Cardinal O’Malley 2005 moral teachings absent from Crux launch event

September 14, 2014

In our last post, we shared why we thought it was scandalous and gravely wrong for Cardinal O’Malley to appear at the Boston Globe’s Crux launch event, publicly endorse this heretical pub, and help lead souls away from salvation.  So much was bad about the content of the event that we will not have time to go into everything. But we will share a few points, including how unfortunate it is that the Sean O’Malley who seemed to have the courage to preach on certain moral issues in 2005 (e.g. homosexuality) was not the Sean O’Malley at the Crux launch event responding to a question about homosexuality.

To be fair, this part of what Cardinal O’Malley said on communion for divorced and remarried Catholics was fine: “the prohibition from communion for divorced and remarried Catholics is unlikely to change..”  O’Malley cautioned against expecting much change. “The pastoral practice must always follow our theology and doctrine.”  But regarding homosexuality, what was NOT said was problematic.

As we noted earlier this year in our post, “Boston pastor praised by Cardinal O’Malley puts Holy Family on par with homosexual couples“, on November 23, 2005 Cardinal O’Malley published a Letter from Cardinal Sean O’Malley on Homosexuality where he said:

In the Gospel when the self-righteous Pharisees bring the adulteress to be stoned, Jesus says let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Then to make sure they got the point Jesus wrote their sins on the ground. The stones fell from their hands and they fled. Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn you”, but He added, “Go and sin no more.”

If we tell people that sex outside of marriage is not a sin, we are deceiving people. If they believe this untruth, a life of virtue becomes all but impossible. Jesus teaches that discipleship implies taking up the cross each day and following Him with love and courage.

It is never easy to deliver a message that calls people to make sacrifices or to do difficult things. Sometimes people want to punish the messenger. For this reason we priests at times find it difficult to articulate the Church’s teaching on sexual morality. It is important to express the moral teachings of the Church with clarity and fidelity.  We must teach the truths of the Gospel in season and out of season. These recent times seem to us like it is “out of season”, but for that very reason it is even more urgent to teach the hard words of the Gospel today.

We know that friends and relatives of homosexual Catholics sometimes feel torn between their allegiance to Christ and their concern for their loved ones. I assure them that these goals are not incompatible. Calling people to embrace the cross of discipleship, to live the commandments and at the same time assuring them that we love them as brothers and sisters can be difficult. Sometimes we are told: “If you do not accept my behavior, you do not love me.” In reality we must communicate the exact opposite: “Because we love you, we cannot accept your behavior.”

BCI thinks this part of the letter is so well written that Cardinal O’Malley should fax it to the Holy Father in one of his regular communications with him.  And we think he should be perhaps even republish the letter.

The problem is, the Cardinal Sean O’Malley who had the courage to publish this in 2005 appears to be MIA today.  When asked a question from the audience about whether Pope Francis’s reported pastoral concern for gay Catholics might slow the firings of gay Catholics from Catholic institutions, the Cardinal responded in this way:

O’Malley, not addressing the question directly, said the pope’s “notion of mercy and inclusion is going to make a big difference in the way that the church responds to and ministers to people of homosexual orientation” but, like with divorce, said the church will not necessarily change its doctrine.

The notion of mercy has always been a part of how the church ministers to sinners. That is what the sacrament of reconciliation is all about.  But the notions of mercy and forgiveness come along with the concept that we should “go and sin no more.” And we need to say to the sinner, “Because we love you, we cannot accept your behavior.”  

In 2005, Cardinal O’Malley said it was urgent to teach the hard words of the Gospel in season and out of season.  BCI agrees. We are not sure which season it is now–that he is having such trouble teaching these words–but we hope and pray he develops the courage to start repeating his same words from 2005.

As for the rest of the event, that the secular reviews of the event are positive is not a surprise. But a review by a Catholic priest being positive is very troubling. The post over at Patheos by Fr. Dwight Longnecker gushing over the event and the potential of the heretical pub, Crux, (that plans to promote views opposing Church teachings in a range of areas) was really shocking.  Fr. Dwight, how can you in good conscience, go out of your way to lead the faithful astray and to sin by saying, “I believe this new enterprise has great promise,” when that enterprise has a columnist who routinely criticizes and disagrees with the teachings of Holy Mother Church, and the pub is on the record with plans to publish views of people who believe Church teaching wrong on “gay marriage”?  Why in the world do you think that is good?  Mark 9:42 immediately comes to mind: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

We pray that Cardinal O’Malley starts preaching his words from 2005 about the sin of homosexual activity, and we pray that Fr. Dwight and others snookered by Crux see the light and cease endorsing it.

