One of the great realizations of my life has been that there is a MASSIVE difference between religion and spirituality.
Religion is a man-made phenomenon wheras spirituality is rooted deep in the universe, creation and the soul.
Religion CAN BE a way into spirituality – but that means moving beyond religion and finding spirituality.
The religious masses stay stuck in religion and never move on from it.
Whereas truly spiritual people either never needed religion in the first place – or cast religion off as a caterpillar casts off the “shell” as it becomes a butterfly.
For a catterpillar to become a butterfly it undergoes a complete metamorphosis.
For religious people to become spiritual people a similiar complete metamorphosis is required. Most people don’t get there in this life.
The religious condition is a condition for people who are afraid, conformist, and the inability to be spontaneous.
They have their creeds, their catechisms, their canons, their rituals and they believe that by sticking absolutely to these things and in total obedience to their religious leaders, they will get to paradise and heaven.
The back page of their catechism is their ticket for the Pearly Gates.
Of them, one must ask: “Is there life before death”?
And they are dangerous, very dangerous. As Jesus said: “The time will come when those who kill you will think they are doing a holy work for God”
People such as these planned and carried out the Crusades, the Counter-Reformation, the Inquisition, American Slavery, Apartied, the Twin Towers …….
I once saw a vodka add that summed up religious zealots and zealotry. It read:
“So pure, its wicked”.
Many people who come to me to get married often say about themselves: “I’m not very religious”.
And I tell them, its more important to be spiritual. And ifbthey say they are not spiritual, I ask them:
So you don’t like music?
You don’t like art?
You dont appreciate a beautiful mountain or seascape?
You don’t believe in love?
You don’t marvel at the innocence of children?
We are all born with a capacity for the spiritual.
Sometimes the experiences of early life dulls our spiritual senses.
But they are still there, waiting to be revived and blossom.
One of the great purposes of life is to find and recognise the inner spiritual and to go with it.
Believers, atheists and agnostics can be spiritual too – even sometimes more spiritual.
The spiritual is the non-materialistic, the intangible, the awesome, the wondrous, the glorious.
The spiritual is also the painful, the distressing, the agonising, the harrowing, the unknowing and the unknown.
It is perfectly possible to be amazingly spiritual but not to believe in a God.
But for me personally, and for many others, our spirituality is God and Jesus centred.
SLIGHT REORDERING OF LARNE ORATORY.
This week we slightly reordered our Oratory here in Larne – especially to accomodate a beautiful hand carved wooden tabernacle which came from Brittany, France.
It allows us to put the Blessed Sacrament back as the central and focal point of The Oratory.
The hideous habit of putting the Blessed Sacrament to the side and replacing the tabernacle with the bishop’s chair is odious.
The Blessed Sacrament is what we must treasure and adore, not iffy bishoos.
126 replies on “RELIGION v SPIRITUALITY”
Much better and a lovely tabernacle. Consider removing the Holy Spirit as the dove looks like a dead pigeon. I’d move the sanctuary lamp closer to the tabernacle and put a bigger statue of OL of Walsingham in the corner.
The problem with Spirituality is that it can mean anything you want it to be. What is Spirituality? It is a nonsense. Total nonsense and they all take advantage of vulnerable people big time.
Spirituality is not nonsense, but it is a deceit if its essence isn’t inclusive love (not love that tolerates anything) and the humility to recognise oneself in the moral weaknesses of others.
MMM, an atheist, is a deeply spiritual man, whether or not he likes this description.
There’ll be surprise in Heaven at who is there, and who is not.
Magna, I leave it to others to pass judgement on my spirituality!
But as for Heaven, well I’ll be more than surprised, in fact gobsmacked to “awaken after death ” and find myself, or anybody else in this imaginary Heavenly destination!
How many readers actually believe that this alleged ‘destination’ actually exists?
What form does this Heaven take, and where is it?
What form do “we” take?( ie those ” saved” after jumping through the holy selection process of avoiding mortal sin when we finally ‘cash in our chips?’
Is there enough space in this heavenly destination for the billions already dead and more to come, and will their constant singing the heavenly praises not become tedious,
Oh dear. So many questions.
Unlike IrisdeMent Pat, I simply can’t accept that I should just “Let the mystery be.” (Albeit I do like that song.)
MMM, I paid you a compliment I don’t pay many others. Take it, gracefully.
If your spirituality ties in with John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila or Thomas Merton, it is pretty sound.
Thomas Merton? That prick?
And what do you think the clerics and the nuns were doing to the women and their children who turned on them, after the Church had their father turn them out of the family home. You have a healthy scepticism towards spirituality – and I would share it – but what is religion but spirituality on ‘infallible’ stilts. Keep away for ‘FAITH’: ‘Those who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities!’
