Monday, 17 July 2017

LETTER FROM MAYNOOTH SEMINARIAN



The following letter arrived this weekend from a Maynooth seminarian:


"Dear Bishop Pat,

It has taken me a while to put pen to paper to you. I have put it off for so long.

I am a former seminarian in Maynooth. I decided to take time out of Maynooth to reflect. 

I decided to withdraw from seminary as I was unhappy with the place - not so much with my formators - but the student/seminarian group. 

When the story broke last Summer about Maynooth I was not one bit surprised. My time away from Maynooth has been good for me as I was offered a good job with xxxxxxxxxxxx which gives me the time to travel the country.

Since Easter I have been working in the xxxxxxxxx area which means I can get home every weekend. 

The people I meet in my current job are very nice to deal with - as was not the case in Maynooth. 

I did not like the Cork seminarians in Maynooth. They were very immature and bitchy. A friend recently attended two Cork ordinations. 


Image result for father evin o brien cork
EVIN O'BRIEN

The first was in Cork and Ross for Rev Evin O'Brien. It was certainly not a joyous occasion - lots of LATIN. When Evin started in Maynooth he was a nice, normal, ordinary guy but then was taken in by the old style church and he got a liking for the latin. I wonder does he really understand latin as he is not the brightest guy on the planet. I wish him well but feel sorry for the people he will minister to as he lacks personality.


Related image
JOHN MAGNER

The second ordination was for Rev John Magner. It was totally different - uplifting, God filled occasion. At that ordination the seminarians dressed in choral dress and all received Holy Communion on the tongue. They had that look of arrogance. 

Newly ordained Evin O'Brien from Cork and Ross did not concelebrate but sat with soutane and lace surplice and stole on his arm. Why Maynooth allowed this guy to be ordained and let behave in this manner, one wonders.




There were interesting characters at the ordination you often refer to in your blog. One such person is Ronan Sheehan. You, Pat, never developed any story on him. He is so far up his arse with his own importance. Why he is still in Maynooth, one wonders. He always got to do his own thing, got cosy numbers. I heard he is off to Gay Paris for the summer to learn French. His time in Paris will be "interesting". I know you have lots of material on him because he is not liked by anyone. He is the type to bring everyone down with him, if he was asked to go. The Dublin deacon is a saint in comparison!


Image result for father thomas deenihan

Last year you wrote about Father Thomas Deenihan who is the Cork priest who is working in the CPS MA in Maynooth as well as holding down his powerful post in the diocesan office in Cork. I got to know him well through his comings and goings in Maynooth. He was friends with some of the seminarians.




You wrote last Summer about Kevin McElroy. When the story broke that he was in Cork Kevin fled back to Down and Connor and his priest "friends" washed their hands of their good-looking, dashing friend.

People like Ronan Sheehan and Kevin McElroy have stories to tell about seminarians and priests. They will talk if they are axed.

Anyway, I better finish and get back to my job - but please do not reveal who is the writer of this letter.

You can do what you want with it.

I'm sure there are others that will help you get these stories off the ground. 

Keep reporting THE TRUE STORIES OF MAYNOOTH.

If a few more at Maynooth go then our Church in Ireland will be a lot better off with fewer good ones.

Sincerely yours,

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX

PAT SAYS:

Dear Xxxxxxx,

Thank you for your letter to me. I have changed parts of your letter to protect your identity. 

I have also lfet out some of the material you shared with me - but you know that this was very informative. I have it filed. It fills in some blanks in the Maynooth story. 

I am happy for you that you feel happier away from Gaynooth and that you have a job you enjoy.

God is still guiding you and He has a plan for you and your life that nothing will disrupt. Keep listening to him for guidance.

The MAYNOOTH PROBLEM has not been solved and is a continuing abscess on the Body of Christ.

It must be lanced once and for all.

The Irish Bishops - in cowardice - have decided to try tweak the situation. 

You do not put ointment or plasters on cancer. It needs RADICAL SURGERY.

That will eventually happen - and it will be helped by people like yourself coming forward and giving information.

I will be sending your letter - without identifying you - to my contacts in Rome. 

I hope to hear from you again.

God bless,

+Pat.

Pope Emeritus Benedict's words at Cardinal Meiseners funeral in Germany on Saturday>



IS MAYNOOTH IS ONE OF THE HOLES LETTING THE WATER INTO THE BARQUE OF CHRIST?

