Elizabeth Scalia, "The Anchoress", over at First Things is planning a trip to Rome to do some loud pounding on desks while yelling "Stupido! STUPIDO!" This is in view of the obvious public relations disaster that was the announcement of new norms for dealing with priests who commit crimes against minors, and various other delicts such as, well, the attempted ordination of women. (See: The Vatican’s Epic Fail – UPDATE) This is much along the same lines as Damian Thompson's post of last week.
For an alternative view of the announcement, read Fr John Boyle's expert analysis and for a solidly neutral assessment, there is John Allen.
For what it is worth, my own position would be nearer to that of Elizabeth Scalia and Damian Thompson. (The Catholic Herald also has a good article on the matter this week.)
The Holy See should consider the public impact of its statements, taking into account the fact that many journalists, and not only those hard-wired to seize on any opportunity to attack the Church, will not read the full statements issued by the Vatican. This is even true of some Catholic pundits who simply follow the pack.
Anyone with an ounce of PR awareness could have shouted "Nooooo!" at an early stage, knowing that the juxtaposition would be like bowling a nice bouncy underarm to Sachin Tendulkar. (Seen above hitting Brad Hogg for six.)
Surely it would have been possible to issue the substantive norms concerning "The more grave delicts against morals" in an initial document, with the procedural norms attached; and then a few months later, to issue the substantive norms concerning delicts against the sacraments. The attempted ordination of women would then be lumped in with desecration of the Blessed Sacrament and the violation of the seal of confession.
It should also be said that while it is reasonable to complain about PR disasters, it is also important for Catholics to be well informed by reading the documents themselves, and pointing out that the journalistic take on the norms is also "stupido." The Curt Jester has a pertinent article in which he expresses his outrage that the State of Florida equates child abuse with impersonating government officials.
8 comments:
Personally, I do not think that the Vatican PR people should write their documents thinking of the potential reaction of journalists who.... do not even read the full statement. A bad journalist will always be a bad journalist and a journalist bent on attacking the Church will find something anyway.
My impression is rather that many journalist have an inflated opinion of their own importance and of the impact that such mini-controversies (created and inflated by.... journalists) have on the real life of the faithful.
I read the Vatican document.
And the delict re: abuse of minors was separated from the delict re: ordination of women.
I do understand the problem here.
But for heaven's sake, can't someone with a modicum of sense realize that the two aren't "equal"...even Msgr. S. (I can't remember his name) explained this.
A PR problem?
Yeah, pretty much.
An inability to common sense and actually researching what it all means.
Absolutely!
This has to be one of the few times I disagree with you father. I am in agreement with Carl Olson of Ignatius Press and his take on the matter.
http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2010/07/the-little-flap-in-the-catholic-media-and-blogosphere-about-the-way-the-vatican-released-the-norms-for-dealing-with-sexual-ab.html
I am inclined to agree with mundabor. The Curt Jester has a good post on the topic (here: http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/2010/07/unbelievable/); indeed, it is absurd that the priesthood is considered less sacred, less inviolable an office than that of a policeman.
If the Vatican itself does not forcefully assert the gravity of such a crime, then how is the rest of the world to understand it? As mundabor pointed out, bad journalists are bad journalists, and anti-Catholic journalists will be anti-Catholic journalists no matter what. Had no mention of womynpriest heretics been made, then undoubtedly the document would have (and in fact has been) denounced as too little, too late; much likely would have even been made about how what the Church really needs is the "wisdom of woman" in Her hierarchy, or some other such nonsense.
The soft pastoral approach is all well and fine for the morally and spiritually ambivalent--but while you can wean a child off breast milk, you cannot wean a junkie off heroin.
Our society is most certainly not hooked on breast milk. Time for some tough love!
Aristides - in the post, I linked to the Curt Jester and I think his post is helpful.
My view is not that we should feed people with milk and water but that as well as being innocent as doves, we need, in the modern world, to be wise as serpents.
Victoria - thank you for the link to the Ignatius article. There is a lot of good sense there. But we do not have to be "primarily" focussed on the battle with the secular media to recognise that sometimes we can deny them the opportunity of an open goal (to add a football metaphor to my previous one.)
I made much the same point in another combox - under English law it is perfectly possible for the same criminal penalties to be applied to impersonating a police officer and to non-penetrative sexual assault of a minor. Where's the journalistic outcry?
While the attitude of the Vatican ‘PR machine’ may be seen as that of an Admiral Farragut (“Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”) by some and at least inept by others, I don’t think the Church should pull her punches when it comes to teaching doctrine or discipline. It seems that many in the Church have been doing that for decades, to the detriment of the faithful.
People with a grudge are always going to twist what the Church says to suit their own prejudices or lack of faith. And while your point about ‘serpentine wisdom’ is well taken Father, neither should we grovel serpent-like in the dust at the feet of the mainstream media. We should also say ‘yes’ when we mean yes and ‘no’ when we mean no…
While we have grown used to the constant criticism of the Church by the secular media, as well as Catholic commentators who dissent from Church teaching, I have personally found it very hard to endure the past week's comments on this from those commentators we normally rely on to articulate a view in support of those teachings.
Perhaps I'm a bit strange, but I don't have any difficulty in seeing a bishop's abuse of the fullness of Holy Orders in attempting the ordination of a woman as not unconnected with a priest's (or other cleric's) abuse of his own orders in perpetration of sexual abuse against a minor.
Yes, I accept that the damage done to the victim of such abuse is grievous and permanent, but the potential damage done to the faith of ordinary Catholics, by bishops who pretend to administer ordinations which they must know they have no authority to administer, is also serious and potentially long-lasting.
Aside from that, I simply do not accept that issuing the two norms in two different press releases would have prevented the ill-disposed and ill-informed from conflating the two issues. To have announced the two norms, contained in the same document, in two separate press releases, even separated by months, would have offered the opportunity for some enterprising commentator to point out the attempt to conceal the connection.
Sorry, Father, but, even in the modern age, I think the Church must simply say what she needs to say and trust to the Holy Spirit.
Post a Comment