So, once again there is a major error in a major story out there in the major media and we cannot really discuss its contents because it is behind a pay-for-content firewall. Trust me, I know that the future of journalism depends on journalists getting paid for the product that they produce, yet I also know that the future includes interactivity and blogging. ‘Tis a puzzlement.
The story is the new iPhone and iPad app that helps Catholics prepare to go to confession.
So let’s start with a news report on this development that you can read, which is over at CNN.com:
(CNN) — Bless me father for I have sinned. It has been 300 tweets since my last confession.
Whether you’ve been “borrowing” free Wi-Fi or coveting your neighbor’s avatar — or, heaven forbid, something worse — a new mobile app is designed to help you atone for it.
Lame tech jokes aside, the makers of “Confession: A Roman Catholic App” say their software is seriously designed to help believers with the sacrament, and to help those who have left the church take a digital step back home.
Worry not, faithful Catholics: The $1.99 application, for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch, is not intended to replace the confessional. Instead, it’s designed to complement the act of confession, offering a “personal examination of conscience” (password-protected, of course) and a step-by-step guide to sin-confessing.
The app provides suggested acts of contrition and the “ability to add sins not listed in standard examination of conscience.”
And there, my friends, is the key phrase — “examination of conscience.” This app is actually a combination between a personal diary and the “examination of conscience” booklets and tracts that Catholic and Orthodox Christians have carried in their pockets, wallets and purses for generations. As Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, a popular Catholic blogger, notes at his “What Does the Prayer Really Say?” website:
I am all for anything that gets people to go to confession. But let’s be clear about something: The iPhone app is for preparing to go to confession. It is not a substitute for going to confession. …
It has an imprimatur from Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend. The app store says that it was developed by Fr. Thomas Weinandy, OFM, the Exec. Director of the Secretariate for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices for the USCCB and Fr. Dan Scheidt, pastor of Queen of Peace Catholic Church in Mishawaka, Indiana. WDTPRS applauds their effort.
The problem, you see, is that many readers who are fans of all things Rupert Murdoch are reacting to the lede in a story (behind that firewall) in The Times (of London).
Alas, here is the top of that story (care of the omnipresent Father Kendall Harmon of TitusOneNine):
Roman Catholic bishops have approved a new iPhone and iPad app that allows users to make confession with a virtual “priest” over the internet.
“Confession: A Roman Catholic App”, which went on sale through Apple’s iTunes website … last week, offers “a personalised examination of conscience for each user”, according to its makers. It asks penitents to list sins they have committed by misdeed or omission.
Senior Church officials in the US and Britain have approved the app, which they say can be used by Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
The lede is totally wrong. There is no “virtual” priest and no “virtual” sacrament. Period.
Now, is there a more accurate wording later on in the story? I don’t know. Ask me in a few weeks when the iPad 2.0 comes out and I try out The Daily, that is, if Murdoch has decided to allow his own media holdings to work together in a digital product.
Meanwhile, we do live in a sinful, fallen world and this inaccurate perception is spreading. Thus, at the Economic Times one can read a headline that states, “No time to visit church? Confess via iPhone.” The lede states:
LONDON: Users of iPhone can now perform contrition and other religious rituals without visiting church, thanks to a new online application.
“Confession: A Roman Catholic App”, created by a US-based company called Little iApps, is designed for Apple devices such as iPhone, iPad and iPod, the Telegraph reported. … It offers password protected customised profiles, a guide to performing the sacrament as well as a list of acts of contrition.
What in the world does that lede mean? The key words, of course, are “without visiting church.” Well, it is true that priests can hear confessions just about anywhere — face to face. This does not, as of yet, include FaceTime to FaceTime. We are talking about a sacrament encounter between a believer and God, with a priest hearing the confession as a representative of the church, the Body of Christ. What does the Economic Times mean by “other religious rituals”?
So how does one correct an error of this magnitude? I think the London Times needs to do an entirely new story. Meanwhile, Murdoch (who is an Anglican) might want to go to confession and see how that process works.
If you find other reports about this subject — good and bad — please note them in the comments pages. Thanks.
Photo: Yes, I know that confession booths (second photo) are now considered old fashioned and that many priests and penitents prefer face-to-face confession in the newer Rite of Reconciliation.
 | Posted at 9:51 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (19) |
February 9, 2011, at 10:00 am
Re: Meanwhile, Murdoch (who is an Anglican) might want to go to confession and see how that process works.
Anglicans do have the sacrament of confession, although most of us, unfortunately, don’t go as often as we ought to. There’s no reason why Murdoch, if he is an Anglican, shouldn’t know how the process works.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
February 9, 2011, at 11:22 am
I’m guessing Ruth Gledhill wrote the article.
Or maybe Libby Purvis.
The other usual suspect would have been a guy named Owen or Owens, based in Rome reporting tidbits in Italian tabloids as authoritative dictates of “the Vatican”, but he retired, thank God.
I’m glad for the pay-wall - my blood pressure has gone down since I can’t read these sxxx disturbers anymore.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
February 9, 2011, at 11:42 am
Although I’m not ordinarily a Maureen Dowd fan, her column today in the New York Times offers a well-balanced and light-hearted take on the app. I actually learned more about the app because she quoted from sample passages and put it in context with quotes from its developers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 9, 2011, at 12:35 pm
Mike, the only problem with your post is that you did not provide the link for others to read her piece so here it is: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/opinion/09dowd.html
The actual examples made her opinion piece a better news story than what we see in “news” sections.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 9, 2011, at 1:20 pm
Since this site in general, and this post in particular, is about journalism, might I point out that there is no such newspaper as “The London Times” — despite the common usage.
It is simply “The Times”. If one must, when citing it, then, “The Times” of London, or “The Times” (London).
Other newspapers, founded more recently, have added their location as part of their name: NY Times, LA Times, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Times
Thus, as a sort of back-formation, people began to say “The London Times”
I do realize that in the present case you are merely quoting an earlier article.
LC
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
February 9, 2011, at 1:22 pm
LOUIS:
Correct. Lazy of me. I will correct.
And then there is the Sunday Times, right?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 9, 2011, at 4:25 pm
Meagyn Kelly on FOX News this afternoon did a commentary about this indicating that it was preparation for a good confession to a priest. But she did not seem to know that there was a perception out there that this program was to facilitate the actual confession to a priest.
I’ve noticed that in several articles and news pieces. The situation is left very vague about whether the app helps to prepare the person for a person-to-person encounter or substitutes for that encounter.
I’m guessing Catholics assume everybody knows that this is an aid to preparation and the non-Catholics aren’t sure what the heck it’s for.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 9, 2011, at 4:27 pm
Correction: I meant that Meagyn Kelly seemed to not realize that there was a perception that this program was replacing a direct encounter with a priest.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 9, 2011, at 4:39 pm
A forwarded Daily News story claimed the app was “approved by the Vatican”…. that hive mind again.
It notes that “The new app doesn’t replace the priest. Only they have the power to forgive sins here on Earth.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2011/02/09/2011-02-09_catholics_get_right_with_lord_by_iphone.html#ixzz1DV3ZTLTP
But… that smacks of Protestant polemic. Do priests actually “forgive” sins, or do they proclaim GOD’S forgiveness?
What seems to be a correction (http://www.nydailynews.com/tech_guide/2011/02/09/2011-02-09_vatican_you_cant_confess_your_sins_to_an_iphone_app.html) notes “Vatican wary of Confession…app”, quoting “spokesman” Federico Lombardi.
It also notes that the app claims to have an “imprimatur” from Bishop Rhodes (who, of course, is not “the Vatican”.) Did he really decree an official “Imprimatur” (let it be printed), usually done in the days when “indexing” of books was being actively pursued? Or is this just a slang “imprimatur”?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 9, 2011, at 5:49 pm
Some headlines to google for more stories than one person should read:
• “Can’t Make it to Confession? There’s an App for That”
• “Catholic Church Approves Confession by iPhone”
• “Bless Me iPhone for I Have Sinned”
• “Catholic Church Endorses App for Sinning iPhone Users”
• “US Bishop Sanctions Cell Phone in Confession”
• “Forgiveness via iPhone: Church Approves Confession App”
• “New, Church-Approved iPhone Offers Confession On the Go”
• “Confess Your Sins to a Phone in Catholic Church Endorsed App”
• “Catholics Can Now Confess Using iPhone App”
• “Catholic Church Approves Online Confession”
From Time’s religion experts, some weird writing:
The app, which costs $1.99, just goes through the motions of confession, but churchgoers must see a priest for absolution.
Reuters, however, gets it right.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
February 9, 2011, at 6:07 pm
Considering all the distortions and mistakes the media has made over what should be a fairly easy story to report correctly it makes one wonder how accurate the coverage is of governmental, political, business, and world affairs issues which can be far more complicated.
It reminds me of a doctor who told me that most news stories about medical affairs make him want to cry because of their regular and gross inaccuracies that totally mislead people.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
February 9, 2011, at 6:11 pm
As my grandmother used to say, this CNN entry just gets my goat. It’s a common strategy (I can’t think of a better word) for correcting a story about faith—especially, it seems to me, the Catholic Church.
Note where the author puts the blame:
Oh, so the Vatican once thought that the application was a new form of the sacramental presence of Christ? And then someone changed their mind?
I would love someday to see the following words in a follow-up story about the Vatican: “Rome responded today to misinterpretations about [fill in the blank]. While it had been reported that [fill in this one, too], those news stories were in error, which prompted the Vatican to issue the following statement …”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
9 
0
February 9, 2011, at 6:18 pm
Note—about your picture of the “old-fashioned” confessional booth.
Some observers of the Catholic scene claim that one big reason for the huge drop-off in making use of the sacrament of confession is the widespread belief among Catholics that one must go to confession face-to-face—and they loathe doing it that way so they stay away.
Along these lines it is then not surprising that, for example, a Carmelite chapel near my home, which still has confessional booths, probably hears more confessions than all the Catholic parishes in the area combined hear.
And that would make a good news story: the preference of Catholics for the “old-Fashioned” confessional booth.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
1
February 9, 2011, at 8:56 pm
Tmatt: that’s right (and applies to several other papers here too).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 10, 2011, at 10:46 am
Uhhh… Stoo, what’s right? What’s the subject of your comment?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 10, 2011, at 11:31 am
And now The Telegraph is reporting that the Vatican has
banned the confession app, but then says it was never intended to replace the priest, but then talks about having a connection to God. Quick interviews with people on the street but we don’t get to hear the question. For the reporter it’s just too good of a story with lots of funny & clever lines to stay coherent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8314666/Vatican-bans-iPhone-God-app.html
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
February 10, 2011, at 12:04 pm
Tmatt: the question you ended with “right?”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 10, 2011, at 11:01 pm
In case anybody is still paying attention, Fr Z has a rundown on how the press is now erroneously saying that THE VATICAN is banning the iPhone app. After linking some horrible new stories, he says:
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 10, 2011, at 11:03 pm
Sorry. Here’s the link to Fr Z’s article.
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/02/will-newsies-never-report-on-the-iphone-confession-app-correctly/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0