108 comments:

  1. Maynooth Seminarian ( Well was one 40 years ago)17 July 2017 at 02:01

    Another non-story Pat. This old horse is well and truly dead stop flogging him.
    Your headline on todays posting reads 'LETTER FROM MAYNOOTH SEMINARIAN' yesy as soon as we stary reading we discover he is an EX Maynooth Seminarian. Predictably he is anoonymous although what he is hiding his identity for is a mystery.
    Pat you could just as easily have a headline tomorrow reading "cARDINAL TELLS ALL OF VATICAN SEX PARTIES" He would of course be anonymous and his credibility would be as good as yours. Grow up Buckley and get yourself a real job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why comment on a "non story"?

      I have a real job.

      Your problem is I'm doing it too well :-)

      Delete
  2. One person's word to go by. Not enough, Im afraid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow magna, i am shocked!

      Delete
    2. You are displaying great logic and reason!

      Delete
    3. Thank you.

      Add to this 'justice', and you'll be closer to home.

      Delete
  3. What an incredibly bitchy, nasty posting.

    Maynooth may well have problems. I wouldn't know. But public character assassinations, complete with photos, is not the way to rectify them.

    If this destructive, knife in the back posting is an indication of what the Barqe of Christ is supposed to be about, I very much want out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So where is gorgeous ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leave people alone..
      If the letter writer has now found an alternative job to which he is more suited, that is good.
      So why on earth is he wasting his employer's time by writing this spiel complete with photographs.
      His intention seems to be solely to make mischief and engage in character assassination.
      How is that going to help anyone?
      We have had years of people writing tripe like that. People are naturally bored with it.

      Delete
  5. Arlene's on fire.17 July 2017 at 08:24

    The new President of Maynooth has been appointed for only a three year term to give time to students accepted for admission this Autumn, as well as current ones, to complete their degrees. Watch out for an announcement during the academic year that no new students will be admitted, ahead of closure in three years time.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So let me get this straight. You publish people's names without their permission on this blog? But you won't reveal the identity of the likes of Fr X? Truly you are a hyppcrite Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Name them, then - as you have so quickly and simply named those mentioned on the blog today.

      Delete
    2. Name the 2 priests Pat, stick their picture's up on this blog if you have the courage to do so.

      Delete
  7. Kevin is a gentleman, a holy man and a faithful Catholic clerical student. You are a disgrace Buckley!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Some of them in Maynooth do glance at this blog the odd time out of curiosity. But it is silly to think that it has any effect on their behaviour! They are mildly amused at times but would never take any blog that seriously,least of all this one! It is a conceit to imagine that you are maintaining "constant vigilance" as they are not particularly interested or bothered what people write.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another boring diversion away from more important concerns, including grave scandal. They could easily be reverting to type up at Maynooth without this blog's constant vigilance; signing up on daddy-type dating sites, for example, or placing cheap 'no fats, fems or trolls' type ads in Craigslist for mature east European truckers and taxi drivers. Disgusting!

      Delete
    2. We are well aware that the inmates of Gaynooth have no desire to change.

      We are also well aware that the Irish RC bishops do not want real change.

      The pressure for change/closure is coming from the outside and it is working to whatever extent.

      Rome (for its own reasons) is watching and acting.

      So far this Blog, with all its limitations, is the only place where all can comment.

      Delete
  9. Dear Former Seminarian Thank You for the post. Most enlightening. strange how whenever Maynooth is mentioned the pot boils so much. Not exactly a scholarly and erudite way to refute an argument. As to your own vocation speak to Pat. Via Romana is not the only way to God....Good Luck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat do you realise how intolerant you are sounding? Latin and lace? So what! If that is what they want to wear that is their choice. Don't dare attack someone by what they wear and by how they want to pray or celebrate the Mass. You cannot remake the Church in your image.

      Delete
    2. The Church of England is now (subject to the approval of parish councils) allowing clergy to celebrate liturgical services in ordinary clothes.

      There is even a call for the scrapping of episcopal mitres.

      Good call. The REC should follow suit, but it won't: it wants its clergy to stand out, and above, everyone else. (Which is precisely what those L&L lovers want, too.)

      So much for obedience to Christ's command that his disciples are to become servants.

      Delete
  10. Pat, I am generally in favour of your exposing Maynooth as an unsuitable place for priestly formation due to immorality and incompetence among the formation staff, etc.

