Kindly return the favor.
Pell, in my opinion, is part of the solution and not the problem.
Well, let's be more specific. Pell was cardinal in Australia during the time when the Royal Commission was set up to investigate the ghastly, widespread sexual abuse of children within the Catholic Church in Australia. He was also archbishop of Melbourne and Sydney while these abuses were happening.
Yes, let's be more specific.
Pell was appointed Bishop of Melbourne in 1996. Of what specifically are you accusing him? The actual coverup of sex abuse cases while he was bishop? Or a lack of sympathy towards those making accusations of abuse under previous bishops?
I know of no cases where Pell himself is accused of participating in coverups or furthering the damage caused by abusive priests. For those truly interested in delving into the findings of the "Royal Commission" to which our resident expert on Catholic sex abuse keeps referring, it's Interim Report is HERE. Better to go straight to the source than swallow the Guardian's or Brisbane Courier Mail's respective spins, right Doc? Not they can't be trusted to give a balanced account or anything.
The report details the stories of 150 people who have detailed their experiences of abuse and is divided into sections which examine residential care, foster care, government schools, non-government schools, the community, churches, and juvenile justice.
The cases I've read pre-date Pell's time as a bishop. Do you know of any cases where he's accused of cover-up? A link would be good.
The headline which you pasted ...Royal Commission: George Pell was calling all the shots" does not, I repeat, does not refer to Pell's handling of accusations of sex abuse against his priests while he was bishop. It refers to how he handled claims for compensation from a sex abuse abuse victim who suffered in the 1970s, long before Pell was a bishop, right Doc? HERE is the actual article.
The sex abuse victim was given a rough ride by the Church's lawyers in his claims for compensation and according to the Royal Commission at least, Pell was behind it.
For the record, this is not why Pell is now in Rome. He is accused of no crime, that I know of, and while many may not have liked his demeanor before the Commission, he is not some sort of fugitive from justice, now skulking in the Vatican as the Doc seems to be implying.
Just to clarify.
Carry on...........
The lure of money encourages victims to reveal themselves. It also lures shyster lawyers to press the cases of faux victims. The Church is far more exposed to suit than, say, a major corporation like BP, and if the Courts give frauds the benefit of the doubt, then the contributions of millions of Catholics, living and dead, will be handed out until there is nothing much left. It is a kind of confiscationof the assets of the Church , something like that which occurred under Henry VIII, and during the French and other radical revolutions. The immediate result was to eliminate the social and educational foundations of the Church and, eventually, to vest these responsibilities in the State. So vast are now the resources of the state, at least in the West, that the contributions of the churches are no longer valued highly. If Christian hospitals and schools, or orphanages, or adoption services disappear, little is lost, so the thinking goes.