Priest stuns congregation by resigning over affair.

[Evil Genius]

You're just rambing now for the sake of it. See my previous posts on the duties of a Catholic priest.

Oh, so when the questions get difficult, your best retort is to accuse the questioner of rambling? 

OK, since you have based your case on certain assumptions, I shall address those directly:
1. Do you know the woman in question is Catholic?
2. If "Yes", do you know for certain she is/was a member of his Congregation?
3. Do you know her exact marital status? (Your posting a contradictory description of her as "Divorced/Separated" clearly suggests you don't)
4. Do you know that the Priest continued to advise her spiritually after their relationship began?
5. Do you know that he and she are "shagging"?

You know, for one who demands such high standards of evdence and burden of proof etc on other issues, you're playing remarkably "fast and loose" with the facts of this particular topic.

Perhaps the Priest is not the only hypocrite in this affair...

I already said in a previous post I was making similar assumptions as those who'd already posted.

Ah, so it's their  fault that you blithely accept their (unsustainable) assumptions and use them to support your case?

And you accused me of "rambling"?

OK, I'll make it even easier for you.

Do you still think it safe to accept any of the five assumptions I listed above, "Yes" or "No"?

[mylestheslasher]

Where have I got personal? I pulled you up on your views nothing else. You are taking a very hard line against this priest while anyone that knows the man on here has nothing but good to say about him. I suggest you are against the man because he broke the rules of the catholic church - a rule which has nothing to do with the word of Jesus or God as far as I can see. Now I compare this to your failure on the "clerical abuse" thread to condemn bishops, priests and others who covered up the horrific abuse of little children. Indeed you proclaimed that a priest who knew about such actions taking place would not come out and speak if the bishop told him not to. You showed great understanding to such a priest (if such things ever happened) and you instead spread the majority of the blame to the government. It appears to me, like many a bishop, you are more concerned about keeping the catholic church in a position of power than you are of caring about the people within the church. Not very religious in my opinion and most certainly not the view of a republican.

I'm not against the man because he broke the rules of the Church. I am "against" him, if that's the right phrase because he broke his vows. Those vows allowed him to be elevated to a certain level of trust in his community so by breaking the vows he has undermined his Church and his fellow priests who took the same vows.

Oh, his vow. Are you against everyone as ferverently that broke a vow. I took a vow once never to drink till I was 18 along with 90% of the country and I broke it numerous times. What about the vow of the cardinals and bishops and even the popes to protect the people within the church (like children). I think they broke that vow many times. I believe you thought £1 would be compensation enough for the victims of child abuse from the church, perhaps if the priest gave £1 into the bishop that would change your opinion of him?

[Donagh]

You're just rambing now for the sake of it. See my previous posts on the duties of a Catholic priest.

Oh, so when the questions get difficult, your best retort is to accuse the questioner of rambling? 

OK, since you have based your case on certain assumptions, I shall address those directly:
1. Do you know the woman in question is Catholic?
2. If "Yes", do you know for certain she is/was a member of his Congregation?
3. Do you know her exact marital status? (Your posting a contradictory description of her as "Divorced/Separated" clearly suggests you don't)
4. Do you know that the Priest continued to advise her spiritually after their relationship began?
5. Do you know that he and she are "shagging"?

You know, for one who demands such high standards of evdence and burden of proof etc on other issues, you're playing remarkably "fast and loose" with the facts of this particular topic.

Perhaps the Priest is not the only hypocrite in this affair...

I already said in a previous post I was making similar assumptions as those who'd already posted.

Ah, so it's their  fault that you blithely accept their (unsustainable) assumptions and use them to support your case?

And you accused me of "rambling"?

OK, I'll make it even easier for you.

Do you still think it safe to accept any of the five assumptions I listed above, "Yes" or "No"?

Your questions are irrelevant. The man has broken his vows and as a result has damaged his Church and the standing of his fellow priests. What point are you trying to make?

[pintsofguinness]

You're just rambing now for the sake of it. See my previous posts on the duties of a Catholic priest.

Oh, so when the questions get difficult, your best retort is to accuse the questioner of rambling? 

