Monday, 5 September 2016

MAYNOOTH - CATHOLIC PRIESTHOOD IN MELTDOWN

CATHOLIC PRIESTHOOD IN MELTDOWN




THE ONE THING that the recent scandals in Maynooth and the priesthood in general is telling us is that the current model Catholic Priesthood is failing and in meltdown.

This is shown by:

1. The declining number of seminarians.

2. The poor intellectual, moral and spiritual fibre of current seminarians

3. The declining number of priests.

4. The evolution of the priesthood into a mainly sexually active gay profession.

Of course I am not saying that everything in the past was well. Far from it! The BRENDAN SMITH'S of the Church were born in the 1920's and 1930's and were hidden abusers from the 1940's onwards. 

CARDINAL KEITH O'BRIEN who sexually seduced seminarians and priests - even in the confessional was born in 1938. 

I believe the whole rot in the priesthood - past and present can be traced back to TWO big sources - the Catholic Church's medieval approach to human sexuality and the imposition of obligatory celibacy.

MEDIEVAL SEXUALITY:

When you strip away all the theological niceties the Catholic Church HATES the human body, human genitalia, human sexuality, women, penises and vaginas!

It talks in an anally retentive way about the body being a "Temple of the Holy Spirit". But by this it means the human virginal, chaste and non sexual body. 

The Catholic Church has a major hang up about VIRGINITY and what it thinks of as CHASTITY.

The only woman the Catholic Church really likes is MARY - and it loves her not because she was a woman or the mother of Jesus but because she was a VIRGINNNNNNNNNNNN.

All of us grew up as sexually repressed Catholics - and that sexual oppression was forced upon us by popes, bishops, priests and nuns.

And all of those popes, bishops, priests and nuns were sexually repressed people who either became obsessively frustrated and angry or who coped by having illicit affairs, masturbating, drinking, beating or abusing children, being on permanent power trips or going ga ga in so many ways. 




As one priest said to me on one occasion: "PAT, THEY WOULDN'T LET US GET RID OF OUR SEMEN AND IT WENT TO OUR HEADS AND MADE US FUCKING MAD".

The only cure for this - and the only hope for a healthy renewed priesthood - is a complete reform of Catholic thinking on sexuality that takes us from the Middle Ages into the 21st century.

OBLIGATORY CELIBACY:

Celibacy is a charism and a gift for the small number of people who are called to it.

For most other people - men and women it is a THUNDEROUS DISASTER.

If you are forced to keep your sexuality repressed you are creating a monster that will eventually emerge from the deep with catastrophic results.

Seminarians and priests on GRINDR as the result of universally imposed celibacy.

Seminarians and priests using men, women and children for illicit sexual gratification is the result of universally imposed celibacy. 

Seminarian staff members questioning seminarians about their erections and wet dreams is the result of a universally imposed celibacy.

SEX has been the Catholic Church's clarion call for centuries.

SEX has been, is and will be the Catholic Church's UNDOING!


The more intelligent young men in today's society would not go near a seminary or the priesthood with a barge pole.

The candidate's currently being accepted into seminary would not have been accepted in the past. They are being accepted now because there are no others.

In a recent texting conversation with Deacon Michael GORGEOUS Byrne he spelt faggot as "faggit".




See what I mean?

PAT'S BOOK ON SPIRITUALITY AND SEXUALITY:

In 2005 I published a book on the intimate connection between spirituality and sexuality. For anyone interested it is still available on AMAZON and can be downloaded on KINDLE.



I addressed the above topics at much greater length.



MOTHER TERESA:

I have never liked Mother Teresa who was canonised in Rome yesterday.

I have not liked her for the following reasons:

1. She practised mindless obedience to the corrupt powers in Rome.

2. She idolised Pope John Paul 11 who I regard as one of the greatest religious con men in the Catholic Church's history.

3. She canonised the notions of suffering and death to the point where she believed there was a value in suffering that could be solved and relieved.

4. She hobnobbed with vicious world dictators and took hospitality from them that included rides in their helicopters and private planes - houses, helicopters and planes that were acquired mainly by the oppression of the poor.

5. Even up until yesterday in Rome she provides "cover" for the corrupt Church that will make millions and millions of pounds out of Mother Teresa medals, books, relics etc etc.

I find myself in agreement with much of what Christopher Hitchens says about her in his book: THE MISSIONARY POSITION.




FIRST COMMENT MAKER BELOW: Recommends another book exposing the wrongfulness of Mother Teresa's "spirituality" by one of her nuns. Will be buying it:

HOPE ENDURES - LEAVING MOTHER TERESA - LOSING FAITH AND SEARCHING FOR MEANING.

I'm afraid Mother Teresa is another victim of the Catholic Church's PERVERTED theology who went on to make other victims !!!!




THOUGHT FOR TODAY:




TODAY'S POEM:

The Touch of the Masters Hand




Twas battered and scarred, and the auctioneer
thought it scarcely worth his while to waste much time on the old violin,
but held it up with a smile; "What am I bidden, good folks," he cried,
"Who'll start the bidding for me?" "A dollar, a dollar"; then two!" "Only
two? Two dollars, and who'll make it three? Three dollars, once; three
dollars twice; going for three.." But no, from the room, far back, a
gray-haired man came forward and picked up the bow; Then, wiping the dust
from the old violin, and tightening the loose strings, he played a melody
pure and sweet as caroling angel sings.

The music ceased, and the auctioneer, with a voice that was quiet and low,
said; "What am I bid for the old violin?" And he held it up with the bow.
A thousand dollars, and who'll make it two? Two thousand! And who'll make
it three? Three thousand, once, three thousand, twice, and going and
gone," said he. The people cheered, but some of them cried, "We do not
quite understnad what changed its worth." Swift came the reply: "The touch
of a master's hand."

And many a man with life out of tune, and battered and scarred with sin,
Is auctioned cheap to the thoughtless crowd, much like the old violin, A
"mess of pottage," a glass of wine; a game - and he travels on. "He is
going" once, and "going twice, He's going and almost gone." But the Master
comes, and the foolish crowd never can quite understand the worth of a soul
and the change that's wrought by the touch of the Master's hand.
Myra 'Brooks' Welch

CONGRATULATIONS TO GEORGE AND EILEEN MARRIED IN THE ORATORY, LARNE

"Love is for the young at heart as well as for the young"



47 comments:

  1. According to Hope Endures by a former nun from Mother Teresa's order, The Missionaries of Charity, Collete Livermore, the order though it had sufficient money donated to it for the purpose of buying books to help with the medical work this was not done (page 115). As a result, the health of the sisters was at risk. The book explains how the nuns were not provided with medical advice, the use of mosquito repellents, information about malaria and vaccinations (page 115). It attributes this to the idea that God would look after the nuns.
    The book recounts how Colette, then called Sister Tobit, got into trouble with the order for helping a man with dysentery who was in danger of dying (page 163). The order cared more about obedience than doing the right thing. Mother Teresa declared according to page 168, that she recognised 1 Peter 2:18-23 as being correct. This text ordered slaves to obey their masters even if they were abusive and difficult. It said that it is great to be beaten for doing wrong when one is innocent and that such patience pleases God. Peter also says that this has to be the right attitude for Jesus gave us an example to follow. Mother Teresa used this text to urge her nuns to obey superiors without question (page 168). Sister Tobit decided to leave the order. She didn't like the way she was expected to let the poor suffer rather than disobey orders and she made that clear to Mother Teresa (page 172). Mother Teresa was "not sympathetic" and told Tobit that her feelings were sourced in temptation and pride (page 172). In other words, Tobit was bad for seeing sense. Mother was judging her despite forbidding Tobit to judge those who acted as dictators in the order over her (page 224).

    Later Colette recounted the tale of what happened in Manila when she tried to help a sick boy called Alex. Sister Valerie who was in charge of her forbade her to help him though Colette told her there was no reason why they couldn't.

    Mother Teresa wouldn't let the nuns have a washing machine (page 194). This forced the nuns to wash the underwear of the incontinent with brushes. The order was more concerned about inflicting hardship on the nuns than on helping the sick. A washing machine would have freed up their time to help people. Mother was definitely misusing the funds so kindly donated to her from all over the world. It was the struggle to help not the helping that mattered in her Christian philosophy.

