Monday, 30 April 2018

MAGHABERRY PRISON PROBLEM RESOLVED



I PROMISED TO KEEP BLOG READERS UPDATED ON MY PROBLEM OF GETTING ECCLESIASTICAL VISITS TO PARISHIONERS AT MAGHABERY PRISON OUTSIDE BELFAST.

I am pleased to let readers know that my problem has been resolved and I am making my first in a while ecclesiastical visit to Maghaberry today, Tuesday.

I have to thank a number of people for this matter being resolved.

The first person I need to thank is the Permanent Secretary of the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland Mr. Nick Perry.

NICK PERRY

I had written to Mr. Perry about my visits problem.

He handed the matter over to the Director General of the Northern Ireland Prison Service, Mr. Ronnie Armour.


Mr. Armour very kindly wrote to me and told me that he had contacted the Governor of Maghaberry Prison - Mr. David Kennedy, who was willing to arrange an ecclesiastical visit for me to my parishioner.

GOVERNOR KENNEDY
And of course, I must also express my gratitude to my local MP Mr. Sammy Wilson who was kind enough to make representations on my behalf.

SAMMY WILSON MP


As far as I am concerned the matter is now resolved and I am deeply grateful for all the help I have received.

I can now visit my parishioner in prison who has many issues to face and a difficult future ahead.

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

ARCHBISHOP EAMON MARTIN



I also wanted my readers to know that I have had several recent communications with Eamon Martin about important matters.

I have criticised Eamon before on this Blog.

But in fairness, I must say that recent communications were both respectful and businesslike.

I am sure that Eamon and I will never be best friends but we must always give credit where credit is due.

I am hoping that Eamon will emerge as an Irish bishop who wants the Church in Ireland to change for the better - by acting on matters that need acting on.

At this stage, I am prepared to give him the chance to show that.

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

FROM THE ORATORY CARTOON COLLECTION





98 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Magna's jaw must have dropped when he read today's blog.

      Delete
  2. Glad you have taken our previous advice and dropped the "Amy" nickname.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t think Pat acted on any advice of yours dearie. “Our” advice you say. Who constitutes “Our”? Perhaps “your” own advice should be directed at some Armagh Clergy who continue to refer to their Archbishop as ‘Amy’. It began with them sniggering behind his back and calling him this name not Pat.

      Delete
    2. The nickname was first used by an Armagh PP at a clergy dinner.

      Delete
    3. 8.41
      Your comments are irrelevant and of no interest to us. Please give Pat the credit due to him on the name issue.

      Delete
    4. 09.24: Name calling should have no place on any blog. It's a form of bullying and displays an immaturity which we expect teenagers to engage in. Grow up - and act your age.

      Delete
    5. 8.41: We are better human beings when we respect one another and show some tolerance and understanding. Name calling is reminiscent of school yard bullying and is totally unacceptable. Just wrong. If you depend on name calling to support your argument, then you have no real argument. Respect and tolerance are more preferable.

      Delete
    6. @10.55 You totally miss my point completely because you don't listen. Your comment should be directed not to me but the clergy in Armagh because it's they who came up with the name not me. I have never used that name in anyway so your comment is irrelevant to me.

      Delete
    7. 12.12: What's inside your knickers? You seem like an old maid by your silly comments...grow up.

      Delete
    8. Why does it matter where the name calling originated? The name calling on this blog is basically an ecclesiastical version of Trump tactics that belittle and dehumanize others. Where it started doesn’t matter. Continuing with it is inexcusable.

      Delete
    9. Tell all of that drivel to the Armagh Clergy 17.04 & 17.13 (probably the same moron).

      Delete
  3. Glad to hear that the Maghaberry visit is sorted.

    For me I think there is a very real and immediate need for a vulnerable person.

    There is the other matter of the Hegemony (dare I say monopoly?) of the Church of Rome on Catholicism. A position that the Church will not give up willingly.

    I used to think that there was no problem with this hegemony. Until I saw the many people the Church of Rome kicks to the kerb: the Divorced, Gay/Lesbian people, mixed marriages etc. I once saw a Priest deny the family of a dead Child the request to play a song she requested at her funeral. Things have got terribly ugly in the Catholic Church.

    The list appears to widen year by year. What is to become of all these lost sheep?

    Pat and the Oratory Society pioneer in providing a direction and an alternative for these lost sheep.

