Thursday, 1 February 2018

Proposed new Australian law could label priests ‘agents of the Vatican’

Catholic Herald 30 Jan 2018
Bishops warn the bill could leave priests and laypeople exposed to the claim they are foreign agents
Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull


Australian bishops have warned that proposed new legislation could require priests, and potentially any Catholic involved in advocacy, to register as a ‘foreign agent’ of the Vatican.
Bishop Robert McGuckin of Toowoomba told a parliamentary committee: “Catholics are followers of Jesus Christ, we are not agents of a foreign government.”
Although the law contains an exemption for religious groups, the draft bill also states that the Catholic Church is affiliated with the Vatican, leaving both priests and individual Catholics exposed to the claim they are foreign agents.
The proposed bill would require those who act for foreign powers to reveal their status on a new register or face criminal charges.
“I want to be clear in rejecting the characterization of the Catholic Church found in the explanatory memorandum,” Bishop McGuckin said.
“It seems that every Catholic involved in advocacy may need to register and report”, he said, adding “We don’t believe that is the intention of the bill.”
The bishop’s comments were heard at the beginning of a two-day public hearing regarding the legislation.
The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference had already written to the committee, stating that the bill was “drafted on the incorrect belief” that the Australian Church acted on behalf of the Vatican.
Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, head of Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, said that according to security services, the country was “experiencing unprecedented levels of espionage and foreign interference”.
In light of new laws against espionage introduced last year, Mr. Castle said he was “not convinced there is a need” for more, but that the new legislation was “seeking to protect Australia and its interests”.
Attorney-General Christian Porter declined to comment on specific responses to the bill at this point. He said: “They are important, but they are made in the context of the critical process of modernizing the law to make Australia a safer place and I will be considering all the submissions with great care.”
Australia’s biggest news organizations, including ABC and News Corp, have declared in a joint submission that they will not support the bill unless specific exemptions are made for journalists.

When the bill was announced in December, Attorney-General George Brandis said: “If you act covertly on behalf of a foreign actor, in a way that harms Australia’s national security, to influence the political process or a Government decision, that conduct will be criminalized.




PAT SAYS:

I think that Australia has a point. Many Catholic bishops and priests would place allegiance to the Roman Catholic institution above allegiance to their country.

Anywhere the RC Church exercised political power - as it did in Ireland from 1922 until quite recently it used its power to further its own ends and the ends of The Vatican.

The role the RC Church played in Nazi Germany is still a very cloudy picture.

The RC Church is not just a CHURCH. It is also a STATE with the pope as head of state.

It has over 160 ambassadors to other states around the world.

I had personal experience of the interfering power of the RC Church when I became no longer part of it in 1986.

The Irish Catholic bishops tried to stop my marriages being recognized in civil law as valid marriages - which they were.

I had a hell of a battle with the Irish Registrar General of Marriages to get him to recognize my marriages as valid civil marriages - which he eventually had to do - because the law was on my side. I had much less problem in Northern Ireland where the bishops have less influence. 

And when I became a bishop and wanted the Irish State to recognize the marriages conducted by The Oratory Society priests what did the Registrar General do? He wrote to the Vatican about me!

Imagine that - an Irish civil servant - writing to a foreign state - about one of its own citizens. I eventually won that battle too,

Since the time of Constantine, the RC Church has meddled fiercely in politics. 

Thank God we are now living in times where PRIEST RULE happens less and less. 



--------------------------------------------------


CARDINAL PELL NOT ABLE TO TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA TO SPEAK TO THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON ABUSE BECAUSE OF A "BAD HEART" EATING STEAK AND CHIPS AND DRINKING BEER IN ROME AT SAME TIME.



177 comments:

  1. Obviously, 'priest rule' has completely collapsed in ROI. The result of the reference on ssm more or less confirmed it. The Catholic Church doesn't even have the authority to check Thinking Catholic. LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this is a strange one. What about other Christian based groups and denominations. Also other religions. It's not just the Catholics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No other religion is also a "state".

      Delete
    2. Not correct! And this time - - I will leave you to do your own research even at this belated stage.

      Delete
    3. What about countries that have "Islamic" in their title e.g. the Islamic Republic of Pakistan? Will their citizens be covered by the new law?

      Delete
    4. I wouldn't fancy a steak, chips and beer with George Carlin.



      He seems a bit intense.

      I wouldn't mind know why he favours a seperation of church and state. Usually there's a reason. Let's discover his back story.

      Delete
    5. @11:47 you made that up, didn't you? Medical insurance for doctors is huge and massive if they go by air inter-connnental. Any evidence? A quick recognisable link would do. Over to you.

      Delete
  3. "Imagine that - an Irish civil servant - writing to a foreign state - about one of its own citizens."

    Extraordinary. Surely this could not happen in ROI today. Mind you, a few years ago I read the Irish government attempts to reform schools are constantly frustrated by all the knights of Columbanus in the department of education. I am not Irish, so I had not heard of this order before.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The RC Church is losing its power in Ireland quickly. But there is still some influence with politicians and civil servants tipping their hats.

      Delete
    2. Pat at 9.47. I agree with you that the RC Church is losing the grip of power it once had. That's a good place to be as it will force all of us to think deeply about who and what we should be as a Church - the Body of Christ. The essence of the gospel hopefully will be our stronghold. If we have just a remnant, let it be true leaven which stands out, a light on a hilltop. I think the challenges are great, not unattainable and a new Church requires vision, creativity and imagination and true leadership. I think it's sad when, in the midst of so much brokenness and challenges, there is so much unnecessary vile, venom and hatred poured out. There are many who desire and hunger for a better, Christ like Church. Cynicism, prejudice and hatred have no part in this.

      Delete
    3. True.

      But throughout history anticlericalism has always followed periods of church corruption.

      Delete
    4. 11.10 I would add ‘bitterness’ too at the end of your excellent post.

      Delete
    5. Those who have been trampled on by the clerical boot are entitled to be bitter.

      Delete
    6. 11.23. We all have a right to be outraged when trampled on by any powerful "boot". Even you Pat, trampled on others with your belligerent, hostile and intimidating nature. Be truthful. You wouldn't be where you are if you were a quiet, fragile angel!!

      Delete
    7. The world is upside down!

      Delete
    8. 09:33 The claim about the Knights of Columbanus being powerful in the Department of Education and frustrating political attempts at reform is sheer fantasy. The senior officials of the Department have an entirely secular outlook for several years now.

      Delete
    9. Yes, I agree with you, poster 16.15
      It is definitely a misguided and very outdated notion which, I'm afraid, indicates a clutching at straws situation!

      Delete
    10. Yes, the commentator said he had read "somewhere" (where?) about the baleful influence on the Irish Department of Education of the Knights of Columbanus. He'd never heard of them because (of whom he'd never heard) a fact he explained away by saying he's not Irish. An excellent witness for the prosecution.

      Delete
    11. Ha ha ha! We rest our case !

      Delete
    12. Correspondence between officials of sovereign states happens all the time. The Free State guy was probably trying to check with the Vatican the ins and outs of Pat witnessing weddings. He could just have easily asked an Irish diocese but may have felt he had to approach the Vatican for a definitive answer on what Catholic priest can an cannot do on the wedding witness front.

      Delete
  4. Pat, yoy have failed to understand fully the reality of the Australian story. Yet again, you extrapolate from it conclusions to support your own narrow vision. Even journalists will seek an exemption from any such law. I'm certain other human rights groups will express concern too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Vatican is hardly a human rights group. It is an absolute monarchy.

      Delete
    2. Cardinal Pell’s imperious refusal to leave the Vatican to attend the royal commission in person also comes to mind.

      Delete
    3. Indeed. He claimed his heart condition prevented him travelling.

      The same week he was in Roman restaurants eating pasta and drinking wine.

      These guys think they are above the law.

      Delete
    4. Eating pasta with a plain sauce and drinking red wine in moderation - exactly what a good cardiac consultant would prescribe.

      Delete
    5. 10.22 He did not refuse to leave the Vatican - get your facts straight! He did turn up to the Royal Commission of his own free will and he is currently in Australia so what’s your problem. Cheap point scoring I’d say.

      Delete
    6. Pasta e vino rosso? Looks more like steak and chips and beer this patient is more in to.

      http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/05/10/06/33FFC50A00000578-3582232-image-a-1_1462857250189.jpg

      Delete
    7. @11:21

      No, he refused to attend the royal commission in person citing heart problems despite several top Australian heart specialists offering to accompany him on the flight home at their own expense.

      However, he is now back in Australia after the pope cut him loose to stand trial on charges details of which are yet to be revealed.

      Delete
    8. Jsckanory... 'Fraid so...

      Delete
    9. In medicine, once a patient's own doctor (who has full access to his notes of medical case history etc) has taken an important decision eg with regard to the patient's suitability to travel, no other lesser informed physician will override that decision It would be regarded as extremely unethical and would put the "interfering" doctor's reputation at stake, particularly if things should go wrong.
      Suitability for plane travel cannot be deduced from what one was seen to be eating.
      For those reasons, I very much doubt the veracity of post @ 11.47

      Delete
  5. Stop rewriting a story re: Australian government's concerns about groups who may be working for outside agencies. That's a natural and good concern. Why are you attempting to swing the argument to promote your hatred, prejudices and untruths? Pat you should do some more learned research.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then why are Catholic bishops speaking out about It?

      Delete
    2. Pat 10 07. You miss my argument.The Australian Bishops along with other groups are speaking and rightly so. But you are using the story in a twisted way to express your vehement, anti Catholic bias. If you were intelligent and rational, that would be conducive to a balanced debate. Every issue you blog becomes an opportunity to beat the Church into the ground, often with misleading information..

      Delete
    3. I don't have to "beat the Church into the ground".

      They are doing that themselves.

      Delete
    4. Pat seems unaware how closed his mind is, how one - track his agenda is. No, Pat, the Church is not beating itself into the ground
      Its continual detractors are doing that relentlessly.

      Delete
    5. 13:02, so the clerical abuse scandals and the corruption had no effect on morale, then? No adverse influence on Mass attendance?

      Delete
    6. I think they probably have an effect on morale, Magna.. That's almost inevitable but in the darkest moments that's when one's backbone and faith in prayer and in God's guiding hand comes through for me. That's how I feel.
      It's interesting too, Magna, to remember that at times in history eg Cromwellian times and the years of the Penal Laws in Ireland, the Church actually gained in strength afterwards. Does the struggle maybe shake people out of their complacency and make them wake up to their responsibilities.
      I know that I, personally am the sort of person who would never throw the towel in and give up on something which was really valuable to me. I don't imagine that I am the only one who feels strong like that. I know I am not. Nil desperandum!

      Delete
    7. 15:04, I don't believe that non-attenders at Mass necessarily have given up on the Church, but on the clergy. And for very good reason.

      Delete
    8. If people are simply not attending Mass because of the Clergy as opposed to the Church it says more about their faith and yours. Huh! What exactly do you base that sweeping statement on?

      Delete
    9. Thank you for your rerespone,Magna (I am 15.04)
      I am sure others will respond to you too...

      Delete
    10. Long Corridor has great views2 February 2018 at 16:54

      Magna Carta bases it on the fact that he entered Maynooth in 1993, as part of one of the last big first year classes (there were 45) of them. He left three years later. Whether or not it was by mutual extent will be pored over by digital architects diseccting this blog 10,000 years hence.

      Delete
    11. So you equate non-attendance at Mass as giving up on the Body of Christ? On what do YOU base such a sweeping statement?

      Delete
    12. 16.54 We know he was in Maynooth but he was shown the door and he inflicts his bitterness and anger on to posters here as a result. It’s not rocket science but he is to be pitied more than anything else the poor love.

      Delete
    13. Don't forget that the Anglicans in Australia have been notably anti-Catholic (a code for being anti-Irish), same as the KKK. There was a notoriously anti-Catholic Anglican bishop or archbishop of Sydney in the 80s/90s. Their local Ian Paisley.

      Delete
  6. So Irish born Cardinal Farrel is blocking Mary Mc Aleese from speaking at world day for families in Vatican City.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And comment makers here want us to believe that the Vatican is into human rights?

      It won't even allow McAleese, a practising Catholic and a friend of Sean Brady's to speak.

      Delete
    2. A friend of Sean Brady's? What kind of recommendation is that?

      Delete
    3. How much of the Church's teaching can you reject and still be trumpeted as a "practising" Catholic?

      Delete
    4. None.

      But McAleese is a holy water hen who has kissed more clerical ass than the busiest of papal Chamberlains -)

      Delete
    5. Very pejorative description, Pat. How easily you descend into abusive language!
      Are you not even aware of that?

      Delete
    6. In the Church of Ireland Mary McAleese would be regarded as a liberal. She's an ethnic Catholic, believes very little of the Catechism, would find liberal Proestantism much more aligned with her worldview. But liberal Catholics hate the P word and would rather change the Catholic church from within rather than admit they are de facto Protestant in their beliefs.

      Delete
    7. 'Ethnic Catholic', 16:12? Have you just invented a new category of 'Catholic'? Tell us what it means.

      Delete
    8. Go look it up on Wikipedia, that’s what you usually do.

      Delete
    9. Mrs. McM Aleese wishes to refute in the strongest possible terms the assertion of poster 16.12 who made an unwarranted statement that "she believes very little of the Catechism"

      Delete
  7. No surprises that Buckley looks favourably on something that harks back to the worst antiCatholic prejudices of the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.

    They will never even attempt to push that nonsense through. Australia would make itself a laughingstock.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The prejudices of those centuries were a reaction to Vatican corruption and evil.

      Delete
    2. Closer to home, a great many Brits believe that most Northern Catholics are agents of the Republic. Just as silly.

      Delete
    3. And many Northern Catholics see Protestants and Unionists as British agents. Also silly.

      Delete
    4. I don't know, they've been pretty outspoken on Muslims, adapt to Australian culture or leave the country.

      The outcome of the royal commission must also be one of the many reasons behind the proposed legislation.

      Delete
    5. Indeed.

