VATICAN SAFEGUARDING – FOLLOWING THE MONEY

I recently wrote about Father Small visiting the beautiful palace he and his Safeguarding staff – the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors –  are taking over – and to which Survivors of Catholic sexual abuse will also have access to in some as yet unclear way. Vatican Safeguarding, it seems, is currently going through a difficult period with the resignation of two Survivors who were on its staff and now the resignation of its leading member Hans Zollner.

Zollner’s comments at a press conference included:

“One thing is certain, several members have left the Pontifical Commission before me and there has been no shortage of criticisms recently expressed publicly by past members, some quite strong”. 

“If there is a lack of transparency, complaints and accountability, the doors are open to cover-ups”

Certainly no progress has been made on the De La Salle child sexual abuse scandal which I understood Father Small was hoping to resolve, following the example of the Comboni Brothers. He was going to write to me and I intimated that I welcomed his letter.

Perhaps he’s too busy. Because it transpires that Father Small is not only the head of the Pontifical Commission, but also the Founder and CEO of Missio Invest ‘blending faith and finance’ : an ambitious developmental aid project in the Global South. ‘In Africa alone,’ Missio says, ‘ there are over 74,000 religious sisters, 46,421 priests, and 8,779  brothers.’ This link takes you to their site https://missioinvest.org/en/about-us/#our-team-anchor and tells you about the impressive work they are doing in Africa and elsewhere. This includes  agriculture, hospitals, old people’s homes and… schools.

Hence my interest.

Because my Catholic education was conditional on my becoming a seminarian. When, aware of the terrifying sexual abuse in seminaries, I declined, I was thrown out of my school at the tender age of 15. Altogether, my brother and I had 9 years of ‘free’ expensive education at St Joseph’s College, Ipswich. But, of course, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. There were other criminal strings attached, specifically being abused by the Catholic Knights of St Columba whose paedophile Knights included Canon Burrows of St Pancras Church, Ipswich.

This conditional Catholic education was commonplace in the past. Parents, like my Irish mother, even dedicated their children to the Church, with all it implied in that past era. A national journalist has expressed an interest in looking into this disturbing subject.

And there’s the example of John McDonnell MP who wrote to me:

‘I was at St Joseph’s in Ipswich from 12 to 16, funded by the church to then go on to a minor seminary to train to become a priest.’

A fairly recent article about St J’s had a spokesperson denying there was any such thing as St J’s ‘facilitating’ vocations as John described. Despite there being a De La Salle vocations teacher on the circuit of the DLS schools and despite my own clear recollections of being taught Latin one-to-one by Brother Kevin.

I would hate to think that Father Small’s educational work  in the Global South includes a similar covert, easily deniable, conditional requirement as I’ve described. So that children there are still at risk – through desperate poverty – of being pressurized into seminaries, religious orders or at the mercy of clerical abusers or Catholic laity abusers, just as I was. Given that the Church has never acknowledged and expressed regret for its past ‘strings attached’ policy, not to mention the sexual abuse that so often went with it, of course it’s still going on and, of course, children are still in danger, even though it’s now obscured with a modern PR gloss, an obfuscation that is the familiar hallmark of the Church. Plus ça change

But where does the Church’s money come from for its ‘free’ education for suitably spiritual, obedient or poor and desperate children its clerical predators can take advantage of?

In my case, was it from some investment fund the Knights ran for the Church? Or from a diocese fund?  My old school, St Joseph’s, when it began, was mysteriously funded by the Knights and its current finances are still equally mysterious so  that a lawyer and a reporter who looked into them both found the current financial set-up ‘very strange.’

John McDonnell, like myself and others, says his education was ‘funded by the Church’ – but no knows where the money comes from, who it’s funnelled through –except in my case it was the Knights – and how else it’s used.

It’s time we found out.

If  Survivors and ordinary concerned people are ever going to make sense of the the Catholic Church, its current potential for abusing and corrupting new generations of poor children in the Global South – where it’s acknowledged by the Church the safeguarding protocols are not as strong as in affluent countries – then it’s important to follow the money.

So this view, sent to me by an insider, knowledgeable in the workings of the Catholic Church, is important. I had no idea about Missio Invest before I read this.

I’ll comment further after their analysis.

I poked around a bit on the internet after reading your blog post about the palazzo – I was intrigued by Fr. Small talking about fundraising to do up the place, I thought, “Surely the Vatican funds the Commission and accepts that it has to throw resources at problems to resolve the crisis for the Church.”

Small’s background is that he’s a commercial lawyer cum entrepreneur. He’s involved in Missio Invest, a Church fund for start-ups by Church entities in the 3rd/developing worlds which got $20m from the World Bank in recent years. The idea is to put Church assets and the assets of Catholic lay organisations to work.

As you know, the De La Salles set up an investment fund in 2009. CBIS Global (Christian Brothers Investment Services) is an offshore fund that’s managed from Dublin. I don’t know how to find out for sure, but what’s the betting that CBIS and Missio Invest don’t have dealings with each other somewhere? What’s CBIS investing in if not the kind of thing that Missio Invest encourages?

Who would pay to do up a palazzo for the Vatican? Especially when that should come way behind redress for victims, an issue on which the Church clearly doesn’t impose universal rules? My mind is boggled 

It said somewhere in the articles I read that to get a loan from Missio Invest an organisation has to adhere to the guidelines for safeguarding laid down from Rome. So which comes first in Small’s world: safeguarding and justice for victims, or getting the organisations that want loans from Missio Invest to sign up to safeguarding so that he can spread money around and build his reputation as an entrepreneur?

This kind of thing may be what Zollner was hinting at when he said that concerns about financial transparency were involved in his decision to resign from the Commission.

COMMENTARY:

Investors acknowledged by Missio Invest include the Jesuits  and the Sisters of Saint Louis. But it’s quite possible the De La Salles are involved, given that ‘CBIS manages assets of $3 billion (€2 billion) in 10 funds based in the US through which “socially responsible” investments are made on behalf of more than 1,000 Catholic organisations. The Dublin-based fund will mirror the investments made by the firm in the US and will initially target Catholic organisations in Ireland, France, Italy and Spain.’

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/de-la-salle-brothers-launch-investment-fund-in-dublin-1.780525

I’ll return to the subject of the actual value of  Missio’s developmental aid another time. It’s a subject I know a fair amount about having written a two year semi-documentary series Third World War that concluded in 1990. It exposed numerous scandals in the Third World such as the Nestle Baby Food Scandal, the human cost of monoculture exports, and the IMF ferocious policies leading to suicides but also heroic resistance by indigenous people.

Today, it’s far worse. Nestle try to control water supplies and seeds are patented so farmers are at the mercy of transnationals. Given that Missio Invest is linked to the World Bank, I fail to see how it’s following a different and more noble path.  

Common criticisms of the World Bank

• Creating a climate where high levels of lending are deemed to be good.
• Advocating disability adjusted life years as a health measure.
• Disregard for the environment and indigenous populations.
• Evaluating health projects by looking at economic outcome measures.

And, if you imagine Father Small’s Church would have respect for indigenous populations today, then I need to tell you about the Jesuits who threw the Apache Indians off their sacred mountain so they could build a Vatican-controlled and financed observatory on the top. It has the most powerful telescope in the world called Lucifer (Truly!) which searches for alien life. According to Father Chris Corbally, the project’s deputy director, ‘If civilisations were to be found on other planets and if it were feasible to communicate, then we would want to send  missionaries to save them.” The Jesuits wanted to name the observatory ‘Columbus’ which the Apaches objected to for obvious reasons.

Some of the information I discovered is on these links :

http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/471  https://rense.com/ufo/popescope.htm (quoting the London Sunday Times)

The Apaches now need a prayer permit to ascend their sacred mountain. Their claim to it is disputed by the Jesuits because they don’t have written records.

 Father Coyne, director of the Observatory, further declared that Apache beliefs were “a kind of religiosity to which I cannot subscribe and which must be suppressed with all the force we can muster.”

Plus ça change

Will the Knights of St Columba Ipswich now be investigated?

According to the latest Vatican information it now seems possible that the Knights of St Columba Ipswich could be investigated.  Because I believe all Knights are recognised by the Holy See.

Here’s the link:, dated March 25 this year:

https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/pope-francis-promulgates-revised?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

The relevant text from it is as follows:

Pope Francis promulgates revised ‘Vos estis’ – Here’s what changed

The revised policy makes permanent the norms introduced experimentally by Pope Francis in 2019, while broadening the scope of the law to include investigations of lay leaders in international associations of the faithful. 

