Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 25, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama Targets Fox News
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Dave Pierre's blog
  • Taranto: ‘Obama Presidency Has Given Liberal Media Bias a New and Dangerous Form’
  • Fox's Ed Henry: Colleagues Cheered Me On When I Grilled Bush Administration - They Don't Now
  • Bozell Column: The 'Assassinate Wall Street' Movie
  • Paul Krugman’s Flagrant ‘Austerity’ Double Standard
  • WashPost's Milbank Mocks Nikki Haley, 'Reached Out to' 'White Supremacists'
  • Networks Give Three Times More Quotes to Supporters of Gay Scout Admittance Than Opponents
  • State Dept. Official Who Altered Benghazi Talking Points Promoted; Only Fox Covered
  • MSNBC’s Krystal Ball Gushes Over Obama Speech, Claims the President is ‘Reining In His Own Power’

NYT Issues Another Slanted Attack Against Catholic Church

By Dave Pierre | May 22, 2011 | 20:05

A  A
Dave Pierre's picture

An analysis of the New York Times' response (a May 19, 2011 editorial) to the Vatican's recent clergy abuse guidelines reveals yet another ill-informed and skewed attack on the Catholic Church.

1. The Times writes that bishops once oversaw "hush payments to victims and relocation of abusive priests."

"Hush payments" are yet another popular falsehood in the reporting of the narrative of the clergy abuse scandals. They have become somewhat of an urban legend that the media continues to propagate.

The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, now a U.S. District Judge in Minnesota, has had as much experience as any individual with clergy abuse cases. Discussing the issue of settlements with victims, Judge Schiltz has said,

"I have been involved in hundreds of settlements, and I literally cannot recall one that required the victim not to talk about his or her abuse."

In the uncommon instances that there were secrecy components, Schiltz has noted that it was usually the victim who requested secrecy. "There is a reason why victims often sue as 'Jane Doe' or 'John Doe' and often seek protective orders from courts," wrote the jurist. "Victims are understandably concerned to protect their privacy."

As far as the issue of bishops relocating abusive priests: Yes, bishops indeed did not always remove abusive priests. That is a sad, undeniable fact. Yet there is another side to this truth that the media has not reported. Here is Judge Schiltz once again:

These stories were horrible because what the bishops did was often horrible. It should be noted, however, that something rather important was usually left out [in the media's] stories: In most cases in which a bishop decided to permit a priest accused of abuse to remain in ministry, the bishop was relying on the advice of a psychologist …

On countless occasions, psychologists gave bishops terrible advice about abusive priests - and, of course, this bad advice led to terrible consequences for victims and the broader church. Yet these psychologists have gotten off scot-free in the media.

There is a lot more to these issues, and – again – Judge Schiltz sheds some very important light: "What the media missed in the sexual-abuse scandal" (highly recommended).

2. The Times claims that the Vatican should have an "unequivocal mandate" that Church officials notify law enforcement when clergy are suspected of abuse. Apparently the Times is unaware that the Church in the United States already has such a policy in place.

In addition, as the Catholic League keenly noted last July, the New York Times has no such policy itself applying its own employees who are suspected of crimes such as child abuse.

Hypocrisy? It sure seems like it.

3. The Times' editorial also has a glaring omission. It does not provide an example of an organization that is doing everything that the Times demands of the Church. Who, according to the Times, should be the Church's model for protecting children? The New York City Public Schools? No way. The Orthodox Jewish community in New York City? Uh-uh. The Los Angeles Unified Schools District? No.

The Times also refuses to acknowledge all of the measures that the Church has implemented in recent years to correct its wrongs, protect children, and reach out to harmed victims. Despite not a shred of evidence that those in the Church abused or "covered up" more than anyone, the Catholic Church in the United States has:

  • paid over $2 billion in settlements;
  • paid over $70 million in therapy for victims;
  • installed "abuse panels" in dioceses;
  • required yearly audits;
  • mandated intense screenings and trainings for all priests, seminarians, and employees;
  • extended countless apologies; and
  • adopted a "zero tolerance" policy that is so strict that a previously unblemished priest can be removed from ministry within just a couple of hours of a phone call to a bishop.

"The Catholic Church was at the forefront of this (addressing the problem of child abuse)," Andy Eisenzimmer, chancellor for civil affairs for the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, told the National Catholic Register last year. "I am not aware of any other organization that is doing as much as we're doing, and at such a cost."

Indeed, the clergy scandals are a dark episode in the history of the Catholic Church. The harm to victims is immeasurable. Justice and compassion must be demanded for all victims of clergy abuse.

Yet all of the efforts in recent years have resulted in the fact that the Catholic Church may be the safest environment for children today – by far. Yet somehow you won't read this in the New York Times.


-- Dave Pierre is the author of the book, Double Standard: Abuse Scandals and the Attack on the Catholic Church. Dave is also the creator of TheMediaReport.com and is a contributing writer to NewsBusters.

  • Anti-Religious Bias
  • Christianity
  • New York Times
  • Dave Pierre's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

abuse of children

Submitted by ohio granny on Sun, 05/22/2011 - 9:00pm.

How would the public schools fare if they were subjected to the close scrutiny the Catholic Church has been subjected to?

The media constantly covers the Catholic Church's abuse scandals but usually not so much as a peep regarding the same in public schools.

Sexual abuse is wrong wherever and whenever it happens and the damage can and usually does last a life time. But to single out the Catholic Church is wrong and does a disservice to the victims of abuse in other settings.

  • Login to post comments

SARCASIM

Submitted by jessieH on Sun, 05/22/2011 - 10:17pm.

"Don't you just hate when those pesky Catholics go out of their way to kill innocent people!" Why would anyone read what the N.Y.T. puts out? You can get more truth by reading the dictionary!

                                                                                                                                                                    

  • Login to post comments

Where are the "abuse panels" 

Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 05/22/2011 - 10:46pm.

Where are the "abuse panels"  overseeing the public schools?

Oh, that's right, teachers are harder to fire than priests; they have unions.

Nevermind.

  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • Obama/Holder DOJ's radical departure on press freedom is chilling (Boutrous @ WSJ)
  • Oops: Obama fails to salute Marine, went back to shake hand (Weekly Standard)
  • Deputy kills PBS NewsHour staffer (Washington Examiner)
  • Oklahoma disaster was tragic, but larger ones have occurred (USA Today)
  • Mainstream Media Scream: Today’s Savannah Guthrie questions GOP ‘overreach’ (Paul Bedard, Washington Examiner)
  • Desperate Carney complains asking about scandals like asking about birth certificate (RCP)
  • Look at NYT's partisan-hack rewrite of the IRS hearing (Draw and STRIKE!)
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Ann Coulter Column: When Did We Vote to Become Mexico?
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: Why Tim Tebow Is an Ultimate Clutch Player
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Gosnell's Just the Tip of the Iceberg
more cartoons
  • Leno: Obama Can Close Gitmo By Making it a Government-Funded Solar Company
  • Charlie Sheen Changes Name to Carlos Estevez for Upcoming 'Machete Kills' Film
  • HUH? Slate Editor: Kaitlyn Hunt Case 'Is About Gay Rights. But It’s Not About That'
  • Weekend Open Thread
  • Leno: ‘Not Looking Good for Obama - Today His Teleprompter Took the Fifth’
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use