Thursday, 21 June 2018

BISHOPS AND CARDINALS AS ABUSERS



Open Letter of Richard Sipe to Benedict XVI 2008


Your Holiness, I Have the Evidence
Card. McCarrick Is a Homosexual, Please Act
MC CARRICK





Statement for Pope Benedict XVI about the Pattern of
the Sexual Abuse Crisis in the United States

Your Holiness, I, Richard Sipe, approach you reluctantly to speak about the problem of sexual abuse by priests and bishops in the United States, but I am encouraged and prompted by the directive of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, Chapter IV, No. 37. “By reason of knowledge, competence…the laity are empowered—indeed sometimes obliged—to manifest their opinion on those things that pertain to the good of the Church.” And also moved by your heartfelt demonstration of concern for victims on your recent visit to the United States I bring to your attention a dimension of the crisis not yet addressed. It is closer to the systemic center of the problem and one most difficult for you to address.


RICHARD SIPE

As the crisis of sexual abuse of our children and vulnerable adults by priests and bishops in the United States is unfolding, the dynamics of this dysfunction are becoming painfully clear. 

This sexual aberration is not generated from the bottom up - that is only from unsuitable candidates - but from the top down - that is from the sexual behaviors of superiors, even bishops, and cardinals. 


The problem facing us in the American church is systemic. I will present Your Holiness with only a few examples: 



Bishop Thomas Lyons, now deceased, who was an Auxiliary in the Archdiocese of Washington D.C. groomed, seduced, and sexually abused a boy from the time he was seven years old until he was 17. When that boy grew into manhood he, in turn, abused his own child and young relatives. When I asked him about his actions he said to me, “I thought it was natural. Father (Lyons) told me a priest showed him this when he was growing up.” A pattern was perpetuated for at least four generations. 



Abbot John Eidenschink of St. John’s Abbey, Collegeville, Minnesota sexually abused some of his young monks during confession and spiritual direction. He admitted this behavior in regard to two of the monks I interviewed. They described the behavior in disturbingly graphic detail. Older monks that I interviewed told me that they knew that John’s Novice Master was inappropriately affectionate with him during his two years as a novice. More than a dozen of the monks of this monastery have been credibly accused of abuse of minors while Abbot Eidenschink was promoted to President of his Monastic Congregation, the American Cassinese. 



While I was Adjunct Professor at a Pontifical Seminary, St. Mary’s Baltimore (1972-1984) a number of seminarians came to me with concerns about the behavior of Theodore E. McCarrick, then bishop of Metuchen, New Jersey. It has been widely known for several decades that Bishop/Archbishop now Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick took seminarians and young priests to a shore home in New Jersey, sites in New York, and other places and slept with some of them. He established a coterie of young seminarians and priests that he encouraged to call him “Uncle Ted.” I have his correspondence where he referred to these men as being “cousins” with each other.


Catholic journalist Matt C. Abbott already featured the statements of two priests (2005) and one ex-priest (2006) about McCarrick. All three were "in the know" and aware of the Cardinal McCarrick’s activities in the same mode as I had heard at the seminary. None of these reporters, as far as Abbott knew, had sexual contact with the cardinal in the infamous sleepovers, but one had first-hand reports from a seminarian/priest who did share a bed and received cards and letters from McCarrick. The modus operendi is similar to the documents and letters I have received from a priest who describes in detail McCarrick’s sexual advances and personal activity. At least one prominent journalist at the Boston Globe was aware of McCarrick from his investigation of another priest, but until now legal documentation has not been available. And even at this point the complete story cannot be published because priest reporters are afraid of reprisals. 



Your Holiness, you must seek out and listen to these stories, as I have from many priests about their seduction by highly placed clerics, and the dire consequences in their lives that does end with personal distress. 


I know the names of at least four priests who have had sexual encounters with Cardinal McCarrick. I have documents and letters that record the first-hand testimony and eye witness accounts of McCarrick, then archbishop of Newark, New Jersey actually having sex with a priest, and at other times subjecting a priest to unwanted sexual advances. 

Your Holiness, you must seek out and listen to the stories, as I have from many priests about their seduction by highly placed clerics and the dire consequences in their lives that does end in their victimization alone. 

Such behavior fosters confusion and makes celibacy problematic for seminarians and priests. This abuse paves the way for them to pass the tradition on — to have sex with each other and even with minors. 

The pattern and practice of priests in positions of responsibility for the training of men for the priesthood — rectors, confessors, spiritual directors, novice masters, and other clergy — who have sexual relations with seminarians and other priests is rampant in the Catholic Church in the United States. I have reviewed hundreds of documents that record just such behavior and interviewed scores of priests who have suffered from this activity. Priests, sexually active in the above manner have frequently been appointed by the Vatican to be ordained bishops or even created cardinals. 

I approach Your Holiness with due reverence, but with the same intensity that motivated Peter Damian to lay out before your predecessor, Pope Leo IX, a description of the condition of the clergy during his time. The problems he spoke of are similar and as great now in the United States as they were then in Rome. If Your Holiness requests I will submit to you personally documentation of that about which I have spoken. 

Your Holiness, I submit this to you with urgent concern for our Church, especially for the young and our clergy. 

Richard Sipe

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

SACRED MONSTERS





PAT SAYS:

Up until now, we have become used to stories about priests and nuns sexually abusing and assaulting people.

