Another report from Benedict’s secretary For anyone interested


#1

https://spiritdaily.org/blog/news/benedicts-spokesman-ex-pope-has-not-commented-on-vigano

Which contradicts this

It is hard to find the truth these days in the media it seems.


#2

The reporting by Lifesite was poor, and the National Catholic Register was unclear.

The original report in NCR was simply that Ratzinger recalled imposing sanctions on McCarrick, and did not claim that he had spoken out about Vigano’s letter. Ratzinger’s secretary was responding to a New York Times report that the former Pope had endorsed the letter itself, and made no claims about previous statements by Ratzinger regarding sanctions against McCarrick.

The sanctions have been confirmed by other sources as well, including the Diocese of Washington and a witness that worked for the Nunciature.

Here is a link to the NYT article in question.


#3

Ugh even the nytimes article is vague when it writes

“Mr. Busch said leaders of the publication had personally assured him that the former pope, Benedict XVI, had confirmed Archbishop Viganò’s account.”

It doesn’t say that Benedict previously confirmed at an earlier time. It takes a pretty huge journalistic liberty and adds the assumption that pope Benedict had confirmed the most recent letter.

It’s hard to find the truth in the media :frowning:


#4

You don’t go to lifesite looking for the truth.


#5

In fairness to the NYT, they were reporting what Mr. Busch told them, not what had been reported originally in the National Catholic Register.


#6

As much as I disagree with them on a lot of things, my experience is that they do try to do their research, even if they show bias.

This is coming from me, a guy who has had a dozen accounts banned by lifesitenews :slight_smile:

I do find they try to give facts even if they add in a lot
Of opinion as well


#7

True
10 characters


#8

Actually, The Register was very clear, they never reported that the Pope Emeritus had commented on the Vigano letter. They reported that Benedict confirmed he had imposed sanctions on McCarrick but did not recall the details. This is never disputed in the OP 's article.


#9

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.