1/
Since #Pell's death concern has been expressed that it may trigger those who suffered & survived childhood sexual abuse.
Now we are witnessing a plethora of church leaders, former politicians & commentators publically singing Pell's praises & ignoring facts & abuse survivors.
2/
No person is completely good or completely evil. (Although some might argue) I'm sure Pell did things worthy of praise, but with his passing should the evil he did be ignored?
Some go part of the way to balanced commentary by acknowledging he was tried for child sex abuse.
3/
Yes, a jury did find Pell guilty. Yes, the Court of Appeal upheld the jury's verdict & yes, the High Court overturned those decisions. Whilst many didn't agree, that's our legal system & we have to accept it.
But, should Pell be held up as innocent when the High Court...
4/
never said he was 'innocent', but did say the complainant wasn't merely credible & reliable based on his evidence, but he was compellingly credible & reliable.
Yes, the verdict was overturned & the Vatican has held Pell up as a modern day martyr.
But is he, really?
5/
He might have been the Church's Strong Man, but I doubt he was, 'God's Strong Man'.
Church & Christianity are different.
When he learned of the crimes of paedophile priest Gerald Ridsdale was Pell strong?
Did he act to support Ridsdale's victims?
Did he alert law enforcement?
6/
Did he remove Ridsdale from ministry?
The answer to all these questions is, 'NO'.
So were these the actions of a strong man?
The church might thinks so, but what would Jesus say?
As an Archbishop when Pell learned of the crimes of Fr Searson Pell repeated the same weaknesses.
7/
Pell may have acted strongly to protect his church, but not so the children.
Then there's the treatment Pell dispensed to the raped children & their families.
Who can forget the evidence of Chrissie & Anthony Foster at the Royal Commission?
8/
After learning of Fr Kevin O'Donnell's repeated rape of their daughters, Emma & Katie, the Fosters went to Pell for help.
Pell again showed his strength, threatening if they took his church to court he'd fight them with highly paid lawyers every step of the way. And he did.
9/
Pell then held up his, 'Melbourne Response' as a world first, but behind its cover the Ellis defence & misly compensation payments to survivors continued to protect his church's vast assets. Strong men of the church still herald this cruel policy document as ground breaking.🤔
10/
Then there's the unresolved allegations against Pell at the Ballarat & Torquay swimming pools & David Ridsdale's evidence of how Pell allegedly ask what it would take to buy his silence about his uncle's offending? I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea.
11/
Archbishop Fisher said Pell was, "without doubt Australia's most prominent ever churchman, having provided 'strong' & clear leadership..."
Archbishop Comensoli said he was, "a significant & influential Church leader... 'strongly' committed to Christian discipleship."
12/
No mention of those who suffered due to Pell's failed handling of child rapists. But, as the Vatican ponders who should become Australia's next Cardinal, their comments shouldn't do any harm.
Former PM Tony Abbott said Pell was, 'a fine man wrestling with a cruel fate &
13/
...trying to make sense of the unfairness & suffering.'
Considering the
'unfairness & suffering'
of so many child sex abuse victims & survivors, it was an unfortunate choice of words.
Pell's death might not trigger all survivors, but comments like these just might.
14/
This all says more about the organisation, the Church itself, its inability to acknowledge the truth in spite of overwhelming evidence. Without accepting & truely acknowledging its history it is incapable of change.
Pell has left a legacy, but maybe not that intended.

End

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Peter Fox 🦊🦘

Peter Fox 🦊🦘 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Peter_Fox59

Jan 25, 2021
Why is 26 Jan Australia day? #AustraliaDayJan26
1. It wasn't the day Cook or other Europeans first sighted or landed in Australia.
2. It wasn't the day the first fleet arrived, that was 20 Jan.
3. It wasn't the day Arthur Phillip selected Sydney Cove, that was 22 Jan.
/2
4. The flag he raised wasn't the Australian flag, but the British flag.
5. Phillip didn't take possession for Australians, but the British crown & toasted the King.
6. Phillip only took possession of the east coast of NSW. It excluded SA, WA, NT & Tasmania.
/3
7. Only military & convicts were present at the possession ceremony, no settlers.
8. Phillip's goal wasn't settlement, but to establish a penal colony.
9. It wasn't necessarily an invasion of all Australia, Tasmania, WA, Torres Strait etc were separate & much later.
/4
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(