With this week's suspension of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, we now know that there are bishop, archbishop and cardinal abusers and sexual predators.

It would be absolute foolishness on our part to think that there have been, and may still be, Irish bishops who have abused or assaulted!

That would, to some extent, explain:


1. The Maynooth Crisis.

2. The Irish College Crisis.

3. The dysfunctional formation staff in places like Maynooth.

4. Bishops tolerating and covering the promiscuous lives of seminarians and priests.

5. The ordination of unsuitable men to the priesthood.

6. An almost "pro-gay" culture in Irish seminaries and dioceses by bishops.

7. Rumours of senior clergy being blackmailed by former "lovers".


It has happened in the US and around the world.

Is it happening here in Ireland TODAY?

It looks as if it is!








158 comments:

  1. When I was in Maynooth there was a number of 17 year olds in my first year class. Without doubt at least 1 was abused and Donal O'Neill was involved in the abuse, but not single handedly. Maynooth is the reason I no longer practice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like child abuse in Maynooth right there.

      Delete
  2. Thank you for highlighting this, Pat. It is of course the heart of the matter. Another distinguished commentator, Fr Daniel Cozzens, has described clericalism as the cancer which vitiates the entire Catholic world. It poisons relationships, destroys communities, and promotes secrecy and lies. Remember Ratzinger stood behind JP2 throughout his reign with calamitous results and as BVXI actively promoted clerical affectations, rewarding his creatures with a whole revived world of possibilities for cross dressing around the reinstated Old Rite. A lot comes back to him: what he knew and what they have on him. Even Cardinal Tobin of Newark, who is supposed to be one of the good guys, blithely announces that nothing was on file about McCarrick‘s alleged pedophilia, only that historic settlements had been made with his adult victims. So how then does Dolan of New York have the effrontery to be shocked and saddened by stuff which has been known for decades? NB none of this had any impact whatsoever on McCarrick’s career rise nor upon his active ministry and good standing until only a couple of days ago. And he’s far from being the only dodgy Cardinal either past or present in America alone, as a quick google search will tell you. This is not local or national but universal. But, goody, the Pope’s coming to Ireland to give some tips on family life. Fortunately the Republic has given the Church its answer in two recent referendums: stay out of it, and get your own house in order!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cardinal Tobin - supposed to be one of the "good guys"?? I suppose that depends on your point of view, but he too is an arch-liberal like McCarrick and (come to think of it) Rembert Weakland.

      Delete
  3. McCarrick is an arch-liberal. What do you expect?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Neo-liberalism is doing as much for the church as it did for the banks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. McCarrick was born in 1930, 30 years before Vatican 11 and sexually active in the 50s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He became a priest in 1958, but the alleged incidents are 1971, 1972. I'm not sure any many would survive with reputation intact if his whole back like was scanned like this.

      Delete
    2. Post-Vatican II sexual meltdown of US clergy seems the right framework.

      Delete
    3. You are jealous of post-Vatican 2 clergy because they are gorgeous and you probably fancy the lot of them, in the same way that everyone was jealous of gorgeous because he was gorgeous.

      Delete
  6. The diocese of Down and Connor is riddled with gay priests. So what? Let them openly practice their sexuality. Let them love instead of having to hide it for fear of retribution from the gestapo in Lisbreen. Love is love and a gift from God. Christ is not present in that organisation. The devil and evil have moved in and they are flourishing. Time to claim back our church. DeValera took the keys of the Brits and handed them to the Irish roman church. Time we got the locks changed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 09.37 “The Diocese of Down and Connor is riddled with gay priests?”. Care to explain? Anything to substantiate such a sweeping claim? Any chance of proof? Maybe a snippet of evidence? Thought not,

      Delete
  7. There can be no doubt - given all the Gaynooth antics - that there are McCarricks among the Irish hierarchy.

    There can be no doubt that some of these seminarians have been in beds with some bishops and prelates.

    There is no other explanation for the lack of action and the tolerating, by ecclesiastical authorities, of these scandalous situations.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You cannot be a liberal in a Church which insists that women are not made of the right stuff to represent Christ, that gays are intrinsically disordered, that just one act of masturbation is enough to condemn you to eternal retribution, that you can never sufficiently grow within a marriage to realize that people change and may have made a mistake, that a woman cannot take responsibility for her own body, that the earth exists to be exploited — and what have I missed out so far? Most of us like citizens of any repressive state find our own way of living with this — or leave. For clergy it is a very different thing: to actually choose to deliver all this stuff as if it were true. Keith O‘Brien was the exemplar of this toxic dissociation: how an apparent liberal could rail against gay relationships as a danger to society. In the US, studies by such as Richard Sipe, Daniel Cozzens and Thomas Doyle have demonstrated over decades the clerical culture which enables abuse. One of the most common examples is a teenage boy who confesses masturbation, as the Church demands he do on pain of eternal punishment. The confessor, far from reassuring him, plays upon the intractability of the sin, but as a priest offers a way of helping him out. Though today the possibilities of this kind of entrapment are greatly reduced NOT because the Church has changed either its mind or its culture but because most Catholics wisely do not go anywhere near a confessional or the danger that lurks within. Nevertheless we enable Catholic education on a massive scale in which culture young people are subject to attempted indoctrination by desperately flawed and damaged men in positions of power. Is this really what we want for ourselves and our children?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MourneManMichael22 June 2018 at 11:17

      Anon @ 10:15: Well said sir or madam.
      MMM

      Delete
    2. Here speaketh the Athiest from the kingdom of Mourne at 11.17

      Delete
    3. Have you awoken? Nice of you to join us at this late hour in the day. It speaks!

