Monday, February 25, 2013

Politics, Religion and the abuse of power


Neither Cardinal Keith O'Brien nor Lord Rennard is accused of pederasty, incest or rape. But the allegations against them are still very serious, for they are concerned with sexual misdemeanour and the abuse of power. The former is accused of 'inappropriate acts' with teenage seminarians. The latter of 'inappropriate behaviour' towards women. Both men, of course, are denying the claims.

If you are Roman Catholic, you leap to defend your cardinal. If you are Liberal Democrat, you leap to defend your peer. Notably, those who hurl allegations of bigotry or bias in the mere reporting if the allegations against the Cardinal are mostly indifferent to the plight of the Peer: it is far easier to presume the innocence of your co-religionists than it is of your political opponents. The demands for justice and appeals to due process are vapid in the double standards and hypocrisy: if you're a cardinal, you have rights and are equal before the law; if you're a LibDem, stuff that, who cares? One look at that smug, corpulent visage is enough to determine guilt.

Millions want Cardinal O'Brien to be absolved and his male accusers exposed as the charlatans they are. Millions want Lord Rennard to be guilty, and his female accusers lauded for their bravery in confronting the sexist sleazeball. But the Cardinal may be guilty and the Peer may be innocent: it is for weighing the evidence in such cases that we have courts of law and trials by jury.

But neither case is likely ever to come to court: both are now subject to internal inquiries - the Cardinal's case is with the Pope; the Peer's case is with a LibDem committee. And the Liberal Democrats have a cloaking machine every bit as effective as the chronic cover-ups of the Roman Catholic Church. Where religion and politics are concerned, the powerful always act to protect their own.  And the victims become collateral damage; discarded on the rubbish heap of inferior humanity.

But we must not ignore the timing of these revelations. The Cardinal is about to fly to Rome to choose the next pope - the only voting representative from the UK. All of Britain's Roman Catholics are hoping for a hint, awaiting clue of how he might cast his ballot. The Peer is in the middle of what is possibly the most important by-election in a generation. All of Britain's politicos are waiting to see if the LibDems can hold on to Eastleigh or if the Conservatives can take the seat from them. On this result rests the futures of Nick Clegg, David Cameron and possibly the outcome of the next General Election.

Nick Clegg is clearly of the view that the timing of these allegations - not the allegations themselves - are a clear attempt to undermine his leadership and damage his party's prospects in Eastleigh. Hence the strongly-worded denial that he was involved in any cover-up. And many believe that the allegations against the Cardinal have been publicised now in order to hasten his retirement and remove him from the Conclave.

Hum! Conspiracy?

Cardinal O'Brien wouldn't be the first 'spiritual director' to abuse his position of power: the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland has a long and sordid history of doing preciselty that. Lord Rennard wouldn't be the first 'senior politician' to abuse his position of power: the Liberals, Conservatives and Socialists all have their predatory perverts.

There's something about power in politics and religion which is irresistable, principally because its application produces results. When you put together authority and charisma, you have influence. When the elite exercise that over those who are beholden or dependent, there may be healthy respect or fear, and you arrive at a potential system of abuse. It is a culture we have inherited: power controls us, sometimes in deleterious ways. The only solution is greater accountability and enhanced transparency in community. There should be devolution and a separation of powers. The elite should certainly not be permitted to judge in their own cause, for that is likely only to lead to further abuse and cover-up.

One of the complainants against the Cardinal was just 18 at the time of the alleged abuse. He has said that he was too frightened to report the incident, and became depressed. He was ordained, but resigned when Keith O'Brien was promoted to bishop in the mid-1980s: "I knew then he would always have power over me," the victim says. "It was assumed I left the priesthood to get married. I did not. I left to preserve my integrity."

What potential did the Roman Catholic Church lose in this young man? A great priest? An inspirational bishop? A future pope?

We will never know.

255 Comments:

Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

25 February 2013 at 10:33  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

The first post on this article was, as ever, by Dodo. It was, as ever, ad hominem. He is now banned. Permanently.

25 February 2013 at 10:54  
Blogger Happy Harpy said...

A superb article - congratulations!

25 February 2013 at 10:56  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

And suddenly, as if by magic, a completely new communicant appears...

25 February 2013 at 10:58  
Blogger Corrigan said...

Dodo? Ad Hominem? Surely not, Cranmer!! If he were Jewish, and I were Avi, I'd be screaming "Ahhh!!! Anti-Semite!!!"

Seriously, though, whatever he said must have been a doozie to get him banned. At least I hope it was, because I'd hate to think that the bould Cranmer was going down the path of censorship.

25 February 2013 at 11:19  
Blogger Lazarus said...

'Millions want Cardinal O'Brien to be absolved... Millions want Lord Rennard to be guilty...'

Well, who knows what 'millions' want? (Have you asked Stonewall recently what they'd like in the case of Cardinal O'Brien?) What I'd really want in both cases is clarity and the truth. As things stand at the moment, I have seen several women being interviewed on camera, making clear and credible allegations about Lord Rennard. On the other hand, I've seen a few rather vague newspaper reports about vague claims against Cardinal O'Brien. I hope that, in due course, the full truth -on way or the other- comes out about the latter.

As far as what I'd enjoy? Of course, it's always amusing to see a bunch of right on liberals getting their comeuppance, and it's dispiriting to see a Catholic leader behaving badly -if those are the outcomes. But in the end, I don't want to be amused: I want the truth and certainly not the 'discarding' of victims.

25 February 2013 at 11:23  
Blogger Nick said...

It is indeed sad that at a time when society is in moral decline we find that so many of its "pillars" are in fact made of jelly. It is quite right that the Cardinal should resign - it is the only honourable thing he can do under the circumstances. I suspect the other one in the article won't be so honourable.

The Catholic Church desperately needs to clean up its act (probably the CoE needs to as well).

However, there is a whiff of hypocrisy about the media coverage. The Cardinall allegedly made inappropriate advances to members of the same sex. Had he not been a Catholic and had he been a paid-up member of Stonewall, then I wonder what the media coverage would have been?

25 February 2013 at 11:26  
Blogger Corrigan said...

Actually, asking Stonewall (or at least Peter Tatchell) what they want in a cardinal might not be a bad idea. Thatchell is on the record as saying he wants the age of consent lowered to 14,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/sep/24/sex-under-16-underage

a position he has, more recently, slightly modified to exclude sex with adults. Presumably, somebody pointed out to him that a blanket reduction would exhonorate many of the "paedophile priests" who are currently doing bird.

http://www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/age_of_consent/Should-the-age-of-consent-be-reduced-to-14.htm

I guess that kind of thing happens when you're engaged in making up your own personal morality as you go.

25 February 2013 at 11:37  
Blogger Corrigan said...

It is quite right that the Cardinal should resign - it is the only honourable thing he can do under the circumstances.

And what are the circumstances, Nick?

25 February 2013 at 11:39  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Yes, as has been said, it's the truth that's needed, and not witch hunts.
It all goes to show that we are all flawed, right through, and need the forgiveness of God.
Dodo. Hmm, the hitherto, to my knowledge, gentle, tolerant and well read elderly avian, will be greatly missed. What a great pity. I hope that such an extreme sentence as total, permanent excommunication is justified. But I shall never know. However, Au Revoir, Dodo, and have a good journey.

25 February 2013 at 11:40  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

As a Catholic I want any cleric who abused his position of power – the 'filth' as Pope Benedict described them – cast out if guilty. But, as you say, the timing of these allegations is somewhat convenient. Why now?

Only last week in an interview with the BBC Cardinal O'Brien said he would be happy for priests to be able to marry. He was also named "Bigot of the year" by Stonewall last November, having earned the ire of gay rights activists for daring to be outspoken (some would say outraged) about gay marriage. He is, therefore, a man who will have detractors on all sides.

I would also take you to task on your "chronic cover-ups of the Roman Catholic Church" slur. No organisation has been more forthcoming about the mistakes it has made, nor embarked upon a steeper learning curve on the issue of child abuse, a learning curve that certain media organisations and political parties have yet to begin.

Not saying that the Cardinal is innocent, but he (and the Lib Dem peer) IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE.

Let's not forget that.

25 February 2013 at 11:54  
Blogger Nick said...

Corrigan:

Interesting to learn about Tatchell support for lowering the age of consent. It's interesting because whenever one makes a connection between homosexuality and paedophilia they usually get pounced on by the LBGT lobby crying foul.

25 February 2013 at 11:54  
Blogger blondpidge said...

Actually many Catholics who noted that the allegations against Cardinal O'Brien were unsubstantiated, made no comment about Lord Rennard either.

Like Lazarus, many of us want the truth, but note that this is unlikely to be found via the reports of the MSM or social media.

Reporting the allegations in themselves are not biased, but speculation as to possible or potential guilt, such as the type of priest that the Roman Catholic church may have lost, displays a propensity to take them at face value and as being true.

Abuse of power to achieve sexual ends is a serious business but speculation does nobody, least of all the victims, any favours.

His Grace mentions 'nauseating tribalism' on his Twitter feed. I think Catholics would call this an obedience to Holy Mother Church and a dismay when someone whom we previously admired, seem to be repeatedly tweeting the allegations, with what appeared to be relish.

I hope that this comment will not be removed, but given that His Grace seems to be exercising censorship and zero tolerance towards those who feel that (perhaps unfairly) they have felt a hint of schadenfreude in some of his sentiments, I would not be surprised to see it vanish into the ether.

These allegations are painful to us all, especially if they do turn out to be true. We need to honestly examine what in our culture has allowed such things as child abuse to go unchecked.

But a reluctance to form a judgement based on one side of the story, especially given the timing of such allegations, and a dismay that a fellow Christian seemed to repeat them several times, along with selective quotes, does not equate to blindness.

I think Cranmer risks losing the sympathy of some of his natural allies.

25 February 2013 at 12:01  
Blogger bluedog said...

'The Cardinal is about to fly to Rome to choose the next pope - the only voting representative from the UK.'

It seems that the Cardinal has been given the red card by the Pope and will not be going to Rome after all.

