I thought I had headaches before?

Share Button

I  have blocked Inhisservice from posting for the next few hours.  His/her comments will now go into a moderation queue and will not be posted until I give OK.  This is the first time I have ever had to take such a step.  As much as I hate to do it I felt I had no choice.   Inhisservice  has posted in the order of 40 comments in the past few hours.  I asked him/her to slow down.  No luck.  I said no more postings for the rest of the day.  No luck.

I emailed  Inhisservice.  No luck.

This has nothing to do with the content of what  Ihhisservice has to say.  It has everything to do with taking over the blog to such an extent that people can’t follow any threads but those on which he/she posts.

The following are the comments which I removed after I had told Inhisservice at 10:38 pm  “No more for today Inhisservice. That’s it.” They run from the most recent at 11:30 pm.

11:30 pm

Since you are removing my entries now, please do me the service of removing all of them. I’m done.

I do not wish my entries to remain. You have an agenda and I want no part of it. Period. I have tried to offer constructive input and you and your gang dislike the challenge, particularly of FACTS.


You are delusional


No need to apologize. She got cranky only when I corrected her on FACTS.

I thought this was a serious site in which to share. Like some bishops, she is now censor in chief and is in CONTROL.


I was told that you were crazy and had an agenda. They were right.


Shove it all – I thought you were serious about running a respectable website – only on your terms.

Don’t let the facts get in the way of a great agenda I suppose.

Have a happy existence, your Excellency! You are no better.


Sylvia removed some of my remarks – you would make a great bishop. Sneaky, controlling, vindictive.


How pathetic – you rant about hierarchy and their need for control! How are you different dear? I am appalled.


So I take it then prima that you are a contented Protestant, waxing eloquently on a blog dedicated to the abusive behavior of clergy in the Roman Catholic Church?

At least we know what you are about!

Why don’t you visit a blog about the perverts in your own church? Your rhetoric is mostly irrelevant anyway. You don’t care about our church. You have an agenda to discredit it, as evidenced by your constantly negative remarks against Ray.


Let me guess – a family member?

You are delusional.

He was convicted of two counts concerning the 1979 gropefest inGriffith. He is damn lucky he is not in jail for the rest of his life for what he has done in your diocese!


Sure spank and run. Read up my dear!


I suggest that you remove the word REPLY from below each entry then. Or is it that you only want some of your ‘regulars’ commenting so much? Agenda?

And, landing in my email box at 11:34 pm as I was rounding up the above:

Remove every entry of mine IMMEDIATELY.

You are clearly no better than the controllers and manipulators you pretend to challenge.

Too bad you don’t want facts to get in the way honey. I have more education, experience and knowledge about this than you will ever know.

Pleasant agenda!

It’s unfortunate but perhaps best that it came to this.  I won’t be removing the comments Inhisservice’s comments .

BUT, hold on, just as I was prepared to post along comes this from Evictedbysylvia@gamil.com.  Inhisservice isn’t prepared to disappear after all:

I had heard interesting commentary about this website and it’s agenda. I thought what I was told was a myth. You see imam the former inhisservice.

The moment I challenged Sylvia’s facts, the rhetoric of our venomous Protestant Larry, and our angry prima, I was restricted in my submissions by mama Sylvia.

Don’t worry Sylvia, I have a TON of email accounts. This is my post for the day! Please describe, not about me, but what YOUR purpose is for this site? Do you have a side agenda? What of friends: Larry, prima and their disdain for Ray? What of your censorship and control of the site? I had too many entries so others could not participate? Nonsense, the computer handles it fine.

Please inspire me with your study of SST and the remarks I made about this 2001 legislation and your understanding of it.

And now no less than three more!

And I thought I headaches before 🙂

Enough for now,




This entry was posted in Administrative and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

85 Responses to I thought I had headaches before?

  1. lostsheep2011 says:

    I am a canonist, serving in my diocese in the State of California. I have reviewed the information presented by “inhisservice” concerning the canonical procedure with Rome. The author is correct in his analysis. Whatever misgivings there may be about his posts or questions, the information provided is factual.

  2. Sylvia says:

    Oh my oh my Inhisservice – you take the cake! So, you’re a canonist are you? In California?

    Really?!!! Cross your heart?

    No matter. There was never any question about what you said about canonical procedures. The issue by then as you well know was that you you were putting up one post after the other. I had asked you slow down. Then I asked you to stop for the day. Then I blocked your posts because you just wouldn’t stop.

    Then you were back as “Evictedbysylvia.”

    Now you’re back as lostsheep2011 – a “canonist.”

    And I thought I had headaches before?

    Am I going to have to block you again?

  3. lostsheep2011 says:

    I’m not sure what you are talking about? It seems there have been some strong questions raised about your bias and objectivity, and that of a few other contributors. Would you not want to address those questions and not just remove them?

    • Larry Green says:

      Lost sheep2011, If you have been reviewing the comments on this thread as you say you have , what is it about Sylvia’s comment that baffles you ? And how is it that a canonist serving in his/her diocese in the state of California becomes lost ? Have you been roaming in a pasture somewhere around the Ottawa Valley and can’t find your way back to California ? Not to worry, you haven’t been lost for to long because we are still in 2o11. If it helps I can tell you that you must go south.

      • lostsheep2011 says:

        Your venom and cynicism Mr. ( I use the term loosely) Green is kind of sad. You do know, with your stellar intelligence, that persons outside Pembroke, outside Toronto, outside Canada can access the World Wide Web (i.e. The www part)? They don’t have to be there. You do know that?

        From your previous threads, it is apparent that you have nothing but disdain for the clergy and church of the Diocese of Pembroke. I cannot remember, off the top of my head, who it was that challenged you in this regard. Naturally, you did not reply. I gather from your threads that you are a non-Catholic ( and a rather black one at that), who has no interest in our church, the true church, the Roman Catholic Church. Why don’t you attend to some of the problems in your own backyard.

        And, then of course, is the ever present disdain and venom you spew at Ray. What’s that about Larry? Is it charitable? Just trying to get a fix on what your agenda is here. Doubtless it has nothing to do with victims and the challenges that face OUR church.

        • Sylvia says:

          I will block you again. If this is the best you have to contribute I will block you. Final warning.

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            Block me again? What do you mean?

            My frank questions to Larry are NO different than those he has posted against Ray. Or what prima has posted. Check the threads.

            Doublestandard? No worries. Last post Sylvia. I will await Larry’s reply and your acknowledgment that your words to inhisservice that he did NOT know what he was talking about was an error, for which you apologize.

        • Lost: Let me answer your questions for you. Larry Green is an upstanding member of the Cathedral parish. He and his wife were participants in RCIA and baptism prep. during my term there. He is rightfully disgusted with the presence of predators in his Church. He writes intelligently in challenging those whom he believes to be enabling or covering-up for the Church in the scandals. He has done nothing to earn your malicious words. You owe him an apology.

