If Church leaders can’t make things right, God will raise up others who can
Sep 30, 2018
SENIOR CRUX CONTRIBUTOR
Cyrus, the Persian Emperor who conquered the Babylonians as described in the Bible. (Credit: Wiki image.
In salvation history, whenever a divine commission or an inspired word goes unheeded, God moves beyond the assumed and ordinary forum of exchange with his people. This is most acutely seen in the tragedy of the Babylonian Captivity.
Leading up to the captivity, God’s people would not listen to him. They defiled the Temple, dishonored the Sabbath, and mocked his exalted Name, and so - as both a discipline and a remedy - God elevated the gentile empire of the Babylonians and allowed all that was sacred to be leveled and formally profaned.
In this movement of his permissive will, God brought into the light all of the sacrileges that had been committed in the darkness, rationalized and justified by his own anointed leaders. In essence, God used the licentiousness of the gentiles, who were never taught the moral law of God, to become the means of showing his Chosen People the consequences and squalor of a life of sin and deception.
In this purgation, God raised up Cyrus. He was the Persian Emperor, who conquered the Babylonians, and allowed for God’s people to return to the Promised Land. Cyrus was not of the Chosen People. He was an outsider, a gentile. And yet, the biblical narrative tells us that God anointed him and chose him for the special mission of bringing his people home. It was as much an elevation of Cyrus as it was a conviction against the evil of his own people.
In the Gospel Reading this weekend at Catholic Masses throughout the world, the Lord Jesus is continuing his southern journey from Caesarea Philippi to Jerusalem. In the account today, another outsider is doing a great work. The unnamed party is preaching and casting out bad spirits, something the apostles themselves found hard to do.
The initial reaction of the apostles is to prevent and intimate the evangelist. Perhaps part of this reaction was born from a purity of intention, but perhaps another part was bred from an implicit accusation to the apostles by this person’s power and ability to bring about spiritual healing and goodness.
In reaction to the desire to isolate the anonymous exorcist, however, the Lord commands his apostles: “Do not prevent him.” In summary, we can imagine the Lord saying, “Let him do the work of my kingdom because someone needs to be doing it!”
After the above direction, the Lord Jesus promises reward to those who are faithful, while also preaching against those who would cause harm or scandal to the little ones.
The application is obvious. While the weekly rotation of Bible readings at the Catholic Mass are always full of meaning and value, every once in a while they strike a particularly intense and apropos nerve in the life of the Church. This weekend is one such moment.
As we see again various news reports about sexual abuse and cover-ups, high Church leaders seem adamant about holding on to power, disguising their neglect, and retaining a deafening silence bordering on apostasy of goodness.
Rather than taking up the mantle of accountability, assuming the cross of responsibility, and both repenting and confessing their sins before God and humanity, many high prelates are shamelessly acting as if God doesn’t know what has happened in his kingdom and what has been perpetrated in his name.
In response to such a brazen lack of faith and elementary goodwill, God will direct his gaze elsewhere. He will allow the consequences of obstinacy and sin to play out in the life of his people. There will be bastions razed and assumed temples destroyed. Echoing biblical wisdom, God will demonstrate that he is no fool, and he will cease to look upon these specific leaders ordained by him to govern his people, and will rather search elsewhere for other shepherds after his own heart who will truly care for his people.
God will permit this scourge of evil to run its course, purifying his people, and he will offer his anointing to a new generation of Cyrus. Who they will be or where they will come from we can only guess, and we will most likely be wrong.
God will labor for his kingdom. His word will not go out and come back empty. If some of the ordained will not do the task of guarding the sheep and growing the flock, then the mission will continue in spite of them.
Now is the time to avoid being thrown into the sea with a millstone around one’s neck, a consequence also spoken about by the Lord for misguiding others, and instead to convert, confess sins, and reorient the Church’s vitality and dynamism to the work commissioned by God, such as protecting the little ones, sharing Good News, and exorcising bad spirits.
If current leadership will not do this, then God will raise up others.
PAT SAYS:
It is now clear that the bishops and the clergy have totally failed when it comes to church governance.
There is a universal crisis of genuine authority in the RC Church.
The hierarchy and clergy are now emperors with no clothes.
The church cannot be saved by these deviants.
Who will fill the void?
Is it even worth filling the void?
Maybe we should let the RC thing sink like the Tatanic?
It has not the iceberg of universal corruption and abuse.
The captain and crew are mutineers.
It is now clear that the bishops and the clergy have totally failed when it comes to church governance.
There is a universal crisis of genuine authority in the RC Church.
The hierarchy and clergy are now emperors with no clothes.
The church cannot be saved by these deviants.
Who will fill the void?
Is it even worth filling the void?
Maybe we should let the RC thing sink like the Tatanic?
It has not the iceberg of universal corruption and abuse.
The captain and crew are mutineers.
Do you, in your haste to post the bilge you produce nightly, bother your arse even to give a cursory proof read of your trash, to ensure that, at least, the language is intelligible?
ReplyDeleteOr have you had a few brandies down your neck by the time of night the latest unveiling of your little mind occurs?
