Great images; great photos.By the way, in the last 2 days:Can anyone imagine any pope before THE Council or any pope before Francis giving away 2 of the Church’s holiest relics - two pieces of the true Cross - to King Charles as a coronation present?Can anyone imagine a past Catholic Cardinal allowing a group of Anglican clergy, including a divorced, civilly remarried, Freemason bishop concelebrating an Anglican Eucharist on the altar at the Pope’s Church the Lateran Basilica in Rome?The sources for the above are Michael Voris’ Church Militant, Fr Z’s Blog and Robert Nugent’s Devrevi Determined to be Catholic podcasts etc and NOT The Babylon Bee satirical site.
The Sisters of the Holy Cross taught me - they had a fairly unique habit - the fluted cap was pretty cool. I had relatives who were Holy Cross Sisters. This ordered ministered to the wounded during the American Civil War - now they worship GAIA
TJM, the CSC sisters were extremely orthodox, almost at times over doing it. BAMB! they went immediately off the rails after Vatican II. And, oh how the mighty have fallen. Like you, I'm deeply grateful for the faith formation I received from them, scars and all.
William, They taught us in first grade the Latin responses and simple chants. Baltimore Catechism, etc. They were actually late in implementing the “reforms” - late Summer of 1967! But after that, yes they started going off the rails. By 1971 it had gotten so bad that my wife’s Aunt left the Order after 28 years, the very week they nominated her to be Mother General - she just could not tolerate the rank disobedience and puerile behavior. She remained an orthodox Catholic and her funeral was at the Loretto Chapel at St. Mary’s College. Very sad because I admired them so.
Can anyone imagine that mistakes are made? Can anyone imagine that errors in communication and/or judgment are not intended to harm or to mislead? (Can anyone imagine that the Cathedral in Savannah has hosted more than once the rites of another Christian denominations for acceptable reasons such as those spelled out in the “Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism”?)https://thetablet.org/rome-basilica-apologizes-for-allowing-anglicans-to-celebrate-mass/Can anyone imagine that a Pope might share a sacred relic with another Christian as a gesture of good will and, I suppose, congratulations? Can anyone imagine that such a gesture might actually engender good will? And will disgruntled Catholics who look for ANY reason to complain be the ones to miss the potential for good?
Can anyone imagine a TLM priest or a group of TLM priests from the USA or Canada or Australia being allowed to rock up in Rome and celebrate a Latin Mass in the Pope's church, the Lateran Basilica - as easily as these Anglicans and freemasons did?Can anyone imagine a liberal, progressive Anglican or Catholic actually believing what was taught was taught for centuries about holy relics?
Can anyone not only imagine but also explain what changes had taken place in the Catholic Church from the 1950s to 1970s so as that in England in the 1970s Catholic Cathedrals built and paid for by faithful Catholics in the 13th century could readily be used by, for example, Methodists and freemasons for their services and "ordinations" but the same cathedrals could not be used by a Catholic priest ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre to celebrate a traditional Latin Mass?
Can you imagine a bishop or priest voting for the Party of Moloch and Transgenderism? Hence the collapse of the Faith we are facing!
Anyone suffering from ecumania can be as irrational, illogical and even as delusional as a poor individual suffering an episode of bipolar mania -and as much in need , if not psychiatric meds, of suitable counselling, therapy and guidance.
Paul, it would seem that, like many traditionalists ("Tradition is the living faith of the dead. Traditionalism is the dead faith of the living." -Jaroslav Pelikan) you are ready and willing to embrace the doctrines of the Church with which you agree. But you are ready and willing to reject the doctrines of the Church with which you disagree. The Church's teaching on ecumenism is doctrinal and, therefore, authoritative. The “Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism” is also authoritative, giving direction to Catholics who 1) desire and 2) work for the restoration of the visible, organic unity of the Church. You may believe that the doctrines regarding ecumenism and the directives regarding the implementation of that doctrine represent a rupture with previous teaching. You do this without the charism given to those who, by virtue of their ordination as bishops, receive that authority. I'll stand with the Church and its magisterium.
Dear Fr K,Mind-reading again?How could you possibly know me well enough to label me a "traditionalist" ? And a traditionalist by your definition of what a traditionalist is !!And claim to know that I am one who picks and chooses what doctrines I believe in !You astound me ! So, Fr K, apart from having the ability to read minds you also have X ray vision into the hearts and souls of individuals you've never met?I don't think even Jean Vianney (sp?) or Padre Pio had your gifts !!I could write a 1,000 word short essay on ecumenism during the adds of the movie I'm watching....and another on which 20th century theologian most truly understood Newman's writings on the development of doctrine....but this is not the place for that...However, to take a more straightforward issue or doctrine like the death penalty - "development" can never result in reversal or repudiation of the original teaching/doctrine...And on this matter, like many others, I think I am better off and safer following the teaching of every major Catholic thinker and teacher from St Augustine to Pius XIIthan the so-called "Magisterium of Francis".
Fr K,If you stood with the Church and its Magisterium you would not vote for the Party of Moloch and Transgenderism. If Pope Benedict were still Pope you’d be singing a different tune. You love the lefty, mean spirited Francis because his Papacy is crushing faithful, traditional Catholics
Does merely reading books by Archbishop Lefebvre make one a traditionalist, as defined by you, Fr K ?The truth is I have never attended a SSPX Mass - but I'll confess, over the last 2 years, I've been tempted...
