Vatican strategy baffles US defenders

  • Thread starter Thread starter markeverett49
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

markeverett49

Guest
Lack of Vatican communications strategy on scandal baffles pope’s U.S. defenders
By Michelle Boorstein
Sunday, April 11, 2010

The Vatican spokesman doesn’t regularly discuss the clergy sex-abuse scandal with the pope. Its communications council’s next meeting is in February (on the agenda: “the Internet”). For American defenders of Pope Benedict XVI, it has been frustrating to watch an apparent lack of a communications strategy for dealing with the scandal.

“My best answer would be a primal scream,” Russell Shaw, who was the U.S. bishops’ spokesman in the 1970s and '80s, said when asked about the Vatican’s recent dealings with the public. “It reflects a totally inadequate understanding and mind-set as to the whole subject of communications.”

Facing a torrent of cases in Europe and a new effort by survivors’ advocates to highlight unresolved cases around the world, members of the pope’s inner circle have said things that have only drawn more criticism, like the priest who on Good Friday compared criticism of the Church’s handling of the abuse crisis to violent anti-Semitism.

Most American organizations facing such a barrage of negative news would long ago have pulled together a crisis management team and made top officials available for interviews to explain their point of view. But the Vatican said such an approach is too commercial for the Church to adopt. “We are not a multinational enterprise, this is clear,” the Rev. Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, said in a telephone interview. “The normal situation of the Church and the Vatican is to help the people to understand the teachings of the Church and the documents of the pope and not to sell particular products.”

On Friday, however, Lombardi released a statement that appeared to be trying to change the conversation. It said the Church wanted to emphasize its cooperation with civil justice systems and a desire for “reconstituting a climate of justice and full faith in the institution of the Church.” Benedict, he said, “is ready for new meetings” with victims of clergy sexual abuse.

Untapped experience

Some American defenders of the pope’s actions say they are mystified about why the Vatican has not reached out more publicly to U.S. Catholics, who were tempered by a decade of experience in helping the Church hierarchy respond when the subject erupted publicly in Boston in 2002.

Lombardi said the Vatican is consulting privately with some American leaders. Some obvious candidates, including Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, the archbishop emeritus of Washington, and Atlanta Archbishop Wilton Gregory, credited with making the Vatican understand the severity of the U.S. scandal, declined to speak for this article. Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. bishops, said they would not publicize any assistance they might offer.

“Any conversations between us and the Vatican I wouldn’t mention,” she said, hastening to add, “and that’s not to say that there have been any conversations.”

Walsh, who worked with the bishops’ press office during the U.S. scandal, said the Vatican didn’t see the need to speak out extensively during the scandal, as “it was seen as an American problem.”

There appears to be a more organized effort, particularly in the United States, to defend the pope. American bishops across the country, including Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, took to the pulpit and op-ed pages over the Easter weekend. “What happens when a pope is persecuted?” was the title of a news release by the Atlanta-based Catholic public relations firm Maximus. “Martyred Popes” was the name of a blog post by American Catholic writer Robert Moynihan.
[Whole article would not fit—more at the link below.]

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/10/AR2010041002808.html?hpid=topnews
 
My personal view, as a non-American jurist, is that there is something about the American political culture that is alien to many outside the US. It *seems *to attract and reward those who publicly fling bold statements, unconstrained by honesty or logic, and it seems to me many lay American people unfamiliar with the ordinary everyday workings of the US legal system may have fallen for this trap, and think that even in the US courts, everything happens like in the movies. So perhaps the true US *legal *system may not be what the US *political *culture seems to appear to us outsiders. But the issue here seems to be the political culture, and for me, sometimes, it does seem far worse than merely alien. It sometimes seems repulsive. Personally, I see a culture that tempts people into engaging in a sort of sordid public fight and from there it’s a slippery slope in outright lying, in the presumed basis that in the realm of public discourse the marketplace of ideas works when people engage in an adversarial manner. I think it does not, and never will. I also think it is bad for the soul. But that’s just me, coming from another place and another culture, seeking to understand why the Vatican seems reticent on being drawn into participating in a media circus.
 
As an American Catholic, I would like to see the Vatican make more of an effort to get it’s side of the story out. They need to develop an ongoing media strategy to combat the attacks from the “anti-Catholic” establishment. After this latest attack subsides…they haters of the Church will be back in a few years time with the same recycled stories. Let’s get the truth out there and let the chips fall where they may.
 
Here’s a link to the previous thread about this article.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=446466

I’m posting it just for completeness of discussion. This forum is extremely active right now, with so many new threads being created, that older ones get bumped off the first page, even if the article is only two days old. :o
 
My personal view, as a non-American jurist, is that there is something about the American political culture that is alien to many outside the US. It *seems *to attract and reward those who publicly fling bold statements, unconstrained by honesty or logic, and it seems to me many lay American people unfamiliar with the ordinary everyday workings of the US legal system may have fallen for this trap, and think that even in the US courts, everything happens like in the movies. So perhaps the true US *legal *system may not be what the US *political *culture seems to appear to us outsiders. But the issue here seems to be the political culture, and for me, sometimes, it does seem far worse than merely alien. It sometimes seems repulsive. Personally, I see a culture that tempts people into engaging in a sort of sordid public fight and from there it’s a slippery slope in outright lying, in the presumed basis that in the realm of public discourse the marketplace of ideas works when people engage in an adversarial manner. I think it does not, and never will. I also think it is bad for the soul. But that’s just me, coming from another place and another culture, seeking to understand why the Vatican seems reticent on being drawn into participating in a media circus.
Having practiced law over 40 years I can assure you that the American legal system is not what is portrayed in movies and television. It is a tough business indeed, just as it probably is everywhere. Just ask anyone who has been dragged through a hard fought lawsuit.

However, American law (1) makes truth a defense to libel and slander and (2) attacks on public figures cannot be the subject of libel and slander actions unless the public figure can prove the attacks were based on malice. This is a high burden of proof.

The Vatican knows this. It just can’t answer media charges effectively.
 
Having practiced law over 40 years I can assure you that the American legal system is not what is portrayed in movies and television. It is a tough business indeed, just as it probably is everywhere. Just ask anyone who has been dragged through a hard fought lawsuit.
Amen. I too, found it very often utter tedium, and litigation is nothing like LA Law or Boston Legal portrayed. A witness doesn’t show up, a van from the jail is held up in traffic and the defendants aren’t there, the prosecution isn’t prepared, long sidebar conferences, postponements, paper shuffling. And, on the civil side, even more tedium and mountains of paper. 🤷
 
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. I agree with what has been said above. I just wish my Church could put it’s best foot forward in the court of public opinion.
 
Having practiced law over 40 years I can assure you that the American legal system is not what is portrayed in movies and television. It is a tough business indeed, just as it probably is everywhere. Just ask anyone who has been dragged through a hard fought lawsuit.

However, American law (1) makes truth a defense to libel and slander and (2) attacks on public figures cannot be the subject of libel and slander actions unless the public figure can prove the attacks were based on malice. This is a high burden of proof.

The Vatican knows this. It just can’t answer media charges effectively.
Thanks, bro! Apologies for replying “out of time” as I haven’t figured out how to enable auto-notify. My main grouses lie with the public perception, in that an inability to hit back (presumably hamstrung by the high burden of proof) tends to get seen as an admission of guilt. All the more so when you’re a large and old organisation.

Off-topic: yeah the TV and movie shows seem to follow an 80-20 rule. 80 percent of the show is dedicated to the stuff that only takes 20 % of the effort. EXCLUDING DISCOVERY!!!

Off-topic2: is truth a partial or total defence?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top