Saturday, 18 November 2017

DERMO OF THE FORKED TONGUE





Church’s stance on women alienates people, says Martin


Archbishop Diarmuid Martin: “Young people felt unwelcome in parishes”

The low standing of women in the Catholic Church is the most significant reason for the feeling of alienation towards it in Ireland today, Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin has said.
“Next would be the ongoing effect of the scandals of child sexual abuse,” he said in an address yesterday.
“I believe, in particular, that people have underestimated the effect of the scandals on young people.”
He added that young people’s “disgust at what happened is deep-rooted”.
Dr Martin said one of the most disappointing documents that he had read since becoming archbishop concerned a recent survey of young people in Dublin, conducted in preparation for the Synod of Bishops on Young People in Rome next year.
“Young people felt unwelcome in parishes,” he said of the survey’s results.
This reflected “on our system of faith education, which is overly school-centered” and “does not bring young people into better communication with the parish”.
Looking at the current Government, he said he was struck by “the fact that there are more members of the current Cabinet under 45 than there are of priests of that age in the [Dublin] diocese. The same applies to leadership cadres in many other sectors of society”.
He said 57 percent of priests in the Dublin archdiocese were over 60 and this was projected to rise to 75 per cent by 2030.
He said that leadership in “many aspects of our culture belongs to one generation and leadership and the mainstream membership of the church belongs to another”.
“How do you bridge that gap?” he asked.
Dr Martin said he was “happy to see a new generation of young politicians who are inspired by a politics of changing Irish society for the good rather than just fixing problems”.
However, the archbishop said some people might interpret what he was saying as that he was “happy to see politicians who support same-sex unions or wider access to abortion”.
“Let me be very clear. The church will never change its teaching on marriage and on the right to life.”
The archbishop made his remarks in a talk titled The church in Dublin: where will it be in 10 years’ time? held at St Mary’s Church, Haddington Road.

PAT SAYS:

Once again Patsy McGarry is giving Dermo of Dublin a wonderful outing in The Irish Times.

Its nearly got to the point where - if Dermo breaks wind - Patsy is publishing and recording every detail of the flatulence.

And Dermo is the master of the FORKED TONGUE!

Here, on the one hand, he is lamenting the downturn in priestly vocations and the unfairness of the Catholic Church to women - and the lack of young people at Mass.

On the other hand, he is repeating RC dogma that only single men and women can marry and that abortion - even in the most extreme cases - will never be "allowed" by the RC Church.

But DERMO MARTIN is PERSONALLY PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for the decline of his Church in Ireland.

He is an absentee archbishop!

He has a deplorable relationship with the priests he has!

He has a deplorable relationship with his two auxiliary bishops!

He promotes favourites among the clergy and is either disinterested or hostile to those who are not favoured!

He rules in secret and has even stopped publishing his clerical changes!

He has made his archdiocese far less democratic and collegiate that it was prior to him!

On appearances at least he seems to have a preference for gay priests and seminarians!

He has failed to act in the most serious of cases.




His stand on Maynooth was not sincere. He simply wanted to give Maynooth a kick in the goolies!

He is obviously fiercely ambitious - even in his early 70's.





If he really wanted to give the Church in Dublin a future he would need to:

1. Argue for the ordination of married men and women.

2. Spend more time in Dublin and less time traveling.

3. Re-establish his Personnel Commission.

4. Stop his favouritisms!

AND GENERALLY, put his money where his mouth is.

But Dermo is a politician.

Dermo is an empty soundbite man.

Dermo is more interested in his PR profile than he is in being a pastoral father to the people and priests of Dublin.

His legacy will be:

"WHAT WAS THAT ALL ABOUT"???


Image result for bishop cartoons


87 comments:

  1. Following his own logic, shouldn't Dermo, who's in his 70s make way for someone younger.

    And from where does he get the notion that the clergy are older than their congregations. Utter piffle. It's all silver-haired coffin-dodgers in the pews. The failed Vatican II project emptied the churches of anyone born, say, after 1975. The revival that took place under JPII and Benedict was a swansong, and the fabled Francis effect is just that, a fable. Papal audience numbers have slumped under Francis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 08:15
      You misunderstand the point about the leadership generation.

