+++Pell’s History of Protecting Sex Abusers

 

Edit: Sciambra is an unfortunate creature who you can’t trust in general, but he at least strives for objectivity. His interview with John Lamont at Church Militant is particularly useful, despite his occasional and unnecessary autobiographical interjections. People think that because they’re “victims” that they have authority. 

John Lamont is unusual, since he works at Church Militant and yet accuses the pope of being a heretic. What’s going on there? Unfortunately, he doesn’t talk about Pell’s other credible accusers of lurking around the pools, and doesn’t seem to think there’s a lot of evidence for Pell himself being an abuser. I don’t agree there. 

Neither is Pell is a friend of tradition, according to Lamont (Pell writes an encomium on Chardin of all things) nor is he anything but a mediocre functionary.

Here are the time stamps:

00:00  Sciambra Introduces John Lamont, who works with Church Militant.

Sciambra says positive things about Voris’s showboat apostolate. Positive about CMs attacks on SSPX and FSSP.

2:43 Church Militant is the only one that takes victims’ stories seriously.

3:00 Reviews credentials starting in Canada, then as Gifford Fellow in Scotland.  His book, “Defending the Church Against Present Heresies” by Arucca Press which is an attack on Bergoglio’s heresies. Wow!

5:00 hired at Sydney Seminary because he studied under a liberal peritus at Vatican II and got to know Pell.

6:20 Pell has a long history of covering up sex abuse and belongs in jail.

6:35 Discussion of Pell’s alleged exoneration by the Australian Supreme Court and Traditionalist  Catholics defense of him.

8:20 Picture of Pell going to court with convicted sex offender, Gerald Ridsdale, which leads Sciambra to dig deeper.

We haven’t heard much about this in the USA.

10:00 John Lamont begins by way of an introduction of the history of the Australian Church . 

10:50 Joseph Banks initiated Penal Colony in 1788 in Botany Bay with convicts and their guards. Penal colony till 1850s gold rush.

11:50 Colony was brutal for minor offenders who were slaves till the end of their terms. Protestant dominance is the colony was very cruel for Catholics.

14:00 John Bede Polding, English Benedictine who wanted a chain of monasteries, but was pushed aside by the Jesuits. 

15:25 Australia is dominated by Freemasons

15:30 Canberra was planned by occultists. Wow!

16:20 Sciambra intervenes about his secrecy hobby horse.

17:00 The laity depended on the educated clergy for matters secular and spiritual.

18:00 But it’s not a bad thing, “huddling” per se, says Sciambra, but the tendency to keep things in house…. [These people always want to rationalize these things with historicism, aimed at the hierarchal nature of the Church.]

18:50 Pell’s father was a boxer who owned a pub and ran a bookie

20:30 Cardinals and bishops are singled out and Sciambra finds this very interesting.

21:00 Ballarat’s background as a mining time and Pell’s tenure there till 1975. It’s essential to understand Pell.

22:00 Bellarat is notorious. Pell first addressed sex abuse in 1974 by not doing anything about a boy who said he was abused.

23:40 14 credibly accused clergy.  850 children claimed to be abused by Christian Brothers and 30 committed suicide.  

24:00 Diocese of Ballarat is a criminal organization.

24:40 Pell was a man of ambition.  So he was committed to getting ahead in the organization he belonged. Use your knowledge to get ahead. 

25:50 Ridsdale  Royal Commission determines Pell knew about the abuse. Kerns asks Pell about Ridsdale, which Pell denies and is not found credible by Commission

26:00 Ridsdale is the worst and most sadistic abuser in Australian Church. Pell accompanied him.

28:15 Appears in court with Ridsdale to send a message. Do what I want and I’ll protect you.

30:00 Pell knew pedos were running it or had the veto, so he played that game.

