Cardinal Pell charged and must return

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roseeurekacross
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ringil said:
I wonder if Pope Francis could gently suggest that Pell return to Australia?
Click to expand...
He is going back Ringil.

The song was regarding his evidence to the Royal Commission last year (where he wasn’t even on trial which makes the song more sensationalist).

He didn’t go back then because of health reasons but instead gave evidence over video link from the Vatican for a few hours.

That was last year but apparently he is ok now to travel.
 
ringil said:
I wonder if Pope Francis could gently suggest that Pell return to Australia?
Click to expand...
Wut?
Cardinal Pell is not resisting or avoiding authorities in Australia.
Folks need to be very careful with the insinuation that Cardinal Pell was moved from Australia to the Vatican to avoid the law. He was appointed by Francis.
 
Edmundus1581 said:
The best article I’ve read on this - very thorough in listing and challenging the known allegations, and putting them in the context of animosity to Card. Pell, and of how false childhood memories in the past have been widely accepted and acted on by police.

👍
Click to expand...
At the moment, Melbourne Uni press has withdrawn the book from sale, as per the lawyer suppression of details order.

It is quite a hope of some in my Diocese that after this is done, and if Cardinal Pell is found innocent, he will say Mass for us, here.
 
An Australian Journalist (of the conservative persuasion) - Gerard Henderson - has written a number of articles calling out poor journalism and other missteps in reporting and investigations concerning Card Pell.

Inserting here and accessing links to his articles at the newspaper where he has a column appears to hit a paywall, but if you search directly on Google using

cardinal pell gerard Henderson

you may be able to access his articles (dated Nov 4 2016 and May 20 2017 at www.australian.com.au).

And here is Henderson’s Review of the book by another (not conservative) Journalist (Louise Milligan) which documents and asserts various allegations against Pell.

thesydneyinstitute.com.au/blog/review-of-cardinal-the-rise-and-fall-of-george-pell/
 
JimG said:
From First Things:

The Case Against Cardinal Pell
Click to expand...
Here’s my summary of the article, and, as far as I can see, half the posters on this thread:
  1. clergy are just doing their jobs as Christ intended
  2. any accusations against priests are inspired by the devil and/or anti-Catholics
  3. If accusations cannot be proven to the standard of a criminal courtroom, the accused is innocent.
My summary of all that: Is this really what Christ wants?
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Here’s my summary of the article, and, as far as I can see, half the posters on this thread:
  1. clergy are just doing their jobs as Christ intended
  2. any accusations against priests are inspired by the devil and/or anti-Catholics
  3. If accusations cannot be proven to the standard of a criminal courtroom, the accused is innocent.
My summary of all that: Is this really what Christ wants?
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen two or three anywhere. Maybe I missed it.

Three? Well, why would one be a Catholic without a priesthood?
 
I think the point of the article was to illustrate how spin, left out facts, and innuendo can influence a whole nation, a judge, and a jury.
But hey…I’m all for waiting until the trial if there is one.
:coffeeread:
 
pianistclare said:
I think the point of the article was to illustrate how spin, left out facts, and innuendo can influence a whole nation, a judge, and a jury.
But hey…I’m all for waiting until the trial if there is one.
:coffeeread:
Click to expand...
Calling a movie a documentary does not make it less a movie, or more factual, as in Michael Moore. Likewise, a fictional piece can involve solid research. Movies are still just movies, that is, entertainment. Some people are entertained by the emotional involvement in fictional life, some by fantasy, some by getting really mad with a documentary that preaches to the choir, so to speak.

That’s entertainment!
 
pnewton said:
Calling a movie a documentary does not make it less a movie, or more factual, as in Michael Moore. Likewise, a fictional piece can involve solid research. Movies are still just movies, that is, entertainment. Some people are entertained by the emotional involvement in fictional life, some by fantasy, some by getting really mad with a documentary that preaches to the choir, so to speak.

That’s entertainment!
Click to expand...
It’s all just theory until it impacts their own Diocese for many people.
 
pnewton said:
Calling a movie a documentary does not make it less a movie, or more factual, as in Michael Moore. Likewise, a fictional piece can involve solid research. Movies are still just movies, that is, entertainment. Some people are entertained by the emotional involvement in fictional life, some by fantasy, some by getting really mad with a documentary that preaches to the choir, so to speak.

That’s entertainment!
Click to expand...
With all due respect, have you seen the documentary? It is not a “movie.”
I live in the diocese in question in The Keepers. It is not made up. The Archdiocese has responded to do damage control and acknowledged the abuse. So please, don’t mislead people with your comments.
 
Irishmom2 said:
With all due respect, have you seen the documentary? It is not a “movie.”
Click to expand...
Heck no. I am so sorry I got this wrong. It is a mini-series on Netflix, I found out, so I am more than happy to correct such a mistake. But no, I do not get information from such sources. I did not say it was “made up,” only that I have found such programming a dubious source. (edit) Okay, for the sake of totally honest, the fact that it is produced to make money is an excuse not to watch such things. I don’t watch anything, fiction or non-fiction involving children getting hurt, or any tear-jerker ever, unless it tricks me at the end, like* Die Hard Another Day* did.

