tomahawk
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@samuel j wrote:
And what would they class the current state of St.Colman’s with crumbling plasterwork, water ingress all over the place and the doors… to name few. Would the lack of any planned maintenance program and the utter waste of Joe Publics donations on advisors fees while not a tin of varnish is bought for the doors, as anything else but destruction.
We can beat around the bush forever as to wonderful plans and spend months (years at this stage) arguing points from whatever side of the fence you’re on….but while this is all going on, the place is falling to bits and nothing is being done.
Is this some sort of stuborn attempt to get back at the people of Cobh becasue the re-ordering was stopped…. it certainly starting to reek of it and does seem to hint of a contempt for the people who willingly donated so much…
I assume you are pro – ordering and if that be so, fair enough you are entitled to your views but the ‘silent majority’ as you call it would want to get moving and come out in the open with any new plans or you’ll have nothing to reorder. We are approaching another winter and had one of the wetttest summers on record…god only knows what the state of water damage is by now and what lies in wait to show itself…
Whatever side of the fence one is on can we not agree that the structure itself is crying out for some tlc.
Sam,
As I have stated previously I was indifferent to the present row. The reason I entered this debate was because of the hypocritical attitude of some people using this site who have spent a long time being offensive and abusive to those they disagree with, however when they meet those people in a face to face setting they are courteous and charming.Of course if they didnt have the cover of a web name we wouldnt see half of these posts. I do agree with you that people are genuinely concerned with the fabric of the building I also believe that that concern is shared by people on both sides of the argument and I can say this because I have spoken to people from both sides. I wouldnt be a conspiricy theorist and believe that every move the authorities make has to be examined in detail for the hidden agenda. This should not be a them and us situation, if we leave out the re-ordering for a moment and concentrate on maintenance can we not agree everybody is on the same side.If we can manage to overcome that one who knows maybe we may find some bit of common ground on the bigger issue.I am convinced that as long as we have abuse and smart-ass comments we wont have progress on any issue.@Praxiteles wrote:
Try a few of those on a Cathedral re-ordering ticket at the next local elections in Cobh and see how far they go! Only a suggestion.
There are a number of sitting councillors who support the changes and will be going forward for re-election next June. They are not “single issue “candidates but their position on the issue is well known.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Tommyhack! is not this getting a little boring? Do not let’s be so childish!
Prax. The point was being made that as your colleagues were present at the conference and not being accused of being either clerics or councillors. You continue the infantile practice of mispelling my name and namecalling of others you disagree with and you accuse me of being childish. Take a good look at yourself.
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
You know all Bishop Magee has to do is tell the people of Cobh that he has decided that there will be no re-ordering of the Cathedral and that he is going to ensure that the building is going to be repaired properly and maintained in the future. If he did that one simple thing he would regain the respect of most of the people and they would probably help him with funding the repairs.
Tomahawk, you were obviously at this conference in Ballincollig. That being so and given that you say you are not a cleric or on any of the diocesan committees you must be a member of the County Council. That being so, you purport to have an inordinate knowledge of the people of Cobh and the working of the HACK.
Are YOU the reason they keep getting away with illegal activities and get planning for appalling wreckovations?
We know they are buddy buddy with someone in Cork County Council as it is the only explanation for what has been going on.The three lay members of FOSCC who accompanied Praxitelles to the conference were neither clerics or councillors!!
@samuel j wrote:
Should this not read “Bishop Magee of Bishop of Cloyne has cut a very large rod for his back in that he has set a precedent for disloyalty from his priests and disunity in general”
I would echo Gianlorenzos point “I cannot imagine who you have been speaking to, if you get the impression that there is a ‘silent majority in favour of this destruction.” With respect I fear you may have been talking to a very select group of YES MEN as I have spoken/discussed with many and I must say it always came out as a silent minority were in favour.
Heads are still in the sand I fear as this is not what the people want or ever wanted. Restoration of St.Colmans not anything else and thats what they/like I thought we were donating to…….
Take a look at St. Colman’s now….. a disgrace…. and all OUR money wasted………:mad:
The silent majority do not view it as destruction!
@Praxiteles wrote:
Any news of the famous Ballincollig Conference organised by the CLoyne HACK and the Cork County Council?
Reports would be very interesting.
Most interesting would be an account of the obviously biased theological presentation.
Stop the charade Prax. werent you and three of your colleagues present at the meeting. I believe that you are someone who aspires to succeed Bishop Magee as Bishop of Cloyne if so you have cut a very large rod for your back in that you have set a precedent for disloyalty from your priests and disunity in general. Perhaps if you didnt serve so long in your cushy number and had to work in the parishes with your fellow priests doing pastoral work you would have a true feeling for what day to day life is really like for the laity and you would share in their worries, anxieties,their grief and indeed their joyous occasions, then you wouldnt have so much free time to be on sites like this.Remember Prax we reap what we sow.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Tomahak! many thanks for this very sensible approach. Openmindedness is indeed a very great quality and one which needs cultivation through education, experience of life, and the philosophical quest for wisdom in truth. I am sure that when some of those those involved in the Cathedral controversy in Cobh begin to cultivate the urbane attitude favoured by yourself, then of course, progress can be made.
Praxiteles, for instance, is aware that a proposal for an altar, modelled on the Basel altar piece, to be placed in the present sancturay, was made some time ago to the Restoration Committee people but not a single word wass heard about it.
Then, D. O’Callaghan, in his (hardley less than urbane) book Hand to the Plough, takes a stance that is utterly uncompromising and deeply entrenched. It is very doubtful that that represents an open minded approach.
As Praxiteles has said, this is not the time to raise unplesant controversies, either from the past or in the future, as the Bishop of Cloyne prepares to retire. Praxiteles would suggest that a pacific atmosphere be allowed to develop so that he can pay his adieu in a dignified manner and without having to run the gauntlet of pickets or other unseemly things. Over to you now!
Prax. I have no interest in dominating or flogging this issue to death but rather re-visit the past both sides need to be openminded to allow us all to move forward
@Praxiteles wrote:
Praxiteles seems to recall that the democratic option mentioned here or something similar to it was mooted by Counsellor Mulvihill in late 2005. At that time, he rather unrelistically spoke of a plebicite.
Tonahak is of course correct in saying that the vast majority of the people of Cloyne support their bishop but very many of them, indeed the vast majority of them, would be going along with the idea of “pulling the Cathedral to bits” – as many of them put it.
The true test of that statement will not be found in the politicisation of the FOSCC – either actively by running candidates or passively by eleiminating hostile candidates. Rather, it will be found in the amount of cash the people would be prepared to subscribe if told that they are giving money for the wreckage of the Cathedral interior. Praxiteles suspects that the results of such would be a very thin harvest.
Indeed, not even the published returns for the parish of Cobh manage to hide the fact that parochial subscriptions have collapsed since the Cathedral controversy began. There are cases of people who will not only not put cash in the Cathedral collection baskets but some even refuse to pass them to their neighbours. Indeed, so entrenched and regular is this situation that the collectors kow at this stage where they need not bother distribuiting the baskets.
Despite a huge drive to collect money from the “corporate sector” for the Cathedral Restoration relatively little in fact derived from that source. The returns for the Restoration Committee to the Companies Office, as far as Praxiteles can remember, only mention one corporate gife – a mere £30.000 or so. Other than that and the various funds subscribed by public bodies under different grant schemes, the vast majority of the funds spent on the Cathedral restoration came directly from the people of Cobh Parish and the diocese of Cloyne (as they did for the building of the Cathedral). However, when the people (and I do not mean that in any socialist sense) were finally told at the eleventh hour that a reordering was also be on the cards, and when they saw what it might entail (or even a fraction of what it might entail), they did the obvious thing – THEY CLOSED THEIR PURSES and they have kept them that way, Indeed, Praxiteles is of the view that it will take quite a bit of convincing to have them re-open them.
On the other hand, the FOSCC mounted and extremely expensives defense of the Cathedral from the proposed wreckovation on the basis of public subscription. It has to be said that the public response in Cobh andnthroughout Cloyne diocese was overwhelming – indeed, a true demonstration of “popular” sentiment and opinion. Documentation can also be produced to indicate the dirty tricks employed by certain persons (who should have known better) to stifle the legitimate fundraising efforts of the FOSCC. I am quite sure the FOSCC, if necessary, will not mind putting all that in the public sphere. Nonetheless, the FOSCC case continyues to enjoy a broad based popular support.
And then, of course, there was the question that arose last year with regard to the spending of the Cathedral Restoration funds. Praxiteles seems to recall that while something over Euro 100,000 had been spent on unspecified professional fees, only Euro 4,000 had been spent on actual works to the Cathedral – in that case to the Cahedral bells. So, it may well be the case that a revision of administration will proved necessary also if the “people” are to be convinced that their subscribed funds are properly applied and wisely applied.
This test, it seems to Praxiteles, is a much more convincing and democratic one.
