During his address on Tuesday, June 29, 2010, the
feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, the Holy Father asserted that the “greatest danger” to the Church is not external persecution, but the “negative attitudes” of the world that can pollute and “infect the Christian community” from within. This idea of internal pollution brings to mind the situation of Fr. Bryan Hehir and his actions and words here in Boston. This will be the first of several posts, culminating in our final response to Fr. Richard Erikson, Vicar General, regarding the prospect of meeting to discuss the blog. Read on for one of several jaw-dropping examples that could meet Pope Benedict’s definition of “internal pollution,” but you can be the judge.
First, here are some passages from Pope Benedict’s homily, given to 38 metropolitan archbishops upon whom he bestowed the pallium after delivering his homily
Speaking on Christ’s promise in the Gospel that the “powers of hell shall not prevail” on the Church, the Pontiff explained that this not only “includes the historical experience of persecution suffered by Peter and Paul and other witnesses of the Gospel, but it goes further, wanting to protect especially against threats of a spiritual order.”
Indeed, if we think of the two millennia of Church history, we can see that – as the Lord Jesus had announced, Christians have never been lacking in trials, which in some periods and places have assumed the character of real persecution. “These, however, despite the suffering they cause, are not the greatest danger for the Church. In fact, it suffers greatest damage from what pollutes the Christian faith and life of its members and its communities, eroding the integrity of the Mystical Body, weakening its ability to prophesy and witness, tarnishing the beauty of its face.”
Reflecting on the Scripture readings, the Pope explained that the “Second Letter to Timothy – of which we heard an excerpt – speaks about the dangers of the ‘last days,’ identifying them with negative attitudes that belong to the world and can infect the Christian community: selfishness, vanity, pride, love of money, etc.”
Now, the Bryan Hehir connection. Back in December of 2005, Fr. Bryan Hehir and Catholic Charities of Boston under his leadership honored Boston Mayor Tom Menino (who backs gay marriage and abortion) at Catholic Charities’ holiday fundraiser dinner. This scandal may seem like ancient history, but almost no one is aware of Fr. Hehir’s almost incredulous explanation for why this scandal occurred. And his actions in 2005 are very relevant to what we have been seeing and exposing in 2010.
By 2005, Mayor Menino’s public record of advocacy for gay rights and other issues opposed to Church teachings was well known by most people in society—Catholic or non-Catholics. He led the Gay Pride parade every year, sponsored a gay prom for teenagers at Boston’s City Hall, flew the gay rainbow flag over City Hall, maintained at public expense a gay/lesbian liaison office at Boston City Hall, appointed pro-abortion members of the Boston school committee, and much more you can read here. Most importantly, he was a highly visible advocate for gay marriage in 2004-2005 in the heat of the Church’s battle against same-sex marriage. The issue made headlines on almost a daily basis in the mainstream media. (We’ll share some examples in subsequent updates to this post). At one point, Menino planned to authorize marrying couples from out-of-state in defiance of the governor, and Menino welcomed 99 gay couples to City Hall for champagne and a wedding cake reception on May 17, 2004, the first day that gays were able to get marriage certificates for these so-called “marriages.” Here are some articles that describe the whole affair. About a year later, Menino declared June 3, 2005 to be Queer Eye Day in the City of Boston. One would have had to essentially live on another planet to miss this.
Fast forward. In November 2005, Bryan Hehir’s Catholic Charities announced plans to honor Menino, in direct opposition to the USCCB’s Catholics in Political Life, which states:
The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.
A massive outcry by Boston-area Catholics immediately followed, and Cardinal Sean O’Malley pulled out, however Catholic Charities proceeded with honoring Menino at the event. Here’s the kicker. At the December 1, 2005 meeting of the Archdiocesan Presbyteral Council, then-Archbishop Sean O’Malley commented on why this situation occurred in the first place. Are you sitting down? Here is what the Archbishop of Boston said, as documented in the minutes of that Dec. 1 meeting (p.6):
Re: the Catholic Charities Dinner: Honoring a special public figure can be advantageous to the fund-raising event. He met with Bryan Hehir, The people at Catholic Charities were not away [sic, aware] of the statements against Church policy from the mayor. Generally, the USCCB guideline is to not honor politicians as a prudent move. The Archbishop decided to respect the office of the Mayor and not cancel the event, but he [the Archbishop] wouldn’t go.
