Saturday, 13 February 2016

DOWN AND CONNOR PRIEST ENTERS CIVIL PARTNERSHIP ???

DOWN AND CONNOR PRIEST ENTERS CIVIL PARTNERSHIP ???


This Blog was informed today that a serving Down and Connor priest has entered into a Civil Partnership with his long time lover who also happens to be a Catholic teacher!

The priest providing the information has provided the Blog with information on previous occasions and in each case his reports were later proven to be true and accurate. 

The Civil Partnership ceremony is reported to have taken place in recent times in a County Antrim registry office in the presence of the civil registrar. 

The Blog has been provided with both the name of the priest and his partner. However, due to lack of documentary evidence and the evidence of others those names will not, at this stage, be published.

The priest in question is known as been actively "gay" among many of his fellow priests.

This further development comes in the wake of a series of scandals and stories that seem to suggest that in practical terms, at least, Down and Connor no longer requires celibacy as a requirement from priests. 




Clerical circles are awash with stories of priest of the diocese who are sexually active with both women and men.

Priests regularly discuss their colleagues who have virtually live in female and male partners. Some of these relationships have been in existence for years and indeed decades. 

As far as we know however only one priest has, to date, attempted to contract civil partnership with another man. A Croydon priest had a civil partnership with a Pakistani man to keep him in the UK. He was suspended and later welcomed back. However in this case the motive was to help an immigrant rather than marry a lover.



  

CANON LAW AND A PRIEST'S MARRIAGE:

Canon Law (the Catholic Church law) forbids its priests to EVEN ATTEMPT MARRIAGE.




As far as the Church is concerned a priest cannot validly marry and any marriage he attempts to have would be regarded by the Church as always being INVALID.

Of course Civil Partnerships are not Marriages. They are simply recognised in civil law as giving couples many of the rights of marriage.

However in Ireland and in many other countries same sex couples can now celebrate full marriages.

If it is true that a D&C priest has contracted a Civil Partnership it would of course not be recognised by the Church.

However, I suppose, it could be a way a priest wanting to commit to a man could do so and not be guilty of breaking Canon Law.

However I cannot see most Catholic bishops being happy with one of his priests being in a Civil Partnership. 




In Down and Connor Bishop Noel Treanor seems to tolerate a lot from priests.

But could he really tolerate a priest having a Civil Partner?




Time will tell.

We will update readers on further developments.

54 comments:

  1. This story is another attempt by PB to undermine the Church.

    A check into the Register of Civil Ceremonies will soon sort out whether or not this story is true.

    I do not believe it!

    Priest of D&C

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Father I agree that if this ceremony took place it will be found on the public record.

      My Blog DOES NOT say whether or not it is true.

      I am simply reporting what another D&C priest told me.

      Delete
  2. As a retired priest I would not be shocked if this story were true. There are far more scandalous and serious stories circulating around the diocese that those of on the inside know to be true.

    If it is true at least the priest is acknowledging, in some way, his relationship.

    99% of them carry on behind the backs of their bishop, fellow priests and parishioners.

    Those of us who kept our celibacy promises feel very let down.

    Father Grey Hairs

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am an Irish priest thought not of Down and Connor. I have been in a long term loving and committed relationship with a lady my own age for many years. We have no children. On a holiday to the USA sometime ago we married in a civil ceremony as a sign of our commitment. This action, and the making of a will, will see to it that she does not want if I die before her. I am totally unconcerned about what Canon Law says. As far as I am concerned love is the greatest law of all.

    Priest and Husband.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then you are NOT a priest - good luck in Make Believe Land.

      Delete
    2. Well done Fr 13 Feb 18.36 if what you say is true. Its the hypocrisy and cover ups that annoy me

      Delete
    3. PS why is callender saying February

      Delete
  4. If the priests and bishops know of all these situations and know that celibacy is not working why do they continue to pretend it is.

    When is the Church going to address this massive elephant in the room?

    Parishioner/ Ballycastle.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A priest member of our family mentioned this matter at the dinner table in the family home within the last few days. So it is "out" among some clergy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is interesting then that the report had being talked about among the clergy BEFORE being mentioned on this Blog.

      Either the report is true or we are experiencing clerical Chinese whispers.

      Delete
  6. If the priest in question entered a civil partnership he has certainly broke the spirit if not the letter of can law.

    However either way a more important question must be answered. Has he betrayed his celibacy promise? Has he also commmited a sin against the Sixth Commandment.

    A civil partnership does not give a priest, or anyone else, to breaks God's commands.

    Priest.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Are we to believe then that there is a priest in D&C arrogant enough to make a public and legal statement about his sexuality and then think he can continue in ministry regardless?

    Maybe he has already been to Bishop Treanor to hand in his job?

    Or will be another case of pride preceding a fall?

    Bemused Catholic Belfast.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If this blog entry is true, then one could trace its genesis to the tolerance of Bishop Treanor in particular to irregular clerical relationships. He's been sending out the wrong message to the troops.

    LUX.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Firstly, if I could express my views without being patronized by anonymous (Roman collar-wearing?)critics: I believe the Bible to be the inerrant and inspired Word of God - and if that does not dovetail into the world of other readers - then: TOUGH! You see, "ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and Christ was made sin on the Cross to redeem us (2 Cor. 5:21). I'm judging nobody - as I'm a sinner - but I will not take it lying down from an anonymous, pejorative critic who decides to drip-feed me with his views. Jarlath Vaughan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The inspired and inerrant Word of God, Jarlath, did not come down out of the clouds written in Shakespearean English. The Bible comes from the Church. It is the Church's Book. The Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, decided its contents.

      Delete
    2. To Anonymous @ 23:56

      I marvel at the biblical illiteracy of some commenters on this blog, yours more than anyone else's. Take your pious statement: 'The Bible comes
      from the Church.' Where did you plagiarize this nonsense? For one, the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) precedes Christianity. The 'Church' , as you
      put it, may have made it part of the canon of Scripture, but it didn't 'come' from the 'Church'. Your statement makes sense (but not a great deal) only if it is understood metaphorically, you moron.

      Delete
    3. You really outdo yourself in crass and asinine stupidity anonymous screamer at 23:56. Are you fifteen years old by any chance???

      The Church - properly understood - constitutes the people of Israel (OT) and the New Israel - the Church of Jesus Christ (NT).

      There was no constituted Bible, as we know and possess it today, until the Catholic Church Councils of Carthage and Hippo (late 4th/early 5th cents).

      These Councils decided, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, which book of the O and NT were to be part of the Canon of the Bible.

      Thus, truly, the Bible is entrusted by God to the Church. It is the Church's Book to be authoritatively interpreted within the Church.

      Delete
    4. The Bible does not teach anywhere,the ‘doctrine’ of ‘Scripture alone’. The Bible does teach (2Th 2:15-16)"keep the traditions that we taught you, whether by word of mouth or by letter" Scripture consists of both the written and the oral word
      And in (1Tim.3: 15-16) "God's family, which is the Church of the Living God the pillar & foundation of the Truth."
      The Scriptures contain the Truth of God’s word but The Church is the custodian of that truth. The Church decided which books got into the Bible and which books did not.

      Delete
  10. Dear Jarlath,
    I don't understand your last contribution vis a vis the patronising clergy. What in particular did you object to in what they said ? Can you please clarify ?

    LUX.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For heaven's sake, it's Saint Valentine's Day. Let's wish the happy couple well and leave them alone. Who are we to judge? Their well informed consciences are obviously not bothering them and if they are faithful to one another they won't be bothering any other body. If every sexual act outside hetero-marriage is still always a mortal sin for Catholics it's time someone in authority said so clearly and explained why.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whoever you are YOU are not well informed.

      All sexual acts outside a valid man/woman marriage are sinful - and some mortally so.

      Homosexual acts are always and everywhere sinful.

      This has been the Church's teaching always and still is.

      PP

      Delete
    2. Ridiculous stuff and nonsense continually foisted on the 'faithful' to create dependence on the priestly caste's role as intermediary with the all seeing powerful 'eye in the sky'!
      MMM

      Delete
    3. To Anonymous @ 14:04

      What pompous, moral claptrap you type: 'All sexual acts outside a valid man/woman marriage are sinful - and some mortally so.'

      You ignorant Catholic cleric. For the first 1000 years of Christianity there
      was no valid ( sacramental) marriage: marriage was purely a civil contract, free of Church involvement, and could be enacted anywhere, even down the pub. Sex here was not considered sinful by the Church.