Paul - Regarding the death penalty, I will stand with the magisterium of the Church, not the Paulgisteruim of you. You, without the extraordinary charism of being a teacher of the faith given to bishops, declare the development of our understanding of this issue to be a "reversal or repudiation." It is not.As we read in Donum Veritatis, presented by then Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II in 1990, "...conscience does not constitute an autonomous and exclusive authority for deciding the truth of a doctrine."Regarding the death penalty, it is necessary to understand that, "Although many individual teachings in the Catechism have previously been taught infallibly, the Catechism itself is not an infallible document. This is one reason it is capable of being revised."Cardinal Ladaria wrote: "...the new formulation of number 2267 of the Catechism expresses an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium. These teachings, in fact, can be explained in the light of the primary responsibility of the public authority to protect the common good in a social context in which the penal sanctions were understood differently, and had developed in an environment in which it was more difficult to guarantee that the criminal could not repeat his crime."Yes, you are a traditionalist.
No, only according to the Mickavesterium of your dear self...
How can I be a "traditionalist" as you understand the word/term when I happily attend a good, reverent Novus Ordo Mass and accept Vatican 2 - but only object when the ambiguity of one rare sentence here or there in a Vat 2 document is weaponised by a modernist priest or modernist theologian so as to constitute a rupture with what previous councils and previous popes taught for over a thousand years before what "progressive" Modernists call THE Council.Do I understand you correctly, in that because I MAY not fully believe the death penalty is an intrinsic moral evil, and sometimes or often think the late Archbishop Lefebvre, the late Michael Davies, and also such people as Pope Benedict, Scott Hahn and even Taylor Marshall and other like minded Catholics often made and make good points and had valuable insights regarding the often problematic, flawed and occasionally disastrous implementation of THE Council etc I am somehow a "bad Catholic"...?I am old enough to have lived through and experienced that crazy era from the mid 60s to early 80s and I thank God I was never fooled by so-called good enlightened modern Catholic priests and lay people who interpreted Vat 2 as an EVENT that meant a lot of sound and true Catholic beliefs and practices were now theologically outdated, legalistic and Jansenistic nonsense or arose in an era they now regarded "theologically bankrupt"...Fr K, I believe your passion and learning would be better directed against those progressive modern Catholics who are, for example, basically agnostic on death, judgement, heaven and hell and also, for example, believe scripture and tradition basically got it wrong on marriage and sexual morality for all those centuries and at times, honestly, have as much genuine belief and commitment to core Catholic beliefs , the Creed etc as my wife's cat.
Finally, Fr K, if you have never met a Jesuit, Paulist or Marist etc priest/philosopher who is basically agnostic on death, judgement, heaven and hell - or never met a priest or nun who honestly believes that as a result of certain scripture scholarship, they agree with, that all we can know for certain about the Resurrection of our Lord is that it was a belief held by some in certain faith communities years after Jesus died - and even believe such nonsense as a “resurrection experience” caused by grief induced visions or hallucinations….or never recently met up with a priest who for the past 30 plus years has been telling gay or bisexual men and or sexually active unmarried Catholics, in any sort of relationship or arrangement, it is fine for them to receive Holy Communion ….and on and on.. - well you should get out more.I seriously doubt my doubts about what Pope Francis has said about the death penalty, Luther, divorce/second marriages, Protestantism, non Christian religions, illegal immigration or the modern dogma of global warming/climate change, and Pachamama etc puts me in the category of “bad Catholic” with problematic views/beliefs compared to those I’ve described in the above paragraph…
Paul - I have repeated what the Church teaches. There is no "Mickavesterium" here.You are a traditionalist because you, "...only object when the ambiguity of one rare sentence here or there in a Vat 2 document is weaponised by a modernist priest or modernist theologian so as to constitute a rupture with what previous councils and previous popes taught for over a thousand years before what "progressive" Modernists call THE Council."Your presume to label people who disagree with you "modernists." (OH! Are you reading minds now? How could you possibly know them well enough to label them a "traditionalist" ?) Who is making the judgment that a "rupture" has been made? You? Taylor Marshall? Scott Hahn? Michael Davies? I think my passion and learning is best directed to presenting what the Church teaches. not relying on myself or some dubious sources of "authority" such as Michael Vooris or Taylor Marshall.
Paul,Unless you haven't figured it out by now, mind-reading and defining his opponents are two of the favorite techniques in Fr. K's arsenal. He also will always have the last word on political subjects, even if it means we end up having 300 posts. And when you wise up enough to stop wasting your time arguing with him, he will boastfully proclaim that you have "given up" or "don't have any arguments". Not exactly what I myself look for in a priest, but I guess some people are gluttons for punishment.You've been warned.
What's your definition of a modernist?As far back as a teenager when I heard liberal, progressive priests and nuns, friends of my parents, over drinks, praise such original modernists as Loisy and Tyrell - who 99 per cent of educated Catholics regard as modernists, I assumed they were modernists too - the label modernist is not necessarily an unjust slur or insult but merely an accurate description of certain priests and laypeople - over 30 years I've heard such progressives praise every modernist from Tyrrell to Kung - and at least privately they were proud to be modernists too; as according to them for over a 100 years the modernists had been asking all the right questions - and almost always got the answers right.
Jerome - Your saying "he will always have the last word" is just another way of saying you "don't have any arguments."Give up yet?
Thanks for the warning, Jerome.But on the advice of my doctor and a specialist clinician to lessen the odds in coming years of suffering from the serious sort of age related cognitive decline, or dementia of such people as my institutionalised uncle Bede who will physically attack those who dispute he attended Vatican ONE, c 1870, ……or a President Biden, I’ve lately been keeping my mind active by learning Hebrew, relearning NT Greek, teaching Latin part time; going for long walks through national parks AND during the adds and breaks of channel 32 SBS World Movies contributing to several Catholic blogs - it is not a punishment nor penance for me…..it is much more likely to amuse me than annoy, anger or frustrate me…..By the way, a week ago, I found most of my old 1980s massively footnoted essays and assignments on the Reformation, Greek and medieval philosophy, Catholic Modernism and Paul’s Letters etc I had hoarded away…..I might now head off and see if the very learned Fr Hunwicke or Fr Z might again accept my contributions re whatever they are discussing there.
Paul - "Modernist" used here is a slur. The modernists and modernism were condemned, so to call someone a modernist.....I am pretty sure I never heard of Loisy or Tyrell in my seminary days. I can't think why their names or ideas would have come up in the courses we took. I've learned about them since then in my own reading.Loisy, among others, espoused a questioning of authority. This way of approaching things has had many beneficial results. We no longer believe in the divine right of kings and queens, the subjugation of non-white peoples, the idea that cholera is caused by "bad air," that Moses wrote the first five books of the Old Testament, or that the Creation Accounts are literal history. That last notion was actually nothing new - it was the position St. Augustine took in his work "The Literal Meaning of Genesis."Heresy is a truth taken too far, to the extreme. In questioning authority, he eventually came to jettison, pretty much, the notion of divine revelation and certainly the notion of the Magisterial Authority of the Church.
Oh yeah, Father. I gave up a LONG time ago.
Fr K,You never fail in your ability to astound me !!You managed to complete seminary studies without even hearing of Frs Loisy and Tyrrell ?!!We did a semester on them!Who were your lecturers in Church History?Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ or the famous Sister Daisy Simpleton?
Fr K,As Pope JP2 told us all: Do NOT fear !No person, no cleric nor layperson is responsible for an invincible ignorance bought about through circumstances beyond their control….Again fear not! And do not despair!Pew research et al has repeatedly shown that the vast majority of clerics and laypeople who received an education at most Catholic colleges circa 1970 to 1985 graduated with the theological IQ of a boiled potato …..you are not alone!Also, Pew et al has shown that only 2% of such graduates in theology in that era, through no fault of their own, are either morally or intellectually not capable of any supererogatory effort to overcome such a pedagogically enforced invincible ignorance ….Regards,Paul.PS I am going to write out by hand word for word your synopsis of a synopsis of the writings of Abbe Alfred Loisy and add it to special and rare written material I collect for the purpose of providing me laughter for all the years I have left on this very fallen earth.
Fr K, I wish to be neither uncharitable nor arrogant but (really!!) your attempted synopsis of a synopsis of the writings of Abbe Alfred Loisy has led me to make the following decision:To say a Hail Mary for you tonight then forever give up on any attempt at serious discussion of theology or Church history with you….Regards,Paul.BUT - PS : seen any good movies lately?
Paul - The ugliness of your failed attempt to impugn the knowledge and ability of my seminary history teachers is astounding. The idea that you spent an entire semester on two minor characters from Church history is ludicrous. Did you spend a semester on Didymus the Blind or Paschasius Radabertus or Minucius Felix?Enjoy your self-serving laughter. Regards....
A semester on Catholic Modernism is not at all ludicrous.To describe Frs Loisy and Tyrrell, key persons in Catholic Modernism (and the influence of their writings and thought from c.1900 to the present day) as “minor characters” in Church history is ludicrous.
And to think that they used to call Don Rickels "Mr. Warmth"!
For you to use the word “ludicrous” is telling…Ludicrous - saying something so silly, ridiculous and unreasonable as to be amusing.What you wrote at 6.49 is as truly ludicrous as a person who has allegedly studied modern European history at university later claiming that Napoleon, Bismarck and Lenin are “minor characters” in modern European history.Or even almost like a philosophy student claiming Kant and Hegel are “minor characters” in western philosophy!My older daughter’s church history book in her last year at high school gave a chapter to Loisy and Tyrrell.Even the classic text “God’s Funeral” by A N Wilson gives a chapter to Loisy and Tyrrell.I could give a dozen more examples, off the top of my head, but why bother?I think if you continue with this, we’ll need a word stronger than ludicrous to describe your howlers.
The great William H Marshner used to teach a semester long course, largely about Loisy and Tyrrell, Modernism in the Catholic Church, at Christendom College.
Fr K,Why not update your theological knowledge and knowledge of Church history by completing a few online courses at the New St Thomas Institute run by Taylor Marshall or an online course in Church history by Timothy Gordon?Having studied European history and Church history myself at Sydney University, the CIS and Cambridge, Marshall and Gordon, though primarily Thomist philosophers, are quite knowledgeable on Church history, and are both quite gifted teachers.
Seriously, Jerome and Fr K, if you are interested, and can spare 10-15 minutes, just Google Fr Alfred Loisy and Fr George Tyrrell and read a very brief summary of their lives and works at Wikipedia; both were excommunicated for holding views that in the last 50 years have largely become mainstream in both the Catholic and Anglican churches.
Paul - Your story changes. First it was, "You managed to complete seminary studies without even hearing of Frs Loisy and Tyrrell ?!! We did a semester on them!" Now, your story is, "A semester on Catholic Modernism is not at all ludicrous."Yes, a semester on Modernism may be defensible, especially at a place like Christendom. And I'm sure for someone like yourself who views the world through a thick lens of suspicion and mistrust, these two characters shine like supernovae. It seems the course included a tad more than Loisy and Tyrell...Loisy and Tyrell had no where near the impack of Napoleon, Bismarck, or Lenin. I do not find their names in the index of the great Jaroslav Pelikan's classic and magisterial text "The Christian Tradition - A History of the Development of Doctrine."Your remarks about the people who taught Church History at my seminary still stink. They were uncharitable and offensive. Bourbon much?
Paul - I would not cross the street to listen to Taylor Marshall.
