The latest development from Rome is most disturbing. You can read a report of what is happening here. Peter Saunders, appointed by Pope Francis to be part of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, himself a survivor of child abuse, has made a very strong attack on Cardinal George Pell, who has been appointed by the Pope to head up the Vatican’s financial commission. As you would expect, given the gravity of the charges against him, the cardinal has responded. I have never met Cardinal Pell, but it is interesting to note that this is not the first time he has been the object of criticism. Some time ago he was attacked for extravagance, a charge that turned out to be utterly baseless, and made one wonder at the motivation of those putting about such rumours. But what really strikes one here is something that sadly goes back to the beginning of Church history: the desire to air grievances in public. St Paul upbraided the Corinthians for having recourse to pagan courts (see the sixth chapter of the First Letter to the Corinthians). This is not the same as saying that these disputes need to be settled “in house”, which would be dangerous, given the sad history of the way child abuse has been covered up in the past. But what it does mean is that there are proper channels for deciding disputes inside the Church laid down by Canon Law, and one hopes that these can work effectively. But is the Roman Curia working effectively when we have two men, both appointed to important jobs by the Pope, clearly not getting on well in public? Indeed, here we have the spectacle of one man calling for the other to be dismissed. Imagine that happening in the Cabinet, for example. John Allen, the leading Vatican-watcher of our time, spotted the potential for trouble back in February. He observed the following about the Papal commission for the protection of minors: