FRANCIS THANKS MEDIA FOR EXPOSING CHURCH PREDATORS

 

Pope Francis offered his “heartfelt thanks” in a lengthy speech on Friday to members of the media who helped expose sexual abusers within the ranks of the Catholic clergy.
In his yearly address to members of the Roman Curia, the pope publicly thanked “those media professionals who were honest and objective and sought to unmask these predators and to make their victims’ voices heard.”
“Even if it were to involve a single case of abuse (something itself monstrous), the Church asks that people not be silent but bring it objectively to light, since the greater scandal in this matter is that of cloaking the truth,” Francis said.
The pope himself has come under fire in recent months for a lack of transparency regarding his own conduct in the case of disgraced former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, accused of serial homosexual abuse of seminarians, priests, and laypersons for decades.
In late August, the former papal nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, accused the pope of having rehabilitated McCarrick despite knowing of his abuse.
Cardinal McCarrick enjoyed a “long friendship with Cardinal Bergoglio” and played an “important part” in his recent election, the archbishop claimed in an 11-page affidavit, which led the pope to continue using McCarrick as a trusted aide in the naming of American bishops even after learning of his misdeeds.
“McCarrick was part of a network of bishops promoting homosexuality who exploiting their favor with Pope Francis manipulated episcopal appointments so as to protect themselves from justice and to strengthen the homosexual network in the hierarchy and in the Church at large,” Viganò wrote.
When journalists questioned him about the truth of these and other allegations, the pope refused to answer and has maintained his silence ever since while lashing out at his accuser as an agent of Satan because of his attempts to reveals others’ wrongdoing.
“It is true, we are all sinners, we bishops,” the pope said in September, but the Great Accuser “seeks to unveil sins so that they may be seen, to scandalize the people.”
In his address Friday, Francis praised the “heroic example” of the martyrs and countless good Samaritans but said that their witness cannot “make us overlook the counter-witness and the scandal given by some sons and ministers of the Church.”
He said:
The Church has for some time been firmly committed to eliminating the evil of abuse, which cries for vengeance to the Lord, to the God who is always mindful of the suffering experienced by many minors because of clerics and consecrated persons: abuses of power and conscience and sexual abuse.
Comparing abusive priests to King David, the pope said that these men “perform abominable acts yet continue to exercise their ministry as if nothing had happened. They have no fear of God or his judgement, but only of being found out and unmasked.”
“Today too, there are many Davids who, without batting an eye, enter into the web of corruption and betray God, his commandments, their own vocation, the Church, the people of God and the trust of little ones and their families,” he said. “Often behind their boundless amiability, impeccable activity and angelic faces, they shamelessly conceal a vicious wolf ready to devour innocent souls.”
The pope also reiterated the commitment of the Church to root out the evil of sexual abuse.
“Let it be clear that before these abominations the Church will spare no effort to do all that is necessary to bring to justice whosoever has committed such crimes. The Church will never seek to hush up or not take seriously any case,” said the pope.
“To those who abuse minors I would say this: convert and hand yourself over to human justice, and prepare for divine justice,” he said.
“Remember the words of Christ: ‘Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea,’” he said.

96 thoughts on “FRANCIS THANKS MEDIA FOR EXPOSING CHURCH PREDATORS

  1. Fly on Th Wall 27th Dec 2018 — 8:40 am

    Not slot to say hi Thanks is good what about action. The diehards speak of holy mother church. Now holy father Pope has spoken So get on with the clean up hi

    Like

    1. 8 40: Would you stop your nonsensical jargon. Learn to write coherently and intelligently. You are irritating.

      Like

      1. 9:58
        You’re easily irritated! 😣

        Like

      2. 9.58 for fs give over
        Many people posting here are of different ethnicities and if not they prob didn’t have the free education that priests and seminarians are privileged to get from the hard working Irish gullible.

        Like

    2. I agree hi fly; …get on with the clean up,those in authority in the church.

      Like

  2. I doubt if Francesco will be thanking the secular legal authorities in various countries that are now on the case, and determined to bring cases to justice, not just the perpetrators, but also those who have covered up for them, colluded, hidden, lied, been economical with the truth…… Why do you think +Vinny is so much a shadow of his old self, a man brought low ? Because he has realised that his seemingly ‘sensible and prudent’ decisions of the past were in fact frustration of the course of justice, and that he is accountable for that, not just morally, but also legally. Bishops will find themselves in the dock, perhaps even in prison, for what they have done to quietly facilitate this evil in the Church – all to protect themselves, their power and authority, the reputation of the Church, and for the excuse of not scandalising the faithful. Well, much of that stands in contradiction to justice. For that they will have to answer. The Church has proven itself incapable of policing itself and its priests. The secular authorities are going to have to take over. No longer will they defer to these self-serving bishops and priests. It’s about time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. 8:42; Good comment.
      It’s a ticking time bomb. It’s a matter of the clock running down.
      Pope Francis seems to be affirming your work Bishop Pat.

