs of the State - as I said - every time contracteption is given out to minors with no follow up. It's a huge cover up and if you don't agree then you're as guilty as any priest or bishop.

It's an entirely valid point to make that the focus on the Catholic Church allows others to get away. It doesnt' make what happened in the Church any less significant, but it is an important point to raise.

Smithy - it's ludicrous to suggest the 2001 instruction was an attempt at cover up - it was quite the reverse - forcing to dioceses to spill the beans so Rome could get a handle on the extent. I think there were problems with the decision, mainly that they didn't expect the numbers and weren't equipped to deal with it - which is why many of the cases are returned to national tribunals for examinination.

I have mixed views on Law and his position and I share some of your concerns.
Any mental reservations? 10:37am on 30 Nov 2009 Of course the church has never been overly fond of the notion itself. the circumstances in which it was allowed were very limited - Nazis hunting for Jews etc.

But it can be fun. I remember holding out for a long time when I was younger for spilling milk cos my accuser kept referring to a "glass of milk" and I'd been using a cup. that was handy.
Dublin child abuse report published 02:43am on 30 Nov 2009 Marcus - when did I mention witchhunt?

Did you read the references to Bishop Drennan who was exonerated by the Report but still smeared by the press, that's the point I was making. He hasn't acted guiltily at all.

But here's the thing, if there are no prosecutions, you'll say - oh, more cover up, suppression, cosy deals - reality of course will be the DPP will discover early on that a)laws weren't broken, or b) insufficient evidence. That's just the reality of the law.

What evidence have you to support the statement that the Pope "virtually sneered at the whole thing"?

I'm all for pulling back the rug and examining the 95% plus of child abuse which has no connection with the clergy. How will you address the mothers who covered up for husbands, the sisters who let their own sisters be abused, the older homosexual men who routinely engage in consensual but illegal sex with minors, the older teenagers who have sex with younger teenagers, aided and abetted by school nurses, doctors and family planning clinics who issue contraception, even though they know with absolute certainty that the law is being broken. None of that suits the agenda of course so there will be no investigation.
Any mental reservations? 02:07am on 30 Nov 2009 I think you'll find Will it's used more by politicians than any other group.

Here's a good example of a form of mental reservation - The Commission writes:
"Mental reservation is a concept developed and much discussed over the centuries, which permits a churchman knowingly to convey a misleading impression to another person without being guilty of lying"

One could easily conclude from this statement that mental reservation was designed only for "churchmen". That of course would be misleading and doubtless wasn't intended.
Dublin child abuse report published 01:52am on 30 Nov 2009 Apparently calling call Nell something unflattering is enough to get you moderated these days. The absolute power of the BBC - the organisation doing its best to hide the Climategate story.

Marcus - glad you mentioned money. One of the reasons why Catholic cases in America are so high profile and other cases (public schools) are so low is the perception that there's money to be had from the Church.

My point about Nell attacking Martin is that she was attacking the wrong man - and despite the horrors of the Murphy report, there is no evidence of the sort of systemmic organised cover-up that people have been claiming. You can say there was all you like but no evidence of it in the report or anywhere else.

You have Enda Kenny calling for all bishops included in the report to resign and newspapers publishing photos of them all. I'm not going to try and defend them all because several are clearly guilty (though in legal terms, probably not of a crime as we'll see in due course), but do take one example - Bishop Martin Drennan of Galway. Take the time to read the case of Fr Guido - page 617 of part two of the report. It's a good example of a difficult case - obvious homosexual issues, Gardai and HSE involved, Bishop Drennan behaved entirely appropriately and yet the press still list him as if he were involved in a cover up. It's simply unjust and unfair. And before someone starts ranting at me about the bad ones, I know, I can read. But someone has to stand up for the better priests in this country.
The world's first strike 9:42pm on 29 Nov 2009 Helio - I agree totally. Journalists are lazy bleepers who never investigate properly and take most of their news from wikipedia

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

mccamleyc