THE IRISH NEWS
A victim of clerical abuse has called on Archbishop Eamon Martin to resign, accusing him of a lack of “transparency”.
Sean Faloon made the call after meeting the Catholic primate about the case of former priest Malachy Finegan last month.
From Hilltown in Co Down, Mr Faloon (41) has previously revealed how his abuse began with hugging and kissing after Mass.
Her was later raped and abused by Finegan over a seven-year period from 1990 to 1997.
In 2006 Mr Faloon settled an action against the Diocese of Dromore for a six-figure sum.
He claims that during the conversation with Archbishop Martin he asked why former Bishop of Dromore Dr John McAreavey hadn’t followed up with police in later years.
He claims Archbishop Martin replied by asking him why he hadn’t returned to police when he turned 18 – an age where he didn’t need parental consent.
“The onus was put on me to go back to the police six months later – that’s victim blaming,” he said.
“I think he should resign.”
Eamon Martin shouldn’t only resign. He should never have been appointed in the first place.
He was only appointed for his spinelessness, gutlessness, and lack of intellectual and moral integrity.
Indeed, these negative attributes seem to be the most common attributes of recent generations of RC bishops.
When I was a curate in the fishing port of Kilkeel in the early 1980s, one of my parishioners invited me to view his new fish processing plant.
I saw the fish come on to the assembly line.
First, they cut the fishes heads off.
Then they ripped their bellies open and removed their guts.
Finally, they removed their spines.
And you ended up with fish fillets.
The priesthood and episcopate is exactly like that.
Most of them have had their heads, guts, and spines removed.
And we have ended up with filleted bishops and filleted priests.
And, as the Psalmist laments…..
There is neither priest nor prophet to ply his trade in the land……
Today, Friday 3rd of March, Fr Neil McGarritty, will be sentenced at Glasgow Sheriff Court for 5 charges relating to 4 girls.
Let’s pray for these and his many other victims over the decades who never got their day in court.
The clergy here hope he is given a custodial sentence.
84 replies on “MALACHY FINNEGAN VICTIM DEMANDS EAMONMARTIN’S RESIGNATION.”
Remember Pat, you are a Bishop by default. You are no more full of moral, spiritual or intellectual integrity than any of the Bishops. You have some great human and gospel like qualities but I think your take on Archbishop Martin is unnecessarily harsh, unkind and un-Christ-like. I believe that the leadership in the Church is still too legalistic in their response to abuse survivors. “He claims..” (Mr. Faloon) that Archbishop Martin asked him why he didn’t return to the police? How are we to know since there’s no transcript of a conversation. And I’m sure Archbishop Martin will be surprised at the allegation made about him in this blog piece. It seems that you’ll find any reason to “fillet” all Bishops. But, who’ll fillet you, Pat?
‘You are no more full of moral, spiritual or intellectual integrity than any of the Bishops.’
This is the ‘nobody is any better than us’ argument. You usually hear it used by paedophiles and other criminals.
10:50 true, paedophile protectors and self interested cover up merchants.
And lapsed Cathol ex-seminarians who have embraced unionism.
10.50: You’re ability to understand comments is deficient and defective. I merely stated that Pat is not superior in any way to the Bishops he condemns. He has faults and failings, which he knows, but makes essential points nonetheless. There shouldn’t always be a smashing of people who hold different views. Archbishop Martin doesn’t deserve the harshness spewed at him by you and others. Try to make intelligent comments.
12:47 Nice to see you don’t think commenters who think sexual assault isn’t a problem, should be allowed to hold those views.
10.50: I agree with 12.37pm. Pat isn’t any more moral or spiritual than the many for whom he has disdain and contempt. Pat has indeed many great qualities and has challenged many of us by his persistence but surely we should not play god with others. The Catholic Church did so for too long. Let’s not replace the terrorism of the past with the modern “judge, condemn and crucify” as revenge.
11:43 Better a Unionist than a paedophile protector and all round cover up merchant, Fathers & Co.
Why are you disbelieving what the abuse survivor is claiming?
“I am always anxious to support survivors of abuse.” Yeah, right….
I’m sure bishops anxiety levels rise prior to meeting victims-survivors of abuse. Can I remind you, + Pat is not responsible for covering up CSA for priests. Considering the bishops conference acknowledged a RECKONING on CSA has yet to take place, to what extent are the bishops of Ireland continuing to cover up…?
‘He claims Archbishop Martin replied by asking him why he hadn’t returned to police when he turned 18 – an age where he didn’t need parental consent.’
Your daily illustration by the cult that they don’t have the first idea of how abuse happens and how it affects people. You would think that they’d at least read a couple of books or sites so they don’t ask stupid questions.
Anyone would think they didn’t give a shit.
LikeLiked by 2 people
11:51 They don’t give a shit. They are busy enjoying the spoils of their evil cult and they will feign ill health or declare bankruptcy if the law ever straightens itself out to catch up with them. Cult Mafia they are.
If the Roman Catholic Church weren’t being protected by State Governments and legislators worldwide, it was be forced to liquidate its assets and to settle its debts to victims & survivors but instead the RC continues to abuse and gaslight and proactively deny justice to victims & survivors of church related abuse and corruption.
LikeLiked by 2 people
EVERY Diocese and Religious Order on the island of Ireland needs to be investigated.
Safeguarding MUST be completely independent of the RCC.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes – in EVERY country. The paramountcy principle should reign in all walks of life, more especially in so called ‘religious’ orders and sects. Though, to be fair, 🤮, the RCC does, religiously adhere to collusion and cover ups.
I very much liked the phrase
‘He was only appointed for his spinelessness, gutlessness, and lack of intellectual and moral integrity.’ It does indeed apply, Pat, to most bishops and priests.
It can be ‘soul destroying’ to the people – if we allow it to control our faith, our hope and our love, & the Gifts we use every day, every week at Mass. LET’S NOT ALLOW IT TO. LET’S PUT ON THE ARMOUR OF PAUL and fight the good fight from indoors! ✝️🙏✝️
If you dig down a little in to the detail of McGarrity’s case, you do wonder what he is being found guilty of. Just being a little over affectionate ? Or is there more that we are not being told.
I don’t detect anything horrendously sexual about what is being reported. It doesn’t mean that it isn’t appropriate or a bit creepy. But full on sexual assault ? Doesn’t seem like it to me. In contrast to what Finnegan appears to have been doing all those years ago.
It seems to me that anything that can be deemed ‘appropriate’ is now a crime. Maybe McGarritty needs to cop on and realise that his behaviour is not that becoming of someone who should know better. But sending him to prison for sexual assault ? Not in my book. Unless, as I say, there is something that we are not being told ?
What kind of sick person reads a newspaper report of a conviction for sexual assault and wonders what the abuser did? I see you eventually managed to realize that the details you want were rightly not reported. 🤮
LikeLiked by 1 person
10:56 Ah, go on, take a wild guess!! 😇
It was obvious and highly sexualised behaviour by McGarrity, and you know it, but don’t want to believe it. Why? Are you guilty of such behaviour yourself?
McGarrity crossed sexual boundaries, without any consent from his victims. He was, therefore, guilty of assault. SEXUAL assault.
LikeLiked by 1 person
9:10 Now that the nature of sexual assault and that it is a criminal offense has been brought home to you, I hope you will stop ‘copping a feel’.
The newspaper reports indicate that McGarritty had multiple young girls over to the presbytery and was very flirty.
Given his total lack of boundaries I would find it implausible that nobody suspected what was going on nor that no concerns had ever been raised about him.
I’m just popping out to William Hill to put a bet on that there were massive red flags about him and they were ignored.
@1017 – yes, I’m with you. There will have been red flags about his inappropriate behaviour. However, from what I am able to read about the case, the ‘inappropriate behaviour’ doesn’t appear to have been sexual assault, so I will be interested to see what his sentence is going to be. I do think we need to be careful and to be able to see things in perspective and proportion. All ‘inappropriate behaviour’ is not necessarily sexual assault or rape. These days just embracing someone for a second or two longer than is see as ‘appropriate’ is deemed ‘inappropriate behaviour’ or worse. Calling someone other than their preferred pronouns is seen as discriminatory behaviour. Where does it stop ?
10:35 Thank you for yet another demonstration that you don’t understand how abusers operate.
Abuse does not start with rape and sexual assault, it starts with ‘inappropriate behaviour’ which is testing the waters and eroding the boundaries for future sexual violence. It is exactly the same way that a controlling and coercive relationship doesn’t start with the victim being chained up in a cellar, it starts by eroding their autonomy.
