Monday, 30 October 2017

BALLYRAGGET NONSENSE





St.Patrick's Ballyragget intermediate hurlers have come to national attention in the last few days after their Kilkenny Intermediate Hurling Championship victory.
Photos and footage of their wild celebrations were widely circulated with two strippers called Fifi and Sabrina at the forefront of the party.
A garda investigation has even been launched, over footage of one of the ladies performing a sex act on a Ballyragget player.
The club insists it was a private event, a 21st birthday party for one of the players. The Kilkenny County board have still launched their own investigation though.
If you thought the scandal couldn't get any more Irish, it just has.
Fr.Tommy Murphy, of St Patrick’s Church in Ballyragget has had his say.



Speaking to the Irish Independent, he said a "scar" had been left on the community.
“Unfortunately, Ballyragget is now in the papers for all the wrong reasons. It leaves a scar on the community.
“I’m just sorry that it ever happened. What was a grand occasion has really been spoiled? I hope this is a lesson learned.”
Fr.Murphy added that there could be a positive outcome though.
He has offered confession to anyone involved in the scandal.

"I don't think there's going to be a rush to confessions but if anyone wants to talk about it, I would be very glad to talk to them. There is salvation at the end of this."


PAT SAYS:

FOR GOD'S SAKE WHY IS THIS STORM IN A TEACUP MAKING NATIONAL NEWS IN IRELAND FOR DAYS AND DAYS???

A 21st-century young Irish man celebrating his 21st birthday get drunk with a few friends in a rural pub and two adult women come along (paid or unpaid ???) and do a strip act.

AND THE GARDAI ARE INVESTIGATING !!!!!!

There were no minors present or involved!
No sexual crime took place!

Nobody was forced to be present and nobody was raped!

And the stupid bloody priest wants the young men and women to come to Confession to him and receive FORGIVENESS and SALVATION!!!

We all know that parties involving young men and women - especially at the periphery of football - can be sexually charged.

We all know - that whether or not the Catholic Church likes it or not - most young Irish people engage in premarriage and extramarital sex.

It's not as if any of them were married with vows.

It's not as if any of them were priests or nuns with vows of chastity.

And of those making a song and dance about it all _

How many of them were married and sleeping with their secretaries on the night in question?

How many priests in Ireland were having sex with men and women that night - in their presbyteries or in night clubs and saunas?

Of course, I believe in the Christian IDEALS about sexuality happening in the context of love and commitment.

BUT does Ireland not have bigger moral problems than the Balltragget pub party:

- The homeless sleeping on the streets of Dublin?

- Families being thrown out of their homes by ruthless bankers?

- People living below the poverty line?

WHY IS IT THAT WE IRISH STILL THINK THAT THE GREATEST MORAL ISSUE IN OUR COUNTRY IS SEX???


Image result for sex in ireland






108 comments:

  1. It is easier for saga based Catholics to be more horrified by the blow job given at that party than to be horrified by the number of homeless... quite simply it is easy to call oneself Catholic while considering the past actions of our neighbour than it is when considering the action we are called go exercise.

    (Secretly man of us are just jealous of the blow job and sexual liberty displayed)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The last sentence of the @23.18 posts is definitely an instance of "Speak for yourself(Ugh!)

      Delete
  2. MournemanMichael30 October 2017 at 23:51

    +Pat: many of your cartoons and sketches are brilliant. Where do they come from?
    MMM

    ReplyDelete
  3. What an idiot of a priest to get involved at all. Grist to the mill of anyone wanting to poke fun at the church. Very badly advised.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pat, if it's ni5t such a big issue, why are you wastig space with it? What do you hope to achieve from rehashing what we already know - except to take a cheap shot at the lical priest. Politicians, parents, teachers, club leaders - have all expressed outrage, not at it happening g but that it went viral. Have all these responsible people legitimate cares for their younger children? Pat you wouldn't have a clue about parents' worries and nightmares about their young teenage sons and daughters. So, don't be so dismissive and judgmental on the priest, parents, teachers etc. Incidentally you've gone into omerta mode re: Little Brothers and all the justifiable questions asked of you in relation to certain aspects of it. Where is your voice of transparency and truth?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have not gone into omerta mode.

      The LBO will be a little community about Eucharist, prayer and charity.

      It will get going with two living in the house - a 70 year old priest and a 50 year old former religious/semi seminarian.