Cardinal O’Malley Supports Launch of Heretical Pub, Crux

September 13, 2014

In the wake of Cardinal Sean O’Malley recently joining in the Boston College commencement that honored pro-abortion, pro-gay Sec. of State, John Kerry,  on Thursday evening, he continued his endorsement of people and groups that oppose the Catholic Church and her teachings by opening the launch event for the new heretical Boston Globe “Catholic” pub, Crux.

Crux came right out the gate letting everyone know they are publishing content about the Catholic Church that is often going to disagree with Catholic Church teachings.  Just one example is them hiring Margery Eagen as “spirituality columnist”–she has criticized and opposed Church teachings for years, called for the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI in 2010 and in the past week at Crux has already ridiculed a comment made by Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and attacked the “bizarre crackdown” on the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), which is being investigated by the Vatican. Another example is a Crux advice columnist who just told a “Cafeteria Catholic” who disagrees with Church teachings to hang in there waiting for Church leaders to change Catholic doctrine:

 “There are women who, in good conscience, have taken priestly ordination vows and consider themselves Catholic…My unordained advice, therefore, is this:  Hold onto your Catholicism – as well as your conscience – and perhaps your leaders will follow you there.”

Thankfully, a reader responded:

“If a Catholic found no wrong in thievery, but wanted to remain Catholic, the answer isn’t to see if the leaders of the church will follow his example and embrace stealing. Instead, the thieving Catholic must pray while seeking forgiveness that he can accept the Church’s position that stealing is forbidden. (True, he may fail many times and struggle along the way, but too it may take years for someone to break free from society’s teachings about birth control or gay marriage and embrace Catholic truths.)

Quite simply, Crux is BAD.  And this is the essence of the problem with Crux and the problem with Cardinal O’Malley endorsing the pub. Catholic Church teachings are intended to lead people to holiness and urge them repent from their sins so they can save their souls, avoid the fires of hell and get to heaven. By Crux airing “all the voices in the conversation” with paid staff that has a history of touting the opposite of what the Catholic Church teaches on nearly every moral teaching, they lead souls away from salvation. And by supporting and endorsing Crux, Cardinal O’Malley is once again shirking his responsibility as bishop to teach the teachings of the Church and he is helping lead souls to hell by giving credibility to this publication.  It is shameful and scandalous.

Why would the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston endorse this publication and open their kickoff event?  The only explanation BCI can come up with revolves around PR: that by doing so, he ensures John Allen and the Globe continue to give him favorable coverage. If there is another reason why the Cardinal Archbishop would willfully lead the souls of his flock away from salvation, we hope someone in the archdiocese lets us know.

The Tenth Crusade has several great pieces that cover the launch event on Thursday night and lead up to it.  Our favorite line about Margery Eagen–who openly disagrees with the Catholic Church on abortion, birth control, homosexuality, hell and more, and who suggested in June that the Pope should try smoking pot–is this one: Margery Eagen sitting in a pew, “doesn’t make her a Catholic, anymore than sitting in her garage makes her a car.”

In our next post, we will cover everything wrong and questionable about things said at the event itself on Thursday evening. For now, we pause. At Mass this morning, BCI will be praying that Cardinal O’Malley find the backbone, courage and strength to focus his time and energies on teaching what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

The Connors Conundrum (and Facts about Jack)

February 26, 2011

The article in Wednesday’s Boston Globe about Peter Meade leaving his job leading the Sen. Edward M. Kennedy Institute had a detail we did not get to mention in our last post—namely, how Jack Connors, Jr. is raising $125 million to fund the new Kennedy Institute.

That brings us back to the conundrum over powerbroker, Jack Connors, and his ongoing involvement in the Archdiocese of Boston.  At the end of this Opinion piece, you will find an interactive poll for audience participation, so you may want to keep reading, or just jump to the end of the post for the poll.

In the interest of balance, you can see from articles in the Boston Globe and Boston Magazine that Jack Connors does much good around Boston.  But those civic good works are different from the nature of his involvement in the Archdiocese of Boston and Catholic Church, where different questions need to be asked.

