BISHOPS HURTING PRIESTS

On the Blog, over the last few days, we have heard a fair little bit about how bishops can hurt their priests and seminarians and sometimes even destroy their lives.

We heard from the relative of a priest who claimed that Cahal Daly destroyed their brother's life.

We heard about priests being greatly hurt by the behaviours and actions of the Archbishop Emeritus of Cashel and Emly.

We have heard of the Dublin priests who feel hurt, neglect and being taken for granted by Diarmuid Martin in Dublin.

This week I personally heard of how a priest felt hurt bu the coldness and aloofness of Noel Treanor in Down and Connor.

The sad reality in the Catholic Church is that bishops can treat their priests very unfairly and like dirt and the priests have no come back.

Traditionally I have heard priests say that in Canon Law the only right a curate has is to a Christian burial!

SEMINARIANS:

We have also seen on this Blog over time about vulnerable seminarians are to the whim of their bishops and indeed to the whim of Maynnoth priest staff members.

We heard of the great injustice Conan in Derry suffered at the hands of Maynooth and Donal McKeown when he reacted in shock to find two fellow seminarians in bed together.

The response of the Church and the bishops seem to be: FIRE THE WHISTLEBLOWER. 

This type of behaviour is no longer accepted in industry, the services industry, and the civil service. These places now have a Charter for Whistleblowers to give them protection.

If these "secular" entities protect whistleblowers and have a grievance procedure for their staff - how much more should the Church have it - the Church being ideally that body which advocates the Trust and Justice of Christ and God?

Bullying is and has always been, rife in the Church and the bullies - bishops and superiors get away with it under the illegitimate cover of the vow/promise of obedience - blind obedience!

WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT?

If the Church was willing - and of course it is not - there should be a whole new section in canon law - a grievance procedure - whereby a priest or a seminarian should be able to challenge the behaviour and decisions of bishops and superiors.

This procedure would need to be totally independent of Church authority - maybe run and overseen by law people and civil lawyers. Their findings should be binding on bishops and superiors and a bishop should not be able to "punish" a priest or seminarian for resorting to this grievance procedure.

The occasional priest has successfully appealed a bishop's decision to Rome. But even then it is all done in secret courts and is very unsatisfactory.

Perhaps as part of this, there could be a Priests and Seminarians Representative Body who would speak for and represent a priest or seminarian. If you like a priests and seminarians trade union.

Those of us who have brought bishops to Industrial Tribunals and Civil Courts (like I did with Cahal Daly) know how impossible this way of getting justice is.

In Irish and UK law a priest is not deemed an "employee". Rather he is deemed to be a self-employed subcontractor to the Church and the bishop. That's why the Belfast Industrial Tribunal would not hear Buckley v Daly.

And when I got him to the Belfast High Court I was told that the Catholic Church in civil law had the same status as a golf club. In order to succeed against Daly, I had to PROVE that he acted otherwise than in accordance with Canon Law. As Canon Law was made by bishops, for bishops - a curate did not have a snowball's chance in Hell!

How ludicrous it is to say that a diocesan priest is a subcontractor and not an employee.

A bishop dictates to a priest where he shall live, in what house he shall live, at the bishop's whim. He dictates his income and working conditions. He dictates his time off and his holidays. He even dictates who he can associate with.

Not only is a poor priest an employee - he is a SUPER EMPLOYEE with very few rights.

A priest is a little better off than a modern day (if comfortable) slave!

In the absence of the Church and canon law doing something to correct this - who do priests form their own "trade union" - The National Union of Priests and Seminarians?

That's how other former work slaves freed themselves from their work masters.

The union could negotiate priests rights with the Bishops Conference and bishops would be bound by an employment contract. 

An unjust or tyrannical bishop could find himself the subject of "industrial action", a go slow, a work to rule or indeed an all-out strike.

I imagine that priests would get tremendous support from their parishioners in such a venture.

Imagine a picket on Diarmuid Martin's house to stop him getting to the airport for his next international flight?

Imagine a picket on Noel Treanor's palace where other union members would not pass and prevent his delivery of fine food and fine wines?

Imagine Dermot Clifford not being able to get his latest delivery of Jameson or Red Breast because of the clerical picket in Cashel?