      Others may join? I will be a very regular visitor for Mass, prayer and friendship time.

      I have known the priest for 14 years and Br Jim for 33 years. I have no worries about either.

      Why should any of us have to answer endless questions from an Anonymous person whose motivation for inquisition is ?????????

      In time we will create a website etc.

      In the meantime mind your own bloody business!

      Delete
  5. could some poor soul remind the good father its 2017 not 1957.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. The youth of Ireland are in more danger from the RC Church and priests than they are from sex!

      Delete
    2. That comment at 9.26 is not thought through properly I fear..
      Yes, the incorrect use of and disrespect for sexuality does lead our young people into many difficulties and unwise courses of action and this is ESPECIALLY true when its misuse was perpetrated and initiated by ministers of the Church who failed woefully in their duty to our young people and thereby failed in serious aspects of their vocation.

      Delete
    3. The commandments came WITHOUT a sell by date! So it matters not a fig what decade or even what century we're in.

      Delete
  6. Fr Tommy Murphy should have offered to go to Gaynooth with his confessional box rather than offering the sacrament through the national media to a group of young people who just drank too much.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Really are you serious ?

    ReplyDelete
  8. A lot of what you say is absolutely correct but two thoughts struck me.. There might be internal controversy amongst some of the other players or their parents or some additional committee members who were attending as to whether there was a sex act performed publicly which was of the category usually described as "offending public decency"(eg oral sex)
    This would certainly be the case if any players in the surrounding areas were under 18 yrs completely irregardless of whether the party was being described as a private birthday party or not. The GAA prides itself on its ethos of excellent pastoral care to all its young players under 21 but has a serious responsibility in law towards the players under 18 who are legally "children". Every training coach has to be vetted if they are going to work with these young players and permitting the "adult" events described in the blog would be regarded by parents and GAA management as a serious misjudgement and breach of that trust.
    Now as I said above, I only know what I read here about this incident which some may feel brings the careful standards of the GAA into disrepute.
    The players are described as "Intermediate"
    I am aware however, that the age group structure of the GAA is anything but simple and you do get gifted younger players over 16 yrs being permitted to take part with somewhat older ones under very laid down rules and this can lead to some degree of mixed ages. Could that be why some people felt unhappy that this was being regarded as suitable for the evening's entertainment, birthday or not?
    In any case, the GAA prefers to promote a healthy clean image and an environment where all their young players, both male and female feel appreciated and protected.
    They probably regard this incident as a lapse of judgement on the part of one or more organisers or maybe it was a surprise "joke" "planned by a few of the fellow's friends without any prior permission!
    That would explain why there's now an enquiry.
    I think on this occasion the local priest should have given any opinions to the group itself rather than the way he did. He appeared to show little discretion as to what he should say to the players in private and what(if anything) he should say to the general public!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Horse play like that shouldn't be filmed and circulated. Young lads who've got carried away and now probably are mortified. It's not going to help their future employment or relationship prospects.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nothing nonsensical about Ballyragget inident. It went viral and only contributes to a cheapening of human sexuality, to the denigration of women. Let them act immmrally and foolishly behind closed doors. These so called icons for younger children have sent out very immoral and dangerous messages. For all the teenagers (and children) who access such images on mobile phones, it is not a laughing matter. As a parent I try to teach my children respect for their body and never to allow themselves to be denigrated or dehumanised through such behaviour. Pat, obviously not having children and all the challenges we as parents have, you can sneer and laugh all you like but I find this incident abhorrent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, poster above at 6.43 I am with you one hundred per cent.
      The club needs to have a serious review of its Child Protection policy and supervision arrangements both before and during functions. They owe that much at least to the families who trust them to provide wholesome recreation for their young people.
      The wider GAA community is a little less than charmed by their distasteful antics I can tell you!

      Delete
    2. Innocent until proven guilty. Where is the proof that anybody was exploited? And many of those who are outraged are probably porn fans. As for the denigration of sexuality, choice comes first.

      Delete
    3. Choice does not always come first - sorry!
      Not where the care of young people is concerned and your "choice would in any way infringe on that.
      Not where your" choice" involves participating in the further denigration of women.
      Not where maybe in other circumstances your "choice" involved breaking the law or infringing on other people's rights.
      (Did someone a few days ago actually try to argue that we don't need Religious Education taught in our schools. I think we very much do... It certainly sounds as if we need more, not less.)

