Archive for the ‘Bryan Hehir’ Category

With everything going on around St. Cecilia’s in Boston earlier in the summer, I forgot to mention that Fr. Bryan Hehir, Secretary for Health and Social Services for the Archdiocese of Boston received the “prestigious Joseph Cardinal Bernardin Award at the Philip J. Murnion Lecture, at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago on June 10.”  According to this blurb from “Around the Archdiocese“:

Ordained in 1966, Father Hehir has worked for 45 years as priest in the archdiocese, including being a Professor of Religion and Public Life at Harvard University, and as president of the Catholic Charitable Bureau of the Archdiocese of Boston. He is known locally, nationally, and internationally as a teacher on matters of social justice.

The Cardinal Bernardin Award is given annually to an individual whose work embodies the spirit of the Catholic Common Ground Initiative, promoting unity, dialogue and collaboration within the Church.

Congratulations to Fr. Hehir!  He’s is in good company. Previous recipients of the award are:

  • 2010: Sr. Catherine Patten, R.S.H.M.: She’s former director of the Catholic Common Ground Initiative, from when it was based at the National Pastoral Life Center in New York
  • 2009: Sr. Carol Keehan.  She’s president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association. Keehan was selected because of “her extraordinary contributions to creating common ground between church leaders and government officials, organized labor and Catholic health care providers, the rich and the poor,” according to the citation presented to her.  In 2010 she publicly suppored Obamacare, in opposition to the U.S. Catholic Bishops, promoting the USCCB to call the CHA’s efforts a “wound to Catholic unity.” Shortly after that, Fr. Bryan Hehir spoke at the CHA conference, praising her “intelligent and courageous leadership” and undermining the U.S. bishops’ position by saying there was a a basis for the “multiple voices” and “different judgments” on the bill.  My post, Fr. Bryan Hehir “Wounds Catholic Unity” by Undermining U.S. Bishops on Healthcare” detailing his CHA talk prompted an angry response by Vicar General, Fr. Richard Erikson in the comments on June 24, 2010.
  • 2008: Bishop Gerald Kicanas. Here’s what one blogger said about Kicanas’ receiving the award: “It was recently announced that Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson has won the 2008 Bernardin Award. Kicanas is a Bernardin protege. As Chicago’s seminary rector, he ran interference for a student who racked up charges of sexual misconduct. (That student went on to become a priest now in prison for molesting boys.) So you might say he’s a worthy recipient.”
  • 2007: Dr. Eugene Fisher.  Fisher was associate director of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs and has his own controversies. On September 2, 2005, the USCCB Office of Media Relations issued a statement by Dr. Fisher on the death of New York Rabbi Balfour Brickner on August 29, 2005 that was gushing with praise. Read this Matt Abbott column at RenewAmerica for more details:

But according to Randy Engel, executive director of the Export, Pa.-based U.S. Coalition for Life:”Dr. Fisher’s unqualified praise of Rabbi Brickner as ‘a great friend’ of  Catholics and the Church carefully omits any reference to the seedier aspects of Rabbi Brickner’s well known, long-time crusade for ‘abortion rights’ and ‘homosexual rights.’  Rabbi Brickner served on the boards of the Planned Federation of America (PPFA), the PPFA Board of Advocates and the PPFA Clergy Advisory Board, Planned Parenthood of New York City. Rabbi Brickner was a founder of Religious Leaders for a Free Choice, a New York-based pro-abortion organization. Rabbi Brickner was a founding member and board member of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL), renamed NARAL — Pro-Choice America. Rabbi Brickner served on the board of the New York affiliate of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCAR). In the mid-1970s, Rabbi Brickner, testified on RCAR’s behalf before the U.S. Senate in favor of abortion rights. He stated that in Judaism the fetus in the womb is not considered a person and has ‘no juridical personality of its own.’ In fact, he stated, ‘a fetus did not acquire legal standing until thirty days after its birth.’ “In ‘Bush Administration Alchemy Would Turn a Fetus into a  Child,’ Brickner charged that by making the fetus eligible for health care, the Bush Administration was turning ‘a fetus into a child and a woman into a vessel.’ He stated that the unborn fetus ‘is not a child’ and ‘it is not a living soul.’  “Rabbi Brickner helped draft the 2000 SEICUS (Sex Education and Information Council of the United States) ‘Religious Declaration on Sexual Morality, Justice, and Healing,’ which upholds contraception, abortion and homosexual rights including the right to ‘the blessing of same sex unions,’ cradle-to-grave sex instruction and population control.”  “Dr. Fisher’s claim, made on behalf of the USCCB, the official  arm of the American bishops, that Rabbi Brickner was a great religious leader whose name may ‘forever be a blessing,’ needs to be refuted; Dr. Fisher and his superior, the Rev. Arthur Kennedy, executive director of the Secretariat, [Bryan Hehir Exposed note: Kennedy is now Aux. Bishop in Boston and rector of St. John’s Seminary] need to be sent packing; and the members of the hierarchy who permitted this scandalous statement to be issued need to issue an apology to the pro-life community. In addition, the Vatican should remove Dr. Fisher from any advisory position to the Holy See on Jewish ecumenical relations.” [This report from the U.S. Coalition for Life summarizes the final outcome].

