Peter Tatchell

There is an guest post on the "Harry's Place" blog by Gay activist Peter Tatchell entitled "On the Pope’s state visit to Britain". It contains the text of Peter Tatchell’s speech at the Protest the Pope public meeting at the Old Town Hall, Richmond, on 12 August 2010 which begins

Pope Benedict comes to Britain next month. As democrats, we believe he has every right to come here and express his opinions. But we also have a right to protest against his often harsh, extreme views. We have a right to say that he is not welcome.

The Protest the Pope campaign is calling on the British government to disassociate itself from the Pope’s intolerant teachings on issues such as women’s rights, gay equality and the use of condoms to prevent the spread of HIV. On these and many other issues, Benedict is out of step with the majority of British people, including most Catholics. ..... and includes the following gem:

While condemning loving, consenting adult same-sex relations, the Pontiff played a role in shielding Catholic clergy guilty of child sex abuse from prosecution.

There are 32 responses to date including the following two:

[A] A Bit Dark… 14 August 2010, 1:31 am

“While condemning loving, consenting adult same-sex relations, the Pontiff played a role in shielding Catholic clergy guilty of child sex abuse from prosecution.”

Peter Tatchell, 2010.

“Lee is 14. He’s been having sex with boys since the age of eight, and with men since he was 12. Lee has a serious problem. He wants a steady relationship and has been going out recently with a guy in his mid-twenties, who he met at the hairdressers. But in the eyes of the law, Lee’s partner is ‘a paedophile’ and Lee is’ a victim of child abuse’. That’s not, however, the way Lee sees it:

“I want to have a boyfriend. It’s my choice. No one’s abusing me. Why should we be treated like criminals?”.

I am sitting in the kitchen of a friend’s house talking with Lee. Wearing a white T-shirt and combat trousers, his sophisticated gay image makes him look older than 14. He comes across as bright, articulate, sure of himself, and mature beyond his years. It’s hard to imagine anyone getting away with taking advantage of him.”

Peter Tatchell, 1997

http://www.ipce.info/newsletters/e_22/2_16_Lee.htm

[B] Kilbarry1 14 August 2010, 10:39 am

@ A Bit Dark

Re Peter Tatchell
The 1997 article you quote by Tatchell is on the IPCE website. According to its homepage http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/

Welcome to the Homepage of the Ipce Web Site

Ipce is a forum for people who are engaged in scholarly discussion about the understanding and emancipation of mutual relationships between children or adolescents and adults.

In this context, these relationships are intended to be viewed from an unbiased, non-judgmental perspective and in relation to the human rights of both the young and adult partners.

Ipce meets once every one or two years in a different country, publishes a newsletter and a web site, co-ordinates the (electronic) exchange of texts and keeps an archive of specific written publications. [among which is Peter Tatchell's article].

According to “The Free Dictionary” the definition of the acronym is

IPCE International Pedophile and Child Emancipation

Well there are other possible meanings but in the current context it is unlikely to stand for:
IPCE Independent Parametric Cost Estimate
IPCE Interprofessional Cancer Education etc
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/IPCE

Bishop John Magee and Ian Elliot

The folllowing is an extract from my article on Bishop John Magee. It may help to explain the hostile report produced by Ian Elliott, chief executive of the National Board for the Safeguarding of Children

http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/accused/bishop-john-magee/index.php

Ian Elliott and Bishop Magee
A clue to the attitude of Ian Elliott towards Bishop Magee can be gained from an episode in April 2008 in which Mr Elliott was quoted in the Sunday Tribune (20 April) as saying: "The national board for the safeguarding of children in the Catholic Church has been made aware of issues surrounding the handling of allegations of abuse within the Diocese of Cloyne. The board has not received the full information and documentation requested of the diocese. We are trying hard to resolve these difficulties and have sought an urgent meeting with the diocese to progress these matters further."

In its statement in response, the Diocese of Cloyne said that Bishop Magee and other representatives had met Mr Elliot on two occasions. "These meetings were cordial and productive," said the statement, adding that Bishop Magee later wrote to Mr Elliott offering to meet him on either April 4th, 7th, 14th or 21st as well as promising to co-operate fully and provide him with access to all relevant files. Mr Elliott wrote back on April 14th, indicating that he was unable to fix a date for a meeting until after April 17th, and that he would be in contact to discuss other possible dates. The Diocese statement said his comments were therefore "surprising".

Bishop John Magee and Cloyne Report

I completed the main draft of my article concerning Bishop John Magee yesterday as Judge Yvonne Murphy's Report on the Cloyne diocese is due to be published this autumn. I would expect it to ignore most of the salient issues e.g. the previous false allegations of sex abuse directed at Bishop Magee in 1994 and 1999. Anyway the following are the last two sections of my essay which is at:
http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/accused/bishop-john-magee/index.php

AFTERMATH TO PUBLICATION OF NBSC REPORT IN DECEMBER 2008

Prior to December 2008 the Gardai had submitted several files to the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to allegations against two priests of the Cloyne Diocese. In every case the Director stated that no criminal prosecution should be brought. In December 2008 Garda Superintendent Pat Carey confirmed that there were no current investigations relating to alleged child abuse by priests in the Cloyne diocese.

