ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Catholic incidents , church scandals , George Pell , sex scandals , sexual abuse charges , sexual abuse incidents , sexual misconduct charges

Reply
Old 28th May 2020, 04:40 AM   #601
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,305
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
You are very consistent in this thread. You come up with everything possible to deny or excuse catholic clergy sexual abuse. “What if, what if, what if.....”

You quote clearly biased catholic periodicals and blogs time and time again. Apologistics 101.
Whereas you would have had Pell swinging from the yard arm long before he became archbishop.

There is a reason why the legal system requires due process. It is to stop pitchfork wielding yokels from administering their own brand of "justice" on the slightest of pretexts.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:51 AM   #602
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,696
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
Oddly, I've had many conversations with abuse victims, talking about aspects of their abuse, and can certainly recall each time someone made a disclosure to me.

I worked for over 30 years in child and adolescent mental health, so it's not too surprising that this was the case, as we encountered a number of victims. Strange that folk from within the Catholic Church (and, to be fair, other churches, such as the CoE) cannot recall such things. I found it to be the kind of thing which stuck in my mind.
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
With all due respect, what you are offering is an argument from personal incredulity. In addition, you are assuming that the disclosure happened. What if BPL's memory is faulty? Maybe he made the disclosure to someone else.
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
If you were the victim of abuse I suggest you would have a vivid recollection of the event no matter how many years pass. The coming out to someone about the abuse would be most traumatic also and would also remain vivid in you memory.

Someone who had been told about it would not have the same demanding attention I suggest, and if that person is trying to protect an institution, and indeed constrained by canon law, how could you possibly give the same weight to their testimony?
Yes, but you have to realise that Carrot Flower King has only spent his working career in adolescent mental health, so would have come across an order of magnitude fewer disclosures than the average senior RC official.



</end sarcasm>

It's not an argument from personal incredulity, when one has direct professional experience that, but its very nature, would have a disproportionate number of abuse victims.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:58 AM   #603
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,181
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
It doesn't say that. What it does say is that problems that occur within the church are addressed within the church. The upshot of which is that canon law overrides secular law when the problem is perceived to be a church problem.
Yes, but if the problem is institutional, then making a scapegoat of a specific person doesn't address the problem. In fact it makes it worse as it implies that you just need to deal with a few individuals when what is needed is institutional reform. In this case, nothing that is a criminal offence within secular law should be perceived as a 'church problem' to be dealt with under canon law. I agree that holding people to account is an important part of pressure for reform. That is provided that they are only being held to account for what they actually did and not to satisfy some more general anger directed at the church.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:13 AM   #604
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,181
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Yes, but you have to realise that Carrot Flower King has only spent his working career in adolescent mental health, so would have come across an order of magnitude fewer disclosures than the average senior RC official.



</end sarcasm>

It's not an argument from personal incredulity, when one has direct professional experience that, but its very nature, would have a disproportionate number of abuse victims.
There are few circumstances I can think of on this forum where a claim from somebody that they remember every single instance of somebody telling them about a particular incident would just be accepted without question. At the least they would be asked whether they have tested their own recall against an independent written record of every instance of being told.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:17 AM   #605
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 45,473
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Whereas you would have had Pell swinging from the yard arm long before he became archbishop.

There is a reason why the legal system requires due process. It is to stop pitchfork wielding yokels from administering their own brand of "justice" on the slightest of pretexts.
None of which addressed my post to someone else. Congratulations on this epitome of irrelevancy.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:23 AM   #606
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
Memories are malleable and fragile

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
With complete lack of respect, you already posted that BPL had informed Bongiorno about Ridsdale's activities...Or did he just talk about the footy scores?
How do we know that BPL told Bongiorno, as opposed to telling someone else? This is not the first time I have made this point; please try to keep up.

The Royal Commission noted the possible confusion of identities with respect to a different incident: "'While we accept that BWF genuinely believes he spoke to Cardinal Pell, we are not satisfied he did so. We do not know the identity of the priest he did speak to,' the commission said." link
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:28 AM   #607
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
Even the Royal Commission acknowledged this possibility

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
It's not an argument from personal incredulity, when one has direct professional experience that, but its very nature, would have a disproportionate number of abuse victims.
One problem with your argument is that the job of a priest and the job of a counselor are not the same. Another problem is that it may be the victim of abuse whose memory is imperfect, or do you disagree with the Royal Commission (see comment directly above)?
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 28th May 2020 at 07:40 AM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:31 AM   #608
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
The bias fallacy

Originally Posted by lionking View Post
You are very consistent in this thread. You come up with everything possible to deny or excuse catholic clergy sexual abuse. “What if, what if, what if.....”

