Article in the Irish Times on Sat 7th Feb

MatthewVII

Irish Times wrote:

Time to restore Ireland's own Catholic Church

Madam, We now have a Pope in Rome who implicitly says that gay people represent a greater threat to the world than climate control; who has reconciled a Society of Saint Pius X bishop who is a holocaust denier; and who has appointed an Austrian bishop who believes that God flooded New Orleans because of the city’s tolerance of homosexuality and liberal sexual mores.

In his short time as Pope, Benedict has managed to offend and alienate the world’s Islamic, Jewish, liberal Catholic and LGBT communities – and God knows how many others.

Here in Ireland we have a Roman Catholic Church with a dark legacy of clerical and religious sexual abuse and Magdalen Laundry activity and the covering up of that abuse and activity by hierarchy and religious superiors.

To this day we have at least one bishop who has blatantly failed to observe both the civil and ecclesiastical rules for reporting and managing clerical sexual abuse and insists on staying in his post with the support of some of his colleagues.

In spite of all of this, the Roman Catholic Church, in Ireland and internationally, insists on regulating every detail of bedroom, reproductive and sexual life; tells married people and women that God could not possibly be calling them to priesthood; refuses to allow married priests to return to ministry, preferring instead to close down parishes; refuses a second chance to people whose marriages have broken down; tells gay, lesbian. bisexual and transgendered people that they are “disordered”; and informs Anglicans, Presbyterians, Methodists and all other Protestants and believers that their churches and faiths are not real churches or faith communities at all.

Am I the only Catholic in Ireland who believes it is way past time that we told our Roman colonialists and their Irish branch managers where to go and reconvened an Irish Catholic Church, independent of Rome, while preserving all the essentials – the Bible, the sacraments, the priesthood, and our rich heritage of Irish spirituality and mysticism, while at the same time being open to the new? “Is not the Kingdom of Heaven like a householder which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old?” (Matthew 13:52.) – Yours, etc,

Bishop PAT BUCKLEY,

The Oratory,

Larne,

Co Antrim.

Seems like this Bishop has his head screwed on the right way. What do other people think about his views?

Rev Hellfire

MatthewVII wrote: »

Seems like this Bishop has his head screwed on the right way. What do other people think about his views?

Much of what he says could be seen as making sense from a liberal standpoint.

But it also smacks of opportunism in my view. Here you have a 'bishop' from an fringe offshoot of the catholic church making hay while the sunshine's on the controversy surrounding the "holocaust denial" by a member of the catholic clergy. imho etc etc.

sorella

He is not a Bishop; period.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Buckley

Arguably as he is excommiunicated, not a Roman Catholic either.

His practices go against all teachings and beliefs; and his bitterness more than anything else belies real Christian belief.

And yes, he is delighting in stirring the pot now.

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Buckley

Ah, I didn't think to look up his backstory, silly me. Does this mean that all of his thoughts are completely invalid?

Rev Hellfire

sorella wrote: »

Arguably as he is excommiunicated, not a Roman Catholic either.

Nope, he would still be a catholic. Excommunication doesn't evict you from the church.

Mickeroo

sorella wrote: »

He is not a Bishop; period.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Buckley

Arguably as he is excommiunicated, not a Roman Catholic either.

His practices go against all teachings and beliefs; and his bitterness more than anything else belies real Christian belief.

And yes, he is delighting in stirring the pot now.

Since when does preaching tolerence go against christian beliefs? Jesus would have ageed with him. In another thread you spoke of how the church is not Jesus, but here you stand up for them.

Fanny Cradock

Mickeroo wrote: »

Since when does preaching tolerence go against christian beliefs

Sorella said nothing of the sort.

Mickeroo

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Sorella said nothing of the sort.

Sorella - "His practices go against all teachings and beliefs..."

I just read the wikipidea page on the guy, I assume she's talking about marrying divorcees and blessing unions between homosexuals. To most people this would seem like the guy is promoting tolorence.

MatthewVII

Mickeroo wrote: »

Sorella - "His practices go against all teachings and beliefs..."

I just read the wikipidea page on the guy, I assume she's talking about marrying divorcees and blessing unions between homosexuals. To most people this would seem like the guy is promoting tolorence.

Then again, the Bible doesn't teach tolerance, it teaches love. So God teaches us to love homosexuals but to not accept their beliefs. His love is beyond our understanding.

