Some unpleasant details have been excluded from at least one Catholic news agency's initial coverage concerning the recent recovery of the True Cross relic. And just what are the omitted details concerning the "domestic dispute" which resulted in the recovery of the relic stolen from the Boston cathedral? According to various sources, the relic was returned after two homosexual men ('partners') were arguing in their trailer park over what should be done with the stolen relic. The priceless relic was reportedly in the possession of one of the men (described by one source as a "transient") when his 'partner' apparently tipped off the police when he called to report the "domestic fight" he was having with his gay 'partner' (who reportedly wanted to return the True Cross relic to the church, not the police). The man who had possession of the relic apparently claims he didn't personally steal it from the Cathedral but acquired it from "another man" (an "unidentified third party"). He reportedly fled the scene but was later arrested on an unrelated warrant. He is expected to be charged with possession of stolen property.
Observers may fear the theft was connected with homosexual activism or may theorize it was influenced by other motives (e.g. theft for personal use or possible future sale). Some observers have opined that the theft was a "hate crime" (e.g. "hatred of Catholicism"), but all motives at this point seem merely speculation. Thankfully, reports do indicate that the relic appears undamaged.
Commentary: Coincidentally, Catholic news sources simultaneously reported on an upcoming "Vatican conference for the Catholic press to examine how to cover controversy" which reportedly includes examining "questions of whether or not the Catholic press should avoid certain topics". Perhaps they should consider Pope Pius XII's comment that...
"News of any event, even if nothing but the bare fact is related, has yet an aspect of its own which concerns morality in some way. 'This aspect, affecting human morals, must never be neglected; for news of any kind provokes a mental judgment and influences the will. The news-reader who worthily fulfils his task, should crush no one by his words, but try rather to understand and explain as best he can, the disasters reported and the crimes committed. To explain is not necessarily to excuse; but it is to suggest the beginning of a remedy, and consequently, to perform a task at once positive and constructive'." (Pope Pius XII, "Miranda Prorsus", 1957)
And, isn't it generally better to hear "certain topics" from a Catholic source than a (typically biased against the Church) secular news source since the Catholic source may provide a little Catholic perspective? Just a thought...
[8/17]
Posts