      The problem with Vatican II is, as GKC said of Catholicism, it has never been tried.

      Francis is one of the most popular human beings on the planet. At the same time his approach to papal audience numbers may be gauged by his decision to ask South Americans not to travel to Rome for his inauguration but to give the price of the fare to the poor.

      Delete
    2. I would be very worried about a Pope having such popularity. I also extremely doubt that it is reduced numbers from South America causing the reduction in crowds attending papal audiences.

      The reason Benedict was hated so much by the media was because of his love of truth. Truth expressed through love was the epitome of Benedict's papacy. Benedict never compromised on God's truth and could convey the faith with cogency and clarity.

      It is hard to decipher Pope Francis and he certainly lacks precision in communication while standing back and allowing clouds of confusion enter the Catholic Church which are causing much disquiet among the faithful.

      Delete
    3. At 13:00
      Pope Francis doesn’t do people’s thinking for them. Jesus’ use of parables shows that he doesn’t either. You call it confusion, others call it scandal. It’s neither. It’s calling people to exercise their God-given faculty of conscience.

      Your diagnosis of people’s hatred for Benedict as his love of truth betrays too subjective a perspective to be of any use in reaching an objective conclusion.

      Francis’ actions around his inauguration together with his more recent remarks about photographiy during Mass show where he stands on popular acclaim and the numbers game (including at audiences.

      Delete
    4. Benedict's 'love of truth', 13:00? This morally odious little man tried so hard, for so many years when he was prefect of the CDF, to bury truths which he considered damaging to the institutional Church. And even afterwards, when he became pope.

      There can be no love of truth without a corresponding love of justice. Benedict loved neither.

      You need to remove those rose-tinted spectacles from your adulating face.

      Delete
    5. 13:54, your whole comment reeks of subjectivism; so please do not involve yourself in circular arguments which involve neither conclusion nor agreement.

      And Jesus "didn't do peoples' thinking for them" is,I presume, morse code for allowing people do whatever they want? That's not the Jesus I have read or meditated on.

      I would say you are in your 1st or 2nd year of philosophy and now think you are very educated using words like "subjective" and "objective". Keep studying buddy...

      Delete
    6. 16:21, Jesus, for example, told his followers to love their enemies, but he did not go as far as telling them HOW to love their enemies. In this sense (and in others), he did not do the thinking of his followers.

      Delete
    7. I appreciate and agree with your comment MC. However, I believe that the connotation in 13:54's comment had a different sense than you state.

      Delete
    8. Magna - - I agree.. though I think there are Biblical examples that you could say are times when Jesus did show people how to love their enemies... I am only in from work and feel a bit tired and so I haven't given chapter and verse... There was the time when He said that you should forgive not seven times but "seventy times seven" an a time when he talked about "turning the other cheek"... I know there are other instances too but I need to get a cup of tea now.... Sorry... I am not in research mood at the minute.... There was the night before Jesus' death when Jesus demonstrated to Peter how to treat an enemy who confronted them. Peter had lashed out with his sword and cut the man but Jesus.....

      Delete
    9. 16:45, what then, in your opinion, is the connotation?

      Delete
    10. 17:42, so you agree with my post at 16:29. And yet, you then proceed with a litany of objection?

      Come back to me when your head's stopped turning.

      Delete
    11. When I finish my tea and the crossword..!!

      Delete
    12. Re 16:21
      Your post is an instance of the ‘tu quoque’ logical fallacy - an elementary error.

      Perhaps the Jesus you have ‘read’ (sic) and meditated upon is a caricature.

      Subjectivism is different from a circular argument - another elementary distinction. Just because something can be thrown doesn’t make it a stone.

      All in all, you appear to have nothing to say but an obligation to say it.

