FIVE sisters were sexually abused by the same US Catholic priest when one of them was just 18-months-old
The Fortney sisters were abused by Father Augustine Giella during the 1980s
He was a trusted family friend who would come round for meals and say grace
Patty, Lara, Teresa and Carolyn said he would bring them candy and clothes
Caroloyn just 18 months when abuse happened while fifth sister didn’t speak out
Father Giella charged with child sex crimes but died before he could face trial

One of hundreds of paedophile priests who’ve been unmasked across the USA

Five sisters from Pennsylvania were all abused by the same Catholic priest in the early 1980s when one of them was just 18-months-old, in the latest shocking example of child sex crimes in the US branch of the church.
The Fortney sisters, Patty, Lara, Teresa and Carolyn, said Father Augustine Giella would regularly give them gifts before attacks, one of which took place on 13-year-old Patty while her other three sisters looked on.
‘He was constantly hugging me in front of them, kissing me in front of them, trying to put his tongue in your mouth,’ Patty Fortney-Julius told CBS News. Lara was then 10, Teresa in first grade, and Carolyn one. Another sister chose not to speak out.
The Fortney sisters suffered horrific sexual abuse at the hands of their local Pennsylvania priest in the 1980s. Pictured from left to right: Carolyn Fortney, Teresa Fortney-Miller, Laura Fortney McKeever, Patty Fortney-Julius
Giella, their local pastor in Enhaut, was a trusted family friend who was often invited round for family meals, where he would say grace.
‘Even at our kitchen table things happened in front of my parents’ face that they couldn’t see,’ said Lara Fortney McKeever.
‘I would continually remind myself, ‘He’s my priest. He’s the mediator between God and man. This is okay,’ Patty Fortney-Julius said.


The abuse happened, Caroloyn said she only realized what going on when she turned 12. ‘I was watching a movie of a priest molesting altar boys and that’s kind of the day that I put it together,’ she said.
Giella retired from the church in 1989 but the Fortneys still saw him. Three years later, a relative found a box containing child pornography, including naked photos of Caroloyn.
The children’s parents, Ed and Patty, reported the photos to the Harrisburg diocese, while one sister called child services, which informed the police. Giella was charged with sexual assault and possessing child pornography, but died awaiting trial.
Although deprived of real justice, the sisters settled two civil lawsuits with the Harrisburg diocese.
The sisters said avoided talking about the abuse as adults, but decided to speak out three years ago to prevent the same happening to other children.
‘I believe that there’s going to be change,’ said Fortney-Miller. ‘I pray that there’s going to be change because nobody should live like this with this pain. Nobody should. It’s every day. But I have hope now. I do.’
Some 1,000 children are thought to have been abused by 300 predator priests in six Pennsylvania dioceses, according to a recent report. Forty-five of the priests named in a grand jury report served in the Harrisburg diocese.
Through his deception, and the great esteem he was held in as a priest of the Catholic Church,


The diocese said it sent its ‘deepest apologies and prayers’ for failing to stop the abuse.


Harrisburg Bishop Ronald Gainer was named in the report for failing to advocate the defrocking of an abusive priest. The diocese defended Gainer, saying he took swift action against that priest and another abusive priest after becoming bishop in 2014.
While acknowledging the church is faced with a ‘spiritual crisis,’ Gainer said most of the abuse happened long ago.
The diocese has taken ‘significant and effective measures to protect our children and remove any person who intends to do harm to them,’ he said.
The sheer number of children who were abused by Catholic priests in America has only recently started coming to light.
On Thursday, officials in New York, New Jersey and New Mexico announced investigations into how the church had handled abuse allegations. Missouri recently announced a similar investigation.

These cases always have the capacity to deeply shock. How any man or priest can abuse a child is nearly impossible to understand.

But imagine how horrific the sexual abuse of an 18 month old baby is?

This is real sickness and it is more shocking that the perp was a priest.

“If anyone hurts any of these my little ones it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea”


Arlene Foster – DUP

20181212_165115 (1)




The Irish Catholic bishops, in a statement following their Winter General Meeting in Maynooth, said they were dismayed that, for the most part, the voices of those who voted against abortion in May’s referendum have been ignored.
They highlighted how “reasonable” proposals for legislative amendments to the bill, such as the prohibition of abortion on the grounds of sex, race or disability, had been rejected.
The bishops also expressed concern over the bill’s erosion of the right of conscientious objection for all healthcare professionals and pharmacists. “They cannot be forced either to participate in abortion or to refer patients to others for abortion,” they warned.