You quote clearly biased catholic periodicals and blogs time and time again. Apologistics 101.
Ignoring an argument because one claims without substantiation that it is biased, is intellectually lazy and according to this link a kind of logical fallacy. In addition, it is nonsensical to treat the Catholic Church as if it were the Borg. At one point I quoted Father Frank Brennan, and he is pretty much at the opposite intellectual pole from Cardinal Pell.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 28th May 2020 at 08:47 AM. Reason: added link and reworded the comment to discuss a logical fallacy
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:47 AM   #609
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,696
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
One problem with your argument is that the job of a priest and the job of a counselor are not the same. Another problem is that it may be the victim of abuse whose memory is imperfect, or do you disagree with the Royal Commission?
On one hand we have a confirmed victim of abuse stating that he informed Bongiorno of abuse. On the other we have Bongiorno saying that he can't remember that.

Like the vast majority of the population, if someone asked me whether person X had informed me of abuse, I would categorically and truthfully answer "no". Because it would be a highly-significant event.

A priest saying that he didn't recall such a conversation is either lying, or had had heard so many accusations that it wasn't shocking or significant - just as I could not tell you whether I had refilled my car on any particular day.

The latter seems highly implausible. As was pointed out by Carrot Flower King based on his personal experience of having troubled adolescents inform him of abuse due to his professional work.



Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
"Journalist Paul Bongiorno was a Catholic priest in the Ballarat diocese in the early 1970s. One of Ridsdale’s victims, BPL, told the royal commission that he had informed Bongiorno about Ridsdale. Bongiorno advised in a statement that he had no recollection of any such conversation. The royal commission found that it could not resolve the differing *accounts of PBL and Bongiorno. The latter was not called to give evidence, nor was PBL. The royal commission did not disbelieve Bongiorno." link to Op-Ed by Gerard Henderson

One of my take-aways Mr. Henderson's article is as follows: the conversations in question took place many years ago, and it is not surprising that people's memories of what was said are different. The commission did not always make a call as to whether or not someone was lying. Yet they did chose to do so with respect to Cardinal Pell.

Earlier in this article Mr. Henderson wrote, "Royal commissions make findings, not judgments. And their burden of proof is far lower than guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It’s closer to the balance of probabilities that prevails in civil cases."
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
Oddly, I've had many conversations with abuse victims, talking about aspects of their abuse, and can certainly recall each time someone made a disclosure to me.

I worked for over 30 years in child and adolescent mental health, so it's not too surprising that this was the case, as we encountered a number of victims. Strange that folk from within the Catholic Church (and, to be fair, other churches, such as the CoE) cannot recall such things. I found it to be the kind of thing which stuck in my mind.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 08:06 AM   #610
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,017
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Whereas you would have had Pell swinging from the yard arm long before he became archbishop.

There is a reason why the legal system requires due process. It is to stop pitchfork wielding yokels from administering their own brand of "justice" on the slightest of pretexts.
I don't think anyone has wielded any pitchforks or suggested anyone should be lynched. Rather they have suggested that due process was left rather late.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

Last edited by Robin; 28th May 2020 at 08:09 AM.
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 08:22 AM   #611
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
BWF's faulty memory

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
On one hand we have a confirmed victim of abuse stating that he informed Bongiorno of abuse. On the other we have Bongiorno saying that he can't remember that.
The Royal Commission noted the possible confusion of identities with respect to a different incident: "'While we accept that BWF genuinely believes he spoke to Cardinal Pell, we are not satisfied he did so. We do not know the identity of the priest he did speak to,' the commission said." (quote with link in comment #606).
Was the Royal Commission wrong about BWF, and if not, why not? From what I can gather, the conversation took place in 1970 or 1971.
EDT
The Royal Commission wrote on p. 243, "Our experience during this inquiry confrms ordinary human experience that memory can be unreliable after the passage of time. However, on the material available to us, we are unable to resolve the differing accounts of BPL and Mr Bongiorno" Link
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 28th May 2020 at 09:03 AM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 11:28 AM   #612
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,696
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
The Royal Commission noted the possible confusion of identities with respect to a different incident: "'While we accept that BWF genuinely believes he spoke to Cardinal Pell, we are not satisfied he did so. We do not know the identity of the priest he did speak to,' the commission said." (quote with link in comment #606).
Was the Royal Commission wrong about BWF, and if not, why not? From what I can gather, the conversation took place in 1970 or 1971.
EDT
The Royal Commission wrote on p. 243, "Our experience during this inquiry confrms ordinary human experience that memory can be unreliable after the passage of time. However, on the material available to us, we are unable to resolve the differing accounts of BPL and Mr Bongiorno" Link
And my point is that Bongiorno's statement is pretty iffy.

He didn't deny that he had been told, he claimed that he had no recollection of being told.

That's not something one forgets. I would have been more inclined to believe him if he had denied it.

If someone told you that a colleague of yours had raped them as a child, and your colleague was later shown to have been a paedophile, I think that would stick in your mind.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 03:42 PM   #613
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
A clear denial from Mr. Bongiorno

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
And my point is that Bongiorno's statement is pretty iffy.

He didn't deny that he had been told, he claimed that he had no recollection of being told.

That's not something one forgets. I would have been more inclined to believe him if he had denied it.

If someone told you that a colleague of yours had raped them as a child, and your colleague was later shown to have been a paedophile, I think that would stick in your mind.
From p. 242 of the Report (link previously given)
"Mr Bongiorno denied having the conversation with BPL. He said, ‘That conversation did not happen with me. I would remember it. I would have been deeply shocked by the alleged substance of that conversation’.1158"
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 03:46 PM   #614
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 45,473
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
From p. 242 of the Report (link previously given)
"Mr Bongiorno denied having the conversation with BPL. He said, ‘That conversation did not happen with me. I would remember it. I would have been deeply shocked by the alleged substance of that conversation’.1158"
So everyone is lying except abusive priests and their protectors. Yes I get it.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 04:19 PM   #615
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,709
BPL and Monsignor Fiscalini

Originally Posted by lionking View Post
So everyone is lying except abusive priests and their protectors. Yes I get it.
No, you don't. The Royal Commission said, ""Our experience during this inquiry confrms ordinary human experience that memory can be unreliable after the passage of time. However, on the material available to us, we are unable to resolve the differing accounts of BPL and Mr Bongiorno." The Royal Commission also wrote in respect to another conversation, "Our comments about BPL set out earlier apply equally to his accounts of his discussions with Monsignor Fiscalini. That is, we accept his evidence that he spoke to a priest; however, we cannot be satisfied that it was Monsignor Fiscalini." It's amazing what one can learn by reading the links that have been given in this thread.

My position is not far from that of the Royal Commission. It is that either BPL is mistaken about whom he confided, or that Mr. Bongiorno has forgotten. Mr. Bongiorno was born in 1944, making his age must have been above 70 at the time of the commission's work. Therefore a lapse in memory cannot be ruled out easily.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 28th May 2020 at 04:23 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:08 PM   #616
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,017
Whatever the facts of the Bongiorno case, the analogy with the case of the Consulters like Pell is misleading.

Bongiorno did not take part in the deliberations around moving Ridsdale.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 07:32 PM   #617
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,952
Originally Posted by Elaedith View Post
In this case, nothing that is a criminal offence within secular law should be perceived as a 'church problem' to be dealt with under canon law.
Oh, absolutely. Don't mistake me as actually supporting this idea. But the concept of "church problems, church solutions" is very deeply ingrained.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 02:14 PM   #618
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,195
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Oh, absolutely. Don't mistake me as actually supporting this idea. But the concept of "church problems, church solutions" is very deeply ingrained.

A concept that should be tackled head on by secular law.

We have a situation in Australia where some Catholic priests have denied the right of the law, to compel priests to reveal that which was confessed to them. I think those making this assertion, should be charged with inciting other priests to break the law. Pack the rosary clutching bastards of to jail I think!
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:31 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.