Apparently this is still an on-going investigation.

washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/05/17/exhumed-priests-dna-doesnt-match-evidence-in-case-of-sister-cathy-slaying-from-1969/?utm_term=.dd8a915e5f33
The unsolved slaying of Sister Catherine Ann Cesnik in Baltimore in 1969 hit another dead end Wednesday when police learned that DNA from a long-deceased priest did not match crime scene evidence that Baltimore County police have preserved for almost five decades.
Click to expand...
In February, police exhumed the body of the Rev. A. Joseph Maskell, the former chaplain at Archbishop Keough High School in Baltimore, where Cesnik had taught… Maskell became a suspect in Cesnik’s death but denied any involvement to police. He died in 2001.
 
pianistclare said:
It’s all just theory until it impacts their own Diocese for many people.
Click to expand...
It is not theory that some priests have molested children. I get that. The question here is whether Cardinal Pell did. It is also not a theory that some people sue for either attention or money. This is not an accusation towards anyone, just one of the forces that drives our society, just like sin drive our humanity.
 
pnewton said:
Apparently this is still an on-going investigation.

washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/05/17/exhumed-priests-dna-doesnt-match-evidence-in-case-of-sister-cathy-slaying-from-1969/?utm_term=.dd8a915e5f33
The unsolved slaying of Sister Catherine Ann Cesnik in Baltimore in 1969 hit another dead end Wednesday when police learned that DNA from a long-deceased priest did not match crime scene evidence that Baltimore County police have preserved for almost five decades.

In February, police exhumed the body of the Rev. A. Joseph Maskell, the former chaplain at Archbishop Keough High School in Baltimore, where Cesnik had taught… Maskell became a suspect in Cesnik’s death but denied any involvement to police. He died in 2001.
Click to expand...
Yes, but this is not the whole story either. Who killed Sr. Cathy, and how Maskell abused students are two separate things. So that we do not derail this thread any further, people may wish to use the search to find the one remaining thread about the Netflix show.
 
Much of the media in Australia is very secular and liberal…any hint of church scandal and they are out for blood…Australia as a whole is a secular country so in many ways Cardinal Pell will most likely have already been convicted by many in the public arena…he’s not going to be believed even if he is innocent of the charges against him…I just hope he’ll at least get a fair hearing
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Here’s my summary of the article, and, as far as I can see, half the posters on this thread:
  1. clergy are just doing their jobs as Christ intended
  2. any accusations against priests are inspired by the devil and/or anti-Catholics
  3. If accusations cannot be proven to the standard of a criminal courtroom, the accused is innocent.
My summary of all that: Is this really what Christ wants?
Click to expand...
That’s not a summary, that’s a work of fiction in its own right.

Numerous priests committed the crimes and are doing the time as they should. There are bishops who covered up the crimes who also deserve to do time, though most are dead. There are also some who were unjustly accused.

The case against Pell - to the extent its known - does not appear to involve convincing evidence. He deserves justice too - based on the facts.
 
The clerical sex abuse scandals stab at the hearts of those of us who love the Church. The Roman Catholic Church is the sanctuary of purity. We, the faithful, are all part of a “great family”, and we value the innocence and purity of our children as something sacred. These diabolical crimes have left us , the victims and the faithful, weeping bitter tears.

I hope and pray Cardinal Pell kept fidelity with Christ and did nothing wrong. He will not get a fair hearing and the secular media will do its best to shade the coverage in the worst way to portray Pell (and more importantly, the Church) as some grotesque enemy of humanity.

In times like these I seek wisdom from the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church.

Part One, Article 7, page 193:

According to the Lord, the present time is the time of the Spirit and of witness, but also a time still marked by “distress” and the trial of evil which does not spare the Church and ushers in the struggles of the last days. It is a time of waiting and watching.
 
kmaaj said:
The biblical manner in which guilt or innocence of the accused is established is quite stringent, and Jesus and St. Paul both alluded to the process in the New Testament and any decent chain reference bible worth its salt will reference the specific Old Testament verses that Jesus and St. Paul alluded to. Public opinion tends to adhere more to rumor, gossip, hyperbolized inference, and mob mentality rather than the facts at hand. Sometimes, the courts themselves are swayed more by mob mentality than by the facts at hand. Philadelphia is a prime example of this trend. I sincerely hope Victoria does not follow suit, though it appears they already have.
Click to expand...
The Biblical standard, whatever it may be, is totally irrelevant in the Court.

Further, I strongly suspect even in biblical times public opinion strongly influenced matters of this sort.

In any event, the Australian Courts will deal with the matter as they should. As to Philadelphia, rather than blame the courts, any blame for a skewed verdict (if it was skewed and not simply to your disliking) should be placed with clerics and hierarchs who did and/or covered up these horrific acts.
 
Rau said:
That’s not a summary, that’s a work of fiction in its own right.

Numerous priests committed the crimes and are doing the time as they should. There are bishops who covered up the crimes who also deserve to do time, though most are dead. There are also some who were unjustly accused.

The case against Pell - to the extent its known - does not appear to involve convincing evidence. He deserves justice too - based on the facts.
Click to expand...
Do you think the prosecutors who have more access to the case and evidence than you or I are making a political move against a high ranking prelate?
What do you think the motive is of that?
 
I know I said I wasn’t going to participate in this thread again, but I felt I should say this. I read the following article

firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/07/the-case-against-cardinal-pell

And found it very informative. I am not a fan of Cardinal Pell as I’ve made clear. I think his non action that he himself mentioned in his testimony is horrible. I think Peter Saunders’ resigning was a big problem. But as for these charges against him, I was neutral. After reading the above, there’s a lot of problems with the charges. I don’t believe he is guilty of those things. Still not a fan.

The last few paragraphs are disturbing and depressing about the state of our Church. At least Cardinal Pell never told a victim he had some guilt in what happened. God help the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top