The teaching of the Roman Catholic Church says:
That sex outside marriage is a serious sin.
That homosexuality is a grave disorder and sin.
That masturbation is a serious sin.
That pornography is a sin.
That the use of condoms is a sin.

When you become an RC priest you represent the Church and its teachings.

You make a promise of celibacy – which just does not mean you will not get married – but also means you will not have a sex life.

The RC Church grants you ordination on the basis that:

You will be celibate and be chaste.
That you will obey your bishop or religious superior.
That you will pray the Divine Office every day.

You cannot grab all the benefits and privileges and forget about the responsibilities you have taken on and the vows and promises you made.

If you do that you are a HYPOCRITE and a PRETENDER.

When I first visited the Statue of Liberty in New York harbour I remarked that there should be a similar statue built opposite it – THE STATUE OF RESPONSIBILITIES.

Many RC priests nowadays are living double lives.
And that goes right to the top with Benedict and his boyfriend George.

The RC priesthood is now being used by those who would not do well anywhere else in life. They use it for the “THREE HOTS AND A COT – a roof over their heads and three hot meals a day.

People have seen through them and are walking away from them in droves. Quite right too!

I would have more respect for them if the observed the Catechism they promote and preach and practice what they preach.



He is an identikit Legionary of Christ. What on earth made him as a young, personable young graduate from Stanford “fall in love” with that order and get himself ordained when Marciel Maciel was running the show? There is not a flicker of doubt, or questioning of self or of what he regards as the inviolable message. That kind of smooth self-satisfied certainty is troubling, and, knowing what we do, we cannot help but wonder what dark matter it conceals.


9 12: Marge – you’d know all about the nether region…it’s where your brain permanently resides…get it, shitheads…😍😍😍😣😣😏😥🐱🐱🐱🐱🐱🐽🐽🐽🐽🐽🐽…oink, oink, oink, pigsty man!


Tis all about the sinz hi What is a sin anyway? Tis a label put on an action by human beings. Remember when Twas a sin to eat meat on Friday. Once a sin always a sin Sin is a judgement in the mind of the doer. Anyway lads sometimes this blog talks right and often talks schyte. So where is all this leading to Action or the daily coffee conference hi


Trying telling that to Eamon’s seminarian. So many senior clergy and young clergy compromised by this Armagh Seminarian. Pat I totally disagree with your assessment regarding Byrne as the most famous homosexual in Maynooth , its Stephen Wilson.


Why is he a creep? He is an earnest man. He is an American, so will often seem more “out there” than we are used to. I cannot understand that as soon a younger man presents himself as well groomed, the clean cut look, you jump to presume he is a creep, or a closet homosexual or the like. Surely, this is the worst form of argument? In classic english studies we call this “argumentum ad hominem.” It is a nothing argument and just reveals our own bias.
I occasionally look at your website and I must admit I have noticed your preoccupation with matters homosexual etc. It is almost obsessive. Please try and cover some other matters. I can detect that you are a good man and priest who has been hurt in the way in which you have been dealt. Please don’t let the anger and hurt of that direct you from your path of love, care and forgiveness after the mind and heart of Our Lord.


The video is at least fifteen years old; he was a washed-up actor who couldn’t get any work, so he turned to the priesthood. Nowadays he is a pepper-and-salt daddy. What else is new?


Correct. The Romanists cannot have it both ways. And Jesus told them so: ‘You cannot serve both God and mammon.’ And yet, the Romamists continue trying to serve two masters by vowing or promising obedience to an opulent and corrupt institution while claiming to serve Jesus.

Piffle! 🤧

The Romanists are first and foremost liars; everything else corrupt and mean about them (and which is now internationally known) inevitably follows.