      Like

      1. Yes he does. This blog is also media.

        Like

  3. Pat, you have spoken for a ling number of years re: the corruption in the Church. I know you seem to call all priests “ci-abusers” or “enablers” which us an injustice. That aside you are right to constantly monitor all happenings, decisions and promises. I do that in my own life. I condemn all abuse and have done so. My voice has been heard and I will continue to do so. Despite the awful shame I feel for the monstrous failings – in some cases – criminal – I get on with my work and responsibilities. Sometimes I feel affirmed in my efforts, other times I wonder about it all. Yet, because I have a deep conviction about priesthood in my life and because if deep faith, I know I can still do the right, just and acceptable thing in my own ministry for the people in the parish where I work. I see the parush as thecspecial.vibeyard given to my care a ling with wonderfully good parishioners. Tigether we trybto make it a very caring, Christian community. After that we ensure the needs if vulnerable people are looked after sensitively and caringly. But as always, I must first change, renew and transform my life more into Christ. Otherwise I am a noisy gong…

    Like

    1. I understand your points.

      But to be really effective you have to express your views in a very public way – in the media. You could start by putting your name to your comments here???

      Like

      1. I don’t need lecturing about moral right or wrong Pat! I’m heard. Don’t worry….

        Like

      2. I am glad you are heard. Were we to know your name would we then know you are heard?

        Like

      3. Very good point, Pat. To post here as anonymous is to be afraid of the consequences, as I am. If that poster is a leader in a parish and claims to be speaking out, then why is he afraid to post his name here?

        Like

    2. 10:09
      I don’t believe one self-pitying, self-promoting word you say.
      You are a priest freely vowed to obey the institutional Church (and to tacitly accept, and cover up, all of its moral corruption) rather than Christ.
      YOU are part of the problem; you cannot also be part of the solution.

      Like

      1. 10 40: Magna, I couldn’t give a damn what you say. You never have anything worthwhile to say about any priest. You delight only in judgment and condemnation. Your inability to accept the rational, decent, sensible and intelligent response of priests is pitiable and a reflection on your own debased, crass and ignorant life. Get over your rejection experience and stop always being so nasty and hateful. It must gall and and hurt you deeply that our churches were full to capacity for Christmas, that people were enormously grateful for our ministry and generous to us in so many ways. I thank God for the GIFT of priesthood (denied to some). Now Magna – sneak on back under you rock….your efforts on Christmas Day to appear compassionate dismantled very quickly. I’m afraid your “principles”, if any, are built on sand…Praise God for his mercy and goodness. You should try it.

        Like

      2. 3.13: To answer your question – I don’t need to print my name. I am doing what everyone does on this blog – using “anonymity”. Nothing wrong with that. It doesn’t invalidate our arguments.

        Like

    3. 10:09
      A balanced, reasonable and honest comment, for the most part.
      I can only be true to me (authentic), on all levels, (true to the gospel) regardless of how others chose to live, or no matter what their position is, in whatever context.
      Co- abuse(rs) can be tacit or explicit.

      Like

    4. 11:29

      Oh, I already knew you wouldn’t care about my opinion; this is the arrogance, and self-defensiveness, that comes from vowing to serve such a morally corrupt institution as the Roman Catholic Church. You don’t care about my opinion because you are long-wedded to this darkness.

      Oh! And I wasn’t rejected from seminary. Sorry to disappoint you over this.

      No, it doesn’t hurt me, or gall me, that some (but not the majority of) Catholics attended Mass over Christmas; it does concern me, though, that these poor people (the sheep) continue to be fooled by sponging charlatans like you. They do say that the proof of pudding is in its eating, and it will, sadly, take the experience of your REAL loyalty (to the institutional Church rather than Christ) to convince these people that you, and your kind, will let them down at the drop of a hat, and without flicker of conscience, should your bishop issue an instruction that goes against your congregation’s interest, but is, nevertheless, in the interest of the institutional Church. (What’s an example? Why, covering up child-sexual abuse, of course!)

      As for Roman Catholic priesthood’s being a gift, I agree: it is a gift…to priests alone. Why would any reasonable person even consider it a gift to a congregation? What? A sponging, indolent priest who lords it over his congregation while thinking himself special, and ontologically superior to mere lay folk (your description of priesthood as ‘gift’ implies all of this), should, by congregants (some of whom receive from foodbanks) consider this a gift? Grow up, for heaven’s sake!

      By the way priest, your referring to me as living under a rock hardly does you, and the priesthood, credit; it shows, if anything, that YOUR priesthood is more moral white elephant than gift. 😆

      Like

      1. 1.57: Proof yet again of your deluded existence, arrogance, craziness and utterly poisoned mind. You possibly cannot love anyone. How could you? Your only interaction with people is through this blog. Rock on Magna. What are you drinking tonight, creep?

