Pell went through the whole legal system and was convicted. The time he spent in jail was the time that elapsed while waiting for the High court to hear and then quash his conviction.
Saunder's process is only beginning. Seems his financial chicanery mismanagement has caught up with him and he can't afford to post his bail, and, unlike Pell, no one believes he's innocent enough to help with those costs.
The odd thing is that the accusations against Cardinal Pell were implausible, as the Australian Supreme Court eventually found. But the prosecutors pursued the case and somehow got the second jury involved to convict and the initial judges to check off on it. (One does have to ask about how the jury and judges were selected and instructed, and whether there were some people in the Vatican eager to get rid of Cardinal Pell and his reform efforts pushing for the conviction, or even paying for it.) By contrast, in this case, the Australian authorities did not aggressively pursue the accusations against Bishop Saunders when they were first made in 2019 and instead only recently managed to discover the incriminating evidence. One suspects that the Australian government favored Bishop Saunders but found the more faithful Cardinal Pell to be a nuisance.
It's also very likely it's just different people making the decisions - with different degrees of (in)competence, different jurisdictions and different biases
Accountability extends to those who recommended Saunders in the first place. A sleazy guy doesn’t become more sleazy overnight. I am certain it was manifestly evident that Saunders was highly questionable from the get go. So who are these people who emplace an evil perfidious priest in the first place? More basic - who arranged for his ordination to the priesthood? I think we should get to the root cause and name names of the sponsors and protectors of evil men in cloth.
If I am so tired of them, what must Our Lord think who knows all? Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary warn us repeatedly. We cause so much pain! Sigh. Always this disconnect between the flock and those who live on its largesse.
Blessed Mother please bring us back to your Son, Our Lord, Jesus Christ. Give us holy priests!
I disagree. This problem will not be properly addressed by demanding accountability of these prelates. It must include that they be made accountably and subject to review and questioning by the laity.
That is true. It had to do with the authority of lay people on review boards for clergy accused of harming children. But to elaborate, by accountability, mean going beyond narrow initiatives to protect children but oversight and review of church finances. "Follow the money".
Yeah I hope that will happen someday. But I'm not sure any initiative to give lay people the ability to do so wouldn't be quashed the same way the USCCB effort to give lay people some authority over child sex abuse cases was.
No one should ever take the Church seriously that they are committed to protecting our children until the laity are brought into the financial management of the Church. And I am not talking about a secretary who is an at-will employee of the bishop. In protecting our children, it is essential that we follow the advice of that great Watergate-era theologian 'Deep Throat' to "follow the money." (or, in the words of Blessed Walter Reuther, "Show us the books."). Saunders would never got past his first Bunga-bunga party had there been financial transparency.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't... keeping the hierarchy in charge of the money is the only thing slowing down the German Synodal Way, while keeping the hierarchy in charge of the money here is what allowed abuse.
What exactly is the process for what happens when the Vatican orders a cleric, like here when he was ordered to reside outside the diocese?
Would this order have been known to anyone, like the acting bishop of the diocese? It seems like either someone else still in power should be held responsible for allowing him to remain in the diocese, or else the Vatican is extraordinarily naive in expecting the kind of person who would use his position of power to sexually abuse vulnerable children to follow restrictions placed on him on the honors system.
This is so sad and disturbing. Thank you for this important reporting.
Is there a good explanation why Pell gets a year of jail time for being innocent, while Saunders is a free man after all of this?
Pell went through the whole legal system and was convicted. The time he spent in jail was the time that elapsed while waiting for the High court to hear and then quash his conviction.
Saunder's process is only beginning. Seems his financial chicanery mismanagement has caught up with him and he can't afford to post his bail, and, unlike Pell, no one believes he's innocent enough to help with those costs.
The odd thing is that the accusations against Cardinal Pell were implausible, as the Australian Supreme Court eventually found. But the prosecutors pursued the case and somehow got the second jury involved to convict and the initial judges to check off on it. (One does have to ask about how the jury and judges were selected and instructed, and whether there were some people in the Vatican eager to get rid of Cardinal Pell and his reform efforts pushing for the conviction, or even paying for it.) By contrast, in this case, the Australian authorities did not aggressively pursue the accusations against Bishop Saunders when they were first made in 2019 and instead only recently managed to discover the incriminating evidence. One suspects that the Australian government favored Bishop Saunders but found the more faithful Cardinal Pell to be a nuisance.
It's also very likely it's just different people making the decisions - with different degrees of (in)competence, different jurisdictions and different biases
Saunders is currently out on bail. He has said he will plead not guilty, and he will reappear in court in June, according to this reporting from Australian Associated Press: https://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/feb/23/christopher-saunders-former-catholic-bishop-of-broome-indicates-he-will-plead-not-guilty-to-child-sexual-abuse-allegations
His victims were black and Pell's alleged victims were white?
Accountability extends to those who recommended Saunders in the first place. A sleazy guy doesn’t become more sleazy overnight. I am certain it was manifestly evident that Saunders was highly questionable from the get go. So who are these people who emplace an evil perfidious priest in the first place? More basic - who arranged for his ordination to the priesthood? I think we should get to the root cause and name names of the sponsors and protectors of evil men in cloth.
If I am so tired of them, what must Our Lord think who knows all? Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary warn us repeatedly. We cause so much pain! Sigh. Always this disconnect between the flock and those who live on its largesse.
Blessed Mother please bring us back to your Son, Our Lord, Jesus Christ. Give us holy priests!
Exactly! And amen!
I disagree. This problem will not be properly addressed by demanding accountability of these prelates. It must include that they be made accountably and subject to review and questioning by the laity.
The USCCB tried something like this a few years ago. The Vatican stepped in to tell them they couldn't do that.
That is true. It had to do with the authority of lay people on review boards for clergy accused of harming children. But to elaborate, by accountability, mean going beyond narrow initiatives to protect children but oversight and review of church finances. "Follow the money".
Yeah I hope that will happen someday. But I'm not sure any initiative to give lay people the ability to do so wouldn't be quashed the same way the USCCB effort to give lay people some authority over child sex abuse cases was.
No one should ever take the Church seriously that they are committed to protecting our children until the laity are brought into the financial management of the Church. And I am not talking about a secretary who is an at-will employee of the bishop. In protecting our children, it is essential that we follow the advice of that great Watergate-era theologian 'Deep Throat' to "follow the money." (or, in the words of Blessed Walter Reuther, "Show us the books."). Saunders would never got past his first Bunga-bunga party had there been financial transparency.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't... keeping the hierarchy in charge of the money is the only thing slowing down the German Synodal Way, while keeping the hierarchy in charge of the money here is what allowed abuse.
Saunders had opportunity and the motive for this crime…what more is needed other than a prison cell!
What exactly is the process for what happens when the Vatican orders a cleric, like here when he was ordered to reside outside the diocese?
Would this order have been known to anyone, like the acting bishop of the diocese? It seems like either someone else still in power should be held responsible for allowing him to remain in the diocese, or else the Vatican is extraordinarily naive in expecting the kind of person who would use his position of power to sexually abuse vulnerable children to follow restrictions placed on him on the honors system.
Our Church needs more people like Cherrille Quilty.