Posted on 06/04/2014 9:51:45 PM PDT by boatbums
Almost 800 babies and children were buried in a mass grave in Ireland near a home for unmarried mothers run by nuns, according to new research Wednesday which throws more light on the Irish Catholic Church's troubled past.
Death records suggest 796 children, from newborns to eight-year-olds, were deposited in a grave near a Catholic-run home for unmarried mothers during the 35 years it operated from 1925 to 1961.
Historian Catherine Corless, who made the discovery, says her study of death records for the St Mary's home in Tuam in County Galway suggests that a former septic tank near the home was a mass grave.
The septic tank, full to the brim with bones, was discovered in 1975 by locals when concrete slabs covering the tank broke up.
Until now, locals believed the bones mainly stemmed from the Great Irish famine of the 1840s when hundreds of thousands perished.
St Mary's, run by the Bons Secours Sisters, was one of several such 'mother and baby' homes in early 20th century Ireland.
Thousands of unmarried pregnant women -- labelled at the time as 'fallen women' -- were sent to the homes to have their babies.
The women were ostracised by the conservative-Catholic society and were often forced to hand over their children for adoption.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
How wealthy was Mary at her death?
Did Joseph leave her anything to live on?
Did John get to take her as a dependant on his taxes?
Check out GREEN burials...
http://flannerbuchanan.com/what-we-do/green-burial/
No need for new material; as long as you keep getting a new audience.
I didn't ask for nor want anyone's sympathy, however, it would be better spent on the nearly 800 innocent children who died while under the care of a Catholic "home" in Tuam, Ireland as well as the countless others who were subjected to rape, molestation and abuse from other Irish Catholic institutions - only God knows how many there are. Don't you have any tears to spare for them?
You can wait until your last breath and one will not be forthcoming. I owe you NOTHING! All anyone needs to do is read through this thread to see that it is far from "thoroughly discredited" - though, no doubt, you would love for everyone to think so. The last time I checked, the formal investigation is ongoing.
What is NOT false is that there WERE nearly 800 children and babies who died there during the time it was operating and NO burial records were found.
What is NOT false is that some of those children's bodies were found in an abandoned concrete septic tank.
What is NOT false is that there remain people who were around back then who have testified to the sickly and malnourished condition they saw of many of the children and that they were shunned and segregated from other children.
And for the record, Metmom only commented on this thread weeks after it was initially posted. She hardly jumped on it. The jumping on was done by many FRoman Catholics who prejudged the whole thing before all the facts were known and castigated anyone who dared express shock at the story. There were also a few "Protestants did it too" defenses, to boot.
When I have done something or said something wrong, I'll apologize. Until then, deal with it. Oh, and thanks for bumping the thread!
Exactly!
Yeah when the facts are against you and you are caught in an outright lie the best move is for the prots to go on the offensive and try and tug at the old heart strings.
Try to be a real Christian instead of the poser you are, admit your error and move on instead of beating this dead horse with more lies.
The only conclusion jumping was from the prots.
“What is NOT false”
Leftists lied about the graves, lied about every facet of the grave hoax story. But you despise the Catholic Church so much you repeat their fabrications and have aligned yourself with the Catholic hating leftists of the world. The story below I posted on FR that you ignored.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3171476/posts?page=4
Whatever you are talking about I do not know. Changing user names, though, I is a weak defense
Please leave us be
Leviticus 5; 17 “If any one sins, doing any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, though he does not know it, yet he is guilty and shall bear his iniquity. 18 He shall bring to the priest a ram without blemish out of the flock, valued by you at the price for a guilt offering, and the priest shall make atonement for him for the error which he committed unwittingly, and he shall be forgiven. 19 It is a guilt offering; he is guilty before the Lord.”
RSV
Established?
So you are saying a probability has been established? It's more like a possibility, for those structures were not exactly common, and there would remain some question as to when the structure was installed.
I've seen the primary info that has so far been available, and that's all it is. A possibility.
The local researcher Corless is herself Catholic -- I think.
She never said that the "septic tank" aspect had been proven, but that according to the information she had, it did fit the evidence as to strong possibility, for old maps do indicate there was a septic tank somewhere near there in past times...
But--- it could have been a burial vault, and the old disused septic tank some yards away, for all we know, so far...
But who put the burial vault in, if there was one there?
It likely was not there during the "work house" era of the facility, or else the other bodies which HAVE BEEN exhumed would have been placed within it, instead of being buried more conventionally.
I do not recall the exact year these I speak of were discovered, but it may have been as recently as 2012. Did you know about those?