      Delete
    4. The Anglicans would be a much better fit for you, 10:15. Have you tried them or are you one of those "cultural Catholics"? I bet you voted Yes. #shame

      Delete
  9. How many priests suffered struggling with celibacy while these gob*ites were playing the field. The whole thing is a joke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you Page didn’t play the field too I suppose. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. I’ve taken a few screen shots of you calling people gobshites and telling them to feck off. Let’s see what Lambeth Palace thinks about it.

      Delete
    2. @11.38
      Are you for real. Everybody knows that Sean had the courage of his convictions. When he wanted into a relationship he stepoed out of ministry Sean is true to himself, his promises and his wife

      Delete
    3. 11.38 Let us know what the buffoon of Canterbury says out of interest. His liturgical gear looks like he's popped out to the nearest party hire shop in Kent.

      Delete
    4. 11.38 Please remember to include your comments too It is important to have a ballanced view of every story. Of course you will have to stop being anonymous. Otherwise fek off. PS Fek is recognised in the dictionary courtesy of Fr Ted. Gob*hite is a word relevant in Irish context and culture. Please explain you unacceptable phraesology when referring to me. This is religions discrimination. I can take screenshots too. But o dear which anonymous g s am I referring to

      Delete
    5. Must be hooray Henry in deepest Surrey! Missing Ireland Henry?

      Delete
  10. MourneManMichael22 June 2018 at 10:42

    Anon @ 00:46 above refers to "the heart of the matter." I will use that phrase to comment on what I see as the heart of the matter, and the crux of the problem.

    Sexual activity, in its myriad forms, is an entirely natural phenomenon found in all living organisms. The desire to procreate, and behaviour associated with it are some of the most compelling instincts in animals. Morally and ethically, sex of itself is neutral.
    Sexual behaviour invariably involves partner participation, and where this is freely consented between capable individuals their actions too are morally and ethically neutral.
    The two words, "freely" and "capable" I use to describe the consent being given entirely without duress and between persons of appropriate and sufficient age and intellectual ability. Opinions and legal requirements vary considerably on these two matters.

    In the course of its development, the Christian church, and more particularly the RC church has taken a particular view, and subsequent stance on sexual activity. It has prescribed that its sole purpose is procreation and consequently attached all manner of religious imperatives to it.
    I believe that responsible sex as described above, whether for procreation or enjoyment, has nothing to do with the spirituality associated with a belief in God.

    It is argued that the RC clergy of the Latin Rite supposedly practise celibacy from original Pauline views on women, and to enhance their dedication and availability in furthering the church's work. Some too will say its origins are associated with restricting control of the church's assets by avoiding inheritance demands.
    Whatever its origins and rationale, the RC church of the Latin Rite has perpetuated a requirement of celibacy on its clergy which is entirely at odds with human nature, and has no reasonable, sensible, or true religious basis.It is entirely predictable that human nature will predominate over unreasonable ill founded requirements.

    The consequences of this have become increasingly obvious as media awareness allows revelations by Sipe, +Pat, and many others to place in the public domain the very great cancer that has pervaded the RC church for so long.

    And I use the word "cancer" intentionally, for it is eating away credibility at an increasing rate as the "two faced" activities of clergy become more widely known, and their other so called religious prescriptions and requirements are questioned and increasingly abandoned.

    At the heart of the matter is the duplicity of the RC church and a significant number of its clergy who abuse sexually and otherwise, by use of position and power to take advantage of the vulnerable.
    I certainly do acknowledge that there are indeed many good moral upstanding clergy doing their best to minister caringly. I acknowledge and have sympathy for the despair they must feel at their colleagues betrayal.
    MMM

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A very accurate and rational analysis.

      Delete
    2. I love this analysis.

      I honestly believe that if the institutional church took sex of it's Catholic appointed pedestal and placed the Gospels there than the pews would be somewhat more populated. Instead the church ties to control people through unnatural sexual morality and simply alienates the people of God.

      Delete
    3. The cabal of Pat, MMM, Magna/Langer hammer, Sean Page agreeing with every word each other utters is not just irritating but comical. Four dummies nodding in agreement with one another lol.

      Delete
    4. One word: LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

      Delete
    5. MournemanMichael22 June 2018 at 13:06

      Simple solution Anon @12:10: just don't read comment you don't agree with. Unlike you, those you refer to put an easily recognisable 'signature ' with our comments which may help you to avoid us.
      But if that's too taxing on your ability please suggest a reasonable alternative.
      By the way your slight on non speaking individuals is innapropriate as neither PC nor an anology: we certainly "speak out" albeit through the written word.
      MMM

      Delete
    6. Langer/Magna, Pat and Sean Page haven't agreed that your post is terrific yet.

      Delete
    7. 13.46
      Both Magna and I have assured you we are two distinct individuals.

      And what is wrong with people agreeing with each other? People often agree with each on here, but as MMM notes, we are just recognisable because we choose not to hide behind anon statuses - unlike you... i have a sneaking suspicion that there are far fewer people behind the various anon identies than you'd like us to believe.

