Boston Archdiocese Punts on Religious Freedom Lawsuit

On Monday, May 21, Cardinal Dolan, President of the USCCB, applauded 43 dioceses, hospitals, schools and church agencies for filing 12 lawsuits around the nation saying the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services contraception coverage mandate violates religious freedom.

The Boston Archdiocese was not one of those dioceses.

St. Anthony of Padua said, “Actions speak louder than words” and the actions of Cardinal O’Malley make it  increasingly obvious that our Cardinal is lacking in courage.

Here is an excerpt from the AP report on the news:

NEW YORK – Roman Catholic dioceses, schools, and other groups sued the Obama administration Monday in eight states and the District of Columbia over a federal mandate that most employers provide workers free birth control as part of their health insurance.

The 12 federal lawsuits represent the largest push against the mandate since President Obama announced the policy in January. Among the 43 groups suing are the University of Notre Dame, the Archdioceses of Washington and New York, the Michigan Catholic Conference, and the Catholic University of America.

“We have tried negotiation with the administration and legislation with the Congress, and we’ll keep at it, but there’s still no fix,’’ said New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. “Time is running out, and our valuable ministries and fundamental rights hang in the balance, so we have to resort to the courts now.’’

The suits bring the total number of cases now pending over the mandate to more than 30.

The Archdiocese of Boston did not join the effort, although it supports the legal challenges. “There is no need for every single diocese or other Catholic organization to sue,’’ Terrence Donilon, archdiocese spokesman, said in a statement. “The various plaintiffs reflect a broad cross-section of Catholic institutions, and together they represent the wide variety of issues, impacts, economic consequences, and divergent facts that exist among Catholic organizations nationwide.’’

In other words, while the Archdioceses of New York, Washington and St. Louis; the Dioceses of Dallas, Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, Rockville Centre, Springfield, Ill., Erie (PA), Jackson and Biloxi (Miss.) and others, along with the University of Notre Dame and the Catholic University of America; and Our Sunday Visitor dig in and fight the battle (see here for list), the Boston Archdiocese will sit back and do nothing.  All the plaintiffs are being represented pro bono by the law firm Jones Day, so the out-of-pocket cost to Boston would be zero.

BCI literally is almost speechless upon hearing that Boston is bailing. Several times in recent months Cardinal O’Malley has called publicly for courage. Now he fails to demonstrate it via his actions.

September 2011 at diocesan Red Mass for lawyers and jurists: “We are called upon to defend the gospel of life with courage and resolve…Your very profession invests in all of you a great responsibility to ensure that all laws are just.”

November 2011 at the “ad limina” visit to Rome: Here is most of the CNS story reporting on this:

Bishops from northeastern US begin ‘ad limina’ visits with prayer

By Cindy Wooden, Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Praying together at the tombs of the Apostles Peter and Paul and meeting Pope Benedict XVI should be a moment for bishops to reconfirm and strengthen their faith, said Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of Boston.

In his homily, the cardinal told his fellow bishops that after Jesus’ arrest in the garden of Gethsemane, “Peter flees. He’s trying to follow the Lord at a safe distance, something we all try to do at one time or another. But Peter discovers it’s impossible; you can only follow the Lord up close.”

“Jesus doesn’t ask Peter if he’s excelled in his intellectual prowess or his organization skills or his fundraising capacity or his Myers-Briggs score. Jesus only asks, ‘Do you love me?’” he said.

Peter’s love for the Lord brought him to Rome, the cardinal said, but — according to legend — as persecution grew Peter decided to flee again. Leaving the city, he saw the risen Lord and asked him, “Quo vadis?” (“Where are you going?”), and Jesus replied he was going to Rome to be crucified again. Peter renewed his faith and returned to the city where he met a martyr’s death.

“Each of us has gone through a ‘quo vadis’ moment or two in our vocation as bishops,” the cardinal said. “Hopefully, our being together at the tomb of Peter and close to Benedict will renew us in our generosity, courage and faith in following Jesus up close so that we can say with all our hearts what Peter said, ‘Lord you know all things. You know that I love you.’”

The comment by Terry Donilon suggests that Cardinal O’Malley and the Boston Archdiocese are, like Peter, fleeing and trying to keep a safe distance from this crucial issue. Apparently, the hope for renewal of courage nearby the tomb of Peter from last November has already worn off.  More and more, when the Cardinal calls upon the Catholic faithful to have courage, the words ring hollow because he fails to match his actions with his words.

We close today with a quote sent by a reader from Edmund Burke, “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”  That is what is happening in Boston on this issue. We hope and pray that those who have the courage to fight will prevail, and those currently lacking the courage to fight will realize they are allowing evil to triumph and will change their ways.

116 Responses to Boston Archdiocese Punts on Religious Freedom Lawsuit


    There could be a strategy to filing in some federal districts and not others. Could be our local federal court would not be receptive to this kind of argument/objection/suit. I assume this law firm, working pro bono, has chosen certain federal districts in which they feel they would have their best chance of success or at least a level playing field. The decision may not have been that of the individual diocese at all; it may have been the decision of the law firm based on their reading of the individual courts.

    Just my .02

    • Liam says:

      Very true. And it’s not something that is going to be publicly discussed, as judges do not look kindly on looking gamed.


        Liam, Absolutely. It would be professional suicide for the law firm to discuss why certain courts were chosen and others were not.

      • Liam says:

        And the federal courts in Boston would not be a propitious venue.

    • teddy ballgame says:

      Don’t think so. There are 89 Federal District Courts in which to file, and Jones-Day picks the Eastern Dist. of New York and Washington DC? If they are shopping venues then why not the more conservative South and Mid-West?

      The answer: The Cardinal is really a Chicken!


        Suit was filed in 12 federal district courts as far as I know. There are only 11 circuits in the federal system (each Circuit has its US Court of Appeals). No reason to file in each district court at all and a considerable waste of time and $$$$$ since these cases will be appealed to the relevant Circuit Court anyway, no matter what happens below. . It would be highly irresponsible to file in each district court. I do not have the list of each district court chosen but that would be helpful to see.

        I think many people here are ill informed on this. What is happening is forum shopping, plain and simple, complicated by who really has standing as plaintiffs. If you get to read the original complaint, I think you will understand better.

      • MaryL says:

        I don’t see our diocese of Chicago on the list. Where is Cardinal George?

  2. Gerald Brent says:

    This is amazing that Boston was not included. and that it will “sit back and do nothing.” There was an article in the Globe back in 2007 that was titled The Invisible Hand of Jack. Enough said.

  3. Bill Redmond says:

    The lawsuits include two archdioceses lead by Cardinals. Having Cardinals Dolan and Whurl taking the lead on this makes sense.

    The Archdiocese of Boston is not running from this issue. All you have to do is check out the archive episodes of The Good Catholic Life radio show. There has been regular discussions of the religious freedom issue.

    • Michael says:

      I once was like you. But Cardinal O’Malley has no courage. He talks a good game, but his actions scream the exact opposite. His words of encouragement to lawyers at the most recent Red Mass, closely parallel his rallying cry to lawyers in 2003 in fighting against same-sex “marriage.” The problem is that his actions never achieve the level of commitment as the words he preaches. All bluster, no bite. His words seem tough. His actions are weak. We need a leader not someone who thinks that because others have stood up, he has no independent duty to stand as well. He does. He is the shepherd and he has failed, once again to lead.

      Your loyalty to the Cardinal is laudable, but misplaced.

      • Paulie Girl says:

        As others have pointed out, someone doesn’t just go to the enormous expense of filing a lawsuit just to “look good”. EVERYbody doesn’t have to get their name in the paper so to speak. You and others – the author and headline writer of this piece – need to take a deep breath and calm down for a minute. Nothing is lost by the Boston archdiocese (or the 100+ other dioceses) not filing suit Monday. There’s no need for dozens of “me-toos”. Please recognize that.