One sure thing: God won’t be looking towards the garage in Larne for His “Cyrus”.
You probably couldn't convert a double garage into a sacred space, and you don't probably need to, because you are probably a clerical leach who has invaded a sacred space which you didn't build but act as though you own. The former garage at Princes Gardens in Larne, used to be a space that Pat let athletes train in until he found a better use for it. Don't you remember the story of Bethlehem, where Christ was born in a stable?
DeleteDid he give the athletes personal massages when they fnished training?
DeleteI bet the athletes paid well for the garage. Did Pat supervise them as they trained.
DeletePat, did you know that Miss Amy says that Size doesn't matter?
ReplyDeletePrimate: ‘We may be a minority in Ireland, but we can be a creative minority’ (Catholic World Report)
Editor's Note: Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh is Primate of All Ireland.
23:35 That must have been written by a Christian.
ReplyDeleteQuite so @02:54. One has to dig through the bilge on this blog to access the truthful insights so often expressed but concealed below a great deal of rant - I suspect this is deliberate, so that I too am often put off reading through let alone contributing. The last two days postings have been well worth considering and are directly linked. John Paul’s rushed canonization only confirmed the crisis. What promised so well for the Church became a disaster, so we are in a new Babylon - that at least must be clear to all. The Spirit like Ichabod has departed, and we all need to embrace that fact, and discern the Spirit’s action in the world where She has been from the very beginning. The notion of a smaller Church as a Remnant of the pure is heresy. It does however fit with the spurious Theology of the Body which is an invention of JPII and nothing more than an internal cult of the family, which sounds all very nice, but is anything but, as it excludes most people and most areas of human life. If that’s your costive notion of Christianity, keep it!
DeleteMournemanMichael:
ReplyDeleteDoes God make mistakes? If He is almighty and allseeing why and how does He choose these "wrong" leaders in the first place, both now, and in the 'Alice in Wonderland make believe fairy tales of ancient history"?
Or maybe He chooses well but then His choices go rogue: but how come He didn't forsee and forestall that?
And if He is annoyed to the extent that he then uses His almighty power to make amends by sending 'new brooms' to 'sweep clean' the evil ones, why in the first place didn't He gently correct the 'evil ones' to see the error of their ways and reform?
Oh! I see now: Adam and that 'damning apple'. That's where it all went wrong! Or is that another fairy tale of the past too?
"God works in 'mysterious ways'! Too true!
As others say: "Only asking, ....like!"
MMM
Willo, I do not believe that God makes any such choices, good or bad. But these so-called 'leaders' (including clerics today) are careerists who strove ambitiously for power and control, to dominate others. Think of men like McCarrick.
DeleteThese parasites, in a monumental act of self-regard, have even created a divine rationale for their greed and materialism: they speak reverently, portentiously, of 'vocation'.
What a crock of s**t! If people were truly to accept this caca, your questions about God would be absolutely justified. And uniquely unanswerable.
Mournful Mick and Parasite MC were both chosen so we only have God to thank that the Church was spared from these two specimens of pond life. I wonder what accounts for their deep seated hatred and venom? It must be terrible to live such sad lives that your existence is consumed with ranting daily on this blog. They have so much in common with their bromance, is it a Seminary rejection thing because servingblogger has this affliction too.
DeleteMournemanMichael:
DeleteMagna, other than the common usage of the word 'vocation' is there some extra significance in your use of it in the middle parag? As it reads, I can't understand its relevance other than that of course I certainly agree with the prevalence of the trait you refer to among many of the hierarchical clergy.
A Humanist friend once suggested, tongue in cheek, that the reason things go awry with religion here on earth, may be that God is just too busy keeping an eye on all the 'goings on' in the other millions of earth like planets in the many trillions of solar systems, galaxies and the like that science has revealed exist out there.
And whether or not people accept the 'caca' your last parag refers to, surely you accept that my questions about God are absolutely justified?
It's the theological gymnastics and suspension of rational thought in "answers" that cause me to shake my head in disbelief.
If God exists, and gave me a brain, through evolutionary development or otherwise, surely He expects me to use it rather than suspend its faculties? And I'm nothing exceptional: plenty of much more intelligent and educated individuals ask the same questions, but get no coherent answers.
MMM
Willo, Roman Catholic priests use the word 'vocation' in a much more rarified way, investing it with supernatural significance (not for everyone, of course, just for themselves).
DeleteThe biblical root of the word is the Gospel of John, 15:16 :
'You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide...'.
This belief can (and very probably does) provide most of these parasites with a very pleasant sense of specialness: men set not just apart from the ordinary run of humanity, but decidedly well and ontologically above it. This conceit is the root of clericalism in the Church and to the sense of entitlement mentioned earlier by servingblogger. You can see flashes of it in today's blog, from priests who naturally (and inevitably, given their massive self-regard) think of themselves as leaders and, of course, the laity as followers (sheep...baaaaaa🐑)
No one invited these men to lead. (I mean: Sean Jones. Seriously?) But they are arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to lead. Take the poster at 11:23. Another priest:
'I have no hesitancy about my calling to be a LEADER in the Parish (sic) entrusted to my care.' And then, without the slightest evidence of tongue-in-cheek, he goes on to say: 'Arrogance is not one of my destructive traits.' The mind truly boggles at this parasite.