          Fr. Tim

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            Nonsense Father! Your defense of your former parishioner is admirable, however his threads have been consistently rude, particularly to Ray and I am wondering why? Is it because of what Ray had bravely shared about his experience in the seminary. Or is it because he is a lawyer? Blogs like this one lose credibility when uncivilized comments, lies, accusations, and generalizations are tossed around indiscriminately. My strong remarks emerged only after seeing the repeated battering that Ray was receiving by some of the regulars. I note that sometime back you absented yourself from this blog because of the very nonsense I am identifying. Is that not true?

          • Lost: Indeed you are correct. I tend not to post here as comments from priests can be painful for some victims to cope with. I do so now only because you are creating such an issue under your different aliases over the past 24+ hours are are attacking good people for no reason.

            Larry is perfectly within his rights to challenge Ray. He has never been rude… he is forthright and honest with his convictions I am sure that as a lawyer, Ray is more than competent to speak for himself and does not require you to act as his virtual bodyguard.

            Take Sylvia’s advice… relax and take a break for posting for a while, at least until you get over being angry.

            Fr. Tim

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            If you re-read your parting post, it is obvious that your departure was not just because your presence caused some people pain.

            I disagree entirely with your characterization of the rest and your condescension. Thanks, I’m just fine.

            Perhaps the moderator will be so kind as to publish these new rules about posts and apply it equally. Aliases are sometimes needed when these rules are changed mid-stream, especially when folks are challenged or insult each other without apology.

            Since I assume I will be edited out again I say good luck and goodbye!

  4. Theresa says:

    THANK YOU Sylvia, Without you keep us posted on what’s going on in cases like this we the people wouldn’t know. If people doesn’t want to read what you post they shouldn’t, but instead they do and then they get on your back, for whatever they don’t agree with you.
    We ( my family) lived across the street from Monsignor Borne’s family, as kids we use to go and play with Robert and his sisblings. What a super family, anyone would have loved living on the same street has they did.
    I feel bad for the family. I love them like they were my own family. I will continue to pray for them, and for Robert and also the victims. What a hard pill to swallow after so many years. I believe there is still so much we don’t know about the case, like why the victims didn’t lay charges years ago, They knew then it was just as wrong as it is now, and one of them is in his late fourties now. Give me a broke. He should have laid charges years ago, why now all for a sudden. What was his reasoning for now after all these years. I guess the best way to sum this up is we will all find out on Judgement Day. Once again Sylvia Thank you for your hard work.

  5. Theresa says:

    THANK YOU Sylvia, Without you to keep us posted on what’s going on in cases like this we the people wouldn’t know. If people doesn’t want to read what you post they shouldn’t, but instead they do and then they get on your back, for whatever they don’t agree with you.
    We ( my family) lived across the street from Monsignor Borne’s family, as kids we use to go and play with Robert and his sisblings. What a super family, anyone would have loved living on the same street has they did.
    I feel bad for the family. I love them like they were my own family. I will continue to pray for them, and for Robert and also the victims. What a hard pill to swallow after so many years. I believe there is still so much we don’t know about the case, like why the victims didn’t lay charges years ago, They knew then it was just as wrong as it is now, and one of them is in his late fourties now. Give me a broke. He should have laid charges years ago, why now all for a sudden. What was his reasoning for now after all these years. I guess the best way to sum this up is we will all find out on Judgement Day. Once again Sylvia Thank you for your hard work.

    • Suzanne says:

      Theresa and all who question the victim coming forward years after the fact: Victims often are not able to consciously deal with the tramas of sexual abuse until many years later; especially when a person of authority (in this case a trusted member of the clergy) abuses a teenager ;they plod on in their lives; burying it into the deep reccesses of their minds because it is too painful for them to deal with; I saw personnally and upfront a close family relative who had been sexually abused for years; gave birth to a child at age 15; we knew there must have been abuse but also knew that emotionally she couldn’t deal with it; it was only 20 years later when a life trigger forced her to have to deal with what had happened to her; the pain; the pain; the pain was unbearable…. now picture a hetrosexual male; who is accosted by another male; clergy; and the guilt and the shame he dealt with…..he is a brave; brave individual to move forward in the way he did…. with his actions he most likely has helped prevent there to be any future victims of Borne; he has done society a great service by coming forward; and it WAS not easy; I do not know him; but I was in court to hear his testimony; sincere; and as the judge said “scrupulously honest”….. also; Robert Borne admitted to having several homosexual relationships; one with the victim’s brother (going on for 2 years) who was 2 years older than the victim; do the math….. Robert Borne; unfortunately; was not the person that many of us thought he was; we need to grasp the reality…taking teenagers to a tiny community rectory; sleeping in the same bed as them….I could go on…is this the image we had of a holy priest of our Diocese????….I think not…. the victim and all the others that he engaged with were betrayed; as are his good colleague priests; as are ALL the good people of Pembroke; and ALL the communities across the Diocese… and the real reality; however hard it is for all to swallow is that he committed crimes …. he has been found guity of 2 crimes under our criminal code.. that judgement did not come lightly….

  6. Sylvia says:

    Well said Suzanne.

    Theresa, if you take some time to go through the site you will see that it is rare for a victim of clerical sexual abuse to come forward at the time of the abuse or for many years after. Male victims generally do not speak up for 20, 30, 40 years or more. I know of 60-year-old men who, amidst tears, literally shook and trembled as they the abuse they endured at the hands of a priest.

    There are many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that they are generally engulfed in shame and guilt, a shame and guilt which rightly belong to their abuser, not to the child who was so ruthlessly violated. It is extremely difficult for victims to speak about the sex acts to which they were subjected at the hands of a trusted Roman Catholic priest. It is extremely difficult, embarrassing and humiliating for victims to take the witness stand and speak of these things in an open court.

    Please Theresa, read on this site and elsewhere the horrific impact of clerical sexual abuse on a child. Rest assured that one way or the other these victims lives are turmoil from the time they were abused. The damage done is immense.

  7. Lina says:

    Very well stated and very worth repeating Suzanne about the trauma of sexual abuse.

    Some complaints I heard about the Borne case is why don’t these victims give their names. Why did they keep going back even their own kids would know better etc..

    I say tactfully to some of them remember Robert Borne is the adult. He is the one that should know better. Sadly…they do not want to believe Monsignor Borne would do such stuff because he is so nice. So much in denial.

    Forgive me for straying a little here. I was ask by some seniors in their late 70’s and early 80’s at different times what that “F” word meant in the newspaper. Of course, their eye sight is not the best and one lady had a recent eye surgery. The “F” word is fellatio. I will not go into detail here what I told them but these seniors got a mini lesson about oral sex.
    I will say….some of these seniors are seeing Monsignor Borne in a very different light now.

