Sunday, 29 January 2017

PATSY MC GARRY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH - THE IRISH MEDIA


*** BLOG ALSO AVAILABLE ON thinkingcatholicism.org



Quite a few of my readers – commenting on the current sexual scandals involving THE IRISH CATHOLIC BISHOPS – THE CATHOLIC CLERGY  - SEMINARIANS and THE IRISH MEDIA have been asking two questions:





1.   Where is THE IRISH TIMES?

2.   Where is PATSY MC GARRY?




For those who do not know Patsy McGarry is the religious affairs correspondent of the Irish Times.

For instance, while the alleged rape of a “silverdaddies” member on Catholic Church property in Bray was a front page story in THE IRISH INDEPENDENT the Irish Times have ignored the story completely!



It CANNOT BE that no one in the Irish Times was aware of the story? In fact I emailed Patsy McGarry a copy of my blog where the story was born.

So it seems as if someone in the Irish Times made a decision that they would not touch the story.
Why would that be?


1.  Was it because the Irish Times thought that the public would not be interested in the story? If so – they were absolutely wrong. The public is very interested in this story.

2.  Was it because Archbishop Diarmuid Martin is the DARLING of the Irish media and people in the Irish Times do not want to hurt his feelings?




3.  Did Patsy Mc Garry himself decide the story was not to go in?

4.  Was it because it was a “gay” story and gay friendly people did not want to do the story that might bring a “gay” “gays” into disrepute?

I don’t really know the answer. Maybe some readers might know?

I do know that when the MAYNOOTH GRINDR SCANDAL story broke last summer Patsy McGarry was the first one I notified about it and he ignored the story until it started appearing on the Irish Independent and on RTE news.



It seemed that he then had to deal with the story so as not to look as if the IT was blatantly ignoring it?

Since the 1920’s the IRISH CATHOLIC CHURCH / HIERARCHY had a stranglehold on the Irish media.

To fall foul of a bishop as an editor or a journalist could spell the end of your career.

Many a newspaper, many an editor and many a journalist was gagged by a bishop and the church.

Archbishop John Charles McQuaid even reprimanded the editor of THE IRISH PRESS for allowing a full page ladies underwear ad for Cleary’s Store.



McQuaid’s objection was that when you looked at the drawing in the ad of a ladies silk knickers you could see the outline of what McQuaid called the “MONS VENERIS” – the outline of the pubic area !!!




I think that we still have a good little bit of the Irish media tipping their cap to the Irish Bishops and to the Irish Catholic Church.

Is this out of respect or out of fear or out of fear of legal action?

You tell me.

Anyway it looks to me that at present Patsy McGarry and the Irish Times want to give the Church – and Diarmuid Martin in particular an easy ride.

This smacks of some kind of old boys network or of middle class respectability to me.




And it certainly smacks to me of SUBTLE CENSORSHIP and NEWS MANAGEMENT.


Not good! Not good at all!





PS: I am finding it increasingly difficult to have a letter to the editor published in the IRISH TIMES :-(


***BLOG ALSO PUBLISHED ON:  thinkingcatholicism.org

40 comments:

  1. Patsy:

    Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.

    George Orwell.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Archbishop Martin is Dublin's first anti-clerical Archbishop and his fuzzy line on all matter moral plays right into the hands of the Irish Times set. e.g. His very muddled thinking on Gay Marriage. Personally I think DM is an atheist.

    ReplyDelete
  3. the said McGarry has a direct line to Dermo and has been in his pocket since Dermo came as Co-Adjutor to Dubkin.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Media has its own internal mode of conduct and a very short memory and concentration span in my opinion. Today's news is tomorrow's loo roll. I don't know if Irish media has the stickability for drawn out investigations. I'm thinking of the papers here. Papers tend to thrive on short sharp shock

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Today's news is tomorrow's loo roll.'? I don't ever want to spend a penny at your place, Sean. I prefer something softer than newspaper against my nether region.

      Delete
    2. I have a friend who had a very messy divorce in Rep of Ireland and fled to the North.