Yes, your questions are justified regardless. I just thought that accepting God's apparent whimsy in appointing good and bad leaders made them even more relevant.
My own response to this is that God doesn't appoint anyone if those making the choices are motivated by such things as self-interest, greed, petty jealousy, pet projects, or whatever. I can't influence anyone who isn't open to my influence. I assume its ditto with JC.
MournemanMichael:
DeleteThanks Magna: However your last paragraph inevitably leads to an examination of the doctrine/concept of "free will"?
To what extent does the Christian God allegedly suspend His benign involvement to 'permit' wrong choices of those negatively inclined individuals motivated by those malign personality defects you refer to? And why?
Is God a 'puppet master' who occasionally doesn't bother to tweak the proper strings influencing His earthly puppet human creations towards better choices. And why?
As you've said: indeed YOU can't influence anyone not open to YOUR influence: but surely that doesn't apply to the allegedly almighty God? To what extent, is He hampered by His human creations' free will inspired 'wrong choices'?
........If He really exists?
You see, for me, the invariable response to questions going to the heart and rationale of religious belief, especially the RC church, boil down to:
....the bible says:
....The church's teaching is....(not just the RC
church either)
....the Magesterium/early fathers teach that..:
....and customarily, the big catch all: "It's a
matter of faith."
And I've not yet seen or heard anything cogent which answers even the most basic questioning of religious belief.
In that, I distinguish between it's objective inherent truth reality as opposed to the many psychological, emotional, societal and cultural factors influencing humankind's longstanding clinging to religion's aspirational benefits for those in need of some sort of meaning to our earthly existence, combined with the fear of the inevitable reality of death, and the hope for something meaningful subsequently.
Undoubtedly this latter factor is one of the main driving factors in religious belief, and one much capitalised on particularly by the RC church.
MMM
'pon my word you shure ask some awkward questions Micko!
DeleteI can't answer them, but what amuses me is that none of these so called learned clerics have any sensible answers either. Other than to insult you and rubbish your ignorance for even asking them!
Shows them for what they are.
Pat. Last nights poster at 21-18 spoke of efforts to try and heal matters between the church and you. Apparently the pope was involved and the wholly disgraceful incident with bishop Phonsie was mentioned
ReplyDeleteThat should be a clear indication that you are doing damage, big damage!
The press watch this blog like hawks and a number of negative stories detrimental to the Irish church have emanated from it or quietly from you personally
The old dictum about keeping friends close but enemies closer is at work here.
Pat, you are shining lights in dark corners and they don’t like it one bit.
Beware if Greeks ( and Romans) bearing gifts!!
Dalriada Dick
It's a bit like getting a dental filling.
DeleteThe decay must first of all be drilled away before reconstruction.
I shouldn't get to excited @09.17 that the Pope was involved. Nobody has bore any gifts and Pat's rift with Rome is now deemed too deep. Many congratulated Phonsie on what he did and still do.
DeleteMournemanMichael.
DeleteGood to see you back DD.
Hope you're still enjoying the occasional Black Bush in that big N Antrim chair.
MMM
Pat, your broad sweeping statement about the hierarchy and clergy yet again is so imbalanced, untrue and unjust. None of us on the ground in our parishes feel your negativity because, though we know the crisis of authority and the challenges we face, we continue to be caring leaders, trying to work for the good of our community. We're not fools. We keep focused on what we are called to do. The alternative is to sit behind a laptop all day or trawl sites for scandal, name call, judge, condemn, create trouble, sit back and ridicule. I prefer to work away, focusing on the parish entrusted to my care and make it as Christ like as possible. I keep my energy for the WELL BEING of parishioners, and with them ensure our community is welcoming, caring, hospitable and inclusive of all people. If I was to take your approach and model, I'd achieve very little. I effect the relevant, necessary change and renewal in myself first and with God's grace enable parishioners to do likewise. The constant haranguing of clergy you engage in is so negative, unfair, so counterproductive and so uninspiring. Can you open your eyes a little wider to see......?
ReplyDeleteThank you for your honest comment.
DeleteEvery bishop and priest must be part of challenging the decay. They must speak out.
It's good that you are caring for your parishioners.
But you have a duty too to the whole church.
The silence of most priests is deafening.
Yeah Pat, should they speak out like you and Mulvihill? Look where that has got you. You really do make me laugh. What sort of priest would heed your idiotic advice - they wouldn't be right in the head.
Delete09:23, 'we continue to be caring leaders'? 'Leaders'? Really? Who the hell appointed YOU, or anyone else, a leader?
ReplyDeleteAnd the parish entrusted to YOUR care? What do you think your parisoners are? Tradeable commodities? You arrogant priest!
Roman Catholic clerical arrogance: there really is nothing quite like it.
You people cannot lead. You're morally unqualified to lead. How can the lost lead?