‘These days just embracing someone for a second or two longer than is see as ‘appropriate’ is deemed ‘inappropriate behaviour’ or worse. ‘
Yes, because that is the red flag, if it is non-consensual or otherwise unsuitable. How is it even possible to describe these behaviours as inappropriate and fail to see that they are inappropriate at the same time?
If you are in a role with the public requiring safeguarding training you need to start again because the training has not sunk in and you will not recognize dangerous situations for what they are.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@1105 – but he did not sexually assault them as is ordinarily understood by sexual assault. A bit over affectionate maybe. But I don’t read of any sexual assault. Fact.
You call what McGarrity did as being ‘a bit over affectionate’?? He wasn’t being affectionate; he was indulging sexual urges, you bloody fool!
I hope you are not around children, because you seem completely unaware of social and sexual boundaries.
Have you offended in these ways yourself? If you haven’t, then you are a high risk to children, if you believe that McGarrity’s behaviour was nothing more than a display of affection. You are not honest with yourself, and are making excuses for sexually criminal conduct.
Christ! You people never learn. And probably never will.
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘ordinarily understood by sexual assault’
I suggest that you and the other members of the ring don’t understand how the law understands sexual assault. Incidentally if you’re going to carry on all day and then say you were joking to trigger people who have any concern for child safety and sexual consent, can you hurry up with getting to that point, please.
LikeLiked by 1 person
11:48 It’s an unusual experience to have a real time demonstration of how sex offenders think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@11.19 If you are ever convicted of sexual assault, you will get very bored by the amount of time spent in prison making offenders understand the impact of their offence on their victim, and not in reinforcing their minimization of this impact.
A brilliant, insightful comment. Thank you.
It’s difficult to believe that Eamon Martin could have said something so callous and so stupid to a victim.
I remember when people thought priests were holy, celibate and would never rape a child. I even remember when people thought bishops wouldn’t cover up crime, but here we are.
10:22, your experience of a bishop will not represent his treatment of a victim.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Up to very recently court cases involving the sexual abuse of children were held in camera. Society, for its own reasons operated a culture of cover up.
Culture of cover-up, or the protection of child victims from adverse publicity and attention?
Not every institution is as navel-gazinly self-serving as yours, Father.
When society does it, it’s called protection. When the church does it, it’s termed lack of transparency and cover-up. Double standards.
Nice try. When society does it, it’s protection. When the perps and involved others do it, it’s lack of transparency and cover up.
There, fixed it for you.
The funny thing is you didn’t fix it for him/her and you didn’t fix it.
4:13 Do you find that as funny as you find sexual assault?
If it happened, it was a deflection from the question and a tacit admission by Martin that McAreavey’s failure to inform police was reprehensible. A piece of cowardly sidestepping.
10:22 It’s not unusual
‘That’s not sexual assault, all he was doing was touching those girls’ is the peak demonstration of why kids and other vulnerable people still aren’t safe in church.
Exactly! Those bastardos will play down any criminal conduct by the priestly fraternity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
11:25 Birds of a self interested feather flock together.
Yes and 11.05 yes – sexual abuse begins with grooming by the offender. Its known as ‘flirting’ when its consensual between adults. Its grooming to curry favour with the vulnerable adult (s), child, children. The You Tube iicsa.gov (UK) into Ampleforth & Downside are long but, I found as an RC very educative – in the sense that we see a highly academic RC social work lecturer and RCs in other professions, highlighting their ‘holier than thou’ attitudes over non Catholics. I was stunned and appalled by a female lecturer’s response to a lawyer stating that when a Catholic volunteers their time / help / support to others she is more ‘Holy’ than secular people. Thank God I trained and worked in a Local Authority ( not perfect, I know – but much good done by us all), rather than any religious institution, especially this one! Humble thanks be to God for my journey…….so far…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bishop Pat, has there been any answer to the Silverstream safeguarding query to Teresa Devlin?
Thank you for confirming that you are not aware of any child safeguarding concerns at Silverstream Priory.
All Church bodies in Ireland, are required to have a designated safeguarding person (DLP) and put up a notice about child safeguarding, directing anyone concerned to the statutory authorities and to the Safeguarding DLP. Both these are in place in Silverstream.
I will have to defer to the Authorities in Silverstream around canonical responsibilities.
Should you in the future have any child safeguarding concerns, please report these to An Garda Siochana and Tusla, in line with civil law in the Republic of Ireland, in the first instance; then to the DLP or to the National Board.
Pat, is Teresa only mentioning children because that’s her remit or has she failed to mention vulnerable adults and sexual offences against adults with capacity?
LikeLiked by 2 people
On the topic of Silverstream, ++Eamon must come out and rebuke Fr. Tom Deenihan, the episcopal gangster, masquerading as the bishop of Meath. Fr. Tom Deenihan’s ongoing persecution of Dom Benedict Andersen, the true Prior of Silverstream, is absolutely scandalous and morally reprehensible.
Absolutely loving that (presumably) a troll is trolling the blog making out that only rape is a sexual offense. I wonder whether he’s thought that comments on this blog are usually assumed to be from priests and that his comments will confirm the reputation of the priesthood for being full of kiddy fiddlers. 🤷
This is your reminder that they actually don’t care about abused children at all. 😢
LikeLiked by 1 person
12.09 is your daily reminder of how not to use absolutely. Absolutely howling and absolutely loving it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You can’t be expected to understand that ‘absolutely’ is an adverb and thus modifies (in this case strengthens) the verb it is attached to. In this case loving, and you’ve used it in the same way to modify howling.
I’m also absolutely fascinated at why the comments using absolutely get you quite so fit to be tied. 😂
We are able to parse an adverb and don’t need you to do for us. However, you used it incorrectly twice. It means without or not admitting of exception. So you are loving it or howling without exception. Duh!
4:10 We as in a queen? 👑
Or as in a bunch of clerics who get together to troll Bishop Buckley’s blog?
Er, yes. Without exception of ANY aspect.
One can love a person or thing without exception of ANY aspect of its character. In this sense, the action is complete, which is one of the senses in which ‘absolutely’ may be used. Similarly with ‘howling’.
Incidentally, if you are also the commenter at 12.57, the word ‘absolutely’ should have been in single quotation marks. It’s not only your parsing that requires extra attention from you.
No quotation marks required when a word qua word is being referred to in a piece of writing. In fact, their use as you prescribe it would be an infelicity. The tendency today is to reserve quotation marks absolutely for direct speech.
‘But I don’t read of any sexual assault. Fact.’
Paedophiles never admit to their crimes because they don’t see any sexual assault and justify things in their own mind. Fact.
Luckily the law decides what sexual assault is.
Is the priest McGarity a member of Glasgow’s infamous Daisy Chain.
I know he is part of the TLM brigade with Mark Morris, mother Burke and Co.
Catholic judge helps out the RCChttps://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/scottish-news/23360646.glasgow-priest-sexually-abused-girls-walks-court/
Not much to see here. I think even the judge knew it. Yes, somewhat pervy behaviour, but criminal ? Really ?
He has been convicted of sexually assaulting children.
The lenient sentencing reflected that the crimes were at the milder end of the spectrum.
But still crimes.
He will now face a canonical ttual.
‘Not much to see here’ ? It’s what kiddie-fiddlers think or say, isn’t it? To understate their crimes, morally and legally? At least, those who deceive themselves about their actual motives for such behaviour by morally sanitising them. It naturally places them at high risk of reoffending, because it absolves them of the need to resist such impulses.
Please stay away from children, both for their sake, and for yours. Because, by your apparent inability here to sift criminal behaviour from acceptable behaviour, your capacity for social inhibition will be inversely affected, which means that, if you experience paedophilic or/and ephebophilic sexual urges, you are a high risk to children, and other vulnerable people.
5:17 Not just children, he should stay away from the unfortunate target of his sexual attraction full stop.
I’m a mental health nurse and some years ago worked in a very small organization so we had our Christmas do in a restaurant which obviously had other small parties in. It meant I had the opportunity to play ‘spot the rapist’ with my boss by observing the other parties.
You can tell the potential rapist because they’re touchy feely, ignoring other people’s discomfort or non-verbals, don’t respect consent, and actually enjoy crashing through other people’s boundaries.
It’s very possible to spot potential sex offenders, which is what makes it implausible that no clergy have ever been aware of any possible abuse. It’s just they’re inside a culture where doing these things is acceptable, and in today’s comments they’re helpfully warning the public that this is the case.
Person: ‘Priest convicted of a sexual crime’.
Catholics: ‘That’s not that bad, everyone does that, that can’t possibly be a crime’.
But do please tell us how your church isn’t the embodiment of rape culture.
Parents, if you are still unwise enough to take your children to an RC church or send them to an RC school, read the comments above from a cleric who thinks adult nonconsensual touching of children shouldn’t be a crime.
Then note that the resistance to this expression of child abuse has been from only two or three commenters, hardly an avalanche.
Then note the relatively few comments today.
The only conclusion is that child abuse is of no concern to RCs, and they won’t step forward to prevent an abuser.
The abuse in the blog post was in the past few years and this could still happen to your child.
OMG the number of times I’ve heard clergy mitigate the severity of sexual crimes involving children – they rush to point out where it is on the spectrum be it: downloading images or the nature of the act – touching, masturbation or rape etc – to be fair rape ((which they see as penile and not oral) tends to shit them up.
A crime is a crime is a crime and guess what Father touching a child sexually is a crime end of.
Oh and get this – clergy who sexually abuse children are a menace, a curse and deserve the full force of the criminal justice system.
I’ve watched some You Tube videos about paedophile surveillance groups. They are frightening & scary to watch. The would-be perpetrators display the deviousness of their manipulative minds. Entrapments were set for the men who all knew the age group of the child they were to meet: 13/14/15…and almost all of them declared they would not have done what they said in texting and tweeting, the contents of which were very sexually explicit. Had any man actually met the “victim” they thought they were meeting, the damage done to any child would be incalculable and perhaps irreversible. These abusers, whoever they are, deserve all opprobrium heaped upon them and must face the full rigour of the law. Any infringement of boundaries, emotional, physical, mental or sexual must never be trivialized or minimised. Each small infringement is a step in grooming, however gentle a touch on a shoulder may be. At our parish council meetings we discuss all safeguarding matters to ensure there are no violations or loopholes and at every school board meeting I chair the same commitment is carried out. It’s wrong for commenters to say that Catholic schools are not safe places. Lies and mischief making. Any cleric who appears to have an iota of disregard for safeguarding should be called to full accountability. In 38 years of ministry in schools or parishes where I worked ever had any abuse case, except one incident. When brought to my attention within six months of arriving in the parish. The highly regarded member of the community was reported immediately and removed from any involvement in church groups. The said person received a jail sentence. None of us in any role of authority should ever be careless re: child safeguarding.
‘It’s wrong for commenters to say that Catholic schools are not safe places’
Thank you for reinforcing that you don’t listen to what people say here. In fact the consistent point made by the truth tellers is that the RC church’s faltering attempts at safeguarding are at best a sop. If RC schools as schools have up to date safeguarding in place, the children have the law to thank for that. It is the legal framework which is responsible.
8.41: When I was in primary school run by lay teachers, corporal punishment was allowed. Some of us hot vicious slapping with knotted branches. It was brutal from some teachers, as if their own repression and anger was unleashed on us. We daren’t tell our parents. I know some people of my generation wh still cannot forget the punishment received for something as simple as getting your spellings wrong. Often the stick beating was accompanied by verbal humiliation. It was wrong and criminal then but no one could say anything to anyone. However you try to ignore the awful horrors in society and in lay run schools, the truth is that all were complicit in allowing abuse to occur. In secondary iarding school it was a few mad lay teachers who were harsh and cruel. Thankfully I was never afflicted but it was horrible watching the belittling of others and be so fearful of saying anything. By accepting and acknowledging societal and family abuse is not to mitigate or play down the seriousness and criminality of Church abuse in any way. Now because of abuse in all kinds of clubs and organisations (which are well documented) apart from the Church we have stringent safeguarding policies. They must be implemented every day. It is proper that civil law and government devise, define and articulate safeguarding requirements for all.
I am convibced that one or two commenters are making frequent comments, all with much the same intention: to repeat the narrative that all clerics are suspect and abusers and that the “abusers” are rampant every opportunity they can get. It’s a most unfair, dishonest and unjust narrative to promote. It trivializes the truth of the reality of abuse and also fails to recognise the realuty of societal and family abuse. All abuse is horrendous.
‘The realuty (sic) of societal and family abuse.’?
You have to credit them: they, the clerical fraternity, don’t give up trying to deflect from its criminal character (Who can blame them?), despite knowing that their attempts will never succeed. It’s a kind of meme: just goes on, endlessly, inanely repeated.
Classic definition of ‘stupidity’.
Classic projectionism on your part. Your perverted narrative appearing almost on an almost daily basis here is not succeeding in that which it is subconsciously intended to do: to convince yourself of the truth of what you allege. It is precisely that which will never succeed. It could never do. Because that is not where truth lies.
6:56 this blog is only one small source of proven confirmation that the Roman Catholic Church is a corrupt Mafia dedicated to covering up sexual & financial abuse by clergy and their members. Check out international media online or hard copy.
This blog is highlighting abuse corruption and criminality in the context of the RCC. Of course all abuse is horrendous but particularly horrendous when perpetrated by priests covered up by bishops while claiming to be spiritual leaders. The RCC hierarchy has a major credibility problem.
6:56 From the 1960s, when Pope John XXIII told them to deal with abuse in-house, all the bishops did just this and failed to report these crimes, until stopped by civil authorities. As a result not a single diocese or order has been without an abuse scandal with the same pattern of facilitating and cover up.
I can’t think of a single family, society, profession, or even other church which has managed this 100% record internationally of facilitating abuse.
That is the reality which you are trying to avoid: no matter anyone else’s failings, no other group has been as consistently evil as to ALL be in on it as the bishops.
No other group is as despicable as you cultists who continue to ignore this fact and, like any other criminals, continue to point at the family and society.
At last…we have the explanation for why, despite being anti sex the so called Catholic so called church lays so much emphasis on the family: it thinks it’s the seed bed of abuse.
Just type in the word “priest” to Google news each day and see what’s returned. It’s far from edifying.
Ah do detect a little clerical defensiveness out on manoeuvres – that old chestnut about abuse in the family, true, but that’s called child abuse.
The sexual abuse by a member of the clergy is called clerical child abuse and no single profession or sociological grouping is more associated with child sexual abuse than Catholic clergy and that’s a fact my clerical friend.
6.13: I respect your profession as a mental health nurse and I’d expect you to have greater psychological awareness of the manipulation and deviousness of abusers. Yet, all of us should have the sense and ability to notice and identify the behaviour of potential abusers. When I was studying in the early 70’s our psychology, sociology and moral theology rarely went into detail about the seriousness of abuse. Parishes and schools at that time didn’t have safeguarding policies as we have today. However, any of us who have antennae about endangerment to others must act immediately. Not having policies in the past is NOT an excuse. We just didn’t talk about such “things of a sexual” nature, regrettably, even though we confessed our “impurities” of mind and heart! I carried my abuse at 13-25 yrs of age all my life until recent years. Our parents in the village always warned us about staying away from a certain man but sadly it was another, so called “kinder” man from a neughbiyrung village who perpetrated my abuse. Could I tell my parents or teacher or local priest? Absolutely not because I was manipulated into believing this was our secret, our special friendship. This experience made me very aware of how vigilant we need to be and of the absolute imperative that all of us in responsible roles should know fully the psychology and pathology of abusers. Thankfully our Diocesan Safeguarding Team audit our policies frequently. There can never again be an excuse or a tolerance for abuse of any kind in church or society. Ever.
Regardless of psychology, it’s immoral and illegal but in the context of the institutional church, covered up to protect the ‘reputation of the church,’ i.e. the clergy.
‘SORRY’ IS NOT ENOUGH : ABUSE VICTIMS NEED ANSWERS, SUPPORT, POPE SAYS
VATICAN CITY (Vatican City)
National Catholic Reporter [Kansas City MO]
March 2, 2023
By Carol Glatz
“It is not enough to ask people who have suffered abuse for their forgiveness, Pope Francis said. They also must be offered “concrete actions to repair the horrors they have suffered and to prevent them from happening again” as well as the truth, transparency, safe spaces, psychological support and protection, the pope said in a video message released by the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network March 2.https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/sorry-not-enough-abuse-victims-need-answers-support-pope-says
McGarrity always had his girls around him. Usually ones who had issues with ‘daddy issues’ or ones that were fragile.
He’s a lucky man to escape the turnkey, look at how he attended court and admitted to some of the charges.
But for a victim to call childline, it suggests strongly he was doing wrong and was pushing boundaries.
This right here should have been a red flag.
Leave McGarrity alone. Seriously you are all just witch hunters and there is no witch in this game with him. He is innocent. Patting a child on the head hardly makes one a pedophile
Your reminder that RCs think child abuse is a matter for trying to be funny with troll comments on the internet.
Shamed priest placed on sex offenders register