      Delete
    4. To Anon at 14:04

      What are 'homosexual acts'? I know that homosexual couples act in
      various ways. I know, for example, that some care deeply about each other. Is this a 'homosexual act'? I know that some self-sacrifice for each other. Is
      this a 'homosexual act'? I know that some will sit up all night with each other if one is sick. Is this a 'homosexual act', too? I could go on, but
      hopefully you've got my point.


      Hold the show! I think I've got it. You meant 'sex acts', didn't you? Is this all homosexual relationships are about? Sex? (You wouldn't happen to be in
      one, would you?) If not, then why do you associate homosexuality purely
      with sex. Do you do the same with heterosexual relationships? No? Then
      why are you obsessing about homosexual sex?

      Delete
    5. Why call people names?

      When Jesus gave the Church the power to loose and bind He did not place a time limit on that power. It is until the end of time.

      The Church, in the Name of Christ,teaches infallibly.

      All sexual outside the context of a valid marriage - and open to conception - are sinful and many mortally so.

      This includes all extra marital sex including homosexual acts and masturbation.

      Im sorry if you cannot stomach the truth.

      If the priest mentioned in this Blog is having sex with a man then they are both commiting mortal sin.

      They need to get to Confession ASAP

      PP

      Delete
    6. To Anonymous @ 17:17

      'The Church, in the name of Christ, teaches infallibly.' You really believe this, don't you? Why are Catholics so blind to the doctrinal failings of their
      church? The 'Church' teaches that human life is sacred and that abortion,
      therefore, is morally wrong; yet it will not disavow the death penalty...even though the life of a condemned person is as sacred as any life in the
      womb. And didn't Jesus specifically tell us to love our enemies? I'm sure that not even you, with your legalistically conditioned Catholic mindset,
      could honestly argue that taking someone's life by judicial execution is an act of love towards him.

      You, sir, are kidding yourself about the infallibility of Catholic Church teaching.

      Delete
    7. Gay relationships exist in the animal kingdom. Did God sin when he created these animals

      Delete
  12. I can confirm that the story of this priests civil partnership is being talked about among us clergy in Down and Connor.

    As for it being St Valentines Day and wishing the couple well - the priest at the centre of this story is famous for not sticking to one partner.My sympathies would be with his partner.

    PP D&C

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sitting up all night with a sick person, whoever they are is virtuous.

    But it does not excuse sin or indeed remit it.

    The only think that does that is a sincere Confession. PP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To Anonymous @ 17:25

      Yes, it is virtuous; but in a loving, homosexual relationship, it is also a
      'homosexual act'. Why are such acts never acknowledged in this way either by Pharisaical priests like you, or by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church?
      Why do you always think of loving, committed homosexual unions in such a sordid and sleazy way? The Catechism clearly sees these unions as purely
      sexual affairs (as 'homosexual acts'). This is a travesty of the real thing. And
      you cannot draw reliable moral teaching from a travesty. You and your kind have tried to do so (and keep trying), but you have failed...and will continue to
      fail.

      Be honest, for once in your priestly life. Homosexual relationships can be as loving and fulfilling as their heterosexual counterparts. Ok: I do have a moral
      difficulty with the sexual expression of love in same-sex unions...but don't
      throw out the baby with the bath water. Don't morally dismiss loving, committed and chaste homosexual relationships. Like their hetero
      counterparts, they, also, can be the ground in which holiness is sown and reaped.

      Delete
    2. See! You admit that sex between two men or two women is wrong!

      PP

      Delete
    3. To Anonymous @ 18:21

      Er, yes, I do admit this. But I never said otherwise.

      Delete
  14. It's not even wrong! Catch a grip!
    Lapsed Catholic

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lapsed Catholic! Lapsed Morality?

      PP

      Delete
  15. Well done them two And om Valentines Day and all.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Seems to be plenty of priests in Down and Connor with a 'lapsed morality' - sure how could I know any better?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lapsed Morality is a subjective judgement.

      Delete
  17. To Anonymous @ 19:18

    Is this the moron also @ 23:56? Of course it is, because you make as much sense,
    biblically and intellectually, as he did.

    No, you scriptural dilettante, 'the Church - properly understood - ...' does NOT constitute 'the people of Israel (OT) and the New Israel - the Church of Jesus Christ
    (NT)'. How did you come by this faux theology? Through a correspondence course?

