3AW's Neil Mitchell confirms Fr Bob Maguire's status as the priest-hero of the anti-Catholic media

No one who has been exposed to Neil Mitchell's anti-Catholic fetish would have been surprised to hear another session this morning on Archbishop Hart and the Catholic Church. When I heard on television's news bulletins this morning that media darling Fr Bob Maguire was asked by Archbishop Hart to hand in his resignation I knew there would be a Pavlov-dog reaction.

Why has Fr Maguire been asked to resign?

The reason is a straightforward matter for Catholic priests, something Mitchell shows himself ignorant of. Indeed, he continually shows he knows little about the Catholic Church, its beliefs, its philosophical defence, and why millions of people call themselves Catholic. The basis for his comments and interventions is his anti-Catholic fantasies. Those fantasies are continually reinforced by the attention he gets from the fellow anti-Catholics he draws from dark holes whenever he goes to town on the Church.

The straightforward reason for Fr Maguire's resignation is the stipulation in canon law that all priests hand in their resignation when they turn 75 years. Archbishop Hart outlines the canon law requirements and their reasons in an article in the Herald-Sun today. The reasons are sensible. Mitchell says he has read it, but you would hardly think so. Ignoring those sensible reasons, as he usually does with information that would disturb his fantasies, he thinks there is an agenda there. He has not said what that agenda is, but it is not hard to fathom. The Church is up to its old deceitful, corrupt, power-hungry ways. Mitchell shares this fantasy with his constituents.

Fr Maguire is reported as sticking up for the battler and helping the disadvantage. I don't question those reports. But you do not have to be a Catholic priest to stick up for the disadvantage. And this is the issue for me: Fr Maguire's action and behaviour as a priest.

Fr Maguire makes it very clear, especially when there is a microphone and a camera in front of him, that he does not give a fig for the Church's hierarchy and their "rules". He gives the impression that he views Church teaching in the same way. In a nutshell, he gives a convincing impression that he has the same view of rules and doctrine as anti-Catholics like Mitchell and compromised Catholics - those that appear for births, marriage and funerals. For those of us who accept the fullness of Catholic belief Fr Maguire is at least an embarrassment, if not harmful for the Catholic Church.

I see people throwing their arms up in disbelief at such an assertion. Rules for the sake of rules etcetera, etcetera! This is the typical misapprehension. You see, recognising the legitimate authority of the successors of St Peter and accepting and acting according to the Church's teaching will in the long run be more beneficial to the individual and society than otherwise.

It is an irony that Mitchell unwittingly gave support for this on his program this morning. He and expert legal commentator for 3AW, David Galbally, spent some time glowingly endorsing Fr Maguire and his matey maverick qualities that make him so special, and then went on to discuss the problem of youth violence in Melbourne.

They agreed that the problem is deeper than alcohol. They then began talking about upbringing and education. They were right to take that tack, as I have continually said in previous comments. The problem is one of moral education. Young people these days have little or no respect for authority. It's a major reason for the lack of restraint in young men who resort to violence against anyone (young or old) who cross their paths.

Fr Maguire is a great example of one who gives the finger to properly constituted authority, an authority that he has publicly vowed to obey.

Comment: gerard@gerardcharleswilson.com