        It would help lessen a lot of people’s angst if everyone would realize that just like Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither was the societal rot surrounding us. And likewise, correcting it is a 2 steps forward-one step backward experience oftentimes
        Every bishop, archbishop and cardinal is just one person. Ditto with every priest. We all need to do our part like members of a symphony but doing so doesn’t mean presto, everything is solved. This applies also to bishops – they’re not able to fix everything by merely acting courageously. Some have lacked courage (though that virtue is on the rise) but lack of courage isn’t always the cause between every seeming inaction or slow action.

        In my experience, it’s generally most productive to encourage good actioms and pray and respectfully request additional good actions when they’ve finally happened somewhere!

      • Bill Redmond says:

        Thanks Michael.

    • Stephen says:

      Talk is cheap.

  4. Boston Blackey says:

    Do you think that the silence on this issue might have something to do with all of the lay leaderships that are so dedicated to Pres. Obama and the Democrat party? That is the first thought I had when I read the article in the NY Times on Sunday. Shame on you Cardinal O’Malley and on all of your auxiliaries who said nothing.

    • Agreed. Boston’s ordinary and auxiliary bishops have done nothing, not only in regards to the HHS, but towards vocations to the priesthood, promotion of the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments (which includes confirming and ordaining minor and major orders for priests to serve Boston), the true meaning of marriage and providing proper preparation towards it (not those “Engaged Encounter” classes that have everything to do with Modernism), show the urgency that “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” by having infants baptised as soon as they leave the hospital; opperating a TV station that is filthy (something that Cardinal Cushing would not think would happen to Catholic TV); and for the worse of it all, having a plan to cluster parishes and keeping them open with one pastor, while if you read between the lines they’re reducing the number of parishes by 40% by 2017.

      Boston needs an SSPX chapel now. They’re the only hope for Confirmations and a Ponitfical High Mass to take place in Boston, which the latter is not happening anytime soon under the Friar’s watch.

      • Stephen says:

        Marie from Squantum,
        Are you still out there?
        This is your answer.

      • Marie says:


        Still here. I send you the latest as it relates to Mary Star of the Sea Squantum:

        “Dear Friend,

        We deeply regret to inform you that the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy (the lower court) has UPHELD Cardinal O’Malley’s Decree of Relegation of Star of the Sea Church.”

        There is an appeal in process to the Apostolic Signatura.

        For me, I just want to see that a wrong is made right, that Mary Star of the Sea is re-opened as a place of worship for the Catholic faithful of the community of Squantum as it should be. It is they who built this church.

        You can use my name. I use only my name.

        You all seem to know each other very well and can see the personal barbs; I do not. However, with such a volitile subject and so many deep rooted emotions and opinions, what would anyone expect? As long as there is no disrespect for opinion, there may be some answers here, in the form of opinion, that will give each food for thought.

        I must say that this may become the BCI never ending blog topic. Fifty years at a crossroad and fifty years without resolution.
        Is there resolution?


    • GodBlessAmerica says:

      Who knows? A little confusing though…….you read the
      New York TImes not the Daily news or NY Post?

      Please stop naming people.

  5. jbq2 says:

    Not good! With a quote from the “Cash Cab”, are you in or are you out!

  6. Jack O'Malley says:

    They used to affirm that it took a man of courage to occupy an episcopal see, particularly that of Rome with the words testiculos habet et bene pendentes.

    In this corner of the world we have a bishop qui testiculos habet et bene recedentes.

    Why do you suppose he wears the brown rather than the red?

    • GodBlessAmerica says:

      Regardless of the current issue, it did take a man of courage
      to take over the Boston Archdiocese in 2002/2003.

      I suppose he wears the brown, because he does not
      want to appear imposing.. Maybe he is trying to be more approachable? He could have ten reasons.

      Please stop being mean. I do not think he would do
      this to someone.

      • Stephen says:

        Archbishop Chaput is of the same order as our Cardinal yet
        no longer wears his brown felt robe. Why?
        True, we do not know the reason that our Cardinal wears his brown robe. It could be vanity, comfort or to save on laundering expenses. Clearly he is making some fashion statement by rejecting a traditional Cardinal’s habit. “I’m not like those other guys” is clearly and intentionally implied. The opting out on the HHS mandate lawsuit is a similar odd ‘political’ statement

        Courage or Fortitude is a Cardinal Virtue that increases only by the exercise of it. The Bishops staff has two ends, one to hook the stray sheep, the other to stab the wolf.


    ‘JUST WONDERING’ === why am I not surprised???? BUT,
    why am I disappointed????? Why am I leaning towards BOSTON BLACKEY’s statement. WHY….WHY….WHY IS OUR CARDINAL AFRAID TO JOIN IN?????

  8. Anonymous says:

    Would anyone expect anything else from O’Malley considering the fact he sold out on the Catholic Hospitals.

    • Michael says:

      Same-sex adoptions
      Same-sex “marriage”
      Catholic Hospitals,
      Catholic Schools
      St. Cecelia’s
      etc., etc., etc.

  9. teddy ballgame says:

    RCAB is run by a bunch of non-practicing Catholics. What else would you expect?

    • Agreed. And sadly, I believe you Teddy. I don’t think that many of the “Pastoral Center” employees are practicing Catholics. Some may have never been Catholic, but they are just working there. If you polled chancery workers (anywhere), how many of them would you think that they would agree with the Magisterium on Papal infallibility, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, the role of the priest, indulgences, Death, Judgement, Purgatory, Hell, Heaven, and most of all, transubstantiation?

      • Shocked&Sad says:

        I hope these things are not true. Please consider the possibility
        that religion (to some) is highly private. Some people quietly
        attend mass, agree with the Magisterium, and…………
        no one but God would ever know.

      • Capt Crunch says:


        You have a point, I myself was one of those, however…

        Desperate times call for desperate measures. Read “The Keys of this Blood” by Malachi Martin or “Benedict XVI’s Reform: The Liturgy Between Innovation and Tradition” by Nicola Bux.

        There appears to be a battle amongst the church leadership and, unfortunately, the RCAB is being run by the wrong team.

        The RCAB should be standing up for truth, period. For those that say Cardinal Sean may not joining this battle publicly because our local court may not be receptive… I’m calling cow poop. Once the Church plays the politics game the battle is lost.

        Joining this lawsuit is either the right thing to do or it is not. Making the decision to join this lawsuit based on political expediency is a bad idea. How did the political expediency game play out for Pilate when he shipped Jesus to Herod for judgement….

        Stand up for the truth or get out of the way…

  10. breathnach says:

    On a central issue like this Cardinal Sean asks himself: “What would Jack Connors do?”

    • Jack O'Malley says:

      Exactly. But Seáno would probably word it: “What would JC do?” just in case someone were eavesdropping.

      But he likely wouldn’t even have to ask himself the question. The éminence grise there would be right there to whisper in the ear of the éminence brune.

  11. […] Boston Archdiocese Bails on Religious Freedom Lawsuit – Boston Catholic Insider […]

  12. I mentioned it on Google Plus, got this reply:
    Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston2:52 PM
    As we said in our official statement, there is no need for every single diocese or other Catholic organization to sue. The various plaintiffs reflect a broad cross-section of Catholic institutions, and together they represent the wide variety of issues, impacts, economic consequences, and divergent facts that exist among Catholic organizations nationwide. We are confident in the strength of this broader effort as it is, and we applaud and support it.

    • Carolyn says:

      The institutions filing suit are the ones that are considered leaders of the Roman Catholic Church in the U.S. Note Boston is not on the list. One of the finest Catholic lawyers in the United States is a partner at Jones Day’s office in Boston… so the argument that Jones Day didn’t think of Boston, or vice versa, is ridiculous.

