CBS news story distorts 1962 Vatican document (Analysis)

Catholic World News ^ | Aug 7, 2003 | staff

[polemikos]

Boston, Aug. 07 (CWNews.com) - A CBS network news report, claiming that the Holy See orchestrated a cover-up of sexual abuse by Catholic priests, is based on a gross misinterpretation of a 1962 Vatican document.

In a sensationalist report aired on August 6, CBS Evening News claimed to have discovered a secret document proving that the Vatican had approved-- and even demanded-- a longstanding policy of covering up clerics' sexual misdeeds.

The document cited by CBS does nothing of the sort.

In fact the network's story misrepresented the Vatican document so thoroughly that it is difficult to attribute the inaccuracy to honest error.

The CBS story is based on a secret Instruction issued to bishops in March 1962 by Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, then the prefect of the Holy Office (now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith). That document sets forth the canonical procedures to be followed when a priest is charged with the ecclesiastical crime of "solicitation"-- that is, using the confessional to tempt penitents to engage in sexual activity.

[The Vatican document, in an awkward English translation, can be downloaded from the CBS News site. CBS also offers the Latin original.]

The Vatican document deals exclusively with solicitation: an offense which, by definition, occurs within the context of the Sacrament of Penance. And since that sacrament is protected by a shroud of absolute secrecy, the procedures for dealing with this ecclesiastical crime also invoke secrecy.

In short, by demanding secrecy in the treatment of these crimes, the Vatican was protecting the secrecy of the confessional. The policy outlined in that 1962 document is clearly not intended to protect predatory priests; on the contrary, the Vatican makes it clear that guilty priests should be severely punished and promptly removed from ministry.

It is important to keep in mind that the 1962 Vatican Instruction dealt exclusively with "solicitation" as that term is understood in ecclesiastical usage, under the terms of the Code of Canon Law. The policies set forth by Cardinal Ottaviani do not pertain to the sexual misdeeds of clerics, but to the efforts by priest to obtain sexual favors though the misuse of their confessional role.

It is also important to note that because solicitation takes place inside the confessional, only the accused priest and the penitent could possibly have direct evidence as to whether or not the crime took place. If the solicitation led to actual sexual activity, that misconduct could be the subject of an entirely separate investigation, not bound by the same rules of secrecy.

The crime of "solicitation" has always been viewed by the Catholic Church as an extremely serious offense, calling for the strongest available penalties. Cardinal Ottaviani stresses that any confessor who solicits sexual favors from his penitents should be suspended from ministry and stripped of all priestly privileges. These penalties apply to all cases of solicitation, whether they involve minor children or adults of either sex. The 1962 document is not concerned with all instances of solicitation; it does not concentrate on the solicitation of children.

The CBS report claimed:

The confidential Vatican document, obtained by CBS News, lays out a church policy that calls for absolute secrecy when it comes to sexual abuse by priests-- anyone who speaks out could be thrown out of the church.

That is inaccurate.

While it is true that the Vatican document threatens excommunication for anyone who discloses the proceedings of an ecclesiastical trial for "solicitation," it does not bar the priest's accuser from making separate charges about the priest's sexual misconduct. In fact the document makes it clear that during the canonical trial, the accuser should not be questioned about any sexual activity that he may have undertaken with the priest; the accuser is to be questioned solely about what occurred within the confessional.

Thus, someone who was sexually abused by a priest would be free, under the 1962 Vatican policy, to bring criminal charges against that priest for his sexual conduct, while simultaneously charging the priest with "solicitation" in an ecclesiastical court.

In fact, the Instruction from Cardinal Ottaviani stresses (in section 18) that every Catholic has a solemn duty to bring canon-law charges against a priest who attempts to solicit sex through the confessional. The importance of that obligation is underlined by the fact that a Catholic who fails to report solicitation is subject to excommunication. Moreover, the penitent remains under this solemn obligation to report solicitation even if the priest has already confessed his crime.

