Maike Hickson Follow Maike Lifesite News

Cormac Murphy-Oconnor

Pope Francis told Cardinal Gerhard Müller in 2013 to stop investigating abuse allegations against British Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, according to a highly-placed Vatican source who spoke to Marco Tossati. Murphy-O’Connor, as a member of the “Sankt [St.] Gallen mafia,” played a pivotal role in getting Jorge Bergoglio elected Pope in 2013.

A source from England with inside knowledge of the case told LifeSiteNews that a woman alleges the cardinal had himself been involved in abusing her when she was 13 or 14 years old and that she was the reason for the investigation by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).

Tosatti and LifeSiteNews have worked together on this joint story for some weeks now. We have shared our findings with each other.

Tosatti had previously revealed what he learned in September 2013 from a high-ranking Vatican source – “an extremely good source, who was then in the government of the Curia,” and he adds that his source has “learned [it] from those directly concerned.” – that Cardinal Müller, then Prefect of the CDF, was interrupted by the Pope while saying Mass at the Church of Santa Monica (next to the CDF building) for a small group of German students. But now Tosatti reveals that the reason for the interruption was to demand that an investigation into Cardinal O’Connor be halted.

As Tosatti puts it in an article for First Things last year: His secretary joined him at the altar: “The pope wants to speak to you.” “Did you tell him I am celebrating Mass?” asked Müller. “Yes,” said the secretary, “but he says he does not mind—he wants to talk to you all the same.” The cardinal went to the sacristy. The pope, in a very bad mood, gave him some orders about a dossier concerning one of his friends, a cardinal.

This event took place in June of 2013, not long after Pope Francis had been elected Pope.

According to Tosatti’s newly released report, that cardinal and friend of the pope was Cardinal Murphy O’Connor, former Archbishop of Westminster, England and President of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales. As the Italian journalist explains: “He was accused of abuse by a woman,” and that woman had insisted for years on her claims and “had finally filed a complaint with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”

Tossati describes his source as a “high-ranking exponent of the Curia.” He reports that the source “was very amazed” at this event involving the Pope, both about the way in which the communication took place, and also about the message itself.

“He [the Pope] should have said: let me see the dossier, bring me the results. Do not order the investigator to act in a specific way a priori. These are things that leave us very perplexed,” said Tossati’s source.

Tosatti says he “asked for confirmation from the competent offices, without receiving an answer.” LifeSiteNews reached out to the office of Cardinal Müller, asking for a denial or a confirmation of the story, but the answer was only that there would be no comment made. That is to say, we received a non-denial. LifeSiteNews also reached out to the Vatican Press Office, asking for a confirmation or denial of the story. Should they respond, we will update the report.

Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor died on September 1, 2017, without ever seeing a proper investigation of these charges.

After hearing this story as related by Marco Tosatti, LifeSiteNews reached out to a reliable source from England who is very well informed about exactly that same lady who had been accusing the English cardinal.

According to this English source, the lady has never gone public with her charges. But she has been in contact with Church authorities for about 15 years now, without ever having received a thorough investigation of her claims. This lady is already an acknowledged abuse victim, having received a settlement from the Archdiocese. She had been abused, when she was 13 or 14 years of age, by Father Michael Hill.

The pedophile Father Hill was imprisoned for five years in 2002 for abusing three minor children between 10 and 14. He had previously been imprisoned, in 1997, also for abusing children. He is thought to have attacked about 30 boys between his ordination in 1960 and the late 1980s. As The Guardian put it at the time: “His case is particularly notorious because the church’s leader, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, gave him a post despite warnings that he had abused young boys.” Hill had been moved to different parishes, in spite of the ongoing complaints of parents. Finally he underwent therapy in the 1980s.

Murphy-O’Connor, then bishop of the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, had appointed Hill in 1985 and made him chaplain at Gatwick Airport. Hill then was charged with abusing a teenager with learning difficulties who had missed a flight and was visiting the airport’s chapel.

As later reports showed, Murphy-O’Connor had been warned by therapists that Hill would be abusive again. Murphy-O’Connor accepted that the diocese should pay compensation to those victims of Hill, but requested their silence on the matter of their abuse. Murphy-O’Connor had also been accused of trying to pay hush money to Father Hill – some £50,000 to buy his silence when he was released from prison.

Murphy-O’Connor “utterly” denied that claim. It was said that a junior bishop made the offer on his behalf during a visit to Hill’s Belmarsh prison in London.

Another sign of the cardinal’s indulgent leniency toward child abusers is the case of Father Tim Garrett. Fr. Garrett, then a priest in the Portsmouth diocese, was convicted, according to media reports, of taking indecent photographs of boys in the 1980s. Following the advice of a risk assessment showing that Garrett would not be dangerous, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor allowed him to transfer to his own Diocese of Arundel and Brighton. He later regretted that permission, just as he apologized for his mishandling of the Hill case.

The lady who accused Murphy-O’Connor himself of abuse, claims that when Hill abused her in the late 1960s, there were several other priests present and involved. She claims that Murphy-O’Connor was among them. She, who then lived in what is now the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, had entered in the early 2000s into an agreement with the Diocese and received £40,000 payment for the abuse of Father Hill.

Murphy-O’Connor had been the Bishop of Arundel and Brighton from 1977 until 2000, when he was appointed Archbishop of Westminster. He was also a member of the Sankt Gallen Group that tried to get Jorge Bergoglio elected, first in the 2005 conclave, and then again in 2013.

The story of the female victim of abuse is a story of delayed justice and denial of due process. Since she now lives in the Diocese of Portsmouth, she started to express her accusations to Church officials there. But sometime between 2009 and 2010, she also contacted the Archdiocese of Westminster with her allegations. Cardinal Vincent Nichols, who has been Archbishop of Westminster since 2009 – and thus the successor of Murphy-O’Connor – refused to investigate the matter.

When Murphy-O’Connor was asked, in 2010, by Pope Benedict XVI to be the head of the Apostolic Visitation to Ireland in order to examine the abuse crisis there, people in the Diocese of Portsmouth were concerned that the abuse allegations against Murphy-O’Connor would then come to light and destroy the credibility of the Apostolic Visitation.

In 2011, according to our English source, the Diocese of Portsmouth, together with the Diocese of Northampton, contacted the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then under Cardinal William Levada, in order to request an investigation of the claims of that female victim by Rome and to protest Westminster’s refusal to follow the national safeguarding protocols. It was then Charles Scicluna, today the Archbishop of Malta, who requested that all the files from England be sent to him in person. A person from the Diocese of Portsmouth flew to Rome and delivered the files to Scicluna. It is understood that he began an investigation. However, in 2012, Scicluna became the Auxiliary Bishop of Malta and was thus removed from the Murphy-O’Connor case at the CDF. It was then Monsignor Robert W. Oliver who, after the departure of Monsignor Scicluna, met in 2013 with one of the English bishops in Rome in order to discuss the matter.

During that time, the Archdiocese of Westminster was finally agreeing, for the first time, to meet with the female victim. One of the auxiliary bishops – now a diocesan bishop elsewhere in England – met with her together with the diocesan safeguarding head, but still did not agree to start an investigation, according to the source.

Those within the Catholic Church in England who support this victim’s cause argue that, independently of whether this lady speaks the truth or not, the Church must follow her own rules as they are now set up. That means that the accused clergyman should first be withdrawn from the exercise of his office, and then an investigation should be started. Depending on the result of the investigation, when it is completed, the accused clergyman is to be either reinstated or punitively removed. The protocols make no distinction between the treatment for a priest or deacon and that for a bishop or a cardinal.

As our source in England relates, there have been repeated attempts, on the side of good bishops, to request a Church investigation into the case of this female victim. They insisted that the Church has to follow the standing rules. Yet, as our source says, Murphy-O’Connor has been treated “as if he were above the law.”

Our source points out that, in his own career, Murphy-O’Connor always “stood very lightly with regard to the Church’s moral and doctrinal teaching.” In one interview, Murphy-O’Connor made it clear that he is not opposed to non-practicing homosexuals being in the priesthood. He then said: “I think the Church must judge the people who are ordained on what kind of person they are, not on their sexuality. And I think that there will be men, probably a very small minority, who might have a homosexual orientation. Obviously, if they are practicing, this would exclude them [from ordination]. But I would not say that a person who has a homosexual tendency is necessarily debarred.”

He also rejected the claim of a connection between homosexuality and child abuse: “All I would say is that it does seem to be established that the question of child abuse has nothing directly at all to do with homosexuality.”