        Like

      2. 1.57: Magna, how often do I need to reassure you that I am very fulfilled in priesthood – and that I comprehend its significance and relevance. I never had doubts about being a sharer in Christ’s priesthood. I’m sorry your behaviour in seminary ended your dreams but on reflection, that was a God inspired decision. If you stopped pouring out such nasty, sickeningly abusive words, you might receive more favourable responses, even a date!! Words used by you in condemning others can come from only one place – a dysfunctionality within. Try to at least express yourself with a modicum of self respect.

        Like

    5. 7:11
      I’ve hurt you, haven’t I?

      Like

      1. 8.52: Hurt me – now that comes easy to you but I’m immune to your attempts to destroy my confidence. God is with me… somehow, you’re the one that is deeply wounded, all self inflicted.

        Like

    6. 7:20

      I’ve hurt you, too, haven’t I, by telling the truth about Roman Catholic priesthood? I don’t MEAN to hurt anyone, but I must tell the truth, mustn’t I?😆

      As for my experience of seminary (and subsequently!), boy, would you be surprised! You ALL would!!😅

      Like

  4. Poor Pope Francis! The guy couldn’t be more confused had he a form of dementia. (Perhaps he has but, like the slabbering Polish fathead, does not want to concede papal power.)

    Francis thanks the media for exposing the huge feet of clay in his church, but then goes on to caution, implicitly, against such exposure, since behind it all is Satan, the ‘Great Accuser’. 😅

    C’mon, Francie boy: make up your confused Latino mind. Is it good to expose the moral filth in your lying church, or not? You do realise that your very argument (about the great eschatological bogeyman, Satan) is one of the arguments your filty, corrupt, and lying confreres used for generations, ‘for the good of the Church’. You, Francie boyo, are actually endorsing what those confreres did, and for the reasons they did it. You silly, mixed up Latino!😆

    Like

  5. I don’t think we have yet fully come to appreciate the seriousness – even existential – of the present crisis in the Church. In years to come people will look back and see this as a seminal moment in the Church’s history. It has blown apart the integrity of the Church and the way in which people give the Church their loyalty and support. In one way that is good. It opens the way for a new future and a new relationship between the hierarchy and the faithful, which means that the hierarchy needs to be dismantled and a new Church developed.

    There is a great deal of transference of responsibility and blame – on to the Devil, on to homosexual clergy, on to the wicked media etc. etc. Mostly in order to absolve those on whose watch this monstrous betrayal took place – in particular the bishops. I don’t think that thinking Catholics will be fooled by that and most certainly secular authorities are not fooled by it and will increasingly act on bringing those perpetrators and enablers to justice.

    But, that does not let the rest of us off the hook. We should learn from history. I look back to Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. When 1945 came about and the true horror of Nazi Germany became clearer, many Germans claimed that they knew nothing about this. The fact is, they did know what was going on in their name, but we cowered in to submission and passive collusion – not asking questions, not inquiring too much. Yes, there were dangers in doing so. Very few were prepared to face those dangers. Some martyrs did. But they knew what was happening, and their claim that all this happened without them does not ring true. It is the same with us, the Church. We all knew long ago that priests could be dodgy, but we were cowered in to not asking the awkward questions. The bishops did a good job in reassuring us : Father will never be able to do this again, we are moving him, he is going to a monastery – then only to reappear and reoffend in another parish in another diocese or country. But, we knew that stuff was going on and did little or nothing. So, we are somewhat complicit also. Just like the Germans.

    I feel ashamed of the Church that has been a part of my life forever. I have come to realise the rottenness at its heart, and the way in which powerful people have used the Church for their own advancement and comfort. I have come to despise the episcopal and priestly caste, which lives in isolation to people and reality, ensuring that they are well protected, and at the same time selling us a narrative of their lives that for the most part was simply a lie. I feel that I have been fooled and lied to, and I should have been more aware and more on the ball. I let them get away with it for so long. But, no longer. It is right that they are being called to account, whether they be active perpetrators or complicit enablers of abuse and protection of the abuser. The latter, while not as guilty in law as the former, should have known better because they were the leaders of the Church. That to me compounds their complicity and their guilt. Let them hang their heads in shame.

    Like

    1. I reject your argument entirely! I most certainly did not know about abusing priests and their being moved to other parishes, where most of them, perhaps all, reoffended. By nature of these crimes and its oh-so-careful concealment from the vast majority of Catholics, your claim that we all, including the laity, colluded in this criminality is utterly preposterous and totally untrue.

      How dare you!

      Like

      1. 12:21;
        The overwhelming majority of laity didn’t know, MC.
        A few lay professionals, (who knows how many) employed by the church, did know.
        That’s clear from various reports into clerical CSA. I’m kinda assuming the comment at 11:40 is made by a priest referring to his colleagues. Maybe the poster can clarify if so?

