TONY WALSH – THE BIGGEST PRIEST ABUSER IN DUBLIN.

 

thumbnail_20181220_184931
WALSH – AS YOUNGER SINGING PRIEST

Tony Walsh possibly ‘most notorious clerical child sexual abuser’ in Dublin

Murphy report said it was ‘likely that he has abused hundreds of children’

Tony Walsh’s abuse of one boy in Ballyfermot from 1978 to 1983 was so extreme that he was sentenced in December 2010 to a total of 123 years.

Patsy McGarry The Irish Times

Updated: Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 16:38

Former priest Tony Walsh, who was jailed on Wednesday for indecently assaulting a boy 35 year ago, was described by the Murphy Commission as “the most notorious child sexual abuser” to have come to its attention.

“It is likely that he has abused hundreds of children,” its 2009 report said.

It also found that Dublin’s Catholic archdiocese did not report child sexual abuse allegations against Walsh to the Garda for 17 years after it first received such a complaint about him.

The report also revealed that in 1989 it had been suggested in the archdiocese that Walsh, then an admitted (to the archdiocese) child sex abuser, be appointed to the regional marriage tribunal, which dealt mainly with annulments.

This was not done but, as the Murphy report put it, there were then “two known abusers . . . in the regional marriage tribunal . . .”

Those were Fr Ivan Payne and a priest referred to as ‘Fr Cicero’ in the report.

The commission investigated how clerical child sexual abuse allegations were handled in Dublin’s Catholic archdiocese between 1975 and 2004.

page15_links4
MORE UPDATED WALSH PICTURE

Walsh’s abuse of one boy in Ballyfermot from 1978 to 1983 was so extreme that he was sentenced in December 2010 to a total of 123 years.

Five of the 13 counts, for buggery, attracted sentences of 10, 12, 14, 16, and 16 years each. The remaining counts, for indecent assault, brought sentences ranging from four to nine years. As Walsh was to serve his sentences concurrently, 16 years was the maximum time he would spend in jail for those crimes.

Four years were suspended as a psychologists report said it was unlikely he would offend again. It was the most severe sentence ever imposed on a clerical child sex abuser in the State.

According to that boy’s victim impact statement, prepared by psychiatrist Prof Ivor Browne, Walsh raped him with his wrists tied to his ankles as he lay over a coffee table at the presbytery in Ballyfermot, which the then priest shared with Fr Michael Cleary and his housekeeper Phyllis Hamilton.

The boy was “crying loudly” and “hysterical”.

Walsh, who had turned up the music to drown out the boy’s cries, took “about an hour to calm me down. I then went home,” the boy said. This assault led to one of the 16-year sentences.

Another incident took place at Enniscrone, Co Sligo. About 50 children from the Ballyfermot were taken there by Walsh and three other priests, including Fr Cleary. Walsh took the boy to the sand dunes where he raped him. Sand caused the boy to bleed, so Walsh brought him to the sea where he washed the blood off and saltwater stung the child’s wounds.

The boy was also raped by Walsh in Dublin’s Phoenix Park. Afterwards Walsh wiped him with “a purple sash (stole) he had with him”. When Walsh picked up his jacket “a small receptacle for holding Holy Communionwafers fell out of his pocket”.

He brought the boy back to the presbytery in Ballyfermot, “put on Elvis records . . . and gave him a glass of Coke”.

He then showed him “a Bible with pictures of Hell and said if he told anyone he would burn in hell and never go to heaven. Then he let him go home.”

One evening the boy told his mother an edited version of what had been happening. She went to the presbytery and knocked, accompanied by the boy’s aunt. Phyllis Hamilton answered and denied Walsh was inside.

The mother insisted he must be in as his car was there. They thought they had seen him at a window. Hamilton went inside, and Walsh came to the door.

He denied everything.

As Prof Browne puts it, in the victim impact report, “then knowing the game was up, Walsh stopped abusing D altogether and terminated their relationship”.

Walsh spent eight years trying to stop his trial, exhausting the judicial review process. He failed. He had failed similarly in another case in 1997. Then, after another round-the-houses judicial review process, also under free legal aid, he pleaded guilty and served time.

Denied all charges

However, he forced the December 2010 trial, denying all charges. The jury found him guilty, unanimously, after just 94 minutes and on the 13 counts.

Tony Walsh was born in 1954 and ordained in 1978. Even as a seminarian in Dublin’s Clonliffe College, as emerged years later, he abused children and at the home of another abuser, Fr Noel Reynolds, to whose house he had a key.

