Friday, 27 May 2016

MAYNOOTH SEMINARY - NEW GAY SCANDAL

MAYNOOTH SEMINARY IN CRISIS !!!
Published: 25 May 2016


This article from Catholic Voice was sent to this Blog by "Mary".

It is about the latest gay scandal from Maynooth seminary.

Anthony Murphy



The time has come for the laity to demand a thorough reform of St. Patrick’s Seminary

“If a man has the power to do good, it is sinful in him to leave it undone”. This short line from the Epistle of Saint James is a stark reminder of the duty of every Christian believer to do what is right. Why then, we may ask, are our bishops not taking an active role in bringing about a sorely-needed reform of our national seminary, St. Patrick’s College, Maynooth? 

Seminary has been enveloped by controversy for many years

Last May, this paper carried an article which alerted readers to the fact that out of a class of ten seminarians, for no less than sixty per cent of them it was recommended that they take “time out” from formation. One of the primary reasons given in these dubious reports was that they were “theologically rigid” – in other words, they were not willing to compromise their Catholic faith. Some of these seminarians were criticised openly in these reports because they chose to kneel – as is the universal norm of the Church – during the consecration of the Mass. This same article drew readers’ attention to the damaging heterodox theology being taught by certain members of the faculty – for example, there have been outright denials of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, a questioning of the divinity of Jesus Christ (by suggesting that Christ might have sinned), and the notion that salvation is merely “living well”.

Another newspaper, The Irish Catholic, drew attention to the same situation. It highlighted the fact that the Apostolic Visitation ordered by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, which included a visitation of Maynooth seminary, has had little practical effect. The article, which claimed that certain bishops had intervened to ensure that three out of the six “theologically rigid” seminarians be allowed to return to seminary, also drew attention to the fact that controversy surrounding the programme of priestly formation in Maynooth seminary is nothing new. It mentioned the claims made a few years ago that a number of seminarians who wished to kneel at Mass were suspended from seminary. This is a crucial point: the issues raised last summer were not isolated. Neither are the charges relating to heterodox theology a new development. The plain fact is that the seminary has been enveloped by controversy for many years. To use the familiar phrase, there is no smoke without fire. 

Homosexual sub-culture

One of the controversies which has persisted for many years is that of the existence of a homosexual sub-culture among some seminarians. 

Again, this is not news. However, this newspaper understands that this sub-culture is still very much active. As a matter of fact, it has come to light that in recent weeks a seminarian was suspended from seminary for uncovering the existence of homosexual behaviour. 



This is unfathomable – the one who spoke up was punished, while those engaging in behaviour which the Church regards as objectively sinful remain in formation for the Catholic priesthood. It is common knowledge among current seminarians that one seminarian (who is no longer in formation) last year boasted that his formation in the seminary helped him to discover his “true self” (i.e. as a homosexual). Having helped this man to discover his “true self”, this same seminarian was invited to continue his formation the following year. Is it any wonder that there was no uproar from the seminary authorities last year when the campus was saturated with posters advocating a “yes” vote in the marriage referendum?

Naturally, following the controversy which arose last summer in particular, the President of St. Patrick’s College, Monsignor Hugh Connolly, dismissed the claims being made about seminary formation. 


Hugh Connolly

Writing in The Irish Catholic, he rubbished claims that seminarians would be targeted for being too conservative. Why then, one might ask, was it considered acceptable or even important to note in a number of end-of-year reports that certain students knelt at Mass? Quoting David Quinn, Monsignor Connolly wrote, “David Quinn is right to remind us that ‘Catholic theology cannot stray on the fundamentals from the teachings of the Magisterium’. Neither for that matter should a priest or seminarian so stray”. Why then are seminarians reporting year after year that they are being taught much theology which has indeed strayed from the teachings of the Magisterium? Indeed, in some instances it has more than merely “strayed” – judging on what has been reported over the years, much teaching can only be described as outright heresy. Again, there is no smoke without fire.

Faithful have the right to demand action from bishops




A sincere Catholic cannot but be outraged by the controversy surrounding Maynooth. They cannot but be outraged that men are being formed for the Catholic priesthood in such an environment. They cannot but be outraged when they consider how those who are charged with forming men in the likeness of the Supreme Priest, Our Lord Jesus Christ, can actively and knowingly jeopardise or even destroy the vocations of those men whom He has called and chosen. Our seminarians deserve better – they deserve a Catholic formation which is in full agreement with the mind of the Roman Catholic Church. Indeed, you, the faithful, deserve better – especially since you are the ones who pray for, and financially support, the formation of our future priests.

Sadly, despite your many fervent prayers for vocations to the priesthood, many men are not answering the call – one of the reasons given by many is that they cannot enter Maynooth seminary while it remains in its present state. As faithful Catholics you have a right to have your concerns listened to by your bishops – in many cases the cries of their own seminarians have been ignored. Perhaps they will listen to you. Indeed, there is something very, very wrong when those who expose wrong doing are expelled while the offenders are allowed to continue as if nothing happened. This cries out to Heaven for vengeance and surely no person of good will can ignore such a dreadful situation, we have a duty to act. 

I therefore urge you, dear faithful readers, to make your voice heard on this matter. The Code of Canon Law tells us that the faithful have a right and even a duty to make their concerns known to their pastors for the good of the Church (Can.212). Indeed, it is surely now time for those priests who have, by the grace of God, survived the trials of Maynooth seminary to make their voices heard. Please consider contacting the Primate of All Ireland, Archbishop Eamon Martin, stating your concerns about our national seminary, and asking him, as President of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, to initiate a serious discussion on the state of affairs in the seminary when the bishops’ conference next meets in Maynooth on June 7, 8, and 9. You have the power to do good – do not leave it undone. 

PAT SAYS:

Homosexuality has been a feature of Maynooth for many years now - and indeed a feature of many Catholic seminaries.

Is is also a feature of many modern seminaries that the seminarians are often right wing.

Many of the seminarians, who later become priests, combine their right wing Catholic views with active and promiscuous gay life styles.

Its all a very strange phenomenon. 

I'd welcome readers views.

73 comments:

  1. This story is also on the front page of the Irish Catholic where it is more factually reported and minus the histrionics of Anthony Murphy who is an ultra-right wing reactionary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Saw it. I'm sure The Irish Catholic would give the story intense coverage :-)

      And - even Anthony Murphy is entitled to have a view and express it.

      Delete
    2. Irish Catholic gave the made up Maynooth version. Catholic Voice is the true version.

      Delete
    3. I'm a sincere catholic and I'm not outraged.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous at 15:48, how would you know it's the "true version"? You wouldn't be Anthony Murphy, would you?

      Delete
  2. Pat.
    What happens or doesn't happen in Maynooth or the sort of individual they form for priesthood doesn't concern me one little bit. Why. Simply the thing which concerns me is that my relationship with my God is ok. No churches, priests, clergy politics or hypocracy to contend with.
    God loves me. I love him and try to do to others as I would wish them to do to me. It's called keep it simple and it's very satisfying and fulfilling. Since I walked away from the man made,self serving Catholic Church I've never felt so spiritually well.
    Happy Camper

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear HC, I understand you perfectly. I made a similiar move in a different way.

      Now, anytime I have to make a decision I simply ask myself: "What would Jesus do". I get the answer from his teachings in the NT and from the guidance of the HS.

      It brings great freedom - the freedom of the sons and daughters of God.

      Delete
    2. @Happy Camper. I agree this blog is so focused on the institution. Where is Jesus in this blog? There is no spiritual nourishment.

      I am afraid I don't know any self serving priests.

      Delete
  3. A PHENOMENON is exactly the right word, Pat. A lot of these seminarians are sexually active gay men. They swathe themselves in silk and lace and waft incense at the altars they have erected in honour of their own delusions. They have rigid views on morality that they do not apply to themselves. Obviously, there is rottenness and corruption in the formators also. Clear them all out! Otherwise, God help the Church and the people. We need priests who are basically HEALTHY in every respect - whatever their sexual orientation. If a man does not exercise self-control, he will invariably turn out to be a sexual pest to either women or men - or worse still - the young and the vulnerable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you know these seminarians are sexually active?

      Sounds like unsubstantiated nonsense to me.

      I don't believe for a second that you will have ever even been in Maynooth. As I said in previous posts, these are young men in formation. Why do we have such high expectations that they should be perfect before they've even entered the seminary.

      I think some Christian charity wouldn't go amiss.

      Delete
    2. So, you think it is ok for seminarians to have sex with each other in Maynooth and then graduate to Grindr after they are ordained?

      I have spoken to Maynooth seminarians and former seminarians and they all confirm that there is gay sex among the seminarians in Maynooth.

      Delete
    3. I don't get it. On the one hand these seminarians are accused of being so conservative, then they are claimed by Pat as being his sources of the scandal.

      It seems a total contradiction to me. (Conservative) seminarians would clearly have/want nothing to do with Pat Buckley. Former seminarians may simply have an axe to grind.

      I am not saying it is right for them to have sex with each other Pat. But I have been provided with ZERO evidence that they are, except your claim from anonymous unsubstantiated sources. I suspect if you did have any evidence it would have been splashed all over this blog a long time ago.

      Until there is evidence of it, then it would make me a false accuser to criticize the seminary over it.

      Delete
    4. Let me clarify. I have not spoken to current seminarians.

      I have spoken to former seminarians - some who are nor ordained and some who are not.

      I never said that these were my source for the current scandal. Those sources are the Catholic papers - The Irish Catholic and Catholic Voice.

      What I am saying is that any source I have ever spoken to has told me about homosexuality in Maynooth. At one time they even had a special corridor for meeting which the students called "The Pink Corridor".

      I have also spoken to gay men from Dublin who went out to the wooded area behind Maynooth college to meet seminarians.

      Why was the Maynooth President dismissed by the bishops some years ago = for having sex with the seminarians.

      I personally saw homosexuality in both the seminaries I attended.

      What do you want produced for you to believe - the stained bed sheets?

      Delete
    5. Pat. You seem very behind the times. It might be time to stop digging a hole. No where in the paper does it say that seminarians are having sex with each other or even allude to it.

      So because the president of Maynooth was removed over ten years ago, it is proof that Seminarians are having sex with eachother today? Ridiculous. It doesn't even make sense.

      Delete
    6. Well. We will have to agree to differ until I can produce the DNA for you.

      Delete
  4. Anthony Murphy might be ultra conservative and right wing but at least he speaks the truth. The Irish Catholic won't go against the Bishops. The dogs in the street know what is going on in Maynooth for years but no action is taken. Orthodox seminarians are living in fear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is very sad that orthodox seminarians are living in fear.

      I would like to hear from one of them on here - anonymously of course.

      Delete
    2. It is very sad that orthodox seminarians are living in fear.

      I would like to hear from one of them on here - anonymously of course.

      Delete
  5. These men usually even tell the dean's that they are homosexual and they then have a straight path through Formation. Many of them use the Latin Mass as a cover up. They love the silk vestments, lacey surplices, berettas and the most expensive cassocks from barbaconi with thick white collars and swinging thuribles They enjoy dining in fine hotels and restaurants like Carton House. The sad reality is that these men appear to be able to walk through formation whereas genuine men are either pushed out or leave due to discouragement. It does not matter about orientation, all these men are called to celibacy incase people think this is homophobic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've never actually seen Pat Buckley mention Jesus on this blog. He should read the bible - it's great.

      Delete
    2. What did I do at 14.05 above - over 2 hours ago.

      That's right. I mentioned Jesus.

      Read the blog / comments properly before you comment.

      It's also a great thing to do :-)

      Delete
    3. Indeed. I don't find these figures on visitors to this blog very credible - "This Blog - Its Critics".

      Pat seems to suggest that these numbers suggest support. Not necessarily.

