The Irish Bishops " get it"!

[Catherine_S]

The Irish bishops “get it.”

The damaging revelations about abuse in the Irish Catholic Church were, as I noted yesterday,* the most depressing story of 2009. But the agony of the Irish Church has already produced one very positive result. Unlike their brethren in the US,** the Irish bishops have acknowledged their own** culpability. *
Within a month after the release of the Murphy Commission report, four Irish bishops had resigned. They stepped down under heavy pressure from public opinion, at the clear prompting of Dublin’s Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, who stated that any bishop involved in the Dublin cover-up should seriously re-assess his position. (Archbishop Martin did not openly call for resignations, but his intent was clear enough.) *
One of the outgoing prelates, Bishop James Moriarty, denied that he himself had ignored complaints of sexual abuse, but conceded: “I should have challenged the prevailing culture.” Exactly. Any bishop who could tolerate sexual abuse—or even stand by while others in authorities tolerated it—thereby showed himself incapable of sound pastoral judgment. A bishop who responds to a scandal by covering up the evidence must have either a complete indifference to the welfare of the souls assigned to his care or a severely warped vision of what constitutes the good of the Church. In either case he has disgraced himself, and made it impossible to maintain confidence in his pastoral leadership. Resignation is his best option. ***
In the US, where literally dozens of dioceses have been dogged by sex-abuse scandals for the better part of a decade*, only one bishop has resigned because of his mishandling of the crisis. In Ireland,four have taken that step in less than a month, after the problems of a single diocese were exposed. The Irish bishops are showing a pastoral sensitivity that their American counterparts lack. There is one more positive aspect to this unhappy** story.** Pope Benedict has promised** a pastoral letter in response to the Irish crisis. The Holy Father’s deft handling of the sex-abuse scandal in America, during his trip to this country in April 2008, encourages the hope that the Pontiff will draw important new lessons from the Irish problem.*
*http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=415 *

 

[Yellow_Belle]

The Irish bishops “get it.”

The damaging revelations about abuse in the Irish Catholic Church were, as I noted yesterday,** the most depressing story of 2009. But the agony of the Irish Church has already produced one very positive result. Unlike their brethren in the US,** the Irish bishops have acknowledged their own** culpability.
Within a month after the release of the Murphy Commission report, *four Irish bishops had resigned. They stepped down under heavy pressure from public opinion, at the clear prompting of Dublin’s Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, who stated that any bishop involved in the Dublin cover-up should seriously re-assess his position. (Archbishop Martin did not openly call for resignations, but his intent was clear enough*.)
One of the outgoing prelates, Bishop James Moriarty, denied that he himself had ignored complaints of sexual abuse, but conceded: “I should have challenged the prevailing culture.” Exactly. Any bishop who could tolerate sexual abuse—or even stand by while others in authorities tolerated it—thereby showed himself incapable of sound pastoral judgment. A bishop who responds to a scandal by covering up the evidence must have either a complete indifference to the welfare of the souls assigned to his care or a severely warped vision of what constitutes the good of the Church. In either case he has disgraced himself, and made it impossible to maintain confidence in his pastoral leadership. Resignation is his best option. **
In the US, where literally dozens of dioceses** have been dogged by sex-abuse scandals for the better part of** a decade**, only one bishop has resigned because of his mishandling of the crisis. In Ireland,four have taken that step in less than a month, after the problems of a single diocese were exposed. The Irish bishops are showing a pastoral sensitivity that their American counterparts lack. There is one more positive aspect to this** unhappy** story.** Pope Benedict has promised** a pastoral letter in response to the Irish crisis. The Holy Father’s deft handling of the sex-abuse scandal in America, during his trip to this country in April 2008, encourages the hope that the Pontiff will draw important new lessons from the Irish problem.
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=415

Don’t think I can agree that all Irish bishops ‘get it’ - some certainly do. And as the article itself notes, the four bishops were basically pressured into resignation by a combination of the force of public opinion and an Archbishop on a mission. (Possibly a mission from Rome) So comparing the situation in Ireland with that in the US is really not comparing like with like.

It will be interesting to see what the Pope’s pastoral letter will contain and what changes it will mandate for the Irish Church. But whether the current Irish bishops are capable of managing and implementing that change remains to be seen.

 

[Catherine_S]

Don’t think I can agree that all Irish bishops ‘get it’ - some certainly do. And as the article itself notes,** the four bishops were basically pressured into resignation by a combination of the force of public opinion and an Archbishop on a mission.** (Possibly a mission from Rome) So comparing the situation in Ireland with that in the US is really not comparing like with like.

It will be interesting to see what the Pope’s pastoral letter will contain and what changes it will mandate for the Irish Church. But whether the current Irish bishops are capable of managing and implementing that change remains to be seen.

From your* particular*** perspective,** I agree with you !**
The force of public opinion and even an Archbishop on a mission (in the larger picture) however, may just be** what the Church needs at this point in history,** not only for the sake of the Church but for the sake of all children in the future!
Just as long as they “get it” , and know that things are changing on the part of the faithful, is what counts from my particular perspective!

 

[Yellow_Belle]

From your* particular*** perspective,** I agree with you !**
The force of public opinion and even an Archbishop on a mission (in the larger picture) however, may just be** what the Church needs at this point in history,** not only for the sake of the Church but for the sake of all children in the future!
Just as long as they “get it” , and know that things are changing on the part of the faithful, is what counts from my particular perspective!

I take your point. However, it must be remembered that the extent of the mishandling of abusing priests and religious in Ireland has come to light only because the Irish state mandated independent judicial commissions of inquiry in religious-run institutions and in three dioceses. The Irish Church did not initiate this “fessing up”- it was forced upon it by the Irish state.

The dioceses within the Republic of Ireland were also the subject of a government initiated child sex abuse audit in 2006. By February 2009 only three dioceses had fully complied. In September 2009, concern was expressed at “a continuing lack of adherence by Irish Catholic bishops to implementation of the Church’s own child protection guidelines”, and that only 2 out of the 26 Irish dioceses could be said to be compliant with the Church’s own child protection guidelines. And this was just a few months after Bishop John Magee, who had been private secretary to three popes, was compelled to step aside from his diocese after it was alleged “he ignored church guidelines, state guidelines, and Vatican directives on the matter [of child protection]” Cloyne diocese is still under administration by the Archbishop of Cashel.

The point I’m trying to make here is that the Irish bishops - with some notable exceptions - have given no real indication that they ‘get it’ at all, so comparing them favourably with what happened in the US shows a lack of understanding of the complexities of the Irish situation.

 

[Catherine_S]

I take your point. However, it must be remembered that the extent of the mishandling of abusing priests and religious in Ireland has come to light only because the Irish state mandated independent judicial commissions of inquiry in religious-run institutions and in three dioceses.*** The Irish Church did not initiate this “fessing up”- it was forced upon it by the Irish state. ***

The dioceses within the Republic of Ireland were also the subject of a government initiated child sex abuse audit in 2006. By February 2009 only three dioceses had fully complied. In September 2009, concern was expressed at “a continuing lack of adherence by Irish Catholic bishops to implementation of the Church’s own child protection guidelines”, and that only 2 out of the 26 Irish dioceses could be said to be compliant with the Church’s own child protection guidelines**.** And this was just a few months after Bishop John Magee, who had been private secretary to three popes, was compelled to step aside from his diocese after it was alleged “he ignored church guidelines, state guidelines, and Vatican directives on the matter [of child protection]” Cloyne diocese is still under administration by the Archbishop of Cashel.

The point I’m trying to make here is that the Irish bishops - with some notable exceptions - have given no real indication that they ‘get it’ at all, so comparing them favourably with what happened in the US shows a lack of understanding of the complexities of the Irish situation.

