Cult Leaders vs The Pope

Embed this:

* * * * *

Like Unreasonable Faith on Facebook for daily skeptical goodness:

Spain's Stolen Babies and the Catholic Church

Recently, I wondered aloud if the Catholic Hierarchy – faced with the child molestation scandal and tin-eared towards PR – could have their reputations sink even lower? Could they have come up with a worse crime to commit and cover up?

Yup. Trigger warning: Don’t read this if you don’t want to be angry for the rest of the day. Please enjoy this baby numbat instead.

From BBC News:

Spanish society has been shaken by allegations of the theft and trafficking of thousands of babies by nuns, priests and doctors, which started under Franco and continued up to the 1990s. [...]

The scale of the baby trafficking was unknown until this year, when two men – Antonio Barroso and Juan Luis Moreno, childhood friends from a seaside town near Barcelona – discovered that they had been bought from a nun. Their parents weren’t their real parents, and their life had been built on a lie.

Juan Luis Moreno discovered the truth when the man he had been brought to call “father” was on his deathbed.

“He said, ‘I bought you from a priest in Zaragoza’. He said that Antonio had been bought as well.” [...]

The practice of removing children from parents deemed “undesirable” and placing them with “approved” families, began in the 1930s under the dictator General Francisco Franco.

At that time, the motivation may have been ideological. But years later, it seemed to change – babies began to be taken from parents considered morally – or economically – deficient. It became a money-spinner, too.

The scandal is closely linked to the Catholic Church, which under Franco assumed a prominent role in Spain’s social services including hospitals, schools and children’s homes.

Nuns and priests compiled waiting lists of would-be adoptive parents, while doctors were said to have lied to mothers about the fate of their children.

More at the BBC. Apparently this is the summary of a new documentary, “Spain’s Stolen Babies,” which currently can’t be viewed outside the UK.

But the summary is bad enough. Seriously, don’t read if you are on blood pressure medication. It looks like a less violent but larger version of Argentina’s “missing generation.”

Holding Bishops Accountable

Here’s an interesting development: authorities in Kansas City, Missouri, have indicted a Roman Catholic Bishop for failing for failing to report that one of his priests was taking pornographic pictures of underage girls.

From the New York Times:

A bishop in the Roman Catholic Church has been indicted for failure to report suspected child abuse, the first time in the 25-year history of the church’s sex abuse scandals that the leader of an American diocese has been held criminally liable for the behavior of a priest he supervised. [...]

A decade ago the American bishops pledged to report suspected abusers to law enforcement authorities — a policy also recommended last year by the Vatican. Bishop Finn himself had made such a promise three years ago as part of a $10 million legal settlement with abuse victims in Kansas City.

While the charge is only a misdemeanor, it looks like some authorities are finally holding members of the hierarchy accountable.

Too Many Lawyers

I spent my teenage years in Winston-Salem, NC, the town named after two brands of cigarettes. Winston is the home of RJ Reynolds Tobacco company. (Also the home of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts. “We’ll kill you somehow,” that was our motto.)

Not surprisingly, it’s a city where people drive around with bumper stickers reading “Tobacco money paid for this car.” One of my friends in high school did an internship in the RJR corporate labs. He came back telling people that there was a lot of evidence that smoking doesn’t cause cancer. This was in the 90s, and the cancer argument was already won and the victors were shifting to second-hand smoke.

In his book A Question of Intent, former head of the FDA David Kessler suggested that RJR’s problem was simple: too many lawyers. RJR’s lawyers were playing a weird double game: they insisted that smoking didn’t cause cancer, and they insisted that everybody already knew that smoking caused cancer and so it was your own fault if you started smoking.

The need to keep up this contradictory stance led to a corporate culture where the lawyers basically ran things. Every statement had to be vetted in case it came across as an admission that jeopardized their two-faced legal pose. A slip up could lead to lawsuits that would destroy the company.

So it’s with a flash of recognition that I read a story, via The Irish Times, about the Cloyne report. The Diocese of Cloyne was one of the regions of Ireland when reports of child molestation by Catholic priests, and the report covers the investigation of those abuses. According to the Irish Times:

Church’s solicitor guarded every angle

A name that crops up with conspicuous frequency in the Cloyne report, when it comes to “restraint” on the part of Catholic Church authorities in co-operating with State inquiries into child sex-abuse allegations, is that of solicitor Diarmuid Ó Catháin.

This is the same Ó Catháin who advised Cardinal Desmond Connell when in 2008 he initiated High Court action against his successor as Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin. That was an attempt to restrain Archbishop Martin from handing over documents to the Murphy commission which the cardinal deemed confidential to himself personally. Cardinal Connell later dropped the action and the documents were handed over.

This is the same Ó Catháin who attended a controversial meeting in Limerick on March 30th, 2006, as a member of the interdiocesan case management advisory committee of Cloyne and Limerick dioceses. Set up in 2005, this committee advised then bishop of Cloyne John Magee and then bishop of Limerick Donal Murray on handling allegations of clerical child-sex abuse.

There’s more in the story, much of it suggesting that Diarmuid Ó Catháin has been acting to prevent the release of information for several years now.

Like RJR, it appears that the Catholic Church has its own lawyers watching over things. Are lawyers now running the church, as The Lead suggests?

Donohue on The Ledge

Matthew Chapman is the writer and director of The Ledge, a movie that opened last week that is being heavily marketed to atheists. Via Chapman’s blog I see that Bill Donohue is irked that atheists have produced a movie with atheistic themes:

Matthew Chapman is the writer and director. “God-fearing straight men have had a monopoly for a very long time,” he says, “and many peculiar decisions have been made.” Among the most peculiar, historically speaking, is something Chapman doesn’t want to admit: it was the Judeo-Christian ethos of America that accounts for the unprecedented levels of justice and freedom enjoyed by non-believers.

First, given America’s track record in excluding both Jews and Catholics, it’s startling that Donohue would write a phrase like “Judeo-Christian ethos of America”. America’s “ethos” is largely an outgrowth of the Enlightenment, which itself was more of a product of the Reformation and Protestant Christianity. Catholics were feared and excluded during most of America’s formative stage.

And of course, Donohue also ignores that those people who rejected America’s ethos were also Christians. Tories were firm believers in the authority that God had invested in the divine monarch. America was formed by brave Christians and their loyal Christians allies fighting against despotic Christians and their sneaky Christian flunkies.

What are we to say to all that? Thanks for fighting this out guys. We’ll take it from here.

Chapman is an atheist and the great-great grandson of Charles Darwin. Darwin, it should be noted, was a self-described agnostic. He once said to a dogmatic atheist, Edward Aveling, “Why should you be so aggressive? Is anything gained by trying to force these new ideas upon the mass of mankind?” Too bad Chapman didn’t learn that lesson.

Seriously, what would we expect from Charles Darwin? We’re talking about a man who suffered several nervous breakdowns during the writing of On the Origin of Species. He’s a man who gently euthanized worms in salt water before baiting his fish hook. If you want aggressive, you don’t look to Darwin. There’s a reason that Huxley had to become “Darwin’s bulldog.”

Anyway, we’ve got an answer to Darwin’s question now. Darwin, like most of the rationalists of his time, believed that Christianity was still necessary to hold society together. We don’t believe that anymore, since we can see plenty of non-Christian and even non-religious societies that continue to function.

Instead, we’ve seen in this history of our own country that religion can be harmful to the society. Religion is an excellent prop for the tyranny of the majority, justifying the oppression of the minority.

We’ve also seen what happens to a religious institution when it become exempt from scrutiny and pressure from the outside. The willingness of American Catholics to let the church deal with various wayward priests rather than going to the authorities helped lead to the enormous pedophilia scandal.

I’ve probably put more thought into Donohue’s comments that Donohue has. Being outraged is his raison d’être after all. Still, it’s the best I can do until I see the movie. Some folks in the forum are commenting on it, and the CNN Belief blog has a lengthy post which is moderately positive.