In July 1978, two days after Walsh took up his first appointment as a curate in Ballyfermot, a complaint was received in Archbishop’s House that he had sexually abused an eight-year-old boy. That was alleged to have taken place in June 1978 at Fr Reynolds’s house.

tumblr_l0cnxu4QJl1qac8ago1_1280

The next complaint was in 1979 when a mother went to the parish priest of Ballyfermot, the late Canon Val Rogers. Fr Cleary was despatched to educate the woman’s son on male sexuality. In 1985, Canon Rogers admitted this case had been “hushed up”.

Sometime between 1980 and 1982, there were complaints to Archbishop’s House about Walsh’s abuse of young girls at a summer camp.

In June 1985, Walsh began attending a psychiatrist. In October 1985 of that year, he denied indecently assaulting a young girl earlier that month.

Even after he was moved to the Westland Row parish in the south inner city in February 1986, complaints kept coming from Ballyfermot. A housekeeper at his house in Ballyfermot said there were always children there and on one occasion, she saw two boys coming from his bedroom.

In January 1987, the housekeeper at Westland Row claimed to have found underwear of hers in Walsh’s room. She also found condoms and syringes and said “a number of boys had slept overnight in his bed and a boy from Ballyfermot had been visiting”.

Walsh denied all of this and protested he did not know what condoms looked like. In April 1988, a woman alleged her son was in Westland Row with Walsh. The following month, parents claimed Walsh had interfered with their daughter.

Once a fortnight

In May 1988, Walsh admitted to then chancellor of the Dublin Archdiocese Mgr Alex Stenson that over the eight years he had been in Ballyfermot, “he was involved with boys about once a fortnight”.

3171_cartoon.png

It was then 10 years after the first complaint about him was made to the archdiocese. Walsh was sent to the Stroud treatment centre in England. He returned to Dublin in November 1988 and was appointed chaplain at a hospital for older people.

He signed a contract of good behaviour with the archdiocese and nominated Fr Cleary as his spiritual director. He continued to receive counselling.

In August 1989, there were complaints about his dealings with a boy at Dublin’s All Hallows College. Walsh was returned to Stroud.

Management there notified the archdiocese that Walsh intended accompanying the All Priests’ Show (with whom he had a spot doing an Elvis impersonation) on a UK tour.

He was refused permission.

In April 1990, then Archbishop of Dublin Desmond Connell and Msgr Stenson gave Walsh until May 1st to decide on either dismissal from the priesthood or voluntary laicisation. Archbishop Connell also formally ended Walsh’s public ministry.

In March 1991, there were further reports of Walsh’s contacts with children. The Dublin bishops decided to begin canon law proceedings against him. In August 1991, and for the first time, a parent complained to gardaí about Walsh’s attempt to pick up her son.

Psychiatric hospital

The following month, Walsh was ordered by Archbishop Connell to go to the St John of God psychiatric hospital in Stillorgan. The night before he did so, he attempted to pick up another boy and gardaí were alerted.

Walsh returned to Stroud in January 1992 where he posed in nearby streets as a priest counsellor at the clinic and agreed to babysit for a family. By chance, the father of that family found out who he was.

Back in Dublin, in July of that year, he befriended a 15-year-old boy. One of the boy’s parents contacted gardaí, who contacted the archdiocese. More parents complained about Walsh’s activities in December 1992 and again in May 1993.

In August 1993, a Church tribunal in Dublin decided Walsh should be defrocked. The following October, he appealed this to Rome.

While that appeal was in train, he abused a boy at the child’s grandfather’s funeral in west Dublin. The boy’s mother contacted gardaí, alleging Walsh had also abused her son a year earlier.

In late 1994, there were media reports about this.

Early in 1995, Walsh admitted to gardaí that he abused two boys in the 1980s. He was charged in connection with his abuse of the boy at the funeral in 1994 and sentenced later to 12 months. It was the first of many such sentences.

Laicisation

In May 1995, the archdiocese provided gardaí with other complaints about Walsh.

Meanwhile, Rome decided on Walsh’s appeal. It rejected his laicisation, decided he should remain a priest but also spend 10 years in a monastery.

That November, Archbishop Connell petitioned Pope John Paul to dismiss Walsh from the priesthood.

In January 1996, Pope Benedict XVI, then cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, issued a decree confirming Walsh’s dismissal.

Acknowledging the role of the archbishop, subsequently cardinal, in this, the Murphy report said it was he who decided to have Walsh laicised “and he pursued this course in spite of the advice and, indeed, interference of his judicial vicar (Msgr Gerard Sheehy) and in spite of the Roman Rota (Appeal Court).”

