Irish priest under Vatican investigation for liberal views

gimmebroadband

I always felt that the ACP were a dissident organisation, it must be serious if the Vatican is investigating!

Founder of the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP) Fr Tony Flannery is under Vatican investigation for some of his liberal views The Irish Catholic newspaper has learned.

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2012/04/irish-priest-under-vatican.html

MagicMarker

It is believed that the views which have come under most scrutiny are Fr Flannery’s opposition to the Church’s ban on artificial birth control and his support for the ordination of women.

The monster!!

thegreengoblin

So he's 'under invesigation' eh? If only the Vatican had moved as quick to investigate paedophiles and those who facilitated them.

gimmebroadband

thegreengoblin wrote: »

So he's 'under invesigation' eh? If only the Vatican had moved as quick to investigate paedophiles and those who facilitated them.

Paedophiles who abused children are criminal acts and should be investigated by the law - I agree that some bishops were slow to act! The vatican are in the process of replacing some of them as far as I know!

Benny_Cake

It is imperative that we crush the freedom fighters before the start of the rainy season!

In all seriousness, if the Vatican thinks that Tony Flannery is it's biggest problem in this country, then they are even more detached from reality than I thought.

Cycl

thegreengoblin wrote: »

So he's 'under invesigation' eh? If only the Vatican had moved as quick to investigate paedophiles and those who facilitated them.

Crimes against the faith are in a more severe category than paedophilia.

Benny_Cake

Cycl wrote: »

thegreengoblin wrote: »

So he's 'under invesigation' eh? If only the Vatican had moved as quick to investigate paedophiles and those who facilitated them.

Crimes against the faith are in a more severe category than paedophilia.

I'm not sure if you are trolling here, I hope you are.

Cycl

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I'm not sure if you are trolling here, I hope you are.

Evidently you're not familiar with Canon Law.

Benny_Cake

Cycl wrote: »

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I'm not sure if you are trolling here, I hope you are.

Evidently you're not familiar with Canon Law.

Not greatly, although if paedophilia is considered less serious than voicing an opinion under canon law, then I don't really want to know to be honest.

How has Tony Flannery and the ACP violated Canon Law?

Cycl

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Not greatly, although if paedophilia is considered less serious than voicing an opinion under canon law, then I don't really want to know to be honest.

How has Tony Flannery and the ACP violated Canon Law?

While I agree with Fr Flannery on many issues (most notably his public defence of the seal of the confessional) and respect his liking for the modern liturgy (there are many traditions in Catholicism), he is a disgrace of a Catholic priest on issues such as contraception, priestesses, his opinions on "clericalism" and the homosexual lifestyle.

He is obviously a bitter man who has been passed over for promotion and this is his way of "getting back at" his superiors.

On Tony Flannery violating canon law: I'm not a canon law expert, but if you saw that "Would You Believe" programme on RTE a couple of months ago, you'd be understandably outraged.

Ronnie Binge

Just as well Rome isn't taking an interest in the views of the laity - on contraception alone most of us would be hopped out of it, let alone having contrary views on ordination

Keylem

Benny_Cake wrote: »

How has Tony Flannery and the ACP violated Canon Law?

The Catholic Church has no Authority to change the Dogmatic Status of the Male Priesthood. Celibacy on the other hand is a discipline, and can be changed by the Church.


http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/MALEPRIE.TXT

Keylem wrote: »

Mark Mallet posted the following at his Blog

And then, within the Church itself, one could almost say an invisible schism exists whereby there are those who receive and try to live out their Catholic Faith as it has been handed on to them through Sacred Tradition—and those who have decided that we need to "update" the Church. Liturgical experimentation, liberal theology, watered-down Catholicism and outright heresy continue to prevail in many places.

Today, it so happens that many "diocesan sponsored" events are in fact heretical while lay movements in communion with the Holy Father struggle to find ecclesial support. Catechical programs, retreat centers, and religious orders are often overrun with dissidents who continue to promote a liberal agenda that disregards the Church’s moral teaching and emphasizes ecological, "new age", and social justice agendas. A priest and former vocations director recently lamented to me that "conservative" Catholics who make even a small mistake in their dioceses are often quickly and mercilessly silenced while heretics continue to preach unabated because we need to be "tolerant" of other’s views.

Full story.....

http://www.markmallett.com/blog/2011/05/the-ark-and-non-catholics/#more-5952

HamletOrHecuba

Benny_Cake wrote: »

It is imperative that we crush the freedom fighters before the start of the rainy season!

In all seriousness, if the Vatican thinks that Tony Flannery is it's biggest problem in this country, then they are even more detached from reality than I thought.

He is crucifying Christ afresh in His Mystical Body.

That is a rather serious problem.

HamletOrHecuba

Cycl wrote: »

While I agree with Fr Flannery on many issues (most notably his public defence of the seal of the confessional) and respect his liking for the modern liturgy (there are many traditions in Catholicism), he is a disgrace of a Catholic priest on issues such as contraception, priestesses, his opinions on "clericalism" and the homosexual lifestyle.
.

To compare the various experiments that have followed on the Novus Ordo with venerable though varied Rites of the Church is just wrong- the fruits of the liturgical version of the French Revolution should be plain to all. Also there is much truth in what he has said about clericalism- Catholics need to get back an understanding of the Priesthood of all Believers. However most of his views are plain evil.

mcmoustache

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

He is crucifying Christ afresh in His Mystical Body.

No. You've got that wrong. Jesus is working through Tony Flannery but the Roman Church doesn't want to change.

ISAW

mcmoustache wrote: »

No. You've got that wrong. Jesus is working through Tony Flannery but the Roman Church doesn't want to change.

And your evidence to support this is?

mcmoustache

ISAW wrote: »

And your evidence to support this is?

It's in the same place as HamletOrHecuba's evidence of Tony Flannery's crucifiction of a mystical Jesus.

I've heard that evidence for Jesus's dislike of women and married clergy is kept there too.

HamletOrHecuba

mcmoustache wrote: »

No. You've got that wrong. Jesus is working through Tony Flannery but the Roman Church doesn't want to change.

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and for all time.

Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle.

By going against that Revelation he is showing that it is not Jesus who is working in him.

HamletOrHecuba

mcmoustache wrote: »

I've heard that evidence for Jesus's dislike of women and married clergy is kept there too.

I believe Parish clergy should be married.

However St Paul in His letters makes clear that women are not to preach in Church and also the Christian attitude to homosexuality.

Onesimus

Priests being married isnt a problem. But...it could create many problems. its very rare in the Byzantine rite that priests choose to be married. And having both these vocations and remaining on the road that leads to Christ is very very difficult I would imagine. this is why St.Paul preferred that those called to priesthood to avoid marriage.

but anyhow, with the OP I have to say that I'm not surprised. It's very hard to find a priest who is 100% on Catholic doctrine these days in Ireland. Very hard indeed. and with the little amount of people in the seminaries at the moment, one can see just how bad it has all gotten. this late late show of 2009 being an example.

I honestly fail to know how his eminence went to maynooth college to investigate and failed to see all this. But of course it's always easy to cover up when you have been given good notice to do so I think. The Irish Catholic paper I believe came out with a true story and then they had to quickly change their tune. something fishy goin on in them there colleges I tell ya.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMEYJ8eXM4

HamletOrHecuba

Onesimus wrote: »

Priests being married isnt a problem. But...it could create many problems. its very rare in the Byzantine rite that priests choose to be married. And having both these vocations and remaining on the road that leads to Christ is very very difficult I would imagine. this is why St.Paul preferred that those called to priesthood to avoid marriage.

Only Monastic Priests in the Byzantine tradition are not married. All ordinary clergy are married.

Onesimus

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Only Monastic Priests in the Byzantine tradition are not married. All ordinary clergy are married.

False. Not ALL Byzantine clergy are married. You make it sound that every single byzantine cleric is married when that is really not the case at all. Some could also assume from your statement that all ordinary byzantine clerics must be married preceding their ordaination or something.

So what I said still stands.

Onesimus

Doc Farrell

There are few priests of the calibre and brilliance of Tony Flannery, over 40 years he has helped many tens of thousands, long may he do so! Fragments of reality is the title of his latest beautiful book.

Doc Farrell

Cycl wrote: »

thegreengoblin wrote: »

So he's 'under invesigation' eh? If only the Vatican had moved as quick to investigate paedophiles and those who facilitated them.

Crimes against the faith are in a more severe category than paedophilia.

Classic! Doesn't get more enlightening than that. Anyone know what a millstone is?

Ronnie Binge

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Classic! Doesn't get more enlightening than that. Anyone know what a millstone is?

A number of years ago I remember seeing a documentary that had the following comment, quoted verbatim and from memory, from an elderly man who disliked Vatican II and all that flowed from it:

"I used to see the young seminarians walking in procession from Clonliffe. They were very handsome with their red lined cloaks. It was wonderful to know that these young men would never maul a woman with their hands".

Give me Tony Flannery over creepy lay people who are more Catholic than the Pope any time.

tommy2bad

Ronnie Binge wrote: »

A number of years ago I remember seeing a documentary that had the following comment, quoted verbatim and from memory, from an elderly man who disliked Vatican II and all that flowed from it:

"I used to see the young seminarians walking in procession from Clonliffe. They were very handsome with their red lined cloaks. It was wonderful to know that these young men would never maul a woman with their hands".

