Crimen sollicitationis and the Media

I intend to write a bit on this topic, but the next few posts lay the groundwork. I’ll refer back to them when my main article is complete. In other words, this post is on a topic that I’ll put in perspective later on.

Below is a diagram (done using Microsoft Office Visio 2007) showing the key early events in the (U.S.) media’s coverage of the Roman Catholic document “Crimen sollicitationis“. Below the diagram is a list that makes sense of each step. I’ve given each step a number. Look to the description below (start at 1) and then refer to the diagram to see where it fits in in the sequence of events. The details are not important for understanding “Crimen sollicitationis” but I found them interesting. Note the role that Kathleen “Kathy” Shaw plays in the process. I think that it’s at least arguable that she had a conflict of interest that should have been made clear to her readers but perhaps I’m overreacting. Go through each article I refer to and scrutinize each of my claims. I’ve set up multiple posts (which I will draw together in my profile) that I hope will make readers aware of my philosophical/theological/political outlook and allow them to assess the extent to which these factors may potentially bias my assessment.

1. The document “De delictis gravioribus” is posted on the Vatican Website on the 18^th of May 2001. The document is accessible here.
2. Attorney Daniel J. Shea notices a reference to the document “Crimen sollicitationis” in “De delictis gravioribus”. This is noted in the transcript of a speech Shea gave on the 22^nd of June 2007. The Washington Post’s Alan Cooperman earlier wrote an article in which he claimed that Shea noticed the reference to Crimen on the website “in January (2003)”.
3. Shea contacts his “good friend” Kathleen A. Shaw to ask for assistance in obtaining a copy of “Crimen sollicitationis”. Jim Hinch, of the Orange County Register (as reported in Religion in the News – I could not obtain access to his original article) claimed that Shea said “he had worked closely with her [Shaw] on past stories about lawsuits.” Shea claimed in his June 2007 speech that “It [Crimen] simply arrived in my office one day in a plain brown envelope, no return address, Latin original and English translation.” Two other reports suggest that Shea actually knew who the documents came from.
4. Thomas P. Doyle enters the process. It’s not clear how this occurred, but he was essential to obtaining the documents.
5. Doyle obtains a copy of “Crimen sollicitationis”. The Washing Post article claims that Shea obtained a copy of the document from Doyle, as does Religion in the News. The date mentioned in the Washington Post article is “late July (2003)”. Darren Lyn of ABC13 Eyewitness News says that Shea received it from “a clergyman in Germany who has close dealings with the Vatican.” Doyle was an Air Force chaplain in Germany at that time. Religion in the News says that Doyle translated the Latin original into English.
6. The documents are distributed to journalists. A copy finds its way to Timothy P. Staney.
7. Staney posts the documents on the internet.
8. Shaw produces the article “Vatican Document Instructed Secrecy in Abuse Cases”.

Related Posts

• Crimen sollicitationis
• Thomas Doyle on Crimen sollicitationis
• Reverend Thomas Patrick Doyle
• Jacob Prasch and Moriel Ministries
• My Response to Moriel Ministries

Comments

• My Library

• Blogroll

  • Andrew Norton
  • Bede’s Journal
  • Catallaxy
  • Club Troppo
  • Crimson Catholic
  • Currency Lad
  • Fallacy Files Weblog
  • Farrellmedia
  • Hack WordPress
  • Harry Clarke
  • Humbug! Online
  • Lex Communis
  • Sentire cum Ecclesia
• 
•