  • Archbishop Wilton Gregory: 2006
  • Boston College: 2005. For its “Church in the 21st Century” project
  • National Council of Catholic Women: 2004
  • Archbishop Harry Flynn: 2003.  Flynn was archbishop of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis at the time.

As I wrote in “Fr. Hehir and the Seamless Garment,”  Fr. Hehir and the late Cardinal Bernardin were close collaborators and friends.  From the 2001 book, “Religious Leaders and Faith-Based Politics” we hear:

Shortly after the pastoral on war and peace had been issued. and no doubt trying to take advantage of the momentum it bad generated within the hierarchy. Cardinal Bernardin undertook another major initiative intended to broaden the bishops’ pro-life agenda beyond abortion.

As one would expect,in undertaking this initiative Bernardin received the invaluable assistance of Bryan Hehir. Indeed it is fair to say that this initiative was chiefly the product of their long collaboration. After working together over the years, the two men had become close friends.

In this post, Fr. Bryan Hehir, Bishop Kicanas, and Cardinal Bernardin, I talked about the Bernardin Connection to  the Gay Agenda and Sub-Culture in the Catholic Church, including excerpts from Randy Engel’s book The Rite of Sodomy: Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church published in a column by Matt Abbott entitled “Remembering Joseph Cardinal BernardinThe Special Case of Joseph Cardinal Bernardin:

  • “To do real justice to Cardinal Bernardin and his entourage of clerical homosexuals and pederasts and ancillary hangers-on who made up the Chicago-Washington, D. C. Homosexual/Pederast Axis would require more than one full size book.”
  • “The Boys Club” Murder

On May 30, 1984, Frank Pellegrini, the organist and choir director for All Saints — St. Anthony of Padua Roman Catholic Church on Chicago’s Southside was found brutally murdered in his apartment. There was no sign of forced entry. Police officials investigating the case believed that the murder was committed either by a woman or a homosexual.

According to his girlfriend, Pellegrini had had a homosexual relationship with a Chicago priest and was part of a secret clerical “Boys Club” that not only included homosexual assignations, but also ritualistic, occult worship and the sexual abuse of young boys garnered from low income ethnic families in the city.

Two young private Chicago investigators hired to look into the Pellegrini murder were able to confirm the existence of a clerical homosexual/pederast ring operating out of the Archdiocese of Chicago. It appeared that the alleged homosexual ring they had uncovered was the same one mentioned by Father Andrew Greeley in the paperback version of Furthermore! Memories of a Parish Priest written in 1999.

One of the puzzling mysteries surrounding the murder involved Cardinal Bernardin. According to the police who were present at the crime scene, shortly after Pellegrini’s body was discovered, Cardinal Bernardin arrived at the murdered man’s home to quiz the officers about the killing. The cardinal told police that he did not know the murdered man. This raises the obvious question of how he learned of the killing so quickly and of what special interest was Pellegrini to him since he did not know the victim. The Pellegrini case was reopened in the early 1990s, but to date, the crime remains unsolved and Father Greeley remains silent.

  • Bernardin and the Winona Seminary Scandal

Although the homosexual scandal at Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary in Winona, Minn. has already been covered in the previous chapter in connection with Bishop Brom of San Diego, it may be helpful to recall the case again briefly as Archbishop Bernardin was implicated in both the scandal and the subsequent payoff, and because it ties into the well-publicized Cook Affair.

…the details of the Winona scandal did not come to public attention until 2002. However, it had its genesis in the 1980s when a small group of homosexual prelates decided to scout out fresh meat from candidates for the priesthood at Immaculate Heart Seminary in the Diocese of Winona.