In the context of the Catholic Church and the Archdiocese of Boston, the more one looks at the actions by Connors, the more one cannot help but ask if he has objectively disqualified himself from serving on a key archdiocesan body like the Finance Council. We ask the question. You will have a chance to weigh-in on the answer in a few moments.

Anyway, according to the Globe article about the Kennedy Institute, Jack has almost hit the $125 million fundraising goal. This is the same Jack Connors who is supposed to have raised $70 million for the Campaign for Catholic Schools “2010 Initiative”—which was supposed to have ended December 31, 2010. Yet here we sit two months later, and the new archdiocesan fundraising group announced under the pretense of enabling more “accountability and transparency” has yet to account for what they raised by their deadline. One can only assume that they missed the goal and are still scrambling to raise the money.

A number of BCI readers have asked how Jack can be raising $70 million for the Catholic schools—a part of the Catholic Church, which we all know opposes abortion–while at the same time he is raising even more money, and apparently more prodigiously, to fund an institute commemorating a man who publicly supported abortion on demand. If we knew how to reach Jack via email, we would invite his reaction, but we just cannot seem to find his email address anywhere.

Beyond this matter of his conflicting fund-raising priorities, an even more important question to ask is the following:

Based on the guidelines for membership on the Archdiocese of Boston Finance Council, has Jack Connors, Jr.–by virtue of his public actions and public advocacy for certain politicians–objectively disqualified himself from membership on the Finance Council?

We are not commenting on Jack as a person or his values.  We are simply sharing objectively verifiable facts and public actions and asking the question.  Below we share the requirements for membership, definitions of key terms, and the “Facts about Jack” that call into question whether he has made himself ineligible for membership.


Beyond business/financial expertise, there are two requirements to serve on the Archdiocesan Finance Council we would like to highlight:

  1. The Code of Canon Law (Can. 492 §1.) says that Finance Council members must “outstanding in integrity.”
  2. The Archdiocese of Boston’s Finance Council Charter also says that members should be “Catholics in good standing.”


  1. Integrity: Here is the definition of “integrity” from “adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.”
  2. Catholic in good standing: There is no dictionary definition for “Catholic in good standing,” or even one in the Catechism, so we turned to Google instead and grabbed what several Church leaders have said on the topic:

Archbishop of Milwaukee, Jerome Listeki, speaking about a group that promoted use of contraception and abortion among Catholic youth said the following: using media advertising the group is, says the Archbishop-Designate, “attempting to convey the message that Catholics can disregard Church teaching regarding contraception, abortion and human sexuality in general and remain Catholics in good standing.” However, “Nothing could be further from the truth.'”

Archbishop of St. Louis, Robert Carlson wrote the following in the St. Louis Review:  it is “clear and unambiguous” that Catholics who want to remain in good standing with the Church can’t support abortion….Since the first century, the Church has addressed the moral evil of abortion and the killing of a defenseless baby in the womb…”You cannot be ‘pro-choice’ (pro-abortion) and remain a Catholic in good standing.”

Fr. Roger Landry of Fall River after the funeral of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy wrote in The Anchor about how the bishops’ “educating” policy has not converted any politician or made any politician less pro-abortion: “Jesus spoke of a different way in the Gospel (Mt 18:15-18). It involves not merely general educational statements that we hope offenders will apply to themselves in conscience, but the type of one-on-one instruction traditionally called fraternal correction. If that fails, and fails repeatedly, Jesus enjoined us to regard the offender as someone who no longer belongs to the community, who is no longer a member in good standing.”

Cardinal Sean O’Malley, in a 2007 interview with the Boston Globe: acknowledging that Catholic voters in Massachusetts generally support Democratic candidates who are in favor of abortion rights, O’Malley said, “I think that, at times, it borders on scandal as far as I’m concerned.”