Mickeroo

MatthewVII wrote: »

Then again, the Bible doesn't teach tolerance, it teaches love. So God teaches us to love homosexuals but to not accept their beliefs. His love is beyond our understanding.

So it's kind of like "I love you but i don't respect your right to be happy or live a rich full life"?

Beyond our understanding indeed.

MatthewVII

Mickeroo wrote: »

So it's kind of like "I love you but i don't respect your right to be happy or live a rich full life"?

Beyond our understanding indeed.

Apparently, our lives can't be truly happy or rich unless we know god, which means forsaking everything he sees as sinful

I imagine it's small consolation

sorella

Thank you, Fanny..

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Sorella said nothing of the sort.

sorella

Realising the furore that would soon break out re this - and who the mails would be from- you are so predictable!! - , I came back online to post the (in)famous "Creed" of "Bishop "Pat Buckley.

And came across it with this commentary. ( scroll down past the gap)

http://josiahconcept.org/2007/03/25/bishop-pat-buckley/

Which says all that is going to be said from here on this.

Buckley does not, you see, base his ideas on the teachings and life of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour. But on a bitter rebellion against the Church.

He has thrown the Baby away with the bathwater.

Notice that not once does he use the Holy Name, or even "Christian"

The life of a Christian is full and rich and joyful; because the only true happiness for man is to love Jesus and to obey Him.

THAT is fulfilment. Nothing else.

THAT is freedom.

And unless you are a Christian, how can you "judge" or quantify our faith?

You clearly have no respect at all for God or Jesus from the way you write.

This is your choice; your freedom to make it.

Ours to love the Lord Jesus with all our hearts and mind and soul and strength.

We bless you this night in Prayer.

sorella

Maybe you should read more of this also;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3623138/Sacred-mysteries.html

He is a renegade simply.

His choice always.

Over and out:)

Mickeroo

sorella wrote: »

The life of a Christian is full and rich and joyful; because the only true happiness for man is to love Jesus and to obey Him.

THAT is fulfilment. Nothing else.

THAT is freedom.

For your information i was raised a christian and listened very intently in bible studies and believed it all once...but thats neither here nor there.

I know the life of a christian can be rich and full of joy, but to say it can only be rich and full of joy because you're chrisitan is incredibly small minded. I'm not having a go at you, maybe your life is rich and full because you love god and jesus but you can't say that without that somebody can't enjoy life to the full. My life is rich and full because I'm surrounded by people i love and i get to do things i love all the time. If i get married or father a child i'll enjoy just as much as you,but god would have had nothing to do with it. Life is what you make it,not what god or jesus make it.

You don't need to pray for me, but if it makes you feel better go ahead.

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

Buckley does not, you see, base his ideas on the teachings and life of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour. But on a bitter rebellion against the Church.

To be honest (and I may be mistaken) but it seems that Buckley is rebellious because he feels the Church has strayed away from Jesus's teachings. I don't think that is bitter or petty in any way.

sorella wrote:

The life of a Christian is full and rich and joyful; because the only true happiness for man is to love Jesus and to obey Him.

THAT is fulfilment. Nothing else.

THAT is freedom.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think a fulfilling life comes about through enriching those around you through your deeds and works, and doing the things you enjoying doing with the people you enjoy doing those things with. Life has so much to offer that is not related to any sort of deity. To suggest that atheists are, by definition, not being fulfilled is slightly offensive

sorella wrote:

And unless you are a Christian, how can you "judge" or quantify our faith?

I don't have to be a Christian to disapprove of the effects of your faith on other

sorella wrote:

You clearly have no respect at all for God or Jesus from the way you write.

I am an atheist. How can I respect something I don't believe in? I respect your right to believe in it, but don't see the need for me to tiptoe around the issue humbly.

sorella

Of course it does.

You have a very poor knowledge of the Church.

Communion is the Centre of all the life. It is the Full Membership "proof": when someone converts to RC, receiving Holy Communion is the Sign and Symbol of that Act of Conversion.

Excommunication is the casting out from the Church. The severing from Life therein.

Whether you agree on this matters not.

The Rite of Excommucation is the ultimate; rarely used and then only in extreme cases.

As is the case in other traditions in slightly different ways.

Someone who like Buckley has abandoned the teachings of Jesus so radically?

Is no longer thus a member of the RCC.

So, accepting this, he then tried to get into several other Churches... who also refused him membership

See

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/buckley.htm

See also the present furore re the removing of excommunication from other dissident Bishops - if they agree to terms.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Nope, he would still be a catholic. Excommunication doesn't evict you from the church.

sorella

What you write is non-sense. Did you read that article on his creed?


Do you know what Jesus teaches? Clearly not.

MatthewVII wrote: »

To be honest (and I may be mistaken) but it seems that Buckley is rebellious because he feels the Church has strayed away from Jesus's teachings. I don't think that is bitter or petty in any way.



We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think a fulfilling life comes about through enriching those around you through your deeds and works,

And? We do that; because Jesus teaches that.

and doing the things you enjoying doing with the people you enjoy doing those things with.

We do this too. What is your "beef"? If someone has hurt you; forgve and move on.....

Life has so much to offer that is not related to any sort of deity. To suggest that atheists are, by definition, not being fulfilled is slightly offensive


I did not say that; please do not twist my words like this.! I said FOR A CHRISTIAN.


I don't have to be a Christian to disapprove of the effects of your faith on other

???? Someone has clearly hurt you; not me. Not anyone here.


I am an atheist. How can I respect something I don't believe in? I respect your right to believe in it,


No you do not.


but don't see the need for me to tiptoe around the issue humbly.

OK: so why attack us? What purpose walking among Christians? IF you are happy as you are. why do this?

THAT makes no sense at all. I would not dream of coming onto an atheist board and attacking your ways; why do this then?

OK> enough, no more.

Over and OUT now. work calls. So that our abandoned babies can eat again.

sorella

So why are you here on a Christian board, attacking Christians like this?

If your way is happiness, why do this?

makes no sense; clearly you have been hurt; not by me or anyone here.

We as Nuns get cursed in the streets by those who have been hurt by those who do not obey Jesus. We understand far more than you realise.

Always we say; we did you no wrong; why do you do this?

Beloved Child of God;forgive and move on?

Life is made by God and by Jesus.

You choose to leave that; why attack us like this?

Blessings this night.

Mickeroo wrote: »

For your information i was raised a christian and listened very intently in bible studies and believed it all once...but thats neither here nor there.

I know the life of a christian can be rich and full of joy, but to say it can only be rich and full of joy because you're chrisitan is incredibly small minded. I'm not having a go at you, maybe your life is rich and full because you love god and jesus but you can't say that without that somebody can't enjoy life to the full. My life is rich and full because I'm surrounded by people i love and i get to do things i love all the time. If i get married or father a child i'll enjoy just as much as you,but god would have had nothing to do with it. Life is what you make it,not what god or jesus make it.

You don't need to pray for me, but if it makes you feel better go ahead.

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

OK: so why attack us? What purpose walking among Christians? IF you are happy as you are. why do this?

I am happy. Others are not (e.g. Pat Buckley) because of a perceived austerity in the church. I do not have problems with Christians, I have problems when the church they support impacts negatively on others. Apologies if I misrepresented you in any way, but it seems to me a lot of people would be a lot happier in this country if the catholic church didn't preach certain things

Mickeroo

sorella wrote: »

So why are you here on a Christian board, attacking Christians like this?

If your way is happiness, why do this?

makes no sense; clearly you have been hurt; not by me or anyone here.

We as Nuns get cursed in the streets by those who have been hurt by those who do not obey Jesus. We understand far more than you realise.

Always we say; we did you no wrong; why do you do this?

Beloved Child of God;forgive and move on?

Life is made by God and by Jesus.

You choose to leave that; why attack us like this?

Blessings this night.

I'm not attacking you. I come on here because i enjoy debate not because i'm unhappy,you know nothing about me just as i know nothing about you,i had no idea you were a nun until now for instance. I would never curse a nun in the street nor would i curse anyone else,unless i had reason to, and i don't curse you now nor do i forgive you,because you never did anything wrong in the first place. I bare no hatred towards anyone because of their beliefs, but i feel i have the right to question such things just you have the right to question me.

Fare thee well.

sorella

Please, excuse me now?

Our heating oil has run out and there is no money for more. It is so cold tonight.

Thank you.

Rev Hellfire

sorella wrote: »

Of course it does.

You have a very poor knowledge of the Church.

Communion is the Centre of all the life. It is the Full Membership "proof": when someone converts to RC, receiving Holy Communion is the Sign and Symbol of that Act of Conversion.

Excommunication is the casting out from the Church. The severing from Life therein.

Whether you agree on this matters not..