      The judge kept sending him summons.

      Eventually he wrote to the judge saying:

      "Your Honour, I wish to let you know that I have received the summons you sent me.

      I was wondering, if in future, you could print them on softer paper" :-)

      Delete
    3. The next bit should read!
      "Yes, I can assure you thatI got your long letter - - At this moment I am sitting in my bathroom with your words in front of me.
      In a few moments, they will be behind me!

      Delete
  5. It's like the Irish News in Belfast, Amy in Armagh encouraged readers to boycott it after they revealed the Rory Story. Amy pleaded with the owner of said publication not to print the photographs which still remain in the safe of Mr Doran. The identity of FR X is also known but not published. That to me smacks of Church/State control. Excellent blog Bishop and glad you are on a new site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We do not know whether Father Coyle's naked pictures are in Mr Doran's safe or whether he has given them to Amy?

      I hope Amy did not find them "an occasion of sin"?

      Delete
    2. Did Martin really tell people not to read the Irish News?

      Delete
    3. 14.09
      Of course not.
      Nor, to the best of my recollectio, bdid anyone else.

      Delete
  6. I don't believe that any of us have faith in the so called free or freedom of the press. It is what is going to sell of course, the bottom line is the priority not necessarily to get to the bottom of the truth.

    Even bloggs contain censure, not that I see too much of that on yours +Patrick.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You make a valid point Bishop Pat. Besides an occasion of sin, maybe a case of wet panties also.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Maybe McGarry thought that the Irish Times readership wouldn't really be that interested in the story since the readership isn't really very bothered about whether priests have sex or not, since they consider the vow of celibacy to be rather silly? Hence not much of a story from their point of view?

    ReplyDelete
  9. any more revelations or news with the Maynooth scandals?

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1. In direct response to today's blog when I was in Maynooth it was said that DM's brother was a senior figure/editor at the Irish Times. I know not if this is true but I suspect there are some family connections.

    2. Much of last year's media uproar was ignored by the general public who seem to have a majority a) against celibacy, b) don't mind if seminarians are sexually actively c) straight or gay and d) let's face it, have sexual activity standards that appear more common than previously in society. What people missed was the lack of consent involved in some cases.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. In other words is it legally / morally acceptable for a Catholic seminarian / cleric to anally rape someone?

      Delete
    2. I agree with @18.05. Vast majority of people don't care. They would care about a rape, but so far we haven't really seen any evidence so don't think anyone is taking it too seriously.

      Delete
    3. 18.05. You are correct. DM's only sibling Seamus Martin is the retired International editor of the Irish Times. He was appointed to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland in 2014.

      Delete
  11. @1805 DM's brother, Seamus, has retired from the Irish Times. In relation to your point 2 - you are incorrect. The general public were aghast at the revelations. Albeit for only about 2 weeks, but they were dismayed and outraged. The general public is not anti gay (after all they voted for Gay marriage), but they were annoyed about Maynooth. Even non-practising catholics were outraged. They see the difference between ordinary gay men and gay promiscuous men in the church and seminary. People hate hypocrisy. These guys should just get another job or career. thats what it is to them a career - it cannot be a vocation. God does not call men to the seminary to be on Grindr. muslims shouldn't go to America for the time being until the rules change. Actively gay men should not go to Seminary until the rules change. They don't have vocations, they are just looking for jobs ... go get another one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really? Don't think they give a rat's ass about Maynooth. They aren't bothered when practising gays go up to receive communion; when those having sex outside of marriage receive communion; when a lad has a bit of fun with a girl he met on Tinder etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. All a breach of the rules for practising Catholics. So no-one cared very much about the seminarians, they generally thought it was all rather amusing.

      As for this promiscuous thing, maybe we should all get off our high horses and be a bit more realistic. No-one really knows what they actually got up to. 90% of unmarried youngsters are on Tinder and Grindr is just the same thing for the gays. Some use it to be promiscuous in both cases, others don't. Who are we to judge? And frankly, no one apart from a handful of blue rinses, really cares. Unless they thunder from the ambo about the sin of homosexuality or fornication I suppose!

      Delete
    2. i'm afraid you're wrong. People were shocked. It wouldn't have gotten so much coverage on the papers, tv and radio if they weren't.

      Delete
    3. People don't care whos on tinder or grindr. They care when priests are being promiscuous. they are usually priests from working class backgrounds who entered priesthood for a career. They don't have vocations and are living a lie. Get out and get a proper job

      Delete
    4. They might have found the story interesting but I don't think they were shocked. I mean it's a sort of Priest is Gay, Water is Wet sort of story.

      I agree nobody wants a promiscuous priest, but these weren't priests. Anyway, I don't get this notion that I see repeated often that men do it for a career. Maybe in the South, but in the North a curate gets paid about £700 a month plus a draughty miserable house. Imagine advertising that in a newspaper for any other job - you wouldn't have many takers.

      Delete
  12. I agree with 18:05 that in the main folks now are past caring about clergy being gay or not, having affairs or not etc. Hardly earth shattering stuff in 2017. However I could bet my bottom dollar they would be very interested if they found out that a cardinal, archbishop or bishop had a big skeleton in the cupboard. Eg, O'Brien, Wright, Conroy, Cleary etc. People loved to see pompous hypocrites exposed and laid low.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I didn't notice Casey being a bit bothered
    Wasn't Cleary dead before we knew anything about him
    Which of our bishops is compromised?
    As a practicing Catholic I do care if my priest is a hypocrite

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aren't you a bit of hypocrite yourself though? Trawling through a blog that is avowedly anti-Roman Catholic, by a Bishop whose ordination merited excommunication? If you were that good a practising Catholic, surely you wouldn't be lending it your tacit support? I mean, don't get me wrong, I have no problem with any of that. But just throwing that out there.

      Delete
    2. "Merited excommunication" is a matter of opinion.

      If "excommunication" is so important how come Jesus never mentioned it?

      Delete
    3. Well if we took that line of reasoning, on what grounds can you say that sexually active seminarians should not be in the seminary? You have argued that they should not be there because it is against the stated rules. Fair enough. Well you also went against the stated rules, so on what basis can you say that your episcopal ordination did not merit excommunication?

      Personally, I don't think we have to go along with every ridiculous rule issued by some windbag in Rome, but if we proceed from the view that Roman Catholics have to comply then I don't really see how you could argue that you didn't merit excommunication.

      On the other hand, that is not to say that I personally think you merited excommunication.

      Delete
    4. Matthew 18:15-18, is Jesus' teaching on excommunication. Not that I believe that you merit being excommunicated - but it is a disciplinary penalty that has Scriptural sanction.

      Delete
    5. 20:09, do you read this blog regularly? It doesn't appear so, since you'd know that the blog is anti-Roman Catholic clericalism, NOT anti-Roman Catholicism...as am I.

      Delete
    6. Sorry, 22:05, the passage you quoted is more likely the view of the Gospel writer (a Hellenistic Jew writing for other such Jews) than the words of Jesus himself. We can gauge this from the broader gospel context, which indicates the inclusivity of Jesus' teaching, not the liturgical, moral and social shunning so characteristic of ancient Judaism.

      Delete
  14. @Pat have the hackers gone? Any news on Gorgeous? Were they hacking to get rid of stuff about him and the other dastardly bunch of deacons or was it Armagh stuff they were deleting?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Pat, did you find out who your hackers were ?
    Can they still hack ?
    Does this new .org site prevent hacking on it ?
    Do you think georgous will be ordained ?
    if he does how on earth can we the laity accept him as a parish cleric ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 21:25, if that guy is ordained, then NO lay person must accept him. Just boycott any services at which he presides.

      Delete
  16. Ok Pat xx
    Just hope and pray that you are ok
    And yes agree with another poster re your profile
    Please smile next time

    ReplyDelete
  17. It was probably difficult enough for McGarry reporting on Grindr antics without following it up with SilverDaddies and their admirer(s).

    ReplyDelete