I believe that the story of the rescue of the 33 Chilean miners who spent sixty nine days underground could be named the story of the year. It is indeed a story of human resilience and perseverance, solidarity, hope kept alive and of a people determined to work together to keep 33 of their people alive, safe and well.
On August 5 this year 33 miners from Chile were trapped underground when a tunnel collapsed while working at the San Jose Mine located about 700 km north of Santiago. Mining is one of the main earners of foreign exchange for Chile and provides 40 percent of income for Chileans. So on August 5, while they were doing what Miners do, there was an explosion, the mine caved in and sent them underground. For the first 17 days no one knew if they were alive or dead. Families waited in hope and with faith never ceasing to pray. Then after much drilling and searching, a face surfaced on one of the devices and a note was sent subsequently telling the world that all 33 of them were alive and ok. A note the President, Sebastian Pinera kept with him for the entire time the miners were trapped underground. Hope soared and families waited with great anticipation while the government worked on a plan to get them out alive.
The rescue effort in and of itself was remarkably coordinated. Headed by the Minister of Mining, it involved hundred of rescue workers, some who are experienced miners, engineers and basically a wide variety of technical expertise. The NASA team from the United States played a significant role giving advice and sharing technical equipment all of which contributed to a mastermind of turning what could have been a disaster into probably the most remarkable, joyful, touching story of the year.
Now that the 33 are out, everything is not smooth sailing. Thankfully, except for two of the men, all of them are in very good health and at the time of writing most of them have been sent home. But the not so nice issues surround some of the men, their wives and their mistresses. It has come to light that about 5 of the men have more than one family. Some of the sweethearts (or second families) claim not to have known about the legitimate families and of course the wives did not know about the sweethearts. An expert consultant in relationship (man-woman) matters could tell from the first "hugs" out of the hole which of those wives had found out that their husbands have been having affairs. Then there is the matter of the pact that the men made while underground that they would evenly divide proceeds gained from any interviews done by anyone or a sub-group of them. Will this hold? or will some dipping into the cookie jar occur?
Another issue that needs to be carefully looked at and monitored is the psychological state of both the miners and their loved ones. The mothers, the sisters, wives and children who do not wish for their men to go back and work in the mines. No one can imagine what they went through, especially in the first 17 days when no one knew if they were alive, nor did the miners know that Chile had not given up on the possibility that they might be alive. The special bond and comradeship that was formed by the men while underground is what is going to keep them healthy. In other words, they have to keep the group active and alive and in doing so they have to help each other and their families as well. In maintaining the bonds formed, this will lessen the psychological deterrents that may arise as a result of the ordeal itself. Hopefully they will keep the pact so every can benefit.
The story is still unfolding, the President has closed the Mine saying no mining will be done there again. He has promised to improve the working and safety conditions of Miners in Chile through renewed and revived legislation. The younger members of the 33 can go back to school if they so desire. The men themselves have given thanks to God over and over and so has the President. The ordeal has united the country and has given its people a renewed hope and sense of pride.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Rastafari
Recently, August 17 -21, 2010, the University of the West Indies hosted the Inaugural Rastafari Studies Conference under the theme "Negotiating the African Presence: Rastafari Livity and Scholarship". The Conference highlighted the 50th anniversary of the publication of the Report on the Rastafari movement in Kingston, Jamaica which was written by M.G. Smith (now deceased), Rex Nettleford (also deceased) and Roy Augier.
I have been interested in Rastafari from a very young age and Rastafari, to my mind, is a very controversial religion in and of itself. From my brief reading of the Report many many years ago, it states that the Rastafari Brethren are a very heterogeneous group and hold only two beliefs in common: 1) Rastafari (ie. Haile Selassie) is the living God, and 2) Salvation can come to black men only through repatriation to Africa. The Report states that "...on all other matters the opinions of the brethren vary as widely as the opinions of the rest of the population". The Report goes on to tell us that some Rastafarians wear beards while others do not; and only a small minority of them wear the locks. Some are men of highest moral fibre, while at the other extreme some are men of crime and violence. Some smoke ganja while others abhor it. Some are excellent workmen, while others are lazy and avoid work at all cost.
The Report, written fifty years ago also pointed out that Rastafari is very disorganised and lacking in leadership. There is no leader or group of leaders who can speak for the movement as a whole or define its doctrines. This is still the case today. At the Opening Ceremony of the Conference on Tuesday August 17, 2010, there was a variety of Rastafarians present. Quite of few of them were given the opportunity to bring greetings. This was a very entertaining aspect of the programme as some purported for repatriation while others pushed for reparation. Some said "peace and love" while others from the audience shouted "peace and love can't buy food". Some hailed Haile Selassie I as god, yet others hailed Je-sus and yet still others hailed Marcus Mosiah Garvey as the "Black Je-sus" and prophet.
According to Noel Leo Erskine in his book "From Garvey to Marley", the twin concepts of Haile Selasie as god and the redemption of black people have distinguished Rastafari from other Afro-Caribbean movements that have sought to promote an awareness of black consciousness in the Caribbean. For the Rasta man or woman, the ultimate evil is 'Babylon' and here 'Babylon' represents the oppressor or all oppressive sources which could range from racism, lack of employment, injustice, the police's response to their smoking of the herb otherwise known as ganja.
In going back to the study however, it was because the Rastas in Jamaica were so misunderstood (I think this is still true today) and so mistreated that they asked for a study to be done to show the Jamaican government that they were not a set of disruptive 'raggamuffins'. "The study not only revealed the socio-economic conditions of the movement to the general public, but also, for the first time, articulated the history and doctrine of the movement. The Report found that the vast majority of Rastafari brethren are peaceful citizens who do not believe in violence" (Erskine quoting Bennett and Sherlock).
Professor Rex Nettleford gave an excellent overview of the position of the Rastafari movement in society in his book Mirror Mirror when he pointed out that there were vast cleavages in the Jamaican society, many of which were caused by the colonial education system. He explained that the system trained the middle class who had matriculated through the secondary school system, to view Jamaica through Eurpoean eyes. This placed the middle class on a collision course with Rastafari who viewed life through Afrocentric lenses. It was the University Report which helped middle class Jamaica to see that Rastas were not as unpatriotic as they had originally thought. The desire of the Rastas to repatriate to Ethiopia was presented as not un-Jamaican but rather was more likened to the migration of middle class Jamaicans in search of their destinies. I should say here that after the report was written a number of middle class Jamaicans became Rastas themselves.
The controversies of Rastafari are still evident today or even more so. For in Rastafari there are so many different sects and sub-sects representing varying views. This disparity causes the the movement to be viewed as ludicrous or even senseless and a lot of the middle class who had become a part of the movement in the 60s and 70s have now pulled away saying that the movement served its purpose then but many of them still hold on to the ideologies concerning the advancement for the blackman.
I have been interested in Rastafari from a very young age and Rastafari, to my mind, is a very controversial religion in and of itself. From my brief reading of the Report many many years ago, it states that the Rastafari Brethren are a very heterogeneous group and hold only two beliefs in common: 1) Rastafari (ie. Haile Selassie) is the living God, and 2) Salvation can come to black men only through repatriation to Africa. The Report states that "...on all other matters the opinions of the brethren vary as widely as the opinions of the rest of the population". The Report goes on to tell us that some Rastafarians wear beards while others do not; and only a small minority of them wear the locks. Some are men of highest moral fibre, while at the other extreme some are men of crime and violence. Some smoke ganja while others abhor it. Some are excellent workmen, while others are lazy and avoid work at all cost.
The Report, written fifty years ago also pointed out that Rastafari is very disorganised and lacking in leadership. There is no leader or group of leaders who can speak for the movement as a whole or define its doctrines. This is still the case today. At the Opening Ceremony of the Conference on Tuesday August 17, 2010, there was a variety of Rastafarians present. Quite of few of them were given the opportunity to bring greetings. This was a very entertaining aspect of the programme as some purported for repatriation while others pushed for reparation. Some said "peace and love" while others from the audience shouted "peace and love can't buy food". Some hailed Haile Selassie I as god, yet others hailed Je-sus and yet still others hailed Marcus Mosiah Garvey as the "Black Je-sus" and prophet.
According to Noel Leo Erskine in his book "From Garvey to Marley", the twin concepts of Haile Selasie as god and the redemption of black people have distinguished Rastafari from other Afro-Caribbean movements that have sought to promote an awareness of black consciousness in the Caribbean. For the Rasta man or woman, the ultimate evil is 'Babylon' and here 'Babylon' represents the oppressor or all oppressive sources which could range from racism, lack of employment, injustice, the police's response to their smoking of the herb otherwise known as ganja.
In going back to the study however, it was because the Rastas in Jamaica were so misunderstood (I think this is still true today) and so mistreated that they asked for a study to be done to show the Jamaican government that they were not a set of disruptive 'raggamuffins'. "The study not only revealed the socio-economic conditions of the movement to the general public, but also, for the first time, articulated the history and doctrine of the movement. The Report found that the vast majority of Rastafari brethren are peaceful citizens who do not believe in violence" (Erskine quoting Bennett and Sherlock).
Professor Rex Nettleford gave an excellent overview of the position of the Rastafari movement in society in his book Mirror Mirror when he pointed out that there were vast cleavages in the Jamaican society, many of which were caused by the colonial education system. He explained that the system trained the middle class who had matriculated through the secondary school system, to view Jamaica through Eurpoean eyes. This placed the middle class on a collision course with Rastafari who viewed life through Afrocentric lenses. It was the University Report which helped middle class Jamaica to see that Rastas were not as unpatriotic as they had originally thought. The desire of the Rastas to repatriate to Ethiopia was presented as not un-Jamaican but rather was more likened to the migration of middle class Jamaicans in search of their destinies. I should say here that after the report was written a number of middle class Jamaicans became Rastas themselves.
The controversies of Rastafari are still evident today or even more so. For in Rastafari there are so many different sects and sub-sects representing varying views. This disparity causes the the movement to be viewed as ludicrous or even senseless and a lot of the middle class who had become a part of the movement in the 60s and 70s have now pulled away saying that the movement served its purpose then but many of them still hold on to the ideologies concerning the advancement for the blackman.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Catholic Church and Jamaica
Since I last wrote in this blog a lot has happened. Needless to say about about 76 persons died in what has become known as "The Tivoli Offensive" and Michael Christopher Coke the man who the extradition request was out for was finally captured on Tuesday June 22, 2010 and was sent to New York on Thursday June 24, 2010, the same day he waved his right to an extradition hearing here in Jamaica. So what could have happened in two days, had the government dealt with the matter confidentially and in the best interest of the country and not politically, took us ten months to complete. So as a country we have lost ten months over what? Because of what? Over selfishness, because of political ambitions and fear. I get to understand that if as a country we go ahead with a commission of enquiry to assess everything that has happened and why they happened, along with if Mr Coke opens up just a little bit, there are going to be some big troubling politically exciting times for Jamaica land we love.
Also too, the Roman Catholics are at it again. Almost daily a new or should I say an old sex scandal is revealed. There is a saying "whatever is done in darkness must come to light". Maybe the Roman Catholic priests have never heard it but I doubt that. There are a lot of theories, especially psychological, that are being circulated as to why priests commit these sexual sins. The most popular of which is that the vow of celibacy stifles or should I say go against a man's natural make up. We are sexual beings. As adults we should be having sex. How can someone live without sex for all their lives? That is why for priests that sexual energy is usually dispensed with in an inappropriate channel or usually leads to perversion. A channel that has harmed many many young boys over the years.
Just this week, the Roman Catholic Church in Belgium was invaded in an abuse enquiry. And in May a Nun was excommunicated for allowing an abortion, a decision that was made to save the life of a 27 year old woman who was 11 weeks pregnant with her fifth child and who would have died, along with her child. The doctors had told her that if she continued with the pregnancy that there was a 100 percent chance that she would die. Now this happened at St Joseph's Hospital and Medical Centre in Phoenix and this Nun, Sister Margaret McBride who was an administrator at the hospital as well as liaison officer to the diocese, gave her approval to proceed with the abortion under what I get to understand (from an article by Barbara Bradley Hagerty) is called "Directive 47". These are ethical guidelines which allow for procedures that could kill the fetus to save the mother. And so, when the Bishop heard about Sister Margaret's decision he automatically excommunicated her. Excommunication is the worst penalty anyone could receive in the Catholic Church.
Now then, after all these priests molested all these little boys, over all these years, non of them were excommunicated. Take Father Marcial Maciel for example; a great achiever in the Catholic church in Mexico and a close associate of Pope John Paul II; had at least two common law wives and a string of kids from a number of women; stole academic work from someone else, translated it, renamed it and called it his own and sexually abused most of his students and seminarians. He even sexually molested his own children (for more on this please see Alma Guillermoprieto's nyrblog 2010/may/17 enitled Father Maciel, John Paul II, and the Vatican Sex Crisis). But Maciel was never excommunicated. He died a priest.
In concluding I ask the following questions: does this highlight the inequality and double standard which exist in the Catholic church?; Is the Jamaican government mirroring the negative aspects of the Catholic Church with its double standard, where the constitutional rights of some citizens are more important than others? Mr Coke in a statement thanked the security forces for not treating him badly. But isn't this the basic standard by which all peoples are to be treated? Or are some alleged wrong doers more special than others?
Also too, the Roman Catholics are at it again. Almost daily a new or should I say an old sex scandal is revealed. There is a saying "whatever is done in darkness must come to light". Maybe the Roman Catholic priests have never heard it but I doubt that. There are a lot of theories, especially psychological, that are being circulated as to why priests commit these sexual sins. The most popular of which is that the vow of celibacy stifles or should I say go against a man's natural make up. We are sexual beings. As adults we should be having sex. How can someone live without sex for all their lives? That is why for priests that sexual energy is usually dispensed with in an inappropriate channel or usually leads to perversion. A channel that has harmed many many young boys over the years.
Just this week, the Roman Catholic Church in Belgium was invaded in an abuse enquiry. And in May a Nun was excommunicated for allowing an abortion, a decision that was made to save the life of a 27 year old woman who was 11 weeks pregnant with her fifth child and who would have died, along with her child. The doctors had told her that if she continued with the pregnancy that there was a 100 percent chance that she would die. Now this happened at St Joseph's Hospital and Medical Centre in Phoenix and this Nun, Sister Margaret McBride who was an administrator at the hospital as well as liaison officer to the diocese, gave her approval to proceed with the abortion under what I get to understand (from an article by Barbara Bradley Hagerty) is called "Directive 47". These are ethical guidelines which allow for procedures that could kill the fetus to save the mother. And so, when the Bishop heard about Sister Margaret's decision he automatically excommunicated her. Excommunication is the worst penalty anyone could receive in the Catholic Church.
Now then, after all these priests molested all these little boys, over all these years, non of them were excommunicated. Take Father Marcial Maciel for example; a great achiever in the Catholic church in Mexico and a close associate of Pope John Paul II; had at least two common law wives and a string of kids from a number of women; stole academic work from someone else, translated it, renamed it and called it his own and sexually abused most of his students and seminarians. He even sexually molested his own children (for more on this please see Alma Guillermoprieto's nyrblog 2010/may/17 enitled Father Maciel, John Paul II, and the Vatican Sex Crisis). But Maciel was never excommunicated. He died a priest.
In concluding I ask the following questions: does this highlight the inequality and double standard which exist in the Catholic church?; Is the Jamaican government mirroring the negative aspects of the Catholic Church with its double standard, where the constitutional rights of some citizens are more important than others? Mr Coke in a statement thanked the security forces for not treating him badly. But isn't this the basic standard by which all peoples are to be treated? Or are some alleged wrong doers more special than others?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Jamaica Under Siege - A personal reflection
It's been a long time since I wrote anything on my blog. I guess I was having a 'writer's block'. You might ask how could I have had a writer's block when there is so much happening right here in my country Jamaica land we love. I had decided that I would not touch any of the social, national and political issues concerning Jamaica in my blog. But after today I felt that I could no longer remain silent.
My heart is full. My heart is broken for my country Jamaica land we love. At first I told myself that I did not care, that I would not allow myself to be affected. With all the calls for the Prime Minister's resignation over his handling of the Manatt Phelps Phillips and the extradition affairs I did not allow myself to care. Many of my friends who know that I have strong political views have called me to get my opinion on the saga as it unfolded, but they were disappointed with my response as all I had to say to them was "I have nothing to say". I did not care to tell them that I think the Attorney General and the Solicitor-General should resign for the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. That is unless someone is lying. I did not want to tell them (for I believe they already knew) that it is a reason why the opposition was in power for eighteen years. Neither did I want to comment on the convenient attempt to all of a sudden separate the ruling political party politics/doings from government business.
It was not only my mouth that was zipped but my sensitivities to political and national issues had died. My friends know why my response was like that. They know that I was a casualty. I just didn't have anything to say about national politics anymore. The country could rot for all I care.
But last week when the examinations council had to re-schedule venues for students to sit their exams, I started to feel as if the walls that I had built up to protect my sensitivities were being torn down and I could do nothing to stop it. I started to feel ANGRY. Angry that our children were the ones to suffer for the mess that the government had created. Now tomorrow, May 25 2010, some schools will remain close and there will be more bundling in the re-scheduled exam centres where students have to write exams while hearing the echoes of thousands of shots being fired.
Now I know what it feels like to be living in a country where there is war. I always thanked God that I was not born in one of the middle eastern countries but now I find myself living and existing in a literal war zone of Kingston, Jamaica land we love. The Prime Minister has called a limited state of emergency but twenty four hours later he has not yet specified what those 'limitations' are. So far I am hearing from the news that seven members of the security forces have been injured (one fatally), five civilians and nine gun men are dead (these are unconfirmed reports), flights have been cancelled in and out of the country, our tourism product is negatively affected, and the war continues...
I am at home, my heart is breaking, my heart is bleeding. I am waiting until 8:00 pm when I will receive an advisory on where the hot spots in the war zone will be tomorrow and if we will have to remain marooned in our house for one more day. I hope I will be alive to write another entry in a few days time.
(For a balanced background to the issues mentioned in my above entry, please see the Jamaica Observer's article in the panel across)
My heart is full. My heart is broken for my country Jamaica land we love. At first I told myself that I did not care, that I would not allow myself to be affected. With all the calls for the Prime Minister's resignation over his handling of the Manatt Phelps Phillips and the extradition affairs I did not allow myself to care. Many of my friends who know that I have strong political views have called me to get my opinion on the saga as it unfolded, but they were disappointed with my response as all I had to say to them was "I have nothing to say". I did not care to tell them that I think the Attorney General and the Solicitor-General should resign for the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. That is unless someone is lying. I did not want to tell them (for I believe they already knew) that it is a reason why the opposition was in power for eighteen years. Neither did I want to comment on the convenient attempt to all of a sudden separate the ruling political party politics/doings from government business.
It was not only my mouth that was zipped but my sensitivities to political and national issues had died. My friends know why my response was like that. They know that I was a casualty. I just didn't have anything to say about national politics anymore. The country could rot for all I care.
But last week when the examinations council had to re-schedule venues for students to sit their exams, I started to feel as if the walls that I had built up to protect my sensitivities were being torn down and I could do nothing to stop it. I started to feel ANGRY. Angry that our children were the ones to suffer for the mess that the government had created. Now tomorrow, May 25 2010, some schools will remain close and there will be more bundling in the re-scheduled exam centres where students have to write exams while hearing the echoes of thousands of shots being fired.
Now I know what it feels like to be living in a country where there is war. I always thanked God that I was not born in one of the middle eastern countries but now I find myself living and existing in a literal war zone of Kingston, Jamaica land we love. The Prime Minister has called a limited state of emergency but twenty four hours later he has not yet specified what those 'limitations' are. So far I am hearing from the news that seven members of the security forces have been injured (one fatally), five civilians and nine gun men are dead (these are unconfirmed reports), flights have been cancelled in and out of the country, our tourism product is negatively affected, and the war continues...
I am at home, my heart is breaking, my heart is bleeding. I am waiting until 8:00 pm when I will receive an advisory on where the hot spots in the war zone will be tomorrow and if we will have to remain marooned in our house for one more day. I hope I will be alive to write another entry in a few days time.
(For a balanced background to the issues mentioned in my above entry, please see the Jamaica Observer's article in the panel across)
Sunday, April 18, 2010
The Pope Apologises
On seeing the need to finally respond to the sexual abuse crises that the Catholic Church is facing, the Pope has now pledged that the Church will protect the young from abuse. In fact, he recently met with a group of victims who were abused by Catholic priests and promised them that the church would do everything in its power to bring justice to victims and protect the young people in the future.
Is the word of the Pope enough guarantee for the millions of people who send their children to Catholic church and schools? Can the world relax, believing that not one more little catholic boy will be abused again? Or should we just not send our boys to become altar boys or better yet just not send our children to Catholic Schools, especially catholic boarding schools? This would be unfortunate as the catholics have some of the best schools all over the world. But as we know from history, specifically biblical history, in every paradise there is corruption.
Narrowing it down to home; a specific example is that Jamaica is a paradise but in that paradise there is so much muck.
Is the word of the Pope enough guarantee for the millions of people who send their children to Catholic church and schools? Can the world relax, believing that not one more little catholic boy will be abused again? Or should we just not send our boys to become altar boys or better yet just not send our children to Catholic Schools, especially catholic boarding schools? This would be unfortunate as the catholics have some of the best schools all over the world. But as we know from history, specifically biblical history, in every paradise there is corruption.
Narrowing it down to home; a specific example is that Jamaica is a paradise but in that paradise there is so much muck.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
A World of "Broken" Men
Over the last couple of months the Vatican has been in the news rather negatively over charges of improper sexual behaviour by some of its priests, albeit which occurred some many many years ago. According to a New York Times article entiltled "Transfer cleared by Pope, Priest molested again" (Kulish and Benhold, 2010/03/26)the story involves a priest named Father Hullerman who in September 1979 was removed from his congregation after three sets of parents reported to his superior that he had molested their sons.
The main issue this past week is that the present Pope who at the time was the Cardinal in Munich, knew of this priest's particular "weakness" and had approved sending him to therapy to overcome pedophilia, but did not object to him (Hullerman) being returned to pastoral work within days of actually beginning psychiatric treatment.
My issue is not with the Pope (then Cardinal), he may not have seen the memo that was copied to him telling him that Father Hullerman was being returned to Pastoral work. He may have been too busy with numerous other cases and the usually high political climate of the Catholic Church. It may just have been an oversight on his part and on the part of all his 'assistants' who worked with him.
Needless to say, Father Hullerman returned to pastoral duties and was later convicted of molesting boys in another parish. This is SAD!. This is so so SAD! Sad that today there are so many molested men out there,so many broken men, who were not vindicated, who did not get a chance to heal, always having to deal with this 'dark' experience. No doubt some have become pedophiles themselves, some struggle with living as 'normal hetrosexuals' and some more than likely are on the 'down low' confused about their sexuality.
It is interesting to note that, according to Kulish and Bennhold's NYT article, in a letter to superiors written by a Father Melangre dated January 3,1980, it was suggested that Father Hullerman could "teach religion at a girls' school". To this I have many questions. Would this act of putting him at a girls' school cause Father Hullerman to manage his sexual urges better? Would it have healed him? Was it the case that the priest had a general sexual orientation towards under aged boys in particular or would it have extended to under aged girls had he been put to teach Religion at a girls school? What did the sessions with the psychiatrist prove? Did any of his superiors bother to follow up on the level of wellness of his psychological state? The sad part is, he was allowed to resume pastoral duties and got the chance to abuse more and more boys in his continued destructive service as a priest in the Catholic Church.
In another related story found on msnbc.com, entitled "Deaf boys tried to tell of Priest's abuse for years", the Vatican is also having to deal with the exposure that over a thirty year period a Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy molested deaf boys ( a total of about 200) at St John's school for the deaf in Milwaukee, USA. Although the boys were deaf, they chose not to remain silent. They told other priests, they told three archbishops of Milwaukee, they told the police but their reports fell on deaf ears.
The issue now is that in 1996, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now the Pope), received letters about Father Murphy's behaviour and that the deaf community needed "a healing response from the church" For whatever reasons, we are not aware, this case was pushed under the Vatican's plush carpet, like many other such cases, shrouded in secrecy, hushed up, and in 1998 Father Murphy died an honourable priest.
Once aagin, I am not blaming the Cardinal (now Pope), maybe it was the nature of the Catholic Church to deal with these matters secretly or not to deal with them at all. But now we can see why psychiatrists and psychologists will always have jobs because in the cases at hand, two priests were allowed to repeatedly sexually abuse so many boys. No doubt, over the years, these abuses have manifested in unhappy marriages, multiple sexual partners, continued chain linked pedophilia, messed up relationships between fathers and sons, and fathers and daughters, and the list goes on and on and on.
The question is to be asked: Would some of these problems be lessened if the Vatican had acted decisively and honourably as soon as they were made aware of the issues and finally would we have less "broken" men in our world today?
The main issue this past week is that the present Pope who at the time was the Cardinal in Munich, knew of this priest's particular "weakness" and had approved sending him to therapy to overcome pedophilia, but did not object to him (Hullerman) being returned to pastoral work within days of actually beginning psychiatric treatment.
My issue is not with the Pope (then Cardinal), he may not have seen the memo that was copied to him telling him that Father Hullerman was being returned to Pastoral work. He may have been too busy with numerous other cases and the usually high political climate of the Catholic Church. It may just have been an oversight on his part and on the part of all his 'assistants' who worked with him.
Needless to say, Father Hullerman returned to pastoral duties and was later convicted of molesting boys in another parish. This is SAD!. This is so so SAD! Sad that today there are so many molested men out there,so many broken men, who were not vindicated, who did not get a chance to heal, always having to deal with this 'dark' experience. No doubt some have become pedophiles themselves, some struggle with living as 'normal hetrosexuals' and some more than likely are on the 'down low' confused about their sexuality.
It is interesting to note that, according to Kulish and Bennhold's NYT article, in a letter to superiors written by a Father Melangre dated January 3,1980, it was suggested that Father Hullerman could "teach religion at a girls' school". To this I have many questions. Would this act of putting him at a girls' school cause Father Hullerman to manage his sexual urges better? Would it have healed him? Was it the case that the priest had a general sexual orientation towards under aged boys in particular or would it have extended to under aged girls had he been put to teach Religion at a girls school? What did the sessions with the psychiatrist prove? Did any of his superiors bother to follow up on the level of wellness of his psychological state? The sad part is, he was allowed to resume pastoral duties and got the chance to abuse more and more boys in his continued destructive service as a priest in the Catholic Church.
In another related story found on msnbc.com, entitled "Deaf boys tried to tell of Priest's abuse for years", the Vatican is also having to deal with the exposure that over a thirty year period a Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy molested deaf boys ( a total of about 200) at St John's school for the deaf in Milwaukee, USA. Although the boys were deaf, they chose not to remain silent. They told other priests, they told three archbishops of Milwaukee, they told the police but their reports fell on deaf ears.
The issue now is that in 1996, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now the Pope), received letters about Father Murphy's behaviour and that the deaf community needed "a healing response from the church" For whatever reasons, we are not aware, this case was pushed under the Vatican's plush carpet, like many other such cases, shrouded in secrecy, hushed up, and in 1998 Father Murphy died an honourable priest.
Once aagin, I am not blaming the Cardinal (now Pope), maybe it was the nature of the Catholic Church to deal with these matters secretly or not to deal with them at all. But now we can see why psychiatrists and psychologists will always have jobs because in the cases at hand, two priests were allowed to repeatedly sexually abuse so many boys. No doubt, over the years, these abuses have manifested in unhappy marriages, multiple sexual partners, continued chain linked pedophilia, messed up relationships between fathers and sons, and fathers and daughters, and the list goes on and on and on.
The question is to be asked: Would some of these problems be lessened if the Vatican had acted decisively and honourably as soon as they were made aware of the issues and finally would we have less "broken" men in our world today?
Friday, March 26, 2010
"Love Conquers All" vs. "Love is not Enough"
In the love conquers all scenario, I believe that if both persons love each other intensely and selflessly they will get through the adverse situations. They will find the necessary loopholes to overcome the difficulties that will arise. The combination and the strength of their love will indeed allow them to conquer all. But that's usually not the case.
In the love is not enough situation, the lack usually shows up when the love for each other is not strong enough, maybe on the part of one partner (for whatever reason), not true enough, or not genuine enough. Usually, there are ultererior motives in the "love" relationship. Sometimes there is self over the relationship, and it is in those times that love turns out seemingly to not be enough.
But love is enough and it does conquer all! Who would believe this?
In the love is not enough situation, the lack usually shows up when the love for each other is not strong enough, maybe on the part of one partner (for whatever reason), not true enough, or not genuine enough. Usually, there are ultererior motives in the "love" relationship. Sometimes there is self over the relationship, and it is in those times that love turns out seemingly to not be enough.
But love is enough and it does conquer all! Who would believe this?
MY HIDING PLACE
I happen to love to read. I love it because it takes me away from my own reality and place me in the midst of other people's lives. It takes me to places I have never been, might never go. It allows me to understand situations that I have never been in.
Reading allows me to sympathise with other people's pain, be happy for proven strength, character and accomplishments when a person moves from nothing to something. A good book usually allows me to not be affected by what is going on around me, because I am usually so entrenched in the story. A good book gives me something to look forward to going home to when I am at work under pressure. Reading is my number one HIDING PLACE.
Reading allows me to sympathise with other people's pain, be happy for proven strength, character and accomplishments when a person moves from nothing to something. A good book usually allows me to not be affected by what is going on around me, because I am usually so entrenched in the story. A good book gives me something to look forward to going home to when I am at work under pressure. Reading is my number one HIDING PLACE.
Monday, March 15, 2010
DENTING THE RATE OF SINGLENESS
Am I hearing right? Roman Catholic priests have been giving some thought to relaxing the rules of celibacy? From what I understand, that is one side of the discussion. The other side is that some of the priests do not have a clear idea that the issue of celibacy and its proposed "relaxation" has nothing to do with other issues such as sexual abuse, pedophilia and buggery (charges and scandals which have been rocking the Catholic Church in Europe over the last few months). Those are different issues in and of themselves.
Let us imagine that the Vatican agrees to "relax" the rules of celibacy and allow priests to have a little sex every now and then, what would be the defining rules surrounding this "relaxation"? Would it be defined by guidelines such as:
Let us imagine that the Vatican agrees to "relax" the rules of celibacy and allow priests to have a little sex every now and then, what would be the defining rules surrounding this "relaxation"? Would it be defined by guidelines such as:
- Priests are only to have sex when the urge is unbearable (in this case, how would unbearable be quantified and justified) and,
- Priests are only to have sex with consulting adults (the choice of male or female is up to the individual's priest's sexual orientation)
Can't think of anymore right now but could this discussion eventually lead to priests being allowed to marry? That would certainly increase the number of men available for marriage and put a dent into the high rate of single women's existence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