The Englishman John Smeaton, chief executive of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, the world’s oldest pro-life group, and co-founder of Voice of the Family, told LifeSiteNews the following about Cardinal Murphy O’Connor: “However deeply disturbing it is, it is very much for the good of the Church that evils which have been deliberately hidden by Church leaders are coming to light.” He gave as an example that the “late Cardinal Murphy O’Connor is on record for seeking to cover up evil. In 2008 it was revealed that the Cardinal had approved an ethics code for St. John and St. Elizabeth’s hospital which effectively accommodated referrals for abortion and other unethical procedures.”

Professor Luke Gormally, a former member of the hospital’s ethics committee commented at the time: “How can the Church in this country effectively defend the sanctity of life when its Chief Shepherd is prepared to approve a code which effectively accommodates referrals for abortion?”

John Smeaton concluded: “Church officials at the very highest level, including the Holy Father, must learn the lesson of recent revelations which have so scandalized the faithful: The cover-up of evil has got to stop.”

Perhaps most importantly, Murphy-O’Connor is said to have helped Pope Francis to get elected. Austen Ivereigh, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s former assistant, said that days prior to the March 12 conclave in Rome,

Murphy-O’Connor was tasked by the St. Gallen “mafia” to inform Jorge Bergoglio of a plan to get him elected. As Ivereigh described in his 2014 book on Pope Francis, Murphy-O’Connor was also tasked with lobbying for Bergoglio among his North American counterparts as well as acting as a link to those from Commonwealth countries. So, when Bergoglio met the English cardinal after his election, he said, “You’re to blame!”

As The Guardian puts it: “A few months after his election, the former Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was apparently lightheartedly to credit Murphy-O’Connor, when the two met at a papal audience. The pope pointed to his old friend and said, ‘You’re to blame!’”
Murphy-O’Connor, it became clear, was an old friend of Bergoglio. As The Guardian’s obituary states,

Murphy-O’Connor called Pope Francis “my man”: “And, of course, his [Murphy-O’Connor’s] presence in Rome in 2013 [was in order] to witness the election of his friend as Pope Francis. He looked on in pleasure at the impact made by the Argentinian whom he liked, jokingly, to refer to as ‘my man.’”

So, based on the revelation from Marco Tossati’s source in the Vatican, it would seem that Bergoglio, after his election, especially thanked Murphy-O’Connor by telling Cardinal Müller to halt the investigation against him. As of this date, the abused lady’s complaints have never been thoroughly investigated, neither in England, nor in Rome. And with the help of Tosatti’s own report, we now know some of the reasons why.

Similar to McCarrick, Murphy-O’Connor is known to have later speciously shown himself to the public as being a hardliner with regard to abuse cases. “Roman Catholic bishops found to be flouting the new guidelines on child protection will be held to account, or expected to resign,” is the headline of a 2003 article quoting Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor. However, as with the McCarrick case in the U.S., the truth is now gaining upon the Church’s hierarchy that has been evasively looking the other way.

In England, there is currently a government-commissioned independent investigation into all sex abuse cases in society, to include those in the Catholic Church. This investigation has the legal power to compel the production of evidence. For this investigation, a so-called “Truth Project” has been set up, whereby victims of sexual abuse of minors may now come and relate their story.

Our source tells us this female victim may have contacted that same Truth Project, since several weeks ago, the investigators requested the Archdiocese of Westminster the release of all the files pertaining to allegations against Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor.

It would be important now that four dioceses release their files to the Truth Project concerning this woman’s case: Arundel and Brighton; Westminster; Portsmouth, and Northampton (which submitted the case to the CDF, together with Portsmouth). Bishop John Arnold (now of Salford), who was at the time involved in refusing to investigate the case in Westminster, should also release his files.

Thus, as it seems, the Catholic Church is now sitting upon a ticking time bomb. And on top of that time bomb sits Pope Francis.

This report was consciously published on September 24, the Feast of Our Lady of Walsingham – Patroness of the Catholic Church in England – and on the day of the beginning of the English bishops’ Ad Limina visit to Rome.

John-Henry Westen contributed to this report. The report has been checked by our English source for accuracy.


One or two of the usual moaners will complain about this article bring from LifeSite News.

But what really matters is whether or not the story is true.