Good for the Irish State !
Perhaps this same force can be brought to bare against those in other parts of the world! Even in the USA!!
I am not comparing unfairly what happened in Ireland with what happened in the USA :nope:. What I am trying to say or ask is " how can we help the Bishops in the US or anywhere else in the world to “get it” in terms of their at least accepting the fact that the tide is changing and the Catholic faithful or even the secular powers that be are fed up with this disgusting evil being inflicted upon God’s little ones, and in the future this behavior will carry with it very serious consequences indeed. How this happens, be it state inforced or whatever, things must change! If a corrupt secular power can do the job, even if their motivation is to undermine the Cathlolic Church, so be it. For the abuse of children is a horror story and within the Catholic Church this is the truth and to own this great sin is to own the truth which always sets us free!
All these crimes against children are only a little more evil and disgusting than the crimes of those* who know what is happening** and do nothing. Or worse still, those who hope it will** just all go away**.*

 

[teajay]

I read some of the so called “Murphy Report” and it surprised me. It surprised me that someone with such poor reasoning skills got to head a commission on such a serious matter. I know that Ireland is a small country, but surely they could have gotten someone more talented to head it up.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

I read some of the so called “Murphy Report” and it surprised me. It surprised me that someone with such poor reasoning skills got to head a commission on such a serious matter. I know that Ireland is a small country, but surely they could have gotten someone more talented to head it up.

Judge Murphy '‘got to head a commission on such a serious matter’ because she was appointed by the Irish government as a person eminently qualified in legal, judicial and social affairs in Ireland to do so.

Biographical Note on Judge Yvonne Murphy, Dublin Circuit Court

Married with 3 children.

Educated :
St. Louis Convent, Kiltimagh
UCD & King’s Inns

Qualifications:
1971 Barrister at Law
1973 Post Graduate Diploma in Social Science (UCD)
1985 Master of Business Studies

Work Experience:
1967-1970 Executive Officer in the Revenue Commissioners
1971-1973 Aer Lingus
1973-1979 National Social Service Board: Information officer, Head Of Information and Acting Director
1979-1982 RTE Presenter
1982-1984 Editor, Industrial Relations News
1984-1998 Practising Barrister
1988 Barrister at Law, Middle Temple, London
1993 Barrister at Law in the Court of Northern Ireland.

1998 Appointed as a Judge of the Circuit Court
2003 Appointed as a Member of the Special Criminal Court

How well qualified are you to comment on her abilities?

 

[Guyonthestreet]

I don’t think they get it at all. The chuch is Ireland is only doing what it’s doing, because it was forced to. Not one single Bishop would have resigned had their hands not been forced - precicely because they DONT get it.

All of the information that came out in the various reports came out mostly under duress and legal threats … the Church, the priests, bishops, nuns, brothers, would NEVER have come clean - after all theyve been sitting on this information for decades in some cases.

No, I don’t think they get it at all, which is why I can’t trust anything they say or do.

Sadly.

 

[rep140]

Guy,

I can see where you are coming from. I am now reading “The Bible is for Living” written by an 83 year old priest who is also a respected Biblical scholar. The theme I get from it is that the Church has a beautiful message, but is not always right. The Church is populated by humans. The same ideology of these bishops is maintained by the EWTN apologists. It would be a refreshing breath of air if they ever said that the Church or a Pope screwed up.

The only reason the the Church in Ireland or the U.S ever owned up to anything about sex is because they had to. Boy does this make me mad!

 

[teajay]

Judge Murphy '‘got to head a commission on such a serious matter’ because she was appointed by the Irish government as a person eminently qualified in legal, judicial and social affairs in Ireland to do so.

How well qualified are you to comment on her abilities?

I was not logically persuaded by many of Judge Murphy’s claims. There are other reports, such as the Ferns Report, that contain arguments that I did find persuasive.

A person does not have to be more qualified than someone else in order to disagree with them, and a well qualified person can give poor reasons for their conclusions. Such was the case with the Murphy Report.

I read part of the Murphy Report, part of the Ferns Report, and part of the U.S. Philadelphia Grand Jury Report. All are critical of the Roman Catholic Church. But the Ferns Report comes across as fair and objective whilst the Murphy Report appears, to me, to be biased. The Philadelphia Grand Jury Report was so flawed that I lost all respect for the Investigative Grand Jury system on that basis alone.