30:40 Pell admits he knew about it when he sent Ridsdale to treatment in the US. Sciambra discusses Farrel who claimed he didn’t know about McCarrick. (He takes the time to take a catty shot at traditionalists)

33:10 Ridsdale’s nephew, David Ridsdale approached Pell

33:30 John Walsh accused of abuse by John Walsh, nothing happens so Pell promotes him. He’s easier to control. Ridsdale’s nephew, David, claims he was offered money.  Walsh is compelled by Pell to testify, with no effect, and then causes his victim John Walsh to speak out. Gives insight on the Royal Commission being good on the Catholic Church.

36:30 Explains the Royal Commission which documents are available on line. 

37:30 Explains Wollongong and mayor Frank Arkell who was bludgeoned to death by a Satanist. He and the local police and clergy were in on preying on children. https://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/4095493/the-wollongong-leader-that-fell-prey-to-a-twisted-killer/

39:00 Walsh quits under duress. (After being told by Pell to lie)

39:30 Sciambra interrupts to quote Pell’s defense of appearing in public with Ridsdale.  Compares it to Bergoglio’s hypocritical lies, and turns to discuss how Bishops are chosen.  Pell shouldn’t have risen after his 1993 hearing at the Royal Commission, but he gets promoted. Talks about the “tone deafness” of the people deciding who gets promoted.

42:00 Talks about “Precious Little” Bishop Little who protected pedos himself. 

43:00 Sciambra talks about the gravity of Ridsdale’s crimes.  Talks about the “those were the times” defense people like to use, as well as an unfortunate comparison to Nuremberg. 

45:50 Melbourne Response, an alleged independent commissioner who is a representative of the Church to offer a $50k payoff and NDA.

47:40 Canon which demands that clergy should be punished.

48:50 Sciambra cites from Melbourne Response that victims have the right to approach the civil authority but claims will be “strenuously defended.”

50:04 Case of John Ellis who is an attorney and victim by Adrian Duggan, who gets sued by the Church when the court decides the Catholic Church can’t be sued and they go after him to recover their legal costs of $1.5 million. 

53:30 Pattern with Pell where he is brutal to abuse victims. He denies knowing about Ellis to Royal Commission, which found Pell as not credible.

58:10 Pell’s arrogance and absence of remorse.

1:01 What is the purpose of the Melbourne Response?

1:02 Vatican Bank conspiracy. 

(Pell has some good traits, not completely devoid of humanity, like Pope)

1:03:30 Pell was the kingmaker of the Australian Church under JPII. Not men of principle, but those who would obey him.

1:04:20 Pell is viewed favorably by traditionalists and Neocons. 

1:06 Pell is not a traditionalist, but permits them. FSSP parish dinner, a meeting on the Latin Mass which he thought was a fundraiser with lots of old people and he saw all the young people and threw away his prepared speech filled with erudite discussion on the Mass and talked about how horrible the old Mass was.

1:07:18 Old Irish Gangster

1:07:50 Traditionalists want scraps

1:08:25 Why not Vigano instead of Pell?

1:09 Fessio publishing Pell’s prison journals to raise money to cover his expenses. [Ignatius Press sucks]

1:11 The jury didn’t care about the evidence, they just saw all the dirt on Pell in addition to that.

1:12 Pell is the only Cardinal to go to prison, even though he deserved to go to prison for the things he DID do.

1:13:20 Quote from Pell saying he didn’t have much interest in the victims stories and suffering. People gasped at that during the hearing. Thug and sociopath coming out…

1:17 Picture of Saint Patrick’s Seminary with Pell and Archbishop Cordileone. He’s like a boxer who won’t go down, he’s been to jail and he’s back out swinging.

1:19 David O’Hearn now convicted of dozens of offenses. Things are so bad in Australia… Bishop Heather was caught shredding documents. Exercising sex Ed program, Bishop Vincent Long.

Caught Heather coming out of a night club which led to Heather retiring, who still appears at Australian Bishops’s Conferences.

1:22 Celeste Patterson, it’s like Dame Edna Experience skit

1:23 if Pell could have gotten to the top by burning pedos at the stake, he would have done that.