One significant change to the text of Vos estis lux mundi is the inclusion of lay leaders of international associations recognized by the Holy See, who might now be investigated either for perpetrating abuse themselves, or for failing to investigate or address allegations of abuse or misconduct made in the context of their communities.

The move was likely influenced by revelations which emerged in recent years concerning the spiritual and sexual abuse of prominent Catholic layman Jean Vanier, founder of the international L’Arche community, who died in 2019. While the new norms would not have actually impacted the allegations against Vanier himself, because L’Arche is not recognized as an association by the Holy See, it would apply to other founders of international apostolates, movements, or spiritual associations accused of abuse. 

The revised text of Vos estis lux mundi clarifies that investigations of lay leaders will be undertaken under the aegis of the Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life, which is given legal competence to oversee them.

The text does not make clear how lay leaders might be punished for sexual abuse if the allegations arise after their terms have expired. While clerics can face the penalty of laicization, it is not clear what meaningful sanction might be imposed on a layperson.

Pat’s comment on the above:

Surely the obvious sanction for criminal abuse or concealing or ignoring criminal abuse is court action and penalties according to the law of the land? Or is this another case where Canon Law takes priority?

Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life ?  Another Safeguarding organization?

It does add to the current lack of clarity about Safeguarding which I barely understand, and I’m sure is very confusing to others.

Perhaps this Dicastery is not relevant, but it sounds tailor-made to fill a current gap in Safeguarding.

http://www.laityfamilylife.va/content/laityfamilylife/en.htm

info@laityfamilylife.val

Is it relevant for the UK? 

Or does Laity abuse fall under the aegis of the CSSA or the RLSS ?  The RLSS because Laity was abusing in collusion with a religious order as I’ve exampled in so many past posts

Currently neither the CSSA or the RLSS (and their predecessor the SCOE) have taken responsibility for looking at these crimes of the Laity which I’ve told them fall within or overlap both their remits

Perhaps the RLSS and the CSSA can explain or pass on my past concerns to the Dicastery.

I would also point out to the Dicastery that the CSSA did not respond to my concerns about Solidarities which may also fall within their Laity remit.

Perhaps the CSSA will pass on my previous post on that subject

For due diligence, the RLSS, the CSSA  and the Dicastery have now been informed via a copy of this post

 And I would repeat for the Dicastery the summary of my numerous past posts – namely:

The Knights of St Columba Ipswich Province were involved in serious ‘historic’ organised child sex abuse crimes. That female Catholic Laity were also involved.  And the De La Salles were in collusion with the Knights. That there are current concerns about the Knights not having DBS checks and that the Colchester Knights ensured that recent serious sexual abuse offences by one of their Knights did not reach the national media. It’s possible Colchester children may still be at risk as there appears to have been no audit after the trial and guilty verdict of the Knight abuser.

All this I’ve gone into in exhaustive detail in past posts.

The Knights are aware of my allegations which can be found on endless Google posts, but they have not officially responded.

Neither have  the RLSS or the CSSA.

FEEDBACK ON AN OFFICIAL CATHOLIC ABUSE SURVIVORS FORUM

Feedback coming in now on a proposed official Catholic Abuse Survivors Forum – mainly a VERY cautious positive response and, thus far, two survivors who said specifically it was a waste of time. One of them has been through the wringer many times with the Catholic Church so I can understand his exasperation. I think that goes for all of us.

My initial tweet thread was too dry, got a very limited response, so my thanks to my wife Lisa for suggesting a follow-up more ‘tabloid’ tweet which got far more engagement. Given that I write popular culture for a living, you’d really think I’d have realised that!

And the responses, in themselves, amount to important material for a forum and how such a forum would look and the likely responses. Nothing problematic that I could see..

I looked at both the RLSS and CSSA sites and couldn’t find ANY Survivor feedback!

It was all Chiefs and No Indians.

That HAS to change. It’s against everything the Elliott Report stands for. Perhaps Elliott was also at fault for not spelling out how Safeguarding can be pro-active.  Even though to me, and many Survivors, it’s so obvious. 

I think I’ve demonstrated below that there is cautious interest in a Forum. So it’s over to Safgeguarding now.

I’ve also demonstrated it does require social media skills to engage everyone concerned and get Survivors interested.That’s something the Safeguarders must take on board. As I said to Nazir Afzal, the Safeguarding approach is very ‘Daily Telegraph’. It needs to be tabloid to reach and interact with people.

I’ll blog my conclusions separately.

The alternative of doing nothing and endlessly raising concerns for decade after decade, while the Safeguarders and the abusive organisations they’re protecting remain heavily entrenched behind their official positions and are not pro-active is against the spirit of the Elliott report.

We have to move forward.

Anyway, here was the social-media savvy tweet

@PatrickEMills

If you had the chance to speak direct to Catholic Safeguarding and leaders of the Church on an official survivors’ forum, what would you say? That possibility now seems to be on the table. Good idea? Or a waste of time? #CatholicTwitter #CatholicAbuse@CatholicHerald

And this was my follow up tweet:

The burning question I want to ask on a forum is – what happens to Survivors’ claims when they’re not ‘current’ & they don’t want the hassle of legal action. It’s no good saying ‘we don’t know’. I have several sensible pro-active solutions I’d like to share on a forum.

Here were the replies, plus a few replies from my earlier tweets

1)Marilyn Hawes

@MarilynHawes9

WASTE OF TIME @RCsurvivors twitter.com/PatrickEMills/…

its simple don’t listen they don’t change worse still nor do they wish to but they purport to be religious its a joke ! do they read the bible ? I support many victims of abuse I’m sick of the catholic church too many have been harmed even forced adoption Nazareth house sickening

Pat:Thanks, Marilyn. In a couple of weeks time I may well be saying something similar to yourself. Right now, I have to give them the opportunity for ‘due diligence’. I’ve heard harrowing stories about adoption which amounts to trafficking.

2) Rafael Viola

1. rafael1viola on March 23, 2023 at 2:04 pm said:Edit

Count me in Pat if that’s ok then they can hear our voices

@RafaelViola17

Replying to @PatrickEMills and @CatholicHerald

This is the last chance saloon for me I’ve heard it all before fake apologies broken promises this is my last attempt and that I do promise

Pat:

Thanks, Rafael. They are running on borrowed time

 Rafael:

We need answers and actions right from the start and proper media attention let’s get this out in the open no more bull shit let both parties put their card’s on the table

3) Catholic Survivors England

Think it’s worth a go but wouldn’t enter into it with any expectations so you’re not too disappointed if it doesn’t work out.

Pat:
Thanks. Good advice! What I’m personally hoping for is video interview to go on a Forum. All those questions Nazir ducked and was’ too busy’ to talk to Andy. It’ll be harder – but not impossible – for them to say ‘no’ to an official forum.

Catholic Survivors:

Sounds like a really good idea – there has to be something to hold them to account. Please continue to share any updates.

4) Survivorstrong

That this is not all about policy & is a lot about culture, that the belief any ill in the church is of demonic influence leads to demonizing those reporting that harm. That continuing to point to LGBTQ+ as the problem is hiding the entitlement granted via toxic theologies.

Pat:Good point. I’m sure priests would see me as demon influenced! Issues around LGBTQ+ should be aired on a forum about RCC’s failings. If it happens, I hope you’d get into that. I know RCC was keen on conversion therapy until it was banned.

Survivorstrong:

That theologies that teach men are naturally violent & women are here for containing male sexual violence, for providing domestic comfort, for reproducing is creating great suffering & harming their stated mission of creating a just & peaceful world connected to the Divine.

Pat:Yeah, I’m personally aware as a survivor of the misogynistic nature of RCC. Specifically by their denigrating Mary Magdalene and promoting passive Virgin Mary. Your similar view needs wide airing.

5)  Jane Chevous

I always think that having honest conversations are a good idea. Have a look at our Charter as a basis for safe working https://survivorsvoices.org/charter/

Pat:
Thanks, Jane. That charter could well provide a structure where everyone feels safe in airing and receiving views

Jane:Recently they did a survivor survey about engagement. I’ll let you know when it’s published

So the Church of England doesn’t have a survivor forum as such, although there are a significant number of survivors working with them on consultations about policy, practice & training, & some co-production.

https://www.churchofengland.org/safeguarding/survivor-engagement
Survivor feedback is a good idea. At the moment I suspect most of the feedback comes in the form of complaints

Pat:Yep! And rightly so. But when the RLSS did get DBS checks on Cistercian monks on@caldeyabuse1970 did make a point of saying so. They need encouraging to do the right thing.

