Clergy/Hierarchy Abuse Scandal: UK Braced As English Cardinal Implicated

Extracts below from LifeSiteNews bombshell report:  Pope blocked investigation of abuse allegations against cardinal who helped elect him

Pope Francis embracing Cardinal, Murphy-O’Connor

September 24, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – 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 [well-known Italian journalist and Vatican expert.] 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 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.

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.

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.

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 (sic)  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.  [Emphases added].   Source – to read entire report click here

Comment: 

There’s really nothing to add to the above report except to note that, as we have said for years in our newsletter, when bishops cover up or make excuses for  priests causing scandal, in various ways – as did our Cardinal O’Brien RIP in response to our reports and letters about dissident Edinburgh clergy attacking the Faith and morals in newspapers and through the broadcasting media – there has to be a reason. And the reason – we frequently hinted – has to be something very serious.

So, nobody should be surprised at these latest revelations. I’ve never written to Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor but I have written to other members of the English (Scottish and Irish) Hierarchy, all to no avail.  We’re watching, therefore, with interest as this latest scandal unfolds, and can’t help but wonder if our observations will prove accurate in other cases… both north and south of the border and across the Irish Sea.  Will we find even more chickens coming home to roost?  Let’s watch and pray, especially for the Consecration of Russia, because, until that happens, these scandals will continue and worsen.  Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!  

USA: Should Kavanaugh Withdraw? 

Only now is the UK media beginning to cover the reports of sexual misconduct brought against Brett Kavanaugh –  with the predictable unquestioning acceptance of the allegations levelled against the Judge. Well, after all, it’s a woman making the allegations, and the accused is male, so she must be telling the truth… right?  As for what is motivating these women to exert themselves to keep him out of the Supreme Court… Having watched the ferocity of the pro-abortionists here in the UK, desperate to extend abortion “rights” and to decriminalise it completely, I think it’s clear that these “liberal” females will stop at nothing to prevent any “conservative” candidate from tipping the balance a tad more to the “right”.  Nothing these morons do surprises me in the least.  Maybe, though, for the sake of his own peace of mind, not to mention his family’s safety (there have been death threats), he should withdraw his nomination although  The New York Times  reports that he vows to continue  What would YOU advise him to do?  Is it really worth it?  Can anyone really fight this sort of smear campaign – and remain sane? 

Below, a short video clip from the USA media, refreshingly challenging the uncritical media coverage to date…  

Comments invited…

Is the UK no longer free? 

The treatment of Tommy Robinson, coupled with the contrived outrage over Boris Johnson’s ‘burka’ remarks this week, do beg the question: is Tucker Carlson right to question whether, in fact, the UK really is a free land?   And why are the Catholic bishops not asking the same question? 

Comments invited…   

Broadcasting Media putting brakes on BREXIT: UK Likely to Remain Prisoner of the EU – Pray Urgently! 

Editor writes…

It’s now very clear today, with news of the latest Sky Data poll apparently showing a dramatic change in the public mood with more people changing their minds about leaving, and thinking we ought to stay in the EU, that my own personal prophesy, when the referendum was announced in 2016, is apparently coming true:  we will never be permitted to leave the EU.  The EU will see to it that we remain imprisoned in their diabolical project. Bit by bit, the media – especially the broadcasting media – have been building up their case for remaining; leading questions, ill-informed discussions, second-rate and manifestly biased commentators creating a picture of devastation outside the EU.  And, it must be said, the Leave side has been weak in its response – when, that is, they are permitted to respond.   So, what, if anything, can be done about it? 

Blogger, Westminster Fly, replies…

The EU is a spiritual problem – being freemasonic and satanic in origin, For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.”

So I think we’ve got to go all out about this – have Masses said, rosaries, novenas, and penance, that we may completely leave the EU and that it may be destroyed completely.

The battle won’t be won by clueless politicians like Theresa May, that’s for sure. Humanly speaking, I think our best bet is if they get rid of her, and Boris Johnson gets in and gets Jacob Rees Mogg in the cabinet, then we stand a chance. Both are far from perfect, but they are light years ahead of Theresa May.

