Two survivors share stories of grooming, emotional manipulation and sexual abuse by nuns in the Catholic Church.
By Carol Kuruvilla and Jessica Blank Huffington Post.
The predator nun walked into Trish Cahill’s life straight out of the blue, on a busy summer day in the late 1960s.
Cahill was a teenager back then, wire thin with long, chestnut brown hair framing her face. She was babysitting her cousins in Glen Rock, New Jersey, and there were eight of them to look after ― a big Catholic family, much like her own.
One cousin was playing outside that day and Cahill had another little one in a high chair in the kitchen. It was quite a common child care tactic at the time, she said ― stick a kid in a playpen in the yard and watch through the window while doing chores and taking care of the others inside.
Cahill was washing dishes at the sink when she looked up and spotted a nun, in a full religious habit, hovering over the baby’s playpen.
At that point in her life, the teenager was still trying to make sense of a painful secret ― the sexual abuse she says she experienced just years earlier from her uncle, a Catholic priest. So when she saw the nun leaning over the baby, Cahill said, she sprinted outside to protect the child.
“It was like, ‘You’re not going to touch her, you’re not going to put your hands on her,’” Cahill remembers thinking.
But the nun she met took her by surprise.
Sister Eileen Shaw (pictured above) was 21 years older than Trish Cahill when they first met in Glen Rock, New Jersey. (Illustration: Damon Dahlen/HuffPost; Photos: Trish Cahill)
The woman introduced herself as Sister Eileen Shaw, telling Cahill that she was out on a walk from her nearby convent.
“She’s nice to me, which was confusing,” Cahill recalled.
The two struck up a conversation, Cahill said, which led to an invitation for the teen to play guitar at an upcoming Mass. That invitation led to more special treatment, private phone calls and private trips.
In fact, this strange encounter on the lawn was just the beginning of a long period of grooming and emotional manipulation, Cahill said. She didn’t realize until much later that the 12 years of history she had with Shaw was not a relationship ― but sexual abuse.
“She stole from my body, my mind and my soul,” Cahill, now 66, told HuffPost. “The woman was a thief who did not keep her vows.”
For over a year, the Roman Catholic Church has faced a reckoning over the crime of clerical sexual abuse. Catholics are once again demanding answers about bishops’ mishandling of abuse allegations, after high-profile scandals in the U.S., Australia and Chile toppled prominent figures. In response to this renewed call for transparency, Pope Francis acknowledged for the first time ever this February that nuns have been victims of sexual abuse by priests and bishops. Nuns from across the world have come forward to share their stories and demand change.
But stories like Cahill’s, about nuns being the perpetrators of sexual violence, have largely been lost in this new wave of accountability. Although abuse allegations against “women religious,” meaning nuns and Catholic sisters, are rarer than allegations against priests or monks, Cahill and other survivors of nun abuse are convinced that there are more stories out there. But because of gender stereotypes about female perpetrators of abuse, it is much harder to see the broader picture.
As survivors push more states to extend their statutes of limitations for child sex abuse cases, experts believe more of these stories will start coming to light.
“Why are they not coming out?” Cahill mused about fellow survivors of abuse by nuns. “They don’t have any other survivors to see what’s happened. They’re the only one.”
“The boys thought they were the only ones for a hundred years,” Cahill added. But now, she said, “the girls think they’re the only ones.”
A Childhood Lost
Trish Cahill is a 66-year-old survivor living in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. (HuffPost)
Church was an integral part of Cahill’s life growing up. Her family made sure to respect holy days of obligation ― the days in the liturgical calendar that Catholics are expected to attend Mass. Her parents sent her and her siblings to Catholic schools. Cahill said she was taught from a very young age to believe that heaven and hell were real places where people would be sent based on their earthly deeds.
So when her uncle ― the priest ― allegedly threatened that she would “burn and blister in the fires of hell” if she told anyone about the sexual abuse he was inflicting on her, Cahill said she believed him.
Cahill said the alleged abuse from the Rev. Daniel F.M. Millard, who died in 1973, happened between the ages of 5 and 13. (The Diocese of Camden told HuffPost that Millard’s name was not on a recently released list of credibly accused priests because Cahill’s allegation against Millard ― “the only accusation ever received about him,” it said ― “was deemed not credible.” The diocese also pointed to a 2005 article in which a family member questioned Cahill’s reliability. The diocese said it has not been provided with additional information since 2002.)
Trish Cahill claims she was abused as a child by her uncle, the Rev. Daniel F.M. Millard. (Courtesy Trish Cahill)
Because of the abuse Cahill claims happened to her as a little girl, when she met Shaw, she was already feeling vulnerable and lost.
