Tweet of the day? (re George Pell & catholic church)

 
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
That is largely untrue, and extremely unfair. You could do well to follow your advice to Heath and google things before posting random rubbish. Pre the rise of Hitler the Catholic population of Germany (and most specifically, Munich) were no fans of the Nazi party. With the later rise of the party, the Nazis actually set about removing all religion, most certainly including the Catholics. In the between time it was a case of, 'if you Catholics leave us alone politically, we Nazis will leave you alone and not kill you' that was about the strength of the relationship.

You will of course find some Catholics who were supporters of the Nazi party, and you will find some Catholics were kiddie fiddlers, but you will also find both of these things existent in much larger numbers too, within the general population of the world. The Catholic Church is not too dissimilar to many organisations worldwide in that regard, they are by and large just an approximation of the society from which it draws it's members.
Aaron

Aaron it has been proved that the Nazi's had money in the Vatican Bank so what does that say to you. They would not have wanted this to have been found out back then. The Vatican acted as bankers for the Nazi's not good to hear.  By the way I am of German descent before we go any further!

Sponsored advertisement

  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
David, I am not sure what your heritage has to do with anything, should you however have some ancient ancestors from the father land who can tell you where the money went perhaps you could ask them these questions.
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in the Vactican Bank? - it wasn't even in existence pre 1942.
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in the SNB?
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in Portugal?

I note that the case against the Vatican for laundering Nazi assets was backed by such credible evidence that it fell in a screaming heap and never proceeded.

I don't for a second doubt that the Nazis ended up with money in the Vatican, hell, Rome was an ally... In the end it was likely an insignificant amount in comparison to the assets laundered through (supposedly) neutral Switzerland and Portugal.
  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Valvegear, I admit I don't understand your point, it's especially difficult when you post opposing opinions of whether an apology should occur or not in back to back sentences.

The Catholic Church (and the greater Christian and wider religious movements) do not have an exclusive right to, reputation in, definition of, or use of morality. There are many non religious people, organisations and corporations that mange quite well morally without the guidance of the Bible, having read the Bible (as an atheist it helps me argue with the fundies to know what's in there) I can tell you that if you got all of your morals from the Bible you'd lead an 'interesting' life from today's point of view.

What Pell did in reading the apology he had prepared was complete his first and foremost responsibility to the 'pseudo corporation' (which is what I view the Catholic Church as) he represented. He did it well.

He is not a guilty party, it is not his role to apologise, statutes of limitations do not apply to heinous crimes, but one should exist when the would be defendant is deceased. Pell should not, could not and ought not be made to apologise for happenings that he did not cause, commit or even preside over. - Pell was not even in the position of Archbishop at the time of the Ellis abuse.

The legal problem in the Ellis case comes from the initial trial judge in 2004 granting leave for the trail to proceed in the first place. Had the case been squashed as it should have been on the first reading in 2004 there would not be these current problems of people being confused/concerned about the 'Ellis defense'.
  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Blergh, typed that on phone, several typo errors, can't edit and can't be bothered editing even if I could, you'll still get the point.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
Aaron,
Yet again, you are going off on your predetermined course, without reading carefully first.  I have not posted opposing opinions about an apology. I have said that an apology is warranted on behalf of the Church; an admission of liability by Pell himself is not.

It is a matter of opinion. You say Pell should not apologise on behalf of the Church for reasons I can understand. I happen to believe that he should apologise on the Church's behalf, since he is it's leader now.  It's the same as the apologies to aborigines, the stolen generation et al which we have recently seen.

Next; nowhere do I claim that any church has exclusive rights to reputation, definition or use of morality. What I said stands - one expects the Church to be a leader in such matters - not the bl00dy exclusive leader.

I am not arguing legal points with you. I am concerned with the morality of the whole issue.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
David, I am not sure what your heritage has to do with anything, should you however have some ancient ancestors from the father land who can tell you where the money went perhaps you could ask them these questions.
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in the Vactican Bank? - it wasn't even in existence pre 1942.
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in the SNB?
How much money (gold) did the Nazis have in Portugal?

I note that the case against the Vatican for laundering Nazi assets was backed by such credible evidence that it fell in a screaming heap and never proceeded.

I don't for a second doubt that the Nazis ended up with money in the Vatican, hell, Rome was an ally... In the end it was likely an insignificant amount in comparison to the assets laundered through (supposedly) neutral Switzerland and Portugal.
Aaron



There is to much cover up of things in places like churches etc. If it had been a company and Pell had been the CEO, he would have had to have borne the trouble whether he was directly involved or not he was in charge at the time. So really if Pell was in charge of the church in Australia then he has to bear some responsibility for what happened, as he was the boss or CEO at the time. Some underling under him might have ordered the cover up, but he is still the one in charge though or is he in charge.

Who ever it was that covered it up should be found as guilty as those scum out doing it, no excuse at all for it and as has been said the church itself should have set an example, not swept it under a rug. It was most probably a lot bigger than what was found out though, this could be one reason that it was covered up and that could infer that those in the upper reaches of the church knew about it. So we get back to Pell again don't we in the end!

Switzerland was Neutral if you check it up so no problems with banking there as the the church in Switzerland did not own the bank. The same for Portugal as while not being neutral it was aligned with the Nazi's to a certain extent as was Spain. But coming to the Vatican which was the church and they owned the bank outright it is not a good thing to have a church taking money from criminals that were disguised as Nazi's. Then this same church bleats on about non violence etc and other things, seems hypocritical to me that one! But money speaks louder than any religion though.
  TheFish Chief Train Controller

Location: Pyongyang
The only way in which healing can occur is for there to be first and foremost a free and frank admission of remorse and an apology. Ask any abuse victim what they want to see and I'm sure 90% of them would say that as the Stolen generations said in the Howard years.

The Howard government, in its era, refused to apologise to the stolen generation claiming they didn't have to because it was not their government that perpetrated the wrongs. However Howard, as the Prime Minister, represented the Australian Government as an institution, an institution that had a duty of care which it failed to meet.

It was not a matter, as Howard made out it was with the Stolen Generation, of taking personal responsibility for previous generations actions but of acknowledging that these failings were wrong and that as decent human beings we are sorry these situations happened to our brothers and sisters and want to ensure it doesn't happen in future.

The church also had and continues to have a duty of care in these cases and whether Pell was party to this failure or not it is in his position as a representative of the church as an institution that he should apologise.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
TheFish has it exactly right. I agree with everything he said.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
Yeah, well I suffered indignity and humiliation at the hands of the Church of England, so don't lay the blame entirely at the door of the micks.
  TheFish Chief Train Controller

Location: Pyongyang
Yeah, well I suffered indignity and humiliation at the hands of the Church of England, so don't lay the blame entirely at the door of the micks.
TheBlacksmith

Indeed!  My earlier post applies equally to any organisation that is shown to have failed its duty of care in this regard.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
Today in the news the DPP in Victoria have advised the Police there is enough evidence to charge George Pell with a series of offences.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Today in the news the DPP in Victoria have advised the Police there is enough evidence to charge George Pell with a series of offences.
x31
Not before damn time either, someone has to take the blame for what happened and it might as well start with him. Personally I think he knows a lot more than what he lets on. Just some of his previous actions on these things seem to tell you that he knew something was going on but remained silent. When something hit's the fan everyone gets covered in it!
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
Pell has just damaged his own credibility. He was too ill to fly to Melbourne and testify before the Royal Commission, but that didn't stop him flying from Rome to London and back some days ago.
I have said before; if Pell told me the sun would rise tomorrow morning, I'd want a second opinion.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
John Silvester in this morning's Melbourne Age has written an article headed "The judgement of George Pell." A couple of Silvester's comments are gold:-

"He presents as cold and aloof, and as someone who, at best, did not have the capacity to deal with systemic child abuse committed within the Catholic Church."
and
"But now he is accused of being more than just an arrogant prick with the empathy of a polar bear stalking a seal pup."

Well said, Mr Silvester.
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

IF, charges are warranted, then charge him. IF he argues that he cannot fly, due to health issues, to defend such accusations, stick him on a plane, anyway. Should he suffer issues, on the flight, so be it.

If not, just full of it. And exposed as the arrogant prick, as above.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
There is now a book available in stores called "Cardinal, The Rise and Fall of George Pell" anyone got a copy of this yet?
  theanimal Chief Commissioner

There is now a book available in stores called "Cardinal, The Rise and Fall of George Pell" anyone got a copy of this yet?
bevans
Bought a copy in Adelaide at Dymocks last, will read it next week.

Going to give it them to a 67 year old made who went to St Stannies in Bathurst in the 1960s' and swears black and blue that this is a beat up against the Catholic Church, although after so many  confessions he is going a bit quiet.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
I bought the book in Dymocks in Melbourne this morning. It should be a "good piece of read".
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I bought the book in Dymocks in Melbourne this morning. It should be a "good piece of read".
Valvegear
Be interesting to hear what you think of it in due course.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

IF, charges are warranted, then charge him. IF he argues that he cannot fly, due to health issues, to defend such accusations, stick him on a plane, anyway. Should he suffer issues, on the flight, so be it.

If not, just full of it. And exposed as the arrogant prick, as above.
michaelgm
Hello ALL ,

apparently the Cardinal cannot fly due to on going health issues , however subsequent to this statement has was photographed walking out of Heathrow Airport complete with wheelie baggage .

This leaves at least two options , one , that he trained from Rome to Heathrow because he likes Heathrow Airport , or two , he can only fly short distances. If the later is the case then a flight with lots of stopovers from Rome to Melbourne could be arranged.

However in reality, he probably holds a diplomatic passport , Australia does not have a extradition treaty with the Papal State ( nor i suspect does any country ) and for those two reasons alone he is highly unlikely to actually face a criminal trial in Australia or elsewhere.

Best wishes and regards, Radioman.
  theanimal Chief Commissioner

It is taking the Victorian police/solicitors a bloody long time to decide if charges are to be laid, methinks its too thorny a nettle to grasp.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I would take a long time if I was being paid $1000 + an hour  .............................
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
George Pell will be the most senior Catholic leader to face a jury after being committed to stand trial on multiple historic sexual assault charges.

In a decision that will ring loud through the Vatican and around the religious world, Australia's most senior Catholic and the man who a year ago oversaw management of the Vatican's finances was on Tuesday committed to stand trial on half the charges he faced, involving multiple accusers.

However, magistrate Belinda Wallington struck out a series of serious charges at the start of her ruling, finding there was insufficient evidence for him to be convicted by a jury.

Ms Wallington committed the 76-year-old on charges against multiple complainants, involving alleged sexual offending at a swimming pool in the 1970s in Ballarat, where the accused man was then working as a priest; and at St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne in 1990s, when he was the then Archbishop of Melbourne.

Asked to enter a plea, Cardinal Pell said in a loud, clear voice: "Not guilty."

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.