The Northerly ans West side of the property was being redeveloped. Houses and streets ---- which included mechanized earthwork. They found a body or two accidentally, then some sort of official professional archeologist was brought in to do some more excavation. They found a few more. less than a dozen in all(?) adult corpses which had been surface buried, four or five feet deep. No coffins, just wrapped in blankets, but buried in orderly fashion.
Bullshit.
Catholic apologists, including you, have been jumping to conclusions themselves.
There was one single historian-archeologist who claimed that "burial vaults" were "common".
THAT one comment is what the alternative to the underground structure in question having not been previously a septic tank is based upon. One single comment! -- though one oft repeated, and repeated so much that many have indeed jumped to the conclusion that the matter has been fully settled. It has not.
Every single time the claim has been repeated, the trail leads back to the one single comment -- which as of yet is far from having been established as fact that such a purposed structure existed on that particular property, instead of that being possibility, but even then still not ruling out that a disused septic tank could have been utilized also, for the need to do so may have arisen.
People saying that it "has been established" (that it was a burial vault) using those type of words of description, are in fact "leaping to conclusions" with arguably less information than Corliss had for assuming the chamber had likely been at one time a sewage tank.
That word "common" is a stretch in this regard, according to other comments I ran across made by local Irish, in that those sort of structures were not exactly common -- but not entirely unheard of either (and thus a possibility as opposed to the structure being a septic tank).
If it eventually proves to have been that and that alone, then those who wish it to be that way can say "I told you so".
But for people here to be demanded that they provide some form of apology while being presently insulted, is a bit much.
It becomes fighting words.
Even the 'baptism' part of things is screwy.
The local priest provided the information by way of extrapolation.
There were a certain number of baptisms recorded for -- I *think* it was ten different facilities.
Dividing it up roughly equally, does bring the number into near enough range to then assume that all the children at the Tuam facility were baptized.
But why have the greater number, then need to divide by ten, unless perhaps the names as listed were not also designated as to where the baptisms actually took place, but instead all from that Diocese in that time frame were all on on list, with no included indication of which facility those who were baptized were from. That could be a reasonable explanation, but then again it still begs a few questions. There was no further explanation that I have seen, making me wish I was a bit nearer so that I could possibly ask some follow-up questions myself.
Turning back to burials;
There were burials uncovered from the 1800's at a different location on the property. That has been established through recent archeological work which actually handled those corpses directly.
Since those bodies dating from the "work house" days were not buried in what is either -- a purpose built burial vault --- or possibly a disused septic tank, that would lead a person to consider the structure (if burial "vault") was not present during the initial era of the facility.
There is also a more normal, conventional graveyard right across the road to the Northwest of the property.
No large communal "vaults" there that we know of are "common" to THAT graveyard.
The facility was used by the Irish Army for a short period also -- so THEY could possibly have added some underground structure(s).
We don't know that they didn't, any more than we or much of anyone else knows that they did -- but it is possible enough, and makes a bit more sense then the Bon Secours having initiated excavations on-site, then paid for brick/concrete work to have been done...when there was a graveyard a [literal] stone's throw distant.
How well have you checked primary resources? Did you know that there is an anecdotal account of there being small bodies found in the same area of the same property, a bit distant (maybe twenty yards or a bit more? something like that...) from the spot where the cover or lid from whatever it is -- septic tank or "burial vault" is?
I'm still waiting for the Catholic venom to subside before sharing further as to this other information.
So what's it going to be?
Will you concede that there has been a bit of jumping to conclusions on the part of Catholic apologists -- yes or no?
The info I have been sharing is factual enough, with more than enough comments here on this thread serving to further prove my point.
Will you allow yourself to be corrected, even if but partially?
If so... then I would be willing to go to the trouble of spending the possible hours it may take me to again find these extra tidbits of info pertaining to children's bodies, other than the ones seen under the lid or stone that was pried up back in '72 (or whenever that was , it may have been '75, but the year makes little actual difference).
Well, tell that to your fellow RC's who use the term on a regular basis.
bb didn’t *jump into the thread*. She POSTED it.
And she’s right that I didn’t jump into it, having posted on it months after it was posted.
False accusations are called *bearing false witness*.
So I wonder where the apology is from NKP_Vet for bearing false witness?
You mean CATHOLIC; right?
Oh?
Kinda like the Galileo trial?
Oh?
EVERY???
So there was NO septic tank?
No bones in non-existant tank?
Non-existant bones in a non-existant tank were laying on TOP of the ground with marks on them?
Oh?
Like how Mary is in heaven; helping Jesus handle His prayer requests?
Please leave us be
???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.