One thing you most certainly don't and cannot lead on is humility, such is your degree of self-regard and the presumptious arrogance you've expressed in that sanctimonious post at 09:23. 😆
09.49: Magna, your comment should be treated with the disdain it deserves. You have neither self insight nor common sense. You behave like a little spoiled brat. I thank God for the wisdom and understanding given to me about the true nature of the gift of priesthood, a gift denied you because of your instability and unsuitablity, both still evident in most of your comments. How the people of God have been spared your abusive, destructive behaviour!! I have no hesitancy about my calling to be a LEADER in the Parish entrusted to my care. None whatsoever. Arrogance is not one of my destructive traits. I am constantly thanked for my ministry, broken as it is at times. Poor Aul Mags, the morning after the night before - a comment written with such childish bitterness and calculated insult, typical of a lousy hangover. If the phrase "morally unworthy" should apply to anyone, Mags, just look at the rotteness that spews from your mouth frequently. The rejection of you as a seminarians still hurts you deeply. "Oh Lord, it's so hard to be humble when your perfect in every way...". Remember the words of the song Maggie! That's me!!!Humble..
DeleteIm surprised you can string a sentence together today Madman Magna. After your weekend of drunkeness when your posts were so incoherent I don't think you are in a position to sit in judgement on anyone. Waste of space and waste of time. Shut your ass for a change and give your mouth a chance.
Delete9.49 Wow!!! What an arrogant rant.
DeleteAnonymous at 11:29
DeleteYou're so right, we have heard it all before, it's the same old crap over and over (yawn)again!
Anonymous at 11:23
DeleteRev. Father you are so perceptive, and you've got aul Maggs to a tee. God Bless You.
11:23, my comments are read avidly, even by you.
DeleteWhy would you disdain them? They're the highlight of your empty day as a priest. 😆
12:55, 'Rev Father'? Oh, how cringingly deferential.
DeleteJust a sec! There's a brown smudge on the tip of your beaky hooter. Yes, right there.
Magna Carta at 13:01
DeleteMy Dear Child, my days are not empty like yours,I am very busy doing God's work, praying for poor sinners like you. I send you my Blessing.
Magna Carta at 14:33
DeleteNo ya Mad Cow, it's called respect, nothing cringing about it. You can't stand it that you never made it, and were considered unfit to enter The Sacred Priesthood.
15:36, 😆
Delete"The silence of most priests is deafening". No surprise, because they have sold their souls and bodies to the institution of the Church, and rely on it for pretty much everything- their housing, their living, their stipend, their other income, their standing, their sense of worth. So, it is no surprise that they will not rock the boat for the most part. They are also inculcated in a culture of entitlement - to deference, to being listened to, to having more or less what they want, to not being gainsaid or contradicted. It's only when a priest is able to escape that suffocating and controlling clutch of the Church, like + Pat has done, that a priest is able to stand out and tell it as it is. For the majority of priests, they would find it very difficult or almost impossible to break away from the Church that provides them with everything, because they are unemployable for the most part in the real world. What transferrable skills do most of them have ? What do they know about the real world of work, having to get up, commute, hold down a job, forego the lunchtime G&T and wine followed by a long siesta, being able to arrange their schedule so that they can get away to the golf course, or take time off to go to Gran Canaria ? You know what I'm saying is true, don't you boys ?! So, the majority of them will stay where they are, comfortable and cosseted, and they most certainly will not rock the boat that gives them a cosy berth, or bite the hand that feeds them indulgently.
ReplyDeleteSo, + Pat, imperfect even as you are, keep shining the light in to those murky corners, and keep asking the awkward questions that make them sit up and listen, and make them uncomfortable. Good job !
The trouble still bubbles for Pope Francis and what he knew and what he did in respect of McCormick, Murphy-O'C, and others. It would appear that there is one law for the rich and one for the poor in the Church, or rather depending on what colour of cassock you wear. Why is it that M-O'C was allowed to continue swanning around Westminster, Rome and elsewhere in his retirement, representing Catholics in this country at significant events in place of Vinny, when he was under investigation for an alleged assault ? If your local parish priest had such an allegation levelled against him, I assure you that he would have been put under all sorts of sanctions and limitations, probably moved out of his house, put on furlough, and even when an investigation by the police showed that there was no substance to the allegation, the Church would continue with the assumption that there is no smoke without fire and the poor man would be continued in exile. The Church is most definitely a hierarchy when it comes to how you are treated !
Servingblogger you wouldn't be biased by any chance? Another one thankfully that got a boot up the hole out the door of the Seminary and has never gotten over it. Time to move on me lubber.
DeleteMournemanMichael:
DeleteMagna and SB: What you say is very true. I particularly like your pointer SB to the sense of entitlement and deference into which the clergy are inculcated.
I suspect that seminary training did not advance very much in the decades after I left it in the 1960's. In comparison to my subsequent experiences, there was a complete lack of any intellectual rigour. It's little wonder that any questioning, of religious moral or practical matters, are only seen as hostile challenges to be dismissively ignored by the complacent clergy.
But just as the late 60's civil rights movement sprang from a better educated populace no longer content with second rate citizenship, so too the laity in the RC church are beginning to demand answers and changes to the status quo. And the adverse RC clerical scandals publicity is an increasing catalyst to that process.
MMM
Anonymous at 11:32
DeleteSpot on, I agree with everything you say and he is such a BORE too!
Wilo thewisp at 12:09
DeleteThe Mutual Admiration Society of Magna, MMM,SB,AND WOTW. What a motley crew with all their anti clericalism and anti Catholic rheteric that we get from them on a daily basis would you's ever just feck off and give us peace.
14:43, I sense that I'm not welcome here.
DeleteAm I being paranoid? 😆
Mad Magna Caca at 17:21
DeleteNo Polly you're not being paranoid, you have sensed right, just stop all your anti catholic rants. Love and prayers B. Eviva Maria!
10.16: What a very sweeping portrayal you paint of clerics! Do I detect the soundings of another reject from the seminary? Seems you have lots of axes to grind. I think it's unfortunate when an individual, like Servingblogger overstates and exaggerates a rather biased impression he has of priests. I certainly don't fit your caricature, nor do many of the clerics I know. We try our best to be men of integrity but always aware of our shortcomings. In today's society, sadly, because of Church abuse scandals, priests are held up for ridicule and mockery. All of us are seen in bad light. I know that respect and trust have to be earned. I take nothing for granted. I give of my best but often fail. I speak out against abuse at every proper forum. At my age, were I to leave, I would not be employable because of "caricature priesthood", as I have academic qualifications in education and psychology, but because of my AGE!! I have put my qualifications, like many other priests, at the service of my parish. I have been enriched by the opportunities given to me to minister to others. I accept the changing landscape of Irish life and I accept the huge challenges, criticisms and questions given to, and asked of me. The portrait you paint is unfair, unjust and completely wrong. Priests are human first and foremost and we experience the same travails and struggles like others, albeit in a different context. I find the trivialisiation and ridiculing which you offer very disingenuous and dishonest. But,thank God, through his grace, I survive the vicious insults which priests are now experiencing on a daily basis. And I thank God that I am personally challenged in all the darkness to re-think, renew and reform myself every day.
ReplyDeleteJeepers! You do have a very high opinion of yourself, don't you?
DeleteI'm surprised you can find the time for all that self-pity you like to wallow in, too. 😆
@12:21
DeleteGood for you ! And that there were many more like you. But, it simply isn't the case. A goodly number of your priests brothers are as I describe them. Perhaps even some of your bishops, too. And, I believe that you probably know the kind of priests that I am describing, for they will be all around you in your neighboring parishes. Keep up your good witness. But allow me and others to shine the light on those who are evidently as I have described them.
And, no, I was never booted out of seminary, and I bear no sense of animosity or frustration towards the Catholic priesthood because I am a frustrated priest.
And, no, I am not from Downpatrick, either !
I just observe and I form a view and I express it.
Well said, Fr at 12:21. The faceless guttersnipes on this blog, like “servingblogger”, sniping from the dark web, have absolutely NOTHING to offer except bigotry, prejudice and even worse in case of that appalling “Magna Carta”.
DeleteI agree also. These gobshites are only to happy to pour scorn and be part of Pats hate filled agenda. Rome would never contemplate taking Buckley on board again. Never
Delete13:15, but sure Jesus loves me, so he does. 😆
DeleteAnonymous at 12:21
DeleteRev. Father excellent comment. God Bless You.
Maggie dear at 12.54, you'd know nothing about real life, interpersonal human emotions, empathy, sensitivity, goodness of heart. You continue your nasty, abusive, contemptible behaviour as you began it in the seminary. You've just entrenched yourself more deeply in your caca. Trailer trash type....just sayin' it like it is!!!
Delete14:04: Oh, Rome isn't half so picky as you imagine. All of those paedophiles/ephebophiles it has, and still, harbours and protects.
DeleteEven Lucifer would turn up his nose at an invitation to join such a criminal organisation as the institutional Roman Catholic Church. 😆
"The silence of most priests is deafening.." - so says serving blogger at 10.15. Then we are told by him at 12.59 that you are a frustrated priest. Hmm...like many of the clergy but I suspect you also belong to the band of those who say nothing, whose "silence is deafening..." Welcome to the club Fr....or are you shouting from the rooftops ...and we can't hear you or see you? Tell us "frustrated priest"!
Delete12.59: If you are a frustrated priest, get out. You described the life of a priest (a caricature) in a comment at 10.16: I presume you too have enjoyed all the "perks" and "comforts" in priesthood. Are you staying because of these or are you also "unemployable"? Do you not have "transferable" skills? Obviously not. If it all seems so horrible and so awful, can you outline the steps you are taking to live a more authentic and contented life as a priest, if that's your true work!! It's hard to know but if I had such deep frustration, I might be looking in the direction of Larne. Your apparent life destroying "hopelessness" should compel you to rethink your way of life (as a priest). I share your concerns but not the darkness of your misery.