      Delete
    4. Pageviews today 1,102
      Pageviews yesterday 2,761
      Pageviews last month 81,780
      Pageviews all time history 960,451

      The above are today's figures.

      I have been challenged on several occasions to show these figures.

      If I don't show them you say I am making them up!

      If I do show them you still say I am making them up!

      I have NEVER suggested that these figures show "support".

      I simply publish them for what they are.

      Delete
    5. PS: And at least I put my name to everything I write !!!

      Delete
    6. WELL DONE PAT. IT SEEMS WHEN YOU PUT YOUR MIND TO IT YOU REMEMBER WHO IT IS THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED OT BE SERVING. NOT YOURSELF!!! LOL

      Delete
  6. Was Pat having sex in the seminary?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous at 16:19 - I was in Maynooth last week! No one expects students to be "perfect" but they are expected to be chaste. Believe you me, some of them are rampant homosexuals and the most Christian and charitable thing to do would be to BOOT THEM OUT! Send them back home to mammy. She may shed a few tears but she will shed even more bitter tears if they end up another Rory Coyle!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some people on here will accuse you of making that up!

      I believe you.

      Can you clarify any further?

      Delete
    2. I am a curate in a West of Ireland diocese and just a few short years out of Maynooth. I am heterosexual and I was sexually active when I was in Maynooth and still am - with the same woman.

      Most of my fellow seminarians were gay and the majority of them were sexually active - with other seminarians, lay students from the NUI over the bridge and on days off in Dublin.

      I can assure you that so called "chaste" priests are as rare as hen's teeth.

      CC

      Delete
    3. Anyone can be anything - anonymously - on this site. I find it impossible to believe that you are a priest. However, if this is true you have really managed to get an extremely stupid woman! If you are a priest - get out now!!
      Carte

      Delete
    4. Why are you continuing Ministry? That is Sacrilege. You knew this Vocation requires celibacy.

      Delete
    5. I continue in ministry to love God and serve people. I believe that obligatory celibacy is a bad law and I am not bound by it. At the same time I am discreet and cause no scandal. Pat knows who I am and he knows I am sincere. In years to come there will be optional celibacy and I will marry my partner. We have true love between us.

      CC

      Delete
    6. Optional celibacy is not going to happen. You will cause serious damage to your soul through sacrilege. I see your point about love but you can't have both. You knew that before the hands were layed on you and the oaths.

      Delete
    7. Someone mentioned recently that they heard from their priest that Hell's Natiomal anthem was
      I DID IT MY WAY
      Any comment in this - CC - and others??
      Carter

      Delete
  8. As a seminarian currently at St. Patrick's College in Maynooth, I can confirm that a sub-culture of any kind may that be gay or whatever, does not exist within Maynooth. Unfortunately like any situation you have those few that make assumptions about others within a certain place. Go crazy with it and write articles, letters and feed the big bad wolf which of course we all know is the media. This then creates a fake story and makes a big issue of which in fact does nothing other than cause damage for other seminarians and of course the church! Though whatever floats their boat I suppose! They usually end up getting caught up in their own mouse traps anyway whilst trying to eat their own cheese and this has been most evidentiary of most recently (I say no more). A guys sexuality is not and should not be an issue for his formation. Fella's are called to be celibate and if this is the case that they can follow through with this then it doesn't matter if they are black, white gay or straight. I think the quote "BOOT THEM OUT" is a little childish. On Sunday Maynooth will ordain a number of good lads full of energy and strong filled faith to diaconate! They will become men of God. Where is the crisis in this? It's a wonderful thing and this blog should be celebrating that and talking about that instead of putting the rest of us down. I would take heed and not listen or believe everything you read! Even you should know that Pat and that goes for everyone on here. However I can assure you, maynooth is a great place, great staff and the students are a credit to everyone of their dioceses. We aren't perfect but we and I know the staff try their best for us and the church. We don't always get it right. It's called being human. Keep us in your prayers. -Seminarian

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We take you at your word and indeed we should celebrate all the good that happens everywhere.

      My long experience would incline me greatly to disagree with you about how things are. But you are as entitled to your view as I am.

      If you are who you are I wish you well.

      Delete
    2. Lies. Active homosexuals are rampant and their party piece is that they are victims of gossip. Three good men are gone. The cheese which these genuine men ate was the poison of the authorities simply because they told the truth. Authorities always preaching about gossip but it is truth. Jesus can read their hearts, but then again, they don't believe because of the crap theology.

      Delete
    3. Well then, they should learn quite simply! Don't set traps if you are going to stand on them yourself. The atmosphere in Maynooth is very positive since three men who all watched too much Midsomer Murders together and then tried acting it out left. Though I would agree with the saying, you lose some and you win some!!

      Delete
    4. So deluded. Homosexuals should not be in a seminary environment. We have had enough abuse crisis. Ordaining these individuals will lead to more scandals because they have no control of their disordered passions. Only celibate men can be ordained to the priesthood (oh that's so bad because it is not inclusive, maynooths native language is inclusive) Again and again,I repeat - you cannot fool God who can read your hearts.

      Delete
    5. Excuse me "seminarian" or "deacon" who is making these comments, if you are big enough to implicate the three men that have left the seminary recently who are easily identifiable please have the decency to identify yourself. Why are you not able to indentify yourself?

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. ‘Seminarian’ black/white is not comparable to homosexual/heterosexual. Sexuality is in no way comparable to race. Your opinions are not in line with the Church’s thinking on this matter. The Congregation for Catholic Education’s ‘Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders’ makes it clear that : “the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture".” As for your comment ‘A guys sexuality is not and should not be an issue for his formation.’ Are you serious? Why’s the Church in Ireland in such a mess? Child sexual abuse; homosexual priests; priests running off with women... I hope that’s not the ‘formation’ you’re getting in Maynooth!

      Delete
    8. I am pretty sure this "seminarian", who can't even write decent English, is one of the pink crowd. BOOT THEM OUT!! They are damaging further an already tottering Church. Maynooth needs a clearing out of these unsuitable students and the staff members who are fostering/facilitating this dysfunction.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. Just for the record 'Seminarian's' last comment was:

      “Catch.....yourself.....on!! The unsuitable students have already been cleared out as we have heard in this forum this evening. The rest of us can now get on with what we are here to do! I can assure you, I wouldn't label myself as one of the pink crowd. God bless you ;)”

      Sorry ‘Seminarian’ but who are you? You're on here, anonymously making throw away comments about a number of individuals who you claim are 'unsuitable' - Unsuitable how? If you're going to make such accusations, vilifying a small number of easily identifiable persons, at least have the guts to share what you mean, and put your name to it.

      I wonder if you’ll reply this time…and leave it up!

      Delete
    11. "Deacons" should not tell lies Mr Seminarian

      Delete
  9. I am the Mary who sent this blog to Bishop Buckley.

    Maynooth have not dealt with this matter robustly, if you call suspending the whistle blower for 4 to 6 years "in order to grow in maturity".

    Two other seminarian left due to discouragement over this.

    The lad who is guilty is like the one mentioned in this blog - in his fine dining, lacy surplices etc.

    Maynooth has not dealt with this robustly. Anyone who reports homosexual activity is blamed for causing gossip.

    Please do not quote your source as seminarians are living in fear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary, I see no reason to disbelieve you. If I can help those who have had to leave then please let them know I will.

      It is often the best seminarians that are thrown out.

      It is often the best priests who leave.

      Delete
    2. Three model students who would have made fine priests. They had a genuine love for Christ unlike these careerists who appear not to even believe. Jesus can read your hearts boys.

      Delete
    3. If God wants them to be priests they WILL BE

      Delete
  10. No independent panel like maynooth claim only a kangaroo court

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe you. I was offered a kangaroo court myself.

      Delete
    2. PS: I called it - Indicting the Devil and holding the court in Hell.