    Be quiet a moment and allow me to educate you scripturally. In the Gospel, Jesus makes it clear that he WILL found his church. You with me so far, moron? The church
    founded by Jesus emerged at PENTECOST, not in the era of Judaism. Official
    Judaism rejected Christ as the messiah; therefore Jesus had to, as it were, start from
    scratch. Which is why he told his disciples, IN THE FUTURE TENSE, that he would
    (will) build his church. This, you moron, represents the official, theological, messianic
    and Christological disconnect between Judaism and Christianity. I've lost you here, haven't I? Well, I did say that you were a moron.

    BTW, even if, for argument's sake, I accepted your intellectually threadbare thesis (that the Bible comes from the Church), I'd be as much a moron as you so clearly are: The Bible (the Word of God) comes from God, not from some fucked-up human institution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you some sort of a ranting psychopath "Anon" @ 21:41? Cut out your filthy and abusive language, you ignorant thug. Your insults and abuse only reveal you as a stupid individual, with a superficial grasp of theology and Scripture - and plenty of hot air.

      Jesus indeed founded His Church upon Peter and it exists today as the Catholic Church with Pope Francis currently in the Chair of Peter.

      The Church can truly be said to have existed in OT times. God has not rejected the Jews. Jesus brought Judaism to perfection in Himself. The NT Church is the completion of Q'ahal YWHW - the Ekklesia - Assembly of God - in the OT.

      The Bible indeed comes from God but it does so through priests, prophets and kings. God entrusts His Word to His Church and He communicates through the prism of human agents and human experiences.

      Delete
    2. To Anonymous @ 13:06

      You know I'm beginning to believe what they say about Roman Catholics :
      they have to check in their brains before they can check out their Faith.
      You're actually a classic case in point, so I'll take this very, very slowly.
      The Jews are NOT part of the church founded by Christ because, you arch-
      moron, they did not and do not believe in Jesus' divinity. Christ! I swear a kindergarten class could understand this far quicker than the braindead
      Catholics I've been debating with on this blog.

      Let me scream this at you, moron: THE CHURCH OF CHRIST DID NOT, INDEED COULD NOT, EXIST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT PERIOD BECAUSE IT
      WAS FOUNDED ONLY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT PERIOD BY CHRIST
      HIMSELF, YOU ASSHOLE!!!

      You're kidding me, right? Please tell me you're winding me up because no one could be as moronic as you're making yourself out to be; it isn't, er,
      natural.

      Oh, as for your hilarious statement that the Bible comes through priests, prophets, etc,would these be the same priests and prophets who, in Old
      Testament times, ordered genocidal destruction, including the slaughter of
      children, all in the name of Yahweh?

      And would these be the same priests who, in the New Testament period, sent people off on crusade to the Holy Land to slaughter in the name of
      Christ? And the same priests who raped and sodomized our children and then had their revolting crimes covered up by bishops and popes?

      And isn't the present pope, Francis, refusing to abolish the Pontifical Secret, despite a direct request from the United Nations? You do know
      what the Pontifical Secret is, don't you? Or perhaps you don't because
      clericalist morons like you are so busy kissing priests' arses they don't
      want to hear anything bad about them...even if it is true. The Pontifical
      Secret allows bishops to continue covering up these crimes in countries where civil law does not require reporting of them to law-enforcement
      agencies. In fact, the PS forbids bishops (on pain of excommunication, I believe) from reporting these crimes and obligates bishops to report them
      instead to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith...that's right: Pope Benedict's curial old stamping ground, where, as plain old Josef Ratzinger,
      he covered up child-sex crimes for decades. And guess who's in charge of the CDF now...that's right: another German, who is himself under fire for
      allegedly covering up sex crimes against boys when he was bishop of a German diocese. Good old Francis! Yes, we can trust him, his bishops and
      priests to speak to us the unadulterated Word of God... just like those Old Testament prophets and priests... and we can trust them to put the welfare
      of the Church's most vulnerable members at the top of their 'To Do' list.

      When are you and your kind going to grow up?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 14:41 - you are talking thru your f---ing hole, you braindead c--t. You are actually so thick that it is impossible to get thru your thick skull with any reason. MORON! ASSHOLE! There's a wee taste of your own medicine, you d---head.

