Chapter 26 Fr Harry Moore
26.1 In March 1982, Archbishop Ryan received the following letter:
“At 4am approx. on Sat., February 27th 1982, I was indecently assaulted by Fr. H. Moore C.C. of St. Josephs parish, Glasthule Co. Dublin.
Inquiries subsequently conducted by me lead me to believe that this was 0by no means an isolated incident.
I therefore earnestly request that appropriate action be taken without delay”.
26.2 The sender of this letter identified himself and his address. However, he did not give his age but he is likely to have been in his late teens. The
response of Archbishop Ryan was as follows: “In view of the fact that your letter of the 8
th March was marked “Private and Confidential”, there is little I could do about the matter. If, however, you wish to discuss the matter further,
I would ask that you get in touch with Monsignor Jerome Curtin, who is a Vicar General of the Diocese”.
26.3 At the time of this complaint Fr Harry Moore was a curate in Glasthule parish and the alleged assault was said to have taken place in the presbytery.
Fr Moore was born in 1936 and was ordained in 1960. His first appointment was as chaplain to Artane Industrial School from 1960 – 1967. During his time there he compiled a report at the request of Archbishop McQuaid on the conditions under which the boys lived in Artane. This report was handed over by the current Archbishop of Dublin to the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse.
26.4 His next appointment after Artane was as a curate in Ringsend parish until 1975. He was then sent to Kilquade parish for one year. He asked to be reassigned because of loneliness and he was given a position as assistant priest in a Catholic youth organisation.
26.5 During this period Fr Moore developed a serious alcohol abuse problem and was admitted to St John of God Hospital in 1977. A comprehensive medical report from this hospital was provided to Archbishop Ryan in March 1977. This report stated that Fr Moore was admitted “ostensibly because he had a problem with alcohol” which he said started
about three years earlier and had progressively become worse over the years.
26.6 The report stated that Fr Moore had begun to drink heavily in his early curacy and was consequently sent to a parish in Wicklow for six months where, owing to maladjustment, he was removed to the Catholic youth organisation for another six month stint. This in turn was followed by a year‟s sabbatical to study theology. By this time, the report noted, he had had two hospital stays for alcohol addiction.
26.7 He underwent various psychiatric and personality tests while in the hospital. The doctor noted that he had real concerns about Fr Moore‟s sexual functioning as he had “difficulty in satisfying his strong affectionate needs because of his inability to establish mature adult relationships”. His was described as a personality with “a very strong element of psychopathy and
hysteria”. He recommended Fr Moore forteam-based occupations if supervised correctly, but he did not recommend him for parish work.
26.8 Despite this medical report, Archbishop Ryan returned Fr Moore to active parish ministry, appointing him a curate in Edenmore parish in
26.9 Over the next two years he is recorded as receiving treatment for alcohol dependency. Despite leaving one of the facilities without completing his therapy, he was appointed a curate in Glasthule in February 1980. It is while he was assigned to Glasthule that the complaint of indecent assault noted above was conveyed to the Archdiocese (in March 1982).
26.10 In August 1982, it was suggested to Archbishop Ryan, by his auxiliary bishop, Bishop Comiskey, that Fr Moore needed treatment in Stroud. Fr Moore himself reacted negatively to that proposition. Within hours of having been informed of this proposal he was reported as having been discovered drunk and “with some young lay men”.
LHe had to be admitted to hospital suffering from an ulcer.
26.11 In September 1982, Fr Moore was sent to a therapeutic facility in the UK (not Stroud). Archbishop Ryan wrote to the administrator outlining Fr Moore‟s situation. He explained that various attempts had been made to rehabilitate him but all had failed. He stated that in addition to his alcoholism “there is some evidence of sexual indiscretions during Fr Moore‟s drinking bouts but it has been rather difficult to collect evidence concerning the nature and extent of these activities”.
26.12 Of particular significance is the fact that Archbishop Ryan does not appear to have sent the report from the St John of God‟s doctor although he did send a confidential letter from a friend of Fr Moore.
26.13 Fr Moore was relieved of his curacy in Glasthule due to ill health. He remained at the UK facility until March 1983. The final report from the facility said that Fr Moore had explored his use of alcohol “as a means of covering his confused sexual identity, his way of evading responsibility…”. Further therapy was advised.
26.14 In June 1983 Fr Moore was appointed curate in Bayside parish. It was while he was there that he committed a number of very serious sexual
assaults, including buggery, on a young teenager.
Complaints in relation to these assaults were not received by the Archdiocese until 1999. The
Archdiocese was, however, aware of his escalating alcohol problem while in Bayside. In 1985 he had become unmanageable because of his alcoholism
and the parish priest had asked for him to be removed.
He was then appointed to Francis Street but relapsed again.
26.15 Despite the 1982 complaint from Glasthule and his prior history, Fr Moore was appointed chaplain to a secondary school for boys in October
1986. He also had an appointment in Cabinteely parish. He complained in
1992 about the lack of an official appointment to the secondary school. It was
Patrick Walsh was approached for a further assessment of Fr Moore, after he had been reported to have made inappropriate remarks to parents at a school function.
26.20 Dr Walsh informed Monsignor Stenson that Fr Moore “shows every sign of gravitating towards young people, especially males, as objects of
affection”. He also warned the authorities to be vigilant in their supervision of him and stated “unless he was prepared to engage over a long period of time lwith a therapeutic programme and with a system of supervision and regular
reviews, I believe there are considerable risks of a return to alcohol abuse or to inappropriate behaviour, particularly towards young people”.
26.21 In May 1995, at a meeting in Archbishop‟s House attended by the auxiliary bishops, the conclusion was reached that the only alternatives left to the Archbishop were:
a) the complete removal of Fr Moore from ministry for life;
b) that the Archbishop receive a report that would enable him to give Fr Moore an appointment.
26.22 In the end, Archbishop Connell terminated Fr Moore‟s tenure in Cabinteely and released him from all priestly duties. Fr Moore was still
attending Dr Walsh at this stage and was recorded as making progress.
26.23 In October 1995, Dr Walsh wrote to Archbishop Connell stating that the medical professionals were more optimistic of a meaningful recovery. He said: “as long as he remains sober, he will not, I believe, act out” and added that Fr Moore was adamant that “he has never sexually abused children or adolescents”. In light of his known history, Fr Moore‟s assertion should have been troubling to the Archdiocese.
26.24 Fr Moore expressed worry about the newly stated policy of the bishops of reporting all cases of child sexual abuse whether current or past. In November 1995, the Archdiocese did report theGlasthule incident to the Gardaí. When contacted by the Gardaí, the complainant did not want to make a formal complaint at that particular time but the matter was left open.
Somewhat late in the day, in 2002, the suspicions that arose in 1993 and
26.25 Fr Moore was very annoyed about the reporting to the Gardaí and claimed that his recovery had been sabotaged and retarded by the disclosure.
Monsignor Curtin, who had spoken to Fr Moore at the time of the Glasthule complaint and again in May 1995 about the 1995 adverse reports, was also annoyed about the matter, condemning what he saw as “a grave violation of justice and charity”. In February 1996, there was some discussion about
whether Fr Moore might have some sort of informal chaplaincy with the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) group, with which he was already involved.
The advisory panel
26.26 In April 1996, the file was passed to the recently established advisory panel who noted that the file is “light on certain important facts, particularly the ages of the young people involved”.
The panel expressed reservations on
the proposed appointment of Fr Moore as chaplain to the AA until there was a comprehensive assessment and treatment programme establishing whether there existed “significant danger of inappropriate behaviour occurring other
than in an alcohol related situation”.
26.27 Fr Moore decided not to be further assessed and to retire on health grounds. He retained his clerical faculties. He was allowed to say mass and
hear confessions whenever there was a need, for example, if a priest was sick or on holidays.
In April 1997, he signed the following document but it was noted that he expressed “unhappiness in relation to the need for signing the document” and “unhappiness about the manner of the process”. The document reads as follows:
“DUBLIN DIOCESAN CURIA
I, Father Harry Moore, a priest of the Archdiocese of Dublin, now retiring on grounds of health from holding any priestly office in the said
Archdiocese, hereby declare in reference to my diocesan faculties which I continue to enjoy:
1. I will confine the exercise of my sacramental ministry within
2. I will not be available for any ministry outside of the above except for the administration of the sacraments of penance and the anointing
of sick in situations of grave need.
I further declare:
1. I will attend for review meetings with Doctor Walsh on a basis to be agreed with him;
2. I will maintain contact on a regular basis with Monsignor Jerome Curtin and [another named priest]
3. I will maintain my regular involvement with A.A.;
4. To avoid even the suspicion of any possible impropriety, I shall avoid being alone with any person under 18 years of age.”
This document is signed by Monsignor John Dolan as a witness and Fr Moore, and is dated 29 April 1997.
26.28 In 1998, following a visit to Medjugorje, Fr Moore attempted to book a catholic youth hall for a weekend retreat for a number of adults and young
persons whom he had met on that trip. The diocese instructed the youth organisation not to give him the hall. It was pointed out to Fr Moore that this
activity was in breach of his contract with the diocese.
Bayside complaint, 1999
26.29 In February 1999, a man complained to the Gardaí that, while he was a teenager, he had been sexually abused by Fr Moore while Fr Moore was
attached to Bayside parish between 1983 and 1985.
The complainant had also complained to a bishop in the UK about this abuse. The UK bishop
contacted Archbishop Connell. The complainant travelled to Dublin in March 1999 to make a formal statement to the Gardaí. He told how he and a group of his friends used to drink with Fr Moore.
On one occasion he poured out his soul to the priest because he had problems at school and at home. The priest brought him to his own house and plied him with several kinds of drink. He woke from a semi-conscious state to find Fr Moore performing oral sex on him. He alleged that there was anal and oral sex frequently at Fr Moore‟s
26.30 When interviewed by the Gardaí, Fr Moore admitted that they had oral and anal sex but said that it was consensual and that it had occurred on only two occasions.
26.31 In September 1999, the 1997 declaration (see above) was amended and he agreed not to “exercise any public sacramental ministry within
churches and oratories”.
Criminal charges, 2000
26.32 In 2000, Fr Moore was charged with 18 counts of sexual assault including buggery in respect of the Bayside victim. He sought a judicial
review on the grounds of delay and was unsuccessful.
26.33 The charges were reduced to four and in July 2004, Fr Moore pleaded guilty to two charges of indecent assault and two charges of buggery while a curate in Bayside. Sentencing eventually took place in May 2005 and on that
date he was sentenced to seven years in respect of each of the buggery
charges and three years in respect of each of the sexual assault charges.
These sentences were suspended for a period of ten years and he was put under the supervision of the probation services. He was also ordered to
abide by the provisions of the Sex Offenders Act 2001.
This is generally described as „being placed on the sex offenders‟ register‟ – see Appendix 2.
26.34 While awaiting trial it was reported to Bishop Murray (who was no longer an auxiliary bishop of Dublin) in 2002 that Fr Moore had resumed giving school retreats. Fr Moore told the Commission that this was untrue.
Bishop Murray informed the Archdiocese of this report.
26.35 In 2004, the Archdiocese notified the health board about the complaints. Social workers from the area where Fr Moore lived met him to discuss the advisability of refraining from contact with children. This information was not produced in the initial HSE discovery (see Chapter 6) and was brought to the Commission‟s attention only after the HSE received the
The Commission’s assessment
26.36 The reaction of Archbishop Ryan to the 1982 complaint was totally inadequate. The Archbishop had a comprehensive psychiatric report detailing
Fr Moore‟s problems with alcohol and with his sexuality. Given that the Archbishop had already ignored the advice of the psychiatrist (in 1977) about not locating Fr Moore in a parish setting, the Archbishop‟s response to the 1982 complaint was inexcusable.
26.37 Here was a priest whom he knew, from the 1977 psychiatric report, had many problems. There was a complete failure on his part to
comprehensively investigate a complaint of actual sexual abuse and possible other incidents of sexual abuse as reported in the letter. His excuse, that
there was little he could do since the letter was marked private and confidential, is deemed by the Commission to be unacceptable. Had he acted appropriately in relation to this complaint, it might have prevented the very serious assaults that took place some years later on a teenager for which Fr Moore was convicted.
26.38 The Archbishop did not forward the 1977 psychiatrist‟s report to the UK therapeutic facility in May 1982, when he sent Fr Moore for treatment
there. He did however tell that facility that there had been sexual indiscretions during Fr Moore‟s drinking bouts. He also gave permission to that facility, subject to Fr Moore‟s consent, to contact St John of God Hospital directly.
26.39 One of the features of the handling of this case was the number of different doctors to whom Fr Moore was sent. There was a failure to coordinate their efforts, diagnoses and recommendations until very late in the
26.40 The Commission‟s view is that it was unacceptable for the Archdiocese to leave Fr Moore unmonitored for a period of six years in the
26.41 There was good communication between the UK bishop (to whose diocese the Bayside complaint was initially made) and the Archdiocese. The English bishop notified the Archdiocese. Archbishop Connell replied promptly that he was nominating Monsignor Dolan to deal with it. The UK bishop met the complainant and told him this. He also notified the Archdiocese that he had done so and told them that the complainant had gone to the police in the UK with his complaint.
26.42 The Gardaí handled the case appropriately and their efforts resulted in a successful prosecution.
I wanted readers to see and understand the disastrous mishandling of sexual abuse in the past.
The case above goes from 1980 to 2000
The whole emphasis was om:
1. The saving if the Church’s reputation
2. The looking after if the priest and not the victim.
Hopefully this mishandling is a thing of the past.
But If we forget our past we will repeat its mistakes.
MICHAEL BYRNE’S PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT
We discovered yesterday that MJB is employed as chaplain at St Colmcille’s Hospital on the Dublin Wicklow border.
Archbishop John Charles McQuaid died there on April 7th 1973.
Its good to see that MJB has found his feet in hospital chaplaincy – a place where untold good can be done.
129 replies on “HOW THE ARCHDIOCESE OF DUBLIN SERIOUSLY MISHANDLED THE CASE OF AN ABUSING PRIRST.”
Plymouth Diocese had concerns about Peter Littleton prior to his transferal to Southwark Archdiocese.
Why were they ignored?
Wonersh Seminary had concerns about Peter Littleton after he was ordained Deacon. They were so serious, the seminary authorities attempted to block his ordination to the priesthood.
Why were they ignored?
The Rector of Wonersh boycotted Peter Littleton’s ordination to the priesthood. Why was he ignored?
That is an astonishing piece of information @10:41 pm, yet it would explain why he went through nine years of training and switched dioceses. Again it would appear that a bishop – in this case surprisingly the late Peter Smith – went against all advice and ordained a dubious candidate. We have already seen the fall-out from Philip Egan’s persisting in ordaining JP Lyttle. And how many more? I’m far from easy with hounding young men for youthful indiscretions, but, as Magna regularly and correctly reminds us, these characters are opting for lives as Romanist agents of a system which vilifies their gay sisters and brothers – among many others whose lives don’t “measure up”. So, to take another, is it true that Josh Hilton played the field at his two seminaries, yet was ordained by Marcus Stock, who should have known better? Or has Josh been shamelessly traduced on this blog, and deserves an apology? And as for all the others mentioned on this blog: is there anybody who is “okay”?
Pat’s presentation of the past case in Dublin is a salutary reminder that little has changed, something most of us know, no matter how the bishops and seminary staff deny and dissemble. Frankly I cannot take any ordination seriously, and am reminded of Psalm 14 in which God looks down from Heaven to see if a single one is wise or seeks God: “All have turned away, all alike turned sour … Are they not aware, all these evil-doers? They are devouring my people … Ps 14: 2-4
Well, they have to spend parishioners donations on training somebody, for example, in this case; £85.00 X 365 days X 9 years = £279,225.00 is the minimum that has probably been spent to produce Littlewanker.
Your post has forfeited any semblance of rationality by your appeal to the sociopathic soundings of a poster who contributes nothing except vulgar prejudice.
12.34: Are you a goid Priest in God’s eyes or are you – what are you – tell us. Then we might make a better assessment of your judgment.
Wonersh.org is still “Site currently under development.” Strange?
‘Still under develepmont’, well, that is one statement from the Rcc we can all agree on 🤣🤣
Seminarians dont spend 365 days a year in a seminary. The average cost per seminarian is £35,000 per year. £35,000 x 6 = £210,000.
Oh boy, there is so much there ! Son of a farming family ? I bet he hardly ever laid a hand to the plough, sensitive little soul. Goes from nothing, to Evangelical, to Traddy Catholic. And spends 9 years training. 9 years ! What took so long ? Well, I think I can guess. There will have been question marks about his suitability all along the way, moving from one seminary to another. What gets me is that with so many of these guys, the seminary usually picks up something that is out of kilter about the seminarian, and the bishop ignores it, moves the guy somewhere else, does a bit of delaying, but then ordains a guy over whom there have been consistent question marks about suitability. Why ? This guy Littleton, JLP, Hilton….. and so many more. Ordained by bishops like Smith, Egan and Stock, who think that they know better than anybody else. Do bishops not realise, these are damaged goods and will only cause trouble ion the future? We see the evidence on this blog daily. And even if they are rumbled further down the track, what happens ? They are sent off at great expense for ‘treatment’, they become ‘pious’ and ‘observant’, they are ‘rehabilitated’. They keep under the radar, but essentially they and their antics do not change. Until they get caught or exposed again. They should never have been ordained, they should have been ‘let go’ at their first indiscretion after ordination, and they should not be allowed back to lord it over us, and try to fool us in to thinking that they are holy and faithful priests.
9.53 you’ve basically repeated yourself from yesterday. Anyone would think that you have a vendetta against Peter.
Smith was conditioned by CMO’C to become the tool of the Del Boy element. I knew a squeaky (when sacramental) Romanist, ex-Valladolid, prior to the lace era, who turned beach evangeliser.
Time again work like that of Calasanz, Fitzgerald, Bosco after his death, also the half-baked Arguello, has got hijacked. When Rome isn’t catholic we don’t have to belong to Rome.
But taking our main aim against those who agree with us, while their timing is their own affair, is wrong.
@ 11:04 – Well, Littleprick is the gift that keeps giving. The more that is revealed about him, the more interesting he becomes. He is a self-publicist, so I imagine in some perverse way he is rather enjoying all this attention. He is a self-righteous, arrogant, rigourist nitwit, and I see no reason not to bring him and his nonsense to public attention for dissection and ridicule. There will be much more to be exposed over time, I am absolutely confident.
Who are you?
9.53: You obviously are a deranged, jealous brat. You have a hateful vendetta against this priest. I think you need to grow up. Stop being the hounding bastardo with your trolling harrassment and bullying. You are the one who needs caring. Also, you wrote the same hate speech yesterday. Liars need good memories!!
What was the basis for the concerns /attempts to block ordination? I am interested as this chap has recently arrived in a parish close to here. Equally concerned that some / all of this sounds scurrilous so good to understand. Thank you.
How many more of these cases must come to light before the so-called ‘faithful’ awaken to the fact that dirty, filthy, paedophile, Romanist 😉 ….. that -word- pat- hates …. are NOT needed for service of Christ.
Where are MMM and Joe Lollard? Are they well?
And where is Tom Wood, and all the rest we haven’t heard from in recent weeks? Are they well?
I’m very well thanks Magna.
I seldom bother with the blog now as it has become so boringly repetitive both in content, and the tit for tat negative hostile retorts even to well expressed informative contributions , evidently from a cadre of non intelligent, small minded and ill informed clerics.
I’ve also noted, and regret, the absence of the educative, and at times witty comments from many of my favourite contributors of the past.
11.34: MMM – you forget the elephant in the room – Magna. His obnoxious, insulting and hateful comments and many late night drunken, vulgar insults put many people off. So, less of your condescension – and a little more truthful realisation about the negative impact which this fool has on this blog. When he is absent, there’s always a greater, respectful interaction and sharing of opinion. So, weaken up from your cocooning and define this Bitch Magna for what he really is.
Are you willing to say who is the chief protagonist, MMM? I have been following Pat’s blog right from the start, perhaps you did too, MMM. In the early days there were no comments because the blog wasn’t famous and then there was a wonderful period filled with clever, creative and light-hearted comments by regulars. There was exchange of views and variety of opinions, together with engagement on issues.
Then someone found the blog and ruined it. That someone, being somewhat egotistical, will identify himself and launch a vicious retort in a moment.
Driven away from the blog by Magna, like many before them. The old blog, before Magna found it, was great craic and much better. Even MMM says so.
Pat @3.58. You might as well post a picture of anything because nobody bothers addressing the original post especially today (and I do notice the irony that I am doing the same).
Blogs are not just about the blog author. Blogs must also follow what the readers want to know about.
Anon@2:57, 3:07, & 2:50: I agree with the gist of your comments that prior to Magna joining in, there was a much more amiable and pleasant tone to the blog. I think many of his comments are educative and entirely correct in strongly criticising the RCC and its clerical shenanigans. But it is most unfortunate that his OTT articulation fosters equally OTT though less intelligent or educative responses and the qualitative value of the blog degrades even further.
I have directly criticised Magna for this in the past. I would simply say to him now:
Just accept that the RCC institution while still outwardly robust, is a busted flush run by misfits. I use that word to encompass all those whose selfish, evil and misguided behaviour has been continually exposed, and those still engaged in suchlike. Raging at clerical misfits is wasted energy, as is any attempt to engage with them through intelligent debate or educative historical/biblical information. Their emotional and psychological self defence mechanisms are cemented in place by clericalism and complete dependence on the RCC institution. Their public exposure by validated information is helping turn the tide of their pervasive malign power. You can better assist +Pat in that, more through concrete evidence, than historical, biblical, debate and analysis.
While saying this, I acknowledge that there are indeed compassionate RC pastors still trying to “make the best ” of the bad job lot they signed up to while young, impressionable, and well motivated. It’s for others to estimate their numbers. They have my sympathies.
I just count myself very fortunate to have long since abandoned the whole shilleboth of religion and its suffocating clutches.
You can repeat your lies and slanders as often as you like, Troll in its cups at 12:28am. They will remain lies and slanders.
For every bad priest there is a good one who is doing good work. Your hateful rhetoric arises from your own deep dysfunction and your own sinfulness.
We faithful know many good priests who serve God we’ll and who are dedicated to their people.
Yes, there have been and are, SOME bad and unfaithful priests. But not all and we were warned by the Chief Shepherd about the wolves who would come.
Good 9.31, what cups at 12.28 doesn’t appear to realise is that it is the evil leadership that is letting the world down and not the less corrupt of the rank and file (clergy and lay) like you & me. Pat may be said to sound serene on the phone but he has to cry for help. It’s noticeable that cups at 12.28 is very touchy about the “sectarian”.
I guess JPL will be somewhat relieved that Littleprick has taken the limelight on this blog for a few days. Phew !
Very touchy about the sectarian? Me? I’ll take that as a backhanded compliment.
Sectarianism is the moral root of many murders here in Northern Ireland; touchiness about it is completely warranted.
9.25 yes, truly sad – including for relatives by marriage of relatives by marriage. The English system of religious mosaic doesn’t really cause sectarianism as such. What raises suspicions over such as Littleton is the question of what does he want to pull over on us by his simpering?
I agree there are some good priests, but in my own experience, all the good ones are nowhere to be seen when clerical ssues arise.
+Pat is a rare exception (as is my pp the peace activist) and you can place all your trust in +Pat and Fr F). He will lead you to safe waters and pastures green and full of life.
+Pat, thank you from the bottom of my heart and soul for being my spiritual armour during the onslaught from the evil ones. Because of you I have seen them coming a mile off and can now read them like a book.
Your happy and faithful servant in Christ Jesus x
Ps I now know what the word ‘Gaslighting’ means – hence the threats to send letters to my GP and telling people I was cuckoo. Give a little here, a little there, then let him assume, then say he’s crazy. Incidently, a leading consultant psychologist, only yesterday, burst into fits of laughter when I told him they said I was paranoid and delusional lol. He has written an report to my GP stating NO PSYCHOSIS and he is very happy with my mental wellbeing, however he has acknowledged the abuses and the pain it is causing me and my family. +Pat has a copy of this and can confirm I am perfectly sane, well… unless you put chocolate in front of me and strong coffee haha.
Speaking of a Cuckoo…
Cock-A-Doodle-Do! It certainly will a-doo! Haha
Keep the love flowing guys and dolls (and queens).
