The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Six points on Pell > Comments

Six points on Pell : Comments

By Xavier Symons, published 7/3/2016

After reading the transcripts of Pell’s 19 ½ hours in the witness box, it strikes me there are several key issues that have not received sufficient attention.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Well I simply have to agree with the court of public opinion!

I too have a blood pressure problem that can be and is controlled with medication. And he could have been put on O2 for the duration of the flight, or flown in an airliner with the capacity to maintain sea level atmospherics!

If I had my druthers, his self evidently farcical testimony would have been tested with covert space age lie detector technology.

And appropriate given his selective memory failure and self contradictions to his own sworn testimony?

High office and vestments never ever an absolute guarantee of implicit honesty.

And borne out some would say by a promise of an audience with the pope that seemed to flutter in the breeze and die almost as soon as the (absolute)commitment was uttered!?

And almost as unbelievable was the assertion absolutely everyone else deceived him, the apparently only completely honest individual in the victorian establishment?

Sorry totally non repentant Pell, I believe, there's only one place for you, and it rhymes with Pell? And may god in his infinite wisdom have mercy on your soul, always providing you still have one?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 7 March 2016 9:17:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bioedge is of course run by opus dei.
So what?
Well as far as I know George Pell was instrumental in allowing opus dei to get a very strong foothold in the "catholic" church both in Sydney and (perhaps) other parts of Australia too.

For an interesting perspective on the rise to power of opus dei, and similar back-to-the-past "traditionalist" outfits I recommend the book by Matthew Fox titled The Popes War on the Church - it was reviewed on this site some time ago.

AND

Check out the various essays on the dark behind-the-scenes applied politics of opus dei on The Open Tabernacle website - not a pretty picture.

And these people pretend to be a moral presence and voice in the world!
Posted by Daffy Duck, Monday, 7 March 2016 11:29:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good article. The court of public opinion is doing what it usually does - running around in circles, biting at its own backside. Pell has been treated abominably by the media and the Commission. I believe he genuinely did not know of certain thing; he was a conservative sidelined by progressives who were hiding the truth about too many foul priests.
Posted by ttbn, Monday, 7 March 2016 11:59:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What these people on power, protecting other people with power, have done to generations of young people has been utterly despicable.

I just hope that such vile child abuse is not in a process of being secularised, not totally eradicated but simply secularised, but such idiotic initiatives as the 'Unsafe Schools' program. I hope that our children and grandchildren won't have to go through similar torture with yet another gaggle of pedophile abusers, protecting each other, advising each other, exchanging their vile experiences.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 7 March 2016 12:22:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As someone the same age as Pell I must agree that not only is it incredibly difficult to remember events that happened over 40 years ago, but also that child abuse was never talked about then. The slightest rumour was squashed, dismissed and hidden.
Men like my husband absolutely refused to believe that men they respected or were related to could ever do such vile acts to children. In fact on one occasion, when told about a comment made by a child he insisted that the child must have misinterpreted the physical touch!
So, although not catholic, or even religious, I can believe Pell when he makes these statements.
The past really was another country.
Posted by Big Nana, Monday, 7 March 2016 2:39:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh come on Big Nana, if someone told you a priest or brother was molesting them or someone they knew, I doubt it is something you would forget? I know I have remembered some awful comments or confessions I heard many years ago.
Some things are just too awful to successfully forget.

Do you think Pell had absolutely no idea why his mate Ridsdale was moved from parish to parish so often? Do you not think he would have even had a mild curiosity about it and asked why? Even once? And there wasn't even one close colleague or friend who felt they could have confided those reasons to Pell in all those years?
Yeah right...
Posted by Suseonline, Monday, 7 March 2016 5:05:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An excellent article which deals with the facts.

I agree with Big Nana that recalling details of places, times and conversations from 40 years ago is not as simple as his detractors want us to believe, without ever demonstrating their own perfect recall, of course.

Rhrosty, with his intimate knowledge of the diagnosis of Pell's cardiologist, tell us blood pressure medication and an oxygen bottle were all that were required for Pell to take a long-haul flight back to Australia against the cardiologist's advice. The "court of public opinion" Rhrosty identifies with has a more accurate name: the lynch mob.

There are two types of bigotry which are bog-standard for the Left in Australia at present: anti-Catholicism and anti-Semitism.

The anti-Catholic bigotry has led to many of the inanities expressed in relation to Pell - that he should have taken a long-haul flight as though a commercial aircraft is fitted with an emergency medical centre, that his memory lapses were examples of deliberate evasion, that he "must have known" about Ridsdale and other perverts (when journalist and former priest Paul Bongiorno also admitted to being deceived by Ridsdale), that Pell's statements were "implausible" (which is an opinion of the counsel assisting, Gail Furness, not a fact), that he must have been aware of local gossip in a town 200 kilometres from where he lived (another unsubstantiated Furness assertion) and the numerous sly misrepresentations by journalists.