Now, here are some objective facts which are not in dispute. In other words, regardless of ideology, we believe that no one can disagree with these pieces of information:

  1. Jack was chair of the “sham search” to select a new Secretary of Development for the Archdiocese of Boston–announced to every Catholic in the archdiocese with great fanfare in June of 2010–while Jack, Chancellor Jim McDonough and others closely involved knew knew before the committee was formed that Kathleen Driscoll was slotted for the job.  There was never the intention to conduct an open search. Committee members were told they were selecting a new person, but the committee never met to interview candidates, no ads were ever placed in philanthropic journals to try and find the best candidate, and the committee was told in October of 2010 that their services were no longer needed since Kathleen had been chosen independent of them. BCI detailed the situation in multiple posts, including “Diocesan Deception and Coverup?” and “Diocesan Deception and Coverup: The Archdiocesan Response.” We repeatedly asked the archdiocese to respond to the issue of the sham search and they never did. [Issue: Integrity]
  2. Jack is Chairman of Partners Healthcare, whose Brigham and Women’s Hospital profits from performing 4,300 abortions every year (3,600 first-trimester and 570 second-trimester).  The only data we can readily find on number of abortions per state  annually (which is likely incomplete), suggests Brigham and Women’s handles about 18% of the 24,128 abortions performed annually in Massachusetts. [Issue: Catholic in good standing]
  3. Jack was the Co-Chair of the 2004 Democratic National Convention that nominated Sen. John Kerry for president. Sen. Kerry is pro-abortion in his voting record. [Issue: Catholic in good standing]
  4. Jack publicly endorsed Martha Coakley for U.S. Senate. Martha Coakely is pro-abortion in her political record. In a January 2010 radio interview, when asked about conscience rights and religious freedom for Catholic healthcare workers who believe what the Pope teaches, Coakley responded, “You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.” [Issue: Catholic in good standing]


So now we return to the Connors Conundrum.

To be a member of the Finance Council, someone must be “outstanding in integrity” and a “Catholic in good standing.”  We make no judgment calls on Jack Connors’ character, motivations, political views or the state of his heart and soul.  We simply look at the factual information–words and actions that can be objectively observed, and pose a question.

Based on the guidelines for membership on the Archdiocese of Boston Finance Council, has Jack Connors, Jr.–by virtue of his public actions and advocacy for certain politicians–objectively disqualified himself from membership on the Finance Council?

Since the archdiocese is doing a survey to get input on the “relegation to profane status” of closed church buildings, we thought it would be timely for us to do a survey on the Jack Connors Conundrum.  Here is the one question:

We will keep the poll open through the weekend until Monday, so let other friends and family members know.  Only one vote per person.

What do you think?  Please keep any comments to just the topic of this post and free from personal attacks.

Boston Globe Gets it Wrong…Again

January 15, 2011

NOTE: The blog post originally published at 9:30am has been updated as of 12pm today.

We will have more for you on the new Catholic Schools policy in a separate post.  But in case you saw the headline in today’s Boston Globe about the appointment of Fr. Christopher Coyne to an episcopal position in Indianapolis, we wanted to let you know the Globe got the news wrong, yet again.  That is, they got it wrong until BCI corrected them.

First, let it be said that the blog thinks Fr. Chris Coyne is a fine priest, and we congratulate him on his appointment as auxiliary bishop of Indianapolis. He will also be Vicar General, which is effectively the #2 leadership/administrative position–at least it is in basically every other diocese in the country (except Boston today).  That he was appointed to be auxiliary bishop of Indianapolis seems rather clear from the Vatican announcement and the article in The Pilot, whose headline reads, Pope names Father Christopher Coyne auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis.”  It also is extremely clear from this article published yesterday afternoon in the Indianapolis Star whose headline reads, Indianapolis archbishop introduces new second-in-command and says,

“Coyne’s main mission will simply be to help Indianapolis Archbishop Daniel M. Buechlein carry out his duties. He will carry the load of the sacramental duties — like priest ordinations and confirmations — the archbishop typically performs in the large archdiocese that covers 14,000 square miles in 39 counties. Coyne also assumes the role of vicar general, which essentially is the No. 2 administrative post.  Buechlein, who turns 73 in April, has been on a reduced schedule since 2008, when he was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s disease, a cancer of the lymph nodes. That cancer is now in remission, church spokesman Greg Otolski said Thursday.

Today’s appointment came with no guarantee that Coyne could become archbishop of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis…Buechlein said he asked the pope for a co-adjutor, or assistant, but he chose to designate an auxiliary bishop.”

Yet despite that clarity, the headline of today’s Boston Globe article in the print edition reads, “Coyne to lead Indianapolis Archdiocese.”  It read the same way online as of 9:30am when we put out our post criticizing their mistake.  Keep reading to see the before and after.

That is simply inaccurate.  The photo caption says, “The Rev. Christopher J. Coyne listened yesterday as Archbishop Daniel M. Buechlein of Indianapolis announced his retirement.”  That is wrong–Archbishop Buechlein did not announce his retirement at all.  The title tag on the page (in the blue bar at the very top of the browser) says, “Spokesman for Cardinal Law to lead Indianapolis Catholics.”  That is wrong too.

Note the Indy Star headline for comparison:

Might auxiliary bishop-designate Coyne be well-positioned to become the bishop of Indianapolis in the future when the current archbishop of Indianapolis retires?  Sure.  But that is not assured, and he was simply appointed auxiliary bishop at this time.  Often times, the people who write the articles (e.g. Lisa Wangsness at the Globe, in this case) are not the same people who write the headlines, so we do not fault the reporter.  But we felt we should let you know about the error, because if we or our readers tell the Globe about the error, they are not likely to listen to us.

12pm UPDATE: Well, the Globe did listen to us in this case!  The headline of the article and photo caption are now changed as you can see below.

This shows that at least in this case, when the Globe sees something is objectively wrong, they are able to report the truth.

This brings us to three other related points.

First about the Boston Globe.  For some reason, the Globe seems to be totally ignoring the Boston Catholic Insider blog these past few months (except this morning!) and the breaches of fiscal responsibility and corruption we keep reporting on. In previous years and in other metropolitan areas, if there were serious allegations of corruption or breaches of fiscal responsibility like this, it would merit an investigation and probably be headline news, like the cronyism and misconduct in the Massachusetts Probation Department have been here lately.  Not the case with the corruption in the Archdiocese of Boston.  Seems as though the Globe must get exclusive rights or first access to the pablum handed out by Terry Donilon and Jack Connors–about the Catholic schools (fund-raising, increasing appeal to non-Catholics, the new Catholic Schools non-discrimination policy) or the personal good works of the Cardinal (e.g. visit to Pine Street Inn, visit to a prison), or the “dialogue” with the vigil parishes–and in exchange, the Globe simply will keep their heads in the sand and not write about the fiscal mismanagement, breaches of fiduciary responsibility, conflicts of interest, and other corruption that squander millions of dollars in donor contributions and could result in government sanctions some day.  If it makes Terry, Jack or the current leadership of the archdiocese look bad, the Globe is simply not likely to report on it today.

Secondly, this news about Fr. Chris Coyne being appointed auxiliary bishop/Vicar General/#2 in Indianapolis should cause everyone to ask about what is happening with the leadership in Boston.  Vicar General Fr. Richard Erikson is rumored to be heading back to full-time duty with the Air Force within a few months.  What attributes should the Cardinal look for in his next Vicar General?  What is happening with the future of the Chancellor? That will be the topic for a different post.

Thirdly, it is noteworthy that when the Archbishop of Indianapolis felt that he could not lead effectively, he asked the pope for help.  And the pope responded.  Food for thought..

We will have more about the Catholic Schools policy in our next post.

In the meantime, we extend our heartiest congratulations to Fr. Chris Coyne on his elevation to auxiliary bishop.  Here is a 2-minute video clip of the introduction of Fr. Coyne in Indianapolis we thought you would find of interest. The loss for Boston is a gain for Indianapolis.  We hear he has been an outstanding pastor at St. Margaret Mary in Westwood and we wish him well in his new assignment.

“Systemic Corruption”

November 19, 2010

From today’s Boston Globe:

The state’s highest court, firmly embracing a …conclusion that the ___Department is riddled with fraud and “systemic corruption,’’ ordered…officials yesterday to move swiftly to fire the…commissioner, suspend his senior lieutenants, and ask prosecutors to weigh criminal charges.

“Such abuse and corruption are intolerable,’’ members of the Supreme Judicial Court said in a statement.

The independent counsel…concluded that…senior executives oversaw a hiring system that was rigged “on a grand scale,’’ conducting…phony job interviews when the positions had already been promised to politically connected candidates.

“The fraud begins at the top…and it extends through most of the hierarchy..who participate in interviewing candidates for hiring and promotion,” wrote …a prominent private lawyer tapped by the state’s highest court to investigate the Department after…documented its deep culture of politicized patronage hiring and described the…___Department as “an employment agency for the well-connected.’’

Who could the organization be?  Who would engage in such practices?

This article is about the Massachusetts State Probation Department.  But, without this blog mentioning any names, can any readers come up with any other Boston-area organizations whose name might be substituted in the blank?