At the time, Shaw was a teacher at St. Catherine School in Glen Rock. Cahill was a student at Paramus Catholic Girls’ High School, which was staffed by Shaw’s religious order, the Sisters of Charity of St. Elizabeth.
Back then, Cahill said, she was just flattered that an adult who seemed so kind and caring was paying attention to her.
“For her to be nice to me was just fantastic. She cared like she wanted to be with me. She was 36. I was 15. Who gets to hang out with a 36-year-old?” Cahill said. “Everything was in my favor.”
Looking back, the unusual nature of the pairing seems so obvious, Cahill said. She said she now wishes she had somebody “just watching out for me.”
Cahill remembers Shaw calling her at home for private, scheduled chats. The nun gave the teen gifts. Cahill said she soon felt safe enough to confide in Shaw about her uncle’s abuse.
About three months after they first met, Shaw allegedly invited Cahill to her bedroom at St. Catherine Convent ― which is where the abuse first turned physical.
In the years afterward, Shaw used to pull the teenager out of high school in the middle of the day, Cahill said. They would go to a nearby motel, where the pair would stay for hours.
“Then she’d bring me back to school, so I was there for dismissal,” Cahill said. “Nobody questions a nun.”
Trish Cahill is pictured with Sister Eileen Shaw in this photo collage. Cahill said Shaw sexually abused her throughout high school. The pair remained close until Cahill was about 27 years old. (Illustration: Damon Dahlen/HuffPost; Photos: Trish Cahill)
They started taking trips together ― to Shaw’s parents’ house and vacation home, to religious retreat houses, to Atlantic City, to the Meadowlands Racetrack. They traveled all over the East Coast, Cahill said, from Florida to Quebec. They went on camping trips and slept in the same sleeping bag, she said. Shaw allegedly taught Cahill how to gamble on horse races and introduced her to alcohol and drugs. The nun told her how to dress and fashion her hair, and discouraged her from dating boys, Cahill said. They once went to a gay bar in New York City’s Village neighborhood, she said.
“She told me she loved me,” Cahill said. “I believed it.”
Shaw had a medal inscribed with the religious name she took when entering her religious order ― Sister Marian Anthony. That medal took on another meaning during their time together, Cahill said.
“She would take it off of herself at night and put it on me, and then we would have sex. Not a relationship, sex,” Cahill said. “And then, in the morning, it would go back on her. It was the seal of confessional.”
Cahill told HuffPost that members of the Sisters of Charity knew or at least suspected that she was spending an inordinate amount of time alone with Shaw.
Now we have the nuns abuse story.
Some nuns were quite normal and very well integrated.
Others were either neurotic or psychotic.
There was a lot of lesbianism in convents.
Lesbian nuns targeted girls and girl teenagers.
I attended a convent school in Carlow in the late 1950s.
One of the nuns that taught me was a raging sadist and loved doing out corporal punishment.
A lot of girls were forced into convents by ambitious Catholic families.
Their reproductive drive was denied and it made them crazy.
In my earlier years as a priest I was stalked by two nuns.
They acted crazily and it was hard coping with them.
Abuse by nuns is a large part of the RCC system.
95 replies on “WOMEN SEXUALLY ABUSED BY CATHOLIC NUNS SPEAK UP – “SHE TOLD ME IT WAS GOD’S LOVE”.”
As I said on yesterday’s blog, institutional Roman Catholic TURDS.
It is, logically and truthfully, the ONLY honest way of describing the institutional Roman Catholic Church…as a moral cesspit.
You wouldn’t disagree, would you Bishop Pat?
Oh! And ‘Father Mick’ is really that lying basket-case, and intellectual retard, Barking Bellarmine.😆
You really need to find another interest Magna. This blog has sadly taken over your life. Get out man! I will offer Mass for you today that somehow God will take you out of this place to a much better one. God bless.
10.10: You are dealing with a delinquent bully with Magna. Don’t even try to engage with him. He’s damaged goods since he was thrown out of the seminary. He’s a bitter old fool and seeks notoriety by his vulgar, extreme hatred and nastiness. Just scroll by the screwed up demented idiot. He’s a joke. The onky one who takes him/it/she seriously is the image in the mirror and what ugliness that is!!!
You know where you can put your Mass.
12.25am: You’re out of your cesspit Magna, ready to demolish and destroy all around you with the usual tripe, crap and bullying. Stay in your cave and remember what Mumsy told you: you’ll find some man to love you one day. Don’t give up but till then stop acting with such horrible nastiness. Try to be kinder…….
Good to know my barbs are pricking the right people.
MC at 12:25am!!!!