Give me Tony Flannery over creepy lay people who are more Catholic than the Pope any time.

If only he had known who they would maul?

Keylem

It seems that Fr. Flannery has been under investigation by the CDF for the past couple of months, but the story 'conveniently' broke out during Holy week! I found the following article informative!

more.....

Ronnie Binge

Keylem wrote: »

It seems that Fr. Flannery has been under investigation by the CDF for the past couple of months, but the story 'conveniently' broke out during Holy week! I found the following article informative!

more.....

It would be interesting to find out what parish that nice man is assigned to, so I can give it the widest possible berth.

Benny_Cake

Fr Kevin Hegarty has a piece about all this in the Irish Times today.

joseph brand

Onesimus wrote: »

It's very hard to find a priest who is 100% on Catholic doctrine these days in Ireland. Very hard indeed. and with the little amount of people in the seminaries at the moment, one can see just how bad it has all gotten.

It would be far easier to have priests believing the doctrine 100% if they did not know much of the world around them. The more people open their eyes and see the world and gather information the harder it should be to try to live by 2000 + year old rules/ culture. I would venture a guess that Third World priests are far more likely to follow the doctrine to the letter.

Ecclesiastes 1:18
For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

The church needs to keep the priests locked inside, away from the outside world. Have them study the bible over and over, and over again.

gimmebroadband

Liberal priests want to conform God to the image of man. They knows full well that the CC has no Authority to ordain Priestesses ever, and contraception is out of the question. Allowing priests to marry won't solve vocations, they will be divided between their spiritual family and their natural family. Then there might be more problems with marital breakdown. Even in other denominations that allow married clerics, there is hardly a upsurge in vocations, in fact it's the opposite!

marienbad

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Fr Kevin Hegarty has a piece about all this in the Irish Times today.

Courageous man .

tommy2bad

They knows full well that the CC has no Authority to ordain Priestesses ever, and contraception is out of the question.

So they gave the keys back then?

Medicine333

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Liberal priests want to conform God to the image of man. They knows full well that the CC has no Authority to ordain Priestesses ever, and contraception is out of the question. Allowing priests to marry won't solve vocations, they will be divided between their spiritual family and their natural family. Then there might be more problems with marital breakdown. Even in other denominations that allow married clerics, there is hardly a upsurge in vocations, in fact it's the opposite!

Well said!

gimmebroadband

I have withdrawn this post as it should not be used against priests in ACP. Apologies!

PDN

gimmebroadband, are you saying that Rev Flannery is irreverent, impious, a lover of money, a sewer of impurity and under the vengeance of God for crucifying Jesus afresh? That sounds like an extraordinary kind of thing to say.

Is this kind of apocalyptic extremism typical of mainstream Catholicism?

Run_to_da_hills

The obvious reason why the Vatican wants clergy to remain celebrate is because they are afraid of their lives of loosing all their gold in divorce lawsuit settlements.

Medicine333

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The obvious reason why the Vatican wants clergy to remain celebrate is because they are afraid of their lives of loosing all their gold in divorce lawsuit settlements.

Maybe you should concentrate more on your spelling rather than ridiculing the Catholic Church.

Flannery criticised the Pope, he openly expressed views that are contrary to the Church's teaching and he seems more interested in spreading his word than the word of God.

The Pope is effectively his boss. If you criticise your boss, there will be repercussions.

PDN

Medicine333 wrote: »

Maybe you should concentrate more on your spelling rather than ridiculing the Catholic Church.

Acting like the spelling police does come across as a bit petty, particularly when you thanked and applauded a post that said "they knows full well". Please let's stick to addressing the issues rather than criticising one another's spelling and grammar.

gimmebroadband

PDN, no it's directed at future disobedient priests in general, who lead the flock astray. Our Lady of Salette and certain prophesies about the future of the Church was approved the local Bishop. Once an apparition is approved, the Church proclaims it worthy of belief, though no one is compelled to believe it.

http://www.thepopeinred.com/secret.htm

As for Fr. Flannery, he has openly been disobedient to the teaching Magisterium of the Church in matters of the faith, by criticising the Church for not ordaining priestesses, and the use of contraceptives etc. If left unchecked, it may lead to heresy. The ACP are just whinging for being corrected.

gimmebroadband

PDN wrote: »

Acting like the spelling police does come across as a bit petty, particularly when you thanked and applauded a post that said "they knows full well". Please let's stick to addressing the issues rather than criticising one another's spelling and grammar.

And this comes from a mod who's criticising grammar, you have heard of typos! The 's' in knows was a typing mistake that I overlooked! :rolleyes:

1ZRed

And this they actually decide to investigate!

Cycl

1ZRed wrote: »

And this they actually decide to investigate!