      Delete
  2. have a brilliant solution to all of this! Having been a pupil at SPCA/SPGA in the late 80s/ early 90's and daily witnessing the clergy at work, I can safely say that none of these creeps will ever get near any of my children who are having as secular an education as is possible in NI at integrated schools. I know that my family think I'm a bit extreme (I asked the priest who married my sister to stay away from my children at the reception) But personally knowing 2 people who were raped by xxxxxxx might have colored my judgement. IMO These people have squandered the right to spiritually guide the next generation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have every right to protect your children.

      Would it not be better for you to be always present when your children are in the company of strangers?

      Delete
    2. Hey, 09:39, if you wanted a secular education send them to controlled schools. Are we forced to work out what SPCA means? Is that common parlance? Is it St Patrick's College, Armagh?

      Delete
    3. 09:39, you sound like a right sicko to me. The priest should have told your sister that he would refuse to celebrate the wedding if you and your children were present, given how gratuitously offensive your remarks were. It makes me wonder how safe are children around YOU??

      Delete
    4. Autually 12:53, 09:39 is right in stating his opinion that 'these people (Roman Catholic priests) have squandered the right to spiritually guide the next generation.'

      I don't agree with 09:39's warning to that priest; it must have been personally very hurtful...if the priest was not known to have abused kids, or been suspected of it.

      Delete
  3. In my day the furthest you got to the Rector's lair was his study/sitting room and never the bedroom. How doctrine evolves. Though in the case of Mgr Ledwith it was definitely a case of 'access all areas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hardly a matter if doctrine.

      Delete
  4. Gorgeous is in Spain. Dublin PP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why can't you leave him alone - it's clear he's out of the picture now!

      Delete
  5. As you say D needs to put his money where his mouth is. The way personnel are managed by many Bishops would be questioned in many secular organisations. Clergy should have a proper independent union.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 9.39 Extreme as you say but you are making a valid point. I wonder how priests or anyone else can stay away from children at a wedding. If such was asked of me I would respectfully decline to addend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think I would stay away too - and advise the couple to get another priest to celebrate their marriage ceremony.

      Delete
    2. Pat, for very obvious reasons, most priests do not attend wedding receptions, apart from the fact that a whole day is gone and you may have to rush back for evening mass or a parish meeting. But because of attitudes expressed like 9.39, priests have become hate figures, unnecessarily. There are, sadly, many people who despise priests as they represent a Church that abysmally failed in its care of children. The sins of the few monsters have sullied the good name of many. I and many clerics find the challenge of our work very difficult, yet, because we made our commitment, we stay with it, still believing we are doing something worthwhile. I never ever allow any child/children be on their own. They must always have a parent or guardian with them. I have always in my entire life protected the vulnerability of the little ones and have on some occasions brought my concerns to relevant authorities. However, the landscape for all priests has changed radically, forcing us to reflect serioysly about the true nature of what we should be doing in the name of Jesus and his gospel. Thst is always my starting point.

      Delete
    3. You speak well Father.

      Only 4 - 6 % of priests have abused children and in the eyes of many 100% are guilty :-(

      Delete
    4. Because the others buried their heads when it was going on
      And even after they couldn’t talk about it

      Delete
    5. 'ONLY 4-6% of priests', Bishop Pat? This statistic belies the fact that the entire institutional Church facilitated (and, therefore, encouraged) sexual abuse of children on so many levels, including canonically, and through local 'protocol' at diocesan level.

      When were these apparently blameless clerical voices raised in collective protest at this terrible betrayal of children, and of Christ himself? The truth is there were few (if any) such voices.

      Moral culpability for this injustice against children, their families and the wider community goes much higher, and wider, than that innocuous-sounding statistic.

      Delete
    6. Magna, you are always so animated when in your anti Church, anti Priesthood mode. Your hatred is tangible. I and many clerics condemned the abuses of children. We did so in our Churches, at Diocesan gatherings. Many of us publicly called for the resignation of Bishops. Many of us spoke frequently to express our outrage and abhorrence at the abuse inflicted and of the cover up by the institution of the Church. To this day, I assure you, I am still angry within, but I don't allow that anger colour my perspective of the true Church in action - the people of God, who with their Priests and religious seek to create safe, welcoming, christian parish communities. Expressing your hatred of a group of people - priests - does not bring healing or comfort to anyone. Yes, we priests myst atone for the behaviour of our colleagues and that is why I continue to truly care for all, to the best of my ability.

      Delete
    7. 10.51 Are you in Ireland or UK. As I remember it it was obligatory for both bride and grooms priests to attend a wedding. Yes it did take up the whole day.

      Delete
    8. You spoke out AFTER the event, 17:55.

      If you (like Cardinal Sean Brady) are old enough to have spoken out against the potential for cover-up inherent in canon law (and in certain diocesean protocols), but, like Cardinal Brady, remained self-serving)y silent, then you ARE morally culpable.

      Speaking out after such atrocious scandal does not morally exonerate either you or your colleagues if you all were in a position to help prevent it, but, instead, chose to do nothing. (In other words, 'you sinned by omission'.)

      As for hatred, don't 'knock' it. God hates, too; in fact, far from being sinful, it's a God-given (and God-driven) emotion. It's in Scripture. (You're not familiar with Scripture, are you?)

      Delete
    9. 'The entire institutional church facilitated (and therefore encouraged) sexual abuse of children...' I have never read such a sweeping generalisation in my life. So there are no decent men in this vast organisation at all? Of course there are.

      Delete
    10. 20:54, it is people like you who will make saints of people like me, such is the forebearance we must show you.

      From the pontificate of Pius XI, allegations of solicitation by priests in confession of sexual favours from young people and others were henceforth to be dealt with in-house (that is, 'without involving the police'). This would eventually be broadened to include actual sexual abuse of adults and minors by priests. (As prefect of the CDF, the morally odious Josef Ratzinger issued a directive to his staff that henceforth ALL such reports were to come to him...so that, er, he could promptly 'sit' on them. Which, of course, he did, being a priest of the institutional Roman Catholic Church rather than of Christ)

      Every Roman Catholic priest who knew all of this, but remained silent in face of it, is, indeed, morally culpable in the sexual abuse of children. Those priests (if any) who spoke out against the might of such institutional injustice, BEFORE the scandals broke, is a hero. But I am not aware of any such priests. Are you?

      Delete
    11. Magna, 20.48. As a priest, as soon as I became aware of such heinous crimes having been committed and the subsequent morally reprehensible cover up, I spoke very strongly in condemnation. In fact long before any unfolding of abuse by clergy I contacted relevant authorities about improper sexual behaviour I witnessed against persons working in the Church. That was the end of a particular person's involvement in Church and community activities. The law took its course. I have always - like many priests - behaved responsibly and caringly with and towards people, including children. It is wrong of you to continue peddling the lie that all priests participated in enabling abuse and are incapable of truly caring for people. Your hatred of Priesthood is so dangerous that you are unable to affirm the genuine goodness of many priests and accept that the majority of us are as appalled as you at what became a horrendous reality. Many of us try to care for people and feel a profound sadness for all who experienced abuse.

      Delete
    12. 22:06, try telling the truth, for once in your useless, financially parasitical, priestly life.

      Don't remain the moron you so obviously are. I wss speaking of the inaction of Roman Catholic priests BEFORE the clerical rape scandals broke.

      Did you protest then? Did you put your head on the block before the scandals involving useless, financially parasitical priests broke?

      Delete
    13. Magma's thought-disordered, disjointed, non-sequitur replies when he's in this mood are hilarious. Then of course he blames everyone else and makes even more of a fool of himself than usual.
      He obviously hasn't read Marie Stopes.

      Delete
    14. Magna, all I can say in response to your continuing ignorant comments is that you are an emotionally and mentally unwell person. Your vitriol and abuse is beyond intolerable. You are so self absorbed in "you" that I can't imagine anyone else in your miserable, lonely, selfish world.