Imagine gynecologists and midwives coming out on strike in sympathy with Waterford priest's picket on Phonsie?

Imagine Amy Martin stuck behind the picket lines in Ara Coeli for a month and not being able to get to the Bogside to collect his fairy cakes and fresh cream sponges from his mammy?

This idea has great potential you know........................................

PRIESTS versus PROPHETS

THE MEDITATION BELOW IS BY FATHER RICHARD ROHR OFM.

BIOGRAPHY:

Richard Rohr OFM (born 1943) is an American Franciscan friar ordained to the priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church in 1970. He is a known inspirational speaker and has published numerous recorded talks and books.

Rohr was born in Kansas. He entered the Franciscans in 1961 and was ordained to the priesthood in 1970. He received his master's degree in theology from the University of Dayton in 1970. He became the founder of the New Jerusalem Community in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1971 and the Center for Action and Contemplation (CAC) in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 1986 where he currently serves as the Founding Director and Academic Dean of the Living School for Action and Contemplation. The curriculum of Rohr’s Living School for Action and Contemplation is founded on seven themes developed by Rohr:

Scripture as liberation

integration of action and contemplation.

incarnational mysticism.

Community building

Peace and social justice issues

Male spirituality

The Enneagram of Personality, and eco-spirituality

He founded the international movement known as Men As Learners & Elders (M.A.L.E.s), which focuses on ritual and rites of passage to encourage men to greater spiritual consciousness. 

He often refers to his position as being on the "edge of the inside", as a prophetic place from which to challenge and encourage the Church.

In a critique of Rohr, Fr. Bryce Sibley writes that Rohr asserts that God is neither male nor female, supports the mission of homosexual advocacy groups, asserts that the Crucifixion of Jesus was not necessary for the redemption of mankind, and criticizes Catholic rituals for a lack of efficacy.

Rohr has been notable for his support of homosexual causes, attracting criticism from some Catholics. 

In 1996, Rohr presided over a ceremony for a lesbian couple, which has been referred to by a commentator as a "wedding", during one of his retreats. In 1997, Rohr spoke at a symposium of New Ways Ministry, a ministry to homosexual people which was later condemned by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for not teaching in accord with the Catholic Church's moral teachings regarding homosexuality.

In 2000, Rohr publicly endorsed Soulforce, an initiative to use "relentless nonviolent resistance" to encourage Christian groups to accept homosexual people.^[16] In a 2003 letter to his diocese, the Archbishop of Santa Fe, Michael Sheehan, wrote that Rohr had agreed in discussions to conform to official Catholic teachings in his presentations

Rohr emphasizes "alternative orthodoxy", a phrase the Franciscan tradition has applied to itself, referring to a focus on "orthopraxy"—a belief that lifestyle and practice are much more important than mere verbal orthodoxy.

Rohr's "wisdom lineage", those thinkers and movements that have influenced his own work, include the Bible of Nature and Creation; the Hebrew Scriptures interpreted by the Prophets; the Gospels, the Incarnation and Jesus; Paul as first Christian mystic; the Desert Fathers and Desert Mothers; the Patristic Period, particularly in the East; orthopraxy in much of Buddhism and Hinduism; non-dual thinkers of all religions; the early Franciscan theology of Bonaventure and Duns Scotus; the unique witness of mythology, poetry and art; the non-violent recovery of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.; much of Carl Jung's teachings; Spiral Dynamics and Integral Theory; 12-Step spirituality/American pragmatism; and scientific evidence from the universe.

THE MEDITATION - PRIESTS v PROPHETS

"A prophet is one who keeps God free for people and who keeps people free for God. 

Both of these are much needed and vital tasks. 

God has been imprisoned and made inaccessible, and far too many people have been shamed and taught guilt to keep us clergy in business. 

Our job became “sin management.” 

Sadly the laity bought into this negative story line. That is what happens when priests are not informed by prophets.

The priestly class invariably makes God less accessible instead of more so, “neither entering yourselves nor letting others enter in,” as Jesus says (Matthew 23:13).

For the sake of our own job security, the priestly message is often: “You can only come to God through us, by doing the right rituals, obeying the rules, and believing the right doctrines.” 

This is like telling God who God is allowed to love! 