      Important documents on child abuse hidden in the Nunciature or spirited away to the Vatican.

      Delete
  8. Love the term holy water hen...where did you find that one ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lady friend of mine in Donegal uses the term.

      It is good.

      Delete
    2. There is a comparable French phrase, grenouille de benitier, frog in the holy water stoup, which implies a not very nice person.

      Delete
    3. No, it doesn't, Faux Magna, imply what you suggested. The literal English translation of this French idiom doesn't even remotely suggest its meaning, and it certainly isn't 'a not very nice person'. It means rather 'someone who is religious to the point of naivety'. Unkinder people would render, wrongly, the meaning as 'religious nutter'. But this is not the French idiomatic usage of the phrase.😆

      Delete
    4. I wonder how Pat would like that lady - or others - to describe him!

      Delete
    5. 15:00 Wikipedia literary criticism makes a change from Wikipedia biblical criticism.

      Delete
    6. Ça par exemple! The false Magna, despite insisting on calling me 'faux' once again demonstrates his lack of ability at languages. And he shows his lack of linguistic savvy by literally translating an idiom rather than going to what a native speaker means.
      A comparable example would be that he would expect the idiom 'tu me casse les pieds' to mean 'you are breaking my feet', which would leave him looking even more stupid than he normally does. Idiomatically when the French use that phrase, they mean what we mean when we say 'you're doing my head in'. Strangely suitable example for that casse-pieds.
      When the French use grenouille de benitier it has an idiomatic undertone of a nasty person.
      If you haven't got beyond google translate and misremembered Latin phrases, you will make a fool of yourself by showing your lack of knowledge. I say this to save yoi from yourself.

      Delete
    7. You won't be told, will you Faux Magna?

      I know an ego when I see one. I know a fool, too.😆

      Delete
  9. Yes, we know were your sympathies lye standing next to a UVF symbol laughing and swilling beer. Don’t lecture us on nationalism or Unionism because you wouldn’t know much about it anyway coming from the South yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. It's great not to be a bigot!

      Delete
    2. --Except when you speak about the Church which you hate, Pat.

      Delete
    3. Personally I am delighted that Pat went to the loyalist pub. I think he did good work that day. I wish there was more outreach like that.

      Delete

  10. So far out of 44 comments - Pat has comnented 16 times! This blog is now a shrine to Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On Wednesday I was criticised for commenting only twice.

      Today I am criticised for commenting too much?

      You cannot win with the Holy Water Hens and the Taliban :-)

      Delete
    2. Lol and it is your blog after all!

      Delete
    3. I'm also happy that Pat replies more on the blog. His replies are civil and interesting and balanced enough to help debate.

      Delete
  11. Can’t believe that Farrell buck....not many will be hooking up with Frankie when he arrives....if he arrives

    ReplyDelete
  12. Pat as a ex cleric could I officiate at weddings in the North? Would I have to register at the local council office?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The law has changed in recent years.

      You would have to be nominated by a "Religious Body".

      For instance The Oratory Society is a religious body and I as its bishop nominate marriage officiants.

      Delete
  13. The notion that Catholics, and especially priests, in Ireland and Englan were agents of the Vatican was used to justify the savage Penal Laws. Would you welcome their return, Pat?

    What about Anglicans from England who move from England to Ireland or Australia and still consider themselves members of the CofE, the Established Church. It's far more a State church than the Catholic church in Ireland, with the Prime Minister approving the appointment of bishops and with bishops in the House of Lords, and therefore part of the legislature? Imagine the uproar if it was proposed that Catholic bishops sit in the Australian or Irish parliaments.

    So the question is whether members of the CofE visiting or living abroad are agents of Lambeth Palace?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course I would not welcome the Penal Laws back.

      The COE is an established church but it is not a STATE.

      The COE operates in a state called England or the UK.

      I totally disagree with the PM appointing bishops.

      I am for the complete separation of church and state in Ireland and everywhere.

      Delete
    2. The CofE and the State are inextricably linked. Parliament has an Ecclesiastical Commitee to regulate that church's affairs and the Queen of the UK, Australia, Canada etc is the Supreme Governor of the CofE and uniquely of all religious beliefs or atheists, Catholics uniquely are forbidden by law to be Sovereign of the UK, Australia, Canada etc and therefore their Head of State. How very liberal, democratic and secular and a fine example of the separation of church and state.

      Delete
    3. Arlene, Catholics, especially priests, WERE agents of the Vatican at the time and, indirectly, of England's sworn enemies, Spain and France. This is the period known for bitter and cruel religious warring. In 1570, for example, Pope Pius issued a papal bull, in which he exhorted the Cathoilcs of England to rebel against Queen Elizabeth and encouaged her assassination by declaring that not only would her killer not sin, but that he would earn great merit in Heaven.

      Jesuit priests especially were active in plotting to assassinate Elizabeth.

      There was also the attempted invasion of England by Spain with her mighty Armada in 1588. And there was the Gunpowder Plot in 1605 to destroy England's Protestant parliament.

      Roman Catholicism WAS a dangerous political force and its mission was profoundly sectarian: to destroy everything Protestant. Had Protestantism in England at the time not been in the ascendency, do you really think that Catholics wouldn't have imposed their version of the Penal Laws? If you do, think back to the reign of bloody Mary: some three hundred Protestants martyred for their Faith.

      Delete
    4. You talk some bull***t most times and this is no exception. You make not one mention of WHY the Gunpowder plot was instigated and WHY so many plotted to kill the basta*d Queen (as history sometimes calls her). Thank God for the 40 Catholic Martyrs of England and Wales and there were many many more. Get back to your Wikipedia and history books you total moron.

      Delete
    5. Jeez Magna, you have a great career ahead of you as a fiction writer!
      Catholics resisted when they saw their priests and people tortured and brutally murdered.

      Delete
    6. 16:47, your anger is clouding any ability at historical judgement that you might possess. (And I suspect you possess precious little.)

      You miss the point. The very fact that these acts, including the Gunpowder Plot, took place, regardless of what you believe were their motives, rendered Roman Catholicism a political and militant force that no Protestant monarch coukd reasonably ignore.

      Fundamentally, Roman Catholicism sought to turn back the clock on the Protestant Reformation.

      I know that Catholic bigots, like you, prefer a sanitised version of history, one that presents Roman Catholicism as a perpetual victim. But Catholics mature enough to live with the truth know that NO religion in this turbulent period of European history, including Roman Catholicism, had morally clean hands.

      As for Queen Elizabeth, the motive for the popes' shit-stirring the Catholics of England into open rebellion against her and to commit murder (regicide) was simple: the restoration to power of Catholicism in England.

      Try thinking before you post.

      Delete
    7. 1700, you do realise that Roman Catholicism, especially in this period, was not noted for its tolerance of the Reformed Faith (Protestantism)? Right from the start, it took to slaughtering Protestants whenever and wherever it could, under a perverse moral rationale. Roman Catholicism had no intention of putting up with rival Christian churches, and its bloody history is testament to this.

      I don't need to fictionalise this period of European history; it tells a stark enough tale on its own.

      Delete
    8. That's his most bonkers contribution to date. Not that I've read it of course, but it's bound to be. Just saw the name, yawned and scrolled on down

      Delete
    9. You’ve moved on from spouting bulls**t to verbal diarrhoea. Go and lye down and take your medication before you get locked up for your own protection man. And for heaven sake stop plagiarising from Wikipedia.

      Delete
    10. 19:01, you remind me of another halfwit, Cardinal Basil Hume, for his public criticism of that wonderful film by Martin Scorcesse, The Last Temptation of Christ. A journalist, with more a lot more wit than Hume, asked him: have you actually seen the film? A red-faced Hume admitted that he hadn't. What a fool!

      And you're just like him, not actually having read my post, but being presumptious enough to criticise it.

      Idiot.😆

      Delete
    11. Cardinal Hume, that repressed gay shoehorned into Westminster by the Duke of Norfolk who lobbied the Nuncio, refused the Viaticum and the Sacrament of the Sick on his deathbed. But he was like Mary McAleese, the ethnic Catholic. He didn't believe half of it.

      Delete
  14. @14.28
    Your view about how Pope Francis is regarded in Ireland is very restricted to the vibes which naturally you pick up in the anti-Church comments day and daily on this blog.
    Tt is a distorted viewpoint.
    Pope Francis will be warmly welcomed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He will be welcomed by many and not welcomed by many.

      If he was in the house next door to me I would not go and see him.

      He's not the worst of popes but some of us have gotten over pop star popes.

      Delete
    2. 15.17 Pat, and I'm sure Pope Francis would nit want to waste his time in you either! God bless Pope Francis.

      Delete
    3. 20 Pat's comnentary so far! Isn't it amazing how some people, a bishop of all people, find time for useless activities. Oriwking internet, smartphones.. etc...all day. Just amazingly lazy.

      Delete
    4. Pat I'm on the much more conservative/orthodox side of Catholic theology than you, but I agree with you about the superstar Popes. Paul VI started it with his global travels, then St John Paul II went crazy with his "pastoral journeys". He seemed to have visited half the world's countries, often more than once.

      In a mass media age this provided good footage and enhanced the office of the papacy into a sort of mega-CEO/President.

      This is far from the traditional notion of the papacy as a conserver of the faith once received.

      In the history of the Church most Catholics wouldn't have known anything about the pope of their day, they simply went about their Catholic business.

      I had hoped that Benedict XVI would resist it but he turned out to be JPII in better tailoring.

      And now traditional Catholics bewail Francis as the dictator Pope. He is an absolute monarch with great PR forcing through doctrinal change by his own volition while yet being apparently humble. He is the peak of the Ultramontane/Vatican I papolatory.

      The thing that would hurt him most is indifference rather than protests.

      Delete
    5. 16:34 m, your views are not conservative. They are certainly not orthodox. They are somewhere between sedevacantism and renegade anticatholicism.

      Delete
    6. Or views that are quite simply confused!

      Delete
    7. Neo-cons the both of you. It's all very well saying that whatever the Pope of the day says is doctrine. Do you worship the Pope more than Jesus? Does the clock stock with each pontificate? Look up the Code of Canon Law on the rights of all Catholics to voice concerns to bishops. St Athanaius wasn't a heritic, not was St Catherierna of Sienna.

      The 2000 year old church is not the personal property of the Pope of the day. Read Benedict XVI's installation homily which refers back to to Vat I. Libs think each Pope brings new policies. And that's what Francis thinks.

      Delete
    8. 20:03
      Learn to spell if you wish to be taken seriously.
      Learn to discern if you wish to persuade.
      Learn to keep silent first if you wish to contribute to the discussion.

      Delete
    9. 20.03 I read and wept.

      Delete
    10. 23:45 & 01:21. You could do with a bit more "Who am I to judge?" in your lives.

      Delete
  15. The haters out in force today Pat!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed.

      The good Catholic Christians!

      Delete
    2. How ironic to actually read, though, where the hate and animosity is coming through on the blog.. Maybe not the reply the poster anticipated.

      Delete
    3. The "haters" are out in force trying to defend themselves from other "haters". Works both ways....Pat!

      Delete
    4. Pat, your statement @ 11,17 is quite simply grossly incorrect in the context of the historical context at the time. It would take me as a historian, pages here to try and inform you properly. You know that!. So please, for accuracy's sake, make some effort to do proper research and inform yourself. Maybe some Irish or local historian there will have the time and patience to attempt to write an informative post to help you. But your dismissive impoverished evaluation of what caused the Penal Laws is quite simply ludicrous.

      Delete
    5. "Haters" is a relatively new thing in which liberals describe anyone who has the cheek to give a different opinion. You know what they say, a liberal is a liberal until you disagree with them.

      Delete
    6. 15:47, that statement by Bishop Pat is, in a general way, correct. If it would take you 'pages' to challenge it, then you need to learn the art of brevity. It's a good point of literary style.😆

      Delete
    7. 15.30 It might be a good idea to get yourself a dictionary and see the huge difference in the meaning of hating someone as opposed to disagreeing with them.

      Delete
    8. Magna. You are often not a big fan of brevity yourself See @ 16.00
      LOL

      Delete
    9. 18:39, there really is no way of expressing this that wouldn't make you look a total jackass, so I may as well come out with it: the four paragraphs of my post at 16:00 is scarcely consistent with 'pages'.😆

      Delete
    10. Magna.. believe me, one long convoluted paragraph from you is far more tedious than several pages! If we want to read Wikipedia we can do it ourselves, thank you !

      Delete
  16. Don't go to see the Pope if you feel that much animosity, Pat. It would be callous to say you won't be missed. I think it's sad really...But it's where you are and that's that...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mrs McAleese is a confused and angry woman. On discovering her son was gay she suddenly became a campaigner for gay rights. While attending a service in and Anglican affiliated cathedral sho took 'holy communion'. She is doing a doctorate in Canon and could become a pain-in-the-aspidestra armed with her new found learning.Rome did right to block her speaking within the Vatican. He natural home would seem to me to be more Presbyterian than anything else. Trouble is they abhor Gays.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where is she going with a Phd in Canon Law? She might be over qualified for Tesco.

      Delete
    2. And what was wrong with that? Most people don't start 'campaigning' (fund-raising) for such things as cancer until they, or a member of their family, suffer with it.

      Yes, she took holy communion. Are you seriously suggesting that Jesus wasn't present at a service in which the participants were following his instruction ('Do this in memory of me.')?

      I doubt whether that Mary McAleese could be a pain in many places with her doctoral degree in Canon Law: her writing style is too convuluted (rather than highbrow) for general interest.

      Delete
    3. Poor Mary causes much pain here and there.

      Delete
    4. But she causes a lot less pain than some..

      Delete
    5. 16:57
      Far from it in fact. Mary McAleese, a past pupil of the Dominican Sisters is a clear-sighted and highly articulate woman. Her professional achievements, quite apart from her role as President of Ireland, bear this out.

      The cardinal who attempted to block her is an Irishman, and a former Legionary of Christ. It's a pity his public action vis-à-vis Mrs McAleese was not paralleled by similar actions in relation to the abuser of seminarians and the father of children by at least two women, Father Marcial Maciel Degollado when they were needed.

      Delete
    6. Mrs McAleese is indeed a clear-sighted woman, and part of that comes from being a mother. Vatican Monsignori and Cardinals remain trapped in an unsavoury miasma of obtuseness and obfuscation and can't hold a candle to her.

      Delete
    7. What a vile post form 16.57. As is well known, Mrs McA was a campaigner for legal equality for gays in the mid 1970s long before her son was born. So the poster is not only vicious but mendacious.

      Delete
    8. The two who went apoplectic at her carrying out Jesus’ command ‘Do this in memory of me.’ Fr James McEvoy and Card Des Connell made a show of themselves in the process. The former, a so-called pracicioner of a reasoned approach lost it. The latter shamefully referred to the eucharistic prayer used on the day as a ‘sham.’

      Delete
    9. Well you may join the twenty or so who go to the Sunday morning Holy Communion service at the stolen St Patrick's cathedral in Dublin. The Anglican planters have such a cheek holding on to Dublin's ex-Catholic cathedrals, especially as they cannot muster a congregation of more than 200 between them on a Sunday morning.

      Delete
  18. Bishop Pat, You carry on saying your 'Mass' for the holy huddle of Larne and leave the supreme Pontiff to his task.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Father Pat, Father Pat
      Father Pat, and his six or so cats.
      early every morning, Pat rises to scorn them,
      Pats a really, really clever man

      Delete
    2. I don't think Pat is all that clever really. He finds it impossible to learn anything new that doesn't fit into his old ideas and prejudices. Also, he can write incredibly naive and immature opinions.

      Delete
  19. Pat, I clearly and unashamedly idientify myself as one of 'the haters'. I hate the way you pontificate from some imaginary moral high place. I hate the way you jeer and snigger at others. I hate the way you allow people to be defamed on this blog and your own defamation. I hate how people use the anonymity of this blog to have a go at people they wouldn't say boo to face to face.
    I hate the posts by opinionated fools like Magna Carta and above all I hate the lack of christian love that pervades these pages. And Pat to be honest I am working hard not to hate you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now you know why these pages lack 'Christian love'. Because of your own self-confessed multiple hatred.😆

      Delete
    2. What would you know about Christian love? Look up the word hypocrite when you are glancing through the internet for answers to people’s questions.

      Delete
    3. Magna, 18.46: you are the chief hate monger on this site. If only you'd see clearly into your own pathetic mind that all too frequently you epitomise what "hate" and "being hatful" truly means! I pray for your healing.

      Delete
    4. 17.07
      I feel sorry for you nd your friend...or of course it could be you repeating yourself.
      I never use the word hate...because I’m trying to be the best Christian I can I don’t actually hate anyone...even the couple of people who ignore me in real life.
      I agree with you Magna...this poster is so jealous of you ...he / she has a vendetta against a pseudo name.
      Really , really sad person/ persons.
      I will pray for you so that you can understand that Pats blog is just that..A blog.
      BTW I love reading it...it is so enlightening in more ways than one?

      Delete
    5. 17.07
      You need help...you should try some counselling or try praying or both...
      Your have this personalised problem with another poster...how sad are you?

      Delete
    6. "The haters" are just pissed because they can't get away with their shenanigans anymore without the risk of +Pat blogging it for readers fun and enjoyment.

      Delete
    7. 17,07
      Solution
      If you don’t bother reading this blog....surely your hate problem will disappear.
      Try it....it will work and a miracle cure will be achieved.

      Delete
    8. Everyone is dumping on 17.07 -- which suggests he touched a chord?

      Delete
  20. Somebody uo there needs to differeniate between the words "hater" and "debater" A revealing alternative viewpoint doesn't make one a hater

    ReplyDelete
  21. I sympathise greatly with poster @ 17.07
    I feel the same.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I don't hate either you or 17:07 And in the unlikely event you ever needed me I would be there for you.

      Delete
    2. Take yourself up a mountain for a wee hike.
      Bet you a cure will be achieved.

      Delete
  22. Is Pat Relihan on sabbatical or has he left?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous 17.07 -- thanks for expressing so well what so many of us feel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol at 20.55 posting to himself again
      U couldn’t make it up
      Ha ha ha

      Delete
    2. What a nutty response there at 21:25.

      Delete
    3. Poster @ 21.25 couldn't accept that many posters feel the same as poster 17.07
      But we do.

      Delete
  24. Bishop Patrick, Apparently Mrs McAleese was barred by Cardinal Farrell due to her views on gay rights. What would Cardinal Farrell have to say about recent revelations concerning Irish clerics on your blog? Or more recent revelations, like the Grindr revelation last week in The Irish College? Or the other revelations about former priests and current priests and their exploits in Roma?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cardinal Farrell would stay quiet about all those scandals and turn a blind eye.

      That's what all Vatican functionaries do.

      And all in the name of God, of course.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps we should give him a chance. he seems like a really good guy. I've read some of his material and its very insightful

      Delete
    3. He's a homophobic bigot.

      He's blown it!😆

      Delete
    4. "Apparently" lol

      Delete
  25. Well, if that is the case thank God you have more backbone Pat. You are doing the Church a great service by opening the door on the hypocrisy. @20:54 you are correct. A lot of people are on here giving out because they know they wont be able to get away with it anymore, or risk appearing on this blog. What's good for Mrs McAleese, is good for them. they need to be barred from the Clerical State until the Church changes its views on Gays and Celibacy. Look at the many men who left the priesthood due to celibacy? They have more Christianity in their little fingers than the current set of hypocrites have in their clerical collars. Keep up the good work Pat. Open the doors in Dublin, Meath and Galway.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Maynooth sub-archivist2 February 2018 at 21:52

    Magna Carta has yet to deny that he entered Maynooth in 1993, one of the 45 who did so that year in a seminary community of 250.

    By his own admission he found the "spiritual month" at the start a bit difficult.

    But he learned not to put bottles of milk on the windowsill outside his room in New House because mice would scale the Virginia creeper on the building and help themselves; and a few months later he experienced the overnight departure of Mgr Ledwith.

    Therein lies his expertise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 08:42

      New House came later. He started in Long Corridor. His was one of the first classes in which each seminarian could have a room to himself there.

      Delete
    2. What is his Christian name(MC's) then if you claim to know who he is?

      Delete
    3. WhaW is MC's Christian name? You say you knkn who hr is...

      Delete
    4. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 17:54

      I'd lose my job if I told you. We are given batches of seminarian records to digitalise. It's done in alphabetical order. As there are just four sub-archivists it would be apparent who was the culprit. Another fun fact from the archives is that up to the last record the Deans asked in Latin that the seminarian's parents had a Catholic wedding before the seminarian was born. The PP response was also in Latin. If the answer was negative the seminarian was asked to leave, with no reason given.

      Delete
    5. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 17:59

      The only reason the archive of ex-seminarians is happening is because they want to create a bit of the website giving names of seminarians and ordination dates and parent dates if known. It's just to stop ad-hoc and time consuming enquiries from geneologists, especially Irish-Americans who seem obsessed with family trees.

      Delete
  27. Haha haha �� 21.52

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 08:31

      He wasn't an early adaptor. Later he asked the Top Pats Monitor to keep it in his fridge.

      Delete
  28. @Maynooth sub-archivist 21:52 President Ledwith left in mid 1994. New house was the preserve of second years. Perhaps you can open the archives on the priests (priest and ex-priest) mentioned earlier this week? Or did they go to Maynooth or just to rome? What does the archive say about Georgeous, Puck and friends?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 14:08

      Contemporary seminarian records are kept in Maynooth University, the Theology Office and by the Formation team. They only transfer to the archives 10 years after departure from SPCM. They are kept securely in the Pugin Store behind Logic House. A lot of records were lost in the New House fire in 1940.

      Delete
  29. Did Margaret get as far as Mary's where the milk could be put out with no adverse consequences? The crows living in the Graf were known to eye the milk cartons though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 08:36

      No, he didn't go to Mary's. A scan of the letters from his Dean to his bishop said, briefly, that MC failed to please. Is it unethical to mention this?

      Delete
    2. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 08:54

      Magna used to get his milk from Maynooth Tesco when it was still 24hrs. That's how he explained to the gate lodge his post-11pm return to the college. It's all in the record.

      Delete
    3. Cows can be choosy about who gets to drink their milk! They could get into a bad moo-d.

      Delete
  30. So what is your business if he did or did not.
    He is not on trial here...you are just jealous of his knowledge.
    Now go and do some study, and then take yourself to bed.
    Goodnight

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The knowledge source of one of those who post here under MC is accessible to anyone who is literate - Wikipedia and Google Translate.

      Major deficiencies, typical of someone out of their depth: rehashing of basic facts, no analysis of information and no imagination to perceive links not yet identified.

      Delete
    2. Absolutely agree with you poster @ 7.26

      Delete
  31. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 16:18

    I should explain that Susan Leyden is the SPCM archivists. The sub-archivists are MU history students doing it as a part-time student jobs. The archive is boring mostly, mainly financial ledgers, which reveal, for example that there were 43 college servants in 1903, all male and single.

    The only bonus is the access to seminarian case files dating from 1940 to 2007. There's some reading there.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Some seminarians had a clear run through their Maynooth years and some didn't. It was ever thus.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Maynooth sub-archivist3 February 2018 at 19:13

    True. Some of the records just have the date of birth, baptism, confirmation.

    ReplyDelete