1:23:10 priests who tried to do the right thing and got “squashed”.

1:24:40 System is broken

1:24:50 Benedictine monastic system as an alternative to keep the bad ones out.

1:26 Sciambra doesn’t like top-down model. [Lame]

1:27 How do you keep your faith? Fabulous Rod Dreher couldn’t!

1:28 He plugs his book, Divine Faith. About the rational basis for the Catholic Faith

1:30:30 Religious Education Meeting in LA. They’re just corrupt mediocrities.

1:31:02 there is a narrative that’s been spun about Pell. Do your reading, Catholics!

1:32:30 Pell should have lain low for the victims he trashed.  Why didn’t he go to the beach house he inherited from his mother? He built a luxurious palace for himself in Rome. Leopard can’t change its spots. I guess he and his supporters want to do their victory March.

1:34:10 Pell was accused falsely. Thinks that Pell himself wasn’t an abuser.

AMDG

Here are the Time stamps:

Cardinal Dziwisz Defends John Paul II from Charges He Reacted Slowly Against Sexual Abuse

Cardinal Dziwisz defends John Paul II against "biased" criticism.

(Krakow) Opinions and allegations that Pope John Paul II has reacted too slowly to the sexual abuse of minors by some clerics, "are biased and contradict the historical facts". Stanislaw Cardinal Dziwisz, Archbishop Emeritus of Krakow, rejected this claim in a public statement. Cardinal Dziwisz served as personal secretary to Karol Wojtyla for almost 40 years.

Yesterday, the statement "John Paul II on sexual abuse in the Church" by Cardinal Dziwisz was published on the website of the Polish Episcopal Conference in Polish and English.

It is not true, according to the cardinal, that John Paul II "wanted to tolerate the crime of sexual abuse of minors in the Church". The truth is that the Pope was rather "shocked" and "fought against it".

Dziwisz was ordained priest in 1963 by Karol Wojtyla. From 1966 he became his secretary as Archbishop of Krakow. When Cardinal Wojtyla was elected to the pope in 1978, Dziwisz went to Rome as his personal secretary. Benedict XVI. appointed him Archbishop of Krakow after the death of the Polish Pope and created him Cardinal.

Dziwisz recalls, inter alia, the indulgences given by John Paul II to the United States of America (1994) and the Church of Ireland (1996), which approved a policy known as "zero tolerance". The former personal secretary of this Pope also refers to the document Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela for the Protection of the Sacraments, which was published in May 2001 on the initiative of John Paul II. It proclaimed new norms "on the more serious crimes" (de delictis gravioribus), which took the defense and fight against such crimes to a new level

John Paul II had observed how the local churches responded, in whose responsibility cases occurred. This was especially true of the United States, where the problem occurred for the first time massively. "If necessary, he helped them, often on their own initiative," or "at the request of the local episcopate." In the 1980s he reacted to the crisis in the US church.

"The pope first observed the activities of the episcopate of the United States, and when he came to the conclusion that new instruments were needed to combat these crimes, he gave the church superiors new powers. For the bishops, this was a clear indication of which direction to fight. "

When it became clear that the local episcopates and religious leaders still could not cope with the problem and that the crisis spread to other countries, John Paul II recognized that the problem "not only concerns the Anglo-Saxon world, but has a global character ".

It is known that a new wave of revelations came in the United States in 2002, caused by publications known as "Spotlight". On the other hand, as the cardinal states, it is scarcely known that John Paul II published the document Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela (for the protection of the sanctity of the sacraments) in May 2001 just one year before these events. "We know the groundbreaking significance of this law," said the emeritus Archbishop of Krakow. In doing so, the Pope responded to the apparent difficulties of the competent episcopates to respond appropriately to the problem.

"All sexual crimes committed by clerics against minors have thus been reserved for the jurisdiction of the Apostolic See."

"He also pledged every bishop and religious leader to report all these crimes to the Congregation of the Faith, if their probabilities were confirmed in a preliminary ruling."

