Categories
Uncategorized

DOWN AND CONNOR AND GAMBLING PRIESTS IN GENERAL.

ON TUESDAY THE DIOCESE OF DOWN AND CONNOR BURIED RETIRED PARISH PRIEST, FATHER CONLETH BYRNE.

Father Byrne has been living in a monastery since a lady in his parish managed to persuade him to hand over £ 145,000 of parish money to her.

He also gave her £ 45,000 of his own money.

The media report at the time:

Published: 08:35Thursday 11 April 2013 Newsletter

“PARISHIONERS in Loughinisland yesterday told of their “shock and sadness” after their 78-year-old former priest pleaded guilty to fraud earlier this week.

Fr Conleth Byrne, now retired, informed police he paid around £145,000 of parish funds to Marie Hanna from Ballycastle over a 19-month period out of “charity” after she begged him for financial help, a court was told.

He pleaded guilty to fraud by abuse of position just before his trial was due to begin at Downpatrick Crown Court on Tuesday”

Father Byrne was highly respected and loved in all the parishes he served in.

His actions, so late in life, were totally out of character as far as we know.

Another Down and Connor priest told me yesterday that Father Byrne was always a very big gambler on horses? I had never heard this before.

This priest often witnessed Conleth in the company of another D&C priest, Fr George McLaverty putting large bets on horses at race meetings.

The biggest priest gambler I knew was Fr Fr Vincent McKinley the administrator of St Peter’s Cathedral, Belfast, when I was there from 1978 to 1983. He had a telephone account with a bookie and lost up to £ 2,000 on some Saturdays. £ 2,000 was a lot of money in the late 70s.

£ 2,000 in 1978 is worth £ 10,000 today.

A lot of money for anyone, especially a priest, to lose in one day!
Does any reader have any opinions about priests and big gambling problems?

I’m sure some clerical addiction is connected in some way with celibacy and lonely living?

84 replies on “DOWN AND CONNOR AND GAMBLING PRIESTS IN GENERAL.”

Reeeeeeemember, Readers! The gambling Romanist parasites are spending YOUR money, not theirs, since none of these spongers actually works for a living, but siphons off YOUR hard-earned pennies.
Doncha just love the Romanists? If they ain’t screwin’ yer kids, they’re screwin’ the hard-workin’ parents of them. (Or screwin’ ’em both.😲)
Ack! I’m just sayin’, like, so I am.☺

Liked by 1 person

1.26
But they ain’t spending other people’s money, are they?
In case you’re too thick to draw the logical conclusion here: they ain’t thieves and liars.

Like

1.39 – sometimes they are – because they are spending from the family account which includes money that their spouse has paid in!

Like

Pat, I do believe that priests have the same temptations as everyone else. Priests are human beings, first and foremost and therefore experience temptations of life much like any other human being. I have worked with priests who were/are alcoholics, who had gambling (horses) addiction, depression. I do not know if there is empirical evidence to support the argument that the percentage of gamblers is higher in priesthood than any other profession. However, I do believe that celibacy, living alone, not being a good interactor with people, trying to be all things to all people or acting alone on all areas of administration and unresolved sexual identity issues are all contributory factors in priests engaging in gambling. Unless you are well grounded in yourself and maintain good, nourishing relationships and connections with parishioners, family and friends, it is very easy to fall victim to gambling, sexual adventures and alcoholism. I do believe and have argued for a long number of years that the culture of priesthood today is not healthy for us, especially now that we are far fewer and therefore often have little collegial support. There should be trusted professional persons, psychologists, therapists psychiatrists available for priests to turn to when faced with these human temptations. My experience is that there is not, sadly, any meaningful support systems of care provided by Dioceses for priests. This issue on your blog hopefully will be treated seriously and not be an opportunity to trash, ridicule or mock priests in these awful situations. In my own situation I had to find a professional therapist to help me through a breakdown as a result of bullying, harrassment and family loss and grief. There was no one at Diocesan level whom I could turn to or trust. I could easily have travelled the destructive road to gambling and drink. Thankfully I sought out a wonderful therapist and counsellor who turned my life totally around. Amazing.

Liked by 1 person

1.30
Stick your protracted, rambling, self-pitying apologia for dysfunctional Romanist priests with the rest of the moral sludge you utter parasites excrete in the course of your useless existence.
You effectively admitted about these vermin what I said yesterday: they are liars. ‘Trying to be all things to all people.’ ‘Deceivers’, in another word.
You are like your colleagues who engage in apologetics about child-sexual abuse: you are defending not just the immorality of theft, but its criminality, too.
Give poor ‘Father’ a pass: he is ill. Isn’t this the refrain (the excuse offered) we heard so many times about child-abusing Romanist priests?
How many non-Romanists have access to the funds to which these gambling-addicted parasites have access?
Get rid of the Romanist priesthood, that Melchizedekian curse.
(Just luvin’ it, like. 😄)

Like

1.56: Stick your vomit down where it came from Maggie, the sewer which us your body. A deep, black, dark, evil has pervaded you. Your seminary rejection experience has fatally damaged you. A drunkard, a deviant, a PERVERT, a sickly mind and heart, a damaged soul, a bulgar abuser, a fimthy creep: I’d sue Maynooth for damages!! Seriously, before you fall off the cliff.

Like

Celibacy is totally unnatural and is not scriptural. It is another rule made up by the RCC. However, those who enter priesthood know the rules of their organisation before entering clerical life. A man or woman is designed to have company if they so choose. Forcing them to be on their own can no doubt lead them to seek a form of escape. However, what about them being ontologically changed and imbued with the Holy Spirit? in truth the only change that takes place is that they now think they are superior and can do whatever they want with money and people. The whole system is weird and unnatural.

Liked by 1 person

This is exactly what I was thinking.
I also find it really creepy that the ontological change stuff is followed quickly by ‘priests are only human’. This seems to me one that they really can’t have both ways – either they are ontologically changed or merely human, but not both.
The priest’s comments above about lack of support are dead on – yes I am cynical, but I have commented here before to the effect that the church doesn’t look after anything, and this extends to its clergy.

Like

A hi sure the priest was always linked with horses cars golf and drrink Now lord save us you can add in sexxx in all its diversity.
In the past I believe it was and still is a kind of sublimation. The pot has now gone sour and many flowers in the lord’s garden have turned into weeds but

Like

Pat I was a compulsive gambler that lost my wife, family and all I had due to my uncontrollable addiction.
I’m doing my best at recovery now, this sickens me to the bottom of my tummy for you to scorn and mock others because of their shortfalls and mistakes from the past!
Have you no consideration or respect for others especially those on bent knees?
Shame on you!

Like

Apparently, £45,000 had been repaid at the time of his trial, and the judge ordered Byrne to repay the outstanding £100,000.
Perhaps someone from Loughinisland or the Diocese of Down and Connor can let us know how much finally paid back.

Like

Anon @ 23rd, Maybe the Loughinisland contributor of a few days ago could let us know. Maybe even Loughinisland’s current PP could find out and inform us: U know who;….One Ciaran Dallat!

Like

Anon 12.53. “Skirt ferret” that’s a new one, and very appropriate. Believe me we are watching him closely. He’s been trying to inveigle himself into various parish activities, like the football club, but the camogie ladies are all well aware of his Belfast history of “ferretting!”

Like

I once read there are some people are in Mountjoy for not paying their TV Licence and that thieving old bastard got a suspended sentence.

Like

There is a mythology among diocesan priests that celibacy and solitude are the problem, and they look longingly at religious life. Anyone who knows religious life knows that it is full of dysfunction, bullying, competition, and people not talking to each other.
I think the problem is that the people allegedly called to priesthood are so dysfunctional they are incapable of relating to other people.

Like

Religious orders have such dynamics because they live together in fraternity. We all know families; families argue, ignore each other, give out about each other’s different ways – but they live together and stick together.

I am no defender of the RCC but I do see the human weaknesses in what they try to do.

Like

Anonymous 23rd Jan 2020 — 9:48 am
Celibacy and solitude have nothing to do with it, Bp Pat, most priests will steal your shit.
………..
That’s absolute rubbish. From start to finish.
First of all, most Catholic priests are still decent men – somehow they do manage to cope with their celibate lifestyle or else, if they see that it’s creating a grave moral hazard for them, they quit.

But when RC clerics do fall into any addiction – and kleptomania (‘stealing’ as you style it) is an addiction – their isolation and loneliness has to have been a factor.
And most such unfortunate clerics were vulnerable men anyway, which is how they got scooped-up into the seminary.
Remember that Kipling poem –
‘ … Done with truth and honour,
Lost to love and hope,
Slipping down the ladder, rung by rung … ‘

Like

12.52
JL, how do you know that most Romanist priests are ‘still decent men’?
Are you the proverbial fly on every presbytery wall? (Every tree at every unofficial truck-stop? 😕 Every gents’ toilet? 😡 Every kid’s bedroom? 😬 Every…?😳)

Like

9.48: You are a disgusting pervert. I am surprised that Pat printed this comment. As I suspected, Magna would be the first to comment (12.43am: drinking hours) with a vicious comment. Forget about his abusive, vulgar sneering at priests who fall down for whater reason, it’s his deliberate hate incitement against priests by his disdain and contempt today who have addictions that is profoundly morally reprehensible and offensive, inhumane and poisonous. It’s obvious to bloggers that this specimen is INCAPABLE of human empathy, such is the gutter of sickness and dysfunctionality he is in through his own addictions (not just drink but HATRED too). For any commentator to delight in, ridicule and denigrate any person with addictions and ignore the illness and psychopathy behind addictions is ignorant and unforgivable. The issue of gambling is a very serious problem in all professions and deserves intelligent, insightful comment and debate, not hate inciting rejoicing just because the gambler is a priest. I worked in a school where a teacher was a gambler who used school phones duringn the day. We succeeded in curbing his addiction not by smashing him with sledge hamners but by ensuring he received professional help. The realities and consequences around any compulsive addictions are complex and require professional therapists and support services to intervene for the good and well being of all. Smartalec comments, with poisonous invective as by Magna, 9.48 and 11.01 are disgusting and belong to the trash bin.

Like

12.57

You pompous, self-righteous apologist for Romanist criminality. These priests are THIEVES, not just gamblers. They STEAL to feed their addiction (their parishoners hard-comeby cash), and they must be held to account for it.

Get over yourself, you fool. There will be no more passes for you PARASITES because you are priests. In fact, you should be punished with the greatest severity since your CRIMES hurt a much-wider community: they destroy its trust in God, its hopes, and its dreams.

Would that you utter parasites could be swept off the planet!

(Just day-dreamin’, like. Lovely daydream, though. 😕)

Like

These people claim they have been “chosen” by God. What a lot of crap. Chosen to do what? Lie, abuse, cover up, steal other peoples hard earned money. Live in luxury whilst preaching against all the things they are guilty of. Gambling is an addiction not restricted to priests and is not to be smeared at . But these “called ” ones surely have a greater power with them to stop them falling into these vices. After all they’ve been “changed”. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry . What penalty did this man face from the Bishop for his theft of others money? Did he lose his home like so many other addicts? Did he endure hardship? Who paid back the money? Did funds from other parishes pay for this? If so then it’s ok to rob the people because other people’s money will be used to pay it back. After all these priests are ontologically changed

Like

11.01

Romanist parasites tell themselves (and just about everyone else equally gullible) that they are ontologically changed at ordination becsuse it brightens the imaginary aura of specialness with which they surround themselves. But if such an aura did exist at all, it wouldn’t be bright, but very dark indeed, through sexual perversion, child rape, theft, lying, etc.

Nowhere else in the civilised world would such a miserable category of homosapien be allowed such a dominant place in community.

(Just tellin’ it like it is…like. 😞)

Like

MC I believe priests are chosen by God and there is an ontological change- a bit like in marriage However marriages can break down and priests can go sour. A sour priest can be like a caged animal who is afraid to escape caus he couldn’t cope in the real world hi Night All Sleep Tight

Like

9.58
Evidence?
Because I’m tellin’ you girl, why would Jesus institute an ontological change in candidates for Romanist priesthood who, er, vow or promise obedience, not to JC himself, but to a Romanist bishop?

Like

11.01: If you want heavy boulders to throw at this priest I’ll give you some from my garden. And, I presume you want the crucifixion in the local market square! I trst and pray to God that you never have the misfortune of addiction to drink, drugs or gambling because it’s not ignorant, disdainful and offensive opinion that will help you recover but people who truly CARE. Somehow I suspect you are incapable of being a CARER…

Like

1.40
You poooor bleeding heart.😢
Go bleed someplace else!
I’ll listen to you when you have repaid ALL the money these revolting Romanist parasites stole from their own parishoners. Hard-working, working-class families, most of ’em, who trustingly donated money only to have their tryst betrayed…yet again!… by the scum who were meant to be Christ’s representative.
(Just weary at all the excuses for the criminality of Romanist priests, like. 😩)