The clergy and religious leaders, unintentionally perhaps, teach their disciples “learned helplessness.” 

The meditation below is from Father Richard Rohr.

Thus the prophets spend much of their time destroying and dismissing these barriers and trying to create “a straight highway to God” (Matthew 3:3). 

Both John the Baptist and Jesus tried to free God for the people, and it got them killed.

The other half of the prophet’s job is to keep people free for God. 

We get trapped in chains of guilt and low self-esteem, focusing on our imperfect church attendance and inability to live up to the law’ s standard. 

As if the goal of religion is “attendance” at an occasional ritual instead of constant participation in an Eternal Mystery! 

Prophets turn our ideas of success and belonging on their head, emphasizing God’s unconditional and unmerited love in response to our shortcomings. 

God is always breaking the approved “rules of God” by forgiving sinners, choosing the outsider or the weak, showing up in secular places.

Our job is to love others the way God has loved us. 

In my life, I’ve experienced God’s unearned love again and again. 

God has persistently broken the rules to love me at the level I needed, could receive, and was able to understand throughout my life. 

The magnanimous nature of divine love keeps liberating me at deeper levels where I’m still entrapped.

Priests construct and prophets deconstruct these constructed illusions. 

Any true ministry then reconstructs on this now solid foundation. 

Only a contemplative or nondual thinker like Jesus can honor both the priestly and prophetic functions. 

Frankly, it is rare"

------------------------------------------------------

PAT SAYS:

Much that Richard Rohr says resonates with my own thoughts on spirituality, theology and ministry.

Every Christian is baptised as: PRIEST - PROPHET - KING.

But most lay people forget that they are priests, prophets and kings.

Priest - to offer prayer and worship to God.

Prophet - to challenge the Church and the world to me more God like.

King - as heirs and heriesses to God's kingdom.


Instead, most lay people see themselves as passive - passive listeners and receivers from the professional priesthood.

Our faith is founded on PROPHECY and not on PRIESTHOOD.

The priests are the one who organise everything, take it to themselves as if they own it and distribute it to everyone else in return for obedience to the priest and giving him payment and honour.

Prophecy is the ENEMY of the Priest.

Prophecy calls the Priest to repent and change his ways.


Prophecy is overturning the applecart of priestly dominance and superiority to make way for God's Son riding on a humble donkey.

As the Bible says: WOULD THAT THE WHOLE PEOPLE OF GOD WERE PROPHETS!

Priests have always tried and always will try to castrate and destroy the Church.

Prophets come along to castrate the priests and give them free access to God.

TODAY WE NEED PROPHETS MORE THAN WE NEED PRIESTS!!!

"THE WORDS OF THE PROPHETS

ARE WRITTEN ON THE SUBWAY

WALLS AND TENEMENT HALLS

AND WHISPERED IN THE SOUNDS

OF SILENCE"

(Paul Simon)

"I TELL YOU IN TRUTH;

ALL MEN ARE PROPHETS.

OR ELSE GOD DOES NOT EXIST"

(Jean-Paul Sartre)

"ENCOUNTERING THE OTHER" BEGINS AT HOME!

LAST NIGHT TWO INTELLECTUAL SOIREES TOOK PLACE ON THE THEME OF DIALOGUE AND INVOLVEMENT WITH OTHER PEOPLE.

In Maynooth Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was speaking at an ecumenical gathering on the theme: ENCOUNTERING THE OTHER.

While in Belfast the great and the good gathered to hear a Vatican archbishop wax lyrical about Cahal Daly on the theme: GO THE EXTRA MILE - CAHAL DALY - REFLECTIONS ON THE PRACTICE OF DIALOGUE.

Of course, there is no real harm in having these intellectual naval gazing sessions followed by finger food and wine. 

But the question has to be asked: "DOES DIALOGUE, LIKE CHARITY, NOT BEGIN AT HOME?

DIARMUID MARTIN:

Diarmuid Martin is never done travelling the world and giving speeches on every topic under the sun. He has the knack of making the very PC soundbite and having all his words worshipped by the Dublin 4 crowd and his friends in The Irish Times. Dermo has hardly ever uttered an unpublished word. He is the doyen of the great and the good and the patron saint of the cucumber sandwich brigade. He smiles with the smiley brigade and weeps with the weepy brigade. He is all things to all men - a man for all seasons. In Rome, he is a Roman. In Dublin, he is a jackeen. In Paris, he is a francophile. If he was a film and stage actor his mantlepiece would be coming down with Oscars.

