CARDINAL PELL - CHURCH NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ABUSING PRIESTS !

CARDINAL PELL - CHURCH NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ABUSING PRIESTS!

Cardinal Georg Pell - the former archbishop of both Melbourne and Sydney in Australia - and now the man in charge of the Vatican's finances - says that the church should not be held responsible for priests who sexually abuse!

He had this statement via video link from the Vatican to the Royal Commission in Australia who is looking into child abuse.

His argument goes like this - If a truck driver employed by a trucking firm takes a woman into his truck and sexually assaults her then the trucking company and its CEO should not be held responsible.

His argument is totally reprehensible and it shows the depts to which RC church leaders will stoop to avoid moral and financial responsibility for its abusing priests and bishops.

It does not say much for Pell's faith and spirituality that in his 70's he is willing to compare the Church - the Body of Christ - to a secular trucking company.

But it does tell us all we need to know about these wheelers and dealers in the hierarchy and clergy of the RC Church who are so cynical, ruthless and faith-less - as to compare the Church to a large for profit commercial company.

Do I really have to explain to Pell the difference between a truck driver and a priest?

1. A priest studies and becomes immersed in spirituality, moral theology and faith for 7 years of training while a truck driver only needs a HGV licence which he can get after 20 hours of practice.

2. A priest - according to Catholic teaching is supposed to be an "alter Christus" - another Christ - a truck driver does his 40 hours a week for the going rate.

3. A priest is supposed to be the exemplar of Christian and moral living - a truck driver has only to obey the rules of the road.

4. A priest is put in charge of people's immortal souls by the Church and his bishop - a truck driver is responsible for a machine while he is at work.

5. A priest takes vows / promises of poverty, chastity and obedience - a truck driver's moral responsibility extends to doing a decent days work for a decent wage.

6. A priest lives 24 hours a day on church property - a truck driver attends a place of work for 40 hours a week.

7. The church can move a priest from parish to parish all his life - a truck driver lives where he chooses and if his company wants him to move he can refuse and have the backing of the union.

8. The Church tells the men, women and children of a parish to do what the priests tells them to do in order to live a good life and save their souls - the truck driver's company only responsibility is to have insurance in case the truck / driver have an accident.

I could go on..

The RC Church literally "owns" a priest - body and soul from the day he enters the seminary until the day he goes into his grave. The Church is not only the priest's "employer" - the Church own the priest in the same way as masters used to own their black slaves in the US before the civil war.

If you claim to own someone absolutely - as the Church does - then the other side of that coin is that you are absolutely responsible for them and for all they do and don't do.

The fact that many of the RC dioceses in the USA have already been forced by civil law to pay out billions of dollars to the victims of abuse is the strongest indication of all that modern civil law regards the Church as responsible for the actions of abusing priests.

What Pell is afraid of is that the precedent already set in stone in the USA will be used in his native Australia - and elsewhere - to make the Church legally and financially culpable for abuse.

He is also afraid that in the future some good lawyer will find a way to make the pope and the Vatican legally and financially responsible.

Jesus Christ had the harshest of words for those who hurt little children.

When a priest abuses a little child he incurs the wrath of Christ.

When a bishop covers up for a priest who abused a little child that bishop incurs the wrath of Christ.

When a Vatican cardinal seeks to deprive a little abused child of the just compensation they are entitled to that cardinal incurs the wrath of Christ.

George Pell is 73. Sometime in the next 10 to 20 years he will go and meet The Lord. Is he not afraid that The Lord will ask him to explain his attitude to the victims of abuse?

Is he not afraid that The Lord will say to him: "As long as you did it to one of these, the least of my children, you did it to me"?

If I was him I would be afraid.

If he is not afraid? Is he deceiving himself? Is he brainwashed and blind? Is he arrogant?

Or - My God! - Is he a secret atheist? Does he not belive in God at all?

+Pat Buckley
22.8.2014.