F
- Status
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
You seem to be the only one who finds it ‘ironic’.
Can I pose a question for you? A thought experiment?
If you saw a bank robber with a gun running from the crime scene wearing the disguise of a Nun’s habit, would you think that person was a real Nun?
Do you think that a person who secretly commits abominations behind closed doors yet publicly stands in front of a Church full of parishioners preaching about sexual immorality (Galatians 5, Colossians 3, 1st Corinthians 6…) can really call themself a Catholic Priest?
www.clergyproject.org
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
I think that prayersoutherncross thought it ironic as well.Freddy:
You seem to be the only one who finds it ‘ironic’.
Can I pose a question for you? A thought experiment?
If you saw a bank robber with a gun running from the crime scene wearing the disguise of a Nun’s habit, would you think that person was a real Nun?
Do you think that a person who secretly commits abominations behind closed doors yet publicly stands in front of a Church full of parishioners preaching about sexual immorality (Galatians 5, Colossians 3, 1st Corinthians 6…) can really call themself a Catholic Priest?
www.clergyproject.org
But maybe they confessed. I mean as in confession. Not just to the police. How would that affect their right to be classed as a Catholic? Or a priest? And that’s a serious question. And how is a priest who has been convicted but has not confessed (in either case) meant to be treated? I’ll guess we know if Pell loses his appeal. The vatican will have something to say about it.
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
Because nun’s are scarce, and those owning habits even scarcer, the probability that the person at the bank is actually a nun is very low for that reason alone. Do you see some analogy to the thread topic in this observation?
The hypocrisy is plain. But what is your point?
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
Probably so. Given the lack of admission of the crime, the protestations of innocence and the lack of objective evidence, the Pope may face a most difficult act.
I wonder if any other cleric has been laicized while protesting they are innocent of the crime?
J
JimG
Guest
A last chance for Australian justice
Emeraldlady
New member
Good article. One point against one of the commenters under the story claiming that Vatican has abandoned Cardinal Pell. That isn’t true at all. Once the Australian Courts have exhausted all avenues, the Vatican then does it’s own investigation. That is when the voice of the Australian clergy will all but unanimously unite behind him for the sake of the Australian Church. It’s not prudent during the civil proceedings for clergy to speak out.
C
CRV
Guest
Excellent article restating the facts. Thanks for posting.
ETA - First Things has the same article …
ETA - First Things has the same article …
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
How on earth would that work? A man is convicted of raping a young boy, has two appeals turned down (in your scenario) and the Catholic church backs him up to a man? Can you be at all serious?
If you wanted to completely destroy the Catholic church in Australia then that is exactly what you’d do.
R
Rau
Guest
The Church will take up a position in opposition to the judicial system? I very much doubt that.
If the High Court allows the status quo to stand, the situation will be exceptionally difficult for the Vatican. And I suspect the Australian Church will have very little to say.
Last edited:
F
FiveLinden
Guest
If Cardinal Pell succeeds in his appeal I think the most likely outcome will be for him to retire from all active Ministry and (probably) return to Rome where his security will be assured. I imagine that in light of his retirement there would be no Church procedures brought against him. If he is well enough my guess is that he will write a book about his experiences. I would be surprised if he granted media interviews although there is a personality streak there that might lead him to unwisely take the path recent trodden by Prince Andrew (just comparing media choices not cases).
Should he lose I am sure that he would be treated as many other clerics have and ‘reduced’ to the lay state. He would not I think be given sanctuary in Rome. Security will be an issue. Again, I think he might write a book, possibly not on his experiences but on an issue like Church administration and the efforts of the last two Popes.
Others would continue to campaign for a reversal of the decision but any such process could not succeed for many years.
Should he lose I am sure that he would be treated as many other clerics have and ‘reduced’ to the lay state. He would not I think be given sanctuary in Rome. Security will be an issue. Again, I think he might write a book, possibly not on his experiences but on an issue like Church administration and the efforts of the last two Popes.
Others would continue to campaign for a reversal of the decision but any such process could not succeed for many years.
G
Greenfields
Guest
It’s curious you place emphasis on your thoughts he would write a book FL .Somehow you assume something about a man whom you know less than many of us.God bless.
T
tafan2
Guest
It has also been reported that 10 members of the original jury wanted to acquit.
B
Bill6
Guest
His Emminance Cardinal Pell is without question innocent. He is being used by thr Australian Government. I pray for him and for all those in jail or prison, most especially the wrongly accused and convicted. Let us pray to Saint Raymond, Saint Margaret of Antioch, Saint Joseph, Patron of the Church, and Saint Joseph Cafasso, Patron of those in prison.
God bless
God bless
F
FiveLinden
Guest
There is no evidence of this.
F
FiveLinden
Guest
In Australia the courts are independent of the government. What involvement of any sort has the government of any site or the federal government had in this case?
R
Rau
Guest
Nonsense. The government has no say over the court process.
He may well be a victim of injustice, but the government is not at fault.
R
Rau
Guest
Certainly what he said has been reported, though the jury vote is not made public in Australia so it may be difficult to verify. Certainly the 2 juries did not agree and neither did the 3 appellate judges agree. What a mess.
F
FiveLinden
Guest
What who said? No one in a position to know, i.e. aJury member has been reported.
R
Rau
Guest
Tafan2 - the poster to whom you responded. What he said about the voting in the first trial has indeed been reported. That information is (under law) meant to be kept confidential hence is not readily verifiable.
- Status