So much for innocent until proven guilty. Even an Anglican can see that the timing of the initial disclosure was done in such a way as to cause maximum damage to both Cardinal and Roman Church at the moment of greatest vulnerability. The actions of lawyers, not Christians.

One gets the feeling that the RCC is about to undergo some extraordinary challenges. As this communicant has said before, there can be no schadenfreude. All Christians who worship in established Churches that descend from the Roman precedent will find themselves in much the same boat.

25 February 2013 at 12:07  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"I think Cranmer risks losing the sympathy of some of his natural allies."

Look in the mirror: your projection is obvious.

25 February 2013 at 12:07  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Hello blondpidge.

Cranmer doesn't censor people because they are Catholic or disagree with him. But as the host of this blog he has a duty to ensure that no one uses it to say defamatory or highly offensive things about other people.

Also, let's not forget that the Cardinal is not, I understand, facing allegations of child abuse - an eighteen year old complainant is not a child. Best to keep those issues separate.

25 February 2013 at 12:08  
Blogger Corrigan said...

Jeez, Cranmer, you really need to get that spring in your bed fixed; it must have been sticking in your ribs all last night to have you in this humour.

25 February 2013 at 12:14  
Blogger blondpidge said...

No projection there Your Grace, although I did note that I was referred to by your good self as "unintelligent, undiscerning, fatuous" and being unable to see beyond a "myopic prejudice".

You may well be right on the first count, but maybe motes and beams re the second?

That you may have an antipathy towards the Catholic Church is understandable and perhaps evident in the name. But the Catholic Church is, as you are well aware, not simply the Vatican but consists of the body of Christ here on earth, even though some of us experience the pain of separation.

Catholics are experiencing the shock of losing their beloved pope in a way that they did not expect. Some sensitivity from their Anglican brethren, instead of remarks critical of the papacy and repeated damaging allegations would not have gone amiss.

Pax.

25 February 2013 at 12:22  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"I hope that this comment will not be removed, but given that His Grace seems to be exercising censorship and zero tolerance towards those who feel that (perhaps unfairly) they have felt a hint of schadenfreude in some of his sentiments, I would not be surprised to see it vanish into the ether."

His Grace does not remove reasoned criticism, but it is totally in keeping with your self-righteous desire to cast slurs and propensity to play the victim that you feel the need to raise the doubt. Please, don't feel you need to comment here or even visit: it is an Anglican blog, and therefore, by definition 'biased'. And nothing that you ever written or tweeted could possibly ever be accused of that egregious vice, could it.

25 February 2013 at 12:23  
Blogger Manfarang said...

"It is quite right that the Cardinal should resign - it is the only honourable thing he can do under the circumstances."
He has resigned and so did Lord Rennard from his position in the Liberal Democrats years ago.
I believe the male population on Pitcairn island is in jail for sexual misconduct.

25 February 2013 at 12:27  
Blogger blondpidge said...

Gosh. How unutterably sad. :-(

Best wishes Your Grace x

25 February 2013 at 12:29  
Blogger Flossie said...

I too shall miss Dodo, but I think His Grace has put up with a lot of unfair accusations lately. 'Straws' and 'camels' backs' spring to mind.

Let us hope that the 'real' truth emerges from this unhappy spectacle. I must say I find the recent spate of witch hunts quite alarming. Most people commit youthful peccadilloes (well, I did, anyhow) and are ashamed and sorry in later life. There must be countless millions of through history who have gone on to do great things in spite of unwise incidents in their earlier life, and who do not deserve to have them publicly paraded.

25 February 2013 at 12:30  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"Gosh. How unutterably sad. :-("

Gosh, how patronisingly pretentious.

By the way, the Pope has now forced the Cardinal to quit, with no right of reply to the allegations against him, in contravention of all principles of natural justice. Presumption of innocence? Fair trial? Justice?

Oh, perhaps it's only 'biased', 'bigoted' or 'sectarian' Anglicans who are prohibited from commenting.

25 February 2013 at 12:36  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Priceless. The "Bigot of the Year" turns out to be a closet homosexual. Is it true or not? Who knows? At this point it doesn't even matter. On one side, the accusation is sufficient proof for those who want it to be true. It simply confirms their belief that hostility to homosexual behavior is evidence of latent homosexual desire. The RCC on the the hand is going to bury the whole matter in an unmarked grave. In two weeks it will be a forgotten story. A man's reputation will have been destroyed or a man's sins will have found him out. We will never know which.

This is assassination by journalism. It truly is despicable. And even more so since the RCC is just going to let it happen.

carl

25 February 2013 at 12:55  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

It is a curious one, no doubt.

The Pope accepted his resignation on the 18 February from "the pastoral governance of the archdiocese of St Andrews and Edinburgh", to be announced today. (He is still a Cardinal.) However, this follows his actual resignation last November, which was accepted by the Pope nunc pro tunc (now for later).

Cardinal O'Brien's statement said: "Approaching the age of 75 and at times in indifferent health, I tendered my resignation as archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh to Pope Benedict XVI some months ago. I was happy to know that he accepted my resignation… on 13 November 2012. The Holy Father has now decided that my resignation will take effect today, 25 February 2013."

Was he ousted because of the allegations against him? Was it because he came out in favour of married priests? Or did he just resign with honour because of his age from a very demanding job, a resignation which was activated before the next Pope was chosen?

Feel like Dan Brown lies down – I am a DJ…

25 February 2013 at 12:58  
Blogger blondpidge said...

No, I am very sad. I like you, I don't like falling out with people and being a sensitive soul who is afflicted with the sin of vanity, it's never nice being given a list of character failings or shortcomings, even if such criticism is no doubt justified and merited.

I have not referred to you as 'bigoted' or 'sectarian' in any event.

I am aware of the developments in the O'Brien case. I don't think that the Holy Father was really left with any choice and besides this seems like an honourable decision by the Cardinal, even though it does leave him open to assumptions as to the allegations.

I guess Catholics have to trust his wisdom, that of the Holy Father and most importantly of the Holy Spirit. We don't know why the Pope has accepted the Cardinal's premature resignation it could simply be to avoid scandal, but whatever the truth of the matter, leaked allegations don't do anything to further the causes of justice.

It's something of a tragedy all round.

25 February 2013 at 13:02  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

The sad thing is that whether true or not, this is an illustration of where we have got to in 2013, both with regard to religion and to politics.

Trial by media.

No, this isn't a reference to His Grace's blog.

It is simply observing that no politician, Lib-Dem or otherwise and no priest, Catholic or otherwise, will ever again get the benefit of the doubt when a public accusation is laid against them. The right to which all of us are born under British law, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, has been taken from them in perpetuity.

Monsignor Harry Byrne in America wrote a wonderful piece a couple of years ago commenting on this phenomenon. He entitled it "The Dishonoring Of My Regiment" and he made the very valid point that the bad handling of the sexual abuse crisis by the authorities of the Roman Catholic Church has left all its priests, many of them good and decent men who have served the Church well and loyally, "tarred with the same brush".

Somehow there has to be a way out of this mess. But at present I think only the Holy Spirit knows what it is.

25 February 2013 at 13:08  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Two words - Homosexuals and Feminists both are out of control.

I tend to think His Grace's fifth paragraph is in tune with what is going on.

25 February 2013 at 13:12  
Blogger Kinderling said...

There is the leaning towards or the leaning away. And there is a centre point.

A Liberal is a person leaning towards.

A Priest is leaning away.

The child knows nothing of this.

Positive affirmations or negative affirations of Unworthiness, to praise or damn the Lost Sheep into heros or into sinners, to mold them into an army of slaves, awakens in them the very nature of playing God in offering to all the comfortable option from distress is by Conversion through Faith. The Salvation-Givers.

And so exualted in this office of The-Charade-of-Goodness-for-Mankind they are pricked into self harming to indulge into that one single self-glorification left to the dead: the reproducing animal in return for a sense of life; because their minds constantly dwell on it, into the promotion of Liberal beastiality or into the Abstenence for Holy Orders, to remove any claim that people should live by conscience alone, but by the memorized exposure to their Craft.

Awakened by frustration of not actually being God,(though most achieve title and exhaultation), the fruit is eaten from the Tree of Knowlege.

Out of season.

Neither can act or do normal.

Those who serve in Temples vying for Goodness will find their temptations consume them to a passion so that any First Bloom who enters will be claimed openly as perpetrator, whilst in secret shared for quenching fires.

Know this: Enablers only save for themselves.

25 February 2013 at 13:13  
Blogger David B said...

I see that both of those alleged harassers mentioned in the OP have now resigned, which will bring further pressure on at least one American and one Irish Cardinal, I imagine.

I will happily defend HG against allegations of censorship, after all he puts up with a liberal, but quite militant atheist like me.

On the discussion board I co-founded we do not normally ban people for views that are unpopular - there are some egregious views that would involve a rapid ban, like those who defend paedophilia, but people do not get banned for defending supernatural views.

We do, however, occasionally ban people for persistently behaving like a jerk.

I cannot blame HG for following a similar policy.

I have a good deal of respect for a number of the Christians who comment on this blog, as well as for the founder - decent people with principles which sometimes coincide with mine, sometimes not, but people of principle for all that, and people who are tolerant of dissent, even when outspoken in arguing against it.

Dodo was not among their number.

David

25 February 2013 at 13:27  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I am sorry that Dodo has been banished from Crackerbox Farm.. I found his posts interesting and informative . His sense of humour and compassion will be missed by me at least.
And to all the creepy Catholics who do not support him prostrating themselves before Cranmer for fear of being given the toss..show a bit of gumption!

25 February 2013 at 13:32  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"I have not referred to you as 'bigoted' or 'sectarian' in any event."

And now you're playing the meek-and-innocent card. Astonishing.

You allege 'un-Christian' behaviour, yet it was you who first made allegations against His Grace behind his back. You even boast about doing so - without using his handle. Why, one wonders, would you choose to do that? A bit sly, isn't it? A bit 'un-Christian', isn't it? His Grace would never have known if he hadn't received an email informing him of your mischief. There was certainly no courteous email from you, and no polite tweet. Just casual slur and back-stabbing denigration. Doesn't Scripture say something about that?

