Categories
Uncategorized

AUSTRIAN BISHOP HANGS PICTURE OF NUDE TRANSSEXUAL IN CHURCH FOR LENT.

The Catholic bishop of Innsbruck, Austria, inaugurated a “Lenten” decoration of the main altar of the historic University church of Saint John Nepomuk, a baroque jewel from the early 18th century. The “decoration” shows an enlarged partial inverted photograph of a naked young man with scars and tattoos lying on a bed and has been placed as an altarpiece above the tabernacle of the former main altar of the church. The piece of contemporary art by Carmen Brucic was specially chosen by Bishop Hermann Glettler, and bears the title: “Tired.”

Bishop Glettler has campaigned for the blessing of same-sex couples in the past (more on that later)

https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/austrian-bishop-hangs-banner-of-nude-trans-activist-over-main-altar-for-lent/

PAT SAYS:

One of my worries for a long time now has been the gradual homosexualisation of the Catholic priesthood and church.

The priesthood is now a gay profession but it should not be.

The People of God are very diverse and that diversity should be expressed in Holy Orders.

A GAY DIRECTION

I do not agree with the Austrian bishop displaying the image he has displayed.

And it’s not because I’m a prude – far from it.

I have no objection to erotic art or indeed homoerotic art. But I believe the place for such art is either in an art gallery or in the private home of an individual.

I do not believe that homoerotic or erotic art should be displayed in a church.

There is nothing wrong with church art that is challenging or makes us think.

But do we really need to see genitalia displayed above altars?

And this trend is not just in Austria. We have it in Ireland too.

Brother Emma’s who to my mind is an extreme good artist painted the picture below and it was apparently planned to be placed the the monastery Chapel.

Is it an angel or the archangel Michael?

It was actually banned by Facebook.

And apparently it was placed in the monasteries library and not the Chapel.

But what do achieve spiritually liturgically or pastorally from displaying an angel with his male genitalia?

Do angels have genitalia I wonder?

Is this another subtle way of homosexuising the priesthood church.

I have no personal objection to Brother Emmaus’ painting. And I would, personally have no problem having it in a private room in my house.

But not in a church surely?’

SILVERSTREAM

Dom Kirby had some of these paintings in Silverstream.

Again, in my opinion this actually very good painting by Terry Nelson, is not suitable for a church.

And again, a good painting but for an art gallery or private home.

I am concerned about the creeping homosexualisation of the priesthood.

It’s not good when any minority, lobby group or one issue campaign group tries to hijack the whole church.

124 replies on “AUSTRIAN BISHOP HANGS PICTURE OF NUDE TRANSSEXUAL IN CHURCH FOR LENT.”

Pat, the modern art piece as displayed is most unsuitable for a church. Just crazy and bizarre to place it in the sanctuary and in the space where the Blessed Sacrament is reserved. An appalling decision. As for the homosexualization of priesthood: aren’t you a prime promoter by your own admission and by your life choice? Seriously? May I ask you: if 6 gay men sought entry into the Oratory, what would be your response? Aren’t there contradictions in your statements and beliefs?

Like

I would take 26 gay men into the Oratory. I have been celebrating same sex blessings for nearly 40 years.

Do I want The Oratory to be a gay church?

No. I want it to be a church for anyone and everyone.

Like

9.00: Avoidance technique. Would you accept 26 gay men, married or not or in open relationships or just normal human beings as candidates? So a small % is allowed!!: Who decides and what are your criteria?

Like

It’s not an issue at The Oratory as we are not RCC.

Everyone is welcome here regardless of orientation.

Like

By Post Author

10.48 am. Anon

The point is this, it shouldn’t be all gay men, or all straight men, or all white men, or all black men, or all Asian men, or all young men, or all middle age men or all elderly men.

It should be a combination of all.
Too much of any one type leads to problems. As seen in what we have now ‘the priesthood/monks etc as being a homosexual profession’.