Dear Fr K,1 glass of fine red wine, to tell the truth....How about yourself?You now have my wife and daughter laughing. You accuse me in your last paragraph of being "offensive and uncharitable" right after your sad attempt of an insult , with an (attempted) unjustified and irrational character assassination of me in the third paragraph.Tell me, how often in high school, college or seminary did a teacher or academic say to you something like:Now Michael, you've got this wrong, you are in error here - please just admit that, learn from it -and move on. OK?Misquoting another, childish ad hominem attacks, and or reverting to often irrelevant pedantic nickpicking does you no good and convinces and impresses no-one. OK?Are you completely unaware that anyone who has ever studied any theology or Church history, especially, could read all you've written above, and then in the future have serious doubts about anythin you write in the future - even when it's a subject you might know something about..?
PS - jokes about the quality of intellectual formation in many Catholic seminaries circa late 60s till about 1985 have been told by many Catholic priests and laypeople for a long time, in the circles I mixed in, anyway - compared to a lot of those jokes told by many people for decades, what I wrote above about your seminary was very mild and restrained.
Paul - Would the Timothy Gordon you mentioned be the one who has the "Rule for Retrogrades" podcast which, in its Twitter feed, posted this quote from Pope Pius X: “It is a mistake to maintain that woman’s rights are the same as man’s. Women in war or Parliament are outside their proper sphere & their position there would be the desperation & ruin of society. Woman, created as man’s companion, must so remain...always under his power”?
Paul - It is, sadly, not surprising that your wife and daughter share your willingness to disparage the history teachers who helped form hundreds, if not thousands, of candidates for the priesthood at my seminary. Birds of a feather, you know. And you didn't write something "mild" about my seminary. You specifically said disgusting things about the history professors there. You say you spent a semester on Loisy and Tyrell. Then you "adjust" your story to say you spent a semester studying Catholic modernism.Your character needs no outside assassin. You're doing just fine all by yourself.Enjoy running in circles. Cheers.
Oh my dear Fr K,Where do I start?And when will this end?LOL !!The marriage of Mr and Mrs T Gordon does not really interest me.They seem quite happy though, God bless them.I can appreciate his knowledge of law and philosophy, but after a short while I tired of his style of presentation and now very rarely listen to him at all.My wife and daughters, could not care less about your precious seminary, only something stronger than good wine could explain your bizarre statement about my nearest and dearest - like Jerome and others they noted your, at times, quite unpleasant and uncharitable TONE and lately also your rising hyperbolic hysteria...It was quite ungentlemanly and even more unfitting for a Catholic priest to write of any man's wife and daughters like you did..But I expect no apology - you and Pope Francis have that in common - you are both contenders for the Guinness Book World record for the length of time lived without apologizing to anyone....LOL...!My God! LOL! AND you write of another assassinating his own character...!!In this dialogue you are breaking records there too!But back to Catholic Modernism 1890 - 1910 - I wonder why so MANY lectures on this subject and so many chapters in books etc can, for example, give about 50 per cent to Fr Loisy and up to 30 to 40 per cent on the Jesuit Fr Tyrrell - and then 10 -20 per cent for the rest...For your own sake, why not quit now...Why not do as it is said in Australia and parts of Canada..."Have a cup of tea, an aspirin and lie down.."In your case, I'd advise a couple of valium too...Seriously, when you calm down, tomorrow or the next day, I think you'll be quite embarrassed and ashamed by parts of what you've written above...Regards,Paul.PS if you wish to be writing of the giants of Catholic Modernism in the future it helps to be able to correctly spell their names ...
Fr K,On rereading your insulting nonsense above (especially where you include my wife and daughters) , if I lived in your state, or diocese, and if you didn’t at times seem to me to be a sad, pathetic character, perhaps with “issues” I know nothing of……I’d seriously consider reporting you to your bishop P.
Paul - You are concerned about the "unpleasant and uncharitable TONE" of MY comments?That, after your post regarding mhy seminary history teachers: "Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ or the famous Sister Daisy Simpleton?"All I can say is wow.
Fr K,Do you know anything about personality disorders?Cluster B personality types includes those with histrionic and narcissistic traits.Most people, and there are a lot of them, who possess, to a degree, Cluster B traits can accurately be described as “dramatic attention seekers”.What is important to note is that for those who have Cluster B traits (which includes those who have been diagnosed with a borderline personality disorder) is that those traits are displayed consistently, at times constantly, over a long period of time….Likewise, obviously, a person who only drinks to excess one or twice a year, and can often without effort go a month or more without drinking alcohol, can hardly be described as a problem drinker, as someone who has an alcohol abuse disorder.Likewise, an occasional lapse with sarcasm does not make one a sarcastic person…Now, take a person, a person so PROUD of his education and “progressive, enlightened” views, who (especially online, on a blog he obsessively monitors, knowing the majority of people on this blog are theologically and politically conservative) consistently and often has a tone that is unpleasant and uncharitable, over YEARS; can very often be patronising, condescending and insulting to those he regards as beneath him; also, a person who has great difficulty ever acknowledging an error, and has greater difficulty saying a simple “sorry”……and can often respond with personal insults and at times near hysteria whenever successfully challenged etc…..What do we have?I guess only a clinician employed by your diocese could look at such a combination of personality traits and deliver a professional verdict…Bit it sure don’t look good!
Dear Fr K,The silly games you play. So often you contribute here almost with the assumption that most of the rest of us are like intellectually challenged children, who have read almost nothing, and or are sheltered, naive people with little life experience…I’ll try and help you. Please imagine the following:There may be a least half a dozen or even a dozen people who read this blog who have over YEARS socialised with Catholic priests.Most Catholic priests are fine men BUT, my God!, how some priests (especially privately, and over drinks with people they trust) can talk about other priests or their own bishop or some other bishop! SUCH TALK of other priests about other priests and various bishops makes my little jibe about a “Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ” almost nothing in comparison…Dear Fr K, Before you next type away and before you press “I am not a robot - and - Publish your Comment” please try to remember you are not addressing a class of ten year old school girls.
Paul, you remark on, "...a tone that is unpleasant and uncharitable..." but seem to gloss over your own vicious and unfounded attack on my seminary history teachers. Actually, you don't gloss over it - your ignore it completely. Remember when you referred to them as, "Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ or the famous Sister Daisy Simpleton?"? Then, you try to justify your remark by saying that in your hobnobbing with other priests, especially when you and they are under the influence, terrible things are said about others. That makes it OK - in your mind. But, let's not dwell on your own unpleasant and uncharitable comments. Oh no, no no. Let's play clinical psychologist and focus on the so-called faults of others. Sorry, Paul, you're all hat and no cattle.You are miffed that I mentioned your wife and daughter, as if that were some breach of dignity or some other rot. But, you will recall, Paul, that you brought them into the conversation. You do recall that, don't you? "You now have my wife and daughter laughing." Maybe your "fine red wine" of your bourbon clouded your thinking...No, I'm not addresssing a class of ten year olds. I'm not addressing a class at all. I am addressing only you. Like too many people you find those who disagree with you "uncharitable and unpleasant." As for reporting me to my bishop, here's the postal address:The Most Rev'd Stephen ParkesBishop of Savannah2170 East Victory DriveSavannah, Georgia 31404
You are wrong on just about everything as usual.I couldn't bother listing it all.But what amazes me is your lack of balance, a lack of any sense of proportion and most of all a lack of self awareness.Are your perceptions SO clouded and weak not to pick up that mush more than anything else you amuse me ?!There is an old Canadian saying:If there is no players there is no game.Well this game is boring me now.But seriously after your last near unhinged rave I, and others, seriously recommend you seek some psychological and or spiritual counselling asap !So bye for now, you silly old thing.Regards,Paul.
Fr K,My first PS to the above was sent privately to Fr Allen.I hope he informs you re this soon.So this might be my final post script on this thread:That aside, how about we finish with a joke? OK? And a friendly bet and gamble?We both are both early to mid 60s, I believe.How about we both post on this blog the results of our last medical check up full blood count test?And we can then compare our individual liver function results for men our age. Okay?I am confident my liver is bigger and healthier than yours!What do you say to that?If my liver function results are better than yours, I win the bet and you have to send me a dozen bottles of quality Merlot red wine.Should you win, I’ll send you a dozen bottles of your favourite drop; plus, I’ll throw in a copy of Fr James Martin’s about to be released new book…it is claimed this new Jesuit masterpiece has been titled:“Catholic Modernists I’ve Known and Loved”.Regards,Paul.
Paul - It would be helpful if you consult a lawyer BEFORE you make threats. If you don't want family members brought into this converastion, YOU should not do so in the first instance. Check the thread - I am right.I am also right that you insulted, without any basis, the history teaschers at my seminary. Then, you made a lame excuse about doing so, saying: "SUCH TALK of other priests about other priests and various bishops makes my little jibe about a “Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ” almost nothing in comparison…"I am not going to listen to an historian, Gordon in this instance, who thinks that a woman should remain under her husband's power.I could not be less interested in your liver function. Regards.
But dear father K,We are concerned about YOUR liver function and your general health…!!!Where would this blog be, and where would each individual who frequents this blog be, without you as a very wise, very learned, very mature and very emotionally stable sort of self appointed chaplain to keep us all intellectually, morally and spiritually in line !!!(Now turning off the sarcasm and attempted humour, for a moment) Wrong again, on all counts, Fr K,1. I have made no threats….(please provide dates and time above where any threat was made).2. In private communication with Fr Allen I indicated what will happen if one certain line was crossed again. I assume that information was conveyed to you…3. And, before I typed that private communication to Fr Allen, I had already spoken with a lawyer.Jerome, especially, was 110% right re your near clinically OCD like need and compulsion to have the last word….Again, if your bishop is not going to steer you in the direction to receive some psychological and or spiritual counselling (though the likelihood of that happening is increasing about every 12 hours) then seek such treatment and or counselling for your own sake; and the sake of those you seek to minister to in the real world.Okay?Now I honestly give you the last word…..we are already placing bets here on how long that will take….
PS -So according to the LOGIC of the holy Mickavisterium -If any person who has ever occasionally mentioned or referred to a female family member in passing - wife, mother, sister, daughter etc on this blog over 10 years….…..that alone is grounds to absolve you from any nasty insult (slander?) of that same female family member you choose to make?Is that right?If that is right I’d say who ever were the professors or academics who tried to teach you philosophy and logic probably had the nicknames of…….something similar or even funnier than “Frs Dumb and Dumber SJ and Sister Daisy Simpleton”…If there were 3 key philosophy lecturers at your seminary all those years ago (so long ago, almost all have gone to God) I would have named them The Three Stooges…..Or was your seminary nickname: Forest Gump?
Paul - Regarding threats, please your email to Fr. ALLAN McDonald which he forwarded to me. You can provide the date and time you sent it.It is funny how you can dismiss the nasty, unfounded comments you make toward seminary teachers, but you find comments I make to be slanderous. Funny.I enjoy the give and take, the sharing of ideas, even the disagreements we have here. Some people, and you seem to be one of them, however, get their shorts in a knot when they someone has the temerity to disagree with them, when their errors are pointed out, or when they can't win others to their line of reasoning.
