[georgieporgy]

Originally Posted by karakorak

Jesuit alert!

Your point is technical. Morally, D'Arcy has been hammered. The Vatican heavies put the frighteners on him. He expressed his shock and sadness, himself, describing it as "brutal".

"I was very hurt by it for it was a pretty brutal way of dealing with someone and at that moment I thought I'd have to leave the church; that this was the end of my time as a priest." — Brian D'Arcy

Those are the words of a man in shock.

To me they sound like the words of a man who has no intention of doing penance and amending his life.

[Brer Fox]

Originally Posted by georgieporgy

To me they sound like the words of a man who has no intention of doing penance and amending his life.

I was thinking yesterday, wouldn't it be an exciting thought experiment for these priests to consider, for just one moment, that perhaps (just perhaps), the Church might actually be right: about homosexuality, women 'priests', and contraception. These men have staggering arrogance, to pit their own preferences against the Church which Jesus Christ established (at least that is what Catholics believe; it is intrinsic to the Catholic faith claim), and then cry victim when the Church says, no, this is not the faith of the Church, and you, as one of our priests, must respect the doctrine and the rights of Catholics to receive Catholic doctrine, not your opinions about Church doctrine.

[The Brigadier]

Originally Posted by Doc Farrell

Lol, I guess we better go with Sedevacantism, what a Joy!

If you consider yourself a sedevacantist then that is up to you.

[The Brigadier]

Originally Posted by Brer Fox

I was thinking yesterday, wouldn't it be an exciting thought experiment for these priests to consider, for just one moment, that perhaps (just perhaps), the Church might actually be right: about homosexuality, women 'priests', and contraception. These men have staggering arrogance, to pit their own preferences against the Church which Jesus Christ established (at least that is what Catholics believe; it is intrinsic to the Catholic faith claim), and then cry victim when the Church says, no, this is not the faith of the Church, and you, as one of our priests, must respect the doctrine and the rights of Catholics to receive Catholic doctrine, not your opinions about Church doctrine.

I have said it on many occasions. As a priest, on matters of the faith, you do not get an opinion. Your role is to evangelise and explain Church teaching.

[F12]

Originally Posted by karakorak

Why are people so afraid of questions and debate? It seems many people are truly not as sure of their beliefs as they would like us to imagine. Confident people don't try to dismiss people who wish to open discussions, rather, they engage with enthusiasm in the dialogue, as befits adults.

Have you ever considered that it may simply be so because the more they might debate the issues, the more risk there is of reasoning and working out the reality from the fantasy, and lose or even reject 'the Dream'? Have you ever wondered that maybe that something that people who live in the Dream can't quite learn to function without, as it insulates them from their actual realities, at least until it kicks their ass with a size ten boot.
You must not question your 'faith' in the Dream (trust in what you have been taught to imagine or believe), as you will lose the imagined profits of what that mindset makes promise of, even if the promise is actually unfulfillable.
Religious belief makes great promises; promises that many people, at some fundamental level, know deep down just can't meet up with reality, but the idea (concept) that they just might (the gamble) do so is so alluring and powerful that it warps any true capacity to reason, and therefore overrides it in most cases.
The unconscious-unreasoning part of the mind is many times more powerful than the lesser quality of reason, so if the balancing force of reason is damaged or limited by lack of knowledge and experience, the individual will unknowingly be hamstrung by the baser elements of their being, which is basically raw unreasoning beast, the unformed human. This is why religions don't want people to know things (you must believe/accept), as to question is to seek to know, and to seek to know may well result in something being discovered that may cause potential threat to what people to date only accept on the basis of belief or opinion only. Fear is a reactive thing, and reason is a considerd thing, so, who do you think loses if people wake up and start to work things out (reason)? Maybe you've already worked out that one?

Reality still operates at all levels of our existence, even if we want to choose to believe that we've wished it away, but in the meantime, until we wake up, we stay in the Dream, unconscious or maybe semi-conscious at best, unaware of much of what goes on, but that's profitable to those who keep us in the Dream, those peddlers of false promise. If you took and swallowed the pill, even if you thought it would cost you nothing, all you have left is the nothingness that living in the dream left you.
Basically, if a mind works on such a level, the owner of the mind just doesn't care, as they just want more and more pills, more faith in larger doses of medication, just like 'the doc' ordered, and he's happy to give you a repeat prescription. Now can you see why you are noticing why people just don't seem to care, or if they do then why don't they do what they should do, or do they know any better? Surely, if they cared enough, they would do enough? Maybe Brian D' Arcy cares enough to speak out because he knows right from wrong, and that all the years of trying to live in the Dream just didn't override all of his reason? Lest the light go out in the minds of man, surely one must trim one's wick and be ready to be enlightened?

[Brer Fox]

Originally Posted by F12

Maybe Brian D' Arcy cares enough to speak out because he knows right from wrong, and that all the years of trying to live in the Dream just didn't override all of his reason? Lest the light go out in the minds of man, surely one must trim one's wick and be ready to be enlightened?

You give him too much credit. Look at the likes of Cardinal Newman's reasoning and logic, then look at Fr B's Sunday World column and its 'reasoning' - nothing more than a lame appeal to the Zeitgeist.