  8. Leona says:

    A heartfelt thank you to all of the men who came forward in this case. It is an amazing act of courage to go through the justice system in order to bring an offenders crimes into the light, and you have done it.
    It is always interesting to me when people ask why it took victims so long to come forward. Sylvia is able to state it well from her conversations with many victims. As a survivor myself, I now find I was an “early adopter”, in my actions against Fr. Jack McCann O.M.I that started in 1990. The offenses had occurred between 1974-1981. It took me 10 years to come to terms in my head with what had happened to me. I had been so isolated by McCann, and my world view was so narrow. I’d been told that if anyone ever found out that I could be excommunicated by the Pope. The church was my world. I was a Catholic School teacher! I realized that if I was going to be able to live a life of integrity that there was no choice but to take this action and I did. 10 years later! Even then I was told, why didn’t you say something right away!
    When I did say something, I was told by family members that I would be ruining a man’s life. I was told by my parents that I should have known better, that it was my fault. I was told by the school I worked at that they didn’t want me working there anymore. Articles that detailed the sexual nature of the relationship were printed in the local papers. As much as I felt that I was doing the right thing, I still felt like crossing the street when I ran into someone I knew. When I read some of the vitriolic comments on this website that Bourne’s victims may be reading, I feel their pain. It is these types of statements that make it difficult for other victims to come forward.

    The church gave McCann a new life when he got out of prison. I had to rebuild mine on my own. It is only now after raising my family to their teenage years, and being confronted once more with what it’s like to be a teenager, that the issue has come up for me again. I now understand at every level of my being that I did what needed to be done. If I hadn’t been fortunate enough to have had the support back in 1990 to do this, I’d be doing it now.

    Although McCann’s transgressions were with females, they were similar in method to what I read hear about Bourne (without the alcohol), and occured around the same time. The victims ages in the Bourne case appear similar to mine. It makes sense, that they are at a place in their lives when we as humans reflect on our pasts as we get ready to embrace the next chapter as our lives, to live out our 50’s and 60’s with purpose.
    Thank you again to the courageous men who came forward. You have done a great service for others.

    • C1 says:

      Well said Leona, much appreciated thank you.

      • C1: As a priest of the Pembroke Diocese let me offer my appreciation and gratitude for your efforts in this case. I promise to pray that peace, joy and contentment now come your way in abundance. You deserve it!

        Fr. Tim

        • TLWST says:

          I somewhat started this issue about homosexuality in regards to Borne’s case wich Ray and inhisservice got caught up in and my entire point was lost. The reason I am bringing this topic up again is because it is important in this case. As I mentioned previously, I grew up in Pembroke and my extended family still lives there, so I often travel back. When Borne was first charged I wasn’t surprised, I know of another of his victims that hasn’t come forward but named Borne as his abuser 10 years ago, this person was young when it happened (grade 3), he is an adult now but he is not ready to come forward for many reasons. When Borne was first charged several of my aunts who still live in Pembroke said to me “Well I don’t know about this situation because some of the boys who are saying Borne abused them are gay” which completely shocked me. Several catholics seem to think this somehow justifies what Borne did! I had to explain for several hours that being gay and being a paedophile are not the same thing. I tried to use the anaology that if this was a priest (or any adult) and a 15 year old girl would it be okay? Coupled with the fact that a priest takes a vow of celibacy! They admit it isn’t right but really have a hard time accepting these boys as true victims because of their age and perhaps because some of them may be gay men. They understand that Borne is still wrong but don’t give as much empathy to the victims as they should, where as if these victims had been younger they would have more support. When I bring up that Borne also did have younger victims, they tell me well they should come forward with little emphathy towards how difficult that is to do. I am having a hard time getting my point across, when I asked what was the church’s stance on gay marriage and homosexuality – I didn’t mean the question literally – I have been raised Catholic my entire life – I know Rome’s position. I was asking if there were any priests who disagreed or what feelings the congregation had regarding this topic. Now, I want to clearly state that I do not hate the church, nor I do not wish to see the Catholic Church destroyed. However, there have been errors in judgetment in the past and the chuch has had to change their opinions on things in the past. At one point in time the church executed people for saying the world was round – again I know it was a different time – I am merely saying the church is a man made organization and anytime man is involved errors can be made and interpretations can be wrong. The bible has been interpreted many times over the years by man and I am suggesting that the church’s stance on homosexuality is wrong. Everyone is aware that there are homosexual priests and this gets confused with priests who are paedophiles, which is so wrong. The problem is priests who are paedohpiles not homosexual priests. One is evil and one is not. My point here is that I think it is wrong for the church to preach that homosexuals need to restrain themselves, try to be cured, and not act on their temptations. The question I think that needs to be asked here is that if Dan (who posted earlier) who thought he was gay had a healthy avenue to discuss his feelings about homosexuality would he have ended up in a priest’s bed? A paedolphile’s bed? He was taught his whole life that homosexuality was bad, so who could he ask? His parents? His priests? His teachers? His friends? No, so instead he was possibly (I don’t know Dan so I am hypothosizing) vulnerable and Borne saw that and took it to his advantage. Now, you have a young person who is being shown that adults lie, the church is full of deception, and this is one of his first adult experiences. Society is demanding equal rights for gay and lesbians and it will be attained eventually and once again the church is going to find itself on the wrong side of a human rights issue. The church will eventually change their stance (as they have on other issues in the past) but only when they have no one left in their corner. The sad thing is the chuch will make this change dragging their feet instead of as the leader they should be. We hear priest apologizing and saying please don’t judge all priests based on the evil of a few, fair enough. However, in the case of Borne – it is also what the priests have taught about homosexuality which lead to this awful situation. The church with their beliefs and teaching regarding homosexuality is causing mental anguish with gay people, please they do choose to be gay, they do not choose a harder life, and the church should not fill them with thoughts of self loathing, self doubt, and make them vulnerable. The church should be saying, talk to us, let us help you be the best adult you can be regardless of your personal choices (as long as those choices are HEALTHY). I want to say that leaving the church for my husband and I was not an easy decision, we didn’t leave over this gay marriage issue, we didn’t leave over the paedophiles, we left because the church doesn’t listen to us (hell they don’t even listen to their priests), they talk down to us and tell us to “tow the company line or leave”, the church has stopped being a leader. This is why we left.

          • Tim Dooling says:

            To TWSL: You are operating under several illusions. One is that God can make a mistake. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD to make a mistake.
            God made all people equal at birth.
            All people have free will, given to them by God.
            Free Will does NOT me licence to do as you will- no it means you are frtee to choose the right way or the wrong way.
            It is my strong belief that NO boy of the age of 16 or thereabouts knows much about what he is sexually. He has a lot going on quickly in his body. He experiences many changes in a week, and then there is now the constant blather of TV and the everpresent peer pressure.
            The Priest is the Adult- supposedly in charge of his emotions, faculties and senses. He is expected to act only for the greater good of others- not for his own sexual pleasures (which he has taken a pledge to control), or his perverse desires.
            The Church can never legitametly change and accept gay Marriage- there is no such thing that is acceptable under GOD !
            GOD does not nees to change with the times. If GOD id always right ( and HE is) then HE has no need to change. Why is that so hard to understand?

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            Good thoughts Tim! I wish TWLST could meet my priest. He and I have emailed a great deal over the course of the past two years and especially as this trial was approaching.

            As I read TW the following questions come to mind:

            Is the church a democracy? Should it be?
            One parishioner, one vote?

            Should faith/morals be changed every time we think culture has gotten ‘ahead’ of us?

            In some circles polygamy is well accepted – given the right media push through sitcoms etc., should the church change to embrace that too?

            If we are going to create our beliefs, how does that work? Each parish, dioceese, country just make it up on the fly? What if many of the members disagree? Could lead that to the church’s downfall?

            Finally, I was born in 1970. I can honestly say that I have never attended a mass where i felt the priest was looking down his nose at me or acting like an arrogant person.

  9. TLWST says:

    Tim, sorry I upset you. To clarify, I am not suggesting God has made a mistake, or that God is wrong, or that God needs to change with the times. I am suggesting perhaps man’s interpreatation of God’s message was wrong. There are other intepretations of the bible Tim. I understand you are following the preachings of the Catholic Church, but there are other churches who have different view points. Communications and discussions should be allowed. I am allowed to question this interpretation. I agree with most of your post, I agree young men and women are not mature enough to understand what is happening with their bodies sexually and that Borne as the adult and the priest was the one in the wrong. Borne took advantage of confused young men who were not mature enough to deal with what was happening.

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      TW: a single scripture passage that suggests that marriage between man and woman is equal to gay marriage? One passage that explicitly supports gay marriage or gay acts?

  10. TLWST says:

    Lostsheep2011 that’s right the church has never dug in on an issue in the past that they have had to change their stance on! Or is the world flat? Point being, the church has had to change their stance on many many issues in the past, and whether you like it or not the church will have to change their stance on homosexuality and gay marraige it is not a matter of if but when. Also, to get back on topic, the church’s stance on homosexuality, in my opinion, was partially to blame in what happened with Borne, and it has led some catholics to believe these boys were not true victims and that is very sad.

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      On matters of faith: the sacraments, the creed, core Christian teaching, name one? You are right, some matters have changed or evolved – language at mass, discovery of the world – not core elements of the creed or the sacraments!

      By the way tell me how this congregational model works again? One person, one vote? How has that worked out in many mainline Protestant churches?

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      By the way, I could not disagree more with your assertion that it was the church’s stance on homosexuality that led to this stuff with Borne! Are you kidding me? What a ridiculous and reckless theory. Let’s keep our heads fixed on the facts of this case and quit this theory-making exercise. It is as ridiculous as suggesting that Borne’s vow of celibacy was to blame (which is the church’s fault too, of course). You don’t have to agree with the church’s teaching. You may want to just make up your own. Go for it! Let’s not get loopy.

      I do agree that the victims get blamed which should NEVER happen. Young vulnerable children and teens should never be blamed in these cases. Borne was the adult and took advantage with booze as the primer. Disgusting. Disgusting!

      • lostsheep2011 says:

        Is the church’s teaching on the one hour communion fast mostly responsible for anorexia among Catholic girls? Lord help us!

        • Sylvia says:

          I have been trying to reach you by email without success. I would prefer to have reached you privately but since I am unable to do so must take this route. You have been falling back into old habits with your multiple postings. Yesterday I asked you to slow down on your postings. I am asking you now to please refrain from posting further comments today.

          And please please don’t tell me you don’t understand what I’m talking about. I know that you are Inhisservice aka Evictedbysylvia

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            No doubt you have a burr in your sandal about me. That’s fine. As I indicated to Fr. Tim, I changed names only because you blocked me out. You did not like being challenged so you killed the discussion. Especially when I corrected you about the matter of canon law (by the way written by my parish priest and forwarded to me), you got snarky.

            Tally the input today. You are suggesting I am dominating or is it that I am asking questions some of the regulars don’t like?

            I would hope that you realize that if you are going to run a blog and invite discussion, there will be banter, especially at heated moments. Clearly the day of the Borne verdict was such a day for me and many in my parish and in the whole Pembroke diocese.

            Finally, might I suggest you park the parental scolding. It’s unseemly and I assure you, I am not going ANYWHERE.

          • Sylvia says:

            I was busy last night, and have to be away this morning. I hope I can trust you not to run wild with your comments.

        • Tim Dooling says:

          lostsheep- get found, or REALLY get lost! You add as much to this site as hornets and ants add to a picnic!
          But, they at least serve a useful purpose in the Universe.

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            Tim, I notice the moderator did not scold you, as she should. Don’t act like a child. Put on your big boy pants and at least discuss in adult fashion.

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            Finally, the reference to lost sheep is a loving acknowledgement of those who have suffered terrible abuse, feel lost and alone and are looking for healing and support. The Lord knows who they are and loves them immensely. It is we as a church who need to do likewise.

            So maybe when the urge hits you to mock my signin name, you might remember that and zip it.

      • Sheep: Thank you. The only focus should be on the caring for victims and ensuring the safety of children now and into the future. No one can read the heart or soul of another. Borne’s motivations are irrelevant. His actions were criminal and his victims suffered as a result. That’s the only point that we can be certain of… and that’s the only point that’s essential.

        No doubt civil litigation will follow. That’s the victims right to seek redress and it is right and proper. If the Diocese is complicit in covering this up, then it will be made to pay. All I know is that as soon as the current Bishop was made aware that allegations had been lodged, he removed him from parish ministry. He has not functioned as a priest since. And there was no way for him to have known, as everyone that worked in the Chancery office in years past (including during the time of Borne’s assault for which he was just convicted) is dead. Everyone that is except Borne, and I doubt he would have reported on his own malfeasance. He has acted in perfect compliance with stated policy.

        Fr. Tim

        • Suzanne says:

          Fr. Tim: I totally admire and respect you for your open communications re: abuse within the Church. I do; however; take exception to the fact that “Borne’s motivations are irrelevant” Yes; healing of victims is utmost; but without an understanding of what makes a pedophile tick; we can not conduct preventative teachings regarding such abuse of power. A question; after reading the Diocesan statement; why was the word “charges” used rather than “convictions”- ???? …the same old googly; gook as always isn’t it?

          • Suzanne: I do not speak for the Diocese and I had no role in drafting the press release. So I cannot speak to the language used.

            However, if there is going to be any study done of Borne’s motivations, it’s not going to be done by any of us. It will be done by professionals if it’s done at all. That’s the only point I am trying to make. Each of us may have differing theories about his motivations, but they are just that… theories. None of can be sure that we are right.
            So long as that’s the case, the only legitimate focus is on justice for victims and transparency in the way that the Church deals with any other allegations. Anything else runs pretty close to being malicious gossip or unending debate.

            One of the things I respect most about this site is the fact that Sylvia has kept it focused on legitimate issues. We do not do her any service by making her spend time having to moderate conversations or comments that cross the line. We should all thank her for that.

            Fr. Tim

    • Ray Selbie says:

      Dear TLWST,
      I am somewhat sorry that I raised the ogre of homosexuality as it has allowed us to divert into the discussion about social acceptance of same versus the scriptural and scientific fact that there is no such state of being-it is a choice that people make and it is a choice that they have a right to make in this country.
      I cannot however even think that the Church will go against the teachings of the Judeo Christian Scriptures that go back perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, in the attempt to become ‘popular’. If it does, then I for one am gone.

      By the way, there is nothing in the scripture about the world being round or flat but there is plenty of teachings on morality and the wages of sin i.e death.

      I hope that in some way there will be a return to how we are going to demand that there be truth stated by all concerned and reconciliation flow from it.
      Ray Selbie

      • Larry Green says:

        Ray Selbe, how sincerely sorrowful can you be about raising the “ogre” of homosexuality ( which part is the ogre – the sexuality or the homo?) when your expression of such is followed with further remarks intended fully to incite a collective and oppressive attitude toward gay people. I don’t know you and I have no idea what you’re underlying motivation and agenda is with regard to the millions of individuals amongst this population as well as the vast majority of the real world that views homosexuals as equally valuable , lovable and as HOLY as anybody is in your little circle.
        I have not had the opportunity or the privilege to receive the education that you have and you are therefore much more capable of conveying your opinions and ideas than I am , but I’ll tell you something Mr. Selbe you don’t intimidate me because it’s very clear to me that while you are superior to me in the head you are definitely not in the heart!!!

  11. TLWST says:

    Lostsheep – where does Jesus advocate capital punishment? Yet the church murdered thousands. Jesus himself questioned religion,hence the old and new testements. Which is why I am not willing to follow any man made organization blindly. This is a never ending debate you want to start. I am not interested. My point is that I have a right to question the interpretations (man made interpretations) of the bible. Communication and discussion are a good thing. Again, my issue here is that this stance on homosexuality is confusing catholics in this Borne case, these young men (gay or not) were victims.

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      You have the right to question anything you want. You have your opinions. I continue to find it odd that persons who want nothing to do with my church want to bash it?

      Would it not be more honorable just to say, you know I’m not a Catholic, but there church has their beliefs, some of which I don’t understand or follow. I can respect them however for being good people and being a part of a church that has done infinitely more good than bad! You did know that the the RC Church is the largest charitable entity in the world?

      Even with our sins and failings our church is good as are the vast vast majority who attend throughout the world.

  12. TLWST says:

    Which quote from the bible specifically denounces homosexuality? I want to read it.

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      Read your Old Testament and St Paul.

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      Last word for today, the family is soon ready for supper – you never addressed any of the following:

      Is the church a democracy? Should it be?
      One parishioner, one vote?

      Should faith/morals be changed every time we think culture has gotten ‘ahead’ of us?

      In some circles polygamy is well accepted – given the right media push through sitcoms etc., should the church change to embrace that too?

      If we are going to create our beliefs, how does that work? Each parish, dioceese, country just make it up on the fly? What if many of the members disagree? Could lead that to the church’s downfall?

    • lostsheep2011 says:

      Cf. 1 Corinthian 6:9, Romans 1:22-30 (Galatians 5:19)

      Christian marriage: Matthew 19:4,

  13. TLWST says:

    Again, I am not bashing your church. I have never bashed the chuch. As I have stated many many times, I have had very good memories about the priests of my childhood and my time at the church. I feel that you cannot accept any questions about the church and in turn attack me for daring to question any of the beliefs. As for your suggestion about reading the Old Testament -well they also agreed with slavery. Anyway, I really don’t want to fight. I went to church up until 2 years ago, I have volunteered and am well aware of all the good the church does and I still donate to them despite my recent questions. Anyway, again I think that this issue on homosexuality led some victims to think they were somehow responsible for what happened, it made them feel guilty and it led some catholics (my own aunts) to view them as less than victims. All of these things are a concern for me. Let’s leave it at that for now. I respect both you (Lostsheep) and Tim. Have a good night. I am taking a break for awhile.

  14. Sylvia says:


    It is disturbing to hear that people are negating the abuse of some victims because the victims are homosexual. I don’t understand the rationale of those who take that stance. These boys were molested by a homosexual priest, but somehow if the victims are homosexual they are to blame, or, it’s no bog deal?

    Do these people also blame female victims who are heterosexual who were sexually abused by a priest?

    If not, why not? How does their logic work there?

    • Sylvia: Thank you for demonstrating my comments above. When we start to posit motivations to others (a task that is beyond any of our capabilities) we run the risk of re-victimizing the victims again. These recent conversations have questioned their sexual orientation. Let me ask you… how many young teenagers do you know who are completely solid in understand their sexuality? Let me tell you as a licensed social worker and a priest confessor… they are far fewer than you would expect. It is WHOLLY inappropriate to even raise the issue. It is an affront and an offense to people who have just been proven to be legitimate victims of a sexual predator. They were children. He was an adult. He carries complete responsibility as someone who violated an obligation of trust and care that is solely the responsible of the adult to carry.


      Speculations as to the motivations of others provides nothing positive to the conversation.

      Isn’t running a blog fun? I feel (and appreciate) your pain and effort.

      Fr. Tim

      • TLWST says:

        Fr Tim are you telling me I shouldn’t have addressed what I heard from people in Pembroke about this? They are not my beliefs they are the beliefs of others in that community. I was thinking the priests should be correcting that erroneous thinking. However, you are saying that I am causing further damage writing about what I heard?

        • TLWST: Yes. Exactly. By speaking about it here, you took something hurtful to these victims that was shared between a few people and put it before hundreds, if not more by posting it here. It was wrong for you to do so. The harm done far outweighs any good you may have intended. It was a sin. Calumny, the stealing of someone’s good name by the spreading of hurtful gossip. If you’re a Catholic, it’s something you should remember the next time you go to confession.

          Here’s an old story that works to explain this concept for you. (Reader’s Digest version) Someone confesses that they shared gossip. For a penance the priest instructs them to rip open a pillow from a hill top and return the next week for absolution. When they return, the priest tells them that to complete the penance they had to return to the hill-top and gather up all the feathers. When the penitent complained that the penance was demanding the impossible, the priest responded that it would be easier to gather up those feathers than it would be to try to take back hurtful words or news publicly spoken.

          You should go and pick up your feathers. It will keep you away from your keyboard for a while. (wry grin) I know that works for me when I make a similar mistake. I take the time to contemplate how to do better.

          Understand this too. You’re far from being alone in setting ‘feathers’ loose to the winds. I only remarked on your comment as a sign of respect: that I would demand better of you because I know that you can.

          Fr. Tim

          Fr. Tim

          • OOPS… hick-up! Pardon me.