Fr K,I did not send an email to Fr Allen. I’d say Fr Allen forwarded to you a comment I asked him not to publish - pertaining to you alleging my wife and at least one of my daughters suffers from the same sort of suspicious paranoia and dark lack of trust etc you of all people have the TEMERITY to claim I suffer from…..”birds of a feather” etc, recall?Please explain how anything I have written can in any sense be regarded as a threat?Are you going to keep repeating that lie as well?Okay, we will see how this plays out…..at minimum you have on this occasion disgraced yourself as a man and a priest.Unless in the 1 in a 100 chance all the above is deleted, the record of your recent bizarre and completely inappropriate and at minimum uncalled for nastiness towards family members of a fellow contributor to this blog will remain for anyone to examine….I’ll share with you Fr Forest….sorry Fr K….some feedback from people who have read all the above posts/comments (These people range from : a clinical psychologist, a successful solicitor and 2 fellow ESL teachers:)- “…..and this man is meant to be an active, functioning Catholic priest? ““….what a case of a poor sod who has clearly had a safe, sheltered cotton wool existence…”- “How old is this Fr K?”“Early 60s, I think”“Good God, the obvious immaturity of the fellow!”…..”as a clinical psychologist what is professionally interesting to me is how at times with a near 100% certainty one can often tell X was written while intoxicated and Y was written when not intoxicated …..on several occasions I’d say alcohol plus some underlying emotional distress were both factors….”I could boast if I wanted to re what psych evaluations I have passed to undertake certain work for certain government organisations….What psych evaluations have you ever passed, Michael?Oh well, lets let the above record stand?Okay?Some could argue, and MANY have in fact argued,bthat psychological screening approximately 40 years ago for certain Catholic seminaries was as shoddy as the basic intellectual formation in philosophy and history they provided in the same era…Again, bye for now,Paul.PS - to repeat, if you have ANY integrity, please explain your use of the word “threat”….be specific, and at least attempt to be honest, in explaining how I possibly in any sense threatened you - you won’t, because you know you can’t. we four here wait with baited breathe your final final words….
Sorry, I can’t resist!Fr K, please again indulge in your favourite drop and please join in the more recent discussions on this blog…But remember, as both John Nolan, and pastor Gene have said in the past - please remember, Micky, almost everyone else here is sober most of the time, and sane all of the time.Regards,P.
Paul - You know what you wrote to Fr McDonald. You know the date and the time and the contents. If you have ANY integrity, you'll post that message publicly. Otherwise...Disgraced? Nah. You can play at being the determiner, but it's just a game. But, if it brings you happiness...You bring up "nastiness" again, yet continue to deny the nastiness of your comments regarding my seminary history professors. Yes, the record stands.
Yes, Father, the record does, INDEED, stand.….it was actually for your sake, that I asked Fr Allen not to publish ONE comment I made on this blog.All I asked of Fr Allen was to pass a message along.If Fr Allen chooses to end this thread on this post by publishing THAT which I thought it best, for your sake, not to publish - (it was NOT an email as you claimed and clocked up about your 10th error of fact and about your 7th error of judgement)…Well that’s fine by me - if Fr Allen posts it….publishes it… I have nothing to hide in this matter.Well………..okay, I’ll honestly give a quite accurate and honest paraphrase….:“Fr A,I’d rather you don’t publish what follows. But if possible could you inform Fr K privately that if he ever mentions and or insults again a female member of my family, it will not be me emailing his bishop, but it will be both my archbishop and my lawyer emailing his bishop.Thanks if you can pass this message along.Paul. “Happy now, Fr K?If Fr Allen publishes what I sent to him several hours ago, that is Father’s choice, but if he does it will conform my paraphrase as accurate…Another post script:What think you of that part of NT scripture that says something about never offering a sacrifice at the temple while there is some problem/strife/trouble with a fellow believer?I actually want to attend Mass today.So, I’ll finish, hopefully, with this : I believe ALL the above originally started showing you up in quite a bad light….In the end, I feel, it ended up showing us both in a bad light.I’ll acknowledge my part in what ended up in rather a pathetic squabble between 2 adults who should know better -And I apologise for those times above when I did go over the top mocking your seminary intellectual formation - and overdoing it with too many nasty jibes about you drinking too much and your possible mental/emotional stability.I regret that.However, I repeat here what I sought to keep private. A promise not a threat…Fr Michael Kavanagh,If you EVER again mention or insult a female member of my family, the least of your worries will be me emailing Bishop Parkes, it will be my Archbishop and my lawyer emailing Bishop Parkes…Okay?Done?
Oaul - I have not made 10 errors in fact in this exchange. That's just more hyperbole. And what you call errors in judgment - well, that your perception. I, of course, would argue otherwise.I am glad that you acknowledged that you did make a threat of legal action. You can call it a promise, but that makes as much sense as calling your vicious attacks against my seminary history professors "mild and restrained." Not that it matters to you, but the religious sister who taught us Church history held two graduate degrees, a PhD from CUA, the other in educational management from Harvard. She was well thought of by the seminary administration as evidenced by the 25+ years she taught there. And she was much beloved by her students. The other, a diocesan priest, was on the faculty for 44 years. Neither of them were dumb or a simpleton. They were dedicated educators and formators.The "bad light" is, again, your perception. I will say again that I suspect you just don't like it when someone stands up to you and disagrees with you. THAT puts them in a "bad light." If you don't want your relatives involved in online discussions, don't bring them into the conversation. And when you speak again to your attorney, have him/her explain 1) the difference between slander and libel, and 2) the meaning of "defamation."Regards.
Dear Fr K,Myself, Mr Oaul O’Oonnell, a mere retired hack journalist (who may have simultaneously done a little intelligence work - it is not uncommon for the two vocations to overlap) with my wife, Oary, an Anglican, soon to be Catholic, and a clinical psychologist, and my oldest daughter , a Canadian barrister, Ms Oheresa O’Oonnell…..AND my youngest daughter, Oucy, and all HER TLM community etc..wish you well……and hope you benefit from the near certain psychological and or spiritual counselling you will soon be directed to undertake….Our close family friend, and retired bishop, Oilliam Oartin, if delegated the job from our archbishop, and should he contact your bishop, would recommend 1 month in a traditional monastery, involving total abstinence from alcohol, total abstinence from internet/social media and your only reading material the New Testament and the Catechism of Trent, the reading of which you must complete before returning to priestly ministry…..Regards,Oaul,
A friend from the local pub, a local solicitor, a devout Catholic and wise man is happy, pro bono, to pass on some advice he has given to MANY people from his own children and grandchildren, to young military recruits, to young people hoping for a career in politics and public service etc :Remember anything you write online, any material you publish, retweet etc online is, in a sense, there forever….This Mr Oobert O’Oielly pro bono is willing to advise you as he has been paid to advise all public servants at the …….department of …….”remember, you must remember NEVER to write anything online, NEVER write and send a single email without first thinking “how this would look for me if this blog post or email was published front page tomorrow in a local or city or national newspaper”……Another pub friend has suggested - to rule out even the slightest trace of demonic disorientation - for 40 days, each day starting with the wearing of a brown scapula and the recital in private but aloud of a decade of the rosary in Latin BEFORE any use of social media and smart phone etc….if an individual, and especially the individual being a Catholic priest, should find such a devout practice as either repugnant or ridiculous……well, right there, there is a concern; and perhaps the diocese’s exorcist should be called on so as he could at least have a “little talk” with ………well, you know….Sorry, now it is my turn to buy a round of drinks…..
Paul - You speak so highly of the benefits of psychological and or spiritual counselling, ofspending 1 month in a traditional monastery, involving total abstinence from alcohol, total abstinence from internet/social media, and of having as your only reading material the New Testament and the Catechism of Trent, that one is left wondering...
One is left wondering what?Dear Fr K, I made my first longish retreat at a Cistercian monastery way back in 1989….Then I think it was in 1992, in Lebanon (Beirut was and is a beautiful city!) after a quite stressful 6 months “reporting” there ..etc….and before a new assignment in Cairo….I made a retreat with some Maronite priests in the Kadisha aka Qadisha (Holy) Valley - site of some of the most ancient Christian monastic communities of the Middle East…Since then……I have made various retreats; once not so long ago, not far from Savannah, Georgia….as it happens. The 2020 presidential election time….that was the last time I was in the USA.
Just read 2nd and 5th paragraph, 6.12.Fr Kavanaugh, Can you provide an email address for your bishop or a phone number one could ring to obtain that email address?Yours…..
Fr K,Paul back again.Can I ask if you smoke cigarettes?Just curious.Are you in any way interested in languages, dialects, colloquial slang etc?Could you translate, at least some parts, to the best of your ability, into ordinary Georgia everyday speech, that might be spoken by, say, an ordinary working class or lower middle class family in your state:“Priest or not, put that aside, okay? The man is a goose, who does not know how to cut his losses, and has no bloody idea when it’s time to pull his head in! 6.12 shows the goose has the maturity of a 15 year old boy, tops! And also shows he can’t stop digging his hole deeper. And 8.03 shows the goose does not realise that it was about 3 days ago the silly game was up with him wanting to show to his audience of probably no more than a “baker’s dozen” people at the time that he is intellectually etc the boss cocky in these parts, the top dog, THE alpha male on his block. Struth! I thought most men after 15 gave up playing such games as whose got the biggest….sorry, who caught the biggest fish! I’d say his teachers at that semin what you call it Catholic college were OK, maybe even good…I tell ‘ya, I’d bet London to a Brick this lad grew up poor or not much higher and I also bet at his college priest factory place he spent too much time reading such as The New York Slimes and the New Jerker as preparation to be able at least pass himself off as sophisticated priest intellectual….problem is, I reckon, if he could in real life off line in the REAL world be sipping fine liquor and puffing on his smokes conversing with any of those local southern real intellectuals he’d be bloody doing it and not damned well playing his games as the most morally enlightened and the most culturally man for all seasons etc the smartest boy in the room of this blog…..you got me interested, now, cobber, let’s see if in 24 to 48 hours he’ll be chipping in on recent posts as Fr K, cultured cleric about town doing all the people on this blog the favour the blessing of his cultured enlightened presence….will it be liturgy, politics, history etc ? Who knows when he’ll get off this thread and jump into the top shed with the big boys to try again…?”….
Paul - Well, that's curious.....
Curious in what sense, Father K?
By the way, which of your possible penances do you dread the most?One month abstaining from alcohol and use of social media?Or 40 days wearing a brown scapula and starting each day with saying a decade of the rosary in Latin aloud privately, before reaching for, say, your first coffee and first cigarette? 😉Father K, not just myself, but others ARE curious when you last went to confession/reconciliation?Also, we know this may well seem impertinent, but when did you last confess the bearing of false witness against another?Or are some modern priests in the USA like the vast majority of American lay Catholics in no longer going to confession/reconciliation?Feel free to answer none of the above; but I must ask: are you totally unaware how a large part (but NOT all) of the above has been the result of several people having a little fun at your expense?When I was advised by another contributor to this blog re your unusual near clinically compulsive NEED to have the last word and to declare a “victory” for yourself, and your capacity for nastiness, “mind reading” others and insulting others etc - and a 12 year old could note your patronising condescension and lack of humour and a complete lack of humility when it comes to admitting one single fault etc….what I wrote about 3 days ago still stands …..while of course you can be quite an annoying chap, more than anything else: you AMUSE me!Regards,P.PS do you honestly believe, that in all the above, you NEVER made one error in fact, and not one error in judgment? Is that right? Forget about every other question asked here if you want, but if you can honestly believe you have not made one error in fact and not one error in judgment in all the above and state that here in your next comment……well, to repeat, for God’s sake seek some kind of help, some kind of therapy or counselling…
I’ll finally finish off here with a true story.I’ve known this particular Catholic priest (and a fine scripture scholar, by the way) -and it does not matter if this priest is Canadian, Australian or English but he truly exists - for over 30 years. He was born in 1954; a little older than us. We’ve had many conversations over 30 plus years - at times, serious disagreements…..however the friendship continues to this day.I’d just like to say that while this VERY well educated priest and a man knowledgeable re theology in a way you and me could only dream of being…..what has always impressed me is that he was never arrogant at all about his intellect and knowledge AND more importantly, what impressed me and others, and earned the respect of many was his genuine personal humility - a classic example = “My God, after a directed retreat and counselling and so on I have to acknowledge that was there proper psychological screening to enter seminary back in the early 70s I would not and should not have ever been accepted into any seminary, let alone be ordained a priest…” that was spoken at a low point in his life, but such honesty and humility became a foundation to start again and to be now a truly fine priest as he approaches his 70th birthday next year…
Paul - Where you get the idea that I think I can't make errors I just don't know. The error I am certain I made in this exchange was when I said you had "emailed" Fr. McDonald when, in fact, you had not. Your comment to him was via a post on his website you asked him not to publish. That was the comunication, by the way, in which you threatened legal action against me, a threat you then repeatedly said you did not make, calling is a "promise."As for errors in judgement, we'll have to continue to disagree on that one. You judge your way and I'll judge my way.
To be precise, dear Father,I think I wrote re the possibility of my archbishop and my lawyer emailing your bishop.Again, I don’t like to boast but there are and have been enough lawyers in my extended family that I have known for at least 40 years, in most states, in the western world, that defamation is a “rich man’s game”, in our state it is a high court matter, and involves the upfront initial expenditure of at least $100,000 (in your US dollars) to kick start the whole thing….Did I anywhere write above anything like “Fr K, it is not a threat but a promise that if you again repeat (for example, that my wife and daughters are “birds of a feather” with me in living in some dark, fearful, untrusting mental universe, and to paraphrase, they are, like me, some near paranoid sort of “traditionalist” etc and or disgustingly insulting types who like me question the quality of your intellectual formation at seminary etc…) I will initiate legal action to sue you for defamation in a civil court …..Please, Fr K, I and others really think that was your overreaction and your quite bizarre, rushed, flawed and exaggerated interpretation of what I actually wrote….For all you know, someone chosen by my Archbishop may well email your Bishop to direct his attention to all the above - all your hasty, often highly irregular and at times, at minimum, very inappropriate and unbecoming (for a Catholic priest) comments above…AND not posted anonymously ! but openly by a named Catholic priest of your Bishop’s diocese…And perhaps, a partner in my daughters legal firm, may have wanted to make a gentle inquiry re Canon law and pointing out to your Bishop the dangerous direction you seemed to be heading in…..as strongly indicated by your hundreds of words above - words, claims, statements etc any reasonable person could only take, at minimum , to be often insulting, often uncharitable and, to be honest, occasionally quite unhinged….P.
We are fully aware civil law and Canon law are different things….But this example, of an actual legal event, may enlighten you.About 7 years ago, my youngest daughter, who you nastily, and also almost irrationally, insulted was in a……….X…a large public hospital.A male nurse who was a manager of a unit in this hospital crossed certain lines re my youngest daughter (the details I’ll not go into)……to cut a long story short - at first our family initiated not full on legal action but a formal complaint to our state’s Health Dept Complaints Commission - this alone resulted in this male nurse losing his position as the manager of X unit at this large public hospital - this male nurse then could not admit fault, could not cut his losses etc and then just kept digging a bigger hole for himself and on a public forum (similar to this blog but with a 100 times bigger readership) insulted and ridiculed my daughter and myself AND former colleagues and several superiors in the Health Dept….then all we had to do was THREATEN legal action (and the way the law works our legal action, primarily, would be directed not at the male nurse unit manager BUT at his employer the state Heath Dept) as a result, immediately, the Health Dept sacked this male nurse - it could not be disputed this man had shown himself to be a “stupid, malicious loose cannon” and clearly, under stress, was shown to be mentally unfit for any employment, in the public or private sector, in our state….we received a full public apology…..and, eventually , some out of court settlement $$ too…So, what you VERY wrongly assumed was the initiation of defamation proceedings …was in fact the possibility of a lawyer contacting your Bishop to ask 1. Is your bishop aware of the scandal SOME of your comments on this blog could be said to have caused….2. Perhaps it may be wise for your bishop, for his sake and yours, to direct you to refrain from commenting on blogs for a time…Or one of a DOZEN other things, questions etc a lawyer could easily asked your bishop without the matter of defamation etc being raised…I, unlike others, and I think unlike yourself, I DO know my limitations….I know little of civil law, nothing really re canon law BUT I do have enough brains to shut up and listen when someone (be it a respected lawyer, a cardiologist or even a good car mechanic etc) is explaining something to me I need to know…When I make an effort I can be succinct so how about this…Who or what will it take for you to “pull your head in”, and to cease continuing on this blog, at times, and this thread especially, making a fool of yourself, minimum, or even occasionally causing scandal …
Guys, this innocuous post has garnered 73 comments mostly both of yours. Don’t you think it might be better to exchange phone numbers and continue the discussion privately over the phone? Just a thought.
Paul, this is what I received from Fr. McDonald:"Fr McDonald,I was going to include the following in a PS above, but decided not to…So please don’t publish this.But could you possibly inform Fr K that if he EVER mentions and or insults any female members of my family again, it will not be me emailing Bishop Parkes but both my archbishop and my lawyer will be emailing Bishop Parkes.If you could privately pass this is on to Fr K, I’d be grateful.Thanks and regards,Paul"Now, you say, "I think I wrote re the possibility of my archbishop and my lawyer emailing your bishop."Your words: "...both my archbishop and my lawyer will be emailing Bishop Parkes.""Lawyers", Paul, is legal action.You, too, can do well to listen when someone is explaining things to you.And, yes, I am openly named. You aren't.
Fr Allan,Thank you.I agree.With regards and respect,Paul.
Post a Comment