      More over we tend to be more enlightened and rise above what the likes of Maynooth want us to believe... we are cured of the Stockholm Syndrome otherwise known as Institutional Roman Catholicism.

      OHL

      Delete
    8. MourneManMichael22 June 2018 at 14:57

      I agree, OHL - yes, Anon @12:10, I'm agreeing with someone again. We are not hiding behind anon statuses. Everyone knows who I am.
      MMM

      Delete
    9. Hammered @ 14.35. You may have reassured the poster 13.46 about you and Magna. However your reassurances don't count for much in fact they count for sweet f.a

      Delete
    10. MourneManMichael22 June 2018 at 16:04

      +Pat - that was not me @14:57.

      Is the best thing for me to set up a blog so that I can get a profile name that no one else can use? Maybe I could use a different name altogether while still giving my usual valuable contributions.
      MMM

      Delete
    11. @15.06
      My reassurances may be sweet F.A to you. But your accusations are that of an anonymous, a person in the shadows unwilling to offer any link between their contributions and responses on here.

      Responding to your needs is not anywhere on my list of priorities and actions. Stand up and be counted or crawl back into your anonymous hole.

      Delete
    12. If you don’t like anonymous posts take it up with Buckley. However I do note that you are happy to read the anonymous posts and reply to them. Going to crawl back into my Anonymous hole again.

      Delete
    13. The skin's nearly worn off my finger from scrolling past MournfulMick, Magna/Hammered and the Vicar of Sligo.

      Delete
    14. MourneManMichael22 June 2018 at 18:08

      It's MourneManMichael to the likes of you, Anon @17:45. And there is absolutely nothing mournful about me, let me tell you.

      If you don't like scrolling past my posts (or anyone else's, for that matter) you always have the option of keeping away from this blog. I've found that it's possible to move down the page using the arrow keys rather than scrolling with the mouse. Hope that helps your poor, poor wee finger.
      MMM

      Delete
    15. @MMM I feel so sorry for you.

      Delete
    16. 17.45 Time for a change then. Mind that finger

      Delete
    17. @19.36
      Did your CPE course not teach you the difference between sympathy and empathy?

      Delete
    18. It's a right laff Magna/Hammered telling others off for being anon.

      Delete
  11. Down and Connor is full of gay priests. So what? Let them love freely. Love is a gift from God. They shouldn't have to fear the lisbreen gestapo. Some of them are very good priests

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10:51, what on earth are you talking about? This has nothing to do with “gay priests”. This is about sexual predators using their power, position and influence to sexually molest minors and young adults.

      Down and Connor is full of gay priests, is it? Ya don’t say?? Big news that! The world everywhere is full of “gay” people. What has that to do with the topic here today?

      Delete
    2. Would you include tying people to bed with vestment cinctures etc as love?

      Delete
    3. F*** that Pat, any updates on a new dog?

      Delete
    4. Definitely not Pat. That's not love. That's abuse

      Delete
    5. My point is that abuse has many forms. The abuse you highlight is vile. The abuse suffered by gay priests from their bosses is also vile. The common thread is that roman bishops in Ireland continues unchecked

      Delete
    6. My point is that abuse has many forms. The abuse you highlight is vile. The abuse suffered by gay priests from their bosses is also vile. The common thread is that roman bishops in Ireland continues unchecked

      Delete
    7. Definitely not Pat. That's not love. That's abuse

      Delete
    8. lotsa guys love being tied up

      Delete
    9. Do they?

      I don't.

      And what about the profane use of vestments in such "ceremonies"?

      Delete
    10. That's nothing compared to the profanity that comes from your mouth and your blog.

      Delete
  12. Not the old cincture in the bed chestnut! Do you ever tire of using the same old stories. 11.45 Would you ever put a sock in it because you are talking pure bunkum. How can bishops abuse gay priests when their priests keep it secret that they are gay you fool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not the cincture IN the bed.

      The cinctures tying a sexual partner to the bed - and not for penetential putposes :-)

      Delete
  13. More info on McCarrick here:

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2009/09_10/Newark-2009.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  14. KING PUCK:

    Any word on the mad puck goat after the “suicide attempt”?

    Word on the streets directly from Big Nurse Nellie Moriarty is that Ray Brown hasn’t left the bedside, holding the fragile little paw in his hand and mouthing such urgings as, “come on now, my wee handsome boy. You can do this this. You’re Uncle Ray’s brave little soldier laddie boy. Don’t let that big bastard Buckley cause you to take on so. Come on, my little fighter, brave dear heart, little Puckeen. Don’t give up on us baby”.

    Lads from Gaynooth have been visiting singing jaunty versions of Puc Ar Buile round the bed in the hope of giving the little ladeen his grove back.

    Ladies in Killarney cathedral are praying to Matt Talbot in the hope that the miracle of the mad puck goat’s rising from the bed will be THE miracle long awaited.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He will skip like a he-goat upon the mountain come Sunday.

      Delete
    2. It's pretty sad that even the suggestion that someone might have attempted suicide is seen as worthy of mockery. I think it displays the fundamental heartlessness that this blog is founded on - a complete lack of concern for those that have been identified as outsiders to the in-group as defined by Pat.

      Delete
    3. Nobody is making a mockery of anything.