Some of the kindest, most Christ like people I know and have encountered are those who are prayerful, have a great love for the Mass, spend time at Adoration and who actually are both religious and spiritual. We can say that we are all “spiritual” in that as human beings we are seekers and searchers, we look for meaning, purpose and truth. For many, many people this “spiritual” is found in their religious faith, a faith sustained by prayer and attending mass. As a continuing living out of this faith, we bring the Christ of the Eucharist with us to inspire true gospel living. We can each make up our own “spiritual” beliefs but I cannot find anything more profound for Christians than the Gospel of The Beatitudes, the love of God and love of neighbour command, the Good Samaritan….these along with other scripture sources are a true blueprint for developing a deep religious spirituality. The Catholic tradition is filled with wonderful Christians who were truly Christ-like. I believe we should respect the philosophy, spirituality and religious faith of one another. Tolerance and respect for all genuine seekers of truth, but for me the truth I live by is in Jesus Christ.
I think it an exaggeration to describe religion as a man-made phenomenon, at least in its entirety. Like Judaism, Christianity has its superficial and superfluous accretions, but there is a spirituality at its heart.
If Jesus were around today (in an incarnational manner of speaking, naturally), he would condemn the accretions as uncompromisingly as he did Jewish ritualistic legalism, which neglected the spirituality at the heart of Judaism (mercy, justice) for rigid conformity to purely human, behavioural prescriptions.
Magna makes a sound point. It has been fashionable to reject religion in favour of spirituality, yet forgetting that spirituality can be just a private affair, whilst religion emphasises the shared experience of a community of faith and practice. Notwithstanding intolerance and abuses, this is not necessarily a “bad thing”, as the endurance of say Judaism testifies.
Now let’s see the clergy all ranting at you saying how dare you talk about God when you have revealed a clergy move by Any!
8.34: It’s a pity you don’t stay with the topic for discussion, although It’s probably beyond your comprehension. You’d rather the shallow, superfluous stuff of nastyism. If we look up the meaning of spirituality we’ll find many definitions, many of them speaking about “spirituality” as encompassing empathy, care for others, compassion and making oneself aware of something more than just the material world. In this respect, we can all be defined as spiritual. But for millions of others, this spirituality is found through a belief in God, as revealed in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. He is the One who reveals “our God” and in the Teilhard de Chardin thinking, because of the incarnation, all life, animate or inanimate is holy, sacred. For me personally, I describe myself as both spuritual and religious, my spirituality (vision of life, morality, norms for living etc…) are epitomized by Jesus and since I am a Christian, my spirituality is rooted in my christian/religious faith. I am enfuched by the winderful lives of the saints of the Church, particarly St. John of the Cross, St Teresa of Avila, St. Francis, St. Anthony, St. Mother Theresa, St. Therese of Lisueux – all giving different understandings of union with God, which for Christian, is the ultimate goal. I can walk through a magnificent landscape and be moved within to appreciate the beauty of it all; It’s a spiritual moment because I low it effect my emotions towards awe, beauty and winder. When I spend time in prayer or at mass or in silence in a sacred space, I am drawn to a transcendence, to a deep awareness of something more than my material setting, to an inner sanctuary of the soul, the divine essence within. This journey of faith, spirituality and religious iconography, poetry and mysticism are profoundly impacting in my life.
Me me me me me me me!
You’re a priest, aren’t you.
11.04: No Magna: I am a Buddhist Monk, you fool!! I am engaging in a conversation which Pat has initiated and sharing my experiences and understanding of spiritual and religious visions, beliefs and insights. Since I am a true male Catholic priest – unashamedly so – with no confusiins about my gender identity, it is gramatically correct to use the pronoun “I” when expressing opinions. You are easily perturbed. If this is the only response you can offer, you are most definitely an empty well.
Anon @ 11.04: Is this the depth of your brain? A very dead one it seems. What is So wring with 10.34 that you resort to such cynicism? Pity you don’t read the classics he suggests: they would enlarge your capacity to grasp something deeper than your childish comment. I guess you are trailer trash genre. Do you know the alphabet?
(Sighing wearly😩) No, I am not the poster at 11.04.
I’m crying with laughter so early in the day. BTW I’m not Magna Carta.
You won’t believe that.
Actually if you were a Buddhist monk you would be able to have a sensible conversation instead of proving my point. 🤣
Eva Peron was declared the spiritual leader of Argentina.
Frankie the Fraud is a Peronist.
Yes, but for a pretense of spirituality.
Prominent and supreme political figures like her woo the hoi-polloi with slick propaganda seasoned with only a sprinkling of truth, and with a glamour that seems to include the poor.