It was because of the high standards that were set by the Ferns Report that I expected the Murphy Report to be of a similarly excellent standard. That’s why I was disappointed when I read a number of parts of it and was forced to conclude that it was biased and therefore of little value.

Of course, I could be wrong Yellow Belle, but so could you.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

It was because of the high standards that were set by the Ferns Report that I expected the Murphy Report to be of a similarly excellent standard. That’s why I was disappointed when I read a number of parts of it and was forced to conclude that it was biased and therefore of little value.

Oddly, no-one else in Ireland, including those criticised - the Dublin Archdiocese, several government departments and the Garda Siochana - appear to have been ‘forced’ to a similar conclusion. Perhaps, if you had read all the reports (including the one you appear to have missed, the Ryan report) in their entirety and understood something of their differing terms of reference, we might have grounds for a debate on the issue. Until then, we’ll have to agree to differ and perhaps refrain from hijacking this thread from its stated subject.

 

[teajay]

Oddly, no-one else in Ireland, including those criticised - the Dublin Archdiocese, several government departments and the Garda Siochana - appear to have been ‘forced’ to a similar conclusion. Perhaps, if you had read all the reports (including the one you appear to have missed, the Ryan report) in their entirety and understood something of their differing terms of reference, we might have grounds for a debate on the issue. Until then, we’ll have to agree to differ and perhaps refrain from hijacking this thread from its stated subject.

It is quite plausible to suggest that those implicated determined that it would be in their best interests, from a public relations perspective, to unreservedly accept the report’s conclusions rather than engage in a more complex and easily misrepresented response.

And this thread is premised on the legitimacy of the claims made in these reports. It is not ‘hijacking’ the thread to question the accuracy of that premise.

You obviously are angry that your conclusions are being challenged and therefore it will not be productive for me to continue this discussion.

 

[NPC]

I read some of the so called “Murphy Report” and it surprised me. It surprised me that someone with such poor reasoning skills got to head a commission on such a serious matter. I know that Ireland is a small country, but surely they could have gotten someone more talented to head it up.

Are there any particular cases/sections which display Judge Murphy’s “poor reasoning skills”? I would genuinely like to see some examples; although I’ve read quite a lot of the report - I have certainly not read it all - I have not so far found her findings to be unreasonable.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

it is quite plausible to suggest that those implicated determined that it would be in their best interests, from a public relations perspective, to unreservedly accept the report’s conclusions rather than engage in a more complex and easily misrepresented response. Point taken. But that does not preclude those not

implicated, from criticising the report. To date, the only criticism I have seen from any quarter is that the investigations on which the reports are based did not include more cases.

and this thread is premised on the legitimacy of the claims made in these reports. It is not ‘hijacking’ the thread to question the accuracy of that premise. No, this thread has nothing to do with the claims made in the reports. It is based on the OP’s contention that the Irish bishops actually acknowledge voluntarily their own culpability in mishandling cases of abuse (as opposed to the reaction of US bishops in similar circumstances). The publication of the Murphy report and the resignation of Irish bishops was the context for the OP’s subject line.

you obviously are angry that your conclusions are being challenged and therefore it will not be productive for me to continue this discussion. I am not in the least angry. Forceful and interrogative, perhaps, but that is my style. And I am not the one who has written about their ‘conclusions’. Perhaps you are projecting?

 

[Bubbles65]

The Irish bishops “get it.”… Any bishop who could tolerate sexual abuse—or even stand by while others in authorities tolerated it—thereby **showed himself incapable of sound pastoral judgment. **A bishop who responds to a scandal by covering up the evidence must have either a complete indifference to the welfare of the souls assigned to his care or a

severely warped vision of what constitutes the good of the Church.

Wow. Do we get to apply the same standard to JPII? After all, he knew for a fact what Cardinal Groer was up to and did nothing for years. My, certainly loved youth there didn’t he?

Or are we all still supposed to be so stupid as to believe his pathetically passive indifference was really 'cause he thought it was all a commie plot?