Like

10.58: But Pat keeps avoiding the real questions. It would never happen that we’d have only one particular gender or sexual orientation in any particular profession. Pat is arguing on the head of a needle. Can he he us how many gay men he presently has in the Oratory and what their ministries are? Legitimate question to ask.

Like

The bishop pushes at the proverbial open door with this homoerotic image. Pope Francis has abandoned any idea of an objective distance towards gay issues. Zanchetta is just the latest of many episcopal strays and waifs who found home in the Vatican of Francis, when instead they should, if they not be criminals like Zanchetta, be under treatment. More than a few have shown themselves in be Kirby-style whoopsie men. This art is a sort of whoopsie moment for parishioners. It could be worse. The bishop could have made it a permanent installation along with some stuff borrowed from poor Dom Kirby, chased around as he is by Dutch nuns. The sudden sacking of the bishop Torres of Arecibo, Puerto Rico might be the latest instance of this. He supported conscientious objectors to mandatory vaccination and opposed legislation which seems to enshrine gender ideology, two things the Episcopal Conference support. Francis, pro-workingman that he is, sacked him immediately when +Torres refused to resign.

Like

6.30
It’s safe to defuce from your posts that you are a barrel of laughs to light up a room and dispell sadness and darkness.

Like

@)8:43 is this the simple simon who thinks Symmachus means ‘joyful?’ Well I don’t know what ‘defuce’ means you cabbage. Think before you type.

Like

This is the Bishop’s message, accompanying the artwork:
“Tired? Exhausted?
Beginning of Lent: Intervention of Art in the Church.
Large-format photo staged by Tyrolean artist Carmen Brucic in Innsbruck’s University Church of St. John. The photo is from the series “Private Stages” in Tbilisi. David, half-Ukrainian – shown in the picture in an exhausted state (or simply at rest?) – is demonstrating in the Georgian capital these days against the madness of the war. A matter of collective and personal fatigue, but also a restoring the strength for the resistance.
Lent is a time for reflection, purification, awareness of needs, and a “rising” from the power of faith. Go with Jesus, sympathize. An inner connection with God. Tonight’s service with a cross of ashes. Happy Lent everyone!”

Like

5.17, so you feel ‘replenished from ‘a good Lenten season’. I’m almost afraid to ask for your definition of ‘good’.

Does a such a season make you feel good about yourself? Purged? Purified? And then … entitled? Deserving? More than a little self-satisfied?

This is the fundamental flaw in Roman Catholicism: it puts so much emphasis on works; on self-redemption through self-reliance.

Hell lies that way.

Like

Spot on, 7.29! That is precisely what Lent is about: an egotistical attempt to make oneself right with God, by giving up this, or doing that.

It’s basically a search for ‘me’, not for God.

Like

8.24, you can’t see the contradiction in your post, can you? Unless you were being tongue in cheek.

Not removing yourself from the centre is NOT making room for God. Precisely that.

Roman Catholicism: it really is something else.

Like

David Apakidze, the model in this picture, is certainly not transsexual. I don’t know why you think he is. But he is a cis male Ukrainian artist. And the art work is a gesture of solidarity with Ukraine. An anti-war statement.
Church buildings and church art includes many examples of the male and female form in various depictions. Are you anti-body? Anti-flesh?
Also: I thought you were gay. I understand that you do not approve of gay priests leading secret gay lives. That you think this is hypocrisy. So be it, you may be right about that. But even allowing for that, I don’t understand why you are writing this kind of post today. It sounds like you don’t approve of gays anywhere in the church. Your post is lifted from LifeSire news, a right-wing fundamentalist Catholic site. I can understand why they would post homophobia. But why are you, a gay man, posting it?
I am confused.
Respectfully, please explain?

Like

I have ordained gay men. I want to see everyone in the Church.

But I don’t want the church to be 100% gay.

I do not believe this blog is homophobic.