Like

Buckley is incapable. That’s why he picks on others. It tells you a great deal about Him. Can you recognise the playground bully – that’s our Buckley

Like

5.30
Ack! Sure away and give yer head pace.
Y’ did nathin’ wrong, like. Y’ jist transferred the money t’ the local bookies and off-licence, an’ the local sauna.
Y’ were jist helpin’ the local economy. An’ what’s wrong wi’ that? 😕

Like

There’s many a priest doesn’t have a vocation:

‘Reflect on God’s love. Fr. Brett Brannen, in his book To Save a Thousand Souls, recommends this meditation when a man feels fearful: “God is infinite in power and he loves me infinitely. There is no snatching out of his hand. God will never send me where his grace cannot sustain me. If he asks me to do something difficult, like become a priest, he will give me the grace to do it. I will not fail because he is with me. And I will be happy because I am doing his will. Even if I lack some of the needed qualities, God will help me develop them. In his will lies my peace.” ‘
Source: https://www.vocations.org.uk/overcoming-the-fears.html

Of course the other possible explanation for God not giving a man he has called to priesthood the grace to live this vocation, is that God doesn’t exist, but that’s a whole other argument.
If a man has a vocation God gives the grace, therefore if he can’t live his vocation it is not really his vocation.

Like

Anonymous 23rd Jan 2020 — 2:28 pm
“There’s many a priest doesn’t have a vocation … ”
…………………
You’re absolutely right.
The seminaries and Recruiting Sergeants have targets to meet so they seem to be filling the ranks with anyone that’ll fit into a cassock.
There are still decent men coming forward with real vocations, but there aren’t many of them. And that’s been so for a very long time.
So the RCC has been making the numbers up with men who’ve only enlisted because they couldn’t manage for themselves in Civvy Street. For them the priesthood is the Irish versio of joining the French Foreign Legion. No women, but still it’s board-and-lodgings plus some sort of a wage.

Like

There’s a lot of (presumably deliberate) confusing of issues and distraction to Magna going on today.
Out here in the real world, somebody who stole that amount of money for their gambling addiction would face prison for it.
Hopefully that would be the shock which would make him realise the effect of his gambling addiction on his life, if he had already sadly lost wife and children and home to it.
If someone stole that amount of money from their employer they would certainly be dismissed for gross misconduct.
Yes, addiction is awful but we are talking in addition about crimes.
If you care for an addict you have the dilemma of when to stop facilitating their addiction, with the knowledge that they may end up worse off.
The diocese clearly had a duty of care to this priest, however as clearly had a duty to safeguard the parish finances.
There are a number of failures here, however forgiving what addicts do will usually involve facilitating their addiction.

Like

5.21: A sensible comment. We are talking about many issues in this story: addictions, crime of theftband misappeopriatiin of money, denial, lack of accountability. Leaving these seriiys issues of criminality (theft), we do not help anyone with addictions by giving them money nor do we offer them a way forward with the abusive, vulgarity and offensive language used by Magna. No one can defend anyine who is a thief to nourish their habits but the law should be applied where appropriate. That’s a different matter to actually engaging positively and realistically with an addict in helping them find professional help. I am certain that if an emoyee at Magna’s workplace stole to nourish addictions, he’d not react with this horrible nastiness. It simply proves that he has an insatiable appetite of hatred for priests. That is unacceptable. I cannot support Pat in any argument as to his rationale for facilitating, yet again, this destructive hatred. Too many repetitive words of hatred. Care to comment, Pat?

Like

I do not approve of hatred at all and I would like Magna to use fewer hateful words.we have seen e has that ability.

Like

7.36

Me, sir! 🙋

(Fingers eagerly clicking) Please sir! 🙌

I’ll answer. 👦

If ANYone at my workplace admitted to such a problem, without minimising or denying the destructiveness of his selfish conduct (to himself, but especially to innocent others), I should go to the ends of the Earth to help him.

But if this person pleaded for himself by offering his addiction as total mitagation for the damage he had caused, I should scorn him as much as…well, as much as I have excoriated those Romanist priests who aren’t man enough to face the awful truth about themselves.

They WILL face it, however, either in this world or another. And if they remain entrenced in a cowardly comfort-zone of denial, and self-justification, they will never be with God as he intended them to be.

Grow up, you fool. You, and others here today. Cease trying to make a moral molehill out of this mountain of human wrongdoing.

Like

People (some people, mostly Romanist priests I suspect) hate Magna, and object to his posting on this blog, cos, just like good oul Sammy from the Shankill and Seamus from the Falls, they need an outsider to hear their sins correctly, fully, and without the attractive veneer of self-euphemism and self-justification.
To tell it to them like it is, like. 😆
In my experience, everyone at some stage, and frequently, plays down (reduces) the severity of his wrongdoing, and so denies himself the opportunity of full repentance and the grace to grow spiritually, into the person God invites him to be. The more serious cases of this spiritual self-stunting I have discovered among the clergy, the professionally self-righteous. And the vast majority of these have been Romanist priests.
Just reflect on the postings from Romanist clerics on this blog today. Not one of them…not a single one…has had the moral or intellectual courage to step up to the plate of personal honesty and integrity by admitting, IN FULL, what Romanist clerics with gambling (and other) addictions have done, both to themselves and to many others. Instead, they have tried to garner sympathy for them by making extravagant or sentimental excuses for their wrongdoing, presenting these priests as ‘fallen ‘ (suggesting heroic wounding in battle 😅) rather than what they fully are: yes, men with addictions in need of professional help, but also as men who have committed serious crimes and who have deeply wounded the people they each would claimed to have serve. They have effectively denied these men ANY moral, never mind legal, culpability.
I have had enough of this Romanist moral cowardice, this lack of personal stature and integrity. I already had had enough of it when I heard the excuses made for these clerics when they were caught out, and called out, for the rape or molestation of kids, and adults. Don’t they know that minimising their sin and criminality minimises also the grace they would receive in return…and delays the moment, indefinitely, when they can fully, and uninhibitedly, enter into the joy of the Lord?😕
(Here endeth the lesson, like. 😆)

Like

5.30: The appalling rant of a morally, human and spiritually deficient madman. No psychological understanding of human nature, an irrational, dangerous hatred of priests, lacking any human decency or kindness. However he tries to portray himself, the very words alone used by this vulgar and ugly piece of humanity suggest someone who is spiritually dead. Dead. It is quite astonishing to think people like this actually exist and that Mags might be so close to madness, insanity, that he is potentially a danger to all. The depth of his hatred reserved for Roman Catholic Priests which Pat allows to be expressed is nauseating and repugnant. I am glad that someone of this horribleness never crossed my pathway. I think of the many alcoholics and those with addictions I have helped over the years and reflect that, if I treated them in the way Magna treats priests or if I used such harsh, denigratory, ugly and belittling language, I am certain I may only add to their addictions or be the cause of someone taking their lives. Magna’s theology, spirituality and supposed beliefs in God or insights into the gospel of Christ require an immediate renewal. This comment and others today reveal a totally disreputable, sub human being. Anything of “God” within him is also dead.

Like

7.06: Super comment. Just ignore the maestro of hatred jumping to Pat’s puppetry. Disgusting abuse of a blog today.

Like

5.30: In light of this response we now realise that Magna would have defied the words spoken by Jesus to the crowd jeering the woman caught in adultery and smashed her to pieces with stones before trampling her into a grave. There can be no other conclusion drawn from the hate filled verbiage of this morally dead moron. Marge: look to CHRIST for help. Please.

Like

7.10

You silly little boy.

Read that gospel passage again, THINKINGLY.

Jesus forgave the woman because she was penitent. And for this she had to admit to herself her sin. Not once in that maelstrom of accusatory violence of intent did the woman ever deny what she was being accused of.

Romanist clerics who mimimise or deny the evil they have committed through their addictions are not, at all, like that woman. She had balls; they have none.

And they will not be forgiven until they follow her example rather than make cowardly excuses for themselves.

You very silly little boy. 😎

Like

This “Magna Carta” whoever, whatever it is, comes on here, day in and day out, spewing its vicious hatred from the outer darkness and demonising an entire group of human beings – Catholic priests – the vast majority of whom are not child rapists, perverts, thieves, etc,. ad nauseam.
Catholics know this and it is their experience. We know that some clergy have utterly betrayed their calling but we know too those who have not and do not.
Whoever, whatever this “Magna Carta” is, it wouldn’t dare do what it does on here in the real world because it wouldn’t get away with it. It can come on here though, into the madhouse of Buckley’s Blog and rant away – fuelled possibly by drink or whatever – who cares? Certainly fuelled by pure insanity and madness.
“Magna Carta” or whatever the hell you are – I am not a “Romanist” priest and I am not a “sheep”. Most sane people see you for the sad and pathetic creature you are behind all the braggadocio and, accordingly, take you and your ravings with a pinch of salt.
However, if this blog ever had potential or hopes to be a place of genuine debate and where real concerns could be raised, thanks to bullies and trolls like “Magna Carta”, that is no longer possible.
And Pat Buckley himself has allowed that to happen through his own blindness and bizarre “bromance” with a vicious and mad creature or creatures, whom he claims never even to have met.

Like

7.46: Excellent. And indeed what a pity Pat is hand in hand with this vicious specimen. Magna’s shitty hatred is destroying a forum that could have the potential for real debate about important issues but its dominance in hatred is unconscionable.

Like

You know the most amazing thing? It’s the number of people who post on here whinging about Magna, about Pat, you name it.
You would think, if this blog were that dissatifactory, they would go away or start their own.
But they don’t, do they.
Keep going Magna and Pat. Magna, your comments today have been very insightful.

Like

The most striking feature about Magna Carta is his/her cowardice. Isn’t MC the brave soul who under the cloak of anonymity spews out the venom. Wouldn’t for one moment make any of his accusations to the face of a priest. Big, brave forthright and strong MC. A credit to humanity. But the reality is MC is such a sad soul. Lurking in the shadows. Always going on about clergy child abusers. I wonder why? Perhaps there is something distasteful about his own behaviour now or in the past that he feels the need to purge himself of his dark feelings and actions. Me thinks he protesteth tooooo much!
Poor, lonely, troubled, demented Magna!

Like

8.45

And your name is?😕

Well, ‘Larne Larry’, this username, too, is a cloak of anonymity, isn’t it?😆

You’re not the brightest, are you, Larne ‘Anonymous’ Larry? 😕

Missing such a whopping faux-pas on your part?😅

Like

8.45: It is very sad that Pat is allowing Magna to spew out his vile hatred on priests. We can only surmise as to the reasons he behaves so obnoxiously. There are obviously derp, unresolved abuse/hurt/pain/rejection issues that contribute to his abusive and unacceptable hate rhetoric. Magna does not deserve judgment or condemnation for personal issues in his life, but it does not exonerate him from responsibility for his morally reprehensible and inhumane behaviour. Any self respecting person, even in the darkest of illness or psychological breakdown would not come close to the madness and danger of Magna. Pat, in conscience you should accept culpability for encouraging this hatred. The comments from Magna today have crossed the boundaries of human decency. Very ugly situation. Pat, you have encountered priests and others in “addiction” situations, as I have: do you believe it’s acceptable to allow the ugliness of Magna’s language be levelled against them or any individual? Put aside your own disdain for Catholic Priests in answering this question.

Like

8.56: UGLINESS: HATRED: PERVERT: DEVIANT: ABUSER – all words neatly defined by Magna all day. Oh to have one’s life so embittered and to let drink fuel the madness!! Sad to witness a person’s life with rage. Magna, Remember your dignity as a child of God not that of the darkness of sataaaaaaan…….Has sure has a deep grip on you. PERVERT.

Like

10.18: Yes Magna, I know Satan, thanks to you. You personify the traits of a dangerously possessed, dark, evil man. But you seem happiest when in your deep evil darkness. All humanity is sapped out of you, replaced with an ocean of filth. Jesus most definitely say of you – ” GET BEHIND ME SATAN…” You pervert.

Like

10.34
Funny you should say that.😕
Satan?😰
They thought the same of Jesus.
Called him ‘Beelzebul’.
Or somesuch. 😕

Like

It’s all so predictable. “Magna Carta” goes berserk. Dials down the rhetoric for a few days. Goes berserk again. Dials down. Goes mad once more. Tones it down. Spews our hate. Gets a tap on the wrist from Big Buck. Dials down. Goes apeshit with hate again. Tap on the wrist and mild criticism from the Blog Meistersinger. “Magna” says it will try to be more measured and won’t use words like “whore”. Big Buck praises it for some of the stuff it says which Buck describes as “that’s Magna at his best”. It’s a cycle. Wait and see if “Magna” throws another hissy fit and “resigns” from Buck’s blog. Set your watches because it will be back. It can’t stay away. Trolls need feeding and Buck’s blog dishes out tasty fodder.

Like

Civil partnerships should be “sexually abstinent friendships” – whether between a man and a woman or two people of the same sex, says the Church of England.
The pastroral advice from bishops was issued after a recent law change allowed straight couples to have a civil ceremony instead of a regular marriage. “With opposite sex civil partnerships, and with those for same sex couples, the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics remains unchanged,” says the statement “For Christians, marriage, that is the lifelong union between a man and a woman, contracted with the making of vows, remains the proper context for sexual activity.
“In its approach to civil partnerships the Church seeks to uphold that standard, to affirm the value of committed, sexually abstinent friendships and to minister sensitively and pastorally to those Christians who conscientiously decide to order their lives differently.” The law changed on New Year’s Eve after the Supreme Court agreed it was discriminatory to only allow same-sex couples to have civil partnerships. Registering a partnership gives the same legal rights and responsibilities as a married couple. They came in for same-sex couples in 2004, while same-sex marriage was legalised in 2013.
When it comes to its clergy, the Church of England allows same-sex civil partnerships – provided they are also sexually abstinent.
“The House of Bishops does not regard entering into a civil partnership as intrinsically incompatible with holy orders,” says the statement, adding that it would be a “social injustice to exclude from ministry those who are faithful to the teaching of the Church”.
LGBT campaigner Jayne Ozanne, a member of the Church’s General Synod, criticised the guidance.
She tweeted: “I’m sadly unsurprised by the content of this statement but I’m deeply saddened by its tone.
“It will appear far from ‘pastoral’ to those it discusses & shows little evidence of the ‘radical new Christian inclusion’ that we have been promised.”
The Church of England is currently carrying out a study on sexuality, called Living in Love and Faith, due out later this year. It said it will “inform further deliberations in the House of Bishops”.

Like

10.16

The C of E isn’t cognisant of its historical lineage.

Marriage was not a sacrament until the 12th century. Before this, marriage was a purely civil contract, and the Christian Church did not object to it…nor to the sex inside it.

Sex between two, loving and committed people is sacramental…IN AND OF ITSELF.

What does 1 Peter 4:8 say? ‘Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers a multitude of sins.’ (‘Sins’ here meaning, of course, quasi-sin…like the kind picked out by the C of E. 😆

Like

Just so long as they don’t have sex though, ain’t that so, Maggie? No genital contact? No penile or anal explorations between the two who love each other? Going south is a great big No No. Below the waist is verboten. They can only love in a “spiritual” way and if they absolutely fancy the pants off each other and want to ravish one another, inside out and upside down, tough tits eh?

Like

11.29
My remark(s) on same-sex sexual intercourse are OPINION. And I may be wrong.
So far, however, I haven’t heard a convincing argument in its defence.

Like

So tour views “Carta” on same sex relationships are exactly the same as the RCC. So what are you slabberin about?

Like

7.14
If only YOU would stop ‘slabberin’, you might manage to construct at least a plausible moral case for same-sex sexual intercourse.
Imagine the kudos, for you, on hearing Magna say ‘I was wrong. You were right.’
Tempted?😕

Like

You’d love a “plausible moral case for same sex sexual intercourse” wouldn’t ya, Magsy? Because then you could justify it for yourself. It’s because you can’t or won’t that gives rise to your self-loathing, expressing itself in hatred for priests, the Church and contempt for everyone, isn’t it?
God help ya. Get a life. Do you think we are stupid? We can see through your attempts to portray yourself, in the past, as a rambunctious, heterosexual, rutting stag. Even more so your “slim, blond, blue eyed” imagined persona. That was a total giveaway! You’re as queer as a bottle of chips and you can’t reconcile with it. Hence the continuous daily vituperation.

Like

Go on Magna. Get your member out and give it a good flogging. It’s probably the only pleasure you have. No person in a balanced, mature relationship would have the time or inclination to be so involved with this blog. So Mags give yourself a cheap thrill. It’s about the worth of you. Sad sad person.

Like

10.34

The only pleasure I have? Really? Onanism?

You’re probably too poorly educated to know what ‘onanism’ means, so look it up.

Others here would disagree with you. They think I have other pleasures, like alcohol and hate.

Maybe you could organise a symposium, to have you all agree on what I am. This way you would all at least appear intelligent.

Oh! Excuse me. You don’t know what ‘symposium’ means either, do you?

Look it up. 😅

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