DeleteMagna Carta at14:38
DeleteThank God it was picky enough to get rid of you pronto. You tried all you could to join the Institution you're always denigrating. But the Church was not fooled it recognized you as one of Lucifer's angels and acted accordingly. It would have been criminal had you succeeded.
You have never forgiven it, hence your hateful rants
Magna Caca at 14:21 - what Jesus does not love is your hate-filled invective spewed up on this blog.
DeletePat please don't ever contemplate reconciliation with the church. To paraphrase the US comedian WC Fields "I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have you as a member." Stay as you are, out of sight, out of mind etc........
ReplyDeleteThat was Groucho Marx, not WC Fields. 😆
ReplyDeletewho asked you? Igonramus.
DeleteNo one needed to ask, because I always give freely of my generousity and (what's that buzzword?), er, 'giftedness'. 😆
Delete13.06: Only Maggie would recognise another Groucho!! but not half as funny as the original...
Delete17.33: Mags, time for you to have a dictionary beside you - you are making too many spelling mistakes - "GENEROSITY" without a "u"!!! Or maybe cut back on the booze...or perhaps the planks in your eyes are blinding you!!!The planks Jesus spoke of...
DeleteGrammar Granny you missed out correcting the "igonramus" above. Shame on you.
DeleteHow can we take you seriously: my 'generousity' doesn't stretch tha.....t fa....r!
Servingblogger looks like he'll follow the way of Mulvihill if he's not careful. His daily musings suggest a deeply, unhappy, lonely, unfulfilled man. I could be wrong but this "frustrated priest" (12.59) is beginning to sound tiresome, moaning, condemning priesthood as he sees it in others, while still undoubtedly enjoying the goodies! Are you a priest or just a malcontent or both?
ReplyDelete"And, no, I was never booted out of seminary, and I bear no sense of animosity or frustration towards the Catholic priesthood because I am a frustrated priest."
ReplyDeleteI think that you may all be misinterpreting the 'because I am a frustrated priest' bit ! It means, if you read it carefully, firstly that I was not booted out of seminary, and secondly that I was not a seminarian who had his hopes of being a priest frustrated; I am not a frustrated priest. Actually, I'm not frustrated at all ! Except with the way most clergy and bishops seem to be behaving.
So, please, all you rather defensive and angry bloggers, let us get this straight: I do not write because I am a disillusioned and angry priest; I am perfectly balanced and sane. I may not be a priest at all; I may be an ex-priest; I may be a layperson; I may be a married deacon; I may be a eucharistic minister; I may be a bishop !!
Whatever I am, I have a perspective on the Church and on its priests and bishops and I choose to express it here on this blog.
It is very interesting the angry and nasty comments that are coming from priests. I think it is because they know that I have rumbled them. They know what I am saying is true of so many priests. And they don't like it ! Hence the irrational and angry responses. Now, if you could come up with some sensible, cogent arguments, then I'm prepared to debate. But just getting angry and calling me a gobbshit because you don't like what I'm saying is pretty immature, and does not cut the mustard. Is that the way you talk to your parishioners who disagree with you or challenge you ? It says to me that you are exactly as I have described, and once somebody bursts that little egocentric, entitled, clerical bubble, you react with fury. Because you are not used to being challenged. And you have been rumbled !
Why did you admit @16.46 to being in a Seminary on a previous blog sometime ago? If you don't want to be caught out as the lying toad that you clearly are you need to have a good long memory. You are the one that's been rumbled. You are lying nasty scum.
Delete16.46: Continue your imbalanced anti clerical rant. Continue to be dishonest both to yourself and to the contributors. You have a viewpoint which you're entitled to but spare us your faux outrage. It becomes tiresome not for what it says but because we could now write your script. You are blinded by your own bias, judgment and arrogance. TRUTH is what we all strive for and you, Servingblogger do not have a monopoly on TRUTH. I thank God for the many, inspiring and caring priests I have encountered.
Delete16.46: Servingblogger - a liar needs a good memory. Your comments are revealing you as a liar, contradictory and completely disingenuous. Even those who arrogantly believe their own opinions, as you obviously do, can be right gob*****s. You neatly fit the category. Instead of pretend concern, you should open your eyes a little more and recognise the many, many good priests 8n our midst. Your broad sweeps of judgment are unjust but if you find fulfilment in your self righteousness, so be it. Your self contained, smug little world is infinitely worse than the one you condemn in priests and your bubble is being pierced.
DeleteTold you so. It's not me that's been rumbled, it's they, and they don't like it ! So they rely on attack as the best form of defence. Oh well, poor souls, they will just have to sup their whiskey and dribble down their already stained cardigans, not to mention the trousers they have probably been wearing for the last 6 months ! See, I can get nasty too, if I have to !
DeleteBy the way, I never said I had never been in a seminary !
And, even if I had, and even if I had stayed or left, my observations, I believe, are valid and realistic, and you know it ! That's why a couple of you just react in such a nasty, gleeful way !
Oh, + Pat, you do attract a strange group here sometimes. Anyhow, I shall continue contributing my thoughts. If they don't like them, then then can just not read them.
And, I note, they are all anonymous. Brave boys, aren't they ?
