Why is the church still running our schools?

by Seamus Wed Nov 16, 2005 13:29

Good point. Bertie is quoted recently as saying that if the Catholic church pulled out of running the schools "we would never not manage". Somehow I think we would manage just fine, in fact its high time the "church" got the boot out of our schools and our hospitals too!
S

by Gyro Wed Nov 16, 2005 13:41

For the love of God, the almighty, when will we realise that the Church Teachings e.g. the Ten Commandments is a very proven and worthwhile Template on how we should live our lives. The religious people are the only ones that take it upon themselves to educate us on this stark fact. Now, we can't get Robots to do this teaching, so we have to rely on people like ourselves i.e. susceptible to weaknesses of the flesh etc. I am not condoning such crass behaviour that some of our our priests are charged with. But let us inform ourselves as to what is happening: the Bald Fact is that our religious are now an elderly community and some are on sought after real estate. They are prone to the very real human weakness i.e. take advantage of the elderly! A society that gets so bitter against its own elderly priests is doomed in my opinion; what goes round ,comes round!

The teaching of the Church gives us an understanding of the value of life, how to live that life and pass on the customs and beliefs that we inherited from our forbearers to our future generation. Sideline that teaching and you get anarchy. Wealth will increase, young men and women being exploited to generate profit, birth rate collapses. France is further down this road than we are. The birthrate of Muslims being three to four times higher than that of non-Muslims, the proportion of children, teenagers, and young adults in urban France is not 5-11 percent but a very impressive 33 percent or so. All nations who sidelined the teaching of religion in their schools are now becoming wealthy old aged societies! Need I go on and relate what will become of such societies. They will implode from within and without. Pure unadulterated ignorance is somehow impeding us from understanding this logic!
See the piece "Discount the wealth of a childless nation; you'll get zero value! " under the related link below.

by iosaf Wed Nov 16, 2005 14:04

check your underwear now!

Would it have been cleaner with the old traditional ways which offered employment and shelter to the unfortuanates who in their day did their bit to stop population decline?

by Con Carroll - Class-war Wed Nov 16, 2005 16:08

Isof
take the issue seriously
bishop Diarmuid Martin in a meeting with women who were in Magdalene Laundries, that he used to get his laundry done there. that the women never donea great job starching his shirts
all religions should be left outside the class room door.
why arethey still in education in most places this no longer exists. as their members are eldery. recruitsare no longer around thanks be to public awarness. the right to masturbation with another consenting man/woman

by Lefty type Wed Nov 16, 2005 16:19

dont kill, dont steal, be nice to other ppl. lovely sentiment and stuff that i'd wholeheartedly agree with. in fact the church has got *SOME* very valid liefestyle advice. however all this rubbish about some deity sitting up there strokin his beard i dont get. what has chanting a few slogans about divinity every sunday got to do with everyday life?

and why this whole magic act crap they put on? i mean if jesus really did fly and walk on water and read minds or whatever, how does his message apply to HUMANS?

so an alien came down from space and got my oul one up the duff, bless her she's a tight bitch and has never done the dirty deed. she must be a god of some sort, which gives me freaky cool superpowers. sounds like a cartoon, but it is the commonly held belief of over 1 billion people.

excuse my cynicism but i think i'll stay in the minority of non-believers. at least we've got a grip on reality

by dara Wed Nov 16, 2005 18:34

with that in mind, getting the priests out of schools becomes the imperative of every right thinking person.

I think we can pass on customs, beliefs etc. without an institution of violence, domination, oppression, repression and depression doing it... i think we can do it a hell of a lot better too...

Central to Gyro's absurd comments is the assumption of transcendent knowledge and morality. Supposedly, there is some sort of transcendent moral order (what does it look like?) and we can only access it through the knowledge that the Church gives us.

Clearly this transcendent system of morality cannot be anything but authoritarian, since it attempts to prescribe normative human relations, and to impose single meanings upon actions and thought. It destroys any idea of the individual, self-creating subject, since all being is brought back to these concepts.

Of course, any attempts at transgression are brought back into line with severe and horrific consequences. Hence, the laundries, the schools, the endemic and systematic abuse of all kinds. Violence is not the exception to this system, it is the ruling concept, it is the way in which hierarchy and normativity are maintained. To use any illusory 'positive aspects' of the Church to say that abuse is bad, but the Church is a good institution is ridiculous, it is an attempt at 'inoculation', that is the use of a class-bound institution's accidental evil to distract attention from its primary function.

by Gyro Wed Nov 16, 2005 19:39

Nothing that has been said by other commentators has persuaded me to change my views. If I think something is right, I feel an obligation to communicate this to others. It is their prerogative to dismiss anything I say and reject it.

Yes, Dara, the individual seems to be supreme in the EU today as backed up by the European parliament’s interpretation of human rights. Many Roman Catholic ideas are rejected in modern Europe and the stabilization influence it brings. Anything goes! Ironically people will end up believing any kind of rubbish, because deep down they desperately seek a meaning in life.

We can put men on the moon. This would never have arisen if ideas were not capable of being taught and learned in school etc.

Against God's authority! You have not seen anything yet! In the absence of belief in God and the protection and security of the family; the only authority left will be the State, which will be unaccountable to no one; rule by the deaf, blind and can’t recallers, when challenged to account! The innocents will suffer. This is inevitable if all life's religious supporting structures are pulled down one by one by allowing a free for all i.e. divorce, abortion etc. Anarchy will reign and the blind will take control. I trust we will then all file into step! It is happening! Let's pray that it is a benign authority! I guess all the cards are in the anarchists hands; the priests are powerless; the EU is for individual over the community; the birth rate has collapsed.

I'm tired; thank you all for the further enlightenment and to Sean who opened the debate! You gave me a lot to reflect on! I am just hoping that you are not 100% serious in what you say.

by dara Wed Nov 16, 2005 22:59

try engaging with what people say, rather than spouting horsheshit about the world going down the tubes and oh! isn't it a sad state of affairs that we don't say our rosaries.

i attempted to do an offhand analysis of the violent hierarchies that underlie religion, don't address me unless you're prepared to deal with what I'm saying.

anarchy does not reign when the 'blind take control'. Anarchy is a movement from power that controls, dominates, oppresses to power as self-power, where individuals determine their own identities. What you're saying seems to be based on anger at the Enlightenment happening; get over it, its been long enough.