Like

Pat, 11.12 makes relevant comments and highlights absolute contradictions in your stance. You must seriously and truthfully answer the legitimate questions asked of you. You say you have ordained gay men. Fine, but you cannot reconcile this with your absolutist statement that you do not want the priesthood to be a “fully” homosexual profession. Is 45% or 50% or 60% acceptable then? Your statement is bizarre. We really need to know exactly what you mean. Pat, on the evidence of this statement by you it is logical for us to conclude that you are confused and homophobic, perhaps unintentionally. I also believe that many of your proclamations about gay priests vis a vis your acceptance of gay men now requires further debate.. Something is not quite rational about your argument. I think the comments by 10.48 and 11.12 from last night deserve more in-depth answers. Can you engage? Also, how many gay men are presently part of the Orarory and what ministries are they involved in?

Like

Pat, if you lift something from another site, it’s ethical practice to acknowledge that.
If you lift aomwthing from the site mentioned by 11.12 why are you giving publicity to this quarter?

Like

I have not “adopted”. O printed a small part of it, gave the link to the full article and made my own commentary on it.

Like

By Post Author

Pat, I googled this. You’re wrong. The model in this artwork isn’t transsexual.
Maybe a correction?

Like

Pat,

You misunderstand me. The name of the make model in this photographic artwork is David Apakidze. He is NOT a transsexual. I’m simply explaining that you’ve been mislaid about that. I googled the name and read about the artist, the male model, and the artwork.

Like

The most problematic lobby group in the Roman Catholic Church is not a minority group within the Church, it seems to be the majority that proactively either engage in or are complicit in cover ups. It’s like a cult now, if you are in it, you have to toe the party line even if it’s a crooked line. As someone said on here recently, the preservation of Church interests takes precedence over victims and survivors. At this stage, having a nude painting hanging in full view of the congregation is quite mild compared to the other lewd activities that altars are allegedly used for in the dark of night. Sad that RCC has become so dysfunctional.

Like

9:27 The church is the family of God and contains great diversity with most of its people not being homosexual.

The priesthood should be representative of that diversity.

It would be a great contradiction, in my opinion, for a diverse church to have a totally or even majority homosexual priesthood.

It would be like McDonald’s only having gay staff.

Liked by 1 person

9.33: Pat, sorry but you are tripping yourself up in contradictions. Basically what you are saying is that a “little bit” of homosexuality is acceptable. You do have a serious problem with your arguments. Your analogy with McDonald’s is absurd. So what if McDonald’s only have gay staff? Who decides which “gay man” should or should not be admitted for priesthood? Would you exercise bias and prejudice if 12 gay men or women offered themselves as candidates? Who is to be the arbiter of this judgment? I’m not being awkward but your blog today has evoked these relevant questions. They must be answered openly and honestly. Thanks.

Like

Bishop Pat, I was at Silverstream a few years ago, was thinking about a vocation. In their chapter room (I think) there’s a very weird “beheading of John the Baptist” painting that struck me as extremely homoerotic. I was rather shocked that it was in a monastery. It would certainly bother (or turn on) any same sex attracted monk there. Maybe someone else has seen it and can confirm that it wasn’t just my imagination. When I heard about the problems at Silverstream, it all sort of clicked for me. So glad I did not try my vocation there. 😅

Like

10:59 The RCC requires all priests to be celibate.

It also forbids gay men being accepted into the priesthood – a rule the most often overlook.

It’s up to every religious body to decide for themselves.

Here at The Oratory it is not an issue but even here I prefer a diversity.

Like

Pat I think the rule most overlooked, even with the disproportionate number of gays in the priesthood, is still the celibacy one. Sipe reckoned 5% of priests were celibate.

Like

11.54, really? You exaggerate, and not a little. Sipe reckoned that at any time, 50% of priests in the USA were celibate, not 5%. Presumably, he would have reckoned, by the same metric, that the same percentage would have prevailed throughout the rest of the world.

Like

Bob at 4:43 The source for your unfounded statement is a misunderstanding of this sentence:

‘No researcher so far has assessed that more than fifty percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy.’http://www.awrsipe.com/Media/2010-04-28-ncr.htm

It won’t help you since you can’t read but if you look at the rest of the site you’ll find Sipe gives 5% celibate and the meaning of this sentence is NOBODY thinks more than 50% of priests are celibate.