According to reports based on an investigation by Roman Catholic Faithful, the bishops involved in the sordid affair were alleged to be Joseph Bernardin, John Roach, Robert Brom, and a fourth bishop whose identity is not known. (The Boston Globe briefly mentioned the scandal here)

Endnote 26:

Cardinal Bernardin’s “Seamless Garment” later renamed the “Consistent Life Ethic,” like “The Many Faces of AIDS,” is another illustration of how Bernardin helped to advance the agenda of the Homosexual Collective. The Seamless Garment strategy set out by Bernardin in the 1980s sought to broaden the pro-life tent by expanding the movement’s opposition to abortion, euthanasia, population control and school sex instruction to include other “social justice” issues such as war and peace, opposition to the death penalty, welfare reform and civil liberties. One of the immediate effects of the Seamless Garment ethic was the increase of power and financial resources of Social Justice offices at the diocesan level where the Homosexual Collective has always been strongly represented.

Since the Homosexual Collective has been extremely successful at framing the homosexual question in terms of a “civil rights” issue, the Bernardin strategy opened the NCCB/USCC and diocesan Social Justice Departments (and their considerable resources and manpower) to further exploitation by the Collective. At the same time the Collective benefited from the neutering effect the Seamless Garment strategy had on pro-life/pro-family forces within the Church that had become the backbone of public opposition to the political and social agenda of the Homosexual Collective. The Bernardin strategy served to breathe new life into the languishing Democratic Party and its pro-homosexual platform as well as promote the “big tent” inclusive policies of the Republican Party that sought to capitalize and exploit the political talents and financial wealth of the Homosexual Collective in America.

Fr. Hehir’s been the recipient of many awards, so he’d be well versed in knowing the histories of previous award recipients and the award’s namesake.  This award adds to others like the Institute for Policy Studies’ 1983 Letelier Award, named after Orlando Letelier, a Marxist-Leninist and IPS fellow who was assassinated in 1976 in Washington by the Chilean government’s secret police. A new report describes the IPS as “a Washington, D.C. think tank that provided a cover for Chilean Marxist and Cuban agent Orlando Letelier​ to conduct communist political influence operations in the nation’s capital.”

So, congratulations again to Fr. Bryan Hehir on winning the Cardinal Bernardin award!

Read Full Post »

Fr. Bryan Hehir’s buddy, Jack Connors, Jr, is in the news yet again.  When last we gathered here to talk about Jack Connors, he was helping organize support to raise money for pro-abort VP Joe Biden.   Apparently, no one told Mr. Connors that was a no-no, so he’s one-upped himself and just raised $2M for an even more egregiously pro-abort and pro-gay politician, President Obama.  What do we hear from Cardinal O’Malley about this?  (Hint, think of the name of a Simon and Garfunkel song).  The sound of silence.

Even though Bryan Hehir hasn’t done much new lately to merit a post, Jack’s done enough that we think Bryan Hehir Exposed readers should take action and ask the Vatican to intervene.  Click here to sign the petition sponsored by Boston Catholic Insider asking the Papal Nuncio and Vatican to intervene and do something about the mess that Cardinal O’Malley’s allowed.

Over at Boston Catholic Insider, this post mentioned our good friend, Bryan Hehir, as one of the reasons behind Cardinal O’Malley’s failure to effectively defend life in recent years:

If indeed Sean Patrick is the “pastor” (think Latin) of his flock, he is called to consistently and frequently behave as if he believes that abortion stops a beating heart. He must publicly teach that the fragile women who seek abortions, and their children, not yet born, at risk of death, need everyone’s support. He needs to privately call out Jack Connors, and publicly ask him what he’s done lately to help the most vulnerable among us — women who can see no other solution than abortion, and their children who deserve life (and a good one at that). Are these not as worthy as those who receive face transplants, and “miracle” cancer cures at Jack Connors’ hospitals? Where’s the Partners Healthcare PR about supporting women at risk of abortion and their babies who need to breathe life?

But we need to change, too. We need to understand that the woman who is sufficiently desperate to seek an abortion will tell you that her primary “problem” is not that she is pregnant. It is homelessness, or violent physical abuse, or substance use, or some very real and desperate fear of the responsibility for this child, that takes her to an abortion provider. But once the abortion is over, the problems she took into the clinic with her remain. The only difference is that she isn’t pregnant. And she has a new problem… the day she eventually wakes up — and it is inevitable — and realizes that her child died. All in all, a messier conversation than, “Abortion is wrong.” Takes a lot more thought and work.

But Sean doesn’t want to do the work… to speak up. He doesn’t want to demand that his well-heeled friends support these women and their fragile, unborn children. Why? Because Bryan Hehir won’t LET him. Hehir will let him walk in the Boston Life Walk in October (though note Hehir, who oversees “Life” from his cabinet position, does not appear), and he will let him “march” in DC in January. But that’s about it. No point “offending” people and “marginalizing” himself by stirring up the conversation that Hehir proclaims (and I heard him say this) “will never be solved in our lifetime.” If that’s the most rigorous intellectual argument Hehir can raise for the cardinal’s cowering at a public discourse on alternatives to abortion, the Kennedy School of Government is not getting its money’s worth letting Hehir occupy an endowed chair.

To Bryan Hehir: Among problems that will not be solved in your (or my) lifetime: Homelessness, cancer, and not even baldness. But WE will be judged — not on some progress measured by the arbitrary yardstick of our lifetime — but by the quality and effectiveness of our efforts to provide another way for these women and their children.

Sean flunks the test because he demonstrates a consistent and longstanding pattern of mere lip service to an abortion conversation, and utterly fails to rally the likes of Jack Connors in the support of abortion alternatives in Boston. Why? He fails to act solely in deference to Bryan Hehir’s undue influence and insatiable addiction for political expediency. Sean doesn’t flunk merely by bowing down to Jack Connors, and failing to send him packing from the Finance Council. He fails utterly because he has a longstanding pattern of failing to act to find another way for these women and their children. FACTA NON VERBA, Sean. And that’s why you who read BCI should write to the nuncio.

Cardinal O’Malley flunks for caving in to Bryan Hehir. And Bryan Hehir flunks for his pattern of relativism and compromise. Seems he and Sean have  also not learned much from Hehir’s history of being wrong on just about every big issue he’s taken up for the past 40 years.  How much you want to bet that Bryan still thinks his position on nuclear disarmament was right, the Call to Action conference was a good thing, it was OK to honor the pro-abort, pro-gay Mayor Menino at that Catholic Charities fundraiser, and it was a good thing for Catholic Charities to broker adoptions and place young children with gay parents?  I betcha neither Sean or Bryan has ever mentioned the word ‘abortion” to Jack Connors.

Bryan Hehir will say, “We can’t fight abortion (or gay marriage) on Beacon Hill because it will alienate our allies.”  What allies?  All of the Catholic legislators vote against the Church on abortion and “gay marriage” anyway.

Bryan Hehir will say, “This is a complicated issue.”  Everything is complicated. As though no other mind can handle “complicated” issues” like abortion or “gay marriage” but his.

Bryan Hehir will say, “We live in a complex pluralistic society” and so we need to compromise. No–because of societal values, we need to hold even stronger to our beliefs, not compromise them.

Bryan Hehir or his like-minded colleagues will say, “We can’t fight ___ because if we lose on this issue, then it sets a precedent and we’ll probably then lose on this next one.”  So that means you don’t even try?

But for now,  Jack’s influence as one of the shadow archbishops in Boston needs to end.  Take Action today in the Stop the Scandal campaign and let the Vatican know what you think.

Read Full Post »

Fr. Bryan Hehir’s buddy, Jack Connors, is at it again.

The Boston Herald is reporting that Jack hosted a gaggle of major Democratic donors on Monday night at a ritzy closed-door “friend-raising” event, reminding them that they are necessary for President Obama’s 2012 re-election bid.

It’s not just that we couldn’t have won without you. We will not be able to win again without you,” Biden told a crowd of 110 supporters at the Hancock Towers office of Boston powerbroker Jack Connors. “Our shot at getting re-elected is through you and the same way you did it the last time.”

Bryan and Jack are long-time buddies from their time when Jack was on the board at Catholic Charities.

Jack’s a busy guy these days also raising money for the memorial to another pro-abort, pro-gay politician, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.  Here’s how the Globe described the Biden visit to Jack’s ritzy digs at the top of the Pru:

One of the two meetings is taking place in the personal offices of Jack Connors, the local advertising executive who has been spearheading the fundraising effort for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate, according to a Connors assistant and a top local Democrat who saw the invitation.