    Going to Mass in the Oratory for the first time a few weeks ago I was struck by an immense sense of community and belonging. I was also reminded that Christians for the first load of centuries gathered in this fashion.

    Perhaps the Roman Empire enshrined in the Catholic Church is in decline. Perhaps we must look for new ways for our Faith to continue onward.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent comment 1:12

      Delete
    2. Rusty Madra at 1.12: I am glad the issue re: Prison visitation is resolved for Pat. I'm glad too that you find comfort in Larne Oratory. Eventually all local Church communities will be forced to return to the early Church experience. The institutional church is always removed from local Church communities. It's important to acknowledge that the vast majority of priests try to create a warm, caring, welcoming community. I certainly seek, along with pastoral council and hospitality group to make our parish a welcoming place for all. I know from my almost 40 years that creating and sustaining a good, caring community is possible, requiring a constant effort. I think the majority of us try to be sensitive and kind to parishioners in difficult situations. We just don't proclaim it from the rooftops but do our work, quietly, caringly and compassionately, sometimes coping ourselves with personal struggles. In the world of today we must never give up, however challenging, to renew, nourish and revive our local parish communities where much Christ like living is happening.

      Delete
    3. Heaven preserve us from middle class pastoral councils. Get out and get your hands dirty and do some real community work rather than sitting around tables at your cosy talking shops in warm parochial houses.

      Delete
    4. 12.17: What cuckoo world do you live? Obviously you are cuckoo to make so ignorant a comment. If you have any contact at all with your parish - or intelligent awareness - you'd be aware that all parishes, whatever their status, have pastoral councils or groups similar in nature. These groups ensure parishes are welcoming places and along with their priest(s) harness the giftedness of people for the good of their community. That, of course, would mean nothing to a cynic like you! Nothing cosy about my parish. And now at your suggestion, I'll go and get my hands dirty - through gardening which I love.....

      Delete
    5. @14.22 The condescending tone in your reply tells us all we need to know about pastoral councils. The nonsense is that your select number are chosen by the PP to sit on these talking shops. I bet not many from the housing estates are chosen.

      Delete
    6. The membership is usually retired teachers and the like.

      Delete
    7. 17.44: Sorry to burst your cynicism. You definitey have no knowledge of how parishes work. All members of our pastoral council were nominated and chosen by fellow parishioners, one from every estate. We certainly did not discriminate on background. I wouldn't tolerate that approach. We have a very vibrant parish community and I'm appreciative of the role our parish council play in this. Your assumptions are ignorant, ill informed and stupid. Irrespective of what manner a council is chosen, their presence is hugely significant in our parishes. Were you ignored or rejected by your parishioners that you are so negative and cynical?

      Delete
    8. @22.47 What a load of self-righteous tosh. You are living in cloud cuckoo land luv.

      Delete
    9. 00.08: We're obviously dealing with a plank head philistine! You simply don't haven't a clue. God give you intelligence and insight.

      Delete
  4. "I am hoping that Eamon will emerge as an Irish bishop who wants the Church in Ireland to change for the better."

    YEAH, LIKE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A senior Irish journalist who has spoken with EM told me yesterday that he wants to clean up the Irish Church.

      He did remove Rory and McCamley.

      Let us watch and then judge.

      Delete
    2. Did he remove them because they were not chast or because they were caught? It depends on which he thinks is more scandalous.

      The true test of men with such power is how they use it to help the vulnerable. The seminarians we have spoken about in the last week have not faired well under this Chancellor of St.Patrick's College Maynooth.

      If we are to believe he has plans to clean up than he best begin by alologising for his own governance failings.

      Delete
    3. That is a very true perspective.

      Eamon is FULLY up to date with the Maynooth problem.

      I hope he does act.

      Delete
    4. I shall expect a written apology from him so in reply to the communications he ignored in the weeks after his was appointed... but I shall not hold my breath.

      Delete
    5. @9:05, How exactly is Archbishop Martin supposed to know whether priests are truly celibate or not? I’m pretty sure bishops don’t have psychic powers to read prople’s minds. And, contrary to the opinion presented on this blog, gossip does not constitute evidence. So what is it you want the Archbishop to do to ensure that he has 100% knowledge of the celibacy of his priests?

      Delete
    6. @17.18
      Please begin by assessing the difference between celibacy and chastity.

      I have never insisted that he seek any assurance of every priests chastity. So the basis of your question is invalid.

      However since you seem to have difficulty with understanding good governance and management I will give a high level overview of his failing in this area. Good goverance and management would result in a more assertive response when scandals are reported to him. History shows that he failed to respond adequately when informed privately of situations. In fact on several occasions he only responded adequately when adverse publicity forced him to. It should not take such force for him to exercise his responsibility.

      Delete
    7. @19:32, diocesan priests take a promise of celibacy, not chastity, so I feel quite justified in the use of the word I employed at 17:18. Secondly, you make the assumption that every report given to the Archbishop has to be assumed to be true. It could be equally true to say that he investigates such reports to see whether or not they are true and either finds them to be untrue, or finds that not enough evidence can be established. Which leads back to the point of his inability to know with certitude the commitment of each priest's to their promise of celibacy. He can only act if he is certain that something needs to be done, and someone repeating gossip about a priest, which may or may not be true, but which cannot be easily determined either way, does not really give grounds for certainty. Other than hiring private investigators to gather credible evidence, which I assume priests would object to, I would be interested in finding out how you propose to establish firm evidence of breaches of the promise of celibacy rather than relying on hearsay alone.

      Delete
    8. If +Pat is example, ++Martin's whole time would be occupied with scandal otherwise.

      Delete
    9. @20.57
      Eh again look up the difference between celibacy and chastity. If a priest gets married there will be loads of evidence, such as when the maynooth director of formation got married.

      And again, I have made no proposal to seek "firm evidence of breaches of the promise of celibacy". Do not be so rude as to put words in my mouth.

      Chastity is very different to celibacy. Still there is all too often too much evidence ignored and this blog proves that time and time again; ergo your point is bootless.

      Delete
  5. We'll done Pat. I hope bigots of all shapes and sizes get the message. I wish your parishioner well

    ReplyDelete
  6. 08.09: Sean, bigots !! - Don't forget yourself in this category, along with viperous Magna, though not quite as nasty and hate-filled. Well done to Pat for his perseverance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8.49. Please explain with examples I'm intereagued

      Delete
    2. 14.10: Sean, are you drunk? The correct spelling is "intrigued" not as you spell it. See, my Catholic Education taught me correct spellings! (I'm sure you also meant to print 8.42 not 8.49!!! - Do I detect a philistine in our midst?).....

      Delete
    3. Bridie McGonagle told me he's fond of the bottle. poor fella.

      Delete
    4. What are you fond of, Canon Heartburn?

      Hope it's legal!😆

      Delete
    5. 19.10: Magna, Canon Matt is fond of you which is legal - are you not happy about this? He might tame your excesses...Engage more with him/her!!

      Delete
    6. 16.59 What palistanian. Get a life and have a good day. Bigot my a*se

      Delete
  7. The Maghaberry problem may be solved, but I doubt Maynooth ever will be unless, of course, they abolish celibacy in favour of free love. Mind you, they seem to be getting plenty as it is.

    Everything was going swimmingly... until +Pat came along and spoilt everything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. German Department, Maynooth University1 May 2018 at 21:48

      +Pat is a total spoil-sport.

      Delete
  8. Pat you say "Amy" is a nickname that the PP's in Armagh gave to His Grace Eamon Martin but you have also used this to describe Eamon. Now that you are hearing what you want to hear from His Grace you use his proper name?

    You also recently broadcast videos of a man who was calling to Eamon's house and causing a nuisance.

    I think this is a case of running with the hare and hunting with the hound.

    I wonder how long it will be before we see "Amy" appear again on this blog?

    I suppose this wont be posted as it does not fit with the agenda today.

    God Bless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am trying to be a bit balanced.

      But you cannot please all the people all the time.

      God Bless you too.

      Delete
    2. I am sure Amy is tame compared to the name they have for +Pat.

      Delete
    3. Sticks and stones..........

      Delete
    4. Pat been a follower of you for some time but don't always agree with your blogs/ posts.
      That young man on Facebook from somewhere in Armagh is seriously damaging your image.
      Can you please tell him to stop posting in your name, he portrays to be in partnership and close ally of yours.
      He seem's to be in need of some serious help God love him!
      Is he any relation of you?

      Delete
  9. So his peaked cap and birthday bash photos will be placed on the back burner...not burned though...one never knows when u might need them again.
    Now please do not allow stuff to be swept under the carpet just to please Amy...oh sorry, his eminence Archbishop Eamon Martin.
    Lol you couldn’t make it up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't worry.All records preserved.

      EM will of course need to prove himself.

      Delete
    2. Prove himself. He is laughing at you! Like everyone else

      Delete
    3. Pat why are you allowing names of seminarians be posted on here? Why are you taking disgruntled seminarians word as gospel? You have constantly named individuals or allowed those individuals to be named and they are innocent. The only people that have defamed them is you, your website and those one or two people that comment. why?!!

      Delete
    4. I agree!!

      Delete
    5. You need to give some lads a chance Pat. I was in seminary as were you. I don't think its right allowing other people to write what they want because they might have an issue with that person and them perhaps innocent. You need to calm your jets with the bishops. You will not budge them, so let them be. It might do you a favour in the long run. I understand you holding ordained deacons or priests to account. Give the seminarians a chance to grow. Formation is formation after all!!!

      Delete
    6. Why did you contact seminarians bishops? That is out of order and unprofessional. You simply cannot defame a persons character like that. You are a bishop (catholic or not) you should know better. I know these people in question and they are normal guys. That was out of order Pat, I would understand if you had hard evidence. I would be shocked if you did but I know you don't, because its actually ridiculous to make up something like that. As @16:15 said, I think you need to investigate those making up such crap. It's them type of people that should not be allowed near a parish or seminary. Ridiculous carry on if you ask me!!!!!

      Delete
    7. Formation is indeed formation 16:40. It does not include having illicit “gay” or “straight” sex.

      That’s not only against the rules in the seminary but is forbidden by the very Word of God.

      Practicing chastity is basic to a good Christian life. It is taken for-granted that a seminarian is chaste. His formation goes on top of chastity and other basic Christian virtues.

      Those virtues are fundamental to any formation and discernment. If they are not being practiced then the guy shouldn’t be in seminary. Period.

      Delete
    8. @16.40 What have you to hide or lose I wonder? Your post sounds desperate. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear.

      Delete
    9. But going on Grindr etc is not a formation issue. A seminarian who cannot follow the basic moral law to which all Catholics are bound is too unformed to be admitted to a seminary.

      Also, didn't Francis reaffirm the official ban on admitting gay men to seminaries.

      Delete
    10. @anon 16.40
      To be fair to +Pat what he publishes are normally problem issues that the institutional church has previously refused to resolve and often even refuse to acknowledge. +Pat also welcomes responses from people who are involved in the issues and always moves towards healing where all parties seek it.

      +Pat is a mediator when all parties are willing to mediate

      Delete
    11. @17.2 Your post seems desperate. Pat is not that dim to write to a Bishop without evidence. Do you think he's just writing to say hello?

      Delete
    12. 17.53 In your day you had the Ireland's Own. Things have moved on. Your homophobia hasn't though. Just like the women in the church, if all of the gay clergy (at every level) stayed at home on any given Sunday, can you imagine what worldwide Catholicism would be like for the day!

      Delete
    13. It would be better off.

      Delete
  10. Noel Treanor of D&C has been elected as Vice President of COMECE at the 2018 Spring Assembly, which was held in Brussels earlier this month????????????????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More jaunts to Brussels for Noel. He must be delighted.

      Delete
  11. "... acting on matters that need acting on."

    You are asking the impossible, +Pat. Celibacy is a shibboleth.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "... Eamon and I will never be best friends but we must always give credit where credit is due."

    It will all end in tears.

    ReplyDelete

  13. Pat why is Fr Collins protecting Xxxxxxx. Pat this extends into criminal law now. Collins must realise that grooming and assault of either sexual or physical is a crime under Irish and European law.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is a seminarian from Armagh that has caused untold damage to seminarians and he needs to leave seminary. I hope Bishop EM does the right thing before HE becomes a bigger issue! He is emotionally immature and not fit for seminary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was fit for seminary! 😆😆

      Delete
    2. 19.15: Maggie, fit my a**e! You were most unsuitable. We remember your nonsense. Glad you never made it....

      Delete
    3. It was the donkey that wasn't.

      Delete
  15. The Maynooth scandal can be traced back to one main person BRENDAN MARSHALL.

    Pat, he got off lightly when Conan was his victim for daring to challange him bed hopping. Please do not ignore his proven predatory behaviour. Vocations depend on it!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It’s not half obvious which ex-seminarian is writing these comments haha and it’s not even a Derry connection

      Delete
    2. What about the domestic abuse?

      Delete
  16. 17.36 Totally agree and if they are in the Seminary they should leave NOW if sexually active to save the Archbishop's, Bishop's and their Families any embarrassment as the days of Bishop's sending them for sex therapy or to another parish has well gone.

    And the Laity has a role to play here as well as Clergy as they should report it to the Archbishop's and Bishop's as they do not want it in their Diocese and certainly the Papal Nuncio does not want sexually active Seminarians, deacons or Priests in Ireland.

    The Church in Ireland under Archbishop Eamon Martin is in renewal and hopefully within 18 Months the replacement in Dublin will back him 100%

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 18.50. You sound like the uneducated Irish resident of Scotland running to the papal nuncio to cure all the world's ills.

      Delete
    2. 'The days of Bishop's sending them (priests) for sex therapy...has well gone'?

      Have they really?

      Eamon Martin clearly isn't up to speed, then.😆

      Delete
  17. 18.06 if you have any information on your accusation on Father Collins can you please forward it to his Diocesan Bishop or the Papal Nuncio as you have made a serious accusation and should back your statement if you want to stay independent then send it to + Pat. or is it just more gossip.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bishop Pat could you speak to Xxxxx quietly for me and empower him to seek support for this extreme behaviour. Pat I could set up a priavte meeting maybe in the commom room its up on the second floor of St Mary's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course I would have a private chat.

      Delete
    2. St Mary's is a decent place .

      Delete
  19. Well there are two seminarians who are Predators. One is small in height and looks like something from the movie nightmare on Elm street and the other one is tall and looks like ur fella from Broke Back Mountain. These two predators are continually fighting over who is the male dominant in seminary.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Pat, Do you know what the attraction of Prague might be for a Maynooth field trip? There is a video series called "Prague Capture" wherein guys armed with substantial sums of money go and choose a man on the street, make an irresistible cash offer for sex and then video their exploits, which is then broadcast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They choose a man in the street? For sex in exchange for cash?

      I don't want to dampen any romantic gay musings here, but wouldn't the 'pick-up's' (ahem!) 'part' be unprepared for (ahem! again) a good pounding?

      Delete
    2. Poverty makes people do things they wouldn't choose to, for money.

      Delete
    3. CzechHunter is another incarnation of it. Also, DebtDandy and DebtDaddy were probably raking in Irish parishioners hard earn cash too.

      Delete
    4. If you believe that fantasy of the poster , you'd believe anything!

      Delete
  21. What is it about Armagh? Rory, McCamley, Fr X, and others. Did the Wounded Healer look the other way, as usual. Pat says that Eamon has removed Rory and McCamley. It's true that he's removed them from parishes and sent them to America for expensive treatment. It would be more his line to petition the CDF for forced laicisation, though under Francis that's rarer now as he thinks pervy priests should be unpunished in the name of mercy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder whether Armagh archdiocese would send a lay person to America for such expensive treatment. What the hell am I thinking! Of course it wouldn't: a lay person isn't ontologically superior, unlike a holy priest.

      Why do the Irish laity keep financially supporting these spongers? Especially when they think it inferior to priests?

      Delete
    2. Magna Carta's Mum1 May 2018 at 21:45

      Now Magna, you mustn't be churlish, after all the readers of the blog are having a whip round to help me finance your own treatment. I hope when you come back from San Francisco a fully-fledged homosexual you say thank you to the nice people.

      Delete
    3. I imagine young Coyle has been cut loose (with a pay off and confidentiality agreement) to fend for himself, whereas dirty old girl McCamley will be given a house and unlimited broadband on condition she behaves.

      Delete
    4. I supppose its speculation like this is why ++Martin is trying to sweet talk +Pat into discussions to solve the chronic problem of (homo) sex mad priests and seminarians.

      Where the two seminarians at the Sauna Babylonia foam party propaedeutic? I wonder.

      Following is an example of a foam party for the uninitiated:

      https://cdn-az.allevents.in/banners/f4db033dd7c6545a5c98fc79a664e855

      Delete
    5. Mommie dearest (at 21:45), what else could I be coming back from San Francisco?😆

      Delete
  22. 20:18
    At least you needn't worry about outdoing Pope Francis in mercy.
    Such peevishness tends to develop secondaries. How healthy and wholesome your own sexual life is a moot point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Bishop Barros.

      Delete
    2. So did Francis keep the gay ban or not? Yes or no? And did he reverse the CDF's laicisation of a priest who went on to abuse again? Yes or no?

      Delete
  23. Bishop Barros is still on his throne. The Pope hasn't removed him.

    ReplyDelete