And last night he was speaking about ENCOUNTERING THE OTHER. 

His main responsibility in life is to be a pastor - a father to his priests and his people.

But there is hardly a bishop anywhere with a poorer relationship with his priests - with the exception of that small number of priests who are his favourites and his lapdogs.

Dublin used to have a very efficient personnel panel to advise him on clerical appointments. He abolished that and now makes his appointment on his own - with the help of archbishop@s house favourites.

There was a time when Dublin parishes had PP and curates. Diarmuid has watered those positions down to titles like "moderator" and CO PP in order to reduce people's rights in canon law.

Dublin used to publish its clerical appointments. Nowadays Dermo fails to publish and the appointments are all secret.

He appears to have the most empathy for Dublin priests who gay?

There is nothing at all wrong with encountering the others in the Anglican churches and others around the globe.

But what about Dermo's failures to encounter the other in his very own priests?

And as I say - does encountering the other, like charity, not begin at home?

CAHAL DALY:

Cahal Daly had a great name for "reaching out" to Protestants. 

However, that reaching was done in a formal and non-challenging manner. Little visits to Protestant churches. Little invitation of Protestants to Catholic churches - without Holy Communion of course. Nicely prepared intellectual talks - later published in pamphlets or in The Irish News. Expensive Christmas cards sent to COI bishops, Presbyterian moderators and Methodist presidents. Church Unity Week services in the better-heeled suburbs of Belfast. 

Bt at the very time, he was preaching about Catholic and Protestant reconciliation he was refusing to meet me or be reconciled with me. 

When I wrote to him asking for reconciliation he answered: "The fact that I have removed you from the diocese was an administrative action that does not affect our personal relationship"!!!

Really?

So he was saying that as my line manager he sacked me but we were still loiving Christian friends?

Is not one of the worst forms of dualism. It's saying: "In my capacity as your manager I am sacking you - but there is nothing personal in it and we can still be friends"?

The fact that he refused to meet me and refused to be reconciled with me made it necessary for me to stand in front of him in public on three occasions - to try and bring it home to him that you cannot preach about Catholic/Protestant reconciliation if you are refusing to have dialogue/reconciliation with one of your priests.

Once when I was in Divis Flats a young man came to my door with a very bloodied face. I brought him in, let him wash and made him tea and sandwiches as we sat down for a chat.

He told me that his father was a violent tyrant who beat his mother and his children on a regular basis.

I offered to go with him to his family home to have a chat with his dad.

When we arrived at the house I was shocked to see whose his father was. He was a local leader in several charismatic prayer meetings, carried a great big Bible and claimed to have the gift of healing.

When we entered the house the father was sitting in his armchair being waited on hand and foot by his wife and his cowering children were sitting around the room in silence.

At first, he greeted me but when he spotted his son behind me he became very aggressive.

He stormed out of the room, Bible under arm, ordering his wife to bring his food to his bedroom on a tray.

HYPOCRITE!

The world is full of street angels who are house devils.

The world is full of people who portray themselves on the world stage as sages and prophets but whose "home lives" are far from wise, prophetic, caring and loving.

There is such a phenomenon as a wolf in shepherd's clothing!

FORGIVENESS - PLUSSES AND MINUSES

Does Forgiveness Have a Dark Side?

Recent research suggests that forgiveness may sometimes impede 
positive change.

juliana breines

• Assistant Professor
• Behavioral Science
• University of Rhose Island

Forgiveness is widely considered to be a psychologically healthy and morally virtuous approach to coping with victimization. Research suggests that people who forgive more easily are happier and healthier than those who hold grudges. In addition, forgiveness interventions have been shown to reduce stress reactivity, increase optimism, and facilitate reconciliation with offenders.

Definitions of forgiveness vary, but most include two key elements: 1) intentionally letting go of negative emotions, such as anger and hostility, towards the offender; and 2) intentionally cultivating positive emotions, such as compassion and benevolence, towards the offender. Some definitions also involve seeking contact with rather than avoiding the offender.