    However, today's post comes over as the vindictive poison pen letter of a malicious ex-seminarian. It is pure character assassination and gravely sinful against the 8th commandment.

    How can you justify this? This is lurid. To say you are doing yourself no favours is an understatement.

    After reading this ex seminarian's letter, one wonder if the entire Maynooth saga since last summer was not the concoction of a group of bitter and vindictive men who fed you a pack of slanderous lies about lads against whom they have a grudge?

    Does the ordination of a seminarian, who had so much Latin in his ordination Liturgy, not give the lie to the claim often made, by those alleging they are exposing Maynooth's faults, that the more "traditional" students are persecuted and driven out?

    Big thumbs down to this piece. A malicious and mischievous missive from a nasty man who hates Cork!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of the claims about Maynooth is that there are a group of "girls" there who are gay and into L&L - Latin and lace.

      Those being persecuted are heterosexual/celibate homosexual men who are Vatican 11.

      Delete
    2. Nothing wrong with L&L per se.

      But L&L and Gaynooth activities ?

      Delete
    3. Up to now I thought l&l was leather and lube. I'm switching from my sauna to my local church :-)

      Delete
    4. Is there not also a claim that guys who say the Rosary, want to kneel at the Consecration of the Mass, and other shocking crimes, are being driven out?

      So what is the true state of affairs? Is it just all a bunch of nasty "queens" at each other's throats?

      The telling remark in this ex student's "letter" is that he hadn't much of a problem with staff! The staff, from the revelations of the past year in your blog, are the principal source of dysfunction.

      For if the staff were what they are supposed to be, there would NO gay subculture, no Grindr, Silver Daddies, King Puck and Gorgeous, etc!

      Delete
    5. Thank you 11.11, what struck me too was the claim the alleged Seminarian who sent the alleged pen letter had problems with students but not Staff at Maynooth. This is a totally massive contradiction given that this blog has primarily accused staff at Maynooth for its present problems. Give us some credit please.

      Delete
    6. It's hardly surprising that he didn't have much of a problem with the staff - sounds to me like he was on the same wavelength as them. A few examples:

      - he believes the seminarians who received Holy Communion on the tongue had "that look of arrogance". Bearing in mind - this is only what this guy heard from a friend. What is arrogant about receiving Communion reverently? Communion on the tongue actually is the norm, but it is frowned upon by the Maynooth authorities.

      - he has a problem with a priest not concelebrating at an ordination Mass. A priest is always free not to concelebrate - they don't tell you that in Maynooth though. He's probably one of Liam Tracey's "pets".

      - he is obviously repulsed by Latin. This guy was probably regarded as a perfect seminarian by the formation staff who literally kicked genuine seminarians out of seminary because they went to the Latin Mass.

      As I say, this ex-seminarian was not bothered by the staff because he was on the same wavelength as them: anti-Latin, anti-tradition, but gagging for gossip and brimming with bitchiness.

      I can't understand why Pat has fallen for this nonsense - this is clearly not a credible source.

      Delete
  11. "...please do not reveal who is the writer of this letter".

    Indeed... but "please publish my letter in which I bitch at length and name and defame other seminarians and priests".

    Sure thing...that's fair.

    Very disappointing blog today, Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But it was written and posted.

      Delete
    2. What do you mean it was "written and posted"??? So what!! So character assassination is fine so long as it in an envelope with a stamp?

      Delete
    3. So someone who writes and posts a bitchfest letter like today's blog then actually has the temerity to request that his name would not be disclosed! He expects anonymity after the names - photos etc that he has spilled out!
      But of course he doesn't want to be held accountable.
      What planet is he from?!!

      Delete
    4. No, Pat - he is definitely not from Planet Reality.

      After the way he has written about other seminarians - much of which really has nothing to do with any Maynooth controversy but his own personal dislike of Latin and lace (which seems to be quite a fixation for him) - would you really admit him to seminary? If that's how this lad talks about his fellow seminarians, what would he be saying about his parishioners?

      By all means continue to expose the corruption in Maynooth, but please do not think you are fooling us into thinking that this lad is from Planet Reality. It is plain to see that he is not a credible source, and certainly not an un-biased one: bitchy, naming people that he simply doesn't like. If his disgust at a priest wearing a soutane and surplice and seminarians receiving Communion on the tongue is anything to go by, I would suggest that he is from the same planet as Fanny Mullaney, Collins, and Prior - which as you well know, Pat, is certainly NOT Planet Reality.

