Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
Media coverage of St. Louis archbishop criticized as ‘misleading’

Media coverage of St. Louis archbishop criticized as ‘misleading’

Last updated on: June 12, 2014 at 4:56 pm by CNA Daily News

Media coverage of St. Louis archbishop criticized as ‘misleading’ 2014-06-12T16:56:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

St. Louis, Mo., Jun 12, 2014 / 10:56 am (CNA).- The Archdiocese of St. Louis criticized “inaccurate and misleading” reports suggesting that Archbishop Robert Carlson did not know sexual relations with children were illegal; the archdiocese said his deposition responses were instead focused on mandatory reporting laws.

“Contrary to what is being reported, Archbishop Carlson is and has been a leader in the Church when it comes to recognizing and managing matters of sexual abuse involving the clergy,” the archdiocese said June 11.

It highlighted his 1980 letter on a sexually abusive priest in which he said “this behavior cannot be tolerated.”

On June 9, attorney Jeff Anderson released a videotaped deposition of the St. Louis archbishop concerning damages for a Minnesota lawsuit involving allegations of a sexually abusive priest in the 1980s. Archbishop Carlson was an auxiliary bishop and chancellor of the Archdiocese of Minneapolis-St. Paul at the time.

The archdiocese said that although Anderson, the plaintiff’s lawyer, made several questions at the deposition concerning whether the archbishop knew sexual relations between a minor and an adult were against the law at the time, the archbishop’s answers were referring to the previous question. That question concerned whether he knew Minnesota’s child abuse reporting law and whether he knew that clergy were mandatory abuse reporters.

“When the Archbishop said ‘I’m not sure whether I knew it was a crime or not,’ he was simply referring to the fact that he did not know the year that clergy became mandatory reporters of suspected child abuse,” the archdiocese said.

Archbishop Carlson’s attorney, Charles Goldberg, had objected to Anderson’s sudden shift from mandatory reporting laws to laws criminalizing sexual relations with minors.

Anderson, who has won judgments of hundreds of millions of dollars through sex abuse lawsuits against the Catholic Church, released an excerpt of the video on June 9.

The video showed the archbishop responding “I don’t remember” to several of Anderson’s questions about whether he knew it was a crime for an adult to engage in sexual relations with a minor.

The archdiocese said that the plaintiff’s lawyer “strategically took Archbishop Carlson’s response to a question out of context.”

The excerpted video was widely viewed and prompted many responses.

The St. Louis Post Dispatch’s editorial board published a harshly critical editorial contending that the archbishop used “slippery language” that is normally used by “lawyered-up mobsters, politicians or Wall Street fraudsters.”

It criticized what it described as the archbishop’s inability to remember his actions and thoughts in the 1980s, suggesting that if the archbishop can’t remember, “he should resign and seek treatment for Alzheimer’s or some other form of dementia.”

However, the Archdiocese of St. Louis said that the archbishop “had repeatedly requested and was denied the ability to review case documents pertaining to the questions asked of him” and is “now being maligned for his inability to recall certain events.”

Bill Donohue of the New York-based Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights on June 11 charged that the video clip was “rigged by Anderson to make the archbishop look as if he didn't know it was a crime for an adult to have sex with a kid.”

Donohue said that the news media “led by the Post-Dispatch, published Anderson’s propaganda as if it were true.”

“It is obvious that the media never independently verified Anderson's selective account,” he said.

The Archdiocese of St. Louis said that the archbishop is not a party in the case and did not commit any crime. He previously gave depositions concerning the case at least three times in the 1980s.

“He has not only voluntarily participated in this legal process, he has offered his testimony as clearly and thoughtfully as possible, given both the span of time in which this discovery process has taken place and accessibility to certain documents,” the archdiocese said.

The archdiocese said the reporting on the deposition and the controversy has “impugned Archbishop Carlson’s good name and reputation.”

Previous Post

June 12, 2014

Young priest's murder shocks, grieves Arizona community

Next Post

June 12, 2014 Chile to abandon consistent pro-life stance at UN

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the primary form of transportation in Biblical times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Chariot Camel Donkey Horse