Remember, all that Christ asks is that we (you and I) put our faith in Him and he will protect you from the snare of the evil one x
10.50: You don’t do yourself any favours with thus damn, crazy rambling…..can you write it coherently…
Anonymous at 12:39pm
What do you mean when you say ‘I Don’t do myself any favours?’
Could you possibly elaborate?
Don’t do = double negative = Daisy does. Is this what you meant?
Crazy Daisy x
Precisely. They (the so-called ‘good’ priests) are indeed nowhere to be found when clarical malfeasance is made public knowledge. This is because their obligation to the institutional Church, and to themselves, trumps every time their higher obligation to Christ. They are Romanists through and through.
They are only nominally good.
OMG! PmsI that much just spilled my coffee on the eiderdown.
Just found this music vid on YouTube.
Miss Piggy sings… She Drives Me CRAZY
Re @10:53, Littleprick has certainly had a dose of reality this week, having been so pleased with his performance in Tooting. I wonder now what can be done with JPL given his tarnished record, other than being shunted around the diocese as a “problem”. As to “Paris” Hilton in Leeds, I daresay he has given his bishop the usual assurances.
As long as they give a ground floor bedroom there should be no problems.
(PLEASE DON’T POST THIS)</
I have not published the comment you sent. Have sent a copy to your friend on LinkedIn
Admirers of the late great Charles Hawtrey may find Littleprick striking several other attitudes on his blog at St Anselm’s, Tooting Bec whilst dispensing his wisdom. The constants appear to be a cassock, French cuffs and lace, but inevitably Charles likes to sport a biretta when his PP isn’t looking. Absurdly he doesn’t even understand the rubrics he tries to adopt viz the wearing of the maniple while preaching – if you are going to make a traddie prat of yourself then get it right, or people might suspect you just like dressing up!
Canon Hebbron, the Rector, is a well-regarded senior priest in Southwark, so it is beyond sanity why he tolerates these antics in a newly ordained curate, against whom there were many questions and reservations. It might have been thought that Peter Smith would have entrusted this risible character to a safe pair of hands, yet it seems he is being indulged in his foolishness. God knows what the parishioners think.
Same sad and lonely person replying to himself.
Ah, yes, at 5:45 pm – another manifestation of “obsessed stalker alert” aka “leave the lad alone” and now “same sad and lonely person replying to himself”.
So, Lottie, what are your reasons for reading and posting on this blog at a time of day when most normal blokes are coming home to their wives and kids, or meeting up with their girl/boy-friends for a few bevies after work?
I don’t think you fit into any of those categories, do you? You’ve probably been turned down more than once for the seminary – though they take anybody – yet still hanker after a biretta.
OR – as I think more likely – you could be a priest … somewhere in Westminster, I suspect. Shall we narrow it down? As you like to say, I think I know who you are.
Homily begins at 10:40.
Notice that Littleprick takes off an extra stole hanging from his arm. Looks like a Traddy hangover.
You’re bang up to date with Littleprick at 1:22 pm! The extra stole you refer to is the aforementioned maniple, which generally fell into disuse with the introduction of the Novus Ordo, so – yes, you’re right – like the biretta, it is a traddy hangover which places you in a certain CAMP. Back on 3rd April, Littleprick had not got the hang of the rubrics so preached wearing it – as the homily is not part of the Mass, the maniple is removed – but now it seems he’s been on a course or somebody has filled him in, so today he not only does not wear a lacy alb with his Gothic-style chasuble, but takes off the maniple – though it might be asked why he was wearing it in the first place. If all this sounds trivial, effete nonsense, that’s because IT IS! Nice one, Charlie!
I never knew the maniple was removed for preaching. Then I never wore a maniple.
Obsessed stalker alert.
2.59 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
IIRC Fr David Jones, the YouTube hermit, keeps his maniple on for his sermons. Perhaps someone here could have a word.
Plenty on Josh Hilton in Allen Hall. Roger Taylor covered up many adventures. Always got the special treatment. I wonder why?
Come on, don’t be coy! What kind of adventures? Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme – that kind of thing, you mean?
Well, Josh does have the kind of looks of a ruined choir-boy that certain clergymen find they cannot say no to.
Who’s this mystery Deacon you mentioned yesterday?
Pat did you ever get to the bottom of the trip from Oscott to the ProCathedral in Dublin. I hear one of the boys is now ordained in Salford and the main contact will be ordained a deacon in two weeks. Now that Oakley is gone who will protect him….. Ooooh I forgot the vice rector is still from his diocese.
Brentwood, you mean? Yes, what about the smooth, ever so plausible Paul Keane?
The story above uncovers a modus operandi of dealing with abuse issues in the past. How has the process changed or evolved. MMM Sadly I have to agree with your comment (hi)
1. Here is an alarming tale of ever decreasing levels of responsibility taking and accountability:
Why would you look to them for your faith or credence? They don’t have anything to say to us about serving God.
2. Now a country where the horrors have become telescoped in a different way:
TYLKO NIE MÓW NIKOMU | dokument Tomasza Sekielskiego | cały film | 2019
(subtitled – over 2 hours)
Note this is very difficult viewing indeed (except beautiful Polish countryside). Note with pain the way the present day church institution – as of only a few months ago – entrenches poison and viciousness.
Note also how (approx 30 mins. in) a priest who had ministered to children in breach of a sentence then took refuge at one of the RMSs. Authorities in the Dundalk and Allen Hall regions should be aware the public will no longer settle for brush offs about these institutions.
RMSs are not at the service of bishops: bishops are at the service of the RMSs.
Since RMS Allen Hall, and the other Allen Hall, merged it is likely the RMS call most of the shots in fact.
More chaos and shenanigans in the Not So Safeguarding Department.
Maybe somebody could say Mass for those who tell big fat porkies. RED FACES, EMBARESSING MOMENTS, and HOT FLUSHES, IN… CARRY-ON NOT SO SAFEGUARDING. Packed with ALL the same old familiar CARRY-ON and cover ups. NOTHING EVER CHANGES! SAME OLD STORY! … Which is why It’s so easy!!
But is their time up? ⏰
LOVE, MUST, AND WILL, CONQOUR ALL: BUT THE LIGHT OF THE LORD WILL DISPELL ALL DARKNESS TO MAKE WAY x
Just a humble curate.
I cannot understand what any 21st century young man wants a pic like that of himself? What is it about the biretta the maniple etc that gives his life meaning. I hope he spends some time visiting the poorer golf of Tooting?
I’d worry for his sanity.
As you once said of such priests, they are fulfilling a fantasy.
The psychology of this nonsense should, on its own, have precluded this narcissist’s ordination. But then, this is what the institutional Romanist Church is…a playground for narcissists, and fools.
Ming from Flash Gordon
Two seminarians on the right of the picture.
Oh, come on! For those of us not in the know, you’ll have to fill us in! Who the fuck are these freaks – something to do with the Ordinariate? It is extraordinary how, without anybody really noticing, the Anglican virus has entered the Catholic Church. Too late now, chum!
Note badge on left – ONE OF THOSE – argh – “sovereign” military equestrian suspicious crooks
Who’s in bishops’ attire?
That’s not normal behaviour in that photograph. That has to be some form of paraphilia. Those three at the far right – they look like a right barrel of laughs! I’d say there’s enough “issues” among those three to keep a team of psychiatrists busy until retirement and then a new team take over. Facking crazy O sweet baby Jebus!
There’s a sweet picture on his Twitter feed of Fr Matthew Jolley on Gaudete Sunday 2018 attired in Rose vestments and biretta. His attire on the following Gaudete Sunday 2019 was somewhat less formal in the slammer.
Those seminarians certainly do look rather glum.
Father Littleprick does need to get his rubrics correct if he is going to be taken seriously as a Traddy. He will need to go on a course. Pretending and getting it wrong just makes him look even more of a tit. The Latin Mass Society types won’t take kindly to him getting it wrong. either.
More seriously, however, I have been reflecting on the psychological profile of Littleprick. There is no doubt that he is a fussy, prissy, precise, OCD type who cannot deal with uncertainty, subtlety and nuance. Everything has to be in its place, secure, tight, and black and white. This personality framework will also apply to his theology and ecclesiology. For people like Littleprick, they need to be given a complete edifice of theology that is fixed and unchangeable. Then he will feel secure. Pick up the book, turn to the right page and the correct paragraph, and voila, there is your answer. Underpinning all this will be a simple belief that the Church cannot possibly err and therefore what it teaches is undoubtedly true, and can be applied as such. He has learned the language, memorised the texts, and just applies them with no discrimination or proper thought. It fits nicely with his psychological makeup.
The question is, why is somebody like this ordained in the first place ? Just being able to parrot the texts isn’t sufficient. Just being ultra orthodox doesn’t cut it. So, I really do question the wisdom of those who allowed him to progress to a point where he is foisted upon the unsuspecting faithful. I would have expected that as a new curate his PP has a responsibility to ensure that he acts, preaches and ministers in a mature and sensitive and pastoral way. He is not the finished object when he comes out of seminary. He needs lots more formation. It is evident from his videos and writings that Littleprick is far from the finished article. So, I would expect + Wilson and his PP should be calling him in and talking to him about the real world and real ministry. He needs close supervision.
Wise counsel at 4:18 pm – let’s hope for everybody’s sake, the powers that be are taking note, or somebody is going to come a cropper!
By the way, I see our old groupie “obsessed stalker alert” has risen once again like Grendel from the mire – this is usually a sign that we are on to something!
@4:18pm – do you even know this lad? Leave the guy alone ffs. This blog has become an incredibly cruel place where absolutely any faceless and gutless creep can say what he likes about whoever. It’s gravely sinful and you will all have to account for it someday. The Christ you would claim to follow knows what you are doing. Easy to see the idleness you live in – that you’ve F all else to do all day – but stalk social media accounts. The devil and idle hands and all that! You’re a disgrace.
Oh, here we go! We’ve already had the “obsessed stalker alert”. Now here comes the “leave the lad alone” brigade. That picture posted at 4:03 pm is SHOCKING! It is of young man, newly ordained, who is sticking two fingers up to everything that a Council of the Church declared about priesthood and how to be a Christian in the modern world. Not even the SSPX would post such a photo, so what the hell did Peter smith think he was doing?
I think Old Nick has more fun in other places than on the blog – like one naked priests giving the Last Rites to another naked priest in a gay sauna after a heart attack???
You are an enabler – encouraging mindless dressage and knowing well that it will end in tears. There is none of the virtues of religion here. It’s a sham.
This guy – Littleprick – does not hold a position whereby he can play a game with no consequences. If he wants to be taken seriously, then act seriously. He’s just prancing about in some sort of faux Traddy world garnering all sorts of attention for himself and thinking that he’s rather wonderful. He needs to be disabused of this straight away, and made to realise that he cannot use his position and ministry as some sort of pantomime. If he persists in doing so he will continue to be ridiculed and people like me will make it my business to see that he is brought to heel and respects the Church and its liturgy and teachings, rather than creating for himself some sort of twee parallel universe. He’s a joke, he’s pathetic, and hopefully his exposure in this blog will give him the boot up the arse he needs and make him realise that he has no right to be behaving, acting, doing liturgy, prancing around and pontificating as he is. And, yes, I’m absolutely sure he’s got a small prick !
You are a cruel person.
Actually, @4:35 pm this is precisely the concerned pastoral approach that Father Peter’s superiors should be adopting, rather than sitting back and letting the poor deluded sod dig his own grave. I don’t know whether his education included much Latin – a rarity these days outside the privileged circles of our esteemed Prime Minister – but you can bet your bottom dollar that Littleprick has signed up to the Latin Mass Society’s courses on how to celebrate the Old Mass.He’ll soon be in control of his maniples – trust me!
Traddy by day, Tranny by night!
A prime example of an unintegrated priest.
Unintegrated? Did you know that most men who are not priests are never categorised in that way, was your father integrated? How do we know you are ? And what exactly does that mean? Do you think men discuss in the pub how integrated their mature sexuality is?
4.18 I wish you were right, but given I’d not heard of him before two days ago it’s immediately apparent to me he is a brazen p*** artist.