      Facta non verba is the only Latin one needs to know when judging Boston’s (very) ordinary. Long on verba and short on facta…

  13. Ray Neary says:

    Fear not! There were 5 sign-carrying, pamphlet-passing, rain-drenched stalwart Roman Catholics standing outside of Auschwitz Boston on 1055 Commonwealth Avenue this morning. An irony: Two people (clients) who tried to wheel their baby carriages with children in them where ushered out. A violation of PP rules. Just figure that one out!

  14. c matt says:

    I don’t know much about the AD of B, but there are legitimate legal strategic reasons to join or not join. They are likely in a separate federal district, so you would have separate filing fees and service costs, have to appear at different trial courts, etc. All appellate circuits seem to be covered, so there really is not much gained (except for showing of solidarity). This will end up with the SCOTUS one way or another, so adding another plaintiff at this stage does not do much. On appeal, they can always join in an amicus brief, although I doubt there is much surprise as to their position. Could also be that Jones Day does not have a Boston office (they are acting pro bono, which means they would wisely want to keep costs down). There is also the forum shopping (don’t know if they filed in any 9th circuit jurisdictions).


      “In addition to the Archdiocese of New York and Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, the dioceses involved are the archdioceses of Washington and St. Louis and the dioceses of Rockville Centre, N.Y.; Erie, Pa.; Pittsburgh; Dallas; Fort Worth, Texas; Jackson, Miss.; Biloxi, Miss.; Springfield, Ill.; and Joliet, Ill. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which provides medical benefits to more than 1,100 Catholic institutions and approximately 10,000 employees in the state, also is a plaintiff.”

      I agree this is definitely a case for SCOTUS. Aside from whether or not you are Catholic, fascinating First Amendment issue worthy of many amicus briefs, even as curious as ACLU . Just how many Catholics are on the US Sup. Ct today??? Six our of the nine are Catholic. That is amazing and certainly historic.

      Roberts, Chief Justice – Catholic
      Scalia – Catholic
      Kennedy – Catholic
      Alito – Catholic
      Thomas – Catholic
      Sotomayer – Catholic

      This should be an exciting case, aside from the interests expressed here. It is not about how many archdioceses have filed suit at all. There will be a split in the circuits and USSC will take the case.

      • Capt Crunch says:

        @YOUGOTTABEKIDDING, c matt, Liam, et al

        Great summary of the potential legal intricacies of this case…

        How about we discuss the “Law of the Big Mo” or, shall we say, the lack thereof. If Cardinal Sean doesn’t start developing the 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership then this whole discussion will be mute because the only option for church will be the local evangelical church in the strip mall down the street. Maybe that’s the goal….

        Just sayin’

    • Objective Observer says:

      There is no strategic reason for Boston to not have filed. The suits will likely be combined on appeal (no matter who wins) and sent to the Supremes. That’s how you get cert. in these situations. The goal here is to get the question to The Court.

      There are two reasons I can think of that kept Boston on the back benches:
      1. Bryan Hehir said no to save embarrassment; and/or
      2. RCABoston is on the brink of bankruptcy and sees itself bogged down in Federal Bankruptcy Court in the next year or two, so can’t afford to fight a war on two fronts.


        And there is no strategic reason for Boston to have filed. Many have not filed.

      • Michael says:

        No strategic reason to file?????

        How about standing up and being counted. Seriously. We only need a few people who agree with us to sign up. Ridiculous. Even basic schoolyard etiquette says that you bring anyone with a vested interest to the fight. Cardinal O’Malley isn’t vested.

      • JUST WONDERING says:

        Objective Observer, I’m afraid “JUST WONDERING” agrees with you….Bryan Hehir not only wants to “save embarrassment” BUT he is embarrassment personified and sits at the ‘right hand of the father.”


      Very sad. Does this Archdiocese ever seek to sell modest property??

  15. c matt says:

    Also, it’s a bit inaccurate to say they “bailed”. That implies they were in it then dropped out. A better way to put it is they passed on joining.


      Agree. Nobody bailed at all. I honestly think only certain plaintiffs were invited to file.

    • c matt, Thank you for your comment. You raise a valid point–indeed we could have written the topic of the post as, “Boston Archdiocese Punts on Religious Freedom Lawsuit” or “Boston Archdiocese Passes on Joining Religious Freedom Lawsuit.”


        Objective Oberver, I am intrigued. Do you have a basis for your position that the Archdiocese bailed on this or just plain refused to participate?? I have no personal knowledge of the players but rather a good handle on appellate practice and how this would have been handled. That is the basis of my statement that only certain plaintiffs would have been invited to file.

      • Michael says:

        or Boston Archdiocese afraid to join Religious Freedom Lawsuit.
        or Boston Archdiocese lacks moral clarity to join moral battle
        or Boston Archdiocese too engaged in democratic politics to join Religious Freedom Lawsuit
        or Boston Archdiocese worried about what others might think to join Religious Freedom Lawsuit,

    • Paulie Girl says:

      Yes! I noticed that too and meant to mention it though I would have been less diplomatic and said it was completely inaccurate to call the Boston archdiocese’ non-joining of these lawsuits “bailing”. It just causes problems (not to mention being unfair and reducing this blog’s credibility) when you (the blog) distort things like this.

      Based on the contents in the story, the headline should have simply been, “Boston Archdiocese Not Among Litigants in Religious Freedom Lawsuits”. That would have properly highlighted the true reality and been fair and not had this blog being the boy who cried wolf, which has certainly reduced this blog’s credibility for the future. There are presumably enough serious problems without needing to make them up.

      Then there’s the simple matter of the imprudence of pushing disunity in the Church – at a time when the Church in America (overall) has clearly woken up and finding her voice and her backbone again. Please re-think the scorched earth strategy of attacking Card. O’Malley and try and demonstrated greater perspective and prudence in blogging.

      • Paulie Girl,
        Thank you for your comment. We changed the title/headline of the post.

        Perhaps you are new to the blog and are missing some of the history. BCI suggests you read this blog post for more background:

        In writing about his presiding over the Ted Kennedy funeral on his blog in 2009, Cardinal O’Malley said of Kennedy, there is a “tragic sense of lost opportunity in his lack of support for the unborn. To me and many Catholics it was a great disappointment…” In the words of the Cardinal, it was a “lost opportunity” and “great disappointment” that Kennedy actively supported the killing of more than 50M unborn babies in the womb, but in the same blog post, Cardinal O’Malley used harsh language to criticize pro-lifers who complained about the funeral, saying, “At times, even in the Church, zeal can lead people to issue harsh judgments and impute the worst motives to one another. These attitudes and practices do irreparable damage to the communion of the Church.”
        Cardinal O’Malley allowed a 2010 Boston Social Justice Conference to feature a BC priest, Fr. Thomas Massaro SJ, who signed a public letter supporting Kathleen Sebelius for HHS Secretary. According to published minutes of an Archdiocesan Pastoral Council meeting, the Cardinal dismissed complaints by council members about this matter, saying he “takes Fr. Massaro’s work in the context of the priest’s life of service to the Church.” Now that same HHS Secretary, Sebelius, is forcing an unprecedented infringement on our religious liberty.
        Cardinal O’Malley still retains Jack Connors as Boston Archdiocese Finance Council member, fund-raiser and adviser while Connors raises millions of dollars for the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history and while Connors works against the Catholic Church by chairing Partners Healthcare, one of the largest abortion providers in the commonwealth. Yet Cardinal O’Malley fails to try and rally Connors to support abortion alternatives in Boston, or to insist that his advocacy for those who support abortion is incompatible with him serving in a senior advisory and fund-raising role.
        Back in 2009 when pro-life Catholics complained that the proposed Caritas Christi arrangement with the Commonwealth Care program would result in referrals to abortion providers, the Cardinal reacted on his blog by criticizing pro-life Catholics for “doing a great disservice to the Catholic Church.”

        With this additional background, does your perspective on this blog change at all?

  16. jay says:

    The Secretary of Social Services and Health Care’s intimidating presence has infected our shepherd’s very vitals.
    There is no one to fight for the faith.

    • Capt Crunch says:

      Make a statement.

      Take any money that you would donate to Cardinal Sean’s Annual Appeal and donate it to Servants of the Holy Family ( or some other Trad Catholic Organization and send the receipt to the Catholic Appeal…

      • Anni says:


        A better way to make a statement is to tape two pennies to your Annual Appeal pledge form along with a note as to why all they are getting is your “two cents”. If you don’t respond to the pledge, no one will notice, but if you send in a piddly amount they have to count it and they will see your note.

  17. David Justen says:

    I find it somewhat disconcerting that this blog, which has been criticizing His Eminence and the Archdiocese for failing to focus on matters within the Archdiocese is now criticizing both for failing to get involved in this national effort, which–to be sure–is going to involve not a little time, money, and resources.

    Also, look at all the other initiatives going on in this Commonwealth at this time, including a major electoral fight against the legalization of physician-assisted suicide on the ballot this November. Not to mention internal matters such as a major reorganization of the Archdiocese through the pastoral planning process.

    I believe we should thank New York and Washington and the others for taking up this torch, give them all the support we can including moral and prayer support, and go about continuing to bring our own house in order.

    • Michael says:

      Every single Catholic in the US should join this lawsuit. It doesn’t just affect religious organizations. It directly affects every single Catholic business owner in America and goes to the core of religious freedom in America (a former constitutional right our country once cherished). So, the time spent on this, is absolutely worth it. But you raise a good point, unwittingly. Maybe the reason why Cardinal O’Malley will not engage in this battle is more basic. If O’Malley joins this lawsuit, the obvious question will be, well why did you not file the exact same lawsuit back when Mitt Romney intorduced $50 co-pay abortions in Massachusetts under RomneyCare? Great question. Why didn’t O’Malley file suit against RomneyCare back when he was THE ONLY ONE who would be expected to file such a lawsuit at the Cmmonwealth level. The answer as to why he didn’t file that lawsuit has been thoroughly and repeatedly explained above.

      • Carol says:

        Most abortions on Commonwealth Care are and have been $0. Commonwealth Care increases the copays with income, and for higher income the abortions cost more ($50,$100).

      • GodBlessAmerica says:


        Would this pursuit help the Catholic Business owner?
        I do no understand if the objective is more narrow in focus?
        Please explain.


      • David Justen says:

        If conspiracy theories are your bailiwick then have at it. But you’re building suppositions on your biases and calling them fact. I’m not interested in joining you and the others in this thread in that endeavor. Mind-reading is a skill I don’t possess.

        However, I do think every Catholic in the US will join in the lawsuit at the proper time. As others have suggested, the coordination and strategy behind such suits is complex and I can envision a moment down the road when more dioceses will file amicus briefs in various appeals courts and, in event it gets that far, in the highest court.

    • David, Thank you for your comment. BCI has indeed been critical of His Eminence for extensive travel outside of Boston for matters unrelated to Boston and for failing to focus adequately on matters within the Archdiocese. At the same time, we have also highlighted the religious freedom issue and other issues of both local and national impact, where it is critical for Catholic voices to be heard and where the Church should not allow the intrusion of the federal government on how we practice our faith.

      Boston has often been described as “Ground Zero” for the both the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church and for many of the key moral and political issues facing our country. We strongly support His Eminence on those occasions when he speaks out strongly on important moral or political issues and Church teachings that have consequence for both Boston and the country.

      BCI agrees we should thank New York and Washington and others for taking the lead, and we should give them all the support we can including prayer. As for the exact reason(s) why Boston elected to not participate in this lawsuit, we do not know what those are.


    Link to all the complaints filed on the Contraception Insurance Mandate; I have scanned the NY complaint but some may have more time:

  19. Sam in Spokane says:

    I can’t speak directly to the Boston situation since I live on the West Coast.

    However, note that no cases were filed in any of the District Courts that are part of the 9 states that comprise the 9th Circuit. Thus, no cases from LA, SF, Seattle or Phoenix. It would be dumb lawyering to file a case in the 9th Circuit since the vast majority of the Judges on the 9th Circuit are fairly liberal, and that is no surprise to anybody who follows the law.

    These District Court cases will first go on appeal to the Circuit Courts of Appeals before going to the Supremes. No point in giving the Obama Administration a sure victory in a liberal Circuit Court. I have to assume the plaintiffs have analyzed the situation in the other Circuits before deciding where to file these cases.

    These decisions sometimes have to be made on realistic assessments instead of idealistic considerations. You can’t be Don Quixote.


      I suspect this is the reasoning in NOT filing here in the First Circuit as well. Not a receptive court.

      • Carolyn says:

        Boston College has polled or somehow consulted current students re the possibility of BC filing suit, per several of my daughter’s friends who are BC students. Seems odd for BC of all places to risk the ire of Jack Connors.

    • Paulie Girl says:

      Well said!

      … MA Catholics – and kind, thinking people of all/no faiths – need to focus more on defeating the assisted suicide initiative than slinging arrows at the cardinal right now. If assisted suicide isn’t stopped in MA, it will create huge momentum and be propelled nationwide. Please work to inform yourselves, family, friends, and co-workers on the certain and dangerous threats inherent in legalizing assisted suicide (and put shadowing the cardinal’s every move and non-move on the backburner for now.). There’s also the nationwide Fortnight for Religious Freedom (6/21 – 7/4) that folks can productively focus on at their parish and community level. People can always attack the cardinal later if they want – but right now it’s just a time-stealing distraction at best.


        Ditto!! The cases filed across the country are historic, no matter the named plaintiffs. No one would file those suits without hand picking the plaintiffs.

      • Capt Crunch says:

        Ok, I’ll bite.

        Where’s the RCAB’s lawsuit against assisted suicide? I notice you said in your comment inform yourselves. Thank you, you’ve made my point! Where is Cardinal Sean’s campaign against assisted suicide?

        Cardinal Sean recorded a video that was shown in the churches once a few months back. The churches raised it as an issue, also once a few months back. Now, only a website and go inform yourselves. The sum of this anti assisted suicide effort is summed up as

        “Please visit which has been created to educate people on this issue.”

        Made a video, check; setup a website, check. I can say I’ve spoken out about this, now back to the landscaping…

        The arrows will stop flying when the leadership steps up. We Catholics have a cardinal yet we need to organize ourselves into grass roots efforts to defeat assisted suicide in Boston; piggyback on other archdioceses and institutions to get protection for our religious freedom; reorganize into PPTs (or whatever they are called) being served by a single priest; and donate money for the privilege.

        The few priests that will remain are going on a death march. Thank God that we will have those few priests, they deserve a much better that what they are going to get and what they have gotten. They are our true leaders!

      • Michael says:

        Yes what a great campaign … “Assisted suicide is suicide.” Who was the genius who came up with that slogan. How about asssted suicide is EUTHANSIA. Where is our leadership?

      • GodBlessAmerica says:

        To: Capt Crunch

        I’ll bite back………….I understand the “dig”-(no pun) on my
        entry observing the lack of thanks to C.S. for reaching out—–
        trying to satisfy some of the suggestions/complaints with regards to some people/parishes “not feeling supported.”

        It is clear the current issue is paramount compared with
        “landscaping.” However, an ongoing theme with this blog
        seems to suggest no desire to give thanks when thanks are deserved.

        The other improvement for this blog would be to not make complaints “personal” by using the persons name, whether it is a parishoner or a priest or a cardinal. It appears, several of
        the individuals making entries clearly have the information they need, clarity of thought and excellent ability to write.

        Please consider taking your God given talents one step further by stating your case (s), & offering suggestions without being so mean and making the attacks so personal.

        Thank you.

        *I do not work for the RCAB.

      • GodBlessAmerica, Thanks for your comments. BCI presents a mix of thanks where appropriate and criticism with suggestions We commended the Cardinal and archdiocese for his pastoral letter on evangelization, the Catholics Come Home initiative, the initial efforts to oppose physician-assisted suicide. we commended Cardinal Dolan and Cardinal O’Malley for their initial reactions to the Obama moves that intrude on our right to religious freedom, while we also suggested that Cardinal O’Malley use stronger language than he did in his blog post. We commended the archdiocese when they announced the former chancellor was leaving. Can you be more specific regarding exactly which good things of major significance and impact you feel we should have recognized publicly that we have?

        As for readers naming names, we ask that personal attacks be a avoided, otherwise we will moderate those comments or ban the reader from commenting.

      • CaptCrunch says:


        Just for the record, the landscaping comment was not a shot at you, sorry for the misunderstanding.

        My frustration is the complete lack of leadership in the RCAB. I’ve made a number of points and suggestions in numerous entries from BCI with respect to the lack of leadership which have not been responded to…

        As one of parishioners in the RCAB I would like to think that the parishioners in the RCAB matter. However, if that were the case this blog would not be needed.

        In response to making the comments to personal; Cardinal Sean is the leader of the RCAB. As the leader of the RCAB he holds the responsibility for this archdiocese. Look around the archdiocese, it’s withering and dying. What you call personal attacks I call accountability. If you think my comments are too sharp edged, ok. I would think people in such high visibility positions would need to be thick skinned. However, I will concede your point and tone it down.

        My apologies to everyone on this blog…

      • GodBlessAmerica says:

        Capt Crunch,

        Thank you. By the way I do not even know CS. I would have
        responded the exact same way no matter who placed an
        entry about any individual. Lots of people have done this
        on many many types blogs about all kinds of issues. I was hoping for a higher caliber of exchange on this blog.

        Thank you for apologizing.

    • Sam in Spokane (and others who believe there was a strategic selection of courts to file in),

      Though BCI prefers to not label people or entities as “conservative” or “liberal,” we agree with you that the 9th Circuit has a reputation for being fairly liberal. That said, as an alternative to people conjecturing on why there were no cases filed from LA or San Francisco, this piece explains why there are no lawsuits filed from the California bishops.

      “Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, Calif., broke the silence on his side Tuesday in an interview with Kevin Clarke of the Jesuit magazine America. Blaire expressed concern that some groups “very far to the right” are turning the controversy over the contraception rules into “an anti-Obama campaign.”…

      But in a letter to the national bishops conference that has not been released publicly, lawyers for California’s bishops said the lawsuits would be “imprudent” and “ill-advised.”

      Here is another article with additional perspective:

  20. Bill Redmond says:

    The Archdiocese of Washington has put together a very nice website with videos explaining the religious freedom issue, and this prayer:

    Loving Father, Thank you for the gift of life and for the freedom to love and worship You. Through the power of the Holy Spirit inspire us to be your witnesses. Grant us the courage to boldly and joyfully stand in protection of our freedom. In your mercy, guard our religious freedom so we may continue to live out our faith and transform the world in which we live. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

  21. GodBlessAmerica says:

    To both camps:

    “Houston, We’ve Had a Problem” (Fact Finders)

    “Houston, We Have a Problem” (Hollywood Types)

    No one noticed or said, “Thank You” on this blog
    to Cardinal Sean and workers for working on the landscaping last week, and, stating: “The reason we exist is to support the parishes.”

    • Mack says:

      I saw the picture in the Globe of the cardinal trimming some weeds.
      I just wish he would trim the REAL weeds that are growing in the RCAB.
      But really, it just seemed like another publicity photo op to me.

  22. CaptCrunch says:

    An interesting and related article…

  23. David Justen says:

    Clearly the prevailing attitude in the comments on this blog remain “Nothing good can come from the Pastoral Center.” Were the Cardinal to implement every single one of the demands expressed in these comments, including those that contradict one another, I will hazard to say that he would still be excoriated as inept at best and a dastardly schemer at worst.

    I don’t attribute the worst of these attitudes to the author(s) of this blog per se, although they can often stray into lighter versions of the blackest complaints at times, but I believe they should consider whether the labor they’ve engaged is contributing to calumny and lack of charity among those here. They have created an atmosphere that breeds such commentary.

    There is no quarter given in these pages and no benefit of the doubt afforded at all. When I’m done reading these pages, I despair not for the archdiocese’s leaders but for its people who are so bereft of even the slightest hint of the love that St. Paul called the Corinthians to. I see nothing in all these pages that would provide the least impetus to a non-believer to consider the claims of Christianity.

    I fear that for my own well-being I must return to ignoring this site again and hoping that others, for the sake of their faith and well-being, will do so as well.

    • Paulie Girl says:

      I think this is a good insight: that this particular story, and others with a similar tone of barely concealed contempt and disdain towards the cardinal and chancery, create a very negative atmosphere, leading to destructive or paralyzing levels of cynicism, down moods, anxiety, apathy, even despair.

      It was good to note the improved title (from Boston Archdiocese “Bails” to “Punts”) as well as the interest in seeking from a commentor specific instances in which this blog has not credited the cardinal for positive statements and actions.

      My hunch is that this blog was started out of sheer frustration and sorrow over many problems in the archdiocese but that perhaps the effectiveness of these time-consuming efforts are less than they might be with an approach that’s more consistently calm, objective, and respectful and less amped up, emotional, and accusatory.

      Of course every blog has its own style….but priests, bishops, cardinals, and the pope are all vicars of Christ on some level. They have all received special graces with their ordination and elevations to higher offices like the episcopacy. They all bring Christ to us via the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

      For these reasons, they are all particularly due our respectful treatment of them with charitable, constructive, persuasive critiques if and when indicated. Most people, from all walks of life, find it much easier to do what they need to be doing when they’re showered with encouragement, friendship (and when deserved) praise and thanks, rather than to be the subject of frequent commentary and assessments (particularly by people subordinate to them).

      All I’m saying is that maybe this blog might benefit by reviewing its founding objectives and revising its approach a little to one that’s more productive and less demoralizing for all. The cardinal has clearly done some fine and faithful things so he’s got it in him to do more. Encourage him while encouraging a spirit of hopefulness in your readers and yourselves. Be persistent but positive and pray that the Holy Spirit guides the entire archdiocese.

      • Objective Observer says:

        For years, I and many others gave a lot of energy to providing the leadership of the Archdiocese of Boston an atmosphere of encouragement, friendship, gratitude, praise and fervent prayer (the most important of these). Over the past ten years, I and many others saw behind the curtain and came to understand the weaknesses and turpitude at work on Brooks Drive. Please don’t think one paints with a broad brush — there are some very good people who work there. But they cannot overcome the pervasive culture of impropriety and ethical misconduct.

        It may be that the VG who is here now can turn the Queen Mary; indeed I believe he has corrected her course a few degrees already. Understand that there are those who write comments on this blog who have seen up close the malignant neglect as well as serious wrongs committed at the top and middle levels of RCAB. Sometimes the rule of law (canon as well as civil) provides the greatest good in such circumstances.

        Setting things right will take Grace in abundance. Grace is the energy one needs to accomplish God’s will, and surely God’s will is for this particular Church to flourish.

        God’s will for those who lead the Church in this Archdiocese: to lead souls to Heaven. The salvation of souls depends on the banishment of the tempter and his ways, not on his accommodation. May God give all of us (and especially the ordinary) Grace in sufficient measure to wrest the local Church from the sulfurous grasp of the tempter.

      • Marie says:

        Paulie Girl,

        I have one particular reason for visiting this place. Unfortunately it appears that my cause and this blog and the issues discussed in this place are one and the same problem.

        As I observe what happens here, I know, you all know, there is much being spoken of that too many have been thinking for too long. But, out of respect and out of a strong sense of “place” they have been let go for too long.

        From Paulie Girl:

        “My hunch is that this blog was started out of sheer frustration and sorrow over many problems in the archdiocese but that perhaps the effectiveness of these time-consuming efforts are less than they might be with an approach that’s more consistently calm, objective, and respectful and less amped up, emotional, and accusatory.”

        Calm and objective can only occur after the venting process; respectful is “in kind”; there seems miuch disrespect here.

        Some “fine and faithful” is not enough.

        Is it truly expected that one should encourage one who has done “some” fine and faithful things?

        I do believe that the role requires only fine and faithful behaviour. Only then can hopefulness be forthcoming.

        The Holy Spirit guides, but only some hear.


    • GodBlessAmerica says:

      Thank you.

    • David and Paulie Girl,
      Thank you for your comments. You have given BCI some meaningful feedback to prayerfully consider and to react to in subsequent posts.

      Many faithful Catholics are frustrated with the leadership of the Boston Archdiocese. The responsibilities of the bishop are to teach, sanctify and govern. There seems to be precious little public teaching–we wish there was more, and we have encouraged that very consistently–and very low interest in governing, but a lot of traveling. A well-known author on leadership identifies the following key attributes of successful leaders:


      Integrity means alignment of words and actions with inner values. It means sticking to these values even when an alternative path may be easier or more advantageous.

      A leader with integrity can be trusted and will be admired for sticking to strong values. They also act as a powerful model for people to copy, thus building an entire organization with powerful and effective cultural values.


      Dedication means spending whatever time and energy on a task is required to get the job done, rather than giving it whatever time you have available.

      The work of most leadership positions is not something to do ‘if time’. It means giving your whole self to the task, dedicating yourself to success and to leading others with you.


      A magnanimous person gives credit where it is due. It also means being gracious in defeat and allowing others who are defeated to retain their dignity.

      Magnanimity in leadership includes crediting the people with success and accepting personal responsibility for failures.


      We do not see a lot of sticking to strong core values even when an alternative path is easier or more advantageous, and the highly-paid exec leadership team at the Pastoral Center has not shown themselves as having built a strongly Catholic organization with powerful and effective Catholic cultural values.Just a recent, seemingly small but significant example of this is the defense of yoga being offered to employees in the Pastoral Center, despite strong admonitions by the Vatican against such practices. The form of yoga offered was not at all innocuous stretching exercises as claimed, but something much more gravely concerning and potentially spitiually dangerous to participants. Fr. Bryan Hehir appearing on a panel with Barney Frank. Jack Connors still serving on the Finance Council and chairing the Catholic Schools effort while he raises money for President Obama that will help him advance his clear anti-Catholic agenda. $3M+ in excessive six-figure salaries that violates the fiduciary responsibility of the archdiocese to donors to be a good steward of their funds and threatens the financial stability of the diocese. SJS property sold out from under the seminary against recommendations from the Vatican, and then the debt not repaid. Pensions promised to lay employees not paid, while the affiliated entities were never billed and while excessive six-figure salaries continue being paid to current execs. Pro-life Catholics who complained about a deal to have Catholic hospitals profit from referrals to abortion providers were criticized as doing a “disservice to the Church” when they were actually doing a service to the Church.

      To those who criticize BCI for our tone and approach, what would you have us do in the face of these and other concerns?

      Priests and laity generally get no responses to private letters written, phone calls, or emails. The only 3 things this diocesan leadership seems to respond to are: lawsuits or threat of lawsuits, bad publicity or threat of bad publicity, and money (gifts or potential loss of money).

      Shall we be silent? What other means do you suggest for fulfilling our duty as Catholics to make our needs and concerns known to our pastors?

      • GodBlessAmerica says:

        Okay. I suppose the best of all possible worlds would be
        to have the RCAB provide an online blog with this one.
        And, if the question are asked politely….for the individual
        “best suited” to answer the question to do so. All individuals
        seeking answers/explanations must understand:

        1. They are a private organization, and, do not have to respond.

        2. Seekers may not fully appreciate all of the variables going
        into the decision to” act or abstain” from action on each individual matter.

        3. Encourage the RCAB to provide as much explanation
        as possible for individuals to understand what it is
        they do, and where they are headed.

        4. Harness the intellectual minds and well written entries of this blog with the RCAB, place advertisements, and generate
        funds for clergy pension, seminary scholarships, and
        charity work and scholarships.

  24. Michael says:

    Enough of the self-righteous propaganda. These are legitimate concerns of essentially devout Catholics.

    The Cardinal has had plenty of time to address any issue raised in this blog. And in the short time this blog has been around, he has not addressed one issue raised here. Instead, he paid investigators and highly priced lawyers to investigate the identity of the authors of the blog.

    Seriously, the person in need of your prayers is Cardinal O’Malley. If you have room for more, then add the wolves in sheep’s clothing who run the Archdiocese. Next pray for the people making the unconscionable salaries that help them keep their mouths shut and their consciences in neutral. Then pray for the pathetic sheeple who can’t deal with the truth of what is happening in the Archdiocese (like you). Finally, pray for the innocent victims (of the terrible policies that this Archdiocese have created) who have been thrown to the wolves. What victims? How about all of the poor children who are being handed over to same-sex “couples” because Cardinal O’Malley was afraid to stand up and fight to protect 100 years of Catholic Charities services to kids in need of foster homes. Was that a “loving” act? To surrender without a fight. Despair for the people who will have to face God over that cowardly decision.

    • Paulie Girl says:

      I’m sure the cardinal would appreciate your prayers.

      It seems reasonable for the leader of any entity – business, government, charity – to want to know which of its employees is potentially leaking inside information outside the entity. It makes sense that lawyers would be involved because they’d need to advise on how to legally go about identifying these employees and would also best understand the breath of any legal risks to the archdiocese should various types of confidential personal information be leaked by these employees.

      That is disturbing that Catholic Charities and the arch didn’t stand up and vigorously fight for the right to continue to operate adoption/foster programs in accord with the dictates of the faith. Not sure but perhaps the arch was advised that such a legal fight would be lost and would be damaging as it would set damning precedent that would impede other dioceses in the same and other jurisdictions from operating adoption/foster programs in accord with the faith.

      • Michael says:

        WRONG. Other diocese caved in as well. Still other diocese had the courage to fight. If you are under the misimpresion that all of these bad decisions are somehow connected to an overall big picture strategy, you are mistaken. They DO NOT CARE. It is obvious. They are not defending religious freedom, parents’ rights, the right to life, etc. They, including O’Malley, are at best weak, or at worst, subversive.

  25. Jack O'Malley says:


    This is an excellent suggestion, if somewhat idealistic. But it has been tried before. It’s called Cardinal Seán’s Blog. There are many questions in the comments there which are very forthrightly answered, although the answers do reflect some of the provisos you mention. I have helpfully copied some of them from past postings. Answers are in all cases from the individual “best suited”, viz. Mr Donny Terenson, whose salary does keep him in very good suits indeed.