      There is no pontifical secrets anymore, by the way. All abuse must be reported. Including by obtuse w---kers like you, so if you know anything different, you twat, ring the police or the BBC - you pr--k.
      http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/02/15/papal-commission-bishops-must-report-sex-abuse-charges/

      Delete
    4. To Anonymous @ 18:29

      You must be one of those braindead Catholics I mentioned earlier.

      Oh, dear! There is no easy way to say this that will allow you to save face...not that I wanted to anyhow. The Pontifical Secret still exists and is
      written into Canon Law. Francis could, unilaterally, abolish it; but he has
      CHOSEN not to do so.

      You seem fine with this refusal to offer greater protection to children. You wouldn't happen to be a priest, would you?

      Delete
    5. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/02/sola-scriptura-unbiblical-refutation-of-dr-richard-bennett.html

      Delete
    6. Children are far safer today in the CC than in any other Church, safer than they are in secular society and safer than they are in the home (where most abuse occurs). The CC has strict guidelines and procedures on safeguarding and there is compulsory reporting of allegations to the authorities. This is evident to all except the most twisted, ignorant and prejudiced. No I am not a priest. I am a Catholic parent and a teacher.

      Delete
    7. Anon. @ 21:34, you are living in fantasy land, like so many other braindead Catholics.

      Delete
  18. To Anonymous at 19:46

    'Lapsed Catholic! Lapsed morality?' Wow! I'LL bet you were really pleased with
    yourself for coming up with that pithy soundbite.

    Do you, asshole, associate morality with Catholicism? Christ! You don't know anything about the history of ministerial Catholicism, do you? Tell you what, asshole:
    spend less time behind a keyboard and more time informing that immature intelligence of yours about the filthy truth of the Roman Catholic Church.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Pat, maybe you should set some rules about language and abuse on here? The individual(s) at 21:51 and 21:41 sounds quite insane! It is affecting the overall tone on your page which, normally, quite good-humoured and respectful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. About a year ago there was a period of regularly abusing posts directed at +Pat, and a similar suggestion was made.
      My recollection is that Pat was reluctant to start censoring posts, other than those which are clearly 'beyond the Pale'. I applaud him for that willingness to expose himself to criticism, however unwarranted. I think most of us can form our own opinion on the value or otherwise of intemperate abusive posts, and the nature of such posters.
      I do agree with your view on the most recent intemperate posts, especially those using abusive disrespectful language.
      MMM

      Delete
    2. Thank you MMM.

      Most readers will agree that those resorting to abuse of others are losing the rational argument.

      What was the quote?

      "I totally disagree with what you say but I am willing to die to preserve your right to say it".

      Delete
  20. For some reason this post reminds me of a wedding I went to at St Chad's cathedral in Birmingham where the priest in his antique cope definitely outdressed the bride!
    I've never knowingly had sex with a Catholic priest (and by and large I've always found them an uninspiring lot). I did once have a man in a gay sauna try and fail to translate my tattoo in Greek. I commented that if he'd forgotten his Greek he must either have had an expensive education or be clergy. 'I am a priest of the Church of Sweden,' he said.
    Didn't somebody say something about the truth setting you free?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its interesting that the Classics are being discussed in the gay saunas :-)

      Its not so long ago that a priest died in a gay sauna in Dublin and other priests present have him his Last Rites.

      Delete
  21. Has anyone found out yet who the priest in question is ? . If it's who I think it is I wish him well in his new life

    ReplyDelete
  22. if you have heard the name being discussed on the clergy bush telegraph then the name you have heard is correct. I understand there will be " movement" on this issue next week- or so I'm lead to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  23. What raises my ire about this revelation is the following - a few weeks ago, we deported, from this warren of Down and Connor, a large, exotique, grey-furred, pink, irreplaceable, singing specimen of rabbit, whose only crime was his doe-eyed love, for another young(ish) buck.

    Couldn't they both have just gone down to the City Hall, cemented
    their love and continued making the sweet music that so rejoiced and thrilled us - giving hours of entertainment every day of the week - to their audiences???

    As it is, a rare and glamorous specimen has departed his hutch in Divisship Down, to romp and breed in the luxurious warrens and tunnels of West London. And we - in these burrows - are the poorer for it..... sigh!

    ReplyDelete