    Sister Tobit applied for a dispensation from her vows (page 224) because she was expected to do things like sending dying children away when commanded to do so and because she was not allowed to have a mind of her own. She wrote that she felt that "the order whose raison detre was to show compassion, chronically failed to do so, both to its own members and to the poor." "The Society demanded that I have no mind of my own and censored everything I read, a form of brainwashing that almost turned me into an automaton". These quotes can be read on page 224. On page 213 we read that Mother Teresa held that if an event happened, it was either willed by God or allowed by him to happen. We read that it led her to conclude that what the religious superior commands is either willed by God or at least allowed by him to be made meaning the commands no matter how silly or harsh they are are from God's authority. To disobey them is to disobey God.

    When Tobit came Colette again she began to suspect that the gospel commands given by Christ to give to all who ask and thought that attempts to love unconditionally and forgive unconditionally really made one a doormat (page 287).

    The book proves that Mother Teresa cannot be called a good woman. It proves that living the gospels properly is bad for you. The Missionaries of Charity experienced the damaging power of the gospels and yet they lived their lives as an example to those who they helped and those who knew them - ultimately to see them take on the same torments. Some charity

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for such a thorough and thought provoking comment.

      I had not heard of HOPE ENDURES and have just purchased it from Amazon.

      Delete
    2. I echo Pat's thanks. Colette's writings just confirms my views of most religious zealots.Thanks for sharing the insights.
      MMM

      Delete
  2. Those who sit in their 1st-world armchairs and criticise Mother Teresa, a woman who gave her entire life to helping the poor by following the teachings of Jesus (even if some aspects of her methods were not too pleasing to modern eyes), do absolutely nothing to discredit the saint, but instead they show up the envy and heartlessness in their own bankrupt souls
    Curious cat

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We are entitled to question the theologies and spiritualities of anyone - even one who is a money making saint for the RC regime.

      I have no doubt that Mother Teresa was sincere in her beliefs.

      So were the thousands of those who engaged in self flagalation as part of their spirituality.

      To me there is enough "cross" in daily living without inventing crosses that may be as much about neurosis as spirituality.

      Delete
    2. Excellant reply to CC Pat.
      MMM

      Delete
  3. Pat, I read your blog every lunch time at work and want to thank you for all that you have, are and will do, you are certainly not the bogey man that the clergy of Down and Connor paint you as.
    This post claims that the current seminarians lack intellectual, moral and spiritual fibre, I was, not so long ago, a seminarian and can assure you that the current seminarians are far from lacking in intellectual fibre, and many are full of moral and spiritual fibre, at least that which is either charismatic or Tridentine, two clear camps in the Wing and Maynooth. I can honestly say that when I was in seminary there was nothing untoward going on, but to be fair the Wing is so small people don’t get away with much, which makes the situation between two seminarians in the Wing all the more surprising, to be fair though there was no way the two Samarians were not going to get caught,
    I can’t speak for Maynooth, but I cannot have more respect for the formation team in the Wing especially the rector and Director of Formation, you couldn’t find two men more suited to their roles. I never once had a problem in the Wing, the viciousness started after I left seminary and came out. To be fair though, I was once called “the biggest papist in seminary” due to my devotion to the church, which in a sense I worshipped instead of God.
    A few months after I left seminary, I finally realised that I could not continue lying to the world, I was gay and I had to accept that, so given my devotion to the Church I turned to priests that I trusted for help, that was the worst decision I ever made. Instead of compassion and respect, I was treated like something they stood in. I will never forget what they said to me.
    1. Nothing good could ever come from my coming out.
    2. The only way I could be happy and get to heaven is to live alone for the rest of my life, what people don’t know can’t hurt them.
    3. I was buying into secularism, hook line and sinker.
    4. If I stopped coming out I could return to seminary and no questions would be asked.
    5. Homosexuals cannot love the same way heterosexuals can, as we are leading others into mortal sin and by doing that we are only thinking about ourselves, the best we can achieve is Philia, friendship love.
    After this my world crumbled around me, I was rejected by the church that I was so devoted to and indeed by so called Christians who when I was in seminary had put me on a pedestal, and being so sexually repressed I couldn’t deal with my coming out so I suffered a break down. In all honesty the breakdown was perhaps the best thing that ever happened to me, by destroying my world I had to rebuild it in the real world without the church. I am stronger now than I ever was before and my life is going very well, but I had to go through hell to get here and in a way I blame the Church for it all. So you are dead on with the claim that celibacy is a thunderous disaster.
    In rebuilding my life I had to reconcile my faith and sexuality, two major facets that make me up. In doing so I had to look at the so called homophobic scripture verses in their original languages and political, cultural and religious contexts, and found that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality it is dealing with temple prostitution etc that St. Paul and others were facing in spreading the Gospel, it also clearly showed that Ruth and Naomi as well as David and Jonathan were in homosexual relationships with one another. There is not enough room here to go into anything.
    I have found in my relationsips that the church has managed to get into my mind and so I have to fight that and continue my relationships, and I am all the better for doing that.
    I would truly state with conviction that the Catholic Church is psychologically abusing countless numbers of people, and even more with seminarians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Wing indeed is very small and so it can be easy to put 2 + 2 together. If the above guy (@13:47) is who I think it is, he had/has MAJOR ISSUES and it is simply disingenuous for him to "blame the Church". Not "all there" as they say.

      Delete
    2. You are talking through your hat. There is NO evidence to suggest Jonathan and David, Ruth and Naomi, were "lovers" in that sense.

      And, by the way, heterosexuals or homosexual, no one "leads" another into mortal sin. Mortal sin is something we do all by ourselves. It requires full knowledge, freedom and consent - otherwise it is not a mortal sin and, in fact, may not be a sin at all.

      Everyone, before God is responsible only for his/her own actions - no one else's. No one is condemned for the sins of another - only for our own.

      Delete
  4. You made a glaring grammatical mistake in your addition of an apostrophe before the s in this sentence, 'The candidate's currently being accepted' before going to savage the learning and spelling of the typical Maynooth candidate. Aside from that, totally agree with you.God created a person with a penis or vagina, not so that they could then reject that part of his creation but to use it to show love with/procreate with. To impose celibacy is nonsense and despicable as it rejects one of the most powerful urges God has created one with.Celibacy, aside from saving the church money on pensions, on inheritance disputes, ensures that the priest has very few people to rely on come a problem and makes him a eunuch whose only ties lie within the Church and few places else. In the past, his celibacy might have strengthened his magic but now such nonsense is no longer needed, if it ever had been. Finally, one question. A penis and set of bollocks is needed if one wants to reproduce. Are we made in God's image? What does God use his downstairs equipment for in such a case?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And of course Jesus, who was fully human, had the same body parts we all have.

      Delete
  5. I do apologise 14:17, it would be wonderful to be perfect like you. The s was a simple mistake in typing this post, it was certainly not a sign of a lack of learning as my grammar is usually perfect, but we fallible people do make mistakes, it is rather odd that given the depth of that post you focused on one grammatical error. Perhaps you are uncomfortable with the verbal and psychological abuse that the RCC subject those that stand outside of their perfect view of the world, you would clearly understand a perfect view of the world given your focus on one simple error.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you think your grammar is "perfect" then, on the basis of your writing here, thus far, I respectfully suggest you go back to school - or go to English Language night classes!

      Delete
    2. This blog is not reserved to people who have perfect English.

      Delete
    3. True Pat - but basic punctuation and decent spelling are helpful in making one's points understood.

      Delete
  6. Very well said curious cat!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was commenting on Fr Pat's blog, not a comment by yet another Anonymous.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A few thoughts on today's blog -

    1. The former seminarian writing at 13:47 this afternoon, proves your point, Pat, about the educational standard of quite a few seminarians today. They can barely write and express themselves in intelligible English.

    2. In my experience, as an ex-seminarian also, some seminarians had obvious psychological and personal problems - including sexual orientation issues - when they entered seminary. They didn't of course go away in the seminary - au contraire.

    The next thing you know - they leave (often an acrimonious parting) and, all of a sudden, they get an "enlightenment" that ALL their problems were caused by the Big Bad Church.

    3. Sailor Boy, pictured above, is a case in point dim wit. I hope, Pat, you are sending his texts to the Archbishop of Dublin. No doubt it has been/is - a riveting exchange!

    That this young man has not been expelled from the seminary - and the procedure for his dismissal from the clerical state begun - is a shocking scandal in itself.

    4. Hitchens' criticisms of St Teresa of Calcutta have been well answered by many more qualified persons than I and they are available online, for those interested in a more balanced and objective view, of the new saint's life and work.

    Mother Teresa is a saint, not because she always made the right decisions, only associated with "approved" persons, etc. She undoubtedly made many mistakes, errors of judgement and committed sins. She could be very stubborn and wilful. She is like every other mere mortal. She was hard on herself and on others.

    Nevertheless, she is a saint because she persevered in the Grace of God and cooperated with that Grace to a heroic degree. She, like all the saints, is an example of someone who lived the Gospel in a radical way. She made a difference to an incalculable number of people.

    Despite her shortcomings, she sought to treat the most destitute and abandoned with the dignity they deserved as children of God. She was working against impossible odds - but work she did - nonetheless!

    5. Colette Livermore isn't the first - and won't be the last - disgruntled nun or priest to write such a memoir. One thing is certain - there are many other sides to the tales she tells. There are also many, many, women who have found their true vocation and the fulfilment of their lives as Missionaries of Charity - including a former atheist - who almost perished in the World Trade Center, on 9/11.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really appreciate all the points you made.

      I think its a pity to write off Collette Livermore as merely disgruntled.

      Since she left the convent she has trained as a doctor and now works free of charge in the Third World.

      She may indeed be one of those "unknown" and unacclaimed saints?

      Delete
    2. Point taken, Pat. I didn't know that about her.

      Delete
  9. By St. Brigid of Sweden (made Patron of Europe by Pope John Paul II)
    “…..that pope who were to go against the aforementioned pre-ordinance and will of God and concede to priests such a license to contract marriage……would be totally deprived by God of his spiritual sight and hearing, and of his spiritual words and deeds. All his spiritual wisdom would grow completely cold; and finally, after his death, his soul would be cast out to be tortured eternally in hell so that there it might become the food of demons everlastingly and without end. Yes, even if Saint Gregory the Pope had made this statute, in the aforesaid sentence he would never have obtained mercy from God if he had not humbly revoked his statute before his death.”
    The Temple priests who dealt with animal sacrifice had to abstain from relations with their wives during their turns of duty, hardly surprising then that celibacy is required of priests if we actually believe in the Real Presence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you actually saying that a married priest making love to his wife in the Sacrament of Marriage becomes too defiled to celebrate the Eucharist?

      Delete
    2. I'm not saying anything but the OT and Saint Brigid certainly did say things on this subject and they certainly don't seem to support your position.

      Delete
  10. RC Priesthood is gone beyond repair because the model of church has lost sight of prayer spirituality and God. It is all about ticking the boxes and disgruntled clerics boo hooing and trying to compensate for the fact they have signed up to celibacy. They try and do what they like using what I believe is a misguided logic of occult compensation. Pat you have the Sacraments and the Oratory. The possibility of growth is there. People need to act as well as talk and think

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True - and I have Tried to act as well as talk for 30 years in The Oratory.

      At The Oratory we try to practise a compassion based Christianity / Catholicism rather than a can law based one - and it has made ALL the difference.

      Delete
    2. Pat,

      Compassion is what is central to a relationship with God. But I have to ask you. Is sexual immorality a sin? Not according to you, or to the Church, or to anyone in this earth, but according to Christ, His Father and the Holy Spirit.

      Delete
  11. I am not doubting you Pat it's a pity more people don't respond with their feet as well as their mouths or typing fingers

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have to commend the contribution at 16.03! Brilliantly written, pertinent points - well done!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Celibacy is the issue they keep ignoring. Importing priests seems to be their present solution. I can't see that as a long term solution. Just look at the recent appointments in Elphin:


    Bishop Kevin Doran has announced the following diocesan appointments:

    Very Rev Canon Eugene McLoughlin, who is retiring as PP VF of Roscommon, to be Administrator Athleague and Fuerty

    Very Rev John Cullen, PP Kiltoom to be PP Roscommon

    Rev Michael McManus CC Athlone (Drum), to be PP Kiltoom

    Rev Kazimierz Wrobel (Archdiocese of Katowice, Poland), CC Athleague and Fuerty to be CC Athlone (Drum)

    Very Rev Canon Joseph Fitzgerald PP is retiring as PP Castlerea. He will reside in Ballygar and join the parish team at Sacred Heart Parish, Roscommon

    Very Rev John McManus, PP Kilgefin (Ballyleague) to be PP Castlerea

    Rev Dusmanta Mahanyak (Archdiocese of Cuttack Bhubaneswar, India), CC St. Mary’s, Sligo, to be Administrator Kilgefin (Ballyleague)

    Rev Julian Lupot (Diocese of Tagbilaran, Philippines), to be CC St. Mary’s, Sligo

    Rev John Gannon (Archdiocese of Johannesburg), to be PP Tulsk, which became vacant on the death of Monsignor Austin McKeon

    Rev Tomasz Grzegorzewski SDB is taking sabbatical leave and has resigned as PP of Aughrim and Kilmore

    Rev Stephen Ezenwegbu (Diocese of Awka, Nigeria), to be Administrator of Aughrim and Kilmore

    It sounds more like the UN than a very rural diocese. Maybe that's no bad thing and good luck to them but I wonder about context and enculturation etc. It's one thing sending a priest to one's own compatriots in a large urban centre like London, New York or even Dublin, but a tiny rural diocese with a very defined culture? I would have thought even a Dubliner might take time to find his feet in rural Sligo or Roscommon with its own nuances. Even language and accent in Ireland varies quite a bit so that must pose difficulties for both foreign priests and parishioners. I suppose we just have to move with the times and recognise that even globalisation is a Church phenomenon also and we must welcome diversity. However, I wonder how those former priests in Elphin who in good conscience chose marriage feel who find themselves no longer worthy to offer their priesthood for their local communities? They are looked upon as Judases by many. Very sad.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 18.15 I can't disagree. Elphin was my old diocese. I am amazed to see the amount of imported priests. While I wish them well this is not the ideal solution. I know I would not like to live in an Irish diocese as a laicised priest I,d feel stifled. I'm not sure what compromise my former colleagues came to.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jesus is the answer

    ReplyDelete
  16. Maybe they should give celibacy a try. Obviously, no one celibate, except perhaps the elderly, otherwise there would not be these neverending sex scandals

    ReplyDelete
  17. I find the current church so pointless. I have enroled in a programme this week to mentor young prisoners and about to be offenders to become real men and go on to to be good citizens in London. This is my catholic mission. And my good deed.
    The irish catholic church is irrelevant. They are a bunch of self centred faries who could not give a flying fuck about anyone other than them selves.

    Rasputin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a very mature comment and attitude, Rasputin.

      Well done on the young prisoners though.

      Maybe the experience will help you grow up a little and leave behind some of the adolescent "He-man", self-righteous bullshit you go on with here.

      Despite the goons who receive all the attention on this website, there are still plenty of committed priests, religious and laity, in the Catholic Church, who make what you have enrolled in, their life's work.

      Delete
  18. Livermore finally left in 1984 and followed her first calling, to become a doctor. She now works as a general practitioner in Gosford, NSW.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Quote: "My dislike of the venerable Mother crystallised in the ’70s. Our popular ‘Divinity’ professor, a young Australian nun, announced her intention of leaving Loreto College, my alma mater and Mother Teresa’s original teaching order, to join the Missionaries of Charity. Appalled, I argued, “Are you crazy? You are young, intelligent with such an impact on your students. How can you possibly join Mother Teresa? She forces her nuns to stop thinking. You’d have to put your brains on hold, swear blind obedience. You’d mortgage your intelligence, your intellect? For what? To mop floors? Anyone can do that. Why should you?’

    “I’m not giving up my freedom,” my sister-teacher replied, gently. “I’m choosing to obey, to abandon pride and ego for humility. It’s what I want to do with my life.” And she walked into what we thought of as a prison and stayed there till the end of her days."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Salvation is not earned. It has been won by Christ. What we do we do out of gratitude. We are not paying off a heavenly account or proving a point. We live in the tension of Hegel's Dialectic. We cho

      Delete
    2. We choose to be who we are because we are thankful for what God has given us. The Christian response is to share of what we have been given

      Delete
  20. Just to add something to the Mother Teresa debate. The worst thing she ever did was to hoard up millions while her nuns were forced to use the same syringe over and over again on the patients. I have googled and there is no refutation of that at all. We need hard evidence to refute such a terrible deed. The excuse that they were doing all they could do under the circumstances is just an excuse. There is no excuse for spreading disease that way. The believers are blinded by faith. Real faith in God should be based on reality and determination to get rid of bias. Any faith that does not care enough about truth is an idol. As Bonhoeffer said we need to be careful that our religious faith in God does not become an idol. The fundamental problem with idolatry is that it cuts you off the real God if there is one. When a saintly person shows terrible serious flaws you can be sure the God they are a saint for is the one they have created in their heads. Jesus made that very point about the Pharisees.

    It is startling how people on this blog are dismissing Colette Livermore a good woman without reading her book. That is bias pure and simple. As for calling her disgruntled and dishonest that is a biased judgement. Did they walk in her shoes? As for Christopher Hitchens, though he was correct, he should have been a little more methodical in his refutation of Mother Teresa's humanitarianism. But the argument does not depend on Hitchens - there are many testimonies and investigations that support his thesis and those are carried out by people more qualified than those armchair religionists who despise the findings and want them forgotten.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The case against Teresa being truly good is conclusive. This wily Pope can ignore facts if he wants but he cannot make them wrong. And I would ask people what is the best risk to take: "What comes first? Upholding Mothers good name or risking condoning the spiritual and physical suffering she enabled and caused and did? Do the poor matter as much to me as her?!

    ReplyDelete
  22. I am encouraged to see that a few have taken to attacking me ad hominem. I guess if you can't refute me then you have to attack personality. I should like to point out to 17:25 and 16:30 that I am perfectly "all there". A breakdown a number of years ago, in which certain certain clergy of Down and Connor played no small part, does not impact upon the present. These comments should be seen as scandalous to any decent human being and deeply offensive to every reader.
    Indeed I did leave seminary, on pleasant grounds and by my own choice. As I explained in my previous post. I did not experience a sudden enlightenment. I came out and accepted my God given sexuality and turned to the clergy for advice, however, I instead vicious bile, some of which I quoted in the previous post. It was a deeply hurtful experience to be rejected by the church in which I planned to dedicate my life simply because I didn't fit into their strict binary. Indeed I did speak out against the corruption and lies of the Roman Church, but let's face it I'm hardly the only one.
    17;47, I agree with you, but as I pointed out, it seems not everyone in Down and Connor agrees. The scriptures are clear that David and Naomi were lovers, try reading scripture more often. The scriptures say: "...the soul of Jonathan was bound to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul...Then Jonathan made a covenant with David, because he loved him as his own soul, Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that he was wearing and gave it to David, and his armour, and even his sword and his bow and his belt." (1 Sam 18:1-4). It goes on to say: "Greatly beloved were you to me me; your love to me was wonderful passing the love of women." (2 Sam 1:27). Have you ever heard a heterosexual man who was so close to another that his soul was bound to another, and say that he loves a man more than women?
    Now as for Ruth and Naomi, scripture states that Ruth and Naomi shared the same love for each other as Adam and Eve: "Ruth clung to Naomi."(Ruth 1:1-18). The Hebrew word for clung is "dabaq", this is precisely the same word used in Genesis 2:24 to describe how Adam and felt for Eve.
    These comments only fuels me on to continue as I am, I am indeed "all there" despite what the attack on my character may claim. Yes I have gone through hell in the past, but I have come through it stronger and better than ever before. I am proud to be gay, I am proud of what I have come through and the strength I have shown in surviving it, and I am proud that I can think for myself. If people have an issue with who and what I am, that's their issue and I pity their mentality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As you said previously, the Wing is small. You were your own worst enemy. It would be interesting to hear the priests' version of events - not that we ever will. Stop blaming your own neuroses on everyone else. Deal with them and get a life. Take some responsibility for a change.

      Delete
    2. I hold those clergy of D&C responsible for their contribution. Obviously other difficult times in my life also contributed, particularly the struggle in accepting my sexuality, but i will continue to hold those clergy responsible for their contribution. As for getting a life, I now have a wonderful life and couldn't be happier.

      Delete
  23. i only know of two 'gay' people - One of each. I get on well with them - everyone is friendly with them and our priest also gets on well with them.
    We have to accept people as we find them!
    Who - indeed - are we to judge?
    Pip

    ReplyDelete
  24. I am an old man now and recall that the weekly fodder for the News of the World among others was 'Vicar accused of assaulting choirboy'. It became a cliché for the contents of the less salubrious Sunday papers. These men were able to marry, to carry out clandestine homosexual affairs (though illegal it was ignored so long as no horses were frightened). And of course, more cases are coming to light in the Anglican Church (the notorious Bishop Ball for one) together with accusations of 'cover up's' at the highest levels. So, my question is, why would anyone believe that opening the priesthood to married clergy is going to stop the abuse of position by priests and bishops in the Catholic Church? One further question (very personal so I will certainly understand if it is ignored). Pat, you say that your 5 years as a priest in Belfast were the happiest in your life. Were you sexually continent during that time?
    E.L.

    ReplyDelete