The document on which CBS based its distorted story is a densely worded 24-page document, couched in the technical idiom of canon law, and accompanied by a 36-page Appendix that provides the formulas to be used in an ecclesiastical trial. No careful reader could fail to recognize that this was a specialized document, providing a set of procedures for a particular ecclesiastical offense. Why, then, did CBS News draw a broad general conclusion from a tightly focused legal document? Why did the network fail to distinguish between the ecclesiastical crime of solicitation and the public offense of pedophilia? The questions are worth pondering.

[polemikos]

Never rely on the secular media to report the facts coming from the Vatican correctly.

[Pyro7480]

Pinging the traditionalists.

[Dave S]

Why did the network fail to distinguish between the ecclesiastical crime of solicitation and the public offense of pedophilia? The questions are worth pondering.

A better question would be why should priests be doing either of these acts. A priest doing either should be hung on a meat hook in the public square.

[steplock]

Why What is Happening - Explains the SCOTUS, CHURCH, etc (no religious explanations here either)

[Pyro7480]

Pinging the people from the original CBSNews thread.

[Darksheare]

I'm in.
Digesting info.

[Varda]

Thanks for posting this but for the room temperature IQ set that hates the church it won't matter.

[Blood of Tyrants]

SeeBS LIED? Nooooooo!

[SoothingDave]

A better question would be why should priests be doing either of these acts. A priest doing either should be hung on a meat hook in the public square.

We have this quaint custom of a "trial" before hanging. It is this that the document is instructions for.

SD

[Olde School]

Absolutley right about the need for a trial first. But can't have a trial without an arrest and you can't have an arrest if the Church pays off victims, ships out the priest and denies anything happened - which was the SOP for years.

[HamiltonJay]

Well this is good to know.

[Fury]

SD was correct in his initial assessment.

What a pantload CBS published. When I read this tripe, I understand that objective journalism for many news organizations is in fact, a thing of the past

[Itzlzha]

We have this quaint custom of a "trial" before hanging. It is this that the document is instructions for.

I got the ping to this thread...now I have another problem here.

As I said I do not trust the Alphabet-networks...but how do you reconcile what you said above with the FACT that the RCC was NOT interested in a "trial" of the accused pedophile priests...they shuttled them from Parish to Parish and NEVER let the new Parish know what they were getting!

Nor did they EVER admit wrong until they were sued by the VICTIMS! And they have used every trick to get out of the suits!

Given these FACTS, can you please reconcile these things for me?

[SoothingDave]

Absolutley right about the need for a trial first. But can't have a trial without an arrest and you can't have an arrest if the Church pays off victims, ships out the priest and denies anything happened - which was the SOP for years.

We have a seperation of church and state in this country. This document deals only with church procedures for having a church trial of a priest accused of a particular type of wrongdoing.

There is nothing preventing the state from exercising its power in its sphere of influence.

(What you say was SOP for many bishops is true. But it is not a result of them acting under orders from the Vatican via this document, which is what CBS alleged.)

SD

[SoothingDave]

but how do you reconcile what you said above with the FACT that the RCC was NOT interested in a "trial" of the accused pedophile priests...they shuttled them from Parish to Parish and NEVER let the new Parish know what they were getting!

I's quite simple. Way too many bishops did not follow the procedures they should have. Instead, they listened to psychologists.

All I have been saying on these last few threads is that CBS is lying and this document is not proof that the Vatican ordered coverups and shuffling them around.

SD

[Olde School]

Regardless of whether there was a coverup or not - where was Rome for the past 10, 20, 50 years to do something?!? They knew things were rotten but did nothing!

[Olde School]

Regardless of whether there was a coverup or not - where was Rome for the past 10, 20, 50 years to do something?!? They knew things were rotten but did nothing!

[RobbyS]

The FACT is that this instruction from the Vatican has been misapplied. The assumption is that the priest will be punished, but punishment can be anything from slaps on the wrist to punishment that fits the crime. Light punishment for severe crimes are doled out every day in the secular courts.

[OXENinFLA]

Like I said in the last thread.....

"What a great way to take attention off the Vatican's stance against Homosexuals that came out (npi) last week."