You’re one of the RC faithful aren’t you! 🐏

Like

When I was a kid the mood music was that every RC priest had foresaken heterosexual marriage for the kingdom of heaven.
Today priests are effete and feminine more like a woman of a man, girlie and twee with the strong whiff of belonging to an elite gay club.
It’s especially bad in Birmingham where being gay is almost a right of passage – it was bad with Couve and is getting chronic under Longley.
Like Newman the cleric as a shrill maiden art prevails has gained traction and is a runaway train.
St Sebastian is the new poster boy and Ratzinger didn’t help with his live in lover.
Celibacy isn’t a virtue it’s a mask which hides rampant homosexuality and a gay culture which is cruel and bitchy – again Birmingham excels at this.

Like

Homosexuality isn’t the only sexuality hidden by the mask. The whole pretence of celibacy is a mask covering the reality that the clergy have never actually been celibate.

Like

12.11
Yes. And celibacy was dressed up as a priest’s ‘giving himself to God’ by sacrificing the possibility of marriage and family. The clear implication was that the laity were spiritually and morally lesser than priests.

Like

Pat, homosexual priests are the majority, not minority. I know several in northern dioceses who holiday with their boyfriends. The network is real. It is not just priests but other professions too.
An example from Tyrone: we have (at least) one priest who is a complete drama queen. Another is an interior design expert. We have one who openly teaches against biblical teaching on sexual acts. Another reportedly an active ‘scene’ member. The list here is endless. That’s only your Hors d’Ouveres. Tune in next time for more 😇😇

Like

Jeremy – as once described on this blog – the RCC is a Universal Knocking Shop – mainly homosexual that explains the reported abuse and harassment of seminarians & the subsequent, intense harassment and intimidation tactics used to suppress truth about these matters facilitating further endangerment.

Like

What do you expect after years of the left wing liberal elite being in charge. This degenerate bishop should be dismissed immediately for this sacrilege. But he won’t, he will be protected by all the other disciples of Satan now in power. However had done anything remotely authentically Catholic he would have been removed forthwith. We need not despair we have Our Lady’s promise that in the end Her Immaculate Heart will Triumph. Then all these evil men will get their just reward Hell’s fire for all eternity.

Like

It really is quite odd. Years ago we in Britain (and other countries) sent missionaries to Africa to bring Christ to those countrymen. Now African priests are coming over here to bring Christ to to the British. It`s very odd indeed !

Like

11.06, we ‘bring Jesus’ to others? How supercilious and condescending!
There is a fundamental contradiction in the Gospel; indeed, throughout the Bible. On the one hand, there is a missionary mandate to evangelise (in the Gospel, to carry to others the ‘Good News’); on the other hand, there is the explicit teaching of Jesus that God, the ‘kingdom of Heaven’, is already within each and every person. So no need to evangelise?

Like

Hmmm, apart from the question whether St Michael, as an angel, should have any sex there is the worrying point that he lacks any secondary sex characteristic. That’s just a fancy way of saying he’s not depicted as a mature man, he’s depicted as a boy.

Like

Thanks for the blog. I always suspected they were all gay and told my son not to join because he’s cute and they’d haunt him.

Like

9.28: To be quite honest Pat, printing this revulsion and obscenity is very revealing. It is done to continue a debasement of the monks but worse, it debases any respect we ought to have for sacred spaces. I regret you are back to business as usual. You know you’ll receive much traction at the very name of Silverstream. TBH – you have no intellectual interest or capacity to deal with serious questions arising out of the blog for today re: gay men and women in priesthood and ministry.

Like

Martin at 11:04, perhaps you missed the part where Kirby wanted to place a homoerotic “icon” in the monastic church, and the whistleblower told him it was inappropriate?

