Friday, 21 April 2017

CHURCH / BISHOPS PROTECTING SEX ACTIVE PRIESTS

USA TODAY

Sex orgies, prostitution, porn: Allegations shake Catholic Church in Italy

Josephine McKenna | Religion News Service



ROME (RNS) — Lurid accusations of priests involved in sex orgies, porn videos and prostitution have emerged from several parishes in Italy recently, sending shock waves all the way to the Vatican and challenging the high standards Pope Francis demands of clergy.

In the southern city of Naples, for example, a priest was recently suspended from the parish of Santa Maria degli Angeli over claims he held gay orgies and used Internet sites to recruit potential partners whom he

The allegations concerning the Rev. Mario D’Orlando were brought to the attention of the diocese when an anonymous letter was sent to a Naples bishop. D’Orlando denied the charges when he was summoned by the city’s archbishop, Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, but is now facing a formal inquiry conducted by local church officials.
In the northern city of Padua, a 48-year-old priest, the Rev. Andrea Contin, is facing defrocking as well as judicial proceedings amid accusations he had up to 30 lovers, some of whom he took to a swingers’ resort in France.

Contin was removed from his parish of San Lazzaro after three women came forward with complaints against him in December. Bishop Claudio Cipolla of Padua cut short a visit to Latin America to deal with the scandal.
“I am incredulous and pained by the accusations,” Cipolla said at a news conference last month. “This is unacceptable behavior for a priest, a Christian and even for a man."



One woman, who claims to have been Contin’s lover for more than three years, claimed the priest carried sex toys and bondage equipment, prostituted his lovers on wife-swapping websites and also invited other priests from the area to sex parties.
“Even if, at the end of this affair, there are no legal consequences, we have a duty by canon law to take disciplinary action,” said Cipolla.

He also revealed Pope Francis telephoned him personally at the end of January to offer his support and urge him to stay “strong.”
Since his election the pope has taken a tough line on ethical behavior in the church, though he has also recognized the reality of human imperfection and personal flaws.
In recent weeks the pontiff has spoken out many times against “temptation,” and last week he told a gathering of clergy at the Basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome that faith could not progress without the challenge of temptation.
“Temptation is always present in our lives. Moreover, without temptation you cannot progress in faith,” he said.

Alberto Melloni, professor of church history at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, said there is nothing unusual about scandals in the priesthood.
“There is no sin that a cleric doesn’t commit. Scandals to me seem quite normal,” he said.
“And I think the illusion of stopping scandals through better selection of personnel is not very promising and has not yielded great results. ”
Francis has frequently called for a more rigorous screening process for seminarians, and he has taken direct action when scandals erupt in Italy.
A case in point: When reports of “playboy priests” surfaced in the Italian diocese of Albenga-Imperia in the northern region of Liguria in late 2014, the pope sent a special envoy to investigate claims that clerics had posted nude photos of themselves on gay websites, sexually harassed the faithful and stole church funds.

Two years later the pope replaced the leader of the diocese, Bishop Mario Oliveri.
Austen Ivereigh, commentator and author of The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, said the pope distinguished between sinfulness and corruption and was intent on “rooting out” corruption inside the church.
“The remedy for those who succumb to temptation is forgiveness and a fresh start,” Ivereigh said. “The problem is when priests turn their backs on the people, lead hidden lives and end up justifying their conduct. That’s corruption.
“And it’s only possible in the priesthood because of clericalism. That’s why the pope is so intent on rooting it out.”

PAT SAYS

These stories keep coming. 

ALL these things are happening in Ireland as well as in Italy. That is:

Bishops covering up for sexually priests.

Bishops accepting sexually promiscuous men for priesthood.

Seminaries accepting and protecting sexually active seminarians - especially when they are gay.

We are well aware of well known situations of this.




Why for instance is Diarmuid Martin Martin and the authorities in The Irish College cutting Gorgeous out of college ceremony pics?

This is obviously an orchestrated effort.

Why ?????????

A COMMENT MAKER ON THIS BLOG HAS BEEN TELLING US THAT GORGEOUS AND PUCK WILL NOT BE ORDAINED THIS YEAR.

I THINK IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE THAT QUICK, SECRET ORDINATION CEREMONIES ARE BEING PLANNED BY BISHOPS AND SEMINARY AUTHORITIES.

THIS CAN ONLY MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT CERTAIN BISHOPS AND CERTAIN SEMINARY AUTHORITIES.




112 comments:

  1. They are all filth... pure and simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The truth is never pure and rarely simple, as Oscar Wilde would have put it!

      Delete
    2. Oscar's life was testament to that.

      Delete
  2. Will the new broom sweeping clean in Italy also be deployed elsewhere?
    I would like to think so, but as usual, will not be holding my breath!
    Always happy to be proved wrong. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Pat Did you report all you know to the Congregation for Priests and religious? The Pope may be informed through them. Did you report to the nunciature? Regardless of whether they get back to you or not, they will act on it. There are diplomats there working away although the nuncio has not been replaced. This is a very grave situation. Who manages the Dublin Facebook page? Why are they editing him out? Who is responsible for posting photographs on the Irish College in Rome's website? Why are they editing him out? Why are they covering up?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They cover up because they are not servants of Christ, but self-serving careerists. They represent the institutional Church, not the broad body of believers. But if these do not protest in the face of clerical scandal (or, worse, defend those who commit it), then they are complicit in this moral corruption.

      Archbishop Fulton Sheen was correct: it is the laity who must and will save the Church.

      Delete
    2. ANd are we expected to believe that you are a servant of Christ. You are a deputy to Satan.

      Delete
    3. So true, Magna Carta.

      Never mind Anonymous at 01:29, hallucinating Satan ... ridiculous comment.

      Delete
    4. 01:29, in that case, he owes me a lot of back pay.

      Delete
    5. Maggie when were you removed from Maynooth?

      Delete
    6. Hello again, 08:19. Have you made that doctor's appointment yet, for short-term memory loss? Sorry! You wouldn't remember, would you?

      Guess you'll pop up again soon. LOVL

      Delete
    7. When were you removed from Maynooth? I guess failure is a hard pill to swallow for you. LOVL, gg ez

      Delete
    8. See, 14:35? I was right. You do suffer with short-term memory loss cuz you keep repeating yourself.

      Trying ever so hard not to...ROTFL! GG EZ

      Delete
  4. @23:00 Your post has given me some comfort in my hope for justice regarding Abbot Cuthbert Brogan of St. Michael's abbey, Farnborough, that the Congregation for religious may inform the Pope. (Just sent off an email today. To view https://www.facebook.com/amorveritatis/?fref=ts )I was only thinking, next the Pope, but uncertain how to communicate directly. That probably wraps up official channels, after that it's just a case of keeping it "Out There" at the very least for the purposes of harm reduction. Forewarning and forearming others.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Corruption vs sinfulness. Good point. Another word I picked up on is normal. Priestly life as it stands is not normal. At least that was my experience. Allow normal and anything else may well be corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think very shortly we will see the deacon byrne been ordained privately and being shipped off somewhere to minister privately - Bishop Martin is a skillfull rogue and has plans for him.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Over the last week or so there was has been back and forth things being said about some lad called Magna Carta. Not to disrespect him as I do not know anything about him only the comment on here - he seem angry with the church and maybe he has every right to be. Would it be possible for him to put into context his feelings and what happened to him, if the church has done something to him , it needs to be known. Blessings to all on Easter Saturday .

    ReplyDelete
  8. Pat when are you doing the Galway and Clonfert blog?

    ReplyDelete
  9. This once fine blog has been taken over by cranks and nutters. I wonder has anyone else noticed? Also note that the comments are now vastly less than they used to be. This is due to the fact that loud mouthed imbeciles like Magna Carta [sic], Sean Page (whoever the hell he is), and now one Tom wood (a novice who dissent know how to spell Altar...really, I ask you?) have taken over. The sad thing is they have been allowed to. And rather like in the asylums of old, the blog is fast becoming like one of those Day Wards where the lunatics sat round blabbering at one another and making no sense whatsoever. Nonsense in fact. This is really sad, as Bishop Pat's blog was once a forum for truth and insightful comment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You told us you were leaving this blog...some time ago, as I recall. And yet, here you are, back visiting. LOVL

      Delete
    2. MournemanMichael22 April 2017 at 14:14

      Do others think this a valid comment?
      Any dissent?
      Ahem!
      MMM

      Delete
    3. I dissent. The personal attacks on these people are far more obnoxious. I know Tom offline, he is certainly not a crank, does good for others, and actually comments here quite rarely.

