1.) This would stop happening if they just simply announced the penalties publicily, and the lifting of any publicly.
2.) This tells me he is likely guitly as sin:
" following the indications of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and the special leadership of Pope Francis"
He's trying to play to the pope's ego. Flatter him as a way of getting saved by him when things get worse. Its done because.... there's plenty of cases of sexual abusers flattering Francis and then receiving favors/preferential treatment.
Pope Francis despises Cardinal Cipriani, who was his most ardent opponent in the Conference of Latin American Bishops. Pope Francis is infamous for holding a grudge while acting benevolent. I would like to know what happened as this smells too much of another Cardinal Pell set up which was orchestrated by Vatican digniteries close to Pope Francis.
and how do we determine guilt? It's is folly to abandon the presumption of innocence before the completion of a rigorous legal process. This is the situation the cardinal faces. what proper and fairly conducted trial is in the offing, one that can prove his guilt?
Or trying to act "merciful" like when Pope Francis visited Cardinal Becciu's apartment when he was convicted of defrauding the Vatican. The Church has to have an open and transparent procedure that any canon lawyer or even any Catholic can clearly see the allegations and reasons for conviction. Like in Cardinal Pell's case where it was physically impossible for him to abuse the altar boys after Mass and run to greet people in the Cathedral vestibule in 5 minutes because a journalist showed walking the distance himself that it was simply impossible.
1.) This would stop happening if they just simply announced the penalties publicily, and the lifting of any publicly.
2.) This tells me he is likely guitly as sin:
" following the indications of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and the special leadership of Pope Francis"
He's trying to play to the pope's ego. Flatter him as a way of getting saved by him when things get worse. Its done because.... there's plenty of cases of sexual abusers flattering Francis and then receiving favors/preferential treatment.
Pope Francis despises Cardinal Cipriani, who was his most ardent opponent in the Conference of Latin American Bishops. Pope Francis is infamous for holding a grudge while acting benevolent. I would like to know what happened as this smells too much of another Cardinal Pell set up which was orchestrated by Vatican digniteries close to Pope Francis.
We know Francis granted him a lifting of restrictions, even if "limited." Could be he just views him innocent.
Question is: is he? That statement set off flags
and how do we determine guilt? It's is folly to abandon the presumption of innocence before the completion of a rigorous legal process. This is the situation the cardinal faces. what proper and fairly conducted trial is in the offing, one that can prove his guilt?
Or trying to act "merciful" like when Pope Francis visited Cardinal Becciu's apartment when he was convicted of defrauding the Vatican. The Church has to have an open and transparent procedure that any canon lawyer or even any Catholic can clearly see the allegations and reasons for conviction. Like in Cardinal Pell's case where it was physically impossible for him to abuse the altar boys after Mass and run to greet people in the Cathedral vestibule in 5 minutes because a journalist showed walking the distance himself that it was simply impossible.