Top Catholic Official compares Vatican to a trucking company

[edhopper]

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/631776/top-vatican-figure-in-row-over-child-abuse-comments

Australia’s leading Catholic cleric George Pell, a top Vatican official, came under fire Friday after drawing an analogy between the church’s response to child abuse and a trucking company.

Cardinal Pell, a former archbishop of both Melbourne and Sydney before taking up a high-powered job this year as head of a new Vatican finance ministry after being handpicked by Pope Francis, made the comments Thursday.

He acknowledged to a Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in Melbourne that the church had a moral obligation to the victims of pedophile priests.

But he suggested that when it came to its legal responsibility, the actions of its priests were not necessarily the fault of the church, citing the hypothetical example of a woman being molested by a truck driver.

The Vatican is also claiming immunity from turning over important documents to the Australian Commission.
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2014/s4011316.htm

[Brettongarcia]

1. Why is the head of a Vatican "finance" ministry so anxious about pederasty?

Perhaps he is afraid the lawsuits will find the Vatican bank - and empty it.

So what might his job in a new "finance" office be?

Maybe ... hiding the money? While trying to stop the suits.

Let's watch this one carefully.

[trotsky]

2. ...

"when it came to its legal responsibility, the actions of its priests were not necessarily the fault of the church"

Regardless, it was definitely their legal responsibility for covering up the priests' crimes and transferring them to new parishes with fresh victims.

[edhopper]

3. Wow!

This thread is burning up almost as much a the "Dawkins said something" thread.

[Brettongarcia]

4. Some people don't want to talk about the Pope I guess

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Well I think there has been a bit of wagon circling going on.

The lack of response may just be an unwillingness to concede any ground at all.

[cbayer]

13. Are you promoting a self-fulfilling prophecy here?

Why don't you give it some time. You already made this prediction in another thread, but I don't think 2 hours is really enough time to judge how much attention this will get.

It is also more likely to get play if you respond to those who do take the time to participate. Give it a try and see what happens.

You may be right, but I think your outrage is premature.

[edhopper]

15. Well since I don't control responses

it wouldn't be self-fulfilling.
But I guess we will see.

(I only had two post here, not a lot to respond to at the time)

[cbayer]

18. You may or may not get a lot of response. But it is threads that cause the most contention

and are the most divisive that get the most attention.

It's really not a measure of whether it is important or not.

I know you realize that, but I just wanted to point it out.

[edhopper]

20. uh huh

[Warren Stupidity]

5. OK, I'm sort of speechless about this. A serious WTF in tone deafness milestones has been reached.

[Htom Sirveaux]

7. Because trucking companies exercise the kind of top-down theological control

that the Catholic church does.

[Brettongarcia]

8. Actually, that IS very funny! : )

It might also be that our right-wingers are in panic; they just lost a big series of jury decisions.

[Lordquinton]

9. eat your heart out Dawkins

Last edited Fri Aug 22, 2014, 11:56 PM - Edit history (1)

This is why Tom Leher retired.

[cbayer]

14. What? I am assuming you mean Tom Lehrer, right?

Are you saying that he retired because of child sexual abuse by the catholic church in Australia? I thought he retired to teach and because he no longer wanted to perform.

I loved his last album and Vatican Rag remains one of my favorites.

And what this has to do with Dawkins completely escapes me. Do you see some link between the child sexual abuse of the RCC and Dawkins?

[edhopper]

16. Because real life

is more ironic than any satire he could write?

[rug]

10. Respondeat superior.

[Brettongarcia]

11. Rug for once is seemingly relevant

The Vatican is trying to assert that the Vatican, the Pope, were not responsible for the actions of their priests. Their argument is that the Church is NOT a top-down organization; amazingly, they are now saying that the Vatican and Pope don't tell priests what to do, and do not manage them.

That argument of course is absurd and perverse, to the point of being laughable. The Church has for centuries, emphasized the authority and centrality of the Pope. As in fact, its central, main, core principle. As the very thing that distinguishes itself from say, Protestantism. The Pope, in other words, is an important authority in Catholicism. Obviously. For the Church to now repudiate the central authority of the Pope, is an obvious, laughable reversal of everything it ever stood for, and for its formerly "eternal" doctrines.

To be sure though, in more recent years the Church had been giving SOME greater authority to local, national organizations, and bishops. And on the basis of this, the Church is trying to say that the Pope was not responsible for child molesting priests. Because the Pope was not overseeing them, and had no authority over them.

And therefore? It is now argued that we cannot sue the Vatican. Or the Pope.

Of course, the Church's current argument is as hypocritical, false, and laughable as any argument we have heard in decades. The Church is now saying that the Catholic Churches don't and shouldn't try to follow the Pope.

Is the Pope head of the Church? (Or from the other way around: is the Pope Catholic?) No, says the Church today.

Now the Church is clearly in the realm of flip flopping, slapstick comedy.

Here we see the Church at its most hilarious (and tragic) hypocrisy and inconsistency.

The Bible warned that our highest holy men, even the "host of heaven" (Isa. 34.4, 51.6?) were horrible deceivers. But it told us that one "day" we are supposed to see that.

And now we are seeing it. We see priests molesting children; then we see the whitewashing cover-up. Starting from the very top.

[mr blur]

23. There's always a first time.

[cbayer]

24. Oh, goody! Now I can look forward to a long subthread full of meaningless snark.

Thank you so much for providing the starting point for that and I am sure the OP will be thrilled, as he was afraid that this thread would not get any attention.

[cbayer]

12. This Commission is going to tear them apart and they are only making

it worse for themselves.

They need to roll over and be totally compliant with whatever the commission wants. These kind of lame analogies and excuses just make them look more heinous than they already are.

Shame of Pell and the rest of the hierarchy. They should cut him loose at this point.

Disgusting.

[edhopper]

17. What should be done

if they show the Church was engaged in a long term criminal conspiracy.
Should they be treated as any secular organization that was found to do the same, or do they get special treatment because they are religious, in your opinion?

Also what makes you think Pell is not doing the bidding of the Church.

[cbayer]

19. I thik they should be treated like any other criminal.

Why would I think they should get special treatment for being religious? I don't think I've ever expressed such an opinion.

Not sure where you get the idea that I think Pell is not doing the bidding of the church. I honestly don't know whether he is or not, but he is contradicting their most recent stance on being completely open about this in order to resolve it.

[edhopper]

21. I probably used

your post as a springboard to diatribe. Not aimed at you specifically.
It was more "don't you think..." than "why don't you think..."
Probably worded awkwardly.

[cbayer]

22. Who knows what goes on, but I am hopeful that the pope would look at this with a troubled eye.

It just seems to run completely counter to what he has said his aim is.

[edhopper]

25. One would hope

I also hope this commision does not hold back because it's the Church.
There probably should be a Bishop or Cardinal somewhere that should be in jail.
They are treated like Wall Street Bankers.

[cbayer]

26. From what I have read, I don't think this comission has any intention to hold back

at all. Quite the opposite actually. Australia is a very secular country and there isn't that much high regard for the church.

I agree that they are often treated like Wall St. Bankers. The whole thing has been a heinous disgrace.