You then consort with your co-religionists who do indeed call His Grace 'sectarian' and 'bigot', and you snigger with them as you affirm their perspectives. No further inquiry requested, no reprimand. Just further inferred slur.

You are the architect of this 'falling out'. You chose to carp and criticise in a public forum, a propos of nothing and without any attempt to communicate beforehand. And then you laughingly project the 'un-Christian' tag on the target of your malicious sniping.

Tragedy? Yes, indeed. But for Christ's sake don't come here and pontificate about how you think His Grace 'risks losing the sympathy of some of his natural allies'. Or seek to excuse your behaviour because 'Catholics are experiencing the shock of losing their beloved pope' and so 'demand 'sensitivity from their Anglican brethren'.

It is you who did the losing: it is you who lost the sympathy.

And the Pope belongs to the world; he is not the sole preserve of Roman Catholics. His departure affects all Christians, whether they acknowledge it or not. And few Christian bloggers have been as supportive of either this pope or Cardinal O'Brien. But why let the facts get in the way of a bit of gossipy bitching, eh?

Please, be happy in your bubble of self-righteous indignation. Please pray for us sectarian bigots and blinkered heretics. And don't bother to email His Grace again with private pleas for support or assistance when your opponents are slandering or beseiging you, for your help must come from the Lord.

No doubt you will blog and tweet and slander amnd disparage further. No doubt you will seek solace in the locked tweets and private DMs of your co-religionists. But this is the end of it as far as His Grace is concerned. Good-bye.

'How unutterably sad', indeed.

25 February 2013 at 13:44  
Blogger non mouse said...

Your Grace: Fame and Defamation** have been with us since we had speech, I suspect. Neither powermongers nor their media ever learn, and today's media have the potential to reach more people than ever before. I think they insult their audience as much as those they defame, though. They expect us to leap to judgement while vicariously enjoying the sins of the supposed sinners.

Once upon a time, however, we British had a legal system that sought to redress the balance of such injustice. The present irrelevance of that judicial system is, arguably, the real tragedy we witness.

The Papacito? Who knows why he has required resignation of the Cardinal? Perhaps the retiring pontiff has an eye to the reputation he will leave to posterity ... and perhaps, eventually, historians will know why he retired. Though frankly, as a thoroughly bigoted Anglican, I couldn't care less. I've seen enough of the rich and famous to know that, while they would shame the rest of us for our faults, a different rule lets them revel in their own.

On the matter of harassment - ah well. That again is not confined: especially not to RCs, to the clergy, or to men. I think it's becoming widely accepted that the practice is one of power - rather than of s**, gender, age, ability, or any other divisive topic. Categorisation simply provides convenient excuses for what is, I suggest, a type of rape; and it is very, very, common. The perpetrators get away with it for a variety of reasons that are often associated with defamation of their victims.

And so, Your Grace, I applaud a certain poetic justice in the sentence you have passed today. Long ago, I observed that you were "most gracious" in your tolerance of the bird. You were so for a very long time.

____________
**Witness the Graeco-Roman Fama, and Chaucer's mediaeval update, Fame (House of Fame).

25 February 2013 at 14:02  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Ars:"Also, let's not forget that the Cardinal is not, I understand, facing allegations of child abuse - an eighteen year old complainant is not a child."

The age of consent was 21 back in the 1980s.

25 February 2013 at 14:19  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Thanks DanJ0 - I'm not sure what the legal position is on retrospective prosecutions - someone here will know.

"The Dual substance of Christ- the yearning, so human, so superhuman, of man to attain God... has always been a deep inscrutable mystery to me. My principle anguish and source of all my joys and sorrows has been the incessant merciless battle between the spirit and the flesh and my soul is the arena where those two armies have clashed and met."

Cranmer, for whatever reason, today you are not possessed of a Christian spirit, which is properly cast in the sublime beauty of forgiveness and love.

Playful swipes aside, enough interdenominational scrapping – it's too much of a gift for those who truly hate Christianity.


25 February 2013 at 14:32  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"Cranmer, for whatever reason, today you are not possessed of a Christian spirit..."

As the crowd said to Jesus as He flung the money-changers out of the Temple.

25 February 2013 at 14:37  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

I thought the crowd was up for it - it was the moneychangers who saw the problem.

25 February 2013 at 14:44  
Blogger William said...

I suspect that Cranmer is "out of sorts" because he has been compelled to do something that he really did/does not want to do - excommunicate. Personally, I think that Dodo either had to "learn to fly" or face extinction. He chose the latter.

25 February 2013 at 14:44  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Ars,

The Dual substance of Christ- the yearning, so human, so superhuman, of man to attain God...

The children are perfect; they do not need to yearn for anything. Batteries are included.

"...Jesus called them to him, saying, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God."

Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.

25 February 2013 at 14:46  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Thanks Kinderling, point well made and thoroughly agreed.

Mine was just a quote from the beginning of the Last Temptations of Christ, in which the author was trying to reconcile his Christian faith with his human frailty. Something we all struggle with.

25 February 2013 at 14:51  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

William, unlike his feathered namesake, our Dodo is able to reincarnate himself as many times as a Timelord, something Cranmer has already suspected.

(All I can say is, he's not me!)

25 February 2013 at 14:53  
Blogger David Hussell said...

As has already been said, these inter-denominational skirmishes within the Body of Christ, do not spread the gospel, and should be minimized.

25 February 2013 at 15:06  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...

Well, what I will remember Cardinal O'Brien for, is supporting Steve Gilhooley when he printed the book, 'The Pyjama Parade' an account of abuse at a seminary in Cumbria. O'Brien was under pressure to tell Gilhooley not to print it, but he refused to lean on him and intead supported him. I don't know what will come of these allegations, but I feel it's the old saw of 'mud sticks'. Talking of sticking, I think it's a time for Christian churches to be sticking together. We are all under attack and time spent slagging each other while our religious freedom is under threat, is time wasted. Btw DanJo, the age of consent in Scotland is - and was in the 80s - 16. Hence Gretna Green.

25 February 2013 at 15:11  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Ars,

"to reconcile his Christian faith with his human frailty"

But isn't that The Gospel: to face your demons and the truth set you free? To no longer have the tug of compulsion or tease of temptation?

How can then there be walls of dualism between christianity and human fraility? Who are these 'Gate Keepers' who keep people out from the kingdom of god?

Unless, of course, you are taught you can never be perfect like The Messiah or The Mardhi who justifies in hope, the the unjustifiable religions. The Divided-Jew, The Divided-Christian. The Divided-Muslim. How the Divided-Socialist can work and play in these houses of secrets.

With "Good" on their sleeves and their Breatplates of Righteousness, no wonder the dark side can be fed with the spoils of Cardinals & Liberals, (now there's a good name for a Public House drowning the spirit); it was never cut off!

The individual, the returned lost sheep. And the work is done.

25 February 2013 at 15:11  
Blogger William said...

Ars, Maybe we will see someone posting as The Way of the Phoenix sometime soon?

25 February 2013 at 15:13  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

25 February 2013 at 15:19  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

Oh, no! You've banned Dodo!
And not Banjo?
May torrents of brimstone rain down upon your blog.

Cardinal O'Brian has made a lot of enemies and they are the sort of enemies who will stoop to any level to smear, slander or silence others with a different viewpoint.
So I would regard these allegations against him as mere allegations and suspiciously timed.
http://juliagasper.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/driven-to-extremes.html

25 February 2013 at 15:21  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

25 February 2013 at 15:25  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Heh, very good William. And undoubtedly.

Ars, I don't think he could be prosecuted now unless the alleged victims were 16 or 17 at the time and that would be based on his position of power over them. Or he forced them rather than propositioned them. However, if there is any truth to the allegations then, like Alan Turing, he would have known he was intending to break the law at the time. An unjust law to my mind, of course. This isn't really about the law though, it's about breach of trust, Church doctrine, and perhaps hypocrisy.

25 February 2013 at 15:25  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"As has already been said, these inter-denominational skirmishes within the Body of Christ, do not spread the gospel, and should be minimized." Oh please.

The cyberian guard rush in, all guns a blazing, when something that is not RC is discussed pertinent to Anglicanism or evangelical Christians. However should the RCC be the center of attention for discussion here, they beg for understanding, deference and the old chestnut 'giving succor to the enemies without and within the Body of Christ'.

They always use the tactic that Jackie Pallo found most successful in wresting. Whilst having the advantage, beat them mercilessly but should they get the upper hand, go down on one knee, feigning pain and submission. Once their back is turned, jump back into them more viciously than before. *Ding Ding*

Blofeld

No relation to the featherless (recently plucked) fiend are you, Mr Hustle..He He He

25 February 2013 at 15:26  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

Cardinal O'Brien is EITHER guilty and a hypocritical homosexual, OR innocent - and victim of a sting by the homosexual 5th column that infests the Catholic Church, CofE, Parliament,local government, BBC, media etc.

Either way, not a great day for homosexuals.

25 February 2013 at 15:35  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"As has already been said, these inter-denominational skirmishes within the Body of Christ, do not spread the gospel, and should be minimized." Oh please.

The cyberian guard rush in, all guns a blazing, when something that is not RC is discussed pertinent to Anglicanism or evangelical Christians. However should the RCC be the centre of attention for discussion here, they beg for understanding, deference and the old chestnut ' giving succor to the enemies without and within the Body of Christ'.

They always use the tactic that Jackie Pallo found most successful in wrestling.
Whilst having the advantage, beat them mercilessly but should they get the upper hand, go down on one knee, feigning pain and submission. Once their back is turned, jump back into them more viciously than before. *Ding Ding*

Blofeld

William said...

Ars, Maybe we will see someone posting as The Way of the Phoenix sometime soon?" But His Grace will just block him anyway. Think permanently blocked means continually?!

25 February 2013 at 15:39  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

Only now have I read the comments and note good old Dodo has been excommunicated.

Just a little time on the naughty step should do - be magnanimous and consider him to be the grain of sand to your pearl.