You really have lost the plot, I have nothing to do with”Father Mick” I do not know him but I agree with him about you. Patsy will confirm that it is not me. I have just arrive home only to find the first comment as usual is from the retard of the blog insulting me as always, your hatred of me is quite concerning you really need help with your mental health issues. I await and am willing to accept your apology for defaming me for something that has nothing to do with me, how dare you.
More abuse poured on Magna’s head…
MC at 12:25am!!!!
Still awaiting your apology, whats keeping you?
You didn’t reflect on your comment before posting it, did you? Otherwise you’d have know that it was going to make a fool of you. YOU took my post seriously enough to comment on it.😅
Cesspit cesspit cesspit
Yes, ‘cesspit’ is the appropriate word here. And what fills a cesspit?😉
This is the way with Cathbots, like they were saying to Magna yesterday – they make out they are concerned about the person or the love of God, while intimidating, threatening and cajoling. If don’t overtly abuse their behaviour is still abusive.
When I see one of them post on here who actually gives the slightest impression of holiness rather than conceit, arrogance and abuse, I will happily acknowledge there is a holy priest or religious, but there isn’t.
There is an underlying truth in your comments Anon@10:37.
I think it’s a revelation to consider how much violence originates from religious belief, and that through the ages it has been the case: Crusades, Inquisition and Holy Wars all in honour of OUR God.
And all that large scale misguided piety is mirrored on a personal level on this blog. Indeed it’s hard to tell the extent to which such inter personal aggression here indicates self righteous indignation, ignorant or otherwise, or maloevalent intent conveniently hidden under the guise of benevolent religious concern.
Look at how much violence originates from atheistic humanist ideology.
Look at the history of the 20th century alone. Millions murdered.
So much for your good without God mantra.
I’d be grateful Anon@1:18 if you could back up your assertion with examples .
Just in case you misunderstand humanism, and I do not infer you don’t, but just in case, may I quote what A.C. Grayling lucidly wrote in the Sunday Times on 10thAug 2014:
“Humanism is not a doctrine or set of rules; it is an invitation to approach the question of how to live, and how to build a society, thoughtfully, and with kindness. It’s founding idea is that ethics, -exploring what kind of life and outlook are best worth embracing- must be based on the facts of human experience: that we should think for ourselves, honestly and generously always aiming not to harm others.”
Grayling writes of how many of the world’s disagreements are based on divisions of religious opinion and poses questions of just how well served the world has been by religions, most of which assume that there is only one great central truth and one way everyone must live on fear of punishment for disobedience.
Socrates invited us to live a chosen life rather than one prescribed by inherited doctrines.
I await your examples.
Another unopened can of worms.
Seriously..! You want me to back up ”my assertations” with examples…!!
“China: 65 million deaths; USSR: 20 million deaths; North Korea: 2 million deaths; Cambodia: 2 million deaths; Africa: 1.7 million deaths; Afghanistan: 1.5 million deaths; Vietnam: 1 million deaths; Eastern Europe: 1 million deaths; Latin America: 150,000 deaths; Communist movements or parties not in power: about 10,000 deaths. “Nearly 100 million deaths. Not casualties of war, but civilian slaughter. Deaths in gulags and concentration camps. Deaths from a bullet to the head. Most of all, deaths by starvation – the result either of planned famines, meted out as punishment to internal foes (as in Stalin’s USSR), or unintended consequences of central policy.”
(The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression by Stephanie Courtois et al. 1999)
Gregory Koukl wrote that “the assertion is that religion has caused most of the killing and bloodshed in the world. There are people who make accusations and assertions that are empirically false. This is one of them. Koukl details the number of people killed in various events involving theism and compares them to the much higher tens of millions of people killed under atheistic communist regimes, in which militant atheism served as the official doctrine of the state. Gregory Koukl (February 20, 2013). “The real murderers: atheism or Christianity?” Stand to Reason.
Good without God…!!! B******t.
MMM was speaking of HUMANISM, you utter berk, not atheistic communism.
Can’t you people read properly?😕
ANON @ 4:16: Magna has kindly replied for me at 3:35 From your woefully misguided diatribe above I can see your ability for informed discussion is much limited. I suggest you read “The Very Short Introduction to Humanism” by Stephen Law, (Oxford University Press) or if that’s too much, check out Wiki’s explanation. But you probably won’t bother: it’s more comfortable for many living with and relying on their own assumptions.
4.16: An excellent contribution and absolutely onevwhuch smashes the self righteous, “we are lovely atheistic, humanist human beings” being expounded by MMM and Magna. They have a habit of rewriting history and avoiding hard truths and facts. And both have an intolerable hatred of Catholicism. Well done for enlightening us with the TRUTH of the reality of murderous communist/atheistic regimes.