And it is!

The story was borne out by this weeks evidence before the IICSA.

CMOC got Francis elected Pope and to thank him Francis blocked the exposure of CMOC as a paedo.

This shows CMOC in a very had light.

But more importantly, it shows Francis as a greasy South American gangster.

I have now completely lost the tiny bit of respect and hope I had for Bergoglio.


‘’You are equating an allegation with a conviction. No need for a trial in your world.’’
I gather you went the the Diplomatic college in Rome, no? Were you there the same year as Elsie by any chance?
What year were you conservrated?


There’s the Gayenooth problem.
Too many at prayer and exposition of the Blessed Sacrament,
instead of exposition of their bits on grindr.


Currently 70 students at Gaynooth? But there were only 5 students in the video… and where were the queens?


The running commentary in the video said there ‘Were currently 70 students studying at Oscott.’


Yes. But the president at the time was Hugh Connolly. The video is a few years old.


The other reason this should be investigated is that it says somewhere that other clergy were witness to the abuse. While the publicity focuses on the big names, these others could still be in contact with children.


Francis should be impeached! This is a quid pro quo if ever there was one. You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.How can he preach righteousness, truth and justice to anyone if this is what he’s up to. The revelations of this organisation just keep getting worse. From the top to the bottom of this organisation stink. It is corrupt corrupt corrupt. Why is mainstream media not all over this? By their silence they are complicit. This isn’t just about abuse of power. It is about abuse of vulnerable people. Francis should hang his head in shame


The issues here are really quite simple:

1. The clerical abuse epidemic has been alive and kicking in the RC Church for a very long time, and is still alive and kicking (as in the Jolley case of last week.)

2. The current leadership of the Church does not get the genesis, extent and seriousness of the epidemic, and is keen to get it cleared up as a ‘problem to be solved’ so that they can ‘move on with business as usual’ This viewpoint is cultural and theological, inculcated in them by their whole training and being, and sees abuse as a moral matter which can be solved by forgiveness and prayer. They simply do not get its depth and scope, and the way in which these behaviours have to do with much deeper issues such as psychology, sexuality, emotions, social factors, power, authority etc. etc. As was clear from recent IICSA testimony, the leadership simply does not understand the suffering and needs of the victim / survivors, who so often come second and third in their thought processes and action, behind the need to protect at all costs the reputation and standing of the Church and the clergy.

3. The current leadership does not understand that the current theology and practice of priesthood is a factor in enabling abuse in the church – by clericalism, hierarchy and exceptionalism – which allows the clerical caste to believe their own hype and enables them to be abusers without fear.

4. The way that seminarians in this age are trained for ministry is not fit for purpose and reinforces the dysfunction of 3. We have seen numerous examples of this in this blog, and have even seen an Archbishop removing his seminarians from Maynooth because even that Archbishop could see that there were funny goings on there.

5. The current leadership in the Church has not just failed as in 2 and 3, but also by failing to ensure that adequate and effective means are put in place to deal with the abuse crisis, not just the abusers but especially the victim / survivors. Testimony to IICSA showed clearly that bishops were doing a variety of things in different ways, rather than following clear and consistent policies and processes. They are and have been all over the place on this matter.

6. Even when there are policies and processes to be followed, the leadership wilfully failed to follow them, in specific cases, as in the case of CMOC, so engendering a sense of coverup and corruption, and further undermining what little trust and integrity the Church might still retain. It could be that this behaviour goes right to the top, to Pope Francis.

7. Given all of this, the Church has shown itself incapable of understanding, appreciating and acting in the matter of abuse, indeed it has done ongoing damage to the vicim / survivors and to the faithful of the Church by these failings. In view of this, it is important that the Church loses the right to self-regulate in this matter, and probably in many other areas of its life, and oversight is given to objective, independent and trusted secular bodies, who can bring expertise, insight and wisdom in to the abuse crisis and force the Church and its leaders to do the right things: listen to, value and support healing for victim / survivors; put in place processes that make it impossible for a clerical abuser to remain in any kind of ministry; to report every instance of suspected abuse to the police, including anything revealed in confession; ensure that the future generation of priests are trained in such a way that they are psychological, emotionally, socially and sexually mature and grounded, as well as theologically, in a system that is fit for purpose; to create a priesthood that is shorn of any clericalism and privilege, so that our priests really as servants rather than masters.


As to no 7 in @ 9:46, there is already a model for this, albeit in a smaller way, at Ampleforth, where the business of safeguarding has been taken out of the hands of the monks and monastery, and given over to lay people and solicitors, it having been established that the clergy were simply unwilling and incapable of ordering the business of safeguarding.


Very good at 9:46am but, regards your 4th point, on that Archbishop who could see there were “funny goings on” in Maynooth – what he was too blind to see was that one of his own seminarians was at the very epicentre of those “funny goings on”.

That innocent wee lamb was then moved to Rome and it was only pressure from such places as this blog that made the ever so insightful Archbishop finally SEE that he wasn’t going to get away with allowing this boyo to continue on his merry way.


An excellent analysis sir/madam. I think you may have begun commenting fairly recently: the style and quality is similar to other recent welcome contributions.


I’m @ 9:46.

Well, I think about these things pretty deeply, and try and approach them with a logical and rational mind. Watching IICSA has been interesting, and seeing the forensic, investigative and legal approach to working out what has gone wrong, who has done what, and what is happening now. I must say that if the witness is a clergyman, he is usually all over the place, shifty, dodgy and evasive. If the witness is a layperson, invariably they are incisive, direct, and have a sense of honesty about them. What does that tell you about our Church leaders ? I believe that they are helpless in trying to raise themselves out of a clerical and Church culture in which they have been brought up and educated as boy and man (which sees the Church and its reputation as paramount at the expense of anything else; loyalty to the institution that owns them, controls them, and on whom they rely for everything), and they simply do not have the capacity to see things afresh or anew or to see or understand the the new reality. That is why they need to be bypassed, at least on the matter of abuse.


Anon@ 9:46 & 4:24: Thank you: more incisive comment and very welcome too. The only other thing I’d add is that some of them are, Ahem! just not “very bright” either. Stripping away the fine clerical vestments can be very revealing in more ways than one!


You are right about the ‘brightness’ issue. The classic path of a Catholic priest back in the time that our current crop of bishops were youngsters, was that of the bright working class / lower middle class lad from an Irish Catholic family being ‘talent spotted’ by the local (invariable Irish) parish priest, put through the junior seminary system, and then major seminary. Very few of them went to proper universities and did rigorous degrees. They did the Catholic / Pontifical degree stuff, and in those days probably just the seminary certificate. Ordination was supposed to bestow one them all the instant wisdom that they needed. So, I agree with you. Not very bright. Mind you (and he was mentioned in ICCSA with some plaudits), Marcus Stock of Leeds seems to be a man of brains, wisdom and quality. Of course, he’s a convert, and went to Oxbridge, before embarking on the lamentably intellectually lacking seminary stuff. A man to watch, I think.


‘….sees the Church and its reputation as paramount at the expense of anything else’…
It’s even above the Gospel of Jesus Christ. These people have ‘lost the plot’. Are they brainwashed?


Bishop Pat, will you be at Easons in Enniskillen tomorrow? D’Arcy is signing copies of his new book (the 2nd part of his memoirs). It deals with clerical abuse and his run in with the (red hatted weasel), Cahal Daly, on the Late Late Show and the fallout after it.

He might sign a personal copy for you for an extra fee. If anyone is around Enniskillen tomorrow and spots a big Merc without a big end (has since been fixed at a garage in Arney) you will know Brian’s in town.


Has D’Arcy spoken out yet in condemnation of the horrendous attacks on the present directors of the former Quinn family businesses.
If I remember correctly he was very much to the fore supporting the Quinn’s when things went ‘tits up’


I don’t believe big Merc driving Brian has done so yet. Then again, if there’s no money involved he won’t be interested. Why are so many gullible people taken in by his false charm. It’s all an act ye know. His Passionist brethren are not taken in and some detest his constant name dropping.


He wants us to think he’s very holy and very moved by human suffering 😊


Please don’t mock Fr Brian OBE. He regrets never having the chance to marry and is thought very highly of by Donegal Daniel, Sir Cliff and anybody else HE can think of. He still pines for the Graan and his new home in Crossgar (he’s rarely in the place) is now overrun by drunken young louts at weekends. So much so when on the rare occasion he’s in residence the big car is parked well out of view. Every celebrity funeral he’s Sure to attend and take over the joint.


Oh hello, I’m new to all this (apart form Grindr of course) would anybody like to buy a long red Cardinal’s Scarlet Cappa Magna? I will not be needing it anymore.
If you are interested, please contact Sr Wragg c/o Ambrosden Avenue, London.
Ps Ambitious priests please do reply lol


I have a cardinal’s black and red piped classic xassock with cape, if anyone is interested.


11.10: Pat, tell us first where and when and in whose company you wore that outfit! I have no problem imagining you in it since it’s your gayness that loves this kind of frilly dressing up!!


What’s your asking price, Your Eminence?

I’ve been looking for one of those for ages. At last my wardrobe will be complete and just in the nick of time for Dublin.

Your ever so ‘umble and obedient servant,



Dear Timo, I payed over £800 for the scarlet Cardinals’ cappa magna (well, you did, really!) But if you give me £600 I will throw in scrambled eggs and a couple of slices of brown toast. How’s that?
+ Elsie x


Bishop Pat, I see Sr. Wragg and her address on here today from another poster. Do you think she would appreciate any fan mail as she has become such an iconic figure. It would be done in a fun and tasteful manner. Maybe Vin might not approve. Could we all send her a postcard from well wishers.


I think that is the best idea I have ver heard! Let’s do it!
But it must be very polite and done in a way that will not con across as aggressive in any way, shape or form; this is a must!
After all, she did don on the Cardinals beretta; that in itself requires an acknowledgement.


Do we have the exact address for Sr Wragg? I too think this a good idea and want to send her a card.


This is what Elsie said to World Youth: ‘I really want to encourage you to make your way and feel part of the Church; to feel part of your Church; to feel at home there and know you have a part to play. I want to encourage you to play your part to be the apostles of today. I want you to be the Digital disciples of Jesus, the Digital apostles, people who understand the Digital word and can use it to Let other people know something of the joy and consolation of faith.’
Your wish is our command, Elsie 😂🤣 Honestly, yiu coukd t make it up!


3.40: Only a duckhead like you would express so stupid a comment. The Cardinal was putting a real, worthwhile challenge to young people. Thankfully they don’t have your stupidity and hatred…..


the one on the left looks like a ride and he can take me to the cinema anyday. the one on the left looks a little twinky so not my type.


Oh, so THAT’S Vera? Different from how I had imagined. Where were those two when the Oscott video was made three years ago? I thought they would have been the seminary poster boys.


6.19 and 6.20: Anon and Pat: You are both most unkind, unfair and disgustingly ignorant to interpret Brian Darcy’s demeanour in such horribly cynicism. Pat, you claim to have been abused: I was abused and I don’t know about anon at 6.19, but there are many victims/survivors who carry the demeanour of Brian Darcy: what’s wrong with his demeanour? What is it that makes you sneer, ridicule and look so infantile in your comments? Is it because you both have an intense dislike for Brian. We know that you, Pat, despise Brian, which is YOUR problem, not his! Is it that he takes the spotlight from your supposed concern? He is consistent in his condemnation of all forms of abuse. He speaks with a searing honesty about this abuse, abiut the criminal act of abuse and about the church’s complete moral and spiritual failures. When I am not a fan of Brian, I accept his integrity and credibility more than I trust you. I believe that thousands do likewise. Abuse leaves uts scars for life, whether you are 14, 25, 30 or 74. To sneer so cynically at Brian’s demeanour is to show contempt for all who are abused. There are many men, women and children who will quietly suffer abuse in their homes and who may well sit in a similar, almost despairing demeanour. To ridicule in so horrible and un-CHRIST-LIKE a way his pain is to mock all other survivors. Take this from someone who was abused at 15 years of age by a neighbour. I know that crunched gesture of hopelessness and pain. Shame on both of you, 6.19 and Pat!! Shame.


6.25: What might be your motuvation for this video? Jealousy or an attempt to stir up hatred, mockery and ridicule? Perhaps you could join them for the good cause. Let’s give credit where credit is due…


Yeah. Credit where credit is due.
These seminarians will be saddle sore by the time they arrive in Lourdes.
Any word on Hamish McTaggert, Scotland’s answer to Theo- who loves ya baby- Kojak.
What happened to those pics from Lourdes?


Taggart has ongoing proceedings against him
by a certain Scottish Bishop. Watch this space.


Oh come, now; I think we can all be certain that they were saddle sore before they even though about the bike ride.
… they are seminarians—seminarians at Oscott!


Every diocese in Ireland needs to be investigated with the assistance of the Gardai, an Independent Commission,
plus the Hierarchy. There are numerous victims/survivors of Rcc abuse suffering in silence in Ireland.
We know cover up reaches the very top of the hierarchy.


Thanks big Jim. Will do.
I see the De La Salle Order made The Sunday Post dragging their heels re compo to abuse victims.
The never ending story.


What happened to Sean Fagan ?
What happens when theologians are asked to obey rather than discover? Where is the justice in a Church that deploys harsher punishments to those who mention ordaining women than to those involved in child abuse?Marist priest and theologian Fr Seán Fagan was widely admired and respected as a courageous and compassionate pastor. For many years he was critical of rigid stances by the Vatican on issues of conscience and sexual morality.In 1997, he published the book Does Morality Change?, which was denounced by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) as not in keeping with Church teaching. In 2008, the CDF reacted out of all proportion to one of Seáns letters that was printed in The Irish Times, and two years later he was informed that he would be laicised should he publish anything the CDF considered contrary to Church teaching, and should he disclose this censure to the media. If he failed to obey, he would be dismissed from religious life, a punishment that would have rendered him homeless.He expressed a wish to his close friend Angela Hanley that when he died she ought to spill the beans in public on what really went on, to shame our sinful church in the hope that it might prevent further repetitions.


There was an article in The Examiner by Mick Clifford entitled ‘Discord at the heart of vital addiction service?’ Yesterday online which mentioned Patrick Relihan a former priest who is its CEO. It gave his LinkedIn profile etc. There’s an ongoing HSE review into the Service, whatever all that’s about.


Sarah McDonald Aug 12th 2016
A prominent Irish theologian has strongly criticized the absence of Irish bishops from the funeral Mass of moral theologian, Marist Fr. Sean Fagan, who was censured by the Vatican in 2008, and who died on July 15.
Augustinian Fr. Gabriel Daly, 88, wrote in a blog on the Association of Catholic Priests’ website that the presence of a bishop at Fr Fagan’s funeral would have been “a golden occasion to express metanoia and the readiness to respond more sensitively to the message of the Gospel” and it would have meant so much to the Marist priest’s family.
The Augustinian, who recently published The Church — Always in Need of Reform, said the presence of a bishop at Fagan’s funeral would have given witness to the triumph of Gospel values over institutional church attitudes. “Regrettably no bishop was present,” he wrote. “I believe that this omission was not personal; it was institutional.”
“It is highly probable that many bishops knew that the Roman Curia had behaved in a thoroughly unjust and unchristian fashion when it attacked six Irish priests who were giving admirable and enlightened service to God’s people,” he continued. “No bishop expressed public disapproval of what was happening, or came to the defense of priests who were being treated so appallingly by men who would have described themselves, somewhat implausibly, as Christians.”


Were Bishops present at the funeral Mass of Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado? Same institution, different country.


The evening that Denis McGinley, the school master, was convicted his family home had a very special visitor. None other than the lately deceased Seamus Hegarty, then bishop of Raphoe.
McGinleys family were a prosperous and wealthy lot in the Falcargh-Gortahork area.
Despite the fact that some young men took their own lives,allegedly from the deep personal torment they had suffered at the hands of the pervert master and the other clerical reptile Greene, the bishop was more interested in supporting and showing solidarity with his ‘own type of church folk’
To hell with the victims and their families. They were only the ‘little people’ in Hegarty’s eyes. They weren’t part of the ‘magic circle’ who entertained Hegarty and felt it was a badge of honour in the Donegal community to be seen to be ‘well in’ with the bishop.
Hegarty got switched in due course to Derry but on the day before a report was published into the seedy goings on during his watch in Raphoe he resigned. He cited an irreversible mental illness !
Pat, they are a load of dirty, rotten sneeze balls. Hegarty is now dead. I’m sure he will have taken lots more info about cover ups to his grave.


The BBC report said the sex abusing priest Eugene Greene died earlier this year. Can any Donegal reader tells us if he got a priests funeral with episcopal attendance and full honours


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s