Separately, Bishop Kevin Doran has called on doctors, nurses, teachers and pharmaceutical workers to “resist” the new abortion regime.
Bishop Kevin Doran said the Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy Bill had no moral force and ought to be resisted. “Catholics have no obligation whatsoever to obey this law,” he told the Irish Independent.
He said the bishops “absolutely support the right of doctors and nurses and midwives, not only not to perform abortions, but not to be required under the law to refer their patients”, even though this will bring them into conflict with the law.
His view was echoed by former Taoiseach, John Bruton, who warned that no person, medically qualified or otherwise, should be forced by the threat to his/her employment, or of criminal sanctions, to be involved in the ending of a human life, against his or her religious convictions.
In a speech delivered at the Irish Catholic Doctors’ Learning Network Annual Conference in Swords, Co Dublin, last weekend, Mr Bruton said a law that forces someone to take part in, or to facilitate, an action that that person believes is contrary to a deeply held religious conviction could be in conflict with Article 44.2.1 of the Irish Constitution.
“That aspect of the Bill should be changed. The concept of ‘aiding and abetting’ a crime is well understood in Irish law. The Bill requires a doctor, who has a conscientious objection to doing an abortion herself, to “make arrangements to transfer the care” of the woman to a doctor who will do it. This could certainly be construed as aiding and abetting the abortion, and there is no conscience clause here either.”
Under the terms of the legislation, medical professionals who fail to make the referral will be deemed to be committing a criminal offence.


The Irish people have spoken about the abortion issue and the Irish Government must put that vote into legislation.

Amy Martin of Armagh says that no one is listening to those who lost the vote! Amy must have being off school the day that his classmates studied civics and politics – where they would have learned that the voices who are listened to in a vote are the MAJORITY of those who voted.

I am not pro abortion – far from it!

But I cannot force my religious views and my denominational outlook on all my fellow citizens.


There are a group of RC doctors and medical professionals who are whinging that they cannot be enforced to put Irish law into effect because of their RC conscience.

If they are prepared to take Euro 120,000 plus from a state that allows abortions they should do what their employer tells them to do.

Or – if they do not like their job description – let them have the authenticity to resign and get a job elsewhere!

If they refuse to carry out their employer’s job description – let them simply be sacked! 


Could Eamon Martin and Kevin Doran be breaking the law by encouraging people to resist the law?

If they are – the authorities should act against them.

And if there are no laws on the statute book to deal with this – bring in new laws.

The Irish Catholic bishops have ruled and tyrannised this country for hundreds of years.

The Irish Government should protect its citizens from this tyranny.

The Irish bishops are, and have been, moral and social terrorists!

pope benedicts 2 commandments





Pope Francis accepted on December 10 the resignation of Cuddapah Bishop Prasad Gallela, 56, South East India.

Two Catholics had filed a criminal complaint against him in a court in Andhra Pradesh. One of them, Mesa Ravi Kumar, 40, alleged that Gallela used funds from overseas donations and money meant for public welfare to buy properties for his concubine and a 20-year-old son who is now in college.

Kumar showed 24 documents such as a 12-digit unique identification number identifying Gallela as the husband of his alleged wife.

According to priests of the diocese, Gallela used to spend less than a week a month at the bishop’s house. Nobody knew where he was during the rest of the time. Gallela said the woman was his late brother’s widow.

In April 2016 Gallela was kidnapped and beaten by some of his own priests, and released after a ransom was paid.




by Jamie Manson National Catholic Reporter

The pope who once famously said about gay priests, “Who am I to judge?”, is judging again.
In a newly published, book-length interview, Pope Francis has reasserted his worries about the presence of gay men in the clergy and of gays and lesbians in consecrated life.
His statement is a response to this question, posed by the interviewer, Claretian Fr. Fernando Prado: “It is not a secret that in consecrated life and in the clergy there are also people with homosexual tendencies. What can you say about that?”
Francis offers a response that is rather meandering, and even muddled in some parts. He claims that homosexuality is “fashionable” in some societies and that this “mentality also influences the life of the Church.”
He recounts a story about a bishop who was “shocked” to realize that in his very large diocese there were “several homosexual priests.” The bishop, Francis says, “intervened, first of all, in the matter of formation in order to form a different type of clergy.”
But the heart of the confusion and controversy about Francis’ latest statement surrounds his story about a male religious who realizes some of his students and professed religious were gay. The male religious decided that “it is definitely not that serious … it is only an expression of affection.”
It remains unclear whether these gay seminarians and religious were breaking their vows of celibacy. Were they were actually expressing their homosexuality through affection, or does the male religious view homosexuality generally as an “expression of affection”? Either way, Francis doesn’t like it. He condemns this view as “wrong.”
“For this reason,” Francis says, “the Church recommends that people with this deep-seated tendency not be accepted into ministry or into consecrated life. Their place is not in ministry or in consecrated life.”
A number of progressive Catholics have rushed to Francis’ defense. Some argue that he is only opposed to priests and religious who break their vows of celibacy. Others insist that he did not include heterosexuals in his condemnation of celibacy-breakers because the interviewer’s question was specifically about gay priests and gay and lesbian religious.
But to apologize for Francis in these ways is to deny what he has said previously about homosexuality and about admitting gay men to the priesthood.
In December 2016, Francis signed a rather homophobic document called “The Gift of the Priestly Vocation.”
That document quoted a 2005 instruction signed by Pope Benedict XVI that said, “The Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.’ “
This statement clarifies Francis’ obtuse words in his recent interview. It states clearly that even if a priest is not breaking his vow of celibacy, if his “homosexual tendencies” are “deep-seated,” he loses his chance to be a priest.
In May 2018, Francis also weighed in on the issue during a closed session with the Italian Episcopal Conference. As La Stampa reported, Francis expressed his concern about admitting seminarians with deep-rooted homosexual tendencies, telling the clergymen, “If you have even the slightest doubt, it is better not to let them in.”