Re-instate him, he livens the blog up. After all I cannot recall anyone being banned for ad hominem attacks on Catholics here.

Don't be a blog that talks only to itself and its acolytes.

25 February 2013 at 15:50  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

I wondered what the "Fat Owl" became when he grew up.

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

Question is - was it Cyril Smith or is it Lord Rennard?

25 February 2013 at 15:57  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

I'm sad to see our brilliant and colourful bird banned. Often we crossed swords, but often he and I saw eye to eye. If HG rescinds his sentence I shall be very glad. But if not, we must respect his decision. This is not censorship. This is HG's personal blog. We don't know how Dodo trespassed, nor is it our right to know and opine and judge on what appears to be a serious private matter.

I will miss you Dodo, wish you all the best and hope to cross paths with you on the blogosphere.

25 February 2013 at 16:03  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Harry: "Either way, not a great day for homosexuals"

Because what one homosexual does damns us all, of course.

25 February 2013 at 16:06  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Don't hold your breath..

Someone called 'Jack Spratt' has just popped up in another thread. Along with 'Happy Harpy' above..

25 February 2013 at 16:13  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Julia has made a good point. This may indeed be a set up, so the innocent until proven guilty rule should be applied.

25 February 2013 at 16:20  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Indeed, Your Grace, however having to hide one's persona and style and to pretend being someone else is perhaps worse than banishment.

25 February 2013 at 16:23  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Avi spoke

"Indeed, Your Grace, however having to hide one's persona and style and to pretend being someone else is perhaps worse than banishment." Most indeedy. However, the use of THE favourite id to post an attack on His Nibs smacks of the impetuosity of youth and foolishly believed invulnerability, does it not.

It's like playing cards and using your best card, an Ace, to win a three of hearts..a poor strategy and likely to be punished.

Some people never learn even when warned by His Grace, hence the elderly wisely and steadily move forward and remain happily within the game! Like Infallibility, Invulnerability appears to be a forlorn wish rather than based on a protected, established fact. OY Vey!

Blofeld

25 February 2013 at 16:32  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

His Grace said.

"Don't hold your breath..

Someone called 'Jack Spratt' has just popped up in another thread. Along with 'Happy Harpy' above.. "

Come come now, Your Grace.

Surely these are not the only two on display?

*Huge Chortles*

E S Blofeld

25 February 2013 at 16:34  
Blogger Nick said...

Che
"I think it's a time for Christian churches to be sticking together."

Couldn't agree more. I never understood the inter-denominational rivalry anyway. We have far more in common with each other than we have differences. Christianity is under threat in this country. Let's make sure the threat is only from the outside, not the inside.

It is possible that there is some underhand "plot" to discredt the Cardinal - he does have many enemies in the LGBT community. Personally, I applaud his forthright comments on SSM. If only members of the CofE spoke with such righteous indignation on the issue!

25 February 2013 at 16:41  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo has been walking the line for a while now. I am not surprised this happened. Even so, I will miss him.

Fare Thee well, Dodo.

carl

25 February 2013 at 17:20  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

I reckon Ratzinger (if he indeed had any say in the matter) had to clear his pulpit before the new guy arrived, and rather than leave the festering carcass of the alleged pervy priest under the cassock, he offered him Hobson's Choice. Presumably his pension rights will not be affected and his silence guaranteed. I wonder how many more of his ilk are shaking in their silk slippers right now.





25 February 2013 at 17:41  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Cranmer: "Someone called 'Jack Spratt' has just popped up in another thread."

Actually, I'm 99.9% sure that's one of Julia's IDs if it's "Sprat" rather than "Spratt".

25 February 2013 at 17:59  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

If the Cardinal is guilty then it should come out but as expressed earlier, in our modern culture trolling around for other men to have sex with is something our society is promoting so if the allegations are true, it is unlikely he would even be prosecuted. This is the problem – we have become so considerate of homosexuals and fearful of the term homophobic that we have avoided condemning the sin. It is not surprising – we stopped condemning masturbation a long time ago so it is logical then to accept homosexuality. We allowed page 3 girls and complain about sexual exploitation. We have built a society where unbridled sex has been promoted as a right and we push it even in schools showing young kids how to do it and avoid the consequences. Then if we are faced with the consequences we kill the victim. This issue is far more serious than a Cardinal’s misdemeanours and as a society we are reaping what we have sowed. I would hope that if the accusations against the Cardinal are true that he had long ago repented. If true he should also have confessed directly to the seminarian concerned on his knees in abject humility. It is not too late – hellfire and damnation await the renegade. It were better for some people to have a millstone round their necks and be cast into the sea said Our Lord rather than cause harm to the little ones. I endorse the call for reconciliation between Christians because we mostly agree. Let’s all recite the Creed privately and consider that all Christian denominations believe what it says.

25 February 2013 at 18:46  
Blogger Nick said...

Good point about "men trolling after other men". In the current political climate people like Tatchell should be applauding him for being "sexually liberated" and exercising his rights to chase after other men. After all, this is probably normal practice for many gays. If the LGBT community condemn him for his alleged activity, then surely they are also condemning their own sexual orientation?

25 February 2013 at 18:56  
Blogger David B said...

Nick, I don't think the LGBT community (insofar as it exists) would condemn him or his possible Protestant equivalent Ted Haggard for their activities - except unless or insofar as they constituted an abuse of authority.

More I think they would be condemned - should the allegations be true - for the hypocrisy of adopting an anti-gay stance while themselves indulging.

David

25 February 2013 at 19:41  
Blogger Solent Rambler said...

It’s possible that one or more of the complainants might say that the Observer article does not accurately represent their position. Or they are surprised that the article appeared. Or that they went to the paper.

I don’t know because it’s all very odd.

I’m an inactive Roman Catholic priest with my own considerable criticisms of the Church. But there are some things in the article that make me pause.

For example, how did these four men find each other so that they could make common cause?

If the Cardinal’s behaviour was really so inappropriate, and affected them so badly, why didn’t they warn their fellow priests rather than wait for a conclave?

Bishops certainly figure very large in a priest’s life. But don’t make too much of the naive statement that “he’s more than the CEO of your company”.

In the years since I left active ministry, I couldn’t “kick in the balls” any of my CEOs either.
But my speculation is fruitless.

None of us know what happened or even if it did.

The Cardinal is innocent until he is proved guilty as are the people considering the allegation.

(Incidentally, The Observer said the seminarian was 20, not 18.)

25 February 2013 at 19:50  
Blogger David B said...

I should add that what I said in my post above applies whether one is gay or not, IMV.

David

25 February 2013 at 19:51  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

An angle on the gay issue (Ref Sodom etc) that I had not thought about before and to me it makes sense of the whole thing and why people chose the "gay lifestyle". Seeing it as a symptom rather than a choice was very revealing to me.

Yes I believe it is relevant to the post. I think the gays may be right that they say that they do not chose to be gay.

Unfortunately it is a symptom of something far worse.

http://pjsaunders.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/homosexuality-is-only-one-symptom-of.html

In which case perhaps the Cardinal was right to resign.

Hopefully he will now gain something far far more important than the position he lost

Phil

25 February 2013 at 21:05  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

David B: "More I think they would be condemned - should the allegations be true - for the hypocrisy of adopting an anti-gay stance while themselves indulging."

Well, quite.

As for my homosexual orientation being a symptom of pride and separation from god, that's rubbish. I've been aware of my sexual orientation from about 9 years of age. It's just an orientation. Trying to make it seem otherwise is arguably a symptom of having a religious belief and trying to bend and squeeze and distort reality into something that fits the belief system.

25 February 2013 at 21:28  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Solent: "The Cardinal is innocent until he is proved guilty as are the people considering the allegation."

That's the presumption in law. It's also something fair people bear in mind when talking about it. However, allegations have been made and if they're not investigated properly then they remain and it's fair for people to recognise their existence. At the very least, it needs to be determined in some way whether he actually has a case to answer or not even though there doesn't seem to be anything criminal in it so far.

25 February 2013 at 21:36  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Similarly with Lord Rennard.

25 February 2013 at 21:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Nick: "In the current political climate people like Tatchell should be applauding him for being "sexually liberated" and exercising his rights to chase after other men. After all, this is probably normal practice for many gays."

It's normal practice for a large number of young heterosexual men and women to spend Friday and Saturday nights in town and city centres, chasing after each other and being "sexually liberated" too. People they might applaud the cardinal too, if the allegations have some substance.

25 February 2013 at 21:43  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your man is a Scot is he not ? The British Army has some hard regiments, and the Scots are among the hardest of all. This can be appreciated when you consider that the SAS is comprised predominantly by Scots. Now, in this all male environment, (and forget about the girl soldiers on light duties the cultural Marxist equalisers crow about, it is still and will be forever an all male environment) the male bonding that goes on is tantamount to homosexuality. Yes, they stop short of buggery, and that is all you are getting, as the Inspector will reveal no more due to taste and decency and his own wish to avoid going on the ‘at risk’ register.

It’s a curious form of man attachment to man. The rules are unwritten, the stakes are high. The men have to count on each others support; in Norway they have to count on each others body heat to survive. And yet, to be accused of being the real thing, to wit, a genuine homosexual, then all is lost. You will be ostracised, rejected, and many have committed suicide by gunshot in the barracks as a result.

Can you see the correlation here. Two male dominated environs. An absence of the opposite sex. It’s a mix of power, strength, camaraderie, and of course, ruthlessness. Not every young priest when confronted by this behaviour in an older man, a more senior man, is going to recognise it for what it is, bonding. Because the aforementioned manly behaviour requires one important consideration. You need to leave your intellect behind at the door, and this is no problem for a soldier. But a priest, and a sensitive one ?

Could it be that O’Brien is guilty, when as a younger man, of an inappropriate behaviour that would not be out of place in the barrack room ?

25 February 2013 at 22:03  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Inspector:

Take care old chap. You just got bumped up one on the endangered species list...

25 February 2013 at 22:07  
Blogger Driftwood said...

HOW MUCH FILTH THERE IS IN THE CHURCH
(Joseph Ratzinger - Good Friday 2005)

"Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in his own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of His Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts!How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words!

