George Pell

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
In your post referring to the Pell case you are drawing a very long bow, I am not saying that he was innocent or guilty, so we just have to accept the courts judgment.
One thing I am certain off is that petty hates will always cover up the truth and distort justice, which is something all decent people should avoid.
But then only decent people are able to live their lives without carrying petty hates.
Yes it is possible that Pell was guilty, but it is also possible that the person making the complaint against Pell, thought that he could cash in on making a complaint against Pell because of his high position, and the fact that other complaints were made against Catholic Clergy.
Considering the fact that the Church has paid out in the vicinity of $2-3 hundred Mill to other victims, and also considering Pell position in the Church, I am sure that if Pell was guilty a settlement offer would have been made to the complaint. BTW if the complaint had received an offer from the Church for a settlement and he refused it, I'm sure he would have told the Prosecutor's about it, and it would have been given in evidence.
Also worth noting that the complaint only came oit after the Victorian police went trawling for anyone Who would come forward to say Pell had abused them.

im glad I don’t live in Victoria because there are some very weird things that happen in their police and judicial systems.
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,947
In your post referring to the Pell case you are drawing a very long bow, I am not saying that he was innocent or guilty, so we just have to accept the courts judgment.
One thing I am certain off is that petty hates will always cover up the truth and distort justice, which is something all decent people should avoid.
But then only decent people are able to live their lives without carrying petty hates.
Yes it is possible that Pell was guilty, but it is also possible that the person making the complaint against Pell, thought that he could cash in on making a complaint against Pell because of his high position, and the fact that other complaints were made against Catholic Clergy.
Considering the fact that the Church has paid out in the vicinity of $2-3 hundred Mill to other victims, and also considering Pell position in the Church, I am sure that if Pell was guilty a settlement offer would have been made to the complaint. BTW if the complaint had received an offer from the Church for a settlement and he refused it, I'm sure he would have told the Prosecutor's about it, and it would have been given in evidence.
With regards to the possibility that the guy making the complaint was chasing a settlement, that's a possibility. But considering that 200-300 million has been paid out already, perhaps this case was also a matter of being a very high profile case where the church saw the possibility of muddy water and decided that they would try to use it to stand ground against a lone victim to discourage people who didn't have a lot of solid evidence from making complaints in future. I don't think it's an easy choice to bring these matters to light from the perspective of the victims. And for the church to have paid out that much money, it gives an indication that pedophilia is pretty rampant. Given that Pell has been heavily involved in covering issues up as well as a large number of others, the Catholic church should be considered as a tarnished group of witnesses in my opinion.

My brother in law's younger brother was molested at school and was part of a group of boys that were molested by one teacher. It wasn't about compensation for him. It was more in hopes of being able to prevent future crimes by helping to set a platform that shows that crimes of this nature will be heavily punished in future. It sent him back to counseling having to bring up suppressed memories. The teacher had 30 cases brought against him but wound up dying before the case had completed and he spent no time in jail.

It just doesn't sit well with me that our courts over ruled the jury on a very small technicality and that you hear many Catholics spouting the opinion that it proves Pell was innocent. What this outcome means is that it wasn't possible to prove beyond shadow of doubt that he was guilty. This to me actually makes me hate Catholicism more than I would if he'd faced justice.
 

Kelpie03

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
4,449
Reaction score
3,223
With regards to the possibility that the guy making the complaint was chasing a settlement, that's a possibility. But considering that 200-300 million has been paid out already, perhaps this case was also a matter of being a very high profile case where the church saw the possibility of muddy water and decided that they would try to use it to stand ground against a lone victim to discourage people who didn't have a lot of solid evidence from making complaints in future. I don't think it's an easy choice to bring these matters to light from the perspective of the victims. And for the church to have paid out that much money, it gives an indication that pedophilia is pretty rampant. Given that Pell has been heavily involved in covering issues up as well as a large number of others, the Catholic church should be considered as a tarnished group of witnesses in my opinion.

My brother in law's younger brother was molested at school and was part of a group of boys that were molested by one teacher. It wasn't about compensation for him. It was more in hopes of being able to prevent future crimes by helping to set a platform that shows that crimes of this nature will be heavily punished in future. It sent him back to counseling having to bring up suppressed memories. The teacher had 30 cases brought against him but wound up dying before the case had completed and he spent no time in jail.

It just doesn't sit well with me that our courts over ruled the jury on a very small technicality and that you hear many Catholics spouting the opinion that it proves Pell was innocent. What this outcome means is that it wasn't possible to prove beyond shadow of doubt that he was guilty. This to me actually makes me hate Catholicism more than I would if he'd faced justice.
The only part which stands out about your post is your hatred of Catholicism, It is a well known fact that when a person has a hatred against some group or as often is the case a particular race, that person will always look to find fuel for his fire, and at times even make some up.
I respect the fact that you said that your brother in law brother was molested by a teacher and not by Catholic Priest or Brother.
In your hatred of Catholicism do you also hate all Catholics including Mother Theresa, the 10 Commandments, (BTW if it wasn't for the Catholic Church we would never have heard of the Commandments).
Many of us would be very interested to know why you have come to hate Catholicism so much, eg was it drummed into you at a young age, (just like if you were indoctrinated).
I would also be very interested to know if you believe in God the (Christian God) and if you have taken a serious interest in Christ's life on Earth.
As for a few bad "Catholics or Christians" just remember that Jesus chose 12 Apostles and one of them failed him badly, while the other 11 were all prepared to die for him.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Given that Pell has been heavily involved in covering issues up as well as a large number of others, the Catholic church should be considered as a tarnished group of witnesses in my opinion.
So anybody directly or even indirectly related to the catholic church (i.e. hundreds of millions of people) should not be allowed to testify in front of a court because of their religious beliefs? In the past (many decades ago) there was clearly an enormous issue with paeophile priests in the catholic church. However, my understanding is that the problem has been dealt with and all the cases of priests being charged and found of these sorts of crimes date back 15-20-25 or more years ago.

It just doesn't sit well with me that our courts over ruled the jury on a very small technicality and that you hear many Catholics spouting the opinion that it proves Pell was innocent. What this outcome means is that it wasn't possible to prove beyond shadow of doubt that he was guilty. This to me actually makes me hate Catholicism more than I would if he'd faced justice.
You are incorrect. It was not a 'very small technicality'. The high court essentially said that the jury got their verdict wrong and they also went on to say the judges in the victorian appeals court applied the incorrect standard of proof to the case. To put this in context, the high court essentially said that the appeal court judges failed to understand the burden of proof which is something you learn in high school legal studies.

Ask yourself how the two most senior appeals court judges in victoria could get that wrong. It says something about the political environment in Victoria.
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,798
Reaction score
12,077
With regards to the possibility that the guy making the complaint was chasing a settlement, that's a possibility. But considering that 200-300 million has been paid out already, perhaps this case was also a matter of being a very high profile case where the church saw the possibility of muddy water and decided that they would try to use it to stand ground against a lone victim to discourage people who didn't have a lot of solid evidence from making complaints in future. I don't think it's an easy choice to bring these matters to light from the perspective of the victims. And for the church to have paid out that much money, it gives an indication that pedophilia is pretty rampant. Given that Pell has been heavily involved in covering issues up as well as a large number of others, the Catholic church should be considered as a tarnished group of witnesses in my opinion.

My brother in law's younger brother was molested at school and was part of a group of boys that were molested by one teacher. It wasn't about compensation for him. It was more in hopes of being able to prevent future crimes by helping to set a platform that shows that crimes of this nature will be heavily punished in future. It sent him back to counseling having to bring up suppressed memories. The teacher had 30 cases brought against him but wound up dying before the case had completed and he spent no time in jail.

It just doesn't sit well with me that our courts over ruled the jury on a very small technicality and that you hear many Catholics spouting the opinion that it proves Pell was innocent. What this outcome means is that it wasn't possible to prove beyond shadow of doubt that he was guilty. This to me actually makes me hate Catholicism more than I would if he'd faced justice.
I don't think it was a small technicality. The actual problem dates back to the original jury. These days if you are a Catholic Priest, Bishop, Brother etc... you will be found guilty no matter what is said in court. That's why the appeal in the high court exists and is as it should be, innocent until proven guilty.

Let's keep in mind a few things:
  • Pell would not have had enough to race from the front of the Church to the Sacristy in the off-chance that 2 choir boys were there
  • Had Pell gotten back to the Sacristy in time (for arguments sake), he would NOT have been alone as he would've had a Priest there with him, as is meant to be the case by Canon Law
  • The Sacristy after mass is the busiest place after the Church with it being an open-door for anyone who wants to talk to the Priest or Ministers etc... and there are individuals such as Altar Servers and Acolytes coming in and out all the time
  • The choir/band have no need to enter the sacristy either as their instruments and equipment are all outside in their bay, and with this, I find it highly unlikely they'll be in the Sacristy without their choir leader
  • IIRC one of the alleged victims (who has since passed away) told his mother that nothing happened. I find it somewhat convenient that he wasn't there to testify this!
  • As is the case in court, it's innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt...
Given the above, it is not possible to say that Pell was guilty given the above not only give reasonable doubt, but also make it virtually impossible for these allegations to have actually happened, so he was released on a technicality, however by that same technicality he should not have been convicted in the first place.

As for your in-laws brother, it truly is a sad state of affairs, and no child should ever have to go through this. However I would like the Catholic Priests looked at in a similar way that the teachers are; we've all had that one teacher who we truly despise and is someone who abuses their power against children, but we don't despise all teachers as a result - and I would appreciate if the Catholic Priests are looked at like this as well. The minority ruining it for the majority really is not the way things should be interpreted.
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,947
The only part which stands out about your post is your hatred of Catholicism, It is a well known fact that when a person has a hatred against some group or as often is the case a particular race, that person will always look to find fuel for his fire, and at times even make some up.
I respect the fact that you said that your brother in law brother was molested by a teacher and not by Catholic Priest or Brother.
In your hatred of Catholicism do you also hate all Catholics including Mother Theresa, the 10 Commandments, (BTW if it wasn't for the Catholic Church we would never have heard of the Commandments).
Many of us would be very interested to know why you have come to hate Catholicism so much, eg was it drummed into you at a young age, (just like if you were indoctrinated).
I would also be very interested to know if you believe in God the (Christian God) and if you have taken a serious interest in Christ's life on Earth.
As for a few bad "Catholics or Christians" just remember that Jesus chose 12 Apostles and one of them failed him badly, while the other 11 were all prepared to die for him.
My hatred stems from the fact that they've been shown to have a long history of covering these crimes up and moving priests around when they commit pedophilia. Aside from that I identify the Catholic church as a very wealthy institution that doesn't visibly do much to improve the lives of their parishioners or anyone. l also dislike the idea of confession being seen as a free pass to forgiveness as I see it. If you do something morally wrong repeatedly and confess repeatedly you aren't taking steps to be a better person, just assuaging your guilt. Further dislike comes from the way the Catholic church has treated single mothers historically which has been pretty atrocious. You can also throw in the fact that historically they've been guilty of profiting from brothels which contradicts both the idea of worshipping money and of non marital sex (before you accuse me of making false accusations watch the documentary "sex and the church").

I don't follow any religion really. I attended church when I was younger and I find that people who are religious are incredibly judgmental of people for petty things when all churches spread the tenet that it's only gods right to judge. But I do see the ten commandments as a decent moral code and I try to live by a moral code.

I don't hate Catholics or people who practice any religion. But I do get sad that religious people can tend to lose logic when you question things that oppose their beliefs.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
These two statements contradict?
There is a clear distinction between Catholics and The Church.. A Catholic is an individual follower of the beliefs and views of Jesus Christ as outlined by a certain doctrine.. while The Church is an institution.. individual Catholics had no role in covering up the rampant Pedophilia..and thus should in no way be tarnished with the same brush.. It is also important to stress a Pedophile is not a true Catholic..
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
There is a clear distinction between Catholics and The Church.. .
Yes that was my point in the reply to Alan79. His first comment he says "they" meaning he is talking about individuals as well as the institution.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
Yes that was my point in the reply to Alan79. His first comment he says "they" meaning he is talking about individuals as well as the institution.
In my reading @Alan79 post ‘They’ it is clear he is referring to Priests who are Pedophiles and ‘They’ve’ in no way is implicating all Catholics, but rather the ‘Church’ as an institution..plus he further clarifies his statement by saying he doesn’t ‘hate Catholics’.. Nonetheless, it is my reading of his post, as such I will leave it to him to further clarify his statement..but it seems quite clear to myself..
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Fair enough, maybe I've just misread it.

But I think a fair and reasonable person would look at his posts over the last day or two and conclude that he does seem to have a general hatred to anything associated with catholics, to the point where he is completely misreading making up things about the Pell case which simply aren't true.

To be fair to him, many people in Australia have done this and it seems to be because of the media's treatment of the Pell case (where there was almost no one willing to write the facts and how poorly the case was handled by Vic police from the start and then by the victorian courts once it went to trial).
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
and for transparency. I grew up catholic, church every Sunday etc. However I haven't attended regular Sunday Church since I was about 21.
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,201
Reaction score
18,947
In my reading @Alan79 post ‘They’ it is clear he is referring to Priests who are Pedophiles and ‘They’ve’ in no way is implicating all Catholics, but rather the ‘Church’ as an institution..plus he further clarifies his statement by saying he doesn’t ‘hate Catholics’.. Nonetheless, it is my reading of his post, as such I will leave it to him to further clarify his statement..but it seems quite clear to myself..
I actually had Dawgfather on ignore, so I just read his posts due to you tagging me in this. But you are pretty much on the money.

My ill feelings towards the institution of Catholicism (namely the governing body) are explained as far as I'm concerned.

The sad thing about this all is that Catholic parishioners aren't at the forefront of those wanting the guilty punished and all historical instances brought to light in order to purge the institution of Catholicism of the stigma the guilty have inflicted on their religion. But it largely seems that many followers are taking this case as a victory for their church.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
Fair enough, maybe I've just misread it.

But I think a fair and reasonable person would look at his posts over the last day or two and conclude that he does seem to have a general hatred to anything associated with catholics, to the point where he is completely misreading making up things about the Pell case which simply aren't true.

To be fair to him, many people in Australia have done this and it seems to be because of the media's treatment of the Pell case (where there was almost no one willing to write the facts and how poorly the case was handled by Vic police from the start and then by the victorian courts once it went to trial).
Although I am an Atheist, I in no way see Catholics as a pedophiles, I view pedophiles as non Catholics.. Nor do I mock or ridicule their faith, as I think the fundamental message of Catholicism is something that people of all beliefs and faiths, and non-believers, should take on board, as it is a message that, in my opinion, is a message to live by..
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I actually had Dawgfather on ignore, so I just read his posts due to you tagging me in this. But you are pretty much on the money.

My ill feelings towards the institution of Catholicism (namely the governing body) are explained as far as I'm concerned.
So long as you understand the issues you are concerned about generally date back decades and don't have much relevance for the catholic church of today.

But it largely seems that many followers are taking this case as a victory for their church.
I've only seen people take the Pell case as a victory for the truth and rule of law, but not a lot else.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
and for transparency. I grew up catholic, church every Sunday etc. However I haven't attended regular Sunday Church since I was about 21.
I always remember a little statement.. Standing in Church, makes you as much a Christian, as standing in a garage makes you a car.. In other words how you live your life is what makes you a true Christian, you don’t need to go to Church..
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I always remember a little statement.. Standing in Church, makes you as much a Christian, as standing in a garage makes you a car.. In other words how you live your life is what makes you a true Christian, you don’t need to go to Church..
totally agree. I was just making sure that people didn't accuse me of hiding any particular bias I might have.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
I actually had Dawgfather on ignore, so I just read his posts due to you tagging me in this. But you are pretty much on the money.

My ill feelings towards the institution of Catholicism (namely the governing body) are explained as far as I'm concerned.

The sad thing about this all is that Catholic parishioners aren't at the forefront of those wanting the guilty punished and all historical instances brought to light in order to purge the institution of Catholicism of the stigma the guilty have inflicted on their religion. But it largely seems that many followers are taking this case as a victory for their church.
I just feel bad for the victims..and I hope this doesn’t stop victims coming forward and seeking justice for such despicable crimes..
 

Kaz

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
18,846
Reaction score
11,571
But it largely seems that many followers are taking this case as a victory for their church.
I don't believe, but even I didn't think he should have been found guilty.

Do I think he did it. NOPE.

Did he cover up what priests did. YEP.

Just because he covered it up, doesn't mean he should have been found guilty. (which I think the jury did)
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
The only part which stands out about your post is your hatred of Catholicism, It is a well known fact that when a person has a hatred against some group or as often is the case a particular race, that person will always look to find fuel for his fire, and at times even make some up.
I respect the fact that you said that your brother in law brother was molested by a teacher and not by Catholic Priest or Brother.
In your hatred of Catholicism do you also hate all Catholics including Mother Theresa, the 10 Commandments, (BTW if it wasn't for the Catholic Church we would never have heard of the Commandments).
Many of us would be very interested to know why you have come to hate Catholicism so much, eg was it drummed into you at a young age, (just like if you were indoctrinated).
I would also be very interested to know if you believe in God the (Christian God) and if you have taken a serious interest in Christ's life on Earth.
As for a few bad "Catholics or Christians" just remember that Jesus chose 12 Apostles and one of them failed him badly, while the other 11 were all prepared to die for him.
Do they not have their foundation in Judaism.. Excuse my ignorance but did not Jesus simplify these into two laws..

‘Thou shalt love thy Lord, thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind", before also referring to a second commandment, "And the second is like unto it, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself
 
Top