Just like Frankie, Magna. Your comment describes him to a T!
12.11: Like your 11.04 comment, this too is so innocuous as to be utterly worse than useless in content and meaning…Somehow, you have managed to actually say nothing at all, except empty words…plonker. Say something intelligent, enlightened or worth consideration.
And the content of your comment is…? 🤣
Just a thought, Pat: shouldn’t your symbol of the Holy Spirit be flying OUT from the tabernacle? To the world, in accordance with Jesus’ claim that he would send his followers the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, after his ascension?
Yes, I know that your configuration evokes the descent of the Spirit at Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan, but this was BEFORE his death and resurrection.
What is in the tabernacle concerns the resurrected Christ.
I see it’s the same old bitch fest on here today led by you know who….. I will be back on Monday when these idots have stopped ranting for the weekend. A wee aperitivo before lunch of mash, veg, fish fingers and parsley sauce. Then I will lay myself down for a siesta and that will make more sense than reading the loons on here tearing flesh out of each other. Might squeeze a prayer in for you Pat.
It’s great to see that Fr Brendan Mulhall has settled down
How has he settled down?
Loving the new tabernacle +Pat and I think ur spot on about its proper place being in the centre. Having the Bishop towering over everything as u find in many Cathedrals today reminds me of the story of a Bishop who as he was leaving his private chapel one evening heard a voice from the tabernacle saying “goodnight my Lord”. 🤣 I guess the danger of prizining religiosity over spirituality and not balancing the two is a disconnect from reality and very often a conscience which is numb when it comes to how we treat and speak about others.
Absolutely right! The focus on the celebrant negates the communal celebration which Vatican II liturgy is supposed to promote. In the Italian church in Clerkenwell the celebrant’s chair in front of the altar is a hideous OTT golden throne straight out of The Borgias.
Obviouly you are one of those many morons who talk about Vatican II without bothering to read its documents. I suggest you educate yourself by reading Presbyterorum Ordinis. It’s quite short but you might find that the words are a bit big.
“By their special title in the priesthood of Christ, priests are to act as His ministers. Especially by the celebration of Mass they offer sacramentally the Sacrifice of Christ to which all the other sacraments and all apostolic work are directed. Priests are to lead their people to pray, confess their sins, live the evangelical counsels, and offer their own lives with the Eucharist.”
Jesus was most emphatically not a priest.
11:28 The passage you quote gives no support to the feeling of being special the person you reply to mentions. In fact it indicates that priests are merely ministers of SOMEONE ELSE and thus should stop swanning round going ‘I’m ontologically changed’.
That is the problem with most priests – they have long forgotten that the whole thing is about someone other than them.
Lumen Gentium 10 put it this way:
Acting in the person of Christ, he [the ordained priest] brings about the Eucharistic sacrifice and offers it to God in the name of the people.
Lumen Gentium 10:
Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless interrelated: each of them in its own special way is a participation in the one priesthood of Christ.
The ministerial priest, by the sacred power he enjoys, teaches and rules the priestly people; acting in the person of Christ, he makes present the Eucharistic sacrifice, and offers it to God in the name of all the people. But the faithful, in virtue of their royal priesthood, join in the offering of the Eucharist. They likewise exercise that priesthood in receiving the sacraments, in prayer and thanksgiving, in the witness of a holy life, and by self-denial and active charity.
11.24: Magna, considering the vulgarity, hate speech and depraved commentary that issue forth from your mouth alongside your supposed Christian beliefs, spirituality or religious sentiment, it is not difficult to conclude that your “spirituality/religious” spoutings are also pretentious!! When you so frequently comment in hate filled and vicious ways, with little mercy, empathy or kindness you are devoid of humanity at its deepest.
Exposing abuse, corruption and hypocrisy will always be considered ‘hateful’ by those who have a vested interest in the church’s longstanding tradition of covering it up.
11.59: No, abuse of any kind must always be called out, irrespective of the consequences. All abuse of any kind is unacceptable. No one in their right mind and cognizant of the egregious nature if sexual abuse, could in any way be seen to condone or justify this crime. What we can object to us the deeply offensive, vulgar, hate filled and personalised rhetoric of people like Magna. His commentary is motivated by a hatred of clergy. That’s not acceptable nor should it be encouraged.
12:22 By their fruits you will know them. Given what you say how do you explain the hierarchy on a policy level, actively covering up abuse for decades?
This is the antithesis of any genuine religion or spirituality and I am genuinely interested in getting an explanation for this.
If you say so.
JESUS AS PRIEST, PROPHET AND KING Wikipedia
The threefold office (Latin: munus triplex) of Jesus Christ is a Christian doctrine based upon the teachings of the Old Testament of which Christians hold different views. It was described by Eusebius and more fully developed by John Calvin.
The doctrine states that Jesus Christ performed three functions (or “offices”) in his earthly ministry – those of prophet, priest, and king.
In the Old Testament, the appointment of someone to any of these three positions could be sanctioned by anointing him by pouring oil over his head. Thus the term messiah, meaning “anointed one”, is associated with the concept of the threefold office. While the office of king is that most frequently with the Messiah, the role of Jesus as priest, which involves intercession before God, is also prominent in the New Testament, being most fully explained in chapters 7 to 10 of the Book of Hebrews.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “Jesus fulfilled the messianic hope of Israel in his threefold office of priest, prophet, and king.”
In his 5th century Gospel harmony book Harmony of the Gospels Saint Augustine viewed the variations in the gospel accounts in terms of the different focuses of the authors on Jesus: Matthew on royalty, Mark on humanity, Luke on priesthood and John on divinity.
Jesus rejected kingly titles; the Gospel makes this clear. And as no prophet ever sat at God’s right hand, Jesus clearly did not see himself as a prophet. Nor did he ever declare himself a priest, presumably because he was self-evidently much, much more than a priest. As Hebrews makes clear, Jesus did what no priest ever did, or could do: atone for sin. Why, then, would he have sought to be categorised in such an ineffectual, liturgical role?
References to Jesus as priest, prophet, and king are ATTRIBUTED, but not by Jesus himself. Unsurprisingly, they come almost exclusively from the clerical caste within the Church, those with a deeply vested interest in justifying what Jesus’ death and resurrection had pointed up as ineffectual, and now redundant: priesthood.
Augustine’s view on gospel variation is opinion, not itself sacred writ. Remember this is the man whose OPINION on the eschatology of unbaptised adults and children brought us, first, damnation for them, and then, indirectly, Limbo.
Magna I totally agree about the priest (attributed in Hebrews) and king. But aren’t you missing the places where Jesus suggests he’s a prophet? Or do you understand them to mean he wasn’t a prophet?
His comments would also have suggested that he was divine, identifiable as the son of hashem and surely that is higher than prophet, priest or king?
Can you cite the passages (or one or two of them) in which direct speech attributed to Jesus suggests a prophetic role for him?
Remember in making known his divinity, Jesus most frequently expressed it in the only terms he could: in terms of human linguistics, and, therefore, in imprecise and inadequate terms. Metaphor, simile, and allusion were his most common vehicles, precisely because of their analogous inconclusivity.
I agree with the last paragraph of your post.
Magna at 1:54 I know there aren’t any which is why I said suggested! I meant the passages about a prophet not being welcomed which I would take to suggest (which I believe to be a common reading) that he is a prophet? You would presumably interpret them differently?
I wasn’t trying to trick you.
When Jesus’ asked his disciples , who do you say that I am?, he was severally answered: some say John the Baptist; some say Elijah, or one of the prophets. But Jesus rejects these answers and appears to reject with them any description of himself as a prophet, since he goes on to ask, but who do YOU say I am?. Peter answers that Jesus is the Messiah, an answer Jesus accepts.
The Messiah, in Jewish history, was not a prophet, but the one prophesised about.
“No prophet is accepted in his own native place” (Luke 4:24).
Is this not Jesus speaking of himself as a prophet?
Yes the passage Pat quotes is the oyi was thinking of it but I couldn’t remember where it was or the wording. Magna I hadn’t even thought of the passage you quote which is a very interesting juxtaposition. Would you not interpret Luke 4:24 as Jesus implying he is a prophet?
The Muslims speak of Jesus as “the prophet”.
They also believe that at the end of time it is the Prophet Jesus who will return, not the Prophet Muhammad.
Luke 4:24 is a proverb; in fact, the previous verse contains another spoken by Jesus: ‘Physician, heal yourself’.
Jesus here is not referring to himself as a physician anymore than he is, in the succeeding verse, a prophet.
Thank you, Magna at 4:57.
A very interesting perspective delivered with your usual succinctness and none of the abuse the clergy dish out on here.
Jesus is speaking of himself in Luke 4..24. A narrative-critical interpretation of the passage allows of no other interpretation.
Pat, you are perfectly correct. MC is talking through your hat.
And then, he praises himself under an anonymous hat. Slapping his own back. Revolting.
12.08: When did you last hear any priest say “I’m ontologically changed?” Seriously. I suspect you, sir, haven’t a clue about the meaning of ontoligical and that you found the phrase here on this blog. In 43 years if ministry I’ve never used that phrase nor have I heard colleagues use it either. Most priests, in my experience, try to follow Christ. Don’t tell lies. Following Christ and his ideals is very challenging and I wonder what great witness you give that might inspire “failing” clerics? Sound bytes and generalised judgments are easy to spout.
When did anyone last hear a priest declare himself ontologically changed?
When he said he was an ‘alter Christus’. And, hence, when he insisted on being addressed as ‘Father’.
‘Seriously. I suspect you, sir, haven’t a clue about the meaning of ontoligical and that you found the phrase here on this blog’
I can’t tell you when because I’m not going to run round after you but you have let the cat out of the bag – I have heard it used on this blog. Repeatedly.
You also use the ‘Ive never seen it so it doesn’t happen’ argument which is a non-starter, just as much for theological jockeying as it is for clerical sexual abuse. I have never seen North Sentinel Islanders kill a missionary but am not going to say it doesn’t happen and would have the manners not to call people liars who have a different opinion.
Since despite an alleged 43 years of ministry you have somehow managed to miss learning about the Catholic theology of priesthood I suggest you do a little research to educate yourself.
Since you ask, I have a first degree in theology from a UK university and a taught master’s degree in biblical studies with a focus on Hebrew scriptures from another UK university.
Magna at 2:02 despite your disagreement with it you have a far better understanding of the Catholic theology of priesthood than Incredulous at 12:48. Perhaps he would have been better leaving seminary like you did.
2:33pm. Unless it was a Catholic theology degree it’s worthless.
Moreover, UK theology courses have the lowest entry standards, even lower than those of media studies, drama or history of art.
6:10 I went to university first 40 years ago. You will find that entry requirements were different then, but you’re not interested in facts, just interested in showing how stupid you are.
I sense a Roman STB (LOL) or even less in your CV.
I looove the way the catlicks roll on the floor and foam at the mouth every time Magna Carta is even mentioned. It’s like the girl in The Exorcist seeing the priest.
Keep it up Magna.
1.05: There are few genuine commenters here today. The Pat and Magna lovfest has taken over. If Magna is contentious about the Catholic Priesthood, his criticisms must also refer to Pat’s “priesthood”. You cannot condemn all concepts of priesthoid, as you see it Magna, and exclude Pat! It’s not sufficient to say you recognise him as a good person: that can be said of the majority of priests. They too are truly good, as Pat is.
Pat’s understanding of priesthood has radically evolved over the years, and it is very different, and very much better, than yours.
Yes, Pat is a priest, but his ministry is much closer to the discipleship Jesus had in mind. I cannot condemn that.
Were I to condemn anything here, it would be distinquishing his ministry with such words as ‘priest’ and ‘priesthood’; in fact, anything suggestive of intermediation between God and humankind.
2.33: Despite your learning, you prove my assertion that you haven’t a clue about the meaning of ontological – theologically, spiritually or philosophically. Your contention that I’m using the “I haven’t seen it, so it doesn’t happen” argument is absurd and irrelevant to the comments I made. What did I deny didn’t happen? I could write tomes on Catholic priesthood and ministry and will gladly share them with you. The meaning and understanding of priesthood changes and evolves through the decades. I am impressed with your pedigree but you have much to learn too. There is a confusion about your style of expression and a wrongful mixing of analogy and metaphors. English may not be your forte!!
2.33: On-line cheapie degrees!!! I suspect…
8:04 I clearly have you rattled, to the extent that you’re forgetting what you wrote and your cathbot colleagues are reduced to insulting my degrees because they know the standards are higher in secular universities than in Catholic seats of parrot learning.
Here are the words you forget writing:
‘ In 43 years if ministry I’ve never used that phrase nor have I heard colleagues use it either. ‘
Alcohol always induces memory problems and I’d lay off it in your position.
Magna’s nauseating, twee, sentimental, poundshop Thought for the Day-style sermonettes always make me feel a little green about the gills.
4.40: I’d be very slow to call myself truly good. I am a sinner attempting to be a Christian.
5.45: You would say that Magna, wouldn’t you but you contradict yourself comopetely. Your problem with truth and reality stem from your experience in Maynooth and prior to that personal issues and more recently your daemons as you told us about . Asking your opinion about priests and priesthood is akin to asking Satan about God or the late Ian Paisley about the Pope. You are not honest with yourself: your commentary frequently is threaded with self loathing, shame, dangerous angst and is intended to incite hatred. You cannot separate the meaning of the priesthood which Pat accepts with that of other clerics: you are engaging in semantics for the sole purpose of bias, prejudice and hatred against priests. Your recurring themes are tiresome, nauseating and add nothing to meaningful, rational, decent debate. Since ordination in the early 80’s the concept of priesthood has radically changed for many of us: a new understanding evolves with time, living ministry naturally has to change: our interpretation of ecclesial language fluctuates: our concept of gospel like service is, though you deny such, to the forefront of the many clerics I know and connect with. The majority of us have long since begun to see priesthood, the church and the community of God’s people very differently. Since you seem neither to care or be genuinely interested in the ministry denied you, may I respectfully ssuggest that you look beyond the imprisoned and impoverished world you inhabit. Then, with God’s grace, you might be respected. But you cannot have one priesthoid for Pat and one for others: Pat and all Catholic Priests were ordained as priests through the same rite of ordination: the difference only being that Pat is now independent and defines his own style of ministry. Well done to him but many of us still in the presbyterate are not ever prohibited from living Christ like. Ever.
5.45: I like and understand your comment and am not blind to the goodness to be found in priests.
You say what you want to say, hear what you want to hear, see what you want to see, and you believe what you want to believe.
I don’t recall ever coming across anyone so personally insecure as you.
9.00: You still don’t make sense and are clutching at straws. My brain works well having enabled me receive three degree qualifications at university. Incidentally, I don’t drink! Never have since my 16th birthday. Many of the top universities in the workd are Catholic in origin and in the USA are highly sought out places of learning. Clutching at straws…yes indeed.
Many of the world’s current problems can only be solved by a return to the cult of Artemis. This contains a true spirituality because she hated the chaste who have broken their vows, rapists and liars.
That’s a proper religion.
8.06: Oh, a somewhat subdued Magna!! My God!! The one who rages so viciously against everything any priest says is submitting so easily to the anon at 7.36. What’s happening? A miracle? Anon at 7.36 calls it as it is Magna, helped by your own contradictory and irrational contributions on this blog. You have revealed multiple personalities, from the sublime to the utterly madly ridiculous. You have never been humble in accepting legitimate comments, have demonstrated some worrying behaviours on this blog and have far too often been gratuitously offensive, hateful and bigoted. Perhaps you are slowly realising that being so intolerant, unkind and provocative are not always sane, helpful or constructive ways to exist. Psychologically, self awareness tells us there’s a time when we must name our “sins” before we move into new realms of decent, mature, compassionate living.
You really are being ridiculous and you can’t conceivably intend to help Magna with your passive aggressive rant.
Are you qualified to diagnose multiple personalities (not that the condition exists)? Or diagnose anything beyond a paragraph from Denzinger? If not I suggest you stick to your specialty of presiding over the assembly.
Magna has said here repeatedly that he comments with multiple made up aspects of a fictional person – and who can blame him, since creeps like you keep trying to work out the real person. And you all show such hatred for him that I wouldn’t be surprised if one of you was trying to hunt him down to do him damage.
I suggest you take a deep breath and reflect on your behaviour on the internet, which is plainly below what can be expected of a Christian or anyone with manners.
I think it’s important to distinguish between the corrupt clerical priesthood we have today and the primary notion of priesthood.
At baptism we are all anointed and told to live our lives as priests, prophets and kings.
As priests, we ALL offer God worship and praise.
As prophets, we ALL are charged with speaking for God.
As king, we are ALL sharers and heirs in his “kingdom”.
Many of the things you say are prophetic.
Magna 8 : Deaf Guy 0. Magna is in stunning form today 8 posts so far and the day is still 11 hours to go. Can Deaf Guy even hope to make a comeback let alone an appearance. Magna must be tested by the blog moderator, it is rumoured that he is taking the comment version of Viagra also
Known by its generic name “AdNauseam” But it is good to see that COVID hasn’t turned his brain to jelly
Pat, I agree with you on corrupt priesthood. But it is indisputable that Jesus’ death and resurrection did obviate intermediary priesthood, ALL intermediary priesthood, though historically, Jewish (levitical) intermediary priesthood.
Roman Catholic priesthood has almost always presented itself as intermediary. This is not only a denial of the salvific efficacy of what Jesus accomplished, it is a gross and idolatrous usurption of his divinity. No wonder Roman Catholic priests can call themselves ‘other Christs’.
If we must speak in terms of priesthood, then it can only be as an allusion to a role that was long past made redundant by Jesus himself, and in terms that make it abundantly clear that every man woman and child is his or her OWN priest, totally needless of a clerical-caste intermediary between God and themselves.
If what you said about many of my comments is correct, then I am frightened.
Magna, thank you.
I agree with you that priesthood, as practised before Jesus, is redundant.
And I agree with the rather Protestant idea that there is only one true mediator between God and man – Jesus.
Jesus called “disciples” and made it clear to them that they were to continue his mission by:
2. Preaching his kingdom.
3. Continuing his mission of healing.
Maybe the word “priesthood” is the problem?
Better words, perhaps, are “shepherds”, ” pastors” etc.
The ontological change notion is not from God. It is a man made philosophical theory that impossibly attempts to describe an effect of a sacrament.
Any of us who have received any sacrament are changed by the reception of God’s grace.
In the RC church and priesthood, they have overly opted for inadequate philosophical explanations of what are mysteries.
Listen to Iris de Ment’s song: Leth the Mystery Be. Its on youtube.
PS: I am quite certain you are not dismissing my 45 years attempting to be a shepherd and a pastor?
Pat, you are right to be certain of that.
I have, more than once on this blog, remarked on your goodness, and that of your ministry.
Yes, you are right again: ‘priesthood’ is the problem, because of its obsolete Jewish connotations, and its functional mischaracterisation of the discipleship Jesus intended.
Your final paragraph isn’t exactly a model of lucidity. Or originality.
Your monotonous meme abour Christian priesthood etrays no evidence of recent and current research into the history of the various ministries in the early Christian centuries. As your posts reveal.
If my final paragraph at 2.51 isn’t lucid, then how do you know that it isn’t original.
9.24: Are you taking the correct pills? Magna deserves much opprobrium given to him for his demonstrable vulgarity, hate incitement and complete idiocy. The fact that you refer to Magna’s “multiple” personae suggests a psychological psychosis within him. Oh yes, sir, I am indeed qualified…and, dare I say, a good pastor but I recognise hatred and bullying and call it for what it is. You obviously support the bully, Magna who abuses this forum to promulgate hate narratives. Surely yiu’re not one of his clones or one of his fictional characters!! Whiever you are, you’re all mad!! Magna as an icon is risible and pathetic.
1.14: I agree with you Pat. Magna’s interpretation of priesthood is self created: it ignores all theological and historical meaning and elucidation. His fears about clergy being “priests, prophets and kings” is misplaced, deliberately so. We should of course always seek, as priests, to imitate Christ as Priest, prophet and king – not in the power and dominance such titles may wrongly confer, but through a life of humble self giving and service to others. Therein lies the ultimate challenge which many of us fail to fulfil.
6.34: Magna’s hatred of clerics and all others is a big barrier to his spiritual vision. It’s a blockage that requires spiritual surgery…of which this buffoon is incapable of.
I do not HATE clerics. I have been hurt by them and I’m sure I’ve hurt them.
There are really bad clerics.
There are indifferent clerics.
There are good clerics.
I’ve met all three catagories.
McCamley (PP) pervert priest as the Dungannon folk are now calling him has been spotted sniffing around Dungannon. Petition is well underway to help prevent this piece of garbage stepping foot in the place.
Good for you and it is also important not to give money because that will force them to listen to you.
@2.37pm The petition I mentioned does urge those who sign to discontinue giving money to the parish.
They kill babies in Dungannon. They must be dreadful people altogether.
Unlikely you have been part of a praying community if you refer to a human being in those terms.
2 29: No doubt you’ll receiving the SACRED Host at Communion tomorrow? And you think It’s ok to call another human being a puece if garbage? Whatever the failures of Fr. Mc, you are lower in filth. You seriously should not approach any altar before a contrite confession.
The Missal you have on your Altar. Is it a Roman, Anglican or one you put together yourself. Asking +Pat out of noseyness.
It is the Vatican II Paul VI missal.
Pat did you instigate the petition that’s going around Dungannon yesterday and today. Just asking for a friend.
I only asked because someone seen you in a bar in Dungannon Pat. No offence intended.
I have never been in a bar in Dungannon 🥴
It seems wanker McCamley and Amy is getting paranoid at the thought of you Pat in Dungannon. Can you just imagine what the school children will be skitting and laughing about.
‘’There’s a time for Mass and a time for action’’ [Fr Ted Crilly]
Do you think you might start celebrating the mass ‘ad orientem’ so that you are worshipping WITH the people and it celebrating FOR the people (over the counter).
I think ad orientem worship displays so much more humility on the part of the priest.
You need to present the counter to be a proper host.
I respect your views. I have always seen myself as worshipping with the people.
Just a thought…..Did Jesus have his back to the disciples at the Last Supper?
They were all on one side of the table, so faced the same way. We are facing liturgical east, together.
I hope when you’re in a taxi the driver has his back to you.
Did Jesus have his back to the disciples? Of course. They all knelt at the step and John, the one whom Jesus loved rang a little bell while holding the hem of his fiddleback.
‘They were all on one side of the table’
Fr Neal Carlin, who had a sometimes turbulent relationship with bishops of Derry, has died. RIP.