In December 1997, Walsh was sentenced to consecutive terms of six years and four years for assaults on six boys. On appeal, this became six years. He was in prison until 2001 on that occasion.

He was sentenced to 16 years in that December 2010 case. In 2013 he pleaded guilty to two more cases and in 2015 was convicted by a jury in relation to the sexual abuse of a girl.

In July 2016 he was jailed for seven and half years for raping a boy three times, once with a crucifix.

0_1E1oilJlkkiMf8Fx

PAT SAYS:

I was in Clonliffe Seminary, Dublin for one year – 1972 – 1973.

As a very young man he was unremarkable. I am shocked at his depravity as he abused over 200 children.

To rape a child is unspeakably evil. To rape a child with a crucifix is not only depraved – its satanic.

There is no punishment short of the death penalty that  would be severe enough for the crimes Walsh committed. But we do not have the death penalty. 

By the looks of it he will be out of prison in 2022?

He will then be 68.

I don’t know how any doctor can say he will not reoffend. 

There has to be an argument for keeping people like Walsh locked away from children?

Oh! And it is a shame that it took the Archdiocese of Dublin 17 years to report Walsh to the proper authorities.

98 thoughts on “TONY WALSH – THE BIGGEST PRIEST ABUSER IN DUBLIN.

  1. Did we not read all this last week?
    What did a Fr Murray do that aused trainor to see him off.

    Like

    1. Father Murray is credibly a cused of abusing young girls in a Belfast parish. The PSNI want him back from Spain.

      Like

  2. As certain fools who post here would protest, Walsh was a HOLY priest!

    Like

    1. 3.16: What the he’l were you doing at this hour? We can guess….however, Magna, you were restrained. Must be the Holy Spirit. No one ever said that Tony Walsh was a holy priest. His history has been horrendous and his abuse monstrous. Let’s onky hope and pray that all survivors are strong in their lives and finding healing.

      Like

      1. No one ever said that Walsh was a holy priest? Fat chance. 😅

        Some, simply by dint of Walsh’s having been ordained, would have called him ‘holy’, regardless of his conduct. At least one of these fools posts here regularly.😆

        Like

    2. No sane person would ever describe Tony Walsh as “holy”.
      The only one(s) barking enough to do so would be your “composite”, girls.
      In fact, one of the personalities in your composite would be entirely capable of praising Walsh if one of you so decided.
      Your composite is so extreme as to be capable of absolutely anything in print on here. That’s why no one takes you even remotely seriously. 🙂

      Like

      1. 11:13

        No one takes Magna ‘even remotely seriously’?

        Is this why you bothered to draft a reply to Magna’s post, edit it, and then send it off…because you didn’t take it, er, ‘even remotely seriously’? HAH! HAH! HAH! HAH! 😅

        What was it Aristotle (or somesuch) said about stupid people and their defects? That we should take pleasure in them?

        And boy! Have we taken pleasure in YOUR defect!

        Thanks for giving us all a laugh, dear, on this fine, pre-Christmas Saturday morn.😆

        Like

    3. Fly on Th Wall 22nd Dec 2018 — 6:21 pm

      Wholy my whole hi
      It’s black and white. The law has spoken No let the pointy hat mob get the finger out and sort their gaffs hout but

      Like

  3. Those who rapped and tortured young men in Maynooth seminary, must face the Courts. There is a very recent case and it is related to an former Armagh Seminarian.

    Like

  4. A former Maynooth formator publicly and unashamedly told jokes regarding children, anal sex and faeces. Such words revealed the filthy, sick mind of said formator; and it is an absolute disgrace and travesty that such a warped individual was given such a pivotal role by the bishops.

    Like

    1. At the end of the final meeting following the seminary’s “investigation” into this open complaint, the then President dismissively referred to the above explicitly paedophiliac joke as “puerile” and stated it did not warrant any further investigation.
      There were three other witnesses to this outrageous comment; one of whom is now an ordained priest of the Dublin Archdiocese.
      Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was also informed of all the above in a personal one-to-one meeting.

      Like

      1. Is this a reference to Enda ‘time’ Cunningham

        Like

      2. No 12:54, this is not a reference to Enda Cunningham. The President was Msgr. Hugh Connolly and the Vice President was Fr. Michael Mullaney, both of whom were present at the final meeting whereat Msgr. Connolly made his stated derisory remark with regard to a comment, which given the state of the Church, should have elicited a much more serious response.

        Like

      3. Definition of “puerile”: “Childlessly silly and immature”.
        Msgr. Connolly by his own choice of wording used to describe such a disgusting comment indicated that this formator priest was not mature. Consequently, it beggars belief that this priest was thought suitable to act as a guide to seminarians under his care and tutelage.
        One of his required roles was to help seminarians attain to the acceptable levels of affective maturity expected of Catholic priests.