      Delete
  11. '(Fr Murphy)... said a "scar" had been left on the community.'

    Drama queenery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In a sense, the priest was correct in that a fairly small local GAA club which had an excellent reputation with the parents of the boys and girls who were enrolled as Juniors and progressing into the higher age bands,is now in the position of having to fight to convince schools and parents that this is an environment where there is safety and respect. Child Protection is a much wider responsibility than simply making sure that there is no one-to-one inappropriate approaches being made to the under 18s

      Delete
  12. Not the most appetising image first thing in the morning! If the young man had a better chest with a bit of colour on it then it might be worth a look......much ado about nothing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The photo is not appealing for 8.25.
      It is not appealing for me either.
      But the young man's chest is not the reason.

      Delete
    2. 'A better chest with a bit of colour on it', 08:25? It is already coloured...white, the colour God intended.

      Tanned skin is damaged skin. There is no such thing as a healthy tan.

      Delete
    3. Hear hear Magna! I never tell any friend any more when she returns from a hot climate holiday "What a great tan..." etc I show interest in other nice aspects of her trip instead (and no.. I am not jealous as I am a bit of a jetsetter myself!) If I am pressed to comment on the tan, I reply sympathetically "Try not to worry... Now that you are back home, your skin will start to recover its damage." etc
      It never fails as a tactic to bring people to their senses.
      I highly recommend that approach. Nice to see you. Magna. Hope you are in good form.

      Delete
    4. Thank you, 16:11, for your pleasantness and for your good wish.

      The same to you.

      Delete
  13. Hi Pat,

    Sorry I missed your blog the last few days but I thought I'd mention something about the clerical salaries posting.

    There is a system to keep everything low. In first year Maynooth all seminarians are brought in to sign forms for a medical card. I did as I was told and was registered as living in a religious community with no/low income. This was the only time in my life that I had a medical card. I neither wanted it or needed it. I had VHI through my own funding and never took money from St. Joseph's YPS.

    I believe it is a disgrace because religious orders across this country bank their money in corporate accounts while making priests, brothers, sisters and nuns appear in poverty through minimal 'pocket money'.

    When the Dept. Of Health run their figures this necessarily means that some people in real need and genuine poverty are cut off so that the religious can scam the system.

    These persons are neither in self-employmemt nor in poverty. I accept that there may be genuine independent clergy, such as your good self, who may qualify. But there is no way and Catholic priest, brother, sister or nun is actually on the breadline unless their superior is abusing them.

    It is a scandal.

    Sincerely,
    A former seminarian, a Christian who has not called himself Catholic since seeing the clerical side of the institution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To poster @8.49
      You probably did right to leave the community then.
      You appear to have real issues coming up with regard to taking your "vow of poverty".
      You appear to feel that would cast a slur on you - -if you found yourself having to be classified as "poor".
      That was unfortunate but it was honest to leave if you wanted to be perceived as a person who had plenty of money for any circumstance that might occur.

      Delete
    2. At 10.29 - you clearly missed the point. Employees of the Catholic church are not poor, rather they are poorly paid in order to scam the State systems while the Church hides its money in corporate accounts. The church could well afford VHI policies rather than medical cards.

      I have no problem with poverty where it is genuine. But I have a massive problem with wealthy people choosing to appear poor in order to abuse the social welfare system designed to protect those who genuinely need help.

      Delete
    3. 10.29's response exhibits the clerical cynicism designed to twist a valid objection so much that Anon 10.29 has replied to their own twisted interpretation rather than the comment.

      10.29 could do well by standing back and opening their mind.

      Delete
    4. Agree fully with 10:29.

      08:49 and 14:12 (whether one or two people) your argument is fallacious. The financial position of seminarians is very different from that of religious orders. The corporate finances of the latter have nothing to do with the individual cases of the former.

      There was nothing to stop you from declaring your independent means and private health insurance and from opting out of the medicsl card system.

      It must have been difficult for you to have had it known that as a student and a seminarian you had signed up for a medical card.

      You can also always make an anonymous contribution to any charity you like and as often as you like.

