Not a very savory site that one that you just quoted. It has links to Indonesian porn from my end.

Further, and I quote from the article you quoted:

" ... "For an apostolic visitation to have any chance of success, the participating bishops cannot be guilty of the same offenses they are investigating," said BishopAccountability.org, which conducts research into the abuse crisis. ... "

And that's the problem, given the current pope is likely every bit as guilty of covering up as those he is rebuking and investigating. Why doesn't he stand down in favor of someone more spiritually pure and temporally able?

Whatever else Ratz is he isnt stupid.'

What if he stands down and lets someone else conduct the investigation and he is found to be as guilty.
Could the Church stand the exposure ? so dont hold your breath wondering. The answer is a deafening "NO!"
Socratease

"Not a very savory site that one that you just quoted. It has links to Indonesian porn from my end.

Further, and I quote from the article you quoted:

" ... "For an apostolic visitation to have any chance of success, the participating bishops cannot be guilty of the same offenses they are investigating," said BishopAccountability.org, which conducts research into the abuse crisis. ... "

And that's the problem, given the current pope is likely every bit as guilty of covering up as those he is rebuking and investigating. Why doesn't he stand down in favor of someone more spiritually pure and temporally able?"

Sorry about the porn site link. It wasn't current when I looked at it.

It isn't necessarily a problem or at least that isn't the real problem. The Pope has a proven track record that makes him obviously the best for the job. Only paedophile priests should want him removed.

You need to ask yourself why an anti-Catholic organisation was commenting in the first place and why they weren't more specific. The obvious answer is that the journalist doesn't like the Catholic Church and wants to taint the appearance of anything the Pope does. The organisation interviewed could be guaranteed to make a negative comment.

And they did. They do research abuse issues within the American Church. So I took the Bishops named in the article to find out the specifics of the wrongdoing hinted at. This is the outcome:

New York Archdiocese ie. Archbishop Timothy Dolan who has been there since 15 April, 2009.

Nothing on Bishop Accountability website happening after 2008

Nothing googling of any wrongdoing. However there is an accusation that his attempt to remove sex abusing priests was described as a witch hunt. He sounds like an enthusiastic rooter outer of baddies like the Pope. Perhaps Bishop Accountability had in mind the others so I'll keep going.

Toronto - Archbishop Thomas Colins since January 30 2007

Not in America so not researched by Bishop Accountability

Nothing googles on misconduct in sexual abuse cases but the Catholic Cover Up website at
http://tor.id.au/article.php/20100418100335527

reports on his reformation of abuse handling processes in his Archdiocese

Westminster - Archbishop Vincent Nichols 21 May 2009

Not in America

Googling didn’t locate any involvement in sex abuse scandals. The worst dirt was criticism of a comment he made:

In his own words: "Every time there is a single incident of abuse in the Catholic Church it is a scandal. And I'm glad it's a scandal."He was, however criticised widely on the issue of priests facing up to their crimes, where he claimed, "That takes courage, and also we shouldn't forget that this account today will also overshadow all of the good that they also did."

Ottawa - Archbishop Terrence Predergast since 26 June 2007

Not in America

No dirt googled

Boston - Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley who commenced in Boston July 2003.

Bishop Accountability’s website refers to the Archdiocese but it seems to suggest all known problems were over by July 2003.

Nothing googling of any wrongdoing by O'Malley. However the Boston Globe reported the following comments from a lawyer for sex abuse victims:

''I think the world of Bishop O'Malley,'' said lawyer Roderick MacLeish Jr., who represented 101 clients in the Porter case and currently has more than 200 clients who contend they were sexually abused by priests in the Boston Archdiocese. ''He sat down face to face with the victims of James Porter in a variety of ways. ... He's an incredibly compassionate human being, very humble, extremely modest. It's a terrible loss for Fall River.''

There is also a report of a recent incident in the Archdiocese where an accusation was made against a music teacher employed by a parish was made and the archdiocese immediately reported it to the police.

