Ongoing religious scandals

Hotblack Desiato

the culture of deference wrote: »

With bishops like this speaking their mind it really must be only a matter of time before the alleged 92% of census catholics cop on.

"Only" 84% claim to be catholic, according to the census (which is massively distorted by fear, inertia, mammies and cultural factors)

However the roman catholic church controls fully 92% of Irish primary schools, which is where your figure comes from. This is a national disgrace to be frank, education should not be indoctrination even if a majority wishes it to be so, or else what is really the difference between Saudi Arabia's religous state and Ireland's 'liberal democracy' ?

Delirium

First Bishop Convicted of Shielding Pedophile (USA)

The first bishop in the history of the cleric child sex abuse scandal in America has been convicted of shielding a pedophile priest. Kansas City Bishop Robert Finn was found guilty on one misdemeanor charge, and not guilty on a second charge, for failing to report a priest who had taken hundreds of pornographic pictures of young girls, and was allowed to continue to attend church events with children, even though Finn knew of the photos. Finn was sentenced to only two years of court-supervised probation, though he faced a possible year in prison and a $1,000 fine. The conviction, however, is a "watershed moment" in the scandals, notes the New York Times.

Finn, 59, rose in court to say: "I truly regret and am sorry for the hurt that these events have caused.” The priest he's convicted of shielding has pleaded guilty to federal child pornography charges, and is awaiting sentencing. The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests and other victims’ advocacy groups hailed the conviction of a bishop, but criticized the sentence as too lenient. "Only jail time would have made a real difference here,” said a SNAP statement.

recedite

Pleading ignorance.
Is there any other sphere of human life where someone in a senior management position can say

Bishop of Clonfert wrote:

I hadn't a clue

after a major fu*k-up, and not be forced to resign...
and then can just say

Bishop of Clonfert wrote:

I have learned sadly since, it has been a very difficult experience

and then continue on his merry way. Are we supposed to feel sorry for him, because he is a slow learner?

robindch

Penn wrote: »

Father Benedict Groeschel, American Friar, Claims Teens Seduce Priests In Some Sex Abuse Cases

Following up on this:

1. In an article on the National Catholic Register, Groeschel says:

Benedict Groeschel wrote:

My mind and my way of expressing myself are not as clear as they used to be

and the order he founded drops him like a hot potato:

The Franciscan Friars of the Renewal wrote:

In recent months his health, memory and cognitive ability have been failing. He has been in and out of the hospital. Due to his declining health and inability to care for himself, Fr. Benedict had moved to a location where he could rest and be relieved of his responsibilities.

Ouch. That's gotta hurt.

2. The Catholic News Agency reports that he's stepped down from his show on EWTN, the conservative president of which couldn't help himself from taking a swipe at what I imagine is the fairly liberal NCR:

Michael Warsaw, president and CEO of EWTN Global Catholic Network wrote:

It should have been obvious to the editor that Father Benedict's physical condition and mental clarity have deteriorated and that the comments were completely inconsistent with his life's work and witness,

robindch

A Kansas court finds a catholic bishop guilty of failing to report a pedophile to the authorities in a case that was expected to go to jury, but was unexpectedly decided by the judge in just over an hour. The first time, I believe, that any bishop has been found guilty of anything worldwide. The bishop was sentenced to two years of court-supervised probation, he will not serve jail time and he was not fined.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/us/kansas-city-bishop-convicted-of-shielding-pedophile-priest.html

New York Times wrote:

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Roman Catholic bishop was found guilty on Thursday of failing to report suspected child abuse, becoming the first American bishop in the decades-long sexual abuse scandal to be convicted of shielding a pedophile priest.

In a hastily announced bench trial that lasted a little over an hour, a judge found the bishop, Robert W. Finn, guilty on one misdemeanor charge and not guilty on a second charge, for failing to report a priest who had taken hundreds of pornographic pictures of young girls. The counts each carried a maximum penalty of one year in jail and a $1,000 fine, but Bishop Finn was sentenced to two years of court-supervised probation.