        Like

      4. This foul-mouthed formator priest also voyeuristically quizzed seminarians regarding their erections, wet dreams – and one seminarian was asked if he found the elderly people “attractive” whom he visited when performing his pastoral work in a nursing home.
        It is beyond comprehension that this priest was a formator in the National Seminary until very recently.

        Like

      5. Starting with Msgr. Ledwith and proceeding through Fr. Drury, formator priests and unsuitable ordinands, the Irish bishops have never taken any complaints seriously with regard to Maynooth.
        I hope the bishops have all read and meditated on Pope Francis’ annual message to the Roman Curia which he gave yesterday. Serious words indeed…

        Like

      6. Furthermore, said “formator” then vindictively compiled malignantly mendacious end-of-year reports, which had no relation with reality, against seminarian friends of the complainant.
        This priest is one of the main causes of the current implosion in real vocations to the Irish diocesan priesthood.

        Like

  5. Has Murray not yet returned from Spain to meet with the PSNI ? If not, that is outrageous. I don’t expect that he will listen to the Pope’s exhortation for abusing priests to turn themselves in and face the music. If he didn’t do it, then he has no reason to hide and no reason to fear. The fact that he seems not to have taken the opportunity to meet with the PSNI and give his side of the story and proclaim his innocence speaks volumes about him and what probably really went on. Oh, and I’m sure that on the side Treanor et al are probably quietly encouraging him to stay away so as not to cause them any trouble. And they probably also tipped him off to get out of the country (with his housekeeper ?!) when the PSNI were closing in. I’m only saying !

    Like

  6. Why does Roman Catholic priesthood attract such men? Men who appear to have not only psychopathic (Fr Brendan Smyth) or sociopathic tendencies, but deviant sexualities? The answer is obvious: there is something inherent in priesthood (something itself deviant) which appeals to these mindsets.
    The theology of priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church deifies men, presenting in their own and other minds scope for incredible power and prestige; the opportunity for social control and dominance (for manipulation and exploitation of others) is obvious. And this is, practically speaking, what has occurred for centuries in the Church, even though it hasn’t always manifested itself in sexual deviancy and criminality.
    Pope Francis, in his recent and annual address to the Roman Curia, gave absolutely no indication that he understood not just the magnitude of the faith-crisis in the Church through sexual abuse of minors by priests, but its facilitatory link to priesthood, the theological understanding of which is the antithesis of Jesus’ gospel command to his disciples to be servants of others rather than masters of them.
    Until this link is remedied, the sexual abuse of minors by priests will continue (but less openly and more subtly), because the scope for such (and other forms of) abuse will remain, not even acknowledged, let alone addressed.

    Like

    1. Rubbish Carta group. The priesthood also attracts exceptionally good men.
      It’s inevitable though that degenerates will be drawn to it for all sorts of reasons.
      Face it – some of you were attracted to it but didn’t make it. Thank God.

      Like

      1. 11.17: The problem ad infinitum is that Magna is crippled emotionally and spiritually. He does not have an inner moral capacity for decency, goodness, empathy or rational thought processes. His words are dangerous, his attitude is both abusive and racist. Better as Jesus said of such hateful, dangerous and viciously abusive people “that he was never born…”. Not my judgment but that of Jesus!

        Like

      2. 11:17
        No good person would be attracted to Roman Catholic priesthood, because his motive could only be self-interest and self-aggrandisement (sprinkled with a modicum of piety to make his motivation appear less worldly…at least to himself).
        The proof of what I say lies in what happens at ordination, when the ordinand willingly, even keenly, makes a vow to obey, er, a man, but not the God-man he would loudly protest he had given up everything (even the prospect of a wife 😅 and family) to serve.
        Roman Catholic priesthood is a charade, a self-deception. Were it truly what Christ commanded (the mark of servanthood), none of these self-styled ‘exceptionally good’ men would have given it a second thought. But truly Christ-centred individuals WOULD have been attracted to it…and the Church wouldn’t be in the moral sludge it now finds itself, courtesy of people like… Well, like you, really. 😆

        Like

    2. 10.31: Magna, do you not get tired of asking the same questions over and over and answering them? I could write your script blindfolded at this stage! If you weren’t so intolerant and disrespectful of others, your views and questions would be conducive to more intelligent and rational debate. Your nasty, hate filled invective is morally repugnant and must surely rank as hate inciting speech, which on other social media blogs would not be tolerated. Who do you think you are? Maybe you might allow the Christ child renew your heart this Christmas.