– ancien regime allusions
– deliberate mistakes with vestments
– whingeing about “sacramental eucharist” without any meaning
– miscellaneous tricks learned abroad
Nothing the likes of Plymouth can do can end this man’s “vocation” anywhere on earth, and furthermore don’t think Smith ran Southwark, it ran him.
There are “enough” fixers / handlers / minders / controllers somewhere or other that think Littleton will “push buttons” for their purposes.
Peter Smith was a “nice man”. But let us say he had one or two well known blind spots.
One or two Irish OP’s who say a Latin Mass in Cork’s Pope’s Quay would fit in well in this pic. Neither has a word of Latin – as is crystal clear to anyone in attendance. They might as well be reading Shakespeare backwards.
I fail to understand how the picture is sticking two fingers up at Vatican 2? Nowhere do the documents of Vatican 2 mention lace or style of vestments. What you will find in the actual council documents is that some texts may be translated into a vernacular. You will also find in the actual missal that the priest is told to turn to the people at various points, which indicates mass is being said facing away from them.
Oh, and the maniple became optional 🤣
Gosh, Pat! I’m impressed that you have managed 40 years in the priesthood without recourse to the maniple. What’s your secret? I’d be lost without mine and fearful that people would not take me seriously.
Maybe I am just a disabled priests suffering from manipleostopathy?
Most Rev. Bishop Patrick Buckley, MA , Bishop of the Oratory
Big prick or littleprick I dont know and I don’t care. Congratulations Fr Peter Littleton for surviving Wonersh and all the scrEwing around. Coming through all that it is not surprising that you attracted the attention of the destructive, self serving, promiscuous, “normal”, perverted view of priesthood and chose something better. You don’t have to “guild the lily”. You made it. Relax in the Lord.
Thanks, but for the benefit of those out of the loop, can you identify where this fandango is being held, and who the perpetrators are? Was it ever “normal” – whatever that means – for a Low Mass to be assisted by another priest in a cope? Looks VERY C of E.
Fr Littleprick states that he said his first mass (pictured) at St. Mary Magdalen’s, Wandsworth East Hill which google suggests IS a CofE Church!!!
I can only guess it is a Church sharing agreement
1. It is perfectly normal for a newly ordained priest to have a more experienced priest to assist him at his first mass. I imagine it must be a nerve racking experience and that having someone who knows what he is doing is very useful.
2. St Mary Magdalen Wandsworth East Hill is a Catholic parish, despite the fact that it has the same title as the lock C of E parish.
What a fruit and nutcase.
@7:04pm, you belong to the Hermeneutic of Continuity tendency, as espoused by the arch-fraud Joseph Ratzinger, though, unlike the Pope Emeritus, I doubt you have the slightest understanding of what you are on about. Vatican II was not more of the same, as Archbishop Lefebvre was honest enough to acknowledge even after he had signed up to all the documents, but a rupture. The post-Vatican II priest is a servant, not a seigneur; the Church is not the clergy, but the people of God – extending even to including those who do not even acknowledge God, but have goodwill in their hearts. Don’t tell me you have read the documents, Lottie: it wasn’t on account of your non-existent A levels that you got into the seminary.
Lol I have never been to seminary or even applied.
Interesting how you reference hermeneutic of continuity: I didn’t and merely said what the documents say, because you see I have the advantage of having read them and know what they actually say.
Something I missed is where they say primacy should be given to Gregorian chant and the organ.
How can my understanding be in any way defective when I am replying to a comment about the council with what the council said?
And I’ll tell you another thing gratis, which you won’t like: the current code of canon law says priests must understand Latin.
There there, did I disrupt your ‘spirit of Vatican 2’ fantasy world? Or is Ireland merely behind the trend in the rest of the world?
Nonsense! You know very well that Paul VI’s Novus Ordo emphasizes the Mass as a community celebration, as intended by the Council. The idea that things would carry on in the same old way is borne out neither by a reading of the documents nor by what actually happened. You know “exactly what they say”, do you? So why weren’t you going out with girls, getting married and playing footie like a “normal” bloke? How many ordinary Jack the Lads have read the documents of Vatican II, as you claim to have done? I think you have been hoisted by your own pétard – if you know what I mean!
The People of God are the Jews , if Christians call themselves that then it should be acknowledged as implicitly antisemitic and offensive to most Jews. Vatican Two was very clear that both the Mass and the priesthood should be adapted to be acceptable to Protestants and to modern man, the Mass should be called the Eucharist or the Supper of the Lord only and priests are presiders , not servants, amongst a range of ministers .The terms Mass and priest are as relevant as Confession and Extreme Unction, they can be used within brackets for anyone who doesnt recognise the proper , just as maniples and birettas are part of the former Roman Rite the hangover language of the past shouldnt be used in the new rites
Supressed homosexual alert @ 8:35
Oh, and 8:35, haven’t you heard that socially distanced football isn’t a thing? And what kind of team plays on a Friday evening?
Oh, of course, you wouldn’t know would you 😉
Incidentally since I am not living with my girlfriend, I have barely seen her since lock down. Some of us take the health of those around us seriously lol
Well you won’t mind providing a reference from the Vatican 2 documents which says Mass should be made acceptable to Protestants.
Take your time now, look thoroughly 🤣
Presider and servant are not mutually exclusive terms @8:18. Presiding is a service.
“I note that one priest in America seems to have gone to quite some length to create a ‘community feel’ for his private Masses, installing pictures of all his parishioners.
I suspect I don’t need to point out to too many of those who know me, that I won’t be doing likewise”
Quotation from Fr Peter Littleton.
Littleprick…..a suggestion… delete your blog and your YouTube videos. You are just asking for trouble leaving that stuff up live. Then, ask the various fringe groups to which you belong to delete photos and references to you. Then, go quiet, go about your business, and don’t raise attention to yourself. Perhaps your bishop and your PP will have a quiet word with you about your arcane theology and liturgy, and help you out there. Go about your parish duties and just be kind and loving and compassionate to those to whom you are lucky enough to minister. Stop lecturing them. Forget about being judgemental, and worrying about other peoples’ sins. Perhaps you could hold off hearing confessions for a while. Take yourself off to the local food bank instead and do some volunteering – in lay clothes (do you have a pair of jeans ?!). Then all might go quiet and we will leave you alone. You will disappear in to the midst of time and this blog. And then we can all be happy again. You too. Okay ?
