Before beginning, a few explanations are in order. First of all, this particular blogpost (and an accompanying, more or less 'stream of consciousness' one vis-a-vis the future of the longstanding Roman Catholic practice of (public) confession (to a priest) - i.e. 'the confessional' as it's better known), was initially written (out) way back yonder, on the 21st of August to be precise...only not posted (for various reasons, chiefly other priorities/lack of sufficient time to do it proper justice).
Being an important topic, and one moreover which I wanted to do sufficient justice to, procrastination evidently got the better of me (as it has with other, equally serious matters such as 'Black Lives Matter', Global Warming/Climate Change, the Me Too Movement, 'Making a Man an Offender for a word', Cultural Christianity, the present state and status of the Vatican/papacy vis-a-vis global geopolitics, (western) mainstream media double-standards over so-called fake news - and in relation to the treatment accorded Islam on the one hand and Christianity on the other (especially vis-a-vis so-called 'hate speech'), and thus political partisanship in general (again, principally as witnessed in 'western' nations), those current 'cream of the crop' (especially western world-wide) issues atop the apex of the cultural warfare pyramid, abortion and euthanasia (and other, related, life-and-death matters of public policy) vis-a-vis the (rapidly diminishing) right of folk (especially health professionals) to take a stand and stance of conscientious objection to, the *GLBT 'community' and its increasingly strident public presence (alongside the equally insistent demands for safe spaces in public fora juxtaposed with how important the once dearly-enshrined value of freedom of speech still is)) - yes folk, my work is evidently well and truly cut out for me, I well appreciate; but just to remind regular readers that, no, I haven't forgotten my (long-declared) intention to tackle these thorny topics.
So where do I begin? Just here...in regards to my 'good fortune' - or rather providential 'luck' /blessedness - in having a chance encounter (the day I started posting this) in a local (downtown) supermarket with a fellow 'very much in the know' about institutional abuse (in a religious setting); coincidentally at the very time (and in the very week) I'd been preparing to at long last get around to posting my long-gestated blogpost/s on Cardinal Pell (and the RCC Confessional).
Since I daresay it would serve no real purpose except (to stoke) a misguided and self-serving sense of self-importance - and anyhow it's **/**quite inappropriate to do so without asking/getting that person's approval in so doing - I've no intention of name-dropping unless and except insofar as said gentleman at some time gives me permission to mention his name and/or insists I do so...
Suffice to say my chance encounter has thrown a mini spanner in the works, as - upon reviewing said (long-shelved blogpost) draft upon arrival home Friday - I discovered it was somewhat more favourable towards the ***'good' cardinal than I'd expected (or recollected)...And though I will ever and always continue to pursue this blogsite - as its longstanding motto declares - 'with fear of and favour towards none', whilst 'bestowing bouquets and brickbats', I feel I owe it to said gentleman to make it abundantly clear why I hold the ****particular view I evidently do...
*Or is it now GLBTQI et al...? (Though last I heard there's now a plethora of such sub-categories.)
**And so I felt I owed it to my (aforementioned) sometime acquaintance to respect his confidence (though we've hardly discussed anything in any great depth, really only upon a fairly basic level).
**Yes, not all (would-be, wannabe) journalists (including those, like myself, of a strictly freelance variety) can be said to operate in an amoral atmosphere without respect of common decency and the like - despite persistent public perceptions to the contrary.
***Using that (quote, unquote) term 'good' strictly in its colloquial sense (and because it has a certain resonance) - but most definitely not because I feel it in any way aptly depicts the said clergyman.
****That being stated, I recall that my own views were/have been somewhat complex, coloured as much by what I perceived as being somewhat of a personal witchhunt latterly conducted against Cardinal Pell - irrespective of the particular facts in the matter, and with a *****predetermined agenda at play... However, having qualified myself thusly, I say that only in respect of the specific crime of which he has been recently convicted and sentenced to imprisonment...
*****For, as has become increasingly apparent to myself and numerous fellow believers over recent times - irrespective of our views about systemic abuse in state and religious institutional settings over many years and decades, and even centuries - there are those with a predetermined agenda towards, even a personal (and frankly, barely-disguised) vendetta against, pretty much anyone and everyone professing a Judaeo-Christian faith/belief system (along with their associated church); and I say that as someone who - like such greats as President Abraham Lincoln (and Aotearoa-New Zealand's own Janet Frame) - has had very little time for 'organized religion' as such...
But, lest my (aforementioned) comments (as in the two immediately preceding paragraphs) be somehow or other misinterpreted/misconstrued/misunderstood, I say the foregoing ******most definitely not in relation to Pell's longstanding, overarching, powerful position of being the go-to person for anyone and everyone within the Roman Catholic Church in Australia - and especially the states of Victoria and/or New South Wales as the case may be - vis-a-vis those seeking exposure of paedophile priests and their being brought to account for their *******'aberrant behaviour'...
******For, though this will be elaborated in Part Two (and possibly Three) of this blog series, Pell would appear to be as donkey deep in the longstanding global paedophile priest cover-ups that have (in, initially, the North American instance, and, latterly, that of France) thus far been so thoroughly and graphically exposed in all their shameless shamefulness by two international film festival movies, firstly 'Spotlight' set in Boston, Massachusetts, and more recently 'By the Grace of God', set in France...
*******Deliberately, intentionally understated by me here - as ever - to emphasize my point.
******* (&***) Well aware - in both these (rather disparate) instances - that this is (admittedly, just one of!) the very 'foible'(s) (again, deliberately understated for natural emphasis) for/about which the ********'venerable' Prince (i.e.Andrew!) has been so unceremoniously lambasted over recent times ...though in his case, it would indeed seem to reflect his personal 'character', or lack thereof ...
...yet let me state once again that - deliberate, intentional - understatement is not a sin; indeed, ye average journo engages in the same without batting an eye - and moreover without incurring 'pushback' - pretty well all the time...
********Hey, there I go again - pretty well automatically, involuntarily...-so maybe I too have an endemic case of foot-in-mouth disease...
Being an important topic, and one moreover which I wanted to do sufficient justice to, procrastination evidently got the better of me (as it has with other, equally serious matters such as 'Black Lives Matter', Global Warming/Climate Change, the Me Too Movement, 'Making a Man an Offender for a word', Cultural Christianity, the present state and status of the Vatican/papacy vis-a-vis global geopolitics, (western) mainstream media double-standards over so-called fake news - and in relation to the treatment accorded Islam on the one hand and Christianity on the other (especially vis-a-vis so-called 'hate speech'), and thus political partisanship in general (again, principally as witnessed in 'western' nations), those current 'cream of the crop' (especially western world-wide) issues atop the apex of the cultural warfare pyramid, abortion and euthanasia (and other, related, life-and-death matters of public policy) vis-a-vis the (rapidly diminishing) right of folk (especially health professionals) to take a stand and stance of conscientious objection to, the *GLBT 'community' and its increasingly strident public presence (alongside the equally insistent demands for safe spaces in public fora juxtaposed with how important the once dearly-enshrined value of freedom of speech still is)) - yes folk, my work is evidently well and truly cut out for me, I well appreciate; but just to remind regular readers that, no, I haven't forgotten my (long-declared) intention to tackle these thorny topics.
So where do I begin? Just here...in regards to my 'good fortune' - or rather providential 'luck' /blessedness - in having a chance encounter (the day I started posting this) in a local (downtown) supermarket with a fellow 'very much in the know' about institutional abuse (in a religious setting); coincidentally at the very time (and in the very week) I'd been preparing to at long last get around to posting my long-gestated blogpost/s on Cardinal Pell (and the RCC Confessional).
Since I daresay it would serve no real purpose except (to stoke) a misguided and self-serving sense of self-importance - and anyhow it's **/**quite inappropriate to do so without asking/getting that person's approval in so doing - I've no intention of name-dropping unless and except insofar as said gentleman at some time gives me permission to mention his name and/or insists I do so...
Suffice to say my chance encounter has thrown a mini spanner in the works, as - upon reviewing said (long-shelved blogpost) draft upon arrival home Friday - I discovered it was somewhat more favourable towards the ***'good' cardinal than I'd expected (or recollected)...And though I will ever and always continue to pursue this blogsite - as its longstanding motto declares - 'with fear of and favour towards none', whilst 'bestowing bouquets and brickbats', I feel I owe it to said gentleman to make it abundantly clear why I hold the ****particular view I evidently do...
*Or is it now GLBTQI et al...? (Though last I heard there's now a plethora of such sub-categories.)
**And so I felt I owed it to my (aforementioned) sometime acquaintance to respect his confidence (though we've hardly discussed anything in any great depth, really only upon a fairly basic level).
**Yes, not all (would-be, wannabe) journalists (including those, like myself, of a strictly freelance variety) can be said to operate in an amoral atmosphere without respect of common decency and the like - despite persistent public perceptions to the contrary.
***Using that (quote, unquote) term 'good' strictly in its colloquial sense (and because it has a certain resonance) - but most definitely not because I feel it in any way aptly depicts the said clergyman.
****That being stated, I recall that my own views were/have been somewhat complex, coloured as much by what I perceived as being somewhat of a personal witchhunt latterly conducted against Cardinal Pell - irrespective of the particular facts in the matter, and with a *****predetermined agenda at play... However, having qualified myself thusly, I say that only in respect of the specific crime of which he has been recently convicted and sentenced to imprisonment...
*****For, as has become increasingly apparent to myself and numerous fellow believers over recent times - irrespective of our views about systemic abuse in state and religious institutional settings over many years and decades, and even centuries - there are those with a predetermined agenda towards, even a personal (and frankly, barely-disguised) vendetta against, pretty much anyone and everyone professing a Judaeo-Christian faith/belief system (along with their associated church); and I say that as someone who - like such greats as President Abraham Lincoln (and Aotearoa-New Zealand's own Janet Frame) - has had very little time for 'organized religion' as such...
But, lest my (aforementioned) comments (as in the two immediately preceding paragraphs) be somehow or other misinterpreted/misconstrued/misunderstood, I say the foregoing ******most definitely not in relation to Pell's longstanding, overarching, powerful position of being the go-to person for anyone and everyone within the Roman Catholic Church in Australia - and especially the states of Victoria and/or New South Wales as the case may be - vis-a-vis those seeking exposure of paedophile priests and their being brought to account for their *******'aberrant behaviour'...
******For, though this will be elaborated in Part Two (and possibly Three) of this blog series, Pell would appear to be as donkey deep in the longstanding global paedophile priest cover-ups that have (in, initially, the North American instance, and, latterly, that of France) thus far been so thoroughly and graphically exposed in all their shameless shamefulness by two international film festival movies, firstly 'Spotlight' set in Boston, Massachusetts, and more recently 'By the Grace of God', set in France...
*******Deliberately, intentionally understated by me here - as ever - to emphasize my point.
******* (&***) Well aware - in both these (rather disparate) instances - that this is (admittedly, just one of!) the very 'foible'(s) (again, deliberately understated for natural emphasis) for/about which the ********'venerable' Prince (i.e.Andrew!) has been so unceremoniously lambasted over recent times ...though in his case, it would indeed seem to reflect his personal 'character', or lack thereof ...
...yet let me state once again that - deliberate, intentional - understatement is not a sin; indeed, ye average journo engages in the same without batting an eye - and moreover without incurring 'pushback' - pretty well all the time...
********Hey, there I go again - pretty well automatically, involuntarily...-so maybe I too have an endemic case of foot-in-mouth disease...
No comments:
Post a Comment