After Bishop Magee published the NBSC Report in December 2008 there were a spate of further criminal allegations - including one against the Bishop himself. It may be that Bishop Magee published the Report in the expectation that it would "heal the pain" of the alleged victims and "promote reconciliation" with them. If so, he was very much mistaken!

CONCLUSION - THE BISHOPS AND THE NUNS

In the early stages of child abuse hysteria in Ireland the Bishops - including John Magee himself - were prepared to defend the innocent even to the extent of suing newspapers and TV stations that published false allegations of child abuse. The Christian Brothers did likewise - at least to some extent. However the Sisters of Mercy grovelled from the beginning and went out of their way to apologise to people who were making, what were obviously, false claims. (Their rationale seems to be that false accusers are suffering deep pain and the way to heal their pain is to apologise to them.)

In 2004 two events combined to end all ecclesiastical resistance to false allegations. These were the appointment of Diarmuid Martin as Archbishop of Dublin and a further dramatic apology by the Merciful Sisters. After this the Bishops - led by Martin - abandoned any effort to defend their priests; in effect they adopted the policy of the nuns. This is what Bishop Magee did in December 2008 when he published a report that both slandered his own priests and made it impossible for them to sue the report's authors.

The effects of this policy of appeasement were catastrophic for Magee, for the Catholic Church and indeed for all falsely accused persons. Of course the Sisters disclaim all responsibility and blame the Bishops! In an article in the Irish Times on 14 November 2009, Patsy McGarry quotes Bishop Willie Walsh (a great admirer of Archbishop Martin):
He had been speaking recently to the leadership team of the Mercy congregation’s southern province, “women who have given their lives in the service of the church”, and who were “very broken, very sad”. They felt “let down by us, the bishops”.

Bishop Willie - like Martin - is a gutless wonder who never condemns false allegations of child abuse. So it is unlikely that the "very broken, very sad" Sisters whom he quotes, are blaming himself. Presumably they are blaming those Bishops who originally defended the innocent!

No doubt every ruling class becomes morally corrupt before it becomes extinct but even a Franz Kafka would find it difficult to do justice to the decadence of the leadership of the Catholic Church in Ireland today.

Kafkaesque = "Marked by surreal distortion and often a sense of impending danger" (Wikipedia definition).

Labour Councillors Join Mob Harrassment of Innocent Family

Councillor Nicky Kelly and fellow Councillors accept petition at Redcross Commumity Hall.

The following is from a discussion on www.politics.ie regarding a mother and her four children who have been hounded out of four houses in Co Wicklow because her husband was convicted of a sex offence against a minor 18 YEARS AGO! (He got a suspended sentence of six months at the time).

Labour Councillors Join Mob Harrassment of Innocent Family

The family have been hounded out of Kilcoole, Redcross, Rathnew and Ashford. I think they are all in the Archdiocese of Dublin which covers most of Co. Wicklow as well. Ashford certainlly is and that is where their house was burned down.

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has become a great hero of the liberal media because of the way he has dealt with allegations of child sexual abuse. He cannot make a speech without denouncing the evils of abuse and apologising for the way the Church dealt with them in the past. He even put pressure on Bishop Martin Drennan to resign even though NO criticism had been made of him in the Murphy Report. (Like the Wicklow mob, the Archbishop seems to believe in guilt by association.)

http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/Politicians%20and%20Others/archbishop-martin/index.php

Would it be too much to ask the Archbishop to condemn the behaviour of the people who hound an innocent mother and her four children? The mob are abusing these innocents. Moreover the hysteria and fanaticism generated by the mob will rebound on real victims of child sexual abuse in the future. Cynicism is what normally follows after Hysteria.

Bishop John Magee and False Allegations of Child Abuse

The following is my comment on an article in Ciaran’s Peculier [sic] Blog
http://ciaranparker.com/2008/12/22/news-from-nowhere/#comment-1469

QUOTE:No one can say that Bishop Magee has been guilty of any wrong-doing in the diocese of Cloyne. However, I knew of a priest who once served under him. This man was in many ways an archetypal Irish Catholic priest, middle-aged, and with somewhat prejudiced views about the modern world. However, when asked about Dr Magee, he said but one thing. “That man is evil.”

And then again there were rumours, only rumours, that the bishop of Cloyne liked to pay social visits to London, but not to visit the Victoria and Albert museum or take in a show. ENDQUOTE

Is this what you mean by any chance?
“Guardian Apology to Bishops for Paedophile Ring Claim [1994]”
http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/accused/bishop-john-magee/TheGuardianandBishopMagee.php

The following is an extract from an article by Sam Smyth in the Sunday Independent on 10 April 1994:

“Eight days ago an article by Susie MacKenzie in The Guardian weekend supplement about celibacy and the Catholic priesthood made a reference to a bishop’s involvement in a paedophile ring. It outraged the Catholic Hierarchy who apparently considered taking a class libel suit on behalf of the country’s 30 bishops. On Friday the Bishop’s Conference announced that they had made a formal complaint to the Guardian and Bishop Thomas Flynn said they were “highly offended”.

“The Guardian said it is taking the complaint “very seriously”. THE SOURCE OF THE INFORMATION ON WHICH THE ‘BISHOP AND PAEDOPHILE RING’ ALLEGATION WAS MADE IS UNDERSTOOD TO BE A PRIEST. [My emphasis].

“According to research, it would not be surprising if there was one homosexual among any 30 men, although there is not one iota of evidence to suggest that there is a gay Irish bishop. BUT ALL THE RUMOURS CIRCULATED TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS A PRACTISING HOMOSEXUAL AMONG THE IRISH CATHOLIC HIERARCHY HAVE PROVED TO BE FALSE – AND THERE MIGHT WELL HAVE BEEN MALICE IN THE MANUFACTURING OF THEM.”

Scandal In Belgian Church (2) - Cardinal Danneels

The following is the part of the discussion regarding Rod Drehers article Danneels Approved Pedophilic Cathchism? (url is at end)

Perry Bulwer
June 30, 2010 2:57 PM
http://www.perrybulwer.com/religion-and-child-abuse-news

Rod, the link you provide at the top of the article is now dead. It seems the article you took those quotations from has been removed from that website, so it's a good thing you quoted much of it. Dead links to news articles is one reason I started keeping a blog archive of news articles related to child abuse in religious contexts.


Rory Connor
July 1, 2010 3:40 AM
http://www.irishsalem.com

Perry
The article "The Fall of the Belgian Church" by Alexandra Colen is on my website. The url is
http://www.irishsalem.com/international-controversies/europe/fallofbelgianchurch-24jun10.php

and I have also linked it to its original publication in "The Brussels Journal".

The reason the link at the top of this article no longer works may be because Alexandra Colen's article contains a copy of one of the offending illustrations from the Begian catechism. This drawing showed a naked baby girl saying: “Stroking my pussy makes me feel groovy,” “I like to take my knickers off with friends,” “I want to be in the room when mum and dad have sex.” Panic about paedophilia has reached such a level that people may be afraid that showing the ilustration will attract paedophiles.

Yet in the 1990s Alexandra Colen was sneered at by the liberal media in Belgium because she objected to these illustrations and the message they conveyed!

Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/roddreher/2010/06/danneels-approved-pedophilic-catechism_comments.html#ixzz0sTcZaYEJ

Scandal in Belgian Church - Cardinal Godfried Danneels

This is a Comment I made on Rod Dreher's Blog BeliefNet that sums up my attitude to the scandal in the Belgian Church. His article is called Danneels approved pedophilic catechism? and I wrote this on 30 June 2010:

I have gathered together a dozen different artcles on this scandal on my website www.irishsalem.com. The url of the relevant section is
http://www.irishsalem.com/international-controversies/europe/index.php

I have not had time to do a commentary yet but one thing that strikes me is the similarity to the Father Paul Shanley scandal in the USA. Shanley was a promiscous homosexual and also a "gay" icon in the 1960s and 70s. Many conservative Catholics complained bitterly to the Church authorities about him and eventually, in 1979, he was removed from his "gay outreach" project in Boston. He was not however, removed from the priesthood. Even his supporters acknowledge that he was probably having sex with adolescent boys who were about (or below) the age of consent but "liberals" didn't bother about that at the time.

Then in 2002 Shanley was accused of having raped FOUR eight year children decades before. His 4 accusers - all of whom knew each other - declared that they had "repressed" their memories for decades but had just "recovered" them. All of Shanley's gay and liberal friends believed this proposterous story and deserted him. He was convicted on Recovered Memory evidence alone and the Massacheutetts Supreme Court recently refused his appeal and affirmed the validity of this voodoo brain science.

Cardinal Danneels is no Paul Shanley in his personal life but there are certain similarities. Belgian liberals loved the "liberal" Cardinal and sneered at his conservative critics - like Alexandra Colen when she protested at this repulsive "catechism". Now they have turned on the Church and see nothing wrong in desecrating tombs in order to search for hidden documents - straight out of the Da Vinci Code! The Belgian Church degraded itself by adopting the values of the world and now the world despises it and wants to destroy it. It is an end without honour or dignity.

Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/roddreher/2010/06/danneels-approved-pedophilic-catechism_comments.html#ixzz0sM7wlGOH