At 11.20 pm last night Saturday) Monty sent me an email.
FROM MONTY TO PAT
I have to ask you why you allow derogatory comments about me on your blog? It is quite distressing.
There are many untruths being bandied about me.
A particular one is the Australian. He had already announced he was leaving the Beda. Not sure it was before he had touched up a nun or pinned another seminarian on the pool table. It was certainly before the incident that has been mentioned on your blog.
I find the untruths said about me distressing. There are lots of false things said about me but it is enough to ruin my reputation. I’m happy to admit my wrongs but untruths are so damaging. Why do you allow such nasty and untrue comments to be published?
Having seen your blog I’m not sure how you will respond. But I’m writing to you personally in a private way.
I look forward to hearing from you.
I replied to Tom next morning – Sunday.
FROM PAT TO MONTY
Thank you for your email. I always reply to emails and letters. Its just good manners.
Maybe you would give me a confidential call in the afternoon or evening and we can discuss.
FROM MONTY TO PAT
Thank you for your email. I’m afraid I won’t be calling you. From what I’ve seen, I don’t feel that I could trust you.
As you said, responding is good manners. I could have just ignored your suggestion about a call, but that would have been impolite.
I just wanted you to know the effect the online gossiping about me (mainly through comments) was having on me. I’m just getting on with working in the parish, but your pack mob are not interested in that.
I got the first, unsolicited email from Tom at 11.20 pm Saturday night.
I responded by thanking him for his email and by offering a telephone conversation whereby I could listen to his side of the story and perhaps be more circumspect in the comments I allowed about him.
However, his second email to me at 12: 36 today (Sunday) was very shirty and semi aggressive.
So, instead of reaching out the hand to the outreached hand, Monty said he didn’t trust me and accused the comment makers on here of being a PACK MOB.
Why the change in tone overnight?
I expect Monty had a goodly gin in him when he wrote on Saturday night.
And then on Sunday morning, sober, he decided not to talk but to huff and puff.
Some time ago I was sent a full report on Monty undertaken at the request of his archbishop Elsie Nichols.
If I wanted to be nasty I could have published that report in full. I did not.
In fact I never heard of Monty until Westminster prirsts started commenting on here about him.
The big story was Monty’s unfortunate ” encounter” with an Aussie seminarian in Rome who smacked Monty after he made some “overture” to him. Monty came off worst with a broken limb.
Now Monty tells us the Aussie had touched up a nun and had a scrap with another seminarian over a pool table.
Obviously, the Aussie was very STRAIGHT.
Monty has had a few run ins with Nichols.
Nichols demanded he lose weight before ordaining him.
Monty also annoyed Nichols by gossiping about senior clergy in the bars of Lourdes, especially his nastiness about Bishop Alana Hopes.
Monty does not like people gossiping about him but he himself is one of the biggest gossipers in Westminster.
People who have featured prominently on this blog and got in touch with me and I listened to them and acted on their requests.
But Im afraid Monty showed his true colours on his second email to me.