Was Fr. Bryan Hehir really asking the Archbishop and Catholics of Boston to believe that he was not aware of the statements against Church policy from the mayor? Is this the same Fr. Bryan Hehir, who received a “genius” MacArthur fellowship? Is this the same Fr. Bryan Hehir who was called “a brilliant, brilliant student of politics–especially the geopolitical scene” by the former general secretary of the U.S. Catholic Conference ? Is this the same Fr. Hehir who Cardinal Sean recently recognized as highly trusted “strategic advisor” who brings “fidelity to the work of the Church” and ”clarity to our message and mission”? Fr. Hehir’s claim that he and his staff were unaware of Menino’s history is troubling and difficult to believe. If Bryan Hehir was somehow naively unaware of Mayor Menino’s opposition to the Catholic Church on a host of issues, then Fr. Hehir bears responsibility for his own negligence and has no business being Cabinet Secretary of anything in this archdiocese. And if he was aware but lied to the archbishop and presbyterate of Boston, then he should have been fired then and should still be fired now because this strongly suggests that what he says and does simply cannot be trusted–let alone trusted to align with Church teachings.
Fr. Hehir’s action honoring a political figure who rabidly opposed the Catholic Church on one of the core teachings of the Church and biggest social/moral issues of our time—marriage between a man and woman, and the foundation of how we order family and society—is but one example of his long history of dissent and undermining the teachings of the Church.
Do you believe that Fr. Hehir is an example of an “internal pollutant”? With this as just one example in a long history of similar situations, we must ask Cardinal Sean and Vicar General Fr. Erikson a simple question: Why is Fr. Hehir still in a position of decision-making authority over any public policy, staffing, education, or social issue in this Archdiocese?
Authors and readers of this blog remain open to the possibility of a face-to-face dialogue with the Vicar General and Cardinal under appropriate conditions. However, if the archdiocese does not agree that Fr. Bryan Hehir’s behavior and actions in this situation were objectively wrong, in conflict with the USCCB’s guidelines, scandalous, and damaging to the Catholic Church, then it seems we may not have any basis for conversation with the Vicar General or anyone in the archdiocesan hierarchy.
Enjoy the holiday weekend!
If Fr. Bryan Hehir and his staff were really unaware of Mayor Menino’s opposition toward Catholic moral teaching in his politics, this would indeed be cause for concern.
In his Ad Limina Visit to the Louisville, Mobile and New Orleans Provinces on December 4, 2004, Pope John Paul II told the assembled Bishops that, “While fully respecting the legitimate separation of Church and State in American life, such a catechesis must also make clear that for the faithful Christian there can be no separation between the faith which is to be believed and put into practice (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25) and a commitment to full and responsible participation in professional, political and cultural life.”
The laity are called upon by the Church to practice “faithful citizenship.” Should we expect any less from our leaders in the Catholic Church? Luke 12: 48 comes to mind. Bishops and priests have a solemn responsibility to provide authentic moral guidance as well as an example to the laity of “responsible participation” in political life.
And responsible participation is not the fruit of ignorance but of informed citizenship.
I seriously believe the whole Archdiocese needs an exorcism, or at the very least, concentrated prayers of repentance and deliverance. I’d suggest every parish purchase a copy of Father Thomas Euteneuer’s new book “Exorcism and the Church Militant,” available from Human Life International (hli.com.)
Cradle Catholic
Are you suggesting threats of a spiritual order?
Things that pollute the Christian faith and life of its members and its communities, eroding the integrity of the Mystical Body, weakening its ability to prophesy and witness, tarnishing the beauty of its face?
Stay tuned.
The seamless garment of relativism has covered the enemies of The Church for a generation.
Game over.
I have read postings by you before. They are always astute and to the point. Keep up the good work. Christ was crucified and you will be also in one way or another. What is fueling this comes right from the writings of Malachi Martin. The Church has made a deal with the “deep blue sea” in regard to a world socialist government. Semper Fi.
D Paul wrote: “The Church has made a deal with the ‘deep blue sea’ in regard to a world socialist government.”
I quite agree, especially with the Vatican Moscow agreement in 1962 before the Council.
FYI re Malachi Martin:
http://angelqueen.org/articles/07_06_martin_ajc_connection.shtml
The Cardinal actually said Bryan Hehir and their group of cronies on the Catholic Charities Board didn’t know Mayor Menino had been defying the teachings of the Church all over town?
This demonstrates his commitment to honesty and truth.
Good post. You have to understand that Catholic Charities is the “cover” for infiltration. Father Hehir has deep connections. Father Drinan was a priest, by God, who actively espoused abortion on a massive scale.
How can anyone be shocked by this in the face of the funeral given for Ted Kennedy — over which the Cardinal presided?
Elizabeth that’s it in a nutshell. This is what Paul Melanson said at his blog:
Friday, July 02, 2010
Ignorance: Invincible and Vincible
Jimmy Akin, in an article entitled “Ignorance – Invincible and Vincible,” which was published in This Rock magazine (July/August 1999 edition) got it right when he said that, “In moral theology, ignorance is defined as a lack of knowledge that a person ought to have. Ignorance is distinguished from mere nescience, which is a lack of knowledge that a person has no need of. For example, a person who did not know the square root of 1429 would be ignorant of it if he were taking a test that required him to know the answer, but he would be nescient of it if performing a task that didn’t require the number.