Like

Looking at the pictures of the convent in Holland where Dom Kirby went they also have that candlestick thing in the middle of the choir but I couldn’t see that there was a rope around it or any evidence of the nuns kneeling there with a rope round their throat as the monks do when adoring at Silverstream.
I have been to Tyburn Convent and when adoring the nuns just kneel on kneelers and there is no sign of any candlestick thing or anything round necks.
It must be a Silverstream thing 😟

Like

Monsignor Bruce Harbert used to say that the Paschal candle was phallic and plunging it into the font during the Easter Vigil represented fertility. Kitty’s monks are tied to it – with a rope around their necks. Very kinky was our Kitty.

Like

It’s a custom in monasteries which follow the perpetual adoration traditions of Mother Mechtilde de Bar (d. 1698). Silverstream is the first attempt at bringing her “charism” to male Benedictines. The monastery in which Kirby is hiding out is one of Mother Mechtilde’s. The pillar and candle bit is even more disturbing when you enter into the history behind it: it is in imitation of French executions before the Revolution, in which the criminal is made to grovel before the King’s majesty, rope around his neck and candle in hand, before he is torn limb from limb. Lovely spirituality, no?

Like

Thank you, 3:53, very informative. And distinctly horrible.
I thought the Tyburn martyr complex was bad enough.

Like

Nudity, both male and female, has been common and popular in classical art for many centuries. I doubt though, that this is showing much respect especially over the sanctuary of a church. Political comments and `making a statement`, should be left in the wider community that exists outside a church building.

Like

10.19, let me set your doubts to rest: there is no nudity in the image; just the suggestion of it.

Those with their minds on higher things will take no offence.

Like

9:27am Can you please provide the RCC stats on how many priests currently serving identify as:
Gay
Heterosexual
Trans
Bi
Other
Current Locations of clergy & their church laity with convictions or same pending

Like

90%
10% and dying out fast.
None although the odd one has apparently got into seminary for some bizarre reason known only to themselves.
See first answer above.
There is no other, the church likes sliced white bread only.
Serving sentences as given by the judge or bailed.

Two other statistics you don’t mention:
Priests who abused children 4-8%.
Bishops who covered up abuse until forced not to by civil authorities: 100%

Like

Diversity is a real joke in irish rcc as they don’t have any real intentions in doing so. They were firmly against as far as I know from very few deaf aspirants in the past. One of them is a fully blown gay as he’s obsessed or addicted to TLM.
Irish rcc would allow it (diversity) if there was money in it for them. Otherwise, they aren’t interested,period.
Gradual homosexualisation isn’t correct as it’s a full blown one in terms of screening and kicking out nearly or all straight priests, admitted seminarians with gay tendencies or gay until ordination. Instance of this was shown quite clearly in diocese of Motherwell where Toal approved it. imagine if I was in Toal’s shoes, its the exit door out for that seminarian (CM).
First inkling re homosexuality of priests was in 1990 when a deaf gay man admitted to me along with his deaf gay friend from UK as well, having sex with a priest/s in a sauna not far from whitefriar Church. I think that sauna place is gone, not sure.
Then Martel book was a revelation especially to the catholic laity as it opened my eyes as to scale of it. Its on huge scale re priests, bishops and seminarians. Mc Carrick topped it all for me personally cos its top down all the way even frankie knows it too.
It made me think and wonder what about previous popes?

Like

Surely if ordination imparts an ontological change it could make all priests heterosexual at the point of ordination?

Like

Anon at 11.30pm

Are you having me on or you don’t get it🤷‍♂️🙈

Look at mc Carrick, KOB, as i no ontological change. Its a gift of gab or loads of blarney that you are spouting now. It’s hogwash.

Like

I don’t know why you all can’t cope with transsexuals, you have no difficulty with transubstantiation.
The philosophy underlying that should surely make it clear that some people are born one gender but they are really another.

Like

I work in a private GUM clinic and in the last month we have seen 7 members of clergy (not just RCC) under ‘fake’ identities. 2 of whom are married men with children.

Like

If they are signing in under fake identities how do you know who and what they are? That you would know one is plausible – that you would know 7 is suspicious.

Like

1.46: That commenter at 12.14 has said similar things before about knowing who and why a “person” is visiting a private clinic. He ain’t real nor is he very professional. He’s a liar.

Like

Staff in the clinic recognise them maybe? I bet it’s all the priests who have been in the Canary Islands of late, without mentioning them – we don’t need to it’s wide spread. January to March is Clergy (and friends) season in the Canaries.

Like

12.14. You are either lying about this (which I suspect) or you should have no role whatsoever in medical care. Confidentiality is the bedrock of sexual health provision. Your comment is disgraceful.
Another reason why I doubt that you actually work in sexual health: We encourage everyone to take care of their sexual health. That means challenging social stigmas about attending clinics for check ups. If you don’t understand that basic point, I very much doubt that you’ve ever even visited a sexual health clinic.
Either way, you should feel ashamed of yourself.

Like

In the Anglican Diocese of Lincoln there is a dynamic and popular young (30s) openly gay Rural Dean and Vicar running numerous churches in a deprived urban backwater. His husband/partner is also a vicar/priest. His sexuality is not an issue locally and he tweets criticising homophobic African churches etc. A suffragen (auxiliary) bishop in Lincoln is also gay

Like

I know an Anglican vicar who has a same-sex husband and they are having a child together by a surrogate and with their diocese’s blessing. They are far more open minded than the RCC..

Like

I would say a semi emotional yes. I would bexafraid I would not be a good enough father.

I had no childhood. As the oldest of 17 I had to bring up the rest.

I’m very content with being gay.

Like

By Post Author

4.24, meglomaniac? You’re alluding to King Henry VIII, aren’t you?
Yes, Henry was undoubtedly a meglomaniac, like most popes. It’s what happens when one assumes absolute power over others.

Like

As a cradle Catholic do I just have to accept the fact that priests come in all shapes and sizes and sexual orientations.Most of us are busy with our own responsibilities to family and our professions.When the need arises and we have one to one contact with our local priest during times sickness death in family and most of all receiving the sacraments Does it really matter if the minister is leading a double life,I feel that is a matter between the individual and God.My only exception is if you know a priest is harming children and turn a blind eye then that person should not represent the Church,The civil authorities should be involved with the perpetrators.

Like

Bishop Pat, you must be a disciple of Innocent X who began the practice of defacing art for religious purpose. They continued to “cover-up” for centuries after that….as Pat you would seem to wish on the Blog today. Genesis associates nakedness with ” The Fall.” Before that, accordingly, it was the body glorious. You are clearly Pat, more Jansenist and puritan than you realise? Why are ” religious” people so uncomfortable with Beauty and Art in the form of the depicted accuracy of human form ? The secular and the sacred is a political masterstroke by both powerhouses ( and I doubt Jesus answered in the fashion that represents him over a coin.)

Like

Silverstream twink art certainly doesn’t belong in church. It would even be concerning (an underage youth) in a private setting. The Austrian example is not as bad, but wholly inappropriate.

Like

4:54: Foucault’s “Discipline and Punish” is a fitting source for Silverstream monastic spirituality. Kirby was a fixture on the leather scene while a student at Catholic University in DC. (Yes, many of us priests and religious who knew him then have VERY good memories.)

Like

A serious question about the art, Pat. Catholic Churches are full of images, sculptures, of a semi-naked Christ on the cross. The lack of garment doesn’t make the art indecent, surely?
I don’t see anything indecent about the use of this artwork for similar liturgical purposes.
Btw: I do think you should properly display the art as it appears in the church setting. You have turned the image upside down in the picture attached to your post.

Like

I think we know the sufference between a Jesus on the cross wearing a loin cloth and an image with a full penis?

Like

6.09
He would not have been wearing a loin cloth and death by asphyxiation ( crucifixion ) in a male causes full erection and ejacuate. The crucifixion has never been depicted in its full truth. Fact, not for any salacious comment among the uncouth on this Blog.

Like

I see little wrong with that altar pic: you can’t see the man’s bits. It’s a nude pic, but not explicitly so: that detail is expressed more subtly and delicately.
Why are people offended by the pic? Christ on Calvary would have been crucifed buck naked. The fact that we can see him in churches cucified in a loin cloth is not historically accurate; it’s a nod to more prudish, modern sensibilities.
If Christ’s nudity on the Cross can be handled in a nuanced way (and congregations not take umbrage at it), then why the rending of righteous robes at this display?
Nothing revolting about it.

Like

If it isn’t revolting, then why your objection to its hanging over an altar? Clearly, it isn’t there to titillate, since the private parts are not exposed, merely suggested. This is the equivalent of the loin cloth covering the private parts of the crucified Christ. I presume you don’t object to the displaying of crucifixes in churches, so, again, why your objection to the other?

Like

Whether or not an image is revolting is not the only guide.

Is it appropriate?

Like

By Post Author

Yes, it is appropriate.

It is not, as you described, homo-erotic: this, I believe, would not have been your natural reaction, had you not read the article on LifeSiteNews, which you allowed to prejudice your perception of the image.

Few would have known anything about the identity and politics of the model in the image: these are not important. What IS important is the symbolism of the art work, which you and others missed.

The suggestion is that the man is stretched in cruciform fashion, hinting at the crucifixion of Christ himself.

The deeper suggestion is that the Christ-man is ‘tired’ at the repeated crucifixion he must endure in the suffering of humanity at the hands of inhumanity: ‘What you do to the least of these, you do also to me.’

The inversion of the image is significant, too: it compels viewers to look more closely, not just in attempt to see the image of the man re-inverted, but to, as it were, re-invert our attitudes to the suffering of our fellow humans.

I shouldn’t have expected a more insightful comment from LifeSiteNews, but, from you, I should.

Like

Does Archangel Michael have a winky? As pointless a question as asking whether he has a nose, a mouth, or an ear? But, of course, no one ever asks such questions, because these cranial features don’t concern sexual acts. Take yer heads out of yer personal gutters, lads; it does you no credit.

ALL that exists must have form of one kind or another, otherwise it doesn’t exist at all, not even as an abstract concept. Would you rather Michael appeared as a frog? Sure enough, you’d still be asking whether he had a penis and (wink, wink) whether or not it was more than baroque ornamentation.

Grow up. Yes?

Like

the HOLY BISHOP herman is conserved from sll fallible things so cannot make mistakes in the churchnwere the picture was put up it doesnt matter the offences of it if the HOLY BISHOO said so then it is okbwith GOD so peopke should stop going on

Like

There is a homoerotic art piece in the Cistercian monastery in Roscrea. I was told it was painted in 1994 by an Austrian artist and given to one of the monks. It is hung in a part of the monastery not generally where visitors can see. It is a magnificent piece of art. It looks odd in a Cistercian house. There are many things in this life I fail to understand, this is one of them. There is a time and a place. The timing may be good, the place is not.

Like

Dom Colmcille O’Toole was most fond of that piece of art. It is hidden away. I am not sure what Mal Thompson thinks of it!

Like

Part 2 of this 2 part series now showing on RTE 1 or catch up on RTE Plus One tonight.

Like

Pat,
I’ve read this whole thread.
You have, during it, accepted that this story (taken from Lifesite news) contains errors.
One of those errors is the claim, in the title and throughout, that this is an image of a trans man. It’s not. The male model pictured here is not trans. All of that is easily checked by googling the man’s name.
You, Pat, have, during this thread, accepted that. You’ve said, in terms, that you accept he’s not trans.
Yet you have allowed this mistake/misrepresentation/untruth to remain, from headline to content, without correcting it.
Truth matters, Pat. If you’re a man of integrity, you’ll correct your error.

Like

Robert … Thanks for pointing this out. I’m amazed. This article had all sorts of errors in it including the transsexual stuff. I don’t understand why Pat hasn’t made changes and corrections. It’s weird to run a post saying somebody is a transsexual when they’re not. It undermines your credibility when you do that.

Pat, I can only assume you’ve been busy but please make those corrections.

Like

Leave a comment