Religion & Public Life With Mark Silk

Religion & Public Life With Mark Silk

Thanks, GetReligion

Because GetReligion’s Mollie Hemingway is gracious enough to concede that I’ve offered
the “best defense” of the Goodstein/Halbfinger NYT article
on Pope Benedict’s performance as head of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and because I was perhaps ungracious enough
to smack
her around
a little in a subsequent post, let me acknowledge the
validity of her latest grounds for criticism.


First, G/H may fairly be charged with taking a swipe at then-Cardinal
Ratzinger’s position on Liberation Theology. Here’s what they wrote:

As Father Gauthe was being prosecuted in Louisiana, Cardinal
was publicly disciplining priests in Brazil and Peru for preaching that
the church should work to empower the poor and oppressed, which the
cardinal saw as a Marxist-inspired distortion of church doctrine.

OK, if I’d been their editor I would have changed that to read “…for
preaching that empowering the poor and oppressed was the church’s
central mission….” In the context of the article as a whole, I count
this venial sin.


Second, and more importantly, Hemingway claims that the G/H time-line
regarding when the CDF “dithered” is “a mess.” With respect to the
paragraph above, for example, her point is that the prosecution of
Father Gauthe and the crackdown on liberation theologians took place in
1980s, but that knowledge of the CDF’s full responsibility for abuse
cases indicated in a letter from 1922 didn’t surface until some time in
the 1990s.

I’ll stipulate that there is indeed considerable fuzziness about when
the 1922 letter came to be known inside the Roman Curia. For all we
know, the CDF’s staff canonists may have been aware of it all along. But
that’s not the point. The CDF had some considerable responsibility for
abuse cases all along. And we know in
from the Kiesle case in the early 1980s that the CDF under
Ratzinger didn’t merely dither; it brought to a standstill a proceeding
that had been moving forward. As I noted, G/H allude to the Kiesle case
(which Goodstein and Michael Luo looked
earlier this year). Had I been the editor, I would have made a
little space to name and describe it.

Comments read comments(2)
post a comment
Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:40 pm

The Kiesle case is a red herring. You obviously have not looked at the substantive rebuttals brought by various sources against the unfair and wild accusation made by the Times about that case. Catholic News Service lays it out here:; a blog by Jesuits here:; and Catholic World News’ Phil Lawler here:
“OK, if I’d been their editor I would have changed that to read ‘…for preaching that empowering the poor and oppressed was the church’s central mission….’ In the context of the article as a whole, I count this venial sin.” But it was one venial sin piled on a 3,000 word stack of other venial sins to become mortal. It was part of the whole mortal intention of the article — to smear Pope Benedict. The implication is clear — Ratzinger was more concerned about dealing with uppity clergy who were taking care of the poor and oppressed than he was about child molesters. That’s bull, but it was just like the first 3,000 words of that piece — accusations tossed out without any backing.

report abuse

Mark Silk

posted July 12, 2010 at 3:55 pm

In re: Kiesle, I beg to differ, Mr. Szyszkiewicz, and ask that you take a look at my analysis of the documents:

report abuse

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to and may be used by in accordance with the agreements.

Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Religion and Public Life. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Latest News Story on Beliefnet Happy Reading!   ...

posted 3:10:11pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

The Ayn Rand Republicans
I confess to feeling a little bit queasy about the American Values Network's new video hoisting Rep. Paul Ryan, Sen. Rand Paul, Rush Limbaugh, and other GOP luminaries on the petard of Ayn Rand and her atheistic philosophy of objectivism. Take a ...

posted 7:13:30pm May. 24, 2011 | read full post »

Whither evangelicals?
I'm fully prepared to believe that Mitch Daniels' family proved to be the unleapable hurdle in his abortive run-up to the GOP presidential race. Imagine yourself as wife Cheri, having split for the coast to marry on old flame, your husband and ...

posted 9:19:56am May. 23, 2011 | read full post »

No more "social conservatives"
With the presidential election cycle getting up to speed, it's time for reporters and yakkers like me to stop writing about "social conservatives" as if they were an identifiable segment of the voting population. I say this as someone who has ...

posted 8:25:11am May. 20, 2011 | read full post »

So clerical celibacy was not the problem?
Those on the Catholic left are not very happy that the Jay Report declines in no uncertain terms to blame clerical celibacy for the sexual abuse crisis. As the report puts it: Factors that remained consistent over this time period, such as ...

posted 9:50:34am May. 19, 2011 | read full post »


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.