It's the ACP and Tony Flannery who leaked the investigation to the media. That's what they want - to make martyrs of themselves. (of course the ACP is an insult to the real martyrs gone before them).

And besides, crimes against the Faith are worse than paedophilia and ephebophilia (which I assume you are making implicit reference to in your post).

Let's cut the wheat from the chaff and see how Fr Flannery's ideologies fare without the support of the church that has supported him. Sure he could be the next Ian Paisley and travel the country in a mobile home peddling his ideologies to the half-witted!

PDN

gimmebroadband wrote: »

And this comes from a mod who's criticising grammar, you have heard of typos! The 's' in knows was a typing mistake that I overlooked! :rolleyes:

Indeed I have heard of typos, and that is one of the reasons why we consider it ill-mannered to draw attention to such mistakes.

In future, if you wish to comment on moderating actions, advice or instructions, please do so via PM rather than inthread. Thank you.

Cycl

PDN wrote: »

gimmebroadband, are you saying that Rev Flannery is irreverent, impious, a lover of money, a sewer of impurity and under the vengeance of God for crucifying Jesus afresh? That sounds like an extraordinary kind of thing to say.

Is this kind of apocalyptic extremism typical of mainstream Catholicism?

Since when is living under the guidance of the Church considered "extremism"? The Church reasons and considers the great moral issues and issues their findings to the faithful. The faithful then follow the rules, because the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and the best minds in the world have been promoted to positions of seniority and decision-making. Who is Tony Flannery (a low-ranking priest with dubious views) to decide on moral issues? It's a bit like an army lance corporal advising the top brass on things he has no aptitude for.

Sure, an army lance corporal can express his opinions (so long as they are loyal opinions, unofficial opinions, and don't expose anyone to danger), but if he wants to be a decision-maker, he should have trained to be an officer, earned his rank and then make rational, informed decisions that betters the army and won't cause mutiny/confusion/disloyalty/the loss of souls.

PDN

Cycl wrote: »

Since when is living under the guidance of the Church considered "extremism"? The Church reasons and considers the great moral issues and issues their findings to the faithful. The faithful then follow the rules, because the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and the best minds in the world have been promoted to positions of seniority and decision-making. Who is Tony Flannery (a low-ranking priest with dubious views) to decide on moral issues? It's a bit like an army lance corporal advising the top brass on things he has no aptitude for.

Sure, an army lance corporal can express his opinions (so long as they are loyal opinions, unofficial opinions, and don't expose anyone to danger), but if he wants to be a decision-maker, he should have trained to be an officer, earned his rank and then make rational, informed decisions that betters the army and won't cause mutiny/confusion/disloyalty/the loss of souls.

I think you can live under the guidance of a church without calling those you disagree with 'sewers of iniquity' or calling unparalleled judgements from God upon their heads. That is the 'extremism' to which I refer.

Run_to_da_hills

Medicine333 wrote: »

Maybe you should concentrate more on your spelling rather than ridiculing the Catholic Church.

BTW criticise is spelled criticize.

Medicine333 wrote: »

Flannery criticised the Pope, he openly expressed views that are contrary to the Church's teaching and he seems more interested in spreading his word than the word of God.

The Pope is effectively his boss. If you criticise your boss, there will be repercussions.

Well I suggest you tell Flannery's boss to take a good look at the Word of God and open up on 1st Timothy 2 vs 3.

What in your opinion has the greater authority, the Word of God or the dogma of the Roman Catholic Religion.

I would certainly put the Word of God before any institutionalized religion and If I were in Tony Flannery's shoes I would be requesting my P45.

PDN

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

BTW criticise is spelled criticize.

It is in America, but in real English it is more common to use 'criticise'.

Now cut it out, next person that bitches about speling gets an infracshun

gimmebroadband

I have withdrawn post#35 as it should not be used against priests in ACP. Apologies! But I am still critical of their obstinancy in disobedience to the Holy See.

Cycl

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

BTW criticise is spelled criticize.

Well I suggest you tell Flannery's boss to take a good look at the Word of God and open up on 1st Timothy 2 vs 3.

What in your opinion has the greater authority, the Word of God or the dogma of the Roman Catholic Religion.

I would certainly put the Word of God before any institutionalized religion and If I were in Tony Flannery's shoes I would be requesting my P45.

A very Protestant outlook.

Perhaps Fr Tony Flannery would be happier under the Queen of England.

Run_to_da_hills

Cycl wrote: »

A very Protestant outlook.

I am EX Catholic.

Cycl wrote: »

Perhaps Fr Tony Flannery would be happier under the Queen of England.

He would be happier under the direct guidance of Christ Jesus and adhering to the truth in scripture instead of heeding to a bunch of untouchables that should be trialled by an international court for perverting the course of justice with their persistent whitewashing of sex scandals.