OK, since you have based your case on certain assumptions, I shall address those directly:
1. Do you know the woman in question is Catholic?
2. If "Yes", do you know for certain she is/was a member of his Congregation?
3. Do you know her exact marital status? (Your posting a contradictory description of her as "Divorced/Separated" clearly suggests you don't)
4. Do you know that the Priest continued to advise her spiritually after their relationship began?
5. Do you know that he and she are "shagging"?

You know, for one who demands such high standards of evdence and burden of proof etc on other issues, you're playing remarkably "fast and loose" with the facts of this particular topic.

Perhaps the Priest is not the only hypocrite in this affair...

I already said in a previous post I was making similar assumptions as those who'd already posted.

Ah, so it's their  fault that you blithely accept their (unsustainable) assumptions and use them to support your case?

And you accused me of "rambling"?

OK, I'll make it even easier for you.

Do you still think it safe to accept any of the five assumptions I listed above, "Yes" or "No"?

Your questions are irrelevant. The man has broken his vows and as a result has damaged his Church and the standing of his fellow priests. What point are you trying to make?

Damaged the church? No one gives a shite if he goes out with a woman, in fact he's probably helped the church showing that decent men are involved and if he's decided a priest's life is no longer the life for him then so what? That's his business.

If the woman is divorced what makes you think she cares what the church thinks of her, what makes you think she is vulnerable either?

[Donagh]

Oh, his vow. Are you against everyone as ferverently that broke a vow. I took a vow once never to drink till I was 18 along with 90% of the country and I broke it numerous times. What about the vow of the cardinals and bishops and even the popes to protect the people within the church (like children). I think they broke that vow many times.

If your vow exalted you to a position of trust and influence in your community and you then broke it, then yes it would be a similar situation. However as a vow is a pledge between a person and God, then if it's a priest making the vow then it should carry more weight - it's his business after all. I may be wrong but I seem to remember that a priest breaking a vow is sacrilegious in itself, so I'd imagine breaking the solemn vows of Holy Orders is even more serious. 

[Donagh]

Damaged the church? No one gives a shite if he goes out with a woman, in fact he's probably helped the church showing that decent men are involved and if he's decided a priest's life is no longer the life for him then so what? That's his business.

If the woman is divorced what makes you think she cares what the church thinks of her, what makes you think she is vulnerable either?

The Church and practising Catholics care. I would probably care if my wife had gone to him for marriage guidance or confession. If he can't be trusted to keep his vows of Holy Orders, can he be trusted to keep the secrets of confession?

Whether the woman is divorced or not is irrelevant as the Church wouldn't recognise it, I was simply using that as an indicator of what a priests duty should be in such cases - to offer her direction and pastoral care.

[Evil Genius]

You're just rambing now for the sake of it. See my previous posts on the duties of a Catholic priest.

Oh, so when the questions get difficult, your best retort is to accuse the questioner of rambling? 

OK, since you have based your case on certain assumptions, I shall address those directly:
1. Do you know the woman in question is Catholic?
2. If "Yes", do you know for certain she is/was a member of his Congregation?
3. Do you know her exact marital status? (Your posting a contradictory description of her as "Divorced/Separated" clearly suggests you don't)
4. Do you know that the Priest continued to advise her spiritually after their relationship began?
5. Do you know that he and she are "shagging"?

You know, for one who demands such high standards of evdence and burden of proof etc on other issues, you're playing remarkably "fast and loose" with the facts of this particular topic.

Perhaps the Priest is not the only hypocrite in this affair...

I already said in a previous post I was making similar assumptions as those who'd already posted.

Ah, so it's their  fault that you blithely accept their (unsustainable) assumptions and use them to support your case?

And you accused me of "rambling"?

OK, I'll make it even easier for you.

Do you still think it safe to accept any of the five assumptions I listed above, "Yes" or "No"?

Your questions are irrelevant. The man has broken his vows and as a result has damaged his Church and the standing of his fellow priests. What point are you trying to make?

That last part [emboldened] is only one of the points you have sought to make.

Since you have tried to distance yourself from the above false assumptions by blaming others, or calling them irrelevant, and are so evidently wriggling away from various other criticisms which you based upon them, we may safely assume that you now accept you were talking bollox earlier.

Progress, I suppose...