      Delete
    15. @09:06 I feel that MC can be very charming when he wants something from someone - observe the clumsy way he does it to Pat here - so there will be people in his life, but these will not be authentic human relationships because it's all about Magna. Relationship-wise he once claimed here to have had lots of women. I suspect the reality is the love of his life exited after she developed a puncture.

      Delete
  7. Gannon is not very happy with you Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why?

      I thought I showed how bright he was and praised his musical talents?

      I did not say a wrong word about him. Why would I?

      He is and will be a great asset to Dublin.

      Delete
    2. Pat your comedic talents know no bounds LOL

      Delete
    3. I love the sense of irony in your comment Pat @ 12:18.

      Delete
    4. He doesn't really have grounds for complaint, Pat just quoted his linkedin profile.
      PMSL

      Delete
  8. I agree with Sean and Pat at 09:48 & 09:50. It would be highly insulting to ask an unless proven otherwise innocent priest to avoid the children at the wedding. Isn't it the case, statistically, that children are much more at risk from blood relatives, including biological fathers? In my case the abuse came from my brother.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @10.15.Re/abusers mostly being members and extended family... I am sorry to say that statistics prove you are certainly right about that. Family members often have more frequent access and contact. As a Child Protection Officer, I have lately noticed that some problems can arise in a situation where a young single or separated mother takes a new live-in boyfriend into her own home and he becomes a pseudo father to her children. Sometimes partners ingratiate themselves into vulnerable households like that and do not treat the children with respect but appear on the surface to be so plausible. However, I do not imply that they are all like that. Some are decent and others need constant vigilance and should never be left to babysit any age of child. A mother should try to protect her own children and be very wary who she invites to live under her roof.

      Delete
  9. @9:39
    That comment is outrageous and offensive in the extreme and smacks of church bashing at its very worst. Did you ask all the men at the reception to stay away from your children at the wedding because some men have been found guilty of acts of paedophilia or rape? and if not, why not?
    I can understand your hurt at the rape of two people you know, what I can’t understand is your, as you say, extreme response to a man that you don’t know and why you think you had the right to rob him of his humanity by such an offensive remark.
    He might well have been a rapist – but you didn’t know that. Because he wears a collar gives you no right to approach him with such a request. Instead, as Pat said, you should have kept a close eye on your children.
    I responded to this comment because I have a friend who was a priest and such a comment was made to him and it very nearly destroyed him. And I don.t use the word destroyed, lightly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That man @9.39 was just another silly over the top Church basher. Those of us who regularly read this blog know a few of those, don't know! So predictable - you always know which way they'll pounce..

      Delete
  10. Every time an archbishop works out of his own prejudice and facilitates clerical crime and then stands by priests to lie through their teeth - thats when lasting alienation occurs. In other words the duplicity of an archbishop who tramples on certain women and then talks about better attitudes to women in his sermons. It is this duplicity and the grasping nature of senior clergymen to hold onto what gives them status and privileges at all costs - this is what causes people not to invest in a passing brand of church. How come there is no criticism of the media which causes so much division in society and constantly airbrushes Jesus from all discussion?

    ReplyDelete
  11. 22 May 2015

    Immediately after the result of same-sex marriage referendum, Diarmuid Martin said: “It’s very clear, that if this referendum is an affirmation of the views of young people, then the church has a huge task in front of it to find the language to be able to talk to and get its message across.”

    16 November 2017

    “Let me be very clear. The church will never change its teaching on marriage... “

    He likes to use the term "very clear" very often is seems. LOL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dermo is a politician - saying always what he thinks people want to hear.

      Delete
  12. 'The church will never change its teaching on marriage and on the right to life'?

    Historical humbug, Archbishop Martin. Teaching on marriage has shifted and nuanced down the centuries.

    As for respecting the right to human life, in the Church's earliest years, yes. But ever after there was no such respect, since the Church morally sanctioned the death penalty, and the killing (even of unborn children) in so-called 'just war'.