      The "attempted suicide" allegation has been used bore in these situations to try and stop debate.

      We are all aware of the sadness of depression and anxiety and many of us, including myself, have suffered in these ways.

      It is far too serious topic to be used by cynical people to silence debate.

      Delete
    4. Pat has suffered in this way so it's ok to mock others. Whatever people have suffered Pat has suffered it too but 10 times worse than anybody else. He probably suffered on the Cross before Christ did

      Delete
    5. No, it's not ok to mock others.

      We don't even know if there was a suicide attempt.

      I have suffered less than many and more than many.

      I've sorted it all out.

      It is very wrong to make a false claim of suicide.

      Delete
  15. When you saw the allegation of suicide yesterday, you could simply have discretely checked it out yourself as you claim to have contacts throughout Ireland. Instead you published it, and are now using that choice to somehow defend mockery based on the premise that a person you targeted on your blog attempted suicide. Whatever you think of the people you write about, surely there has to be a line as to what you think is fair and decent. You are someone who proclaims the love of God for all people, not just the people you agree with. If that means anything, do you think mocking someone and finding it funny that they might have attempted suicide has any kindness, any compassion, any humanity to it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell all that to the countless seminarians who were targeted in Maynooth - some of whom went straight from Maynooth to psychiatric units.

      This issue is not of my making.

      This is the fruits of decades of cynicism, abuse and mental torture imposed on people by tyrannical bishops and priests.

      Delete
    2. One ex-seminarian has actually died of suicide in the last ten years. This blog did nothing to him; exposure to Maynooth did the damage. Pat is bang on the mark at 14.11.

      Delete
    3. Excellent analysis Pat and one hammered Langer. Totally agree. I nod in agreement.

      Delete
    4. Oh great...another agree-er at 21.09. And not only an agree-er but a nodding agree-er.

      Delete
  16. If you thought the allegation was false, then why publish it? That was a choice. You bear a responsibility for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do not know if is true or false - or sent to silence debate.

      Delete
    2. You control the debate in terms of what gets published and what doesn't. So how could it have silenced the debate? Again, the option was there of just not publishing it, as you do with countless other comments, and making a discrete enquiry, but you chose not to do that, and for some reason you don't want to take ownership of that fact.

      Delete
    3. We are dealing with, in Richard Sipe's term, Sacred Monsters.

      There is a way for dealing with people with integrity.

      There is also a way for dealing with monsters, sacred and otherwise.

      Delete
    4. So the deacon in Kerry is a monster, therefore its okay to think it funny that he might have tried to kill himself? Is that the logic you're applying to this situation?

      Delete
    5. He is not a monster, he is a koala bear

      Delete
    6. I do not know if the Kerry man is a fully formed monster yet.

      Bit for many years now he has gone swming with monsters and aspired to be one of them.

      I do not know if he has put his monster past behind him or whether he is hiding it until such time as there is no going back.

      In any event those of us who are interested in the Church or care about it are entitled to scrutinise.

      After all when a man is ordained he can affect many others for many years.

      Delete
    7. I think that there's a way to scrutinize without treating other people as monsters. Frankly, if you went to the ordination and stood up in the middle of the ceremony and made you views publicly heard, I might not agree with the action, but I'd accept it as a legitimate protest against something you firmly believe to be a mistake in ordaining someone. I just think that somewhere there's a line that we cross that makes us less compassionate, less kind, less human. I think some of the comments, like the one that initiated this exchange, crossed that line. I would like to think that compassion extends to people we disagree with. I think once we label people monsters or any other appellation, we can often take away their humanity. They become just an avatar in our minds, not a person with feelings or vulnerabilities. I think some of the comments that are published here dehumanize others. I think that that is contrary to the Gospel. I think it's possible to vigorously challenge and scrutinize without dehumanizing others, although I acknowledge that doing that requires controlling our own anger.

      Delete
    8. It was Richard Sipe that coined the term Sacred Monsters after decades of study of abuse, scandal, money and power in the RC Church.

      Logically, monstrous things are done by monstrous people.

      You are asking compassion for the perpetrators.

      That's a very big ask.

      Let's first deal with the monstrosities in a just and legal way.

      Delete
    9. Pat, please answer us this one question. apart from the allegations made about Puck being the man in the picture, what exactly do you have against him?

      And if he has been eliminated as this person in the picture (last post) then why is it you continue to go after him?

      After all, this guy could be completely innocent, what if you're doing all this to an innocent man and in turn he felt no other way out but to take his own life.
      (If that's true)

      As previously mentioned you do decide what comments to make visible, you have the responsibility to ensure what is published is true. Otherwise all is just opinion, hearsay and assumptions.

      Those in glass houses......

      Delete
    10. My "glass house" is absolutely open for all to see online and in the books I've published.

      Puck was at the heart of the Maynooth problem.

      He has had issues before and after that.

      People like Ray Browne have no concerns.

      Others have.

      The issue is - is he suitable for ordination?

      Delete
    11. You keep rabbitting on about issues thay SJ has. What are they? Can you name them?

      Delete
    12. @15:57, the answer seems to be that he can't name them, but, much like the situation in the US after 9/11 when anyone who criticized the US wars were shut down as being unpatriotic and supporters of terrorists, Pat and his followers shut down anyone who raises questions about their tactics and methods by branding them as supporters of abuse in the church.