It’s easy to supply examples dear mmm. They are as obvious as the nose on your face. Stalinism, Naziism and Maoism – all diametrically opposed to one another but with one common factor: visceral atheism.
3.35 and 8.04: Your lies have been rebutted by that wonderful contribution at 4.16. Humanists are fearful of being referred to as atheists which is basically what you are MMM……a pretend humanist but one of no theistic belief – i.e. an atheist. QED….Go back to your barv stool conversations…..
Surprisingly, I agree with you: that comment IS an excellent contrbution…but for another, relevant subject.😆 It completely, hopelessly, misses the mark on MMM’s post.
Wrong! Again, read the sequence of posts.
MMM, completely, hopelessly and blatantly avoided answering.
Humanism…’good without God’ …..If only life was so neatly compartmentalized!
If MMM is going to debate issues, let him do so with intellectual integrity,
otherwise, it’s simply game playing, pseudo-intellectual, ego boosting, patronising point scoring.
When you consider the age at which many women entered religious life in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s it is understandable that not all would have been suitable to religious life with its strict discipline in religious adherence to prayer, penance and hard work. Some communities had categories of nuns, those who did the very menial tasks of cleaning and laundering andbthosevwjo were mire learned and professional. I remember talking to an elderly sister, a beautiful kind and gentle woman and she was angry, in old are, at what she was forced to do by way of daily cleaning and scrubbing. She also said they sat in a side oratory with shorter breviaries! She regretted the harshness and duvisiveness of formation but she was a wonderful carer in our parish community. It can be argued that relugious of the 30′, 40’s and 50’s were subjected to very harsh formation to the point of being victims of a neurotic and negative view of sexuality and spirituality. The level of crazy rules and norms within communities were conducive to forming some very unfulfillied, unhappy and unintegrated people. The same can be said of seminary formation of the same eras. Some nuns and priests were emotionally and spiritually damaged by their formation. That is not to excuse any abusive behaviour but I think many women were forced by family to enter convents. These large communities of women living in very strict and harsh regimes must have been very challenged and changed, some for the worse. My experiences of 40 years working with religious women have been positive, good and inspiring. Let’s not start demolishing what is generally a good legacy of the contrubutiins of religious women. There are still many powerful religious women doing hugely good work in our communities. Strange how our Pat always has bad stories of religious and clerics……One really wonders at the credibility of some of his memories……
Your post attests the historical fact that institutional Roman Catholicism, with its characteristic features of, first, overarching patriarchy, and second, subservient matriarchy are not conducive to holistic health.
A word to the wise: study the history of this institution, and there will be only one reasonable conlusion to draw, that this institution is intrinsically evil, was not founded by Christ, and that it serves predominantly a priestly class of men whose goal is power over others (the men I call ‘TURDS’).😆
Subservient matriarchy is an oxymoron – as a rudimentary knowledge of Latin & Greek would indicate.
It’s rather ironic that you employ a Latin sobriquet at 3:32 when your classical competence is non-existant.
And doubly so, since you claimed to be able to handle Hebrew and Aramaic. However, your subsequent forays into these areas gave the lie to that claim.
The Canonesses of St Augustine, whose activities include the More House chaplaincy (where Belfast’s Dean was chaplain for a while) still informally retain the distinction between choir nuns (who taught in their fee-paying schools) and the non-choir nuns who did the cooking, laundry and general skivvying.
I was in More House in the early 2000s as a guest and there were still aged Irish nuns doing all the domestic work while the ex-teaching choir nuns were waited on hand and foot.
You are stretching credibility and truth, 4:45. There is no such discrimination among them, formal or informal.
Read his post at 12:37pm to the poster at 10:37pm.
MMM, was referring to violence originating from religious belief.
It was in that context I replied to him at 1:18pm
There’s no need to resort to abuse.
You’re a liar attempting to save face…and failing miserably.
You were addressing what you called murder through humanist ideology by presenting examples from the history of atheistic communism. The two are NOT the same.
Why do you feel the need to reply for MMM? Let him reply for himself.
I’m not a liar.
I’m not trying to save face, unlike you.
Does violence not include murder? Ever hear of Marxist humanism?
There’s no need to resort to abuse.
Yes, it is. And yet, the phenomenon exists, like ‘cruel kindness’, etc.
Stretch your mind by thinking before you post.
(Sigh😩) MMM didn’t mention ‘Marxist humanism’, just ‘Humanism’.
Give it a rest! Let him answer for himself. 👎
Marxist humanism is a subset of humanism. Logic is not one of your strongpoints.
