Wednesday, 12 October 2016

MAYNOOTH FAITHFUL DEPARTED




MAYNOOTH'S "FAITHFUL DEPARTED"

We are learning more and more about MAYNOOTH, The Irish Church and the Irish Bishops everyday and are therefore putting together a great big jigsaw puzzle.

The jigsaw puzzle has many colours but it is dominated by many DARK, GLOOMY COLOURS !

Today we take a look at he MAYNOOTH FAITHFUL DEPARTED.

Those who left Maynooth - either broken or unbroken.

And those who Maynooth THREW OVERBOARD !

In the past few days we have heard the names of some highly regarded and good seminarians who were moved on:

Phelim Donnolly.

Shane Paul O'Doherty.

P J McManus.

Michael Quilty.

David Nugent.

Declan Gibson.

Conan McGonagle.

I'm sure there are MANY OTHERS and we would like to know who they are.

It seems that some of these (not all) were what is called in Maynooth - "KNEELERS"



Those who out of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament wanted to kneel at the Consecration of the Mass or to receive Holy Communion.

What in God's name is wrong with that?

When I attend Mass and do not celebrate I like to kneel at the Consecration. We Catholics believe that at the Consecration of the Mass Jesus Christ, the Son of God, becomes REALLY PRESENT on the altar.

What else would I - as a sinner - want to do in the presence of the Living God - except kneel in adoration and submission.

But Maynooth seems to think that it's kneelers are expressing the fact that they are "Right Wing Catholics" or that they are showing some form of disobedience. 

Right wing / fundamentalist seminarians do need to be talked to and asked to explore if their attitude is suitable to 21st Century Christianity.

But just because they kneel in the presence of God is not enough to show that they are fundamentalist or right wing.

The other problem is that seminarians who are disciplined or expelled have NO RIGHT OF APPEAL.



Seminarians and priest should have the automatic RIGHT OF APPEAL to a completely independent body and if their appeal is upheld they should be allowed to continue in their vocation without any harassment.

SOLUTION:

Because the Catholic Church is fundamentally democratically flawed - and because it has had such a hold in Irish Life - I think that the government should introduce legislation that forces the Catholic Church - and all churches and bodies - to have a completely independent Appeal Process.

This process could be used by:

Maynooth seminarians who unjustly dismissed or disciplined.

Priests who are unjustly treated by their bishops.

Parishioners who suffer injustices at the hands of priests or bishops. 

THE HIERARCHY  will never VOLUNTARILY bring in such a process.

The STATE and the CITIZENS should FORCE them to do so.


Imagine - you can be dismissed from Maynooth for kneeling before God


But you will not be dismissed for:


Being in BED with another seminarian or seeking SEX on mobile apps !!!!!!

Many, not all seminarians are VULNERABLE ADULTS.

They are being preyed upon by AUTHORITARIAN SEMINARY STAFF and by SEMINARY CABALS AND GANGS.

Its not only children that can be victims.



-------------------------------------------------------

PAT IN 1985



On Sunday night last I settled down to watch the BBC 2 programme POP GOES NOR'N IRELAND. to watch a review of THE TROUBLES in 1985.

I was more than surprised when the clip (below) appeared talking about my dismissal by Cahal Daly. 

Cahal Daly gave me only TWO REASONS for my dismissal:

1. That I was being critical of the Church in the media.

2. That I was over involved in social projects in the parishes in which I served.





What I was saying in the early and mid 1980's about wrong things happening in the Church and people being held accountable has certainly come to pass. 

Except there is not ENOUGH accountability even yet.

But it is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------

46 comments:

  1. How sad was last night's late contribution at 23.19 by the former seminarian who was 'screwed' by the faculty of Maynooth and - clearly - is very damaged in the years since then. Is it possible to re-post that this morning for today's visitors?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Amazing. You were fired off for being involved in social issues and we make mother Teresa a saint. Shower of gobshites. CoE has a ministry of Ordained Local Ministry in the workplace. In our parish we are seeking new expressions of what it means to be church. We've Started a Bible study course called living on the front line. I E being an active Christian in our current circumstances. I might question why some young clerics choose to dress like a tailors dummy in a Vatican dress shop. However I understand they may be searching for identity and getting fek all beneficial leadership

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was in Maynooth. I saw the strange goings on. I fell victim to them. I was a celibate seminarian who happened to be heterosexual. Rumours abound in that place. All people had to do there was tell a Dean that so-and-so was seen with such-and-such a woman and the dean would go through a series of students asking if there was any truth in the rumour. A lot of the rumours started like this; spread by the deans who made innocent students pariahs from much of the community. In contrast if two seminarians spent vast quantities of time together in their bedrooms that was fine, that's just 'community bonding'. I was told I should be more like a guy in my class who was all into that type of 'community bonding'. In fact I was also told that I should have no friends outside the seminary community and should stop visiting my friends when I was on trips home. All I had done wrong was have friends who were not seminarians, to follow the seminary rules and to live the expected life of celibacy and prayer.

      Any way I had cause to make a complaint. I did so, like many others naive in how Maynooth responds to whistle-blowers. And by god did the dean make my life a living hell. I became nothing but his personal play thing.

      After Maynooth I decided I would complain to the trustees and to the nuncio about Maynooth's 'strange goings on'... and so I add my experience to the Irish Bishops reviewed.

      Papal Nuncio, Charles Brown - multiple letters were sent, none have been replied to, except the occasional acknowledgement of receipt on a few earlier letters.

      Cardinal Brady - attempted to have an investigation but told me he was vetoed by a group of Trustees responsible for Maynooth known as 'The Visitors'.

      Archbishop D. Martin - My complaint was discussed with him by a member of his staff. Almost a decade later there has been no reply.

      Archbishop E. Martin - No response.

      Archbishop Clifford - why did this man even become a priest?

      Archbishop O'Reilly - told me to write to Rome.

      Bishop Michael Smith - Apparently complaints against Maynooth have nothing to do with him.

      Bishop Philip Boyce - his secretary laughed at me, quite literally laughed at me.

      Bishop John Buckley - Might as well be talking to a wall.

      Bishop William Crean - The man will ponder on the problem until he can find a weak excuse not to act.

      Bishop Ray Brown - Actually acknowledged the hurt but said anything that happens outside of his diocese is not something he can look into, even if the troublesome priest was on loan from his diocese.

      Bishop John McAreavey - Again nothing to do with anything he can look into because the priest of his diocese running Maynooth is on loan outside his diocese.

      [interesting to note the excuse used of a priest being on loan outside of the diocese, something that was also an issue in the Brendan Smith affair].

      These bishops operate in their own little world. It is a defensive place, closed off from reality and thus truth. They drive on blindly, hiding behind the corners of cannon law that say something happened outside their bishopric's jurisdiction but forgetting that things fall squarely into their responsibility as Trustees of Maynooth. Yet the trust has been breached; what can we now call untrustworthy trustees?

      If they had admitted that Maynooth was even capable of a mistake all I would have asked for was reform in there. What I love is what the church is meant to be not the messed up place Maynooth is.

      An interesting development in the weeks before Hugh Connolly taking his extended holiday - he apologised to me for the fact that Maynooth made a complete mess of my formation. My bishop had told me Maynooth were the experts in formation and were not to be questioned... but Hugh says otherwise. His apology was verbal; it can never repair the breakdown in relationship with my bishop caused by Maynooth's written lies because the apology was not in writing. It can never repair a broken vocation because it was not in writing.

      Delete
  3. I too read that sad post last night quite late. How typical that this former seminarian has had no reparation of any kind from Maynooth or from Hugh Gerard Connolly who oversaw this tragedy - shades of the injustice suffered by Fr. Gerard McGinnity when he attempted to confront Msgr Ledwith about complaints about his approaches to young seminarians in Maynooth.
    Could this man give us more details?

    I'm not sure that it is the issue of lack of an Appeal Procedure which will ever cure Maynooth's ills. The prior disease is probably as of this kind - imagine a very frustrated and highly-strung priest, very dissatisfied by his failure to rise in the clerical rankings for some years who has been desperately unhappy in his priesthood but unwilling to come to terms with this and get the hell out of it. He is then placed in Maynooth as a Formator since his previous energy and decisiveness has won him the attention of some potential benefactor higher up the greasy pole.

    He initially thinks he is at the centre of the Kingdom, choosing who will go forward for the church of tomorrow (today and yesterday's churches are already passé) and bring back the missing hordes of former faithful. He is pleased with the fawning obedience of the younger and more impressionable seminarians who are at his beck and call. He soldiers on.

    Enter a number of late vocation seminarians, not fawning and not seeing any reason to lick his posterior at every turn. Some of them seem happy in their vocations - happier than he is. Suddenly Gott in Himmel one of these upstarts is seen praying the Rosary while walking around the rear of Maynooth! Heiliger Strohsack another is heard mentioning the Great Unmentionable - Medjugorje!! - Get Thee Behind Me [not in that way] - and yet another wants to sit in Adoration [Maynoothspeak "STARING AT BREAD"] - these now become the targets of the pent up frustration and anger and spite of our unhappy Formator and his new hobby is to injure them and get them out.