      Delete
    13. Pat, this isn't for you to decide. The people who are authorised to make the decision as to who is and who is not suitable for ordination have clearly made their minds up.

      Is it the you just can't accept the fact that maybe this guy is innocent of wrong doing.

      By the way. Can you elaborate on what you mean by "at the heart of the Maynooth problem" and what do you mean that he had issues before and after that.

      How do you know all this. From first hand experience or from hearsay.

      I met this man and he seems very much together. None of this is bothering him. He said he has done none of the things you have accused him of. Seams like a smear campaign to me.

      You have made it your life's ambition to bring down these priests you speak about. Are you maybe just bitter over your own situation and therefore want to bring shame on the church as revenge.

      Post this don't post this but either way you'll have read this and know that many many people out there know what you are really up to.

      Delete
  17. If its not okay to mock others, why do you allow it on your blog? You choose the comments that are published, which means that you at the very least implicitly think that the mockery you publish is fair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damned if I do and damned if I don't.

      This Blog will not be silenced by appeals to faux compassion.

      Delete
    2. Why do you think its faux compassion? I work in the field of mental health. Every day I see the effect that words have on people. Thinking that its wrong to find it funny that someone would attempt to kill themselves is wrong in any context. And words like these cause hurt and pain. I find it truly deplorable, and I find your efforts to avoid any sense of compassion towards the people you target to be equally deplorable. And the fact that you choose the comments that are published will be proven by the fact that this one won't see the light of day.

      Delete
    3. Weird Nature by Ranked.22 June 2018 at 14:45

      Koalas Are Positively Riddled With Chlamydia.
      They Can Be More Aggressive Than A Crocodile.
      Koala Young Eat Their Mom's Specially Made Organic Poo.
      Koalas Are Super Dumb.
      Their Main Source of Food Isn’t Good For Them.
      A Koala Will Pee On Someone Regardless Of How Many Records They’ve Sold.
      The Sound They Make Is Horrible.
      Their Hands Are Covered In Warts.
      They’re Not Hugging You, They’re Regulating Body Temperature.
      They Don’t Care That You’re Here To Help.

      Delete
    4. Would you ever f*** up about animals, first we had the idiot dog lover, now the koala bear lover and now the monster lover. FFS I thought Magna was bad.

      Delete
    5. Magna Carta's Mum22 June 2018 at 19:21

      Well he did have a pet snake once...

      Delete
    6. You might as well expect compassion from an IRA man.

      Delete
  18. The Auld Woman22 June 2018 at 15:02

    Did you read the account in the Cork Examiner that bishop elect Rev Dr Thomas Denihan ran up a bill of €28,531.71 in expenses when selflessly serving on the Co.Cork VEC between 2009 and 2013?
    It would appear Father has a liking for the finer things in life or has been doing an awful lot of driving.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There no longer is a paper called the Cork Examiner.

      Delete
    2. The Auld Woman22 June 2018 at 16:47

      Ok. Its de paper boy.

      Delete
  19. These self-righteous b*****ds up on their high nellies over the satire about King Puck’s alleged suicide attempt. Feck off. The whole point of the joke is the jokers behind the hoax in the first place.

    You are so concerned about mental health? Think of the wreckage caused in lives by the likes of McCarrick and his counterparts in the Irish Church scene. Think of the real attempted and actual suicides to which Richard Sipe refers.

    Think of the devastation caused in lives by dysfunctional bishops and priests who should never have been ordained and who have caused havoc in Christian communities.

    You want to get annoyed and up on your high horses? Then get irate about a man about to be ordained who has serious sexual issues and the bishop who is “determined” to ordain him despite there being the gravest concerns.

    Save your high dudgeon for such real situations and, while you are at, feck away off with yourselves. You turn my stomach!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 15.24 - And you turn our stomachs with your indecent haste to condemn all clergy which is unjust, disingenuous and bigoted. Making fun of any person and attempted suicide is gross ignorance and displays a recklessness in attitude which could push anyone over the edge. Have you ever dealt with suicide realities? I have on many, many occasions and I can assure you, there's nothing remotely funny about the grief and deep sadness which follows. So feck away with yourself ....

      Delete
    2. Where is the proof? How do we know there is even concerns.

      What about the countless people who have killed themselves because of cyber bullying. This is what that is. You can't say someone has sexual issues if you don't have proof.

      So if there are bent cops out there we paint them all with the same brush?

      There are good priests out there ya know!!

      Delete
    3. criticizing the methods Pat and his supporters use isn’t a form of neglecting corruption in the church. It’s holding people accountable for their words and actions. Why don’t you ask a family devastates by suicide if they thought the “satire” was funny. For some reason, Pat and his supporters see themselves as above criticism and reproach. And if anyone dares to question them the immediate attempt is to negate the criticism by making false equivalencies - “If you criticize us then you support church corruption.” It’s actually possible to disagree with church corruption and also disagree with the methods of Pat and his supporters.

      Delete
    4. @16.25 Hear hear.

      Delete
    5. Ach sure musha lads and wasn’t it the Gaynooth girls themselves that started d’aul suicide carry on? Sure they’re fierce wans altogether so they are. God between us and all harm.

      Delete
    6. Pat created this issue by publishing a comment that he didn't have a clue whether it was true or not and then starting complaining that people were using it as a strategy to stifle debate. He has control over what gets published, so that argument is self-serving nonsense.