      Delete
    5. No, I most certainly didn't "miss the point"
      Nor did I make the usual mistake of confusing different issues and aspects of the same issue. What I do have a problem with, however, is people going into a vocation which by its nature is not self-serving and then expecting to receive a level of remuneration which enables them to live a flashy lifestyle. When the mere mention of the vow of poverty causes hackles to rise you know there's something wrong.

      Delete
    6. Point remains that religious orders hide money and apply for medical cards instead of taking out VHI which they can well afford.

      In a similar way diocesan priests are told to pretend they are self employed in order to access tax deductions.

      You see it begins with a little benefit (a small drug if you will). Just seven years later small income reports - discounting stipends etc result in small wages being reported and social welfare fraud.

      My problem isn't that I wanted a flashy lifestyle or a self-serving income. My issue is that I witnessed people abusing a welfare system in a wholehearted self-serving and banal manner.

      Delete
    7. PS @15.43
      That donation was made to the diocese to pay for my training.

      Delete
    8. The other tax dodge the religious nuns and priests do in the UK is to "donate" their State Pension via Gift Aid to their Order, which as a registered charity, can claim the Gift Aid, boosting it's value by 25%.

      If you are ever looking for a diverting read, search for the online accounts of the religious order of your choice on the GB Charity Commission website. Last time I looked the British Jesuits had assets of around £800 million.

      Delete
    9. I had also noticed that about the British Jeasuits. They own a lot of property in my home town Preston.

      Delete
    10. 19:11
      Are you suggesting this practice is in breach of the law?

      It sounds like something any accountant/auditor would recommend.

      Delete
    11. Ironically the Jesuits are just about the only society of priests whose members can ask for money for a particular need and will be given it.

      Delete
    12. @23:47. Legal yes, but morally dubious and not in the spirit of Luke 3:11. I'm sure that when the Gift Aid legislation was enacted Parliament thought that one of the provision's purposes was boosting the pensions of monks and nuns.

      It all seems a bit avaricious for religious to be using a tax loophole not available to lay people to further fund an already very comfortable life.

      Delete
    13. According to the Bible the first Apostolic bursar/accountant/auditor was Judas.

      Delete
    14. Jesus shouldn't have told the rich young man to sell all he had, give it to the poor and follow Him. He should have recommended he got a savvy accountant.

      Delete
    15. At 19:44
      What you are saying is that you are resentful such a thing can happen.

      Apart from the fact that you disagree with this provision of the law, you haven't shown what the moral dubiousness consists in.


      Delete
    16. At 19:11
      You have yet heard of the difference between tax evasion (morally questionable) and tax avoidance (morally neutral).

      Delete
    17. @21.54
      Incorrect!. Not Judas.. It was Matthew who was the apostles who was the money man!
      And by the way, neither of them were the first in the Scriptures in the money professions! Not by a long way..

      Delete
  14. The Begorra Factor has never left the Irish psyche. In one sense the hurlers are entitled to their party. On another level they have a duty of care to the public and especially the young. Sexual acts in the public domain is unacceptable. I believe a Coronation Street Actor recently had a contract terminated for unacceptable behaviour. These guys need to be told there are limits. As for Fr McFluffy and his 4 hail marys-A more reasoned and logical response would be better appreciated

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sean Page.. you are so correct about that!
      People's opinions and reactions to an incident like the above can show up their own state of immaturity.
      They may be grey in the head but they are still with the mentality of a schoolboy whose first reaction is always to join in with the guffaws lest - God forbid! - anyone would think me not cool.

      Delete
  15. Pat, this post truly reveals your lack of any sense of decency and morality. Are you really suggesting that because of homelessness etc in our country all other moral issues should be ignored? This party was a disgusting event with prostitutes providing the entertainment - and much more by all accounts! Is that really acceptable to in your eyes? If it is Pat the game is up and you should quietly bow out. No parents would want their offspring behaving in such a crude and coarse way, and treating any woman in the shameful way portrayed. Sex workers are very much victims and many are trafficked into Ireland and kept in a kind of modern day slavery - IS THIS OK TOO?
    Shame on you Pat. Your desire to be the super liberal has trult led you into the mire.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To poster 9.57
      The huge roar you hear behind you is the majority of us shouting "Hear, hear!"

      Delete
    2. Of course I am totally against all forms of trafficking and abuse - of women or men.

      One of my earliest ministries was to women sex workers in Dublin in 1977/78.

      But not all sex workers are victims. Some are highly intelligent people, living in posh apartments and earning a fortune.

      Of course many parents want their children to be virgins until their wedding night. That happens very rarely these days.

      Delete
    3. Listen here Pharisee. If you had a son or daughter who was an actor or a soap star you would see worse. Also, not all parents are that narrow minded. Its none of our business to judge what happened and its happening all over the world.

      Delete
    4. You continue to miss the point being made Pat. Most women who engage so publicly in this lewd behaviour, as in Ballyragget are forced into such behaviour. They are slaves of the sex industry. If you can't appreciate parent's concerns about the inappropriateness of this behaviour, then your morals are suspect. Yes, some women may benefit from the trade and enjoy it, but talk to organisations who work with women in this trade and you'll be more enlightened. Your so called liberal credentials don't qualify you to counsel parents, who have a moral duty to teach their children self respect. That you would even be so flippant brings you to the gutter. I trust that given an opportunity to comment publicly with a journalist, your view point, I hope, would have been more responsible and mature. Then, we must remember your life... and where you come from in all things sexual.... I would prefer the wise advice of the local priest in Ballyragget anytime to your "have what you like attitude"!!

      Delete
    5. Thank you for that, poster 11.38.
      I agree with you.
      You have not lost view of the wider issue that respect for women is something we practice and pass on by the good example of our attitude and where we stand when a real issue and situation comes right up before us such as happened in that parish. A very telling blog today!

      Delete
    6. Yes, poster 11.26 it is very much our business to know where we stand on attitudes of morality anywhere in the world and to know where our own moral compass points. You should not rely on "you'd see worse" in this or that situation. You are your own person. You don't necessarily follow every wind of public opinion. That's what maturity is all about. Just because something is rife and widespread it doesn't make it the correct way to behave.

      Delete
  16. Good on ya Pat for your answer to 00:27! I've been very annoyed by those mudslingers who have been going on at the Brothers. They are not responding to accusations or suspicions, they are CREATING them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The mudslingers are plentiful, not just against the Little Brithers concept but at everything and everyone, clerics particularly. Pat is, of course, the chief and most egregious mudslinger, who cares little for truth. An excellent comment from 9.57 and 10.37. I'm afraid Pat's moral compass is very skewed and outrageous.

      Delete
  17. The Christian former seminarian has a valid point. However, some religious priests, brothers and sisters do live impoverished conditions, inescapably or voluntarily, or both. But not in Ireland!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The seminarian reflected the full implications of the vow of POVERTY and he found himself not in full agreement with how it would work out in real circumstances.
      Luckily he realised in time and so he left.

      Delete
    2. Diocesan seminarians and priests are never asked to take any vow or promise of poverty.

      It is possible to be a secular priest and a billionaire.

      Religious order priests, brothers and nuns do take vows of poverty - and most of them lead a very comfortable and even quite a luxurious lifestyle.

      Delete
    3. At 11.02
      You're twisting the point.
      The point was that the system is rigged. Pocket money is declared as a wage. But not the accommodation, communal transport, lack of food or utility bills... people on minimum wage can be lucky to have €20 At the end of the week. Many orders deliberately set up a system that under-declared members' true access to financial resources within wealthy orders.

      The church literally steals from the social welfare system.

      Delete
    4. 17:24
      Nonsensical ruminations.
      In the first place name just 10 of the ‘many orders.’
      In the second, present the evidence that what you allege is happening is ‘deliberate.’

      Delete
  18. If that is correct that there there can be billionaire priests, let us not have any more criticism of large parochial houses - bishops in luxurious surroundings etc such as I have frequently read on here. You can't have it every way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The FACT of billionaire priests and bishops is one thing.

      The MORALITY of it is another!!!

      Delete
    2. 'Billionaire' clergy? Eat your heart out, Noel.

      Delete
    3. Grow up Magna. You should go trick or treating tonight and hopefully someone might give you a lollipop! You are just irritatingly stupid and childish ...

      Delete
    4. 17:44, we're peas in a pod, then.😆

      Delete
    5. Sorry, - - speak up!What did you say? - You're pees in a pot!!

      Delete
  19. That is right, Pat and I am sure that young seminarian who had objections to been ascribed "poverty" status will read you clear words and benefit from them.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So Pat, you have no issue with the sex industry and women that are forced to work in it for thw gratification of men?

    ReplyDelete
  21. The Ballyragget Hurlers should be sent on retreat with Phonsie as the Director of the Retreat. Fr Tommy could hear confessions and dish out condoms as a reward. LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Don't put words in my mouth!

    I am more than capable of saying what I mean myself!

    I have no problem with two (or more) consenting adults doing what they do in private once it is legal.

    I am totally against all forms of trafficking and sexual abuse.

    Boys and men are sometimes trafficked too.

    Where does it say that the adults in Ballyragget were trafficked or being abused?

    ReplyDelete
  23. "I have not gone into omerta mode."

    I think the person @00.27 made a good comment, especially given the day that it is, the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. It's been a while since we heard about the Oratory Church, Larne and what has been happening with it.
    I suppose it is a fair comment to hear what is taking place with it?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Maybe s look at the fallout from the Reformation will be enough to convince sensible people that the Church has been split into too many splinters already.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'The fallout from the Reformation'?

      It was the fallout from pre-Reformation, institutional Roman Catholicism that led to the splintering you decry.

      The root cause of the Protestant Reformation was instutional Roman Catholicism. Full stop. And this instiution remains a very serious problem for the Church as a whole. 'Sensible people' already know this. They know, too, that unless this instution itself experiences reformation, the problem of splintering will continue.

      Delete
    2. MournemanMichael31 October 2017 at 16:42

      An interesting comment Magna. I have to admit I've never studied anything much about the origins and thinking behind the Reformation until reading a bit recently. From that it seems your comments are "on the money!"
      MMM

      Delete
    3. 16:14
      More Wikipedia-fuelled pseudo-analysis to speak about a root cause of a complex, multifaceted and multinational phenomenon like the Reformation.

      The only appropriate response is to ignore it.

      Delete
    4. I agree with Magna at 16.14.

      Might I add that it was also the inability of the Roman Church to debate and discuss openly that also led to the split from the Orthodox church.

      The "agree or leave" attitude is not endearing especially when there are very dubious practices afoot.

      Delete
    5. I like 17:17's comment about the 'agree or leave' attitude a lot. However a lot of historical research since the 1990s suggests the Reformation was not as clear-cut as previously thought, and particularly in the pews was often very unwelcome!

      Delete
    6. Poster at 17:17
      It’s not clear you understand what you are saying.

      Do you mean the events of 451 or 1054?

      Delete
    7. It is still very deeply regrrtted in many of the High English denominations. Regarded as an unfortunate tragedy of history but we cannot turn the clock back..

      Delete
  25. Pat, you are digging a hole so big for yourself in your obfuscation, double think, hypocrisy on all matters sexual that all of Larne risks being consumed in your sinkhole! The sexualisation, exploitation, abuse and degradation of any person - woman, man or child - is morally reprehensible. The incident in Ballyragget was carried out in public and went viral. In prostitution women are the primary victims. If you try to prevaricate on this issue, shame on you. Your arguments on this issue, like so many other issues, are worrying and show little regard for the dignity of women who are enslaved through the sex trade in this country. The public nature of this behaviour may in fact be considered a breach of public decency as defined by law. You should rediscover your moral vision before you lose all credibility which is unravelling before you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe your moral compass if affected by the magnet of repression and brainwashing?

      You are thinking with your catechism and not with your head!

      Delete
    2. It's plain that a lot more people are taking their "brainwashing" these days from papers like (some) of The Sunday World and certain dodgy websites than from the innocent pages of the Catechism!

      Delete
    3. Pat at 15.27. Be assured that I believe the teaching of my Church about the dignity of the human body and that I believe too in the sanctity of sexuality in the mutual, exclusive beauty of a committed relationship. I abhor the abuse of women through the sex trade industry. I am neither repressed nor brainwashed by my Church's moral teachings. As I said earlier at 15.23, you are losing your credibility. I'm quite certain that you wouldn't approve of persons engaging publicly outside your oratory! Or am I expecting miracles? But seriously Pat, cop on. EXPLOITATION OF WOMEN THROUGH PROSTITUTION IS REPREHENSIBLE. You are missing the seriius nature of this issue. Talk with Ruhama who work with women caught in this financially lucrative trade.

      Delete
  26. As this is the anniversary of Luther....whatever he did...I’m shocked to read today that one could buy indulgences once.
    And even gaining them by prayers is dubious too.
    Our rcchurch sure has some history that many wantpushedunder the carpet.
    Red clothed bishops and cardinals are becoming a weird carryon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As with most errors, the original idea and practice were good: to allow people who could not otherwise participate in doing some charitable deed e.g. feeding the hungry, to make a donation instead, so that someone else could do it, made sense.

      Yes it's easy to see how this system could be abused and misinterpreted. But that's not the fault of the original idea itself.

      Delete
  27. @17.23 - do you have evidence that these women were trafficked?? Not all prostitutes are trafficked and prostitution remains a 100% legal trade in Ireland.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely not!
      Prostitution is illegal in Northern Ireland.

      Delete
  28. 18.57. The point I'm making is that prostitution is part of the sex industry which exploits, abuses, denigrates and destroys the lives of many, many women. Just do your research. Talk with Ruhama. Irrespective of the women involved and the reckless, irresponsible, foolish men, for whom I have no sympathy, women are primarily the victims of the sex slave industry. That I find morally reprehensible. The footballers involved are very often presented as icons within the GAA for younger children, so let's be protective of their innocence first and foremost in every way. That's the least we can give them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said! Thank you for that.

      Delete
  29. 18.57 I never knew prostitution was legal in a country that sells condoms under the counter. Where does it say that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prostitution is illegal in Northern Ireland.

      Delete
    2. And yet it is. Brothel keeping is illegal so as to protect women from exploitation. Soliciting on the street is illegal so as to protect the social image of 'the highway'. But a lady who feels the need to work such a way may do so privately and independently without being criminalised - which also protects the lady from being criminalized. There is no law in Ireland that can prosecute an independently trading prostitute who works in a private apartment of house.

      Think about any media cpurt reports - they only ever concern soliciting and/or brothel keeping.

      Delete
    3. That is correct in letter of the law but if you think about the details re/soliciting being illegal and brothel keeping being illegal, then in realistic "de facto" terms, prostitution turns out to be illegal as the other poster said. The woman asking someone to pay quietly in her own private apartment is treated in law as a consensual relationship (however brief) and cannot be subject to prosecution because it's virtually impossible to prove a case to a jury's satisfaction in a Court of Law. So that's why the Law comes at it from the "public" aspect which might be easier to actually prove and so win our case. But the effect is as the poster said - - to create circumstances in which it is almost impossible for it to flourish.

      Delete
  30. Why is Fr Murphy dressed like a Methodist minister?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Logical fallacy alert:
      Some Methodist ministers wear a blue clerical shirt.
      Fr Murphy wears a blue clerical shirt.
      Fr Murphy dresses like a Methodist minister.

      Delete
    2. Is High Connoly dressed as a Presbyterian minister?

      Delete
  31. Tomorrow's Gospel contains the Beatitudes -----
    Blessed are the pure in heart - it seems that the Bishop has no reservation in erasing this particular Beatitude from the words of God

    ReplyDelete
  32. ‘Pure in heart’ has little to do with sexual relations. Its best exposé is in Psalm 24. The man with clean hands and pure heart desires not worthless things and has not sworn to deceive his neighbour.

    This is the principal form of purity of heart as distinct from mere ritual purity as concerned with clean and unclean foodstuffs etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Incorrect! - See Matthew Ch.5. before you attempt to spread spurious and incomplete personal Biblical interpretations

      Delete
    2. One of the Beatitudes speaks of the 'pure in heart' and it is clear from the context and from the expression itself that the text is not talking about sexuality but rather about justice.

      The fact that the English word 'purity' has predominantly meant no sexual desire, thought or feeling does not mean that this Beatitude says any such thing.

      Delete
  33. Jill meagher, from county Louth, was murdered in Melbourne, in 2012.. readers might be interested in hearing what he has to say, in general, but especially , on the subject of prostitution.. you can easily find him on google.. decency shines from him, as does sorrow beyond words... n

    ReplyDelete
  34. Apologies.. missing text (23.55) .. reference , is to tom meagher , husband of Jill. n

    ReplyDelete
  35. 23:29
    Lost it, Buddy.
    Entirely wrong!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In what sense exactly?

      And you reached that conclusion by?

      Delete
  36. Commonsense
    Reached by deduction

    ReplyDelete
  37. Not a scientific method.

    ReplyDelete