Jane: Also, I and 2 other survivor reps sit on their National Safeguarding Panel, which provides independent advice and scrutiny on safeguarding practice. There is a lot to do, but I wouldn’t stay if I didn’t think it made a difference.

6) StJoesCSASurvivor

I would ask why it was suggested there may be a route to access some funding for counselling from DLS and when I asked about that it, wasn’t an option any more or at best was a ‘last resort’ that was never followed up without my jumping through certain hoops first.

Pat:That’s exactly the kind of thing that should be responded to positively on a forum. We’ve both been misled in similar ways in the past. The forum itself needs to be easy access. Crystal Palace (Beulah Hill) site is good xample although I flunked the football question!

St J’s survivor:
I feel that as long as there are church lawyers protecting church interests (as I’m sure the early church had. Not), a forum is just going to be a handy resource for them, isn’t it? Am certain they’re all over our tweets and such.

7)Denis.Survivor.

I’ve been there loads of times. WASTE OF TIME. twitter.com/PatrickEMills/…

Pat:Thanks, Denis. That’s valuable to know. As I’ve said to RLSS (and they acknowledge) they have to prove themselves before anyone will take them seriously.

Dennis: I would like to meet Zollner face to face,i don’t think he realises what survivors go through on a daily basis.

8)Survivors Hall:

What will it accomplish that the Vatican Abuse summit was supposed to spark? They have more than enough information and data by now and they are not stupid people.

Pat:A forum could raise general media awareness of Survivors. And i have a raft of questions I want to ask various RCC bodies that I and other Survivors need answers to. It could also put Survivors in touch with each other and exchange info and support.

9) Joanna

Video is where it’s at.

10)Insider’s View (an expert on Catholic Religious Order child sex abuse)

Seriously, I think that a survivors’ forum would be good. The Church needs to stop pretending that “audits” of dioceses and religious orders are enough. It needs to recognize the role of the laity, both in covering up for abuse in the past and in preventing it in the present.

‪

11)@RitaTopdog

Hand over Vatican records to the police.‬

12) Raven

I get too strong and emotional at meetings to speak it’s probably best with my level of rage to do a loud protest somewhere. But my level of emotion and strength could show to people How deeply wounded you are by Catholic sex abuse.

CATHOLIC KNIGHTS AND DIRTY MONEY

I was prompted by a recent letter from a St Joseph’s Old Boy to take another look at Catholic Knights and their Dirty Money, specifically the Ipswich province of the Knights of St Columba.

The Old Boy advised me:

I was at St Joseph’s in Ipswich from 12 to 16, funded by the church to then go on to a minor seminary to train to become a priest.

The mysterious phrase ‘The Church’ is often used to explain funding. No one seems to know how that actually works in practice and I doubt the Old Boy in question knew. When I asked my aunt, she said the same thing to me: ‘The Church paid your school fees.’ When I asked what that meant and why the Church would do that, she didn’t know and quickly changed the subject.  But I know the answer now. In Ipswich ‘the Church’ was the Knights of St Columba and they were the writers of the cheques.  This is proved by my own recollections and those of another Survivor whose testimony has been previously covered on this site.  Elsewhere, it might be the Catenians, Catholic Women’s League and so forth.

The source of the Knights’ money I would assume comes from a number of sources:  fund raising, donations by wealthy Knights, and, I would guess, a significant allocation from the diocese itself. So it can rightly be called the Church’s money.

The diocese would need considerable confidence in these Knights to leave them to manage their affairs. It’s a confidence that would be misplaced were the diocese not equally culpable for the actions I’m about to relate.

It’s what that money is spent on by the Knights that is relevant both in the past and today. And that’s what makes it dirty money.  

1)Paying  St Joseph’s school fees for children to go on to be priests as in the example above.  As I know from my own experience, it can bring strong psychological pressure on a child to fulfill the demands and agendas of adults, but I would assume that did not apply in the case above.

2) Paying St Joseph’s school fees as a reward for silence on a serious sexual assault by De La Salle Brother James Ryan.

I’ve related the details previously. That account, by another Old Boy, proves the Knights of St Columba were guilty of corruption and covering up a violent paedophile crime.

And not for the first time.

Something similar also happened to me.

3)Paying St Joseph’s school fees for my brother and I for a total of nine years.

For two of those nine years the fees were paid by the Knights to prepare me for the priesthood. They intended to send me to that same junior seminary at age 15.  It was also to silence me. Instead, I bailed.

But that still leaves seven years unaccounted for. What possible reason would the Knights pay two boys’ school fees for seven years? My explanation is below. If you, or a Knight reading this, can shed any further or alternative light, I’d love to hear from you.

But I believe there’s more than enough evidence to back my explanation.

                                                THE KNIGHTS’ MOTIVES

All organizations need to recruit for their next generation and that’s particularly true for the Knights.

My family consisted of my devout Irish Catholic widowed mother and her two sons. She had great aspirations for her sons but no financial resources, no job and serious mental health problems.  The Church was her whole life and could do no wrong.

There is no way she could afford to send her children to an expensive grammar school for seven years.

Her vulnerability made my brother and I a prime target for the Knights, under their benign guise of caring for and taking a special, charitable interest in widows and children.

We were perfect assets for the Knights.

In effect, my mother abdicated her authority and passed it over to these ‘protectors of children’.  I doubt there were other recruiting opportunities quite this good.

Also, a paternity DNA test I took recently strongly indicates that a Knight was probably my biological father, rather than my legal father. Bearing this out, the Knights also acted ‘in loco parentis’ assuming a paternal role over me which – because they were sick abusers –  I rejected.

But, even without that DNA connection, I think the Knights had enough incentive.

So what did recruiting involve?  Today we would call it grooming and the form it took varied amongst the four to seven Knights involved over my childhood. Some were pleasant, some were aggressive and one was life threatening.

So my brother was given a brand new bike by a Knight who was also a Catholic priest (Canon Burrows).  I was similarly given a brand new bike to silence me about abuse by Brother James.

I was present at several of their misogynistic ceremonies which were closer to a rugby club night or a frat initiation than Eyes Wide Shut.  They seemed designed to be rites of passage experiences, presumably conditioning me to be a future Knight. Pedophilia was an important element at these events.

I assume pedophilia was part of some twisted bonding process and also the price for admission. At the same time, they were instilling conservative Catholic values in me. It’s a contradiction in behavior that’s commonplace in the Catholic religion.

So, in summary, the Knights of St Columba  (aka ‘The Church’) used their money, power and psycho-coercion to recruit children to the priesthood, to buy the silence of victims, and to corrupt, sexually abuse and recruit future members.

                                    THE KNIGHTS TODAY

If even half of what I’m alleging is correct, these individuals and their successors should never be allowed near children.  Because the  Knights are provably transgenerational.  

Consider the following:

In 2016, in Colchester, Ronald Smith, a Knight of St Columba, was found guilty of sexual abuse crimes on eight children, some under ten years old, carried out while he was taking advantage of his position as a Knight, ‘organizing parish family events’. He was given a 19 – 25 years prison sentence: https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/14650497.churchgoer-finally-jailed-after-40-years-of-child-abuse/ That’s an incredibly long sentence, yet, astonishingly, the story never made the national press. The Knights killed it. So no one knew Smith was already a convicted sex offender in 1973. Or that there were three reports to the police about him since 1973 which were never acted upon.

I also know from an insider and from the Ronald Smith case that some Knights, at least, have not had DBS checks.  Otherwise Smith would never have been allowed near children. Yet they have sworn an oath to ‘develop young people in their journey of faith’.

Catholic Safeguarding were not interested when I brought this current danger to children to their attention numerous times.

                                    CATHOLIC SAFEGUARDING

There are two Catholic safeguarding organizations and both are relevant. The CSSA which are mainly part timers and are only interested in current cases, no more than two years old, and auditing unpaid diocesan safeguarders. They supposedly investigate but I know from personal experience they don’t. They simply dump cases on the police. The CSSA replaced COPCA

And there’s the RLSS – hired by religious orders, like the De La Salles, to protect them from Survivors. It’s meant to be a sub-division of the CSSA, but it seems  autonomous and the CSSA have never shown any interest in religious orders abuse. The RLSS has some supposed investigative powers and recently replaced the SCOE. Why the SCOE became mysteriously defunct has never been explained.  Important records from the SCOE where the DLS were concerned were never passed onto their successors the RLSS. Instead, I had to brief the RLSS. The DLS didn’t seem able to or chose not to help, even though they were central to the issues and had all the information.

Then there are the De La Salles own safeguarding officers who only speak to the press when they are cornered after many phone calls.

There is also a different Catholic Safeguarding set-up  for Scotland.

If you’re wondering about the confusing and frequently changing names, you are right to be concerned.  It’s an ingenious technique used by the Church as noted here:

 https://ello.co/countesssigridvongalen/post/p-opcvqmcco0gkp4bdhfrq… Safeguarding in the churches does not work, as all recruitments are done by & within the perpetrator networks that regroup in ever changing charities & positions of trust that they abuse to ensure supply chain & cover ups…

I suspect in a few years, as Catholic scandals grow as usual, the CSSA and RLSS will mysteriously become defunct and be replaced by ‘dynamic new organisations’ to reassure the Catholic faithful that something is being done, even though it’s not.  

So the situation is now worse than before IICSA.  

Consider the laconic response of the CEO of the CSSA to my concerns about the Knights:

I agree with you over this issue around abuse by the laity does seem to be largely ignored and certainly has given me some pause for thought. I think that in our future audit and review processes we need to give this more consideration.

He seems quite relaxed about it, doesn’t he?  He didn’t know about it before?  Until I told him? It took me about two years to confirm – with hard evidence – that the Catholic laity was involved in organized sexual abuse. Yet safeguarders have access to far more information on this subject than myself and they don’t know?! And they don’t want to consider the past to identify the pattern of a Catholic laity pedophile ring as run by the Knights?

Whatever else you may agree or disagree with my analysis, I think you’d have to recognize all this shows a shocking lack of transparency. This is classic Catholic ‘smoke and mirrors’ at its worst.

Both the heads of the CSSA and RLSS are ex-cops but I do not find that impressive or reassuring, despite their protestations that this surely proves their sincere characters and their supposed value to Survivors.  In practice, both are provably useless but some Survivors have drawn a more sinister conclusion. Namely that their policing skills are being used to effectively block the truth getting out.

Given the way the Knights have behaved (and there’s much more to relate on these gentlemen) I think anything is possible.  

But the RLSS have a responsibility to look at the connection between the abuser Knights and their paymasters the De La Salles.

As a survivor of this joint abuse by Knights and De La Salles, I have a right to know when their criminal relationship ended. If it did.

It’s there on the long list of things the RLSS have done absolutely nothing about, despite their promises to the contrary.   

An ex-FBI agent said that if you found paedophiles in an organisation and it didn’t deal with them then it was effectively a paedophile network.

The RLSS has not dealt with the issue it was supposedly set up for. The RLSS have admitted to me that their paymasters, the De La Salles, have the final say and their hands are tied and this is confirmed by the RLSS broken promises.

In my view this amounts to worse than negligence.

It’s collusion.

Fortunately, this site is read by national journalists and the leader of at least one most relevant organization.  So the head of the RLSS might want to reflect on this and how he will eventually be called upon to explain his actions.

Or his lack of action.

Hopefully before the next enquiry and before he’s had a chance to escape responsibility for his betrayal of De La Salle Survivors.

THE RLSS – THEIR TIME IS UP

As you probably know the RLSS (Religious Life Safeguarding Service) is the new ‘go to’ Safeguarding organisation for religious orders, including the De La Salles. They promised to be different – a new broom. But nothing’s changed and their time is up.

Unlike the CSSA, the RLSS does actually have investigative powers.

(So, too, do the unpaid Diocesan Safeguarding officers who I know from past experience in the Copca era were a waste of my time.  But the RLSS seem different)

The RLSS promised an outcome to De La Salle issues of ORGANISED PAEDOPHILE RINGS in their schools. That promise was well before Christmas and we’re now in Feb.

So their time is up.

I believe what is delaying them is the De La Salles trying to wriggle out of their agreed apology for Brother Laurence and their promised investigation.

All over a year old.

My guess is it’s the Catholic insurance company who are saying, ‘Don’t say anything. Don’t admit anything. Maybe Mills will get tired and go away. Survivors often do. We just have to hang on in there.’

Mills is not going away.

The RLSS does seem to have some genuine people, but that’s part of the problem. They’re tethered, as they admit themselves, their powers are limited, so they are as much of the problem as the criminal  De La Salles who are hiding behind them.

To me that’s COLLUSION.

And  just in case someone challenges me on ‘criminal’ DLS,  I’d say an organisation that allows over a hundred cases of child sex abuse by De La Salles and their lay teachers to go without investigation is a criminal organisation.

Especially when there is evidence it’s organised sexual abuse. Not odd rotten apples.

We survivors are not collateral damage, much as I think some Catholics would like us to be and just shut up and leave these “”””holy””””” men alone.

Here’s my TWEETS on the subject of the RLSS.

I’m sure I’ll be returning to this matter again soon.

I’ve felt out-manouvered by Police Hydrant and Catholic Safeguarding. Catholic Safeguarding knew I would be wasting my time by reporting historic crimes to Hydrant, but they let me go ahead. But I wanted to see what the 'new broom' RLSS Safeguarding was like. (1/4)

— Patrick Mills (@PatrickEMills) February 18, 2023

The serious issue of Brother Laurence's demotion and promised apology & promised De La Salle investigation into their child sex abuse crimes at DLS schools in Ipswich, Bournemouth,Beulah Hill etc is still on the table. I'm not letting the DLS monks get away with it. (2/4

— Patrick Mills (@PatrickEMills) February 18, 2023

The RLSS did some good work on the Caldey Island case, so I cut them some slack. But their time is now https://t.co/w02XL569a1 I am tweeting & posting that they are just as questionable as their paymasters the criminal De La Salles whom they are safeguarding, NOT survivors. (4/4

— Patrick Mills (@PatrickEMills) February 18, 2023

My twitter handle is

@PatrickEMills

So if you were able to find those tweets and retweet them, they would reach a wider audience and show the Catholic Church and its organisations for the shameful entities they really are.

ST JOSEPH’S COLLEGE, BEULAH HILL? BROTHER SOLOMON – school photo. 1962?

At first I thought this was St Joseph’s College, Ipswich. But as Old Boy Pete pointed out to me the ties and the badges seem different.

So I guess it must be St Joseph’s College, Beulah Hill?

My apologies for the mix-up.

If you’re a newcomer to this site: Solomon was at St J’s Ipswich in 1961. Then chucked out for drunken behavior and abuse. It’s what I clearly remember as a kid. After laying low in Jersey, part of the De La Salle brothers rat line- where brothers could escape to France if the police closed in on them, he was at Beulah Hill from maybe 1962. Then chucked out, he had a pop career. He returned to St J’s Ipswich in the 1980s as lay teacher Mike Mercado. He was chucked out for abuse and went on to work for an international children’s charity. There were abuse allegations against him throughout his life.

Beulah Hill has actually more allegations of Solomon being a violent animal and sexual abuser than Ipswich. At Ipswich, IIRC there are just two allegations of sexual abuse. One of them is unrepeatable in detail but was covered in summary in the Ipswich paper investigating this vile but not unique monster.

I don’t think even the most fervent defender of the DLS will say about him,’It’s not fair. He’s not alive to defend himself.’

Neither are the World War 2 nazis, but we all know they were monsters. So was this man.

Solomon looks so much older without his toupe which he adopted later when he became the Swinging Monk.He looks as scary in this photo as he really was.His faux holiness image only adds to his menace.

He certainly had a huge impact on me. I measure these things in therapy terms and he cost me around 8 sessions recently. So i certainly need his time at St J’s Ipswich to be noted. The local Ipswich paper were investigating him for a while quite recently.

St Joseph’s Ipswich Wikipedia entry has, I’m told, recently edited out the De La Salle brothers numerous crimes against children, apart from the very latest one – the lay teacher child abuser who killed himself rather than face court.

Good that there are records elsewhere, like here, of the crimes the school seeks to pretend never happened or have nothing to do with them, even though St J’s Ipswich says it is’In the La Sallian tradition’ and maintains endless links (e.g. uniforms) with the old and criminal regime. To them, we victims of De La Salle child abuse are just ‘collateral damage’ who should shut up and go away because we’re spoiling a money-making business.

There must be many parents who have chosen not to send their children to St J’s Ipswich after being made aware of its abusive history from this and other sites. And other parents who are reading about St Joseph’s Ipswich and Beulah Hill here for the first time.

In the schools’ defence it was – supposedly – only a minority of children who were raped or otherwise abused, and only a minority of De La Salle brothers who raped and sexually assaulted young boys. The rest were devout holy men and excellent teachers, according to many Old Boys who were not harmed. Lucky them. So what’s all the fuss about?

Well, Brothers Solomon, Kevin and James were just the tip of the abuser iceberg. It was organised Catholic paedophilia as my various posts and others’ testimonies confirm.