      Delete
  11. It is sad now that these people have tarnished the Holy name of priesthood so much so that people automatically think that a lad who is going to study for the priesthood is gay. Why are these men using seminaries as a hideout. It is not as if it is unacceptable in society these days. Same corrupt staff in maynooth for too long. Only one good priest there and they all hate him because he speaks the truth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous. The problem is not the staff being in Maynooth for too long. I graduated from St Pat's 5 years ago. There's hardly anyone still there from when I left.

      Delete
    2. Who says gay men are hiding out in seminaries? Are you saying that a gay celibate man should not be a priest? We have no reason to think they are not celibate. Pat has conceded himself there is no evidence that they are non celibate.

      Delete
  12. Ladies and Gentlemen: Please, let us agree about one thing. Celibacy is a dysfunctional, mandated requirement that damages good willed young men for life, leading to a life that is lacking in healthy integration and is often compensated for by all sorts of dysfunctional behaviours - be they secret sexual outlets, interest in the peripherals of clerical and church life, or just plain oddness. Much of what is being discussed here about Maynooth fits in to these categories.

    I cannot see one single credible argument for the continued imposition of this requirement on young men who come forward for priesthood. Some, a very few, will have a vocation to the celibate life, but they are few and far between. Please spare me all the pious shite about sacrifice, witness, availability, it being normative because Jesus was unmarried (how do we know for sure ?) and especially the waffle I hear from priests about the joy and privilege of being called to such a celibate life. The more I hear that from a priest, the more I know that on the quiet he is living a life that is completely out of sync with the celibate life he is professing to live.

    I am sure that in years to come the Church will have to answer for it's hobbling and damaging of so many priests by this requirement. Indeed, I would go as far as to claim that it is in itself a form of abuse on the part of the Church, and just as the Church has had to accept vicarious liability for abuse done by priests on children and vulnerable people, in its turn the Church will be found guilty of vicarious liability for the harm it has done to its own priests. Watch that space, it will happen, and the secular courts will side with those whose lives have been damaged.

    Celibacy for the vast majority of priests does them damage. That damage is passed on to the Church and to the people.

    It is time for this to stop. I just don't understand why it hasn't already.

    (Yes, I am a priest myself and I fully understand the damage that celibacy has done to me. It is not a joy and privilege, but a shackle that has hobbled me and made life very difficult. I have had to navigate my way through this idiocy to some equilibrium, but I wish I had not had to spend so much time and energy on doing so. Shame on the Church that has done this to me and so many good men.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No Pat. Just because it didn't suit you, it does not make it bad. Your last comment is totally unsubstantiated. It is easy to say that celibacy does damage to the vast majority of priest. Where is the evidence Pat? You have none.

      Delete
    2. Anon. The Church has done nothing to you. You CHOSE celibacy. You took the oath and you knew what you are doing. If you felt it was doing damage then you should have left the church as you clearly weren't called to the priesthood. You have chosen to stay. So you can't really complain and blame the church because you knew the cost and made the choice and then refused your own inclinations to leave, even though you knew it was causing you damage. I feel you may only have yourself to blame if you felt you hadn't been called but stayed in the priesthood anyway.

      Delete
    3. That was not Pat

      Delete
    4. They think I wrote your comment :-) Talk about denial !

      Delete
    5. Yeah it was pat. Deffo!

      Delete
    6. MourneManMichael4 June 2016 at 02:06

      Have re-read this a few times before commenting.
      On balance, it's an intelligent insightful analysis, most of which I can agree, other than that I do not think any potential future 'court cases' will adjudge against the RC church's requirement of celibacy. The view will be taken that clerics, before and after ordination, will have had sufficient exit avenues from that imposition.
      So I am in agreement with most of the comment, both in the inappropriatness of the celibacy imposition, and with respect to its inevitable abandonment, the latter, both from a practical necessity, and, more relevantly, from its irrelevance in relation to Christ's views as recorded in the New Testament.
      MMM

      Delete
  13. Yes, they probably are poor priests sitting in their lonely presbytery in front of a computer looking at porn and pleasuring themselves ! Talk about denial ! I'm the Anon who wrote at 1942 and let me tell you, I know about priests and what they get up to. And the more they protest, the more they are up to stuff that proves what I am saying. I despair !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well we certainly know what you get up to - Anon Priest at 19:42 and 21:00. Another pathetic whinger blaming celibacy for his sad little life. Why don't you go and actually GET a life? Celibacy is a convenient scapegoat.