It's not if I agree or not, it's if the catholic church does

exhibit A, your honour.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm

The excommunicated person, it is true, does not cease to be a Christian, since his baptism can never be effaced; he can, however, be considered as an exile from Christian society and as non-existent, for a time at least, in the sight of ecclesiastical authority.

That's quite a difference from been removed from the Christian family, an outcast yes, but still a member.

Húrin

I read his book, and I think he's right about a lot of things. However on some issues he is clearly going by wishful thinking. He does indeed have a chip on his shoulder about Rome, but they're put him through a lot so it's no surprise.

Puck

If he gets to call himself bishop I bags the the title "duke"! Yes, duke, it is regal... yet manly!

Talliesin

sorella wrote: »

He is not a Bishop; period.

According to the Roman Catholic Church he is. The reason he was ex-communicated was for taking part in a valid ordination as a bishop, by someone who had been given the authority to do so, but without the approval of the Church (valid but unlawful).

JimiTime

sorella wrote: »

Our heating oil has run out and there is no money for more. It is so cold tonight.

Thank you.

When you say, 'no money for more', what does that mean exactly? For the year? week? month?

Tried to PM, but it wouldn't work. Have you e-mail?

Phototoxin

In his short time as Pope, Benedict has managed to offend and alienate the world’s Islamic, Jewish, liberal Catholic and LGBT communities – and God knows how many others.

yes but he's RIGHT he's the TRUE church so its tough biscuits for everyone else if they dont agree.

Am I the only Catholic in Ireland who believes it is way past time that we told our Roman colonialists and their Irish branch managers where to go and reconvened an Irish Catholic Church, independent of Rome, while preserving all the essentials – the Bible, the sacraments, the priesthood, and our rich heritage of Irish spirituality and mysticism, while at the same time being open to the new? “Is not the Kingdom of Heaven like a householder which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old?” (Matthew 13:52.) – Yours, etc,

that's called schisim. Irish bishops aren't that stupid.

Ah, I didn't think to look up his backstory, silly me. Does this mean that all of his thoughts are completely invalid?

well it causes you to question his motives as he is being misleading.

So it's kind of like "I love you but i don't respect your right to be happy or live a rich full life"?

no its 'BECAUSE I love you I dont respect your right to gay marraige as I KNOW that it wont make you truely happy as it is not part of gods plan as it will not be fecundate and hence is opposed to gods will.

The life of a Christian is full and rich and joyful; because the only true happiness for man is to love Jesus and to obey Him.
THAT is fulfilment. Nothing else.
THAT is freedom.
***************
For your information i was raised a christian and listened very intently in bible studies and believed it all once...but thats neither here nor there.
I know the life of a christian can be rich and full of joy, but to say it can only be rich and full of joy because you're chrisitan is incredibly small minded.

Unfortunatly I ahve to agree, my experience of many Christians is that 'we are happy because we're Chrisitans' as if it were self explainitory. Catholicsm on the other hand tends to mourn life rather than celebrate it. It seems quite morbid from the get go. Maybe its all some form of mass hysteria... well the evangelical stuff... our mass you'd fall asleep unless you really cared. The readings are the only interesting thing.

I am happy. Others are not (e.g. Pat Buckley) because of a perceived austerity in the church. I do not have problems with Christians, I have problems when the church they support impacts negatively on others. Apologies if I misrepresented you in any way, but it seems to me a lot of people would be a lot happier in this country if the catholic church didn't preach certain things

yeah but they're going to preach what they think/know is right, its not about making you feel all fluffy and happy inside.

PDN

Mickeroo wrote: »

Since when does preaching tolerence go against christian beliefs? Jesus would have ageed with him. In another thread you spoke of how the church is not Jesus, but here you stand up for them.

Apparently Mr Buckley's tolerance doesn't extend to a fellow renegade bishop who denies the holocaust.

sorella

anchoresscj at yahoo dot com.

We can filter email; closed PMs here after some bad messages.

All will be fine.

Can I say here what few seem to realise?

Nuns get no money or any help from the Church. We have to earn our keep, and earn all we give also.

Holy Poverty for this Order means just that. We are a mendicant order. No investments, no "old money"; and we are not allowed to own property.

And we do ntot involve in "religious politics": we are Born-Again, Spirit filled Holy Women of God who work 24/7 as we have done for 250 blameless years for the poorest and neediest. baby girls literaly dumped in ditches in India, Haiti etc. In Canada, drug addicts AIDS folk, hundreds who live on the streets there.

If we are ill in bed, we knit or make rosaries..When we get old, we work on always to support our Sisters.. and we all pray always.

The needy are Jesus to us ; Matthew 25.

They are Jesus to us.

We know and love Him more than life itself; because He is Life. He is our Reality

And we are working now to help the growing situation in Dublin, putting resources in there.

Here, our privilege, because we are not an irish order, to sometimes pick up the pieces of the abused ones.

And whatever our needs here, they are as nothing compared to those we serve; imagine being out on the streets in this bitter winter.

Theology and all the debates etc?

All the anger?

Sorry; should have started a new thread for this; maybe later.

We care so much for so many, simply.

Blessings this day

JimiTime wrote: »

When you say, 'no money for more', what does that mean exactly? For the year? week? month?

Tried to PM, but it wouldn't work. Have you e-mail?

sorella

You generalise shockingly.

We are not all the same.

Most are not involved in these things; we most certainly are not.

Blessings

Phototoxin wrote: »

yes but he's RIGHT he's the TRUE church so its tough biscuits for everyone else if they dont agree.



that's called schisim. Irish bishops aren't that stupid.


well it causes you to question his motives as he is being misleading.


no its 'BECAUSE I love you I dont respect your right to gay marraige as I KNOW that it wont make you truely happy as it is not part of gods plan as it will not be fecundate and hence is opposed to gods will.



Unfortunatly I ahve to agree, my experience of many Christians is that 'we are happy because we're Chrisitans' as if it were self explainitory. Catholicsm on the other hand tends to mourn life rather than celebrate it. It seems quite morbid from the get go. Maybe its all some form of mass hysteria... well the evangelical stuff... our mass you'd fall asleep unless you really cared. The readings are the only interesting thing.


yeah but they're going to preach what they think/know is right, its not about making you feel all fluffy and happy inside.

sorella

eg? All the Churches say the same re the major life issues because that is God's law as expressed in Holy Scripture.

What please is negative about the Promise of Eternal Life?

You focus on the negative simply; your choice.

MatthewVII wrote: »

I am happy. Others are not (e.g. Pat Buckley) because of a perceived austerity in the church. I do not have problems with Christians, I have problems when the church they support impacts negatively on others. Apologies if I misrepresented you in any way, but it seems to me a lot of people would be a lot happier in this country if the catholic church didn't preach certain things

sorella

He is unscriptural.

he has put them through a lot too, and led many astray from God and His laws.


he is

Húrin wrote: »

I read his book, and I think he's right about a lot of things. However on some issues he is clearly going by wishful thinking. He does indeed have a chip on his shoulder about Rome, but they're put him through a lot so it's no surprise.

sorella

Puck wrote: »

If he gets to call himself bishop I bags the the title "duke"! Yes, duke, it is regal... yet manly!

sorella

He in fact left the Church.

Defend him by all means as we would expect you to; but get facts right, please?

Talliesin wrote: »

According to the Roman Catholic Church he is. The reason he was ex-communicated was for taking part in a valid ordination as a bishop, by someone who had been given the authority to do so, but without the approval of the Church (valid but unlawful).

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

eg? All the Churches say the same re the major life issues because that is God's law as expressed in Holy Scripture.

What please is negative about the Promise of Eternal Life?

You focus on the negative simply; your choice.

Because if you focus on only the positives you don't realise the damage something can do, e.g. if I focus only on the positive aspects of the career of Richard Nixon I'd think he was great. Focusing on the positives is ultimately pointless and can be used as a way to justify any negatives. Focusing on the negatives is the way to get a true measure of moral fibre and compassion.

You focus on the positive simply, your choice to blind yourself to the negatives.

Talliesin

sorella wrote: »

He in fact left the Church.

Defend him by all means as we would expect you to; but get facts right, please?

I didn't actually defend or attack him. I merely pointed out that he was ex-communicated for receiving a valid but unlawful ordination.

sorella

We hear you; but of course you are totally incorrect..

The grace of Anointing can never be removed, but the appointment as Bishop in real terms is a different matter.

This is not a secular matter and cannot be seen as such. An excommunicate cannot serve as a bishop; period.

Sometimes they make appointments of renegades to non-existent dioceses to solve that problem; Buckley walked simply, so no longer a bishop; he has no diocese.

Talliesin wrote: »

I didn't actually defend or attack him. I merely pointed out that he was ex-communicated for receiving a valid but unlawful ordination.