Yes Joan, I agree with your summation and thank you for it.  What Pell has done is coldly turn his back on those that were abused in an attempt to shield the institution form financial loss.  Since he is a Prince of the Church, he was protecting his own financial posterior.  You are correct in saying during  his Melbourne rule, he got rid of abusive priests, but  He was also never acquitted from the accusation of child abuse.  The judge could not decide either guilty or innocent by the evidence presented.  So by rule of civil law he could not be convicted...  There is an awful lot of smoke here.  Perhaps it is only smoldering omnipotence and lack of compassion that we see in this man.   None the less, his head has rolled and many are happy about it as well they should be.