We’re  wondering if Fr. Hehir has ever mentioned to Jack how the Catholic Church is opposed to abortion and “gay marriage,” and how Jack should work on the salvation of his soul and stop leading people to sin by rejecting any involvement with people who promote the killing of the unborn or “same-sex marriage.”   Or has Cardinal O’Malley ever mentioned it?   Here’s a suggestion for them–just share Matthew 6:19-24 “You cannot serve God and mammon” and tell Jack he has to choose one or the other–which will it be?

Nah, no one wants to be confrontational with Jack.  Better to be confrontational with religious sisters, like the Daughters of St. Paul, and deny them the ability they’re been fighting for since 2005 or 2006 to manage their own employee pension funds and push them into filing a lawsuit in the Supreme Judicial Court to recover $1.4 million owed to their employees. The person mostly responsible for jerking around the sisters seems like it’s Chancellor, Jim McDonough, who is basically acting as CEO of the archdiocese along with Archbishops Connors and Hehir.  We covered them all before, about a year ago, when we wrote about Fr. Hehir and Friends Completing Coup of the Boston Archdiocese.

Turns out the Chancellor’s 5-year term is up for renewal right about now. If he, acting on the Cardinal’s behalf feels it’s OK to jerk around the good sisters at the Daughters of St. Paul, we think orthodox Catholics should send him a message that kind of behavior isn’t appropriate here in the Catholic Church.  Boston Catholic Insider just launched a FedUp campaign to let the Cardinal know people want him to replace the Chancellor. Click here to jump right to the form.  We agree, it’s time for a change, except we’ve been calling for that for a year.  Not sure why it took them guys so long to reach the same conclusion we did a long time ago, but we accept their late realization.



Read Full Post »

Before reading today’s post, you’ll want to read the previous post about How People from the Archdiocese React to Your Emails.

A priest who serves on the Presbyteral Council and who also works at the Chancery on an important initiative responded back to our email/fax campaign (“Catholics Ask Holy See to Intervene in Boston Archdiocese“) over the Catholic Schools policy to admit children of gay parents and complained about getting “spammed” by our emails.

In How People from the Archdiocese React to Your Emails, he sent us a short email asking to be removed from the emails. Since he’s a member of the Presbyteral Council who apparently approved this ill-conceived policy, we asked him a few questions:

  • Are you OK with the use of the Holy Father’s quote out of context at the beginning of the policy, which has the intended effect of deceiving readers into believing the Holy Father approves of such a policy?
  • When a gay or lesbian couple becomes chair of a fund-raising or parent committee, how exactly will the school avoid implicitly or explicitly giving recognition to the validity of their relationship?
  • When a five-year-old asks their parents why Johnny has two daddies, how does this avoid corrupting the innocence of the young mind of that child?
  • Is there some process for how individual Catholics should communicate directly with the Presbyteral Council members?

He responded back, but never answered the questions about the deception or the problems with the inherently flawed policy.  That’s probably because he had no credible answers for them. He conveniently skipped those, and only commented on how he personally would like to receive communications.

Communications from the faithful to him need to be neat and not bothersome.  If a lot of people have the same thing to say, we should go to the effort of aggregating all of the input in one petition with all of the signatures, so he is not troubled by multiple emails.

He feels people should each go to the effort of writing their own personal messages, rather than signing a pre-written letter, even though the Cardinal and his leadership team have such a well-established practice of ignoring personal correspondence from faithful Catholics, that people just don’t want to waste the time any more composing personal letters they know will end up going nowhere.

Our method of communicating didn’t help him understand how we came to our conclusions.  Isn’t this one-page letter with six points pretty much self-explanatory about the rationale?

Here’s his email back to Joe, and then you’ll see Joe’s response back to him, slightly edited to not reveal the identity of the priest:

From: Reverend___@rcab.org
To:     Joe Sacerdo <joesacerdo@gmail.com
Date:  Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:51pm
Subj: RE:  Stop sending copies

Mr. Sacerdo:

I am very interested in hearing the voices of Catholics and their opinions. It is important that Catholics share their ideas and concerns with their priests and bishops. It helps our dialogue and helps us to know the “sensus fidelium.” Normally, priests and pastors get these perspectives in personal conversations with their people or at their parish pastoral councils. They bring those concerns to Presbyteral Council meetings on a regular basis.

If your group, using the same words, had decided to send one petition with numerous signatures that would have been instructive and helpful.

If your group had instructed members to send their individual perspectives to me, in their own words but with similar thoughts, that too would have been instructive. I would have been happy to receive all of them.

What I got today was the same message in my email box…over and over again, with only the signature changed. Thus, my comment that, after one, I understood the issue and the concern.

The method you used was not helpful in making sense of how your group arrived at its conclusions. It gave no background. It did feel like “spamming,” even if that were not your intention.

I want to hear important ideas, strong convictions, deeply held beliefs, as long as they are expressed without calumny or detraction and are spoken with true charity.

I have met and spoken with the members of the Archdiocesan Pastoral Council on several occasions. I have found them to be dedicated and hardworking members of the Church, men and women who love the Church very much. I would not characterize them and have no reason to believe that this “organization is corrupted.” To characterize this fine group of people in such a way saddens me. I believe it to be an unfair and unjustified accusation, based on what came through today.

Thank you for contacting me. I hope we can continue to find actions that build up the Body of Christ and continue the Cardinal’s mission of recovery, trust and evangelization.

God bless,

Fr. ____

From: Joe Sacerdo
To: “Reverend___@rcab.org”
Date: Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:47 PM
Subj: Re: Stop sending copies


Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts back in the detailed message.  Much of what you outlined would make sense and would work in the means you outlined–if the actions by the archdiocese weren’t rooted in deception and were rooted in the teachings of the Church.

I think we may differ on much, but on this we should agree–the Catholic Schools admission policy and it’s means of coming about were rooted in deception. Cardinal Sean put out his statement last May saying the Denver policy would be carefully studied and considered, but Fr. Bryan Hehir said a day later on WBUR that the Denver policy didn’t matter at all to the Cardinal–the Boston Archdiocese was already admitting children of gay parents and would continue doing so, just with a formal policy.  One of the these two gentlemen was lying.  Based on the outcome policy, it would appear that it was the Cardinal.  The policy released says that “we are guided by the words of the Holy Father, by Canon Law, and the USCCB.”  We both know that is also a lie.  Mary Grassa O’Neill is on the record in September saying the archdiocese had two options in which way they went with the policy, and an internal decision was made to not discriminate, then the policy was written around that decision.  There was no guidance by the words of the Holy Father, whose quote talked about all students being able to access Catholic education without regard to financial limitation.  The reality is that the decision was made internally to “not discriminate”, apparently based on some combination of the Cardinal’s own belief, Bryan Hehir’s input or pressure from Jack Connors and other donors–and then people went out and found quotes that could be used in some way to back that position. If they read Canon law, they’d know that the Code of Canon Law: Canon 22: prohibits the canonization of civil laws that are “contrary to divine law.” Because same-sex “marriages” or civil unions and mutatis mutandis adoptions are contrary to divine law; it is arguable that the civil law allowing them cannot be regarded by the Church as valid. Admission of the children to Catholic schools would certainly give the impression that the status of the parents is comparable to parents united in the bonds of Holy Matrimony. Furthermore, the principle of subsidiarity would require decisions be made at the pastor level, not by the archdiocese.

What should faithful Catholics make of the objective reality that the Cardinal, the Presbyteral Council and APC all let this through with an intentionally deceptive use of the quote by the Holy Father opening the policy and an outright lie that the archdiocese was guided by the words of the Holy Father?

The policy was created in secret. There was no opportunity for input by rank-and-file Catholics.We tried providing input and it was completely ignored.


APC members were asked to not share drafts with anyone. After the fact, are people supposed to go to their pastor, who might be on the Presbyteral Council, or their local APC member, and politely ask afterwards, “Why did you allow this deception? Could you try to have more integrity in the future?”

Start with deception, you’re going to get angry people when it’s clear what’s happened.

How to communicate with you and others? Ideally, it would be nice if everyone composed their own thoughtful message; however, we have well-established precedents where organizations offer a pre-written letter to sign online in order to weigh-in on issues with Congress or other representative organizations. They operate almost exactly as we created ours… We could consider an approach where the signatures are queued up and one petition with many names is submitted. However, since the Cardinal has established a precedent where he ignores letters and emails sent to him by both lay Catholics and clergy, an individual letter even with many signatures would never be noticed. Perhaps if you can ask him to start responding to letters, as his precedessor did, more people would be willing to take the time to write individual letters. But since he ignores all letters, faithful Catholics no longer want to waste the time composing their thoughts individually so a form-letter is the best solution.

As for the APC, yes, they’re hard-working and many are dedicated to the Church. But they let the Schools Policy go through with no comments about the deception referenced above and they let the archdiocese sponsor a conference featuring Fr. Thomas Massaro, who had a record of supporting a pro-abortion politician excommunicated by her bishop. I know you are quite familiar with that conference. From what I read in another email sent to us, the APC recording secretary obviously has an agenda and it’s not necessarily advancing the teachings of the Church. And she’s now on the Pastoral Planning Commission to plan the future of the archdiocese. More orthodox Catholics from the APC could have no doubt been chosen for this commission, but instead we have a woman who, as evidenced by the email I received, seems to be manipulating the minutes of APC meetings to highlight feedback that goes against Church teachings and minimizing feedback that supports church teachings. That sounds corrupt to me. Previous Social Justice Conferences also backed by the APC had similarly controversial speakers.

I hope this helps explain what got us to this point, and I hope and pray that you and other priests will stand-up and defend Church teachings on the important issues embodied in this policy and other matters.

God bless,

#   #   #   #

The priest didn’t respond to this email.

Read Full Post »

A few people have asked us recently what’s going on with the blog since there haven’t been recent posts.  In short, we’ve been really busy, but we haven’t given up the battle at all.

The email/fax campaign (“Catholics Ask Holy See to Intervene in Boston Archdiocese“) to the Holy See over the Catholic Schools policy to admit children of gay parents that has sent several hundred messages provoked at least one interesting reaction from the Archdiocese of Boston.  We heard from one priest on the Presbyteral Council who also works at the Chancery.  He complained about getting “spammed” by our emails.  Here is the first part of our interchange.  We didn’t ask for permission to cite his name, so we’re keeping his name unpublished unless he tells us otherwise.

From: Reverend ___
Date: Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:44 PM
Subject: Stop sending copies
To: “faithfulcatholic@bryanhehircampaign.com”  

Dear “faithful Catholic” –
I have received numerous copies of your petition to the Holy See regarding the admission policy. I got the message. Please stop sending multiple copies and spamming my email box. One copy was sufficient to help me understand your petition and concerns.
Thank you.


From: Joe Sacerdo [joesacerdo@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 5:45 PM
To: Reverend ___
Subject: Re: Stop sending copies

Fr. ___

Your message was forwarded to me.  The emails you’e receiving should be coming from individual Catholics who wish to communicate with the Holy See and to the members of the Boston Presbyteral Council who approved the Catholic Schools Admission Policy. You’re listed as a member of the Presbyteral Council.  So, we are not “spamming” you–we have simply put a process in place whereby individual Catholics can communicate with the Presbyteral Council members. If a lot of Catholics are writing, it’s because a lot of Catholics are troubled by this policy.

If I’m not mistaken, none of the members of the Presbyteral Council raised any concern about the use of the Holy Father’s quote from a Catholic University address out of context at the beginning of the policy, which has the intended effect of deceiving readers into believing the Holy Father approves of such a policy.  As I’m sure you know, Pope Benedict’s statement was that he hoped financial means would not limit access for all children to a Catholic education. Are you OK with this?  When a gay or lesbian couple becomes chair of a fund-raising or parent committee, how exactly will the school avoid implicitly or explicitly giving recognition to the validity of their relationship?  When a five-year-old asks their parents why Johnny has two daddies, how does this avoid corrupting the innocence of the young mind of that child?  That the members of the council approved this policy without regard for such important issues is the reason why faithful Catholics want to communicate with members of the Presbyteral Council. Is there some other process for how individual Catholics should communicate directly with the Presbyteral Council members?

Based on your request, we can have your name removed from the distribution list on the petition, and I’ll submit a request that be done. I would be most interested in understanding through what means faithful Catholics can communicate directly with the leadership of this archdiocese and with the Presbyteral Council. It’s not through the Cardinal’s office. It’s not through the Vicar General’s office. It’s not through the Archdiocesan Pastoral Council, as an email I just received suggests that organization is corrupted.

Sincerely yours in Christ,



We did get a response, and we replied back, outlining the extent of the lies and deception in the policy.  Then the interaction stopped.  We’ll share the second round of responses next time.  After yet more of the lies and deception are exposed, we’re thinking we may need to embark on another round of the campaign.