[gimmebroadband]

So much for being gagged, Fr. D'arcy is still preaching to the choir!

[The Brigadier]

I don't have a problem on this occasion. I don't read anything from Fr. D'Arcy that goes against Church teaching.

[Doc Farrell]

Speaking of John Henry Newman, here's a piece on how he would be supporting the ACP today, along with a response suggesting the opposite in the comments section.

http://www.associationofcatholicprie...tholic-church/

[FergusODowd]

Originally Posted by gimmebroadband

So much for being gagged, Fr. D'arcy is still preaching to the choir!

He has not been "gagged", "silenced" or any other such hysterical tabloid term.

He has to submit what he intends to publish for approval prior to publishing it.

No really that different to his job with the BBC, where everything he intended broadcasting for them, as he said himself, was triple checked by the BBC before they would allow him to use it.

Fr. D'arcy is a decent and good man, but he's supposed to be a true representative of Catholic beliefs, not his own Mr. popular / Fr. Trendy a la carte version. Over the years listening to him and other a la carte priests must have been/is extremely confusing to ordinary Catholics.

Now if only the church could continue with this consistancy and sack that disgraceful self delduded and conceited clown Sean Brady, and anyone like him, they might slowly start to regain some credibility with ordinary Catholics.

Pope Benedict is a good man, but it seems the usual vatican politics and playacting self intrested cardinals, bishops, and priests are hampering and hindering his efforts at every turn.

[gimmebroadband]

Originally Posted by FergusODowd

He has not been "gagged", "silenced" or any other such hysterical tabloid term.

He has to submit what he intends to publish for approval prior to publishing it.

No really that different to his job with the BBC, where everything he intended broadcasting for them, as he said himself, was triple checked by the BBC before they would allow him to use it.

Fr. D'arcy is a decent and good man, but he's supposed to be a true representative of Catholic beliefs, not his own Mr. popular / Fr. Trendy a la carte version. Over the years listening to him and other a la carte priests must have been/is extremely confusing to ordinary Catholics.

Now if only the church could continue with this consistancy and sack that disgraceful self delduded and conceited clown Sean Brady, and anyone like him, they might slowly start to regain some credibility with ordinary Catholics.

Pope Benedict is a good man, but it seems the usual vatican politics and playacting self intrested cardinals, bishops, and priests are hampering and hindering his efforts at every turn.

These guys seem to have forgotten who is Peter's sucessor, and what the teachings of Vatican II actually said :



To advise Catholics to ignore and pick and choose clear magisterial teachings is to advise them to reject the clear teaching of Vatican II. How ironic that the "spirt of Vatican II" is often invoked as the reason for dissenting from the Magisterium when it is precisely the Vatican II council that rules this out.

To accept Vatican II is to accept what the council says about the Magisterium, and the Catholic's obligation to follow it.

The public and sustained rejection of the Magisterium and of this clear teaching of Vatican II - largely by dissenting Priests on both sides (wishy washey liberals and ultra traditionals) - has caused and sustained the crisis in the Church.

I totally agree with you.

The tabloids would have you believe that Fr. D'arcy had been gagged altogether by the Vatican, I was just being cynical is all!

[F12]

Originally Posted by Brer Fox

You give him too much credit. Look at the likes of Cardinal Newman's reasoning and logic, then look at Fr B's Sunday World column and its 'reasoning' - nothing more than a lame appeal to the Zeitgeist.

It's only a matter of payscale and status. Newman became the RC poster boy because he turned Catholic, just another 'conversion' from previous beliefs in Evengelical versions of Christianity, later becoming an Anglican deacon, and finally in his mid forties converted to Roman Catholicism. To move from non-acceptance to acceptance of RC dogma about perpetual virginity of a Jewish woman, is not what some might consider 'logic' (scientific reasoning).

[marty1985]

I enjoyed the Liveline podcast on this topic. A caller, Liam, told Fr Iggy O'Donovan to go buy a hall. He is only too happy to take the platform the church give him, but not to preach what he is supposed to preach. It is a bit of a joke to be honest.

[Brer Fox]

Originally Posted by F12

It's only a matter of payscale and status. Newman became the RC poster boy because he turned Catholic, just another 'conversion' from previous beliefs in Evengelical versions of Christianity, later becoming an Anglican deacon, and finally in his mid forties converted to Roman Catholicism. To move from non-acceptance to acceptance of RC dogma about perpetual virginity of a Jewish woman, is not what some might consider 'logic' (scientific reasoning).

Did Newman drive a Toyota Avensis?

Anyhow, I think for Newman it was an intellectual journey into the Catholic Church from Anglicanism. He wrote abundantly on the subject, and I do mean to read his works one day, including his essay on the development of doctrine.

[Brer Fox]

Originally Posted by marty1985

I enjoyed the Liveline podcast on this topic. A caller, Liam, told Fr Iggy O'Donovan to go buy a hall. He is only too happy to take the platform the church give him, but not to preach what he is supposed to preach. It is a bit of a joke to be honest.

It lacks integrity. They are happy to talk about truth and integrity, but every one of them gets a good living from the Church. In any other sphere they'd be sacked, and rightly so but they in their warped-ness take advantage of the generousity of the Church, all the while complaining and bitching about her.