20.03: And likewise you too can suck up your critics! Criticism is a two way process. As you give, so you shall receive. Talking about being anonymous - you're hiding behind a tag also, are you not? Reveal your real name if you have COURAGE, brave servingblogger.
Delete13.01: Poor Aul Magsy Wagsy she has taken to the sup, poor Aul Mags...just can't get over her rejection from Seminary....keeps on being the poisonous little weed as in seminary. Your inner demons are eating you up Mags: Get professional help. You're in the heart of PRIESTLY prayers every day! Sacerdos Sanctissima...
ReplyDeleteMournemanMichael:
DeleteWhat a puerile comment Anon 18.25!
Are you another one of those priests who, having 'got through' seminary life to ordination think you've become something special? The priestly smug 'ontological superiority' some describe is better understood as S. Blogger described it about 10am this morning: inculcated into a life of entitlement and deference. And, it seems to me, it's that clerical egocentric dominant trait which causes so many priest contributors here to resort in anonymity to infantile vitriol when their cosy self satisfied views are challenged.
Thus the continual harping on about Magna, Serving Blogger etc being 'kicked out' of seminary.
I tell you this as fact: I've spoken to many ex seminarians, like myself, and have yet to find one who has any regrets at leaving. But I've certainly met ordained priests who quit and have no regrets,other than that they should have quit before ordination, and others priests still "serving" who, in private have confided to their many regrets at still being "shackled" to the church with no viable alternative options. Indeed I have met some kind and generous spiritual priests, but they are a minority.
So you smug critics commenting on seminary leavers,get it into your thick priestly heads, as Edith Piaf sung it: "Non. Je ne regrette rien" : and that goes for the vast majority of us!
MMM
22.19: How many pints MMM did you consume before you got apoplectic with silliness? Get a life. You too are anonymous with your MMM .....We each have a right to defend ourselves against atheistic, smug, self absorbed irritants like you, whoever we are.
DeleteMournemanMichael:
DeleteIndeed Anon @00:05 you have every right to defend yourself, and thank you for providing a perfect example of 'the dismissive response of the complacent clergy' I referred to earlier.
MMM
The eschatological vision of the lion and the lamb lying down in peace and of the child safely putting it's hand into the viper's lair, is beautiful, but we're not there yet. Is it not better to agree to disagree in the meantime and in a civil manner? The world in a more interesting place because Magna and his 'mommy dearest' are in it. So what if a person sometimes writes from the shadow side of painful memories?
ReplyDelete"Mutineers?" I think that many would abandon ship rather than walk the plank.
ReplyDeleteI think serving blogger has some very good points to make, maybe slightly biased as we all are, but he does make very valid observations. He does so in a respectful way. I don't find his posts antagonistic. He doesn't resort to using foul language or engage in ad hominem attacks. I find his contributions are civil, thought provoking and challenging. It's a pity some people think he is attacking priests and the church when he is merely pointing to its painful faults. We all have our faults and we all need to be honest with ourselves instead of attack and counterattack.
ReplyDeleteYou probably find them useful because you are not one of those priests that I am highlighting, if you are a priest at all. These guys who resort to ad hominem attacks do so because they know that what I am pointing out is true, and they feel uncomfortable being rumbled. So, they go on the attack. Anyhow, thanks for your words.
DeleteToo many priests are afraid to leave the sinking ship because it's the only thing they know. Whilst some in our own Diocese are fine holy men, others just see it as a job and are unqualified or unwilling to contemplate doing anything else. They cannot stand their spendthrift bishop or his minions but prefer to keep their head down and sail below the radar. They go through the motions even though they know that the church they serve is rotten at its core. They bury their heads in the sand ignoring the systematic abuse that is being perpetrated in God's name, be it physical/spiritual or sexual abuse. They are not leaders. They are sheep. They are unqualified to act orcsee themselves as true leaders. If they were leaders they would stand up for the gospel and confront those in authority who are leading people astray from God. No matter how much light is shone on to the RC hierarchy dark ways, there are those within who are just either too blind to see or don't want to see. But the light of God will shine brighter until no one can deny the darkness within the RC church. A change is going to come.
ReplyDeleteMagna, do you know off-hand where Aquinas taught that one cannot commit a mortal sin of gluttony?
ReplyDeleteIf Aquinas said that it is strange as he himself was a glutton
DeleteAs for above
There is a huge difference between anti Catholic rants and
Anti Catholic corruption rants.
20:17, to my knowledge, Aquinas did not teach that the sin of gluttony was not mortal; it is, after all, one of the Seven Deadly Sins.
DeleteMy information about Aquinas, and his gluttonous eating, came from a dean when I was in 'The Wing'.
Could Pat provide the basis of his assertion that Aquinas was a glutton rather than, say, someone who suffered from hyperthyroidism or Cushing's syndrome? This blog at times seems hellbent on defining people solely on their physical appearance and making judgments on that basis alone, and usually those judgments lack any semblance of charity.
DeleteRead my post on yesterday's blog about Aquinas. He was hugely (if not morbidly) obese, so this would rule out hyperthyroisism (weight LOSS is a symptom of this, not weight gain).