[pintsofguinness]

Damaged the church? No one gives a shite if he goes out with a woman, in fact he's probably helped the church showing that decent men are involved and if he's decided a priest's life is no longer the life for him then so what? That's his business.

If the woman is divorced what makes you think she cares what the church thinks of her, what makes you think she is vulnerable either?

The Church and practising Catholics care. I would probably care if my wife had gone to him for marriage guidance or confession. If he can't be trusted to keep his vows of Holy Orders, can he be trusted to keep the secrets of confession?

Whether the woman is divorced or not is irrelevant as the Church wouldn't recognise it, I was simply using that as an indicator of what a priests duty should be in such cases - to offer her direction and pastoral care.

But maybe she doesnt want direction or pastoral care donagh.  Most seperated or divorced people these days don't care what they church think of them and don't look to the church for anything. 
Maybe she's perfectly happy, was perfectly happy when she started going with him.  You're making awful big assumptions to condemn the man.

[Tony Baloney]

Damaged the church? No one gives a shite if he goes out with a woman, in fact he's probably helped the church showing that decent men are involved and if he's decided a priest's life is no longer the life for him then so what? That's his business.

If the woman is divorced what makes you think she cares what the church thinks of her, what makes you think she is vulnerable either?

The Church and practising Catholics care. I would probably care if my wife had gone to him for marriage guidance or confession. If he can't be trusted to keep his vows of Holy Orders, can he be trusted to keep the secrets of confession?


Whether the woman is divorced or not is irrelevant as the Church wouldn't recognise it, I was simply using that as an indicator of what a priests duty should be in such cases - to offer her direction and pastoral care.

Does your wife have something big she's trying to keep a lid on?

A vow is made at a point in time to be maintained with the best will in world. However, "to err is human" etc. so just because he has broken that vow after many years of, apparently sterling, service shouldn't sully the work he has done, nor does it make him a bad man overnight.

As Pints says it actually shows the public that priests are normal, they have a heart and aren't all predators preying on innocent young boys and girls.

Sounds like a loss to the Church but good luck to them.

[Donagh]

You're just rambing now for the sake of it. See my previous posts on the duties of a Catholic priest.

Oh, so when the questions get difficult, your best retort is to accuse the questioner of rambling? 

OK, since you have based your case on certain assumptions, I shall address those directly:
1. Do you know the woman in question is Catholic?
2. If "Yes", do you know for certain she is/was a member of his Congregation?
3. Do you know her exact marital status? (Your posting a contradictory description of her as "Divorced/Separated" clearly suggests you don't)
4. Do you know that the Priest continued to advise her spiritually after their relationship began?
5. Do you know that he and she are "shagging"?

You know, for one who demands such high standards of evdence and burden of proof etc on other issues, you're playing remarkably "fast and loose" with the facts of this particular topic.

Perhaps the Priest is not the only hypocrite in this affair...

I already said in a previous post I was making similar assumptions as those who'd already posted.

Ah, so it's their  fault that you blithely accept their (unsustainable) assumptions and use them to support your case?

And you accused me of "rambling"?

OK, I'll make it even easier for you.

Do you still think it safe to accept any of the five assumptions I listed above, "Yes" or "No"?

Your questions are irrelevant. The man has broken his vows and as a result has damaged his Church and the standing of his fellow priests. What point are you trying to make?

That last part [emboldened] is only one of the points you have sought to make.

Since you have tried to distance yourself from the above false assumptions by blaming others, or calling them irrelevant, and are so evidently wriggling away from various other criticisms which you based upon them, we may safely assume that you now accept you were talking bollox earlier.

Progress, I suppose...

EG, your constant need for attention by expecting people to reply every time you spew out the most pointless shite that comes into your head is extremely tiresome. I thought you would have learned by now. If you wish to make a point, please make it succinctly and I will address it directly. Otherwise, as before, don't expect a response from me.

[Pangurban]

Strictly speaking,Donagh is absolutely correct and is reflecting the official position of the Church. There may be an absence of charity in this view, just as there often is in priestly condemnations of lay people who break their marriage vows. But tyhat does not alter the fact, that he broke the rules, and resignation was the only honourable course open to him. The rest is between him, his conscience and God, and none of us should presume to judge him

[Puckoon]

1. Large assumption
2. I am sure when your marriage falls apart - the fact that the archaic nature of the church "forbids" it - isnt the biggest thing on someones mind
3. Arent you a catholic? Even though your post seems to suggest that you dont believe that I am.
4. As above I guess.

Puckoon, a lot of people who have been around here long enough know my religious opinions and unlike Doogie they know better than to make unwarranted assumptions about my personal beliefs of the basis of something which challenges their cosy world view. The opinion I have presented is that of a Catholic not an 'à la carte Catholic' as they have become known. As this man is a Catholic priest who vowed obedience to Church teaching and doctrine, then I feel it is appropriate to present this view. Of course if that view is uncomfortable for some to take then so be it but not only has this man broken his vows but he has also undermined his Church and his fellow priests who struggle to keep theirs. I acknowledge he has done the correct and honourable thing by resigning but it remains that he has damaged his Church and the authority of his fellow priests by breaking his vows.

OK - Thats what I am asking. You said to ask a catholic - so as you are a firm, non wavering, fundamentalist catholic, I thought Id ask you.

Q. How can anyone who is divorced become reconciled with the church, on the basis that their irreconciliation lies firmly at the churches stance on their divorce, and not any fault of their own (other than god forbid - their wife/husband divorced them)?

Thats what I wanted to know - you said to ask a catholic, so here I am, asking one.

(I realise I may have made up a word there).

I'm not.

You just said you were?

[Donagh]

But maybe she doesnt want direction or pastoral care donagh.  Most seperated or divorced people these days don't care what they church think of them and don't look to the church for anything. 
Maybe she's perfectly happy, was perfectly happy when she started going with him.  You're making awful big assumptions to condemn the man.

Maybe, but sometimes a sick person may not want healed. That would be the view of a Catholic and as such the duty of a Catholic priest would be to attempt to give her guidance.

I'm not condemning the man, simply pointing out that by expected standards, his actions were wrong.

[Tony Baloney]

1. Large assumption
2. I am sure when your marriage falls apart - the fact that the archaic nature of the church "forbids" it - isnt the biggest thing on someones mind
3. Arent you a catholic? Even though your post seems to suggest that you dont believe that I am.
4. As above I guess.

Puckoon, a lot of people who have been around here long enough know my religious opinions and unlike Doogie they know better than to make unwarranted assumptions about my personal beliefs of the basis of something which challenges their cosy world view. The opinion I have presented is that of a Catholic not an 'à la carte Catholic' as they have become known. As this man is a Catholic priest who vowed obedience to Church teaching and doctrine, then I feel it is appropriate to present this view. Of course if that view is uncomfortable for some to take then so be it but not only has this man broken his vows but he has also undermined his Church and his fellow priests who struggle to keep theirs. I acknowledge he has done the correct and honourable thing by resigning but it remains that he has damaged his Church and the authority of his fellow priests by breaking his vows.

OK - Thats what I am asking. You said to ask a catholic - so as you are a firm, non wavering, fundamentalist catholic, I thought Id ask you.

Q. How can anyone who is divorced become reconciled with the church, on the basis that their irreconciliation lies firmly at the churches stance on their divorce, and not any fault of their own (other than god forbid - their wife/husband divorced them)?

Thats what I wanted to know - you said to ask a catholic, so here I am, asking one.

(I realise I may have made up a word there).

I'm not.

You just said you were?

In fairness he's on record as saying the missus is a Catholic whereas he isn't.

[pintsofguinness]

But maybe she doesnt want direction or pastoral care donagh.  Most seperated or divorced people these days don't care what they church think of them and don't look to the church for anything. 
Maybe she's perfectly happy, was perfectly happy when she started going with him.  You're making awful big assumptions to condemn the man.

Maybe, but sometimes a sick person may not want healed. That would be the view of a Catholic and as such the duty of a Catholic priest would be to attempt to give her guidance.

I'm not condemning the man, simply pointing out that by expected standards, his actions were wrong.

A lot of Catholics think that would be nonsense.  I mean is there many out there who would expect someone to stay in a unhappy marriage? and I'd include priests in that.  It may be the official church policy but I don't see or hear of it in practice too often, not this century anyway.