      Delete
  12. I agree totally that this blog has let me down today. By publishing a poison pen is beyond contempt. You have sunk to new levels and you have issued pictures of people just because you have received a letter in the post, get a grip man ffs,

    ReplyDelete
  13. Publish all comments Pat, i made a comment and you did not publish it. Simply because someone holds different views and criticises you, that does not mean should should censor every comment. If i was insulting you, fsir enough, but i have not. Very unfair and unjust. Pandering to your audience as usual.

    ReplyDelete
  14. So he wasn't happy with the seminarian group?

    How noble and righteous of him...I suppose he was a model seminarian! If he was spouting the amount of vitriol and filthy gossip while in seminary as he has written in this letter to you, Pat, we should thank God that the people have been spared the indignity of having him as their priest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do not accept that today's letter from the ex seminarian is a poison pen letter.

      It is his comments on the situation as he found it in Maynooth.

      He did not have the same problem as some had with the Maynooth staff.

      His main issue was with SOME of the seminarians.

      Why should we not hear from a VERY RECENT INSIDER?

      Delete
    2. The people who are angry on the blog today are the ones who are trying to protect and cover up for Maynooth. They are obviously annoyed that seminarians and former seminarians are now expressing their views on this blog. I want to hear more, not less, from these people who have inside information to give us.

      Delete
    3. "... trying to protect and cover Maynooth.."!
      Most definitely not in my case.
      I have never and never will be seminarian.
      But this constant deliberate immature sniping and character assassination has become intolerable.
      Who exactly is it aimed at impressing?
      Decent people are fed up with the constant diet of exaggerations and half-truths and mis-information. Even they cannot now agree on their story! And so the dreary saga goes on..

      Delete
  15. Recent insider? How can we prove that? We can't and you can't. "He did not have the same problem with staff that some had". Do you not realise how ridiculous that sounds. You have torn the staff to shreds which is the point and now you say that they were ok solely on receiving a poison letter in the post. If you don't realise what a poison pen letter is then you are a bigger fool than I already knew you to be. I bet that letter never came with a name printed on it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Pat if you were a student in maynooth today you would be part of the gay cabal. Fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No I would not.

      I would never want to discriminate against heterosexual seminarians and seminarians who want to be celibate.

      Delete
    2. Well posting letters with no names, no accountability and no evidence speaks volumes about you.

      Delete
    3. Just like when Maynooth expels seminarians and gives them no reasons?

      Delete
    4. "Just like when Maynooth expels seminarians and gives them no reasons?"

      Bingo!

      So, in your book, that makes today's blog ok?

      Maynooth has destroyed good vocations and blackened the names of decent men, so it's ok for you to do the same? That solves the Maynooth problem how?

      Delete
    5. Yes, you're correct poster 14.45.
      This is exactly it!
      This is where the immaturity reveals itself - - in the misguided tit for tat notion that two wrongs will somewhat make a right.

      Delete
  17. I have no connections with Maynooth and never have. My comment today is a rational one against the falsehoods and hysteria displayed on this blog that you so clearly thrive on. The fact you want to hear more scandal not less show you up for the pathetic being you are. Get a life and get a job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh Dear! Maynooth also touches a sore point!

      Delete
  18. 11.51 and 11.55( prob the same person)
    If u read Pats blog regularly wd know he wasn't part of any gay gang during his formative years,
    Pat u shouldn't bother posting all those posts form the "" hate directed at you".
    It's people who post here who keep asking for more scandal.
    You don't need to be here, so go do your work, if u lucky enough to be employed...unless u one of round collar lot that haven't a clue about how the world ticks.

    ReplyDelete
  19. So why are you not publishing my post critical of you and your protection of Fr X? You are censoring again, Pat. You do it all the time - not just the nasty comments which you are right not to post - but legitimate criticism which doesn't suit your agenda and worldview. You also protect the troll, Magna Carta, at times, from legitimate criticism even though you claim not to know him/her/it. I know that you do this from others also who try to post. But, be assured, we are not fools and we can put two and two together. You shield Fr X who is guilty of a whole lot worse than some of these young seminarians. You publish pictures of young men today about whom there are scurrilous allegations from a dubious source and yet you cover up for your friend, Fr X, who is making an absolute mockery of the priesthood by his lifestyle. Is he not also a "cancer on the Body of Christ"? You are hypocritical and inconsistent to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can someone tell me who this Fr X is and what has he done?

      Delete
  20. Your refusal to publish criticism of yourself and Fr X only proves and confirms what we are coming to know about you. Duly noted, Pat. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will not publish abuse and name calling.

      Delete
    2. I do publish criticism of myself.

      The Father X case is far more complicated than people realise.

      It will be dealt with in full and in time.

      Delete
    3. You publish abuse and name-calling all the time! You let a troll have free range until you were called out in it.

      Delete
    4. Did Fr X attempt suicide?

      Delete
    5. Sadly Pat, you don't accept criticisms of yourself. You are selective about what you print. You are immune to criticism and you are forever trying to prove yourself right all the time. A word for that -self serving arrogance!! You have published without permission I assume the photos of priests and students today that leave them open to abuse, defamation, character assasination, hatred, invective and whispered conversations. Your blog today says much about you than the misguided former seminarian, much that reflects your distasteful propensity to undo good names and reputations. Your behavious is most definitely un-Christlike. But it seems, you couldn't care less about the Christ you claim to serve and follow because if you imitated him as a so called "pastor", you would shoe greater understanding, charity, fairness and justice. If what you write here is indicative of your "preaching" at Larne, your congregation is very impoverished and spiritually malnourished.....(I know you may need a dictionary to understand some words...).

      Delete
    6. Anon at 17.27: Your question is morally unacceptable from any point of view. What a lurid and degenerate query? Just simply morally unacceptable. It reflects the kind of nasty mindset about priests that Pat loves to receive on his blog. Get a life and do something worthwhile.

      Delete
    7. ALL the photographs on today's Blog are already on the internet.

      They are already in the PUBLIC DOMAIN.

      Delete
    8. That they are in the "public domain", Pat, is not the issue. It's how they are being used and the whole unsavoury business of publishing the bitchiness and character assassination by this former seminarian.

      Delete
    9. Anon at 18:15, are you Fr X? Do you know what really is lurid? Degenerate? Morally unacceptable? A middle aged Catholic priest cavorting shamelessly with a 17year old boy. A priest boasting about his sinful lifestyle and sexual relationship with an adolescent male. So shut your damned mouth!

      Delete
  21. What the writer has said today (parts of which have been redacted for various reasons, fits in perfectly with the Maynooth jig saw puzzle whose pieces are coming slowly and surely together.

    Would readers please stop making the mistake of thinking that EVERYTHING can be published IMEDIATELY and at the one time.

    Maynooth is not a one off story.

    It is an ongoing saga

    ReplyDelete
  22. Pat,

    Can you tell us how this seminarian who has recently taken time out from Maynooth knows what a newly ordained priest was like when he first started in Maynooth?

    Surely it's logical to assume that your letter-writer would have to have started at least in the same year to be in a position to comment on what O'Brien was like when he first started seminary?

    Also, let us bear in mind that a huge chunk of this letter is not his first-hand experience - it was a friend who told him about the ordinations.

    Quite frankly, Pat, I smell a rat - I'm surprised that you're defending the integrity of both the letter and its author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His letter to me was changed in aspects to protect his identity.

      He knew the people his commented long enough.

      Read the "friend" word widely.

      Delete
    2. So the friend isn't really a friend...hmmm - rather makes me more suspicious and dubious of his credibility.

      Nice of you to have gone to such lengths to protect his identity, whereas you just threw out names and pictures of those he mentioned in the letter. In fairness, Pat, do you really think that was responsible? I know some of the names have come up before, but what exactly was O'Brien's crime that it warranted his name a picture published?

      Delete
  23. I would be disturbed to discover a young Priest fresh from Maynooth refusing to concelebrate Mass. This is right wing nonsense and it tells you a lot about his formators in Maynooth. There are many right wing lace wearing young fellas who are recent products of Maynooth, that scares me about their theology of Priesthood in a modern post Vatican II Church. One example is here in Armagh Cathedral. Their Bishops are just as guilty, they should tell them to cop themselves on and get into the real modern world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would not concelebrating Mass disturb you? What is actually DISTURBING about it? What makes not doing so "nonsense"? Because he doesn't share your modernist theology? There is absolutely NOTHING in any Church document which says that a priest must concelebrate Mass - even the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, which permits concelebration, does not require every priest to concelebrate. On the other hand, the Church guards the right of a priest to celebrate Mass individually if he so wishes. I would therefore applaud the priest - the formation that he received in this regard was proper and IN SPITE of the Maynooth system.