Priests sit below the statue of St. Peter as Pope Francis celebrates Mass marking the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul in St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican June 29. (CNS/Paul Haring)
But what precisely is a “deep-seated homosexual tendency”?
The phrase seems to have first been used in the 2005 document, called “Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders.”
That document made the distinction between “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” and “homosexual tendencies” that are “transitory.”
The instruction doesn’t define precisely what deep-seated homosexual tendencies are, but does declare that they are “objectively disordered” and “often constitute a trial.”
Transitory tendencies, on the other hand, are inclinations that either go away or can be overcome, “for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded.
“Nevertheless,” the instruction continues, “such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.”
This notion of “transitory tendencies” should worry all of us who are troubled by the harm done to many young LGBTQ people through reparative therapy programs, such as the one featured in the new film “Boy Erased.”
Francis has alluded to transitory homosexual tendencies in the past, perhaps most shockingly during the papal plane ride home from Dublin last August. In comments that were later redacted in the official Vatican transcript, but reported by The Guardian, the pope seemed to suggest that homosexual tendencies could be treated if they surfaced during childhood.
“When it shows itself from childhood, there is a lot that can be done through psychiatry, to see how things are. It is something else if it shows itself after 20 years,” he said when asked by a journalist what he would say to parents who observed homosexual traits in their children.
The only research I could find on these so-called deep-seated and transitory tendencies was a paper titled “The Distinction between Deep-Seated Homosexual Tendencies and Transitory Same-Sex Attractions in Candidates for Seminary and Religious Life.” Written by Peter Kleponis, Ph.D., and Richard Fitzgibbons, M.D., it was published in 2011 in The Linacre Quarterly, the official journal of the Catholic Medical Association.
The intention of the paper was to offer research that supports the Vatican’s 2005 instruction banning gay priests.
According to the website, Kleponis participates in evaluating candidates for priesthood and religious life and has given conferences to Courage, a Catholic organization that treats homosexuality like an addiction.
Fitzgibbons has been an adjunct professor at the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. In 2008, Benedict XVI appointed him a consultor to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy, a position he no longer holds, according to the latest Vatican yearbook.
According to Kleponis and Fitzgibbons:
Those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies often identify themselves as “gay men” which is based to a large extent upon their sexual attractions. They often reject the current scientific findings that there is no genetic or biological basis for SSA [same-sex attraction] and believe they were born this way. They do not view homosexuality as a disordered inclination, are comfortable with their sexual attractions, subscribe to the increasingly prevalent belief that homosexuality is a normal variation in human sexuality, and think there is nothing wrong with homosexual acts. Their beliefs make them highly vulnerable to sexual acting out.
And what do the doctors believe are the causes of these deep-seated homosexual tendencies? They explain:
Men with deep-seated homosexual tendencies are usually unwilling to examine the possibility that they experienced emotional conflicts in significant male relationships that result in same-sex attraction. When asked, they are often unable to name a best male friend in elementary school. Their strong physical attraction to other men’s bodies and to the masculinity of others is the result of profound weakness in male confidence, a craving for male acceptance, and a poor body image. They have a significant affective immaturity with excessive anger and jealousy toward males who are not homosexual. Their insecurity leads them to avoid close friendships with other men who do not have SSA.
The paper later goes on to argue that gay men have significantly higher incidences of cancer and psychiatric illness.

