Unfortunately I nodded off last night trying to watch Cardinal Pell’s last day on the standing in relation to “Case 8” at the Royal Commission of Inquiry. So, yes, alas, I missed “the apology.”
I have posted the media coverage of the event and the Cardinal’s other testimony. I have also now posted the transcript of Pell’s testimony. Here are the links:
27 March 2014: Cardinal George Pell testimony at Australian Royal Commission – Day three (Transcript) (RC Scandal/Other Countries/Australia and New Zealand)
27 March 2014: “Child sex abuse royal commission: George Pell publicly apologises to victim John Ellis” & related articles & AUDIO
For simplicity’s sake I have copied “the apology” below. You will see from the media coverage that John Ellis was sitting in the front row of the hearings room: the Cardinal did not raise his eyes to address Ellis personally, and moments later passed by Ellis without any acknowledgment of his presence.
I thought though that at the very least Cardinal George Pell would had spoken directly to John Ellis – you know, pretend Ellis is right there in front of him, and even if he, Pell, refuses to look Ellis in the eye, he knows that Ellis is there and hears your every word first-hand and thus speaks to him the second person (ie, you, your) vs the third person (ie his, him)
No. The Cardinal did not do that. You wold never guess in reading this “apology” that Mr., Ellis was right there in front of him. Right there for goodness sake. But the Cardinal chooses to Ellis in the third person! I was always taught that that is very rude – perhaps things and times have changed?
Anyway, such as it is, here is the Cardinal’s “apology” – verbatim
The Cardinal’s “Apology”
As former archbishop and speaking personally, I would want to say to Mr Ellis that we failed in many ways, some ways inadvertently, in our moral and pastoral responsibilities to him.
I want to acknowledge his suffering and the impact of this terrible affair on his life. As the then archbishop, I have to take ultimate responsibility, and this I do.
At the end of this gruelling appearance for both of us at this Royal Commission, I want publicly to say sorry to him for the hurt caused him by the mistakes made and admitted by me and some of my archdiocesan personnel during the course of the Towards Healing process and litigation.
Note those words: “At the end of this gruelling appearance for both of us at this Royal Commission”
“For both of us.”
What exactly does Cardinal Pell mean? Is he equating his self-wrought suffering on the stand to the suffering endured by John Ellis at the hands of himself (Pell) and other Church officials and those retained by Pell?
Whatever it means the bottom line is that Cardinal Pell could not look Mr. Elis in the eye, nor could he address Mr. Ellis directly, nor could he see fit to tap Mr. Ellis on the shoulder on the way out and say: “I’m so terribly sorry.”
Remember too that this “apology” was read. It was scripted. Thought out in advance. Possibly with a lawyer or two and perhaps a trusted clerical confidante at his side?
I personally see the “apology” as an insult to Mr. Ellis.
Enough for now,
Sylvia
Mention has been made of Cardinal Pell’s new appointment, courtesy of Pope Francis I. There is a lot going on behind the scenes, I believe. There is a man in Italy named Francesco Zanardi, who has stated in a press conference to the media: “We know from several Cardinals that Pope Francis is a caretaker figurehead who is not actually the Pope. It’s all been a huge deception. Francis doesn’t wear the papal ring and lives in a convent in Rome, not in the Vatican. He is given no official security and wanders about like a private individual. And he makes policy statements which the Curia of Cardinals then disavow, saying Francis doesn’t reflect church doctrine…” A year ago, as reported by CNN, Zanardi personally attempted to deliver files to the Vatican demanding that one of the cardinals at the conclave, one Domenico Calcagno, who covered up the serial sex abuse of a priest in northern Italy, should be disqualified from voting in the conclave. The point Zanardi is making now is that the unconventional retirement of Pope Benedict XVI could have been a ruse, for better public relations, during a crisis of confidence in the Roman Catholic Church, not only regarding the sex scandals, but the financial underpinnings of Europe. The real power, then, does not actually reside in the hands of Pope Francis. I thought someone might be interested to consider just how far the deception goes. Under this kind of spotlight, it is hardly surprising that Cardinal Pell does not act like a churchman. By the way, when he was an 11-year-old altar boy in 1981 at the Santissime Anunziate church in the town of Spotorno, Zanardi says he was raped by the local priest, Father Nello Giraudo, at least once a week for 5 years. He says many of his school friends also suffered repeated abuse at the hands of Giraudo. Only last year, Giraudo was convicted for sexually abusing a boy at a Catholic boy scouts retreat in the Piedmont Mountains in 2005. Zanardi’s case against him, with four of his contemporaries adding their complaints, had never proceded, because of the statute of limitations having passed. So, as a first offense, Giraudo received a one-year suspended sentence. This pervert’s activities had been covered up by both Cardinal Calcagno and then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/world/europe/vatican-conclave-priest-abuse/