Neither God nor Master.

by arthur Wed Nov 16, 2005 23:27

The parents should do the religous teaching especially as the may be asked the awkward questions by their offspring later. If as mitchondrial dna is now able to confirm that we all came from Africa approximately seventy thousand years ago then we should be of the same belief system if it has to be logical.The only reason in NI there is so many problems is that some associate the schools with Irish republicanism and no other reason for looking for the united stuff .
Numbers 31 paragraphs 13 to 18 is a good read in the Bible ,for those with an open mind.There will never be any real freedom until beliefs systems are out of the schools.

by Headmuzik - (WSM Personal Capacity) Fri Nov 18, 2005 13:31

Gyro contends that "the Ten Commandments is(sic) a very proven and worthwhile Template on how we should live our lives.".
Well, you often get religous people who regurgitate this little cliche, and the reason can only be that very few of them have actually sat down with the Ten Commandments and asked themselves : Are They? Are they really the best moral compass we have?
It's actually not very difficult to make a strong case that they are a very poor moral compass indeed, and that as a compilation of "core" moral guides, they leave an awful lot to be desired.
For instance, the first "Thou Shalt Not Have Any Gods Before Me", would suggest that Christianity be the only valid religion and all others either outlawed or repressed. a recipe for intolerance, bigotry and religious hatred. Not a very strong one to start with is it?
No.2 "Thou Shalt Not Make Graven Images"
Another one, which in its full expanded form contains the line "for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God,".
So great, another one based on jealousy and encouraging religious sectarianism.
No.3 - Thou Shalt Not Take the Name of the Lord in Vain".
Well, God thats a important one isnt it. The downfall of western society will obviously be brought on by people going about saying "Jesus!" when they stub their toe on something. Riiiight.
No.4 Remember the Sabbath, Keep It Holy
- Okay, take is easy on a Sunday/or Saturday if you're jewish, fine, but not exactly a world shaking moral issue is it??!
No.5 Honor Thy Father and Mother
OK. But what about the rights of the child? If this is taken to suggest that the authority of parents should never be challenged you have a recipe for abuse on your hands.
No.6 Thou Shalt Not Kill
AHA! Finally, something substantial. BUT, look a bit more closely.. what about killing in self-defence, is that justifiable? What about killing animals for food? What about killing bugs? Hmm, No unambiguously clear answers on that one then...
No.7 - Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery
You must be careful to put this in context. Ancient Hewbrews had a very different idea of what constituted adultery. What they meant by Adultery was only sex between a married woman and any man.The marital status of the man was irrelevant. Sexist? You bet, but thats what they meant by it.
You can update it for todays world sure but why then was it engraved on stone?
No.8 Thou Shalt Not Steal
Well, seems simple enough, but maybe you need to look more closely at history and economics. For instance, what would you call the "enclosures" in britain? Can a state "steal" money? Isn't that what we call taxes? What about profit? Does your employee ask permission to take those profits from your labor? Why is that not stealing?And what if you're starving with hunger and need to get something to survive? Which do you value more.. property or human life? This is a much deeper and more complex issue than it appears.
No.9 Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness
If you take this broadly to mean "do not lie"... well anyone with reasonable experience of life will see how difficult not lying will make any sort of social interaction!! Like, say if you were to commit one minor indiscretion while married, would you tell your wife all the details? Maybe, maybe not, but you could both have a very happy life together without her ever knowing, while telling her would undoubedly cause her great pain.. Which do you value more... a person's feelings,, or the truth, no matter what damage it would cause?Life is not always so clear cut
Finally No.10 - Thou Shalt Not Covet
Right...thats what the Celtic Tiger was all about :)
Basically, as long as we live in a society that values property and ownership over people, people will continue to "covet". Now Im off to watch MTV Cribs :)

So what great moral issues of our time do these deal with. Do they give us an answer to debates about Abortion? about Divorce? Stem Cells?
Immigration? They seem to have completely omitted any mention or condemnation of slavery.. thats a bit of an oversight isnt it? Especially considering when they were drafted, slavery was considered perfectly acceptable!
I dont see how the Ten Commandments are either a good core moral guide or particularly relevant to the most pressing moral issues of our time....

As for the church as a moral compass... you remember what they did to Galileo? Or the Inquisition? Or the Crusades? Or, to bring us right up to date....what they have done to our children here in Ireland?

by lola - the church of the enchanting wizard of rhythm stevie wonder Fri Nov 18, 2005 13:48

yeah what about the 11th commandment; i think it went something like this; " thou shalt not interfere with thy children".

oooh theres bound to be trouble now.

anyway its all a bit suspicious to me. what with their condemnation of the stay safe programme and the fact that they run 92% of the schools in this country.

by Seamus Breathnach Sat Nov 19, 2005 17:19 sbreathnach at eircom dot net Brookfield Court, Dartry. (01) 4060484

Dear Sir,

The Church is not and never was the moral compass of society

While the above statement is true , it is, on reflection, also false and totally false. After the Christian Conquest , fully achieved between the fourth and the twelfth centuriues in Ireland, the RC interest, extending from the Diocese of Ossory to meet the Norman (Christian Invasion), was total, immovable and indifferent.

Unlike the British the Irish, as cow-herders, simple and superstitious, could never resist either the Mediteranean Myth or the more physical Normans. Even today all Ireland lives under the shadow of some Norman ruins or some forgotten Bishop's mausoleum. A primitive and mediaeval paradigm pervades the whole notion of Ireland, Irish people, Irish culture, the Irish sense of past, present and future, and the Irish sense of organization.

By Irish is really meant 'mediaeval Catholic' and you will find that Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, The Labour Party, Sinn Fein, etc. -- indeed, every organisation that the 'Irish' attempt to institute -- will be made in the same pyrmidical fashion as the RC Church. What is within, says Hegel, is invariably without. Villages, Parishes, Towns , Cities, the GAA, RTE, the IFA --they will all answer the inner value system and create accordingly, all thinking that they live in some aura of utter freedom to choose their destiny, whereas, behaving more like 'sheep in a flock' - if you'll excuse the comparison -- they all cloak themselves with the same structural type and will listen to the 'ethics committee' organised by the RC church in the end.

The schools thre to four thousand of them , are the Church dynamo.

Now ,tell me, who in Irish life (with the recent exception of Liz O'Donnell) has seriously reflected, much less questioned, this arrangement. By the way, these schools are not controlled by the Parish Priests and the RC Church; they are owned by them.... So, too are the third level institutions owned by them and manned by Opus Dei types, ex-priests and ex-nuns. In this sense,therefore, it is true to say that the Irish do not have even one University of a real nature : all, including TCD, is a Cathollic house of propaganda. And it is no good finding fault with this or that Doctorate or Phd; from Maynooth outwards, the offers are only made to those who sing the imperial Roman song.