How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the Priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency!"

"Lord, your Church often seems like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side. In your field we see more weeds than wheat. The soiled garments and face of your Church throw us into confusion. Yet it is we ourselves who have soiled them! It is we who betray you time and time again, after all our lofty words and grand gestures. Have mercy on your Church...You stood up, you arose and you can also raise us up. Save and sanctify your Church. Save and sanctify us all."

25 February 2013 at 22:07  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Dodo

a beacon of light
too strong
in a dark sea of filth
perversion and heresy

25 February 2013 at 22:34  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Greetings Belfast. A fellow goes away for a few days and comes back to find a plucked Dodo hanging in the Archbishop’s pantry. Wasn’t expecting that, I can tell you !

Hopefully, the Inspector will be posting on this site for a long time to come, having forsworn ad hominem some time ago. Ironically it was the late bird’s unbridled contempt for the ill mannered and uncouth DanJ0 that did it for this man. After all, there are only so many ways you can tell someone “I hate you”.

Becket had his lice infested hair shirt. Cranmer his equally annoying bird. Yet His Eminence always held sway, and one might offer he was the stronger for it. One suggests that this site has lost something by what has happened today. One hopes the proprietor remembers the solidarity the thing gave him in his hour of desperation, when the ASA ‘threatened’ to close the site down. We were right behind him then, to a man, woman - and Dodo...

25 February 2013 at 22:37  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

"Hopefully, the Inspector will be posting on this site for a long time to come, having forsworn ad hominem some time ago. Ironically it was the late bird’s unbridled contempt for... DanJ0 that did it for this man. After all, there are only so many ways you can tell someone “I hate you”."

I couldn't dispute your wisdom there.

25 February 2013 at 22:41  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Julia seems to be Danjo's new target. I do hope she gets more support when she is plucked and gutted than poor Dodo from the "wise men". Although being a heterosexual woman she
probably will not get any.

25 February 2013 at 22:52  
Blogger bluedog said...

Welcome back, Inspector! This communicant feared that your absence was permanent, that a vigilante group from Pink News had hunted you down and brought you to their version of justice as you left the Mouse & Wheel late at night. Visions of OIG suffering a fate worse than death...

Either that or you had offered advice to 'Johnny Foreigner' on leaving licenced premises and found yourself dangerously outnumbered.

25 February 2013 at 22:54  
Blogger bluedog said...

Dodo

Cuckoo in the nest

Shameless

Domineering

Fanatical and obsessed.

25 February 2013 at 22:56  
Blogger Brian West said...

I can't help noticing that the tone of this blog has changed somewhat recently; with Bro. Ivo's posts, of course, but now His Grace is commenting again and again in one thread - most unusual, and, to my mind, a shade undignified.

Brian

25 February 2013 at 22:58  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Without the tares, how will the wheat be found among look alikes and sound alikes? The man had his opinion, and got busted for it imeasurably, but a fight gets the measure and the respect that we are all only different in programming, and rationality the only sword worth weilding.

Shacklefree informs that the lack of condemnation of masturbation had turned it into an artform to find its way into a sailor's rum. Certainly depressed souls with their imagined 'biggest scores' makes its way to the charms of the sleeziest brothels, but Danjo arguing he was ready for Gay sex at nine in his head, was never engineered by a Widow Twanking. That depression was from a mother's root.

25 February 2013 at 23:03  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Salutations Bluedog, you really are man’s best friend.

And yes, Dodo did tend to annoy you slightly, one remembers, but he was family, as the cockneys would say...

25 February 2013 at 23:10  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Cressida:

The objection was to what was perceived as ad hominem, which is one of those things that is very clear in the centre and rather more subjective at the periphery.

Easier to resist the temptation to throw insults. It rarely makes anyone's day, despite the brief "zing" of feeling an ephemeral point scored.

25 February 2013 at 23:23  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

DanJ0

At the very least, it needs to be determined in some way whether he actually has a case to answer or not even though there doesn't seem to be anything criminal in it so far.

Exactly so. And it is the responsibility of the RCC to see this through in public. Especially if the allegations are false since public actions taken to date tend to indicate some possibility of guilt. But I fear the RCC PR machine is going to just bury this. It's not fair to anyone involved. And some day an innocent man's reputation is going to be ruined by this tactic if it hasn't already happened.

carl

25 February 2013 at 23:36  
Blogger Dodo in Exile said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

25 February 2013 at 23:45  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 00:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Belfast ,perception is almost always subjective.One needs to be rigorously raised in looking at 'truth', unpleasant as it may be which Catholics are. T'is one of the reasons Anglicans have a hard time when they convert to Catholicism.It should be obvious to you that Dodo has always been unwelcome here and his comments are over scrutinised. But I am not surprised it isn't.

26 February 2013 at 00:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

22:56

A sad dog

unoriginal
uninspiring
toxic blue fangs

26 February 2013 at 00:07  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Cressida:

"his comments are over scrutinised"

It must be said that intense scrutiny is liable to render almost any comment or opinion in the least favourable light - but it would hardly be something unique to our host if that were the case.

To be honest, I didn't read:

"What potential did the Roman Catholic Church lose in this young man? A great priest? An inspirational bishop? A future pope?

We will never know.
"

as being insincere - quite the opposite in fact. I thought Cranmer was expressing something quite important here, which is really easy to overlook, that though the outcome of these scandals is largely measured in political capital, its cost is all too human.

26 February 2013 at 00:31  
Blogger non mouse said...

Mr. bluedog @22:56 - yes.

26 February 2013 at 00:35  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

OIG

Dodo did tend to annoy you slightly, one remembers, but he was family

That's a really good description. One wonders if a severely chastened Dodo might see through to changing his behavior. Perhaps an abject & unconditional apology might turn aside the righteous wrath of the judge. In either case, I will miss him. He kind of grows on you.

carl

26 February 2013 at 01:15  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

slimy
centipedes
crawling

have no appreciation
of a leopard
or its spots
both
things of beauty

a threat
to invertebrates

26 February 2013 at 01:29  
Blogger Jim McLean said...

Both the case of the cardinal and the lib dems, I feel things have really gone too far. When we now spend as much time and speculative gossip coverage regarding quite light matters.

It seems now, that anyone with any blemish at any time in his or her life, is seen as fair game to be villified as if they had killed children or something.

The Crdinal case is "inappropriate" behaviour towards other adults. The same with the lib dems. Since when did inappropriate behaviour become as bad as criminal activity, and when did we all begin to be so sanctimoiniously lurid in our condemnation of these people?

Neither group of victims acted properly in dealing with it as humans, and now hide behind anonymity as though they were child-abuse victims.

These people should get a life and so should everyone else who is enjoying the new game of 21st century...turning everything into a crime and making everyone who has had a bad experience believe they are a "victim".

Can we please all just grow up?

26 February 2013 at 01:57  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Jim I agree it's getting ridiculous. Whilst I don't condone harassment or groping, it certainly isn't or shouldn't be criminal.

I've had a few challenging situations to deal with and my fare share of Dirty Old Men in the past, one just gets the hat pin out or gives them a little talking to.
One I remember an 80 year old Jewish male client used to caress my bottom as I was seeing him out after our meeting and he would give me a hug rather than a handshake. By the third time I had a quiet word saying if his hand wanders anywhere near my derrière again the hat pin might find its way into his. He was well behaved after that. I told my colleagues and every time he visited the office we would have a bit of a joke about him.
Nobody then would have even thought of reporting something like that to the police.

26 February 2013 at 03:04  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The difference with the 80 yo man is that he is non-threatening and you are essentially equals where assertiveness is a reasonable way of dealing with the situation. The anecdote misses the abuse of power in the allegations and the potential for adverse consequences by refusing. In the cardinal's case, it's not as though the subordinates could have simply moved to another Roman Catholic Church after raising a greviance about their manager with the human resources department and it being handled badly.

26 February 2013 at 05:47  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Danjo: "As for my homosexual orientation being a symptom of pride and separation from god, that's rubbish. I've been aware of my sexual orientation from about 9 years of age. It's just an orientation. Trying to make it seem otherwise is arguably a symptom of having a religious belief and trying to bend and squeeze and distort reality into something that fits the belief system."

You make very important statements Danjo, and I'm sorry no one else has picked them up.

As for my homosexual orientation being a symptom of pride and separation from god, that's rubbish.

I agree, God evolves. Exactly in symetry with how human minds evolve. The God of the Ol' Time Jewery commanded the death penalty, and now God of Good Time Christianity demands the love penalty. God can justify and get you anything you want - ask Mohammad.

"Trying to make it seem [for or] otherwise is arguably a symptom of having a religious belief and trying to bend and squeeze and distort reality into something that fits the belief system.

Again, I have no fault with these statements. Those who claim God knows that they are in the right, are perennial.

I only argue to know a person is by their fruit and not what club they belonged to.

They dig in good soil or not.

26 February 2013 at 07:46  
Blogger len said...

Kinderling.

'God evolves'

What utter rubbish.

God is unchanging the are not' two Gods' one unloving one loving.There is One God.John the apostle fell at Christ`s feet in shock when he saw the resurrected Christ.John saw Christ not as just as 'loving Saviour' but as He will return as Judge.
God is BOTH Saviour AND Judge.

26 February 2013 at 08:14  
Blogger Solent Rambler said...

Danjo

As I suspect you're not a Roman Catholic you may not know that the men could have moved dioceses. They could have reported their allegations to their vicar general, if not the papal nuncio. There is canon law.

I've assisted in a number of grievance procedures. They're unpleasant and the complainant needs courage and a high stress threshold. Questions have to be asked of both sides.

26 February 2013 at 09:13  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Len,

Don't worry, following a lot of dialogue with Kinderling, I gather he has created his own religion which includes The Bible, The Torah, The Quran and such texts as the Kama Sutra and the ancient Egyptian book of the dead... with Jesus somehow being a hippie Prophet from the 1960s. Not so much "Mystery Babylon", but just a "mystery".