    Historically, Roman Catholicism has been a raft of moral and doctrinal contradiction.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Archbishop Diarmuid talks of low status and alienation of women in the church. What happened to Sr. Elizabeth Cotter who was his one and only female cabinet member? Why did he do nothing to support the consecrated virgin twins Gemma and Triona King in their total exclusion from active ministry in the Pro-Cathedral? "Physician heal thyself".

    ReplyDelete
  14. The scandal of what happened to the Twins 'GnT' continues to be an open sore in the recent history of the Pro-Cathedral. They are known nationwide as the face of the Pro-Cathedral, the Pro twins. Their popularity was their downfall as the leader and his cronies were so jealous of their popularity. As a struggling catholic who frequently sought refuge in the Pro their prayerfulness, healing ministry, hospitality and kindness to strangers like me made the Pro a warm and welcoming place. The coldness of the place now is so off putting. Not even a cup of tea or a chat after Mass now. They are sadly missed by the ordinary people of the Pro like me but not by the clique who now control it. Shame on you Archbishop for letting them down. Bring back the heart of the Pro.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What’s that other Martin on about today complaining about how difficult his life was after ordination and about his formation.
    I detest that word formation it sounds like grooming to me.
    Why aren’t seminarians allowed to develop instead of being groomed.
    Li

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point. About formation.

      There is more than a touch of arrogance behind use of that word here. It reminds me of Pope Francis' arrogant and presumptious remark, that 'the Church exists to form consciences, not replace them'.

      No one can form another human being in the image of Christ, except Christ himself through the Holy Spirit.

      Delete
    2. Hi Magna, as someone interested in mental good health I abhor the term formation.
      How dare any young mind be groomed and conditioned into selective thinking.
      And by telling us , the rc communities ,that we are the one true church...ridiculous.if we believe that god created us surely it follows that god had a hand in all creation.

      Delete
    3. From many of your posts MC, you seem to have a contempt for the role of human beings in God’s dispensation of grace - your hatred of priests being one manifestation - but your general disbelief that God uses human beings as channels and vehicles of His grace. Yours is quite a misanthropic “theology”.

      Delete
    4. 00:00, I don't have contempt for 'the role of human beings in God's dispensation of grace', but I do have contempt for those who try to replace God altogether. Some priests, for example.

      Delete
    5. “some priests” Ah! We are getting somewhere! Any priest who tries to “replace” God deserves to be repudiated and rejected. The vast majority of priests, however, strive to SERVE God and God’s people. In the dispensation of His Grace, God has chosen to work through human beings as His normal way of dealing with us.

      Delete
    6. 'The vast majority of priests...strive to serve God'. Really. Evidence of this, you arsehole?

      Delete
  16. Patsy McGarry is FULLY aware of the bullying and maltreatment of The Twins of the Pro-Cathedral under Damian and AB Diarmuid Martin.

    Such hypocritical tripe about his concern for women, duly promoted by spineless McGarry.

    What an unholy duo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat, I am sorry to say this but G & T are bitches. Two little busy bodies who attached themseves to likes of 'healer' Briege McKenna. Fr. John Flaherty was too fat and lazy and let them do everything for him 'even iron his underwear'. The truth of the matter is that they are immature and have no formal formation. They were asked to step back to allow lay people more involvement in the pro and it became world war III. I welcome lay involvement.

      Tell their ginger male follower to calm down

      Delete
    2. No need to call any people bitches.
      Who do u think u are...martins sidekick ?
      And what’s with this word formation again....it’s being bandied about here far too much.
      And who is this healer Brige Mc Kenna ?......another a bit like yourself

      Delete
    3. @21.46.
      Don't you find the world a very puzzling place?
      So many questions and so few answers...
      I live many miles away and I haven't a clue either but I won't lose any sleep over it.

      Delete
    4. "Anonymous" 21.33: Is that you Damo????? It's either you or Sr. Patricia.........

      Delete
  17. Being 'disinterested' is a GOOD thing (it means 'impartial') you, presumably wish to accuse the Archbishop of being 'uninterested').

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent correction. It was much needed.