          • Larry Green says:

            I’m very obviously missing something here but if it is what it looks like I have to ask. What precisely is it that TLWST has said to receive the horrible and humiliating condemnation you cast upon her Fr Tim ? Does it have anything to do with the fact that she has expressed disagreement with the churches stance on homosexuality? Is it because she like I do openly express disgust and intolerance with the bigotry of “the church teaching?” Maybe because she left the church. Perhaps it’s because you are becoming increasingly and very painfully aware of the fact that the churches fixation on connecting sin with sexuality is on its last breath.
            Why do you think your gossip is superior to someone else’s? And why do you think you have the right to to offend and condemn the character of anyone let alone someone like TLWST who comes across as someone who is very genuine , honest and just a very good person who if you had any kind of heart would see that you have just been very cruel to because you need to protect the certitude of your ideas. I am appalled and disgusted that you would come on this site and stoop so low as to so maliciously harm another human being under the guise of compassion for the victims. Shame on you and you don;t need to bother going to confession you have done a good job of exposing your dark side here. You entered this thread by cleverly patronizing lostsheep and you left it patronizing Sylvia as you do routinely. You need to use tactics and impressive language to ” win” your point because you don’t have access to the truth. I don’t know what you think this kind of hate and bullshit does to evangelize anyone. You are the one who needs to be evangelized. This is so far removed from the Life of Christ it reeks the stench of death.

          • Larry Green says:

            You are an itellectual bully and it’s to bad because you have so much potential.

          • lostsheep2011 says:

            You will likely ignore for whatever reason, but what exactly is the:

            ” bigotry of “the church teaching?”

            Catchy phrase – what bigotry about what teaching?

          • Larry Green says:

            Furthermore, how dare you come on this site where the main subject for discussion is perverted priests and you suggest someone go to confession at all let alone someone who has done nothing to deserve being bullied by you. Do you realize at all how many of us have been for years as children and adults kneeling
            in a dark little box revealing our innermost secrets with our face an inch or two away from the perched ear of some deviant pervert. Do you know how deeply you offend so many of us by reminding us that that is what we have been doing for so long.
            It takes a very arrogant person to do what you have just done to so many people with that pathetic post.
            You have dashed a glimmer of hope of returning to church for I am sure a countless number of people who have and will witness your display of skilful, colourful ,cocky… bullying.
            Before you say your sorry to God, you need to start with an apology to TLWST , to everyone else on this site , to the Catholic church and then you can apologize to God!!!

            Larry Green, Pembroke Ontario

          • Larry: Please… I am not intending to attack or harm anyone. I am not interested in winning a point! I am not saying anything about what TLWST believes about homosexuality.

            My apologies if I have offended. It was (and is) not my intention. I am only talking about propagating false rumors about the victims. I am only concerned about them as they have already suffered enough.

            Fr. Tim

  15. Sylvia says:

    The one thing I can say on this with certainty Father is that virtually every boy who is sexually molested by a priest is left thoroughly confused about his sexuality. That may not be the case for every boy who is sexually abused by another male – that I do not know with certainty. I do know however that is the case for a large majority of male victims of clerical sexual abuse. Some go on to live their lives as homosexuals, others vacillate back and forth, others become promiscuous with females and/or males. The abuse has a profoundly deleterious impact on the sexual lives of many of these young boys. After all, if “Father” does it, and “Father” says it’s OK, and “Father” is such a nice guy, and if it maybe ‘feels’ good for even a moment, then it must be OK. For many the confusion and questions linger for a lifetime. That, coupled with the almost inevitable loss of faith in the priesthood and therefore the Church, are a huge burden for a young boy to shoulder.

    All of that aside, I was shocked to hear that some people in Pembroke would stoop so low as to discredit and or blame a victim of clerical abuse for his childhood abuse at the hands of a priest because he, the victim, is now homosexual.

    In Borne’s case it’s a bit of a red herring though, isn’t it? Both witnesses who testified at trial are now married men. What do the nay-sayers have to say about that I wonder?

    As for running a blog. it’s a steep and never-ending learning curve 🙂

  16. Leona says:

    Really Father,

    Now I know why I don’t go to church anymore. Do you really feel that it is your job to chastise TLWST? I don’t know how Borne’s victims feel, but as a survivor, I was enjoying his/her questioning. I hear he/she grappling with the issues around clergy sexual abuse and wondering how to discuss it in away that makes a difference. I think this type of talk is healthy, and contributes to our understanding of the issue. As a survivor, I know that even to this day people make their judgements about what happened. I recognize their reasons for not feeling able to do so, we are all somewhere along our spiritual journey, some of us are more enlightened than others. I appreciate that TLWST is reaching out and asking, sharing what he/she hears and looking for appropriate responses.

  17. Leona: You are not offended. Congratulations. You have done remarkably well in integrating the violence done on to you. I appreciate very well just how hard it is to come to the place where you are now.

    Other victims are offended. I know from first hand experience.

    The best than can be said is that we’ll have to agree to disagree. TLWST asked me a question. I answered. You would have answered differently.

    Chacun a son goût.

    Fr. Tim

  18. Leona says:


    Thanks for your thoughtful response. I appreciate you sharing that you know that other victims are offended. I recognize that they are likely still in a very raw state having just come out of the trial.
    I would be saddened to push away the voice of TLWST. I think that we need as many voices as we can in this cause. This blog is one of very few places where people can seek out information.
    I really do truly appreciate TLWST’s voice. I have learned over the years that I can’t control what other people think about me or say, and so one of my spiritual practices is to hear what someone else is saying and ask myself what it is about “me” that makes “me” have difficulty hearing it. When it turns out to be something related to the abuse, I frequently become aware that it’s an aspect of the abuse that I still am blaming myself for, and recognizing it, I am them able to let go of it, bit by bit. I no longer have to put up defensive areas trying to fling off the barbs and arrows of others, but I can see them as fellow travellers on this spiritual journey. We are all made in His image. We are all one!

  19. Sylvia says:

    From the Catholic dictionary:

    Calumny: A false charge or imputation against another’s reputation. This is much more serious than mere detraction, which consists in depriving another of his good name by publishing without just cause something which is true.

    TLWST, I don’t believe that what you had to say is calumny.

  20. Sylvia: Forgive me, for I don’t want to extend this conversation, but how is raising the sexuality of the victims not calumny? To do so imputes that they are somehow complicit or responsible for their own abuse. I did not raise this point to be contentious. I sincerely believe that to share a rumor that they may be gay (something that is not supported by the evidence) calumniates their reputation. I am not trying to be difficult or insulting to TLWST or anyone else, a fact I’m certain you can appreciate.

    Fr. Tim

    • TLWST says:

      Father Moyle I am very angry with you. How dare you give me a public confessional. You are angry about topics that I have brought up and like every leader in the Catholic church when you didn’t like my questions you bullied me into a corner and told me to keep my mouth shut. You are also controlling this blog, telling Sylvia to agree with you and stop this communication.

      I did not sin. I did not spread rumours. I discussed facts, what people (catholic parishoners) are saying. If you do not believe me, read the posts in the Pembroke Observer. I was so appalled by these comments – that I thought it should be addressed. Also, I never hypothosized ANYONE was gay, the reason I addressed that issue is because a vicitim (Dan) posted that he was confused and thought he was gay (whether he is now or not). My post was on topic based on his post – I suggested that the teachings of the Catholic church made it difficult for these confused boys to have a positive outlet to discuss these feelings and that in turn gave Borne an opportunity to abuse. Because I dared to question the church on this belief and the possible problems it presents is the real reason you attacked me Father Moyle.

