"Blind dogmas and hatred" exists on ALL sides runner.

You'll find it within many ..... Catholics, atheists, Protestants, Sallies, Muslims, agnostics, pagans, Scientologists, voodoo worshipers, Mormons, Buddhists, heathens, witches and Tony Abbott.

Of course "Julia" is perfect. What a fine specimen.

"Jesus vs the Vatican"?

I hope Jesus doesn't ask the Pope about the Inquisition. But of course like most of the abominations with the Church's history it will be "explained away" , "put in context" and "excused".

I'm afraid Jesus and Christianity have been at odds almost from the beginning.

I agree benq.

Runner, you are dead right on the whole Roman Polanski issue, it was handled appallingly and all those in the industry that supported him should be black banned. There is never an excuse for child sexual assault.

However, The undeniable issue for the church is that as this problem continues to be swept under the carpet it gets bigger. It appears more and more that child abuse in the church is so ingrained that it cannot be stopped by their own systems of accountability and needs to be cleaned out by the law. There is also the issue of the churches moral position, i would never accuse the entertainment industry of having any morals to contradict but the church has made a career of holding up great virtue and then doing the opposite. The crusades, the inquisition, witch burning and on it goes up to today with child abuse. It is not for me to tell them how to reform as i don't support religious organisations on any level but they must do it before they become the problem.

As for the debate, come on they would crucify Jesus for telling the people to be loving and forgiving. Accept your brother for who he is and help those poor boat people. Turn the other cheek over 9/11, and set aside the hateful greed of capitalism and embrace brotherhood and peace. This is the message he had for the world and why they crucified him in the first place. Since then, those that were threatened by him have kept control of the church to make sure this message is used to oppress the masses not help the people.

The debate would never take place because the Pope would not recognise Jesus, just as Pell is unable to recognise the sheer hypocrisy that tumbles from his lips every time he opens them, on anything.

The Pope would deny that Jesus was back, and declare him to be an imposter.

Unless, of course, the very proof we would 'all' agree to.... fit the Shroud over the new Jesus, and if it fitted, hey presto!, it would have to be him.

Surely, the holes would still be there? A quick check by Dr Thomas would fix that one.

As for the protection of the film fellow.... no, he should have been sent back to face the US courts.

But, the woman he raped did seem to express a desire not to have to relive her experiences through the courts again.

Should her life be protected over the desire of the community to extract justice?