DeleteYou know very well that Cushing's Syndrome was not a recognised illness in medieval Europe, so there was no way of diagnosing it.
The likelihood is that Aquinas was a glutton.
You're correct re. hyperthyroidism, that was my mistake. I meant hypothyroidism, which is associated with obesity. That Cushing's syndrome wasn't identified in Medieval Europe does not mean that it did not exist.
DeleteThe more essential point is that judging people based solely on physical appearance and without access to any other information about them (for example relevant medical conditions that might affect their physical appearance) seems to me to be crass and dehumanizing. I don't think a person's physical appearance can tell us very much if anything about their character. Goebbels was physically slim, but it didn't make him a good person.
It isn't a question of judging Aquinas (or anyone else, for that matter) on physical appearance alone (though this, too, can be a helpful indicator), but on typical behaviour. And, typically, Aquinas would gorge on food and drink, which, logically, might suggest gluttony.
DeleteAquinas wasn't just obese, a common symptom of hypothyroidism, but morbidly so. Moreover, his mental acuity, judging by his voluminous output of written works, remained impressively and intellectually high. Again, this does not indicate hypothyroidism.
I suspect that Aquinas is someone you hold in high esteem (for whatever reason), hence your dogged defence of the man's moral reputation. But sometimes we just have to face the likely truth about our heroes (if we have the mettle for it) and accept that they, too, had feet of clay.
Aquinas himself wrote, at fair length, on the subject of gluttony and concluded that it was indeed sinful behaviour. If Aquinas was quite at ease on passing moral judgement on others in this way, 'without access to any other information about them (for example relevant medical conditions that might affect their physical appearance)', then he, and you, cannot complain when others do.
By his own moral yardstick, Aquinas has been found wanting.
I do have a regard for Aquinas, but I try to be aware of people's imperfections. For example, I greatly admire the hard work and sacrifice of someone like Damien De Veuster with the lepers on Molokai, but am also aware of his short temper and stubbornness. My purpose is not to assert Aquinas as utterly perfect. However, at the same time, I am not convinced that moral judgments, made by Aquinas or anyone else, based on physical attributes are fair, true, or relevant. Inasmuch as you cannot understand my defense of Aquinas, I cannot understand why an obviously intelligent person who seems genuinely concerned with moral issues would think that making any kind of moral judgment on a person based solely on physical attributes is fair.
DeleteMoral judgements about ourselves and others that are based on physical attributes ALONE are perhaps more likely not to be 'fair, true, or relevant'; but my judgement of Aquinas was founded not just on his physical appearance, but also on his known, gluttonous habits.
DeleteI understand your wanting to defend someone for whom you have such regard, but not the strength of this defence, given the lack of affirming medical evidence from the time.
In the absence of such evidence, your reluctance to accept the only reasonable, if provisional, conclusion (that Aquinas was a glutton), is taking loyalty to the man a little too far, in my opinion.
Magna, darling, I don't understand the reference to a garage above. They can't be referring to the bishop's pro- cathedral, can they?
ReplyDeleteAnyway if anyone wants a garage or loft converted I can recommend Brooks in Church Street very highly.
I have never known a bad priest. The vast majority are men wholly dedicated to their vocation. They, like their congregations, have been let down by the ‘senior management’. The Church teaches personal responsibility for one’s actions. No person can ordain himself priest. Only a bishop can do this. The wayward, the devious and the criminal members of the clergy were each of them recommended by a bishop and accepted for priestly training. Later, each was ordained by a bishop. Bishops therefore approved, trained and admitted evil men into the priesthood. However, bishops refuse to acknowledge or accept any responsibility for their gross negligence and dereliction of duty in failing to ensure thorough and exhaustive due diligence on those candidates for the priesthood who later used the sacred trust placed in them to commit the vilest of crimes against the young and vulnerable. The Holy Father says the Great Accuser has been unchained and is attacking bishops by exposing their sins thereby causing scandal. The scandal is covering up scandal and in bishops failing to accept any responsibility for the duty entrusted them by God to ensure the priesthood is kept as a sacred profession unsullied by the presence of the irredeemably corrupt and the immoral.
ReplyDeleteWhat about that man in kildolery, surely he qualifies as a bad priest!!
DeleteTime we had one of those wonderful reviews you sometimes do, Bp Pat, listing the many ecclesiastical rogues, reprobates, and assorted debauchees in Ireland and in particular Maynooth. Also, please don't hold back on Fr Mo Marsden either.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair,there are a lot of great posts on this forum. I suspect, however,that some people don't recognize that long posts don't get read. This applies to Pat's stuff, and to the responding posts. Please bear it in mind. I love the crisp comments, but the long essays are not for me.
ReplyDeleteI quite agree, I scroll through everything longer than six inches, more is vulgar.
DeleteMournemanMichael:
DeleteBy way of contrast: I like the longer posts with more depth to them. Some recent ones, Magna , Serving Blogger etc have much food for thought in them together with much relevant information relating to the issue.
Yes, pithy succinct posts have their place, but I'm all for the variety.
MMM