When logic leads to unpalatable conclusions you move the goalposts, so to speak.
Are you MMMs minder?
MMM, you pompously awaited my examples@ 2:20 but only replied at 8:05, relying on an answer from Magna.
You asked me to back up ‘my assertion with examples’; first line of your post @ 2:20.
You then waffled on with a farrago on humanism, shifting the goalposts from the earlier posts, at 12:37& 1:18, related to how much violence originates from religious belief, citing the crusades,inquisition and holy wars.
You are constantly rabbitting on with the mantra ‘good without God’. It pollyannaish, MMM.
Grayling, Dawkins, Keen, et al, present a the benign face of humanisn, much of it repeddled ‘old hat’ from the
19th century for the 21st century market. Look what happened in the 20th century! Try not be so patronising and condescending. I know it’s an occupational hazard for social workers. Don’t be projecting, MMM re. assumptions.
What’s the difference between God and a social worker?
God doesn’t pretend to be a social worker.
An ego is intolerable enough, but a wounded and proud ego…😲
Don’t live life from the ego. Get in touch with the true self! 😉
Sure whether tis nuns or priests or any one else Abuse is Abuse. To use religion as a justification is abuse of God’s trust trust hi. It seems institutions which are in a position of authority are more likely to take advantage of their position hi
Holy Cross Sr. Sharlet Wagner, the 2018-2019 President of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR)
spoke on the issue of the sexual scandal in the church, in her August 15th last, presidential address.
‘We have all been affected by this scandal.’ ‘And we have heard the stories of women religious ,both in the United States and around the world, who have themselves been abused by clergy and other re!igious. But the guilt does not fall on priests and bishops alone, she said. ‘ It is a source of deep pain for us that in some instances, our own sisters have been perpetrators of the abuse,” she said.” ”This is a truth we must not attempt to avoid.”
Wagner also said, sisters must also recognize that abuse has made it difficult for many to see religious leaders as signs of hope, and must recognize too many of our religious leaders have given grave scandal.Bodies have been violated and souls have been abused by some of those charged with shepherding God’s people.
Wagner said, there’s no easy answer for addressing the issue, but it must be faced head-on.’
SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) officials say while they remain highly critical of how the church’s bishops have handled the abuse crisis, they say sisters are acting ‘ far more recklessly, callously and secretively’ than bishops are: While most bishops publish the names of credibly accused abusive priests, have adopted a national policy on abuse, and let abuse victims speak to their full assembly, sisters have done none of those things despite repeated requests. ”We believe there are far more priest victims than nun victims, but we also believe there are far more nun victims than anyone would imagine’ said SNAP area director, Mary Dispenza. ‘ We are convinced that there are hundreds of nuns and ex-nuns who have hurt innocent kids or vulnerable adults and may still be violating others because they’re unsupervised ‘under the radar’ and have experienced no consequences for their destructive actions.’
2.20: MMM: You’ve been attempting to define humanism these days to the point of boredom. We don’t need your summary definitions. I’m certainly well aware of humanism and it’s ideals. I am a true pluralist in that I respect all opinions of others: I may not agree but I listen carefully and believe in free speech ince our words don’t incite hatred or danger towards others (as in Magna C.). I respect people of all faith and none. Dialogue, respect and tolerance are my approach to all who do not share my deeply held Catholic faith and beliefs. So let us not argue over our different perspective, belief systems and ethics but rather discuss relevant issues. Those of us who hold deep convictions, like you and me often get annoyed too easily when we think we’re being attacked for those beliefs. The substantive issues get lost in such ceasefire.
You respect none, sir, other than those of like-mind.
Your words are the words or thoughts of every dictator or tyrant, or would-be sorts, who ever lived.
Under the guise of listening to others, what you truly seek is conformity to YOUR will, and to YOUR world view. THIS, quintessentially, is very much the history of institutional Roman Catholicism.😆
3.43: Magna, are you dyslexic? Can you not truly understand the opinion of others without reading into it something that is not at all inferred? You continually deliberately misread the opinion of others. Now, go back to my comment at 3.01 and read it slowly and carefully. Because I said I do not believe in – or accept or tolerate language or words that incite violence and hatred (as in your case), you go all defensive, problematic and confrontational and even lie. You’d have made a lousy teacher with such childishness, always feeling the need to attribute sinister motives to the sincerely held convictions of others. I never push my religious convictions on anyone: I argue them cogently and with due respect for the feelings of others. Somehow, Magna, I don’t think you are a rational, well, fair, balanced or decent human being. There is a disconnect between your brain and your relational interaction with others. It’s obvious you are a loner in a lonely world. To reiterate: As a staunch Catholic I will argue my religious, Catholic beliefs and morality, influenced by my studies of religion, psychology and philosophy as earnestly as you argue your vitriol!! You need to grow up, learn tolerance and respect for others but primarily, you need to learn self respect. In my work I have to be a good listener and I believe that it is one of my great strengths. True listening to others does not produce a hate filled heart, nor does it lead to destructive behaviour of others….true listening is conducive to deepening our human empathy and goodness….True listening ensures we don’t rewrite what others say….GET IT…Magna!!