PS: Tomahak, many aspects surrounding the Cathedral controversy were very unplesant and, for some people, very shameful. Indeed, you might say they amount to a fettid corpse which is best left to rest buried in the earth of pirification. While Praxiteles can appreciate the issues brought up by Tomahak, unfortunately they also bring with them the consequences of opening old sores which are better left to heal. At this point, especially as Cloyne diocese has entered a very obvious fin de règne, it would most certainly be better to leave sleeping dogs lie. La Belle Epoque touch à sa fin!!!
I do agree with you Prax. that the controversy has been very unpleasant for people on both sides and no side has the monopoly on hurt.In order for us to bridge the divide the practice of mocking and slagging off those we disagree with (as in message no.4729) should cease as indeed should the constant undermining of the Bishop. We all need to be adult in our approach and try to develop cordial relations with each other and look for a formula which would allow us out of the impasse and move forward in christian unity. For all of this to happen we need to be openminded and less entrenched in our positions, our fellow countrymen in the north of this country have have bridged a much greater divide after hundreds of years of conflict.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Praxiteles is glad that some of the matters raised can be corroborated by Tolohak, especiall that FOSCC is not all bad if they collect. But, the main question remains. Subscriptions as a vote?
I think Prax. you would do well as a stand up comedian particularly dressed in your Mons. garb.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Praxiteles seems to recall that the democratic option mentioned here or something similar to it was mooted by Counsellor Mulvihill in late 2005. At that time, he rather unrelistically spoke of a plebicite.
Tonahak is of course correct in saying that the vast majority of the people of Cloyne support their bishop but very many of them, indeed teh vast majority of them, would bot be going along with the idea of “pulling the Cathedral to bits” – as many of them put it.
The true test of that statement will not be found in the politicisation of the FOSCC – either actively by running candidates or passively by eleiminating hostile candidates. Rather, it will be found in the amount of cash the people would be prepared to subscribe if told that they are giving money for the wreckage of the Cathedral interior. Praxiteles suspects that the results of such would be a very thin harvest.
Indeed, not even the published returns for the parish of Cobh manage to hide the fact that parochial subscriptions have collapsed since the Cathedral controversy began. There are cases of people who will not only not put cash in the Cathedral collection baskets but some even refuse to pass them to their neighbours. Indeed, so entrenched and regiular is this situation taht the collectors kbow at this stage where not they need bother distribuiting the baskets.
Despite a huge drive to collect money from the “corporate sector” relatively little ib fact derived from that source. The returns for the Restoration Committee to the Companies Office, as far as Praxiteles can remember, only mention one corporate gife – a mere £30.000 or so. Other than that and the the various funds subscribed by public bodies under different grant schemes, the vast majority of the funds spent on the Cathedral restoration came directly from the people of Cobh Parish and the diocese of Cloyne (as they did for the building of the Cathedral). However, when the people (and I do not mean that in any socialist sense) were fibnally told at the elebenth hour that a reordering was also on the cards, and when they saw what it might entail (or even a fraction of what it might entail), they did the obvious thing – THEY CLOSED THEIR PURSES and they have kept them taht way, Indeed, Praxiteles is of the view that it wioll take quite a bit of convincing to have them re-open them.
And then, of course, there was the question that arose last year with regard to the spending of those funds. Praxiteles seems to recall that while something over Euro 100,000 had been spent on unspecified professional fees, only Euro 4,000 had been spent on actual works to the Cathedral – in that case to the Cahedral bells. So, it may well be the case that a revision of administration will proved necessary also if the “people” are to be convinced that their subscribed funds are properly applied and wisely applied.
This test, it seems to Praxiteles, is a much more convincing and democratic one.
I dont know are you purposely spelling my name incorrectly you have gone from tomahak to tonahak, but that is a different matter. To be fair and honest about it the parish contributions have not collapsed as you allege but in line with every parish and diocese in the country mass attendances have decreased this in fact is more a social and lifestyle issuue than any form of protest. I would agree with you there is anecdotal evidence that some members of the congregation not only will not contribute but will also refuse to pass the basket, there are hundreds in the same congregation who do contribute generously, in fact there is a member of the FOSCC who assists with the collection at 8am mass on Sundays. The sum collected each week is published in the parish newsletter.