      Like

      1. Maybe I, as you put it, ‘ask the same questions over and over’ because people like you don’t want them addressed. Why? Because you know the answers would (or should) drive you from your psychological comfort zones and your spiritual malaise. In short, you would be invited to change, to convert more deeply, but spiritual lethargy and self-satisfaction and sloth make for more pleasing companions.

        Don’t they?😆

        Like

      2. 11.48: You express the feeling of many of us who look in on this blog. Why Pat doesn’t curtail this deviant and insidious “thing” makes him complicit, an enabler of Magna’s abuseive behaviour.

        Like

    3. 11:48
      😢

      Like

    4. The problem that the priesthood attracts such men is only part of the problem. Teaching, scouting and health care, for example, also attract these men.
      What makes the problem even worse is the systematic cover up of this abuse, and the fact that the institution claims to have a God-given mission and inspiration which gives it a notional power and entitles it to a deference beyond any earthly institution.
      This power and deference act as an even greater magnet to the dangerous, deviant, and just plain hopeless, who are given a free rein with limited consequences.
      I should also imagine that each new bishop, when he gets the key to the diocesan archives, either can’t face looking at the horrors contained, or can’t face doing anything about them because of the collapse of his diocese’s structure and public outcry. It is also very plain that he would not be supported from above.

      Like

    5. Mad Magna Caca at 10:31am
      Polly if that what you think, why did you try so hard to become a priest, it is only because you were dismissed as unsuitable that you have became embittered and full of hatred for anyone who made it. The tendencies you mention describes yourself to a tee, so we can only thank Almighty God you were got rid off.
      Evviva Maria!

      Like

      1. Bishop Pat, the language used by Bellarmine ‘mad’ and ‘caca’ is abusive. I have stopped using the words ‘whore’ and ‘whoremonger’ at your request. A quid oro quo, please. I am neither mad nor excrement.

        Like

      2. Yes, I am finding Bs language unacceptable. Will deal with it.

        Like

  7. Fr Murray is innocent until proven guilty so less of the kangaroo court on this filth of a blog. So many smart ass losers sitting behind their screens salivating and being judge and jury.

    Like

    1. I have spoken to the victims!

      Like

      1. Whether you have spoken to the victims or not is immaterial. He still remains in law innocent until proven otherwise by law and not by Pat Buckley.

        Like

      2. That is true. But he is credibly accused and refusing to come home and talk to the PSNI?

        Like

      3. 11.07: Aren’t you a wonderful man? The most holy, the most just, the most caring….. Your interference is self serving. Buckley, you should rectify your own moral and spirirual disorders before dishing out your crap in others.

        Like

    2. Patsy at 2:03 pm
      Patsy I am so sorry you find my language unacceptable don’t worry you won’t have to deal with it, I will. However I will expect you to do the same with your friend MC I find his language when referring to me unacceptable don’t you?
      Evviva Maria!

      Like

      1. Hi again. What’s this credibly accused stuff again. Innocent till guilty. If genuine alleged victims come forward send out the Bobbies. Thing is how high on civil authorities agenda is the call to sort out alleged and proven wrongdoing across the board in regard to church communities

        Like

    3. MC at 202pm

      I’m so sorry Polly that I upset you I forgot that you were not used to that type of language, I would not want to upset you for the world.
      Love and prayers B.
      Evviva Maria!

      Like

      1. Magna Carta and Bellarmine are equally boring but Buckley favours the Carta group because they hate the Catholic Church.

        Could you just try and hear something, Pat? Many of your readers fail to see the scintillating wisdom and wit you find in the Cartas. Many of us find them nasty, irrational, vitriolic, abusive and obtuse.

        Seriously – as well as the “Evviva Maria” eejit, please considerably curtail the Carta cartel too!

        Like

    4. If he’s so innocent, then why doesn’t he come back and talk to the PSNI and tell them, and then he can go back to his holiday villa. He has the presumption of innocent, I accept. But there are questions to be answered.

      Like

  8. I agree with 11.14 in that we shouldn’t hamper or interfere with a live police investigation. A case could become prejudiced by comments on a blog such as this. Let the police do their job. If it is credible that he refuses to return here to answer questions then a simple extradition warrant will fix that over time. All in all leave this to the police Sir.

    Like

    1. 11.43: Pat, sadly, doesn’t give tuppence about natural justice or hiw hus comments and this blog may prejudice any court pricess. All he’s concerned with is his self aggradizement. He is so deluded thinking that he alone is more moral and righteous than any other priest. He should look to his own heart. There are many, many better and more Christ like priests around than this Bishop would care to acknowledge. Moral and spirirual blindnes are very dangerous. I hope Pat reflects on the Christmas narrative with a more humble spirit than is evidenced here.

