BishopAccountability.org
	The Unspin to the Diocese's Sunday Spin By Frank Mickadeit OC Register September 28, 2007 http://www.ocregister.com/column/brown-diocese-allegation-1852982-unspin-diocesan As a service to its flock, the Diocese of Orange distributed a notice to some churchgoers last Sunday, attempting to unspin the spin it says the media has put on the Mater Dei molestation lawsuit and Bishop Tod Brown's role in the litigation. As a service to my readers, I'll attempt to unspin the unspin. Clip, copy and take to Mass on Sunday. Diocesan spin: Brown did not hide the molestation accusation made against him. The allegation was made in 1997 based on an alleged incident in 1965. "The unsubstantiated allegation had already been disclosed earlier in the press." My unspin: The only place the allegation appeared before this month was in the OC Weekly, in April, 10 years after Brown learned of it and three years after he issued his Covenant With the Faithful. The allegation was only printed because the reporter, Gustavo Arellano, followed a lead. The Diocese would not comment. The Diocese's spin could lead one to believe the allegation was widely known and reported. Diocesan spin: Brown did not violate his Covenant With the Faithful because the Covenant "does not require the disclosure of allegations which have no credible or factual basis. … The Bishop felt no obligation to disclose what he knew from his own experience to be untrue and that was judged twice as unsubstantiated." My unspin: It's Brown's Covenant; he can decide what it does or "does not require." All I know is that it is not ambiguous. Thesis No. 5: "We will be open, honest and forthright in our public statements to the media, and consistent and transparent in our communications with the Catholics of our Diocese." Brown can parse it anyway he wants but by doing so he took away what had been its strength – its simplicity and unequivocal nature. As for being "judged twice as unsubstantiated," the Church, indeed, judged the allegation as such. However, as our Rachanee Srisavasdi wrote recently, law enforcement officials could not remember how they resolved the allegation, so as for the implication that they also didn't substantiate it – well, that simply isn't established. Diocesan spin: Brown did not spirit Monsignor John Urell to Canada as "a legal tactic to prevent him from testifying" and "that at no time was the diocesan legal team involved in making this decision." My unspin: There is no smoking-gun memo or witness (so far) to indicate that Brown ordered Urell to Canada to avoid testifying. And it is possible the "diocesan legal team" was not involved in the ultimate decision. However, what the Diocese doesn't say is that Urell's personal attorney, Patrick Hennessey, by his own admission, consulted with the "diocesan legal team" in the days leading up to Brown's decision. And Hennessey was consulted in the decision-making. Hennessey has been subpoenaed to testify in Brown's contempt hearing, in part to learn what was said in his conversations with the Diocese and its lawyers. Hennessey says he'll fight it. The Diocese's unspin message did have valid points. It decried that some media have only described Southdown Institute in Ontario as a "hospital for pedophiles." It does treat them, but it treats clergy with a wide variety of psychological problems and there's no indication Urell has ever been accused of sexual misconduct. Also, the Diocese says, characterizing Urell as having "refused" to complete his deposition is unfair. I read the transcript and I agree that Urell simply broke down and it would have been inhumane to make him continue at that point. Inhumane to have him continue now? Unknown. In a related Sunday letter to parishioners of St. Justin's in Anaheim, Rev. Joseph Nettekoven had this perspective: "Not everything we read in the papers is the gospel truth. Words can be misinterpreted, sentences can be taken out of context and shaped to mislead the meaning of what is being said, even by those who claim to be Catholic ... Some who suggest only that they want to get to the bottom of an issue and lay it out for everyone to see, even though it may mean a character assassination in the process, will even ask for you to 'say a Hail Mary' for them." Those who claim to be Catholic. … Some who suggestonly that they want to get to the bottom of an issue … will even ask for you to say a Hail Mary. Gee, I wonder who he's talking about. Contact the writer: 714-796-4994 or fmickadeit@ocregister.com
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.