The verdict is a watershed moment in the priest sexual abuse scandal that has plagued the church since the 1980s. Bishops have been eager to turn the page on this era and have put in place extensive abuse prevention policies, which include reporting suspected abusers to law enforcement authorities. But the Kansas City case has served as a wake-up call to Catholics that the policies cannot be effective if the bishops do not follow them.

It was an abrupt ending to a case that has consumed the church in Kansas City and threatened to turn into a sensational, first-ever trial of a sitting prelate. The case had been scheduled for a jury trial later this month, but on Wednesday the prosecution said it would be decided in one afternoon by Judge John M. Torrence in Jackson County Circuit Court.

Before being sentenced, Bishop Finn, 59, his jaw quivering, rose in court and said: “I am pleased and grateful that the prosecution and the courts have allowed this matter to be completed. The protection of children is paramount.” He added, “I truly regret and am sorry for the hurt that these events have caused.”

The church managed to avoid a lengthy, highly public jury trial like the one earlier this year in Philadelphia, where a high-ranking assistant to the archbishop was convicted of child endangerment and sentenced to prison for three to six years.

The Jackson County prosecutor, Jean Peters Baker, said that the expedited trial spared the young victims and their parents from having to testify. She said it also meant that the disturbing photographs of children would not be shown in open court. She said the victims and their families “were all ecstatic that this could end today.”

The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, like some other victims’ advocacy groups, applauded the unprecedented conviction of a bishop but said in a statement that the sentence was too lenient. “Only jail time would have made a real difference here,” it said. The judge dropped two charges against the diocese itself.

The case began when the Rev. Shawn Ratigan, a charismatic parish priest who had previously attracted attention for inappropriate behavior with children, took his laptop computer in for repairs in December 2010. A technician immediately told church officials that the laptop contained what appeared to be pornographic photographs of young girls’ genitals, naked and clothed.

Father Ratigan attempted suicide, survived and was sent for treatment. Bishop Finn reassigned him to live in a convent and ordered him stay away from children. But Father Ratigan continued to attend church events and take lewd pictures of girls for five more months, until church officials reported him in May 2011, without Bishop Finn’s approval. The bishop was found guilty on the charge relating only to that time period. Father Ratigan pleaded guilty in August to federal child pornography charges, and is awaiting sentencing.

Ms. Peters Baker told the judge in opening arguments that Bishop Finn had been given ample warning that Father Ratigan was a danger to children. She said that the priest had even admitted to Bishop Finn that he had “a pornography problem.” The prosecutor said: “Defendant Finn is the ultimate authority. The buck does stop with him.”

In May 2010, the principal of the Catholic elementary school where Father Ratigan was working sent a memo to the diocese raising alarm about the priest. The letter said that he had put a girl on his lap on a bus ride and encouraged children to reach into his pockets for candy, and that parents discovered girl’s underwear in a planter outside his house. Bishop Finn has said he did not read the letter until a year later.

The prosecutor said the photographs discovered on Father Ratigan’s laptop in December 2010 were “alarming photos,” among them a series taken on a playground in which the photographer moves in closer until the final shots show girls’ genitalia through their clothing. Confronted with the photographs, Father Ratigan tried to commit suicide, but survived and was briefly hospitalized.

Bishop Finn sent Father Ratigan for a psychological examination, then assigned him to live in a convent and told him not to have contact with children. But despite the restrictions, Father Ratigan presided at a girl’s First Communion and attended an Easter egg hunt and a child’s birthday party.

The bishop is required as part of his sentence to start a training program for diocesan employees in detecting early signs of child abuse, and in what constitutes child pornography and obscenity. He must also create a fund of $10,000 to pay for victims’ counseling. Bishop Finn and the diocese still face 27 civil suits, 4 of them involving Father Ratigan.

It is unclear whether Bishop Finn will come under pressure by the Vatican or his fellow bishops to resign. Asked at a news conference about Bishop Finn’s future, Ms. Peters Baker, demurred and said, “You’ll have to call Rome.”

Judge Torrence, at the close of the trial, said that he hoped that this ended “a long and dark chapter” in history. “I am convinced that this was an appropriate and just way to wrap this up and let everyone move on,” he said.

Hotblack Desiato

koth wrote: »

First Bishop Convicted of Shielding Pedophile (USA)

If we had such laws here and pursued them with vigour, how many of the current catholic hierarchy would be left?

Incidentally the rcc and such like will not be capitalised in future, they don't deserve the respect it implies.

the culture of deference

ninja900 wrote: »

The roman catholic church controls fully 92% of Irish primary schools, which is where your figure comes from.?

I use the 92% figure because the RCC get free access to indoctrinate children with their BS. The census figure is garbage. Probably about 10% of the population would be a true Catholic.

recedite wrote: »

Pleading ignorance.
Is there any other sphere of human life where someone in a senior management position can say
after a major fu*k-up, and not be forced to resign...

Yea the Civil service. Incompetent over promoted muppets get traded to other dept like pawns.

ninja900 wrote: »

If we had such laws here and pursued them with vigour, how many of the current catholic hierarchy would be left?

Incidentally the rcc and such like will not be capitalised in future, they don't deserve the respect it implies.

This is what frightens the RCC so much.

Damages. There is a couple of ongoing court cases in the world that will open the church to all sorts of lawsuits.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

The first time, I believe, that any bishop has been found guilty of anything worldwide. The bishop was sentenced to two years of court-supervised probation, he will not serve jail time and he was not fined.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/us/kansas-city-bishop-convicted-of-shielding-pedophile-priest.html

At first it seems disappointing that the case was rushed through on the quiet, as does the lack of any jail time and/or a fine.
But, its a very important precedent. It destroys the invulnerability of those who move paedo priests instead of handing them in.
And the conviction of a bishop causes huge damage to the prestige and respect of the organisation. Prestige and respect is what every con-artist trades on for survival.

robindch

No idea if this guy is serious. He seems to be. Has some fairly nutty ideas.

http://the2012scenario.com/2012/09/kevin-d-annett-itccs-issues-vatican-with-one-week-ultimatum/

ITCCS wrote:

One Week to go Before Direct Actions Commence Against Child-Killing Churches
By Kevin D Annett, ITCCS, Dublin Ireland – 7 September 2012

http://itccs.org/

An Update and Plan of Action from Kevin D. Annett, ITCCS fieldworker

Breaking News Item: Vatican officials have one week to respond to ten requirements issued last May by survivors of church terror, or face permanent banishment, occupations and legal summonses.

Hello to you all,

It’s fitting that I’m writing this from Dublin, where the top Catholic prelate in that land, Cardinal Sean Brady, is implicated in protecting child rapists in his diocese and may soon resign; and where his probable replacement, Archbishop Dermot Martin, has been forced to meet with ITCCS and ACCAW activists after they occupied Dublin’s main cathedral recently and one of them, John Deegan, even manacled himself to the cathedral altar during a mass.

This direct action by survivors has the church worried, and Archbishop Martin’s assistant, Rev. Damian O’Reilly, said yesterday that it was their concern about further church occupations that forced them to sit down and try to directly negotiate with survivors like John Deegan of ACCAW (an acronym meaning Anti Catholic Church Activists Worldwide, which is affiliated to the ITCCS).

Nowhere else in the world has the church hierarchy actually bargained with their opponents; the church generally relies instead on obliging governments to shield them from the fallout from their crimes towards children. But the fact that this storm is erupting in the heart of the reputedly “most catholic” nation in the world is a sign of how desperate the church leaders are becoming. But more to the point, it demonstrates that only direct disruption and civil disobedience gets results when it comes to the oldest corporation on earth.

Now is the time, as they say, to press the matter home.

As John Deegan and the ITCCS said this week to Damian O’Reilly and his church bosses, the Vatican must do two simple things if it wants to avoid ongoing occupations: defrock all present and future child raping priests, and those who protect them; and make every clergy and church officer, from Pope Benedict on down, take a public, binding oath to protect children from predators and expose those who harm the innocent, even if doing so contradicts and defies church laws and customs.

[etc, etc, etc]

fitz0

Good man Vincent.

Insufferable preaching from cabals of cowards


If the bishops, after all that has happened, have the bottle to engage in public debate on a moral issue, bring them on. By Vincent Browne.

There is insolence abroad. A malign insolence from a once-powerful quarter, and insolence from a currently powerful quarter that is becoming even more powerful - and probably even more insolent.

We have been given advance notice by an elite cabal - which, notoriously, is in urgent need of moral guidance, having thought that the protection of children from buggery, rape and sexual abuse did not require the urgent intervention of police forces and other protection agencies - that they are about to engage in moral guidance of the populace in general, and of public representatives in particular, on what they perceive is a moral issue.

The cabal I am referring to is the clutch of Roman Catholic bishops, led by a person who had knowledge of the imminent abuse of children and thought it was sufficient merely to pass a report along to his religious superior, thereby consigning an unknown number of children to buggery, rape and abuse.
This is the person who has announced this new programme of moral guidance, primarily for the benefit of our legislators.

I am referring, of course, to Seán Brady, the Cardinal Archbishop of Armagh who, on investigating allegations of the abuse of children by the Norbertine priest, Father Brendan Smyth, interviewed two children about the alleged abuse.

In the course of those interviews, the abused children said Brady inquired whether they had enjoyed the experience, and whether they had had erections (thereby conveying to them that they may have had culpability in what had occurred, thus deepening the abuse).

He then subjected them to yet further abuse: the administration of an oath of secrecy, which itself must have been scarring for them.

Worse than that, on hearing from these children, and apparently believing what he was told, that other children were in danger of abuse by the same priest, he did not go immediately to the parents of the children in imminent danger; nor to the police; nor to any of the other agencies that might have protected these children. He merely passed a report along to his bishop.

Brady thought, and still thinks, that this was the full extent of his duty to the children in danger; children who were subsequently raped, buggered and abused by Father Brendan Smyth.

It is a matter for the Catholic Church authorities whether this person should remain in his position as head of the Irish Catholic Church. It is a matter for the rest of us to point out that such people, who even to this day think they did nothing wrong, are not credible advocates for any moral cause. Furthermore, the cabal of bishops who surround Brady, and who have defended his actions, are equally unfit for moral combat.

Of course abortion is a moral issue, and right at the heart of whether a woman should opt to bear a child or not for up to nine months, is a critical moral decision.

The only issue in the debate on abortion is whether it should be left to the woman to take this moral decision for herself, or whether the state should intervene and criminalise her were she, for whatever reason, to decide that she should not bear the child, depending on her sustenance.

There is no comparable moral choice that humans have to take and, because of the unique demands made on a woman in such a situation, to carry the child inside her for many months and then, almost certainly, to give years of her life to the nurture and care of that child after birth.

Because of the dysfunctional misogynistic character of our society - which, incidentally, the Catholic Church has done so much to foster - it can only be the woman herself who can make that moral decision. The intervention of the state or any other agency or person in that decision is an abuse of the woman's autonomy and personhood.

So if the bishops have the bottle to engage in public debate on a moral issue, bring them on. But, one suspects, their sense of self-importance, allied to a traditional and well-nurtured cowardice, will caution them to be selective in the battles they join.

Now on to the second locus of insolence, this one more robust, more resolute, more powerful, although also selective in the battles joined: our friends in the Troika.

We are told that the Troika, the cabal of the EU Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank, has "warned" our government of the need to reform the welfare system and broaden the tax base.

They tell us: "More needs to be done to alleviate or eliminate work disincentives and unemployment traps caused by some features of Ireland's benefits system (e.g., the broadly flat and open-ended unemployment benefits that do not diminish with the duration of the unemployment spell)."