Read Full Post »

Catholics who oppose the Archdiocese of Boston’s ill-conceived policy to admit the children of gay and lesbian parents to Catholic schools and who are FED UP with the leadership of the archdiocese can now voice their opinion directly to the Holy See–and ask them to intervene and rescind the policy. Just click the FedUp button to the right.

As you may already know from our previous posts and mainstream media news reports, Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley pandered to people pushing the gay agenda on Catholic schools by approving a policy that directs pastors they cannot discriminate against children of gay parents in school admissions.  So, if two gay parents want to place their child in a Catholic school, the policy says the pastor is not to refuse the child admission.

Never mind that the young child who depends on their gay/lesbian parents for sustenance might be harmed by hearing their teacher say their parents’ lifestyle is considered disordered and immoral. Never mind that the Church would be giving some implicit or explicit seal of approval on the gay relationship of the parents.  Never mind the rights of faithful Catholic parents to protect the innocence of their own children’s minds at a young age. Never mind that the Boston Archdiocese misappropriated a quote from the Holy Father saying on a financial basis all children should be able to access Catholic education, and instead used it to deceive people into thinking the Holy Father condoned this policy.

Gay “Catholic” organizations like DignityUSA praised the archdiocese and Catholics for Marriage Equality said they “hope dioceses around the country will adopt Boston’s guidelines.” So, like “gay marriage” that originated in Massachusetts, this disaster too could sweep across the country quickly if faithful Catholics do not act quickly.

Here is a letter that you can easily send with the click of a button to the Holy See:

I am writing to ask that the Holy See immediately intervene in the Archdiocese of Boston to stop implementation of a policy directing Catholic schools to admit children of homosexual parents.

This policy should be rescinded for the following reasons:

  1. The partnership needed between the Catholic school and parents is not possible when parents live a lifestyle openly opposed to Church teaching.
  2. The good of the child is not served–and is instead harmed–by learning values in school that say their parents’ acts and values are morally wrong.
  3. The policy makes it impossible for faithful Catholic parents to protect the innocence of their own young children.
  4. The policy forces Catholic schools to implicitly or explicitly recognize the gay/lesbian relationship of the parents as valid by the Catholic Church, since the gay/lesbian parents will inevitably be present at the school and may assume positions of volunteer leadership.
  5. The policy violates the principle of subsidiarity by making the decision at an archdiocesan level and removing that decision-making authority from pastors.
  6. The use of the opening quote by Pope Benedict XVI out of context from his actual statement deceives Catholic faithful into thinking the Holy Father approves of such a policy.

With salvation of souls at risk, I ask that the Holy See immediately act to rescind this policy before further damage is done in Boston and before other dioceses might take steps to follow the misguided direction that Cardinal Sean O’Malley and his advisors have taken. I also ask that the Holy See take steps to formally clarify Church teaching in this area, hopefully using the Archdiocese of Denver policy of non-admission for children of gay/lesbian parents as a model..

Thank you for your intervention, and God bless.

We have set this up so it automatically sends an email or a fax to the following people: Pope Benedict XVI, Archbishop Sembi (U.S. Papal Nuncio);  Cardinal Ouelett (Prefect, Congregation of Bishops), Cardinal Burke (Prefect, Apostolic Signatura), Cardinal Levada (Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), and Archbishop Zenon Grocholewski (Prefect, Congregation for Catholic Education), Cardinal O’Malley and members of the Archdiocese of Boston Presbyteral Council who approved the policy.

Just click on the FedUp button, fill in your name and other information, click the “Sign the Letter” button, verify your information is correct, and then click “Submit.”  (wait a few moments, and it’s done).

Please share this post with other like-minded friends and family members and ask them to take steps to stop this policy before other dioceses follow suit.

Read Full Post »

Fr. Bryan Hehir will be speaking on a panel at Boston College on Thursday, Feb. 17 .  The program is part of BC’s “Catholic Church in the 21st Century”, and the topic is “Diocesan Priesthood in the 21st Century: Perspectives from Three Generations.”

The panel is moderated by Fr. Robert Imbelli of BC, and will include diocesan priests, Fr. Hehir ’66, Fr. Paul O’Brien ’91, and Fr. William Lohan ’08.  The blog can attest that two of the three priests are solid orthodox priests, and one of those two is widely respected.  Following the panel, there will be time for open  Q&A with the panelists.

The program is open to the public and starts at 5:30pm on Feb. 17.  It takes place in the Heights Room, Corcoran Commons, Lower Campus.  For additional information and directions, see here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »