Noonan Iscariot?

Not to distract from this Sacred Night, but a notable development's come up: in her Good Friday "Declaration" for tomorrow's Wall Street Journal, no less a leading Catholic conservative than Peggy Noonan -- Bush 41 speechwriter, JP2 biographer, EWTN commentator during PopeTrip'08 (for the pontiff's moving visit to Ground Zero) -- has broken from her ilk's talking points of the last week in commenting thus on the Return of the Scandals:

In both the U.S. and Europe, the scandal was dug up and made famous by the press. This has aroused resentment among church leaders, who this week accused journalists of spreading "gossip," of going into "attack mode" and showing "bias."

But this is not true, or to the degree it is true, it is irrelevant. All sorts of people have all sorts of motives, but the fact is that the press—the journalistic establishment in the U.S. and Europe—has been the best friend of the Catholic Church on this issue. Let me repeat that: The press has been the best friend of the Catholic Church on the scandals because it exposed the story and made the church face it. The press forced the church to admit, confront and attempt to redress what had happened. The press forced them to confess. The press forced the church to change the old regime and begin to come to terms with the abusers. The church shouldn't be saying j'accuse but thank you.

Without this pressure—without the famous 2002 Boston Globe Spotlight series with its monumental detailing of the sex abuse scandals in just one state, Massachusetts—the church would most likely have continued to do what it has done for half a century, which is look away, hush up, pay off and transfer.

In fact, the press came late to the story. The mainstream media almost had to be dragged to it. It was there waiting to be told at least by the 1990s, but broadcast news shows and big newspapers weren't keen to go after it. It would take months or years to report and consume huge amounts of labor, time and money—endless digging through court records, locating victims and victimizers, getting people who don't want to talk to talk. And after all that, the payoff could be predicted: You'd get slammed by the church as biased, criticized by sincerely disbelieving churchgoers, and maybe get a boycott from a few million Catholics. No one wanted that.

An irony: Non-Catholic members of the media were, in my observation, the least likely to want to go after the story, because they didn't want to look like they were Catholic-bashing. An irony within the irony: some journalists didn't think to go after the story because they really didn't much like the Catholic Church. Because of this bias, they didn't see the story as a story. They thought this was how the church always operated. It didn't register with them that it was a scandal. They didn't know it was news.

It was the Boston Globe that broke the dam, winning a justly deserved Pulitzer for investigative reporting. They could have gotten it for public service.

For the record, that last piece merits a correction: the Globe's dam-breaking reporting on the Boston scandals did in fact win the 2003 Pulitzer for Public Service -- the equivalent of "best picture" at journalism's Oscars.

Given the error, it's worth adding that the year's investigative prize just so happened to go to... The New York Times.

Intentional error, perhaps?

Either way, tomorrow might be this year's Good Friday... yet lest anybody forgot, it's likewise the fifth anniversary of the journey to the Father's House of the great and beloved Pope John Paul II.

-30-