And as for transitory same-sex attraction, Kleponis and Fitzgibbons “deem it preferable to the use of the terms ‘ego-dystonic’ homosexuality or ‘obligatory’ or ‘optional’ homosexuality because it implies the ability to change,” they write.
Is this the kind of junk science that Francis, the bishops, seminary rectors, and members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are relying on to support the barring of gay men from ordained ministry and gays and lesbians from consecrated life? Is this the “research” that is keeping all LGBTQ people from enjoying the fullness of life in their church?
Francis’ words in this interview and the teaching contained in “The Gift of the Priestly Vocation” seem to suggest so.
To Francis’ credit, he does not associate homosexuality with clerical sex abuse. But some of the ideas he expresses in this new book are still quite damaging.
The pope says that gays who are already ordained and lesbians and gays who are in consecrated life must “be exquisitely responsible, trying not to scandalize their communities or the holy and faithful People of God by living a double life.”
Francis’ words paint a portrait of gays and lesbians as those who will always struggle to remain celibate and who always run a high risk of causing a scandal. That he holds them to a special standard of sinless perfection suggests that he not only sees homosexuality as deviant, he also sees gays and lesbians as somehow powerless against their sexual desires and highly vulnerable to acting out sexually.
The fact that Francis returns to this issue so frequently suggests it is one of his top concerns. The question is why? And why doesn’t he fret nearly so much about heterosexual priests breaking their vows of celibacy?
Many Vatican insiders predict that at next year’s Synod of Bishops, Francis may attempt to relax the celibacy requirement. He has said more than once that the celibacy rule is changeable. Is the pope’s preoccupation with the celibacy requirement for gay priests his way of shoring up this rule, should the time come that there will no longer be mandatory celibacy? Is he afraid that, when that day comes, gay priests will feel as entitled to sexual love as straight priests?
Regardless of his motivations, Francis’ characterizations of gays and lesbians and his notion of “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” will only foster the toxic homophobic attitudes that are already so prevalent in seminaries and religious communities, as well as in the wider church. In his attempt to discuss “the strength of a vocation,” he has only weakened what little hope LGBTQ Catholics still have for his pontificate.
[Jamie Manson is a columnist and the books editor at the National Catholic Reporter.]


If I want to know about RC doctrines I ask an RC theologian or clergyman. That’s their area of expertise, if you call RCism an area of knowledge.

But If I want an expert view on homosexuality I will ask a biologist, a psychologist or a sexologist.

What give RC clerics, at any level, the expertise to render homosexuality a “disorder”?

Most of the experts on sexuality say that homosexuality is a perfectly normal human sexual orientation.

I think what has screwed up RCs and RC clerics sexually is the RC brainwashing we all were all subjected to by popes, bishops and priests and brothers and nuns.

And what makes it worse is that these corrupt bishops and priests have not, and do not practice the sexual doctrines they try and impose on everyone else.

They want us to be as white as the driven snow while they copulate like wild rabbits.

It is these clerics who are gravely disordered – not ordinary people discovering love, intimacy and pleasure in an open and honest way.



BY: https://midnightmurphy.wordpress.coma

Sunday yawned in front of me. I could have been productive and done some Christmas shopping. That’s what Christmas Eve is for though. I should have done some housework, but I have too much self-respect for that. I needed to do something though. On the spur of the moment I decided that I would go to Connolly Station and board the next train, and travel to whatever destination was on the schedule.

I looked at the departures board. It was 13.36. If I ran I would make it to the 13.39 to Greystones, where I could walk the Greystones to Bray Cliff Walk. While this walk is wonderful, it was raining so I decided against it. That was the same reason for ignoring the train to Howth.

At 14.00 was the train to Maynooth. That would suit me. Maynooth is a university town in County Kildare with a permanent population of 15,000 people and a student population of 12,000. I had never been. It is home to two universities . First is St. Patrick’s College – the older college. This is a seminary where Catholic priests have been trained since the late 18th century. Maynooth University is the other, far larger and newer university which trains students in more earthly subjects. This only officially separated from St. Patrick’s College in 1997 which makes it Ireland’s newest university.

Obviously it was the seminary that was more interesting – housed as it is, in grand old buildings. I walked past the medieval castle at the gates and got soaked as I approached the quadrangle – the skies open and the rain pelted down on me. Seeking refuge in the ornate old church with the spire, I discovered that it was locked. Typical.

Spotting a shiny wooden door in the main college building, I approached it and entered. Even though this was not part of the church building it smelt religious. Incense had been burned here. On the walls of the gloomy corridor was a series of paintings of sour old men, who looked positively constipated with disapproval. This was the gallery of the catholic cardinals of Ireland. I recognised Cahal Daly with his wizened face, and devil-red gown. Perhaps he was a lovely person in real life, but he gave me the creeps. His appearance struck me as sinister – resembling a bitter, judgemental, closeted gay man. Perhaps that’s what he was?

I was alone in the corridor. I turned the corner to be faced with another equally long corridor containing more paintings. A grim, atmosphere pervaded. Quite grand in its appearance it nevertheless had the air of a room from where all joy had been banished.

The door on my left was open. I entered and saw a sign for the students’ rooms. That must be a sparsely populated space I thought. Recent reports indicate that there are currently less than 40 men training to be priests in the massive college – the lowest since its foundation in 1795. Some years ago there was a big scandal when it was revealed how popular the gay dating app Grindr was in the college. This was no surprise to me. In the 1990s when I first moved to Dublin I had a friend who was a former seminarian. When I had recovered from my stunned disbelief that he’d spent three years in a seminary (I remember my initial response upon hearing the news had been a stunned ‘Why?’) I had been quite shocked to hear him speak of how the place was as cruisy as the George Bar at closing time.

I didn’t go to the students’ quarters obviously.

I left the building and made my way across to the new university. I never quite made it. The heavens opened again. I dived into a convenient Aldi store for the duration of the shower, and stocked up on tinned mackerel, sardines and haddock for lunch during the week.

Checking my phone I noticed that a train back to Dublin was departing in twenty minutes. I walked back and boarded the train.

The grounds of St. Patrick’s college are vast and green. I will pay a return visit in the summer. It looks like a very pleasant place for a gay first date.


A kind reader let me have this article on Maynooth by a blogger called midnightmurphy.

Its interesting that he not iced the “gayness” of Maynooth.

His report from a former seminarian about how cruisy Maynooth was in his day is also noteworthy.

The RC Church keeps denying that Maynooth is a gay cruising establishment.

Midnightmurphy is further verification of what Maynooth is really like.

I like his last line:






Pope Francis has appointed Monsignor Larry Duffy as the new Bishop of Clogher.
Since 2013, bishop-elect Larry Duffy has been parish priest of Carrickmacross in County Monaghan.
Father Duffy had previously served in various parishes of the diocese of Clogher including Enniskillen, Clones and Carrickmacross.
The diocese covers County Monaghan, most of Fermanagh and some of Tyrone, Donegal, Cavan and Louth.
The head of Ireland’s Catholic Church, Archbishop Eamon Martin, said Fr Duffy would “bring a wealth of pastoral experience having ministered in various parishes – both north and south – in the diocese”.
“As Clogher is one of our neighbouring dioceses within the metropolitan province of Armagh, I personally look forward to working very closely with him at a local level,” he added.
“I have no doubt that bishop-elect Larry will also bring his keen sense of pastoral priorities to bear on our discussions at the Bishops’ Conference, including the benefit of experience and wider perspective gained during his missionary placement in Kenya. “
He will take over from Bishop Liam MacDaid, who retired in October 2016 on health grounds after six years in the job.
Monsignor Joseph McGuinness had been acting as diocesan administrator in the interim.


This announcement first appeared on this blog. We beat the hierarchy to it.

Joe McGuinness must be raging as must O’Reilly in Enniskillen.

Its good to see a parish priest becoming a bishop.

Although, I don’t imagine that Larry Duffy will set any fires alight.





In another video we see the same archbishop being exposed for advising another bishop to tell lies:

So our friend Arch Liar Carlson says he did not know it was a crime for anyone, including a priest, to have sex with children!

Do you believe him?

I don’t! He was lying through his teeth.

In another part of the deposition a Bishop Waters that the best way to avoid telling the truth at the deposition was to say: “I can’t remember”.

So even on a moral and legal issue as serious as child abuse these archbishops and bishops tell lies.

Of course it is no surprise that those who cover up child abuse also lie about it and everything else.

They are a bit like extreme Muslims who hold that it is okay to defraud and lie to an infidel.

In the RC bishop’s case they believe that it is correct to tell lies to protect the RC Church.

They even believe that telling lies to protect the RC Church is what God wants them to do.

The problem with that is that God said:


But then, of course, God allows RC bishops to tell lies – just like God allows them to preach chastity and live promiscuously.

The next time you hear an RC bishop speaking – you are probably listening to lies!







Cardinal Tobin to TAS: Yes, Italian Actor Francesco Castiglione Lived at My Rector

The American Spectator








I helped oversee safeguarding in England and Wales. I wonder if some bishops ‘get it’

by Danny Sullivan – Catholic Herald
I witnessed the complacency of Church officials at first hand


When Pope Francis wrote his recent letter on abuse to the world’s Catholics, the BBC interviewed a survivor in the United States. Asked what she thought of the letter, she replied “nothing”, as it only contained words and proposed no actions. “I have no faith in the Church any more,” she said, “but I still have faith in God. And I know the difference.”
This was a devastating judgment on Church leaders who, even after all these years, fail to meet abuse survivors face to face and take action against those who have covered up crimes, putting the reputation of the institution before the criminally destroyed childhood of victims.
Recently the bishops of England and Wales announced that they had asked the National Catholic Safeguarding Commission (NCSC) to commission “an entirely independent and comprehensive review” of safeguarding.  Cardinal Vincent Nichols will give evidence to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) on December 13th.
These are welcome developments, but it would be unwise for Church leaders in England and Wales – and, indeed, Scotland – to stand back from the current global abuse scandal as if all were well here.
I served as chairman of the NCSC from 2012 to 2015. The commission is an independent body working within the Catholic Church in England and Wales. In that role I recognised some good safeguarding practice, in particular the work of diocesan safeguarding coordinators. But what I experienced led me to ask if some leaders still don’t “get it” when it comes to abuse.
For example, one bishop declined my request to meet the mother of a teenager who was groomed and abused by his parish priest, because his lawyer had advised him not to. An archbishop decided not to meet an abuse victim because he had been advised the person was “mad”. Another bishop appointed a diocesan safeguarding coordinator who did not fulfil the agreed national criteria for the role. When I raised this with the bishop, he simply ignored my concerns. One missionary order to this day will not meet survivors of abuse in one of their schools, failing to support them and their families.
Understandably, some victims regard these kinds of actions as “secondary abuse”.

In his letter to Catholics, Pope Francis described Church leaders who fail to engage with survivors and support them as spiritually arrogant. Words without actions are empty, and abuse victims continue to make this clear.
Will they ever be heard? One doubts it, given the continuing scandals and the effort it takes to remove bishops or heads of religious orders who have made protecting the Church’s reputation their priority.
Following the IICSA report on Ampleforth and Downside, a representative of the Benedictines apologised to victims, but made no offer to meet them or give their families support. Ampleforth is still not trusted by the Charity Commission to oversee safeguarding on its own. I believe that if the Benedictines are unable to reform their safeguarding procedures, then the schools should close.
Only radical action will change the context of the continuing scandal. The following should be considered:
■ Pope Francis should remove responsibility for abuse cases from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which has failed to process cases swiftly enough, and give it to local bishops’ conferences. They should set up investigating panels including lay canon lawyers and abuse survivors. They should be able to discipline – and dismiss – bishops and other leaders. They would send their decisions to the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors in Rome, which would then confirm the decision to the Pope or seek further clarification. This would give the commission the authority and power it currently lacks.
■ Every bishop and leader of a religious order should invite every abuse victim in their communities to meet them, so that they can apologise to them and offer appropriate support. Anyone who declines to do so should be required to resign.
■ The Pope should remove the arcane distinction between bishops and heads of religious orders which has allowed some bishops to claim they can do nothing about allegations of abuse by Religious, leading some leaders of orders to behave as if they were untouchable. Religious should be placed under the jurisdiction of the president of the bishops’ conference. The president should be able to call to account any missionary or religious order in the country.
Sadly, even if these proposals were implemented, it would be already too late for those who have killed themselves, or who are a long way from faith in the Church and, indeed, in God. The leaders of our Church are largely responsible for this.
In 2014, I took two survivors to meet Pope Francis in Rome. At Mass, he explicitly named the experience of victims: for some suicide, for others alcohol and drug addiction, for others still an inability to make or sustain relationships or alienation from the Church.
I have yet to hear a bishop or religious superior in this country talk in such a moving and direct way about survivors’ lives. But it is never too late to try.


Danny Sullivan is a former chairman of the NCSC and was a member of the McLellan Commission in Scotland from its inception in 2014.


Danny Sullivan is right, Many bishops everywhere do not get it when it comes to abuse and many of those who do not get it – do not want to get it!

RC bishops have been formed and trained to put the RC institution and its interests before all else – even before children that are raped by priests.

To them the greatest sin is to be “disloyal” to the institution that gives them power, wealth, influence – and above all else a massively inflated view of how important they are.

Hence, when a bishop receives a report of a child being abused – or a report of a priest being sexually active – he contacts his lawyers – instead of going to his chapel and asking Jesus Christ to help him deal with the matter openly, honestly, compassionately in line with the teachings of the New Testament.

Such a bishop has two books on his desk – the Bible and the Code of Canon Law. RC bishops think more of canon law than they do of scripture.

The only way that bishops will be forced to change is when they see one of their episcopal colleagues going into prison in handcuffs.

They will then act – not because it was right – but to save their own sweaty necks.

I was delighted to see the police and the state troopers in Texas force their way into Cardinal Di Nardo’s house and remove all his files and his three computers. That’s the only language that these boyos understand. Hit them with the full weight of the police, the prosecutors and the prison service.

We look forward to the day when an Irish bishop has his house raided and is led away in handcuffs by the Gardaí or the Police Service of Northern Ireland.






The protection of minors was another issue and scandal that raised its head some 15 or 20 years ago.

The latest and biggest scandal is about the promiscuous of cardinals, bishops, priests and seminarians.

This scandal was given a thrust by the disgraceful story of ex Cardinal McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington.


McCarrick had been sexually promiscuous for decades with seminarians and young priests.

And in spite of his sex life he was promoted and promoted.

He also saw to it that many of the priests and seminarians he abused went on to become bishops too.

The Vatican knew about McCarrick and covered up for him too – because he kept sending millions of dollars to the Vatican.

The Church has addressed the question of the protection of minors. There are child protection people in every diocese and parish.

So, there is no need for the Vatican to have February’s conference on minors.

They should be concentrating on the sexual abuse of adults by bishops, priests and seminarians.

They need to discuss:

  1. The sexual predatory activities of cardinals, bishops, priests and seminarians.
  2. The homosexualization of the hierarchy and clergy.
  3. The widespread presence of sexually active clerical cabals in every diocese.
  4. The widespread phenomenon of seminaries turning into gay clubs.
  5. The phenomenon of seminary staff having sex with seminarians.

These are the CURRENT scandals – not the protection of minors – but of course the protection of minors must always be kept at its best.



We have received your appeal regarding your blog Upon further review we have determined that your blog was mistakenly marked as a TOS violator by our automated system and, as such, we have reinstated your blog. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused in the meantime and thank you for your patience as we completed our review process.

Thank you for understanding.


The Blogger Team



A grave matter: Church funerals denied to priests accused of abuse, says ACP
By Cian Molloy – 01 December, 2018
Is it contrary to Canon Law to insist that funerals of priests accused of abuse must take place in private chapels?

Several diocese and religious orders have policies that allow church funerals to be denied to clergy that have been accused of sexual abuse, says the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP).


Instead, requiem Masses for these priests are being held in private chapels, with no death notices published in national or local media.
The National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church in Ireland (NBSCCCI) has had a “Guidance on the Funerals of Clerics or Religious against whom there is a Case to Answer” available for several years now.
It includes considerations as to whether those who made complaints against a priest should be informed of his death; what role other priests of a diocese or a religious community should play in a funeral Mass; how the location and the timing of the requiem Mass might have a negative impact on complainants; what burial sites are appropriate; and what inscription should be put on headstones.
The guidance document is not an exhaustive list, the NBSCCCI admits. It appears that several diocese and religious orders have put additional measures of their own in place.
“A number of priests have contacted us to say that as a group they are being singled out and treated differently to everybody else,” Fr Tim Hazlewood, a member of the ACP’s admin team, told
“I know of no lay person who was ever denied a funeral because of their involvement in paramilitary activity, gang violence or abuse of children, but it seems that priests who have an allegation of abuse against them are being denied public funerals.”
Fr Hazelwood says the ACP has in its possession two policy documents – one belonging to a diocese and one belonging to a religious order – where restrictions go beyond what is proposed by the NBSCCCI. The diocesan guideline suggests “consideration be given to have the funeral liturgies in a private chapel and/or a time other than the usual times”.
When the notorious child abuser Fr Brendan Smyth was buried by the Norbertine Order, his funeral took place before dawn and the grave was covered in concrete to stop it being vandalised.


But the ACP say there are priests who are being denied normal funerals even though the accusations against them have never been proven and are unlikely to ever be substantiated. Holding funerals in private chapels appears to be contrary to normal Catholic practice. In an online guide to Catholic funerals, prepared by St Mary’s University in London, it says “a funeral is a public event so anyone can attend”.
There are also subtle differences between a church and a chapel, with a church being a centre of community worship and a chapel being a subsidiary place of worship. Insisting that a funeral take place in a private chapel is probably contrary to Canon Law. Canon 1185 states: “Any form of funeral Mass is also to be denied to a person who has been excluded from a Church funeral.”
The additional guidelines seen by the ACP also suggest that no funeral notice be published of priests accused of abuse and that their requiem Masses not be concelebrated. “I don’t know about the Canon Law aspect,” said Fr Hazelwood. “But not publishing death notices is very unfair to relatives. One of the purposes of a funeral is to offer consolation to the bereaved, but this measure denies that to families.”
False allegations of abuse have been made against priests in the past, as Fr Hazelwood knows to his cost. Two years he had to take a civil case to the High Court before a person making false accusations against him admitted he had been lying. He said that Church policy in this area is not priest-friendly and that there is a presumption of guilt.


The Cloyne diocesan parish priest points to the fact that the NSBCCCI operates to seven different standards: creating and maintaining safe environments, procedures for responding to child protection concerns and allegations, care and support for the complainant, care and management of the respondent, training and support for keeping children safe and quality assuring compliance with the standards.
“All of these standards are audited, except for the one to do with the care and management of the respondent,” said Fr Hazelwood. “So if it’s not audited, it’s not worth the paper it is written on and priests are left in a very vulnerable position. Why does the Church treat us differently? Why do these special funeral arrangements only apply to priests and to no one else? It is not fair to priests, some of whom might be suspended from ministry for decades on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations. Then when they die and they don’t get a proper funeral, their families have to live on with hurt and shame.
“Those who are accused of abuse are being treated like lepers. While not condoning their actions, it is not right to single out one group of people like this. Judging them after they have died is the role of God, not the Church. We should not be distinguishing between what type of funeral we will give one group of people and not another.”


A Catholic funeral is, traditionally, a Mass celebrated asking God to allow a departed sinner into Heaven.

So logic would suggest that the bigger the sinner the more need for the funeral.

I always thought that it was very cowardly of the Irish RC Church to bury Brendan Smith in the middle of the night and to pour concrete in over the coffin so that the grave could not be attacked.

Mind you, now that the Norbertines have sold their monastery to a builder for housing it will be easier for a crane to lift a 7 x 4 concrete block out of the ground that it would have been to go coffin and bone fishing.

The questions raised here are threefold:

  1. Should an accused but not convicted priest be given a public funeral?
  2. Should a convicted priest be given a public funeral?
  3. Should the Church ever treat any person or group of people al lepers?


In civil law a not convicted priest is an innocent man.

However every accused priest generally has two trials – a civil one and a canonical one. So you can have a priest innocent in civil law and guilty under canon law. 

And of course we have priests like Father Hazelwood who was falsely convicted.


A convicted priest will have been sentenced and have served his sentence – unless like Brendan Smith – he dies in prison.

If he has served his sentence he has paid his debt to society – although his victims may suffer forever.


I think we know from Jesus’ teachings that the Church should never treat people like lepers.

Having said that, I attended one nation meeting of The Association of Catholic Priests and most of the priests there – including the ACP leadership treated me like a leper!



Was the ACP right to do that – and are they now hypocrites by saying that no one should be treated as a leper?


I think that every Catholic should be accorded a public funeral in the church they were associated with.

In the case of convicted priests maybe the funeral should be held in the cathedral and celebrated by the bishop, who makes it clear at the funeral that people are not there to memorialise the dead priest but to pray for his eternal soul.

In doing this we should be as sensitive as we can not only to the priest’s family and friends – but perhaps more so to his victims.






I’m told that Diarmuid Martin does not approve of this action?

Amy and his Episcopal friends like Lugs Monahan of Killaloe feel differently.

The censoring of my blog began some time ago. This is what happened.


  1. Eamon Martin reported me to the Police Service of Northern Ireland for a comment (not written by me) that appeared on my blog. The police contacted me and asked me to attend at Larne Police Station for a formal, tape recorded interview. Of course I co-operated. The police told me that they would be in touch with me within 14 days to let me know the outcome. After ELEVEN MONTHS they wrote to me to say that there would be no further action.
  2. On six occasions, always on a Sunday morning – 10 minutes before my Sunday Mass began – an anonymous caller called the police to report that day’s blog. Generally the police apologised for troubling me. There was no further action.
  3. Various individual and collective entities have lodged dozens of complaints to Google Blogger about individual blogs. A number of blogs have been taken down.


4. Last week I had a notice from Blogger that my blog had been locked and that it may be permanently deleted i9n 89 days. I have appealed but have heard nothing. It is still down


5. I have several anonymous emails and comments to tell me that Catholic individuals and entities have already been in touch with WordPress to take this blog down.


6. I have had general threats against my personal safety and a number of death threats. All reported to the police.


7. At the weekend my Twitter account was locked after several complaints from Gorgeous – Deacon Michael Byrne.


There is a rumour circulating among the Dublin clergy that Gorgeous, who is living in a presbytery, will be ordained in 18 months time?

In any event, it seems that Gorgeous is trying to erase all mention of his various “travails” on social media – maybe with a view to ordination?

8. I have had solicitor’s letters from Paul Prior, Conor Gannon and Eamon Martin.

9. Over the weekend a senior and well known Irish cleric informed me by email that he had knowledge of a well funded plan within the Irish RC Church to silence me on all social media.


The organised Irish media is afraid to carry all the scandals that are going on in the Irish RC church at all levels. They are afraid of the power, influence and money of the RC crowd.

This blog has been one of the few, if not the only place that these matters can be aired in public, commented on, debated and condemned.

We have only heard a small percentage of what is really going on among the clergy and priests.

They do not want me to tell the whole story and for you to read it and know about it.

In more crude times they would have prepared a fatal accident for me. Some of them are still capable of doing that – or of getting or paying someone to do it for them.

In the meantime they are concentrating on attacking the blog and my social media accounts.

They are powerful and wealthy.

I have no power and no wealth.

Its like dealing with the regimes in Russia, China, Iran or Saudi Arabia – although the Romans these days try to be more hidden and subtle about their tyrannies.

I’ll continue to blog and speak out.

If they suppress me on social media I will still speak out – in O’Connell Street in Dublin or at the gates of Maynooth.

I will accept being a voice in the wilderness.

Many better men and woman than me had to live like that.