In other words, the Troika wants to compel us to drive unemployed people - and, by definition, vulnerable people - into low paid and maybe oppressive employment, by paring back unemployment benefit as the length of their unemployment extends, irrespective of the actual availability of appropriate jobs.

So the vicious blade of an economic system that has shattered the lives of so many people, imposed huge burdens on society as a whole via the bank guarantee and caused massive social dislocation, is now to be sharpened to inflict even more misery, precisely on the most blameless for what has occurred.

They are even more insolent than the bishops, and they too will hide from accountability.

http://politico.ie/social-issues/8726-insufferable-preaching-from-cabals-of-cowards.html

ironingbored

Has anybody seen this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/20/schoolchildren-licked-cream-legs-polish-initiation_n_1899602.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

The mind boggles...

pauldla

That's just unbelievable. FFS.

nozzferrahhtoo

I love how they say "It was an initiation ceremony: maybe it was the kids idea." as if that somehow excuses the whole thing. The point of being a position of guardianship over children is that you do not pander to every single whim them come up with and it being "Their Idea" is therefore in no way a defense of such things. It is up to the teachers or in this case the schools actual principle to maintain a sense of propriety in which whims and ideas he not only allows, but personally partakes in.

Also, the word "Initiation" is being thrown around here. Initiation into what exactly? The school itself? Some society within the school? Or some society outside the school hours and curriculum? What exactly are they being Initiated into here and if those practices are just the "initiation" what practices make up the normal running of said society/group/school exactly???

Penn

Several things wrong with that:

• "Maybe it was the kids idea"? No children would just randomly decide to lick cream off a priest's/principal's knees
• "Maybe it was shaving cream"? Don't dig a hole for yourself, love. That's worse than whipped cream.
• In pictures where children are licking his knees, he's holding a stick. When he's in the chair I thought maybe it could be a walking aid. But in the picture of them outside where one girl is knelt before him, he's holding an actual wooden stick
• It's just wrong, and any adult who took part in any of that should be sacked.

pauldla

Well when I was a youngster there was a group of kids who used to perpetually follow clergymen about with a can of whipped cream. "Father can we lick the cream off your knees?" they'd shout as they ran down the road after him, innocent faces alight. "Run along now, you scamps, with your whipped cream!" saintly old Father Kehoe would reply, a smile at the corner of his lips as he tousled their hair. More innocent days, my friends. We must remember the mystery of faith.

Delirium

Australian Roman Catholic Church admits child sex abuse

The Archbishop of Melbourne, Denis Hart, described the number, revealed during a state parliamentary inquiry, as "horrific and shameful".

Campaigners say even that figure may be a massive underestimate, with some suggesting that thousands of victims have never come forward and the true number could be up to 10,000.

The church said most of the 620 cases dated from between the 1960s and the 1980s, adding that it was still investigating 45 cases. There have only been a few cases since 1990. The issue of abusing children in care has been a traumatic one for Australian Roman Catholics and deeply damaging to the image of the church, with thousands of victims and their families affected.

ShooterSF

"There have only been a few cases since 1990." The RCC - We're getting better at not raping your kids!

Birroc

That prick Brady should be in jail.

Tim Robbins

Important letter in the Irish Times today

Sir, – As a former orphan I welcome the children’s rights referendum. I hope it will prevent in future the abuse that I suffered as a child along with over 30 others in the Westbank Orphanage, Greystones, Wicklow.

Some criticism is emerging to the effect that the provisions might give the State too much power.

All I can say is that the state exercised none over Westbank. As a Protestant Evangelical institution it was left to its own devices without any apparent interference. We had our names changed to that of the owner, the late Adeline Mathers. We suffered physical plus sexual abuse and were used as child labour on farms and in shops in Northern Ireland.

In addition we were paraded as orphan children in front of church-goers in Northern Ireland. We were expected to perform party pieces in the expectation that this would exercise the charitable sentiments of onlookers. It did, but the money raised and new goods and toys donated were not for the benefit of the children.

I use the term “orphanage” advisedly in that it was almost impossible to adopt a child out of the place, unless prospective parents conformed to Miss Mathers’ interpretation of God’s plan for human kind. I know this because my half brother was forcibly extracted (literally) from Westbank by people who became his loving adoptive parents in Northern Ireland. Of course, we only became aware years later that we were half-brothers, as even twins in Westbank were denied knowledge of sibling relationships.

I am for the State exercising power over religious fanatics who think their interpretation of God’s law is superior to all else. The State is required to exercise its powers. In our case it did not, as was also the case with the Bethany Home, Dublin, where I was born in 1966. That has to change.

Currently, the records of Westbank have been removed from PACT, the former Protestant Adoption Society, by the Westbank Trustees in Bray Gospel Hall. They appear to have no training in such matters and are reluctant to give information to former Westbank residents. Perhaps the State could start to show some good intent by taking an interest in that. – Yours, etc,

COLM BEGLEY,

(Formerly “Robin Mathers” of

Westbank Orphanage),

Carrigadrohid,

Co Cork.

Sometimes, I think there should a muesum or a memorial which presents all the facts about the child abuses from religious orders in this state. There are plenty about the halocaust - why not this?

It is as if some people want it to be forgotten about.

Comments...

Nodin

Indeed. It struck me as telling that the "Stone of healing" wasn't to be placed in Armagh, but off on lough dergh.

As regards the protestant institutions, its a disgrace that Bethany house and Westbank aren't included in the state compensation scheme, or any inquiry.

fitz0

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Sometimes, I think there should a muesum or a memorial which presents all the facts about the child abuses from religious orders in this state. There are plenty about the halocaust - why not this?

Not yet. While the full truth is still buried and justice is still to be served, any museum or monument would be premature and would almost seem as though it were putting the matter in the past. That's why I'm glad that this abortive project was shelved.

I think ongoing campaigning and installations like the pasted pictures that were down by the Turk's Head awhile back are better reminders that the horrors of institutional abuse are still in living memory of a lot of people.

kylith

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Important letter in the Irish Times today


Sometimes, I think there should a muesum or a memorial which presents all the facts about the child abuses from religious orders in this state. There are plenty about the halocaust - why not this?

It is as if some people want it to be forgotten about.

Comments...

That's a fair point, actually. Where's Dublin's Catholic catherdral? We should erect a monument to the victims of clerical abuse outside the front gate.

Nodin

kylith wrote: »

That's a fair point, actually. Where's Dublin's Catholic catherdral? We should erect a monument to the victims of clerical abuse outside the front gate.

You mean the "stone of healing"? Thats in a very prominent position
https://maps.google.ie/maps?hl=en&safe=off&ie=UTF-8&q=st+patrick's+purgatory+lough+derg+co+donegal&fb=1&gl=ie&hq=st+patrick's+purgatory+lough+derg+co+donegal&hnear=st+patrick's+purgatory+lough+derg+co+donegal&cid=0,0,4910189200505161241&ei=fcZhUO-qJ9TN4QSb3oHIAw&ved=0CHEQ_BIwAA

Hotblack Desiato

kylith wrote: »

Where's Dublin's Catholic catherdral?

There isn't one...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Mary's_Pro-Cathedral#Status_as_.22pro-cathedral.22
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Mary's_Pro-Cathedral#Plans_for_a_full_cathedral

There are, or were up until recently anyway, regular protests by survivors of child abuse outside the pro-cathedral.

Nodin

Education Minister Ruairi Quinn has criticised religious orders for failing to pay their share of the compensation bill for abuse victims as the total nears €1.5bn.


With internal memos showing the child abuse redress package will now cost an extra €110m, it has emerged negotiations with the religious in the past year have hit the rocks.

Internal memos show the bill for dealing with child abuse in residential institutions has risen to €1.47bn, up from €1.36bn in 2011.

However, writing in today’s Irish Examiner, Mr Quinn has admitted that taxpayers are picking up the majority of the tab.

"I believe there is a moral obligation. I believe that fairness demands such an approach," he said.

"However, the response from the religious congregations remains disappointing.

"There has been no general acceptance by the congregations that they should meet a 50% share. Instead, the taxpayer continues to shoulder the brunt of these enormous costs."

http://www.irishexaminer.com/world/special-report-religious-orders-criticised-over-share-of-abuse-pay-209474.html

Depressing, yet not unexpected.

MrPudding

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/world/special-report-religious-orders-criticised-over-share-of-abuse-pay-209474.html

Depressing, yet not unexpected.

Time to take property off them.

MrP

Gbear

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/world/special-report-religious-orders-criticised-over-share-of-abuse-pay-209474.html

Depressing, yet not unexpected.

I'm confused. If someone doesn't pay their taxes the government doesn't "negotiate".

Why the **** are we "negotiating" with these scumbags?

Bannasidhe

Gbear wrote: »

I'm confused. If someone doesn't pay their taxes the government doesn't "negotiate".

Why the **** are we "negotiating" with these scumbags?

Here's a mad idea - why don't the church hand over all those schools they 'own' as part payment of their debt?

robindch

Gbear wrote: »

Why the **** are we "negotiating" with these scumbags?

Because they're the church and the church has no wish to bow down before the state, as events over the last fifty to, I suppose, perhaps two thousand years have amply demonstrated.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Here's a mad idea - why don't the church hand over all those schools they 'own' as part payment of their debt?

For the basic reason that the majority, perhaps all, of the orders included in the 2002 Residential Institutions Redress Board deal which provided the orders effectively with total indemnity from future claims -- and which deal was "negotiated" and "approved" on the last day of the then-Fianna Fail government by minister Michael Woods -- appear to have transferred the vast majority of their assets (schools, hospitals, old folks homes and other non-saleable assets) into independent trusts which the orders have stuffed with compliant directors. Conveniently leaving the orders themselves pretty much skint, even if the state does, at some point, develop the the cojones necessary to pursue them with anything more worrisome than a wagging finger and a thin whine.

For the religious, it is an act of public cynicism of an unusually breathtaking degree, though nobody really seems to know about it all that much, nor care if they do.

BTW, there's a fuller version of the same article here:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/counting-the-cost-of-abuse-redress-209377.html

My favourite quote came from the "Sisters of Charity" and echoed by the "Sisters of Mercy" -- both claimed that openly settling with the Redress Board would suggest that to the public that all members had been abusers. So they won't.

A final quote:

Irish Examiner wrote:

In the 12 years since the indemnity deal, the orders sold at least €468m worth of property. They retained assets worth over €3bn.

MrPudding

robindch wrote: »

Because they're the church and the church has no wish to bow down before the state, as events over the last fifty to, I suppose, perhaps two thousand years have amply demonstrated. For the basic reason that the majority, perhaps all, of the orders included in the 2002 Residential Institutions Redress Board deal which provided the orders effectively with total indemnity from future claims -- and which deal was "negotiated" and "approved" on the last day of the then-Fianna Fail government by minister Michael Woods -- appear to have transferred the vast majority of their assets (schools, hospitals, old folks homes and other non-saleable assets) into independent trusts which the orders have stuffed with compliant directors. Conveniently leaving the orders themselves pretty much skint, even if the state does, at some point, develop the the cojones necessary to pursue them with anything more worrisome than a wagging finger and a thin whine.

For the religious, it is an act of public cynicism of an unusually breathtaking degree, though nobody really seems to know about it all that much, nor care if they do.

BTW, there's a fuller version of the same article here:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/counting-the-cost-of-abuse-redress-209377.html

My favourite quote came from the "Sisters of Charity" and echoed by the "Sisters of Mercy" -- both claimed that openly settling with the Redress Board would suggest that to the public that all members had been abusers. So they won't.

A final quote:

I really don't see how those trusts can stand. Sham trusts can be challenged. Trust created to defeat creditors can be assed as sham trusts. If the government chose to I expect they could get to the property.

MrP