    Dear Cardinal O’Malley. Please answer my very polite and humble question to Your Eminence. Do you pray for the souls of baptised children who now languish in dens of sodomite iniquity because of your cowardice in running from the race, shirking the good fight and betraying the Faith?

    Answer: The Cardinal feels that the intellectual level of the average lay person is inadequate to appreciate all the variables that go into the decision to pray or not pray for any given class of souls.

    When will you celebrate a pontifical high mass in the cathedral? When will you stop dabbling in the “liturgies” of the neo-catakikos?

    Answer: The Cardinal is the sole authority on the liturgies to be permitted in the archdiocese and this question “fails to rise to the level” that would cause him to deign to answer.

    Your Eminence, will you place Boston College Law School under interdict for allowing Ted Kennedy’s widow to speak at commencement?

    Answer: No. And the Cardinal will not stop the process for having the Senator declared a “Servant of God” either.

    Cardinal O’Malley, my girlfriend is pregnant because the pill failed or she forgot to take it or something. Can she have an abortion at a Jack Connors hospital? Does she need to go to Reconciliation afterwards or is a certificate of merit from Kathleen Sebelius enough to get her into heaven if she gets hit by a trolley on Comm Ave?

    Answer: Yes, it is sufficient but you need to apply now because there is an eight months’ wait.

    Cardinal O’Malley, rumor has it that the archdiocese is forming a landscaping company, to be called “Leprechaun Lawn Care”? Is it true that there will there be a Secretary of Mulch and Humus to be paid $500,000 per year?

    Answer: We are a private organizaton and do not have to respond.

    So, GBA, we’ve been there, done that. The life of a Boston Catholic is frustrating in the extreme.

  26. Capt Crunch says:

    First, thanks to BCI for giving us a place to vent our frustration.

    Second, @Jack O’Malley, Michael, Annie, Marie, et al.

    There are very clear lines being drawn here for a schism.

    On the left the Nun Justice Project has been organized to aid the “attack” on the LCWR. As if enforcing 2000 year old Catholic truths is an attack.

    Additionally, here’s a quote from the article posted last night

    “For too long, the Catholic Church’s stance on public issues has been defined by the outspokenness of its most conservative bishops and the reticence of moderate and progressive prelates. Signs that this might finally be changing are encouraging for the church, and for American politics.”

    Really? The Church’s conservative bishops have been too outspoken? I’m in awe of this statement.

    On the right we have Summorum Pontificum, Universae Ecclesiae and now the apparent regularization of the SSPX.

    While we in the RCAB may not benefit from these directly, hopefully the impact will trickle down to us.

    My prediction is that in the medium term there will be a schism resulting in two Catholic Churches. An American Catholic Church, lead by the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Kathleen Sebelius, Joe Biden and the other usual suspects. The traditional Catholic Church, run the Pope.

    Call me crazy, it won’t be the first time, but that’s my prediction and I’m sticking to it… 🙂

    • Marie says:


      I call you “right on”, but not limited to America.

      I pray that the American Catholic Church faithful are more intelligent than to turn over leadership to those named; is there a greyspeak “B” list? Oh, I get it…..who understands greyspeak only hears words spoken in greyspeak.

      I restate this may become BCI’s never ending blog topic.

      Let the venting continue…………..


  27. Capt Crunch says:

    Well, if it’s any consolation we in the RCAB are not alone in our frustration. Here’s interesting opinion (link below).

    A gem from this piece…

    “Every bishop is given a crosier upon his ordination to the episcopacy. A crosier is a shepherd’s staff. It is a six to seven foot long staff that a shepherd uses to beat the crap out of wolves. That’s your job. Beating the crap out of the wolves – not killing all of the sheep yourself so that there is nothing left for the wolves to eat.”

    Be forewarned, the disrespect meter is pretty high, higher than on BCI.

    • Marie says:

      Captain Crunch,

      Does truth trump disrespect?

      “The only proper course of action is total non-compliance with these totalitarian edicts of the regime, and FORCING THEIR HAND.

      Anything less than that, and you LOSE. MEN fight wars. If you refuse to do your duty and act like MEN, then the war is already lost. And make no mistake, cowardice is a grave sin, and you will answer for it.”

      Interesting opinion, yes. No interpretation needed.

      Have a great day.


      • Capt Crunch says:

        Well, I’m all for truth trumps disrespect, certainly others on BCI don’t think so. I think there’s a fine line which I’ll try to walk.

        My goal these days is to avoid being one of the sheep that gets killed by the RCAB leadership. It’s not an easy task..

      • JUST WONDERING says:

        “JUST WONDERING” — “MEN fight wars.” — what about WOMEN who are also in the service.

      • Capt Crunch says:

        I believe the woman that wrote that quote was speaking in the context of the bishops. Women are not bishops.

  28. Donald W. Lumpkin says:

    Why isn’t your diocese also not involved in trying to stop what is very clearly an attempt to remove religious freedom in our nation. Will the liberals who force gays and lesbians down our throats also be allowed to define our doctrine as well.

  29. Capt Crunch says:


    Somebody may have mentioned this in a previous blog entry, but here’s a thought for Mary Star of the Sea. Look at what happened to Sacred Heart in Lawrence.

    Not to espouse the sede position but if parishes continue to consolidate that may be the only alternative.

  30. Marie says:

    Captain Crunch,

    Thank you.

    Their 2007 “letter” clearly defined a heartfelt expression of faith and conviction by the Dominicans; a breath of fresh air, actually: “However, due to the present circumstances of open heresy and modernism being taught throughout the world from “Catholic” clergymen and institutions —without any correction but rather acceptance, even by the hierarchy in the Vatican — we see no other option whereby we can remain true to our Catholic Faith as handed down by all the Popes and Councils through the centuries.”

    (Truly a large disfunctional Catholic family. I agree with you that the end will result in two Catholic Churches. It evolves as we watch.)

    Let me see now, by closing Sacred Heart in Lawrence, the Archdiocese of Boston, in fact, gave the Domincan Brothers the opportunity to practice their “not Roman Catholic” faith at the expense of Roman Catholics?

    As for Mary Star of the Sea in Squantum, the Catholic faithful, and, indeed, a very supportive community, wait for the return to them of the church they built and to once again practice their Roman Catholic faith within their community and within their church. I would think that would be the Archdioceses preference, but maybe not.


  31. DBP says:

    The smokescreen by Terry Donilon was blown away – probably unwittingly – by Cardinal Wuerl on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Chris asked him about differences of opinion within the Church about this lawsuit, especially since only a relatively small number of dioceses had filed. Wuerl demurred, saying that it only takes one example of infringement on freedom of religion to make the case. I thought the relative silence on why other dioceses didn’t join the suit spoke volumes.

  32. Stephen says:

    Capt. & Marie
    Fascinating stuff. As we know The Eucharist is the source and summit of our Faith. Without a validly ordained Catholic priest to offer the Mass, Star of the Sea is dead. Braintree knows this. In Lawrence the Willing Shepard’s solved this problem by finding a validly ordained priest not from the diocese who was willing to travel. Joyfully, they will soon have a young validly ordained priest in residence that has come from within the community. Truly the fruit of their faith! (the circumstances that established Sacred Heart in Lawrence are quite different than Star of the Sea, however)

    As this blog so well documents… We are in true apostasy from Abortion facilitating to Yoga – it is here now. The issue is far greater than closed churches and shady real estate deals. It is my hope that those in Squantum understand that the problem is not an out of touch uncaring hierarchy, the problem is modernist, progressive enemies of the Faith within the church. Your answer is to find a priest who understands this and will offer The Mass.

    I stopped by the sit-in church in Scituate last week, you know the one? Where the Diocese sold the rectory to a Lutheran pastor? A kind woman is the lifeless church told me so far in 8 years 6 former sit-iners have died, of old age. I personally think Our Lady, Star of the Sea deserves better than an angry dying remnant holding on to bricks and mortar.

    If you get a Latin Mass in Squantum people will come out the woodwork to attend. And Braintree will be pulling their Hehir out.

  33. Marie says:


    And, sorry to anyone who may try to decipher this. My response to Stephen is in parenthesis and I do not speak for Captain Crunch.


    This from Stephen:

    Capt. & Marie
    Fascinating stuff. (Reality). As we know The Eucharist is the source and summit of our Faith. Without a validly ordained Catholic priest to offer the Mass, Star of the Sea is dead. Braintree knows this. (Braintree can supply the missing validly ordained Catholic priest) In Lawrence the Willing Shepard’s solved this problem by finding a validly ordained priest not from the diocese who was willing to travel. Joyfully, they will soon have a young validly ordained priest in residence that has come from within the community. Truly the fruit of their faith! The circumstances that established Sacred Heart in Lawrence are quite different than Star of the Sea, however. (Explain, please).

    As this blog so well documents… We are in true apostasy (Crossroad) from Abortion facilitating to Yoga – it is here now. The issue is far greater than closed churches and shady real estate deals. It is my hope that those in Squantum understand that the problem is not an out of touch uncaring hierarchy, .(Why, then, has Mary Star of the Sea Church been chosen by an in touch and caring hierarchy?) the problem is modernist, progressive enemies of the Faith within the church (This is a problem that needs answers and justification: How do you justify/explain to 2 1/2 generations of Catholic faithful who learned their Caholic faith in and from a remarkably different mentality and Catholic faith era than you, obviously, and I, that all they have learned and asked to be tolerant of and “live with is wrong and not the Roman Catholic Religion. If you have the answer, and the answer cannot be” blind faith”, then you are a very great man, Stephen.). Your answer is to find a priest who understands this and will offer The Mass. (The Mass and the answers?).

    I stopped by the sit-in church in Scituate last week, you know the one? Where the Diocese sold the rectory to a Lutheran pastor? A kind woman is the lifeless church told me so far in 8 years 6 former sit-iners have died, of old age. I personally think Our Lady, Star of the Sea deserves better than an angry dying remnant holding on to bricks and mortar. (I think Mary Star of the Sea must be re-opened and that the Catholic faithful of Squantum are not an angry dying remnant, but, rather, a young and vibrant group of faithful who wish to practice their religion, as taught to them and learned by them, in the community they have grown and lived in every day of their life).

    If you get a Latin Mass in Squantum people will come out the woodwork to attend. (You may be right. You may actually raise the dead! I lived through that transition and there are many, as you well know, who were and may still be wandering in a search for “what was” for all the days of their lives.) And Braintree will be pulling their Hehir out. (I make no comment and will think of this as Stephen’s comic relief; it is funny!).


    • Stephen says:

      As briefly as possible – Re:()
      – Braintree has no intention of supplying a priest.
      – Lawrence – the Capt. got it
      – Apostasy = abandonment of the faith.
      – Closing Star of the Sea is a political/business decision.
      – Re: modernist, progressive enemies
      I am a simple man who was first introduced to the Latin Mass when I was 35 years old and was shocked that my right to it had been stolen by enemies within during V2. Tolerance of people done in charity is virtuous, tolerance of error in dogma is folly.
      The older I get, the clearer it becomes The Mass is the answer and the extraordinary form is the best defense against the heresy of modernism.
      – Re: Scituate. The tabernacle was completely tarnished,
      this speaks volumes. see: Apostasy
      -Re: Opening Star of the Sea. There are several strategies that the church militant could employ. I’d suggest keeping the tabernacle shining is a good first step. Showing a genuine hunger for the Latin Mass is timely and you would get some surprising and strong advocacy. With few exceptions I have found those who support the Latin Mass do not long for ‘what was’ but more clearly understand what ‘is’ and ‘what will be’ in the future.

      • Marie says:


        I am a simple woman born into the Latin Mass. My parents left the Catholic church in the 1960s because they had their Catholic “Church” stolen from them by the enemy. Neither ever returned to the Church. I didn’t get it.

        Thank you for your response. I dare not go back to the subject of Star of the Sea in this blog, but at some point I want to hear about the “political”.


  34. Capt Crunch says:


    The situation in Lawrence is different because Sacred Heart was sold and the Willing Shephards leased the property from the developer. Mary Star of the Sea is still owned by the RCAB. It appears the RCAB is using the “biological solution” to resolve the Mary Star of the Sea controversy.

    The FSSP, ICKSP, SSPX, CMRI and Willing Shephards have small loyal and dedicated communities. With a little support and encouragement they will flourish, at the same time with that same support the modernist progressive agenda will falter. The RCAB tolerates the EF but it does not support and encourage it. This is not isolated to Boston BTW look at the backlash for Pope Benedict in trying to regularize the SSPX.

    A quote about Sacred Heart from an internet source in late 2011…

    “Two years after O’Malley slammed shut the doors of the beautiful Gothic-style, cathedral-like church in 2007, the independent traditional Catholics snapped it up to offer the fully Traditional Latin Mass. Since the Traditional Latin Mass begin in August 2009, the attendance has steadily increased to the present day. ”

    I’d like to make two observations.

    First, as pointed out by multiple posters on BCI if the Latin Mass is offered it will draw people.

    Second, Cardinal Sean said about the Willing Shephards “They’re Not Catholic!” yet their numbers are increasing. From a leadership perspective it would appear that the Cardinal is losing his ability to influence his flock, not a good place for a leader to be.

    One final comment. The two local churches I attend have had their contributions to the Catholic Appeal decimated. The two of them are in the 40-60% goal range per their bulletins. Of course, one main issue in reaching financial goal is the macro economic conditions. But I can’t help to think that it also may be related to the RCABs sheep have been struck by it’s shephards crosier repeatledy have fled to safer pastures.

  35. Marie says:

    Captain Crunch,

    It appears to be a double edged crosier used against the flock and, also, the traditionalists. Looking at input from those who are testing the EF waters, I try to guess the ages. I feel there are a lot who are younger, and, if that base broadens, the traditionalist agenda (“agenda” not used as a negative) will certainly flourish.

    As for Mary Star of the Sea, if the shephard does carry a double edged crosier, then he defeats growth on all fronts.

    And, the ultimate goal is………….


    • To Marie and Capt. Crunch, While BCI does not wish to stifle dialogue here, we do ask that people keep their comments relevant to the topic of the blog post. The topic of the future of Mary Star of the Sea, while an important one, is a bit removed from the main topic of the blog post, which was the Boston Archdiocese declining to participate in the religious freedom lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services. We will come back to church closings and appeals another time soon, and we suggest you may wish to defer additional comments about Mary Star of the Sea until then.

      • Marie says:


        I am sorry.

        I do believe we deviated and returned to topic several times and deviated once again.

        One usually relies on “the advice of council”. It covers a lot of territory. Perhaps the Archdiocese would address the topic from that perspective and speculation and comment would stop.


  36. JUST WONDERING says:

    “JUST WONDERING” — BCI can we get off this subject for a while and please print a new article. 107 replies. Is’t this the most you have had for any blog? Time for a change!!!! JUST WONDERING.

  37. Capt Crunch says:

    Fair enough. I see Cardinal Sean has mentioned the Fortnight to Freedom in his blog. The mention of relevant information or link to the USCCB website that has the info from the RCAB can be found here

    and here

    At first glance it looks like a pretty good job, promote it RCAB leadership!

  38. Capt Crunch says:

    🙂 thanks for the correction, you are correct! moot it is.

  39. […] follow-up of our post last week where we called out the Boston Archdiocese for not joining the religious freedom lawsuit against […]

%d bloggers like this: