The first line of defence

by Editor · September 24, 2003

Earlier this month SABC3 broadcast a programme produced in the United States titled “Catholic Sex”, which contemplated the nature of and reaction to the sexual abuse crisis in Boston.

The self-evident slants and cliches aside, the programme offered a reasonable insight into a scandal that may well represent a watershed in the US Church’s history. Although critical of the Church hierarchy, it could not be dismissed as anti-Catholic.

Oddly, when the programme was broadcast in the US in June 2002, it had the less provocative title “Sins of the Fathers”. The change in title, however, is a minor objection. Catholics are entitled to express puzzlement at the SABC’s omission to note that the programme was, at more than a year old, outdated. The charitably minded viewer may ascribe that omission to negligence and ignorance.

Between the time the programme was screened in the US and its South African broadcast, fundamental developments have taken place. Cardinal Bernard Law criticism of whom was at the centre of the programme retired last December, and was succeeded in July by Archbishop Sean O’Malley, who in a short time has won the confidence of many opponents of Cardinal Law.

The US bishops, meanwhile, last year addressed the question of sexual abuse by Church personnel, and have taken active steps aimed at minimising the potential of abuse by Church personnel. By all accounts, the US bishops have acknowledged that some among them have erred grievously in concealing abuse.

While the problem has not yet been resolved to everybody’s satisfaction, the situation of June 2002 does not apply in September 2003. The SABC’s decision to broadcast the “Catholic Sex” programme failed to reflect this. It certainly will have presented to South African audiences a distorted picture of complex circumstances.

Acting prudently, the SABC might have followed such an emotion-charged programme with a panel discussion looking at how the experiences of Boston in 2002 affect the Catholic Church in South Africa and elsewhere in 2003.

Alas, South Africa’s media are, with few exceptions, clueless in their coverage of religious issues. It is telling that South African newsrooms tend not to have religious affairs reporters. Journalists who are assigned religion-based stories often have no insights on the subject they are designated to cover. This is in stark contrast to the press in Britain and the United States, where most reputable newspapers have at least one knowledgeable reporter covering the religion beat.

The paucity of intelligent coverage of Catholic affairs in the secular media requires a strong Catholic media: not only The Southern Cross, but also Catholic magazines, literature and radio.

The source of that strength must be two-fold. Firstly, the products of Catholic media must be competent and relevant. Secondly, a strong Catholic media requires committed support from the whole Catholic community – bishops, clergy, religious and laity.

As a Church, we should be concerned that not every practising Catholic in Southern Africa has access to Catholic media, and be dismayed that only a few of those who do take advantage of it.

One may speculate how many Catholics who do not avail themselves of the Catholic media will have been misled about their faith by the SABC’s dubious broadcast of an out-dated programme.