The rest continued under the control of the Apostolic Tribunal.

The cardinal states that the main problem of sexual abuse of minors in the Church had already reached its peak before the pontificate of John Paul II. On the other hand, the Polish pope began to act as soon as he became aware of the problem. The demonstrable decline in crime since then proved the effectiveness of the measures, although the problem could not be completely eradicated.

"This analysis serves as a guide for anyone involved in the fight against the crime of sexual abuse of minors by clergy. It helps diagnose the crisis and shows the way out. "

At the end of his statement, Cardinal Dziwisz also commented on the case of Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the Legionaries of Christ.

"It is said that John Paul II has covered up his criminal activities. But the facts say otherwise. I would just like to remind you that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith began in December 2004, during the pontificate of John Paul II, with the investigation into the allegations against Maciel Degollado. Msgr. Charles Scicluna, at that time promoter iustitiae and now Archbishop, was sent to Mexico and the United States with another lawyer to carry out the necessary activities in this matter. The decision to initiate these investigations could only be made with the knowledge and consent of John Paul II. The investigations were not interrupted in the time of the Sedisvakanz after the death of John Paul II and could therefore by a judgment at the beginning of the pontificate of Benedict XVI. be completed."

Text: Giuseppe Nardi

Image: episkopat.pl (screenshot)

With New Sexual Abuse Case Francis May Go From Cleanup Man to Accused

(Rome) In July 2017, Bishop Gustavo Oscar Zanchetta, although only 53 years old, became emeritus diocesan bishop of the Argentine diocese of Oran. The reason given was his health. "Many were worried that he was suffering from a deadly disease, because it was not even enough to celebrate a mass for farewell," said the US Daily Beast on January 4th. The departure from the diocese was extremely abrupt. Now the evidence is mounting, that the reason for it was a completely different one.

A true Bergoglian

Monsignor Zanchetta belongs to the circle of Bergoglians among the bishops with whom the Pope's former Primate of Argentina is rebuilding the Episcopate of his native land. On July 23, 2013, Francis Gustavo had appointed Oscar Zanchetta Bishop of Oran.

Four years later, the bishop left his diocese in a shambles on August 1, 2017. He subsequently justified his hasty disappearance from an unknown location with unspecified "health problems". He merely said that these problems would have to be dealt with elsewhere. 

Then, as is now known, he stopped in Corrientes, 900 kilometers away, and then reappeared further away in Madrid - and apparently in good health again.

Ex-Cardinal Retired to Cloister Near High School

Edit: this decision was not without controversy, however, because despite the remoteness of the Cloister, it’s still close to the parish Grade School or a neighboring High School.  What’s unclear is whether the evil +++McCarrick will be restricted to quarters, or have access to a car, where he can travel a few hours to lurk in Kansas City, Kansas on weekends.

(Rome) Ex-Cardinal McCarrick, who is at the center of an abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, now lives in a Capuchin monastery in the state of Kansas. This was announced by the Archdiocese  of Washington.

Theodore McCarrick was Archbishop of Washington and previously Archbishop of Newark. He is accused of having lived a gay double life for decades and of having aberrosexual relationships with subordinates and seminarians.

On August 26, Monsignor Carlo Maria Viganò, former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, revealed that when Pope Benedict XVI learned of the incidents, he imposed sanctions on McCarrick at the end of his term. Apparently, this was never really implemented till the pope's resignation. Rather, Pope Francis rehabilitated the cardinal and, according to the Vatican diplomat, made him one of his closest confidants.

It was not until the New York Times revealed the Cardinal's double life in July in two articles that the pope's confidant, officially at his own request, lost the cardinal status. The former Apostolic Nuncio in Washington accuses Pope Francis of covering up and covering the cardinal's "perverse and diabolical" behavior, and calls for Francis's resignation.

