This is no way to end religious illiteracy

All true but it would help if the Church would update arcane medieval titles and designations such as "archbishop" and "Pontifical Institute." No wonder people think they have more authority than they do.

Religion reporting in the mainstream press, IMHO, has improved in the past 5 or 10 years, though it has a long way to go. NPR has a reporter named Haggerty who clearly grew up Catholic, so we no longer her about someone "giving a Mass". But she also is well informed on other churches, seems to do her homework.
I am not aware of any reporter on the American scene who can accurately and cogently report on Islam or any of the Asian religions. It would be a great help to our populace if there were.

When I was editor of The Catholic Herald in Colorado Springs about 25 years ago the local daily newspaper, The Gazette Telegraph, published an article covering a city-wide event celebrating Pentecost. The event marking the birth of the church was marketed as a celebration of the Holy Spirit for all Christians. The headline in the newspaper said "Catholics Celebrate Birth of the Holy Spirit." Painful and funny at the same time we used the opportunity to write in our paper about the theology of the Trinity and the significance of Pentecost, but I still wonder how many people think Catholics believe the Holy Spirit was not only born on Pentecost, but was born in the first place.

If John Allen wants the world and the press to have a better understanding of the ways of the Catholic Church, all I can say is: good luck. The byzantine nature of the institutional Catholic Church is so complex and confusing that even cradle Catholics are flummoxed by it. Expecting non-Catholics and non-Christians to understand it is like asking the average American to explain the difference between Sunni, Shia and Sufi Islam. It ain't goona happen.

The last time I was at the Vatican, I was in St. Peters. A Mass had started in a chapel with twenty clerics in mitres behind the altar. I heard a confused American voice behind me ask in disbelief, "Are all of those priests bishops?" I assumed it was a hapless American lay person with a tour group. Instead, I turned around to find a half dozen middle-aged American priests.

It takes time and energy to seek out the truth in any media announcement. Most of my acquaintences do not take the time, but my immediate family members have become more adept at finding the flaws and seeking the truth due to NCR. Thank you. This article is another example of the need to look further than the headlines.

The term meshuggeneh is a noun -- i.e. "a person who is a bit nuts." You likely intended "meshuggeh" as in "...reporters went a little goofy...."

The problem with religious news reporting is only going to get worse as newspapers, and perhaps news organizations in general, cut back on reporters devoted exclusively to religious news. It would help if someone could prepare a handbook of terms and phrases for news organizations which would provide models of expression for those reporters who have to pick up the slack on this reporting. That would be a practical and common-sense suggestion, however, and the Vatican has rarely given evidence of taking such a hint!

John Allen is correct as far as pointing out the error in the New York Times by referring to Cardinal Danneels as the former "head of the Roman Catholic Church in Belgium."

But then Allen in turn goofs with the phrase "the Archbishop of Brussels." If Allen can be picky so can his readers. We need to remind John that there is no such thing the "Archbishop of Brussels." The proper title for this position is Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels. Picky begets picky.

Richard

No serious Catholic, be s/he moderate, liberal, conservative, etc. is dependant on the secular "news" media for accurate information about the going ons of the Catholic Church. Insofar as non-Catholics and barely there Catholics are concerned, the smart ones aren't going to take media coverage of the Church at face value, or just brainlessly assume that "If it's in the paper, it must be true!"

Frankly, intelligent people know better than to take mainstream news' coverage of ANYTHING at face value.

I wonder if those of you who think the Church is medieval and Byzatine also criticize the medieval and Byzatine aspects of your private and state university systems? or are those sacrosanct? They don't seem under the gone and professional reporters seem to know how to differentiate a regent from a Dean from a Department chair from an Adjunct.

Good points all, John. One that jumped out at me was that the Pope has (5,000+) world bishops as "direct reports." I thought that the bishops reported to the cardinals. No? Anyway, as a retired businessman I know that no one can manage, supervise, or control 5,000 direct reports.

This seems a bit of a hair-splitting exercise that does more (once again) to help the bishops affirm that the problem is their critics, rather than face the problems within the hierarchy and the Church itself.

We all know, for instance that while no bishop may formally have authority over another, it nonetheless is true that Cardinal George is going to get his way in a debate with Bishop Trautman (see the American bishops' resistance to Trautman's discussion of whether the Vatican possesses the right to take over editing a vernacular liturgy). There are de facto leaders among the bishops (ARCHbishops, for instance?) who exercise both very real and at times very strong power to shape the work and actions of their fellow bishops.

Similarly, I'm not sure I see where the Pope was misrepresented in your analysis of the "God not Jobs" controversy. The hierarchy at times does talk a great talk about the dignity of work and of the worker, but historically, bishops have been quick to limit workers' rights, and we all know that pay for Catholic laity working for the Church (or for teaching at Catholic schools) is frequently a travesty. If the direction of our spending indicates our priorities (as my local priest says every time "stewardship season" rolls around), then the hierarchy practices a pretty strong "God not jobs" line. It strikes me that the evidence offered above merely shows that some politicians know that the Church's words often have a much different subtext.

So all that's left then is either a single error or a single intentional inflation of a comment from a "senior Vatican [non]official." I know there are others, but we're only discussing these supposed "whoppers." In terms of trying to grasp something as big and sprawling as the Catholic Church, I'd say that is a pretty good track record. If our bishops and our Pope represented differing viewpoints with equal accuracy, we probably would have a much healthier Church these days.

John, I had problems with your headline. Like the recent one about the "Revolution" at Trent, this one is a good hook. Where this one it falters though I think is that the article never proved the premise. "There is no way" is a universal statement but any well-reported piece of religious news would shatter your declaration. In addition it doesn't seem you really believe the statement because you summarized your article by asserting that what you declared not possible can occur...if... I read this as a case of internal disconnect. Interesting though....

Incidentally, although former Governor Blagovich hasn't yet literally been labeled a former emperor, columnists and media pundits (especially in his own hometown) did assign many vivid and varied metaphorical titles. Perhaps during the second trial in 2111 someone will make you eat crow with this example. In Chicago one never knows.

It is also often forgotten that certain older sees, especially in Europe, did and do continue to have the title of "Primate" attached to it. In our own time this is primarily ceremonial and no longer carries with it the same kind of jurisdictional power that it did in former times. Nevertheless, when a (arch)bishop also has the title of "primate" it is not incorrect to describe him as the "head of the church in _____". In fact, even when it is only ceremonial that is precisely what it does mean. The Primate is the visible head of the bishops of a certain country or region. The Metropolitan Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels is also the Primate of Belgium.

That bishops reach Rome without an intervening "national" layer is clear in the geography of Irish dioceses. Each diocese has direct access to the ocean. Any bishop in Ireland can, therefore, sail to meet the bishop of Rome in Rome without having to transit the turf(or surf)of another - Irish or otherwise!

I generally find John L Allen's columns insightful, even when I don't always with him on a particular topic. This one seems to far below his usual quality. He is, in effect, saying that it's a shame that all journalists don't have the deep expertise that he brings to writing about the church. Besides calling attention to his own knowledge and competence in these matters, the column fails to offer anything of significant interest.

DEAR JOHN ALLEN
You are doing a great service to GOD and to the Roman Catholic Church.
May the HOLY SPIRIT continue to guide you in WISDOM and fill you with COURAGE. You... Your family... and your MISSION and CALL are in my prayers.
Lynn Norton

I too, thought that the title was misleading. Religious Illiteracy? I thought it was going to be about the difficulties with formation in the 21st century and some possible suggestions on how to deal with it.

What I didn't expect was to hear a whiny diatribe about Whether or not Cardinal Danneels was the head of the Belgian Church; or whether the Pope's remarks were misunderstood [hope HE isn't whining this much about it].

The Pope is a public figure and that portion of the article had nothing to do with the premise. Misquoting the Pope has nothing to do with an understanding of how things work in the Catholic Religion. It matters not that he laid out something different in a prior encyclical. He wouldn't be the first person to do an about face on a supposedly "entrenched belief." Given his low credibility with the press right now; the least offensive thing he could be accused of is flip-flopping on an issue.

I think Mr. Allen is having a tough time coming up with stuff to write. This was a stretch. I am disappointed.

There may not be a head of the Catholic Church in Belgium or any other country but my memory is that, at least in Ireland and England and probably in other countries, there is a Primatial See (Armagh in Ireland and Westminster in England) whose Archbishop is usually deascribed as "Primate" which gives him precedence over his fellow bishops and he presides at their meetings. I believe that the National Conferences of bishops may rotate that position and may use a different term to describe the role, such as Chairman or President of the Bishops' Conference.
While I have many crows to pick with sensationalist reporters creating their own news, like the "Koran Burning" by a wacky publicity seeker in Gainesville, I think their description of such a bishop as "head of the Church " in any country is understandable even if not precisely accurate and that we have much more serious issues to talk about.
Bill Keane (Theroadrising)

5000 or so direct reporters to the Pope???

Maybe that is why Vatican II, under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, called for more episcopal collegiality/subsidiarity and the upgrading of the importance and duties of the national and regional episcopal conferences!!!

I think that the point about religious illiteracy is not limited to reporting in the news, actually. As a former RC (now C of E and originally Episcopalian in the US), I shuddered at the reporting of the Episcopal Church's election of a lesbian to be suffragan bishop of Los Angeles, and earlier of Gene Robinson's election to be Bishop of New Hampshire. Every major news outlet here in the UK said that Glasspool and Robinson were "appointed bishop". Of course, C of E bishops here are appointed after a limited consultation with a small number of people. In the US Episcopal bishops are elected by a diocese and then their elections are confirmed by consents of a majority of diocesan Bishops and Standing Committees of dioceses. Saying that these people were "appointed" gives the impression here that a small group of people were involved in the process, and that is just wrong. I got after the BBC Religion reporter and he amended what he wrote, but he and others have slipped back to "appointed" in recent years.

I find that in writing in my blog or in other venues, when I use allusions to the Bible or to the Book of Common Prayer or Common Worship, people younger than I am generally do not get them at all. This comes from a combination of general societal irreligiousness here in the UK and a conscious decision on the part of schools not to teach using Biblical or religious themes. This has not (as yet) affected my preaching, as those who attend church usually "get" what I'm talking about when I use religious allusions. But when you mention in reference to learning something "read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest" from Cranmer's Collect for 2nd Advent, you get shrugs when years ago you would get a smile or agreement from people of all ages.

John is right on all counts. The most important point being that their is no head of a "National Church" like a patriarch. What John understandably does not mention is that their are autochthonous churches under the pope who have independent governance. These churches have a married priesthood and culturally determine their own liturgies. These churches accept the pope as the head of the church, yet have independence to make decisions on the local level. This was not the point of his article, but it is a fact the vast majority of catholics know nothing about. One example is the Melkite Catholic Church(Patriarchate).

It is sadly typical of John Allen that what he chooses to focus on in the very sad affair of Cardinal Godfried Danneels is not what it proves about the church-- that Cardinals are still trying to shut victims up-- but rather on some completely unimportant issue regarding his title.

I guess when you devote your career, as Mr. Allen has, to being an apologist for those who rape children, you lose touch with what is actually important. I wish the NCR would forbid him from writing anything further about the abuse crisis until he spends as much time talking to victims as he has to those who continue to victimize them. He thinks getting Danneels' title right matters, but that the corruption he reveals does not.

Is it true that when/if a Monsignor, Bishop, Cardinal....money must be sent by him/or the diocese to Rome? Thousands of dollars...eg $5,000n for the Mnsignor title and upwards from there? My friends say it is common knowledge.