A large number of people, that have left comments on the Mirfield blog about their abuse, may have felt, in the past, that they were alone.
They thought that the sexual abuse they experienced at Mirfield, had only happened to them.
That is, often, how the perpetrator grooms the child – convincing them that they are the only one that matters – that they are special, and more important than all the other children around them.

The blog has been, for some people, the catalyst that has put them on the journey to find, justice, closure and inner peace. It certainly has been that way for me.

Prior to the blog, I too thought, I was the only one that had been abused in the way that I had been at Mirfield.

It has been a long and drawn out process to reach ‘the place’ where I am at now.

The Mirfield blog has empowered people. It has given them the the power and the courage, as a group, to seek recognition and justice for the inexcusable abuse that happened to them and their friends at Mirfield. The abuse they suffered has blighted and effected large parts of their lives for many years – unfortunately, in many cases, the pain and suffering continues to this day.

Mark Murray

I suspect, some of the children that went through the Verona Father’s Junior Seminary at Mirfield, that are now adults, are thinking, how is it that abuse was allowed to take place at Mirfield – and more importantly why was it allowed to carry on?

I know, and a part of me understands, the feeling that some people think that the ‘Mirfield Memories Blog’ has run its course and it should be wound down.
However, I also know there are some ‘Mirfield Old Boys’ that, for the first time in their lives, have been able to speak about their abusive experiences at Mirfield. They have had the strength and courage to do this because of the blog – other people have written on the blog, and this has had a massive positive effect on them.

Their responses and experience may not have been written on the Mirfield Blog, however, the blog has been a catalyst for them – it has given them the courage and strength to talk and email others about their time at Mirfield.

They no longer feel alone. They do not believe that they were the only one’s abused – they now know that there were others. This knowledge gives them, perhaps for the first time in their lives, some sense of control in dealing with their abuse.

I think, a large number of ‘Mirfield Old Boys’ – the abused and the non abused – are trying to make sense of what took place at Mirfield, and because of that I believe that the Mirfield Blog, at least for the time being has a purpose to serve.
Write on the blog If you have any thoughts or experiences – it can only help.

Mark

Bishop Wright has apologised that priests in his diocese used their positions of trust, power and authority to sexually abuse children, and then used that power, control and authority, to conceal their acts. He went on to say, that the abuse perpetrated by the priests was: “exacerbated on occasion by the failures of church leaders” and had caused “real and enduring harm” to the victims, their families and many others.”

Why will the Verona Fathers not apologise for the sexual abuse that took place at Mirfield? As far as I am aware, they know now, and they knew then, that priests at Mirfield were abusing children.

Why is it that so many religious, orders, even when faced with overwhelming evidence of abuse, will not hold their hands up and say we failed and we are sorry, so let us talk? Instead, what seems to happen, and what is often said is – abuse did not take place; it was just inappropriate actions; you are lying; you are in it for the money; it was too long ago; we dealt with abuse differently then – or as I heard recently, “it is a conspiracy and you want to destroy us.” It was then followed by: – we the priests, and the order as a whole, are also suffering as a result of the abusers (that were named).

They are all in denial land or cover up land – whatever land it is, it is a completely different place to the one that I live in. We must protect our name and our church at all costs – that is the land that they seem to be living in.

Their Church – what, and who, is their church, and what does it stand for – more importantly, who does it belong to and where is it now?

They have no idea, they could not possibly have – or at least I hope so – of the pain and suffering that they are causing so many people by their inaction.

Mark

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1608135/video-bishops-unreserved-apology-inquiry/?cs=305

Mark Murray ! I remember your name, do you remember me?

John McCabe.

Reply

A Mirfield Boy says:

12 June 2013 at 6:09 PM (Edit)

I am sorry, I do not.

A Mirfield Boy says:

12 June 2013 at 6:28 PM (Edit)

What year where you at Mirfield?

I was there from September 1969 – Fraser, Russell, Heirons and Hicks were rectors during my time there – Luigi Cocchi, may have, had a period as rector at some point

I knew of a Father Wilkinson, and met Maguire on more than one occasion. Neither of them were based at Mirfield during my time.

Mark

John McCabe says:

12 June 2013 at 5:14 PM (Edit)

Is there anyone out there who might remember the reign of wilkinson and maquire….a reign of unspeakable terror, a compact contrived and brokered in the darkest hour of my life and I am certain of many others…

Written by Dr Ann Olivarius on May 31 2013

When the Australian government announced that it would establish a Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Cardinal George Pell, Catholic archbishop of Sydney and Australia’s most senior Catholic, objected to his organisation being singled out by the media, claiming that the Catholic Church was not “the only cab off the rank” when it came to the sexual abuse of children.

Leaving aside his turn of phrase, on the face of it, his objections seem to have merit. Day by day it becomes clear that there have been incidents of sexual abuse in almost every type of institution which has any dealings with children. Catholic priests, protestant ministers of every description, Jewish rabbis, schoolteachers, Scout leaders, dance teachers, youth workers, television personalities – the list goes on and on. The Catholic Church is certainly not alone.

This, however, is only a superficial assessment of the situation. If one could imagine a Catholic priest, a Protestant minister, a Jewish rabbi and a Scout leader, all committing sexually abusive acts identical in severity and frequency Cardinal Pell would, nevertheless, still be in error in claiming as he seemed to do, that the Catholic Church is no worse than any other institution in this matter.

All sexual abuse, whether committed by a member of an institution or by a private citizen, has some things in common. Sexual abuse is always an abuse of power and authority. It is always a betrayal of trust and it always committed with some form of duress. Often there is a simple use of greater physical power. Adults are always physically stronger than children and men are more often than not stronger than women. Physical strength is often the first line of duress used by abusers, but many other techniques are used: long-term grooming designed to convince the child that the abuser is his or her friend; claims that no one will believe the child if he or she tries to disclose, and threats to retaliate if the child tries to.

There are also common elements in the effect sexual abuse has on victims. Problems like adult sexual dysfunction, depression, low self esteem, the inability to form relationships, feelings of betrayal, powerlessness, shame and guilt are just a few of the burdens survivors of child abuse carry with them, usually forever. The infliction of all this injury on a person is most certainly a crime, regardless of who commits it.

When the crime is committed by a Catholic priest, however, the crime is compounded because of the very nature and structure of the Catholic Church. There are four interrelated reasons as to why this is so.

To begin with, the nature and structure of Catholic organisation and the theology surrounding priesthood in the Catholic Church means that its priests are not the same as leaders in other religious groups, even though they perform many of the same duties and roles. The Catholic Church has always proclaimed that priests are men set apart from other men (not to mention women and children), by virtue of the sacrament of ordination. The Church claims that ordination enables a priest to act as a representative of Christ (Note 1581 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1994) and that it possesses him of “the authority to act in the power and place of the person of Christ himself” (Note 1548 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1994).

Secondly, the Catholic Church vests in its priests the two most important elements of its life as a religious organisation, namely the power to celebrate Mass and the power to forgive sins in the name of God. Both of these powers are fundamental to the very existence of the Church. The Mass is seen as the only means whereby Christ or God can be present to the people through the consecration of bread and wine and only priests have the power and authority to perform this consecration in the celebration of the Mass – so without priests there can be no Mass and without the Mass there can be no church. The mainstay of Catholic teaching is the doctrine that humans are sinful creatures who require God’s forgiveness in order to avoid an eternity of suffering. For a Catholic, remorse and determination to do better in future, no matter how sincerely felt and adhered to, are not enough for the remission of past sins – what is also needed is the intercession of a priest. Only a priest has the power to grant absolution from the effects of sin. Thus through the authority to celebrate Mass and the authority to grant absolution from sin priests are vested with the astounding power to control access to God, and to speak for God.

Thirdly, the Church has buttressed the power and status of its priests by creating around them an aura of mystery and inscrutability. So, priests have traditionally lived apart from the ordinary people, and they have dressed differently and their difference has been justified and reinforced by mandatory celibacy. Indeed, celibacy is seen as an almost superhuman power over sexuality which in itself gives the priest extra authority and mystique.

The Catholic Church’s teachings about sexuality is the fourth element which makes sexual abuse by Catholic priests a more heinous crime than abuse by other categories of leaders. Catholics are taught from a very young age that outside of marriage sexual activity of any kind, in thought, word or deed is mortally sinful. In addition homosexuality is seen in traditional Catholic teaching as being an abomination in God’s eyes.

This then is the nature of Catholic society. In its pure form, it is hierarchical and deeply unequal with the clergy being invested with the political and spiritual power to determine whether an ordinary person will or will not be saved, and these powers are overlayed with the strongest possible prohibitions against any kind of sexual activity outside of marriage.

All sexual abuse is horrifying but it is not hard to imagine the extra layer of horror felt by a young Catholic child if the abuser is a priest. Here is a man who, in the mind of the child is Christ’s representative on earth asking or forcing her or him to do things which this very man probably rails against from the pulpit on a regular basis. It is not hard to imagine the complete physical and emotional paralysis that such an event would occasion, but that is just the beginning. The church has encouraged the child to think that the priest can do no wrong so childlike reasoning would therefore say that these obviously wrong activities must be the child’s own fault. Not only that, but by his actions the priest has condemned the child in her or his own mind to eternal damnation for he has effectively blocked off access to the only thing which the child thinks can provide salvation, namely confession and absolution. How could it be expected that a child would be able to confess to her or his parish priest the acts which have been committed with the very man behind the screen, or to someone who almost certainly knows the abuser and will naturally be his ally? . In most churches, but especially in a small community the supposed anonymity of the confessional is a farce. The argument that confession is not made to the priest but to God because the priest is acting in persona Christi, is really not very helpful either. If the priest is acting in persona Christi, in the confessional it is reasonable for a child to assume that he was also acting in persona Christi when he was committing the abuse.

When a Catholic child has been abused by a Catholic priest he or she is left to deal not only with the physical and emotional wounds which every abuse victim faces but also with a sense that they have been abused and abandoned by God himself. If one believes the theology and doctrine it is hard to imagine a worse condition. Many victims have described their experience as “soul murder”. This conviction, of course, leads to an even more troubling thought — because it is possible to believe that if one’s soul is already dead and condemned to hell for all eternity, the death of the body is a very minor step indeed. It is little wonder that so many victims of Catholic priests have committed or attempted suicide.

This is why Cardinal Pell is wrong and disingenuous when he claims that the record of the Catholic Church in matters of child sexual abuse is no worse than many other organisations. The perpetration of the abuse in a Catholic context carries with it an overlay of theological, spiritual trauma which is exclusive to the Catholic Church.

There is, however, one more level of extra culpability for the Catholic Church. It is now common knowledge that the upper echelons of Catholic hierarchy systematically denied or covered up abuse by priests for decades. Even if the priests themselves did not understand the full spiritual horror of the abuse they were committing (and it is hard to imagine how that could be), any bishop to whom this abuse was reported should have had a sufficient grasp of Catholic theology to know that this apprehended “soul murder” was an unavoidable outcome of the physical acts. To that extent, those bishops who covered up or denied the abuse are accessories to this extra layer of crime, which is exclusive to the Catholic Church. It is to be hoped that they will be held culpable and accountable.

Posted by Mark Murray

Copied from the editor’s desk -The Tablet — Abuse inquiry urgently needed
18 May 2013

From the court appearances of accused TV stars to historic scandals involving priests, music teachers and care workers, to the killing of young girls, Britain’s news pages, websites and TV bulletins are awash with cases of the sexual abuse of children. This week the shocking details of the depravity of a group of men in Oxford were revealed during a court case which saw a gang of eight convicted of the rape and torture of six girls over more than a decade. The conclusion to be drawn is that in Britain sexual exploitation and predation is endemic; that it goes back decades and continues into the present. Many perpetrators have been allowed to continue their crimes unchallenged.
The Catholic Church was one of the first institutions in this country to stand accused of negligence in its dealing with the child victims of abuse and the handling of their abusers. Some critics of the Church blamed its tradition of a celibate priesthood, claiming that sexual frustration was the primary cause. But the scandals now coming to light show that celibacy is not a common denominator. Paedophilia is about power, about people in positions of authority, or who are famous, or are even ordinary but have gained power through long-term grooming of children, who target the vulnerable and defenceless.
There are other common factors. Paedophiles continue targeting young people because institutions allow them to do so. Sometimes those institutions were the ones to which the criminals belonged – the Catholic Church, the Church of England, the BBC – and which failed to act because those in charge were more concerned with the institutions’ reputations and the impact of scandal than with the pain of a child.
On other occasions, as has happened in Oxford, as well as Rochdale and other northern towns, the abusers got away with it because the police, social services and others in positions of responsibility failed to intervene, or did not do enough to protect the children from the perpetrators. There has also been speculation that some agencies failed to act in the case of the Oxford and Rochdale scandals because of racial and religious sensitivities: the victims were white; their attackers were Asian, often Pakistani Muslims. While some experts now accept that white girls have been preyed on by such men who are linked to organised crime, others point out that group grooming is a small part of the picture and that white males, operating as individuals and often through the internet, are a far bigger problem.
What is evident is that the causes of paedophilia, the incidents of it, safeguarding procedures and best practice, all merit further study. In Australia, the response has been to set up a royal commission into child sexual abuse, with a particular focus on institutional cases. A similar inquiry in Britain would enable victims to have their stories heard; it would be an opportunity to consider to what extent changes in culture are needed or whether individual culpability is what matters most. And it should also consider whether the law needs to be changed, making it a legal obligation to report suspected abuse to the police. For many victims, the worst aspects of abuse are being ignored and denied justice. A public inquiry would offer the chance to right these wrongs.

Hi Degs here,

Here are a few of my random memories concerning our outward bound endeavours.One name that springs to mind is Francis Hollahand.One winter ascent of Helvelyn we had to carry him from the summit with hypothermia primarily   because his walking boots had no tongues and let in snow. Another name to play with is Gerald Duffy he was part of a group that I was with that attempted a gold expedition in November, much against the advise of the inspector who came out from Kendal and stated that we were either stupid or real tigers to be going on the Lakeland fells at that time of year . After several mishaps,including losing one of our party on some fells called the hundreds above Ambleside in the dark, we abandoned our attempt and pitched our frozen tent in a farmers field where we were retrieved the following day.(real tigers)

The lads that supervised us from the centre in Dewsbury were fun if a little harsh.I remember one of them giving us a warning about using petrol to start a fire,which he then proceeded to do . The petrol can ignited, he dropped it and covered himself in burning fuel. Then there followed a quick lesson in how to extinguish a burning human.

Next instalment canoeing on the Calder(Francis features in another near death experience ) Photo is me(hanging)Gerald  Meen?(rear) Francis Hollahand?(on the floor) either Mitch or Gerry McLaughlin on the left .If you know any different let me know All the best Degs

I

Hi Degs here again with another intermittent  post

I may not be posting regularly but I am still managing to visit the site on a more regular  basis.It is pleasing to see that more MOB,s are contributing and commenting .However what you don’t  see are the viewing audience that some days can be well in excess of 100, giving us one viewer every 10 minutes or so .People are still interested in what is being said so don’t think that we aren’t being listened to. As well as that the audience is global,lets just say that it would be easier to list the countries where we don’t have watchers.

I hope that people have seen Tonys YouTube entries slightly before  my time but fascinating ,what a great collection of visual memories .Judging from the response so far it looks like the reunion is on its way to being another great success.I am looking forward to meeting and talking face to face with all the MOBs who have shown interest in the blog.(by the way Martin I play the banjo and the bodhran ,the two most unwelcome instruments in any session ,badly.So how about a bit of a jam then ??) It will be good to see everyone. Perhaps after a few beers we may be able to persuade  Mick and Eamon to carry on for one more.

There was an interesting piece in the Guardian about the popes decision to retire by Jonathan Freedland  .The crux of which was this “Benedict did too little to deal with sex offenders in the priesthood. He must be held to account- in this life not the next”

Here are two extracts from the article

When he was the archbishop of Munich, in 1980, the case of  Peter Hullerman crossed his desk. Fr Hullerman was accused of multiple crimes of abuse. In one case he had taken an 11 year old boy hiking in the mountains, plied him with drink, stripped him,locked the door  and forced him to perform oral sex.Yet Hullerman’s punishment was simply to be moved from Essen to Munich for therapy.Within days ,this known sexual predator was given pastoral duties with access to young people-and he promptly abused again.Benedict’s defenders have long insisted those fateful decisions were taken by his deputy .But the crucial documents,when they surfaced, said  otherwise.

The case of California priest Stephen Kiesle , convicted of tying up and molesting two boys in a church rectory.His superiors wrote to Rome in 1981 requesting the abuser be defrocked, warning of a scandal if he remained.After an initial request  for more information,Ratzinger took four years to deliver his reply.It came in Latin-and said his office needed more time to consider the case.No doubt grateful for the delay,Kiesle was able to return to one of his former parishes-in the youth ministry.

Dose this ring any bells with anyone ?There are several more examples even more outrageous it is well worth a read.

All the best Degs

The following post by A. Dean  highlights just how difficult and frightening  it can be for victims of sexual abuse to speak up and pursue a case against their abuser.

It is a very difficult and, at times, a   lonely path to take. However, as A. Dean wrote,  “the fight for justice can nevertheless be one worth waging – strength and solidarity are contagious, and future generations of children are protected.”

Less than a week after being cross-examined in Manchester Crown Court during the trial of Michael Brewer and his ex-wife Hilary (Kay) Brewer, violin teacher Frances Andrade was found dead at her home in Surrey of an apparent suicide. Her death was revealed to the court on 24^th January, without the jury present. Mrs Andrade had been a pupil at Chetham’s School of Music in Manchester in the 1970s, where Michael Brewer was Choirmaster. Michael and Hilary Brewer have since been convicted of sexually abusing Mrs Andrade when she was 14 and 15.

Mrs Andrade’s son, Oliver Andrade, has shone a harsh spotlight on the justice system since his mother’s death, describing how being called a “liar” and a “fantasist” in front of the court was “more than even she could bear”. He criticized the court practice whereby Mrs Andrade was not given sufficient time to prepare with the barrister assigned to her case: “Being a case of the Crown Prosecution Service they had a barrister and [Mrs Andrade] was simply the complainant, not meeting him until the day of the case and talking for a scant 10 minutes outside of the court”. He continued: “this all meant that during the case she was unfamiliar with the process, unsure of what either barrister was trying to do and exceptionally uncomfortable throughout the entire thing.” He also accused the police of advising Mrs Andrade not to receive therapy until the end of the case, which he said deprived his mother of the help and support she needed.

Frances Andrade’s husband, Levine Andrade, has echoed his son’s words, describing how “Fran felt as if she was on trial. She kept saying: ‘I can see why nobody comes forward. I can see how people crack under the pressure’”.

Yet, at the end of the trial Judge Martin Rutland praised all counsel – including Kate Blackwell QC, the defence barrister who questioned Mrs Andrade – for their conduct in the case. Judge Rutland assured Kate Blackwell “You did your job, in that you put what had to be put to the witness”.

In addition, both the Crown Prosecution Service and the Greater Manchester Police have denied having advised Mrs Andrade not to seek therapy until after the trial. Detective Chief Superintendent Mary Doyle insisted that it is the police force’s “policy and practice to encourage victims to seek whatever support they need” and that “the advice to Frances not to seek support may have been given by another party but it was not the advice of Greater Manchester Police.” The CPS has released similar statements.

Yet in the end, a woman considered exceptionally able and intelligent, an accomplished professional and fine mother, took her own life due to the overwhelming pressures of pursing a case against those who had sexually abused her.  This represents not just a tragedy for Mrs Andrade and her family, but for survivors of sexual abuse, a harsh refutation of the idea that the justice system will work for them.

So where was the fault?

This is an important question. There is an exceedingly precarious balance between supportive protection for vulnerable witnesses, and a fair trial for defendants, who are entitled to a thorough testing of the evidence. Striking this balance is often more difficult in historic claims, where evidence may have degraded (witnesses may have died or cannot be found; memories fade), and the cumulative effects of suffering the scars of abuse may make it difficult for claimants to come forward at all, and to withstand the scorching scrutiny that is built into the adversarial system.

While the justice system exists to protect all of society, the fight in individual cases is also for the benefit of those who area victim of crime.  In this case, a conviction was achieved, but the victim was re-victimised in the process, and never witnessed the justice that her bravery and candour made possible. Indeed, we repeatedly see how survivors of child abuse must often battle forcefully to overcome feelings of guilt and shame just to disclose the criminal acts of their abusers for the first time to loved ones – so to be grilled before a court may seem impossibly daunting. Mrs Andrade’s sad death has underlined just how gruelling the road to liberation from childhood sex abuse can be.

But while asking what went wrong, we should not lose sight of the fact that the legal system is not just a place where claims of abuse are picked to pieces – it is also where they may succeed and bring justice, inspiring other survivors in doing so. Mrs Andrade was one of many victims of childhood sex abuse who has appeared in court, and for many, the legal system has delivered accountability and emancipation. Of course, there are multiple paths a survivor of childhood sexual abuse can take towards healing, and not all involve legal redress.  But Mrs Andrade’s death should not be interpreted as proof that the legal system is devoid of hope and support for survivors of child sex abuse.

There are measures in place to alleviate the difficulty faced by vulnerable witnesses. Pre-trial visits are available so that witnesses can become familiar with the court. There is access to witness care officers and specialised counsellors. Additionally, there are special in-court measures available for victims of sexual abuse who testify in criminal trials, for example screens to shield the witness from the defendant; a live televised link enabling the witness to give evidence during the trial from outside of the courtroom; video-recorded interviews; and various other measures. Information from the Crown Prosecution Service about these special measures can be found here.

As we wrote here, 2012 was a year of progress for child protection, and 2013 promises to capitalize on this momentum. The legal system is still the road less travelled for survivors of childhood sex abuse, but for every survivor who chooses it, others are often inspired to take courage, because they see they are not alone.  Though institutions that have enabled abusers may sometimes seem too big a beast to take on, and the legal system too daunting a tool, thousands of survivors have succeeded in bringing claims against their abusers and the schools, care homes, churches and other institutions that allowed them scope to abuse.  The fight for justice can nevertheless be one worth waging – strength and solidarity are contagious, and future generations of children are protected.