P
paycheck
Guest
gopetition.com/online/35223.html
Please sign it and spread it around.
March 31, 2010
Mr. Clark Hoyt
Public Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
E-mail: public@nytimes.com
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
Last week on March 24, the New York Times ran a story by Laurie Goodstein entitled, “Vatican Declined to Defrock U.S. Priest Who Abused Boys“. As you are probably aware, this article touched off an international storm of controversy about how the Pope and the Vatican have handled the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church. (Of course, there is a much bigger problem of child sexual abuse outside of the Church, but we don’t need to provide such unnecessary context to a New York Times article.)
The reaction to the allegations in the article has been vicious, incendiary, and predictable. The ensuing rhetoric has reached near orgasmic proportions for the anti-Catholic bigots who are using the article’s claims to score cheap political points against the Church, with some of them going so far even to call for the Pope’s resignation. Needless to say, the last acceptable bigotry in the world today, anti-Catholic bigotry, has now been stoked by many of the errors, half-truths, distortions, and unfounded pretexts found in Ms. Goodstein’s article.
The point of this letter, Mr. Hoyt, is simply to point out a couple of critical factual errors in the article in question. The first error is actually the main thesis, and consequently the main source of controversy, in the article:
“But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church’s own statute of limitations.” (Source)
The article states that Archbishop Bertone ”halted the process“. Yet, this statement is simply not true and represents a distortion and even fabrication of the events, as the documents that Ms. Goodstein used in his report even confirm. None of the documents give any indication whatsoever that Cardinal Bertone “halted the process” against Fr. Murphy. In April 1998, there was a recommendation by then-Archbishop Bertone, then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy, to implement pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy had no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process because of a number of extenuating circumstances, not the least of which was the frail health of Fr. Murphy and the lengthy and cumbersome procedures involved in a full blown canonical trial. However, this was only a suggestion on the part of Archbishop Bertone since the local bishop retained full control on the ultimate decision. In fact, the next month, the Bishop of Superior rejected Bertone’s suggestion for pastoral measures and began formal canonical proceedings against Murphy. The case was abated by the local bishop (Archbishop Weakland, himself a one-time active homosexual) 2 days before Murphy’s death on August 21, 1998 and only when it became evident that Murphy was on his death bed.
Just yesterday, the Judicial Vicar of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, accused the Times of making “a huge leap of logic and information” in connecting the pontiff to the case involving Fr. Murphy, and for failing to do the basic courtesy of contacting him or checking the accuracy of quotations erroneously attributed to him:
…
Read the rest here…
gopetition.com/online/35223.html
PLEASE EMAIL THIS LINK TO ALL THOSE WHO YOU THINK WOULD SIGN IT!
Please sign it and spread it around.
March 31, 2010
Mr. Clark Hoyt
Public Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
E-mail: public@nytimes.com
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
Last week on March 24, the New York Times ran a story by Laurie Goodstein entitled, “Vatican Declined to Defrock U.S. Priest Who Abused Boys“. As you are probably aware, this article touched off an international storm of controversy about how the Pope and the Vatican have handled the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church. (Of course, there is a much bigger problem of child sexual abuse outside of the Church, but we don’t need to provide such unnecessary context to a New York Times article.)
The reaction to the allegations in the article has been vicious, incendiary, and predictable. The ensuing rhetoric has reached near orgasmic proportions for the anti-Catholic bigots who are using the article’s claims to score cheap political points against the Church, with some of them going so far even to call for the Pope’s resignation. Needless to say, the last acceptable bigotry in the world today, anti-Catholic bigotry, has now been stoked by many of the errors, half-truths, distortions, and unfounded pretexts found in Ms. Goodstein’s article.
The point of this letter, Mr. Hoyt, is simply to point out a couple of critical factual errors in the article in question. The first error is actually the main thesis, and consequently the main source of controversy, in the article:
“But Cardinal Bertone halted the process after Father Murphy personally wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger protesting that he should not be put on trial because he had already repented and was in poor health and that the case was beyond the church’s own statute of limitations.” (Source)
The article states that Archbishop Bertone ”halted the process“. Yet, this statement is simply not true and represents a distortion and even fabrication of the events, as the documents that Ms. Goodstein used in his report even confirm. None of the documents give any indication whatsoever that Cardinal Bertone “halted the process” against Fr. Murphy. In April 1998, there was a recommendation by then-Archbishop Bertone, then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy, to implement pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy had no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process because of a number of extenuating circumstances, not the least of which was the frail health of Fr. Murphy and the lengthy and cumbersome procedures involved in a full blown canonical trial. However, this was only a suggestion on the part of Archbishop Bertone since the local bishop retained full control on the ultimate decision. In fact, the next month, the Bishop of Superior rejected Bertone’s suggestion for pastoral measures and began formal canonical proceedings against Murphy. The case was abated by the local bishop (Archbishop Weakland, himself a one-time active homosexual) 2 days before Murphy’s death on August 21, 1998 and only when it became evident that Murphy was on his death bed.
Just yesterday, the Judicial Vicar of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, accused the Times of making “a huge leap of logic and information” in connecting the pontiff to the case involving Fr. Murphy, and for failing to do the basic courtesy of contacting him or checking the accuracy of quotations erroneously attributed to him:
…
Read the rest here…
gopetition.com/online/35223.html
PLEASE EMAIL THIS LINK TO ALL THOSE WHO YOU THINK WOULD SIGN IT!