      I should know better by now, but I thought some priests were willing to start taking a stand. I thought some priests would finally be standing up in church and discussing these matters, apologizing, and dispelling these awful statements that these boys were not real victims, but what do we get instead? We get the article posted by Sylvia – barely an apology and most likely written by a lawyer to avoid any further culpability on the part of the church.

      To the victims of Borne – I am very sorry if I offended any of you. I certainly didn’t have that intent. I was angry about what catholic people were saying, I wanted to advocate for you and stop this erroneous thinking.

      Leona, thank you so much for your words. I was very upset last night and your support helped me greatly. I am so sorry about what you had to go through, and your strength is inspiring.

      Sylvia you mentioned that you were surprised by how many people were posting regarding Borne. My thoughts…he wasn’t just another priest, he was so revered in Pembroke, fast rise to the top, the Bishop’s right hand man. He was adored. I realize the victims have suffered the most. I think the good priests in the diocese have suffered as well they devote their entire lives to God and they deserve better. However, the entire community has suffered. Borne sat at my father’s bed after a massive stroke providing guidance before his death. It makes me angry.

      I don’t know why I keep trying to find my way back to this church. Like any healthy relationship you need open communication and that is impossible in this church. I am going to stop donating, and I will take my volunteer time somewhere else.

      • TLWST: Please accept my sincere apology. I did not intent to offend you. I deeply regret any hurt that I have caused you.

        Fr. Tim

        • TLWST says:

          Thank you Fr. Moyle. I have attended your masses in the past when I was visiting relatives. I know you are a good person. When I am less defensive, I will reread your words and allow myself to take whatever truth is in them and use it as an opportunity to grow. Let me also apologize to you, I also didn’t mean to offend or attack you. I am sorry.

          Sylvia, you understood the point I was trying to get across pefectly. The parishoners who were suggesting these victims had a choice and were not really victims (you can read the comments in the Pembroke paper if you wish), was my concern. I used your exact logic with them to try and make them understand why their thinking was wrong.

          People have different opinions about homosexuality and gay marriage, Sylvia and Father Moyle side with the church’s stance, and I and Larry have a different opinion. We live in Canada and we have Freedom of Speech and that is a good thing. I also think open lines of communication are good, even if we disagree. My only intent with my criticism of the church’s stance was because I thougtht that if we could allow young people to ask questions in a non threatening (again maybe a poor choice of words as I am not saying the church threatens them but children may view it as threatening or scary) environment perhaps it would be a preventitive measure. Maybe I am wrong.

          I also want to clarify that I was NEVER supporting Borne, I know what he did was evil. I was angry that he was a part of our lives at all (and I know his involvement with my family was far less traumatic that what happened to others).

          I would like to leave the posting for the day on a positive note – we can all agree on one thing today that Borne’s victims were validated with his conviction. Borne has been found guilty and that is a step in the right direction and a cause for celebration (if that is the right word) for all of us.

          I am going to take the day off work, and I am going to spend it with my amazing beautiful son and only focus on the good in the world for the rest of the day.

    • Sylvia says:

      If it’s the truth and the victim (s) is/are living an openly homosexual lifestyle, then it’s not calumny.

      But I fail to see how identifying a victim as homosexual should or could in any way impute complicity, any more than, as I said elsewhere, complicity can be imputed when a heterosexual female was molested as a child by a heterosexual priest. Do we argue then that it’s her fault that she was molested because she’s heterosexual?

      If such thoughts are floating around out there they need to be nipped in the bud. I do not condone homosexuality, but neither do I condone such lack of logic that would stoop to blaming a victim or minimizing the crime because the victim is homosexual. I have had dealing with a number of male victims of other clergy who define themselves as homosexual. My heart aches for them and their pain and suffering every bit as much as it does for all other victims.

  21. Reality Checker says:

    I am just as surprised as Sylvia as to the backlash from the Borne guilty verdict. I have followed this site for a few years now and have NEVER seen the degree of hostility in the postings as I have seen the past few days. I couldn’t understand WHAT provoked this onslaught and hostiity (and it seems ALL from one poster posting using various handles and even having a conversation with himself/herself on this blog).

    TWLST states Borne wasn’t just any priest ….”he wasn’t just another priest, he was so revered in Pembroke, fast rise to the top, the Bishop’s right hand man. He was adored. ” Let me say this – there are many other predator pedofile priests through out the globe who have had fast rises to the top and have been adored in their parishes only to be exposed for what they really are. I can understand that the truth can be devestating to some – but to personally attack the truth sayer – come on – grow up!

    Sylvia has done an outstanding job in profiling these perverts and adding them to the Accused List. Never have I seen such a viscious personal attack on Sylvia as what occured with the Borne conviction – she doesn’t deserve that!!!

    I’m surprised she even tolerated it on
    her blog – but having said that – Sylvia tolerates more than any person known to me. Keep up the good work Sylvia and don’t let them get to you.

    Borne was nobody special – just another pervert!!!

    • TLWST says:

      I agree Borne was a pervert. I agree with what Sylvia is saying! I was saying we were blindsided by it not that I support him in anyway. I was saying Borne let everyone down. I don’t understand your post. I was angry that Borne was a wolf in sheeps clothing to the victims, to the other priests, and with my father.

  22. Lostsheep2011 says:

    Blog: a place for persons to reflect, share, exchange and dialogue.

    If you take a moment to read my posts to Fr Tim and one other you will know that I too was one of many who had a bad day Friday. I think that is allowed. This is serious business.

    My change in ‘handle’ only occurred when Sylvia blocked me! Was I upset? Damn right! About Borne and about the moderator exhibiting needless control like a pompous bishop, or any other pompous type in our world. The change in handle occurred espec

    • Lostsheep2011 says:

      Whoops, continued: especially after SYLVIA ignorantly suggested I didnt know what I was talking about! As yet, she still does not have the humility to admit mistake and apologize!

  23. Reality Checker says:

    Okay – that does it – Lost Sheep??? Are you perhaps Borne’s….. lover???

    I’m entitled to my views and opinions just as you are and that my dear is what I have concluded.

    Have a nice day!

    • Lostsheep2011 says:

      Have a nice day too! You provoked this. I simply explained the change in handle.

      If you READ the definition of blog above, you will know that I am glad that you have views and express them. That’s the point.

      I will do likewise. (Notice that unlike your foul and disgusting accusation, I will not give it a passing mention. I’m being hostile? Lol

  24. Sylvia says:

    Let’s clarify this once and for all Lostsheep2011. You were blocked because you went on a wild tear posting. You were asked to slow down. I finally blocked you. When you eventually returned under this, your third handle, I allowed you to blog freely.

    Lina made mention of a four limit blog per day per person. That is true. Those rules were set about a year or so ago after similar problems with other bloggers. I have let that slide because things settled in and there were instances in which there truly was a need to exceed that limit. I said at the time that I do not like to put such limits on, but, if the blog gets sidelined and the victims are left in the dust then it has to be.

    You are pushing buttons here left right and centre, consequently I am seriously considering once again setting a limit. If it comes to that, it is your doing. I hope therefore, for the good of all, you included, that you will contain yourself. You no doubt have much to offer, but you can, like everyone else, restrict your comments.

    Now, regarding my comment that you didn’t know what you were talking about. I believe that by accident or design you misinterpreted my post. My comment there had nothing to do with your knowledge of or reference to canon law and/or church documents. Nothing. I was talking about your assertion that a convicted child molester would not be in a sanctuary. You were wrong. I stated the following and stand by what I said:

    …you don’t know what you’re talking about. Father Jack McCann, convicted child molester, was functioning freely in the Archdiocese of Ottawa for years. Father Ed MacNeil omi, convicted child molester, was functioning freely as a priest for years. Ditto Father Michael J Walsh. All three were discovered in the past year. All three had faculties to function.

    As for canonical trials, the fact that the three molesters mentioned above were still functioning as priests speaks for itself.

  25. Reality Checker says:

    Sylvia – can you please clarify for your readers on this blog just HOW MANY handles “lost sheep2011” is using….or how many postings are coming from the same url address. It’s all ONE person – isn’t it?
    This is ridiculous and not easy to follow.

    • Lostsheep2011 says:

      My friend, I’m using this handle only. Period. I was blocked by Sylvia twice. I was forced to signin under a different name as a result. She blocked me for posting too quickly Friday night. That is her explanation. Mine is that she does not want to be challenged (especially when she misstates information or does not understand what is shared). She now further suggests that I am pushing all kinds of buttons, left, right and centre. My buttons she dislikes, others she likes. I suppose it depends who the person is and whether they are a part of the same ‘camp’ or ideology. She does not correct Tim, Larry, prima, Lina, even when they make rude and uncalled remarks. But she does, with me. Intransigence I think is the proper word to use here! Enjoy the rest of the day!

  26. Sylvia says:

    He first blogged as Inhisservice. At a point in time I told him no more comments for that day.

    When he persisted I blocked him. He came back again that evening as Evictedbysylvia (I blocked those because I knew it was him)

    The following morning he was back as Lostsheep2011 – claiming to be a canon lawyer in California. He has since admitted that he is in fact in Pembroke.

    • Lostsheep2011 says:

      As a final thought on this thread, here us the matter NOT taken out if context. My reply began with a reply to a question posed to me by Leona:

      Hi there!

      I am not aware of the McCann case you speak of. If he is a convicted sex offender he could not possibly be functioning as a priest, unless the Archbishop has lost his mind or this priest has flown below the radar and landed in the Archdiocese from outside, which I doubt. Is this McCann a convicted sex offender of recent times? If he is, the matter below that I write about would have come into play.

      No priest can function in a diocese without the requisite faculties given him by the bishop. Naturally, and particularly as a result of these disgusting crimes against the innocent, no bishop could have a priest functioning if he is a convicted sex offender, particularly because of newer legislation. Legislation was initiated by Pope John Paul II and further revised by Pope Benedict. These cases MUST be referred to the Holy See (the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) for further action. The Congregation will tell the bishop of the diocese how to proceed. Please note: the bishop will be TOLD. The bishop has no choice but to refer the file to Rome, as will be the case with this Borne matter, now that it has been adjudicated in criminal court. There could be a Canonical Trial to deal with the cleric concerned, but mostly the Holy See has been, by decree, laicisizing these convicted clerics. One suspects that the Borne matter might have a conclusion within six months – obviously the Congregation has a good number of these cases to deal with at present.

      It is my guess that he will be given the boot and rightly so. He will never function as a priest again for the rest of his life.

      Naturally, there is the matter of civil liability. Will the victim(s) seek civil action against Borne personally or the diocese? The victim (1979) in which the guilty verdicts were rendered is the most obvious person to seek damages. Does Borne have anything to go after? Is there clear evidence that will prove that the diocese had information about Borne’s antics and did nothing to stop him? We shall see, probably over the next few years.

      Sylvia says:
      November 25, 2011 at 10:14 pm
      Inhisservice, I repeat, slow down. Your constant posting make it impossible for others to try to follow other posts. I will have to restrict you if you can’t manage to do so yourself.

      That aside, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Father Jack McCann, convicted child molester, was functioning freely in the Archdiocese of Ottawa for years. Father Ed MacNeil omi, convicted child molester, was functioning freely as a priest for years. Ditto Father Michael J Walsh. All three were discovered in the past year. All three had faculties to function.

      As for canonical trials, the fact that the three molesters mentioned above were still functioning as priests speaks for itself.

      Inhisservice says:
      November 25, 2011 at 10:20 pm
      Thanks for the spanking mom – I will try to behave.

      I do know what I am talking about – try to keep up ok?

      There is newer legislation from John Paul II, I believe 2001 is the date. I refer you to the document – short form SST!

      OBVIOUSLY if the convictions were prior to 2001, the legislation was NOT yet in force – get it?

      Don’t worry Sylvia. Enough energy wasted on this thread!

  27. Reality Checker says:

    Wow – get your head out of the sand. Sylvia has very GOOD reasons for blocking people from this blog and I certainly do not have to defend her desicion to do so – she’s quite capable of doing that herself !!! She’s NOT the only one (whether she’s the moderator or not) who dislikes your buttons!!!
    I know a few good priests in the counselling buisness – perhaps I can recommend one. to you (Anyone know if Grecco is still counselling?)

  28. Reality Checker says:

    Got to go to work….so I am not going to further partake. And Lost sheep…..something I learned a very long time ago……DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!!!
    A troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.


  29. Lina says:

    Thanks for that info. Sylvia.

    Many a times I went off the edge and rightly so you stated your point clearly to me. I gladly learned my lesson more than once.

    The Borne fiasco is rocking the Diocese of Pembroke to the core. More fall out is still to come.

    In all this we cannot forget the victims. There are more out there that are still hurting and afraid.

    I found out many folks know more about Borne but are afraid to come forward for whatever reasons. Lots are angry and were deceived by this priest and feel they have lost some kind of control. They are trying to find peace but it is all in the healing process they may be experiencing.

    One thing that hurts me they know Borne did something bad and it’s criminal. Yet…in their next sentence they wish the victims would stay quiet and stop causing this disruption in their lives.

    No wonder clergy abuse victims feel so alone and many take decades to come forward.

    It is a well know fact in Pembroke the nuns use to let certain people use the pool for certain health needs, etc… My own niece use to bring physical and handicapped children there. Seniors spent some times there also. I believe these nuns stop this lending the pool years ago because they could not keep up (financially) with the pool’s upkeep.

    At one point Borne and some other males were at that pool many years ago. I am only repeating what one parent told me about their son. Their son does not like Borne because what happened there. What happened there only Borne and the others there with him knows.

    When this parent son heard about Borne’s conviction he was glad that Borne finally got caught.

    According to the parent their were no children at the pool.
    So I gave my own views to that parent perhaps their were homosexual activities/playing going on? The parent did not want to go into it. The subject was changed.

    I am finish with this unless I get more concrete information.

    Enough for today.

Leave a Reply