That is exactly what his close friend Fr Mark Higgins did when he started to attract negative attention after posting conspiracy theories about Pope Francis and how he was ‘a type of Antichrist’.
See, exactly ! I never heard of Fr Mark Higgins. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. So, Little(or Big)Prick, press the DELETE button. And all will be fine. Trust me….
Hold off hearing confessions? Do you know what he’s like in the confessional? Or are you just making presumptions?
I think that the strange new person with an obsession with a young priest who has done no harm is old and has a drink problem.
‘the weak’, of course.
All young priests are trads nowadays. You’re just sad old little men trying to hold onto Vatican 2 while it erodes around you. You’ve clearly got some half truths and are exaggerating them and frankly even if they are all true who cares! The mother church hinges on a belief in forgiveness who are you to determine when a person has changed? No disrespect, but if you’re even reading this you have real mental health issues
And yet, YOU are reading it; I suspect, compulsively. Vatican II was an ecumenical council. If it erodes all around us, then so does the Church itself – and so it does! Naive and uneducated as you are, you seem to think there are two Churches: the “true” Church, which actually would never have ordained you in the first place as an active homosexual, and another Church to which you belong and which you despise, and yet which allows you to live your double life. ( NB I am, of course, not referring to any clergyman known to me, as that would be too shocking to a man of faith, but to an entirely hypothetical type! )
The reading at this evening’s Vespers is apposite and poses a challenge to us all.
“We who are strong ought to bear with the failings of the week….” Rom 15:1-3
Well, at least someone is impressed. LOL!
The pictures above hold seminarians from wonersh at the right. The one second from the end ordaination on hold, his brother is in the vec and his will go ahead. You will remember Pat , the video from wonersh that you had on the blog months back he was the boy in the gym
I’m glad that Little Miss Priest is being exposed. You reap what you sow. And she’s reaped some shit in her time. As well as her anti-Semite bed-fellow Mark Higgins. Pat – your Blog could go for a few months on these pair.
Really, Father? Bless your candour! So what is sweet gym-bunny Thomas Lawlor doing at that Anglican fandango? The “bishop” is of course nothing of the sort, but just dresses up as one. And the others?
As for the challenge directed at me @8:31 pm, do you truly think, you bigotted prat, that it is the Lord’s will that anybody should be excluded from the banquet of His kingdom?
Does Fr Mark Higgins still have a bumper sticker on his car that suggests that Protestants, Muslims and Gays are going to hell?
I wish that was a joke but it’s true!
Nice idea at 7:19 pm, and bless your compassion, but I fear that many of the naughty lads implicated on this blog are all too accustomed to bearing with the failings of the week. What about the week after?
I spotted the typo immediately and corrected it – for some reason the correction migrated further up.
In response to 7:05 pm, no, my dear old dad would not have had discussions about how integrated he was, though I got the impression that in later life he rather wished he had had those kind of discussions which are now perfectly natural amongst young people. It’s the fact that the clergy – and the basket cases influenced by them – cannot discuss our shared humanity openly and with honesty which is the problem, not my dad’s generational stiff upper lip. People change; the Church doesn’t.
You know young people who talk about how integrated their sexuality is ? No you don’t mate not one, nobody talks like that except in tired seminaries full of unhappy misfits. In the real world nobody actually cares about the hang ups that make people unintegrated that’s for misfits in seminaries to discuss with their formators another thing that no one else in the real world seems to need
Sacrosanctum Concilium in its first sentence makes it clear that the three reasons for the adaptation are for modern man, removing barriers for Protestants and for the life of the faithful. The document was the first one of the council as it was the best prepared as much of it dated from 1954 when the revision of the liturgy of Holy Week was introduced and Pius XII was responding to the liturgical movement. Why be afraid of saying the New Mass is primarily intended to be ecumenical in the direction of Protestants? It’s not the 1962 missal translated into the vernacular its a whole new piece of work and it’s supposed to be part of a liturgical laboratory for modern man come of age with built in options and opportunities for the presider to ad lib and give a commentary throughout, it’s the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper it’s not the Mass and doesn’t claim to be and it’s led by a presider not offered by a priest , that shouldn’t be a problem for any Catholic presider or ordained minister only for ones who keep calling themselves priests when there’s no sacrifice except one of praise and thanksgiving which comes from the priesthood of the assembly not from one man
You are heavily interpreting the sentence, which I will let speak for itself:
This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church.
Where did you learn to read?
Sorry Father you know best, all I can say is that the first sentence says the reasons for the council and a reform of the liturgy are 1 the life of the faithful 2 to change to foster and promote union , that is with Protestants 3 to help man, theres nothing else there.The closing statement of the Council by Pope Paul VI says the religious reason for the Council was because of man only, even the introduction of the vernacular is explitictly described as a right of man ” we too, in fact, we more than any others , honor mankind”
9.04 Whatever your agenda you write nonsense when you try to differentiate between the reformed liturgy of Vatican II and that which preceded it. The sacrament of the Eucharist was never a static reality. It changed snd developed through the centuries and millennia and will continue to do so.
So if it changed and developed than whats the problem with clearly stating that Father? The priesthood has also changed and developed and the clear teaching of the Council expressed in the General Instruction of 1969 and the rubrics in the new missal do not call the liturgy the Mass or talk about the priest, that is gone you are holding back the movement of the Holy Spirit by identifying yourself as a priest not a presider from within an assembly, you need to strip away all those clerical ideas you hold they are not part of the reformed People of God. Your vocation is one of service and leadership its not God speaking directly to you in a way he doesnt to the rest of the baptised making you ‘in the person of Christ’ not at all thats a former belief thats gone and has no place in the reformed liturgy and the reformed ministries , accept that you are not a priest offering a sacrifice that just happens to now be in English and embrace the development and evolution you yourself recognise but dont try and keep it both ways
Re 7:51 and /:55 pm, no football on Friday nights owing to lockdown? And since when have you had a girlfriend – even though you did pretend to have had one to the selection committee?
Since I realised I was a lesbian!
Pat, surely you’re willing to admit that Fanny is a fine figure of a wan. Sure wouldn’t ye shift her yourself in a heartbeat, if ye met her at the hop and ye weren’t married and all?