26 February 2013 at 09:46  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Your Grace,

I have to admit I will miss Dodo and this is my appeal for him to be let back in :

I would say that your posts have the majesty of a mighty river and the comments sections are like the tributary of that river. Whilst we all engage in wit, banter and sometimes personal remarks, I think in Dodo's case he has always been given as good as he got.

Secondly you appreciate the freedom of speech, unless someone posts something way out of the discussions or is libel, to the point that you have keep many comments, of differing views, even on the most controversial of subjects. That is to your upmost credit.

I would therefore ask if you would reconsider letting Dodo back into this blog, but with the caveat regarding proper conduct here. A sort of set of goals, one must achieve before disciplinary action is taken again an employer (e.g. for Dodo a promise not to goad a certain gay man on this blog, on every thread and to calm down a little bit).

I appreciate it is you blog your rules, but I cannot help but feel this has been counter productive for you, as rather than 102 comments on the topic you have written about, a healthy percentage has been devoted to Dodo's expulsion, thus perhaps creating issues which you had sought to avoid, by deleting the comment in the first place.

26 February 2013 at 10:02  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Cressida:

Big cats prowling,
On the hunt.

When all you do is tear
apart,
It can be easy to miss


the beauty of the centipede.

26 February 2013 at 10:12  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Mr B,

You are a poet and I didn't know it!

26 February 2013 at 10:18  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

I don't think I'll embarrass poetry by accepting that compliment :)

26 February 2013 at 10:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Solent, my employer has a grievance procedure as I am sure others do but it's mostly for show. If I had an issue that I couldn''t resolve myself then I would leave rather than invoke procedure. It has almost nothing to do with fairness or justice, and lots with the company avoiding litigation and loss of reputation. People who go through it are damaged goods, even if they get the result they want out of it. That is, they're usually destined for Craggy Island at some level and most people know it. I find it hard to believe that many young people starting a career in a mono-cultured, single employer sector would risk rocking the boat unless it was extreme circumstances.

26 February 2013 at 10:32  
Blogger Kinderling said...

David,

You quote me many books
"...The Bible, The Torah, The Quran and such texts as the Kama Sutra and the ancient Egyptian book of the dead..."

Tell me, in all honesty, to save my life from Everlasting Hell Fire,

1. Which book should I follow?

2. Which God should I bend the knee to?

26 February 2013 at 10:38  
Blogger bluedog said...

Disagree, David @ 10.02, and fully support His Grace's ex-communication.

An assessment of the communicant in question over many years showed a propensity to act as others would never do. In the first instance he early showed a vexatious tendency to misrepresent another party's statement or argument in order to develop a debate on his own terms. He was also not above completely refuting his own earlier statements claiming that they were 'ironic' or 'misunderstood' in order to win a point, as if. Call that an integrity deficit.

You may not recall the period during which he used multiple identities in order to confuse the arguments of counter-parties and reinforce his own positions. No other communicant has stooped that low, as far as one can recall.

This is an Anglican blog. The Catholic communicant in question would often publish posts at a frenetic rate that seemed designed to swamp any other posts that he deemed to be anti-Catholic. Anything pro-Anglican was by definition, potentially anti-Catholic.

In summary, given the personality of the communicant and the nature of his activity, it seems that he regarded Cranmer's blog as a vector for the propagation of his own staunchly Catholic ideas. One could understand that His Grace may have felt that he was losing control of his blog. It would be fanciful to suggest that some of the communicant's actions were on orders from an external authority, but that possibility can not be completely discounted.

There is of course an inherent contradiction and a certain hypocrisy in any attempt to hijack a blog committed to freedom of speech by subverting it as an agency for the promotion of Catholic dogma. As the communicant never tired of telling us, in order to be Catholic it is necessary to accept that church's teaching without question. At which point debate ends and freedom of conscience is eclipsed.

Perhaps His Grace's blog allows practicing Catholics to have a philosophical 'bit on the side', before returning to the rigours of Rome.

26 February 2013 at 10:40  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Kindering

@10.38, there is a good and thorough discussion of those issues, from many of the erudite bloggers here, covering Calvinist, Catholic, Anglican, Atheist and Jewish viewpoints, on the comments section on HG post about George Galloway below.

26 February 2013 at 10:55  
Blogger Kinderling said...

David,

an "I don't know" would suffice, rather than point me to others who don't know either, but can say it ever so nicely that one wouldn't notice.

26 February 2013 at 11:04  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Kinders,

Obtuse guy. If you read the thread, you will see my position laid out clearly, alongside others who also gave their views. So, no, "I don't know" is not what I had written there.

26 February 2013 at 11:09  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 11:15  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Bluedog,

I'm not trying to defend someone else's conduct here, just possibly thinking he should be given another chance, if he agrees to lay off the more outrageous personal attacks on certain people here.

In the past I have been "Dodoed"; remember when he tried to suggest before Christmas that me and Hannah should do some form of self help Psychology and in the George Galloway thread, I did get the full force of Dodoisms, on Sunday night, when it came to his desire for me to give a discussion on his father's conversion to Catholicism from Judaism. Remember as well, when Inspector was trying to wind me up about banking and Jewish stereotypes of the 'greedy banker'.

I guess, because I'm becoming more familiar with the various posters here, it was more easier for me to deal with, but I think the thing is to read posters on their own terms for a while and then come to a conclusion as to whether or not to debate with them (unless I get foolish and leap straight in there, as was the case with my discussion with Thomas Wood or our resident sage of the age, Kinderling).

26 February 2013 at 11:19  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

The poor bird.

Ernst only thinks that some kind of Ballad to the Legend of Dodo the Dude will ease the suffering of the poor fowl for some communicants here.

Ernst is currently composing a dirge as a fitting tribute to the stubborn cyberian.

All contributions would be gratefully received. *sob*

Blofeld

ps

Ernst will provide the buffet..wings, breast or legs deep fried, southern style, Y'all?

26 February 2013 at 11:23  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Ernsty and Tiddles,

I am not sure if Dodo's are Kosher, so I'd better pass on that.

26 February 2013 at 11:42  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

david kavanagh said.

"I am not sure if Dodo's are Kosher, so I'd better pass on that."
Shame. However I do have some McDobbin beefburgers purchased from Iceland to toss on the barbie, should you change your mind ? ;-}.

Blofeld, young man.

26 February 2013 at 11:51  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Dodos are part of the dove taxonomy aren't they? You should be ok :)

26 February 2013 at 12:14  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Poor Old Dodo,

Not only has he been dismissed, but some people now want to eat him! How ghastly.

26 February 2013 at 12:49  
Blogger Jon said...

One of Your Grace's points was that most people would be inclined to waive aside the alleged sins of one of these men whilst calling vigorously for the investigation of the other.

I would be naturally inclined to see the Cardinal's laundry aired very publicly, but I believe the Cardinals "tribe" ought to advocate the same too. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and more than that, will provide a future disincentive for others to exploit a position of power to impose themselves on others.

Cover up and protection of the powerful only serves to emphasise their immunity from civilised behaviour, and weakens the institutions more than the temporary strength saved by avoiding embarrassing either of these men. I would hope that good catholics and loyal lib dems would wish to see due process observed in both cases and for the facts to come out so that justice can be seen to be done. Sadly, as has been pointed out, this may well be denied now.

26 February 2013 at 12:52  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Mr B Dog
You may not recall the period during which he used multiple identities...

S/he still does.

26 February 2013 at 12:56  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Step forward the man or woman who has lead a blameless life.

Thought so...

26 February 2013 at 13:27  
Blogger len said...

There is' brave' and there is 'foolish'( I actually warned the hapless duck of this but to no avail)

I actually saw a programme about Dodo`s and what caused their demise the other day.They apparently were very unpleasant to the taste and were very' chewy' sailors found them impossible to stomach.

26 February 2013 at 13:43  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

Well I am glad that you are back at least. What have you been up to? Anything exciting?

26 February 2013 at 13:50  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Hannah. Been to Leicester. Was hoping to bag the bones of Richard of Gloucester to bring them back, but ended up at the preserved Great Central Railway. Every man has his weakness, this man’s is railways...

26 February 2013 at 13:57  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

I like Leicester, it is a nice old city and has a small, but lively Jewish community.

Did you to the Catholic Priory/Church on Newark Road? Did you have a drink the wetherspoon last plantaganent pub?

I bet you had difficulty in deciding which curry place to go to, as London road has lots of them (and a pub at the top, called the Marquis of Wellington).

26 February 2013 at 14:27  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Regrettably not, sweet thing. Was staying on the outskirts. Leicester is a rather sprawling place, and still swallowing up farmland. They call it progress, you know. All rather sad...


26 February 2013 at 14:40  
Blogger Kinderling said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 14:49  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Oig: "Step forward the man or woman who has lead a blameless life."

Not even Jesus came forward. He might not have known. Give him a prayer...

...

Sorry, he isn't coming.

But he did leave a message that you can become blameless. It starts with repentence.

Informed anyone to repent lately? Those anyone wrapped in their identities so tightly they actually think it is them?

Or will your "blamelessness" only arrive when at Heaven's Gate you have Jesus's corpse wrapped around you to let you in?

Let's do it by ABC:

A: Babies are born blameless.

B: Through no fault of their own they are exposed to religious magic and resentment between the genders.

C: They live these beliefs until they become ruined by them.

D: They repent. Because they have finally learned they are only forgiven when they forgive others.

E: Blameless.

Oh, I just came forward. Sorry. There are so many here who would have shared the Gospel, forgive me, a little bit forward, it works, very practical teachings, love Your-All-Seeing-Eye with with your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor without Y-A-S-E as yourself.

Hence, you can't ever be God, nor can you be his Representative for anyone else. - The Jesus Postulate.

'You are who you are', not 'You are what you claim you are, like others'

26 February 2013 at 14:51  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

Oh well, I was referring to the city centre bit. A pity. I guess if you like trains, you've seen the museum in York?

26 February 2013 at 14:57  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Kinders. You have ‘B’ wrong. “Through no fault of their own they are exposed to godless un-Christian parents / influences”

and ‘E’ “They might just get peace of mind, and even spiritual salvation”


26 February 2013 at 15:18  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Kinderling

ABC, explanation> , then why did you add a D and an E?

26 February 2013 at 15:20  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Hannah,

The interpretaion of this scripture is A leads to B leads to C and so on. It was not literal like someone pointing with a finger and another just staring at it for meaning.

Oig,

Of course you are right,

B: Exposed to Anglican, Catholics,Methodists, Jehovahs Witnesses etc. etc who all wear God on their sleeves, so by definition do not know god and thus instill fear and self loathing at an early age. Thank you. I forgot to include them.

You draw out the insights from a child, you never impose dogma upon them.

26 February 2013 at 16:04  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

A - Do humanities degree

B - Go to Roy Masters event off-campus

C - ???

D - Profit!

26 February 2013 at 16:07  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Roy Masters is like John the Baptist if you had ears to hear. Bringing people to repentance. And you scorn his work. Pointing to a time men and women will be guided only by spirit and truth.

If you had no allegience to knowledge, then a person could say to you, "hey, putting your member in another's anus is dangerous, to tear and spread disease. Any school teacher with a degree would tell you that"

And you would thank them, for protecting yourself and the object of your desire from harm.

But without repentence a pride grows in its place, and in outrage the follower of the way is imprisoned and worse.

Why would you slander a person doing Jesus's work? Why are you ashamed of others standing out alone to be heard?

26 February 2013 at 16:30  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Dodo,

His Grace isn't stupid, you know. He knows you're still present in multiple guises, and he will not be reversing his decision. And you know perfectly well why.

26 February 2013 at 16:33  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Well said Archbishop
For there was no explanation, no contriteness, but flirting for favor. The third-person is used by many egos to distract from the emptiness and hurt, that even themselves they have pushed away and contained as an illusion.

No repentence of what it was, but regret of being caught.

26 February 2013 at 16:54  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Kinders. The Inspector’s advice to the young setting out on life’s journey is this – try and obtain peace of mind from an early age. Determine your strengths and weaknesses, for knowing them will be crucial to that end. Your god will then fall into place. And finally know this. You are right and the others are not necessarily right. Trust in yourself, and keep good counsel. You might even find those who are not necessarily right were right after all.

26 February 2013 at 16:58  
Blogger Kinderling said...

Thank you Inspector, excellent advice. You find peace with reality, not peace in religion. For you can prick the faithful, but not the truth.

26 February 2013 at 17:09  
Blogger William said...

Your Grace

I sense the beginnings of a new online game - a kind of virtual equivalent of "Where's Wally?" - called "Where's Dodo?"

Hot favourites today are Solent Rambler and Driftwood.

AIB

Is that a reference to reddit I detect?

26 February 2013 at 17:13  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Kinders, we must be the master of whatever religion we adhere to. Not the other way round. Maybe this is where you are going wrong...

Let Dodo’s punishment be a lesson to us all. He is now excluded from this paradise for all time. An eternity. Are we not warned that our own immortal souls face the same. But we are weak, so weak.

Carl, the bird was not predestined to suffer this fate, he brought it upon himself. So it is with man born of woman...

Archbishop. And here is the quandary. You find yourself in God’s predicament. Loving us so much that he sent us a redeemer, and yet having to turn away and banish the damned. To appreciate that we must away with making a deal with God. We must be God fearing and accept what it is that is out there for us...

26 February 2013 at 17:14  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Anyone know of an app for Android which hides Kinderling's posts? They add at least six feet to my scrolling down.

26 February 2013 at 17:47  
Blogger Solent Rambler said...

Danjo at 10.32. I agree!

However, these men could still have gone elsewhere as priests; to,in effect, change employer.

Incidentally, I'm not Dodo as presumably the good Archbishop can tell.

26 February 2013 at 17:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

William: "I sense the beginnings of a new online game - a kind of virtual equivalent of "Where's Wally?" - called "Where's Dodo?""

Two things: they'll always have a Roman Catholic bent even if its hidden at the start, and they'll be particularly attracted to any comments I make.

26 February 2013 at 18:02  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

OIG

God ordains both means and ends.

carl

26 February 2013 at 18:03  
Blogger William said...

Danj0

Yes. I had actually clocked both those attributes in the comments from our new contributors. Apparently Catholics are allowed to deceive (much like Muslims) in certain circumstances. Perhaps our fine feathered friend is invoking this? He is quite extraordinary.

26 February 2013 at 18:33  
Blogger Driftwood said...

William

Eh? Is every new or infrequent visitor of a Roman persuasion a suspect?

26 February 2013 at 18:39  
Blogger William said...

Driftwood

If you want to win the game, then it's a pretty good strategy. Have you been drifting long?

26 February 2013 at 18:45  
Blogger Dodo in Exile said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 19:06  
Blogger William said...

Dodo

For goodness sake, give it up. Look it's Lent. Try a bit of abstinence. Have a break. You know it makes sense.

26 February 2013 at 19:14  
Blogger Driftwood said...

William

Lol! It just goes to show I am a trickster. Dodo, indeed. A long dead bird.

To anwer your earlier question, I was a tree before falling in the sea. How, I cannot quite recall. I have been drifting for a few years now and wash up on a number of blogs.

Yes, Lent. A time for quiet reflection on our own conduct and not that of others.

God Bless.

26 February 2013 at 19:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Carl, God ordains both means and ends.

That chap – the Inspector’s very point all along, probably...


26 February 2013 at 20:21  
Blogger Solent Rambler said...

What an odd discussion this is.

I'm not "particularly attracted" to anyone on here.

Yes, I'm a Roman Catholic, but know of no teaching that allows me to deceive.

I have no idea how I can prove that I am not someone else.

Maybe I'm mistaken and I'm not one of those clocked by William above.

But I'm not sure that I want to stay around to find out.

26 February 2013 at 20:54  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 21:54  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 February 2013 at 22:02  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Avi,

'Fraid not, but we all benefit from his pearls of wisdom, especially as Kinderling claims he has found a John the Baptist figure...

looked him up on Wiki and the Christian Bible says that John the Baptist would spend his time rambling around Israel, preaching repentance, in a poverty stricken lifestyle, eating wild honey and locusts....

26 February 2013 at 22:04  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Dodo does not have a literary background and is not capable of emulating different styles. It would be patently obvious if he were adopting other ids here.

Danjo most of your comments are provocatively desperate pleas for attention so one does not have to be RC to respond to these.

William I think you might actually be Danjo.That streak of spite is a dead giveaway.


26 February 2013 at 23:36  
Blogger Driftwood said...

Solent Rambler

I hope you do stay and share more of your insights, experiences and wisdom.

27 February 2013 at 00:22  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Hi David, I'm thinking that if I hired a programmer to do up a kinderling-deletion app, I can make some beer money just from sufferers on this blog alone.

Saw lots of John the baptist types this summer in Israel... the artist colony in Tsfad seems to be their headquarters.

27 February 2013 at 00:25  
Blogger William said...

Solent

"...But I'm not sure that I want to stay around to find out."

Very wise.

27 February 2013 at 09:54  
Blogger William said...

Calamity

"whip crack away, whip crack away, whip crack awaaaay."

27 February 2013 at 09:57  
Blogger bluedog said...

Harsh, William, she hates 'murricans.

27 February 2013 at 10:07  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Cressie said

"Dodo does not have a literary background and is not capable of emulating different styles. It would be patently obvious if he were adopting other ids here."

Ooohh please Cressie. You know perfectly well the bird is no fool, least of all a dumb wit. The fowl is one of the cleverest people Ernst has ever come across but unbelievable stupidity and stubbornness against His Grace has led to his absolute favourite 'persona' being blocked in perpetuity or forever, whichever is the longer, unless His Nibs reLents after Lent, which looks extremely unlikely from Dodo's very personal attacks on him, does it not.

Dodo was his favourite disguise, as it allowed him to express his own defined RC views, as all the 'others' are merely means of expressing ideas, humour or responses to his main 'ID' on display. Dumbwit, I think not.

Invincibility is not an ability that can be shown whilst commenting on anothers personal blog...His Nibs has the keys, the keys and no one may entereth herein unless he permitteth it.

Surely you RC's can grasp this 'petrine' concept? ;=)

Blofeld

27 February 2013 at 10:46  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Ernst name the other ids that you think Dodo is using.It is impossible that is either me or the inspector because we both responded to a comment at exactly the same time... so who?Name them.
I am not aware of any personal attacks on HG made by Dodo...a lot of shadow boxing goes on here and the virulent obscene attacks by "all things bright and beautiful" seem to be condoned.
I think Dodo was too much of a star here and HG thinks the Catholic presence is too overpowering for weak stomached Anglicans. As you rightly said it is HG decision to thumbs up or thumbs down...wielding absolute power over his minions.
Never fear Ernst,you and your little Muslim nurse will be safe. Terrible business all those germs festering in that garb which you brought to our attention.Hope you are not trying to convince that poor girl to get her gear off for reasons of hygiene.

27 February 2013 at 12:52  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Cressie

"Ernst name the other ids that you think Dodo is using (He was an idiot to use his 'personal id, it's called VANITY'. all that investment in it for nothing).It is impossible that is either me or the inspector because we both responded to a comment at exactly the same time (this is very easily achieved by opening multiple windows and ids simulataneiusly, then clicking a button..I maybe old but not a twit) ... so who?Name them."
But my lass, by doing that, Ernst would miss out on conversing with the various 'communicants' on display who are unaware Ernst is 'in the know', which tickles old Ernsty greatly.

It's like communicating in a séernst. Shall we all hold hands, focus on the candles and see who comes through... ;-O

Ernsty

27 February 2013 at 13:10  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo wasn't a "star." His propensity for vulgar double entendres, and his obsessive desire to provoke DanJ0 into conflict made me cringe. It ruined threads. And it always ended the same way ... Dodo with his pants pulled down around his ankles, and the back of his underwear pulled so far over the front of his head he couldn't see, and his shoes tied together. And he would always have some great departing line like "Oh yeah? Well, my dog can beat up your dog." It was humiliating to watch an atheist homosexual justifiably call him out for non-Christian conduct over and over again. He just wouldn't learn. He brought this on himself.