      Delete
  18. You tend to overuse the tripe image. Shows your age.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's wrong with someone "showing his age" as you would put it?
      Is there an underlying ageist jibe there I wonder?
      That is no longer acceptable. All older people should carry their age with pride. They have years of experience that younger people just cannot match however hard they try.

      Delete
    2. Hear, hear! Life is a gift and every year is indeed something to be grateful for and "carried with pride"

      Delete
  19. Pat, give credit where it is deserved........the Dublin diocesan changes are on the the diocesan website yet you continually criticise Diarmuid Martin.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Have heard the word twins bandied about here
    Maybe, Pat, you could do a blog about them sometime as I’ve no idea what yous on about when they mentioned.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Twins indicates that two people were born to the same mother on the same occasion and so they are exactly age. They may, or may not be identical in appearance

    ReplyDelete
  22. Pat I'm in the pub with my friends and we are eagerly awaiting your new blog. WHEN will this be posted?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Go home, dear... Don't wait up... Lol

      Delete
    2. I'll take a pint of whatever you're having!!

      Delete
  23. I'm saddened at the crude and vicious posting at 21.33. Talk about lowering the tone! To refer to any woman in such a derogatory way is contemptible. To refer to the Pro Twins in this manner really is deplorable. While I feel on one level that such a poster should be ignored my sense of hurt for the Twins compels a reply. The twins were very involved in the Pro before Canon Flaherty was ever heard of under several Administrators. I've been attending the Pro for 30 years on Sundays and weekdays and they've always been involved as lay people. What kind of a warped mind refers to a priests physical attributes or underwear? How sad. We've had some great priests in the Pro over the years and some not so good. Canon Flaherty was probably the best priest and Administrator in all those years. He's still missed. Incidentally it's mostly paid lay people who do all the work now in the Pro that the Twins did as volunteers. By the way I'm not ginger and if the 21.03 Poster has had formal formation give me the twins type of formation any time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 23:14

      You are right Fr. Faterty was one of the girls. He was moved for a reason. He liked the young organists too much and YES they ironed his underwear. It is fact. Ask them. The twins owned him. They could not handle being told 'no'.

      The twins served the mass, read the readings, gave communion, sang and did the rosary and the meet and greet. As i understand, canon law allows one person to carry out one ministry during Mass but they carried many. They were not consecrated to the Cathedral but the service of the diocese but i never saw them in Ballymum with the poor? They do not own the Cathedral nor do they have a right to slander others. As i said they are immature :-)

      Yes you are ginger or were ginger. Grey now :-)

      Delete
  24. Why is Paul Glennon (who was ordained in 2015 with Chris Derwin) moving to the Emmanuel School of Mission in The Bronx, New York, for 3 years? After all, Dublin needs priests and he's only been ordained for 2 years. Also, he's one of the younger priests and Dermo was lamenting the fact that there are more people in the current cabinet under 45 than priests in Dublin under 45.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sure Catholics just use marriage for the big day, they do their own thing b4 and after.
    couples work, so don’t be fooled they will use whichever method they choose to avoid pregnancy if not wanted, and they have no intention of telling you priests how that is done.and believe you me women are so into healthy living that they wont take any pill. I never did.
    I will say that most women have a good moral outlook on their lives and a dedication to their marriage and their families, but definitely not religion with all it’s so called trappings.
    Could any young wife name her bishop, I never knew the Pp’s name when working, also I was at work sat and Sunday big % of my working life.
    And I always respected the beliefs and ideologies of my clients .


    ReplyDelete
  26. The vicious anti-twins poster at 21.33 is Damo's side kick who specializes in cleansing the Pro of the homeless and the poor. He also seemed to be a Gorgeous substitute for a while but his Missus put a stop to that.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Who is the twisted poster at 23.14? Is he/was he in Ballymun where he never saw the twins? What an ill informed illogical twat. Pat why do you allow publication of these slanderous allegations based on jealousy and prejudice? At Mass in the Pro this week the same male employee did the reading, took up the collection and gave out communion. What about canon law there? Bring back the twins volunteer female ministry and leadership.

    ReplyDelete