        Like

      2. “Magna Carta”, you claimed in the past to have known about a fellow seminarian who admitted to you he was attracted to children when he was with you in the seminary.
        Or was that a different member of your “composite”?
        Are you monitoring this guy today? Have you kept tabs on him over the years to make sure he didn’t act out his perversion? Was he ordained?
        You’re probably going to tell us that you don’t “remember” his name now, aren’t you?
        You guys need to keep track of each other. There’s an old saying – you need a good memory to be a good liar. Seems you also need a good memory to be a composite like you lot?
        You were clerics. We don’t believe your self-righteous, self-serving, self-exculpatory lies and cant. Get off your fecking high horse.
        In fact, NOTHING you say can, in any way, be taken at face value because no one has any way of knowing out of which of your mouths the “composite” is speaking at any given time!!

        Like

      3. MC at 12:21

        Polly I can’t believe it. a post by you which I agree with. Like you I most certainly never knew about abusing priests and them being moved to other arishes

        Like

      4. MC at 12:21
        Polly I never believed I would ever agree with you but you are right in this post. Like you I most certainly did not know about abusing priests and them being moved to other parishes where they could reoffend. I would never have colluded in anything like this. I would have called in the guards immediately and insisted that the ecclesiastical authorities acted to remove these offenders from any contact with children ever again.
        Evviva Maria!

        Like

    2. 11:40;
      An excellent post.
      I was thinking along similar lines, myself, recently, regarding the parallel to Nazi Germany and the holocaust.(Dissimilar in magnitude but comparable dynamics).
      Dr. Victor Frankl came to the conclusion the holocaust was a result of the ‘individual lie’ (moral evil), becoming millions of lies, resulting in millions of deaths. ‘Whoever is not with me is against me.’ Luke 11:23.
      We can’t assume the hierarchy or clergy are necessarily with Him ( Christ), by virtue of wearing a clerical collar.

      Like

      1. 1.01: Excellent comment. Spoken intelligently and so accurately. Hope that maggie thing takes note!

        Like

    3. KC @ 12:21
      No, that poster was not referring just to priest colleagues; in fact, the poster did not say or suggest that he (Or she? No argument, obviously, if ‘she’.) was a priest.
      I believe the poster was referring to the entire Church: ‘We all knew long ago that priests could be dodgy.’

      Like

      1. MC@1:17;
        I realize it, and take your points. The post has the fingerprints of a priest all over it! How would most of the laity have known, or be told, for example, monasteries were used to incarcerate errant priests!
        We all didn’t know but all of the clergy did know, or must have known, to a greater or lesser extent. (Priests are supposed to go to the sacrament of penance or reconciliation as well as the laity.)
        If clergy to this blog start being honest (anonymously) and sign their posts as a priest,we’d be making a little progress, even if it’s on this blog!

        Like

    4. 1:01

      What lies has Magna told? Name them. 😆

      As for the seminarian with a sexual predilection for children, his name is not forgotten and he IS being monitored. And yes, he was ordained. There has been found absolutely nothing that could, in any way, incriminate the man for sexual abuse of children.

      What you, and others, need to have spelled out is that this guy, while a seminarian, had NOT acted on his predilection, in any shape or form. Nor is there ANY evidence that he has since. In so far as it is humanly possible to tell, he is a good and prayerful priest, obedient to all the moral doctrines of his church. 😆

      Like

      1. Magna Carta, I don’t believe a word you say because, in the past, you have said the opposite – that you had no obligation to monitor this seminarian.

        You are making this up as you go along! Arguing with you is like trying catch a hold of Mercury in any case because you have more personae than Gerasene demoniac.

        Like

    5. 4:25

      ‘That maggie thing’ was well brought up and so takes note of every comment on the blog, even very silly ones.

      Come to think of it ‘that maggie thing’ takes especial note of very silly comments, like that at 1:01. 😆

      Like

    6. Bella @ 7:43 & 8:25
      Yes, we do agree on this. I had NO idea, however incredulous this may seem.

      Like

    7. 8:52
      Personally, I have no such obligation, since I live nowhere near the guy.
      Nevertheless, he IS being monitored.

      Like

  6. 11 29
    I typed you were a pompous asshole and after reading 11.29 .i now reaffirm you certainly are a pompous asshole.
    What hateful typing against another poster
    Your jealousy is so obvious.
    I’ve never ever see any priest involve himself with the vulnerable…bet you are still holed up at mammies wining and dining…get a grip and get out there and leave the typing to us observers who have been there , done that and actually wore the tee shirt.