Even so he was "family." He could also be kind, and friendly. He was a reasonably good RC apologist. He could be a good commenter when he wanted to be. If he could have learned to moderate his behavior, he would have added to the weblog. But he would not. I was serious when I said I would miss him. But I won't miss the behaviors.

carl

27 February 2013 at 13:38  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

carl jacobs said...

My boy, are you suggesting that as a new pope is being inaugurated shortly, that Dodo believed he needed to resign and elect a new star, hence the desire to toss himself on the pyre?
Premeditated Dodicide..Velly intellesting!

" was serious when I said I would miss him." Indeed.

Blofeld

27 February 2013 at 14:03  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I said I would miss him..But I wont miss the behaviours."

You see Ernst, if you continue abusing your medication and insist on indulging yourself in fantasy you could end up like Captain Weirdo reading double entendres into everything.

27 February 2013 at 14:20  
Blogger Driftwood said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

27 February 2013 at 15:16  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Cressie

" Now are we all hold hands, My dear" ;-P

The Bird is dead. Long live the next Thing!
Vivat Regina Cressida, Vivat, Vivat, VIVAT! ;-)

Blowers

27 February 2013 at 16:43  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...



Chaps, the Inspector is a great enthusiast for penance by the sinner. Realisation, Regret and Reparation, that kind of business.

Now, the Archbishop has a payment contraption on his site. Should it please His Grace to switch it on, and should it further please His Grace to suggest a substantial donation for a charity of his choice, payable by the sinning bird, we might get to enjoy intercourse with him again.

Of course, he would be suitably chastised and light of pocket but, more importantly, unlikely to indulge in ad hominem activity again – and so in this condition we would have him back.

Let’s see, shall we say three ponies, and perhaps the fund for retired CoE clergy ?





27 February 2013 at 18:04  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

Do you mean an 'indulgence' for Dodo? LOL.

27 February 2013 at 18:13  
Blogger William said...

Inspector

"...unlikely to indulge in ad hominem activity again..."

I'm afraid the bird is incontinent.

Hannah

LOL indeed. A Protestant taking indulgences from a Catholic so he can be in communion with his blog. Priceless.

27 February 2013 at 18:22  
Blogger Dodo's Ashes said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

27 February 2013 at 18:28  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Well Dodo has been shown the door by our host. Not sure what to make of the chap myself. When he was in a lucid moment he could be very good, but I disliked the war he seemed to have declared upon Danjo.

The lad isn't my cup of tea, but at least he can communicate well and despite being a godless atheist, he is at least not a socialist or a fascist.

I guess if Dodo wishes to come back as something else then that is up to him, but indulgences were the catalyst for the reformation. Ironic, though that it should be suggested to our ANGLICAN prelate.

27 February 2013 at 18:56  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Dodo (/Ashes),

Your apology is meaningless and has no credibility because your professed sincerity is just another lie; it is a sham.

You have been asked very politely on numerous occasions to amend your behaviour; you have also been warned formally. Each time, there has been a temporary lull in your obsessive compulsive behaviour, but you soon revert to type.

Most recently, for no apparent reason, you have taken to judging His Grace's personal motives - not rationally, but with deeply unpleasant prejudice. His Grace takes hours to work on his articles, and up you pop to be the first to contribute with snide and negative judgments, invariably imputing bad faith on His Grace's part.

If you bothered to reason, your contribitions would be worthwhile. His Grace likes passionate criticism: he enjoys vigorous debate. But all he gets from you is ad hominem condemnation and insult. What does Scripture say about that? Who are you to question His Grace's concern for the victims of sexual predators? Indeed, how dare you do so. By what God-Almighty right do you judge?

The questions are rhetorical, because the time for conversation is over. There is nothing you can say by way of excuse, and anything you do will be deleted. You refused to listen - multiple times - so please now take refuge on another blog, or start your own. His Grace 'owns' none of his communicants who may be fans of yours. So feel free to take Hannah and David and Driftwood and Junior and Zauq and anyone else who cares to join you - if they are not already you.

And don't think for a minute that His Grace is going to put up for very long with every thread now being turned into 'Tears for Dodo' mourning tribute. As His Grace says in his 'Bottom Line', comments which are off-topic are likely to be summarily deleted.

This blog aims to be a place for reasoned and intelligent discourse, where iron might sharpen iron. Since you insist on smothering every debate with a drenched sponge and wrapping it round every blade, you dull the blog and piss on proceedings.

There is no amount of money you could contribute to His Grace's Collection Plate to buy your way out of this situation. His Grace doesn't do indulgences: it is a purgatory of your own making. Just go.

27 February 2013 at 19:00  
Blogger Dodo's Ashes said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

27 February 2013 at 19:01  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Just to clarify, Dodo (/Ashes) has deleted his own comments above - all three of them.

27 February 2013 at 19:21  
Blogger Dodo's Ashes said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

27 February 2013 at 19:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

A most sombre post from our host. Eternal judgement in his world is no less than what we all face as Christians in God’s. It is as well to appreciate the full implications now, as much as we need to do when our turn comes upon our deaths - the final judgement will be equally as long.

The Inspector will not talk of Dodo again...


27 February 2013 at 19:46  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Your Grace,

If that is how you feel... I am uncertain as to what this is about, as I have never attacked you personally or this blog, reasoned or not.

But note I AM NOT DODO AND NEITHER IS MY BROTHER.

27 February 2013 at 19:52  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

"His Grace 'owns' none of his communicants who may be fans of yours. So feel free to take Hannah and David and Driftwood and Junior and Zauq and anyone else who cares to join you - if they are not already you."

Sorry you are incorrect in that. I have never, ever attacked you on your blog. If you don't want me to post, then say 'david I don't want to you post'. But give me a bit more credit that calling me Dodo.

27 February 2013 at 19:58  
Blogger bluedog said...

Excellent, Your Grace, don't take a backward step.

27 February 2013 at 20:20  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Blue dog,

So you agree with his Grace that I am actually Dodo then? Shame! Shame! I have gone out of my to defend this blog against gay and Jewish friends I know. And this is the 'thanks' I get for defending this site tooth and nail in private and in other forums.

Well if His Grace doesn't want me here, then I guess I will not post here if he tells me not to do so.

But I will go out with my head held high and say I am not Dodo. Never have and never will be.

27 February 2013 at 20:38  
Blogger William said...

Hannah/David

Read it again.

27 February 2013 at 21:01  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

William

Seriously, it's OK. If Cranmer wishes to think I am Dodo then that is up to him. A family conflab has decided we won't post here. As his Grace has often reminded us this is a Christian /Anglican blog- Bluedog has emphasised this point.

Therefore I guess not being a part of that faith, we shouldn't be here to be 'disruptive'.

I am OK with His Grace not wanting us around, but I am livid at the suggestion, just because I advocated for someone (in what I considered to be moderate tones) that I get accused of being the same person.

The record shows I have clashed with Dodo on numerous times, but was guilty of not saying something to Dodo when he went too far in his argument with Danjo- Carl Jacobs had that measure right (I'm also Carl, btw, just in case you haven't guessed).

PS, His Grace, was quite clear about his thoughts on me :

"So feel free to take Hannah and David and Driftwood and Junior and Zauq and anyone else who cares to join you - if they are not already you. "

If I am not welcome ,I will go; in fact I will go as I find posting here quite an exhausting effort and I will have to find somewhere else to have a dialogue with Christians. His Grace just needed to say so, way back in August, that he doesn't want us to post here, with the kindness and courtesy I am used
to from Anglican Christians.

PS- There is no way I'm voting Conservative again, after the treatment dealt out from one of their own.

27 February 2013 at 21:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Kavanaghs. Get a grip. The Archbishop isn’t accusing you of being Dodo, he is merely marking you down as personae non gratia...

Now guys, no anti Semitism remarks if you will, but you have been treating this august site as a play ground, have you not ?


27 February 2013 at 21:35  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

27 February 2013 at 21:56  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

27 February 2013 at 22:06  
Blogger William said...

David

Well ok if that's how you see it. I thought Cranmer was saying that fans of Dodo were free to leave with him and his alternate persona. For instance Zauq definately was Dodo, Junior and Driftwood probably were, and you and Hannah must have expressed a preference that Cranmer change his mind on his decision to 'excommunicate' him - making you fans.

I would be amased if Cranmer thinks that you or Hannah are one of Dodo's persona.

27 February 2013 at 22:10  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

William

As his grace said before, offence is in the eye of the beholder and well... If I have offended him then I am sorry for that; I am offended for being considered to be Dodo. I bear Cranmer no ill will and am not part of a Catholic conspiracy to upset him. No dramatic throwing toys out of the pram, just a good time to move on.

I agree with Hannah's view on the Inspector, though.

27 February 2013 at 22:15  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

PS- Final post from me, I double promise.

27 February 2013 at 22:16  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Good show Hannah, what a way to go out on your final post ! (...This IS your final post one prays...). Having got all that off your breasts, you are now free to roam the blogosphere to deposit your tat elsewhere and far away. (...Note the ‘far away’ bit...)

Farewell Jewish maiden...

27 February 2013 at 22:22  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


David, close the door behind you, there’s a good fellow...

27 February 2013 at 22:24  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi William,

The why not include Dodo's sidekick Inspector?

27 February 2013 at 22:34  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

HI Inspector,

Unfortunately for you, I doubt you'll ever see a pair of women's breasts ever.

Sooo glad you could read my final words. I'll delete it now as it was only meant for you.

And me and David are now closing the door behind us.

Have a good pint in the mouse and wheel, you sad man, with hugs and kisses.

Hannah xxx

27 February 2013 at 22:36  
Blogger William said...

Hannah

I don't know. Maybe he didn't mention any Catholics, other than Dodo and what appear to be his alternates, as it was assumed that all Catholics on this site are cheer-leaders for Dodo anyway.

Who knows. You must do what you think is right.

27 February 2013 at 22:43  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Have they gone yet ? Talk about a lingering farewell !

27 February 2013 at 22:48  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older