Why else do you imagine that James Joyce ran out of the country? And was then followed by 50,000 sensible protestants, 200,000 Catholic emigrants inthe '60s, O'Casey, Edna O'Brien, Peter Lennon, Dermot Morgan, etc.,etc.. The literary establishment betrayed Joyce's single-handed attack on the Holy Roman Empire, some even selling themselves and their great talents to the Fianna Fail mob, to the Labour mob,and to every gang of Irishmen who took the Roman shilling. Sinn Fein, unfortunately, are too atavistic to be different. The ground that they have won, is now inherited by the celibate army, who will soon dictate the peace.

Further, Bertie's admission of being unable to proceed in educaiton without the Church's is no more that the horrific fact of the condition of Irish life. Unlike any other so-called democracy, the Irish statelet, does not control the Church; it is indeed, from beginning to end, the product ,the creation, the minion of the Church. All political parties are moulded and licensed by the RC church. All spokesmen are allowed to speak with reference and in deference to the Chruch. It wasn't just De Valera who gave our constitution to the Pope to draft, but the radicals like Sean MacBride (a Catholic zealot), Whitaker, and all the politicoes who were allowed to run anything , including Haughey, who was permitted to allow contraceptives, on condition they were sold only to married persons and to thoise who were 'bona fide' purchasers.

The women in the present Dail voted agasint constracpetives. And the Hanafins decided that Irish people could not be trusted with freedom, so Des took a constitutional action ( a rather extreme thing to do if the money involve was his own rather than that of Fianna Fail or Opus Dei's) to stop all Irish people from ever exercising their right to choose for themselves or to arrange their own family-life. Why on earth would anyone give a vote to someone so obviously totalitarian and so objectionally Roman?

As Bertie said,or meant to say:

"I didn't get where I am today without ringing All Hallows"

Neither did any other Irish Taoiseach, politician, or rate collector.

Home Rule is Rome Rule, OK

And if you want to know how the educational ownership extends to the rest of Irish life, including the recent deal done by the Church with Fianna Fail, see

www.irishciminology.com

Seamus Breathnach

by Sonya Oldham - Parent Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:53 sonyaoldham at yahoo dot com

I have many reasons for wishing the seperation of education and the religious orders, the above piece highlights one concern. The main one though is that i do not believe in Catholicism , i have read the Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi scrolls and they have confirmed what i have always believed.
Because of all this and the recent highlighting of the facts on the news i have started an MSN group for anyone wishing to see Religion seperated from our education system. The address is contained in related links.
Please join and add your voice, i am hoping we can start a petition etc that will give a voice to the many who wish to see this seperation.
I opened the group 1 day ago and already 5 have joined so add your voice!

by Fr Dave Heywood - RC Priest Tue Dec 06, 2005 18:31

While the abuse of children is evil and never excusable, it is a mistake to make all priests and personnel of the Catholic Church the scapegoat in this regard. Some priests have been found to be paedophiles and they, and the Church, must take responsibility for this. In reality, and thankfully, they are a minority. Most priests are good men trying to serve God by serving the people entrusted to them.

In respect of the schools in Ireland, history testifies to the fact that most of its present education system was founded by the Catholic Church and its Religious Orders. For the most part, they have provided an enormous gift to children and laid the foundations of an excellent education system.

Don't write off everyone because of a few, and don't do a diservice to the majority of victims of abuse who are suffering even now as I write. The majority of abuse takes place in the family and the extended family. When are we going to have the courage and resources to face this reality?

I cannot excuse the actions of the Church wherever there has been 'covering up', ignorance or even blatant stupidity. At the same time it is easy for society to throw stones in one corner and ignore the wider picture. We fail our children when we do this.

To ask all clergy to be removed from schools is unjust, ignorant of the facts concerning abuse, and tantamount to making the Catholic Church a scapegoat for the evils that occur throughout society. If 26 uncles were found guilty of abuse in a particular area, would you ask all uncles in the country to be removed from Catholic schools? Present statistics dictate that there will be a lot more family members guilty of abuse in the same area.

As human beings, we must do all we can to stop the evil of abuse. In order to do this, we need to work together or we let our children down badly.

by Peter Tue Dec 06, 2005 18:38

"To ask all clergy to be removed from schools is unjust, ignorant of the facts concerning abuse, and tantamount to making the Catholic Church a scapegoat for the evils that occur throughout society. If 26 uncles were found guilty of abuse in a particular area, would you ask all uncles in the country to be removed from Catholic schools? Present statistics dictate that there will be a lot more family members guilty of abuse in the same area."

Fair enough point but what do you think about their roles on boards of management etc? It's not a case of individual teachers working in a school but that the church de facto runs schools.

by Fr Dave Heywood Tue Dec 06, 2005 18:54

The Church is entitled to run its own schools.

If an organisation sets up a foundation and invests huge resources in that foundation, it is entitled to run the foundation with accountability (which is in place through the Department of Education).

If people don't want to go to Catholic Schools, they can ask the State to set up Independant Schools. We live in a free society afterall.

by Seamus Breathnach Tue Dec 06, 2005 21:02 Dartry, Dublin

Why is the church still running our schools?


WWW.IRISHCRIMINOLOGY.COM


Good for you Fr. Dave Heywood! It is somewhat miraculous that you have left your pulpit and come down to talk to us mere mortals. On giving your name I contratulate you, and in your reply you might let us know where you come from. 'Our Church' has an abiding way of moving its personnell around the Empire so as to confuse the locals, you know.

If you are bona fide, then one is delighted to hear from you. As a matter of fact I think I have been looking for people like you for years and years. Most priests I know like to talk down to people under circumstances in which the people can never respond. The Sermon was a great invention of the Catholic Church -- the people get on their knees and the Church fulminates from its ass. In the overall its a kind off penitential government: whereby the celibat-ing class governs the copulatng classes.

I doubt if you are up to my anger -- for I actually saw what Irish priesteens and their Christian Brothers and celibate Sisters have did to the little children who were my friends. I don't mean the sexual assaults, but I would like to remind you that the sexual assaults were an aside from the original complaint at the 1975 Penal Commission.

We had, as you are probably aware two Penal Commmissions in a country that had none for 100 years. One was piloted by the then PRO (unofficial) in the name of the people, and the other had all the money in the world and actually ran around the world under one Ken Whitaker. While the State supported the one headed by Ken Whitaker, both were heavily policed by Jesuits calling themselves Sociologists --and both of them found nothing , even though the Artane boys stated repeatedly how they had been ill-treated in Artane.

But it is neither sexual abuses nor Artane or , indeed, the Industrial and Reformatiory Schools of which I speak. I speak of the ordinary national schools -- of which there are, according to our Taoiseach (who imagines he is against torturing prisoners) three to four thousand in the ownership of the Roman Catholic Church. Now ,I know when the Church is looking for money, it is "our Church", but for all intents and purposes outside this one exception, these schools are owned entirely by 'your Church'. And it is in these schools that the Priests and especially their Christian Brothers and Nuns, beat young children repeatedly, programatically and systematically.

Indeed, if you are really interested in stemming the very violent and inquisitional nature of your Church, you might inquire into the Irish Traveller Website. Why? It is the only WebSite, so far as I know, which recalls the Catholic Church's horrific stance agasint Gypsies at precisely the same time as your Pope, Benedict XVI , was a uniformed and card-carrying member of the Hitlerjugend -- the parents of whom exterminated the Gypsies, some of them even younger than the then Herr Ratzinger. And it is at this same time -- the 1940s -- that the violent abuse of young Catholic children of which I speak took place on a daily basis.

You say that "the abuse of children is evil and never excusable". I agree, but you should take this up with 'your' Church ; for it has never quite come to terms with its own nature,not even after all the Inquisitions it staged throughout Europe.

Moreover, when I was young they supported their control of children not just with violence but with pearls of wisdom that encouraged violence against children. Pears like "Spare the Rod and Spoil the Child" or "Children should be Seen and not Heard". Tell them -- not us -- about your new found humanism ; for I can hardly imagine that you want to hear what I saw them doing five days a week.

Do you know that one boy actually did his number twos -- to his lifelong embarrassment -- in the middle of the class-room. and it wasn't becasue he was beaten , but because he was afraid of the beating that might happen. Did you know that another boy JD was sent to Daingean where he was whipped with a cat-o-nine tails by Christian Brothers. The marks are still visible on his back and he will carry them all the days of his life. JD's crime was that he was good with a ' gat'. A 'gat' was a capapult made from a fork of wood, two strips of car-rubber and a thongs of leather. JD killed two ducks. He was deadly with a gat. For this he was separated from his parents for the period of his life betwen the ages of 12 and 16. JD will not make a legitimate claim against the Taxpayer because he cannot bring himself to document the horrors of his childhood. Such documentation requires him to relive his formative years.

And this regime you think should be retained by our Taoiseach in three to four thousand primary schools?


You say:

"It is a mistake to make all priests and personnel of the Catholic Church the scapegoat in this regard."

You're wrong. If you're in the army and you wear the uniform, then to hell with you! Your Chruch has worked assiduously to own all these three to four thousand schools -- all of which were presented to your Church in good faith, because you claimed to know a God of mercy and a God of love -- or knew Him better than the rest of us. You don't . What's more, you never did. And what's even worse, I don't believe that your Church believes in half the things it proclaims.

I think it believes much more in the widespread operations of governments under its thumb, Taoisigh who ring All Hallows for instructions, Ministers of Education, Justice, Defence and Foreign Affairs, and , above all, it believes in its own Opus Dei moreso than it does in any works of God. It does not believe that the 'Meek' shall inherit the Earth. They already own it and share it , through Opus Dei, with those already endowed with wealth, privilege and power. And it most assuredly does not beliieve in the economic theory of the"loaves and fishes" or in the parable of the "Good Samaritan." Indeed, it's beliefs are more in Opus Dei Judges, Lawyers, Ministers, Civil Servants and Police Chiefs -- most of whom ,act to subvert the secular side of 'our' constitution by your Church and particularly by its miniions in Opus Dei. The schools , primary , secondary and tertiary, are -- as you must know -- governed by Opus Dei -- or don't they tell you how they operate? Indeed, the whole axis of government in Ireland is weighed between Opus Dei's primary bodies in UCD and the Law Library. It is to Mr Michael McDowell's credit, ,and the longevity of the Fianna Fail government, that these bodies are at any given time balanced to maintain hegemony while, at the same time, concealing the secret operaation of the Opus.

You claim that "Most priests are good men trying to serve God by serving the people entrusted to them." Then let them do it without bullying the people, robbing them, telling them Harry Potter stories, and confiscating the earth they stand on. These schools that you call yours are the peoples' schools. Give them back to the people and let them organise the intellectual life of this country according to their own unfettered confederation. And then you can do the same in East Timor, Poland, the Phillipines, Slovakia, Mexico, Venezuela, etc.,etc, etc...

You say: "In respect of the schools in Ireland, history testifies to the fact that most of its present education system was founded by the Catholic Church and its Religious Orders. For the most part, they have provided an enormous gift to children and laid the foundations of an excellent education system. "

Isn't this rather nonsensical! Did you not know that in the Middle Ages the Pope (under the Bull Laudabiliter) actually gave the Irish and this Island away to the British King, Henry 11 -- and we , the native Irish people, have been at war ever since. Of course ,we should have booted you and your Church out then, but we hadn't the moral strength. Did you know that your Church introduced the Anglici Christians into Ireland? Did you know that you and the Orders of your Church, especially Cistersians, killed and murderd with impulinty the native people of this country?

Did you not know that these great educational Rellious Orders of which you speak, Cistersians or Dominicans, burned men, women and children right across Europe just becase they twitched where they shouldn't or didn't twitch where they should?

Did you not know that your Church taught the world how to hate Gaelic Pagans, Astecs, Incas, Indians, Jews, Witches, Albigensians, Waldenses, Hugeunots, Protestants, Bolsheviks, Communists, Socialists, Anarchists, Gypsies, Homosexuals, Women and children in their charge?

Did you not know that in every respect since the middle ages -- and particularly respecting the present ill-treatment of children -- that your Church has absolutely no conception of science or the historical sciences whatsoever, and that rather than take any instruction in any of these matters, they have raised our universities to the status of schools of Catholic propaganda run by priests and nuns who haven't a clue concerning the matter whereof they profess? Did you know that they appoint professors in Ireland on the strict qualification of their piety and zeal, not on their insight or grasp of any of the sciences, social or natural.

These are the things which the Catholic Church have done for Ireland. Obviously, you and the Taoiseach imagine that we should be grateful.