As for that video, what a fawn-fest?! 😱 Nice meets Nicer in an orgy of mutual, saccarhine back-slapping, which basically tells us ‘God is nice, so we’ re being nice, too’. Er, nice. 😖

The programme is called The Journey Home, and it is broadcast on EWTN. It glories in luring Prods and Atheists into Roman Catholicism, showing them off as trophies to an applauding audience of remarkably self-contented, mostly American, right-wing Catholics. But it would be more topical, and more honest, to produce a programme called The Journey Outward, exploring why so many Catholics are leaving the Church. One reason for this is obvious : it is because of perpetually ‘nice’ pricks like the convert priest in that fawn-fest video.

(Ack! Am just determined not to be nice, like. 😀)


Maggie the biggest liar is you, you poor dear.

They don’t “serve two masters”. They serve only one Master. The promise of obedience is to Christ who said to those to whom he entrusted his and his Father’s authority – “whoever hears you, hears me and whoever rejects you, rejects me and the one who sent me”.

He also said first to Peter and then to the other apostles – “whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven …….”.

To obey a bishop in no way whatsoever detracts from loyalty to Christ.

Furthermore, if a bishop, God forbid, should try and ask a priest or anyone to do something forbidden by God’s Law, the priest would have to say no and refuse. Simples.

He is not vowed to obey a sinful order only what is legitimate. You are deliberately twisting the meaning of the promise of obedience for your own nefarious purposes.

The Church has legitimate authority given by God and we rightly listen to and respect that authority. There is no “free for all”. The Eucharist itself has always had a presider as we know from the earliest descriptions of it. The Church as Christ intended has always had leaders.

“Dirty, parasitical, scrounging, mooching, leeching” etc.??? You are describing your own miserable self there, Margo luv.

Your “loathing” is really for yourself. You are projecting your self loathing on to others. You are demonic in your vicious lashing out towards priests whom you envy.

It’s your own fault you got booted out of Maynooth. You need to make peace with your past.


Arguing with this “Magna Carta”, responding to its provocation, is utterly futile. You are arguing with someone’s projection. The person behind it is being deliberately extremist, irrational, outrageous and wants to give maximum offence. The author is probably a priest. Magna Carta isn’t real and you will never win an argument with it. You might as well respond to Little Bo Peep.


Magna, your comment has made @1:13 demonstrate exactly what is wrong with the promise, and so well.
There is only no difference between obedience to God and to the bishop if there is some identification between the two. And that is exactly where the problem lies.
Even if you say that the bishop in his office in some way personifies God in the diocese you have to go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify this if he is a scoundrel. And particularly as we are all aware of how badly bishops have dealt with abuse. Either God was allowing and covering it up or the bishops are not representing God.
It’s exactly the same as the problem of every cleric who comes on here and smugly comments that he acts in persona Christi: the clergy are so identified with God that they have become gods, hence their resistance to accountability or any interference.



All those passages you quoted in defence of that evil vow or promise are dependent on two absolute premises:

first, that the bishops always, without fail, can and do act in Jesus’ name. (They don’t and they can’t, because they are not Jesus. History, and common sense, bear this out);

and second, that Jesus was speaking literally here, if actually he spoke the words at all. 🤔

In view of the first premise, clearly he wasn’t speaking literally. These verses, in terms of literary form, are in the mould of such passages as ‘if your eye offends you, pluck it out’, and ‘I am the vine, you are the branches’. This is going over your very tiny head, isn’t it? So I’ll spell it out for you: they are
FIGURATIVE passages, part of the rich fabric of literary types in the Bible.

You’ve a fifth-grade grasp of Scripture. Sure you can read it, like any fifth-grader, but you haven’t a clue about its meaning. In future, leave this to the big boys, like me. 😀

And God save us from biblical literalists, like you. 🤧



Wonderful comment, wise, and with good old common sense. But it will be a blunt sword to the poster at 2.16.

These people are so committed to defending the status quo of their hierarchical church that they are reduced to the kind of preposterous, vacuous defence that he made. ‘Mental gymnastics’ I think you called it.