In a press release from the Archbishopric of Washington, it is now reported that the now 88-year-old McCarrick "now lives the permission of the Provincial Superior, Christopher Popravak, responsible for the monastic Franciscan Community and the Bishop of Salina, Gerald Vincke, in St. Fidelis Monastery in Victoria in State of Kansas. "

"Out of consideration for the peace of the community of St. Fidelis-Kosters, we are asked to respect the privacy of this agreement."

The transfer to the monastery became necessary after Pope Francis in late July McCarrick prohibited any public exercise of his office. At the same time he imposed house arrest against him in a place to be assigned to him. [Notorious priests under restriction in Collegeville, are right there next to a high school and a university. They are also allowed to travel, some as far as Europe and cushy vacations.]

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Archdiocese of Washington (screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

The case of Julio Cesar Grassi -- Cardinal Bergoglio Refused to See the Victims to Protect them From Murder Threats

August 31, 2018 0

Jullio Cesar Grassi: sexual abuse case in Argentina

by Antonio Tortillatapa
 
The case of Julio César Grassi has been holding Argentina under his spell for 25 years now.
Julio César Grassi (born 1956) was ordained a priest in 1981. As part of Liberation Theology and post-conciliar, humanitarian social engagement, he was particularly involved in social work and "pastoral accompaniment" for poor children and disabled people from deprived backgrounds in Argentina.
 
The decade-long economic decline of Argentina, the political turmoil, the impoverishment of large parts of the population and the chronic recurrent disappointed hopes with deep frustration of the poor population strata, formed an excellent [hunting] ground for the activities of Grassi.
 
Under Grassi's leadership, a large complex of social welfare institutions and homes for the care and support of children and adolescents from precarious conditions emerged.
 
Grassi promoted everything with a great media hype through television and radio, with publications and with very complex and opaque financial transactions.
 
Grassi excelled in tying politicians and wealthy, well-known personalities to his activities and facilities. Especially in the Peronist milieu (or in the political leadership caste of Peronism at the end of the 20th century), he found many sympathizers.
 
At the same time, his ability to raise funds for his facilities was very great, and he became widely known through television appearances.
 
One focus was the establishment of Felices Los Ninos ("Happy Children") for children and adolescents with problems.
 
The center of activities was the Argentine diocese of Morón, suffragan of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires.
 
In 1992, a lawsuit was filed against Grassi on behalf of children and adolescents at the Felices los Ninos in a local court.

The case was not pursued and the proceedings suppressed.

In 1995, the world public was shaken by many cases of severe and widespread and institutionalized sexual abuse of children and wards in the Catholic Church in North America.
 
Pope John Paul II wrote extensively to the bishops of North America.

At the same time, the sexual abuse of children and the disabled in Church institutions in Belgium came to light, in addition to abstruse advertising for pedophilia in local diocesan newspapers and religious books (affair Barzin , affair Roeach3 , case Anneke ).
 
At the turn of the millennium, the tremendous extent of child abuse was perceived in the ecclesial context of Western Europe and North America; it was discussed in great detail in the media.
The Church establishment responded in 2005 mainly with cover-up, beautification, attempts at deescalation and slick financial compensation.
 
The number of trials became Legion, the convictions increased rapidly and the compensation payments reached astronomical heights in the US.
 
In 2002, the Argentine TV station Telenoche reported in a sensational report that a lawsuit had been filed against Grassi for pedophile abuse.
 
The news struck like a bomb: huge popular upheaval, broad media interest, loud defiance of Grassi, and spirited complaints from angry family members.
 
Anticlerical resentments, clerical protective reflexes, competition between media holdings, financial irregularities and political fronts additionally colored the Grassi case: a victim was very fiercely defended by a protagonist of the Montoneros (left-wing Peronists); at the same time, much of the Peronist nomenklatura was associated with the omnipresent Grassi on television.

Extensive police and financial investigations took place.
 
The complaints were examined very carefully; especially the cases "Gabriel", "Ezequiel" and "Luis" were very stressful.

The sealed-off structures of the facilities were screened, tons of little Christian material came to light, many co-workers testified, and not least the horrendous financial mismanagement and embezzlement came to light.
 
Grassi defended himself in a very strange way:

He did not respond to the allegations and substantiated very hard-backed complaints with exhaustive, substantive evidence and evidence, but threatened with very expensive lawyers, attacked the victims loudly, tingled through radio and television stations and railed against a media extermination campaign by the Argentine press group Clarin against him (Grassi) and his private broadcaster.
Grassi refused to comply with a subpoena in court, became fleeting and also gave an interview with the radio before the camera.
 
The matter escalated: In 2003 there were threats and attacks with firearms on witnesses and claimants.

The Grassi case has now become nationally known.

The Argentine episcopate was already aware of the explosive nature of the Grassi affair in 2003: the responsible Bishop of Morón, Justo Oscar Laguna, had immediately forwarded the case to the next higher instance, the Archbishopric of Buenos Aires, given the complexity of the case and the manifold additional interests.
 
The victims and the witnesses, intimidated and threatened with firearms, asked Cardinal Bergoglio, then archbishop of Buenos Aires, for a meeting to stop the attacks on the victims and the witnesses.
 The request for a conversation was denied.
 
By contrast, the plaintiffs and the witnesses were able to raise their concerns with Monsignor Justo Oscar Laguna (1929-2011), Bishop of Morón (1980-2004) and former Argentine President Nestor Kirchner.
 
From various sides much pressure was exerted on the judicial organs.

On 10 June 2009, the Tribunal N ° 1 of Morón sentenced Don Julio Cesar Grassi to 15 years' imprisonment for sexual abuse of minors and corruption.
 
In September 2010, the Second Chamber of the Court of Cassation of the Province of Buenos Aires rejected all appeals against this verdict.
 
On 27 November 2012, the Supreme Court rejected all recourses and confirmed in January 2013, the first instance imprisonment of 15 years.
 
However, Grassi then remained on the loose for a long time for unclear reasons.
 
He was arrested only on 23 September 2013 (according to the 2 + 1 rule in force in Argentina - the period of pre-trial detention is double and is counted towards the sentence - he would have been released in 2018).
 
In 2016, Grassi was sentenced to another 15 years in prison for financial fraud and tax evasion.
Theoretically, Grassi will remain in custody until 2033.

By the way: the word misericordia (mercy) did not even fit in this context.
 
Sources:

• Wikipedia (Spanish edition): Julio César Grassi
• Federico Fahsbender: Cuatro libros encargados por el papa aseguran que el padre grassi es inocente.
• «Caso Grassi: la causa que desvela al papa Francisco» . Infobae

Text: Antonio Tortillatapa
Image: Wikicommons / InfoCatolica
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG 

Pope Francis is Under Pressure

Pope Francis has rceived Cardinal Sean in audience while a clear demand has come from Chile.

(Santiago de Chile) Twice yesterday, the case of Barros stood front and center: in Rome and in Santiago de Chile. Cardinal Ricardo Ezzati SDB, the Archbishop of Santiago de Chile, opened an extraordinary gathering of the Chilean clergy yesterday. In Rome, the most important critic of Pope Francis was received in audience.
 
The reason is Pope Francis' letter to the Chilean Episcopal Conference. With the letter, the Catholic Church leader responded to the report of his special envoy, Msgr. Charles Scicluna, on the sexual abuse scandal in Chile and around the ex-priest Fernando Karadima. The focus is Bishop Juan Barros Madrid. In spite of serious warnings, Pope Francis made him bishop of the diocese of Osorno in early 2015. Karadima victims and a group of faithful from the diocese of Osorno have since protested against this appointment. They accuse Msgr. Barros  of covering Karadima's crimes.
 
For three years, Pope Francis dismissed any criticism as "defamation" and "instrumentalization" by circles hostile to the Church. Therefore, he refused to speak with Barros critics and listen to them.
  
After Francis maintained this attitude during his visit to Chile last January, the criticism became so strong that he finally had to react. The pope's visit in Chile took place mostly in more remote areas. The Chileans showed demonstrative disinterest. The Karadima case, as the Bishops' Conference noted, severely shook faith in the Church. Nevertheless, Pope Francis saw no reason to change his attitude towards the victims and Bishop Barros. Rather, he explicitly invited him to concelebrate with him publicly. The head of the Church evidently thought of silencing the critics with this gesture of demonstrative confidence in Barros. Instead, Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley OFM Cap of Boston joined the criticism. The cardinal is familiar with the case as President of the Pontifical Child Protection Commission.
 
At the same time, evidence was presented that Pope Francis since the spring of 2015 was informed about the allegations against Msgr. Barros. The pope had claimed otherwise on the return flight to Rome.

 

Course change - or not

 

Ten days after his return from Latin America, therefore, Francis made a course correction to curb the international expansion of criticism of his position. He appointed the Archbishop of Malta, Mgr. Charles Scicluna, Pontifical Special Envoy. Scicluna was commissioned to hear the Barros critics. He should do what Francis had refused to do for three years. In the second half of March, Scicluna presented more than 2,300 pages of reports after hearing more than 60 people in the US and Chile.

Cardinal Ezzati yesterday at the press conference in Santiago de Chile

On April 11, the Vatican Press Office published a letter from Pope Francis to the Chilean bishops. He responded to the Scicluna report and spoke of the "pain and shame" he felt when reading the report.
In parallel, the Chilean Episcopal Conference issued a statement announcing the Pope's contrite attitude to the Chileans in order to restore their shattered confidence. Behind the scenes, the question was not settled.
 
Francis did not mention Bishop Barros in his letter. Rather, he issued an invitation to the bishops to come to Rome to discuss the matter. The bishops were silent in public. However, they knew that Francis was signaling that he would continue to cling to Barros, the stumbling block in public perception.
 
Barros himself had in the past submitted to the pope two resignations, which Francis rejected.  A third request was to have Archbishop Scicluna together with his report at the papal desk. Barros himself denies this.

Clear signals from Cardinal Ezzati to Francis

The fact is that the head of the Chilean Episcopal Conference wants to conclude the Barros case and therefore wants consequences. And not just since today, but already for three years. Francis was then also warned from the ranks of the Episcopal Conference against appointing Barros as Bishop of Osorno. The Pope, however, clings to him steadfastly. More and more often the question arises as to why.
 
Outwardly, the Chilean Episcopal Conference looks to be in good spirits. Yet behind the scenes there is considerable discord that Francis does not want Barros to give up his office.
 
The meeting called by Cardinal Ezzati yesterday in Santiago de Chile appealed to the whole clergy of the country to analyze the letter of Pope Francis. On the one hand, it is about the difficult task of regaining the lost trust among Chileans and, on the other, eliminating the causes. What Cardinal Ezzati imagines, he said very clearly and publicly afterwards. He expects Msgr. Barros to resign:

"I'm not a judge to decide if he's covered up something or not. For the good of the Church, however, he should take a step aside."

At the same time the cardinal tried a difficult balancing act, with which he wanted to protect the reputation of the pope and at the same time wanted to build a bridge to accept the resignation Barros.  
Cardinal Ezzati made it clear at yesterday's press conference that the Pope had to decide on his resignation. So far, Francis has rejected Barros' resignations. Ezzati, President of the Chilean Episcopal Conference from 2010-2016, assured the press that Pope Francis had been "deceived" as far as the information on the Karadima and Barros case was concerned.
 
Will Francis yield to this pressure from the Chilean Episcopal Conference?
 

Audience for Cardinal O'Malley in Rome

Yesterday, an event took place in Rome, even before the clergy meeting had begun in Santiago de Chile, which was likely to be directly linked to Chile.
 

Daily Bulletin: Audience for Cardinal O'Malley

Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley was received in audience by Pope Francis. It was noted in the Vatican's daily bulletin that the cardinal is chairman of the Pontifical Child Protection Commission . Nothing was known about the content of the meeting. However, it is believed that Cardinal O'Malley served as chairman of the Child Protection Commission at Francis and was speaking about the Barros case.
 
The meeting of Chilean bishops with Pope Francis in Rome is expected to take place in the third week of May. Until then, no decisions are likely to be made, as Francis has so far indicated no signs of wanting to change his position on Barros.
 
Has what Cardinal O'Malley said to him yesterday and what Cardinal Ezzati demanded yesterday,  changed his mind?
 
The video with central excerpts from the press conference of Cardinal Ezzati yesterday in Santiago de Chile:
 

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Bild: Vatican.va/MiL (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Praise for the Enemy: Ossevatore Romano Heaps Praise on Anti-CatholicNewspaper

Edit: some  things that don't make the coverage on this issue: 

1. The sexual proclivities of the offenders. The overwhelming majority of offenders are everybody's current favorite victim class.

2. The political and religious inclination of the offenders. (Most are not orthodox to begin with.) 

3. Media pets in the hierarchy are actually protected or their complicity in sexual abuse is ignored or downplayed: see Pope Francis' record in Buenos Aires, it's not pretty, or Cardinal Mahony's handling of sexual abuse, which did lead to his resignation at 75, but he by no means gets the same lurid coverage that the Boston  Globe is unjustly praised for attacking the bumbling but mostly Pro-Life Cardinal Law.

4. The Boston Globe has been an anti-Catholic and anti-Irish paper from the beginning, no surprise that it's following the lead of similarly leftist papers like La Stampa  (which has its own hit-man in Andrea Tornielli) by spawning Crux with its own Old Liberal ecclesiastical perspective.

Old Liberals love the abuse crisis, because it allows them to settle scores with orthodox or neoconservative clergy by employing the weapons of popular opinion, which as we've seen with this pope especially, are very important in the way he governs his Church.

What's especially sickening is to see such uncritical and cowardly praise for Boston Globe which has confused and muddled the situation more than anything else, leading to the public perception that sexual abuse is first and foremost, a Catholic problem when all too many of the perpetrators, even where they wear cassocks, are no more Catholic than the evil and luxurious Cardinal Marx.

[Guardian] The Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, has praised the 2016 best picture Oscar winner Spotlight for its convincing attempt to show abuse and cover-ups in the Catholic church. 

The newspaper published a front-page editorial on Monday hailing Tom McCarthy’s film and calling it “not anti-Catholic”. The editorial said Spotlight, which centres on the work of a group of Boston Globe reporters to uncover abuse by Roman Catholic priests, faithfully presented the church’s attempts to defend itself in the face of “horrendous realities”.

Advertisement

“Not all monsters wear cassocks. Paedophilia [Most of them, however, are aberrosexuals, others are from Hollywood itself and quite a few wear yarmulkes.] does not necessarily arise from the vow of chastity,” wrote the editorial’s author, Lucetta Scaraffia. “However, it has become clear that in the Church some are more preoccupied with the image of the institution than of the seriousness of the act.”

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/mar/01/vatican-newspaper-spotlight-oscars-best-picture

Now This:

How would Osservatore Romano be counted upon to know an anti-Catholic film when it itself is demonstrably anti-Catholic? How much does Hollywood pay them to promote their films?

http://www.osservatoreromano.va/en/news/its-not-anti-catholic-film

Australian Military Bishop Cleared of Charges

[ABC] The former head of the Australian Defence Force's Catholic diocese is yet to decide if he will resume his role in the military, after being cleared of child sex allegations.

Bishop Max Davis was on trial last week charged with six counts of being grossly indecent with boys at St Benedict's College in New Norcia between 1969 and 1972.

A jury found the 70-year-old not guilty on all charges, after about four hours of deliberation.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-16/adf-bishop-max-davis-child-sex-cleared-future-military/7173302