@Gianlorenzo wrote:
Tomahawk – Whoever Prax might be, I think you must be a cleric working in the diocese as your reference to the ‘so-called friends’ is exactly how the clergy in Cobh referred to the FOSCC
I can assure you and all other readers that i am not a cleric, i am not involved in any church committee, i am not employed by the Parish of Cobh or the Diocese of Cloyne, I am just a humble lay person. When the present controversy began I was indifferent to it as I prefer to attend religious ceremonies in one of the smaller churches in the parish. I DID attend the oral hearings in Midleton and heard the arguments from both sides.As time has moved on I do believe there is a silent majority in support of Bishop Magee but the best way to test this would be democratically in the ballot box and the friends will have an opportunity to do this next June if they so wish. There is a sitting councillor who makes representations for them already so he wouldnt count as his support base is very wide but let the friends put up a “single issue candidate’ and see what the real support is .
@Praxiteles wrote:
And continuing the multilateral face/name matching initiative, just in case he felt out of it, Praxiteles now adds a nice photograph of Counsellor John Mulvihill, Chariman of the Cobh Urban District Council – that is the one that takes the fees for making planning submissions but does not bother to read them and does think of giving back the money!!
Not wanting to nitpick Prax. but Cllr. John Mulvihill is not Chairman of Cobh Urban District Counci there no longer is any such body but Cobh Town Council, he is Mayor of Cobh and as such one of his functions is to chair council meetings. The Cathedral in Cobh is not Cobh Cathedral but St. Colmans Cathedral. I have asked you twice already and I think you are purposely being evasive coupled with this and having read your posts over the last number of years if I didnt know better I would say you were a priest of the Diocese of Cloyne working outside the diocese.
@Praxiteles wrote:
It is a well known fact that there is not a political bone in Praxiteles’ body – indeed, poor old Praxiteles knows nothing of political ways which is probably a very good thing.
Praxiteles had not realized that there were local elections coming up so soon and, mulling over it, your suggestion to politicise the FOSCC is indeed a very, very, very interesting suggestion. I wonder how the political balance of the various planning authorities in Cork would shift were the FOSCC to run credible candidates in the next elections – or even campaign against certain sitting members who are prepared to accomodate the wrecking of Cobh Cathedral. For instance, what would happen were the FOSCC to direct some political attention to a certain sitting counsellor who in an unprecedented move expelled two of its members from a public meeting of Cobh Urban District Council? Well, this opens up endless prospects. Thanks so vey much for such a wonderful positive and constructive suggestion. Hopefully, the FOSCC are reading and will give the suggestion all due consideration.
Consellor Harrington’s photo was included by Praxiteles here merely to put a face to a name. Nothing else.
I think you hide your light under a bushell and are much more politically astute than you admit to
The friends putting forward candidates would give a true measure of the support they really have. I know I have asked you previously but were you actually present at the oral hearing in Midleton or did you read the transcripts of what Fr. Jones had to say.@Praxiteles wrote:
The HACK “heritage” Conference will be co-chaired by the Kanturk Alwahabi and the present Fine Gael Chairman of Cork County Council, Noel Harrington, from the Bantry electoral district of County Cork. He will certainly have a lot of illuminating things to add to any discussion of “heritage” to say nothing of “liturgy”.
Prax is it necessary to engage in infantile name calling of those you disagree with. i am curious as to why you published Cllr. Harringtons photograph, was it to intimadate him with the local elections coming up in June 2009 and infer that his electorate would turn against him if he is seen to be in “cahoots” with the Diocese.Theres a good idea ,why dont the friends put up a number of candidates in that election and see what support they really have, although they have support on one or two local authotities already.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Here is another comment of the handy Mr. Heffernan at the Midleton Oral Hearing. This is what was said or words to that effect:
Some might think it sounds slightly psychopathic but make of it what you will: I love Cobh Cathedral too but in a way different from the way other people love it.
And then he went on to sign a document RECOMMENDING the gutting of its interior!
I seem to remember a similliar comment from one of the friends -I LOVE MY BISHOP and then he proceeded to castigate him
@Praxiteles wrote:
However, the brightest spark of genius at the HACK conference will undoubtedly be Fr. Paddy Jones who was so helpful to the FOSCC when cross-examined at the Midelton Oral Hearing – you would have thought that he would have had enough of Cork by now and taken the hint from Prof. O’Neill and made a tactical withdrawl.
Prax, were you at the oral hearing. I was there and dont recall Fr. Jones being so helpful. What you must not lose sight of is the planning authority granted the diocese permission to carry out the re-ordering, this was appealed by the so called friends to An Bord Pleanalla, this hearing was chaired by an inspector who listened to the reasons from both sides and found in favour of the diocese.