You write: " The majority of abuse takes place in the family and the extended family. When are we going to have the courage and resources to face this reality?"

I haven't got a clue what this is meant to mean. But I do know that your Church in Ireland has had most say in familial and sexual matters and that you haven't a clue of either sexual or familial matters; that your concerns are more with power. I say that your church possesses more wealth than it can count, and that between the lot of you, you produce neither a loaf of bread nor an Irish baby. In my view, your Church has historically been more interested in the fertility of the Irish family and its exploitation for the manning of the Holy Roman Empire, than in any show of concern for the individuals involved. I believe that the celibacy that your Church enforces on its priests is not just an internal mistake of Church management ,but is quite unhealthy and has untold conseqences on the individuals involved, and on the patterns of Irish social behaviour outside the Church.

You further write: " I cannot excuse the actions of the Church wherever there has been 'covering up', ignorance or even blatant stupidity. At the same time it is easy for society to throw stones in one corner and ignore the wider picture. We fail our children when we do this. "

On the face of it this vacillating morality does not appeal to me. It is false and unworthy. It is not -- as a matter of fact -- easy for an abused child from one of the Institutions run by your Church to accuse a Prince of the most powerful Empire in the World. You demean their courage by saying so and betray a most unrealistic notion of the operations of power in your Church as well as in Irish society. To make their claim these young abused people have had to fight the strongest power-laden, rotten, vindictive, deceitul, malignant episcopacy in the world. No one threw any stone at any priest, brother, nun or Bishop, when, in circumstances they might have been excused for doing a lot more. If it hadn't been for a BBC reporter and Bruce Arnold inthe Irish Independent (and a handful of others) these voices wo9uld have been assuredly as silenced as they had been in the Penal Commission of 1975 and in the 'learned' journals since then.
This -- if you don't mind me saying so -- is the kind of thoughtless Pulpit sentiment that rhythems its way meaninglessly to an unimpressive if not feigned cadential - "We fail our children when we do this"

Your Church has no children. Your Church is a Cuckoo Church: it extends its dead hand deep into the womb of every woman and steals the offspring for its evil and selfish Empire. What you own is three to four thousand schools. You have failed 'our' children, not yours and you don't deserve to hold any school much less own and control them all. If you had any secular honour you would quit immediately ,and if our government had any secular honour ,it would make you do so. But these things , according to our Taoiseach are part of the wonders of what the Catholic Church has done for Ireland. If the Ferns Report proved anything, it proved that the real insult was to Irish womanhood -- and Irish womanhood was never defended by its menfolk -- never -- agasint the ravages of Roman superstition!

You then write , in the same , gimme-gimme-gimme style that :

"To ask all clergy to be removed from schools is unjust, ignorant of the facts concerning abuse, and tantamount to making the Catholic Church a scapegoat for the evils that occur throughout society."

When I read this I feel that there is no point; you and your Church have only one Agenda -- Power! You will never regret what you do and have done. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NOT A SCAPEGOAT ; THEY ARE THE GUILTY PARTY, NOT THE VICTIM!

It appears that you and your church are somehow genetically unable to do what you endlessly impress upon the poor weak-minded masses to do. You cannot exhibit genuine regret and contrition for the gross wrong done to these unfortunates.

In proof of the above , I know that you cannot possibly be aware of how offensively patronising the following piece of avuncular logic is? You say:

"If 26 uncles were found guilty of abuse in a particular area, would you ask all uncles in the country to be removed from Catholic schools? Present statistics dictate that there will be a lot more family members guilty of abuse in the same area."

And , as if that wasn't bad enough, with the following fatuous rally, you actually drag us into the dregs of what was after all -- not an apology , but a Goddamn sermon

"As human beings, we must do all we can to stop the evil of abuse. In order to do this, we need to work together or we let our children down badly."

OH! YE ROCKS!



WWW.IRISHCRIMINOLOGY.COM

SEAMUS BREATHNACH

by Fr Dave Heywood Tue Dec 06, 2005 22:26

Perhaps I may reply to Mr Breathnach's comment as follows:

Dear Seamus,

Since you ask - I am a RC Priest. I live in the UK. My family and many good friends live in Ireland.

You are right - I am probably not up to your anger but, if I may, I offer a few thoughts about what you have written.

I agree that too many bad things have happened in the past in the name of God and his Church. As I've already indicated, those responsible should be brought to justice and the Church must be transparent, accountable and proactive in this regard.

I take the matter of child abuse very seriously and know many of the horrors you describe. I try to do something about it: I was one of the first priests in the UK to pilot the present child protection procedures for parishes nearly 10 years ago, and I currently work in child protection supporting victims of abuse.

I don't think I am wrong to suggest the danger of making the Church a scapegoat for the evil of child abuse. When we make anyone or any institution a scapegoat, we take our eyes off the whole picture and become blinkered. This simply allows abuse to go on somewhere else.

I'm saddened that you experience what I've written as 'pulpit sentiment', 'patroninsing' and even 'fatuous' - that simply couldn't be further from the truth.

In my experience, too many people in the Church and in society as a whole are either ignorant or in denial of child abuse. So, yes, I stand by my 'sermon' that you quote at the end of your comment. And, if a little humour is not out of place: that's the first time anyone has quoted a sermon back to me correctly!

With my best wishes,
Dave

by Rachael Smith Tue Dec 06, 2005 23:27

With respect Mr. Breathnach, you write in your response to Fr. Dave Heywood, 'you actually drag us into the dregs of what was after all -- not an apology , but a Goddamn sermon.' I might be wrong but in what way is what you say different from being short of a sermon? Your anger I feel is misplaced, it might be so that Fr. Heywood's response was not an apology, but for reason should it be? Because he too is a priest? It is my personal opinion that to regard a whole group as wrong-doers simply because terrible and hurtful things have occured due to a MINORITY is ignorant. Although I take issue with many of your points I will lastly say, that ure claim that the church and priests alike are merely after 'POWER' is complete nonsense. Priests serve God... they serve the community and yes just like with any occupation there are those who don't do their job correctly, but there are also those who work hard and endlessly to create a safe and caring environment for children... such does not come from a desire for power. Best Wishes, Rachael Smith.

by Seamus Breathnach Wed Dec 07, 2005 01:26

WWW.IRISHCRIMINOLOGY.COM

Thank you for the curtesy of giving your full name.

You write, "it might be so that Fr. Heywood's response was not an apology, but for reason should it be? Because he too is a priest? It is my personal opinion that to regard a whole group as wrong-doers simply because terrible and hurtful things have occured due to a MINORITY is ignorant."

I believe that this is not the case , at least not in the sense in which I intended it. So, I shall try to explain it further.

I think we should distinguish between the individual and the organisation. The organisation is not the willy nilly collection of individual priests ,bishops, cardinals, parishes, dioceses in Ireland or across one country or , indeed, across the globe. It is the conscious and deliberate government of these enormous bodies through the essential civil service of the Curia and the Papal government of the Vatican -- a civil state like the Republic of Ireland dedicated to one thing, the governance of world Catholicism. Individuals are as lost to this reality moreso than to any army one can name. And it is no accident that while most of the believers are in poor third world colonised countries -- many of which talk tediously about anarchism and revolution, etc. -- their government is squarely in the Vatican where most Popes have been Italian or Italian substitutes. The individual priest may have as little to do with this Goliath as a Russian peasant had to do with the last Czar. And that's the best comparison I can get.

In this overall and indifferent context, I think that we might usefully recall what an individual priest is and what a priest does. More than anythign else he mediates the policies of Goliath to the flock. This he does in precisely the same manner as a lawyer mediates the laws of the land to the citizen. There is really no diference between them. In the Middle Ages the Pope was Christ's Vicar on earth and in that way the Church sucked up to the emerging Nations States by making them believe that respective Kings also ruled by Divine Right. It's a little bit like the modern day Opus Dei in that the Opus , after the Spanish Civil war , went about the worlod telling Bankers and Entrepreneurs that they were all Saints and that stacking ooooooodles of money in the Vatican Banks was a Holy thing to do, even holier that stackiing it in AIB --all of whom are members of .... well, you know!

A priest is not like you or I. We are secular persons, individuals who must make our way in the world without privilege, inherited wealth or power. Anarchists, like the earliest Franciscans and the Waldensian heretics, resent such power and privilege and would reject such a distribution of wealth, not because they want to follow Jesu, but because they are conscious of its deleterious consequences in the best political sense. They would claim to love the community -- and as proof of which they seek nor would take anything out of it, much less wallow in privilege.

We are , if we are healthy, people of appetite and gender. A priest has denied his gender and his ordinary appeitites and gathered all his energies specifically and primarity and devotedly into serving the richts and most powerful organisation in the world. And, incidentally, the most secret as well. A priest, therefore , is above all a zealous and committed , who is trained in promulgating received wisdoms to those who live their lives , not on one specific aspect of their lives, but who live life in the round and without the benefit of world-wide privielge and power. We have to find love in each other, not in a homogeneous mass of fellow-minded zealots; we have to labour to pay for food, light, heat, mortgages,,insurance. We have to pay for our loved ones, after we have paid tithes to the priest and taxes to the State. We do battle for our opinions and take issue with the strong and the weak; we have to fight immorality on the factory floor, the office, the streets. We do not announce that we know better for others than they know for themselves. This the priest does.

And when you say your want a contraceptive, a divorce or an abortion, I say I wish it were otherwise , but at the end of the day I feel that you are more qualified to decide these these things than I am , or some Bishop or Judge is. I'm on your side. I'm a democrat.

The priest is not only undemocratic, but he will not let you decide for yourself what you want. He has arrogated to himself the certainty that he knows better what is good for you than you do. Morever, in the struggle to get you and me the option of having a choice on these matters, the priest and his organisation will undo all our efforts; for with his organisational and political and international connections he will have politicians shore up support to 'enshine' his views in law, such that you and I and ordinary citizens can have no choice in these matters.

That's what a priest does. And while you and I go to work, feed the kids, milk the cows, mend the bike.... he is politiking all the while over a community with which he has no organic relation. The priest if a professional Holy Roman who is then given the privilege to speak to me about sex, children, family, school and education. He will tell me at the drop of a hat how many children to have; he will tell you to obey your husband. I fight for your freedom and self-esteem while you squander it and throw it back in my face. The priest will chastise you for not wearing a yashmak or headgear, he will church you when you produce an Irishman, he will play on your blind-spots, but you do not mind. My regard for your freedom and dignity you abuse.

When I say the Fern's Report is at bottom an insult to you, you are indifferent . Why do you think they abused young boys? If it was an agitation brought about celibacy, then they would have, like Bishop Casey and the rest of us, sought an adult heterosexual relaitonship with an adult female. But Casey couldn't not sustain that ,because to do so would be to enter a lower order -- a secular order, an order where those of us who are in the Chruch's eyes of lessee majeste live. So, if it wasn't celibacy, why young boys? Boys cannot reproduce! If they sought heterosexual relaitons, then the offspring would have claim agaisnt both the priest and his Church. As I have said: the insult of the Fern's Report, Madam, is to you qua woman!

And we have not touched upon the materialist secret society of Opus Dei, the very group of people who manage wealth across the world in the Church's interests. Fancy them getting enought courage, like yourself, to put their name to anything.

It is difficult for me to convince you of the wealth illimited owned by the Catholic Church -- that their world is this one,only hidden behind a babble about the next. I have lately come to the conclusion that they do not believe in any of the things they preach -- or used to preach, the Immaculate Conception, Hell or Heaven, the Ascensiton,the Next World. But you may have these beliefs if they do not take my rights away -- and when the organised Church gets a special place in the Constitution, it become their business by law to take my right of choice away. To make a rather long story about their wealth short, can I ask you - - do you own a house? How have you worked to get the house for yoursel and your family? How has your husband worked for it? Have you down the years paid taxes on every penny you earned before you put the pennies together to purchase the house? Do you remember a time, when, if you as a wife ,worked you had to pay taxe on ever pound affter the second? Where do you think your taxes went? And what went to those who, unlike you, never had children, the same who churched you in your own Church? Can I ask you, how much did you pay for the site upon which your house was built? A site around any village or town in Ireland now cuould be anything between 50 or 80 thousand euros? How much has the price of your house gone up inthe past, say fifteen years? How much as the price of a land site? Can you imagine how much wealth has accrued to the Church's endless property in Ireland; to the central Cathedrals, Chapels, demesnes, graveyards, schools (3 to 4 thousand), college lands, farms, bequests left in every parish and town in Ireland to Bishops, favourite priests, kindly nuns --- and not one child in the whole island-house of theirs to be washed on any Saturday night! No, my dear, they do not look after the community; the community has cossetted them much too foolishly.

Moreover, nothing hangs on whether I blame Fr Heywood or not. In his personal capacity, his attitudes are neither here nor there, nor are mine towards him, save in this respect. If he wants , as he says he wants, to stop these abuses, then he has -- and has had -- ample opportunity to challenge those who perpetrated rapes as well as those who covered them up. Let hiim do that and he might personally find out -- as you might -- that his individual conscience , to be clean, must challenge the group, the awful and powerful world of structural Catholicism. Fr Heywood is not Catholicism. Neither are you. But you and he, while professing personal concern will not allow your concern to rise above or go beyond your personal outrage. Indeed, neither of you,in my opinion, actually comprehend the nature of clerical paedophilia as a structurally protected Catholic problem or, indeed, as an internationally Catholic phenomenon, and neither of you refer to the great struggle that had to be made both here and in Boston to dislodge an immoral if not a criminal Bishop.

You also write:

"Although I take issue with many of your points I will lastly say, that your claim that the church and priests alike are merely after 'POWER' is complete nonsense. Priests serve God... they serve the community and yes just like with any occupation there are those who don't do their job correctly, but there are also those who work hard and endlessly to create a safe and caring environment for children... such does not come from a desire for power."

Here we must difer. I shall say nothing of the 'safe environment' that the Church creates for children. As a child I saw them , as I have already said, systematically put such children in fear and dread. In Joyce's time it was the same. As a matter of fact, I think they most rejoice in a climate of dour Biblical violence and depression.

As for God -- if it exists, it does not need the help of the Catholic Church, who throughout history has managed to amass more of the possesssion of this world than is even known. How do you think they got the three to four thousand primary schools? And that's just one of many items in the family vault. What if I was to tell you that they own as many schools in as many countries , Poland, East Timor, the Phillipines, Slovakia, Spain etc. etc. etc. What if I was to tell you that in the Phillipines and elsewhere the priests live with their girlfriends and the public and the parish has to pay for them.

I'm glad that you didn't refer to the Church's enlightened views on education. You carefully avoided that area. So I'm a little disapointed that you could not find your way to convincing us how a set of medaeval values can subsist around the Celtic Tiger. People like Darwin, Freud and the social scientists -- especially the historians -- don' t exist for dogmatic Catholicism. So no one in Ireland is allowed to benefit from the greatest of the muses -- history, especially Ireland's history. Such blinkers is part of our religious education!

Having read over my stuff I think you are correct in this to say that my spiel is every bit as much of a sermon/lecture as Fr Heywood's . This I didn't realise, so I apologise!

WWW.IRISHCRIMINOLOGY.COM


Seamus Breathnach


By the way , Rachel -- I nearly forgot --

GOD BLESS!

by Me Wed Dec 07, 2005 14:17

Always loved the line in McGahern's book 'The Leavetaking' written in 1974.

"While the State paid teachers, it was the Church who hired and fired."

by iosaf Wed Dec 07, 2005 14:20

Loi 1905 on secularisation in French Education celebrated its 100th anniversary yesterday. France has been unique in the developed world in guaranteeing the right of a child to a secular education for 100 years.

& look how well they turned out.

by Rachael Smith Wed Dec 07, 2005 15:11

Dear Seamus,

I regard you explanation to my response very insightful. Such a debate is of great value and for it to be spoken in an open forum such as this, where there is the freedom to speak our minds and share our views, is immensely important and fundamental to the Catholic Church being the spiritually beneficial body that it is. As such there is no reason not to disclose names or identities, whatever I say to you now, I will say again to any other individual who wishes to engage in this issue also.

It is true that there is a very real difference between the individual and organisation. If you look to any political group, religious organisation and so on it won’t ever be the case that all members are in conformity with those who head/front the group/religion, it is usually only ever that there exists a common thread of beliefs and shared judgement upon which people work together to attain some good. However, the discourse caused by personal misguided agenda or mal-practise of individuals or small groups, which bring a religion into disrepute and scandal (as occurred within the Catholic Church shamefully) should not be looked upon as being the true reflection of what the organisation stands for or indeed should be judged against.

You say that a priest is not like you or I, this is a point which with respect, I take issue with and you are completely wrong in your assessment. In what way does your average parish priest indulge in, ‘privileges, inherited wealth and power?’ If this is what you have been unfortunately led to believe then please be appeased by my more realistic and informed knowledge. The only privilege a priest may claim to have is that of serving the Lord, such a role if done in honesty, never requires wealth or power. A priest is just like you and I in so much as any two people can ever be comparable. Just as any religious person is, priests are on a journey of spiritual growth in the desire to become closer to God, there is nothing that makes this any easier for a priest than you or I. Your depiction of the priestly life is such that they appear like aliens to planet to earth!

There is no way in which there is a denial of gender be becoming a priest, there is no denial only acceptance to the celibate life. It is the priest rather than you or I which surrenders the privilege most people take for granted, that of (which you mention so frequently) a family, wife and children, and this is with the intention to best serve God and of course society. Just as we work in order to pay the bills and buy food as do priests, yet your suggestion is that priests live a work free life in which they should be thankful we all pay for. If it is so that you don’t regard it as the kind or work you or I do and so not really worthy of payment, then that is mere opinion and of no value to this debate; and I would point out that as you have not experienced priestly life according to your own argument you therefore can make no judgement.

(As a separate point, if you spent a week as a lawyer and then followed this with the role of a priest I think you would soon eat the words ‘there is no difference between a priest or lawyer,’ lawyers are paid a lot more and do not have the responsibility of upholding God’s word.)

After reading your response and hopefully interpreting it correctly, there is a question I would like to pose, do you take such issues with Jesus Christ over his single, unmarried status and the fact that he had no children, nor mortgage? I might be wrong but millions of people across the world endear to the teachings and words of Jesus, yet if I was to read your feelings towards priests you seem unable to understand that somebody who doesn’t have cows to milk, or children to feed or a woman to keep happy, can still have an idea of moral matters and real life. Is your view extended to all single people, do they also have no moral inclination?

Your judgement in my view of what makes someone suitable to teach and guide others is intrinsically flawed. Are we not both, here and now, by our thoughts and views, claming to know better than each other? I do not protest that I have any divine right in which my word is infallible nor do priests, they do not protest to offering the only answer or indeed the most perfect one, but rather one which they feel the Lord guides us towards and therefore we should follow.

Priests get things wrong, this won’t ever change as long as they are not God, any priest who professes that we must all abide to their rule an that their word is the only word is someone of which I spoke of in my second paragraph, and as so is not representative.

The point is that for some people in times of suffering, hurt or confusion a priest is there to offer their best view of what God’s voice would be saying in that same situation; some people need, if you like, ‘a go between’ as I am sure you realise to make the spiritual walk alone without ever accepting the need for guidance from anyone other than God is very difficult if not impossible and yet this seems to be what you desire.

There is no point at which a priest in offering guidance is not allowing you to decide for yourself what you want to do, it maybe so that some might influence or direct you in a way which is negative or designed to benefit their own agenda; but this is not something which is a problem only to the Catholic Church but rather in anything where a person has a certain influence, it is up the individual to combine their own common sense to such a situation.

Although my thanks towards your good intention are genuine, there is I assure you no need for you to protect my freedom as it is not at threat no much more so from the Catholic Church than from the government or any influence within society.

To say that Fr. Heywood (and myself) were ‘indifferent’ to the abuse of young boys within the Catholic Church or indeed the abuse of any child or vulnerable person at the hands of a priest, who has been given a place of trust and responsibility, is completely untrue. As a Catholic it is not for me to take reasonability for the near unforgivable actions of some priests, it is for those guilty parties to face suitable punishment, there is however a real and immediate duty for anybody, priests included, to protecting children from such harm. There is nothing anybody can say or do which will compensate for the immoral and evil actions which have occurred within the Church, the suffering for those you speak off can never be justified. However, protecting our children does not mean stopping the church from running our schools and having any influence. If you have children you will recognise the fact that it is never possible to remove any possibility or chance of your child from ever experience suffering, to do so would be to take way their freedom which is almost as serious a crime.

There is much more to dealing with the problem of the abuse of children, it is a problem which is devastatingly in existence within our society- it will sadly occur in any environment where children and adults run alongside each other, as such we must all according to you, have a guilty conscience from allowing this to be the case.

You state that Fr. Heywood’s words are ‘neither here nor there’ so then why enter into such discussion, your attack is upon the elements of the Catholic Church, including priests and you have been given a response from a priest who appears to have full and proper insight to what you are so damming of, yet his words are ‘neither here no there?’ Is it not now obvious that your claim that Fr. Heywood will only at most show personal disgust for such indecencies we speak of, clearly false? What kind of answer if any are your actually looking for? Yes, most certainly clerical paedophilia is a problem as it would be a problem in any form, but a ‘structurally protected problem’ it is not, as this discussion has shown, there is not here or from Fr. Heywood any protection offered towards these priests you speak of; it is rather the victims which are offered the protection.

I would like to repeat that the Church does create a safe environment for children, if this was not the case my self and others would not trust to take their children to church and so on. I ask you this, if your child was abused by a GP, would you then distrust and discredit the institute of which Doctors belong? Or would you come to the logical conclusion that sadly there are very worrying people who have such terrible tendencies, and that these people might be teachers, priests, doctors and so on, but it is their personal immoral doing which needs to be dealt with, not then that all such professions should be placed into disrepute and damned untrustworthy.

Finally, yes God does exist an this I can say without doubt and yes your point is correct, God does not need the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church needs God, this however is not a limitation simply a matter of fact. The very nature of God is such that He is not dependent upon any other agent and so it would never be the case that God ‘needs’ the church. However, if as Christians do, we look to the life of Christ, there is a duty to spread the word of God and His teachings; and so the Church took upon such a role and I ask is there a truly better way of doing this than through a group of people (yes led in the form of hierarchy as common to any such system) gathering on Sundays to celebrate God’s word and welcoming our children to come and decide for themselves if it is a spiritual path they wish to embark on? It is my judgement that this is a caring, protective and loving thing that the Catholic Church, as with any religious institute, is perusing and on its way doing all it can to ensure that any past or current evils are dealt with in the most severe way.

With regards,
May the Lord Be With You,
Rachael

by Patrick Hale - Christianity Today Wed Dec 07, 2005 20:49

Well said! I am a Protestant Christian but feel that the Catholic Church is somewhat made Scapegoat for people's personal issues alittle to quickly; however there are aspects of your church which are not in my mind revealing the better side of Christianity. However I believe that you show a more accurate picture of the Church in general as I have come across it.

Patrick Hale.

by iosaf .:. ipsiphi Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:28

Yesterday Benedict XVI the far right theologian and authoritarian met with members of Spain's guardia civil (the notorious armed police institution set up by Franco but now limited to border and transport security and certain difficult tasks in Haiti) for a public audience. At the end of which he gave them all rosary beads and one ofthem gave him a tricorn hat. Which he then put on, despite there being no plan in the meticulous Vatican choreography for such a symbolic statement. The tricorn hat image has taken front page in today's spanish press for the holiday "the immaculate conception". & naturally, the hat represents more than a vestige armed force, for countless families in the Spanish state it represents a legacy of brutal repression and torture. For countless more it is the uniform which guards the frontiers of Europe, the uniform which takes shoeless migrants from the barbed wire and sends them back to "sub Sahara".
The holiday of the "immaculate conception" begun in the mid 19th century under a previous Pope Benedict. Indeed the dogma that Mary mother of Jesus was herself immaculately conceived proved to be the greatest theological point of schism in christianity until the very recent debates on gender and sexuality and priesthood. It was the addition to Roman Catholic dogma which gave us the notion of "papal infallibility" on such "ex cathedra" statements. & within a generation would cause a split between authoritarian church and Italian and French masonic intellectuals who supported the creation of a unified Italian state and the complete dismantling of the Vatican's "earthly empire". When masons attempted to throw the funeral casket of Pope Pius X into the tiber amongst the cries which were raised were slogans against infallibility.

Today's Europe sees several states hold national holidays to mark the 8/12/05 religious holiday. Amongst them Ireland, Spain and Italy. However, in Spain a custom has grown to allow workers to take off the day between a weekend and national holiday called "el puente". The result is a welcome long weekend. This year has seen as always 2 holidays fall in one week, that of constitution on the 6th and conception on the 8th, but since both holidays were a Tuesday and Thursday workers and school children saw both Monday and tomorrow Friday lost to "a macro puente". The result is a lamentable loss of productivity and educational opportunity especially so close to the Christmas holidays. And for many who work in precarious conditions, a loss of a complete week's wages.

It is thus no surprise that the sensible amongst us are now going to campaign for an end to the official holiday of the immaculate conception.

if the cap fits wear it. Papa Ratzi dons the tricorn of the Guardia Civil in Rome 7/12/05