Moral theology divides ignorance into a number of categories. The two I will consider here are invincible and vincible. Ignorance is invincible if a person could not remove it by applying reasonable diligence in determining the answer. Ignorance is vincible if a person could remove it by applying reasonable diligence. Reasonable diligence, in turn, is that diligence that a conscientious person would display in seeking the correct answer to a question given (a) the gravity of the question and (b) his particular resources.
The gravity of a question is determined by how great a need the person has to know the answer. The answers to fundamental questions (how to save one’s soul, how to preserve one’s life) have grave weight. The answers to minor questions (the solution to a crossword puzzle) typically have light weight.
The particular resources a person has include (a) the ease with which he can obtain the information necessary to determine the answer (e.g., a man with a good textbook on the subject may be able to find the information with greater ease than a man who lacks such a textbook) and (b) the ease with which he can make an accurate evaluation of the evidence once it is in his possession (e.g., a smart man may be able to evaluate the evidence with greater ease than an ordinary man). The graver the question and the greater the resources available, the more diligence is needed to qualify as reasonable…”
Now, bearing all of this in mind, especially the last sentence in bold, read this article from Joe Sacerdo regarding Father Bryan Hehir and his excuse for having honored Mayor Thomas Menino even though the Mayor’s opposition toward Catholic moral teaching regarding homosexuality and abortion are well-known by virtually every citizen who lives and works in and around Boston.
Would such ignorance be vincible or invincible? Come on, you know the answer.
Although Akin doesn’t go into it, there is a category of ignorance known as affected or studied ignorance. When a person deliberately avoids knowledge in order to plead ignorance as an excuse, for example, refusing to read material or avoiding those persons who might inform him, this form of pretense is called affected or studied ignorance.
Something to reflect on this holiday weekend.
Jonathan,
Thanks for sharing Paul’s post. (and Paul, thanks for the fantastic commentary on the issues of ignorance). I think it’s clear that Fr. Hehir has no plausible explanation for the claim of “ignorance” of Menino’s anti-Catholic politics. The consequences of that “ignorance” are indeed very serious.
I suggest, if a debate between blog writer(s), Fr. Erickson and the Cardinal takes place, it be done on line at a site created for the purpose. That way the debaters will be able to assess what is said to them, do the proper reesarch before responding, gather their thoughts and produce well formed responses without the interruption that often occurs in face-to-face informal debates.
As important, it will give the parties the chance to read what they say before posting it to decide if that’s what they really want to say.
And it will give the rest of us the chance to sit in and make our own informed decisions as to who is right and who is wrong and why.
Whatever happens, the allegations against Fr. Hehir and the Cardinal MUST be addressed by the Cardinal himself. If he’s not interested in addressing the allegations, we must conclude he has no interest in being the Archbishop of Boston.
Ferde,
Thanks for your comments and perspectives on the dialogue with Fr. Erikson. We have had a brief private email exchange with the Vicar General regarding the prospect of a meeting, but there is nothing substantial yet to report. We agree with your points about the Cardinal needing to address the situation with Fr. Hehir. If there is no interest by the Cardinal in taking action to address the issues we have raised here, then any discussion or online interaction with the Vicar General will not be a productive use of time.
Thank you Joe for your excellent posts here. It is always encouraging to meet other members of the Church militant. You are doing a fantastic job here.
God bless you!
Internal pollution.
http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=3b04f297-d934-4095-8847-a09fa01825b1
More internal pollution:
Sex, Lies & Videotape
From: RealCatholicTV | July 13, 2010
The Archdiocese of New York is refusing to answer questions about an incriminating internet video
http://www.realcatholictv.com/documents/vort-2010-07-13.php
[...] Greatest danger to Church is internal pollution [...]
[...] The Holy Father recently warned that the “greatest danger” to the Church is not external persecution, but the “negative attitudes” of the world that can pollute and “infect the Christian community” from within. [...]
[...] Fr. Massaro. Unaware? That sounds kinda like how Fr. Bryan Hehir’s Catholic Charities responded to complaints about their honoring Mayor Menino of Boston a few years back. (“The people at Catholic [...]
[...] Greatest danger to Church is internal pollution: Fr. Hehir honored Mayor Tom Menino at a 2005 Catholic Charities fundraiser even though Menino had public record that included marchng in Gay Pride parades, supporting “gay marriage,” sponsoring a gay prom for teenagers at Boston’s City Hall, and flying the gay rainbow flag over City Hall [...]