Monday, 13 March 2017

SORTING OUT RELIGIOUS ORDERS

Redress scheme needs papal intervention, survivors say
RTE Mar 2017 

The Taoiseach has been urged by survivors of institutional abuse to seek an immediate papal intervention to break the deadlock between Catholic religious orders and the State over the Church's contribution to redressing the wrongs done to residents of their institutions.

The call from the advocacy group, Irish Survivors of Child Abuse, says the Catholic Church religious orders which are signatories to the 2002 Indemnity Agreement with the State have reneged on their promises to pay their fair share towards the State's redress process.

Irish SOCA made its plea for Pope Francis to break the impasse concerning abuse in a statement this afternoon.




"Enda Kenny should travel to Rome as soon as practical and demand a comprehensive and honourable settlement of all matters connected with the child abuse scandals which implicate the servants of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland.

Accusing the religious bodies of being "entirely without honour", SOCA says the only power on earth to which they are likely to respond is Pope Francis.

Owners of the largest Catholic institutions where children were abused while in State care have defended their contributions to the €1.5bn bill for paying redress to survivors.

The Christian Brothers and Sisters of Mercy were responding to: yesterday's report by the State's auditor that the 18 Catholic entities concerned had paid about 13% of the cost; and to criticism by Minister for Education Richard Bruton.

John Kelly, co-ordinator of the SOCA said that the 18 religious orders have reneged on their promises to pay their fair share.


Image result for john kelly soca
JOHN KELLY

Recalling that the orders' and congregations' solemn promises in 2002 and again in 2009 were at all times legally unenforceable, Mr Kelly said there remains a debt of honour to the Irish people which must be satisfied.

Mr Bruton had stated that the Church's progress towards shouldering its promised one-quarter share of the redress bill had gone into reverse.

The minister said he will continue to exert "moral pressure" on the religious orders for more progress in meeting their commitments to pay for the cost of residential abuse.

Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, Mr Bruton said he believed the Church should meet its responsibilities for endemic abuse where protection of the institution was prioritised over the protection of children.

In a statement the Christian Brothers' leader, Brother Edmund Garvey, said the audit report's 14-month-old figures do not take account of the congregations' more recent €14m cash payment.


BROTHER GARVEY


Brother Garvey also highlighted that playing fields worth "well over €100m" are almost ready to be transferred to the Edmund Rice Schools Trust.

He calculated that the Brothers' total contribution to help their fellow-brothers' abuse victims would rise to over €600m.

Mr Bruton said the offer of transferring playing fields into the Edmund Rice Trust by the Christian Brothers was not acceptable - rather it should be transferred to the State or sold under a joint agreement.

In a separate statement, the Sisters of Mercy said they had honoured all of their commitments.
They recalled their 2009 commitment to make a payment valued at almost €128m, €81m of which was to be paid directly to the State in the form of properties, which were worth that sum at the time.

However, they said the financial downturn had eroded the State's actual financial gains from the property transfers.

The Sisters said that they had "always made clear that the value of (their) contribution was subject to the fluctuations in value attaching to individual properties".


Minister Bruton said the Government remains of the belief that an equitable share-out of costs would be 50-50 between State and Church, but we are "a far cry" from that.

PAT SAYS:

Successive Irish Governments have been far too soft with the religious orders when it comes to making them pay their share of the abuse claims and costs.

If you or I did not pay our taxes the Tax Man would be down our neck and would be in our house making us bankrupt and taking all the possessions we had.

He would also not be afraid to put us behind bars.

Its time the Irish Government got tough with these orders.

They should even introduce new legislation if needed.

These orders are hiding behind their lawyers to whom they pay massive fees.

The courts should be used to put a freeze on all the assets of these orders and their bank accounts.

The courts should then find against them and order the CRIMINAL ASSETS BUREAU to take what they owe the State off them - with interest.

And bishop, priest or religious who deliberately tries to frustrate the State taking what it is owed should be put in handcuffs and taken to prison!


Image result for priest in handcuffs

The Catholic Church, its bishops, priests and religious have been allowed to use and abuse the Irish for far too long.

Its time to bring it all to and end.


29 comments:

  1. The Republic of Ireland Government is still bending at least half a knee to these Christ-betraying Roman Catholic institutions.

    Unionists have never been wrong about a predominantly Roman Catholic Republic of Ireland Government: it will ALWAYS be in awe of Rome. F**k Irish so-called 'reunification'. It will NEVER happen while that whore, Rome, maintains its stranglehold on gullible Irish Catholics. And CHRIST! Are these morons gullible?!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. The back pocket is the only place that will make the church and it's institutions wake up. Restitution should be fair and as agreed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pat would I be right in thinking that you have never paid a single penny in tax in your life? As a student and priest your "stamp" was paid for by the Church you so despise and attack? Your pension now is paid for by the contributions paid into this by the Archdiocese of Cardiff (of which you were a priest) and then the Diocese of Down and Connor? Don't bite the hand that feeds you. So too with Magna Carta [sic]...what an uneducated and opinionated idiot. Why do you give him space on here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am regarded by the tax man as "self employed". I make returns every year and pay tax.

      I also have paid Class 4 National Insurance Stamps personally for 31 years.

      Delete
    2. PS: I have received nothing from Cardiff since 1978 - nearly 40 years.

      I have received nothing from D&C since 1986 - 31 years.

      Delete
    3. 15:44, so you think I'm 'uneducated and opinionated' It can't be both. The uneducated usually aren't opinionated, because, er, they're uneducated.

      Do you know what 'contradiction in terms' means? Look the phrase up, because it's probably the only chance you'll get of avoiding such a logical faux pas in future.

      Oh! And why did you add ('sic') after my username 'Magna Carta'? Is it because you think I misspelt the name? That it should be written 'Magna Charta' instead? Go ahead and answer. As Dirty Harry would say: 'Make my day, punk.'

      Delete
    4. What a gimp.

      Delete
  4. Magna Carta [sic] every time you write or open your mouth you profess your ignorance. The most opinonated people are more often than not uneducated harridans. You prove the points I make (if proof were needed) with your infantile and quite frankly absurd recourse to "Dirty Harry", whoever that is. Says all we need to know about you. Really C minus all the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 17:23,if you're the poster at 15:44, why did you avoid addressing my points and answering the questions about my username? The uneducated, even if they tried, cannot usually remain opinionated, because their opinions are so easy to refute. Just like yours. So I ask again: why do you think my use of the phrase 'Magna Carta' is, as it were,'sic'?

      As for professing 'ignorance', tell me one thing I've stated that isn't true? And don't give me just your opinion, but substantiate it.

      Oh! As for the mention of 'Dirty Harry', it's a reference to a movie detective played by Clint Eastwood. Don't you know any thing.

      Oh, again! If you've never heard of this character, then how could you know that my reference to it was 'infantile...and absurd'? You keep letting yourself down intellectually.

      By the way, were you better educated, you would know that my mention of 'Dirty Harry' was purely humorous. It's a sign of intelligence and erudition that one can use humour (usually satire) to put one's opponents in their rightful place: at the feet of a master.

      Delete
    2. Your a gimp mc, simples

      Delete
    3. 19:41, you should have typed 'you're' (or 'you are'), not the possessive pronoun 'your'. (Grammatical error)

      Who's 'simples' now?

      Delete
    4. You are still a gimp. We bring you out for entertainment of the guests.

      Delete
    5. MC, you must not get laid often, if at all.

      Delete
    6. 20:04, and you're (note 'you're') an illiterate 'gimp-caller'.

      Please, if you have a mind to insult me, do so with greater aplomb (I mean 'gimp'?), and better grammar. I do have standards to maintain. I expect my detractors to show better than juvenile intelligence.

      20:06, was that a proposition?

      Delete
    7. Let me see, i will call this one. MC, ex seminarian or ex priest. Gay. Frustrated. Limited intellectual ability and confuses that said ability with intelligence.

      Delete
    8. Lol, bring out the gimp!

      Delete
    9. Pat, seriously, you talk about censoring verbal abuse, but all i can see here is name calling, gimps etc. You have double standards.

      Delete
    10. 20:43, I've got right under you skin, haven't I?
      Well, it shows you have impeccable taste in men.

      Gay? Would it matter if I were? You used the word in a derogatory sense. Otherwise why use it? Would you call someone out for being straight? No, of course you wouldn't.

      It's true what a wise man once said: 'Only the uneducated are homophobes.' And you are, alas, a homophobe. (In case you're...take note again, 19:41 of 'you're' here... wondering who is this wise man, it was, of course, I.

      As for ex-anything, I am...

      Delete
    11. Ah, there we have it. Gay and bitter rejected religious. Bon voyage bitches!

      Delete
    12. 21:38, oh dear! Your hermeneutic is so far off the mark.

      Delete
  5. 15:44 and 17:23, still waiting for you to justify using 'sic' after my username.

    What's wrong? Is your tail still between your retreating hind legs?

    ReplyDelete
  6. 15:44 and 17:23, game, set and match to me. Hah! Hah! Hah! Hah!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nah, you are very much a gimp.

      Delete
    2. 22:56, you intellectually poor child. Hah! Hah!

      Delete
  7. Feels sooooooo good to be on top. And I always am...on top. Hah!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I was asleep there a while on the sofa - - Boys o'boys--looks like I missed all the craic!

    ReplyDelete
  9. It was the State which came up with the ridiculous redress scheme which was free money and affectively no burden of proof.

    ReplyDelete