Apparently, since May gave out her Chequers statement, UKIP membership has gone through the roof again. Farage is talking about coming back. God uses all these imperfect instruments, but I still think the best way for a clean break with the EU is an intensive Mass/prayer/penance campaign.

Also, it may be one of these things that isn’t resolved until the Consecration of Russia. But the signs are there. EU apparatchiks are getting worried about ‘right-wing populism’ (i.e. patriotism and common sense) resurfacing in various countries. Things are on the move… so the remedy must be spiritual.  

Comments invited – share your thoughts on this Sky Data Poll – is it contrived, or fake news?  Share, too, your suggestions about prayers and penances as we reflect on Westminster Fly’s contention that the BREXIT remedy must be spiritual.   

Transgenderism: Is It Child Abuse? 

Are children as young as 11 really capable of making life-changing decisions about their gender? Nine young people who all share a remarkable bond. Their stories raise one of the most controversial questions of our age…

1)   Charity Mermaids says it has more than 5,900 queries about exploring gender

2)   They have organised a prom for those aged 11 to 19 who have sought their help
3)   The Daily Mail spoke to nine participants, including 15-year-old Keaton Schubert
Read entire Daily Mail report here

Now watch the short interview with parents who removed their child from his primary school in protest at the pushing of the “trans” agenda. 

Comment: 

Is the lack of proper guidance for young people confused by the “trans” movement tantamount to child abuse by those responsible for the well-being of children, both at home and at school?  Why are these confused children not told that it is simply not possible to change one’s sex – end of discussion? Science confirms that a man is a man and a woman is a woman, and it’s just not possible for us to switch from being a man to a woman and vice versa.  So, what is this madness all about – it’s a direct attack on our very humanity, obviously … so how come it’s taken hold so quickly, and we  are now seeing otherwise sane people actually taking it seriously?  

Thinking Through Catholic Truth…

The above is the self-explanatory  introduction to our new series, “Thinking Through Catholic Truth – The Big Questions… Answered”.

Topics already in the pipeline include Scripture, Spirituality, Catholic education  and the “Institutional Church”.  

If you have a topic you’d like covered tell us in the comments, or if you would like to participate in any of our videos, let us know, either by commenting below or emailing the editor on editor@catholictruthscotland.com   

Click here to view the Catholic Truth videos posted on our website

Catholic Social Teaching Supports Trump’s Challenges To the Media…


From
Crisis

It is not an overstatement to say that the time of the Trump presidency has been one of protracted struggle between the national administration and most of the media. To be sure, the press and the electronic media have faced off with presidential administrations for a long time. Actually, the press has had their political and ideological biases since the beginning of the Republic. After all, weren’t the Federalist Papers originally articles in newspapers that wanted to support the proposed U.S. Constitution and influence the crucial ratification debate in New York State? Don’t historians write about how “yellow journalism” helped lead to the Spanish-American War? Still, when one looks at the behavior of the media in recent decades, the argument can easily be made that as far as concerns political bias, lack of concern for fairness and objectivity, separating out reporting from commentary, a willingness to dig for the facts instead of just reporting what someone claims, journalistic professionalism, and even attention to whether something reported on actually even happened, we are at a historic low.

While Republicans have probably borne the brunt of harsh presidential media treatment since LBJ, the level of vituperativeness directed at Trump is perhaps unparalleled—even surpassing what Nixon, who was known for his long chilly relationship with the press, faced. Certainly, the media’s unremitting pounding of Trump, beginning even well before Inauguration Day, is unprecedented in these recent decades. Some might say that Trump has invited it, with many questions about his background before coming into office, the attention to the ongoing investigation of “collusion” with Russia during the campaign (although this may actually be an example of the “fake news” that the president criticizes), and Trump’s constant sniping at the media with his regular barrage of tweets. Still, it’s hard to make the case that the media has given any breathing room to Trump anywhere along the way.

Most people would probably say that a president is justified in calling out the media and challenging their misconduct. Other presidential administrations have done it, although probably not as regularly and publicly as this one—nor has the president himself usually been the point man, as is the case with Trump. Despite plenty of grounds to challenge the media, Trump was recently attacked in a manner that surely seemed “over the top” by two senators from his own party. Senator Jeff Flake, who has repeatedly tussled with Trump, first conceded that presidents can surely criticize the press but then equated Trump’s actions with Stalin and seemed to suggest that the media can almost unquestionably be relied upon to present the truth. Flake’s fellow Arizonan, Senator John McCain, who has also had a strained relationship with the president, wrote an op-ed arguing that Trump’s criticism of the press is having the dangerous effect of discrediting it and so was emboldening foreign despots to suppress journalists.

All the while, Trump has not threatened the press with anything like censorship, or prior restraint as in the Pentagon Papers case, or imposing a special tax on oppositional newspapers like Huey Long did, or imprisoning journalists as various judges have done for not revealing their sources. Neither senator had much to say about journalistic responsibility or about whether the media—and what we’re mostly talking about here is the mainstream or “big” media—has in fact been discrediting itself by its actions, the most egregious of which has been reporting on stories that have no factual basis (“fake news”).

One wonders if the senators have any sense about the need to confront adversaries, even when they royally deserve it. Their response to Trump was a particularly striking example of what the Republican “establishment” in Washington has been consistently criticized for: routinely conceding to the other side, a “go-along, get-along” attitude that results in the left advancing its agenda even when it loses elections.

The strikingly uncritical and almost apologetic attitude about the media of Senators Flake and McCain is not something that Catholics should countenance, whether or not they like Trump’s approach or manner—that is, if they think he doesn’t act in a way that is “presidential”—or even if they think he carries it too far. Untruthfulness and wrongdoing—and imperviousness to propounding untruth certainly qualifies as wrongdoing—need to be challenged. Let’s remember how Christ had little reluctance about confronting the errant Jewish authorities of his time and that admonishing the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy. It’s especially necessary for top leadership to do it—both for the greater effect they can have and to inspire others to do the same in their own little arenas. Recall what St. Thomas Aquinas said about how those who rule set the norms for their people.

Moreover, when we talk about the media and calling it to responsibility, Catholics need to be particularly attentive to what the Church has said about this. In his social encyclical, Pacem in Terris, Pope St. John XXIII set out his famous listing of human rights and stressed that rights always have corresponding duties. So, while there is a right to express and communicate one’s opinions, to freedom of speech and publication—which certainly includes people acting in the context of the formal organs of communication, like the news media—the people on the receiving end have “the right to be informed truthfully about public events” (#12).

Vatican II’s Inter Mirifica (The Decree on the Means of Social Communication) stresses that while the media has rights it also has the duty to uphold the moral law, which certainly includes the obligation to report truthfully so that this right of people, the citizenry, to be truthfully informed is realized. It also asserts that civil authorities have a duty “to ensure … that public morality and social progress are not greatly endangered through misuse of these media” (#11-12). The Church here is not saying that government should or that it’s desirable for it to impose censorship, or even that it’s mostly government that should be the vehicle to promote this grave journalistic responsibility. She just says that government has or may have a role of some kind in this. That, of course, may involve nothing more than “setting the record straight” or challenging the media when it puts out false or biased information.

Recently, Pope Francis scored the media’s reporting of “fake news,” saying it always has bad effects, and emphasized the obligation of journalists to report the truth.
From a Catholic standpoint, then, while Trump’s confronting the media about ideological bias, reporting “fake news,” and the like may not be elegant and may even seem excessive sometimes, it is warranted as a means of prodding then to act rightly and be more responsible. As such, it certainly may help the cause of promoting the common good. While scrutiny and challenges of the media’s errant practices should come from many sources, to be sure, when the highest American public authority is willing to take it on it especially highlights the problems and may have the most effect. Again, as St. Thomas said, rulers or leaders shape the course of things. Further, the way Trump is doing it is entirely in line with American constitutional principles. Contrary to what Senators Flake and McCain may think, the First Amendment is in no way being trodden upon. [Stephen M. Krason: A Catholic Reaction to Trump and the Media]

Comments invited…