Forgiveness advocates emphasize that forgiveness is not the same as excusing or condoning an offense, nor should it involve putting oneself in a position to be harmed again. Supporting this perspective, some research suggests that forgiveness can deter offenders from repeating their offenses. In one set of studies, participants reported that they would be less likely to repeat a transgression against a stranger who had forgiven as opposed to not forgiven them, and another set of studies found similar results in married couples.

Some have proposed that forgiveness could deter repeated offenses because of the norm of reciprocity, which dictates that positive acts (like forgiveness) should be reciprocated with positive acts (like avoiding repeating the offense). Others have countered, however, that the positive act of forgiveness may be reciprocated by a positive act that is not directly related to the offense, such as giving a gift.

In fact, research suggests that forgiveness may in some cases increase the likelihood of revictimization. A recent longitudinal study of newlywed couples found that spouses who expressed forgiveness more readily experienced steady rates of psychological and physical aggression from their partners over a four-year period, whereas less forgiving spouses experienced a decrease in aggression. Related studies have shown that more forgiving spouses are more likely to experience declines in relationship satisfaction over time if their partners frequently engage in negative behaviors, and that forgiveness can erode forgivers’ self-respect if offending partners have not made sufficient amends. Furthermore, in a daily diary study, spouses were more likely to report being the victim of a transgression on days after they reported forgiving their partner, compared to other days.

Why might forgiveness fail to reduce problematic behaviors?

According to theories of operant learning, people are less likely to engage in negative behaviors if these behaviors have adverse consequences. By reducing adverse consequences such as criticism and isolation, forgiveness may remove an important source of motivation for offenders to change. Supporting this perspective, one study of romantic partners found that direct expressions of anger and criticism were associated with increases in partners’ willingness to make positive changes.

Some degree of anger may also have benefits for victims as it can motivate them to steer clear of a potentially dangerous person. This is especially important in cases of intimate partner violence, where giving a violent partner a second chance could put one’s life at risk. Although forgiveness need not entail reconciliation, research suggests that people who forgive violent partners may be more likely to stay in the relationship.

Forgiveness may also have a dark side when it comes to correcting social inequality. Some research suggests that encouraging members of disadvantaged groups to forgive groups that have discriminated against and harmed them may reduce their motivation to address social inequality. In one study, indigenous Australians who were encouraged to think of an injustice perpetrated against them (the Stolen Generations) in a way that fostered forgiveness (i.e., appealing to common humanity) reported being less willing to engage in collective action on behalf of their group—this included willingness to participate in a peaceful demonstration aimed at improving the position of indigenous Australians and volunteering their time to help people in indigenous communities.

Forgiveness may quell destructive desires for revenge and retaliation, but at the same time it may reduce feelings of anger and frustration that can be channeled constructively into social change. Efforts to foster forgiveness for historic and current injustices may be most effective when they are joined together with equally strong efforts to attain justice. 

The likelihood that forgiveness will promote or impede positive change, whether in close relationships or on a broader scale, depends on a number of factors, including the severity of the offense, the number of times it has been repeated, and efforts of the offending party to make amends. If an offense is severe, repeated or prolonged, and the offender does not take responsibility or try to correct their behavior, forgiveness may be less likely to elicit positive change and may be more likely to put a victim in danger.

For many people, forgiveness can bring great relief and peace, but for others it may not be the best solution. Alternative ways to cope with victimization that don’t require forgiveness include practicing self-compassion (recognizing the injustice one has suffered and offering kindness to oneself), mindfulness (allowing oneself to feel hurt and angry), and connecting with and offering support to other victims. Sometimes giving oneself permission not to forgive—without feeling a sense of moral failure—can be just as liberating as choosing to forgive.

PAT SAYS:

The word FORGIVENESS like the word LOVE has become a much bandied about word and very often we do not think of the whole dynamic required in people being sorry for what they did and their victims forgiving them.

Those who cannot forgive - or who refuse to forgive is sometimes made to feel morally and socially INFERIOR.

I think that Dr. Breines piece above is a challenge to us all to think more deeply about that word and concept FORGIVENESS.

