Vatican Furious Over 'False' News Reports

[Julia_Mae]

gma.yahoo.com/vatican-furious-over-false-news-reports-131830973–abc-news-topstories.html

In an impromptu briefing this morning, Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi responded again to the worldwide distribution of “unverified, unverifiable, or even false” news stories.

Lombardi declined to say which specific news stories objects to, but he appeared to be referring to the report, first carried by Italy’s Panorama and La Repubblica, claiming Pope Benedict XVI is resigning rather than face the fallout of a scandal involving gay clergy who are supposedly being blackmailed.

Foreign news outlets have picked up the story today, attributing only the Italian press accounts.

“It is deplorable that there be a widespread distribution of news stories often not verified or verifiable - false even - that seriously damage people and institutions,” Lombardi said.
Lombardi accused the news media of meddling in the papal election - just [as] monarchs, nobles, and dictators sought to do in centuries past.

 

[Robert_Bay]

I will allow this thread to stay up if it does not further speculation and if people do NOT post links to speculative reports. As soon as that happens the thread will be closed like the others.

Gossip is a favorite pastime of the Italian press especially if they think they can influence a papal conclave. It is not the purpose of CAF to further gossip, murmuring or scandal.

 

[Tomyris]

I don’t see anything in the story that justifies the word “Furious” in the headline.

Would the news media have an agenda here?

That does not mean the allegations are true or false; at this point what can be proven is that the news media ARE biased.

 

[Julia_Mae]

I don’t see anything in the story that justifies the word “Furious” in the headline.

Would the news media have an agenda here?

That does not mean the allegations are true or false; at this point what can be proven is that the news media ARE biased.

Well, we’ve noted before that headlines are written more to get attention and not convey facts, so “furious” being an overstatement isn’t surprising. And something in the report has gotten to be very common in TV news and even in print journalism where there used to be high standards: reporting something and using some other media outlet as a “source” instead of confirming that the thing actually happened. This was a theme in the HBO series Newsroom.

But I think the idea that there are those who would attempt to influence the Papal election is a very real concern, especially in these You Tube, fast as electronics can travel days of disseminating information and rumor.

The headlines are sort of like asking “Have you stopped beating your wide?” If someone overhears it, they take the premise as true. If you use a headline like “Papal Resignation Tied to Fallen Arches, Vatican Source Reveals” the assumption is that the Pope has fallen arches and they really bother him. That becomes the given, and then the discussion is whether that was the real reason. Thus the lie becomes the perceived fact.

 

[Julia_Mae]

I will allow this thread to stay up if it does not further speculation and if people do NOT post links to speculative reports. As soon as that happens the thread will be closed like the others.

Thank you. We don’t want to become part of the problem.

 

[Lisa1967]

I heard about this. I don’t know what to think. I am praying for the Holy Father, and for the papal election.

 

[fatima12]

I think maybe they should sue the newspaper for alleged slander?

We have to pray for our Church its really under attack it would seem. And for the Holy Father and his Successor.

 

[Tomyris]

Assuming the reporter attended the press briefing, where she got her quotes, she may have seen his emotions were “furious” as he spoke…Lombardi used strong language like “deplorable” so it’s entirely possible he was expressing anger. It’s the reporter’s job to describe the manner in which the person was speaking and give a sense of it in her copy, and in the headline.

“Strong language” does not imply “furious”. Did the article say he shook with anger, yelled, his face turned red, he threatened them all with eternal damnation and Vogon poetry, stomped out of the room, etc.? I would expect justification in the article for the use of the word “furious”. It was not there. Why do you seem to be defending the use of the word “furious”? What fact shows it to be a valid description of his mood? I missed it if it is there.

I have seen “strong language” used in a calm, unemotional way. I cannot rule that out in this case. I have also seen the strong bias of the press. There is also the situation: the joined issues of Vatican secrecy and scandal, however provable those are, that informs someone’s view of the situation. What is provable is people believe the Vatican is both secretive and scandalous, they act on those beliefs, and the first explanation many have for what the Vatican does is that what the Vatican is doing must be due to its habitual secrecy and scandalous nature.

I have no idea how the Vatican can possibly act in a manner that will demonstrate to the press and western society that it is NOT both scandalous and secretive. But that must be done if the Catholic Church is to regain its influence in western civilization, which is so fast becoming both Islamic and secular.

 

[Polycarp1]

Tomyris;10398111.:

Would the news media have an agenda here? .

LOL !Why should the news that the Church is under constant attack by the media and others be a surprise to anyone? The Roman Catholic Church is Satan’s number one enemy! It is responsible for all soulls who have and will be saved from him. He is most threatenned by it and continually weaves his schemes to undermine and discredit it

 

[twoshoes]

This is a story for people who want a quick fix of news, if we do are own research these stories are quickly layed to rest. Unfortunately some will believe with out further research.

 

[fatima12]

This is a confusing article.

First, Lombardi doesn’t say what stories he means…we have no idea if the stories he’s talking about are indeed false, or if they are correct.

Second, if Lombardi is commenting on actual news stories, then the reporters would have most likely quoted sources on the topic. So I assume he’s saying the sources who spoke to reporters are lying.

If he’s commenting on just blogs or opinion columns, well…those are exactly that–opinions, and not factual news stories.

But it makes no sense for this Lombardi to give an “impromptu briefing” and not be specific about what stories are false. What good does that do? Why doesn’t he just say which stories are false instead of just giving a blanket “the media is lying” announcement, without backing it up?

If he doesn’t say which stories or lies he’s talking about, he’s furthering the confusion. *And *he may be libeling himself!

Makes no sense.

In a court of law …In Dubio Pro Reo applies. The ones that made the accusations against the Church would have to prove their facts or they could be sued for alleged slander

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

I think that putting the False in quotations is a tad offensive, not to mention misleading.

 

[Digitonomy]

I think that putting the False in quotations is a tad offensive, not to mention misleading.

It is technically proper to use quotes when quoting a particular word or phrase used by the speaker. On the other hand, the reason the word “furious” is not in quotes is that it is ABC’s own characterization.

If the spokesman had been more specific that there were indeed false stories (his wording was vague as to whether the stories were definitely false, or possibly false), and he had said which stories he was referring to so that it could be confirmed if possible, then ABC could be in complete agreement with the word “false,” and it wouldn’t need quotes.

As it is, ABC has no way of knowing, and must take the spokesman’s word for it. Which they’re willing to do to a point, but if stories turn out to be true, the quotes make it clear it wasn’t ABC putting the “false” label on them.

 

[HansTrappist]

Good for the Vatican. Time to call out the slanderers and wolves by name.

I agree with Father Lombardi, who said (bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21557311?print=true):

“Whoever has money, sex and power at the forefront of their mind sees the world through these parameters and cannot see beyond, even when looking at the Church. Their view cannot look to the heights or go in-depth to understand the spiritual dimensions and motivations of existence.”

Referring to the upcoming conclave, during which the next leader of the Catholic Church will be chosen, Father Lombardi also suggested that the media was exerting “unacceptable pressure to condition the vote of one or other member of the college of cardinals”.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

I think that putting the False in quotations is a tad offensive, not to mention misleading.

My deepest apologies. I did not realize that the thread title was a quote of the article title. What a dolt.

 

[Digitonomy]

Good for the Vatican. Time to call out the slanderers and wolves by name.

That’s fair enough, but he didn’t.

 

[mburn16]

Journalism seems as if it will be a particularly unhappy profession to answer for…

 

[_Abyssinia]

My emphases

Secretary of State communiqué on Conclave

Please find below a Vatican Radio translation of a Secretary of State communiqué on conclave, issued Saturday:

“The freedom of the College of Cardinals, which alone, under the law, is responsible for the election of the Roman Pontiff, has always been strongly defended by the Holy See, as a guarantee of a choice based on evaluations solely for the good of the Church.

Over the centuries, the Cardinals have faced multiple forms of pressure exerted on the individual voters and the same College, with the aim of conditioning decisions, to bend them to a political or worldly logic.

If in the past the it was the so-called superpowers, namely States, who sought to condition the election of the Pope in their favour, today there is an attempt to apply the weight of public opinion, often on the basis of assessments that fail to capture the spiritual aspect of this moment in the life of the Church.

It is regrettable that, as we draw near to the beginning of the Conclave when Cardinal electors shall be bound in conscience and before God, to freely express their choice, news reports abound which are often unverified or not verifiable, or even false, even subsequent damage to people and institutions.

It is in moments such as these, that Catholics are called to focus on what is essential: to pray for Pope Benedict, to pray that the Holy Spirit enlighten the College of Cardinals, to pray for the future Pope, trusting that the fate of the barque of St. Peter is in the hands of God".

 

[_Abyssinia]

te-deum.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/holy-see-takes-aim-at-reports-often.html

Secretary of State communiqué on Conclave

Please find below a Vatican Radio translation of a Secretary of State communiqué on conclave, issued Saturday:

“The freedom of the College of Cardinals, which alone, under the law, is responsible for the election of the Roman Pontiff, has always been strongly defended by the Holy See, as a guarantee of a choice based on evaluations solely for the good of the Church.

Over the centuries, the Cardinals have faced multiple forms of pressure exerted on the individual voters and the same College, with the aim of conditioning decisions, to bend them to a political or worldly logic.

If in the past the it was the so-called superpowers, namely States, who sought to condition the election of the Pope in their favour, today there is an attempt to apply the weight of public opinion, often on the basis of assessments that fail to capture the spiritual aspect of this moment in the life of the Church.

It is regrettable that, as we draw near to the beginning of the Conclave when Cardinal electors shall be bound in conscience and before God, to freely express their choice, news reports abound which are often unverified or not verifiable, or even false, even subsequent damage to people and institutions.

It is in moments such as these, that Catholics are called to focus on what is essential: to pray for Pope Benedict, to pray that the Holy Spirit enlighten the College of Cardinals, to pray for the future Pope, trusting that the fate of the barque of St. Peter is in the hands of God".

Fr. Lombardi’s statement

The last couple of weeks of Benedict XVI’s papacy - before the sede vacante period begins and a new Pope is elected in the Conclave - have not been easy as this situation is quite new to the Holy See. Fr. Federico Lombardi remarked this in an editorial for Vatican Radio.

“We do not — and we rejoice — have to carry the pain of the death of a much-loved Pope, but we have not been spared another test: that of the multiplication of the pressures and considerations that are foreign to the spirit with which the Church would like to live this period of waiting and preparation,” the director of Vatican Radio and the Vatican Press Office said. “There is no lack, in fact, of those who seek to profit from the moment of surprise and disorientation of the spiritually naive to sow confusion and to discredit the Church and its governance, making recourse to old tools, such as gossip, misinformation and sometimes slander, or exercising unacceptable pressures to condition the exercise of the voting duty on the part of one or another member of the College of Cardinals, who they consider to be objectionable for one reason or another.”

“In the majority of cases, those who present themselves as judges, making heavy moral judgments, do not, in truth, have any authority to do so. Those who consider money, sex and power before all else and are used to reading diverse realities from these perspectives, are unable to see anything else, even in the Church, because they are unable to gaze toward the heights or descend to the depths in order to grasp the spiritual dimensions and reasons of existence. This results in a description of the Church and of many of its members that is profoundly unjust,” Fr. Lombardi went on to say.

“But all of this will not change the attitude of believers; it will not erode the faith and the hope with which they see the Lord, who promised to accompany his Church,” the editorial continued. “According to the indications of Church law and tradition, we want this to be a time of sincere reflection on the spiritual expectations of the world and on the faithfulness of the Church to the Gospel, of prayer for the assistance of the Spirit, of closeness to the College of Cardinals that is preparing for the demanding service of discernment and choice that is asked of it and for which it principally exists.”

“In this,” the editorial concluded, “we are accompanied first and foremost by the example and spiritual integrity of Pope Benedict, who wanted to dedicate to prayer, from the start of Lent, this final stretch of his pontificate — a penitential journey of conversion toward the joy of Easter. This is how we are living it and how we will live it: in conversion and hope.”

 

[Julia_Mae]

But it makes no sense for this Lombardi to give an “impromptu briefing” and not be specific about what stories are false. What good does that do? Why doesn’t he just say which stories are false instead of just giving a blanket “the media is lying” announcement, without backing it up?.

Because he is pointing out the problem: stories with nothing whatsoever to back them up. Stories repeated with nothing for a source but another media outlet.

The problem with being specific is: you can’t prove a negative. For instance, online atheists rarely if ever say anymore that there is no God. They don’t because it’s makes them look foolish every time a theist says “prove it.” Obviously, they would be believing something for which there is no proof.

Once the Vatican starts defending itself against nothing, there is no end in sight to the continuous baseless claims and then the story becomes the denial and people start talking about whether it’s true or not.

He addressed the real issue. That anyone thinks the baseless story is the issue, is a victory for smarmy journalism.