No one has taken the trouble to find out how and why or if it stopped. We just assume it stopped, some time in the 1990s. That’s how unimportant child abuse is to the Catholic authorities. Appearing to be holy is much more important.

So their crimes and other abuser brothers and lay teachers will rightly follow St Joseph’s College – Ipswich and Beulah Hill – for many years to come. It’s a cross they deserve to bear.

ST PANCRAS CHURCH, IPSWICH, REMEMBERED

I have many happy memories of St Pancras Church in Ipswich (Saint Pancras is the patron saint of children). It was my local church until I was ten (1959) when we moved to Chantry Estate and Saint Marks.

I was an altar boy, a proud member of the Guild of St Stephen and was thrilled when my red lanyard was replaced with a black one. And my red cassock replaced with a black cassock. Even if older altar boys called themselves ‘The Rhubarb Club’ (after the Goon Show), I had no such cynicism, nothing could match the excitement of carrying a lit torch or the incense ‘boat’ or swinging the thurifer.

The old Georgian presbytery next to the church was a most enthralling building. In the cellars it had a smuggler’s tunnel leading to the nearby River Orwell. The first tunnel section could still be explored, but then it was blocked off, to my great disappointment. It was such a shame the presbytery was knocked down and replaced with a faux Georgian building.

The priests Canon Burrows and his curate Father Wace were very warm and friendly. Canon Burrows was always round our house in Stoke, dressed in his boiler suit, doing handyman jobs for my mother.  Father Wace presented me with a copy of ‘A Little Hero’ by Mrs Musgrave which had a cover of a boy wearing a school uniform remarkably like a St Joseph’s College blazer. He told me I would go there one day and he was right.

Father Wace was the Akela in charge of the cubs and I was always baffled why I was a cub for just one week. Then I stopped going and no-one would talk about the reason why. It seemed to be because I had told a friend of my mother’s about ‘something that happened at cubs’ and this friend had stern words with Father Wace.

The Catholic laity – the Legion of Mary; the Knights of St Columba and the Catholic Women’s League – were also an important part of my life. My mother was a vulnerable, devout Irish Catholic widow and these organisations did their best to help her. They introduced her to another Catholic widow, Mrs Czech, and her two daughters and we went on a pilgrimage to Walsingham together.

But writing about the laity at St Pancras is still difficult for me and this short article below by Doctor Philippa Martyr for The Catholic Weekly explains the reason why.

The lay role in covering up abuse

Doctor Martyr concludes:

‘This is the ugly underside of our local vibrant Catholic community. Covering-up goes on all the time, for all sorts of things – and yes, lay people enable it. We just haven’t been brave enough to face this about ourselves yet.’

But before coming back to the laity, I have to say there was also another side to both Canon Burrows and Father Wace which was a real shock to me when the memories came flooding back to me in mid-life.

THE PRIESTS

My mother worked as a housekeeper at St Pancras presbytery. Her vulnerability meant her children were prime targets for clerical abusers.  

Canon Burrows – a listed Knight of St Columba – was a sexual abuser. It took a lot of therapy for me to get my recollections of his behaviour out of my system. His particular technique was magic and conjuring tricks. ‘Now you see it, now you don’t.’ At age six, I wanted to be a magician like the Canon and spent all my pocket money on jokes.

Father Wace is not listed as a Knight, but, given his wealthy background, it seems likely he, too, was a member.

He also was a sexual abuser. My mother smiled at my thrilled expression when I saw Wace’s pyjamas casually thrown across his bed. Because his pyjama jacket was weighed down with maybe twenty fantastic metal collectors’ badges – which would make it impossible for him to sleep in. But they were really cool badges that any eight-year-old boy would do anything for.

And did.

MALE CATHOLIC LAITY AT ST PANCRAS

I’ve previously covered the Knights of St Columba on this site. There are statements from myself and other survivors  that prove there was a ring of sexual abusers in the Ipswich Knights.

The Knights were also the Eminence Gris for the Church, which meant they controlled my school fees and they exacted a price in return. The similar Knights of Columbus describe themselves as ‘The strong right arm of the Catholic Church.’

The only thing relevant here is their use of psycho-coercive ‘double bind’ techniques. These are recorded in their theatrical ceremonies which I have previously featured on this site. Such ceremonies stopped – supposedly – in the late 60’s. Too late for me, unfortunately.

 It’s relevant because female laity abusers used similar ‘double binds’.

A double bind is a dilemma in communication in which an individual receives two or more reciprocally conflicting messages. It’s a mind-twister and shows a deep knowledge of psychology and how to manipulate people.

Especially children.

When – or if – the Knights stopped abusing children I have no way of knowing and no one today cares. Catholic Safeguarding ignored a recent newspaper report of a Knight of St. Columba sentenced to a long prison sentence for child abuse. The Knight was provably not given a police check, which would have shown he had a previous conviction for child abuse.

FEMALE CATHOLIC LAITY AT ST PANCRAS

When I looked at all my bills for therapy, I was startled to see that a good 50% of my recent therapy – over the last three years – related to female Catholic laity at St Pancras.

And that it took emotional priority over male clerical abuse. You might conclude it’s because female abuse is a far greater betrayal to a child, but, actually, I think it’s because of the bizarre but very effective nature of the abuse.

I believe the women were members of the Catholic Women’s League: the female equivalent of the Knights of St Columba, and it’s acknowledged they work closely together to this day.

The CWL doesn’t list deceased members, but I’ll happily supply the five names of the female parishioners concerned for the CWL to check against their records. I would, of course, also need sight of those records. I’d say ‘Deceased Ipswich members 1956 through to the millennium.’

If I’m wrong, I will write a retraction.

If I’m correct, their names will be listed here as child abusers, alongside Burrows and Wace.

Some may have also been members of the Legion of Mary at St Pancras. My eight-year-old self didn’t fully understand the difference between the two organisations.

But I have focused on the CWL because the five women concerned were all middle-class high achievers, which seems to be the hallmark of this organisation. Two of them were spinsters. There is also the CWL’s close connection to the Knights who were provably abusers. But principally because one of the key female abusers was a close friend of the famous Barbara Ward, Baroness Jackson of Lodsworth – Wikipedia.

Barbara Ward went to St Mary’s Convent Grammar school in Ipswich (I went to the adjacent St Mary’s primary school). She then went on to be President of the Catholic Women’s League in the 1940s and introduced my abuser to her husband who was almost certainly a Knight. This was long before my time. And I’ve absolutely no reason to think Ward was an abuser. 

But Ward shows just how intellectual, well-connected and powerful the Catholic Women’s League were when I had the misfortune to come across some of their members, including her close friend.

Exactly like the powerful Catholic laity described in the link above.

Although their abuse was as perverted as any abuse, it had a certain ‘logic’, which perhaps helped them with their justification for their obscene gratification.

I won’t go into graphic details here, but it was a physical form of aversion therapy (not like today’s conversion therapy as fair as I know), an attempt to thwart puberty using psycho-coercive double binds.

It would have had different names in the past, but various forms of aversion therapy – some quite barbaric – were commonplace from Victorian times through to the 1950s. It was still very scary.

Why did they do it?

Because of the abuse I suffered at the hands of Burrows and Wace, I was definitely ‘acting out’ as so many children do.  For instance, I recall drawing and talking openly about what the priests did to me. So it may have been an attempt to physically put a stop to a child’s ‘play’.

But it actually feels rather more ambitious and organised. There were several of them involved, for instance. Even though I was earmarked for the priesthood from an early age (I was signed up for the seminary at age thirteen) I don’t believe that fully explains their behaviour.

It was certainly a ‘procedure’ they were used to.

However, it’s not my responsibility to understand their sick mindset. Or explain how it all worked in detail. I bear the psychological scars and that’s enough.

If your cognitive dissonance is kicking in at this point, and you find it hard to believe that respectable, middle-class Catholic women could behave in such a manner, let me tell you that in the same decade, a number of Dutch boys were castrated on the orders of the Catholic Church because they had shown gay tendencies. In the 1970s, on the orders of his British Catholic school, a young teenager was given hospital electric-shock treatment to similarly erase his gay character. There are other examples.

Aversion therapy seems designed to suppress, reduce or redirect a child’s sexuality. In practical terms, it limits your power over your own body. Instead, these women had control over my body. I’m pretty certain they saw their abuse as ‘holy work’. I’d love to tell you they failed miserably, but, annoyingly, its effects actually lasted until I was aged sixteen.

These fanatical women knew what they were doing.

If you’re a Catholic Safeguarder, or a member of the priesthood, the Knights or the CWL, you may well be thinking, with some relief, as you read this, ‘Ah. But it’s impossible for him to prove.’

Well, it’s true it’s hard to prove. Most survivors must have either accepted their programming, maybe they even thought it was good for them, or are too embarrassed or ashamed to talk about it.   

I’m not.

The best proof I have is the fortune I spent on recent weekly therapy, over the last three years, deprogramming the abusive program these women had instilled into my psyche.

And also the evidence of my therapist who has previously given evidence to the Ipswich police. This resulted in an abusive Ipswich Catholic teacher recently being arrested.

So I wouldn’t be too relieved if I were you.

Needless to say, I would be delighted if the CWL decide to challenge my account.

I know Catholics practice secrecy from the Pope downwards, but this really needs to be brought out into the open.

SAFEGUARDING

You might suggest that Catholic Safeguarding could help me with this matter.

Not a chance, I’m afraid, so I should explain why.

You may believe Catholic Safeguarding are there to help past survivors and investigate past clerical and laity abuse

They’re not.

Catholic Safeguarding is actually in a terrible state today, the worst it’s ever been. And, in case you think that’s just my negative opinion, there is already media concern and research on this aspect.

Furthermore.

The CEO of the CSSA (Catholic Safeguarding Standards Agency) admitted the following to me:

‘IICSA was obviously put in place with the intention of dealing with this but quite honestly I think they were overwhelmed and in the end they presented their final report and it is difficult to know what it all achieved.’

All IICSA’S recommendations (The Elliott report etc) have been ignored by the Church, even though the Bishops claimed otherwise.

As the Daily Telegraph reported: ‘Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse had previously concluded Cardinal Nichols was more concerned with protecting Church’s reputation.’

Today, the CSSA only deals with current issues up to two years old.

‘This of course leaves those that have been subject of abuse over two years ago have very little redress.’

The CEO confirmed my own experience that the police (Operation Hydrant) will only deal with cases where the abusers are still alive.

And:

‘Our remit does not include an investigative branch. The process is that the diocese or religious life group (through the Religious Life Safeguarding Service (RLSS) investigate concerns when raised.’

So where St Pancras is concerned this means that the diocese will investigate.

I’ve been here before during Eileen Shearer’s COPCA era when I first raised Canon Burrows with the diocese. I learnt that Catholic Safeguarding diocese members are unpaid, they do nothing (e.g. they didn’t even look up records) they simply dump complaints onto the police, who can do nothing (see above). The diocese Safeguarders know this and – under the  convenient excuse of ‘we have a mandatory reporting duty’ – they are wilfully and knowingly wasting valuable police time.

The diocese Safeguarding officer also reassured me personally everything would be ‘so much better’ with Shearer’s recent appointment because she was a protestant. So nothing would be covered up anymore.

I was briefly impressed.

Shearer resigned shortly afterwards.

But it’s worse. The investigating officer is from the diocese where the crime took place, so he or she is still part of that Catholic community: they will certainly know the organisations concerned at the very least, they may even be members of it, and they are thus not independent.

This has put off many survivors from reporting abuse and that’s no accident. It’s exactly what the Church intended.

Returning to the laity.

The CEO of the CSSA said to me:

‘I agree with you over this issue around abuse by the laity does seem to be largely ignored and certainly has given me some pause for thought.’

Most of my claims against the Catholic laity can be deemed historic (over two years old) and therefore will be ignored, which is, of course, outrageous as we survivors have to live our entire lives with the results of their crimes committed against us in childhood. But two cases are actually current and one relates to the East Anglian diocese. The other to an adjoining diocese.

In both cases there was a lack of police checks and thus vulnerable people and children may be in danger.

Today.

There was no response from the CSSA and Police Operation Hydrant when I raised this with them both.

THE LIKELY RESPONSE FROM ST PANCRAS, THE CWL AND THE KNIGHTS OF ST COLUMBA

From past experience with the Knights and the evidence presented about them on this site, I fully expect the parish priest of St Pancras today, the Catholic Women’s League and the Knights of St Columba to do nothing.

They don’t seem to see it as their duty to children past and present to look into this most serious matter.

They will prefer to keep their heads down and hope it will all go away.

Or at best, to write back to me with some dismissive hand-wringing, ‘We’re sorry what happened to you, but there’s nothing we can do. We have no records and thus no way of looking at your allegations.’

But in 2023 silence – or such a dismissive lack of interest – is not a good look.

Even if the Catholic insurance company has advised or even ordered them, ‘Say nothing. Admit nothing.’  

(It’s sad when a Christian religion is controlled by an insurance company.)

Today, not responding to hard evidence of abuse means only one thing.

Collusion.

If you have been made aware of crimes past and current, and you choose to respond with silence or in some Pontius Pilate manner, it means you are colluding with the original child abusers to keep these crimes hidden from public view.

SO WHAT CAN BE DONE?

If you’re a Survivor you might feel nothing can be done. That – post IICSA – the Church has managed, with its own admitted poor Safeguarding (see above) to still successfully silence its critics. 

That’s not the case.

‘Naming and Shaming’ abusers at my Catholic school on this site has worked very well in the past and has led to positive results which I’ve described in previous posts. With both local media (EADT) and national media (Sunday Times and the Tablet) covering and investigating the accounts I have brought to light.

It’s only now that I’ve been able to focus on the parish I grew up in, and the clerical and laity abusers, male and female, who harmed me as a child.

So I would hope for similar results here. I’m sure it will be of equal interest to the media.

Particularly local media.

And if you are a survivor of abuse by any of these people I’ve described here, and would like to share your experience, please get in touch. As always, your anonymity is guaranteed.

However, if you are a member of the congregation at St Pancras and are rightly shocked by what you have read, I would appeal to you to raise some or all of these issues with your parish priest.

It is clearly his personal duty to act.

Diocesan Safeguarding is not an alternative. It is provably flawed for the reasons I’ve given and I strongly believe is deliberately designed to waste everyone’s time.

Even if you discount some of the allegations I’ve made, there is still a great deal left that should be looked at, discussed, and which you would hope would be of great concern to your parish priest.

Based on the past, I fear your parish priest will not take responsibility, but I would love to be proved wrong.

Furthermore, my experience is that – even today, despite the Church being called out for its crimes at IICSA – Catholic congregations will not respond to allegations of child abuse within the Church. They will look the other way at clerical and laity crimes.

This is because of the Oath of Allegiance they took and similar ties that bind.

However, I would hope that there are some exceptions who are not sheep and have the courage to challenge their shepherds.

In any event, at some point in the near future, there will be further investigations into the Catholic Church and this post and others will be useful in providing evidence.

Meantime, no one in the parish of St. Pancras can now say ‘We didn’t know. We had absolutely no idea these terrible things went on.’

You’ve been told.

And anyone curiously searching the web for nostalgic memories of St Pancras will come across this post.

They will be appalled to see the Church’s dark history in which the crimes of priests such as Canon Burrows and Father Wace and Ipswich female and male Catholic laity are laid bare for all to read.   

That is the legacy of shame for all the world to now see that St Pancras, its current parish priest, as the representative of the Church, the CWL and the Knights of St Columba will have to live with from now on.

Unless they choose to take a path of light and look at the truth.

Otherwise, it’s a dark cross all of them rightly have to bear.

BROTHER LAURENCE HUGHES – THE MISSING APOLOGY

THE DE LA SALLES – THE MISSING INVESTIGATION

As you may have seen on my previous blog, the RLSS  – Religious Life Safeguarding Service –  have successfully arranged for DBS police checks on Cistercian monks on Caldey Island.  

So it’s a great step forward for Caldey Island Survivors and the RLSS are to be congratulated for their supportive work.

It suggests that, despite, IMO, the questionable nature of all Safeguarding organizations as ‘fronts’ to protect religious orders and priests, that individuals can still work within the system and create real change.  Even though independent agencies are the real answer.

But this still leaves the serious matter of the De La Salles and the RLSS long outstanding.

Currently there is a missing apology and a missing investigation.

Both are of considerable current importance to survivors of the De La Salles.

 I’ve got a little tired recently of reading in posts here how wonderful the DLS  were with barely a grudging nod to survivors, and often with the qualification, ‘But I never saw the brothers do anything wrong myself.’

Well, of course you didn’t because you weren’t at risk!  

It’s like we survivors are necessary collateral damage to fulfill the perverted desires of the De La Salles, while you high achievers got on with your splendid careers, thanks to these wonderful and ‘holy’ brothers you admire so much.

Such high achievers should reflect that, in my era, at least 10%  of every class were physically and sexually abused by the DLS. (I can break that down for skeptics.) That makes the DLS a criminal organization and it’s impossible to identify, with any certainty, who was good and who was evil. Only the blatant ones, a very few of whom were caught. Please reflect on that before you continue to sing the praises of a questionable organization that is still operating today and still has its hand out for more funding to continue its ‘holy work’ in the Global South.

So onto the missing apology and investigation.

I’ve been holding off for some time on both the foregoing, not least because the SCOE, the Safeguarding organization for religious orders of which the De La Salles was a client, was disbanded earlier last year and replaced by the RLSS, a new safeguarding organization.

Before it disappeared, the SCOE didn’t pass any information about these two matters above onto the RLSS.

But of course the SCOE was directed by the DLS who could have easily updated the RLSS.

In both instances, the Safeguarding organizations are limited by their client, the DLS, who actually have the real power as the RLSS have indicated to me.

To reprise, when it existed, the SCOE/DLS assured me there would be a public apology for the horrific corporal punishments delivered by Brother Laurence Hughes previously head of the DLS. He has been ‘reduced to the ranks’ following an investigation which is now complete without criminal charges being made.

I’ve been told that it’s almost impossible to bring criminal charges for physical abuse after such a long time period.

The important issue of how Laurence Hughes dismissed abuse complaints while he was head of the DLS has never been addressed.

Given that he has been reduced to the ranks, it should be.  It means that those complaining of child abuse received a hearing from a man who committed savage physical abuse on children.

Here’s what the SCOE actually said to me on 15^th July last year.

I have been waiting for confirmation on the outcome to the investigation
following receipt of allegations made against Bro Laurence Hughes (LH).

De La Salle (DLS) in the near future will be making a statement about of the
outcome of the investigation and I understand this statement will contain an
apology to victims and will be published. I will ask DLS to make the
statement easily accessible, through their website or to others if/as
requested (* see note below).

I understand that LH no longer holds any leadership or safeguarding role
within DLS.

AFAIK the DLS did not make a statement in the ‘near future’ as promised.

It was also stated, as you can see, that it would be a prominent apology, rather than the earlier example of a DLS apology on a separate and general matter. That was a vague and general apology to all survivors of DLS abuse. Such a cursory ‘sorry’ was buried on the DLS website only after I’d shown the announced apology was actually missing.   Even the Tablet had to acknowledge this was untoward.

And the DLS also said in a newspaper interview last year that there would be a thorough investigation of all the allegations about the DLS in Ipswich and elsewhere in the South of England which it suggested were ‘unheard of’.

As I’ve told the RLSS the cases against Brothers James, Kevin and Solomon in particular are overwhelming and need public acknowledgement by the De La Salles.  They also involve the Catholic laity who helped cover up the crimes of James and Solomon.

Since then, there has been nothing about this ‘investigation’ which I do not believe even exists.

There have been meetings between the RLSS and DLS with no outcome and emails from the RLSS assuring me of their best and genuine intentions.

Because they are a new organization I believed I should give them the benefit of the doubt and also in the interests of due diligence.

So – after an extended delay on the apology and the investigation – we are no further forward.

The DLS have done an excellent job of stalling for most of last year and their RLSS has played a role in this. 

The DLS – according to the RLSS – have not been very communicative with them either. Whilst I have some sympathy with them and the frustration they must feel, my priority is we survivors who have been harmed by the DLS.

The comments below relating to the CSSA (the ‘general’ Catholic Safeguarding agency) apply equally to the RLSS.

I think both commentators on twitter put it very well.

Reference Group 

@Smartcairns11·

Nov 11

Every ‘respectable’ persons engaged as the face of ‪#CSSA‬ must be responsible for their use by church leaders as a ‘smokescreen’ of safeguarding to disguise, facilitate false trust &  add more layers to leaderships cover up and concealment of clerical sex crimes.

‪@nazirafzal‬ ‪https://twitter.com/Smartcairns11/status/1590654903328051200…‬

Countess Sigrid von Galen

@instcrimjust

Nov 10

Those ‘respectable’ persons are dangerous accomplices, as they create a smokescreen & illusion of safeguarding to disguise & facilitate cover ups & ongoing crimes. All inquiries have shown that the churches can’t be trusted & safeguards are PR stunts. ‪https://twitter.com/Smartcairns11/status/1590654903328051200‬

Despite the positive result at Caldey Island, after my personal experience with the SCOE, the RLSS and the DLS, I see nothing to disagree with here, not least because Safeguarding organizations have very limited power.

Of course the real culprits are the De La Salles who would seem to be more formidable opponents than the Cistercians and who are treating survivors with absolute contempt.

Not the behaviour of supposed ‘holy’ men.

LIST OF BROTHERS AT ST JOSEPH’S COLLEGE IPSWICH 1974 – 1980

My name is Seán Michael Lea – I was a Border at SJC Oakhill – then at Birkfield from 1975 to 1980. I left at the end of the 5th Year – and went to my local Grammar School then onto Surrey University.Most of my career was in Retail Leisure and Hotel Management. I retired in 2021.

I’ve got to say Pat that during my years at SJC I never experienced any abuse or ill treatment from any of the Brothers. I was also never aware of any of the guys in my year being subject of any form of sexual abuse. There was also to my knowledge no innuendo of any form of sexual abuse by either the Brothers or Lay Teachers.

Maybe my circumstances were somewhat different from the average pupil at SJC. I was the College Head Sacristan and Master of Ceremonies. I served Morning Mass every day and as therefore got certain extra privileges eg on Liturgical Feast Days eating with the Brothers in their Ref etc. I was also President of the SJC Railway Society and the Brothers in particular Bro Damian (Director) allowed me to organise regular weekend trips to eg National Railway Museum York or Bressingham etc. Also at the time I intended to become a Jesuit Priest so maybe that protected me from abuse.

As I had a lot of day to day contact with the DLS Community in Ipswich I thought it would be helpful to supply you with a full list of names and dates that the various Brothers were at Ipswich from 1974 to 1980.

Oak Hill 1974 – 1980

Headmaster Bro Mark. After Oak Hill Closed Mark went on to teach at the DLS University in Bethlehem. He later returned to the UK to join the DLS Community in Bournemouth. I visited him several times between 2003-04 when I was General Manager of The Carlton Hotel in Bournemouth.

The House Masters were Bro Bede & Bro Charles. I know that Bro Bede later went onto work at St William’s Reform School at Market Weighton East Yorkshire which closed in March 1994. I believe that Bro Bede left the DLS Order around that time.

Also in residence at Oakhill was Bro Osmund. He was Retired and had no Teaching or House Master Duties.

Birkfield 1975 to 1980

Headmaster Bro Lawrence Anthony aka Squealer taught several subjects including History & RE He left Ipswich in 1978. He had replaced Bro Edwin Gerald (who had left the Ipswich Community in 1974 but was the Chair of Governors so regular returned for meetings) Bro Lawrence Anthony was replaced in 1978 by Bro Damian who had previously been at Beulah Hill.

Bro Owen 1st Year House Master still at SJC in the mid 1980’s

Bro Benet 2nd Year House Master until 1978 but remained in Ipswich. He later went onto become Bro Provincial at the Provincialate at Half Moon Lane Herne Hill London. He assisted Mr Michael Thuell aka WallEye who was the 3rd Year House Master during my entire time at Birkfield. Mr Thuell taught History and British Constitution. As of 1978 Bro Benet was replaced as 2nd Year House Master by Bro Laurence Hughes who joined the Ipswich Community in 1978. Bro Laurence Hughes later become Bro Visitor of the DLS Order in Great Britain.

Bro Paul RE Teacher – he assisted Bro Owen and took us on numerous weekend camping trips around Dunwich etc. He left the Ipswich Community in 1978. In the mid 90’s he left the DLS Order and went to work in Peru and was tragically murdered there in 2019.

Bro Aidan taught French and lived in the cottage by the tennis courts with Bro Cuthman. Aidan didn’t have any House Master Duties.

Bro Cuthman aka Fluff taught Classics and Latin. He didn’t have any House Master Duties whilst I was at Birkfield.

Bro Ives – 6th Form House Master left Ipswich in 1977. He was assisted by Mr Rose who taught History.

Bro Laurence Treanor aka Lispboo (due to his lisp) joined the Ipswich Community in 1978 and was the House Master at Goldrood as of 1979.

Brother Richard Allen aka Egg Head a previous Assistant General of the DLS Order based at The Generalate in Rome. Richard arrived at Ipswich in late 1977. He was House Master at Goldrood (4th and 5th Years) in 1977 but was only in post until 1979. He remained at the Ipswich Community for a few years. I met him several times in the late 80’s whilst on visits to Rome. He had returned to work at The Generalate.

Bro Terence – taught various Science subjects – he had no House Master Duties and lived alone in The Lodge at the entrance to SJC off Belstead Road. He was the College Rev Bro Sacristan with myself as Head Sacristan and MC.

Bro Lawrence taught several subjects including English & RE he didn’t have any House Master Duties. He left SJC Ipswich in 1978 when Bro Laurence Hughes arrived.

There were several Brothers at SJC called Lawrence and Laurence.   So there were 3 in total during my era

Bro Lawrence Anthony – Bro Laurence Hughes and Bro Lawrence Treanor.

Bro Peter was Deputy Head and Sub Director of the Community and lived in the House by the entrance by the Art Block / TD & Woodwork. He later joined the Community at St Peter’s Bournemouth. I attended his Funeral in Bournemouth in 2004.

Regarding their various ages – the only ones I’d assume could still be alive in addition to Bro Laurence Hughes would be Bro Aidan Bro Owen Bro Charles Bro Lawrence Francis and possibly Bro Bede.

I do know that Bro Benet died of cancer in April 2009.

TRIGGERS

Often on this site, there are graphic accounts of abuse by lay teachers, priests, monks and De La Salle  brothers.

What is more rare, though, is the psychological abuse that often goes with it.  And how it can be triggered today by relatively minor incidents. 

Catholics, abusers or not, always seem to seek control over children. Maybe it’s the same with other religions.

But it is especially heinous in Catholic communities because they are so authoritarian, so convinced of their rightness and even holiness, they cannot and will not be challenged.   

Their role model, of course, starts with the Vatican and the Pope when he speaks ex-cathedra.

Thus, as I’ve related some time ago,  a staunch Catholic doctor (a functioning alcoholic) and his hospital matron wife needed to bring their typically rebellious sixteen year old daughter ‘to her senses’. This involved her being drugged and incarcerated in the general ward of a mental hospital over Christmas.

Her rebellion was the usual thing – staying out late, bad company, surly attitude, punk clothes and so on. I don’t recall anything unusual or horrendous. But in any event, if every rebellious teenager was sectioned to bring them to their senses, the mental hospitals would be filled to overflowing.  What I do recall that was horrendous was her parents’ close examination of her clothing which, in my view, crossed boundaries.

Undoubtedly they used their connections to get the necessary two Doctors (IIRC) to have her sectioned.  When my daughters told me this, I was so appalled, I contacted the hospital and said the girl could stay at our house with her friends, my daughters, over Christmas. The hospital agreed.  I just had to ask her parents’ permission.

This I duly did. Their response I believe is so typically Catholic, it’s worth writing about again. They told me they were bluffing when they intended to keep her in a mental ward over Christmas, alone with seriously disturbed teenagers. They were going to have her released on Christmas Eve when she’d learnt her lesson and promised to behave herself in future. I told them I was delighted that the family would be united. ‘No, you’ve spoilt it now,’ the matron mum glared at me. ‘So we don’t want her back.’ The girl duly spent a happy Christmas with our family and IIRC now has a couple of university degrees and a successful career. But I happen to know she still bears the scars of her ghastly Catholic family.

Similarly I bear the scars of my ghastly Catholic family.  And that’s probably why I chose to intervene. It was triggering me.

My Catholic family circumstances were different, yet ultimately the same. My mother was mentally ill, so she had delegated her authority  to a group of  four or five Catholic worthies to similarly ‘bring her rebellious teenage son to his senses’. Some, but probably not all, were Knights of St Columba.  All were sexual abusers of children.  And they controlled the financial purse string to my fee-paying education at St Joseph’s College, Ipswich, and thus my destiny.

If you look at photos or film of the Knights today, they’re still puffed up with their own arrogance and so were these gentlemen. They saw no contradiction between sexually abusing children and their own self-proclaimed  ‘holiness’. I have no idea how that works. I suspect they compartmentalised their lives and didn’t make any  connection  between their conscience and their vile crimes. Or they think if it’s good enough for bishops, priests and De La Salle brothers to sodomise and sexually molest children, so it’s good enough for them. Or they see it as an initiation rite, like a frat club.  

If anyone has any insights, knowledge or theories, I’d love to hear from them. I think my theories above are correct, but Catholics are hardly going to explain their crimes today.

What is truly remarkable is how I fought back and how they wouldn’t give up. They were determined to impose their will on me.  I’ve no real idea how I survived and eventually won, albeit at a price. They stopped paying my school fees and so I left at age fifteen and became a messenger boy for R and W Paul in Ipswich.   Even then, they still tried to impose their will on me, which I find astonishing. If I was them, I think I’d  be pragmatic and say, ‘We’re not going to win with this annoying little shit. Let him go. There’s plenty more where he came from.’ 

But Catholics simply don’t think that way. They have to win. Maybe the challenge of  ‘breaking in a wild horse’ appealed to them.

It was only when I was sixteen and left home that I was finally free of them.

In my healing work in recent years, I realised I was dealing with at least four sexual abusers, and it was necessary to understand each one’s style, as I was being psychologically assaulted from four different directions.  Sometimes separately. Sometimes in unison. That takes some unpacking. Thus one, a violent thug teacher, used the heavy-handed, boot camp disciplinarian approach. A second, a barrister, used legal threats combined with suggesting I’d be better off moving to an Ipswich hostel where he’d have me all to himself. A third, an English teacher, appealed to my writing ambitions before ultimately turning on me. A fourth, seemed to be the treasurer of the Knights and I can only remember two things about him. First, his impressive marbled Parker pen with its gold nib, ready to write out a much needed cheque for my school fees. ‘On certain conditions, young man…’And second, the terror his two sons – who  also went to St J’s – regarded him with. Let’s not talk about the fifth man. Too big a subject other than to note he was always whining, Uriah Heep style, ‘I always tried to do the best for you boys.’

I clearly won my battle against these five Catholic heavies, although I still find that remarkable. But I didn’t get off Scot-free, it left a scar and that’s where the Triggers come in.

Some months ago, I was triggered when some of my readers said I shouldn’t even be researching Web3 ‘because it was evil’. They were outraged!  It triggered memories of the Catholic Index and reading Heaven and Hell by Swedenborg. When the teacher thug I’ve described found out, he was outraged! He went nuts.  I’d completely forgotten it, but now the memories came rushing back.(More in an earlier blog)

Naturally, I ignored the Triggers.  After all, if I could stand up to a thug when I was 14, I wasn’t going to let anyone today dictate what I should or should not read.

Recently, the same thing occurred when I brought out my Web3 book, a minor project, ecologically and ethically valid. The complexities and rights and wrongs of Web3 needn’t concern us here, only the attempt by a small group of readers to stop my project, to mould me into someone I’m not, to insist I behave differently, to impose their will on me, without any debate,  adopting a ‘holier than thou’, finger-wagging, moral standpoint just like those awful Catholic worthies I’ve described when I was a kid.

They weren’t interested in polite discussion, only in reacting emotionally and dumping their emotions on me. Angry, sad, reproachful, etc.  Doubtless triggered by something in their own pasts that makes them act disproportionately. Maybe they needed an outlet, a scapegoat, for whatever is wrong in their lives.

As you might expect, it, once again, triggered emotions in me from long ago.

But it also reminded me of one way I defeated the finger-waggers as a boy.  

Music. There were so many battle hymns against authoritarian bullies and I still sing them in my head to this day.

The words of Lesley Gore were a life-saver.

You don’t own me
You don’t tell me what to do
Don’t tell me what to say

Don’t try to change me in any way
You don’t own me

I don’t tell you what to say
I don’t tell you what to do
So just let me be myself
That’s all I ask of you
I’m free and I love to be free
To live my life the way I want
To say and do whatever I please

Such music helped me survive as a kid and those words are particularly relevant today and I shall direct them at today’s Triggers if necessary.

If you’re wondering why I’m fairly  relaxed about it, then I should let you into my secret. Over the years I regularly use such Triggers in my stories and they make for excellent negative characters. I’ve written them into two of my current published series. For example, a science fantasy series where the High Priest of the Archeologists, who bury all forms of progress, has banned technology, and has an especial hatred for Web3. Needless to say, he comes to a bad end which I found most cathartic to write. I’m now thinking of a third way I can use them.  

It’s a great way to deal with the finger-waggers and turn their lead into gold.  

I hope others have found similarly constructive ways of dealing with Triggers.