Mags Cartwheel 3.43: What’s wrong with you this Monday? You are an idiit. You are compketely misreding 3.01. You are a crazy nutcase. I think it’s a very balanced and intelligent comment, not at all suggestive of your interpretation. We shouldn’t be surprised: It’s your trade mark: bullying, vulgarity, cynicism, intolerance of all, disrespectful. Basically you’re a s**thole!!
You’re a ‘staunch Catholic’? Hah, hah, hah 😅
There is always a blessing, an opportunity, even in the darkness of someone’s protracted bluff ignorance. And you have just handed it to me on a whopping, great, shiny platter.
A staunch Catholic, by definition, is someone decidedly NOT open to the views of others, but a rigid, doctrinal bore.
Thank you for proving my earlier post. 😅😅
6.39: Magna, go back to philosophy and l9guc classes. My staunch Catholicism is my blessing. I live by it but don’t push it in anyone’s face. I am confident eniugh to let it radiate through my values and living. It is possible. You, on the otherhand, well, let’s be kind and simply express a sadness for your misery. God is good….
I agree Anon@ 3:01 with much you say other than your initial two sentences, for it’s quite obvious from some comments above that there is much misunderstanding in some minds concerning the nature of humanism, such as simplistically equating it with atheistic communism. Your own comment seems fair minded and in that respect I think Magna is probably incorrect in projecting onto you personally a significant characteristic of RC institutional modus operandi.
Hello Magna. I offered holy Mass for you today. I really hope you find contentment and health in mind and body. God bless.
Oh, thank you!
Er, how much do I owe you?
Let’s be honest about this (and no offence intended, honestly😉), the TURDS have always sought payment for what is freely given by God himself…grace. It’s why Luther et alii got so pissed off at Rome and its philanthropic view of grace and Purgatory.
I’ve yet to see a TURD who didn’t look disgruntled when his palm wasn’t crossed, not with silver but with notes, by a Mass-requester.😅
I do not accept Mass stipends Magna as the Parish are kind enough to pay for my keep, I put any money that is given to me via others for Mass or Baptisms back to the Parish. Stop thinking everyone doing this vocation is rotten – we aren’t! Love yourself and then learn to love others!
3.49: That’s very k8nd of youvMick. Sadly, Magna is not a believer. He has abandinedcall faith, prayer and Christianity. He doesn’t accept God’s grace. He denies God by his low life, abusive, bullying behaviour and hatred of many. Offering Mass is wasted on this leech.
Oh, I accept God’s grace, sure enough…I just won’t pay a priestly TURD for it, nor do I believe that it can come through his agency.😉
Magna I dont like the word turd being used for human beings. Even bad priests are still human beings.
Okay, Bishop Pat: like you I have a soft side, and it comes to the fore when people treat me civilly.
Out of respect for you (and for what you were forced to endure at the hands of an evil institution) I’m going to expunge ‘turd(s)’ from my lexicon of technical words about Roman Catholic priests and the institutional Roman Catholic Church. (At considerable self-sacrifice, I might add.😕)
Thank you. You have no need of those words anyway as your contributions are excellent without them.
And so still am I, Bishop Pat. A human being. And yet, you weren’t moved to post your opprobrium when equal insults were made against me.
Here’s a select example from today’s page alone:
at 11.06: ‘damaged goods’, ‘thrown out of the seminary’, ‘bitter old fool’; ‘demented idiot’, ‘he’s a joke’;
at 11.42: ‘cesspit Magna’;
at 11.42: ‘mental health issues’;
at 6.15: ‘crazy nutcase’, ‘shithole’; ‘low life’, ‘offering Mass is wasted on this leech’.
And these are by no means all.
If your post was a warning shot across my bow, then don’t be afraid to ban me altogether from commenting on your blog. I am not going to sanitise my language further about a cabal of lying, cowardly ecclesial men who willingly continue to support an institution that is a cancer in the Body of Christ. Jesus did not modify his language when addressing Pharisees, or Scribes, or Saducees; in fact, he incensed them to the point of murder by referring to them, for example, as ‘white-washed sepulchres’.
You’ve read the Seven Solemn Woes in Matthew’s gospel, in which Jesus witheringly excoriates the Scribes and Pharisees , referring to them by far-worse terms than ‘turds’: he implies that they are active agents of Satan, leading souls to Hell; refers to them as ‘serpents’, ‘vipers’, and as the murderers of the ‘prophets, and wise men, and scribes’ that he would send. (Think of the first Christian martyr, Stephen, murdered by a mob overseen by a Pharisee, Paul.) ‘Turds’ is an understatement by comparison.
At your behest, I have already sanitised my language. I have gone from the much-preferred ‘Roman Whore’ to ‘Roman Strumpet’, and from ‘whoremonger(s)’ to ‘strumpetmonger(s)’
And at the behest of others, I have stopped using such words as ‘idiot’, ‘parasite’, ‘sponger’, ‘fat-headed’ (in relation to JPII, whom I detest beyond words).
Enough is enough. I have already doubled over backwards to accomodate this blog.
I don’t expect you, or anyone else, to like the words or phrases that I use; publishing them on the blog does not imply that you agree with them, anymore than does publishing a poster’s opinion.
You, clearly, are not happy at the way I write about Roman Catholic priests and the institutional Roman Catholic Church, but it is my way; I am not going to alter it further.
So you need to decide whether to ban me.
8.30: Magna, you bring upon yourself all the opprobrium heaped on you by commentators. Why? Not because you claim to speak the TRUTH (which really is your bias, hatred and prejuduce) but because you are an abn9xious individual. Your commentary of recent time is utter vulgarity but worse, it is all hate inciting of a particular group of people, dangeroulsy inciting and inflamatory. You are a master of HATE SPEECH. May I respectfully suggest that you reflect on your life a little more seriously. You are demonstrating worrying signs of breaking apart. Don’t allow yourself to flip. Turn the other cheek. Ignore the taunts and stop falling every time for the traps of fun being made of you. You don’t have to respond to nastiness with even worse nastiness and invective. The sad reality, as you have madevabundantly clear so often Magna, is that your rages and rants have little effect on any wirthwhile issue. You’d make a greater impact if you tried to be more balanced, fair, rational, less drink enraged and practised self care each day. For now, mind yourself……really, I mean it. I’m sure your mumsy wouldn’t like to hear her wee child have that stenchy word ‘turd’ directed at her!!
Yes you are a human being too – and one I like.
I am quite happy to stop comments that calls you bad bad names.
I already blocked several comments against you today.
I am not firing a shot over your head. I have no desire to lose you as a comment maker.
8.30: Aww.. I’ve almost gone through two packets of tissues wiping the tears from my eyes….not from sympathy for Mags but with laughter at his self pitying nonsense. Magna, get a SENSE of perspective about your non importance in the scheme of life. You seem to hate so many people that this hatred will devour you. You won’t be missed on this blog. Go start your own blog and have Pat’s courage and integrity in printing your real name. Perhaps it may be a moment of gospel metanoia for you! God works in strange ways! Your crazy rant against your critics is akin to the little boy in the school yard who cries because someone stole his lollipop. Magna, g- r-o-w UPPPPPPP!
I was reading your post and was tentatively being influenced by it (to the point, perhaps, of nascent personal change) when that cacophanagous, sarcastic note was struck in your last sentence:
‘I’m sure your mumsy wouldn’t like to hear her wee child have that stenchy word turd directed at her!!’
And you had been doing so well.😕
9.22: Magna, I thought I should just remind you of your beloved mumsy…..otherwise I meant well for you. Some of us do have your well being at heart. Also, I forgot to say earlier – have a SENSE OF HUMOUR….please.
May I borrow that handkerchief of yours (I know you said ’tissue’, but the word is sooo finesesless, and working class), not to wipe away my tears, but to stifle my guffaws at your post? Because I aint going anywhere.😆 (Er, if this sticks in your fleshy old craw, let me know, and I’ll whack…slap😆…your upper back.😇)
Read today’s page of New Ways Ministry to learn what priestly TURDS, on the whole (no pun intended😆), are doing to LGBT people in Poland. How they are demonising them, inciting hatred and violence against them to the point where right-wing lay thugs of the TURDS are physically attacking them.
The Big TURD, Archbishop of Krakow Marek Jedraszewski, at a Mass to honour Polish resistance fighters during the Warsaw Uprising, against the Germans, in 1944, turned this allegedly sacred occasion into an opportunity to denigrate LGBT people as a ‘rainbow plague’ and to have them replace the Germans as the new target for Polish resistance. But the fool (and the TURDS are nothing if not fools) reckoned without the ire of people present who actually had fought in that uprising. In a joint statement, some of them said:
‘We do not know how many there were…among our friends…whom the Creator gave the characteristics called LGBT… We only know that they were among us…and they deserve remembrance, respect and prayers. The message of the Archbishop, to whom we are deeply opposed as Christians and fellow-insurgents, has nothing to do with the Uprising.’
I am sick and tired hearing the TURDS, and their faithful handlers 😅, whine about my expressing hatred of this priestly caste. Apart from the obvious question (‘Given their history, how could anyone feel anything other than hate for these people?’), there is the blinding fact that not one, NOT F**k**g ONE, of these TURDS at the Vatican has condemned this archbishop, a successor of the pope who protected and facilitated paedophile priests like Maciel.
The language of hate-incitement has come from the history of the very people, the priestly TURDS, who are now whining so immaturely about their being a target of it themselves.
Go to Hell, priests, to that privileged place Chaucer believed was reserved for you there.😈
An old gay man once told me a long, long time ago, sometimes “gays are their own worst enemy.” The Polish priestly turds, or łajno (dung), kinda prove his point.
I don’t follow.
Are you suggesting that LGBT people themselves drove these priests to the point of publicly whipping up hate, and physical violence, against them?
Maybe it was the Jews’ fault that the Nazis got so mad at them and decided to exterminate them.😕
Jędraszewski was ordained bishop (and probably selected as his auxilliary) by Juliusz Paetz who would give Keith O’Brien a run for his money. In short: divert attention.
This Magna carry on is still ongoing and I’ve returned after two weeks on holiday, is it all not a bit tedious now? I hear a Priest whose not from the North has been caught having sex on the A1. He’s due in Lisburn court along with others caught there in the past week. He’s probably from the South or on holiday from some place else. It never ends.
Gay sex, or does go without saying nowadays?
‘Magna carry on’?
Carry on like a Carry on…
You’re making that up about a priest on the A1 aren’t you? Another fantasist is what you are.
Stories about nuns bore me, Bp Pat. I hope the new intake, if any, at Maynooth will soon scandalise the faithfull as it has been a while since we had strange goings-on to comment on.
Pat, I have a suggestion. It seems to me that your policy of allowing as many comments as you can in the interest of free speech allows anyone with an agenda to comment, including the virulent anti Catholics and people like Bellarmine.
You personally have enemies who would be very happy to see you post something libellous here.
It is therefore for you to set the tone of the comments, which means stricter moderation than previously. I would advise you to set a comment policy and stick to it rigidly. For example you may decide that this blog is pointing out the abuse in the RC church and you will not facilitate tit for tat arguments. You may also decide you want to keep Magna’s comments but edit them for language , and if he then decides not to comment that’s up to him.
This would also have the advantage that nobody can call the police because you retain tight control on comments on your blog!
And as I have said before if people didn’t like that they can set up their own for free on blogspot and link back to posts here if they want to comment.
Hi Pat. Magna needs banned. Even if he pops up using a different name you can spot it. All this Turd business and wickedness is ruining your blog.
I do not like people, including Magna, being called turds
Why not block him then?
So why do you print it??
Unlike you, I am honest enough, were I banned from posting on this blog, not to attempt to post anonymously.😕
Sorry? My name
Is Jim Docherty Magna. I’m not hiding. Unlike you!!!
You post pseudonymously, at 8.49. Have a look at the prefix. That’s you.
Purposely missing the point of my earlier post (which you’ve just done) is a transparent, and childish, attempt to save face.
You can do better. (Surely?😕)
You’re either poor at comprehension, or illiterate, priest.
It ain’t going to happen.😆
Priest has a capital ‘P’ Magna. A title you’d have if you had not been shown the door. Thank God the Rector could see though you!
Bella, Mick, Jim-bob; cold shower time, lads! 😇
Not correct. Proper nouns have capital letters. A ‘priest’ is a common noun. If you don’t know this, it’s highly unlikely that you are who you claim you to be.
Pat, before this day ends, you should read back over many comments between Magna and his adversaries. Their comments, Magna’s particularly, stray away from the essence of debate and become irritatingly boring but also they all seem to extract the worst from each other. The result is that a whole stream of comments become crass, vulgar, insulting, condemnarory and vile. I really believe you should consider editing some comments or not printing them at all. Otherwise you are going to loose some good contributors.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But this is only your opinion. And who cares for YOUR opinion?😆
That should be ‘lose’.
It’s no small thing.
Thanks for the link, Cait.
It is certainly, no small thing. God bless.
Are you serious “Fr P” at 10:28?
If you really are then you’re a conceited blethering idiot. If you’re not, and on the pi$$take: Good one: you got me!