I'm an atheist, though I attended Catholic schools throughout my primary and secondary education. Not once in all those years was I aware of "rumour" or "gossip" or any innuendo about pedophile priests or brothers. Indeed, I remember most of my teachers as wonderful, dedicated men.

Finally, I hope I live long enough to witness the coming royal commission into female genital mutilation. There will surely be one, won't there? I want to hear from those who will have to admit to knowing about it, but doing nothing to stop it. After all, that's the (anhistorical) allegation made about Pell. Hat tip to Tim Blair of the Daily Telegraph on that one.
Posted by calwest, Monday, 7 March 2016 5:27:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suse, you are overlooking the fact that there is no evidence at all that he was ever told anything. And as he said himself, if he had heard any small rumours about such happenings he would have ignored them because like my husband, he couldn't believe any decent man could do a vile act like that.
You have also overlooked the fact that as soon as Pell was in a position of authority and he knew about this, he created the first ever church fund to compensate victims and provide counselling as well as reforming practises within the church to prevent these things happening in the future.
Quite frankly, as a parent, I would be asking myself how I missed the abuse, and if I knew about it, how could I live with myself knowing I hadn't gone to the police.
Posted by Big Nana, Monday, 7 March 2016 5:53:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, you are not going to be able to whitewash George Pell. It would indeed be a massive coincidence if everyone in the Catholic Church was deceiving George Pell about the activities of pedophile priests. Given the level of knowledge that people throughout the Catholic Church in Victoria had about the activities of Gerald Ridsdale, it is inconceivable that George Pell knew nothing. After all Pell was enough of friend of Ridsdale to support him at his 1993 court hearing.

Even if we were to suspend belief for a while and accept that Pell was kept completely in the dark by everyone else in the Catholic Church, his failure to act when told by a victim of the activities of Edward Dowlan is damning enough. Pell's excuse that he wasn't asked to do anything demonstrates the deep flaw in his character. When you set yourself up as a moral leader you act when you see something that is morally wrong, regardless of whether any one asks you to.
Posted by Agronomist, Monday, 7 March 2016 6:50:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agronomist:

“When you set yourself up as a moral leader you act when you see something that is morally wrong, regardless of whether any one asks you to”

He might set himself up as a moral leader but he does not become a moral leader until he has some followers. If anyone is gullible enough to follow someone simply because he says he is a moral leader then they have some serious issues of maturity to address. Nobody needs a moral leader. We all have the responsibility to form our own moral values and not try and shift that responsibility onto someone else.

When you point out the failure of someone to take responsibility for not doing what they have no responsibility to do then you are trying to make them feel guilty for the responsibility of others. You are also saying that it is reasonable for someone to take up this responsibility on behalf of another which it is not. You cannot blame someone for not doing what they should not be doing in the first place.

He may have failed in his responsibility to protect children but he cannot fail as a moral leader unless people are naive enough to follow him.
Posted by phanto, Monday, 7 March 2016 8:03:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm intrigued with the "transcript of the interview in which [Pell] terminated Searson"

That does not seem to have ever been mentioned before.
Posted by McReal, Monday, 7 March 2016 8:08:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"He may have failed in his responsibility to protect children but he cannot fail as a moral leader unless people are naive enough to follow him."

George Pell is a former Archbishop of Melbourne, a former Archbishop of Sydney and a Cardinal of the Catholic Church. Of course he has people who follow him.

That is the whole point of the Church creating bishops, archbishops, etc. They are supposed to be leaders.

But in Pell it is more than that. He has appointed himself a moral arbiter in Australia over such matters as homosexuality, divorce, HIV/AIDS and embryonic stem cells.
Posted by Agronomist, Monday, 7 March 2016 10:18:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agronomist, get over yourself. Deal with the detail of the evidence, not your own posturing.

"It would indeed be a massive coincidence if everyone in the Catholic Church was deceiving George Pell about the activities of pedophile priests," you say.

"Everyone in the Catholic Church"? A few billion people? Has that ever been suggested? No. Would it ever be suggested? No.

Pell was a junior priest at the time. As he rose through the ranks, he argued, individuals kept information from him: Bishop Mulkearns, Archbishop Little, people running the Catholic Education Office.

Why is Pell supposed to be solely responsible, decades later, for the fact that many, many other people in more senior positions in the Catholic hierarchy at the time failed to deal with the information they had AS A MATTER OF FACT in relation to pedophiles within the Catholic church?

I can hear the bells of bigotry ringing loud and clear.

Why would you not hold to account the parents, non-pedophile teachers, priests, nuns and others who knew about these sex crimes AS A MATTER OF FACT yet did nothing?

Those were different times. So what have you done to expose female genital mutilation lately?
Posted by calwest, Monday, 7 March 2016 11:08:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Do you think he is a moral leader? You are the one doing the blaming?
If other people think he is a moral leader and he fails to act according to what they expect then isn't that an issue between Pell and his followers? What has his moral failures got to do with you since you do not even acknowledge his moral authority.

He may be guilty of covering up child abuse and that is a crime but his moral leadership is only of relevance to his moral followers.It is not a crime to fail your moral leadership.

The only thing most should be concerned about are his crimes.

It sounds like you are disappointed at his moral failure. Why should you be.
Posted by phanto, Monday, 7 March 2016 11:14:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Extraordinary the number of men who try to justify Pell's behaviour and support for many pedophiles in the catholic church.
Posted by MarilynS, Tuesday, 8 March 2016 2:20:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"... the fact that many, many other people in more senior positions in the Catholic hierarchy at the time failed to deal with the information they had AS A MATTER OF FACT in relation to pedophiles within the Catholic church"

Posted by calwest, Monday, 7 March 11:08pm

Yes, the Catholic church is a wholy unethical organisation that fosters immorality among its people
.
Posted by McReal, Tuesday, 8 March 2016 9:03:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MarilynS,

I've checked the posts again and I can't see one that attempts to "justify Pell's behaviour" nor any action on Pell's behalf which supported "many pedophiles in the catholic church".

So would you like to nominate examples?

One of the major problems with this issue is that bigots make wild generalisations to suit their own agendas, then act as though those generalised accusations were matters of fact. It's a convenient cover for pre-existing prejudice.

So be specific, please.

It is anhistorical to accuse Pell of actions (or lack of action) 40 years ago which were socially and culturally different from the way those actions are seen today. Pell has admitted that, in retrospect, he should have done more. But that's almost certainly not the way he or many others would have seen them at the time.

And one more question: why is it only George Pell who is being held accountable for what many others - Bishop Mulkearns, Archbishop Little, various people in the Catholic Education Office, police, parents - did or did not do to bring the relatively small number of pedophiles to justice? That is what smacks of bigotry.
Posted by calwest, Tuesday, 8 March 2016 9:14:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Very relevant item on A Current Affair tonight about Sarah Monahan's experience with Robert Hughes's child abuse 30 years ago on the set of Hey Dad.

Different world. Hughes was protected by station executives, parents and others. And police did nothing, even when offences were reported.

Hilarious, isn't it? Not. Congratulations to Sarah and the numerous other brave girls and young women who came forward to support the prosecution.

As several people, including Sarah Monahan, have made the point, the culture was very different back then. But, of course, that was only 30 years ago.

I'm looking forward to the explanations of how that was entirely George Pell's fault.
Posted by calwest, Tuesday, 8 March 2016 9:14:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Calwest,

You're right ! Nor was that pedophilia the fault of the Romans ! or the Hittites ! [I'm sick and tired of everything being blamed on the Hittites.]

What Robert Hughes did, and how it may have been covered up by TV executives, has absolutely nothing to do with Cardinal Pell. Spot-on !

Just as the abuse of children in the care of Families SA has a lot to do with the management of Families SA - and nothing whatever to do with Cardinal Pell.

But what did occur in various Catholic dioceses and parishes which Pell knew about and did nothing to expose the perpetrators - if such shielding occurred - may well have something to do with Cardinal Pell.

Blame the Hittites for whatever they did wrong to the Hurrians three thousand years ago. Blame the Romans for whatever they did wrong in Britain two thousand years ago. Blame Families SA for whatever their incompetence allowed to happen over the last few years.

And attribute responsibility to Cardinal Pell for whatever he did that he shouldn't have, or didn't do that he should have, to shield pedophiles.

Thanks for clearing that up, Calwest :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 9 March 2016 9:21:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Joe,

And thanks for your attempt at drollery.

Just in case anybody else missed the point, too, I'll restate it: Pell is being blamed for NOT doing things 40 years ago that people today would expect to be done. He was wrong to do nothing and, with the value of hindsight, he said so himself in his evidence from Rome.

Ain't hindsight grand?

That still doesn't alter the fact that the current "get Pell" rort is a perfect illustration of a lynch mob in full flight. At its heart, it's just anti-Catholic bigotry. Pell is being blamed for the crimes of others. At least, I suppose, it distracts from the evidence of similar behaviours in other religious institutions.

Here's another example of the same phenomenon:

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/03/dead-men-cant-sue-mores-pity/
Posted by calwest, Wednesday, 9 March 2016 12:02:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy