Perspective Religion trivialized in Philadelphia
coverage
By PAMELA SCHAEFFER
Some 15 years ago, during my 12-year
tenure as religion writer at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, I picked up a
tip that a theater specializing in pornography was owned by the St. Louis
archdiocese. It seemly highly unlikely that such a rumor could be true. But the
source seemed reliable. With an editors encouragement, I decided to check
it out.
Imagine the surprise in the newsroom when St. Louis County
property files revealed that the archdiocese was a co-owner of the property
with nine other religious and charitable institutions. The institutions were
variously operated by five orders of Catholic nuns, the Southern Baptists and
the United Church of Christ. Officials of at least two of the groups, Catholics
and Southern Baptists, had been outspoken opponents of pornography during the
seven years they had derived income from a theater that regularly showed
X-rated films.
A story on the front page of the Post-Dispatch proved
highly embarrassing, yet ultimately helpful, to the religious groups. The
property, with a lease already in place, had been bequeathed seven years
earlier to the groups by a couple who wanted to honor their favorite charities
but didnt know what sort of entertainment the new lease would bring. Some
of the heirs wanted to sell but found the prospect daunting, given the multiple
owners; some rationalized; others forgot over time that the property was
theirs.
Within a short time after the article ran, a buyer came forward to
relieve the religious groups of an ecumenical enterprise that was unintended
and unwanted.
Despite a happy ending, the story about the theater, like a number
of other stories I wrote for the Post-Dispatch, caused discomfort in some
quarters. Certain readers and religious leaders considered it somehow wrong to
make embarrassing information public. I am happy to report that my editors
never flinched.
NCR risks similar displeasure from readers week after week
when it breaks controversial stories, including wearisome accounts of the now
all-too-familiar problem of clergy sex abuse. We dont necessarily make
friends. Too much bad news, some Catholics say. One more sign that the press is
out to get religion.
That attitude -- that the press should handle religion with kid
gloves lest readers get upset -- is alleged to be at the heart of a controversy
currently raging in Philadelphia and peripherally involving NCR. Ralph
Cipriano, a reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer until he was recently
fired, contends in a lawsuit that his efforts to report on Cardinal Anthony
Bevilacquas spending habits had been rebuffed by Inquirer editors
who feared offending the archdiocese and its heavily Catholic readership.
Cipriano wrote the story for NCR based on documents showing, among other
things, that Bevilacqua had spent heavily and secretly on a variety of
projects, including refurbishing his own mansion, during a period when several
Philadelphia parishes were being closed. The story ran in NCRs
June 19 issue.
The full story is recounted in the October issue of American
Journalism Review. Cipriano was fired after he sued Inquirer editor Robert
Rosenthal for libel. The suit stemmed from a comment Rosenthal made to The
Washington Post about Ciprianos work.
Although good journalists can, and almost certainly will, disagree
over coverage, one principle has guided my own reporting on religion over some
20 years. It is that religious organizations, like other cultural institutions,
should be accountable to the people who support them -- people who include
myself, members of my family and many of my neighbors and friends.
I consider myself lucky to have worked at papers where editors
shared my instincts about religion: especially that it should not be treated as
a sacred cow. Such editors understand that religious organizations wield wide
influence in our society and command, often deservedly, wide respect. These are
institutions that claim a great deal for themselves. They preach morality,
teach values and offer answers to many critical questions, including the most
basic question of all: the meaning of life itself.
Our society, if not directly supportive of religion, is gracious,
according people freedom to practice their beliefs and exempting religious
institutions from paying taxes. Religious organizations are presumed to do what
they purport to do: live by high ideals.
Yet history, including recent history, shows that religious
leaders sometimes fall short. Like all human institutions, religious
organizations are subject to hypocrisy and corruption. Power, wealth and
influence can be, have been and will be abused.
Thats where the press comes in. While reporters cant
undertake reform, they can question, probe and challenge. They can exercise
watchfulness on behalf of those who care. Editors, for their part, do well to
assume that many readers, perhaps most, will be grateful when religion is
covered as aggressively as government, business and other cultural
institutions.
A newspaper worthy of its readers assures them through vigilant
coverage of both good news and bad that it considers religion important. Too
important to be left alone.
Pamela Schaeffer is NCRs special projects editor.
Her E-mail address is pamlives@aol.com.
National Catholic Reporter, October 23,
1998
|