      Like

  9. 11 48: The great wise one has spoken. Listen up all you heathens in the priesthood! Poor sod, Magna, epitomizes the worst a human being can descend to in his vicious vitriol. Imagine had he escaped through into priesthood? Whatever about the horrendous morally criminal behaviour of some priests, this dusreputable reject (Magna) would have wreaked monumental and uncontrollable abuse on others. His behaviour on this blog simply through his words alone represents a potentially dangerous individual who would break and crush people apart mentally, spiritually, emotionally. Need I say anything else? The people of God were spared one who would be even more horrible as those he condemns.

    Like

    1. 12:06
      Psst! You can come down from the pulpit now. 😆

      Like

      1. 12.14: I don’t have a pulpit Mags dear – just stating the truth. Got yah……

        Like

    2. 12:06

      I love your salivating phrase ‘vicious vitriol’. For some reason (perhaps it’s approaching Yuletide), it calls to mind an exceptionally fruity Christmas cordial.

      Like

  10. Some posters seem to be more interested in Magna that the blog of the day.
    Pat,maybe you could stop posting the comments that criticise a poster.

    Like

    1. 12:19

      I did, at 10:31, try to raise serious debate on today’s subject-matter, but the customary loud, and self-defensive, replies attacking my person appeared unelicited.

      Some respondents (and I suspect that at least some of those attacking me today are priests) want the status quo in the Church, including wrong and harmful theological notions of priesthood, to remain. These are the very people who would lament and decry sexual abuses in the Church, but, bizzarely, don’t want to address those factors within which enable or facilitate it. Why? Because, when all is said and done, they are comfortable with the familiar, like little children with special blankets. Hence the rigour of their attacks against me.

      Like

      1. Thank you Magna, I also post during the nite, I don’t think it’s anyones business when I post.
        I’m a non sleeper .i don’t drink.im female…just saying.

        Like

      2. Magna @12:38;
        I had to smile to myself, when I read your reference to ‘little children with special blankets’. Technically, it’s known as a transitional object;- a bridge from the child’s inner world to the outer world. Years ago, I knew a Priest, who I thought, used his clerical collar as a transitional object or in such a manner.
        I also think a lot of people, particularly, traditionalist catholics and religious fundamentalists of any and every hue and persuasion, tend to use religion as a bridge
        ( psychologically transitional) or a defense against existential threat, insecurity and angst. Brings to mind John Lennon’s tune,
        ‘Whatever gets you through the night’.

        Like

    2. Isn’t it obvious that the reason they comment about Magna is either consciously to distract attention from the subject in hand, or subconsciously because they can’t face belonging to a body where child abuse is rampant?

      Like

      1. Can’t argue with that.☺

        Like

      2. @1:01; Or some purposelly scapegoating to divert attention from a topic close to home….too uncomfortable….too threatening and potentially draws too much attention to ‘some locals up to no good’.

        Like

    3. 2:15

      We’re peas in a pod, then: I, too, am a poor sleeper, and while away the ‘wee small hours’ by composing and posting. It beats staring at bedroom ceiling.

      Like

    4. KC @5:38, good points, as always.

      Trouble is, sometimes, transitional objects can become permanent psycholgical crutches. Try kicking one of these away, in legitimate challenge, and all hell can break loose. Ask a ‘traddie’ Catholic. Or a dyed-in-the-cassock Roman Catholic priest. 😕

      Like

      1. @9:05; Magna, very true…transitional objects are to be out grown.

        Like

  11. Dear God, I’ve only rediscovered this new blog. From just looking at it all I can read about, yet again, is that assho*e Magna Magna Magna. Why Pat allows him to dominate his blog raises quite a few suspicious questions – their relationship? I don’t buy this crap that they don’t know one another. Are they the same person? I’m sorry Pat but allowing this horrible person to take over your new blog is totally off putting to say the least.

    Like

    1. Actually, I’m quite a charmer, really.
      Beautiful, toothy smir…smile. Have been told I look extraordinarily boyish when I gri…smile.
      Your mum would want to mother me.😆

      Like

    2. So what is thedear god about?1 .09…actually I stopped reading your post after .

      Like

      1. Thanks Magna @ 2.18pm – sorry but when you post as anonymous you stick out like a sore thumb.

        Like

    3. MournemanMichael 22nd Dec 2018 — 2:20 pm

      MournemanMichael:
      I agree with the sentiment expressed by Anon @ 1:09. Not only with respect to Magna, but to several others, like Bella, where the blogsite seems to simply become a ping pong tit for tat puerile argument. And, frankly, it becomes boring and childish.
      Perhaps restricting any commentator to a maximum of two comments on any one day might be worth pursuing.
      MMM

      Like

      1. Or by refusing to publish comments that attack others?

        Like

      2. Very surprised, and disappointed, to hear you say this, MMM. No one is restricting anyone, including you, from posting whatever number of comments they choose.
        As Pat said on a previous blog: everyone is welcome to multi-comment should they wish to do so.

        Like

      3. 2.20: MMM – you and I and others have expressed our disgust before at the stupidity of Magna and a few others who engage in a tit for tat, childish, crass and offensive manner. Their comments (Magna’s particilarly), are boring, predictable and often abusive and vicious. Is this what Pat wants? Seems to me he doesn’t care about the crass and offensive nature of some. In fact he’s often the cheerleader.

        Like

    4. That wasn’t Magna, old boy (…girl. Whatever.)😆

      Like

      1. Patsy at 2:21pm

        So glad to hear you will stop the vicious attacks on my person by MC it is not before time. Thank You.
        Evviva Maria!

        Like

    5. 4:12
      Magna isn’t stupid.
      And if some of his comments are disliked by people like you, it’s because they cut too close to the bone.
      Isn’t it, ‘Father’?😆

      Like

  12. Tony Walsh is completely mad and very dangerous. He should never be released.

    Like

    1. Agreed. The man is at least a sociopath, and, most certainly, is a sexual predator and opportunist. He is (and I stress this) extremely dangerous to children.
      Should he lapse again (and he almost certainly will), it is possible that he could kill the child in order to prevent his return to prison.

      Like

      1. Who or why was he ordained ?
        .surely the formators must have known his mental capabilities.

        Like

      2. 2:03 & 2:14;
        Sociopaths are not ‘mad’as in having a delusional, psychotic or schizophrenic disorder. Sociopaths are lacking in capacity to empathize, no conscience, little or no insight, poor judgement and fail to learn from experience. They’re narcissistic, controlling and domineering. Basically, sociopaths don’t care how much suffering they inflict on others. They’re not irrational and are drawn to positions of power.
        Plenty of sociopaths in business, politics and various professions wielding power.

        Like

    2. 2:22

      Of course, I can’t definitely tell why he was ordained…but I can make an educated guess. Walsh was seen as a ‘man set apart from other men’, called to so-styled ‘Holy Orders’. And to a man so perceived, every pass in heaven and on earth is given, every excuse made. It is what happens when men are perceived as ontologically different from others, and deified to boot.

      Like

    3. KC, you misunderstood my use of the term ‘sociopath’.

      In answer to the commentor @ 2:03, I said that Walsh was at least sociopathic. In other words, ‘if he wasn’t mad, he at least had this disorder’.

      Psychiatrically, sociopathy is a mental-health condition, ofen referred to as ‘antisocial personality disorder’.

      Like

      1. Magna; Point taken.
        My post was also in reply to 2:03.
        Those with personality disorders are not necessarily ever psychotic or what’s popularly called ‘mad’; their behavior can be considered maladaptive, for various reasons, and can be a source of great distress to themselves and others. They are not necessarily ever psychiatrically ill.
        Those who perpetrate child sexual abuse are not ‘mad’ , are dangerous, and a serious risk to children’s safety. They may well have an associated personality disorder.
        In America sociopath and psychopath terminology were used interchangeably,
        back in the day.
        Now, anti-social personality terminology is used. Labels change!
        They’re much the same in terms of presenting features or characteristics.

        Like

      2. Tony puts on a very good show he fooled me completely.

        Like

    4. KC @ 6:42, would you agree that Walsh’s criminally abusive behaviour could suggest sociopathy? If he is sociopathic (along with paedophilic and ephebophilic), he is an extreme danger to children, not least because his opportunistic offending suggests a compulsion to assualt children.

      Like

      1. A very dangerous man who needs to stay locked up Magna.

        Like

      2. @8:25; Magna, I don’t know the particular individual in question, background, case history, details…etc.
        But, in general terms, in my opinion, very possible. The point I was trying to make was that those with anti-social personality disorders, or any other personality disorder or sociopaths /psychopaths are NOT irrational, as in what’s commonly called ‘mad’. Very simply and very crudely, it’s not what’s commonly called ‘madness’ but more a case of what’s commonly called ‘badness’; as in lack of empathy, psychosexual,psycho-emotionally arrested as well as morally arrested, as in lack of conscience, poor capacity for mature healthy relationships, poor boundaries,objectification /gratification (acting out)…etc.( moral evil).
        There are background factors or reasons or causes to such individuals personality/behavior/acting out…etc.
        Of course!
        Such people are very dangerous around children.
        Would you ask such a character to babysit!

        Like

    5. 8:55

      I emphatically agree.

      Like

  13. Totally agree with MMM at 2.20pm. Pat, for goodness sake this Magna character is dragging this new blog down. I am really getting tired and weary of his constant nasty comments and you seem to just turn a blind eye as you’ve done before. I can predict what your reply will be because your reply has become too predictable itself. Sadly, too often, the topic being discussed is hijacked by Magna and it ends up all becoming about ‘Magna’. I really don’t know why people bother anymore and why should they when our protestations about this vile man Magna continually get ignored. Pat will now do his usual and allow Magna to abuse and belittle my post.

    Like

    1. 3:26
      There really is no need for me to belittle your post: it does a good enough job on its own.
      Why don’t you try discussing the blog topic (as I have done @ 10:31) rather than having a juvenile go at me?
      Oh! And no need for you to wonder why contributors ‘bother’ anymore, since you yourself obviated the need for such by, er, bothering to comment.
      Ya just can’t keep away, can ya?😆

      Like

      1. There we go MC @ 4.47pm. I said Pat would allow Magna to respond to my post @ 3.26pm and sneer and be abusive towards me. How right I was but Pat himself never responded and why would he, his spokesman Magna spoke on his behalf. Had enough of this shit.

        Like

    2. Joe Lollipop @ 7:39, don’t be childish.

      Be a bloke, and stand yer ground.💂

      Like

  14. 2.21: I hope Pat you allow the Christ Child of Bethlehem (whose memory you no longer keep SACRED) to truly touch your heart. You seriously need renewal in Christ. Seriously.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The Christ of this blog is the Christ in the Temple hunting the then and current Pharisees.

      Like

  15. 4.40: Proof of your misguided sense of relevance. If you took your demonic hatred, vengance and vindictiveness out of your heart, then you might afford yourself the presumption of being Christ!!

    Like

  16. The problem with people entering ministry or religious life with sociopathic tendencies is that they are frequently formed by nice people with no conception of what people can be like, or else they will behave right and nobody will realise until too late, or they will even use the politics of their environment to their own advantage.
    For the disbelief thing, well, that has repeatedly been commented on here.
    I know of a priest in a religious order. He joined a community which was frankly at war with itself. The older generation were nice chaps who had all entered young and were naive. The man who had been major superior for years was after numbers not quality, so by the time the man I’m talking about entered, the community was divided majorly and all sorts of sexual shenanigans were going on among the younger ones.
    As a novice this man joined in with the younger more radical faction and was also sleeping with another novice. This was known to superiors but not checked. They also realised he had major problems but he was one of many unsuitable novices allowed to proceed to profession. Many have left but I don’t know of a novice ever being dismissed from that community.
    Shortly afterwards the community literally split down the middle as the previous superior walked out after not being re-elected. This man stayed with the older, weaker faction.
    He was subsequently made major superior after angling for the job for years.
    He has real problems, says whatever gets what he wants in the circumstances, is sexually unboundaried, and the authorities in his order know this. They know this because they have been told repeatedly by departing novices, and others. As early as his noviciate it was suggested he be dismissed, an unusual advice from a visitation.
    This man has got where he is by using all of the sociopath’s techniques and remains there by being frightening and continuing to use these techniques. The monster of one moment can seem the pious religious another.
    Lengthy comment, I’m afraid, but this is a classic case of how a sociopath gets into religion and stays there. They also do damage to others, but nobody believes it.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. A truly excellent comment.

      Very helpful and illuminating.

      Like

    2. Spot on 7:06. There are many sociopaths in collars who have fooled people hook, line and sinker.

      Like

    3. This sounds like an accurate description of an OSB abbot in England who seems to have terrified/charmed his superiors in the Order for decades. Needless to say, he has destroyed the vocations of many decent men – but OSB seems not to care about that.

      Like

    4. @7:06;
      Great comment and example!

      Like

  17. @9:17;
    Bro; there are plenty of such characters in religious life AND in the secular world.

    Like

  18. Magna,
    You were on a roll today.
    Keep rockin’ an a rollin!

    Like

    1. Thsnks, bud.👍

      Like

    2. Kool Kat is another cover name for Magna. Do you think we are fools?

      Like

      1. @ 12:54;
        Fools no.
        Paranoid ideation?
        Most definitely!

        Like

  19. @; 10:05;
    I failed to include very manipulative.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close