      Delete
  20. Ohhh my goodness, BMDS in yesterdays blog

    ReplyDelete
  21. All I hear is dogs, goats, horses koala bears, hippos, monsters, elephants.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 15.24 You speak out of your hole. How do you know SJ has sexual issues and serious ones at that by your claims? Is it because you read it on this blog? What's your analysis based on? Have you seen it with your own eyes perhaps? A little proof maybe or some evidence we have yet to know about. Do tell us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why was he asked to leave the Pallotines? Why has he not robustly defended his reputation? These Gaynooth scandals have made national and international news - not just this blog! Your head is up your own hole. I wonder who/what else you’ve had up there??

      Delete
    2. I see the Gaynooth gurls’ claws are out defending “Bae”. I wonder which ones? Brenda? Stephanie? Fanny? Paulie? Which particular gem one wonders?

      Delete
    3. 16.09 On what evidence have you that he was asked to leave the Pallottines? If he was asked to leave was that a criminal offence or some great evil. Is that the best you can do you silly person,

      Delete
    4. SJ is a dysfunctional man and ordination won’t change that. Brown is ordaining a problem for the future. Jeez the Gaynooth girlies are out in force today alright. Handbags at dawn when they’re told a few home truths. Lol

      Delete
    5. Yep. They only like it "up them" in one way.

      Delete
    6. It seems more like Pat and his supporters can’t handle anyone criticizing them or their methods.

      Delete
    7. 19.36 So by your reckoning SJ is now “dysfunctional”. Could you share with us how you arrived at this conclusion. Please share with us the name of the medical professional who diagnosed this. Perhaps you’ve been privy to such info.

      Delete
    8. 21:02 - Yes. No. No. And yes. ;-)

      Delete
  23. MMM PEOPLE USING YOUR TAG

    I can give you a code that you add behind your name which I will remove before publication.

    I can email this code you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right...special treatment for MMM.

      Why can't he create a blog profile, as he himself suggested earlier,so that only he can use the name he chooses?

      Or will you offer to do the same for "The Auld Woman" and "Weird Nature by Ranked" who posted earlier?

      Personally I prefer the imposter MMM anyway.

      Delete
    2. I will do the same for any regular contributor who requests it.

      Delete
    3. Can you give me a special code too Pat for my new handle: Cecil Face Old Shit Stirrer

      Delete
  24. MournemanMichael22 June 2018 at 18:57

    +Pat, and other readers: the comments at 14:57 & 16:04 we're not from me.
    I would never make such a claim in a comment as that made by 16:04.
    MMM

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Email me and I will send you code to after Mournemanmichael so that I will k ow it's you and the ones without the codes are not you.

      Delete
    2. There, there...of course you wouldn't.

      How do we know you're the real MMM anyway, 18.57?

      Delete
    3. The real one is a dull read, he announces every time he's an athiest and he reminiscences about his time in a seminary shortly after the war. These are the identifying characteristics of the real MMM.

      Delete
    4. For the real MMM why wouldn't you agree with what 16.04 said. After all isn't that what you are. A coward hiding behind your computer and bullying someone. You have no proof, no evidence and no balls!!

      Let's hope that this young man did not attempt suicide or worse that he does not attempt this again and succeeds.
      I'm sure his family and the authorities will trace you back to your shitty little bedroom where you hide and convict you of online bullying. Be ready because Karma is a bitch.

      Delete
    5. I can't see comment at 14.57
      What did it say.

      Delete
    6. Anon 20:00 - you'd have to scroll up and up to see it (risking hurting the skin on your finger in doing so), so here is what MMM posted at 14:57:

      "I agree, OHL - yes, Anon @12:10, I'm agreeing with someone again. We are not hiding behind anon statuses. Everyone knows who I am.
      MMM"

      Delete
    7. 20.22 LOL risking hurting the skin on your finger. Mournful Mick has that affect on people.

      Delete
    8. Ah jayzuz 19:59, wind yer feckin neck in - ya poncey, puffed up, drama queen.

      It was one of your little friends (maybe even the mad puck goat itself) who started the whole “suicide” thing yesterday - which was done before when your other pal, “Gorgeous”, was under scrutiny.

      “Karma” couldn’t be any bigger a bitch than you and your vicious, nasty, queenie, little girlfriends. So feck away off.

      Delete
    9. I really feel bullied by you, 20.59 and am very hurt. Please stop.

      Delete
    10. 21:42 aw diddums. Is your ickle feelings all hurted?

      Delete
    11. MournemanMichael22 June 2018 at 23:32

      Anon @ 20:54: please consult your dictionary, if you have one and know how to use it, to understand the meaning of the words "affect ", and "effect."
      Greater understanding may salve your tender skin, ....unless you're particularly thick.....skinned!
      MMM

      Delete
    12. MourneManMichael23 June 2018 at 01:57

      And for Anon @ 19:54 asking why I wouldn't agree with what 16:04 said:
      16:04 said on 22/6: "while giving my usual valuable contributions."
      That self praising is specifically what I resile from. I prefer to leave it to others to assess the quality or otherwise of my comments rather than proclaim them myself as valuable.
      The remainder of your ad hominem diatribe is not worthy of comment.
      MMM

      Delete
  25. Has the real MMM ever said anything light-hearted?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In short, no! That’s why someone described her yesterday as a dried up old prune who wouldn’t fart. Probably as a face like a trod on chip.