You can't take the message of media reports on the Catholic Church at face value as they have a nasty habit of inverting reality don't they?

MJPB,

Do you have a pure Christian heart or do you serve the Church and money over Jesus' teachings?

If Pell came up with a better deal for the victim than as you put it, “The standard Australian program.....Towards Healing?”, then what does that say about the Christian virtues of the program?

Does it indicate Pell's solution shows more Christian virtues than the program?

Remember we are talking about the alleged criminal sexual abuse of children!

Now if the courts settle these cases for far greater amounts, then does that mean that the courts show more Christian virtues than both Pell and the program?

Hmmm MJPB you seem to have a moral dilemma on your hands!

As a Christian, would you really recommend a victim settles for less than they are due when their lives have been ruined by criminal sexual abuse and further damaged by the alleged lack of action by the organisations that were supposed to protect and nurture children?

If you answered yes, are you really a virtuous Christian, or should you be looking into your own heart? Are you serving money over God? Be careful Jesus is watching you!

http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Luke+16%3A13&version1=51

Is the Church serving money over GOD? Jesus said "No one can serve two masters"

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/16261.htm

Would you defend your churches and the Popes actions over the victims rights to justice?

You say to be wary of the media in these matters...With all the alleged cover-ups by the churches and the sheer number of these alleged crimes shouldn't we be twice as wary of Christians and religious organisations?

Why hasn't the Church delivered all the records on these matters to the Police in all countries?

If the Pope has covered up or not responded to just one case should he resign? Does this also apply to Pell?

If you believe Pell's record is good then what does that say about you? Did Pell allegedly say "if you don't like it, take it to court".

Wasn't he talking about money?

http://www.theage.com.au/national/outrage-over-bishops-abuse-remarks-20080716-3gcr.html?page=-1

Should you stop giving advice MJPB?

MJPB,

Further to your advice to all of us here that Pell's system is reasonable...as amazingly inaccurate as that advice appears, lets see if you can understand why.

What is the maximum monetary compensation under Pell's system?

Allegedly $50,000

Let's look at some other examples of payments as listed here, a Catholic Website :

http://www.americancatholic.org/news/clergysexabuse/

It alleges and doesn't dispute a tally prepared by the Los Angeles Times

1. The Boston Archdiocese agreed to pay to 983 alleged victims $157 million

Estimated Average $159,715 per victim (if correct, over 3 times the alleged Pell Scheme)

1. The Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon, agreed to pay $129 million to 315 alleged victims

Estimated Average $409,523 per victim (if correct over 8 times the alleged Pell Scheme)

The Diocese of Orange, California agreed to pay $100 million to 90 alleged victims

Estimated Average $1.1 million per victim (if correct over 22 times the alleged Pell Scheme)

The Diocese of Covington, Kentucky agreed to pay $85 million to 350 alleged victims.

Estimated Average $242,857 per victim (if correct over 4 times the alleged Pell Scheme)

So how do you feel about Cardinal Pell's offer of $50,000 per alleged victim now? I haven't even listed the largest payout alleged in the article just so you aren't too crushed.

At what point do you just put up your hands and say OK "OP2 - I'm wrong - You win!"?

Here are what others alleged about Cardinal Pell's system

http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=47366

I think you should search harder for your information.

You are allowed to search for the truth you know.

Finally you seem content that the Catholic Church hasn't had any cases after 2008...Are you for real?

Here's what the Pope allegedly stated http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100511/ap_on_re_eu/eu_portugal_pope

The article alleges "The Church originally considered itself the victim"!

And now this on the Pope

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/03/more-evidence-emerges-tha_n_524192.html

How many other victims are out there too traumatised to come forward?

How many other victims were given the advice Cardinal Pell allegedly gave in this article, by other priests, Bishops and Cardinals and are scared to come forward?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/08/2297082.htm