      Delete
    4. I think that the criticism of Sean Page is unjustified.

      What is wrong with his comments?

      Tom Wood is a good young man who has been hurt and is trying to find justice.

      What are Magna's crimes?

      Delete
  10. 12.51. I agree. Sad really. On the basis of "my enemy's enemy is my friend" I feel +Pat has lost it with this blog. Bring back Ballymena Barney, MMM, Dalriada Dick et al.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (Sadie on the sofa) Ach. stop worrying.. Maybe people are just away for Easter. Nobody ever tells you anything..

      Delete
    2. I agree totally with 12.51 and 14.13. The blog is being dominated by the same arrogant opinionated few. I'm not surprised quite a number of people have been turned off and moved on.

      Delete
    3. 15:50, trouble is they DON'T move on, do they? Like you, they just can't stay away. LOVL

      Delete
    4. Magna Carta can't help yourself can You? Pat allows you on this blog to be nasty towards people, more fool you Pat. Just look at the number of contributors to the blog that have dropped from over 100 to barely 50 each day because of dimwits like you Magna Carta. Let's face it they hate you and the real pitiful thing about it all is that you enjoy it and relish it. No wonder why you got the boot from Maynooth. Why didn't you report the paedophile tendencies of your fellow student Magna? You say you did but you didn't. Your pontificating on here makes me sick. Your a total Fraud.

      Delete
    5. 17:52, I don't enjoy laughing at people, as a rule.

      But stupid people? Oh, God! ROTFL!

      Delete
    6. You didn't reply Magna quite conveniently to the charges levelled against you by 17.52. Never thought I'd see the day that the cat got your tongue Maggie.

      Delete
    7. 20:23, do you know what 'scroll back' means. It's a light IT concept not beyond even your level of comprehension. Scroll back a few blogs; let your index finger take you back to the land of knowledge, the answers to all your questions. I've lost you, haven't I?

      Delete
  11. i agree Pat - can we have Bishop Pat the truth seeker back please !1

    ReplyDelete
  12. Can people tell me who has taken over the blog?

    Is refusing to publish their comments not censorship?

    Anyone want to suggest a better system?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would suggest you adopt a policy of not publishing personal attacks on other commenters here. The attacks on Magna Carta amount to bullying. Of course you will want to add a note if you have edited a comment to show you have.

      Delete
    2. I think Sean Page is a decent man. I don't always agree with - but his contributions here are worthwhile. Tom Wood is a wonderful addition to the commentators here. Furthermore, these two man have the courage to identify themselves- unlike the rest of us. So leave them alone! And Tom and Sean, to hell with the begrudgers - ignore them.

      Magna Carta is very arrogant and I often disagree with him/her - but sometimes he/she too has very sensible things to say. So if you don't like her/him, don't take her/him too seriously and cop yourself on into the bargain.

      Pat, keep on keeping on.

      If Diarmuid Martin ordains that deacon then there is something very very seriously amiss with him. Pat, you should send all your evidence to the Nuncio and to the relevant dicastery in Rome. You can bet your life DM has done neither and this is being dealt with "in house" by Dublin diocese.

      DM, it is now widely believed, is personally compromised with MJB

      Delete
    3. Magna Carta often invites trouble and adverse comments from other posters. Some of his remarks to posters who have viewpoints different from his own are often truly vicious and insulting. Have a look back over the blog during the last week or more and you will find ample evidence of what I mean. He has addressed people in terms such as "--or were you born a fool!" and worse.. He has taunted a poster even today with the cruel suggestion that the writer must suffer from dementia (.. memory loss commentary)
      Sean Page appears to be always very measured and respectful in comparison.
      Some posters have that knack of giving differing opinions and "corrections" in ways that are respectful and they are valuable people as they add to the debate (and keep us from descending into the illiteracy of the dreaded "textspeak" spelling and punctuation. God forbid!)
      Other posters enjoy robust debate and that's fine too. Most of us can take the heat of the kitchen but posts should not contain personal insults and inferences that we are intellectual inferiors to anyone whose opinions are worthless! I'm afraid that has been permitted to happen on several occasions. Similarly, posters who courageously dare to defend the Church are also legitimately speaking from their perspective and very often from their personal good experiences of it. Other people have had very traumatic experiences and it is excellent that you, Pat give them a platform and safe place to state their case. Surely one of the big strengths of the blog is that we have this huge variety of opinion, age and experience. Far from "inferiors", I personally know for a fact that you have had posters on--some very recently too - - who are published authors and others who are at the very top of their professions. I suppose that's the fun of being able to stay anonymous! But the opinion of all others is equally interesting and valid. That is the good thing.
      Be encouraged, you are appreciated.

      Delete
    4. 'Most of us can take the heat of the kitchen but posts should not contain personal insults and inferences that we are intellectual inferiors to anyone whose opinions are worthless!'

      17:27, you are not just an 'intellectual inferior' (for not spotting the blindingly obvious contradiction in your sentence), but are also a hypocrite for having posted it. LOVL

      Delete
    5. MC Sorry, but that last sentence is not at all a contradiction! Its implication is that you can be so scathing and dogmatic that at times you have even suggested that some posters are so inferior as to be below even those judged to be "worthless" ie about as low as they could be..
      Please re-read and this will be obvious enough.
      However, your attack has been timely as it is an example (for Pat to view) of the sort of disrespectful reaction which has brought you into recent disfavour. For me, this conversation is now closed.

      Delete
    6. 18:31, and to think you could have kept YOUR intellectual inferiority a secret. But since you chose to display it: the sentence does indeed contain a contradiction. And here it is: calling someone's (implicitly, my) opinions 'worthless' is effectively calling that person an 'intellectual inferior'...to which the poster had already objected. The poster, therefore, contradicted himself by breaking his own suggestion. Has this penny dropped for you? Probably not. (No wonder you wanted no further 'conversation' on this matter: you'd already realised your gaffe. LOVL)

      Delete
    7. Ha ha! M,C more than met your match with that poster! . Best keep quiet I'd say. Good stuff

      Delete
    8. 21:44, it's you again, isn't it? That 'intellectual inferior' at 18:31?

      Close your eyes and picture your head upon my broad, manly chest. You're weeping, and I am deeply sympathetic. I'm whispering in your ear, paternally of course: 'There there, my son. You did your best; it was a stout-hearted effort. But you must know and remember your all-too-obvious intellectual limitations (at this juncture, you are bawling hysterically) and the inevitable fact that no one can defeat the man called 'Great': 'Magna'.

      Delete
    9. Delusions and hallucinations? Yer man's stoned. So that's it..

      Delete
    10. You were defeated when they sent you packing from Maynooth, kicked your arse straight out the door even though there wasn't anything straight about you.

      Delete
    11. 23:22 and 23:32, I love you both.

      Delete
    12. When were you removed from maynooth?

      Delete
    13. I'm now convinced that 10:05 is actually a parrot that has been taught to use a keyboard.

      Delete
  13. Pat, incorrect information was provided. The incident which allegedly happened in Bray happened in the other church/presbytery in Bray. The wrong Church was given to you or perhaps you made an assumption it was another presbytery? So it can safely be announced that NO such incident happened where you allege it happened. That is the view in Dublin diocese. Perhaps you can clarify? With your informant. There are two church's in Bray.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To poster @ 14.58

      The correct plural is "churches"
      (There was a wrong use of the apostrophe. The apostrophe would be correct in an ownership situation eg "The church's steeple is being rebuilt")

      Delete
  14. @12.51 poster
    The correct spelling is ".. novice who doesn't know how."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And this point of yours adds what to the debate? Saddo at 16.26 and 16.45, Pat do something about allowing this on the blog, are you trying to finish off your blog altogether?

      Delete
  15. He dinnie know sounds even better

    ReplyDelete
  16. So it seems there are people who think Magna Carta can be too much, and people who think other posters are too much when they reply to Magna Carta.
    I sense Pat doesn't want to have to apply any censorship to the comments. But would rather trust commentators to be polite and behave.
    Can I suggest that both Magna Carta and those who reply make a conscious effort to tone it down?

    Pat - this is your blog and you have ownership of what is posted here. I have personally found the atmosphere uncomfortable and tbh it has verged on playground taunts recently. I would urge you to stop more coming through screening and either contact the writer asking them to alter their comment or publish a request here.
    This is merely the blog owner taking ownership of what is published here. To be frank I don't think you do that enough - unsubstantiated allegation and rumours which could damage people's reputations have at times appeared in the comments here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 18:27, your suggestion is a good one; I shall try to observe it as best I can. Unfortunately, some who post here are so incensed at my intellectual gifts (and their obvious lack) that they can't resist parrying with me, even though they invariably come off worse. If they desist, then so shall I. But if they don't... Well, I am allowed to defend myself, aren't I? Even if my attackers are intellectual pygmies?

      Delete
  17. Deacon Michael Byrne shall prove to be a "lifelong-mortgage" (to paraphrase Pope Francis)) on the Church should Archbishop Martin ordain him.

    Archbishop Martin, for all his seemingly intense desire to stamp out abuse among the Clergy, is in full defiance of the Vatican, the present Pope and recent Popes in ordaining a man who is a self-professed homosexual and who, it appears, has blatantly transgressed his vows of celibacy and has a very strange relationship with a senior Dublin priest, to say the least.

    The whole saga is most disturbing, and if the reports of the Bray incident are true - sinister is a far more accurate description of what is going in Ireland's largest diocese.

    Something is certainly very "rotten" in Dublin.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Isn't it amazing how much dislike people on here can have for each other,just because they make a comment or spelling mistake that does not suit a particular reader.
    Please do not get me wrong I have seen need to defend myself here too and I think thats fine. If anyone wants to call any church the whore of whatever thats fine. Even +Pat seems to take that on the chin, but seriously it does get a tiny bit boring sometimes the bitching that goes on.
    There's times you can see that making up a comment is like throwing a lit match onto a path of petroleum, up it goes rage and thunder.

    Truly Amazing

    ReplyDelete
  19. So when are we having the petition or the march on Gaynooth
    If people can create a demo against the nuns running a maternity unit
    I'm sure Pat would fare good with his petition of concern.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @Pat there are two Churches in Bray/Presbyteries in bray. Rev Byrne as at Fr Joseph Whelan's Church/Presbytery. So presumably he is not the deacon you seek.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's worse now. The Irish College in Rome have posted a further 21 photographs. He's not in one of them. Yet they've included the new deacons with the Pope. What bright spark in the Irish College in Rome has implicated the Pope in all this. Someone needs to contact the relevant authorities in Rome and inform them

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is clear that Dublin, Gaynooth and the Irish College are dealing with "Gorgeous" in-house and, undoubtedly, because he has high-ranking Pharisees by the short and curlies, ugly "Gorgeous" is calling the shots.


      It is time to blow the scandal wide open, Pat. Write to Dermot Martin and tell him that a growing consensus on your blog believe he is sexually compromised with this deacon.

      List the evidence and concerns - photographs included. Copy to Nuncio and Rome.

      You see, "Rome" probably has no knowledge of this officially. There may be some reading the blog but this needs to be formalised as a complaint against Martin.

      Name them all, Puck too, the Kerry Brown - and the "Sugar Daddy" of ugly "Gorgeous".

      Sad to say, there is only movement when they are forced. There is definitely filth and corruption at the very heart of Dublin diocese. Also it goes to the heart of the Irish Church.

      Delete
    2. I agree, name each and every s**** slot cosmonaut pending ordination.

      Delete
    3. I am sure His Grace has better things to be doing with his time than paying attention to the rantings and ramblings of a bunch of obviously frustrated old queens who haven't got a Christian bone in their bodies.

      Delete
    4. Nor, it seems, has 'His Grace'. (What a 'queeny' title!)

      Delete
  22. Dust in the wind." Let go and let God "

    ReplyDelete
  23. @21:13 Since when is being a promiscuous member of the clergy, 'Dust in the Wind'. Why don't they join the Church of Ireland and get boyfriends and get married and administer as 'reverends'? The Pope says NO to promiscuous seminarians, presumably that goes for Deacons and priests?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... or just continue to drop anchor in poo bay. No one is bothered.

      Delete
  24. Oh my what a development - the question is now - is there a photo of the deacon with the pope - its then GAME SET and MATCH. Why are the Irish college - keeping him out?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fr Tony Flannery on Rte now

    ReplyDelete
  26. I SAW GORGEOUS TODAY!
    He was in walking along the harbour at Howth! I'm sure it was him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who cares.. (Yawns..)

      Delete
    2. ... probably on the lookout for any salty old seadogs.

      Delete
    3. You should have said: 'Hello sailor'.

      Delete
  27. The descent by many in the Episcopate, Priesthood and Seminary Body into pagan sexuality is a symptom of the eschewing of prayer, practice of virtue and ascetical practices which the Church Fathers all taught were a prerequisite for being a true follower of Christ.

    The over emphasis on therapeutic psychology and not enough on the above has exacerbated the Pederasty Priest Epidemic. While the acute phase of the Clerical sex abuse scandals reached its apex in the 1970s (the decade after the sexual revolution of the 1960s), it has now settled into a chronic untreated condition; and the deviant Priests have since migrated from underage teenage boys to vulnerable adults of consensual age as they do not have the same legal protections as the aforementioned age-group.

    Unless Bishops start to forensically examine the Seminary structures and teaching personnel, and unless there is a sincere return to the spiritual practices of old, this appalling scandal will never end and will only mutate into new and more hideous forms.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, you're implying that the laity is to blame for this moral degeneration among clergy? Oh, please!

      Delete
    2. When were you removed from Maynooth? It must grate to see the current batch of deacons progressing when you did not.

      Delete
    3. Oh! The parrot has expanded its vocabulary. LOL

      Delete
    4. Anon 11:21
      The bishops are a product of the same culture, society you describe. Not above it. Not outside it. They will repair nothing. Have repaired nothing. Its all downhill from here.

      Delete
    5. The bishops and priests are meant to bring society up to a certain moral level, not go down lower than it!!

      Also MC, for the life of me, I can't see how you thought that the poster @11:21 is trying to blame the laity for the disgusting carry on of the current clergy.

      The poster is just confirming what I have also read in various reports such as the US National Review & John Jay Report that many priests brought back into seminaries some mad beliefs about human sexuality during the 60's and 70's. The blame lies squarely with the bishops for the utter quagmire that gaynooth has become, and no-one else.

      Delete
    6. It is not just bishops and priests who are meant to 'bring society up to a certain moral level', but ALL of us who dare claim to model our lives on Christ.

      Perhaps I misunderstood the poster at 11:21. But if he meant that the crisis in priestly formation is the result of 'eschewing of prayer' by EVERYONE in the Church (as others have said), then I cannot retract what I stated.

      Delete
  28. Yousuns are all awful hard on poor aul Maggie Carter. Yiz might be more understanding if yiz knew the sorry tale.

    Maggie lives down our wee street - Prince Albert St - down the Falls - near St Peter's, the Big Dean's Chapel. She never comes out much nigh since she got a laptops computer a few years ago but she has a very good neighbor - Big Lily McCoubrey - who brings her in fegs, fish suppers out of Aldos ..... and battles af vadka - coz she loves a wee sup.

    Nigh things weren't always so good between Big Lily and aul Maggie.

    Years and years ago, you see, Maggie, who wasn't a bad lookin bit of stuff in her day, was having a wee fling with a local Padre.

    He promised her the sun, moon and stars. He used to write wee poems to her and everything - "Maggie, dear Maggie, thy teeth are beautiful as the stars - they come out every night ...." That sort of thing. Maggie even thought she was pregnant one time to the priest - bit she was just late. She was getting up in years anyhow.

    Well, here dear, didn't Maggie call up to Big Lil's one night looking a lend of a fiver and wasn't her priest beau b***s deep in Big Lily!!!

    All hell broke loose in our wee street. All the neighbors ran out and got their childer in and locked the doors. The very dogs all bolted. Mind you, we were all keekin out the curtains.

    Nigh, I'm tellin yiz, Lily McCoubrey is one hell of a size of a big woman and Maggie is not all that big. But Maggie trailed Big Lily by the head of hair up and down Prince Albert St. Big Lily's tights were laddered and everything. It was shackin so it was. And the tongue of Maggie Carter was not fit to be listened to. "FOOLS FOOLS FOOLS FOOLS!" She was squealin and bawlin sumthin shackin.

    So anyhow, Wee Maggie took an awful umbrage at the chapel ever since. Even the Big Dean, who everybody worshipped the ground he walked on, aul Maggie would only give him dagger looks.

    Big Lily and hor are very great again but it tuck a lot of years. There was bad blood between them for years and the atmosphere in the wee street was despert.

    So don't be too hard on aul Maggie. She was left in the lurch by Fr ** **********. She's our local Annie Murphy. Her bite is worse than her bark so it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Florrie, iz thon you agean? Y' havin' bin roun t' see me lately. Why nat? The nex' time yur here bring is a battle o' thon stuff frim Lidl's, will y'? It's 30% chaper than thon Asda muck.

      Anywey, where wuz a? Aye! Big Lily. Thon huzzy (Ack! Shiz not a bad critter when shiz behavin' hurself. God luv 'er.) isn't all that big, y'know. It's them friggin' hay heels sh' wears all the time. Makes her luk lik a hulkin' grate transvestite, God luv 'er. But doan tell ur I sed thon, cos shill not get m' messages fer m' anymore.

      Anywey, where wiz a? Oh aye. Remember thon priest: turned out he wiz as queer as a battle o' chips! I shudda caught on agiz ago, cos he kept tryin' t' dock his boat in the wrong port w' me. Y' know wadda mane, don't y'?

      Anywey I'm awful grateful t' Big Lily fer halpin' me out. I'd die a thirst if it wuzn't fer thon huzzy: y' don't git vadka awn tap in these wee red bricks.

      Anywey, al see yiz agean sumtime. Hey! Did y'know that me an' Magnus has split up fer goood? Aye. He wiz drinkin' fer too much. Most o' it mine n'all. Don't tell oor Magna: thon chile has enuff t' put up wi'.

      Delete
  29. To 11.21 poster
    Yes, we do agree with your analysis and you hit right to the root causes of much of the malaise. The Church is not undertaking "the sincere return to religious practices" that you rightfully prescribe. This is because it has now itself become part of the problem instead of part of the solution.
    It is sadly a negative kind of Catch 22 situation.
    The stark truth for each of us is to consider whether or not we are actively trying to be part of a (genuine) solution.
    If not, then we are probably part of the problem.
    (When you decide where you stand on all of this, think carefully before you pick the spot! That could very well be your final spot on Judgement Day)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what of the times when there were what you and others would call 'sincere...religious practices'? We had those for generations. And yet, there was in the Church still abuse of children, still corruption, still clericalism, etc. .

      The problem isn't primarily lack of piety (what I said above proves this), but a theology of priesthood and episcopacy so far removed doctrinally from the servant model insisted upon by Christ that moral corruption and degeneration among the Clergy was inevitable.

      Stop blaming laity for the sins of the 'Fathers'. Grow up and take responsibility for your own wrongdoing.

      Delete
    2. Racism, ageism and hatred spew from your mouth constantly. Why do you hate Christ so much mc?

      Delete
    3. Er, where is the hatred in my comment at 14:29?

      If you'd trouble your useless fat arse to read more than a few of the comments against me, you'll find plenty of hatred there, you sanctimonious, fat tosser.

      Delete
    4. Oh dear! How the mighty "intellectual" has fallen!

      Delete
    5. 00:22, in your dreams, dear.

      Delete
    6. In my nightmares...

      Delete
    7. 00:52, we're in agreement, then.

      Delete
    8. In your dreams, dear..

      Delete
    9. So we're still in agreement? Goood!

      Delete
  30. The influence of Carl Rogers and unconditional personal regard, which was very trendy in the church at one time. The very old, the very young and the very sick have a right to unconditional personal regard, everyone else should take responsibility for their behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Please, please, please Pat can we have more, much more of whoever the genius is who posted at 13.41 today. I nearly wet myself laughing at what must be one of the most humorous comments ever. Please encourage this talented commentator to continue. S/he has helped me so much to deal with the pontificating and bullshit that comes from Magna Carta [sic]. I now know that the best thing to do is to treat his outpourings (which he presents as having the status of Ex Cathedra statements from on high, as nothing more than the ravings of a demented, if somewhat arrogant, fool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, please do, Bishop P.! Cos then I'll be able to post yet again (as dear old 'Maggie Carter') and annoy 21:10 even more.

      Oh, the anticipatory joy!

      Delete
    2. A little of it goes a (very!) long way as far as some of us are concerned..

      Delete
  32. Why don't you shut the f*** up,whoever you are
    Just leave posters be 21.10

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hi Pat, Magna Carta,

    You seem to have issues with the Church of Rome because you were a) kicked out of ministry and b) kicked out of formation.

    I do think that had you been a seminarian now in the Irish College in Rome you would have been allowed to continue to priestly ministry.

    Calling the church whores and other such names is just childish. You joined this organization at one point. What does that make you? A whoremaster ?

    Move on because this hatred is eating you up.

    Pat – you have no problem living in church property. Why do you kick against your bread and butter?

    You’re doing your own things and that is admirable – just leave the bitterness behind and move on. There are many more organizations out there who will accommodate you.

    I would hate to be in your position – wanting to belong to an organization that doesn’t want you. Move on, leave the Church of Rome behind. Life is too short.

    By the way – I think your persecution of a certain Dublin deacon is disgusting. You have no right to start a witch hunt against a young man in formation or any other person for that matter. You are causing untold damage to this man in his personal and professional life.

    Try finding God and you will let this go.

    AMDG

    ReplyDelete
  34. 22:36, I hate to burst your bubble (Oh, okay! It delights me to do so.), but I was never 'kicked out' of anywhere. I was a model, and fiercely clever, seminarian, and I proceeded to ordination.

    You, however, are not fiercely clever. Nor are you even moderately so, since I have never referred to the Church as a 'whore', but only to the INSTITUTIONAL Chuch as such. In other words, to clerics (or seminarians) like you.

    I shouldn't even consider answering for Bishop Pat, since he is more (much more) than capable of answering your weak riposte for himself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hahaha, finally! MC,tough luck asshole, removed from an institution that hides child abusers and sodomisers! You must be bad! Keep building that bridge and get over your rejection and abject failure! GG EZ

      Delete
  35. AMDG, You obviously think you know me but you do not.

    It seens to me that there are two main reasons prople are being expelled from seminaries these days:

    1. Being heterosexual.

    2. Being unwilling to be promiscuous.

    I live in church property as a result of a Belfast High Court case. I do not live there because of the "charity" of anyone but as of right!

    I belong to and am a priest / bishop of the church of Christ. I have no desire to belong to a clerical / episcopal club.

    The case of a "certain Dublin deacon" was an issue before I became involved in the case and is a very serious issue for the present and the future.

    Ido not have to try and find God.

    We are in very constant contact and EVERYTHING I do is brought before him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And so endeth the day...and the verbal ceasefire!

      Delete
  36. And why are you "involved" with the issue of a " certain Dublin deacon" ? Whats your agenda ? Why should it bother you who are outside the R.C church to get " INVOLVED"anyway.
    Who appointed you its watchdog ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. God,? And here's me thinking you were one of the more balanced contributors to these blogs.

      Delete
    2. How did my answer dissatisfy you? Was it that I mentioned God? Or was it my suggestion that God might use Bishop Pat to effect the divine will? Or was it both?

      Delete
  37. Find out how THOUSAND of people like YOU are making a LIVING from home and are fulfilling their wildest dreams right NOW.
    GET FREE ACCESS TODAY

    ReplyDelete