      Delete
    2. MournemanMichael22 June 2018 at 23:03

      In reply to your query Anon @ 19:39 the 'real Mmm would choose elsewhere to be 'lighhearted' rather than the contentious significant issues raised in this blog site.
      There is a time and place for the lightheartedness sought by some of the lightweights sometimes frequenting this site.
      MMM

      Delete
  26. Cardinal Tobin (one of the "good guys" pmsl) knew all about the settlements paid to McCarrick victims and Tobin said nothing.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/whats-next-for-cardinal-mccarrick-how-the-church-addresses-sex-abuse-allegations-95223

    ReplyDelete
  27. Richard Sipe is a bitter old ex-monk with an agenda. He's very against chastity and celibacy. I hope his own slate is clean.

    http://www.themediareport.com/2013/08/07/richard-sipe-ex-priest/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesus had 'an agenda', too. Did this make him bad and untrustworthy?

      Delete
  28. Hi anon 20:00

    That's my line ��

    -anon.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hi anon 20:30,

    No that is in fact my line.

    -anon.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have known Pat Buckley for many years. He has proven to me, and many others that he is lion in the media and a lamb in pastoral situations. In Pat, the lion and the lamb lie down together. I wish I had 5% of his courage. Dublin priest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He doesn't seem to show much compassion for people he criticises on this blog.

      Delete
    2. His compassion seems primarily geared towards people who think he’s a folk hero.

      Delete
    3. I never regarded him as a hero of any kind. But I hit the wall some years ago and contacted him. He took me in, fed me, got me the help I needed and got me back on track. Maybe the "wolves" he deals with need the services of a lion? Dublin priest.

      Delete
    4. I don’t doubt he can be kind and compassionate. I just don’t see that that kindness and compassion extends beyond those he favors, which, to me, is not in line with the values of the Gospel. And I think if you’re establish yourself as a critic and reformer of church practices, you should offer a vision of Gospel values that’s alive and vibrant. And to me, Pat gets stuck in anger, bitterness, past hurts, and vendettas. I could be wrong - and obviously many disagree with me, but that’s my view of it.

      Delete
    5. Make it your business to meet him. You will discover what I mean. Dublin priest.

      Delete
    6. 21.52 Totally agree with you.

      Delete
  31. Fearghal Darach Brannon22 June 2018 at 22:08

    I've been pondering this blog for much of the day, Bishop Pat - I have a lot of time to think when I'm out on the farm.

    Between this story about that liberal McCarrick, the ongoing speculation about Puck's ordination, the real and fake MMM, people agreeing with each other too much, and people whose fingers are being worn away by scrolling through the comments, I really don't know what to say. It's so hard to know, isn't it.

    Maybe you could blog tomorrow about something which will inspire happy thoughts - the good weather or nature maybe. It might give everyone an opportunity for recollection.

    I wonder does anyone agree with me that it's so hard to know. I'm shattered from all this thinking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 22.08 Totally agree with you.

      Delete
  32. This Dublin Priest must have fu*k all to do with his time. Whoever the impersonator is is not fooling anyone on here. Interesting the last number of posts from Dublin Priest almost wants to canonise Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 22.12: The Dublin priest of course is "real". Don't think so! But then, Pat keeps strange bed fellows!!

      Delete
  33. @22.08 Yes it’s hard to know - you’ve said that same shite these past few nights with tonight included. You’re not thinking hard enough on that imaginary farm of yours.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Fearghal Darach Brannon22 June 2018 at 22:43

    22.18 - tonight was only my second post, ya dope. Last night I was agreeing with someone else. Is that a crime now or something? The way some are posting today you'd swear agreeing with someone else is a crime.

    At least Bishop Pat valued my post enough to publish it without calling it "shite" or suggesting that I don't really work on a farm. Thanks +Pat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MournemanMichael22 June 2018 at 23:23

      Take heart Fearghal. You will find that this site is unfortunately regularly blighted by vacuous, critical, (for the sake of it), mean spirited, small minded individuals. They are readily identified by non grammatical semi illiterate short and hostile comments offering limited perspectives and regularly off topic meaningless personalised retorts.
      So in the words of the musical: " welcome to the cabaret
      Your thoughts will be welcomed by the thinking majority.
      MMM

      Delete
    2. Fearghal Darach Brannon23 June 2018 at 00:04

      Thank you, MournemanMichael - I appreciate your comment.

      Fearghal.

      Delete
  35. 23.23: Are you the original MMM? After this exhortation I think you're losing the it. If you are the real MMM, you're not always accepting or tolerant of views that differ from yours. You condescend too much. Fearghal, stay away from this negative, bitchy, divisive, abusive and hateful blog. Find your inspiration elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MourneManMichael23 June 2018 at 02:09

      Losing it?
      Only in later life Anon @ 23:51 did I begin to realise that a very significant proportion of people, for whatever reasons, are, in your own words, "bitchy, divisive, and abusive" as opposed to well meaning and genuinely well intentioned.
      At that stage I truly "lost it" in terms of a previous fairly naive belief that others had the same moral and ethical expectations I'd been raised with.
      MMM

      Delete
  36. To anonymous 22nd June 11.33. Proof? A snippet? I am a gay priest in Down and connor

    ReplyDelete