And they are atrocious gymnasts. 😀



Yes,of course the church has always had a presider , and in the very early years of the church’s existence, it was ANYone in the assembly of disciples, including no doubt women. It was only in later years that a priestly caste of patriarchal presider was created, a band of elitist celebrants who mysogynistically qualified Jesus’ instruction ‘do this in memory of me’. Jesus did not make fulfillment of this dependent upon male-only, Romanist priesthood, as you very well know.

And Christ did not give supreme and exclusive authority to Peter, or to the Apostles as a whole.

As for the supposed leaders in the church, there is only one: the Holy Spirit. Jesus did say that HE, not Peter, was the ‘way, the truth and the life’. And he did say that HE, not Peter, would build his church. You have been proof-texting in your adsurd defence of Roman Catholic hierarchy; and boy, does it show! Jesus, made it clear that his disciples, not just The Twelve, were to remain in Jerusalem until they ALL were empowered by the Holy Spirit. That power, authority, was given to all communally, not to a select few.

You Romanist Christ-betrayers have been disloyal to Jesus’ teaching almost from the get-go.


“Magna Carta”, according to your “reasoning” in your responses to the person who challenged you, every line of the NT and gospels can be rendered meaningless.

You are clutching at straws, “Magna“ and denying the plain sense of Scripture. Even if “whoever hears you hears me ….” is the same vein as “take the plank out of your own eye” IT STILL MEANS THAT THERE IS AN AUTHORITY TO WHICH OBEDIENCE MUST BE GIVEN. It means what it says!

Utterly meaningless, is your “rationale” just like your lie that the priests and bishops of the Church have “betrayed” Christ from the get go. Lies spawned by the hatred, jealousy, envy and bitterness of a sad old internet troll, that spends all its days boozing and brooding 🙄 Get a life.

5th grade knowledge of Scriptures? That’s rich from a composite that has awarded itself imaginary doctorates 😁


It’s the double life thing that really gets me and is so damaging. I know so many priests who live a double life. They know I know. But, it’s just seen as the background to which they carry on with their duplicity and parallel lives. It’s just accepted as the norm. Now, by and large, I don’t care about what they do. But, what I do care about is being taken for a fool. In doing so they have lost my allegiance, my respect, my loyalty. In addition, they are doing themselves so much damage, psychologically, emotionally and spiritually. You do not get away scot free from living such a double life. It damages all around. I’ve distanced myself from these people so that I too will not be damaged by them. I suggest that many of us do that. Go elsewhere. Keep your money. Shun them. Call them out. Maybe they will then get the message.



The Romanists are learning, in Lockdown, that the Laity, not the Clergy, are the soul of the Church. The latter need the Laity (to sponge off), but the Laity do not need them…for anything, since the grace of God abounds, and without intermediary.

Were I a dirty, parasitical, scrounging, sponging, mooching Romanist leech, I should feel ashamed not to be able to support myself financially. It is as though none of these moochers has ever grown up and remains in a state of financial dependency on his parents.

Yes, shaming.

Not to mention ’embarrassing’.

Oh! And ‘useless’. 😕


Au contraire MagnaTroll – priests and people are closer than ever and will emerge from lockdown stronger. Absence makes the heart grow fonder 🙂

And btw we don’t require a mooching, feckless, worthless, vicious old troll, to remind us that God is close to us even though we are constrained from our usual ways of experiencing His Presence. 🙂



If you would just for a moment raise your squinted eyes from the gutter of parochial, Romanist, theological dogma, you would see everywhere, priest, the Real Presence of Jesus, especially in these times of social isolation through Covid–19. In the service, care, attention, diligence, and selflessness of health-care personnel; in the gregarious spirit of those who volunteered as community carers for the duration by looking out for the vulnerable and the housebound; in the spirit of neighbours who keep an eye on one another; in the spirit of those who work in the food and retail trades; in the…

What’s the use? 😕

You people are so fixated on dogma that you miss the wood for the trees. It is why those fools, Martin and McCafferty (and God-knows -how-many-other Romanist priests) thought they were taking Jesus on tour, into no-go areas for him 😅, in large, baroque (‘tacky’) monstrances, while dressed in equally tacky liturgical vestments.

Have you any idea, priest, how preposterous Martin, and those others, appeared? How pathetic and how ignorant of Biblical Theology they were?

Your ‘church’ is a global laughingstock, not least because it thinks it could get away, for the most part, with offering prayers, and parading monstrances in public, rather than actually sharing with national health services its Croesus-like wealth.

It is puzzling, isn’t it priest, that your ‘church’ can find millions for legal fees when it seeks to challenge statutes of limitation to stymie justice for those raped or sodomised by Romanist priests, like you, but ‘can’t find’ less than a tenth of this to fund a ventilator for a hospital?

Your ‘church’ priest, is a scandalous, calamitous, Christ-betraying sham.

But credit where it is due, priest: you were right; you don’t require ‘a mooching, feckless, worthless, vicious old troll to remind (you) that God is close…’. No one quite so distinguished. But you do require SOMEONE to point out your errors, since your moral smugness is ‘smogging’ your vision.👀

As for people’s and priests’ now being drawn closer, if this is true, it isn’t testament to the Christlike qualities of Romanist moochers 😅, but to the docility of the Sheep. But it won’t last, priest, because you parasites, scroungers, spongers, and moochers just keep cocking up, don’t you? You keep mauling the Sheep.

It is as inevitable as … death, really. 😕


Birds of a feather flock together. Your expectations have probably been too high, but it is good you have stopped giving them any more money.


I left ministry as a young Deacon many years ago because I fell in love with a Woman. I felt it was the decent thing to do or else I knew I was been a hypocrite and could not live a double life. I am married now, I love the Woman I am married too but still feel I have a calling to Priesthood. The Hierarchical Church treated me like a Leper when I left. I do not hold any resentments towards the Church or any one, it’s just sad that their are good people out their who are married who would be valuable in the Priesthood. Have a Blessed Day everyone.


Yes, priests can’t have it both ways but they can with integrity have it either way.
I must stress that what I am about to say is not my own view 🤣-
But say if you are a Catholic who actually believes the teaching of the church, you would think that sex is fine between a married couple always with procreative intent.
If you are a heterosexual man you would think that masturbation or lusting after random women are sinful and would use the traditional remedies to this sin.
If you are sexually attracted to your own sex you would additionally think that that sexual attraction is disordered (I. E. Not directed in the right direction). Your response would be exactly the same.
I suspect that in that situation living in a virtual knocking shop would be an occasion of sin so even if you thought you might have a priestly vocation you would avoid going to seminary.
I believe in seminaries in the time before the sexual revolution life was rigidly controlled to prevent ‘particular friendship’ and to ensure seminarians were under a high level of observation to stop, shall we say, liaisons.
Surely this approach is not trying to have it both ways and would be trying to go the way of strictly sticking to the faith?
I also hope this would illustrate how modern formation is part of the problem of trying to have it both ways?


The Priesthood as we have come to know it is not a ‘true’ calling anymore, its a job and well paid occupation with many using it to abuse the ‘true’ vocation.
Let’s pray for our damaged Priests the way Jesus’ would have Prayed- with sincerity, love and mercy.

My Prayer is for Pat Buckley also who has caused much hurt and pain to some very sincere and Holy Priests.


11.29: What a nonsensical question. Nonsense. Such trivial concerns, Bishop – sorry, “b”ishop!!


I was genuinely interested in why someone would always use a capital when talking about priesthood or priests. Was it like the way I use Him when referring to Jesus – out of devotion and respect?


11.29: Pat, the more relevant part of contribution at 11.19 is in the last paragraph which you avoided: the reality of all the hurt you have caused many in pursuit of a vsry self serving agenda of vengeance. Pay attention to the need for self examination.


I do not have a vengence agenda. My agenda is EXPOSE the evil and corruption in the RC institution.


Its always been my teaching. I use capital for all ranks of the Church, not just for the top brass.


The Church’s, and generally held Christian, view of sexuality and the way in which it is to be used is just wrong. It comes out of a particular time, cultural and scriptural context which colours it and warps it. By pretty much viewing everyone and everything through the prism of this warped lens, the Church puts such intolerable burdens on people, and has been responsible for so much harm over the centuries. Many people, like me, have a different view of sexuality and how it should be expressed, and it simply does not have moral connotations or value given to it. That liberates me to be responsible, thoughtful, loving and good in my use of my sexuality, rather than relying on a distorted and damaging view given to me by the Church. Until the Church is able to liberate itself from its current view and understanding of sexuality it will find itself hobbled, and increasingly irrelevant to people who see through it. Of course, for many centuries the Church has been able to use its teaching about sexuality as a mean of control, irrespective of the damage which it knows it is doing to people. But they don’t care about that, they care more about control, power and authority. The traditional Christian understanding of sexuality does not influence my life any more. I have liberated myself from it. And I am so much the better for it. Give it a try !


I’m @ 1143. No, not a priest and never wanted to be. Just someone who has been around a bit and attended various parishes and been involved, and seen what is going on. Because some of it is so obvious to see and you only have to put two and two together to get a clue about what is happening. I’m used to doing that in my own world of work and life, using my intuition and my antennae and having some situational awareness of what is going on around me. It’s not rocket science. I’m sure lots of other people see and hear what I do, but just chose to ignore it or won’t join up the dots. I do join up the dots and I think I see things as they are and not how the clergy want me to see them. I also see good clergy, sometimes !


Pat is was wild the Rabbit room on St Mary’s Corridor. High tea, play doctors and nurses, its was like a Teenage girl’s bedroom. To gain entry you were expected to memorize a musical knock .


Fr Eddie Gallagher was invited once into his room for tea and buns. Eddie left his room looking refreshed and relaxed. this occurred in 2016. Why did you know who give this Derry Priest a special invite to his bedroom during the height of the scandal. Fr Eddie was a changed man.


Bishop Pat, have you watched the ceremonies from Mullingar. What are your thoughts? Bishop Deenihan, Fr Darby, Fr Campbell and Fr Heery and a deacon. Would you be of the opinion that it was a masterclass in solemnity? Didn’t someone say here once that things were tough for some Mullingar priests under the old regime. Bishop Deenihan appears to have cleared the decks. All the Others have been moved elsewhere



There is something inordinately jarring about Archbishop Eamon Martin’s, er, pining lament for his, and his priests’, ‘people’ during the isolation of the Covid-19 Pandemic, in particular since he, and his priests, have done so much damage to the faith of people through their hedonistic and/or self-protecting conduct.

I suspect that Martin, and his kind, miss not so much their ‘people’, but their money. But Martin, that vile effete little man, had the good grace not to raise the subject…again.

Hopefully, the silver lining in the Pandemic will be the realisation among Catholics that Jesus was with them the entire time, in their hearts (as Christ admitted in the Gospel: ‘the Kingdom of Heaven is within.’) and in their love for one another. This is the real presence of Jesus, of his spirit, active and pro-active in their lives. It is a deeper reality than the showy stunts of men like Martin and McCafferty, with their monstrous monstrance-weilding tours of housing estates, along with its implied heretical theology that these men were bringing Jesus into those areas.


5.33: A predictable diatribe. Same old vitriol against Priests. This troll is happiest when pouring forth his poison. I have news for you, Mr. Smart Ass. In our parish we are reaching a phenomenal amount of parishioners through our parish webcam and website. The responses by emails, texts, letters and phone calls are overwhelming and encouraging. Even those who are normally non church going are adding their voices of gratitude. Many just cannot wait to return to be with their praying, caring, believing and Christian community. Thankfully, most people, even those who have stopped practising, still cherish the comfort they receive and are receiving in prayer and especially through the celebration of the Eucharist which they follow through our webcam. You, of course, would know nothing about the Eucharist and Christian community, apart from your Wikipedia information!! A lived, prayerful intimacy with Christ is alien to you. Thank God for the great faithfulness of parishioners which will rebound hugely when possible. Hatred, ridicule, oppression and poison will never destroy God’s love nor the Eucharistic community. Thank God too for the dedication of priests at this difficult time. Marge, were I to tell you the amount of donations given through the post and through our website facility would enrage you. Such amazing kindness and generosity! God is indeed GOOD. Let go of your hatred, heretic.



Whoo-hoo hullabaloo! 😅

I love it when ‘Christmen’, like you, lose all self-control and expose their normally latent, but typical characters. It’s a delight to see the mask slip, to expose the Dorian-esque nature of Romanist priesthood.

What are you ‘reaching’ parishoners with, ‘Father’? More to the point, why do you, and your kind, believe that they need to be reached? And by whom? By you, and your kind? Not by Jesus, that’s for sure, because Jesus is, was, already with them. But they don’t really believe this, do they? Not really; not deeply. Otherwise they wouldn’t be so afraid, wouldn’t have reacted in such a relieved way when that prissy, self-preening, effete little fool, Martin, ‘brought’ Jesus to them … What was it he reportedly said? … because they couldn’t come to him.😅

You, priest, and your vile parasitical kind, have made people dependent upon you, and your so-called ‘Sacraments’. You have deprived people of the opportunity to develop a personal relationship with Jesus, directly, without the intermediary of Romanist priesthood. You have Catholics as insecure as little children (too immature for that solid spiritual nourishment Paul speaks of), afraid to do much without the priest’s moral licence. You rob them not only of their financial wealth, but of their spiritual inheritance: their God-given right to know the security that comes from complete and utter dependence on Jesus alone, not on Romanist priesthood, or on Romanist priests.

And it serves you, priest, you and your vile kind, to maintain this ugly state, because frightened people can be very generous to those they believe can help and reassure them in such uncertain times as these. Parasites like you, priest.

Which brings me to those donations. I’d bet that many of these came from elderly parishoners, people who could ill-afford them, but who were nevertheless so grateful to ‘Father’ for his… For his what? 😕 A good question. Because ‘Father’ brings them himself, along with his phony biblical theology, when he tells these dependent souls that he is the one who brings them Jesus. And all, heroically, amid the risks of the Covid-19 Pandemic.

A parting shot, priest: I’d bet (And I’d bet heaps) that you won’t return to the elderly any of that money they donated, money they need far more than you, and your vile kind, given the Croesus-like wealth of your church.


Pat, I’m afraid this is one time you’ve got it all wrong. Not only can RC priests have it both ways but many have had it all ways 😂


It will be every-which-way with those ol’ gingers; daisy-chain, chain-gang, floral-arrangement, link-sausage, chicken-on-spit, lucky-Pierre, etc.


Honest to God, you couldn’t make this up. Have a look at this pantomime from New York St Patrick’s Cathedral. What a load of up their own arses idiots are these. The cantor ?! Cardinal Dolan with his little red skull cap all askew during his performance of a sermon. And tons of people. Sod social distancing there. It’s worth watching just for a laugh.


6.51: A predictable diatribe from you which is ignorant. You are the idiot – another cynic, mocker and jeerer of all things CATHOLIC. What’s the matter with you psychopaths with all that hatred?


Pat. I went to Scots College in Salamanca in early 90’s. I lasted a year. It was an eye opener. Sex everywhere and the staff were so camp too. I will admit that I did experiment a few times, difficult to keep up with them academically and sexually though. Happily married now but all the stories on here do resonate with me. One of the students had the biggest cock I’d ever seen and is a senior cleric these days. I wonder if he still likes a Friday night gin n blow.


Anon at 6.59: A good riposte to that damned poisonous soul, M. Carta. Sadly, this conglomerate of a dysfunctional personality is deaf to all other viewpoints. It needs healing. This thing Carta is more deathly than the present virus. Let him rant and rave in the madness of his drunkenness.



I know. I know.

I pray every night, before I go unconscious through a surfeit-of-gin stupor, that God will strike that bastardo dead with a thunderbolt (preferably two, in case the first misses the mark).😇


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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