    Like

    1. 1.03: Sorry to disappoint your expectations. Jealousy is not in my genes. You must be a Magna bandwagonner of hate language. If for a moment you feel his (Magna) language of hate is acceptable, then you should go and lie with him under his rock. I work with many vulnerable people. Tough luck if you don’t get out often enough. Your response is puerile and imbicilic. What age are you?? That of a schoolyard bully! Go busy yourself with something useful. I thank God again for the GIFT of priesthood and for the immense fulfilment I have.

      Like

      1. 1:47
        Now there you go again! Referring to Magna as living under a rock. You’re a very strange priest morally speaking, aren’t you? Er, but then again, perhaps not…for such abusive, unchristian conduct is precisely what we’ve come to expect from Roman Catholic priests.
        Yes, our moral expectations of these financial spongers is very low. (Just as well, really. For few, if any of them, could clear even a moderstely high moral bar.😆)

        Like

      2. 1.47 you are not a real priest, are you? ‘ jealousy is not in my genes’ really? By virtue of original sin surely jealousy is in all of our genes. You certainly are not displaying the demeanor of a true priest whoever you are?

        Like

    2. 1.03: Another disgruntled ex priest? Thought so. I have every fulfilment in my life still as a priest, Thank God. I wouldn’t be coloured by your vindictive prose. And take the blinkers from your eyes just to enable you to see more clearly.

      Like

      1. 3 .08
        I not a priest, I’m a woman with many many life experiences .
        Sorry if you thought that only men had the right to post here.

        Like

    3. 1.03: Good for you to have worn the tee shirt! May God bless all who continue to wear the tee shirt and give them strength to face their daily challenges. May he protect them from vicious begrudgers. Some stay, others leave.

      Like

    4. 1:47
      Jealousy is not in your genes? Really, priest?
      Ack, silly me! I suppose this is what comes of being ontologically different, by dint of priestly ordination😅, to mere existential and moral plebs, like the laity.
      Tell me, priest: is telling lies not in your genes either, given your obvious superiority?
      I’ll tell you what really isn’t in your genes: common sense, never mind intelligence. 😕

      Like

  7. I am the victim of a Catholic priest who was jailed for his crimes against me and others.

    I don’t buy this Magna Carta bloke’s condemnations of all priests and false assertions that they are all bad. I have known and still know many good priests.

    Some of them were very supportive of me in bringing my perpetrator to justice. They were and are kind and helpful. The stuff Magna Carta is saying, I have to say, is completely off the wall. It is wildly irrational and seems driven by a deep hatred which can never be helpful in bringing peace, healing and resolution to people like me.

    I think it would be good if bishops who were negligent about abusers were held to account criminally. If a few bishops were also jailed it might cure them all, once and for all, of their not “getting it”.

    Everyone should be equally accountable if they do wrong or cover it up. At the same time, demonising everyone in the priesthood and among the bishops is totally wrong and serves no purpose towards healing and making the Church truly safe as it should be.

    Hatred can never lead to healing.

    Like

    1. Yes, let’s see a bishop jailed for collusion, frustrating the course of justice etc……pour encourager les autres !

      Then new bishops might get it and realise they are not above the law, even if their intention is to protect the reputation of the Church and not give cause for scandal.

      Like

    2. If what you say is true, then those priests acted against their vow of obedience to a mere man rather than the man-god. You were fortunate…if you statement about certain priests is true.
      What you don’t understsnd (and appear not to want to) is that the vow of obedience is idolatrous and evil, and it does not leave priests free to follow Christ…without suffering serious consequences imposed by their bishops.

      Like

      1. Not true Magna Carta at 2:15pm. Twisted reasoning on your part but it is pointless arguing with you as you are malicious and irrational. So Bye now.

        Like

    3. 8:56
      What isn’t true about my post?
      Too cowardly t’ say?😆

      Like

      1. Yeah whatever Maggie 🤪

        Like

  8. It has been said before, there is no point in arguing with “Magna Carta”. He/she/they will only be more extremist and unreasonable in what they/he/she respond with. They do this because of anonymity, because there is no way of really engaging humanly with MC – all hot air. Don’t waste your batteries on MC. There are some anonymous posters you can do business with but not MC – totally pointless exercise.

    Like

    1. Magna is amenable to reasoned and reasonable argument.
      But he has yet to hear any.😆

      Like

      1. 2.17: Proof of your deep delusional state Mags. You do not have the capacity to listen to others, to respect their opinion. Your arrogance is monstrous. Your hatred, morally reprehensible.

        Like

    2. 2:57
      I should have thought that it was your arrogance that was ‘monstrous’, given your bizarre statement that debating me was ‘a totally pointless exercise’. How do you know? Have you tried? If you have, then perhaps I just made better arguments.
      Or you got cold feet. 😆

      Like

  9. Pat, I am finding the pope’s words confusing again. One minute he is cursing those looking for justice, now he’s praising them. Tomorrow? I’m not sure who he is anymore, the same with all his heady supporters. Is he deliberately sending out mixed messages or is he really confused. I honestly don’t know. Is he on the run because of the legalities in the US and Australia. Something is not adding up.