    First means of assault - get a rumour out that Maynooth is "under siege" by Fundamentalists - that will serve to prepare the ground back in the dioceses. [Our victims know nothing about this and remain unprepared and quite innocent.]

    Second means of assault - get an anonymous complaint against each of them from the fawning slaves - easily done.

    Thirdly - command the bewildered innocent seminarian to a furious meeting in the privacy of his room and shout and roar at him, telling him his behaviour and the complaint must be dealt with swiftly - his Bishop is to be told - he is to leave the seminary immediately.

    That's the first one gone.

    The others fall shorty after.

    The mere whiff of the [entirely false but brilliantly useful] allegation of Fundamentalism or Orthodoxy is enough to sway all the jury folk back in the diocese - the Church has been saved from from right wing extremist hiding under a cloak of servitude. Praise the Formator who has saved us! Praise him some more!

    And after a great number of vocations have been done down over a number of years, suddenly this Formator - very damaged individual but a member of the Episcopal Golder Circle - vanishes from the seminary having found a male of female partner and who gives a damn about the injustices of the recent past?

    Think any of these cowardly 'Bishops' [an abused title] will do anything in reparation?

    Believe in fairies too?

    ReplyDelete
  4. But Bishop Buckley didn't say the above

    ReplyDelete
  5. " his secretary laughed at me, quite literally laughed at me." ......sneering contempt. Just about sums up the hierarchy's view of the laity. What a nasty toxic dump.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am glad we are talking about this issue Bishop Pat - it is this issue that in my view is the core problem, and the other stuff about gay cabals etc is the SYMPTOM of this issue. While it can be said generally that Maynooth is a liberal institution, one might have thought in theory that liberal beliefs mean a tolerance of diversity. In the case of Maynooth, such is not the case. "Liberalism" there is a type of totalitarianism where no deviation from the prevailing way of doing this is tolerated. Unless of course that deviation is in the direction of even more progressive opinion.

    Personally, I think a seminary ought to allow for a certain level of diversity of views, since such diversity is a feature of the universal church (though there have to be limits). But diversity of views only travels in one direction in the Kildare Konzentrationslager.

    I remember that last year, or maybe the year before, some bishops had to INSIST that Maynooth accept their seminarians back. Maynooth didn't want them as there were too "conservative". Do we know who these bishops are? And who were the bishops who, just like Dickie Giro the Great Waffler, were too bone idle or ideologically ill-disposed to fight the corner for their seminarians?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree.

      True liberals are tolerant of DIVERSITY.

      Bishops should stand up for their seminarians - unless serious charges are plainly true.

      Delete
    2. Despite what the Irish Catholic reported, I don't believe for a second that any of the bishops intervened when Maynooth wasn't going to take seminarians back last year - they wouldn't have had the guts (as we have come to realise). Some of the seminarians were "allowed" back because SIX out of ten students were about to be kicked out!! That would have raised eyebrows by any standards. However, three of those six were not allowed back..."kneelers" no doubt - where were THEIR bishops?! Did they defend their seminarians in any way?!

      Delete
  7. So which one was this young fella's Bishop
    He needs brought to book

    ReplyDelete
  8. It seems utterly beyond belief that people who are in preparation to soon have the privilege of being able to celebrate the Eucharist themselves, should not kneel in profound reverence at the most sacred parts of the Mass. How low we have sunk! If we look in Scripture we have God's directive --as always -"As surely as I live", says the Lord, "every knee will bow before me and every tongue give praise to God--"Philippians Ch 2 (and many other times eg Romans 14) God bless to Pat and to others --

    ReplyDelete
  9. People writing essays on here make it off putting to others. Most of their diatribes and thesis turn me totally off reading them. Why oh why do people make comments on a subject on the blog which bears no relevance to the topic discussed. Infuriating doesn't cover it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. When Diarmuid Martin expressed his late and sudden opposition to Maynooth's "strange goings on" to Maynooth President Hugh Connolly, Connolly would have been within his rights to reply: "You get your Maynooth - the Pro-Cathedral - in order Diarmuid before you press release about the Seminary you have oversight of you hypocrite!"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Everything seems pretty much on topic today!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I must say that I get a lot from the longer comments - like the early one today outlining the response from various bishops.

      The more people who know what they are talking about tell us the better?

      Peoole can always skip the ones they dont like?

      Delete
    2. Here, here, Pat. I enjoy the longer contributions that are analytical and informative. Keep them coming peeps, I say.

      Delete
  12. But how liberating and exciting if it's NOT on topic!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Pat,I wrote the bit last night that was reprinted today. Thank you.

