I found the following article interesting after all the ill-informed (dare I say – biased) stuff in the papers recently: Published: 08 March 2018
Has debate around the Catholic Church become so polarised that it is moving towards irrational extremes, asks Joel Hodge. Source: ABC Religion and Ethics.
By no means am I advocating that the Church be exempt from robust public scrutiny. I am also not wishing to divert attention from historical abuse and grievous cover-ups in the Church. I firmly express support for the survivors who have bravely stood up to seek justice and healing.Rather, I want to avoid prejudicial scrutiny that only leads to misdirected blame. This misdirection allows all parties to avoid proper accountability.
Take the recent six-month investigation by The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald into the properties of the Church. The investigation sought to highlight issues around the transparency and accountability of the Catholic hierarchy.Yet, despite the purported aims of the investigation, there were some obvious flaws. These flaws highlight how resources and attention are being irrationally misdirected against the Church and could be better deployed.
For example, the Church was treated as one entity by the investigation, whereas, in fact, it is many different entities in Australia – dioceses, religious congregations, parishes, schools, hospitals, aged care, social services and so on. To lump all these agencies together – like lumping all the assets and agencies of the federal, state and local governments – is misleading. Without quibbling about the actual valuations given by the newspapers, much of the reported property cannot be liquidated for obvious reasons. There are churches, hospitals, schools, aged care and social services facilities on these properties. They could not easily be liquidated without a significant social cost and, in some cases, political negotiation.
One is left wondering, then, what was the real point of the investigation? The Age claimed it wished to highlight the Church’s treatment of claims made by survivors of child sexual abuse, as well as question the tax-free status of the Church.
There seems to be a view that, by highlighting the Church’s wealth, it will be embarrassed and pressured into giving more compensation and support to survivors. But it is the federal government that has set the limit on compensation, not the Church.
– Joel Hodge is Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy at the Australian Catholic University.
And now it’s another politician claiming right to privacy…this time it’s Gladys about one of her MPs.
Gladys – and the rest of the politicians – don’t you realise that when you take my taxes – taxpayer funding – you are responsible to me and to the electorate for your actions. .. Along with the rorts, the cars, the big pay there is a downside – you lose your right to privacy and it’s time you realised it.
Politicians – GROW UP.
I am getting so tired of the repetition of “it’s private and should remain Barnaby’s private life”.
I am a taxpayer and as such I HELP PAY BARNABY’S WAGES and so he is responsible to me ,and to his paymasters, for the way he conducts himself. He stood for Parliament to represent the electors… he is responsible to them for his behaviour – it was not a private job he stood for – it was a responsibility to all the electors.
“Joyce explains why public should now move on” (SMH 22 Feb)– my heart bleeds – not for you Barnaby, but for my country but I have some advice for you – “Move on Barnaby – move on”.
Basic maths tell me that you were well into your illicit arrangement when you took the campaign trail recently; that you were still in your (real) partner/wife’s home when you were conducting an affair and claiming respect for marriage and morals, so you have committed the most heinous sin by a politician – no, not immorality – but hypocrisy.
So I reiterate Barnaby…if you want no more publicity…go quietly. MOVE ON!
What I really couldn’t take would be you with your “partner” as Acting PM and representing my country.
In the current imbroglio concerning The Hon Barnaby Joyce, Leader of the National Party, elected member for Armidale, possible Acting PM of this country, (a bit of irony all of it) I am feeling so angry at the constant refrain “he’s entitled to privacy for personal affairs like the rest of us”. I dispute this.
He was elected to represent people of his electorate; he is paid a healthy salary to sit in Parliament representing them; he is NOT a private person like the rest of us entitled to privacy. In all aspects of his behaviour he has behaved outrageously and without consideration for his position, possibly representing me and others of Australia as Acting PM….and He has failed and he should go.
Julia Baird (The remarkable privilege of being a male politician – 10 Feb). You cover the situation pretty well but not quite well enough.
Did Barnaby stay at home after he started his affair with his staffer? If so then he is not worthy of discussion because he is simply a cheat and as a politician he can’t be trusted (who says we trust them anyway) and when his cheating is known then out with him.
If he left home when he realised his marriage was over – and THEN started his affair – he would not be a cheat to the same extent…he would be a failure in his marriage but he wouldn’t be actually cheating.
It’s a measure I have applied several times – I do not trust CHEATS in any respect…politicians or not.
Mustafa Erem asks : Where the good old public service is fair – equal grade, equal pay – SMH 7 Oct. If you are old enough to remember, Mustafa Erem you would recall the days when heads of Departments were not the minions of their Ministers; when those Heads of Departments could give honest, unbiased, independent advice to their Ministers because they were not bought and paid for by Ministers – they were independent; when there were grades and proper pay for grades; if you attained a grade you got the pay. The Public Service was respected and young, bright people leaving school tried for jobs in the Public Service. There’s just something about the Public Service of the past, Mustafa, something with credibility, honesty – something to be looked up to… something to be proud of.