Let us not forget that those who have been hurt in the wrong have a RIGHT to the acknowledgment of their hurt - and a right to a sincere and heartfelt apology by the one or entity that hurt them.

The ideal scenario surely is when the person/entity who did the hurting asks forgiveness of their victim - allowing the victim to forgive or not to forgive?

The old thoughts behind Catholic Confession are helpful here. It goes more or less like this:

1. The offender is truly sorry for the offence and says so.

2. The offender is asked to do something to show the sincerity of their sorrow (penance).

3. The offended promises not to commit the offence again.

4. The offender is forgiven.

Someone sent me this beautiful video of a Holocaust victim forgiving their abuser:

I stand before this lady with awe - and dumbstruck by her spirit and by her strength.

And in her case her torturers are dead.

If they were still alive and still conducting medical experiments on Jewish children would she also forgive?

But Dr. Breines warnings are to be taken seriously. The dangers of :

1. An abuser/offender continuing their behaviours because they were forgiven and did not feel the consequences of their actions.

2. The danger of a victim forgiving and not steer clear of the dangerous person or other dangerous people. 

3. The danger of those who are forgiven of continuing their discrimination or injustice.

4. The danger of a forgiving victim not realising that they must challenge the wrongdoing.

And finally the alternatives to forgiveness:

1, Self-compassion.

2. Allowing oneself to feel the hurt and connecting with other victims.

3.  Sometimes giving oneself permission not to forgive—without feeling a sense of moral failure—can be just as liberating as choosing to forgive.

Over to you dear reader..................................

"NEVER SPEAK ILL OF THE DEAD"

I AM NOT A FAN OF THAT PROVERB/PLATITUDE: "NEVER SPEAK ILL OF THE DEAD!.

Simply "being dead" does not give anyone an absolute right to be spoken well of and not spoken ill of.

I was reminded of this last night as I was cooking my dinner and my doorbell rang. It was a homeless man (48). He broke up with his wife last December and has been sleeping rough in England and Belfast ever since. He also has some mental health issues - depression, anxiety, self-harming and suicidal thoughts. 

I managed to find him a bed for the night in Belfast and I gave him his train fare to get there and a few quid for some food.

During our chat, he told me about his father and his father's funeral. His father had been a violent alcoholic and is probably greatly responsible for the state this man is now in.

At his father's funeral, a priest who did not know his father was giving him a glowing send off. My friend stood up and said: "I'm here to bury a father I never knew and who tortured me all my life".

He was ushered out of the church by family members and parishioners and his family has not spoken to him since.

He asked me what I thought and I repeated to him something my own dead father used to say: "If someone was a bastard when they were living they become a dead bastard when they die".

People sometimes say that we should not speak ill of the dead because they are not here to defend themselves. Nonsense. We should tell the truth about both the dead and the living. And just as the dead are not here to defend themselves - they are not here to be hurt by what is said about them.

I do not like the fact that death seems to give people the automatic right to canonization.

CAHAL DALY:

This Friday evening in Queen's University, Belfast there is a gathering of the great and the good to celebrate the centenary of Cardinal Cahal Daly who was born in 1917.

It is called the Cardinal Cahal B Daly Memorial Lecture.

The speaker is Archbishop Paul Gallagher from The Secretariate of State in the Vatican. The lecture is entitled: "Go The Extra Mile - Reflections On The Practice Of Dialogue".

A suitable floury and meaningless title.

Presumably, it is going to talk about Daly as "going the extra mile" and about him being a man of "dialogue".

Cahal Daly was a little bully who would not budge an inch with or for anyone. He did not engage in dialogue. He pontificated and gave orders. 

He may have had ecumenical cucumber sandwiches with Protestant notables and the fur coat brigade - but that was as far as his "dialogue" went.

At our last meeting in October of 1985 - 32 years ago now - he asked me if I believed if that the bishop was the voice of God?

He said that this was a teaching of St. Ignatius of Antioch.

I told him that I did not believe that nonsense - which he seemed to believe absolutely.

I asked him if that meant that when he broke wind God broke wind!

Pity I did not ask him also: "Would God cover up child abuse"

All you have to do is look at last week's cock up by Phonsie Cullinan of Waterford condemning cervical cancer vaccines.

Does that mean that God condemns cervical cancer vaccines?

And when Phonsie had to apologize later for his ignorant statement - does that mean that God was apologizing for his ignorance?

It's always very dangerous when men think that they are God or that they speak for God.

How many atrocities have been caused by that kind of mindset?

How many millions of people have perished as a result of that kind of thinking and practice by those who believe that they are god-like in their rule and their power?

Religion is one of those areas where men like to claim they speak for God. And just look at the abuse and atrocities that have come from that claim.

"WOE TO YOU WHEN MEN SPEAK WELL OF YOU.

THIS WAS THE WAY THEIR FATHERS TREATED THE FALSE PROPHETS"

(Luke 6:26)

IRIS DE MENT

IRIS DE MENT

LET US TAKE A BREAK TODAY FROM "HOLY MOTHER CHURCH" AND ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE YOU TO ONE OF MY FAVOURITE SINGERS - IRIS DE MENT.

I find her music attractive because she sings in a very soulful, often sad way and because I find a spirituality in her lyrics.

I had the privilege of meeting her many years ago when he gave a concert at Queen's University, Belfast. 

That night her backers sound system did not work and she was going to cancel the concert and I went up to her and said: Iris, it's you we came to listen to. Forget the backing and sing for us with your guitar. She did.

After the concert, we corresponded for a while and then we lost touch.

AN AFTERLIFE:

One of the things we all think about is what happens when we die. Is there an afterlife etc.

I think Iris' song LET THE MYSTERY BE is how we should think about that:

The afterlife - and I firmly believe there is one - is a mystery. So, let the mystery be and let us live this one to the full and do all the good we can.

PAIN:

When I met Iris I felt that, rightly or wrongly, I saw a lot of pain in her face. I don't know if it was past pain or present pain.

We all have times of pain in our lives. But there is always a tomorrow, a tomorrow when everything is going to be better.  Her song INFAMOUS ANGEL speaks to me.

LOSS:

One of the great pains we all have in life in the pain of loss - of losing some to death or reaching the end of a relationship.

At those times - when we are deep in the winter of loss - it feels that things will never get better.

But they do! There will always be scars and memories left. But it becomes possible for us to live again after loss. Iris' song EVEN AFTER YOU'RE GONE is very meaningful to me.

I suffered a great sense of loss when my mother JoJo died after she had lived with me for the last 16 years of her life. I was the first of her 17 births. 

MAM 1929 - 2006

In March this year, I lost my favourite sister Margaret. She and I had been in each other's lives - and very close for 64 years.

MAGS 1953 - 2017

THE HEROES OF ROUTINE:

Most of us have lives of routine - at home, in the office, on the building site etc.

And yet the world would not work without the routine of the mother, the bus driver, the pharmacist, the refuse collector etc, etc.

Very few people get to be rich and famous and powerful - and even those who are not always happy.

We all have to be HEROES OF ROUTINE.

We all have to find meaning - and God if we want him - in the daily routine.

Iris's song EASY'S GETTING HARDER EVERY DAY is an anthem to the miracle and virtue of the daily routine:

CONCLUSION: I know that not everyone will like Iris De Ment the way I do. 

I confess to being a "country" fan.   

Maybe you readers might like to tell us about a favourite singer of yours, a favourite song, favourite lyrics - and why they mean what they do to you?

GETTING DRESSED FOR MASS!!!

THE VATICAN GIRLS DRESSING ROOM

Below you will find a video that gives us a disturbing glimpse into what some people think the Church should be like.

The cardinal in this video - RAYMOND BURKE - is one of Pope Francis' chief enemies in the church and in the Vatican. 

A lot of the young priests being ordained today like the style of church that Burke stands for - loads of lace, ermine and exquisitely tailored cassocks, albs and surplices.

Many of these guys are also secretly and actively gay - in promiscuous ways.

Its as if church ceremonies allow them to parade their feminine side.

This is not an old video.

These dressing up shows are happening today!!!

What it all has to do with Jesus of Nazareth and being pastors I do not know!

AND REMEMBER BURKE IS STILL RELATIVELY YOUNG AND STILL ABLE TO VOTE IN PAPAL CONCLAVES

MORE PICS OF BURKE

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


WHAT DO READERS THINK?