Combative Cardinal Enters the Lion's Den

By Barney Zwartz
The Age
May 27, 2013

http://www.theage.com.au/national/combative-cardinal-enters-the-lions-den-20130527-2n7oc.html



Analysis

Say what you like about George Pell – and journalists sometimes have – you have to admire his fighting spirit. Apart from the four support staff he brought with him on Monday, nearly everyone in the Legislative Council committee room at Parliament house, and the overflow room nearby was antagonistic at best and hostile at worst.

It brought out the combative spirit and unshakeable self-belief of the street fighter that Sydney's Catholic Archbishop has often seemed.

He sat composed, often with hands clasped in front of him, and fought every point, while the gallery – mostly victims – made its derision and disbelief clear at every opportunity.

The six members of the committee conducting the inquiry were determined to give no quarter in challenging the cardinal about the church's record on dealing with child sexual abuse by members of the clergy. And he gave barely an inch in reply, though the weight of evidence used by the members forced a series of damaging admissions.

Cardinal Pell clearly learnt the lessons from Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart's unconvincing display a week earlier, especially the smirk with which he said "better late than never" when asked why it took 18 years until after the inquiry was announced to seek to have a serial abuser defrocked.

And Archbishop Hart seemed ill at ease when challenged by the women members – it would be rare for him to be challenged by professional women – but Cardinal Pell was gender-neutral when it came to obstinacy.

For a man of 71, who could scarcely draw breath in a marathon hearing of more than four hours, it was a strong personal performance. Unfortunately, it was not one that inspired confidence that the church is gaining credibility in the face of the clergy abuse crisis.

The church does not need defiance, or even assurances that things have been better in the past 16 years since it introduced formal protocols for victims, the Melbourne Response and Towards Healing. Both protocols were definitely an improvement on the chaos before them, but both give critics plenty of ammunition.

And it is hard to disagree with survivors and their advocates that the leadership is still more interested in managing the problem than really examining its causes and reaching out to victims.