Magna 10 : Deaf Guy 0. While Magna has slowed down as they day progressed, his stamina and his libido are not what they once were. However his early attack-mode today has surely put the frighteners of Deaf Guy who has not even turned up for the game. Some of the audience who generally root for Deaf Guy and always try to encourage him must feel bitterly disappointed. The wonder child is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps the Ref (Bishop Pat) has been too strict today with Deaf Guy and not let any of his comments land even a slight punch.
As the game drags to an end it seems nobody of note can keep up with the Magnificant Magna even if he is on a high dose of the “Comment Viagra Pill” also known as “Ad-nauseam”
During his younger years, Magna was a frightening combination of sheer aggression and unbridled malice. He would mete out incredible punishment, destroying opponents while building his blog reputation throughout the years. Magna was a very scary fighter, especially during his prime.
But despite a tremendous career, Magns keeps on fighting even as he has got older and way past his best. By this time, Magna is out of shape, and well into his twilight years.
Deaf Guy, Magna’s younger opponent, banks heavily on his fluid technique, excellent timing, and intelligent offense. Amazingly, his defensive reflexes are sharp enough to keep himself out of danger and minimize damage, even when the referee trys to throw the fight in Magna’s favour.
I believe it’s called the biological solution.
Irony has officially died. The ACP has an article condemning dissent in the Church.
Their website looks as old as their average member.
That article just shows how dangerous dialogue mass and Action Catholique were!
The blessing is that this lunacy will die with you. My only hope is that a true and non-corrupt reformer will help us.
That’s right, just sit and wait. Make no effort to reform it yourself.
Mother of God you people are so stupid .
Very interesting discussion today, Pat, once the holy priests fucked off in a fit because Magna was commenting. You and Magna at your best.
The really sad thing about the people abusing Magna above, is that that is all they can do – they obviously can’t engage people in any meaningful way, and unless given continual adulation want to cancel the person they’re talking to. I disagree with Magna that priesthood could never have been intended, but their behaviour here does rather confirm his other points about them.
The +Aul Doll and Rory should be given a penguin egg, Bp Pat, don’t you think?
Pat did you hear about the Canonical Enquiry taking place in a Dublin Parish. Not sure if its called a Canonical Enquiry, Connonical Visitation or maybe a Canonical Enquiry. Sounds painful whatever it is. It wouldn’t have happened in Diarmuid Martin’s time. He wouldn’t allow any of his lapdog be investigated, the nerve of them as Boyle as often said to me “I’m telling you… Joxer… th’ whole worl’s… in a terr…ible state o’… chassis!”
Just a grand title for visit by the bishop to a parish. Most are usually tied in with confirmations.
It’s bizzare this blog is dominated by MC today yet again.
Tell me about it.
Bloody shame, eh?
The posters who find MC’s summaries of Wikipedia tiresome are understandable. When I read his line about the Jewish messianic expectation in the singular that was enough for me. There’s no scholarship behind the encyclopedia summaries. I suspect he ‘departed’ Maynooth before he had completed a philosophy qualification.
It’s a beautiful chapel, Bishop Pat, and I look forward to sitting before the tabernacle and praying with the community, if you’ll have me.
I have finished pruning my Father’s garden, here in Liverpool; and I’ve nearly finished gathering all the old branches and poisonous thorns, ready to be cast aside to their rightful place.
My Father’s garden is looking very nice, and I intend on keeping my Father’s garden a safe garden for all the other beautiful and fruitful flowers so they can flourish without being choked by poisonous thorns or stung stinging nettles. “A l
… It is the LORD who speaks: Blessed be the name of the LORD!
I have also taken it upon myself to keep the foxes and ravenous wolves away from the little lambs: a task which requires a vigilant watcher—-vigiliance so very much needed—especially since the Babylonian overseers promote, encourage and reward such wickedness and filthiness!
I have made a promise to my Father, a promise to keep the little lambs he has entrusted to me safe. I take my Father’s business very seriously. Very seriously indeed! You could say “I’m crazy about my Father’s work!”
… It is The LORD who speaks. Blessed be the name of the LORD!
I AM THE VINE; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you… This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.”
John 15 5-8
On the topic of yesterday, religion is a structure. Spirituality is not bound by religion.
Clergy, lawmakers and law enforcement often seem to want people to do what they say but they themselves do differently. We’ve seen that politicians flouting the covid guidelines.
Our consciousness can exist outside of our bodies. Anyone who has experienced an out of body experience can testify to that.
Science can only work within the rules of what they understand. Just because they cannot understand the afterlife, they cannot just dismiss it. It is interesting that many scientists believe in God but feel because of their job, they cannot speak about their belief.
Like any of the Birmingham Six, I am an innocent man who has been wronged.
Is mise le meas,