The Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, has written what Catholics should have said from the very beginning of this Irish scandal. It really didn’t take much, just the recognition of failure.

The church has failed people. The church has failed children. There is no denying that. This can only be regretted and it must be regretted. Yet “sorry” can be an easy word to say. When it has to be said so often, then “sorry” is no longer enough.

He goes on to say that the church needs to get out of its state of denial, that they have to admit that they’ve done wrong, and that they have to make restitution. It’s a 180° reversal from what Bill Donohue was doing: blame the victims, blame the investigators, try to downplay the results of the investigation.

What Martin is saying is what I would have expected to hear from an organization with good intentions; Donohue was confirming what I expected to hear from an inherently unscrupulous institution. It will be interesting to see which approach ultimately wins out.

Unfortunately, Martin still seems to think his religion is a force dedicated to doing good for humanity. It’s sweet that he still thinks so, but then, he’s an archbishop, and well-schooled in the art of self-delusion.

One of those agony aunts, Dear Margo, got an amusing request for help.

Dear Margo: Our daughter started college a year ago, and we’ve noticed during her visits home that she’s not the sweet, innocent girl we sent away for higher learning. We raised her with strong Christian beliefs, but lately she’s saying that she’s joined an atheist club on campus and is questioning everything we taught her. Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI. I’ve tried to cure our daughter and reconcile with her, but nothing seems to work. I’ve prayed over her at night while she sleeps, enlisted friends in a phone prayer tree and even spoken to my priest about the possibility of an exorcism. I’m at my wits’ end. How can I recover my daughter and keep her from hell? — God-fearing

There’s a regular stampede of young people doing exactly what “God-fearing” describes — isn’t it wonderful? This is exactly what happens when you send your kids off to college: if it works, they start thinking for themselves, develop surprising new opinions, and aren’t afraid to share them with other people. Hooray for college students, some of my favorite people!

As for these poor parents, they shipped their daughter off to college with the wrong idea. They thought college would just confirm them in their same old traditional beliefs. We really ought to send little information packets to the parents of our students, carefully explaining that there will be little shocks like this, because their kids will come back as smart, independent human beings.

Margo’s answer isn’t bad — she tells them that it is normal for people to think for themselves — even if she does bend over backwards to give some unwarranted sympathy to freaky religious beliefs.

And that fanatical devotion to peculiar Christian dogma? Well…

The woman who prayed instead of getting medical help when her daughter was dying of diabetes, Leilani Neumann, has been found guilty. I found the defense argument ludicrous and revealing.

Linehan countered, saying Neumann didn’t realize her daughter was so ill and did all she could do to help, in line with the family’s belief in faith-healing.

He said Neumann is a devout Christian who prays about everything and took good care of her four children.

“Religious extremism is a Muslim terrorist,” Linehan said. “They are saying these parents were so far off the scale that they murdered their child. The woman did everything she could to help her. That is the injustice in this case.”

Charming redefinition there — so only Muslims can be terrorists? I think everything this crazy woman did fit perfectly into the definition of religious extremism.

Apologies, too many Father Ted references lately. Anyway, that’s what popped into my head when I saw that it wasn’t just the Catholics, but the Orthodox church as well, that seems to have a humanity deficiency. A Serbian Orthodox Christian drug rehab center has some rather unorthodox techniques…like beating the crap out of recidivists. Don’t watch the video at that link if violence makes you faint: it shows a thug first smacking a guy hard many times with a shovel, then punching and slapping him until he’s reeling and falls to the floor. It’s a nice touch when he’s bounced off a wall and rattles the Orthodox icons hanging there.

It is truly an amazing hat.

That’s the kind of hat that if anyone other than a priest were seen to be wearing it, small children would point and whoop with laughter, adults would purse their lips in concern and cross the street to avoid it, and concerned policemen would pull over to politely ask, “Do you need some assistance, sir? Are you on any medication?”

Strangely, though, priests must get a special dispensation to be allowed to wear clothing that, if portrayed on the pages of a super-hero comic book, would cause readers accustomed to the garishness of Superman and Wonder Woman to blanch, blink their eyes, and wonder how over-the-top these crazy artists were going to get.

And that’s before we even listen to what they have to say.

That’s the new Archbishop of Westminster, and the Times had the perfect title for the article: Archbishop of Westminster attacks atheism but says nothing on child abuse. Really, nothing more needs to be said.

This is the blinkered cleric who said of the reports of abuses in Irish Catholic workhouses that it took great courage for the clergy to step forward. This is the guy who used the opportunity of his homily to pretend faith was a source of great good in the world.

This archbishop also has a pal, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, who against the backdrop of the recent revelations of pedophilia, sadism, and the cover-up of same, could say:

For Jesus, the inability to believe in God and to live by faith is the greatest of evils.

So Richard Dawkins and I are far greater evils than the goatish Christian Brothers who raped young boys in their care? Well, gosh, thanks, I think.

Just to place myself in the Catholic mindset for a moment, though, if leaving the church is a great evil, wouldn’t discrediting the church by evil acts, by the suppression of justice, and by turning a blind eye to the corruption spreading through the body of Christ be even greater sins, since they will cause multitudes to turn away from the Church? Wouldn’t that make Murphy-O’Connor and Nichols perpetrators of even greater crimes against the faith than Richard Dawkins?

Bill Donohue must be greatly distressed right now, since a commission has blown open the doors on a long history of child abuse by the Irish Catholic Church. He’s scrambling to do damage control and making a pathetic spectacle of himself. He basically belittles the trauma that those kids experienced to salvage the reputation of his beloved Catholicism…it doesn’t work.

Reuters is reporting that “Irish Priests Beat, Raped Children,” yet the report does not justify this wild and irresponsible claim. Four types of abuse are noted: physical, sexual, neglect and emotional. Physical abuse includes “being kicked”; neglect includes “inadequate heating”; and emotional abuse includes “lack of attachment and affection.” Not nice, to be sure, but hardly draconian, especially given the time line: fully 82 percent of the incidents took place before 1970. As the New York Times noted, “many of them [are] now more than 70 years old.” And quite frankly, corporal punishment was not exactly unknown in many homes during these times, and this is doubly true when dealing with miscreants.

Regarding sexual abuse, “kissing,” and “non-contact including voyeurism” (e.g., what it labels as “inappropriate sexual talk”) make the grade as constituting sexual abuse. Moreover, one-third of the cases involved “inappropriate fondling and contact.” None of this is defensible, but none of it qualifies as rape. Rape, on the other hand, constituted 12 percent of the cases. As for the charge that “Irish Priests” were responsible, some of the abuse was carried out by lay persons, much of it was done by Brothers, and about 12 percent of the abusers were priests (most of whom were not rapists).

The Irish report suffers from conflating minor instances of abuse with serious ones, thus demeaning the latter. When most people hear of the term abuse, they do not think about being slapped, being chilly, being ignored or, for that matter, having someone stare at you in the shower. They think about rape.

By cheapening rape, the report demeans the big victims. But, of course, there is a huge market for such distortions, especially when the accused is the Catholic Church.

Whoa. The insensitive gall of the man.

It does not excuse anything to say that many of the reports are from before the 1970s. It wouldn’t make the slightest difference if this report were of events in the 970s — it would still be an indictment of the casual brutality and cavalier disregard of the church for basic human rights, an indictment reinforced by the casual lack of concern given by Bill Donohue now. He ought to be howling in fury at the way the church has betrayed Christian principles (if he believes they actually have them), rather than making excuses for them.

Then to claim that this was merely pedestrian “corporal punishment”, and dismiss the victims as “miscreants” — Jebus. It’s like all the recent rationalizations by right-wing amoral monsters that torture is only like fraternity hazing, and besides, the terrorists deserved it. Is this what the Catholic Church is about, the dehumanization of children and the justification of abuse? Culture of life my ass.

And these were children and young adults. Donohue doesn’t think “lack of attachment and affection” is such a big deal; does he have no kids of his own? Has he forgotten his childhood completely? If that were all the church had done, denied children love, stripped them of their families, put them in isolation, then I would still say that it is a monstrous institution that must be torn down.

Then he belittles “kissing” as sexual abuse. Is Bill Donohue in the habit of walking up to teenaged girls and kissing them? I hope not; most girls would consider that a demeaning and disgusting assault. And if Donohue were in a position of authority of them, using implied coercion to force them to put up with his slobbering intrusions on their persons, it would be even more offensive.

Only 12% of the cases were rapes. ONLY 12%. Does this somehow excuse the crime? I am reminded of the line by Father Ted:

“We’re not all like that. Say if there’s two hundred million priests in the world, and 5% of them are pedophiles– that’s still only ten million!”

Of course, Father Ted was a comedy show. I presume Donohue wrote that with a straight face and thought he was making a serious point.

But what you really need to do is read the personal accounts and the report’s discussion of the evils that were performed in Jesus’ name.

What was going on in the workhouses was Dickensian in its awfulness — this was child slave labor. Ah, but the little miscreants deserved to be worked to exhaustion, right, Mr Donohue?

The commission report documents the pattern of abuse in considerable detail.

Reported abuse ranged from inappropriate fondling and touching to oral/genital contact, vaginal
and anal rape. There were 128 reports of sexual abuse from 127 female witnesses (34%).7 One
witness reported that she was sexually abused in two different Schools. Witnesses described
their experience of sexual abuse as either acute or chronic episodes occurring throughout their
admissions in the Schools. Witnesses reported being sexually abused by religious and lay staff
in addition to other adults, the majority of whom were understood to be directly associated with
the Schools. Witnesses also reported being sexually abused by co-residents.

I am waiting for Donohue to protest that only 127 girls were abused. Wouldn’t one be enough? Also note that 34% of the women interviewed reported sexual abuse. We know that the shame of these encounters also means they are often grossly underreported.

The secretive and isolated nature of sexual abuse together with witnesses’ experience of having
their complaints disbelieved, ignored or punished contributed to the environment in which sexual
abuse was reported to have occurred. Witnesses reported that the culture of obeying orders
without question together with the authority of the adult abuser rendered them powerless to
resist sexual abuse. Witnesses further reported that the fear of punishment, the threat of being
sent to a more restrictive institution or their siblings being removed to another School also
inhibited them in resisting, reporting or disclosing sexual abuse. Some witnesses spoke for the
first time about being sexually abused during their hearings with the Committee.

Witnesses reported sexual assaults in the forms of vaginal and anal rape, oral/genital contact,
digital penetration, penetration by an object, masturbation and other forms of inappropriate
contact, including molestation and kissing. Witnesses also reported several forms of non-contact
sexual abuse including indecent exposure, inappropriate sexual talk, voyeurism and forced
public nudity. Witnesses gave accounts of being sexually abused both within the Schools and in
other locations while in the care of the authorities in charge of the particular institution. They
reported being sexually abused in many locations, including: dormitories, schools, motor
vehicles, bathrooms, staff bedrooms, churches, sacristies, fields, parlours, the residences of
clergy, holiday locations and while with godparents and employers.

I should add that this particular document only describes the girls’ treatment, and the summary report points out that the sexual abuse of girls was relatively light, compared to the pervasive sexual brutality of the boys’ workhouses. Donohue didn’t even bother to address the plight of the boys from this report.

Donohue was wrong. Reuters actually played down the horrors of the Catholic workhouses from the commission report — read it yourself and you’ll find that it isn’t making “wild and irresponsible” accusations at all, but is soberly stacking up a mountain of evidence that the Catholic Church in Ireland was practicing great evils.

I also don’t buy the excuse that this was done in the past and is irrelevant today. Donohue makes it relevant, acting as he does now as the embodiment of the mindset that allowed these nightmarish conditions to exist.

Grim tales are emerging from an investigation of the Irish Catholic Church. For years, they’ve been running reform schools which sound more like hellish work camps, where sadistic priests were given free rein. I found it ironic that some of these workhouses were used to make religious paraphernalia, like rosaries, that were sold to the faithful. I wonder how many hail marys have been said on beads assembled by child-slaves who were raped or beaten as a reward? It does add a rather sinister gloss to Catholic prayers.

A quick summary of the findings:

• a history of official cover-ups of pedophiles within the church since the 1930s.

• a pattern of beatings, abuse, and molestation in church-run workhouses.

• molestation and rape were “endemic” at the boys’ workhouses.

• ritualized beatings and personal abuse and denigration.

• kids were falsely told that their parents or siblings were dead.

• a continuing insistence on protecting the child molesters in their ranks.

• whistleblowers were accused of being “money-seeking liars”.

• the Irish government cut a deal with the Catholic church to cap their losses to lawsuits at $175 million…which is only a tiny part of the full cost.

Many of the perpetrators of abuse are now elderly and in retirement…no doubt in homes that are run with more care and concern than they gave. The institutions are dying out as the priests age, and a good thing, too.

Can we stop equating religion and morality now? They never seem to have much to do with one another.

Colleen Hauser has flown the coop. She has defied a court order to bring her sick son, Daniel Hauser, to a qualified doctor for essential medical care. The boy has Hodgkins lymphoma, a disease with a very good prognosis if treated soon, but is a painful death sentence within a few years if neglected. His mother, though, is fervently religious, and no doubt smug in her righteousness, has bundled her son into a car and is devoutly driving to Mt. Moriah. I hope she’s not expecting an angel of the lord to appear and spare her son.

What she has done has gone even deeper. Daniel is 13 years old; he has been tested for his competency, and has been found to be completely illiterate. He was homeschooled. Colleen Hauser has been wielding the sacrificial dagger of her faith on her son for years, crippling his brain and rendering him unable to evaluate the real-world consequences of their decisions. I wonder how many Daniel Hausers there are in this country, living lives of quiet ignorance, unexposed by the trauma of a physical disease?

And here’s the real tragedy: Colleen Hauser almost certainly loves her son and believes she is doing what is best for him, every step of the way. I can identify with her in that regard — I can understand that deep, gut-wrenching love a parent can have for her children, the kind that can put you to your knees with agony at every little hurt they suffer…and Daniel Hauser faces deeper pain and an imminent threat of death that my kids have never had. But Colleen Hauser is so afflicted with the poison of religion that she has lost sight of reality, and is going to kill her son with her ignorance.

Here’s another case: Leilani Neumann watched her daughter Madeline die of diabetes.

A mother accused of homicide for only praying while her 11-year-old daughter died of untreated diabetes knew the girl was gravely ill at least a day before she died, her sister-in-law testified Monday.

Susan Neumann of rural Merrill was the first witness to testify in the trial of Leilani Neumann, 41, who is charged with second-degree reckless homicide in her daughter Madeline’s March 23, 2008, death.

Susan Neumann said Leilani Neumann told her that she came home from work at the family’s coffee shop on March 22 and “felt the spirit of death” when she reached for the knob to open the door to the house.

“She was afraid,” the sister-in-law said. “She ran upstairs to Kara (Madeline’s nickname) and felt her and was relieved to feel warmth in her arm. Then she said they started praying and praying and praying and didn’t stop praying until supper time.”

Prosecutors contend any reasonable parent would have known something was wrong and Neumann, who believes healing comes from God, recklessly killed her daughter by praying instead of rushing her to a doctor as the girl became so weak she couldn’t walk or talk.

I read that story, and it’s heartbreaking. These were not uncaring parents, and you can tell that they are wracked with grief and loss — their little girl is dead. That pain is real.

But then look what they have done. Juvenile onset diabetes is easily treatable; I know healthy, successful 70 year olds who have lived with it for most of their lives, who have gone on to worthy careers and raised happy families, all things denied to Kara Neumann because her family was infected with the deadly taint of dogmatic superstition. Her parents killed her as certainly as if they had put a knife to her neck on the altar of their faith. Religion turned love into a death sentence.

And they haven’t learned from this tragedy.

Before the start of the trial Monday, Leilani Neumann read from her Bible and circled the defense and prosecution tables several times in prayer.

That, I confess, hardened my heart. I hope her prayers in the courtroom are as effective as the prayers by her dying daughter’s bedside.

These are cases of religion gone pathological, of belief so absurd and so deep that it denies truth and has overt negative consequences. Moderate Christian believers will read about this and dismiss it as irrelevant to their faith; sure, they’d pray, but they’d also get their children in to legitimate doctors who would give them effective treatment.

I have to say something that is heartfelt, and is also meant to offend. I do not absolve you mealy-mouthed moderates, I do not regard your beliefs as harmless. If Colleen Hauser or Leilani Neumann were in your church, you’d tell them to get medical care, but you’d also validate their belief in prayers. You would provide the soothing background muzak that says prayer is good, prayer is virtuous, prayer will connect you to the great lord who can do anything, prayer will give you solace in your time of worry. You would not raise your voice to say that prayer is useless, prayer is self-defeating, that while prayer might make you feel better while your child is suffering, that is no virtue. You pray yourselves. You think it is a noble and generous act for your representatives to prowl the corridors of hospitals, preying on the desperation of the sick. You abase yourselves before false hopes, and sacrifice human dignity on an altar built from the bones of the dead. You would spread the poison, piously excusing yourselves because you only want to administer sub-lethal doses.

You are Abraham’s enablers. I hope you all feel a small tremor of guilt when you sit your own children down at bedtime to beg a nonexistent being for aid, when you plant the seed of futile supplication and surrender to delusions in their trusting minds. Damn you all.

The persecution complex runs deep. Here’s another another example of laughable letter to the editor, complaining about a story that referred to “wafers and wine”:

…the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t now, nor has it ever offered a wafer and wine as Communion. We do offer the body and blood of Jesus Christ, which in John’s gospel he proclaims to be our source of life in Him. To refer to the Eucharist as a wafer and wine is to demean the value of this sacrament, seemingly equating it to an evening snack.

I suggest that Mr. Kush apologize for his lack of respect to Bishop Reilly and the faith of the Roman Catholic Church.

Shall newspapers take this complaint to heart and henceforth refer to communion as a cannibal orgy of consumption of an imaginary dead god’s flesh and blood? That would at least spell out their beliefs.

I think I’ll stick to calling it just a cracker, though.