    Like

    1. 2:05
      You are correct that ‘something is not adding up’ where Pope Francis is concerned. For a start, he is not notably intelligent, handy for curial aficianados who want to pull his strings.
      If you listen to Francis in interview, it does not take long to find out that he is muddled and meanders, and is rarely clear in his words. I suspect he may have a form of dementia. However, the Vatican, in characteristic cover-up mode, will keep this as quiet as it can.

      Like

  10. The pope should also be thanking you, Bp Pat, for exposing spendthrift bishops and other wasters, including priestly exhibitionists and trainee-whores. Not that it does the slightest good.

    Like

  11. Magna, would it be fair to say that a clergyman could take a bow of obedience to a bishop as long as he could in conscience refuse to obey a command to sin or cover up sin? Thanks

    Like

    1. 3:18

      Provided the wording of the vow, and the ordinand’s understaning of it, synced.

      Sadly, there is no such provision in these vows: bishops, including popes, who ordain men to the priesthood expect absolute, and unqualified, loyalty from these priests. Why? Because there is still the preposterous belief among bishops that when they speak, God approves.

      Ask Bishop Buckley: this is, more or less, what he was told by Cahal Daly. And it is all based on what that presumptuously arrogant twerp, Irenaeus, said of Roman Catholic bishops in the 2nd century.

      But you do make a very good point. It is just that I cannot envisage any such bishop accepting an ordinand’s vow to obey him, ‘provided it does not conflict with my conscience’. There wouldn’t be an ordination in this circumstance.

      Like

      1. When I ordain I always offer to leave the obedience clause out. The one who insisted on having it left in refused to when I called that card in 🙂

        Like

      2. Thank you, Magna

        Like

    2. Bishop Pat @ 5:59
      Is the person still in ministry?
      It must have been embarrassing for him or her.
      I like that you offer to leave out that evil vow.

      Like

      1. Yes still in ministry. I prefer to leave it out and encourage the person to obey God and their conscience.

        Like

      2. PS Of course I am a bishop with no power – which is good for me. Power tends to corrupt and zbsolute power corrupts absolutely.

        Like

    3. Bishop Pat @ 6:25

      Oh, you have the power of moral principle, to a degree Roman Catholic priests couldn’t even aspire to (given their vapid, unholy vow to obey a man rather than the God-man).

      Don’t understate yourself.☺

      Like

    4. This is exactly what happens and MC is being deliberately misleading.

      A priests vow of obedience absolutely does not mean that he has to obey something that is contrary to God’s Law or against his own conscience.

      It simply means that he will obey the bishop in the matter of assignments and so on. It DOES NOT mean that he is promising to cover up child abuse.

      That is a monstrous and obscene falsification of how the Church truly understands the vow, which this Magna Carta thing whatever it is, insists on repeating ad nauseam out of stubborn obnoxiousness and sheer hatred.

      Both bishop and priest are vowed to serve Christ. If they act in a way that breaks God’s Laws they are both betraying Christ and breaking their vows.

      If a bishop tries to get a priest to be complicit with him in cover up of sin and crime, the priest is free from his vow of obedience which is overriden by his greater obligation to the truth.

      MC attempt to distort this reality is utterly unreasonable and driven by malevolence.

      Like

      1. 8.46: Excellent comment. Clear and incisive. Yes, Magna is a rather a mendacious person. He enjoys distorting facts and truths to deliberately offend. His is a world devoid of purpose and fulfilment. He lives in a dishevelled world. It’s not possible to lack real “self insight” if you are in purposeful and significant communion with others. In his small world one thing matters to Magna – his reflection in the mirror. From this dark, existentially bleak world of his flows an inability to communicate rationally and respectfully with others, his every word almost expressing great hatred of others, a hatred rooted in self loathing! (Psychological transference). I’m certain he has the potential to engage civilly and reasonably. It’s incomprehensible that Magna only engages in destructive, offensive ways.

        Like

      2. Really, you arsehole @ 8:46? So why did Cardinal Sean Brady, and his priestly co- conspirators, seek to cover up, on the orders of their bishop, the sexual abuse of at least two young boys by that paragon of unholiness, Fr Brendan Smith?

        Like

      3. 8.46 if what you say is true, why did a well talked about retired archbishop not stand up as soon as he discovered that he was used as part of a cover up?

        Like

  12. By the way, who was the priest caught in a toilet menage a trois (or more !) in NI recently ? That seems to have gone quiet. I suppose he will be sent away for a while and then given a little parish somewhere in the country where there are no public toilets !