    What else is there to say... Well there is a gapping lack of transparency but that is obvious. Seminarians get access to twice annual reports Christmas and Summer. They are bland reports. The real damage is done by other letters sent by the Seminary President to the bishop. Seminarians have no access to these despite data protection laws. At that level seminarians don't even know what they are accused of, let alone have an opportunity to defend themselves. Dermot Farrell, now a VG, told me "he was morally certain that such letters do not exist". Years later Hugh Connolly gave me a copy of what Dermot Farrell had both sent and denied existed.

    The document you published the other day. I recall signing one of those in first year. People can dispute what it means and what it intends. But I have lived under the limitations of such a contract, and to have done so is to have had no appeal internal or external to the church.

    What doesn't help in there is the geography. The president and junior dean and vice president all live in a different building, well away from the seminarians. Only the senior dean lives in the same building, but with his own entrance, essentially well away from the seminarians. It is entirely possible to organise suspect meets and be entirely safe from staff detection. There is no supervision.

    Dermot Farrell used to meet students once a year, and join the community for Mass and one meal a year. It quite literally had no other interaction with seminarians before deciding their fate.

    Donal had his favourites, but he also had his play things.. The students he loved to bully, mock, belittle and destroy. Early on he told me that seminarians were to obey him as though we had vows of obedience to him. We were to threat him as if he were our bishop.

    Paul, well they got him from the Irish college. Let's not forget how that faired in the Papal review.

    Who was ordained... Men who left. Men who have been in trouble with the gardai, men who were since sent for psychological review to ensure they were safe to be in ministry, men who were in the pink circle,and a few good men.

    Many more good men were sent packing, including several fantadtic men who stayed 5 or 6 years before being told to go... What a waste of life, dignity and resources.

    Maynooth has no concept of human dignity or wellbeing. A small circle of us know that even though it was hard we might actually be better off away from the abuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keep these coming. Excellent.

      When you feel its right for yuu - get in touch.

      Pat :-)

      Delete
  14. Excellent yet very sad!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it the Maynooth Mafia who dont want these long comments packed with truth and wisdom.

      Delete
  15. Do you mind saying who your Bishop was?

    ReplyDelete
  16. MourneManMichael13 October 2016 at 19:41

    I too agree with the value of the longer analytical and informative comments. I have little interest in brief comments merely expressing indignation. They add little to the debate. Although some brief comments can be pithy, I'm afraid I find too many of them valueless.
    It would be useful if, in this new format for comments, we could reply more directly to another's comment. As it stands, with so many comments simply labelled as "Anonymous" it is difficult to link a response other than to quote their time of insertion.
    Can I suggest Pat that you look at the English angling site Maggotdrowning.com. Superbly organised it readily enables dialogue and tracking comments.
    MMM

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you MMM. I will do.

      I am really an IT baby.

      But I do want to grow up :-)

      In fact I got the name today of an IT man to help me.

      Delete

  17. sickening what happened that boy in Maynooth - Im shocked - who was his bishop ??

    ReplyDelete
  18. MMM and the likes, you may like the essays and longer analytical comments, I don't. Much of them prove inane, uninformative and repetitive. That obviously sums up your intellect. MMM sounds like you need to get a life alongside a personality. We don't care what you have to say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who are you?

      What is your agenda?

      MMM has been a loyal and critical comment maker?

      Delete
  19. Thxs 19.00 for your sharing and honesty. I went through Seminary and was ordained a Deacon. Now Lacized. Any Seminary that ever was and is in existence has no concept of dignity or well being. Bullies. Bullies is all they were and are..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harry for what it's worth you are still sacramentally a deacon

      Delete
  20. To Anonymous @ 19:00 and re. you previous contribution earlier today / yesterday.

    A sincere 'Thank You' for taking the time to write your story, and to tell it so comprehensively, and honestly. It makes my blood boil to read what you were subjected to, and I can only imagine what you went through.
    You say, 'Many more good men were sent packing, including several fantastic men who stayed 5 or 6 years before being told to go... What a waste of life, dignity and resources.' I agree, and I know that what you say in this regard is the truth, and it is deplorable.

    You conclude 'Maynooth has no concept of human dignity or well being. A small circle of us know that even though it was hard we might actually be better off away from the abuse. '

    I am sure that your account will give courage to others who were bullied, and were not supported or believed.

    I genuinely hope that your life is going well for you now.