      These guys would be STILL posting their mickeys on Grindr and bed-hopping if celibacy was abolished tomorrow. They are PROMISCUOUS and their lifestyles cannot be reconciled with Christian Faith. They should repent or get out of the priesthood. If they are seminarians, they should be expelled from the seminary.

      Delete
    2. Pat. I thought you did not allow personal and abusive comments on your blog. I believed this applied to everyone. Not just when you feel they are directed toward you.

      This is an ugly comment again Anonymous 21:00. it is not worthy of Christian discussion.

      Ironically, it is bizarre that if this person truly believes what they say, that they would be on this blog in the first place.

      But it is nasty and ugly language and abusive to Anonymous 21:00. I'm guessing you don't like abuse targeted at yourself- why would you approve it when it is directed at someone else.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 22:45 - did you read what your poor "victim" of this "abuse" wrote at 21:00? Here's what he/she/it said: "Yes, they probably are poor priests sitting in their lonely presbytery in front of a computer looking at porn and pleasuring themselves ! Talk about denial ! I'm the Anon who wrote at 1942 and let me tell you, I know about priests and what they get up to. And the more they protest, the more they are up to stuff that proves what I am saying. I despair".

      Would you ever get over yourself? Your "victim" is well able to dish out "ugly" and "abusive".

      These practicing homosexual priests and seminarians need to be ejected from the ministry and from the seminary. If you or they find that "abusive" - too bad!! Now get the hell's gates out of the priesthood and Maynooth. Go and join the circus or a theatre troupe where you can all dress up and mince to your hearts' content.

      Delete
  14. Oh, trust me, I am quite capable of taking the abuse ! I'm the Anon from 19:42 and 21:00 who is the target of it. It's what I expect of people who know that I am speaking the truth about most 'celibate' clergy. They just don't like it up 'em, as Corporal Jones used to say ! The closer you get to the truth about them, the more they hit back in a nasty way.

    The truth, as I see it, is that this dysfunction has to stop. Clergy are harmed by it, the Church at large is harmed by it. There is no use trying to do a King Canute and hold back the waters, the truth, about this.

    D & C, indeed the Church is Ireland North and South, is not unusual in its dysfunction. It is probably worse in many other parts of the world. Imagine what it's like in Africa, where clergy are still treated as if they are special, and the clerical life is a career opportunity. There is a real, enduring, problem, people ! Wake up and smell the coffee !

    Oh, now, how I would like to see what presbytery broadband usage is actually used for ! There are ways of checking, you know ! And, if it was made public, let me tell you everything I have been saying would be seen to be true.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What a load of unsubstantiated nonsense!

    ReplyDelete
  16. the level of discussion on this page is so abysmal that every contributor is ashamed to write his or her name -- and this includes myself!

    Gay young men will be gay young men, and a collar or cassock won't change that basic datum. Get over it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. [As I have a long response, this is the first of several posts: see replies]

    Pat, with the greatest of respect, I don't really understand your position, here.

    There are two different issues. Let's take the first. The issue of kneeling or not kneeling.

    I haven't read Sacrosanctum Concilium in quite a while, but my understanding is that both forms of receiving the Eucharist are permissible: it is adiaphora, i.e. a thing indifferent. Both can be done with propriety. It is certainly not against the Magisterium of the church for seminarians, or anyone for that matter, to receive the Eucharist in a standing position (which remember, has different gradations of authority: ordinary and extraordinary). The same, of course, cuts the other way. But it doesn't mean that the seminary's decision to forbid students kneeling to receive the Eucharist is in breach of the Magisterium of the church. Put it this way: if one communicant receives the Eucharist kneeling, one standing, they are both following forms that are perfectly acceptable as far as liturgical norms after Vatican II (if one wants to define the Magisterium as something that was fatally ruptured c.1961-5, then of course, I'm afraid that's a whole different sedevacantist ball game). What WOULD be against the Magisterium would be if one communicant wished to receive the Eucharist as a sign of God's presence, i.e. consubstantiation, rather than as the Real Presence (I note this is one of the allegations so I will return to it).

    In short, both kneeling and standing are liturgically orthodox. However, the seminary authorities are perfectly within their right to request and indeed prohibit kneeling where they see fit. That is an issue of "discipline" (I am using the term in an ecclesiastical, rather than general sense). I would completely disagree with them in their approach, and would wish them to allow a more flexible attitude to something which is 'indifferent', but the nature of an indifferent liturgical norm means that those responsible for liturgy - the seminary's rector etc. - are allowed to make a judgement call. The issue, in other words, is a dispute - one I think the seminary have handled badly by alienated students who wish to kneel, but it's not uncommon for different liturgies to treat such issues at their discretion, and seminarians are called to obedience. Not blind obedience, but obedience nonetheless. It's a dispute that with clearer heads on both sides might have reached a resolution (especially if the stupid and ignorant labels 'conservative' and 'liberal' are dropped, and more especially when the actual nature of what the Magisterium is entailed).

    ReplyDelete

  18. A follow up point. You mention heterodox theology: denials of the Real Presence, and the divinity of Christ. To further illustrate my point above, these *are* clearly in breach of the Magisterium, in a way that the liturgical 'discipline' insisted upon at the discretion of the seminary hierarchy is not. Which makes me ponder: are there only a handful of students willing to speak up about this? Are the rest of the young men going through to be ordained happy to swallow denial of the Real Presence and the divinity of Christ? I can speak (with recent experience of seminary in Ireland, the past five years say) that this is not the case. The entire student body would be requesting an audience with the local bishop, or writing to Rome. There are certainly differences of emphasis in how some of the theology/formation staff convey things to how certain students might prefer to have it relayed, and there may even be occasional heretical statements made out of carelessness or ignorance. But for heresy to be heresy, at least according to Aquinas, it has to be persistent, and it has to be consciously chosen (i.e. if I were to accidentally, through my own ignorance, deny a very abstruse theological truth on, say, the nature of the Immaculate Conception, I would not be a heretic; if, in full knowledge that it was against the accepted teachings of the Church, I persisted in doing so even though I knew the true deviation of my thought from the Church's teaching, then I clearly would be a heretic). Some teachers at Maynooth, at seminary's around the world, fathers and mothers in Catholic households - even our Pope - occasionally, it might be believed, can be at fault through ignorance or say something in passing that is not entirely orthodox. One hair's tick does not a heretic make (Aquinas denied the Immaculate Conception, which we consider dogma, and yet is one of our most revered dogmatic theologians; I chose it particularly).

    The second issue I don't want to waste much time on. You are, as far as I am aware, an openly gay man in a relationship with another man, as well as exercising a priestly ministry. It is, I would suggest to you with brotherly correction, uncharitable to judge those young men who are homosexual and yet feel called to serve God. Clearly, the moral theology of the Church, as well as its disciplines of celibacy and so on, prohibit this kind of behaviour... I personally see no problem with being homosexual. In the words of P. Francis, 'who am I to judge?' Let's not cast stones like pharisees. Being gay is itself not a sin. As to promiscuity: humans are fallible, and deserve forgiveness more than judgment.

    I have not left the church - but I am not a communicant. I cannot accept its attitudes on a number of moral fronts, including towards homosexuality. I pray that one day it will become a more open vehicle of love and mercy. Some say it cannot change, which (see my point on Aquinas and Imm. Con., or the fact we celebrate in English as well as Latin), is baloney.

    I believe you are similarly critical of that stance that the Church is unchanging, morally superior, opposed to homosexuality (not just active homosexuality but the - hateful phrase - 'intrinsic evil' of it... eugh. You condemn this as much as I, so why further a homophobic agenda within the Church by writing this way, Pat? Why cast stones like a pharisee?

    - former Irish seminarian

    ReplyDelete