Last week, when the USCCB meeting in St. Petersburg coincided with the Catholic Health Association summit in Denver, the Catholic News Agency (CNA) ran several stories based on the testimonies of bishops attending the meeting.

One of these stories got a great deal of attention.  In it, Cardinal George castigated Sr. Keehan and the CHA for attempting to set up a “parallel magisterium” by defying the bishops’ opposition to the recent health care legislation.    

That same day, John Allen, from the National Catholic Reporter, interviewed Cardinal George on the issue. The Cardinal effectively corroborated what CNA had reported based upon the testimony of others who had attended the USCCB meeting.

Allen quoted Cardinal George as saying,  “The dispute with the CHA involves a core ecclesiological principle about the nature of the Church itself, one that has to concern the bishops — namely, ‘Who speaks for the Church on faith and morals?”’

“The bishops have to protect their role in governing the Church,” the cardinal said.

Yesterday,  Helen Osman, Secretary of Communications for the USCCB disputed the CNA report — but not Allen’s from NCR — on the USCCB media blog:

It appears that [the] Catholic News Agency would benefit from a similar strategy. To put it plain and simple, the quotes they attribute to Cardinal Francis George in their story (also posted on EWTN) are just wrong. I was in the room, as a member of the USCCB staff, for the presentation. And the official audio file that recorded the session for USCCB archives confirms my memory.

While the cardinal did present a sequence of events to the bishops, he never used the phrase “so-called Catholic,” accused the Catholic Health Association of creating a “parallel magisterium,” or said the meeting of the three bishops with Sr. Keehan had “frustrating results.” And that’s just three examples. Not to mention that the reporting of the events is just plain wrong: for an example, the Stupak Amendment was not defeated in the Senate in December 2009, as the article states.

The Catholic News Agency responded here.

The executive director of CNA, Alejandro Bermudez, stated: “Allen’s report validates CNA’s reporting of the remarks made by Cardinal George at the executive meeting.”

Most of the religious outlets who covered the disagreement between the bishops and CHA, such as Commonweal, America Magazine, and the National Catholic Reporter did not support the bishops’ decision to oppose the health care bill, and criticized the USCCB, not based on our report, but on Allen’s.

What is then the reason for the outcry from Ms. Osman over their decision? Her post denying our reporting is disturbing, dishonest, and unfairly selective,  Bermudez stated, adding, “We stand by our report.”

It’s easy for Ms. Osman to claim she has proof of CNA’s alleged dishonesty, and then say that she will not release the audio recording that would corroborate her claims. We support the release of the audio to see who is right.

Given both the seriousness of the charges brought by Ms. Osman, as well as the insulting tone, I find it surprising that Ms. Osman claims to have a recording proving her account, but says she is not willing to make it public.

I find it impossible to believe that CNA would put such a serious charge against Sr. Keehan in the mouth of Cardinal George, president of the USCCB, knowing the seriousness of the consequences.  CNA has an established reputation for accuracy which Ms. Osman’s attempt to defame will not harm. 

If Ms. Osman is willing to contradict the reports of Cardinal George’s comments on Sr. Keehan, based upon testimonies of bishops who were present, and corroborated by NCR’s John Allen, she should make public the recordings of the session (not a transcript!)

 

Deal W. Hudson

By

Deal W. Hudson is ​publisher and editor of The Christian Review and the host of "Church and Culture," a weekly two-hour radio show on the Ave Maria Radio Network.​ He is the former publisher and editor of Crisis Magazine.

Crisis Magazine Comments Policy

This is a Catholic forum. As such:

  1. All comments must directly address the article. “I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter.” (Matthew 12:36)
  2. No profanity, ad hominems, hot tempers, or racial or religious invectives. “And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” (Ephesians 4:32)
  3. We will not tolerate heresy, calumny, or attacks upon our Holy Mother Church or Holy Father. “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)
  4. Keep it brief. No lengthy rants or block quotes. “For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes.” (James 4:14)
  5. If you see a comment that doesn’t meet our standards, please flag it so a moderator may remove it. “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.” (Galatians 6:1)
  6. All comments may be removed at the moderators’ discretion. “But of that day and hour no one knows…” (Matthew 24:36)
  7. Crisis isn’t responsible for the content of the comments box. Comments do not represent the views of Crisis magazine, its editors, authors, or publishers. “Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God… So each of us shall give account of himself to God.” (Romans 14:10, 12)
MENU