    ReplyDelete
  21. WOW 20:22!!! That's so unfounded. If you have kept track of MMM's contributions (over many years) you would know that he has had a long life and, I would say, very full. His thoughts, insight and philosophy are without question some of the most profound on this site. He is also an extremely fair critic. You however have contributed zilch; to the argument and anything to testify that you have either a life or personality yourself. Your 'we' does not include me. I am pleased to see that he doesn't even deem you intellect worthy of comment.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The comment left at at 20:22 is precisely the kind of ad hominem attack that adds nothing to the sum of human knowledge. Engage with the arguments not the individuals. There is no need to resort to (unfounded) personal insults. Some of the longer comments I find interesting some less so, but if they aren't interesting I just skim over them and move on. And if you don't agree with something, say so, and state your argument.

    On the seminary point, a large part of the problem is this idea that a man goes to the seminary to "be formed". For example, I have heard formators speak of the difficulty of forming so-called "late" vocations (though I dispute this outdated notion of a "late" vocation - the Apostles seem to have been "late" vocations for the most part). I think the real difficulty that the formator might have with a late vocation is that such a man has already been formed outside the seminary and can hopefully stand up for himself. While it is true to an extent that one goes to a seminary to be formed, the current ideology seems to be that formation involves a reprogramming of the personality, rather than assisting grace to build upon nature.

    TRS

    ReplyDelete
  23. MMM. We love his blogs and insights. Keep them coming. 20.22 is full of crap.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The Church does not seem to be heavy on human rights.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I attach a link to an article written by a Maynooth seminarian worth re-reading, even if you disagree with the conclusions or perspective. This is from 2011. Unfortunately I cannot find the un-redacted article.

    https://lxoa.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/ms.pdf

    TRS

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'm wondering why 2 posts of mine were not published
    One asked why Sean Brady , the prince, had no influence and what are 'Visitors' in gaynooth
    The other asked whoever it was who said he was lazcized...was it his choice

    Also having been on blogs for 12 years, could I suggest that all rude posts be ignored, I'm surprised at long term posters replying in a negative manner too.
    Just ignore...don't feed the trolls

    ReplyDelete
  27. @20:00
    I have left two analytical comments, but admittedly long, comments today. It felt nice to share some of my experiences but I do understand that some people would not like me to share them. I can only assume you would prefer the facts in my head to not be shared publicly - perhaps you are a bishop's secretary?

    But I will share some more of what I am thinking, and I specifically direct this to you. This is a thread based around truth and Christian belief so please do not attack MMM's contribution; it is valued by many in this cyber-community. Secondly, While I love the writings of people such as Fulton Sheen and Ronald Knox, you may find such spiritual writings too long. Perhaps something a little briefer like the writings of Josemaría Escrivá would be a place that you may find short, snappy and relevant comments. There is a place for all in God's house, you, me, MMM, Bishop Pat and the many other Anon people here.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Don't mean rude words, sure we couldn't live without them
    I'm just asking to not reply to people who criticise other posters
    I always try to keep to the content instead
    Keep up your good work Pat

    ReplyDelete
  29. Pat, you, even as a so-called "dissident", are serving the Church, exposing dark evil. Keep on keeping on, +Pat.

    ReplyDelete
  30. To poster 20:22. Once again a display of intolerance towards another well meaning,informed and often entertaining contributor. You have reduced your credibility by your ad hominem attacks. Step up to the plate with worthwhile contributions on the subject matter please!
    Dalriada Dick

    ReplyDelete
  31. I'm entitled to my opinion about MMM, I didn't realise that this blog was for the "few" select people who post on here. Sorry if this facilitates the chosen "few", I assumed the blog was for all comments and commentators. It seems that there is a clique who feel they OWN this blog, it reminds me of those who think they have the divine right to sit on certain seats in Church and own them as it were.

    I will engage with both articles and their individual posters. As an earlier post claimed that MMM's thoughts, insight and philosophy are the most profound on this site, get a grip of yourself please. I never heard such poppycock and hogwash ever. It's just one contribution from one sad contributor in the Mournes. Sounds like a sad priest or some sad ex priest to be precise.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @07:52, you are entitled to nothing - people who think they have an entitlement remind "me of those who think they have the divine right to certain seats in Church".

    ReplyDelete
  33. MourneManMichael14 October 2016 at 10:59

    I have read the above Anon contribution @ 07:52. I presume this to be the same Anon of 13/10 @20:22.
    I much appreciate your previous supportive responses to this Anon's 13/10 criticism @ 20:22. Rather than reply immediately at that point, I chose to keep my counsel, bearing in mind the advice of a former psychology professor.
    These pointed out to we naive undergrads in 1968 the limitations of embarking on any rational cohesive deductive argument with an individual whose inherent limitations, intellectually or experientially, prevents an appreciation of the nuances of such a discussion.
    I continue to hold my counsel. Thank you all again.
    MMM

    ReplyDelete