    Like

    1. Yes, sent away on an all-expenses-paid holiday (I meant, of course, ‘treatment’) by…the sheep. Baaaaaaa!🐑

      Can you envisage a Roman Catholic bishop doing the same for a lay person? Like hell you can! The laity, even though donations come from them, are ontologically inferior and, therefore, not worth the expenditure. Priests, being special and irreplaceable, are worth every tens of thousands of pounds sterling spent on their cover-up. (I meant, of course, ‘treatment’.😆)

      Like

      1. 6.12: Magna, thanks for your donations over the years for my salary. Appteciate your kindness. Keep on giving. I need to go on an exotic holiday……honestly.

        Like

    2. He was, apparently given a caution and is not to be charged – police source.

      Like

      1. A police caution still has consequences. It will appear on a CRB check, which will have consequences. For example, if there is a school in his parish. Other than that, if he is just left to carry on merrily, then it’s another case of a bishop colluding in the dysfunction of a priest, with all the consequences that has for the people, the Church, and the future. So, let us hope that his bishop is being proactive. Maybe even sack him and throw him out ? As would happen in any other walk of life. But, as previous commentators have said, he will probably have a nice little paid for holiday / treatment in the USA and then quietly be reinstated somewhere. By the way, what has happened to Rory, talking of a nice little paid for time-out ? Or has he found himself some pleasant sunshine posting ?

        Like

      2. Do you think he was treated this way because he’s a priest? Was this fair…to his congregation?
        And presumably the others were treated with equal leniency?
        He should, in my opinion, be laicaised…IF this is not his first offence.
        Some might argue that he should be dismissed for sheer recklessness and lousy judgement. I mean ‘going cottaging when he should have known that the place might be under police surveillance’. How stupid is this?
        He seems to have very strong, and uncontrollable, urges if he acts out so reckkessly.
        He’ll probably do this kind of thing again.

        Like

    3. Buckley, you have a lot of power indeed through this blog.

      You exercised your power over David Dysky and another seminarian not so long ago without any thought or concern for the consequences of your actions.

      You threw them to the wolves to be publicly dissected by every vulture that roosts in your blog.

      On what evidence did you publicly expose them? What proof had you – REAL VERIFIABLE PROOF – to justify them being public picked apart here by your vultures?

      If it is true that they suffered the trauma you have claimed (and there is absolutely no proof of it), their exposure on your blog will have further injured and traumatised them.

      Who told you that what you claimed happened to them did in fact happen? An anonymous phone call or email? You were asked that question and you refused to answer. You talked about “breaking eggs” – a sinister and telling analogy.

      So don’t try and tell us you have no power. You have a lot of power and you are as much capable of abusing/misusing it as those you decry.

      Like

      1. David Dysky? Oh, I must have missed that blog. Was he whordained?

        Like

    4. Salary, priest? Nah! A salary is paid for work. And you guys don’t know the meaning of the word.😆

      Just sayin’, like.😆😆

      (Mind you, I have given large sums of money to certain priests for whom I had deep respect…as persons, not as priests, now. 😕 I can’t stomach Roman Catholic priests; did I ever tell you? Not a lot of people know this.😆😆😆)

      Like

    5. They’re quite few and far between in Clogherhead. But he’ll have a car paid for by parishioners.
      https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=clogherhead+public+toilets&npsic=0&rflfq=1&rlha=0&rllag=53782368,-6170998,22998&tbm=lcl&ved=2ahUKEwj20OXN9sDfAhUNLBoKHYPrCKkQtgN6BAgAEAQ&tbs=lrf:!2m1!1e2!2m1!1e3!3sIAE,lf:1,lf_ui:2&rldoc=1#rlfi=hd:;si:;mv:!1m2!1d54.180303389534025!2d-5.009125249218755!2m2!1d53.39989505803133!2d-7.607391850781255!4m2!1d53.79191409608577!2d-6.308258550000005!5i9

      Like

  13. 5:15. U are right. It doesn’t invalidate your argument but would you face consequences from your diocese if you did publish your name? Would you be sanctioned by your bishop?

    Like

    1. 6:46;
      In my opinion, a core problem in this entire cover up in the church world wide, regardless of promises to Bishops or the illusory/ delusory notion that God speaks through the Bishop; is Priesthood is a fraternity, a brotherhood.
      The brotherhood looks after the brothers. That’s the case with all brotherhoods! Criticism of the brotherhood is disloyalty to the fraternity.

      Like

      1. Good, incisive analysis, especially from a psychological point of view, KC.

        Like

  14. Francis is a fraud. Far from having a zero tolerance policy, an appeals panel he established has sharply reduced penalties on abusing priests in a third of cases, presumably in the name of mercy. See this Wall Street Journal article:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/vatican-panel-faces-criticism-over-leniency-for-priests-guilty-of-abuse-11545423695?mod=e2tw

    Like

  15. 8:41;
    MC; loyalty to the fraternity works itself out in very practical, concrete, obvious ways; behaviors, actions, attitudes,..etc..within the fraternity. It’s no accident it’s taken 25 years plus to get to this point.
    Would Christ Jesus, the High Priest, condone the carry on and criminality from clergy, religious and hierarchy ?

    Like

  16. The focus of the Church hierarchy is currently seems to be on the single issue of Sexual and predatory abuse. What about substantial emotional and psychological abuse inflicted daily by some priests in parishes up & down the country. Emotional Abuse that for many is pervasive & damaging.
    What about the many addicted priests? What about the widespread misappropriation of church funds? What about the apathy and lack of personal faith that pervades the lives of many clergy? What about the priests that are largely absent from their parishes?
    It is time to deconstruct the personal ‘fifedoms’ And ‘mini empires’ that many of these men create for themselves.
    Some of these priests exhibit charm and mock piety with many and then live double lives whilst covertly bullying others to the point of emotional destruction. These men destroy the perception & reality of true priesthood with duplicity. These men demoralise & dishonour true priests who give their best and try to live out a priesthood that honours Christ’s teaching & model of ministry.
    To those brave souls who challenge their ways & do not pander to their whims they invoke anger, rage & campaigns of abuse. They destroy good decent people, and decimate the faith of many.
    In modern secular workplaces such behaviours are simply not tolerated, but the proclivities of these individuals are widely accepted & tolerated in Church, priesthood & parish.
    To tackle all abuse comprehensively a wider lens needs to be utilised & adopted. Tackle all the impulses & ills that give rise to all types & sources of abuse. Look at all the ills of clericalism!!!!

    Like

    1. Might your post allude, in at least one respect, to Fr John Gates? I know what I, personally, should do to this obnoxious, fat dwarf. But then, there are no men in Magherafelt, only helpless women. Aren’t there?😆

      Like

      1. No my post does not relate specifically to Fr John Gates, I do not know him & therefore would not be in a position to comment on that situation. My post does however relate to observations & experiences regarding other priests of the same Diocese.
        If such behaviours and proclivities were isolated occurrences and related to one incident or the actions of one individual MC then I perhaps would not have chosen to post.
        One individual or isolated incident can be handled & hurt healed readily. The problem lies in engrained and systemic nature of the issue. A system where behaviours go unchecked & unchallenged, a system where validity and primacy is given to individuals who show themselves to be duplicit and complicit with regard to bullying and emotional abuse. A system where silence reigns.
        It’s sometimes not about what the individual says or does but about the silence & complicity of those around the bully & abuser that does the most damage. (Lay & Clergy alike).
        I readily realise that no person or system is perfect & that we are all worthy of God’s grace & forgiveness. It seems to me that Catholicism & many Catholics in Ireland have a lot of maturing to do.
        Every one of us must accept our part…Abusive clergy for their actions, Hierarchy for covering it up & Laity for adopting the role of ‘Hear no’ ‘See no’ ‘monkeys’!
        If a Church worthy of Christ is ever to emerge then the reality of how things actually are needs to be brought to the fore. No matter how painful!
        ‘God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin’ Jn 1:5-7

        Like

    2. 9:49;
      I agree with much of your post. Criminals owe a debt of justice to victims and society.
      ( It’s not only a matter of sin to absolved), and Priesthood needs spiritual, moral and practical reform and renewal. Pope John Paul 2 said nothing about CSA; Pope Benedict when prefect of the CDF, unless he was walking the Vatican in a catatonic state for 25 years plus, knew what was going on world wide regarding all sorts, not just CSA.
      Pope Francis is explicitly acknowledging and telling criminals in the Priesthood to turn themselves into the cops.
      (That’s progress). The feds are literally on the case. Playing politics is no longer an option or strategy to handle clerical crime. And there’s lots more criminality in the institution than CSA….

      Like

      1. Kool Cat, you have hit the nail on the head. It is the realisation that the perversion and rot goes from top to bottom. No part of the Church is exempt from suspicion and that is unfair to those who rise each day and endeavour to live out their lives and ministry in a way that is authentic to God’s call.
        I feel for those who in Ministry (ordained or lay) who rise each morning with a sense of dread as to what they will face that day. There are three options,
        1. Simply exist & be complicit
        2. Revolt & Leave
        3. Stay, reaffirm each day the call to a Christian life in the hope that you can reform from within.
        For many choosing the third option will only sustain for so long unkess meaningful change comes in the guise of constructive reform. I love the true Church, the Church founded by Christ but my faith in the Systemic hierarchical Church is wounded so much just now!!!

        Like

      2. Yes! Destroy Roman Catholic priesthood:it is a vile, intolerable evil.
        Away with it!
        (Just suggestin’, like.😆)

        Like

    3. Yes! Destroy Roman Catholic priesthood:it is a vile, intolerable evil.
      Away with it!
      (Just suggestin’, like.😆)

      Like

  17. 12:48am;
    ‘Fight the good fight!’

    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