The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-02-23


to naught IL possible - for the
world has closed its mind against
the church. 1t will not hear OF
her and If it does, 1t is but to
deride - not to judge impartially.
If it is compelled to hear, it will
interpret according to its own
standard, wrought sometimes
through human frailty and often
through malice, the message she
tries to proclaim.
"A concrete example Of the man.
ner in which the efforts to make
known the contribution Of the
church towards the solution of the
worlds problems are nullified and
used against her may be seen In
the treatment which the public
press accorded an address which l
gave recently to the Bridgeport
Council of Catholic Men. You
may recall that only a few weeks
ago spoke to you Of the solu-
lions offered by the pontiffs
through their various encyclicals on
matters vitality affecting present
day society. In the course of my
address in Bridgeport - as in this
church in Waterbury - stressed
the fact that each one Of the prob
lens with which we are faced in
these unhappy times had been
dealt with carefully and judicially
by the Catholic church. Begin
ming with the encyclical of Leo
XIII on the Condition Of Labor
and proceeding in turn through
the encyclicals on the Reconstruc-
ton of the Social Order. World
Peace, The Sanctity of the Home,
Christian Marriage, Christian Ed
ucation, Church Unity, etc. -
sought to outline the effort made
by the Catholic church through Its
pontiffs to give Christ Himself
q hearing in the world of today.
1.-THE message was too Catholic.
Like Goblet, the fearless historian
of the Reformation, Of whom
Chesterton said, in his biography.
HE shouted too loudly to be
heard, I was doomed to repor-
torial obloquy SO far as my adj
dress was concerned. It was too
Catholic; too true; too obvious to
present to a world that does not
wish to hear about the church. 1t
did not make a good news story
for the very fact that it was I'M
assailably true and beyond ques-
ton or cavil. Therefore, 1t was
garbled, altered, changed around
wrested from it's proper context to
such an extent that those who had
heard the address were unable to
recognize the printed report Of 1t.
"As a priest of the Catholic
church whose utterances are &C.
customed to be received as repre-
sentative of Catholic opinion I
take this opportunity to speak
publicly to the gentlemen of the
press. Meanwhile you will kindly
note that am reading the follow
ing statement. If I must be quot
ed I request that it be done ac-
curately. During the past week
the conclusion has been forced
upon me that the number of those
who receive as infallibly true all
that they see in print Is not. dimin-
ishing in any appreciate manner.
Perhaps this Is a tribute to the
press which, generally speaking,
strives to present its news truth
fully and accurately despite the
ever-present temptation to sensa-
tionalism. Nevertheless, such
guileless faith in the daily news
paper is often a source Of annoy
dHCo u LuOSo WIN AlIlu IHCuloSiFSS
the victims of unschooled or un-
principled reporters who regard
quotation marks as just another
used at random whenever the
fancy takes them. Due to the
prominence that was given by the
Associated Press to an alleged
speech which I was reported as
having given short time ago
before the Council of Catholic
Men in the city of Bridgeport, I
feel that I am justified in correct
ing it publicly here.
ITO quote a statement which
speaker has actually made Is on
thing; but to place in quotation
marks and attribute to the speaker
whose talk is being reported the
grotesque and ungrammatical eff
fusions of a sub-moronic cub re-
porter is quite another thing. 1t Is
evidently unethical as we'll as be-
ing something less than honorable.
Theologians and jurists have q
name for it. The former call 1t
lying and detraction; the latter call
it libel.
II am not aware that 1t is as yet
considered an accomplishment
among bona fide newspaper men to
embellish given statement in or
der that it approach the sensa-
tional, especially If the embe1lish-
ing Is tantamount to actual dis
tortion. Yet this is precisely what
occurred in the instance to which
I refer. Perhaps the reporter felt
that what he wrote was consider
ably better than what actually
said. I am not responsible for his
education or lack of it - and
so I cannot quarrel with him on
that score, but I do most strenu-
ously object to being quoted as
having said something that 1 GER
tainly did not say, regardless OF
the fact that 1t may have pleased
the reporter to create a scoop
at my expense. 1 feel that
1t is a distinct departure
from the most elementary news
paper ethics to place inside quo
tation marks a series of state
ments that are Numerically OPP
posed to the general tenor of the re-
marks that are being quoted. From
the screaming headlines Colleges
Held Bad Influence on Young Men
Colleges Played as Bad Influ-
ence - Colleges Denounced as
Breeding Spots for Goddess Civili-
zation - and from the ensuing
reportorial fiasco that seemed to
pass muster as a news story one
would hardly receive the impress
sion that the subject of my dis
course was 1.-THE Five Great Ency-
clicals of the Roman Pontiffs."
From the blanket condemnation OF
university education attributed to
me one would scarcely suspect that
had stressed the necessity OF
higher education as duty incum-
bent upon those Catholics who
could possibly attain 1t. Neverthe-
less, the statement that Catholic