      As for the "right wing lace wearing young fellas", I am baffled as to why you (and many others apparently) get so worked up over some lace. Personally I would have more of an issue with priests who do not offer the Mass in a dignified manner. The link you make between lace and "right wing" is also interesting - judging a man's theology by his attire, eh? If your method is correct, I would be far more worried by priests who wear polyester chasubles that may as well be shower curtains.

      If you are indeed a Catholic, it bothers me that tradition is apparently so distasteful to you.

      But then again, we obviously differ fundamentally: you believe that there is a pre-Vatican II Church and a "post Vatican II Church", a break, as it were, in theology and tradition. This, of course, was never the intention of the Second Vatican Council - there is but one Catholic Church, not a "pre" and "post".

      Delete
    2. If a young priest comes out on the altar wearing a biretta, a fiddle back vestment and a lace ald you can be sure he is not a liberal :-)

      Delete
    3. Apparently vatican 2 is the iphone of theology. Overrated and a gimic

      Delete
    4. Lay people are not the slightest bit interested in the silly, immature "lace /no lace" comments and debates. We never notice or care what the priest is wearing! (We do however notice whether or not your nails are short and spotlessly clean and whether or not you have properly polished your shoes below that low hem!)

      Delete
    5. Yes, Pat - you are most likely correct. But I'd rather this - as long as he is authentic - to a priest who is not teaching or following the Catholic faith.

      But we should be very clear on a few things. First, a traditional priest does not have to wear lace or a biretta - but as a corollary to this, priests need to understand that wearing lace or a biretta does not make them orthodox or traditional.

      Secondly, there has been a lot of talk on this blog linking the homosexuals in Maynooth with lace. It is the most ridiculous connection. In fact, in Maynooth the homosexuals were usually the ones who displayed the strongest aversion to lace, Latin, beautiful vestments, etc. I can tell you that Gorgeous and Puck certainly weren't going off to Latin Masses or dripping with lace - no the homosexuals in Maynooth have other...*ahem*...distractions.

      Delete
    6. 17:59, 'offer Mass in a dignified manner'? By which you mean 'in gaudy, effete and stylised vestments'.

      Jesus offered the first and only Mass in his everyday clothes. By your reckoning, that was undignified. You should tell him so, when you don't get to Heaven.

      Delete
    7. Yes, Jesus offered Mass in his everyday clothes. He was also born in a stable. However, the Magi - on account of this - did not give him gifts of straw and manure.

      Delete
    8. And your point is?

      What on Earth has a Matthean literary licence to do with the fact that Jesus celebrated the first Mass in his everyday clothes and instructed his followers to re-present the celebration in his memory?

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

      Delete
    10. Magna Carta at 19:17 offers us a splendid example of the logical, clear thinking in which he takes such pride. Thank you so much for that.

      Delete
  24. When he says "the Dublin deacon is a saint compared to him......"
    Is he referring to gorgeous ?????
    So gorgeous is still a deacon ????



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about the OSA guy is he a "friend" of Bishop Michael Campbell. He hasn't defended himself so may we infer that MC and OSA Iggy are one and the same and "friends of +MC.

      Delete
  25. Pat + great blog today. Well done to the man who wrote the letter. It seems to me when Maynooth or a seminairan is mentioned , things get really bitchy here. its simple , for healing to take place, we must first recoginise the injury and then get the treatment. Its time to close Maynooth, I have always said Guys needs to spend a year in a parish away from home, some time in Lough Derg to really think about what they want. Pat its time to provide everything on Maynooth and more importantly the BISHOPS involved , you do know what I mean ?

    Tuam Diocese in Maynooth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes we are gradually piecing it all together.

      That's why all the "bitches" are out today.

      Delete
    2. How dare you pat. So anyone who questions your methods of undermining and destroying some other peoples character are bitches? I would say you were an absolute hangman in seminary.

      Delete
    3. So pat me good buddy, if i decide to print fr x name will you allow it to be published?

      Delete
    4. I agree with 19.27. How audacious of Pat the brave....Not only will he call the police if he is challenged to rigorous debate, but now he calls all critics "bitches"....I think there is unanimous agreement that Pat is the supreme bitch....but then he doesn't do irony or truth, so he won't be aware of his hypocrisy.

      Delete
    5. I'd say you're about as much "Tuam Diocese in Maynooth" as the man in the moon.

      After Fanny Mullaney threatening in his rector's talk last september to punish seminarians who communicate with Pat and to sue those who bring the seminary into disrepute (as if Mullaney and co. hadn't already done that), no seminarian contributing to this blog would have the guts to state what diocese he's actually from.

      Unless, of course....you're from the Paul the Pryer school of reverse psychology.

      You are right, though - Maynooth needs to be shut down. As long as the bishops remain in open denial about the situation there is zero hope of saving it.

      Delete
  26. Pat, is it true that Fr X is no longer functioning as a Priest?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes - well, one of the Fr X's at least...Pat says there's two.

      Delete
  27. Fiddle back vestments do mean something because they have come to represent a certain approach to the liturgy and thus faith. This actually predates Vatican II because the adherents of the liturgical movement would tend to wear fuller, even conical, vestments, more reminiscent of the origins of the Mass. The complete polarisation came after Vatican II and the Roman vestments were associated with the sort of Catholicism many people experienced before.
    Does it matter? Not a jot.
    Do people wear these things to make statememts? Oh yes indeedy.
    Actually the only Mass Vatican II said should be concelebrated is the community Mass of a religious community or cathedral chapter. Otherwise the point of concelebration tends to go by the way.
    There are pictures online of very early concelebrations, each priest vested in a fiddleback (lol) and with his owm chalice and paten.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Good blog today. I'm glad the lad left. The future of the church will be outside the catholic one. Its full of the same long gown wearing saducces that shout in the markets and who killed the true priest many years ago. They'd do the same today if Jesus walked among us, and wouldn't recognise his voice.

    ReplyDelete
  29. That letter at the top of today's blog does not ring true. It would not need Agatha Christie to point out the inconsistencies! The oddest thing has to be trying to understand why the writer decided to leave Maynooth. His reason does not ring true. He says he needed time out "to reflect" but has no problem with his own progress or with the formation Staff - -No, his problem, according to him, is that he needs to reflect on the other seminarians, his class mates! I'm sorry but I don't buy that.
    If he was that committed to his own vocation, he would regard the antics of his wayward peers as, at most, a distraction and he would be fully concentrating on his formation.
    Very odd. It is very obvious from his letter that he was actually homesick while in the seminary and obviously wasn't part of the camaraderie which the Cork students had with each other. Now he has decided it is revenge time. He has churned things around for a certain interval of time and now he lifts the scalpel pen and writes the letter.
    Well, they do say revenge is a dish best served cold...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Lol at fiddlebacks
    Is it a sexual position ??????

    ReplyDelete
  31. Not wanting to concelebrate goes against current liturgical, theological and historical research in relating to the Last Supper.

    For the same reason, Cardinal Beniamino Stella, Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy is in the process of formulating a policy document to the effect that concelebration will be the norm in the Roman seminaries. So that's the direction in which the mind of the church is pointing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arlene's on fire18 July 2017 at 16:35

      As the learned Fr Hunwicke points out in his blog: "this represents a direct and shameless attack on a right embodied in the direct enactment of an Ecumenical Council, in Sacrosanctum Concilium of Vatican II. This is a particularly unscrupulous example of the practice of citing Vatican II, or its Spirit, when it suits a writer; and of ignoring or misrepresenting its explicit mandates when they are inconvenient."

      Delete
    2. Arlene's on fire18 July 2017 at 16:38

      Ah yes, the Catholic Church started in 1962. Anything from before then is so much rubbish apparently.

      Delete
    3. Fr Hunwicke? Hardly the most representative of voices.

      He forgets in R.C. the Pope is the supreme teacher. Francis approves of the move.

      Delete
    4. Arlene's on fire18 July 2017 at 22:58

      Beware papalotry. On the contrary, it is to the Scriptures, the Apostolic Tradition, the unanimous consent of the Fathers, and the constant Magisterium of the Church over the course of the entire past two millennia to which we must turn to discover what Jesus wants of us as a Church and individually. A pope's magisterium is only valuable and edifying to the extent that it conforms to and confirms the Faith of the Church. He is not an absolute monarch, or like a President who makes policies ab initio.

      The Church was not founded in 2013, and Pope Francis is merely the Vicar of Christ, not Christ Himself, nor will it be refounded when the pontificate of Jorge Bergoglio ends.

      Francis' approval of something does not trump an Ecumenical Council.

      Delete
    5. Arlene's on fire18 July 2017 at 23:23

      Whether Fr Hunwicke is representative or not is irrelevant.

      The question is whether he is correct in saying that Vatican II reaffirmed the right of priests to celebrate Mass singly, as has been the constant tradition? Having a Pope who thinks he can just rough ride over a Council confirms the Protestant and Orthodox fears of a Church with a dictator at it's head.

      It bemuses me how liberals who dismissed anything that came out of Rome during the St John Paul II and Benedict XVI years now treat every word of Francis as if it's the Gospel. LOL.

      Delete
    6. 22:58, you are correct only in part. The source of God's teaching may be known from all these sources IN CONJUNCTION with the wider Church.

      The Magisterium of the Church is not just the episcopacy; it is the harmonization of ALL these constituent elements.

      Delete
    7. bemuses me how conservatives who hung on every word of Papa Wojtyla and Papa Ratzinger are suddently more discerning under Papa Bergoglio.

      In fact you are not correct. Conciliarism was rejected in the 15th Century. The authority of a General Council in communion with the Pope is not greater than that of the Pope alone.

      I'm smiling at the image of each of the disciples and Jesus celebrating the Last Supper consecutively.

      Delete
    8. Arlene's on fire19 July 2017 at 08:40

      The apostles were concelebrants at the Last Supper? I'm smiling at that image. LOL.

      Delete
    9. You need to read comments with greater care and insight, facilities which you wont find possible without that smug prejudice of yours. My comment was not a defence of Conciliarism, but of ecclesial universalism.

      The Spirit is universal; therefore the concomitant authority to teach is universal, and resides in the conjunction and harmonization of the elements I mentioned above.

      Delete
    10. 08:40, no, the Apostles were not concelebrants at the Last Supper.

      Delete
  32. I'm afraid I don't approve of the negative exposure meted out to the people who are the subject of today's blog. It's impossible to justify it.

    ReplyDelete
  33. A decade ago at this time, Derry diocese Dr. Felim Donnelly was kicked out of Maynooth after making an official complaint about 'a deep homosexual ethos' among higher seminary staff in Maynooth. His complaint was ultimately not upheld and he was summarily thrown out. His Bishop, Hegarty of Derry, refused to support him as soon as his complaint aired.

    Another seminarian who was called to give evidence on behalf of the Doctor just before the guillotine fell on him was the former IRA guy Shane O'Doherty for Dublin. He was dumped out the door shortly afterwards by Diarmuid Martin no reasons given. Many seminarians had reasons to give evidence in support of the Doctor but were too afraid to do so realising that if they gave evidence about homosexual goings on they too would be thrown out of the seminary.

    Imagine that at the same time other senior seminarians were openly telling people that they were driving up to the Phoenix Park to cruise the girlboys there - and they were in no way afraid of any repercussions from Maynooth.

    The sickness has travelled down the intervening years and there seems to be no cure. I can understand why some seminarians don't want to be identified as opposing the homosexual clique - one seminarian known to me took time out of Maynooth and later applied to become a lay parish worker in a paid job. He got a call from the diocese - "You were on priestly vocation track - you cannot therefore be suited to lay parish worker track." In other words, you did not like Maynooth and we will make no positions available to you.

    The entire Irish church seems to be poisoned by the influence of Maynooth down the years. Anyone generous enough to be willing to give up job, apartment and life to go into Maynooth must begin by being well motivated toward Church in general, but just after leaving or being thrown out of Maynooth they become branded as 'ex Maynooth' and are toxic. The toxic quality is only on the straights and the moderately conservative.

    Take then the case of a guy who is all over Gay dating sites, is involved with gay priests and receiving gifts and so on - he is in the media and press for a year or so and - what? - he is not toxic at all and has bishops and priests batting for him. You complainers really need to get a reality check. The letter writer has a case and Maynooth has many cases to answer.

    The solution to the Maynooth virus?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Get a life. Once is enough for your comment to appear without duplicating.

      Any stick to beat those who you don't like with.

      Delete