The Globe article cites strong language by the court, and the criminal penalties could be significant for those involved.

Coincidentally, we have happened to observe the following occurring inside of a certain non-profit religious organization which the state has some oversight for by virtue of it being a tax-exempt organization:

Hiring Politically-Connected Candidates

  • This Catholic non-profit publicly announced a search for a new development chief with names of members of a search committee, when in fact no candidates were interviewed, the position was not advertised in relevant industry publications, and the position went to a person  politically and professionally connected to the search committee chair. The candidate had actually been identified before the search was even announced.
  • This Catholic non-profit hired as head of communications a person who had political and family connections to the PR firm who chaired the search committee.  More qualified candidates not considered.
  • This Catholic non-profit hired as chief financial officer, a person who had connections to a search committee member who happened to have served on the Board with him and profited handsomely from that service at the bank where he was previously CEO.

Overpaying Executive Leaders with General Donor Funds

  • This Catholic non-profit organization hired for a schools administration position, a person whose salary of $325,000/year is higher on a per-student basis than the publicly-disclosed salaries of any other public or parochial school superintendent in the country.  If adjusted on a per-student basis with the closest regional peer, the salary would be $67,000 per year less. The members of the search committee were never publicly disclosed, and sources indicate the person hired for the position may have actually served on the same committee that hired her.

Overlooking Conflicts of Interest

This Catholic non-profit has a “Finance Council” which is supposed to provide objective advice on finances, budgets, hiring/firing of the chief financial officer of the organization, and help with other financial management-related  matters. However…

  • The council’s Conflict of Interest policy is not publicly published.
  • The policy is sufficiently weak or unenforced such that it allowed onto the Council a former board member of the bank where the Catholic non-profit’s chief financial officer had been CEO, as though there was no conflict of interest today.  In the finance council role, that former board member–who personally profited from prior board service with the current chief financial officer–will be asked to objectively assess whether the chief financial officer should have his employment renewed or terminated.

Failing to Abide by Organization’s Own Governance Charter

The “Finance Council” for this Catholic non-profit states in its charter that members must be “Catholics in good standing.” Yet the council of the non-profit apparently violates its own charter by permitting on the council a person who is Chair of a private healthcare company that profits from performing more than 4,000 procedures annually that directly violate a core principle and belief of the Catholic non-profit.  If a “finance council” member of our Catholic non-profit benefits from his leadership of another organization that violates core principles and beliefs of the Catholic Church, how could they be still be “in good standing” with the Catholic organization?  What would it take for a person to not be “in good standing”?

There are many other concerns, but we will stop here for today.  As a commenter noted in our post of yesterday:

people who hold or who held the public’s trust are being dismissed from state government based on their participation in (or acquiescence to), fraudulent search and hiring procedures.

The state’s Supreme Judicial Court said, “Such abuse and corruption are intolerable.”  Prosecutors are being asked to weigh criminal charges.

What if the Catholic non-profit were, hypothetically speaking, the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston?

What is the reaction of the non-profit?

Where is the leader?  What does the leader say about this?

Who will be accountable for these practices?

By coincidence, here is what today’s Gospel says in Luke 19:45-48:

Jesus entered the temple area and proceeded to drive out those who were selling things, saying to them, “It is written, My house shall be a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves.”

Has the house of Jesus been made into a “den of thieves”?

Who will drive out the money-changers?

Stay tuned for more in our next exciting episode.


July 12, 2010

We were just copied on a post from another blog that picks apart the essay in yesterday’s Boston Globe Magazine entitled, “What I Believe.”  We are not yet in the practice of endorsing other blogs, but the  Globe’s essay is a distortion of the Catholic faith and this particular blog post makes some valid points.  Any of a number of entities in the Archdiocese could respond to the Globe’s piece, starting with Cardinal O’Malley on his blog, and on down to Terry Donilon in PR, The Pilot, the website, or Catholic TV.  It cost $3.4 million to operate CatholicTV last year, around $1 million to publish The Pilot,  they spent a quarter of a million dollars to build a new website, and the salaries and PR fees across the Catholic Media group and PR teams (separate budget and funding sources) are easily another $1 million.  For $5.5 million a year, you’d think somone could crank out a response within 24 hours. If they cannot do something this basic, then maybe some of that money should be redirected to the Clergy Retirement Fund deficit.

%d bloggers like this: