The big news of the week on the Boston religious scene was the announcement that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, after consulting with public health officials about ways to slow the spread of swine flu, is recommending that parishes suspend the practice of sharing consecrated wine with laypeople during Communion and that laypeople stop shaking hands or embracing one another as a sign of peace at Mass. Several Protestant denominations had already recommended an end to the use of a common cup for Communion during this pandemic; the local Greek Orthodox Diocese, by contrast, is defending the practice, even during flu season.

The Archdiocese of Boston's announcement on Tuesday was followed the same day by the same recommendations in the Worcester Diocese. The next day, the bishop of Fall River, George W. Coleman, went slightly further than Boston Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, by declaring (rather than simply recommending) a suspension of sharing consecrated wine with laypeople at Communion, and by suggesting that parishes also suspend the entire sign of peace ritual (in Boston, O'Malley is recommending retaining the ritual, but urging people to bow toward one another or lock eyes for a moment, rather than having physical contact). On Thursday, the bishop of Providence, Thomas Tobin, joined in, "strongly recommending" that parishes discontinue the sharing of consecrated wine with laypeople, and that they either suspend the sign of peace ritual or urge worshipers to avoid touching one another while exchanging greetings. The Springfield diocese is the lone local holdout -- its guidelines, issued in September, continue to say that "reception of Holy Communion under both kinds is generally encouraged but is not a necessity."

All of the dioceses have strongly recommended that priests and other Eucharistic ministers pay more attention to their own hygiene before distributing Communion during flu season.

All this talk of hygiene and ritual caused quite a bit of chatter among the churchgoers in my world, and there were two questions that kept recurring: why don't Catholics use individual disposable plastic cups, like many Protestants, and what about the theory that it's not possible to get sick from Communion because Jesus is present? I posed these questions to the Rev. Jonathan Gaspar, co-director of the Office of Worship and Spiritual Life for the Archdiocese of Boston. Here are his answers:

Q: Why don't Catholics use individual disposable cups for Communion, like some Protestants do, and is that a possible change in the future?

A: The reason Catholics will not use individual disposable cups for Communion is because of the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species, which is quite different from the beliefs of many Protestant groups who have Communion services. We believe that during the Mass the bread and the wine become the Body and Blood of Christ, and so the vessels we use to contain the Eucharistic species are considered sacred vessels which are held in special honor. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal clearly sets the guidelines for the sacred vessels: ?Sacred vessels are to be made from precious metal. If they are made from metal that rusts or from a metal less precious than gold, then ordinarily they should be gilded on the inside." For the dioceses in the United States, sacred vessels may also be made of other precious materials, such as ebony or other hard woods, ?provided that such materials are suited to sacred use and do not easily break or deteriorate." However, chalices made of ebony or other hard woods are to have bowls of nonabsorbent material.

1. We wouldn?t distribute Holy Communion in disposable cups because a disposable cup could never be considered a sacred vessel. We don?t dispose of sacred vessels.
2. We wouldn?t distribute the Precious Blood in individual cups because of the theological concept of ?one bread, one cup.? The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament of unity, and we are all meant to partake of the one bread and the one cup, as St. Paul exhorts us in his letter to the Corinthians: ?The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.? (1Corinthians 10, 16-17)

A: Though this belief has never been officially or doctrinally stated by the Church, there are many Catholics who believe germs cannot be transmitted through a common cup. The Eucharist has often been described as a remedy, the medicine of immortality, because when we receive Holy Communion we are receiving Christ, the Paschal Lamb who died and now lives to take away our sins. This great mystery contains the whole spiritual wealth of the Church, and we revere the Eucharist as the Most Blessed Sacrament.

The decision to temporarily discontinue the practice of distributing the Precious Blood from the chalice was a result of recent conversations with medical authorities and specialists in infectious disease, who believe that sharing a ?common cup? can possibly spread communicable illness. We have taken this sensible step out of caution and concern for the health of our Catholic people. Our decision to temporarily discontinue this venerable practice does not diminish our reverence for the power of this great Sacrament.

Catholics believe that Christ, whole and entire, is received even under only one species. This is a belief defined in the sixteenth century by the Council of Trent. When Catholics receive the Eucharist in the form of the consecrated host, we are receiving the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, in an effort to help stop the spread of swine flu, is recommending that parishes stop offering laypeople consecrated wine at Communion and also discourage laypeople from hugging, shaking hands, or otherwise having physical contact during the "sign of peace" at Mass.

The steps, which are supposed to take effect Saturday, are among the broadest recommendations to date by a large Massachusetts institution to change public practices in an effort to stem swine flu, which is now spreading widely throughout New England and the nation. An estimated 294,000 people attend Catholic Mass in the Archdiocese of Boston each weekend.

In addition to recommending a suspension of Communion from the cup, and the change to the sign of peace, the archdiocese is also urging parishes to more regularly and carefully disinfect holy water fonts in churches. Communion from the cup is thought to pose a potential health risk because multiple worshipers drink from the same chalice; the exchange of peace can pose a risk as worshipers touch one another's hands, and the fonts are a concern because worshipers dip their hands in the water.

The disease, caused by the H1N1 virus, can be spread through hand-to-hand contact or contact with objects that have recently been exposed to the germ.

"Given the extraordinary precautions being taken across the nation to prevent the spread of the H1N1 influenza, the Archdiocese has instituted a series of steps to be followed for the time being during the celebration of the Mass," the Rev. Jonathan Gaspar, co-director of the archdiocesan Office of Worship and Spiritual Life, said in a statement. "We thank our priests, deacons, religious and parishioners for their understanding and support of these directives, which aim to protect the health of our people."

The archdiocese said it had made the decisions in consultation with public health officials, and said the recommendations would be lifted whenever the risk of flu infection subsides.

Here is the text of the archdiocesan recommendations, which were sent to parishes over the weekend:

• The Holy Water fonts are to be drained, cleaned with a disinfecting soap, and re-filled with holy water on a regular basis. Please note that old holy water should be disposed of in the sacrarium.

• The distribution of the Precious Blood for the faithful is suspended, with the exception of those who must receive from the cup due to medical reasons. The faith of the Church teaches that Christ, whole and entire, is received even under only one species.

• The exchange of the Sign of Peace is to be offered without any physical contact. If the priest celebrant chooses to extend the invitation for the sign of peace, the faithful, instead of a handshake, may bow to the persons nearby.

• While the faithful retain the option of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand, all ministers of Holy Communion are advised to distribute the consecrated hosts with care, being cautious not to touch the tongue or the hand of the communicant.

• Parishioners should be reminded that if they are ill or suspect they are ill with a contagious illness, they are not bound by the Sunday Mass obligation. They should remain at home and return to church when they are well.

(Photo at top, by John Tlumacki/Globe staff, shows Northeastern University student Rebecca Thibault dipping her fingers in holy water before the start of the midday Mass today at the St. Francis Chapel at the Prudential Center in Boston. The Rev. Craig MacMahon of the chapel staff said that the chapel will now change the holy water daily.)

Newt Gingrich came to town yesterday. In the morning, he spoke to a breakfast gathering in Boston hosted by Catholic Citizenship; in the evening, he was at Harvard to speak at the Kennedy School. Gingrich, of course, is an interesting figure for a lot of reasons; I wanted to talk with him about his recent conversion to Catholicism, and the film he is now making about Pope John Paul II's 1979 visit to Poland. The interview was pretty limited -- I had seven minutes with him at the venerable Union Club on Beacon Hill -- but here's what he had to say in that period of time:

Q: Can you first tell me why you wanted to become a Catholic?
A: I don't know that I wanted to become a Catholic so much as I became a Catholic. I don't know that it was volitional in that sense. Having gone to the basilica (The Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, in Washington) with my wife, who sings in the choir there, for about a decade, I think it gradually grew on me. And when Pope Benedict came to the basilica for vespers with the bishops, and my wife and the choir were singing, and I was allowed to come as a spouse -- I had been talking with Monsignor Rossi, who is the rector of the basilica, for about five years, just about faith, and secularism, the challenges we have in the modern world with our civilization, and that afternoon seeing Pope Benedict XVI fairly close up, and both really believing in his central theme of 'Christ Our Hope,' and seeing the joy in his eyes, fundamentally different than the news media portrait of a severe German intellectual, something in me just was triggered. And I said to Monsignor Rossi that night that I wanted to convert. And we spent the following six or eight months studying with Monsignor Rossi, and it was more a process of becoming more and more comfortable that this was -- this is -- the place that I belong, and the taking of the Eucharist is the experience that enriches my life.

Q: How did you think about Catholicism, growing up among Protestants?
A: I grew up all over the world. I was born in Pennsylvania, and was raised originally as a Lutheran, and then was, my dad was in the Army, so I was whatever the Protestant chaplain was. I was at one point a Presbyterian acolyte. And I think, as a professional historian, you can't study modern European history without some sense of the church, and the sense of the depth and the history of the church. I think, probably from the time I was a child, when my dad was stationed in France…this sense of the -- I may use the word wrong -- but the sense of the magisterium of the church, the sense of the power and majesty of the church, the fact that you're dealing with 2,000 years of history. My dad had studied Augustine in college, and had a copy of Augustine's 'City of God' when I was a child, and you just had this sense of, that you are encountering a continuum of effort to understand God and to explain God to humans, that is pretty overwhelming.

Q: Tell me about how you decided to make a film about a pope as one of your first public acts as a Catholic?
A: Well, we had made a movie, called 'Rediscovering God in America,' which really contextualized American history, in terms of the Washington monuments. Then, we made a film about Reagan, called 'Rendezvous with Destiny,' and in filming the Reagan movie, we had gone to Gdansk, and interviewed Lech Walesa, and we had gone to Prague, and interviewed Vaclav Havel, and both said in their interviews that the decisive moment in the breaking of the Soviet Union was June of 1979, and the pope's 9-day visit. As we thought about that, and began to put it in context, I'd been reading Weigel, starting with 'The Cube and the Cathedral,' and then 'The Final Revolution' and then his biography of the pope, and if you read 'The Final Revolution,' Weigel really argues that the central role of religious belief and the central role of religious organization was at the center of what was happening in Eastern Europe. And then when you interview Lech Walesa, he says, 'You can't understand what happened with Solidarity if you don't understand what the church was doing, if you don't understand what the pope was doing.' And even Vaclav Havel, who is a playwright, was saying – he's not Polish, but he's saying, 'As a neighboring Czech, let me tell you what it meant to us to have a Slavic pope and to have somebody who understood tyranny' and so forth. So I dug into all of that. And then you get to this extraordinary story of the pope, who is born about a year and a half after Poland becomes a country again for the first time since 1793; as a teenager, sees Poland destroyed again by Germany and the Soviet Union; participates in the Rhapsodic Theater at a time when it means a death penalty, in order to sustain Polish culture; enters the seminary for the priesthood at a time when there's a death penalty; becomes a priest under the emerging Communist dictatorship; serves all of his priesthood under the Communists; knew many Jews, understood Auschwitz, has a childhood friend who is Jewish; and this is the man who, in 1978, becomes pope. I mean it is an extraordinary moment in history. And he is an athletic energetic actor who is a charismatic leader. And he has the key underlying insight that you defeat Communism at a cultural level, that you pit the cross against the Soviet emblem, and that the cross ultimately will defeat atheism.

Q: Do you see this as a personal film in any way, or is this purely an academic, documentary exercise?
A: No, I think this which will be -- if we can do it right, and this is a big challenge -- this is a film which I hope will be personal, immediate, people won't walk out and say, 'Gee, that was interesting 30 years ago,' they'll walk out and say, 'What does this mean for my life in my country today.' We hope to translate the film into Mandarin, and we've been asked to translate it now into Vietnamese because there are 5 million Vietnamese Catholics; we hope to translate it into Polish, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, because we see this as a universal film that has an impact for people everywhere on the planet.

Q: So do you still have political aspirations, or is filmmaking now your mission?
A: I think I have a public citizen aspiration. Whether it goes beyond that, we'll find out over the next few years.

(Photos, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, show Newt Gingrich at the Union Club in Boston on Oct. 8, 2009.)

All this rain got you down? Here's an invitation -- tomorrow (Sunday, Oct. 4), I'll be leading a pre-matinee discussion about "The Savannah Disputation" at the Boston Center for the Arts with the play's director, Paul Daigneault, and one of its actors, Timothy Crowe, a onetime seminarian who plays a priest in the production. (Crowe talked with me about his journey from seminarian to actor-playing-a-priest in this interview; we'll talk more about it Sunday.)

The play, which is being produced by the SpeakEasy Stage Company, is a comedy about two Catholic sisters in Georgia whose lives are shaken when a perky young evangelical missionary comes knocking on their door. The production stars two of Boston's best-known actresses, Nancy Carroll and Paula Plum.

The pre-show discussion, which begins at 1:30 p.m., is open to Globe subscribers -- you just go to www.bgextras.com to sign up.

(Photo, by Eric Levenson/SpeakEasy Stage, shows Carolyn Charpie and Timothy Crowe in a scene from "The Savannah Disputation.")

Support for abortion rights appears to be slipping, according to a new report being issued today by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. An excerpt:

Polls conducted in 2009 have found fewer Americans expressing support for abortion than in previous years. In Pew Research Center polls in 2007 and 2008, supporters of legal abortion clearly outnumbered opponents; now Americans are evenly divided on the question, and there have been modest increases in the numbers who favor reducing abortions or making them harder to obtain. Less support for abortion is evident among most demographic and political groups.

The latest Pew Research Center survey also reveals that the abortion debate has receded in importance, especially among liberals. At the same time, opposition to abortion has grown more firm among conservatives, who have become less supportive of finding a middle ground on the issue and more certain of the correctness of their own views on abortion.

No single reason for the shift in opinions is apparent, but the pattern of changes suggests that the election of a pro-choice Democrat for president may be a contributing factor. Among Republicans, there has been a seven point decline in support for legal abortion and a corresponding six point increase in opposition to abortion. But the change is smaller among Democrats, whose support for legal abortion is down four points with no corresponding increase in pro-life opinion. Indeed, three groups of President Obama’s strongest supporters – African Americans, young people and those unaffiliated with a religion – have not changed their views on abortion at all. At the same time, fully half of conservative Republicans (52%) – the political group most opposed to abortion – say they worry Obama will go too far in supporting abortion rights.

The shift in opinion is broad-based, appearing in most demographic groups in the population. One of the largest shifts (10 points) has occurred among white, non-Hispanic Catholics who attend Mass at least weekly. Substantial change has also occurred among Democratic men (with support for abortion down nine points), but not among Democratic women.

A few tidbits on attitudes among people of faith:

• "Among religious groups, observant white mainline Protestants and white Catholics (i.e., those who attend worship services at least weekly) each exhibit double-digit declines in support for legal abortion, as do Jews and less-observant white evangelical Protestants. By contrast, the views of black Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated have held steady."
• "Almost two-thirds of white evangelical Protestants (64%) back greater restrictions on abortion, but fewer than half as many white mainline Protestants (27%) and the religiously unaffiliated (23%) say the same. Catholics fall in between, with 44% in support of more restrictions on abortion."
• "Those who attend worship services more often are also more apt to favor restrictions on abortion. A slight majority of those who attend church at least weekly (53%) favor more restrictions, compared with 37% of those who attend monthly or yearly and 28% of those who seldom or never attend."
• "Among religious groups, white evangelicals (and especially those who attend services more often) see the abortion issue critically important (29% overall, and 35% among high attenders) or as one important issue among many (42% each). White mainline Protestants and the unaffiliated, by contrast, are the least likely to say the issue is a critical one (7% each), and most likely to say the issue is not important (60% and 70%). There is also a wide discrepancy between Catholics who attend Mass weekly and those who do not; among the former, 21% say abortion is critical, compared with 4% among those who attend less often. Black Protestants are less likely than white evangelicals to say abortion is critical (17% vs. 29%), but more likely than white mainliners (7%). A plurality of black Protestants (42%) say abortion is not an important issue."
• "Among white Catholics who attend Mass weekly (most of whom oppose abortion), one-in five continue to rate abortion as a critical issue, which is essentially unchanged since 2006. By contrast, among white Catholics who attend Mass less regularly (most of whom support legal abortion), the figure has dropped from 20% to 4%, a decline of 16 percentage points. Similarly, among the unaffiliated, there has been a 19-point drop, from 28% to 7%. Worship service attendance overall is also linked with the change in the perceived importance of the abortion issue. Those who attend least regularly are now 18 points less likely to rate abortion as a critical issue, compared with a six-point drop among those who attend weekly and a 13-point drop among those who attend monthly or yearly."

(Graphics courtesy of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.)

There's quite a conversation going on in the religion blogosphere about the contrast between the case of Roman Polanksi (famed filmmaker, accused of raping 13-year-old girl decades ago, on the lam, and now, after finally being arrested in Switzerland, winning public support from fellow entertainers and European public officials) and that of multiple priests (not famous, accused of abusing minors decades ago, etc.).

The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, was first out of the box, posting an item headlined, "Father Polanski Would Go to Jail,'' at On Faith. An excerpt:

Polanski's defenders, including a 2008 HBO documentary, argue that he should not be punished. They say that the girl was willing and sexually experienced and she has forgiven him (after receiving a settlement). They even cite his tragic childhood and life as an excuse. And besides, it is ancient history.

Such arguments from pedophile priests would be laughed out of court and lambasted by everyone, and rightly so. It makes no difference that the girl is willing and sexually experienced, it is a crime. It is the role of the court, not the victim, to decide who goes to jail and for how long.

It is not as if Polanski is the only Hollywood celebrity to be accused of child abuse. Woody Allen and Michael Jackson come to mind. I am sure that with a little research the media could come up with quite a list. The Catholic Church has rightly been put under a microscope when 4 percent of its priests were involved in abuse, but what about the film industry?

The world has truly changed. Entertainment is the new religion with sex, violence and money the new Trinity. The directors and stars are worshiped and quickly forgiven for any infraction as long as the PR agent is a skilled as a saintly confessor. Entertainment, not religion, is the new opiate of the people and we don't want our supply disturbed.

Is there a double standard here? You bet.

Next up was the Rev. James Martin, associate editor of America magazine, writing, "If he were in a collar there would be no boo-hooing about his recent plight. There would be zero pity for him." An excerpt from his post, which was titled, "If Polanski Were Wearing a Collar ":

Can you imagine a petition being circulated among actors, directors and producers in the United States to have a Catholic priest reinstated in his parish after he had abused a 13-year-old child? If you believe this about Polanski--that his good deeds offset his guilt and that enough time has passed--do you believe the same about pedophile priests?

Multiple others are chiming in as well. David Gibson, writing for Politics Daily, also asks, "Comparisons are by their nature invidious. But what if Roman Polanksi were wearing a Roman collar? Would "Monsignor Polanksi" receive the same considerations?" Peter Smith, a religion writer for the Louisville Courier-Journal, wonders, "Let's say Roman Polanski was a priest who, say, fled the country and for decades avoid serving a sentence for statutory rape. Well, the question is a bit obvious. Would anyone sympathize with the end of his longtime fugitive status for his statutory rape conviction? Wouldn't people be indignant if a Catholic organization honored him in exile?" Many other religion writers are asking the same, from USA Today's Cathy Lynn Grossman, to Reuters's Tom Heneghan. And Rod Dreher, blogging as BeliefNet's Crunchy Con, takes the argument even further, writing:

In our culture, when it comes to sex, celebrities are beyond good and evil. At least Polanski isn't a orthodox Catholic or committed Evangelical of any sort. In his cultural milieu, that would be the unforgivable sin.

(Photo, by Sebastien Bozon/AFP, shows the "Free Polanski" sign on a man's shirt at the Zurich film festival on September 28, 2009.)

A dispatch from the Boston-is-a-really-small-town department: Paul G. Kirk Jr., who was named today as the interim US Senator from Massachusetts, is the grand-nephew of Cardinal William H. O'Connell, one of the most powerful figures in local church history, who served as archbishop of Boston from 1907 until his death in 1944. Kirk, 71, is one of five children of Josephine O'Connell, whose father, Edward J. O'Connell, was an older brother of Cardinal O'Connell.

The connection ties Kirk to one of the odder stories now unfolding in town, as the Archdiocese of Boston seeks to disinter the cardinal's remains and remove them from land that the church sold to Boston College to raise money to pay off victims of clergy sexual abuse. The saga of the cardinal's tomb, which has been playing out for five years now, last week moved to Suffolk Probate and Family Court, where Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, joined by the trustees of Boston College, are suing 30 of O'Connell's living relatives, including Kirk, for the right to relocate the remains.

I last spoke with Kirk about his famous great-uncle about a year and a half ago. Kirk was born in 1938, and the cardinal died in 1944, so they didn't spend a lot of time together, and the memories have faded, but Kirk told me he remembered, as a little boy, visiting Cardinal O'Connell at his grand residence in Brighton (also now the property of BC), and that his most distinct memory was of reciting the pledge of allegiance for his great-uncle. At the time of our interview last year, Kirk was opposed to relocating the cardinal's remains, saying, "I think I speak for the majority of the cardinal's next of kin in saying that we would like him to remain at his chosen resting place.''

Kirk hasn't been taking calls in recent days, but I spoke this morning with his younger brother, Edward W. Kirk, who told me that Cardinal O'Connell presided at the 1934 marriage of the Kirk boys' parents, Josephine O'Connell and Paul G. Kirk, at a chapel at the cardinal's residence in Brighton. The elder Kirk went on to become a longtime Superior Court judge and then a justice of the Supreme Judicial Court, and "was a great admirer of the cardinal,'' Ed Kirk told me. To mark that admiration, the elder Kirk placed two plaques on the flagpole of the Kirk family's summer house on Wequaquet Lake on Cape Cod, one bearing the name of the cardinal, and the other that of the Rev. Jeremiah F. Minihan, an O'Connell aide and Kirk friend who went on to become an auxiliary bishop in Boston. When the Kirk family sold the Centerville house, Paul G. Kirk Jr. removed the plaques for safekeeping, and the O'Connell tributes are now mounted on a flagpole in the yard of the interim senator's own house on Mystic Lake in Marstons Mills.

(Photo at top, from the Boston Globe's archives, shows Cardinal William H. O'Connell of Boston in 1943. Photo at bottom, by Adam Hunger/Reuters, shows Paul G. Kirk Jr. at the State House in Boston on Sept. 24, 2009.)

Boston's SpeakEasy Stage Company tonight opened the local premiere of a comedy called "The Savannah Disputation,'' about a pair of sixtysomething Catholic sisters who are unsettled by visits from a perky young Protestant missionary, and decide to try to trap her into a debate with their local parish priest.

This production is noteworthy because Timothy Crowe, the actor playing the priest, was himself a seminarian many years ago.

I have a preview of the play, focusing on Crowe's role, in the Arts section of today's Globe. The lede:

The weary priest, seated on a deep couch with a drink at hand, pauses for several minutes before responding to the question about how it felt to embrace a life of celibacy. When he answers, he begins with an anecdote, about the period of time just before he took his vows.

“One day, the fact of celibacy just - hit me in the face,’’ says Father Patrick Murphy, one of the central characters in a new play, “The Savannah Disputation,’’ which opens today at the Boston Center for the Arts.

“For the first time, I seemed to really - understand,’’ the priest says, “and I felt extremely free, like I had sidestepped a trap.’’

The character offers the comment as a straightforward confession of a long-buried emotion. But for the actor, Timothy Crowe, the line is rich with irony.

Crowe, 64, faced that same moment of understanding decades ago as a young seminarian in Missouri. But for Crowe, unlike for Father Murphy, sidestepping the trap meant not entering the priesthood.

“It was a very difficult decision,’’ Crowe said in an interview last week. “But I felt incomplete.’’

(Photo, by Eric Levenson/SpeakEasy Stage Company, shows Timothy Crowe, with Carolyn Charpie, in a scene from "The Savannah Disputation,'' running through Oct. 17 at the Calderwood Pavilion at the Boston Center for the Arts.)

In this morning's Globe, I have a story about the Catholic Church's efforts to relocate the remains of Cardinal William H. O'Connell, who was buried under a small chapel behind his house in Brighton in 1944. Trouble is, the land has since been sold to Boston College, the cardinal's alma mater, and the university has said it doesn't think the campus is the appropriate place for the cardinal's remains. So yesterday, the archbishop of Boston (Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley) and the Boston College board of trustees jointly filed a petition with the Suffolk Probate and Family Court asking for permission to relocate the burial site to the campus of St. Sebastian's School in Needham.

My lede:

The Archdiocese of Boston, writing an epilogue to one of the more colorful stories in the history of Catholic Boston, asked a court yesterday for permission to unearth the entombed body of Cardinal William H. O’Connell and relocate his remains to the grounds of a suburban prep school.

The proposed disinterment is rich with historical irony, because when O’Connell first purchased land in Brighton as a headquarters for the archdiocese, he insisted that the remains of a group of Sulpician priests be dug up and removed from the property.

Now, six decades after his death, the cardinal’s body may be exhumed from the same acreage because his own alma mater, Boston College, has insisted that the archdiocese remove the cardinal’s remains as a condition of the university’s purchase of the Brighton property.

“It is no longer possible to honor the late cardinal’s wishes relative to his burial,’’ Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley and the trustees of Boston College said in a joint filing in Suffolk Probate and Family Court yesterday. “The petitioning parties seek this court’s approval to reinter the cardinal’s remains on a site approved by the court.’’

The good folks at Boston.com have scanned and posted Cardinal O'Connell's last will and testament (a fascinating read) as well as the complaint for relocation of Cardinal O'Connell's burial site for your perusal.

(Photo above, by the Globe, shows the chapel where Cardinal O'Connell was buried in a crypt beneath the floorboards. The photograph was taken on April 28, 1944, just before the cardinal's burial later that same day.)

The Knights of Columbus yesterday hosted a discussion for religion writers, gathered in Minneapolis for the 60th annual convention of the Religion Newswriters Association, about the idea of a conscience right, which is a pretty hot issue in the abortion debate, and has now made its way into the controversy over health care reform.

The speakers, two law professors from the University of St. Thomas and the president of an anti-abortion organization, were urging reporters to pay more attention to this issue, which, at least as they frame it, concerns the rights of health care workers to decline to participate in the provision of services that conflict with their religious beliefs or moral values. There were a couple of interesting moments -- one of the professors, Teresa Stanton Collett, suggested that there is now a trend to view doctors like vending machines, in that they are expected to provide what patients want, without judgment. Charmaine Yoest, the president of Americans United for Life, suggested that "protection of conscience is under attack" as supporters of abortion rights attempt to define abortion as routine health care, and therefore not something a health care provider can avoid providing.

But the most provocative analysis, at least for me, came from law professor Robert Vischer, who noted that here in Minneapolis, there have been recent cases in which Muslim taxi drivers have argued that they shouldn't have to transport passengers carrying alcohol, and Muslim grocery store cashiers have argued that they shouldn't have to handle pork products. But, he said, conscience cases are becoming increasingly complex, pitting several rights against each other. He suggested that there is a general societal consensus that physicians should not be forced to perform abortions, but asked, "what if abortion is now in a pill, and the physician is now a pharmacist?'' He suggested that such a dilemma now pits the right of a customer to have access to health care against the right of the pharmacist to exercise a moral or religious conscience, and the solution depends on how one defines access (does every medication have to be available at every pharmacy, even in a major city with multiple drug stores?) and how one views pharmacists (are they, to use Collett's description, akin to vending machines, or do they have some right of conscience?).

In the analogy of the day, Vischer asked, "What if Tom Cruise wants to open a pharmacy where he doesn't want to sell anti-depressants?"

Food for thought.

(Photo, by Virginia Sherwood/NBC via AP, shows Tom Cruise gesturing toward Today Show host Matt Lauer during a June 24, 2005 interview in which the two discussed anti-depressants and Scientology.)

At a panel on immigration and faith at the Religion Newswriters Association convention Thursday, Luis Lugo, the director of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, made a few interesting observations:

• Immigration is leading to an increase in the number of Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims in the United States, but a large majority of new immigrants are Christian. This stands in contrast to the situation in Europe, where a much higher percentage of immigrants are non-Christian.
• Although Protestants outnumber Catholics in the United States, new immigrants are overwhelmingly Catholic, and as a result, "immigration is tilting the balance within American Christianity in favor of Catholicism." Also, Lugo said, "We're very close to becoming a minority Protestant country.''
• Many of the new immigrants are from Latin America, Africa and Asia. "What we are seeing is not the de-Christianization of America, but the de-Europeanization of American Christianity,'' he said. One effect of this, he said, is a rise in Pentecostal and charismatic worship styles in US churches, because those more expressive forms of worship are often preferred by immigrants from the Global South.
• Nearly a quarter of all Catholics in the United States are foreign born -- the highest percentage among any of the nation's largest faith groups. "To know what the country will be like in three decades, look at the Catholic Church,'' he said.
• The Muslim population in the United States is more diverse, in terms of national origin, than the Muslim population in any other country on earth. No more than 8 percent of American Muslims is from any one country. This, again, contrasts with the situation in Europe, where, for example, many German Muslims are from Turkey, many Spanish Muslims are from Morocco, and many French Muslims are from Algeria.

Another Catholic leader is coming to the defense of the funeral for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

Bishop Robert C. Morlino, the Catholic bishop of Madison, Wisconsin, has penned a column for his diocesan newspaper reflecting on the funeral rites. The quotation that jumped out at me was this one: "The death of Senator Kennedy has called forth at least an apparent rejection of mercy on the part of not a few Catholics." Morlino expresses "contentment" with the church's handling of the liturgy, writing:

The proclamation of God’s Mercy was powerful, the prayer for forgiveness of his past sins was clearly offered, and all of this in a subdued way because of his long-standing and public holding of pro-abortion and other stances which have been a scandal in the literal sense.

The only aspects of the Funeral Rites which were not low key were those on the guest-list, where family preferences are generally granted.

Morlino makes clear his unhappiness with Kennedy's support for abortion rights, but also praises his actions in other areas. Here is an excerpt from Morlino's lengthy column:

I’m afraid...that for not a few Catholics, the funeral rites for Senator Kennedy were a source of scandal — that is, quite literally, led them into sin. From not a few corners has come the question, "how on earth could Teddy Kennedy be buried from the Church?" There have also been expressions from some, that "whatever happens in Church, Senator Kennedy will now face justice, which will lead him inside the gates of Hell."

From the earliest days of the Church it was defined as sinful to enjoy the thought that someone might be in Hell. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit worked powerfully through history so that Hell could be avoided by the proper exercise of human freedom, and to take delight in the perceived foiling of God's plan is wrong.

Pope Benedict XVI has written very beautifully that on the Cross of Christ there was lived out a conflict between God's justice, in that someone who was Himself equal to God had to die in reparation for man's sinfulness, and God's mercy: from the very beginning, the Church believed and taught that Jesus died precisely so that sins might be forgiven. His body was broken and His blood was shed so that sins might be forgiven, so that there might be mercy.

The death of Senator Kennedy has called forth at least an apparent rejection of mercy on the part of not a few Catholics. On the cross of Christ, God's justice came into conflict with God's mercy. God's justice was fully satisfied, but mercy triumphed in the conflict, according to the teaching of Pope Benedict. Without denying any misdeeds on the part of Senator Kennedy, the Church, seeking to reflect the face of Christ, proclaimed God's mercy for the whole world to see in a subdued but unmistakable way. It was more than appropriate.

In the seminary I was taught to speak like a lion from the pulpit — certainly there are those in the diocese who believe that perhaps I do that all too well — but that in the confessional I should be a lamb, reflecting the face of the Lamb of God, who died so that there might be mercy. The funeral rites for Senator Kennedy challenge all of us to question ourselves as to whether we are less eager to grant mercy than God Himself is.

Morlino also comments on Kennedy's relationship with the Catholic church, discussing a meeting between Kennedy and theologians to discuss the abortion issue (I think he must be referring to a gathering in 1964 described by Anne Hendershott in the Wall Street Journal in January):

Senator Kennedy, a good number of years ago, convened a meeting of priests and very high-level theologians to address the issue of Catholic political leaders and their votes with regard to abortion. Obviously, the very convening of this meeting showed that he took his Catholicism seriously and did not consider himself to be an accomplished theologian. Sadly, that meeting simply became another occasion for the development by theologians of the "two-conscience" approach to the faith for Catholic political leaders — that is the approach which says, "privately I’m opposed to abortion, but in the public arena there are other conflicting responsibilities which allow me to vote in favor of legal abortion."

No matter how many theologians get together, the two-conscience theory is irreparably flawed and wrong, and no one can make it otherwise. But if Senator Kennedy was given this advice and this approach, this "catechesis" — false though it is — by prominent theologians, it could at least be said that there was some ground for confusion and ambiguity in his own practice about these matters. The priests and theologians who counseled Senator Kennedy are not free of blame for causing the confusion and the ambiguity through false catechesis.

God forbid that I be taken as making excuses for Teddy Kennedy’s behavior in certain areas, yet Senator Kennedy’s having written a personal letter to our Holy Father during his last days, a letter that was hand-delivered by President Obama, is also an indication that he believed that the pope alone was the Vicar of Christ, and he wanted to make absolutely sure that our Holy Father received his letter. And too, since priests were regularly present to him during his final year and final days, it would be more reasonable than not to believe that he had made a good confession.

Bishop Morlino's full column is here.

(H/T: The Deacon's Bench and Whispers in the Loggia.)

(Photo courtesy of Diocese of Madison.)

I'm tying up a few final loose ends from the Kennedy funeral, and thought I should address Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's vestments, given the amount of chatter among Catholic bloggers about the significance of what he was wearing. As Webster Bull, writing at Why I am Catholic, observed, "In recent days, we have witnessed a brouhaha over Cardinal Sean O'Malley's presiding 'in choir' at the Kennedy funeral." And at Whispers in the Loggia, Rocco Palmo wrote, "Boston's Cardinal Sean O'Malley took the brunt of criticism from pro-life activists for his decision to preside 'in choir' and lead the final commendation at the liturgy."

Some saw in O'Malley's vestments a signal that he was maintaining a certain distance from the proceedings. Over at GetReligion, Terry Mattingly reprinted a comment from a reader asserting, "Cardinal O'Malley was clad in what is known as choir dress. That means he was neither a celebrant nor a presider. He was there the same as the folks in the pews." And at American Papist, Thomas Peters blogged:

I did not watch the Kennedy funeral, but I gathered from reports that Cardinal O'Malley attended in choir (instead of concelebrating). I thought this was an acceptable compromise approach to making an appearance but not 'endorsing' the proceedings.

But at the National Catholic Reporter, Michael Sean Winters saw nothing unusual in the cardinal's choice of vestments:

Others have floated the idea that Cardinal O'Malley showed his disdain for the proceedings by presiding but not concelebrating. In fact, a bishop always presides when he is present but if he concelebrates, he is automatically the principal celebrant. For example, when a priest has his first Mass, if a prelate is in attendance, the prelate is "in coro" as O'Malley was, and can preach or not, but he cannot concelebrate or the new priest could not be the principal celebrant. The first time I met Cardinal O'Malley, we were both at a funeral for the mother of a priest. Her son was the principal celebrant and then-Bishop O'Malley was "in coro" as was Cardinal Aponte. At the conclusion of the Mass, Cardinal Aponte put on his cope and miter and conducted the commendation rite as O'Malley did at Kennedy's funeral.

The Archdiocese of Boston repeatedly said that O'Malley had presided at the funeral, but was not the principal celebrant of the funeral Mass. So I asked the archdiocese to explain what O'Malley was wearing, and why, and this is the answer I got:

The cardinal was not the principal celebrant of the funeral liturgy. It is very common, according to local custom, that the bishop attends the funeral Mass and participates from the side of the sanctuary. In this case (top photo), he is considered to be "in choir." In addition to the red "choir cassock" (different from the "house cassock" that is black with red piping and red buttons, seen for example at the Boston College commencement each year) the cardinal is also seen wearing his rochet (a white surplice worn over the cassock) and the mozzetta (a short red cape worn over the shoulders). On his head he wears the zucchetto underneath the biretta. The choir cassock is worn only at liturgical functions.

After Communion the cardinal took off the mozetta and replaced it with the cope and stole (bottom photo). The cope is worn when the bishop leads the prayers of final commendation at the end of a funeral Mass at which he is not the principal celebrant.

(Photo at top shows Cardinal O'Malley at the start of the Kennedy funeral; photo at bottom shows him during the prayers of commendation at the close of the funeral. Both photos were taken by Getty at the Mission Church in Boston on Aug. 29, 2009.)

This morning, a timely reminder that the Archdiocese of Boston does, as it says, allow funerals for both sinners and saints. (For anyone who has been on vacation, this has become an issue after some Catholics objected to the funeral Mass for the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy because of the senator's support for abortion rights; Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley last night blogged, "In the strongest terms I disagree with that position.'')

Today, at St. Leonard of Port Maurice Parish in Boston's North End, the Rev. Antonio Nardoianni presided over a Catholic funeral Mass for Gennaro "Jerry" J. Angiulo, one of Boston's best-known mobsters, who served time in prison for racketeering, gambling, loan-sharking, and obstruction of justice. "We all need forgiveness,'' Father Nardoianni said in his homily.

My colleague, Shelley Murphy, a longtime chronicler of organized crime in Boston, was there, and filed this dispatch.

(Photo, by John Tlumacki of the Globe staff, shows Barbara Angiulo, the widow of former Mafia underboss Gennaro Angiulo, holding the flag that draped his casket as she waits with the last surviving Angiulo brother, Frankie, while the casket is put into the hearse outside St. Leonard's Church in Boston on Sept. 3, 2009.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston tonight has posted on his blog an unusual statement explaining why he decided to preside at the funeral of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, and what he talked about during his two to three minute exchange with President Obama before the funeral Mass began. The cardinal made the statement after criticism, in the form of phone calls and e-mails to the archdiocese and comments by some bloggers and organizations, lambasting the cardinal for participating in the funeral of a prominent Catholic politician who supported abortion rights. The archdiocese says the cardinal also received multiple expressions of gratitude for his decision to participate in the funeral, but that because of the criticism he wanted to explain his decision.

Here is the statement:

Saturday was the 39th anniversary of my ordination to the priesthood, at St. Augustine’s Church in Pittsburgh by Bishop John B. McDowell, who is still going strong today. In the Church’s calendar, the feast day for August 29 is the Beheading of John the Baptist. People usually take note when I tell them that I was professed to religious life on Bastille Day, July 14, and ordained on the feast of the Beheading. Not that I am superstitious.

On Saturday morning I attended the funeral Mass for Senator Edward M. Kennedy. Father Donald Monan, S.J., former president of Boston College, celebrated the Mass and Father Mark Hession, pastor of Our Lady of Victories in Centerville, preached the homily.

The music was outstanding with the Tanglewood Festival Chorus enriching the liturgy along with mezzo-soprano Susan Graham who later sang an absolutely striking rendition of Schubert’s “Ave Maria.” Cellist Yo-Yo Ma graced us with his beautiful solo performance of Bach and later joined Placido Domingo, who sang the “Panis Angelicus.” Placido has a superb voice. I told him how much I like the Zarzuela, the Spanish classical musical theater productions. His family had a troupe that presented Zarzuelas in Mexico and he promised to arrange a performance.

The venue for the funeral Mass was Mission Church, the magnificent Redemptorist Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help.

Senator Kennedy prayed often in this church when his daughter, Kara, was stricken with cancer. It is a church where countless faithful have gone to pray and ask for healing, grace and forgiveness.

In light of these themes, I wish to address our Catholic faithful who have voiced both support and disappointment at my having presided at the Senator’s funeral Mass.

Needless to say, the Senator’s wake and Catholic funeral were controversial because of the fact that he did not publically support Catholic teaching and advocacy on behalf of the unborn. ­­­Given the profound effect of Catholic social teaching on so many of the programs and policies espoused by Senator Kennedy and the millions who benefitted from them, 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 because, had he placed the issue of life at the centerpiece of the Social Gospel where it belongs, he could have multiplied the immensely valuable work he accomplished.

The thousands of people who lined the roads as the late Senator’s motorcade travelled from Cape Cod to Boston and the throngs that crowded the Kennedy Library for two days during the lying in repose, I believe, were there to pay tribute to these many accomplishments rather than as an endorsement of the Senator’s voting record on abortion.

The crowds also were there to pay tribute to the Kennedy family as a whole. On the national political landscape, if Barack Obama broke the glass ceiling of the presidency for African Americans, Jack Kennedy broke it for American Catholics.

As a young lad, I saw photographs of both Pope John XXIII and President John Kennedy hanging in the thatched cottages of County Mayo and heard the Gaelic greeting, “God and Mary be with you.” Three of the Kennedy brothers died in service of our country in the prime of life. And Eunice Shriver, who died just a few weeks ago, was an outspoken defender of the unborn and an apostle of the Gospel of Life. She taught us all how to love special children and to make room for everyone at the table of life. In 1992, Eunice petitioned her party’s convention to consider “a new understanding” of the issue, “one that does not pit mother against child,” but instead seeks “policies that responsibly protect and advance the interest of mothers and their children, both before and after birth.”

Much of what is noble in the politics and work of the Kennedys had its origins in the bedrock of the faith of Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy. As a young woman she had a profound experience of God’s love that transformed her life. She strove to communicate that faith to her large clan. Since the time of her funeral Mass I have kept her memorial prayer card, inscribed with Rose Kennedy’s own words:

"If God were to take away all His blessings, health, physical fitness, wealth, intelligence, and leave me but one gift, I would ask for faith – for with faith in Him and His goodness, mercy, love for me, and belief in everlasting life, I believe I could suffer the loss of my other gifts and still be happy – trustful, leaving all to His inscrutable Providence."

There are those who objected, in some cases vociferously, to the Church’s providing a Catholic funeral for the Senator. In the strongest terms I disagree with that position. At the Senator’s interment on Saturday evening, with his family’s permission, we learned of details of his recent personal correspondence with Pope Benedict XVI. It was very moving to hear the Senator acknowledging his failing to always be a faithful Catholic, and his request for prayers as he faced the end of his life. The Holy Father’s expression of gratitude for the Senator’s pledge of prayer for the Church, his commendation of the Senator and his family to the intercession of the Blessed Mother, and his imparting the Apostolic Blessing, spoke of His Holiness’ role as the Vicar of Christ, the Good Shepherd who leaves none of the flock behind.

As Archbishop of Boston, I considered it appropriate to represent the Church at this liturgy out of respect for the Senator, his family, those who attended the Mass and all those who were praying for the Senator and his family at this difficult time. We are people of faith and we believe in a loving and forgiving God from whom we seek mercy.

Advocating for the dignity of life is central to my role as a priest and a bishop. One of my greatest satisfactions in my ministry thus far was helping to overturn the abortion laws in Honduras. The person who answered my call for help with that effort was Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who had been a prominent leader in NARAL and the abortion rights movement. His own change of heart led Dr. Nathanson from a practice of providing abortions to becoming one of the most eloquent exponents of the pro-life movement.

Helen Alvaré, who is one of the most outstanding pro-life jurists, a former Director of the Bishops' Pro-life Office and a long standing consultant to the USCCB Committee for Pro-Life Activities, has always said that the pro-life movement is best characterized by what it is for, not against. We are for the precious gift of life, and our task is to build a civilization of love. We must show those who do not share our belief about life that we care about them. We will stop the practice of abortion by changing the law, and we will be successful in changing the law if we change people’s hearts. We will not change hearts by turning away from people in their time of need and when they are experiencing grief and loss.

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. If any cause is motivated by judgment, anger or vindictiveness, it will be doomed to marginalization and failure. Jesus’ words to us were that we must love one another as He loves us. Jesus loves us while we are still in sin. He loves each of us first, and He loves us to the end. Our ability to change people’s hearts and help them to grasp the dignity of each and every life, from the first moment of conception to the last moment of natural death, is directly related to our ability to increase love and unity in the Church, for our proclamation of the Truth is hindered when we are divided and fighting with each other.

President Obama and three former presidents attended Senator Kennedy’s funeral. I had the opportunity to speak briefly with President Obama, to welcome him to the Basilica and to share with him that the bishops of the Catholic Church are anxious to support a plan for universal health care, but we will not support a plan that will include a provision for abortion or could open the way to abortions in the future. The President was gracious in the short time we spoke, he listened intently to what I was saying.

Democrats and Republicans sat side by side in the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, praying for Senator Kennedy and his family. It is my sincere hope that all people who long to promote the cause of life will pray and work together to change hearts, to bring about an increased respect for life, and to change laws so as to make America a safe place for all, including the unborn.

The cardinal's statement appears to have been provoked by the widespread discussion among Catholic opinion leaders and writers about how the church should have responded to Kennedy's death, given that the senator was a member of the most prominent Catholic family in American history, and a champion on many elements of Catholic social teaching, but also a supporter of abortion rights as well as an advocate for gay rights and a man whose personal failings had also been well chronicled.

There has been ample criticism of the hierarchy's role in the Kennedy funeral rites. Raymond Arroyo, the news director at Eternal Word Television Network, blogged:

The prayer intercessions at the funeral mass, the endless eulogies, the image of the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston reading prayers, and finally Cardinal McCarrick interring the remains sent an uncontested message: One may defy Church teaching, publicly lead others astray, deprive innocent lives of their rights, and still be seen a good Catholic, even an exemplary one. The casual viewer is tempted to think that Catholicism has become a Church of externals where core doctrines and major teachings are as malleable as they are in the nearest Protestant community. Or worse, to think it all a hollow show.

Elizabeth Scalia, over at First Things, was also concerned, writing, "By all means, the good done in every life should be remembered and celebrated, but in the twenty-first century it is a problematic hagiography that dismisses some genuinely deleterious public behavior with a shrugging, 'as we’re all flawed, let us on this be silent!'"

Harsher criticism came from groups including such as Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, whose executive director, C.J. Doyle wrote, the day of the funeral:

No rational person can reasonably be expected to take seriously Catholic opposition to abortion when a champion of the Culture of Death, who repeatedly betrayed the Faith of his baptism, is lauded and extolled by priests and prelates in a Marian basilica. This morning's spectacle is evidence of the corruption which pervades the Catholic Church in the United States. The right to life will never be recognized by secular society if it is not first vindicated and consistently upheld within the institutions of the Church itself.

And the Rev. Brian Harrison, writing at LifeSiteNews.com, offered a similar critique:

For to those innumerable viewers and listeners of many religions (or none) who were aware of Sen. Kennedy's public, straightforward, radical, long-standing, and (as far as we know) unrepented defiance of his own Church's firm teaching about the duty of legislators to protect unborn human life and resist the militant homosexual agenda, this morning's Mass, concelebrated by several priests, presided over Cardinal Sean O'Malley, Archbishop of Boston, and adorned by a eulogy from the aforesaid U.S. President, effectively communicated a tacit but very clear message: the Church does not really take too seriously her own 'official' doctrines on these matters!

A few groups opposed the idea of granting Kennedy a Catholic funeral at all -- the president of the American Life League, Judie Brown, wrote Cardinal O'Malley before the funeral, saying, "If this funeral Mass proceeds as planned, Senator Edward Kennedy will have spit one more time on Christ, this time from a casket.'' The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, president of Human Life International, wrote that, "To honor this 'catholic' champion of the culture of death with a Catholic funeral is unjust to those who have actually paid the price of fidelity."

O'Malley's blog post tonight is his first statement about the late Senator Kennedy since August 26, when the cardinal issued a brief statement about the senator's death:

Today we mourn the passing of Senator Edward M. Kennedy and we extend our heartfelt prayers and sincere condolences to his wife Victoria and their children, Kara, Edward, Patrick, Curran and Caroline. Senator Kennedy was blessed with a dedicated and loving family who stood by his side, particularly during the past year as he faced his illness with courage, dignity and strength.

We join with his colleagues in Congress and the people of Massachusetts in reflecting on his life and his commitment to public service. For nearly half a century, Senator Kennedy was often a champion for the poor, the less fortunate and those seeking a better life. Across Massachusetts and the nation, his legacy will be carried on through the lives of those he served.

We pray for the repose of his soul and that his family finds comfort and consolation in this difficult time.

Two of the three other Massachusetts bishops also expressed condolences, without mentioning the abortion issue. The bishop of Worcester, Robert J. McManus, issued the following statement:

It is with great sadness tempered with Christian hope in eternal life that we turn to almighty God in prayer for our departed senator and brother, Edward M. Kennedy. His dedication to public service for nearly fifty years and his zealous advocacy for so many issues of social justice, which benefited not just our Commonwealth but the entire country, will truly be missed. Our hearts and prayers go out to the members of the Kennedy family at the death of a man who cared so much for them as loving father, brother, uncle, and friend. May God bring them his peace and consolation in this time of loss and grief. May Senator Kennedy's soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

And the bishop of Fall River, George W. Coleman, also issued a statement:

The Fall River Diocese mourns the loss of Senator Edward M. Kennedy who, throughout his life, enjoyed spending time on Cape Cod. We join with others across our state and nation in remembering him for his many years of service in the U.S. Senate, where he was a strong proponent of efforts to help the poor and disadvantaged. We offer our prayers for the repose of his soul and extend to his wife, children, and entire family our sympathy and prayerful condolences.

The bishop of Springfield, Timothy A. McDonell, did not issue a statement about Kennedy's death.

In this morning's Globe, I have a story about the exchange of letters between Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and the Vatican. An excerpt:

Scholars generally agree that Kennedy’s letter to Pope Benedict XVI, which had remained secret from the time of its delivery July 10 until the time it was read aloud at his burial Saturday, revealed a man eager to explain how he reconciled his public actions with his private beliefs, and hungry for the prayers and support of his church.

The response, in turn, revealed the top echelon of the church to be far less conflicted and chastising than some of its American adherents, offering comfort rather than confrontation.

“The letters reflect the cordiality and mutual respect that ought to characterize relationships within the Catholic community, even when there are serious differences,’’ said the Rev. Thomas P. Rausch, a professor of Catholic theology at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angles. And the Rev. Richard P. McBrien, a theologian at Notre Dame, said, “The Vatican’s warm reply to the senator’s letter was in striking contrast to the harshly negative rhetoric some of his critics have directed at him, even in death.’’

You can read the whole story here. And I've posted on this blog a transcript of Cardinal McCarrick's remarks at the burial, including the excerpts of the letters.

(Photo, by Dina Rudick of the Globe staff, shows a scene from the burial of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy at Arlington National Cemetery on Aug. 29, 2009.)

Some items on my reading list this Tuesday morning:

Old-school seminary: Eric Gorski, a national religion reporter for the Associated Press, visits a Neocatechumenal Way seminary in Denver. The enticing lede: "The seminarians' wallets are empty, except for driver's licenses and insurance cards. To buy cigarettes or clothes or anything else, they must ask their superiors for money — an exercise in obedience and a reminder that material things are not important."

Gene Robinson in England: The Guardian newspaper has a lengthy interview with the Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire with lots of interesting personal detail, but the newsiest bit is his reaction to the idea of a two-tiered Anglican Communion: "I can't imagine anything that would be more abhorrent to Jesus than a two-tier church."

More on Protestants and homosexuality: On today's Globe op-ed page, scholars Wendy Cadge of Brandeis and Laura Olson of Clemson take a look at the battles over gay rights in Protestantism, and observe that, "Mainline Protestant denominations in particular are slowly, but deliberately, adopting more tolerant stances - leaving conservatives rather than liberals to split off from their churches."

Obama's faith office: Dan Gilgoff of U.S. News takes a look at how the Obama Administration's faith-based office differs from that of the Bush Administration and concludes that "President Obama's faith-based office has given religious figures a bigger role in influencing White House decisions."

Douthat on Kennedys: Ross Douthat's column in Sunday's New York Times about differences on abortion between siblings Ted and Eunice Kennedy, both of whom died last month, is occasioning a lot of chatter. He writes, "It’s worth pondering how the politics of abortion might have been different had Ted shared even some of his sister’s qualms about the practice."

The big news of the day in Catholic America was the resignation of Bishop Joseph F. Martino of Scranton, Pa. This is not ordinarily a diocese that attracts national attention, but Martino had managed to change that with his sharp criticism of his diocese's most famous son, Vice President Joe Biden, as well as various local Catholic institutions, primarily over the abortion issue.

Then today, not only did Martino quit, citing fatigue, at an invitation-only news conference held at a secret location, but his auxiliary bishop also quit, and the cardinal brought in to restore some order, Cardinal Justin F. Rigali of Philadelphia, declined to reappoint the diocese's controversial episcopal vicar. The purge, if that's what it was, is triggering quite a bit of chatter about whether the Vatican (which has been conspicuously warmer toward the Obama administration than have some American bishops) is concerned with the tone of dialogue among bishops stateside.

Martino acknowledged the unhappiness in his diocese, saying, "For some time now, there has not been a clear consensus among the clergy and people of the Diocese of Scranton regarding my pastoral initiatives or my way of governance,'' and blamed his "sorrow" over the situation for causing him health problems.

By far the best summation of the Scranton situation that I've seen comes from David Gibson over at Politics Daily, who writes, "Martino became for many the angry face of the anti-Obama wing of the Catholic hierarchy thanks to his intemperate blasts about pro-choice politicians and an overweening administrative style that irritated the flock and even his brother bishops." It's well worth reading in full, but here is an an excerpt:

In February, Martino warned Irish-American groups that he would close the city's cathedral on St. Patrick's Day if any of them honored a politician who Martino said would be considered "pro-abortion." That was seen as a shot across the bow against inviting Joe Biden; in past years, the Scranton Irish-Americans had honored both Obama and then-Senator Hillary Clinton...

But it was the presidential campaign last year that brought Martino to national prominence, and seemed to bring out the more volatile aspects of his personality.

In September, as Biden was barnstorming Pennsylvania -- the vice president was born and baptized Catholic in Scranton before moving to Delaware later in life -- Martino declared that Biden would be denied communion if he tried to receive at a church in the Scranton diocese. "I will be truly vigilant on this point," Martino said. It was a step not even Biden's own bishop in Delaware would take.

Then in October, Martino had priests read a letter during all Sunday masses in the diocese telling Catholics that voting for a pro-choice politician was equivalent to endorsing "homicide."

Martino also called on priests and anyone who distributes communion to act on their own to deny the Eucharist -- the central sacrament of Catholic belief and worship -- to anyone who they believe publicly supports pro-choice policies. Martino even rebuked Pennsylvania's Democratic Senator Bob Casey, a pro-life Catholic who supported Obama, suggesting he may be denied communion if he came to Scranton.

But it was an event in late October last year, on the eve of the presidential vote, as religious rhetoric was growing white-hot, that may have pushed Martino over the line in the eyes of many.

A parish was holding a regular voter-education forum on the election, featuring discussion of a document, "Faithful Citizenship," the election guide endorsed almost unanimously by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, or USCCB. Martino showed up at the parish hall unannounced, causing a stir. Then he took the microphone and proceeded to critique the organizers for not using his own letter on abortion as the basis of the discussion.

When a nun at the forum reminded Martino about the document of the entire bishops conference Martino responded: "No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese. The USCCB doesn't speak for me. The only relevant document ... is my letter. There is one teacher in this diocese, and these points are not debatable."

There are lots of dots to be connected -- or not -- here, but for those inclined to see a push toward more civil dialogue, there is not only Martino's resignation but also the Vatican newspaper's relatively warm tone toward President Obama, and the decision of two cardinals, Sean P. O'Malley of Boston and Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, to oversee the key funeral rites for the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy, as well as the fact that Pope Benedict XVI responded to a plea for prayers from the dying senator with a note expressing "spiritual closeness" and bestowing an apostolic blessing. And last week Archbishop Michael J. Sheehan, the respected archbishop of Santa Fe, suggested that most bishops were not on board with the heated denunciations of Notre Dame earlier this year for choosing Obama as its commencement speaker. "Hysterical activity doesn’t bear fruit, and there’s been some hysteria in these areas,'' Sheehan told the National Catholic Reporter.

Gibson's conclusion about the Martino matter: "His resignation may be further evidence that the U.S. hierarchy is divided between moderate voices and a more strident conservative minority that is struggling in the wake of Obama's success with Catholic voters." And Mark Silk, over at Spiritual Politics, writes, "Martino often seemed out of control, if not off his meds. ...While no one would say that a strong liberal wing is blowing from Rome, there seems little question that the message for the day is moderazione."

(Photo, by Bradley C. Bower/AP, shows Bishop Joseph F. Martino in Scranton on Oct. 1, 2003.)

In today's Globe, health/science reporter Liz Kowalczyk takes an interesting look at the increase in demand for chaplains at Boston hospitals. An excerpt:

The number of requests from patients, families, and staff for spiritual guidance in one of the country’s most technology-rich medical hubs has soared, as hospitals have expanded the role and number of chaplains.

Since 2004, requests for chaplains at the Brigham have jumped 23 percent. At Massachusetts General Hospital, requests have grown 30 percent since the hospital began tracking visits in 2006. And at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, which expanded its pastoral care program last year, monthly visits are expected to rise to at least 540 this month, a 10-fold increase over the same time last year.

“Visits are just going through the roof,’’ said the Rev. Julia Dunbar, director of pastoral care and education at Beth Israel Deaconess.

Chaplains and doctors said requests - from both religious and nonreligious patients and families - are growing in part because hospitals are caring for sicker patients who are more often grappling with questions about aggressive care and death. The number of Latino patients also has grown, chaplains said, and many of these patients are deeply religious.

Also, as hospitals have expanded the role and number of chaplains, which include priests, ministers, rabbis and imams, they’ve become more visible and available. Last year, Beth Israel Deaconess hired a full-time Catholic priest and six part-time chaplains and began asking all patients whether they want a visit during their stay. Mass. General has assigned its chaplains to specific units to increase their visibility.

(Photo, by John Tlumacki of the Globe staff, shows a Jesuit priest/hospital chaplain, the Rev. George Winchester, talking with patient Bob Perry of Lowell at Brigham and Women's Hospital on Aug. 20, 2009.)

A question for the readers of this blog: have you ever written to the Vatican, and, if so, did you get a response? I'm interested in hearing about your experience; if you've corresponded, or tried to correspond, with Rome, please shoot me a note.

I have to say that this idea of a snub didn't ring true to me. As someone who covers the cardinal fairly regularly, my own observation is that he can be socially awkward at times -- he is clearly not cut from a politician's cloth -- but not intentionally rude, and it's a bit difficult for me to imagine him intentionally refusing to shake the hand of the vice-president of the United States.

There's another factor that might surprise some folks who are aware only of the cardinal's concerns about the Democratic party and abortion. The cardinal's communications director is a man named Terrence C. Donilon, who is from a family that is quite active in Democratic politics at the national level. As it turns out, Terry's brother, Michael (Mike) C. Donilon, is a longtime Biden aide who now holds the job of Counselor to the Vice-President. And Terry's sister-in-law, Catherine (Cathy) M. Russell is a former Biden aide who is now chief of staff to Jill Biden, the wife of the vice-president. (Russell is married to another Donilon brother, Thomas E. Donilon, who is deputy national security advisor in the White House.)

In today's paper, and with a lot of help from local priests and church officials, I attempt to answer many of the most commonly asked questions about Catholicism and the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy. The full article is here, but here is the bulk of it:

Q. Why was the funeral at the Mission Church?

A. Senator Kennedy, before he died, chose the Mission Church, formally known as the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, as the site for his funeral. The church has an icon that Catholics pray before when seeking healing, and the senator had frequently prayed there when his daughter, Kara, was being treated for lung cancer at Brigham & Women’s Hospital. He also visited the church when he was diagnosed with cancer last year. The church also is large, so it had space for the funeral, and it is located in a diverse and long-struggling neighborhood, calling attention to the senator’s concern for the poor.

Q. How was this Mass similar to, or different from, ordinary funeral Masses?

A. The liturgy was the same, in terms of the prayers and rituals, but there were fewer hymns, more speeches, and, obviously, more famous people in the pews.

Q. Wouldn’t Chappaquiddick, or Senator Kennedy’s divorce and remarriage, or his support for abortion rights, disqualify him from a Catholic funeral?

A. The Catholic Church teaches that all of us are sinners and that sinfulness does not disqualify one from a funeral Mass. “It’s not a canonization - if you’re a member of the flock, you have a right to a Catholic funeral,’’ said the Rev. James A. Field, a former director of the archdiocesan Office for Worship. “He was a faithful, baptized member of the church who hadn’t left or been thrown out, and he had a right to a funeral Mass.’’

Q. What was Cardinal O’Malley’s role at the funeral?

A. O’Malley was present to represent the Catholic Church of Boston, and because he is the archbishop of Boston, he was considered the presider. He was not the principal celebrant of the Mass (that was the Rev. J. Donald Monan, chancellor of Boston College), and he was not the homilist (that was Rev. Mark R. Hession, the family priest on Cape Cod). But that was not unusual; bishops often allow other priests to lead weddings or funerals, even when the bishop is present, if there are priests who had closer relationships with the person being married or buried. O’Malley’s most visible role was to offer the prayers of commendation, after the Mass, when he commended Senator Kennedy into the hands of God, and asked God’s blessing on the mourners. During that ritual, O’Malley also honored the body with incense in a sign of God’s blessing.

Q. Doesn’t the church prohibit so many speakers at a funeral?

A. Yes. The Archdiocese of Boston guidelines are quite clear, reading, “only one speaker, a member or a friend of the family, may speak for not more than five minutes in remembrance of the deceased.’’ Other speeches are supposed to take place during a wake. This policy has often been unpopular, and it’s not clear how evenly enforced it is, but Cardinal Bernard F. Law famously insisted on the one-speaker restriction at the funerals of House Speaker Tip O’Neill and US Representative John J. Moakley. There were three speakers at yesterday’s funeral - the two Kennedy sons and President Obama. The archdiocese says an exception was made by Father Monan, the celebrant, and the Redemptorist fathers, who oversee the basilica.

Q. Why was there so little singing?

A. The congregation sang twice, at the beginning (“Holy God We Praise Thy Name’’) and the end (“America the Beautiful). That was significantly less singing than at most contemporary Catholic funerals, where the responsorial psalm, the Allelulia, and the acclamations would be sung. The Kennedy funeral, however, had more choral and instrumental music, led by some famous musicians, including the cellist Yo-Yo Ma, the tenor Placido Domingo, the mezzo-soprano Susan Graham, the Tanglewood Festival Chorus, and members of the Boston Symphony Orchestra.

Q. Who was allowed to take Communion?

A. Communion in Catholic churches is restricted to Catholics in good standing, but no announcement was made, there was no reference to a restriction in the program, and anybody who came forward would receive Communion. Camera angles were restricted so that they did not show exactly who took Communion, but the prominent non-Catholic elected officials, such as President Obama, remained in their pews during Communion.

Q. Is Senator Kennedy going to heaven?

A. Catholic theologians say that is a question for God, not church officials or any of Senator Kennedy’s fans or foes. An archdiocesan official says, “The purpose of the funeral liturgy is to pray for the soul of the deceased person. Our prayer is inspired by our hope in God’s mercy and forgiveness. Senator Kennedy, like any person, was imperfect and in need of God’s mercy.’’

(Photo, by Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images, shows the funeral of Senator Edward M. Kennedy at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Boston on August 29, 2009.)

Here is the text of Cardinal McCarrick's remarks:

There is a certain fittingness in having a burial at the dying of the day, because we know that the sun will come back again tomorrow. And as we think of Teddy, we know that his new life begins. And as we look at this great family, we're sure that new life is already beginning, and that new great things are happening.

Mr. Vice President; Vicki; members of the family: It is for all of us a very special time, in our own lives, in your life, and the life of our country. And so we begin in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. (Amen)

Dear friends in Christ, in the name of Jesus and his church, we gather together to pray for Edward Moore Kennedy, that God may bring him to everlasting peace and rest. We share the pain of loss, but the promise of eternal life gives us hope. And therefore, we comfort one another with these words.

(Kara Kennedy, Senator Kennedy's daughter, then read from the Letter of Paul to the Philippians, after which Cardinal McCarrick resumed:)

May I, for just a moment, be the voice of so many, all around the world, to pay a final tribute to Senator Ted Kennedy, and to offer our heartfelt condolence, to his wife Vicki, to his sister Jean, to his children and grandchildren, and to all the Kennedy family, as also to that extended family that must probably include most of America.

May I also add a word that we who were privileged to watch the very beautiful funeral Mass this morning had to be touched by the wonderful part in that liturgy played by the younger generation of Kennedys. The warm and very personal tribute in the elegies of Teddy's sons, and even that of the president of the United States, whose warmth and whose friendship for Ted is obviously so powerful. That, together with the splendid homily of Father Hession, Ted's parish priest, made our farewell to Senator Kennedy unforgettable.

On learning of his death last Wednesday morning, tributes to his half-century of leadership in American life and politics came in from all over the globe. May I offer my own short one again.

They called him, "The Lion of the Senate," and indeed that is what he was. His roar, and his zeal for what he believed, made a difference in our nation’s life. Sometimes, of course, we who were his friends and had affection for him would get mad at him when he roared at what we believed was the wrong side of an issue, but we always knew, and were always touched by, his passion for the underdog, for the rights of working people, for better education, for adequate health care for every American. His legacy will surely place him among the dozen or so greats in the history of the Senate of the United States.

Shortly before he died, Senator Kennedy wrote a very moving letter to the Holy Father, and took advantage of the historic visit to the Vatican of President Obama to ask the president if he would deliver it personally, which Mr. Obama gladly did. A couple of weeks later, the pope replied with a fatherly message of concern for the senator’s illness, and a prayer for his progress.

When Vicki and I and others began to talk about the organization of this brief service, the happy thought emerged of using part of these two letters to commemorate the faith of Ted Kennedy, and the warm and paternal spirit of Pope Benedict XVI. I want to quote from that letter. It begins:

"Most Holy Father, I asked President Obama to personally hand deliver this letter to you. As a man of deep faith himself, he understands how important my Roman Catholic faith is to me, and I am so deeply grateful to him.

"I hope this letter finds you in good health. I pray that you have all of God’s blessings as you lead our church and inspire our world during these challenging times.

"I am writing with deep humility to ask that you pray for me as my own health declines. I was diagnosed with brain cancer more than a year ago, and although I continue treatment, the disease is taking its toll on me. I am 77 years old, and preparing for the next passage of life.

"I have been blessed to be a part of a wonderful family, and both of my parents, particularly my mother, kept our Catholic faith at the center of our lives. That gift of faith has sustained, and nurtured, and provided solace to me in the darkest hours. I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, I have tried to right my path.

"I want you to know, Your Holiness, that in my nearly 50 years of elective office, I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor, and open doors of economic opportunity. I’ve worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty and fought to end war. Those are the issues that have motivated me and have been the focus of my work as a United States senator.

"I also want you to know that, even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health field and I will continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone.

"I have always tried to be a faithful Catholic, Your Holiness, and though I have fallen short through human failings, I have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings of my faith. I continue to pray for God’s blessings, on you and on our church, and would be most thankful for your prayers for me."

Two weeks later, the reply came back from the Vatican, and in part, it read as follows:

"The Holy Father has read the letter which you entrusted to President Obama, who kindly presented it to him during their recent meeting. He was saddened to know of your illness, and asked me to assure you of his concern and his spiritual closeness. He is particularly grateful for your promise of prayers for him, and for the needs of our universal church.

"His Holiness prays that in the days ahead you may be sustained in faith and hope, and granted the precious grace of joyful surrender to the will of God, our merciful Father. He invokes upon you the consolation and peace promised by the risen savior to all who share in his sufferings, and trust in his promise of eternal life.

"Commending you and the members of your family to the loving intervention of the blessed Virgin Mary, the Holy Father cordially imparts his apostolic blessing as a pledge of wisdom, comfort and strength in the Lord."

That's the end of the quotation.

With the prayers of our Holy Father, Pope Benedict, added to our own prayers, we entrust the body of Edward Moore Kennedy, Senator Ted, to his resting place, until the Lord calls us forth, until the end of time. Amen.

And now, let us pray.

For those of us on the O'Malley beat, there were lots of interesting moments this morning, but none more so than the lengthy greeting that Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley had with President Obama. O'Malley, of course, is the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston and has been sharply critical of Obama's support for abortion rights ("This man has a deplorable record when it comes to prolife issues,'' O'Malley told me after the election).

I asked O'Malley's spokesman, Terry Donilon, what the two men talked about, and he e-mailed back, "If he chooses to speak about it, he will in the blog, but it was a pleasant and gracious chat." He said the conversation lasted two to three minutes, and that the cardinal welcomed the president to Boston and the basilica. He would not say whether there was a more substantive exchange.

O'Malley technically presided over the Mass, but he was not the principal celebrant or the homilist, and he was visible mostly at the end, as he said the final prayers of commendation over the late senator's body. O'Malley's tone, even on the happiest of occasions, is somber, and he added a funereal touch to the funeral's close as he honored the body with incense, a sign of respect for the body and also a sign of God's blessing.

UPDATE: There is strong praise for O'Malley from the Rev. James Martin, associate editor of America magazine, who blogs:

Cardinal O'Malley's decision to attend the funeral is largehearted, compassionate, pastoral, sensitive and, above all, Christian. In this overheated environment, when some in the church are ready to condemn and anathematize, the calm presence of the leader of the Boston archdiocese at the funeral of a man--though the cardinal fiercely disagreed with him on many things--whose led a life of faith, is something that places our church in the best possible light. Kennedy's parish priest noted the senator's deep faith; his children and grandchildren noted his service for the poor; his biographer has spoken of his love of the Gospels, most especially the Sermon on the Mount. Cardinal O'Malley has been clear about his strong opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, his simple presence at the funeral shows his support of forgiveness, compassion and that quality perhaps most missing in today's church: mercy.

Here is O'Malley at the start of the Mass, as the casket arrives. The cardinal is vested in the red robes that signify his willingness to die for the church:

And here is O'Malley during the prayers of commendation, now wearing a cope because the Mass has ended, honoring the body with incense:

(Photos all taken today at the funeral of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy at the Mission Church in Boston. Photo at top, of Obama and O'Malley, by Getty; photo at right, of Obama and O'Malley, by Reuters. Third photo, of O'Malley at the start of Mass, by Getty, and fourth photo, of O'Malley at the end of the funeral, by AP.)

This morning the Rev. James A. Field and I hosted a chat with Boston.com readers about the funeral Mass for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. Father Field is the former director of the Office for Worship for the Archdiocese of Boston, and now the pastor of Incarnation Parish in Melrose. The chat is now over, but you can read our conversation here:

Good morning. Guests have already begun arriving for this morning's funeral for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help (the Mission Church) in Boston. Music, performed by members of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, is to begin at 10 a.m., and the funeral Mass is to begin at 10:30 a.m. and is expected to end by 1 p.m.

I have a story previewing the funeral here. I will be liveblogging the funeral with the Rev. James A. Field, a former director of the Office for Worship at the Archdiocese of Boston, and we'll be welcoming your questions about the liturgy and other religious aspects of the funeral, so feel free to join the conversation starting at 10:30 here at Boston.com.

Here is a detailed program for the funeral Mass:

10:30 a.m. - FUNERAL PROCESSION BEGINS

Entrance Hymn: “Holy God We Praise Thy Name”

Celebrants:

• Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, archbishop of Boston


• Rev. J. Donald Monan, chancellor of Boston College (Former president of Boston College and a Kennedy family friend. Monan is the principle celebrant of the funeral Mass.)


• Rev. Gerard "Gerry" Creedon, pastor of St. Charles Borromeo Church in Arlington, Virginia. (Longtime Kennedy family friend.)


• Rev. Percival D’ Silva of Holy Redeemer Church in Kensington, Maryland. (Kennedy family friend and priest that performed the Blessed Sacraments for Caroline and Curran Raclin while at Blessed Sacrament Church in Northwest Washington.)


• Rev. Mark R. Hession, pastor of Our Lady of Victory Church in Centerville. (Senator and Mrs. Kennedy’s priest on Cape Cod and close friend. Fr. Hession offered mass for Senator Kennedy nearly every Sunday this year.)


• Rev. Donald MacMillan, campus minister, Boston College. (Family friend, who frequently celebrated mass for Senator Kennedy.)


• Rev. Raymond Collins, pastor of the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help.

First Reading: Curran Raclin (stepson) The Book of Wisdom 3:1-9

Responsorial Psalm: Kara Kennedy (daughter), Psalm 72

Second Reading: Caroline Raclin (stepdaughter), Letter of Paul to the Romans 8:31b-35, 37-39

Gospel: Father Hession, Matthew 25:31-32A, 34-40

The Prayers of the Faithful: Kiki Kennedy, Kiley Kennedy, Grace Allen, Max Allen, Jack Schlossberg, Robin Lawford, Kym Smith, Anthony Shriver, Rory Kennedy and Teddy M. Kennedy II (Readers will be reading excerpts of the Senator’ own words.)

Offertory: The Senator’s grandchildren

At Offertory: J.S. BACH Sarabande from Cello Suite No. 6 performed by Yo-Yo Ma, cello

At Communion: FRANCK “Panis Angelicus” performed by Placido Domingo, tenor, Yo-Yo Ma, cello, and James David Christie, organ; BRAHMS “Let Nothing Ever Grieve Thee,” performed by Tanglewood Festival Chorus, John Oliver, conductor, James David Christie, organ; and SHUBERT “Ave Maria,” performed by Susan Graham, mezzo-soprano, James David Christie, organ.

Remembrances: Ted Kennedy, Jr. and U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (sons)

Eulogy: President Barack Obama

Final Commendation: Cardinal O’Malley

Recessional: “America the Beautiful”

After the funeral, the plan is to fly the senator's body from Hanscom Air Force Base, in Massachusetts, to Andrews Air Force Base, in Maryland. There will be a motorcade from Andrews, past the U.S. Capitol, to Arlington National Cemetery, where at 5:30 p.m. Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, the archbishop emeritus of Washington, will preside over a private burial service. Senator Edward M. Kennedy will be buried next to his brothers, President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert F. Kennedy.

(Photo, by Darren McCollester/Getty, shows a billboard outside the Mission Church, where Sen. Kennedy's funeral will be held, on Aug. 28, 2009.)

It turns out that Cardinal O'Malley will not be alone in presiding over a portion of the funeral rites for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy: Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, the archbishop emeritus of Washington, is going to preside over the burial at Arlington National Cemetery tomorrow.

McCarrick had a long relationship with Kennedy from the days when the archbishop headed the domestic and international policy committee for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. And for five years Kennedy co-hosted, with Republican Representative John Boehner of Ohio, an annual fundraiser for inner-city Catholic schools in Washington.

Interestingly, McCarrick headed the USCCB's task force on Catholic bishops and Catholic politicians, which advised bishops not to honor politicians who support abortion rights. But a church official tells me that a funeral and a burial are not considered honors.

(Photo, by Matthew J. Lee of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal McCarrick speaking at Boston College on March 3, 2005.)

BREAKING NEWS:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston will preside at the funeral of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy tomorrow at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help (the Mission Church). The Rev. J. Donald Monan, a Jesuit priest who was the longtime president of Boston College and is now the chancellor, will be the principal celebrant. And the Rev. Mark R. Hession, pastor of Our Lady of Victory Parish in Centerville, will deliver the homily.

PROGRAM DETAILS:

First Reading: Curran Raclin, stepson
Responsorial: Kara Kennedy Allen, daughter
Second Reading: Caroline Raclin, stepdaughter
Homily: Rev. Mark Hession
Intercessory Prayers: Kennedy's four grandchildren, and the youngest grandchild of each of his siblings, will read quotes from his speeches. (The family chose to honor the youngest children because Kennedy was the youngest in his family.)
Offertory: Grandchildren
Music by Yo-Yo Ma
Communion
Music by Placido Domingo accompanied by the Tanglewood Festival Chorus
"Ave Maria" by Susan Graham of the Metropolitan Opera
Tribute: Edward M. Kennedy Jr. and US Representative Patrick J. Kennedy (sons)
Eulogy: President Obama
Song: America the Beautiful

ANALYSIS:

The family and church officials have essentially chosen to split the roles three ways. Cardinal O'Malley, because of his role as the archbishop of Boston, will technically preside over the funeral, but Fathers Monan and Hession, who had closer relationships with Senator Kennedy, will be far more visible to casual viewers of the liturgy. Monan will celebrate the Mass, which will include presiding over the congregation and reciting the prayers of the Mass and being at the center of the altar during the Eucharist. Hession will deliver the homily, and his task will be to take the readings of the day and apply them to the moment. This is a very typical arrangement, not only at large-scale funerals but also liturgies such as the first Mass of a new priest, in which a bishop will step aside to allow a close friend of the person being honored to celebrate the liturgy.

WHY FATHER MONAN?

Monan, a Jesuit priest, was the longest serving president in the history of Boston College, serving from 1972 to 1996; he is a respected figure in Boston and was a transformational leader for BC, shepherding the institution through a period of enormous growth in endowment and reputation. Kennedy, although not a BC alumnus, was a longtime friend of the institution: he received an honorary law degree there in 1966 (see photo below), and he served as a university trustee from 1976 to 1991. JFK also received an honorary degree from BC, in 1956, and RFK received an honorary degree there in 1960.

Boston College issued a brief statement from Monan just now: "I have known Sen. Kennedy for 35 years as a close friend, as a trustee of Boston College and a person who certainly was one of the strongest advocates for the value of higher education. It is an honor to me to celebrate the Mass," he said. Monan previously celebrated funeral Masses for two other significant American politicians, House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O’Neill, Jr., in 1996, and U.S. Sen. Michael J. "Mike" Mansfield, in 2001.

(Photo, courtesy of Boston College, shows Sen. Edward M. Kennedy receiving an honorary
degree from Boston College President Rev. Michael Walsh at BC in 1966.)

Details about tomorrow's funeral at the Mission Church are starting to dribble out.

Father Philip Dabney, of the church staff, told Globe reporter David Abel this morning that cellist Yo-Yo Ma and tenor Placido Domingo are expected to perform at the funeral Mass, and a renowned soprano will perform Ave Maria. President Obama will deliver a eulogy (even though some Catholics balk at that word -- technically there is not supposed to be a eulogy, but words of remembrance, at a Catholic funeral).

The family has not yet announced who is celebrating the Mass, although multiple priests are expected to concelebrate.

And one question still looming over the Mass is whether Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley will preside -- the archdiocese will not say whether O'Malley will be at the funeral or not, but if he is, he would likely defer to someone closer to Kennedy to celebrate the Mass and deliver the homily, while O'Malley would give a final commendation and farewell.

Among the many questions I keep getting in response to today's story about Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and Catholicism: what about his divorce? The answer is that Kennedy's first marriage, to Joan Bennett, ended in divorce; the marriage was reportedly annulled, and his second marriage, to Victoria Reggie, although conducted as a civil ceremony, was "blessed by the church,'' according to Kennedy's office. This is not particularly unusual -- there were 46,000 annulments in just one year (2002), according to the Vatican. Some people argued that Kennedy and other Catholic politicians should not receive Communion because of their support for abortion rights. Kennedy, obviously, did not share that view and Kennedy's bishop, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston, has repeatedly asserted that it is not the place of a priest to deny Communion to a politician; that it is up to individual Catholics to wrestle with their own consciences and to decide whether to present themselves for Communion. Kennedy regularly sought and received Communion at churches in Washington and Massachusetts; he was seen taking Communion at his mother's funeral in 1995, and I myself saw Cardinal Law give him Communion earlier this decade.

(Photo, by Ollie Noonan, shows Sen. Kennedy receiving Communion at the funeral of his brother, Robert F. Kennedy, in 1968.)

As the world anticipates tomorrow's funeral for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, and a eulogy to be delivered by President Obama, Globe editor Roy Greene has pulled together a nice look back at some of the eulogies Kennedy himself delivered over his long career.

(Photo, by AP, shows Sen. Edward Kennedy eulogizing his brother, Robert F. Kennedy, at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York on June 8, 1968.)

I'm getting lots of e-mail in response to today's story about Kennedy and Catholicism, with many questions and observations, some of which I'll try to share over the course of the day.

Among those who e-mailed was Mitchell Garabedian, the Boston lawyer who represented scores of victims of clergy sexual abuse, who wanted to share a little about Kennedy's response to the abuse crisis. Here's what Garbedian told me:

A few years ago Senator Kennedy, while traveling to a meeting concerning the conditions at Guantanamo Bay, personally called me to express his support for clergy sexual abuse victims and for my legal representation of clergy sexual abuse victims.

While speaking with Senator Kennedy about the the harm to clergy sexual abuse victims I could sense a genuineness in his heart and a sincerity in his soul. He was very easy to talk to. It was like discussing the matter with the concerned neighbor next door. Senator Kennedy was not in a rush to end the conversation. In our discussion, Senator Kennedy stressed the continuing need to help those less fortunate.

Several scholars I spoke with yesterday pointed out to me that Kennedy, despite being repeatedly criticized by the Catholic right, never fought back by criticizing the church. I took a look in our clips to see what Kennedy said about the abuse crisis.

In February of 2002, Kennedy said Cardinal Law should not resign over the abuse crisis. "What I'm most interested in is those families, their needs, and their tension and their anxiety, their pain, is attended to, and that we're going to develop within this whole archdiocese an accountability and a responsibility," he said.

But when Law did resign, in December of 2002, Kennedy said the resignation was the "right thing to do for the victims, their families, the church and the whole of the Catholic community. Real closure is far off for the victims, their families and all that are hurt by the terrible pain of this ordeal. But today is the first step toward a new dawn in our hearts and in our church."

(Photo, by Bill Greene of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal Law and Sen. Kennedy in Boston on March 2, 1987.)

In this morning's paper, I take a look at the relationship between Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and the Catholic Church. Here is the lede:

He was, at the same time, the scion of the most storied Catholic family in American history, and the bane of the Catholic right.

By championing the poor, the disabled, the immigrant, and the elderly, his politics often embodied Catholic social teaching, but with his personal failings and, especially, his strong support of abortion rights, he drew legions of often furious opponents who wanted him excommunicated.

As Boston prepares for tomorrow’s funeral of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the nation is getting a very public reminder of the predominantly private way in which Catholicism was woven through the life of Massachusetts’ longtime senator, a man who went to Mass daily for a year after his mother died, who sought help from a “healing priest’’ when he was diagnosed with cancer, who on his deathbed consulted with a local priest, and who, for his funeral, chose the basilica where he had regularly prayed for a miraculous cure for his cancer-stricken daughter.

But the elaborate mourning rituals - starting with the vigil that began on Cape Cod yesterday and ending with the burial in Washington tomorrow - are also reigniting the debate over Kennedy’s place in Catholic history.

“The common thread that runs through everything he accomplished was his belief in building things for the benefit of others, particularly those most in need,’’ said Dr. Patrick Whelan, a pediatrician at Massachusetts General Hospital and president of Catholic Democrats. “I believe this is the essence of being a good Catholic, and I think it’s right at the heart of Senator Kennedy’s entire legacy.’’

But others offered a far more critical appraisal.

“He will be remembered as one of the most scandalous Catholics in the history of the church,’’ said Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, an organization that repeatedly, and unsuccessfully, called for Kennedy to be excommunicated. “I’m horrified by him getting a Catholic funeral, because he spit at the church regularly.’’

For historians and church officials, there are simply no easy answers: Kennedy’s legacy as a Catholic is complex and debatable.

“If you look back over his long career, most of his life was taken up with domestic social policy and social welfare issues, and on those issues the church had a lot of overlap with him,’’ said the Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, a top official of the Archdiocese of Boston. “But it was no secret, and should not be overlooked, that there was direct conflict on the prolife issues.’’

Read the whole story here.

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows Senator Edward M. Kennedy lying in repose at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum on August 27, 2009.)

The priest who said the private Mass for the Kennedy family in Hyannis Port today was the Rev. Don MacMillan (above left), a Jesuit priest who serves in campus ministry at Boston College. MacMillan has for years spent summers assisting at Our Lady of Victory Parish in Centerville, and got to know the Kennedy family through that service, according to BC spokesman Jack Dunn.

Here's MacMillan's bio from the BC web site:

Fr. Don is a Boston native, graduate of BC High, BC '66 and BC '72 ---three times an Eagle!---who came to Campus Ministry in 1995 after twenty-four years as a teacher and administrator at three Jesuit high schools. In addition to counseling, some retreat work and Sunday liturgies, he coordinates the Urban Immersion program, the Arrupe Immersion program in Cuernavaca, Mexico and the Ignatian Family Teach-In/School of Americas Vigil. He is Advisor to the Bands Program and a member of the Critical Incident Stress Management Coordinating Committee.

(Photo courtesy of Boston College.)

For years, thousands of Bostonians have sought healing by praying before a golden image of the Virgin Mary in a shrine on Mission Hill. They kneel before the painting, leave flowers by the rail, deposit notes in a glass bowl, turn on electronic candles, even drop off crutches or braces as a sign of a miraculous cure.

Many of the petitioners are poor and powerless.

But over the years, Senator Edward M. Kennedy also came to the shrine seeking healing, and now his family has chosen the landmark basilica in which the shrine is located as the site for the senator’s funeral Saturday.

Kennedy visited the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help daily in 2002, while his daughter was being treated for lung cancer at the nearby Brigham and Women's Hospital, praying before the icon and meeting with a priest thought to have a healing touch. And the senator again visited the basilica last year, after he was diagnosed with brain cancer.

“The senator wanted to be buried from the basilica because of a deep connection developed here during his daily visits while his daughter, Kara, was going through cancer treatment,’’ said Scott Ferson, a former Kennedy staffer who is helping the family with funeral preparations. “Because of her recovery, it remained an especially sacred place for him.’’

In yesterday's paper, I had a story about a prominent local survivor of clergy sexual abuse who is getting a kidney transplant from another abuse survivor. The lede:

First, he asked his brothers.

Then he turned to extended family.

It was only after it became clear that no one in his family qualified to donate a kidney that Phil Saviano realized he might die.

And then he turned to the one larger community that he has embraced for nearly two decades: survivors of clergy sexual abuse.

Across the country, thousands of men and women who years ago were molested by priests opened their inboxes to find an e-mailed plea to help a fellow survivor.

Seven of them offered up a kidney to keep Saviano alive.

And today, at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, physicians will transplant a kidney from Susan Pavlak, a 55-year-old Minnesota woman who says that years ago she was molested by a former nun at a Catholic high school, to Saviano, a 57-year-old Roslindale man who says that as a boy in Central Massachusetts he was repeatedly abused by a priest who turned out to be a serial pedophile.

“He is another member of the family of the harmed,’’ Pavlak said yesterday, explaining why she would give a kidney to a man she had never met or even heard of. “One way I can respond is to give what I have to give.’’

David Clohessy, the national director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, and Dr. Martha Pavlakis, the nephrologist, tell me that the procedure went well. Saviano and Pavlak are now recovering at Beth Israel Deaconess.

(Photo, by Essdras M Suarez/ Globe Staff, shows Phil Saviano and Susan Pavlak in Brookline on Aug. 24, 2009.)

I'm compiling here statements from religious leaders about the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. Check back for updates -- I'll add the statements as they come in.

From Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston:

Today we mourn the passing of Senator Edward M. Kennedy and we extend our heartfelt prayers and sincere condolences to his wife Victoria and their children, Kara, Edward, Patrick, Curran and Caroline. Senator Kennedy was blessed with a dedicated and loving family who stood by his side, particularly during the past year as he faced his illness with courage, dignity and strength.

We join with his colleagues in Congress and the people of Massachusetts in reflecting on his life and his commitment to public service. For nearly half a century, Senator Kennedy was often a champion for the poor, the less fortunate and those seeking a better life. Across Massachusetts and the nation, his legacy will be carried on through the lives of those he served.

We pray for the repose of his soul and that his family finds comfort and consolation in this difficult time.

From Barry Shrage, president of Combined Jewish Philanthropies:

Like so many people, I mourn the loss of Ted Kennedy. Ted and his brothers were heroes to me, giants in the fight to make a better world of equality, justice and caring.

I’ve never forgotten the first time I met Ted Kennedy. I was 40 years old and brand new to Boston and Ted Kennedy appeared at a CJP event. Steve Grossman introduced us and we spoke. Actually Ted Kennedy spoke - I was speechless. I was speechless because Ted Kennedy was the living embodiment of my best dreams for America and for the world. He was a great leader all by himself but also a symbol of something that powerfully changed my life and the aspirations of my generation.

These changes started with JFK. I never met John F. Kennedy though his picture was on my desk from the day he was murdered in 1963 until I graduated from social work school in 1970. I handed out campaign fliers on the Grand Concourse and Fordham Road in the Bronx when he ran for President. I was 13 and it was 1960. His election taught me something about ideas and the possibility of change.

I did meet Robert Kennedy. During the middle of the Cuban missile crisis, he came to speak at a Democratic Party fundraiser at the Concourse Plaza Hotel where I was working at the time. I was 15 and scared out of my mind.

Robert kept the dream alive. When he ran for the US Senate from New York in 1965, I chaired Students for Kennedy at City College, and I worked for him again when he ran for President in 1968…..a last hope for peace and justice at a time when I was obsessed with both. His assassination, like his brother’s, was shattering.

By the time I met Ted Kennedy, most of my political energy was focused on our Jewish community and its hopes and dreams, for Soviet and Ethiopian Jewry, for a strong Israel, and for justice for the poor and forgotten of our community and of the broader community within which we live.

And whenever the Jewish community needed help, Ted Kennedy was always there. Ted Kennedy was a tireless advocate for Soviet Jewry and went to the Soviet Union to meet with refuseniks on many occasions. Ted Kennedy advocated for their freedom and he advocated for Israel. Through war and peace he always listened. He was always there. He never refused a meeting and he always stood up for Israel.

Ted Kennedy despised anti-Semitism and all forms of hatred bigotry and racism. Ted Kennedy was our own Massachusetts hero and a symbol of the determination of Americans and Jews everywhere for justice and righteousness.

If his brothers were the symbol of the dream that drove and continues to drive my generation, Ted represented the hard work required, day in and day out to turn those dreams into reality. Boston, Massachusetts, our people, the Jews of Greater Boston and all the oppressed of the earth will all miss him.

Our condolences are extended to his entire family.

From the Rev. Peter Morales, president of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA):

I am saddened by the news of Senator Edward Kennedy’s passing and express my condolences to the Kennedy family. Our country has lost a great leader who tirelessly defended the basic rights of all Americans and stood on the side of those people who were most vulnerable. He devoted his decades-long career in the U.S. Senate to advancing the causes of economic justice, immigration reform, and universal health care. His dedication to making government more just and compassionate has been an inspiration to Americans of many faith traditions. Senator Kennedy had a gift for reaching out to religious people and lifting up our shared commitment to equality and the betterment of humanity. We can honor Senator Kennedy by carrying forward his legacy of working on behalf of those who are marginalized in this country. We must – and we will – continue advocating for the living wage, immigration reform, and health care for all. By giving our resources and commitment to the causes of fairness and equality, we move toward realizing the American dream to which Kennedy dedicated his years of public service.

From the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston:

The Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston (JCRC) is deeply saddened by the passing of Senator Edward Moore Kennedy. A model of dedication to the Commonwealth and the nation as a whole, Senator Kennedy embodied the values that our community stands for - social and economic justice, and the fair treatment for all Americans, including its most vulnerable citizens. His ability to create unlikely alliances allowed for a legacy of significant accomplishments in the Senate that have improved the lives of countless Americans. Senator Kennedy was also a true and loyal friend to the State of Israel and provided unwavering support to her in her quest for peace over the years. His leadership in these areas and more will be sorely missed.

Nancy K. Kaufman, Executive Director, said, "Ted Kennedy, who was my Senator from the time I could vote, exhibited his commitment to core Jewish values. Senator Kennedy has worked tirelessly with us on major issues such as health care reform, care for the poor, disabled, and elderly, advocacy for former Soviet Jewry, and support for Israel." Ms. Kaufman stated, "We will all miss his passion and his commitment to democratic issues and values, and we must continue his legacy of advocacy for social justice. May his memory be for a blessing always."

Our thoughts and prayers are with the Kennedy family and all the individuals who were touched by the work and compassion of Senator Kennedy.

From the Anti-Defamation League's New England region:

The Anti-Defamation League New England mourns the death of long time friend Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) following his long and courageous battle with brain cancer.

We mourn the passing of the Senator, a great American, a master legislator and a passionate champion of our nation’s democratic values and fundamental commitment to equality and fair treatment to all.

Senator Kennedy’s leadership on immigration reform was instrumental. Upon the 50th anniversary of his brother, President John F. Kennedy’s essay, "A Nation of Immigrants," ADL reissued the book. Senator Kennedy wrote in the introduction, "The urgent issue before us is about the future of America. It is about our pride for our immigrant past and our pride for our immigrant future."

Esta Epstein, Regional Board Chair and Derrek Shulman, Regional Director praised the work, legacy and the path that Senator Kennedy brought to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the world. "We will continue to champion his values and work as we move forward."

From Jim Wallis, president of Sojourners, a progressive evangelical organization:

In the aftermath of the 2004 Presidential elections, the Democrats were roundly accused of losing the "moral values voters" in America, and of being the party of "secularists" who were hostile to faith and religion. The very first Democrat to call me and ask to talk about that accusation and how to change the moral debate in America was Ted Kennedy. He invited me to his home, where he, and his wife Vicki, engaged me in a long and very thoughtful conversation, into the night, about the relationship between faith, morality, and politics. Their own deep Catholic faith was evident and their articulation of it very impressive. Our discussion was not partisan at all--it was not about how to win religion back for the Democrats. Rather, we focused on the great moral issues facing the nation, and how we as people of faith needed to respond to them.

On the occasion of his death, I pray that God may now move us as a nation to address the greatest commitment of Senator Kennedy's life--the need for a comprehensive reform of the health care system in America--as a deeply moral issue and one that calls forth the very best that is within us. May we honor the life and death of Senator Edward Kennedy by laying aside the rancor, lies, fear, and even hate that has come to dominate the health care debate in America this summer; and regain our moral compass by recovering the moral core of this debate: that too many Americans are hurting and suffering in a broken and highly inequitable health care system; and that it is our moral obligation to repair and reform it--Now.

From Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good:

It is with great sadness that we mourn the loss of Senator Edward Kennedy. Senator Kennedy, a man of deep and abiding Catholic faith, dedicated his life to noble public service. In pursuing the common good and advocating for human dignity around the globe, Senator Kennedy’s 46 year career was a reflection of the core values of the Catholic Social Tradition. He championed the cause of justice for the poor, the immigrant, and the most vulnerable and throughout his career demonstrated the value of civility, compassion, and compromise on matters of critical public concern. May Senator Kennedy’s deep faith and commitment to the common good serve as a model for us all.

From Catholic Democrats:

Catholic Democrats mourns the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), one of the most important Catholic political leaders in our country's history. The third longest serving member of the Senate, Kennedy's life exemplified a commitment to public service. His irreplaceable brand of leadership in Congress and to the nation led to the passage of unprecedented landmark legislation that covered a broad range of social justice issues which reflected both Catholic Social Teaching and his deep personal faith. He touched the lives of hundreds of millions of people, providing for their fundamental human needs, opening doors of opportunity, and helping create a more just society.

"Senator Kennedy's Catholicism was at the core of his identity," said Dr. Patrick Whelan, president of Catholic Democrats. "The common thread that runs through everything he accomplished was his belief in building things for the benefit of others, particularly those most in need. I believe this is the essence of being a good Catholic, and I think it's right at the heart of Senator Kennedy's entire legacy."

"The 'Lion of the Senate', Senator Kennedy brought the passion of his beliefs to, in his own words, "all those whose cares have been our concern" while at the same time reconciling differences between his colleagues from both sides of the aisle. He was both a fighter and a healer. He fought for universal health care, "the cause of my lifetime" he said, until the very end of his life. Both Republican and Democratic leaders will greatly miss his leadership in making universal health care a reality," said Whelan, a pediatric specialist at Massachusetts General Hospital.

"Senator Kennedy's passing is an immeasurable loss to our country and the world. He inspired liberals and earned the respect of conservatives. He was the conscience of our nation, particularly on the necessity of providing health care to all and on behalf of the poor and disadvantaged," said Steve Krueger, national director of Catholic Democrats. "His remarkable life's journey - one of overcoming insurmountable challenges through faith - provides inspiration for all of us in our own personal journeys and in serving the common good."

"We offer our most heartfelt prayers to the Senator's family in this time of sadness. There will never be another Ted Kennedy," said Whelan.

(Photo of Cardinal O'Malley taken in Cuba by AFP/Getty Images on August 18, 2009. Photo of Barry Shrage courtesy of Combined Jewish Philanthropies. Photo of Rev. Morales courtesy of the Unitarian Universalist Association. Photo of Nancy Kaufman taken in Boston by Janet Knott of the Globe staff on August 19, 1999. Photo of Jim Wallis taken in Boston by Wiqan Ang for the Boston Globe on February 11, 2008.)

Good morning. I'm back from vacation, and yesterday afternoon I drove out to Weston to check out a gathering assembled to hear from Roy Bourgeois, a Maryknoll priest who, according to his order, has been automatically excommunicated for refusing to recant his views supporting the ordination of women.

I had read a little about Bourgeois's recent activities. But still, I was struck by his fiery certainty. Rather than backing down, or quieting down, he is becoming more forceful. "I have no choice,'' he told me. "I have a deep love for my church and my ministry, but at the same time, I know an injustice when I see it.''

Even though poll after poll shows that large majorities of American Catholics support women's ordination, stories about the subject draw as much criticism from readers as anything I write about, and I gave some thought as to whether to cover this gathering at all, given that it was a relatively small group (about 100 people) in a non-Catholic setting (viewed as non-Catholic by church officials, they meet in a United Church of Christ church) that does not seem likely to have much impact on the thinking of the hierarchy (which has consistently declared that women can not be ordained). However, I concluded that given the prominence of Bourgeois (best known as the founder of the School of the Americas Watch, and the first priest in good standing to break so publicly with the hierarchy over women's ordination) and the fact that the gathering was hosted by a congregation formed by a former staffer for the Archdiocese of Boston (Jean Marchant, who claimed ordination as a priest in 2005, quit her post with the archdiocese a year later, and was automatically excommunicated herself) the event was worthy of coverage. And when I realized that there were at least three archdiocesan priests present to listen to the conversation, I felt affirmed in my decision that the event was interesting and important enough to be worthy of contextualized coverage. Mindful of the firestorm that greeted my last foray into this subject, I tried to be clear as possible about what the Archdiocese of Boston and the Vatican have said about women's ordination (they say it's not possible), and about the fact that the ordination ceremonies in which Bourgeois and Marchant participated are considered invalid by church officials.

And the double-decker headline seems to me to reflect the story fairly: "Priest takes church to task for not ordaining women; Won’t recant despite excommunication.'' (A reader e-mailed me bright and early this morning to ask about whether Bourgeois is still a priest -- I'm not a theologian or a canonist, but my understanding is that he is -- the excommunication affects his right to administer and receive sacraments, but not his status as a cleric.) You can read the story yourself here.

(Photo, by Maisie Crow for the Boston Globe, shows Roy Bourgeois speaking to the Spirit of Life Community at the Congregational Church of Weston on Sunday, August 23, 2009.)

In a blog posting last night, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston reflected on his relationship with the late Eunice Kennedy Shriver and her husband, Sargent Shriver, as well as the role of the Catholic faith for the family:

Yesterday (Thursday) I went to Our Lady of Victory Church in Centerville and there presided over the reception of the body of Eunice Kennedy Shriver in an intimate ceremony with the pastor, Father Mark Hession, and the members of the Kennedy and Shriver families.

The parking lot was crowded with media trucks and people. The afternoon viewing afforded the opportunity for thousands of people to file through the church and pay their respects to this great Catholic woman. I was happy to be able to be a part of this simple prayer service in which her family placed the pall and crucifix on her coffin, prayed and reflected on the Scripture.

I was very pleased to be able to see Sargent Shriver after so many years. With his Alzheimer's, it was difficult to know exactly how much he understood of the day's events and I did not know if he would recognize me. It had been many years since I had last seen him, but I was very moved when he immediately kissed my ring.

I was touched by how solicitous the family was for him, especially Gov. Schwarzenegger, who is obviously a very devoted son-in-law.

Some of the Shriver children remembered the time I celebrated Mass for the Shrivers, Cesar Chavez and about 100 farm workers in their patio back in the 70s. The Shrivers were living in Maryland at the time and I was at the Centro Católico in Washington. I joked with them, "I think we destroyed your garden!"

That work with the farm workers was just one more indication of the profound commitment of Eunice and Sargent Shriver to the social doctrine of the Church. She was preeminently prolife, against abortion and there to protect and underscore the dignity of every person. This, of course, manifested itself in her love for children with disabilities.

In that regard, she reminds me very much of Jean Vanier who founded the L'Arche movement in Canada. That movement was born out of the Church's teachings on the dignity of every human person as a treasure made in the image and likeness of God and of our obligation to care for each other and to recognize the gift in each person.

Certainly, what Eunice Shriver did made a positive impact in so many ways and was a very strong witness of her Catholic faith.

Her sister, Rosemary, who was mentally retarded, opened up a whole reality that led Eunice to be such a pioneer and allowed her to make such a mark on history with the Special Olympics. It has been my experience that when a family has a child with a mental disability or Down Syndrome, the siblings often learn more about compassion and understanding than they would have if they did (not) have that exceptional child.

Rosemary was undoubtedly a great blessing in Eunice's life who allowed her to discover, in faith and in love, the beauty of her sister. It was that relationship with Rosemary that was later extrapolated to all the children who experience similar types of challenges.

While Eunice's works were remarkable, I don't want to lose sight of the fact that her Catholic faith and education was a very important part of what motivated her and helped her to interpret reality, particularly the reality of disability and retardation. I think this article by her son, Timothy Shriver, speaks volumes about the importance of her faith in her life. It was certainly the soil out of which grew her passion and dedication to the less fortunate and those who are challenged by disabilities and mental retardation.

(Photo, by David Ryan of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal O'Malley arriving at Our Lady of Victory Church in Centerville on August 13, 2009.)

In Monday's paper, I had a story about the planned resumption of perpetual adoration at the St. Clement Eucharistic Shrine in Boston. The feedback from readers has been mixed -- I have received a number of e-mails from people pleased with the story, but also a number critical of one aspect of it: my use of the word 'wafer.' Among the critics is Terry Mattingly over at GetReligion.org.

Just to be clear: multiple mainstream dictionaries identify the altar bread most commonly used in Catholic churches as a wafer. Here, from Dictionary.com, is the second definition of wafer: "a thin disk of unleavened bread, used in the Eucharist, as in the Roman Catholic Church.'' Although some of the commenters complained that the word is pejorative, so far as I can tell dictionaries do not describe it that way, and a quick Google search suggests that the word is widely used in the Catholic context.

Furthermore, I need to be clear about how I see my role here: I'm a religion writer for a secular newspaper; I am not an apologist or an evangelist for Catholicism or any other religion. Part of my job is to try to describe what is going on in the world of religion using language that is clear, descriptive, and understandable, to readers of a variety of faiths and to readers of no faith. It is not my job to stake out, or to state, a position on what takes place metaphysically during a Catholic Mass or any other religious rite -- in this story I described, to the best of my ability, what the Catholic Church says takes place, but it is not my role to simply assert, as some readers suggested I should have, that God is present in the consecrated bread. That is a belief, and one that I respect, but when I am describing a religious practice I am attempting to describe the tangible and visible aspects of that practice in language that readers can clearly understand, and I rely on worshipers, religious leaders, and academics to describe what believers understand to be happening spiritually or supernaturally.

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows the consecrated wafer in a monstrance at St. Clement Eucharist Shrine in Boston on August 5, 2009.)

Last Sunday was the 25th anniversary of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's ordination as a bishop, and he celebrated with a Mass at St. Patrick Parish in Natick (above), dinner and a cake with the Franciscan friars at the St. Anthony Shrine in Boston, and a commemorative edition of the Pilot. The big archdiocesan celebration will be next month (Sept. 16), when O'Malley will headline a "priest appreciation dinner" as a fundraiser for the cash-strapped priest pension funds.

For the anniversary, O'Malley wrote a survey of his own career for the Pilot and his blog. By far the best nugget is his characteristically wry description of how he felt in 2003 when he got the call telling him he was being named archbishop of Boston:

"My family took me out to dinner on my birthday, June 29. The phone rang. It was Archbishop Montalvo (the papal nuncio) telling me that the pope wanted me to be Archbishop of Boston. I dropped the cell phone on the ground. I thought, 'I really need to get caller ID on this thing'."

There are other moments of humor in the narrative; O'Malley writes, "Had I known I was going to be a bishop, I would have studied much harder in the seminary.'' He also observes that, after he was first informed in 1984 that he was going to be named a bishop in the Virgin Islands, "there was a total eclipse of the sun, which I was at a loss as how to interpret.''

He reflects briefly on his career cleaning up dioceses wracked by abuse scandals (Boston is his third such diocese, after Fall River and Palm Beach). He claims that, when he arrived in Palm Beach, where both of his predecessors had been accused of abuse, "I was fingerprinted, and, at the press conference, one of the reporters asked me if I was a pedophile," and writes that, when he was assigned to Boston, "the climate in Boston could not have been more negative."

"I told the priests that I used to think that a vow of poverty meant that you did not own anything, but that was before I owed hundreds of millions of dollars to impatient creditors,'' O'Malley writes.

Summing up his experience, he writes:

For those of us who love maps, Gallup today has put out a nifty set illustrating the differential religious makeup of the American states. The maps are based on new data -- survey research conducted earlier this year -- but there's no big news here: the Northeast is the most Catholic region, the South the most Protestant, Utah the most Mormon and New York the most Jewish. And the Pacific Northwest and northern New England have the biggest percentages of non-religious folks. Here is Gallup's analysis of what it calls a "remarkable pattern of religious dispersion in the U.S.,'' with an interesting unanswered question about Vermont:

"A good deal of the religious dispersion across the states is explainable by historical immigration patterns -- particularly the impact of the large waves of European Catholics and Jews who came through ports of entry in the Middle Atlantic states in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The geographic concentration of Mormons in and around Utah reflects the cross-country migration of that group in the mid-1800s from Illinois and other Eastern states to their new home. The fact that certain states like Oregon and Vermont consist disproportionately of residents with no religious identity is more difficult to explain, with hypotheses focusing on the particular and idiosyncratic cultures of those states and/or the migration of certain types of Americans to those states over the decades."

Here's the map about Catholicism:

And Protestantism:

Belatedly, I wanted to make note of the recent death of the Rev. William McCarthy -- the Father Bill of Father Bill's Place, a homeless shelter in Quincy. He was 82.

From the Globe's obituary:

As he noticed more people coming to his church’s doorstep in the late 1970s and early 1980s needing a place to stay, the Rev. William McCarthy, better known as Father Bill, made a few phone calls.

Within a few weeks, one of the area’s first shelters was created.

Aptly named Father Bill’s Place, it was the start of a network that would eventually serve homeless veterans, battered women, and teens tossed from their homes. As this network took root throughout the South Shore, the longtime pastor of St. John the Baptist in Quincy took heat for bringing in a population that was less than popular in some areas. Just as he persuaded hesitant abutters that ‘love your neighbor’’ was more powerful than any not-in-my-backyard sentiments, he had a way with potential donors that led them to hand over thousands of dollars to cover the costs of keeping his various projects running.

“Very few people say no to me,’’ he told the Globe in 2007. But he also did not say “No,’’ to anyone, reaching into his pockets to help families buy sheets or fix a boiler.

A parishioner once asked him why he never wore her late father’s cashmere coat that she gave him. He explained that he had given it away. “Someone came to the rectory door and needed it and I didn’t.’’

Here is an appreciation by the Globe's Bella English, an obituary that ran in The Pilot, a homily by a blogging deacon, Greg Kandra, and a post on Whispers in the Loggia.

(Photo, by Suzanne Kreiter of the Globe staff, taken on July 12, 2005.)

Mark Silk at Trinity College makes an interesting, if counterintuitive, observation: the more Catholic a state's population, the more likely its residents are to support same-sex marriage. From Mark's blog, Spiritual Politics:

"Six of the eight states where 50 percent or more of the public supports gay marriage are the states with the highest proportion of Catholics, ranging from Rhode Island at 46 percent to New York and California at 37 percent. Meanwhile, the eight states most opposed to gay marriage include six of the seven with the lowest proportion of Catholics, from Alabama at six percent to North Carolina at nine percent. In other words, support for same-sex marriage is directly related to the proportion of Catholics in a given state."

It's not entirely clear to me what this means. Mark takes a dig at the Catholic hierarchy, saying, "Way to go, bishops!", but over at USA Today's Faith & Reason blog, Cathy Lynn Grossman points out that, "The bishops have campaigned long, loudly and clearly against same-sex marriage but the Catholic Church also offers a pervasive message of social justice, an umbrella many liberal Catholics stand under when they argue for marriage equality or life issues such as abortion, contraception and end-of-life decisions." There's much for social scientists to mull over here -- I suspect that the states that rate high in support for same-sex marriage also have high levels of support for other liberal causes, and whether that is because of, or in spite of, the religious makeup of the population strikes me as an unanswered question. Also, here in New England, which is a region with high Catholic population, the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts clearly had an impact on views in neighboring states, so it's possible that for some states the religious makeup of the population is less important than proximity to Massachusetts. Still, food for thought.

(Photo, by Spencer Platt/Getty, shows a couple on their motorcycle in the annual New York City Gay Pride March on June 28, 2009.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston, is expressing opposition to a possible cut to state-subsidized health insurance coverage for some legal immigrants.

Here's the relevant portion of his most recent blog entry:

"As I do upon occasion, before I get to the events of my week, I would like to comment on an issue that is of great importance to me.

The Governor and the Legislature in the commonwealth face excruciatingly difficult choices this week. Final decisions about the budget bring together the fact of an economy in deep recession, declining state revenues and multiple human needs among the citizens of the commonwealth. Those human needs — for nutrition, housing and health care — must be a high priority for the Church and its ministry.

Our agencies — Catholic Charities, the Caritas Health Care System and the Office of Planning and Urban Affairs — are stretched to the limit these days, but that is the work we should be doing.

A particular issue of concern to me is the possibility that funding for health coverage for 28,000 legal immigrants may be cut in whole or in part. The Church, through Catholic Charities and through our parishes, is in direct and regular service of the immigrant community.

My hope and my request is that a way can be found to sustain health coverage for these legal members of our community. Their resources are few and their support system is always stretched thin. The commonwealth has done a very commendable job of providing health care to the citizens of Massachusetts. It would be a tragic mistake to let these 28,000 members of our community lose access to the precious good of health care."

(Photo, by John Blanding of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston in Gloucester on June 28, 2009.)

Last night I went to see the premiere of a new play, "What is the Cause of Thunder,'' at the Williamstown Theatre Festival, and once again was struck by how much religious questions permeate American culture.

The play, by Noah Haidle, is about a longtime soap opera actress who confuses her on-screen and off-screen existences, with serious consequences for her mental health and her relationship with the only other real person in her life, her pregnant daughter. The soap actress, Ada, played by Wendie Malick, prays relentlessly, even obsessively, but isn't sure she's being heard, or whether there is even anyone to hear her. The play opens with a scene in which a nun proclaims that God has died, and then sets off on a comedic journey through Ada's soap scenes, her interactions with her daughter, and her heavenly dreams, through all of which Ada repeatedly questions why life on earth is miserable, and imagines that God might apologize for what God has and has not done.

As always, I'll leave the review to the critics (and I think the Globe will have a review soon), but if you're in the Berkshires over the next week and interested in these questions, you might want to take a look.

(Photo, by T. Charles Erickson/Williamstown Theatre Festival, shows Wendie Malick and Betty Gilpin in "What is the Cause of Thunder?")

Voice of the Faithful isn't closing its national office after all, at least not now. The organization, which on July 13 warned that it might have to shutter its Needham headquarters absent $60,000 to survive the summer, yesterday said it has raised the money it needs to pay its staff until the organization comes up with a plan for its longer-term survival.

Here is the statement from Voice of the Faithful:

"One week after announcing an urgent need for financial support, Voice of the Faithful reports that donors have responded with more than $63,000 to date and still coming.

'We are deeply grateful to our many generous donors and encouraged by their sentiments of support,' said Bill Casey, Chairman of the Board of Trustees. 'Their response is a testament to the important work that Voice of the Faithful does. It also reinvigorates the organization as we work toward the release of new initiatives aimed at transforming the Catholic Church.

'Now we begin to build a stable base of predictable income to sustain our ongoing operations. We will invite our members to support that effort when we roll out the Strategic Plan in early August.'

VOTF members are also completing plans for the 2009 National VOTF Convention in Long Island, New York, October 30-31—an event that will bring members together in a national gathering."

Two 17th century beaded wampum belts made by Native Americans in New England for French Jesuit missionaries as expressions of Catholic faith have been shipped from a cathedral in France to a museum in Vermont where they are now on display.

Alexis Berthier, the spokesman for the Consulate General of France in Boston said the belts were given to the missionaries "as a sign of friendship" and that "they also signaled the conversion of some of these Native American people."

Here is some more detail from the Shelburne Museum, where the belts are on display until July 31:

"Wampum Belts from Chartres Cathedral Treasury showcases two rare masterpieces of Native American art on loan from the Bishop of Chartres and the Musee des Beaux-Arts de Chartres and on view in the United States for the first time. The belts will be on exhibit from July 2 through July 31.

'These belts are a symbol of the rich history of our region and demonstrate the historic connection between the French in North America and their relationship with the Abenaki and Huron peoples,' said Shelburne Museum Director Stephan Jost. 'The caliber of craftsmanship is truly extraordinary and reflects the sophistication of the people who created them.'

Wampum belts are traditional to native peoples from the Eastern woodlands and are an art form used to record important events such as engagements, marriage, funerals or treaties. The two belts on view at Shelburne were made in the 17th century. The Huron belt was made in 1678 and the Abenaki belt was made in 1691 or earlier. Noting the conversion to Catholicism by some of the native peoples, the belts were given to the French Jesuit order. The belts were taken to France and placed in the Cathedral Treasury of Chartres in acknowledgment of their importance."

Museum spokeswoman Leslie Wright tells me that the Latin on the belts "dates to the time of the druids, who predated the Jesuits at Chartres." She said the Huron belt, which is made of shell, glass, and natural fiber or animal hide, translates, "From the Hurons to the Virgin about to give birth,'' and the Abenaki belt, made of the same materials, translates, "To the Virgin Mother, Abenaki"

(Images, courtesy of the Shelburne Museum, are of the Huron Wampum Belt on loan from the Bishop of Chartres and the Musée des Beaux-Arts de Chartres.)

Faithful readers of this blog will recall my struggles with the Pope John Paul II hybrid tea rose bushes that I won at a silent auction at last fall's convention of the Religion Newswriters Association and planted alongside my driveway. One of the bushes has since, sadly, gone to meet its maker, but the other one, I am happy to report, has produced a single bloom:

The Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, has given a warm review to "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,'' praising the film for its “clear line of demarcation between good and evil, making clear that good is right, and that in some cases this involves hard work and sacrifices.”

It must be said that much of the past Christian criticism over the Potter series has come from evangelical Protestants, who have focused on its positive representation of sorcery and witchcraft. But the Catholic Church has produced its share of Potter critics, including not only a Wakefield priest who pulled Potter books from his parish school library, but also the current pope, Benedict XVI, who in 2003 (before he was pope) wrote a supportive letter to a critic of the Potter series, declaring, "It is good that you enlighten us on the Harry Potter matter, for these are subtle, barely perceptible seductions, and precisely because of that they have a profound effect and can corrupt the Christian faith in souls even before it (faith) is able to properly grow."

There has also been plenty of support for the Potter series from Christian writers -- Catholic and Protestant -- who have focused, as the current Vatican review does, on the series's depiction of the battle of good versus evil, and on Harry's clear sense of morality. The Vatican paper itself even ran a pair of dueling analyses of Potter last year, although the critique, saying that the Potter books promote "a grave lie,'' got much of the attention.

The current enthusiastic review in the Vatican newspaper of the latest Potter film may represent a change in attitude toward popular culture -- the paper also gave a surprisingly sympathetic review to "Angels and Demons" earlier this year. Or it might simply reflect an overall change in tone, or even significance, of the newspaper, which was long viewed as a semi-official voice of the church, but which has come under increasing criticism from the Catholic right for its warm coverage of President Obama. The Catholic World News says the review is "continuing an editorial trend that has bewildered many readers and roused many critics.''

The Times of London has a field day with the Vatican rave, running a story with the headline, "Not so immoral after all,'' and listing other "religious conversions" beginning with the church's change in position about whether the earth revolves around the sun.

(Photo, courtesy of Warner Brothers, shows ominous clouds over London in a scene from "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.")

Talk about taking your faith seriously: Domenico Bettinelli, Jr., a staffer at the Archdiocese of Boston, has named his baby Benedict. As in, Benedict XVI, who, as careful readers of this blog are undoubtedly aware, is the current occupant of the chair of Peter (the pope!).

I e-mailed Dom, whose official title is manager of gifts processing and donor relations at the Catholic Foundation, to ask about the name choice. Here's his response:

"We had several reasons for choosing the name Benedict Joseph, which I guess is not unlike the experience of most parents. As active Catholics who are serious about our faith, we love the idea of naming our son after the several saints named Benedict, including St. Benedict of Norcia, whose feast day is Saturday, and St. Benedict of Poland, whose feast day was (July 9), my son's birth day.

Then there is our current Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI. Melanie and I are both big fans of the Pope, ever since he was still Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Of course, as much as we love our Pope, if he had picked as a pontifical name something a little less common like Pius, Urban, or Innocent I don't think we'd have saddled our son with it. But like my many friends who showed their esteem for Pope John Paul by naming their sons after him, I think this trend is continuing with our present Holy Father and we're happy to be part of it.

And then the third reason is that my father-in-law's middle name is Benedict, which was his Confirmation name and his religious name as a secular Carmelite. So we did it to honor him as well.

I'm still holding out hope to name a future son Pier Giorgio after my favorite beati Bl. Pier Giorgio Frassati, but Melanie still needs some convincing on that one."

Of course, I learned about this from Dom's blog, which brings up another point: the real saint in the family must be his wife, because not only did Dom liveblog the birth (sort of), but he also tweeted, facebooked, and flickr'd his way through it.

(Photo, of baby Benedict and father Dom Bettinelli, courtesy of the proud father.)

Voice of the Faithful, the Catholic reform group founded in Wellesley at the height of the sexual abuse crisis, is running out of money and warning that it may close its national office absent an infusion of funds. The organization has had three goals -- supporting abuse victims, supporting "priests of integrity,'' and 'to shape structural change within the Catholic Church.'' That third goal has made it the subject of criticism from some conservatives, and its affiliates have been barred from meeting on church property in some dioceses. But the organization has also been welcomed by some Catholics distraught by what they learned about their church during the abuse crisis and eager for a forum to discuss possible changes.

UPDATE: I just spoke with Bill Casey, the chairman of the VOTF board, who tells me the existence of the organization is not in doubt, but that at stake is the organization's national headquarters, which recently moved from Newton to Needham in an effort to save money. He said the organization needs $60,000 to maintain the office through the summer, at which point it plans to fundraise based on a new strategic plan; if the group can't raise the money, it will close the national office and continue as an all-volunteer network of organizational affiliates. Currently, he said, the organization has 30,000 to 35,000 names in its database, of which it has e-mail addresses for about 20,000 folks, and there are between 60 and 70 parish or diocese-based affiliates or chapters.

Here is the announcement the organization e-mailed its members today:

"With great heaviness of heart, we write to inform you that VOTF is at the crossroads of financial survival and we need your immediate help in order to keep it going.

No U.S. business or organization (from the biggest corporate entity to the smallest non-profit) has been immune from the devastating downturn in the economy over the past 1-2 years. As we know all too well from unyielding media reports, that downturn has rippled into communities and households, confirming worst expectations and fears.

During the past two years, the Board of Trustees approved substantial reductions in VOTF's operating budget as decreases in revenue reflected the emerging and now full economic downturn in our country. Between FY 08 and 09, the Board approved a budget reduction of over 30%. As the economy and our revenue stream worsened appreciably, in April 2009, the Board reduced the FY 09 budget by another 35% (nearly $235,000 more). To accomplish this huge drop, the Board made painful cuts in staff salaries and contractor support; relocated the office to a smaller facility at about half the monthly rental costs; and curtailed costly mailings intended to raise revenue. Throughout this period, staff, contractors and volunteers demonstrated remarkable resolve in doing even more with less.

At the same time, the Board continued an aggressive outreach to members, friends, and donors to raise more revenue, as you are no doubt painfully aware from a variety of appeals and fund-raisers communicated in emails and editions of In The Vineyard.

Cash reserves allowed VOTF to continue operations but only by a very thin margin. The Board's plan was to generate a substantial infusion of revenue when the Officers rolled out a comprehensive Strategic Plan in early August. Based on the enthusiastic response from dozens of VOTF members who have been bringing the Strategic Plan to life for several months, we expected that it would result in a revitalization of members' energy at regional and local levels, and with it, a level of necessary revenue as members and donors recognized the opportunity for a renewed voice and influence in achieving VOTF's mission and goals. Previews of the Strategic Plan have been included in several recent editions of In The Vineyard.

Unfortunately, our financial condition has deteriorated before the rollout the Strategic Plan. As of early July, VOTF's reserves have all but been depleted, and it faces the prospects of not being able to pay for recurring costs during July and beyond. After meeting in an emergency session on July 9, the Board foresaw two realistic options: (1) declare that VOTF could not continue to operate and begin to wind it down, or (2) appeal to members to fund operations in the short term and seek sustained funding based on an anticipated enthusiastic response to the Strategic Plan. If the latter is successful, the Board will develop a downsizing plan commensurate with sustained funding expectations, supplemented where feasible with additional volunteer help.

Many of you have labored tirelessly since 2002 and given generously of your time and treasures to sustain the dream of VOTF's mission: To provide a prayerful voice, attentive to the Spirit, through which the Faithful can actively participate in the governance and guidance of the Catholic Church. We can make the difference in supporting that dream, but only if collectively we raise the revenue to do so.

As a result, the Board is soliciting from its members (and any friends or supporters that you can reach) a short-term infusion of $60,000 by the end of July (our current monthly costs run about $30,000 per month). We know this is a painful choice for you, especially in a very short time, but we ask you nonetheless to go to www.votf.org, click Donate at the top of the page, and make whatever generous contribution you can make, NO LATER THAN JULY 31. Or you can mail a check to VOTF, P.O. Box 423, Newton, MA 02464 (same address as previous facility until it is changed later).

If we receive this level of funding by the end of July, we will be able to continue operations for July and August, disseminate the Strategic Plan in the first week in August, and generate what we hope will be renewed energy and revenue based on the attraction of that plan. Going forward, membership will include an annual financial commitment—a feature common to most other similar organizations.

If reality dictates otherwise, either by July 31 or in response to the Strategic Plan, the Board will exercise its fiduciary responsibilities to begin the steps necessary to close the national office, yet seek to continue VOTF's mission and goals through volunteers, affiliates and members at the national and local levels.

In any event, the conference scheduled on Long Island in October will continue since the Long Island affiliate will administer it as it has done with annual conferences on Long Island for several years.

With great hope in the Spirit to lead us,

Dan Bartley, President
Bill Casey, Chair of the Board of Trustees"

The Catholic Key Blog, by the staff of the newspaper for the Diocese of Kansas City - St. Joseph in Missouri, posts an item headlined, "VOTF is in the Tank - Revenue Slides,'' and blogger Jack Smith opines, "I suspect that more than the economy, decline in receipts for VOTF is reflective of the fact that most big priest sexual abuse cases are now settled. Being able to stage a protest / press photo-op on the front steps of any chancery in the U.S. whenever a settlement is close seems to be a lot more lucrative than holding conferences on church management structure."

In the Ideas section of today's Globe, I have a story looking at medical miracles and the canonization process in light of the Vatican's recent announcement that the healing of a local man's back pain was a miracle attributable to Cardinal John Henry Newman, who died more than a century ago and is now a candidate for sainthood. An excerpt:

"The very idea of miracles may seem deeply at odds with modernity - the word, for many, conjures up images of biblical events like the parting of the Red Sea, or the raising of Lazarus; or paranormal phenomena, like weeping statues and apparitions of the Virgin Mary. But miracles remain an official part of the church bureaucracy, in large part because two official miracles are necessary before someone can be declared a saint - one for beatification, and the second for canonization.

Pope John Paul II, in fact, canonized people at a record-breaking rate, and Benedict, although acting at a slower pace than his predecessor, is still declaring saints in historically high numbers. So over the last several decades, there has been a paradoxical confluence of two phenomena: at the same time that medical science has become increasingly adept at explaining how the human body heals, the Roman Catholic Church is in need of - and finding - an increasing number of inexplicable healings. The result is an unusual process, in which the Vatican has had to develop a medical expertise to help separate remarkable but understandable recoveries from those healings for which medicine has no explanation."

The Rev. James Martin, an associate editor at America magazine and the author of "My Life with the Saints,'' is quoted in the story; today he blogged about his own views on miracles, writing:

"To my mind--and I'm being serious here--I figure that if God can create the heavens and the earth, raise his son from the dead, and so on (to say nothing of what his son's miracles during his earthly ministry) then something like healing someone from an incurable disease in the modern world is, by comparison, relatively easy. Plus, I've read plenty of medical reports surrounding the many verified miracles at Lourdes. And I've also seen and heard about what I would call 'minor' miracles in people's lives that remain inexplicable.

But belief in miracles raises a very difficult question for those who believe in them (including me): Why is one person "cured" while another remains ill? This is where those who do not believe in miracles have a very strong case: for if you admit of the possibility of miracles, then you have to grapple with the question of whether this means that God plays favorites. And many of my friends simply cannot abide that image of God."

Several folks have now asked about the photo of Michelle Obama dressed in black and wearing a veil while visiting the pope today, and it's triggering a bit of discussion on-line. I've poked around and am not coming up with an entirely satisfactory explanation, other than that the veil is a sign of respect and a nod to tradition. The practice is not universally honored -- Raisa Gorbachev once caused a bit of a stir by greeting the pope dressed in red -- but the archives show a lot of examples of prominent women who have followed the practice, including the photo above, which shows Pope Benedict XVI earlier this week arriving for a meeting with some of the First Ladies taking part in a G8 summit in L'Aquila, Italy.

Here's a photo of Michelle Obama, with her husband and the pope, at the Vatican today:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the ailing scion of the nation's most famous Catholic family, drafted a personal letter to Pope Benedict XVI that was hand-delivered to the Vatican today by President Obama.

Although neither the Vatican nor Kennedy's office released details of the letter, and the White House said the president hadn't read it, the missive immediately captured the imagination of Catholics, reinforcing both the sense of the senator as someone reaching out for help, and reminding the nation of the special place the Kennedys have held in American Catholic lore.

The president, who has become a close ally of Kennedy since the storied Massachusetts Democrat endorsed his presidential campaign, asked the pope to pray for the senator during a meeting at the Vatican, and then, after the meeting ended, phoned the senator and talked with him for ten minutes to fill him in on the conversation.

"I find it quite moving,'' said the Rev. Robert P. Imbelli, a Catholic theologian at Boston College. "Clearly, when one Catholic asks another to pray for him, this is a sign both of vulnerability and of trust. To have the opportunity to ask that of the pope is, in addition, a sign of devotion and respect for the one Catholics hold to be the successor of St. Peter with a special role in maintaining the unity and apostolic tradition of the church.''

And R. Scott Appleby, a historian at the University of Notre Dame, said, "Catholicism as a cultural and ethnic identity clearly runs deep in the Kennedy clan. Among individual members, the depth of commitment to the Church itself varies—as with many Catholic families. It seems clear, and it is poignant and instructive, that Senator Kennedy seeks peace and reconciliation with 'Holy Mother Church' as he nears the end of his earthly life."

Kennedy's office declined to release the letter or discuss its contents; his spokeswoman, Melissa Wagoner, e-mailed, "It's a personal letter. End of story."

But the act of reaching out to the pope, while the senator is struggling with brain cancer, is in many ways a traditional act of a religious person reaching out to a spiritual leader, particularly when struggling with illness or other trouble.

"Catholics, and so many others, reach out for prayers in their time of need, as Senator Kennedy does so now,'' said Sister Mary Ann Walsh , the spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "The entire Catholic community prays at Sunday Mass for the sick and for government leaders during the Prayer of the Faithful and their prayers are with him. Senator Kennedy recognizes the prayerfulness of the Holy Father and his reaching out to the head of the Catholic Church is a very understandable human and Catholic action."

The Rev. Thomas J. Reese , a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, also noted that the delivery of the letter reflects the president's acknowledgment of the role played by the pope for Catholics.

"This kindness to Kennedy shows that Obama recognizes the pope is a pastor and not just a world leader,'' Reese said.

The Kennedys have long had a special relationship with the Catholic Church by virtue of their prominence in American politics. Kennedy's father, Joseph P. Kennedy , was an ambassador to Britain when he represented the United States at the coronation of Pope Pius XII back in 1939, and since that time many members of the Kennedy family have met with various popes. When Senator Kennedy's older brother, John F. Kennedy , was running for president in 1960, he had to battle anti-Catholic allegations that he would be controlled by the Vatican; he famously overcame such concerns to become the nation's first Catholic president, a fact the White House cited yesterday in announcing its delivery of a letter from the senator to the pope.

"The president delivered a letter from Senator Kennedy to the Holy Father,'' Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough , whose brother is a priest and who has talked in recent days about the impact of Catholic social teaching on his own views, told reporters aboard Air Force One after the meeting. "He also asked that the Holy Father pray for Senator Kennedy, who as we all know is ill, and whose brother obviously broke an important barrier in our country by being the first Catholic president elected of the United States."

Senator Kennedy is at once one of the most prominent and most controversial figures in American Catholicism -- prominent because of his brother's place in history, and his own lengthy career as the leading liberal lion of the senate, but controversial because of his support for abortion rights and gay rights and occasionally because of his own personal failings and misdeeds. But he has largely ignored the periodic denunciations of his Catholic-ness from conservatives within the church. After his mother died, he attended daily Mass for a year; before he got sick, he periodically attended Mass in Washington and on the Cape, and attended key ceremonies of the Archdiocese of Boston and other major church events, including the funeral of Pope John Paul II in Rome.

In 2005, when Benedict -- then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- was elected to the papacy, Kennedy issued a congratulatory statement, saying, "Vicki and I congratulate Pope Benedict XVI and pray that his pontificate will bring healing to the entire world and to all people of every faith."

Then last year, when Benedict visited the United States, Kennedy issued a statement welcoming him, and attended the papal Mass at Nationals Park in Washington, declaring, “Pope Benedict’s visit to the United States and our capital city is an extraordinary opportunity to strengthen and reflect on the power of faith during this difficult time for our country and for the entire world.”

(Photo, by Getty Images, shows Pope Benedict XVI greeting First Lady Michelle Obama and President Obama at the Vatican today, July 10, 2009.)

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough just briefed the news media aboard Air Force One (en route from Rome to Accra) about today's meeting between President Obama and Pope Benedict XVI. Note that the president gave the pope a letter from Senator Kennedy (deep in transcript):

"MR. McDONOUGH: Hey, everybody. We just had a short talk with the President about his meeting with the Holy Father. Before the President met with the Holy Father, he spent about 10 or -- yes, about 10 minutes with Cardinal Bertone. They talked about a range of issues. The Cardinal also, underscoring the fact that they had little -- insufficient time, underscored that he would share a longer note with the President, which he looks very much forward to receiving. FULL ENTRY

The pope and the president have met. I'm still waiting for the statements and briefings, but in the meantime, here's a photo of the happy pair, plus first lady Michelle Obama, posing for photographers after their conversation at the Vatican:

My editor asks why Michelle Obama is dressed in black and veiled. Here's an attempt at an answer from USA Today, tackling the same question when first lady Laura Bush visited the pope in 2006. Bottom line: tradition.

(Photo by Jason Reed/Reuters)

Tomorrow (Friday) is the much-anticipated first meeting between President Obama and Pope Benedict XVI, and there's lots of discussion about what to expect. The two men have shared interests in economic and environmental issues, but those have generally been overshadowed by the abortion divide, which has dominated reaction to the Obama presidency by the Catholic church hierarchy in the United States.

This afternoon, Catholic Democrats held a teleconference to talk about the pope's recent encyclical and tomorrow's meeting; while on the phone, I asked US Representatives Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Rosa L. DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat, whether they view the pope-president meeting as largely symbolic, or as having some more substantive significance.

Here's what McGovern, who represents central and southeastern Massachusetts, including Worcester, had to say:

"In the past, they have been symbolic meetings that have amounted to more than photo ops and a nice press release. But my sense of President Obama is that he doesn't do symbolism. He's not going through the motions. This is a man who ran for president with a deep desire to change the world for the better, and I believe that he really wants to change things. And I think this pope, with the encyclical that he has issued, has put forward a framework, not just for the US, but for the world. I have high expectations for this meeting. I believe this meeting has the potential to have a lasting impact, not only to inspire, but to provide political cover to move forward in some areas that have been difficult for politicians to deal with – the delicate crisis in the MidEast, or poverty, or hunger. My hope and my expectation is that it will be about real things, and results-oriented. I'm very, very hopeful.''

And here's DeLauro, who represents south central Connecticut, including New Haven:

There was a minor bombing (if there is such a thing) of a Catholic parish in Brockton over the weekend. Globe correspondent Matt Collette talked with Brockton Fire Chief Ken Galligan, who described the damage as minor, but said the explosives could have caused serious damage had they not burned out on their own. There is no indication of a motive -- this could be an act of vandalism, or some kind of hate crime. Here's what Galligan said:

"After the 7:30 a.m. Mass on Sunday, someone discovered two Molotov cocktails – described as glass bottles filled with paper towels and a flammable liquid – between a row of pews on the floor of the St. Edith Stein Church (left) in Brockton. What it looks like now is somebody from outside threw these Molotov cocktails through the window onto the wooden floor. The floor was scorched, but the Molotov cocktails apparently burned themselves out."

The church’s co-pastor, the Rev. Brian P. Smith, declined to comment and referred questions to the Archdiocese of Boston. Archdiocesan spokesman Terrence C. Donilon e-mailed a statement:

"Brockton Police and Fire are investigating an incident which occurred this weekend at St. Edith Stein Church. Because of the ongoing investigation we respectfully decline comment at this time. We are grateful that no injuries and no damage was sustained and we pray for those responsible for this unfortunate incident this past weekend."

The Brockton Enterprise has a story with further details on its web site.

(Photo courtesy of the Archdiocese of Boston.)

The Massachusetts Bible Society, marking 200 years of handing out millions of Bibles to the poor and the imprisoned, this afternoon staged a small-scale re-enactment of its founding in the warm embrace of the round blue state Senate chamber.

A few dozen supporters of the organization, some dressed in knickers, top hats, bowties or bonnets, read from the founding documents, now tinged with irony, about the aspirations and arguments of Protestant denominations that then wielded considerable power and influence in the Bay State.

The event featured readings from early writings of the Bible Society’s while male Protestant founders, most of them Harvard-educated, who could hardly have imagined the organization's leadership of today: the Bible society’s current president is a Catholic priest, the Rev. Walter H. Cuenin, and its executive director is a woman, the Rev. Anne Robertson (above), who is a Methodist minister. But two centuries of modernization has not changed all atop Beacon Hill: as the clergy and lay people of today held their re-enactment, a small gray mouse darted out from beneath the golden drapes behind the podium and scurried unimpeded across the Senate carpet.

The Bible Society, which was the third such organization in the early United States, is one of the lesser-known relics of Massachusetts’ rich religious past, and has undergone considerable downsizing in recent years, selling its longtime headquarters on Bromfield Street, closing its bookstores, and moving its small staff first to the Congregational House on Beacon Street and then, in December, to the campus of Andover Newton Theological School in Newton. The organization’s rare Bibles collection now resides at Boston University, and its printed newsletter is now on-line only. Its endowment, which was $6.4 million a year ago, is now about $3.3 million.

The organization, which once employed 18 colporteurs who traveled around distributing Bibles door-to-door and had a special ministry to the state’s many newly arriving immigrants, still distributes Bibles in prisons, hospitals, on campuses, and through programs for the homeless and the poor. The organization also hosts lectures and publishes articles. But the organization is also trying to reinvent itself for the Internet Age, increasingly emphasizing its web site, and now with a Facebook page, a YouTube channel, and a Twitter feed, and it recently spent $500,000 to construct a media center at Andover Newton that is intended for use training clergy and congregations on use of technology.

“At one time, everybody who was anybody had not only heard of the Mass. Bible Society but was part of it,’’ Robertson said in an interview. “We still have a message, but today we are focusing more on Biblical literacy, understanding and dialogue.’’

In an address to the society members before a ceremonial re-signing of the founding charter (below), Robertson outlined the argument for the future of the organization, which in recent years has emphasized its place as home for a liberal alternative to more evangelical readings of the Bible. The organization has encouraged an interpretive, rather than literal, reading of the Bible.

“Is it a tough road to convince people that the Bible is relevant to our age? Yes, it is,’’ Robertson said. “Is it tougher still to reach out and take the Bible back from those who have ground its contents to such a sharp point that more people seem to feel wounded by it than helped? Yes, it is.’’

After the ceremony, the Bible Society members strolled over to the Omni Parker House for a period dinner featuring turnip soup and pink pancakes (crepes).

Cuenin, the Catholic chaplain at Brandeis and the first Catholic priest to serve as president, said he wanted to be involved with the organization in part because of its history and in part to make sure Catholics were visible in an organization that was long Protestant-only.

“What we’ve been trying to do is figure out where we go for the future, and figure out the electronic means of spreading the Bible,’’ he said. “Two hundred years ago, the purpose was to give out Bibles, but today people have Bibles, so that’s not a big deal. The question is, how do we make it usable?”

Cuenin and Robertson both emphasized the Society’s role in encouraging a debate about the meanings of the Bible in today’s society.

“I’m someone who believes in interpreting the Bible, and not following it literally, and that’s what my church teaches,’’ Cuenin said. “This society would promote an understanding of the Scripture that is more contemporary and open to historical criticism.’’

(Photos, by Yoon S. Byun/Globe staff, show the Massachusetts Bible Society celebrating its bicentennial by reenacting its founding in the Senate chamber of the Massachusetts State House on July 6, 2009.)

President Obama this morning met with a select group of reporters for Catholic publications, as well as the religion reporter for the Washington Post. Obama outlined his thoughts on the upcoming visit to the pope, his relationship with American bishops, the abortion issue, economic justice, and the Middle East. There was no major news, but Obama revealed a couple things I had not previously known about his faith life -- first, that he is considering choosing a group of churches in Washington, rather than a single congregation, to reduce the impact of his presence on any one community. And second, the president said that Joshua DuBois, the president's faith adviser, sends Obama's BlackBerry a devotional prayer each morning for the president to reflect on.

The president opened with a preview of his meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, which is scheduled to take place July 10 at the Vatican:

Karl Malden, the film actor who died yesterday at 97, is being remembered in religionland for his Academy Award-nominated portrayal of a tough dockside priest, Father Pete Barry, in the 1954 film "On the Waterfront.'' Malden's role is one of the most famous depictions of a Catholic priest on film. The role was inspired by the real life of a Jesuit priest, the Rev. John Corridan, who died 25 years ago today. America magazine, the Jesuit weekly, today re-posts an explanatory piece that first appeared in Company, another Jesuit publication. An excerpt:

"After meeting the street-smart, earthy Corridan at Xavier, [director Elia] Kazan grilled [writer Budd] Schulberg: 'Are you sure he's a priest? Maybe he's working there for the waterfront rebels in disguise.' Schulberg viewed Corridan as 'the antidote to the stereotyped Barry Fitzgerald-Bing Crosby' portrayal of the priesthood 'so dear to Hollywood hearts.' Corridan agreed and exhorted Kazan and Schulberg to 'make a "Going My Way" with substance.'

The project was turned down by every major studio in Hollywood before finally being rescued by independent producer Sam Spiegel. Corridan served as adviser on the film and helped secure clearances from the Port Authority for the use of piers in Hoboken, where the film was shot in late autumn 1953. He also provided the filmmakers with his speeches and writings on waterfront conditions, including the famous 'Christ is on the waterfront' speech he had first presented at a Jersey City chapter of the Knights of Columbus in 1948. In 'On the Waterfront,' Father Pete Barry (Karl Malden) provides a stirring rendition of the speech over the body of a slain longshoreman. Kazan and Schulberg refused repeated demands by the producers to shorten the scene, which is the moral core of the film since it persuades longshoreman Terry Malloy (Marlon Brando) to follow his conscience and testify against waterfront criminals."

And, from the Internet Movie Database, a famous exchange from that scene between Brando's Terry Malloy and Malden's Father Barry:

Terry: If I spill, my life ain't worth a nickel.
Father Barry: And how much is your soul worth if you don't?

Over at dotCommonweal, Mollie Wilson O'Reilly recalls her first viewing of the film, just a few years back:

"I didn’t know going in that it was, at least in part, a story about a heroic priest...In fact, 'On the Waterfront' belongs on parish film-fest rosters alongside chestnuts like 'Boys Town' and 'The Bells of St. Mary’s' (and way ahead of silly epics like 'The Robe'). I would certainly advocate screening it in this 'year of the priest.' And as Philip T. Hartung wrote in Commonweal in 1954, 'Karl Malden’s portrayal of the courageous priest is as outstanding as the author’s characterization of the part.'"

(Photo, from the Globe archives, shows Karl Malden (third from left, in Roman collar) in a scene from the 1954 film "On the Waterfront.")

I was wondering how long I could hold out before blogging about Michael Jackson, and now I know the answer: six days.

In those days since the King of Pop died, I've now seen so many items about his faith that my head is starting to spin. He was a Jehovah's Witness. A Muslim. He accepted Jesus before he died. The Vatican loved him, but was that right? There's even a Jewish angle of sorts. Not to mention the unending discussion of what it means to call him an icon, or an idol. Some folks have suggested that his funeral will shed some light on his final faith practices, but I'm not holding out much hope for that.

Here is a brief Michael Jackson religion roundup. Make of it what you will:

• Jackson was raised a Jehovah's Witness, and there have been a variety of unconfirmed reports that at some point he was disfellowshipped by the Witnesses. Back in 2000, Jackson penned an essay for Beliefnet about his relationship to the Sabbath, and in it he discussed doorbelling to preach for the Witnesses:
  

  "Sundays were my day for 'Pioneering,' the term used for the missionary work that Jehovah's Witnesses do. We would spend the day in the suburbs of Southern California, going door to door or making the rounds of a shopping mall, distributing our Watchtower magazine. I continued my pioneering work for years and years after my career had been launched."

  
  
• Jackson's brother Jermaine is a Muslim, and there were some reports during Michael's life that he, too, converted to Islam. The Times of London rounds up the evidence in an item headlined, "Was Michael Jackson Muslim?"; there was also a roundup on Global Voices. Imam Zaid Shakir blogged about Jackson's conversion to Islam, and then retracted his blog item, concluding, "There have been many reports throughout the media concerning Michael becoming Muslim. Allah knows best as to their veracity.'' Perhaps my favorite development on the role of Islam in the Michael Jackson story, though, was this correction that ran Saturday in The New York Times, revising a comment that Jermaine Jackson made at the hospital where Michael Jackson died:
  

  "The article...misstated part of a comment that Mr. Jackson’s brother Jermaine offered for Mr. Jackson after speaking with reporters. He said, “May Allah be with you always,” not “May our love be with you always.”

• Not to be outdone, Christianity Today tackles the question, "Was Michael Jackson a Christian?" The evangelical magazine explores, and then essentially debunks, suggestions that Jackson accepted Jesus just before his death. "Initial rumors that the King of Pop had accepted Christ may have been false,'' the magazine concludes.

• The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, meanwhile, offers a story on Michael Jackson's "Jewish Ties,'' which turn out to be quite complex -- he said some offensive things, he was friends with a rabbi, he flirted with kabbalah (who didn't?) and it's possible that at least two of his children are technically Jewish because Jackson's ex-wife Debbie Rowe, who has been thought to be the biological mother of the children, is Jewish. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, a onetime friend of Jackson, wrote a generous appraisal for Beliefnet; Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the head of the Reform movement, offers a far more critical assessment, asking,
  

  "Is it really necessary, however, now that he is dead, for those who speak in the name of the Jewish community to be joining in the adulation and offering excuses for his actions?"

  
  
• Some in the Catholic community are similarly conflicted. L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, published a generous appreciation of Jackson's legacy, prompting Tom Heneghan of Reuters to observe: "It’s not every day that the Vatican newspaper suggests that a man accused of pedophilia and said to have converted to Islam might be immortal. But that’s what L’Osservatore Romano did today." Over at American Papist, Thomas Peters is not amused, calling the Vatican paper's assessment "fawning'' and suggesting that it could never have appeared in a parish newsletter:
  

  "Jackson, it should be noted, from all outside accounts, lived a tortured existence and the circumstances of his death should prompt an outpouring of fervent prayers for his soul, not these gushing, Hollywood-esque bon mots about how his "myth" will survive "serious and shameful" accusations. All the artistic success in the world, we must realize, is a basket of straw if your personal life was a spiritual, human wreck. I really dig Michael Jackson's music, but as a Catholic, I don't have to buy into the myth that great art makes a great man. Michael Jackson's best chance to "never die" is the mercy of Christ, not his best-selling record."

  
  

"Jackson was a man of multiple identities, which helped account for his enormous worldwide popularity. It seems clear that he was deeply traumatized by his rough show business childhood, and that things happened to him to arrest his development. Just as a stem cell can grow into any organ, Michael's eternal boyishness made him a chameleon. Increasingly androgynous, he expressed both male and female. A boy and yet a father, he was both child and adult. In part because of his vitiligo, he interrogated his blackness and became, like some other powerful and wealthy African-Americans of his generation, racially ambiguous. Toward the end of his life he bridged his family's Jehovah's Witness brand of Christianity with a profound interest in Islam. He was all things to all people in part precisely because of his Peter Pan syndrome. A child can grow up to become anything, after all."

And then there were 291.

The Archdiocese of Boston, which had 357 parishes back in 2002, is consolidating another pair of parishes tomorrow. Sacred Heart‐St. James (left) in Groton and Saint Joseph (right) in Pepperell will merge, forming a new parish, Our Lady of Grace. But this transition, unlike some in the past, appears to be largely peaceful. The churches, located about 8 miles apart, have shared a pastor for three years, and for the time being the new parish will hold Masses in the existing buildings, so the changes for worshipers in the short-term are relatively minor -- a consolidation of the offices, and a slight reduction in the Mass schedule. Over the long term the community hopes to construct a new parish campus, with church, rectory, and parish center, on the town line, that would replace the existing buildings.

The congregations are relatively small for Catholic parishes in the Archdiocese of Boston -- each parish currently has about 750 families, and average weekend Mass attendance runs between 500 and 600 at each church. The Groton parish is itself the result of a previous merger, in 2003, and is now trying to sell one of its church buildings and parish halls. The new parish will include not only Groton and Pepperell, but also Dunstable.

This afternoon I spoke with the Rev. Paul L. Ring, pastor of the parishes. Here's what he had to say:

Q: Is this related to the archdiocesan reconfiguration that began in 2004?
A: What happened was, back a number of years ago, during the reconfiguration, when we sat down as a cluster, it was given to us to figure out which parishes would be closed within the cluster. The cluster asked the archdiocese for a different tack, and so the archdiocese asked them to come up with a plan.

Q: How did you come up with the new name?
A: People were asked to submit names, and we came up with three that we submitted to the cardinal, and he chose. "Our Lady of Grace" comes about because a number of our people have a deep affinity for the Blessed Mother, so a number of "Our Lady" appellations were chosen. And we felt grace was needed in abundance to get through this process. Also, Lydia Longley, credited as the first American nun, was a resident of Groton, and she belonged to the School Sisters of Notre Dame, which is French for Our Lady, so that was another rationale.

Q: How are people reacting to the merger?
A: By and large the folks are happy about this, because it gives us a future. I've been encouraging folks to understand that this was the best course of action, not only for the survival of our two communities, but to build the ministries and the kingdom here in the Nashoba Valley.

(Parish photos courtesy of the Archdiocese of Boston.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's decision to require Caritas Christi Health Care to end its short-lived joint venture with Centene Corp. is generating mixed reaction among his fellow antiabortion activists, many of whom had pushed quite strongly for him to intervene. As the decision, which Kay Lazar and I reported in Saturday's Globe, rippled through the blogosphere, the activists were generally pleased with the development, but differed about whether it went far enough.

O'Malley himself posted the news on his blog Friday night, and made it clear he was upbeat about his decision. "I am happy to share with you the following statement issued this evening by Caritas Christi concerning its decision to withdraw its membership in the CeltiCare Health Plan while continuing its commitment to serve the needs of the poor among us,'' he wrote, before posting a copy of the news release.

The American Life League, which had been quite critical, offered unqualified praise for the decision:

"We profoundly thank Cardinal O’Malley for his courage, leadership and pastoral concern for the health and well-being of those youngest members of his archdiocese. He has set a beautiful example of dedication and charity for those poorest of the poor – the preborn.

Cardinal O’Malley has answered our call and beat the clock as the minutes ticked away until the July 1 launch of the new CeltiCare Health Plan and the Catholic Church’s participation in the intrinsic evil of abortion."

And Massachusetts Citizens for Life, which initially had been critical of the cardinal but then adopted a more conciliatory tone, linked to my blog item breaking the news, and said, simply:

"We at Mass. Citizens for Life maintained our conviction that Cardinal Sean would do the right thing concerning the Caritas Christi arrangements. He has just announced that Caritas has pulled out of the arrangement with CeltiCare...Deo gratias!"

Others were less sanguine, noting that Caritas will remain a provider for Commonwealth Care, the new state insurance program for low-income people, which is required to cover abortion services. (Caritas explained its handling of the issue on June 11, saying in a news release, "when a patient seeks such a procedure, Caritas healthcare professionals will be clear that (a) the hospital does not perform them and (b) the patient must turn to his or her insurer for further guidance. This, in fact, is the practice currently in place in the Caritas system as we work with other insurance companies under state laws that mandate access to procedures not provided within the Caritas system. It is the path that Caritas has always followed and will follow in its engagement with CeltiCare.'')

The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts called Caritas's withdrawal from the joint venture a "partial victory,'' saying that "any continued participation by Caritas Christi in Commonwealth Care would obligate Caritas, directly or indirectly, to make abortion referrals." The statement continued:

"Caritas Christi has indicated that a woman seeking an abortion at a Caritas hospital will be sent back to her insurer. For Commonwealth Care members that insurer will be CeltiCare, which will not only procure the abortion but will provide transportation to the abortion facility. Instead of offering compassionate alternatives to abortion, Caritas Christi will still be engaged in a two-step abortion referral. Troubling questions also remain about whether Caritas has already benefited financially from this contract, and whether it continues to have an ongoing relationship with the Centene Corporation."

And Carol McKinley, a cyberactivist who has been quite critical of the archdiocese, blogged:

"Because the Cardinal and Caritas deliberately misrepresented what was happening in the arrangement until they actually got caught on the CeltiCare website with links to the abortionists they hired and their spokesperson admitted to NARAL being the Advisory Board for CeltiCare and that they had hired phone operators to answer the calls when they referred the women back to themselves to carry out and pay for the abortions, the overall consensus is disgust and a complete lack of trust that they are being forthright now about a situation they have been lying about all along."

What would these activists have Caritas do? The Lady in the Pew (Kelly Thatcher) blogs that if a woman named Judy calls and asks for an abortion:

"What I'm supposed to do is (a) help Judy find an alternative to abortion or (b) refer her to one of the many people and/or organizations who are very good at doing just that. Duh! One good thing, though. Until this whole issue came up, I never realized that so-called Catholic hospitals in the Archdiocese of Boston did the old Pontius Pilate number with abortion/contraception seekers. Now I do."

Harsh language, but Thatcher is not alone. Here is Diogenes, blogging for Catholic World News:

"So it appears that Caritas Christi, the healthcare agency of the Boston archdiocese, won't be involved in the abortion business after all. Thank God for that. The announcement was obviously timed (after business hours on a Friday afternoon) for minimal media exposure, and offered no details about the new arrangement. A few questions linger. Among those questions: How did a Catholic agency get involved with this proposal in the first place? Do the people at the helm of Caritas Christi understand the purpose of healthcare system with a Catholic identity? A spokeswoman for Caritas Christi told the Boston Globe: 'This is the right way to move the distraction of the debate of ownership and allow us to be a provider.' The distraction. A debate over involvement in killing unborn babies is a 'distraction' from the business of saving lives. A debate over mutilating people to make them infertile is a 'distraction' from the distinctive mission of Catholic health care."

Meanwhile, a postscript from Caritas, which is arguing that it could benefit from the withdrawal because it will make reimbursements for patient treatment easier, especially since the state decided to slow enrollment in the program. An e-mail from Caritas spokeswoman Teresa Prego:

"The dramatic reduction of new potential enrollees in the Connector plan due to the sudden elimination of auto-enrollments presented a substantial financial risk due to our involvement in the insurance partnership. We faced additional risk based on the fact we had made investments in physicians and support staff to handle the additional patients from the Connector. Our decision to withdraw from the insurance partnership allows us to mitigate our risk."

Caritas Christi Health Care, the financially challenged Catholic hospital system founded by the Archdiocese of Boston, is abruptly ending its joint venture with a Missouri-based health insurer at the insistence of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who has decided that the relationship represented too much of an entanglement between Catholic hospitals and abortion providers.

The dramatic development, just days before the joint venture was scheduled to start providing care to low-income residents as part of the state's efforts to establish near universal health coverage here, is a vindication of sorts for a variety of very conservative Catholic critics of the cardinal, who have been arguing angrily and loudly that it would be "evil" for Caritas to partner with a health provider that covers abortion services.

The development is also a setback for Caritas, because it represents the undoing of one of the most significant steps its new chief executive, Dr. Ralph de la Torre, had announced as part of his efforts to turn around the hospital system's finances. It was not immediately clear what the financial impact of the change is on Caritas, but the decision is a stark and public reminder from O'Malley to de la Torre and the general public that moral concerns will trump monetary concerns at the Catholic hospitals.

The change will have no effect on patient care, because Centene Corp., the Missouri-based insurer, will continue to participate in the state-subsidized program, called Commonwealth Care, starting Wednesday.

And Caritas will continue to participate in the program, but now simply as one of many healthcare providers hired by Centene to treat patients. Caritas's role as a provider will be the same as the role it plays when providing care to people covered by private insurers such as Blue Cross.

In keeping with the ethical directives that bind Catholic hospitals, Caritas hospitals will not provide abortion or sterilizations. Caritas already refers privately insured patients who seek such services to their insurance providers, and will do the same with state-insured patients. (Caritas spelled out its practices for handling Catholic ethical teachings in a statement June 11.)

Here is a statement just issued by Richard Lynch, chief executive of CeltiCare Health Plan of Massachusetts, the former joint venture, which is now solely owned by a Centene subsidiary:

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (right) has just confirmed that President Obama will meet with Pope Benedict XVI in Rome. Here is the transcript, courtesy of the White House:

"MR. GIBBS: Just one quick announcement before we get going with questions. On his upcoming trip overseas, on Friday, July 10, the President will visit with the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI to discuss a range of issues, including their shared belief in the dignity of all people. That's on the upcoming trip.

Q Does he have a church --

MR. GIBBS: I can assure you, April, we're not joining a church in Italy. (Laughter.)

Q I didn't ask that.

MR. GIBBS: I know. But you know what I did? I just fast-forwarded right to the follow-up. (Laughter.) I'm going to do that -- that's actually what I'm going to do all today. So if I don't answer your question, I will presume your follow-up and answer that instead. (Laughter.)

Q That's very efficient.

MR. GIBBS: Right, this will be like a 10-minute deal.

Q Is Mrs. Obama going to the Vatican, as well?

MR. GIBBS: She will, as far as I know, be on the entire trip, yes."

(Photo, by Ron Edmonds/AP, shows White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs speaking to reporters during his daily press briefing at the White House on June 24, 2009.)

Pope Benedict XVI and President Obama are scheduled to have their first meeting July 10, Catholic News Service reports:

"Discussions between popes and U.S. presidents usually focus on common concerns regarding world events and the church's concerns over issues or policies with special moral relevance. So in addition to discussing ongoing tensions in the Middle East, especially the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the situation in Iraq, Pope Benedict likely will bring up his concerns regarding abortion policy in the United States and renewed government permission for embryonic stem-cell research."

The visit, although in many ways unsurprising, will no doubt occasion an examination of the complex relationship between the president and the Catholic Church. Obama won the Catholic vote last fall, but before and after the election has been repeatedly criticized by Catholic prelates in the U.S. for his support of abortion rights. The Vatican, primarily through its newspaper, has offered a more nuanced take, to the dismay of some American Catholic conservatives. On foreign policy and environmental matters, Obama arguably is closer to the Vatican's views than was his predecessor, President George W. Bush. And because Obama is not Catholic, his visit does not raise some of the questions that came up when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is Catholic, visited the pontiff in February.

(Photo on left, by Joshua Roberts/Bloomberg News, shows President Obama at a news conference at the White House in Washington on June 23, 2009. Photo on right, by Pier Paolo Cito/AP, shows Pope Benedict XVI at Padre Pio's shrine in San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy, on June 21, 2009.)

Religious congregations are often looking for publicity, but one place they don't want to wind up is in the Boston Police Department's blog. That's where the St. Anthony Shrine winds up today, as the victim of one of the lowest of crimes -- stealing from the poorbox. Here's the blog item:

"BPD Investigates Theft of Donation Box Money at Saint Anthony’s Shrine

On Sunday, June 21, 2009, at approximately 11:28pm, Officers assigned to Area A-1 (Downtown), responded to Saint Anthony’s Shrine, 100 Arch Street, Boston, for a report of a larceny.

Upon officers’ arrival, they spoke with church custodians who informed them that they observed an unknown male steal an unknown amount of money from the wooden donation box that is located in the main chapel’s first floor. A later inspection of the box showed the bottom panel to be broken from its hinges. The suspect is described as a thin white male wearing shorts and a t-shirt. The custodians immediately reported the incident to the security officer who confronted the suspect and escorted him out of the building onto Arch Street. The suspect left the area before the arrival of BPD officers.

Area A-1 (downtown) detectives are investigating this incident. Anyone with information pertaining to the unknown suspect is urged to call detectives at 617-343-4248. Information may also be relayed anonymously by calling CrimeStoppers at 1-800-494-TIPS. You may also text “TIP” to CIME (27463)."

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows the St. Anthony Shrine on Nov. 27, 2001.)

There's been a lot of talk in the religion world about Americans' increasing habit of choosing their own religious affiliation -- survey research by Pew, in particular, has shown that half of all Americans have changed denomination during their lifetime. But there's been less attention to the ways in which Americans also have a tendency to make faith their own, accepting those beliefs and rituals that they like, and rejecting those they don't, within or outside their denominations.

I was thinking about this this morning, when I attended the funeral for a co-worker, Sarah Snyder, who died June 11 at the age of 51. Sarah was a gutsy and funny woman, and a talented journalist, who was felled much too soon by cancer. She was also, like so many folks in eastern Massachusetts (although she was not from these parts), a cradle Catholic who struggled with, but did not completely reject, her faith.

Her funeral took place at a Unitarian Universalist meetinghouse, First Parish in Milton, that is simultaneously non-creedal but, visually, quite explicitly Christian. The minister, Parisa Parsa, used a variety of generic phrases for the divine (in her bio, she refers to "that sacred power that resides in all of us") while standing in front of a large cross on the sanctuary wall and between two enormous gold-lettered quotations from the New Testament, starting with "Jesus said unto them: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind.''

As she began the worship service, Parsa declared that "Sarah loved her Catholic faith,'' but that she also struggled with it. And then, she invited the congregation to recite what the minister described as the prayer of Sarah's tradition, the Lord's Prayer, and much of the congregation recited it from memory. The rest of the service included the ambiguous back-and-forth that characterizes so much of the real faith experience of many Americans -- an excerpt from Sarah's journal trying to make sense of the afterlife; several traditional Christian hymns referring directly to Jesus; a friend describing how Sarah had tried to interpret the resurrection of Jesus this past Easter, when she knew her own body was failing; a eulogy that began with an anecdote about St. Irenaeus, an early leader of the Christian church; and a benediction that began, "In the name of God's many expressions among us.''

Of course, many Americans live in an uncertain middle ground between blind faith and avowed atheism, and we see the tension between doubt and belief all around us in any candid conversation; it's just not all that often that I see it in church, and it was interesting to watch how one service illuminated head on the contradictions that characterize so many folks' faith experience.

(Photo, by David L. Ryan, Globe staff, shows First Parish in Milton on May 12, 2000, when the steeple was under repair.)

The past year has been an eventful one for Jewish-Catholic relations – there were controversies over the revival of an allegedly anti-Semitic Good Friday prayer and the lifting of the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop, and then there was the visit by Pope Benedict XVI to Israel. In the middle of it all was Mordechay Lewy, a longtime Israeli diplomat who serves as Israel's ambassador to the Holy See.

Lewy, who previously represented Israel in Germany, Sweden and Thailand, visited Boston this week, primarily to speak at a conference at Boston College, and I spoke with him Friday morning at his hotel in Newton.

Here are edited excerpts of our conversation:

Q: Why do relations with the Vatican matter?
A: We can not afford, as a Jewish state, and we can not afford as a Jewish people, to continue on after 1,900 years of bad experience, traumatic experience with the Christian world. Now, if we take the Christian world as a whole, it's quite an amorphic body. But at least if we have a well known structure, as the Catholic Church, with a top echelon of it in Vatican, I think that would be a missed opportunity not to get along with them as much as we can, knowing that we will not ever be able to come to terms on all aspects the questions which lie between us.

In today's Globe, Rob Weisman has a story about the possibility that Caritas Christi Health Care, the Catholic hospital network founded by the Archdiocese of Boston, may purchase a struggling Rhode Island hospital, Landmark Medical Center in Woonsocket:

"Caritas Christi’s board has authorized its management to move forward with negotiations, according to three healthcare industry professionals who have been consulted about the prospective deal.

Officials at Caritas Christi and Landmark declined to confirm that a deal is close. “We have looked at Landmark Medical Center, as many others have, and have not yet decided whether we are interested in pursuing a relationship with them,’’ said Caritas Christi spokeswoman Teresa Prego. A merger would require Landmark to become a Catholic hospital."

Caritas oversees six hospitals in the Archdiocese of Boston and the Diocese of Fall River; a Landmark purchase would mark its first expansion out-of-state. Currently, there is one Catholic health care system in Rhode Island (the nation's most Catholic state), St. Joseph Health Services of Rhode Island, which includes a single hospital, Our Lady of Fatima in Providence.

"The Diocese of Providence is aware of discussions relative to Landmark Hospital in Woonsocket, however, specific details have not been made available,'' Michael Guilfoyle, the spokesman for the Providence Diocese, told me in an e-mail.

It's not immediately clear how Caritas, which has been struggling financially, would come up with the cash for the purchase, and today, on his blog, Paul Levy, the president and chief executive of Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital in Boston, wondered aloud about the intentions of Dr. Ralph de la Torre, the former Beth Israel physician who now heads Caritas Christi. Here's what Levy wrote:

"When he worked here, the current CEO of the Caritas Christi system would often look wistfully to the south and ask us to consider taking over the troubled Landmark Medical Center in Woonsocket. We put the kibosh on that idea faster that you can say, 'State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.'

Now, according to this Boston Globe story by Rob Weisman, he is pursuing the same plan. I think it's time for the SEIU to investigate this. After all, they are keen on increasing state aid to a financially troubled Massachusetts hospital in the Caritas system. They can't also be in favor of transferring those state funds and charitable assets to support a financially troubled system in another state.

What's the real play here? Perhaps it is the hope that cardiac surgery cases from Landmark would be referred to St. Elizabeth's Hospital, a Caritas subsidiary. How that would help Rhode Islanders is an interesting question. Would the Boston-based doctors and hospital be paid Massachusetts-level insurance rates, which are higher than Rhode Island's? How would Blue Cross of Rhode Island feel about that? Perhaps the doctors and hospital would be paid the lower-than-Boston-market Rhode Island rates? Would Rhode Island's Lifespan system stand by idly and watch this business leave their hospitals?

This is all too hard to understand. It seems to me that if you strap two leaky lifeboats together, they sink faster. Perhaps people could be more transparent about their intentions and hopes."

Meanwhile, Caritas's joint venture with Centene Corp., which Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston is seeking to modify in some unspecified way to address concerns raised by abortion opponents, is continuing to get some attention in the blogosphere. The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, a small organization that has been leading the charge against the Caritas venture, yesterday alleged that Caritas board members have given money to politicians who support abortion rights, prompting the American Life League's Shaun Kenney to declare, "The Archdiocese of Boston has another scandal on its hands. They are in danger of participating in state-sponsored abortion. It’s time Cardinal O’Malley put a stop to this travesty.”

Conservative blogger Carol McKinley has been posting a lot of commentary critical of O'Malley and Caritas for their handling of the venture. And Philip F. Lawler, a former editor of the Pilot, has written a critical history of the Caritas venture for Catholic World Report, where he is editor emeritus. An excerpt:

"The government contract will undoubtedly bring a critical infusion of revenue for the Caritas Christi system. The alliance with Centene Corporation in the CFHP may even lead to a successful sale of the troubled Caritas Christi system. But the apparent involvement of Catholic hospitals in a system that provides subsidized abortions—and the steadfast refusal of the Boston archdiocese to explain how that involvement could possibly be justified—is an astonishing setback for the culture of life. And it bears emphasis that this situation did not arise because the state government forced Caritas Christi into a morally untenable position; the Catholic agency deliberately sought to be involved."

Over at Beliefnet's Via Media blog, Amy Welborn, a popular conservative Catholic blogger, tries to wade through the complex maze of ethical questions involved. Welborn outlines the issues, but does not reach a conclusion:

"There are a couple of points to chew on: First, the argument that social justice demands that Catholic health care continue to exist in its present form, even if such existence requires provision of immoral procedures. Secondly, that the massive-business model centered around the acute care hospital may have to be abandoned by Catholic institutions, and this is not necessarily a bad thing. A third point, though...greed, and an enthusiastic, as opposed to reluctant, abandonment of Catholic principles on life."

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which is meeting this week in San Antonio, today called for immigration reform. The statement from Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, who is the president of the bishops' conference:

"On behalf of the United States Catholic Bishops, gathered in San Antonio, Texas, at our annual spring meeting, I would ask President Barack Obama and congressional leaders of both parties to work together to fashion and enact comprehensive immigration reform legislation before the end of the year.

It has been clear for years that the United States immigration system requires repair and that reform legislation should not be delayed.

We urge respect and observance of all just laws, and we do not approve or encourage the illegal entry of anyone into our country. From a humanitarian perspective, however, our fellow human beings, who migrate to support their families, continue to suffer at the hands of immigration policies that separate them from family members and drive them into remote parts of the American desert, sometimes to their deaths. This suffering should not continue.

Now is the time to address this pressing humanitarian issue which affects so many lives and undermines basic human dignity. Our society should no longer tolerate a status quo that perpetuates a permanent underclass of persons and benefits from their labor without offering them legal protections. As a moral matter, we must resolve the legal status of those who are here without proper documentation so that they can fully contribute their talents to our nation’s economic, social and spiritual well being.

Only through comprehensive reform can we restore the rule of law to our nation’s immigration system.

We urge President Obama and congressional leaders to meet as soon as possible to discuss and draft comprehensive immigration reform legislation, with the goal of making it law by the end of 2009. The Catholic bishops of our country stand ready to assist in this effort."

Pope Benedict XVI yesterday accepted the retirement of Archbishop Alfred Clifton Hughes, a West Roxbury native and former Boston auxiliary bishop, as the archbishop of New Orleans. (Bishops must offer to retire at 75, but the pope can leave them in place as long as he wants; Hughes is now 18 months past the big birthday.)

Hughes has had a pretty rough run in New Orleans, where the archdiocese was decimated by Hurricane Katrina, and where the archbishop decided he needed to close multiple parishes (and allow the arrest of some protesters in the process) because the Catholic population had dropped so precipitously. Hughes has also been criticized for his role as an aide to Cardinal Bernard F. Law in Boston during the period when abusive priests were being moved from parish to parish. This year he also drew headlines when he refused to attend the commencement at Xavier University because Donna Brazile, the Democratic political consultant and a Catholic who supports abortion rights, was being honored. Over at Whispers in the Loggia, Rocco Palmo sums up Hughes's time in New Orleans this way: "a prelate whose seven-year tenure proved unpopular in many quarters, both as a result of Hughes' history in the abuse-tarred Boston chancery over earlier decades and his more recent task of handling the 370,000-member archdiocese's need for post-storm adjustments."

The pope appointed Bishop Gregory Michael Aymond, a New Orleans native who had been overseeing the diocese of Austin, to replace Hughes. In its coverage of the transition, the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports:

"At the news conference called to introduce the new archbishop, Hughes praised Aymond's skills and dedication to the church. But that done, he changed course, reflecting on his own eight tumultuous years in office -- years that included the Sept. 11 attacks, the clergy sex abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina and the current economic downturn -- and asked forgiveness for his mistakes.

'I want publicly to express my sorrow and beg forgiveness for those who experienced continued hurt or also experienced anger,' he said. 'I have never wanted in any way to hurt anyone. Obviously, difficult decisions do hurt people in ways that we don't want.'"

The Times-Picayune has archived its coverage of Hughes's tenure here.

(Photo, by Essdras M. Suarez of the Globe staff, shows Archbishop Hughes (right) blessing environmental workers in New Orleans on Aug. 31, 2008.)

In yesterday's Globe, Kay Lazar and I had a story about the latest development in Caritas Christi's plans to participate in the state's effort to provide health insurance to nearly every resident of Massachusetts. Caritas has entered a joint venture with a non-Catholic health company, Centene Corp., and has become entangled in a complicated controversy over the morality of its participation in a system that, by state law, provides coverage for abortion services. Those services would not be provided at Catholic hospitals, but critics say any relationship between Caritas and abortion providers is unacceptable.

Here's the lede to the story about Caritas Christi and abortion in the Globe:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, concerned about the relationship between Caritas Christi Health Care and an insurance plan that covers abortions, is seeking modifications to the joint venture that the beleaguered Catholic hospital chain has entered into with a St. Louis-based healthcare company to provide insurance to low-income Massachusetts residents.

O'Malley, who has been criticized by several conservative Catholic and antiabortion activists for his handling of the Caritas venture, issued a statement yesterday declaring that "under no circumstances" will Caritas provide or refer patients for procedures prohibited by Catholic teaching, which include abortion, contraception, and sterilization.

And the Archdiocese of Boston said publicly for the first time yesterday that Caritas would not be permitted to profit from the provision of abortion services by others.

The archdiocese would not specify the changes it is seeking to the joint venture, called CeltiCare, which is 49 percent owned by Caritas Christi.

But the church sought to clarify its requirements for the deal after a number of conservative bloggers and interest groups had recently criticized the venture, accusing O'Malley, often in quite angry language, of abandoning the church's commitment to protecting the unborn.

This week, many of the activists have seized upon, as evidence of the problematic nature of the venture, the new website of CeltiCare. The website specifies the copayments for abortions (from 0 to $100, depending on the plan), and lists family planning and reproductive service providers, including Planned Parenthood facilities in Boston, Somerville, and Worcester.

The president of Caritas Christi, Dr. Ralph de la Torre, issued a statement yesterday saying that individuals covered under the new venture will be told to talk to their insurance company if they seek abortions or other services prohibited by Catholic teaching.

"When a patient seeks such a procedure, Caritas healthcare professionals will be clear that (a) the hospital does not perform them and (b) the patient must turn to his or her insurer for further guidance," de la Torre said. "This, in fact, is the practice currently in place in the Caritas system as we work with other insurance companies under state laws that mandate access to procedures not provided within the Caritas system."

Here is a statement on the abortion issue from Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston, and Dr. Ralph de la Torre, the president of Caritas Christi.

Conservative critics of the deal are not mollified. The archdiocese expects to announce the final structure of the Caritas deal, and the cardinal's ruling as to whether it is acceptable, before July 1. The cardinal has the power to block the deal, but the archdiocese is hoping that will not be necessary, both because the cardinal wants Caritas to be able to participate in a system intended to extend health coverage to low-income people who could not previously afford it, and also because the arrangement would generate income for Caritas, which has been financially struggling.

In the Sunday Globe, I have a story about how the Rev. James A. Field and his congregation, the Parish of the Incarnation of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, are coping with Father Field's diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. I hope you'll take a look at the story, as well as the video, but I also wanted to share with you some photographs that two of the Globe's amazing photographers shot of Father Field.

Photographer Dina Rudick shot the Pentecost Mass last Sunday at the parish. The parish poses for a group photo at the end of Mass each Pentecost; here is an image of Father Field with his congregation on the parish steps:

This is Father Field, speaking from the pulpit:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston, last night added his voice to others from the anti-abortion community condemning the killing of George Tiller, the late-term abortionist who was shot dead in the lobby of his Lutheran parish last Sunday. Here's what Cardinal O'Malley wrote in his blog about the Tiller murder:

"Before I come to the events of my week, I would like to address the killing of Kansas abortion physician Dr. George Tiller last Sunday.

This was indeed a tragedy on many different levels. Certainly it was tragedy for Dr. Tiller and his family, as well as and the fact that the violence took place in a Church — a place where people go to pray and to seek spiritual solace.

Obviously, this was the act of a very disturbed person and it is a tragedy for that man and his family, as well. All of those who are working in the pro-life movement are horrified by acts of this kind and repudiate the use of violence; it is in direct contradiction to what the pro-life movement must stand for.

We pray for healing in all of the communities that have been affected by this very tragic crime. We pray, as well, for the day when human life will be protected, at all stages, and that our country as a whole will reject the violence of abortion, the violence of capital punishment and the violence that results from the proliferation of arms in our population."

(Photo, by Michele McDonald of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley at an anti-abortion march in Boston on Oct. 5, 2008.)

I'm not much of a gardener, but last September I came home from the annual convention of the Religion Newswriters Association as the proud owner of two Pope John Paul II rose bushes that I somehow won at a silent auction to benefit starving religion writers (OK, it actually helped fund scholarships for writers to attend the conference).

The rosebushes, a hybrid tea rose developed by Jackson & Perkins in South Carolina, arrived a few weeks later in a long narrow cardboard box. I live in one of those classic Boston triple-deckers, and everyone else in the building is pretty serious about flowers and shrubs, so one day late last fall my neighbor Charlie (who works for the Episcopal Church, but doesn't seem offended by Romish roses) and I planted the rosebushes in an empty patch along the driveway that gets partial sun and has a fence that provides some shelter from the elements. It was pretty late in the year, but, as luck would have it, winter arrived even later, and the roses had a good month before the first hard freeze. Yuri, the orange-striped cat who lives upstairs, immediately took to the project, and began snoozing on the roots, which I imagined would help keep them warm.

When spring rolled around, there was a bit of a complication. Daffodils and daylilies and Solomon's Seal sprung up jungle-like, crowding the pontifical petals:

The rose bushes were completely hidden from view, and I began to worry whether the branches could make it through, so over Memorial Day weekend Charlie and I staged an intervention, ripping out all the other flowers in an effort to give the papal plants some room:

As it turns out, one of the bushes seems to be thriving (left); the other bush (right) is in serious trouble, and may be headed for that great greenhouse in the sky.

So now we wait, which I suppose is what gardeners do. The publicity material about the Pope John Paul II Commemorative Rose promises "grand stature and classic, pristine white blossoms (that) evoke the majesty and honor the memory of one of history's most beloved and influential leaders."

We shall see. In the meantime, do any of you gardeners out there have any advice? And, just in case we wind up with an empty spot, are there any other flowers named for religious leaders?

Andover Newton Theological School (right) this week announced that it is pursuing a possible merger with Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School, prompting me to take a look at the variety of ways in which local theological schools are adapting to new economic and educational realities. Here's an excerpt from the story:

"The decision by Andover Newton follows several innovative arrangements by local theological schools facing financial or enrollment pressures.

In Cambridge, Episcopal Divinity School is in the midst of a new partnership with Lesley University, in which Lesley is purchasing seven buildings from EDS, the land is being governed cooperatively by the two schools, a joint library is about to be launched, and Lesley is taking over buildings and grounds, custodial services, and dining services for EDS. The two schools expect at some point to discuss academic cooperation.

In Brighton, Boston College has absorbed Weston Jesuit School of Theology, which had been located in Cambridge, and Boston College is also providing facilities assistance to St. John's Seminary, which is on land the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston recently sold to the university. In Newton, Andover Newton is already sharing maintenance staffs and some academic programming with Hebrew College, which is now having conversations with other potential partner institutions.

On the North Shore, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, an evangelical Protestant institution that is by far the largest local theological school, has adapted to the new climate by opening additional campuses in North Carolina, Jacksonville, Fla., and Roxbury and sharing faculty and administration among the campuses.

'When you have a fixed amount of money, are you going to spend it on gutters and downspouts or scholarships and scholars?' asked Nick Carter, president of Andover Newton. 'Folks are looking at the challenge of overhead versus the delivery of mission.'"

(Photo, by Wendy Maeda of the Globe staff, shows a building at Andover Newton on May 27, 2009.)

Alberto Cutié, the popular Catholic priest in Miami who was caught canoodling with his lady love, has now switched denominations to the Episcopal Church and plans to marry. The Miami Herald reports on the flight of "Father Oprah":

"Cutié was formally welcomed into the Episcopal Church in a small, private ceremony early Thursday afternoon at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral, the church's South Florida headquarters in downtown Miami.

'I am continuing the call to spread God's love,' Cutié said after the ceremony, adding that he has gone through a 'deep spiritual and ideological struggle.'

In attendance at Trinity was Cutié's girlfriend, Ruhama Buni Canellis, 35, a divorced mother living in Miami Beach. It was the first public sighting of the couple since compromising photos appeared in a Mexican magazine early this month that led the telegenic cleric to take leave from his South Beach parish.

Cutié sat smiling beside Canellis during the half-hour ceremony. Deacons and former Catholic priests now in the Episcopal Church were by his side -- many notably accompanied by their wives.

Bishop Leo Frade, head of the Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida, officiated as Cutié and Canellis knelt in front of him to be received into the church.

'We recognize you as a member of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church; and we receive you into the fellowship of this communion. God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, bless, preserve and keep you. Amen,' Frade recited in Spanish.

At a news conference a few hours later, Archdiocese of Miami officials expressed disappointment in Cutié and had strong words for the Episcopal Church, especially Bishop Frade.

'This truly is a serious setback for ecumenical relations and cooperation between us,' Archbishop John C. Favalora said."

The blogosphere, not surprisingly, is having a field day.

Here's the Rev. James Martin, blogging at America magazine:

"What does this case have to do with the prospect of the church changing its position on priestly celibacy? Very little. Probably the most profound effect will be on members of Father Cutié's parish, as well as on the many Latino Catholics who followed his popular television show on Telemundo (and his radio show as well). But, contrary to what some commentators have been saying on the web and on TV, the departure of a single priest--no matter how popular or influential--from the Catholic Church is unlikely to make the church revamp its 1,000- (or 900- or 1,100- or 1,200- depending on what history you accept) -year-old rule."

At Episcopal Cafe, Jim Naughton has some misgivings:

"Anybody else have mixed feelings about this? One can oppose mandatory priestly celibacy and still feel uneasy about the Rev. Cutié jumping so quickly and publicly to new ministry in a new church after being caught in the act of breaking his ordination vows. No?"

And Rod Dreher, at Beliefnet, also is uneasy:

"That his new bishop received him without the catechumen period, and not only that but has scheduled him to preach at the cathedral on Sunday, reflects poorly not only on Cutié, but on the Episcopal bishop. Showboaters."

Your thoughts?

(Photo, by Al Diaz/AP, shows Rev. Alberto Cutié, center, and his girlfriend, Ruhama Buni Canellis, second left, at Trinity Cathedral in downtown Miami on Thursday, May 28, 2009. At second right is Bishop Shopleo Frade and his wife, Diana Frade.)

The White House tonight announced that President Obama is nominating Miguel H. Díaz (right), a Catholic theologian from Minnesota, as ambassador to the Holy See. Here's the White House bio for Díaz:

"Dr. Miguel Díaz is a Professor of Theology at St. John's University and the College of Saint Benedict in Minnesota. He is the co-editor of the book 'From the Heart of Our People: Explorations in Catholic Systematic Theology' and author of 'On Being Human: U.S. Hispanic and Rahnerian Perspectives,' named 'Best Book of the Year' by the Hispanic Theological Initiative at Princeton Theological Seminary. Dr. Díaz taught Religious Studies and Theology at Barry University, the University of Dayton and the University of Notre Dame. From 2001 to 2003, he taught and served as Academic Dean at St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary in Boynton Beach, Florida. He is a Board Member of the Catholic Theological Society of America (CTSA) and Past President of the Academy of Catholic Hispanic Theologians of the United States (ACHTUS). Dr. Díaz holds a B.A. from St. Thomas University and a M.A. and PhD in Theology from the University of Notre Dame."

The College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University, where Díaz teaches, has posted more detail in a news release, and says that Díaz's academic interests are "the Trinity, theological anthropology and Latino/a theologies."

Early analysis from Mark Silk at Trinity College in Hartford:

"For starters, with Sotomayor this makes for a serious one-two punch with Latinos. It's very interesting that he's a theologian rather than your basic Catholic pol or lawyer type. He served on Obama's Catholic Advisory Board during the campaign, which puts him firmly in the Kmiec camp. This strikes me as the shrewdest of moves, and one that will cause no end of teeth-grinding on the Catholic right, including the likes of Archbishop Burke. But we await learned commentary from his co-religionists.

Update: Turns out Diaz is a consultant to Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. Big win for social-justice, common-ground Catholics.

Exegesis: Catholic conservatives would be free to rail against a pro-Obama Catholic politician. 'Not a real Catholic,' etc. A pro-Obama Catholic theologian who teaches at a major seminary, well, that's a different story. And the fact that he's a Latino working on issues in Hispanic theology, at a time where we're experiencing the Latinization of the American Catholic Church--that's a ten-strike."

And from Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United, a liberal-leaning group:

"Catholics United is thrilled to learn that Dr. Miguel Diaz has been nominated as U.S. ambassador to the Holy See. Dr. Diaz is a devout Catholic, a respected theologian, a leader in the Catholic Latino community, and a dedicated husband and father of four children. We have full confidence that he will serve our nation well and we invite all Catholics to join us in celebrating this historic nomination."

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, the liberal organization to which Díaz serves as a theological consultant, said:

"Professor Díaz has always connected his impressive body of academic scholarship and intellectual rigor with an unwavering commitment to living out the social justice tenets of our faith. Professor Díaz has been an invaluable source of support and theological insight for our organization and the broader Catholic social justice community. Our nation could have no better representative to the Holy See than Professor Díaz. This is a proud day for the Alliance and all Catholics dedicated to the common good."

Two Bostonians have recently served in the position of ambassador to the Holy See -- Harvard law professor Mary Ann Glendon, and former Boston Mayor Raymond L. Flynn.

(Photo courtesy of the College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University.)

In this morning's Globe, I have a story about the efforts by the Archdiocese of Boston to restore its clergy pension system. The lede:

"The Archdiocese of Boston, facing a clergy pension system that will run out of money in 2011 without a financial rescue, is now taking its first concrete steps to limit benefits and raise revenue to shore up the fund.

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley has mailed to all priests a legalistic 17-page 'decree of promulgation' that is raising concerns among some sick priests because it says that they will receive only 60 percent of their stipend, in addition to their healthcare coverage, if they are on health leave. Also in some cases it will require them to submit medical and tax documents to the archdiocese in order to 'demonstrate need.'

The policy also requires priests on health leave for more than six months to seek state and federal government assistance, such as Social Security Disability Insurance, which is a break from past practice.

The policy affects only the 40 priests who are currently 'unassigned' because they are sick, disabled, or on a leave of absence, but it signals the archdiocese's willingness to make difficult and unpopular decisions as it attempts to address its most serious financial challenge."

Judge Sonia Sotomayor has much to distinguish her, but one element of her biography stands out in the world of those interested in religion and the public square: she is Catholic, and, if approved as a Supreme Court justice, she will be the sixth Catholic on the nine-member court. That is a remarkable accomplishment for American Catholics, who make up 23 percent of the nation's population, and will now potentially hold 67 percent of the high court's seats. Two of the justices are Jewish; the resignation of Justice David Souter, who is an Episcopalian, will leave, amazingly given the history of this nation, just one Protestant on the Supreme Court, 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens.

Undoubtedly, Sotomayor's Catholic-ness will be the subject of some debate. Just how Catholic is she? Steven Waldman, blogging at Beliefnet, quotes a White House official saying, "Judge Sotomayor was raised as a Catholic and attends church for family celebrations and other important events."

David Gibson, also at Beliefnet, suggests there may be a strategic reason for Sotomayor to downplay her faith affiliation:

"The (awful) question will now be, what KIND of Catholic is she? She is divorced, without kids. Heck, she may want to downplay her practice of the faith as that will be a huge target--and it's easy to guess who'll be lobbing most of the heavy ordinance."

And Cathy Lynn Grossman, blogging for USA Today, makes a similar prediction:

"Next up: Expect her nomination to re-ignite the ongoing Catholic blogosphere wars over who is Catholic enough. If confirmed, Sotomayor, who grew up in Catholic schools in the Bronx, would be the sixth Catholic on the high court. It may be that her life experiences will align her with the social justice issues pushed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on race, poverty, immigration and economic issues. But for some outspoken Catholics, the 'life' issues -- abortion, family planning, so-called 'conscience clauses' for health workers, embryonic stem cell research and end-of-life choices -- are the litmus test."

Over at GetReligion, Terry Mattingly wonders why the word "Catholic" is not more a part of the early press coverage, and asks if that would be different if Sotomayor were a known opponent of abortion rights:

"Her life story will be a big part of the upcoming mini-debates about her appointment. Here is my question: If she was a pro-life woman, from a Hispanic background, do you think that the word 'Catholic' would be appearing higher in these early (I repeat, EARLY) reports about her life and work? Just saying."

What does it matter if Sotomayor is Catholic? Jacqui Salmon, blogging for the Washington Post, suggests perhaps not much, at least as far as judicial decisionmaking is concerned:

"Experts have been split on what the Catholic majority has meant so far. They point out that Catholics on the bench historically have spanned the spectrum from liberal to conservative. Dennis J. Hutchinson, a court historian at the University of Chicago, noted in 2005 that one of the most liberal Supreme Court justices of the 20th century, William J. Brennan, was a Catholic, and so is one of the most conservative, Scalia."

Manya Brachear, blogging for the Chicago Tribune, tackles the same question, and comes to the same conclusion, although also pointing out the symbolic significance:

"Cathleen Kaveny, law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said a sixth Catholic in the High Court would illustrate how entrenched the church has become in the U.S. A sixth Catholic with views like Sotomayor's also would put the American church’s diversity on display. 'My guess is she’s very much operating in accordance with the commitments of the Catholic social justice tradition which is emphasizing … inclusion, solidarity, justice to those least among us,' Kaveny said. 'It’s strand of American Catholic teaching that is somewhat distinct from other Catholic teaching but not incompatible. People emphasize different aspects.'"

Catholic groups are just now beginning to react to the nomination. Catholics United, a liberal group, reacted positively, and said, "We call on other leaders within the Catholic community to join us in welcoming Judge Sotomayor's nomination and to approach her confirmation hearings with civility and reason." I haven't heard yet from conservative Catholic groups, but in general the reaction from the right has been critical. Ted Olsen, blogging at Christianity Today, reviews the early statements and headlines his post, "Pro-Life Group Consensus on Sotomayor: 'Activist'."

Meanwhile, one thing that struck me in President Obama's remarks about Sotomayor this morning was the language he used to describe the role of Catholic schools in offering children a path out of poverty. This is what he said:

"When Sonia was nine, her father passed away. And her mother worked six days a week as a nurse to provide for Sonia and her brother...But Sonia's mom bought the only set of encyclopedias in the neighborhood, sent her children to a Catholic school called Cardinal Spellman out of the belief that with a good education here in America all things are possible."

(Photo, by Jim Young/Reuters, shows Judge Sonia Sotomayor talking with President Obama at the White House this morning, May 26, 2009.)

"Angels & Demons" was not a great film (my brother, in California, declared, "it was terrible, but at least it was long and expensive'') but I have to say that the one saving grace for me was the production design -- the lovingly vivid portrayal of Rome, and in particular the Vatican's sumptuous interiors and elaborate vestments. I've been covering religion long enough that I've been to Vatican City multiple times, and I've visited most of the buildings depicted in the film. Some of the events in the movie -- particularly the elaborate funeral for a pope and the crowds gathered in St. Peter's Square to watch for the election of a new one -- I witnessed in real life back in 2005, and the re-creations struck me as spot on. Other moments, such as the destruction of the dead pope's ring and the voting by cardinals gathered in conclave in the Sistine Chapel, I've had to visualize based on written descriptions, and it was fascinating to see the filmmakers' imaginings of those scenes.

The filmmakers were barred by the Vatican from shooting on church property. But they weren't totally banned from Rome -- in particular, they actually filmed at Castel St. Angelo -- once a papal fortress and now a museum, as well as in the famous Piazza del Popolo and Piazza Navona. Watching Tom Hanks et al. scurry across the Ponte Sant'Angelo, the pedestrian bridge that leads from the city center to the fortress, reminded me that that bridge, which is lined with statues of angels, is a favorite site of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who led reporters from Boston on a walking tour of the bridge in 2006, when many of us traveled to Rome to cover O'Malley's elevation to cardinal. (O'Malley has another connection to the film -- his titular church, Santa Maria della Vittoria, is the site of a key scene; I wrote a story about Cardinal O'Malley's take on Angels & Demons and his titular church.)

Many of the other locations depicted in the film were re-created in Los Angeles. Large replicas of St. Peter’s Square and Piazza Navona were constructed in the parking lot of the Hollywood Park racetrack; the studio also re-created the Sistine Chapel, the Pantheon, Castel Sant’Angelo, as well as the artworks of Michelangelo and Bernini featured in the film. Some of the places depicted -- such as the Vatican archives -- I've never seen, and I have no idea how closely the film reflects reality, but I have to say that the depiction of the places I have been, like the apostolic palace, looked pretty good, even if they weren't exact facsimiles.

Several critics have also admired this feature of the film. A.O. Scott, reviewing "Angels & Demons" for the New York Times, writes:

"As an exercise in extreme mass-market tourism 'Angels & Demons' gives pretty good value. Unable to shoot in the Vatican itself, Mr. (Ron) Howard (the director) and his team have deftly blended actual Roman locations with Hollywood stage sets and C.G.I. confections to make a dreamy, ephemeral Eternal City.

The costume and production design — all those red cardinals’ robes swirling dervishlike in the incense-tinted light, those sensuous Bernini sculptures and soundless library stacks — nearly steal the movie from the bland, dogged heroes."

In Variety, Todd McCarthy writes:

"If, as reported, the production shot in Rome for only two weeks, it sure doesn't show; pic is saturated with local atmosphere, evidently achieved through expert location lensing combined with wizardly sleight-of-hand in the visual effects and production design, especially in the climactic section set in St. Peter's Square. Dark exterior scenes accurately reflect the low lighting levels of much of nocturnal Rome."

Did you see the film? What did you think?

(UPDATE: The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has now posted a surprisingly nuanced review of "Angels & Demons,'' declaring the film to be "highly improbable but mindlessly entertaining.'' The bishops' review also notes the visuals, saying, "Ironically - given Howard's location filming restrictions - Vatican City looks quite splendid, with majestic aerial shots while the Hollywood recreations of St. Peter's Square, the Sistine Chapel and other locales are, as noted by L’Osservatore Romano, 'magnificent.'")

(Photo by Zade Rosenthal/Columbia Pictures.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston yesterday ordained six new priests for the Archdiocese of Boston. Globe reporter Meghan Irons was there, and filed a story about the ordinations. An excerpt:

"Between greeting guests and offering his first blessings as a priest, the Rev. Shawn P. Carey took a moment yesterday to soak it all in.

'It's a miracle,' said Carey, who was ordained with five other men at Boston's Cathedral of the Holy Cross.

He is one of only 11 deaf men in the nation to be ordained a priest, and he could hardly contain his joy.

'It's been a long journey for me as a deaf seminarian and a deaf man,' he said through a sign-language interpreter. 'And becoming a priest - I never thought it would come this fast.'

Carey, who attended high schools in Northampton and Springfield, was drawn to the priesthood as a teenager and attended seminary after he graduated from Providence College. 'It was overwhelming,' he said of his struggles. 'But it was overwhelmingly joyous.'

Hundreds came to celebrate as Carey and a diverse mix of seminarians were ordained in a two-hour ceremony. A choir sang in Vietnamese, and part of the church was reserved for scores of people from the deaf community who came to celebrate with Carey.

In a stirring homily, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley highlighted the mix of the group - a deaf man, a Vietnamese refugee, a widower, a Spaniard, an Irish immigrant, and a man in his second career.

'A century ago in this cathedral, there would have been 50 men, but those huge ordination processes did not begin to reflect the diversity of . . . today's class,' O'Malley said. 'This is a microcosm of the church today.'"

The archdiocese published brief biographies of the six new priests. And the Globe previously profiled Shawn Carey in 2007.

(Photos by Wendy Maeda/Globe staff, show the ordination ceremony at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston, 5/23/09.)

The Globe magazine section this weekend has a feature about contemporary consecrated virgins, women who promise "perpetual virginity" and dedicate themselves to Jesus and prayer. An excerpt:

"Consecrated virgins have existed in the Catholic Church longer than nuns. The tradition died out around the ninth century but has made a comeback after the Second Vatican Council, or Vatican II, in the 1960s emphasized the idea that everyone is called to holiness. Women who join the Order of Virgins feel called to Christ, much like a priest or a nun does. And, as with priests and nuns, the Catholic Church recognizes consecrated virginity as a distinct vocation. Unlike nuns, however, consecrated virgins don't take a vow of poverty. Instead, they live in their own homes and support themselves by working in jobs outside the church. Like (Kathy) Reda (the consecrated virgin featured in this story), they are women who are inspired to make a public commitment to Jesus. They dedicate much of their free time to prayer, including reciting the thrice-daily Liturgy of the Hours, and volunteer work.

There are about 250 consecrated virgins in the United States and about 3,000 worldwide -- the Boston Archdiocese is home to 13 of them. The vocation even has its own membership organization, the United States Association of Consecrated Virgins, which holds conferences and provides information to members and prospective members. But the church does not actively recruit women to consecrated virginity -- in fact, many Catholics say they have never heard of the Order of Virgins. But the church says interest may be on the rise. "The number of women inquiring about it is increasing," says Sister Marian Batho, O'Malley's liaison for the religious communities of the archdiocese. Batho says the membership organization has helped build awareness, and that bishops have also played a role. "As bishops come to understand it, they can encourage women to listen carefully to see if God is calling them to this vocation," she says. Those who wish to join the order "are women who have never been married or lived in open violation of chastity," says Batho. The church doesn't require any proof of virginity -- a woman's character determines her eligibility. She can be admitted into the vocation by her local bishop and must work with a spiritual director before and after her consecration."

As it happens, the Archdiocese of Boston last week held a Mass for the local consecrated virgins, prompting Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley to blog about consecrated virgins yesterday:

"Last Thursday, we celebrated Mass with the consecrated virgins in the archdiocese. The Mass was offered for Jane Claire Forte, a consecrated virgin who passed away recently.

Boston has one of the larger groups of consecrated virgins in the United States. This ancient order in the Church was restored after the Second Vatican Council and sought women who consecrate themselves in celibacy to a deeper life of prayer and service in the Church.

Certainly, in today’s world, the witness of the consecrated virgins is more needed than ever. We are very grateful for the women who have come forward and discerned this specific vocation in their lives. Sister Marian Batho, our delegate for consecrated life in the archdiocese, has been very good at helping us to prepare women for this vocation."

A much awaited report on abuse at Catholic institutions in Ireland was released today by the government-sponsored Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse.

The conclusions are shocking, even given how much has been revealed in recent years about sexual abuse of minors:

"Physical and emotional abuse and neglect were features of the institutions. Sexual abuse occurred in many of them, particularly boys’ institutions. Schools were run in a severe, regimented manner that imposed unreasonable and oppressive discipline on children and even on staff."

The report, according to the Associated Press, concerns conditions at "Ireland's austere network of industrial schools, reformatories, orphanages and hostels from the 1930s until the last church-run facilities shut in the 1990s." The schools, according to the AP, housed "more than 30,000 children deemed to be petty thieves, truants or from dysfunctional families -- a category that often included unmarried mothers.''

Here are the conclusions on sexual abuse:

• "Sexual abuse was endemic in boys’ institutions. The situation in girls’ institutions was different. Although girls were subjected to predatory sexual abuse by male employees or visitors or in outside placements, sexual abuse was not systemic in girls’ schools.

• "It is impossible to determine the full extent of sexual abuse committed in boys’ schools. The schools investigated revealed a substantial level of sexual abuse of boys in care that extended over a range from improper touching and fondling to rape with violence. Perpetrators of abuse were able to operate undetected for long periods at the core of institutions.

• "Cases of sexual abuse were managed with a view to minimising the risk of public disclosure and consequent damage to the institution and the Congregation. This policy resulted in the protection of the perpetrator. When lay people were discovered to have sexually abused, they were generally reported to the Gardai. When a member of a Congregation was found to be abusing, it was dealt with internally and was not reported to the Gardaí.

"The damage to the children affected and the danger to others were disregarded. The difference in treatment of lay and religious abusers points to an awareness on the part of Congregational authorities of the seriousness of the offence, yet there was a reluctance to confront religious who offended in this way. The desire to protect the reputation of the Congregation and institution was paramount. Congregations asserted that knowledge of sexual abuse was not available in society at the time and that it was seen as a moral failing on the part of the Brother or priest. This assertion, however, ignores the fact that sexual abuse of children was a criminal offence.

FULL ENTRY

For those of you who love Catholic vestments, check out this photo of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston, at yesterday's commencement ceremony at Boston College. The cardinal, a Franciscan Capuchin friar whose preferred garb is the brown hooded habit and sandals of his order, here is shown wearing a silk ferraiolo, which is an ecclesiastical cape used for solemn nonliturgical events, like formal dinners and academic convocations. The ferraiolo is over the cardinal's simar, or house cassock, a black wool garment trimmed in scarlet (because O'Malley is a cardinal). The photo was taken by Pat Greenhouse of the Globe staff; the cardinal is shown entering the commencement ceremony with the Rev. T. Frank Kennedy, the rector of the Jesuit community at BC.

The JP Gazette is reporting that efforts by parents to save the Our Lady of Lourdes School have failed, meaning the last Catholic school in Jamaica Plain will close next month. An excerpt from the JP Gazette story about Our Lady of Lourdes School:

"An attempt by parents to raise $500,000 to save Our Lady of Lourdes (OLOL) School fell far short of that goal, sealing the fate of Jamaica Plain’s last Catholic school.

“We understand that this is disappointing news for those who worked so hard to keep Our Lady of Lourdes School open,” said Boston Archdiocese spokesperson Terry Donilon in a written statement, confirming that the school will close forever in June. “But the reality is that because of declining enrollment and mounting financial pressures it simply is not possible to reopen in the fall.”

Church officials shocked parents early this year with the surprise announcement that the century-old school was so financially shaky it would have to shut down after this school year. Officials had known about the financial problems for about five months, but had not told parents or alumni. Outraged parents demanded and got the chance to save the school for at least one more year by raising half-a-million dollars by the end of April.

But the parents’ Save OLOL campaign raised only $150,000, parent Colleen Scanlan reported in a letter to a church official that she also sent to the Gazette. Scanlan said another donor had pledged to give $200,000 per year, and that a college had pledged to provide two free teachers.

Donilon said that closure plans are under way. OLOL students have been guaranteed seats in other Catholic schools."

I asked Donilon this morning if he wanted to add anything to the story -- here's what he said:

"We know this is not easy for the students and families of Our Lady of Lourdes School. We also know that there are many opportunities for families to continue educating their children in Catholic schools. The closing of Our Lady of Lourdes School does not diminish the Church's commitment to Catholic education. The task ahead for us is to see to it that we provide a smooth transition for the students, families, teachers and staff as the school year draws to a close."

The 97-year-old school had 187 pupils this year. The Globe had a story about the planned closing of Our Lady of Lourdes School in January.

UPDATE: The Parent Committee to Save OLOL has posted on its web site a letter about the latest turn of events:

Here is the text of the speech by Notre Dame's president, the Rev. John I. Jenkins, introducing President Obama at today's commencement, and reflecting on the associated controversy:

"President Obama, Fr. Hesburgh, Judge Noonan, Members of the Board of Trustees, Members of the faculty, staff, alumni, friends, parents, and most of all – the Notre Dame Class of 2009:

Several autumns ago, you came to Notre Dame from home….now Notre Dame has become home. And it always will be. For home is not where you live. Home is where you belong. You will always belong – and I pray you will always feel you belong – here at Notre Dame.

You are … ND.

In my four years as President of your University – I have found that even among those who did not go to Notre Dame, even among those who do not share the Catholic faith, there is a special expectation, a special hope, for what Notre Dame can accomplish in the world. They hope that Notre Dame will be one of the great universities in the nation, but they also hope that it will send forth graduates who -- grounded in deep moral values -- can help solve the world’s toughest problems.

FULL ENTRY

A few observations on the commencement ceremony now wrapping up at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend:

• President Obama was given an enormously enthusiastic welcome by the crowd. The one time I heard a heckler erupt (I was watching the webcast) he was drowned out by cheers. Obama was repeatedly given ovations and applause.

• The Rev. John I. Jenkins, president of the university, devoted almost the entirety of his introduction to a passionate and forceful defense of the university's decision to invite Obama to give the address, and to grant him an honorary degree. He lamented the tone of the debate, saying to the graduates, "The world you enter today is torn by division – and is fixed on its differences," and that "too often differences lead to pride in self and contempt for others.'' He rued what he said was the demonization of others in American culture, and referred to "hateful divisions" among human beings.

• Jenkins, who has faced criticism from dozens of bishops and hundreds of thousands of lay Catholics for allowing an abortion-rights supporting president to be honored at a Catholic university, praised Obama for agreeing to speak despite the substantive disagreement and the ensuing controversy. Jenkins said, "President Obama has come to Notre Dame, though he knows well that we are fully supportive of Church teaching on the sanctity of human life, and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research."

Then, he added, "Others might have avoided this venue for that reason, but President Obama is not someone who stops talking to those who differ with him.'' And Jenkins outlined a series of reasons for honoring Obama, mentioning his positions on education and health care and foreign relations and war, as well as his accomplishment in becoming the first African-American president of the United States.

• Obama spoke for about 31 minutes, drawing repeated applause, even for saying, simply, "I am honored to be here today.'' Then, noting that "I know it has not been without controversy,'' Obama addressed at some length the tension in American culture over the abortion issue. He said that, "Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son’s or daughter’s hardships can be relieved." And, on abortion, he outlined a series of steps that he said the two sides should agree on, including reducing the number of women seeking abortions, reducing unintended pregnancies, making adoption more available, and providing "care and support for women who do carry their children to term.'' He also indicated that he is open to "a sensible conscience clause" for health care workers, suggesting that he is open to compromise on that front.

• Obama also said the abortion issue is not likely to go away. "The fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable,'' he said.

• Obama paid striking homage to two Catholic icons, the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago, who he said he encountered as a community organizer working in Catholic-sponsored groups in Chicago, and the former Notre Dame president, Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, who will turn 92 this week, and who Obama praised for his role in the civil rights movement. In turn, Notre Dame gave Obama a framed photograph of Hesburgh and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., holding hands and singing "We Shall Overcome" at a civil rights event.

Here is the full text of Obama's remarks, as released by the White House:

As the pope travelled through Jordan over the weekend, a reader e-mailed to call my attention an interesting local angle: the Jesuit Center of Amman is staffed by priests from the Boston area. Today, I finally connected via e-mail with the Rev. Kevin G. O'Connell, a 70-year-old Jesuit priest from Roslindale who now serves as pastor of an English-language parish in Amman, Sacred Heart, that ministers largely to Filipino domestic workers for affluent Jordanians. I asked Father O'Connell whether he had met the pope, and although he hadn't, he said he got pretty close:

"On Sunday, at the Papal Mass, I was in the crowd within perhaps ten feet of him as he entered the stadium, & I was even a bit closer as he processed out. I had the impression that our eyes met for a fleeting second as he passed, but I'm sure he had no impression of me! Anyway, it was good to be part of the Mass & to facilitate the active participation of many parishioners. It was a moving & encouraging experience, & I found the Pope's homily at the Mass very supportive to all who were there."

Father O'Connell (right) is one of four Jesuits at the Jesuit Center in Amman; the others are veterans of the New England Province mission in Iraq, from which the Jesuits had been expelled. The community's superior is the Rev. Alfred Hicks, a Needham native and former principal of Nativity Prep in Roxbury; also there is the Rev. Denis Como, from Pride's Crossing, who once directed the Chinese Catholic Center in Boston, and the Rev. Clarence Burby, a Baghdad native who ministers to Iraqi refugees in Jordan. O'Connell is an alumnus of BC High and Boston College, has a doctorate from Harvard, and studied theology and then taught at the Weston Jesuit School of Theology. He was ordained by Boston's Cardinal Richard J. Cushing in 1969.

Here's his e-mail to me about the pope's visit:

"Local Christians were pretty excited about the Pope's visit, especially in the last couple of weeks before he arrived. It was a BIG event for a relatively small country like Jordan, & especially for the tiny local Catholic Church.

There are perhaps 80-90 thousand native Jordanian Catholics, more or less evenly divided between Melkites or Byzantine Catholics (called "Roum Katolik" here because of their affinity to the Eastern Roman Empire at Byzantium) & what we Westerners know as Roman Catholics (called "Latine Katolik" here because our roots are in the Latin Catholic Patriarchate of Jerusalem, begun by the Crusaders & re-established by Pope Pius IX in the mid-1800s), & around 35-38 thousand expatriate Catholics (perhaps 23-26 thousand of the 28-30 thousand Filipino workers here, another 8-10 thousand of the 35-38 thousand Sri Lankan workers here, perhaps 5-8 thousand of the few hundred thousand Iraqi refugees still here, & smaller numbers from many other countries). There are also around 90,000 Orthodox Christians in Jordan, as well as small numbers of Protestants from various denominations.

FULL ENTRY

Miami is abuzz over the plight of one Father Cutié (no kidding -- Father Cutie, with an accent) -- the hunky and popular pastor of a South Beach parish who was photographed bare-chested and cuddling with a woman on the sunny sands of Florida. The Rev. Alberto Cutié is no ordinary priest -- he was a friend of celebrities, a frequent television commentator, and the popular author of a book, "Real Life, Real Love,'' whose subject matter earned him the moniker "Padre Oprah." His downfall is now attracting more attention than his smile, with the predictable debate ensuing over the viability of mandatory celibacy for priests.

The Miami Herald conducted a poll, and found broad support for the priest:

"Days after the Rev. Alberto Cutié admitted he had a romantic relationship with a woman, an overwhelming number of Miami-Dade Catholics still view him favorably, a poll conducted for The Miami Herald found.

Nearly 80 percent of those polled had a favorable view of Cutié, with 10 percent saying they looked at him unfavorably.

...A substantial majority -- 74 percent -- of those surveyed, including Hispanics and non-Hispanics, oppose the Roman Catholic Church's prohibition of priests marrying or having any type of sexual relations. Only 22 percent said they supported the prohibition, while 4 percent said they were unsure or gave no answer."

Not so fast, blogs Thomas Peters at American Papist:

"Of course, the answer to violating the vows of celibacy ... is to observe the vows of celibacy. Not to toss them out! That's why the public improprieties of Fr. Cutié constitute such a grave scandal - they diminish the witness of the Church to the world.

Yes, we ought to pray for Fr. Cutié, but let's also re-double our prayers for the noble young men (and women) who are faithfully living lives of celibacy as they study to become priests (and professed women religious).

Let us also pray for those who have already taken on the vow of celibacy that they remain faithful to it and thereby provide the world with a wonderful (and so needed) witness!"

Father Cutié has acknowledged the relationship in several interviews:

"'Falling in love is not something that I chose to do. It's something I have been struggling with for a long time,' Cutié told The Miami Herald Friday, at the end of a week of seclusion, prayer and tough talks with Miami Archbishop John Favalora and other church leaders.

But now those telling snapshots are out there, the priest -- a star of radio and TV talk shows -- is offering the kind of plain language that has been the cornerstone of his popularity with millions of Spanish-speaking fans across the United States and Latin America.

He says he wants to get married and start a family."

Today, he spoke on The Early Show on CBS:

(Photo above, by Tony Gutierrez/AP, shows the Rev. Alberto Cutié preaching in 1999 in Miami Beach.)

Pope Benedict XVI today arrived in Israel for a much-anticipated visit after four days in Jordan. He immediately touched on the two major issues looming over the trip, addressing the Middle East conflict by expressing his support for an independent Palestinian state and addressing strain in Jewish-Catholic relations with a visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial.

In today's Globe, columnist James Carroll reflects on the trip:

"Abstracting from the complications of Pope Benedict's own record of omni-directional religious insult, his role as a living emblem of what remains of Christendom, the generating core of Western Civilization, is enough to give his journey to Jerusalem special gravity. As the head of a church that has earnestly grappled with its legacy of anti-Semitism, yet understands how that legacy infects the air to this day, he can represent to Arabs the urgency of purging their own attitudes of its ongoing effect. Anti-Semitism no more. The popes who sent wave upon wave of crusaders to Jerusalem have been reversed only in recent years, and Benedict surely longs to continue that reversal. Crusades no more. As the Vicar of Christ in whose name so many colonial adventures were launched, he can stand repentantly with Palestinians who refuse to be treated as a colonized people. Colonialism no more. As the ultimate European, in the ultimate world city, he can acknowledge the new condition of human survival - that it belongs as a right not just to the "superior races," but to all.

However inhibited by strictures of institution or imagination, Benedict is a man of good will. Yet his role transcends his person. A symbolic figure on pilgrimage to a symbolic place, he has opportunities to heal ancient and modern wounds. So we wish him well."

The pope's trip to Jordan went quite smoothly, but over at the National Catholic Reporter, John L. Allen Jr. reports that there is already disappointment with the pope's remarks today in Israel:

"Pope Benedict XVI has long been a figure who draws mixed reactions, with many admiring his clarity and intellectual depth, and others turned off by his traditionalism and occasional lack of a popular touch.

The pontiff's keenly anticipated visit today to Yad Vashem, the main Israeli Holocaust memorial, is likely to become another chapter in Benedict's mixed reviews. Some are likely to see it as a stirring poetic meditation on memory and justice, while others will probably be more struck what the pope didn't say than what he did.

For one thing, there's no explicit expression of regret for Christian anti-Semitism, no allusion to the role that currents of thought within Christianity about Jews and Judaism may have played in preparing the soil for the Holocaust."

Of course, the trip is just getting underway. Tomorrow the pope is scheduled to visit the Western Wall and Temple Mount -- the holy sites of Judaism and Islam. Then he is to spend Wednesday in Bethlehem, Thursday in Nazareth and Friday at Christian sites in Jerusalem before returning to Rome. (One factoid I find amazing: Israel is deploying 80,000 people to provide security for the papal visit.)

The Vatican is posting the texts of the pope's remarks throughout his trip here.

(Photos, by Uriel Sinai/Getty, show the pope at Yad Vashem today, 5/11/09.)

For the last several weeks, as my friends in the media have circled the Globe in a sometimes sympathetic and sometimes eager death watch, I have found myself wondering whether I was the only one curious about what Cardinal Bernard F. Law must be thinking.

It's now been 17 years since that spring day when Law, frustrated by the news media's intensive coverage of a former priest, James R. Porter, who was a serial pedophile, called for divine intervention. In one of the most famous lines Law ever uttered, he said, while speaking at a Roxbury church, "By all means we call down God's power on the media, particularly the Globe."

In the years since, that quote has been twisted (I often hear people say that Law called down the "wrath of God" on the Globe) and, Law argued, misinterpreted (he later claimed that "power" was a relatively benign word). Here's an exchange Law had with attorney Eric MacLeish about the 1992 remark in a 2002 deposition:

Q: Do you remember saying those words, words like that?

A. I don't remember saying words like that, but, you know, calling down God's power is not calling down God's wrath.

Q. I'm not suggesting it is.

A. Yes. And I don't think that would be a bad thing to do, even today, to call down God's power on the news media, including even the Globe, yes. I think that would be good.

I think what Law meant at the time was that he wanted God to influence the Globe, but it's been widely interpreted as Law seeking to punish the paper, and now, with our cash-strapped corporate parent, The New York Times Company, threatening to shut us down if we don't slash spending, apparently I'm not the only one recalling that quotation.

The inestimable Rocco Palmo, blogging over at Whispers in the Loggia, revels in the irony for all it's worth (including the fact that the supposedly make-or-break negotiations are taking place at a Catholic parish in Weymouth (one that, by the way, is rich with metaphoric potential -- it burned to the ground a few years back (act of God?) but had good insurance (miracle?) and has now been rebuilt (reborn?)). Here's Rocco:

"In 1992, Cardinal Bernard Law famously called down "the power of God" on the Boston media, "particularly the Globe," over its dogged coverage of the region's first public case of a predator priest.

Nine years later, the paper's "courageous, comprehensive" reporting on abuse in the Beantown church itself opened the floodgates of the most devastating scandal American Catholicism had ever known, paving the way to Law's resignation in disgrace and earning the broadsheet the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service.

These days, however, in the direst sign of the state of newspapers everywhere, it's the 137 year-old Globe that faces the ax, with its owner demanding $20 million in union concessions and negotiations continuing past a midnight deadline at -- of all places -- a suburban parish.''

I have to say I've had lots of kind e-mail from Catholics and other religious folks saying they're praying that the Globe will survive, or just thinking caringly about those of us who work here. But of course my blog, like others around Boston.com, has had its share of comments from people who claim they just can't wait for us to die (but first they want to post one more observation....). And although all the archdiocesan leaders I've spoken with, including Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, have been sympathetic, at least one church employee is not so sure -- Domenico Bettinelli, who works in fundraising for the archdiocese, blogged:

"Perhaps the Globe outpaced the populace and went further left faster than the people could be brought along. Oh sure, the glitterati and the politicians that the Globe is supposed to cover have all come out of the woodwork to lament the possible loss of the newspaper. But the people have been voting with their pocketbooks for years, dropping their subscriptions to the newspaper with every bizarre anti-Bush screed or anti-Catholic editorial cartoon. Herald columnist Howie Carr has gleefully filled up not one but two recent columns full of the Globe's follies, including some shoddy reporting in which the desire to advance a liberal cause resulted in retractions because they just didn't get the story right. After a while, the people began to notice.

Will it be the end of the world if the Globe shutters its doors? Competition is always better for the consumer, so I'd prefer two healthy competitors in this market to one, even if the one I prefer was the winner. On the other hand, if the business can't offer a product that the consumer wants, then let another take his place."

And even my former colleague, David Warsh, gets into the act, delivering what strikes me as an outrageous kick-when-down to the Globe:

"The pedophile priest story reflected a familiar tactic in building newspaper circulation. Newspapers are often described as an essentially two-sided market, meaning that both readers and advertisers each pay a share, but there is a significant third side to newspaper markets as well, a non-pecuniary one that influences readers' and advertisers' willingness to pay for the product. This is the realm of peer opinion in the newspaper industry, reflected in prizes, medals and general reputation. There is always some risk when seeking the good opinion of the profession of seeming to appeal over the heads of readers...It is hard to evaluate what the vigor of the Globe's pursuit of the story of the church's tolerance of sexual abuse by priests cost the paper in good will."

I don't actually believe the Globe is going to close, and, if it does, I don't believe our coverage of clergy sexual abuse will have had anything to do with it -- our problems are financial, and they are shared by all kinds of papers with all kinds of journalistic histories -- and I find it slightly shocking that a blog about economics would even suggest otherwise. I also think it's kind of insane, and insulting, to imply that the abuse story was aimed "over the heads of readers" -- I've never been involved with any story that provoked more engagement and reaction from readers, or one that readers said was more significant to their own lives. But whatever one thinks, the story has clearly become a defining part of the paper's history -- I noticed in an NECN story about the Globe's past yesterday that sex abuse and busing were the only two stories mentioned -- and, whatever our future holds, it will be part of our legacy.

(Photo by Stephan Savoia/AP.)

The Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life last week reported a finding that at first blush is stunning: the more often one attends religious services, the more likely one is to say that the use of torture against suspected terrorists is at least sometimes justified. And white evangelical Protestants are the most likely subgroup to offer at least some support for torture, while those who are not affiliated with a religious denomination are the least likely.

Here's the graphic from Pew:

The finding has occasioned, not surprisingly, quite a bit of discussion. Andrew Sullivan, in a post headlined "Jesus Wept,'' calls the result "terribly depressing,'' and writes:

"So Christian devotion correlates with approval for absolute evil in America. And people wonder why atheism is gaining in this country.''

Over at Christianity Today, David Neff blogged:

"The immediate impression is that religion — especially religion characterized by active commitment — makes people bloodthirsty. Or something like that. What can we say about this picture? First, the survey is probably accurate. Other studies have shown similar results...Second, there is (as there always is) a gap between leadership beliefs and grassroots attitudes...The key leaders of most evangelical denominations and parachurch organizations have gone on the record against the use of torture."

Neff, who is editor-in-chief of the Christianity Today Media Group, goes on to argue that evangelicals should be against torture always, despite the "Does it work?" debate:

"Utilitarian ethics tends to weigh the magnitude of a potential good against its costs (the greatest good for the greatest number). But evangelicals have been eager to reject utilitarian ethics when addressing other issues — embryonic stem-cell research and population-control programs, for example. Even if embryonic stem-cell research turned out to be the best way to cure Parkinson’s disease, most evangelicals would oppose it, just as we would oppose abortion even if it were shown to reduce, say, food insecurity. By the same token, even if torture produced reliable information about terrorist activity, we should reject it. We are people of principle. Our principles were historically at the root of human rights action and the development of the Red Cross and the Geneva Conventions, and any number of other moral crusades that put principle above utilitarianism. Our principles should now motivate us to lead the world in rejecting torture of any human being, for any reason."

At Spiritual Politics, Mark Silk observes:

"The real point here is that moral issues are tied into a whole array of ethical and political values and commitments. Explaining a particular position on a particular issue at a particular time according to religious identity or commitment is a complicated undertaking. One thing should, however, be clear. In this regard there are few if any slippery moral slopes. The oft-cited claim by the pro-life community that support for abortion rights leads individuals and communities inevitably into moral squalor cannot be sustained--certainly not when it comes to opposition to torture. The most anti-torture element in American society--the Nones--is also the most pro-choice."

Of course, the other element that I don't see discussed anywhere is simply partisanship. Evangelicals, and frequent churchgoers, are more likely to vote Republican; it was a Republican presidential administration, of George W. Bush, that allowed interrogation practices many have now concluded constituted torture; and the debate over torture today is, in some ways, a proxy for a debate over the conduct of the Bush administration. It seems to me it might be difficult in survey research to disentangle attitudes toward torture from attitudes toward the Bush Administration's legacy in general, and response to terrorism in particular.

BRAINTREE -- The Archdiocese of Boston is continuing its slow but steady progress digging out of a deep financial hole triggered by the clergy sexual abuse crisis, but is still facing an enormous challenge in the form of a pension fund for retired priests that will run out of money in two years without major change, church officials are announcing today.

The archdiocese, for the fourth year in a row offering the public a detailed look at the finances of the region's largest religious institution, today is releasing the annual financial reports for the central administration and, in aggregate, the 292 parishes, as well as for more than 60 other Catholic organizations, including schools, hospitals, cemeteries and social service agencies, overseen by Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley. For the first time, the archdiocese also is releasing individual financial reports for 102 parishes; a significant step toward fulfilling O'Malley's delayed goal of reporting every parish's finances publicly each year.

Archdiocesan officials said they were heartened that contributions to parishes rose 4 percent in fiscal 2008, and the archdiocesan annual fundraising campaign slightly surpassed its $15 million goal. And they said that indications are that contributions are holding steady this year, despite the recession.

"The continued generosity of the parishioners in the Archdiocese of Boston, despite very challenging times, is inspirational,'' said the Rev. Richard M. Erikson, the archdiocesan vicar general. And Erikson credited the archdiocese's financial officials with transforming "a diocese that was in economic freefall" to one that he described as now "in the midst of a major turnaround financially, and in many other ways.''

The archdiocese is hoping to balance its budget by fiscal 2010, which begins this July 1.The deficit in fiscal 2008 for its central administration was $4 million, which the archdiocese said was a decrease from about a $15 million annual deficit when O'Malley first arrived in Boston.

The reports are rich with detail about many aspects of the Catholic Church's complex financial situation, but perhaps the numbers that will most raise eyebrows among the public are the salaries the archdiocese is now paying the new employees O'Malley has brought in as he attempts to modernize and professionalize the church administration: the new superintendent of Catholic schools, Mary Grassa O'Neill, is being paid $325,000, and the new general counsel, F. Beirne Lovely Jr., is being paid $300,000. Two other top officials, chancellor James P. McDonough and development director Scot Landry, are being paid $250,000 each.

Erikson noted that the highest salary is for the church's top education official, which, he said, reflects the archdiocese's priority on strengthening its struggling schools. And, he said, the salaries generally reflect the cardinal's decision to recruit experienced laypeople to help transform an oft-criticized church administration.

"The salaries we have are an indication of the cardinal's commitment to attracting the most talented and gifted people we can find to serve in the church,'' he said.

The reports also reveal that the archdiocese's new headquarters, in Braintree, was valued at $25 million when it was given to the archdiocese, in a complex transaction, by one of the archdiocese's biggest donors, Thomas J. Flatley, who died shortly thereafter. The archdiocese spent $8 million renovating, furnishing, and equipping the building -- money that came from a portion of the proceeds from selling the church's former headquarters, in Brighton, to Boston College.

"We see the pastoral center as an investment in the future of the archdiocese," Erikson said, noting that the building, which houses 225 employees formerly spread across six different structures, is already being heavily used by a variety of groups for training sessions and other kinds of church meetings. He also said the building's chapel is proving a draw, saying that about 100 people attended daily Mass there during Lent.

The report is largely backward looking, reflecting on the fiscal year that ended in June 2008. But it also includes several predictive comments that shed light on how the archdiocese is being affected by the economy, and what its concerns are going forward. Among the projections is a grim forecast for the troubled Catholic schools of the region: the archdiocese expects enrollment at its parish elementary schools to drop by 4 percent next year, and at the few remaining parish high schools to drop by 9 percent.

The archdiocese, which recently assigned a single priest to oversee three parishes in Dorchester in what it said could be a model for how to handle the dwindling number of priests, suggests in the report that some parishes should now begin to share employees such as business managers.

"It is critical that parishes begin collaborating and sharing staff and costs whenever possible,'' McDonough wrote in the report. "Going forward, parishes will need to plan for increased payrolls, as more lay staff will be needed for operational responsibilities previously handled by clergy or religious.''

The economy really began to tank after the fiscal year covered by the report, but the archdiocese says in supporting documents that it has been affected in several ways by the recession and the stock market collapse. O'Malley, in a letter that accompanies the report, says the archdiocese is seeing "an unprecedented number of requests for services for the poor and those who find themselves in a never expected circumstance of need.'' And the report indicates that a pooled investment fund for many Massachusetts Catholic institutions, including the archdiocese, lost 18 percent of its value between July of 2008 and March of 2009.

The church investment fund appears to have significantly outperformed the broader market -- it lost 6.4 percent in fiscal 2008, a period when the Standard & Poor's 500 index dropped 13 percent, and it lost 15.8 percent in the first half of fiscal 2009, when the S&P dropped 29 percent. McDonough attributed the church's success to a combination of fortune and skill -- the church's fund had minimal investments in financial services and limited exposure to the sub-prime mortgage market, and also had a relatively high amount of cash, rather than stock, when the steepest market declines began..

As has been the case for several years, the archdiocese says its biggest financial problem is the weak health of the funds it sets aside to care for disabled and retired priests; the funds are short $114 million. The church's historic handling of those funds, which were largely built based on contributions made by churchgoing Catholics at Easter and Christmas, has been angrily questioned by both priests and laypeople, some of whom suspect that the money was mishandled, and others of whom question to what degree the funds were used to quietly support priests accused of sexual abuse over the years. McDonough has commissioned an investigation of how the funds were handled over their 27-year-history, and has pledged to release it in June or July; he said this week that thus far there is no indication of any criminal misconduct.

McDonough said that, in order to shore up the funds, the archdiocese will need to increase revenues and reduce expenses. He said the archdiocese will take several steps to raise money for the funds -- the party-shy cardinal has agreed to headline a gala benefit this year, pegged to the 25th anniversary of his becoming a bishop, that will raise money for the fund, the archdiocese will add a third annual collection, each June, to supplement the Easter and Christmas collections, and the archdiocese will launch a major gifts campaign to benefit retired priests. The archdiocese, chastened by the furious reaction from priests and the public to an earlier proposal to cut clergy retirement benefits, has also held multiple meetings with priests to discuss proposed changes to benefits and housing; church official say they plan to roll out those changes over time, but pledge that retired priests will be well cared for.

UPDATE: Here is the story about the archdiocesan finances that appears in the 5/1/09 Globe.

(Photo above, by Matthew J. Lee of the Globe staff, shows Richard Mawson installing stained glass windows in the chapel at the Archdiocese of Boston's new pastoral center in Braintree on 7/31/08.)

President Obama last night was sort of asked about the controversy over his scheduled commencement address and honorary degree at the University of Notre Dame, and he sort of answered. The exchange:

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. In a couple of weeks, you're going to be giving the commencement at Notre Dame. And, as you know, this has caused a lot of controversy among Catholics who are opposed to your position on abortion.

As a candidate, you vowed that one of the very things you wanted to do was sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which, as you know, would eliminate federal, state and local restrictions on abortion. And at one point in the campaign when asked about abortion and life, you said that it was above -- quote, "above my pay grade."

Now that you've been president for 100 days, obviously, your pay grade is a little higher than when you were a senator.

Do you still hope that Congress quickly sends you the Freedom of Choice Act so you can sign it?

OBAMA: You know, the -- my view on -- on abortion, I think, has been very consistent. I think abortion is a moral issue and an ethical issue.

I think that those who are pro-choice make a mistake when they -- if they suggest -- and I don't want to create straw men here, but I think there are some who suggest that this is simply an issue about women's freedom and that there's no other considerations. I think, look, this is an issue that people have to wrestle with and families and individual women have to wrestle with.

The reason I'm pro-choice is because I don't think women take that -- that position casually. I think that they struggle with these decisions each and every day. And I think they are in a better position to make these decisions ultimately than members of Congress or a president of the United States, in consultation with their families, with their doctors, with their doctors, with their clergy.

So -- so that has been my consistent position. The other thing that I said consistently during the campaign is I would like to reduce the number of unwanted presidencies that result in women feeling compelled to get an abortion, or at least considering getting an abortion, particularly if we can reduce the number of teen pregnancies, which has started to spike up again.

And so I've got a task force within the Domestic Policy Council in the West Wing of the White House that is working with groups both in the pro-choice camp and in the pro-life camp, to see if we can arrive at some consensus on that.

Now, the Freedom of Choice Act is not highest legislative priority. I believe that women should have the right to choose. But I think that the most important thing we can do to tamp down some of the anger surrounding this issue is to focus on those areas that we can agree on. And that's -- that's where I'm going to focus.

(Photo, by Charles Dharapak/AP, shows President Obama walking down the Cross Hall before the start of a news conference in the East Room of the White House in Washington on 4/29/09. )

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops today issued an advisory urging priests and other eucharistic ministers to be sure to wash before distributing Communion, and encouraged sick people to refrain from taking Communion from a cup. But the bishops stopped short of imposing a nationwide ban on handshakes or embraces during the kiss of peace at Mass, or a nationwide ban on the use of shared chalices.

Here is the news release from the bishops:

"The U.S. bishops’ Committee on Divine Worship has posted on the Web a series of 10 questions and answers related to participation at Mass during the time of the swine influenza (swine flu).

The information echoes that published in 2006 at the time of the avian (bird) flu and was developed in conjunction with the U.S. Center for Disease Control.

The 10 questions and answers can be found at http://usccb.org/liturgy/swineflu.shtml

Previously, the Q&A noted, “in those localities where the outbreak of the disease has been the most significant, bishops have introduced several liturgical adaptations in regard to such practices as the distribution of Holy Communion and the Exchange of the Sign of Peace in order to limit the spread of contagion.”

The Q&A also re-emphasized “the need to practice good hygiene” now.

“Ministers of Holy Communion should be encouraged to wash their hands before Mass begins, or even to use an alcohol based anti-bacterial solution before and after distributing Holy Communion.”

The Q&A added that priest, deacons and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion ministers “should instruct people who feel ill not to receive from the cup.”

The Q&A also noted that “the need for the introduction of widespread liturgical adaptations for the prevention of the transmission of influenza in the diocese of the United States of America is not evident at this time.”

The bishops' full swine flu Q&A is here.

The Archdiocese of Boston has sent the bishops' advisory to all of its employees.

(Photo, by Joe Raedle/Getty, shows people wearing surgical masks to help prevent being infected with the swine flu as they shop in a grocery store in Mexico City today, 4/29/09.)

Globe reporter Jenna Russell spent some time this afternoon with Jack Sullivan, the longtime Plymouth District Court clerk magistrate who says that he experienced a miraculous healing after praying for the help of the late Cardinal John Henry Newman. Here's her dispatch:

"MARSHFIELD _ Lying in a hospital bed after surgery on his spine, unable to walk and in agonizing pain, Jack Sullivan propped himself up on elbows and prayed.

Not to some vast, unknowable God, but to a specific figure in the Catholic church, vastly respected, yet mortal: Cardinal John Henry Newman, an Englishman who died in 1890.

The healing, as Sullivan tells it, was almost immediate. He felt a tingling all over, was flooded with warmth, and, as easy as that, he could walk.

Now, the recovery that Sullivan, 70, has been describing for almost a decade, a drama that unfolded in August 2001, is on the verge of being deemed a miracle by the Catholic church, and the unassuming Marshfield man, a church deacon and father of three, is at the center of an accelerating campaign to make the late British cardinal a saint.

A panel of theologians, convened by the branch of the Vatican that investigates possible miracles, has concluded that Sullivan's recovery resulted from his prayer, the London Telegraph newspaper reported. A panel of doctors previously researched his claim and found no medical explanation for what happened, Sullivan said. The final decision to bestow miracle status rests with Pope Benedict XVI. If that status is given, as expected, it would lead to beatification for Newman, the last step before canonization, or sainthood.

For Sullivan, who has remained pain-free since his prayers were answered, and who has lately been busy fertilizing his rose garden and celebrating his 40th wedding anniversary, the Vatican finding confirms what he has long believed.

He said his most striking memory of that summer day eight years ago is the wave of well-being that swept over him as he prayed in his hospital bed.

'The most important thing was the sense of exuberance I felt, exuberance and confidence that all would be well, all would be rosy, and a tremendous happiness,' Sullivan said yesterday. 'I got up and walked all over the place, twisting my cane like Charlie Chaplin.'"

The Globe's Charlie Radin took a look at Sullivan's role in the sainthood tribunal in a 2005 story.

The Catholic blogosphere has been fascinated by the Newman sainthood cause, and this latest development is attracting considerable attention.

Here's the Rev. James Martin, blogging at America magazine:

"Newman would make a fascinating and somewhat controversial modern saint: On the one hand, he is beloved by traditional Catholics (among them Pope Benedict XVI) for the moving story of his conversion from Anglicanism, his "theology of conscience," as well as his elegant apologias for the Catholic faith. But he is also loved by progressive Catholics for his ideas on the "development of doctrine." And, ironically, many Catholics suspicious of clericalism often quote this prince of the church who quipped, "Who are the laity? I answered that the church would look foolish without them.")

And not long ago, in preparation for his beatification, church officials attempted to unearth his remains in order to "transfer" them to a place more appropriate for public veneration but found little left. (Something quite the opposite of the tradition of the "incorruptible" saint.) The exhumation proved controversial since Newman had explicitly asked to be buried next to his lifelong friend, Ambrose St. John. "As far as this world was concerned, I was his first and last...he was my earthly light," Newman wrote. As a result, he is somewhat beloved among the gay community as well, who claim him as one of their own.

Newman: favorite of traditionalists, progressives, anti-clericalists and gays? It's a bit like the quest for the historical Jesus. Which Jesus you're looking for depends a great deal on what you're looking for. Stay tuned for the controversy over the historical Newman."

(Photos, by Debee Tlumacki for the Globe, show Sullivan at his Marshfield home. In the photo at top, he is holding a photo of Cardinal Newman.)

America, the Jesuit weekly, says it is time for the Catholic church to discuss allowing priests to marry. "Silence and fervent prayer for vocations are no longer adequate responses to the priest shortage in the United States,'' the magazine writes in an editorial. "For making do within the limits set by present demographic trends presents a double threat to Catholic life: Catholic communities will become only infrequent eucharistic communities, or eucharistic communities will be severed from the pastoral care and public witness of priests." An excerpt:

"Married priests already minister in the Catholic Church, both East and West. Addressing the married clergy of the Eastern Catholic churches, the Second Vatican Council exhorted “all those who have received the priesthood in the married state to persevere in their holy vocation and continue to devote their lives fully and generously to the flock entrusted to their care” (Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests,” No. 16). That exhortation now applies to the more than 100 former Anglican priests and Lutheran ministers who have entered the Catholic Church, been ordained and now serve in the Latin rite. As we face the challenges of the priest shortage, some of the more than 16,000 permanent deacons in the United States, many of them married, who experience a call to priestly ministry might be called to ordination with a similarly adapted discipline. In addition, the views and desires of some of the more than 25,000 priests who have been laicized (and are now either single or married) should also be heard.

Our plea is modest. The bishops of the United States should take greater leadership in openly discussing the priest shortage and its possible remedies. These should not be conversations in which we face a problem only to find every new avenue of solution closed. Rather, they should be exchanges fully open to the possibilities offered by the Spirit.

In March, Cardinal Edward Egan, the newly retired archbishop of New York, said in a candid moment that the topic of married priests “is a perfectly legitimate discussion.” He added, “I think it should be looked at.” The cardinal later nuanced his statement, but the need for a creative re-visioning of priestly life to sustain the eucharistic life of the church in its fullest sense can no longer be delayed."

Your thoughts?

Breaking news in the controversy over the University of Notre Dame's decision to grant an honorary degree to President Barack Obama: Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon has decided to decline the university's prestigious Laetare Medal, which was to be awarded at the same commencement ceremony.

Here is the letter Glendon, who was the Bush Administration's final ambassador to the Holy See, sent this morning to Notre Dame President the Rev. John I. Jenkins:

"Dear Father Jenkins,

When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame's Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame's most memorable commencement speeches. So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.

Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.

First, as a longtime Consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the President an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. Bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions "should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles" and that such persons "should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions." That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution's freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.

Then I learned that "talking points" issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:

"President Obama won't be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former US Ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal."

"We think having the President come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the President and for the causes we care about."

A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame's decision--in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. Bishops--to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church's position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.

Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the Bishops' guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.

It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.

In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.

Yours very truly,

Mary Ann Glendon"

And here is a statement from Father Jenkins:

“We are, of course, disappointed that Professor Glendon has made this decision. It is our intention to award the Laetare Medal to another deserving recipient, and we will make that announcement as soon as possible.”

(Photo by Tanit Sakakini for The Boston Globe.)

Americans are changing their religious affiliations at unprecedented rates, but Catholics are much more likely to cite concerns about their religion as a reason for leaving than are Protestants, who more often cite changing life circumstances.

The churn within American religion -- about half of American adults have changed their faith affiliation at some point -- was one of the key findings of a major study released last year by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life; today, the Pew Forum is releasing a new study that attempts to explore the reasons why Americans change denominations or religions, or, increasingly, drop out of institutional religion altogether.

Among the most striking findings are that most people who change their religious affiliation leave the denomination in which they were raised by age 24, and many change religious affiliation more than once. And the study found that the growing population of unaffiliated Americans are more disenchanted with institutionalized religion than with the idea of God.

But the differences between Catholics and Protestants are also significant, suggesting that Catholics who become alienated from their church often leave, whereas Protestants have the option of simply switching denominations.

"Protestants show a lot of interdenominational mobility, in part because there are a lot of Protestant groups,'' said John C. Green, a political science professor at the University of Akron. "Among Catholics, there is much less scope for mobility within the denomination, and a larger number ended up leaving.''

The study finds that about half of former Catholics cite religious and moral beliefs as the reason they left the Catholic church. About four in 10 former Protestants who became unaffiliated offer a similar explanation, but among Protestants who simply switch denominations, the main reasons are concerns about particular religious institutions, and life cycle changes such as marriage.

Pew last year released the eyepopping estimate that one in ten Americans is now a former Catholic -- about half of the former Catholics are now Protestants, and about half are now unaffiliated. But the new study suggests that the sexual abuse crisis played at most a minor role in the decision of Catholics to leave -- only two percent of former Catholics who are now unaffiliated volunteered the abuse scandal as the main reason they are no longer Catholic; when prompted by an interviewer, 27 percent said concern about the abuse scandal was a factor in their departure. Former Catholics who are now unaffiliated often said they left because of disagreements with the Catholic church over homosexuality, abortion, birth control, or gender; former Catholics who are now evangelical often say they stopped believing Catholic teachings and are concerned with the Catholic church's teachings about the Bible, while former Catholics who are now mainline Protestants most often say they changed because of marrying a non-Catholic or because they didn't like their priest.

"The sex abuse crisis is nowhere near being among the most important factors explaining why people have left the church,'' said Mark M. Gray, director of the Catholic Poll at Georgetown's Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate. Gray noted that many Catholics who became Protestants cited not one of the culture war issues, but teachings about the Bible.

"Clearly, there's a need to try to connect with youth, because a big portion of the people you're losing are teenagers and in their early 20s, and there's a need to reach out to them in terms of spiritual needs not being met,'' Gray said.

Susan Spilecki, a 41-year-old English teacher from Brighton who was a lifelong and active Catholic until entering the Episcopal church last year, didn't even mention the sexual abuse crisis when describing her transition.

"For my first 20 years, it wouldn't even have occurred to me, no matter how bad it was, that I could change -- being Catholic was just what you were,'' she said. But then, she said, she encountered other Christians in college, she had growing concerns about the church's teachings on contraception, homosexuality, and the ordination of women, she grew tired of explaining why she remained in the Catholic church, and her parish, in Boston's Symphony neighborhood, was closed by the archdiocese. Finally, she decided she wanted to study theology, and concluded that, "as a female, and therefore unordainable, Roman Catholic, who also disagreed with a lot of teachings,'' it was time for a change.

In the Episcopal churches where she worships -- the Cathedral Church of St. Paul in Boston and All Saints Parish in Brookline, "I've met more disenfranchised Catholics, and Unitarians who discovered Jesus, then cradle Episcopalians."

Despite the departures of Catholics from the faith, the overall Catholic population in the U.S. has remained stable because of immigration.

"Long-term, what this means is that the face of the Catholic Church is going to change dramatically over time,'' Green said. "There is likely to be continued erosion by Catholics of European background, and the church is going to be increasingly populated by Hispanics and Asians who are immigrating to the US.''

Among Protestants denomination switching is quite common, and is often triggered by marriage or by a family's move from one community to another.

"A lot of the switching is intra-Protestant switching, and I think at this point that's not even switching -- hardly anyone knows the difference between a Lutheran and an Episcopalian, or even a Methodist and a Baptist,'' said Stephen Prothero, a professor of religion at Boston University. "Lutherans hardly know anything about Luther, and Methodists hardly know anything about Wesley, and they don't care. We live in a postdenominational time.''

Kyle Thureen, a 26-year-old software engineer from Burlington, was raised in a Lutheran church in Minnesota and now attends the evangelical Grace Chapel in Lexington.

"The name on the front of the church is less important than what does the church believe, and how do they live that out,'' Thureen said. "The bottom line is, I would describe myself as a Christian.''

And Susan Stewart, a 44-year-old church worker in Arlington, had been affiliated throughout her life with American Baptist Churches congregations, but then joined a United Methodist church because it had better programming for children. Her husband was raised in the Catholic church.

"We looked around at a bunch of places, and Calvary United Methodist is within walking distance of our house, it was a neighborhood congregation, and there were a reasonable number of children when we started going there,'' she said. "Neither one of us had any experience with a United Methodist congregation, but originally the denomination did not particularly matter to us. In some ways, we were starting fresh together.''

The study also explores the growing ranks of the unaffiliated -- about 16 percent of American adults, according to Pew. The study finds many of the unaffiliated cite objections to religious people or religious institutions as the reason for leaving organized religion; few cited unbelief. And about one third of the unaffiliated say they are still open to finding the right religion.

"In American Christianity, you see a lot of talk about how vibrant it is, and how people are moving in, but there's also a huge open back door that they must be leaving out of,'' said D. Michael Lindsay, an assistant professor of sociology at Rice University. "It's not so much that science disproves religion, so people abandon their faith, it's more like a gradual drifting away, and a number of unaffiliated folks end up coming back and getting involved.''

In addition to the Globe graphics above, here is a cool flash graphic from Pew.

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston this weekend blogs about the upcoming May 15 release of "Angels & Demons," the movie version of the bestselling Dan Brown novel, which features a particularly gruesome killing (above) of a cardinal in a Roman church, Santa Maria della Vittoria, which is now O'Malley's titular church in Rome. (All cardinals are assigned a church in Rome which they are responsible for protecting, financially and spiritually.) I had talked to O'Malley about the connection between his church and the novel back in 2006; here's what he has to say this weekend in his blog:

"I understand that a movie based on Brown’s book Angels and Demons is about to premier. Portions of the plot take place in my titular church in Rome.

I read the book a few years ago and I didn’t find it a great piece of literature. The ending is a kind of a “deus ex machina” and, although it does not present a favorable picture of the Church, in my recollection is not as damaging as The Da Vinci Code, which calls into question the basic tenets of Christianity — Jesus’ divinity and the divine origins of the Church.

I understand that “The Da Vinci Code” was not a successful movie and this one will probably not be very successful either, but Dan Brown’s books were very profitable.

But “The Da Vinci Code” was a particularly virulent attack on the Church filled with many untruths that underscores the need for our Catholics to be more informed about their faith and the history of the Church.

The story line of “Angels and Demons,” I’m sure, will underscore many of the interesting architectural and artistic aspects of the city of Rome, including my own Church, Santa Maria della Vittoria, which has one of the finest statues in Rome: the Bernini statue of “The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa” (at left).

I always joked that I wanted to bring that statue back to Boston, but the Carmelite friars who run my church told me that Napoleon tried to take it to Paris and not even he was able to. They also tell me that they get a lot of tourists coming to the church because it is on the Angels and Demons tour of Rome. But, apparently, the director of the film was refused admission into the Church (although I’m sure they will still do something to replicate it in the film)."

(Photo above, by Zade Rosenthal/Sony Pictures, shows the scene that in the book takes place in O'Malley's titular church, Santa Maria della Vittoria; it's not clear where this scene was staged because the filmmakers were barred from shooting inside the actual church. Photo at left, of the famous Bernini statue in the actual church, was taken by David Ryan of the Globe staff; you can see other photos David Ryan shot of the real-life church here.)

Boston College's Church in the 21st Century Center has pulled together a series of thematic essays reflecting on Catholicism in Boston over the two centuries since the Archdiocese of Boston was established. The essays are collected in a new book, "Two Centuries of Faith: The Influence of Catholicism on Boston, 1808-2008,'' edited by university historian Thomas H. O'Connor. The book is not a comprehensive history of the archdiocese, but rather takes a look at several aspects of the development of the archdiocese, from the French influences on its beginnings, to the role of women and minorities in its ranks, to the role of Catholicism in Boston politics, social services, education and literature.

BC held an event Tuesday to present a copy of the book to Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston; the authors and a variety of faculty and students gathered in the Irish Room at BC's Gasson Hall, under a giant stained glass window of St. Patrick, the patron saint of the archdiocese.

O'Connor, offering the gathering an overview of the book, provocatively suggested that in some ways, the archdiocese of today resembles the archdiocese of 200 years ago, with fewer Catholics and fewer priests than it enjoyed during the triumphalist decades of the early 20th Century.

In the book, one of the contributors, the Rev. William T. Schmidt, pastor of St. Patrick Church in Stoneham, offers a sober look at the history of parish life in the archdiocese, observing that the sexual abuse scandal caused a "crisis of confidence and trust in the leadership of the Catholic Church" and saying "the long-term impact of this crisis is still unknown.''

"The parishes of the Archdiocese of Boston are facing extraordinary struggles, disappointments, and challenges at the beginning of Boston's third centenary. Sunday Mass attendance on the part of Boston Catholics has dropped precipitously from more than 70 percent of baptized Catholics during the halcyon days of the 1940s and 1950s to less than 25 percent today. This depleted participation at Sunday Mass is certainly reflective of continuing anger over the clergy sex abuse scandal. It is also refelctive of some deep distress with the closure of parishes. It would be inaccurate, however, to attribute the depleted numbers at Sunday Mass to these issues alone. There has indeed been a steady erosion of Sunday Mass attendance since the 1970s that is reflective of sweeping changes within the church and society.''

The last word in the book goes to BC history professor James M. O'Toole, who looks back at the bishops of Boston, and then looks ahead:

"For the foreseeable future, the institution of the church will continue to shrink, and the number of priests and sisters will become steadily smaller. Even as new forms of lay ministry expand, the reconfiguration of the institutions and agencies of the church will have to be accomplished cooperatively. For their part, lay people are eager to participate in this process of seeking new ways of 'being the church.' As time puts distance between ourselves and the events of the scandal, it seems increasingly significant that large numbers of Catholics did not simply abandon the church. That they stayed with it, even amid the heartbreaking scandal, evinces a desire to remain faithful members of the church. That commonality of faith has sustained them for the last two hundred years and will be essential for the next century -- centuries -- of Catholics of Boston.''

Cardinal O'Malley spoke briefly as he accepted a copy of the book. Here are some video excerpts of his remarks:

(Photo above, by Wendy Maeda of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston greeting history professor Thomas H. O'Connor of Boston College on 4/21/09.)

Empire State Pride Agenda, a gay rights organization in New York, yesterday released a video (above) and a pamphlet featuring a group of liberal Massachusetts clergy arguing that the legalization of same-sex marriage has not led to restrictions on religious freedom. The video and pamphlet are being used by the New York organization as part of its campaign in that state, where the governor last week introduced legislation to legalize same-sex marriage. Empire State Pride Agenda says the Massachusetts clergy are being cited to rebut claims by conservative religious organizations that the legalization of gay marriage threatens religious freedom.

The clergy interviewed, all of whom support same-sex marriage but some of whom are not allowed by their denominations to officiate at same-sex weddings, point out that most Massachusetts clergy do not officiate at same sex marriages (they're not allowed to, by religious authorities, in Catholic, Orthodox, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, or evangelical churches, or in Orthodox synagogues or in mosques) and said that there has been no government pressure on them to do so.

I called up the conservative Massachusetts Family Institute and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference to get their thoughts; not surprisingly, they see the landscape differently. They believe that confrontation between public policy (supporting gay marriage) and religious denominations (that oppose gay marriage) is inevitable, although they acknowledge that it hasn't happened yet. But they point to the state requirement that Catholic Charities be willing to place adoptive children with same-sex couples in order to continue participating in a state adoption program as an example of how this kind of tension plays out. I have a story, "Clergy lend voices to marriage debate,'' in today's paper.

"Angels & Demons," the Dan Brown thriller, does not paint a particularly flattering picture of the Vatican -- major elements of the Catholic Church's hierarchy are depicted as secretive, violent, conspiratorial, and, of course, anti-science. But the novel is also obviously a work of fiction, by the same writer who brought us "The DaVinci Code.'' So is it anti-Catholic?

As the May 15 release date of the film approaches, William Donohue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has been vociferously critical of the story, even publishing a booklet attempting to debunk the book and film. But now comes Ron Howard, the director of the film, offering a forceful defense, at the Huffington Post.

"Let me be clear: neither I nor Angels & Demons are anti-Catholic. And let me be a little controversial: I believe Catholics, including most in the hierarchy of the Church, will enjoy the movie for what it is: an exciting mystery, set in the awe-inspiring beauty of Rome. After all, in Angels & Demons, Professor Robert Langdon teams up with the Catholic Church to thwart a vicious attack against the Vatican. What, exactly, is anti-Catholic about that?

...But since Mr. Donohue has, in effect, smeared me by claiming I am smearing his Church, I want him to know this: I have respect for Catholics and their Church, and know they accomplish many good works throughout the world. And I believe Angels & Demons treats the Church with respect -- even a degree of reverence -- for its traditions and beliefs."

Donohue, not surprisingly, is firing back (the film's publicists must be ecstatic):

"Howard must be delusional if he thinks Vatican officials are going to like his propaganda—they denied him the right to film on their grounds. Moreover, we know from a Canadian priest who hung out with Howard’s crew last summer in Rome (dressed in civilian clothes) just how much they hate Catholicism. It’s time to stop the lies and come clean."

One interesting local angle: one of the most gruesome scenes in the book (depicted below in a still from the film) is set in Santa Maria della Vittoria, the titular church of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston. I talked with the cardinal back in 2006 about the book (which he had read) and the church. The cardinal called the book "outrageous" (the full blog post is here) but said this about the connection to his titular church, which has benefited from the controversy because "Angels & Demons" tours of Rome bring generous tourists to visit:

"I think it's silly,'' he said. "But if it brings people to see the church, hopefully, being in a holy place, and in a place that is beautiful, hopefully it will be a religious experience for them. For us as Catholics, we believe that the beauty of the church, and the church music, is a way of lifting our minds to God's beauty.''

What do you think? Is Angels & Demons anti-Catholic? Or just a thriller?

(Photos by Zade Rosenthal/Sony Pictures.)

Finally, a reason to start blogging again.

Like much of the planet, I've watched the video of Susan Boyle's "Britain's Got Talent" performance several times, in my case while wallowing in despair over the plight of the news business. I knew she was a churchgoing Catholic -- her primary performance experience appears to be from the pews of the parish in her Scottish village -- but that seemed a bit of a thin peg for me. Over the last few days, however, the religion blogosphere has begun to reflect about why this instant cyberfable, of a frumpy church lady who belts out a surprisingly sound rendition of a schmaltzy but heart-tugging musical theater classic ("I Dreamed a Dream" from Les Misérables), has captured the imagination of so many. More than 20 million have viewed a video of her performance on YouTube, and the appetite for more is unabated -- Google reports that "Susan Boyle" is the fastest-rising search term in the Boston area and is the second fastest-rising search term in the world. I admit, I’m a bit of an easy cry, but even after watching over and over again, something about the combination of the performance and performer, the reaction of the audience and the judges, the song itself, and, it must be said, the expert but manipulative editing of the video, brings tears to my eyes.

The Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest who is the associate editor of America magazine, finds an affirmation of a basic element of his faith in the response to Boyle's performance, writing under the headline "Susan Boyle and the Love of God":

"The way we see Susan Boyle is very nearly the way God sees us: worthwhile, special, talented, unique, beautiful. The world generally looks askance at people like Susan Boyle, if it sees them at all. Without classic good looks, without work, without a spouse, living in a small town, people like Susan Boyle may not seem particularly 'important.' But God sees the real person, and understands the value of each individual's gifts: rich or poor, young or old, single or married, matron or movie star, lucky or unlucky in life. God knows us. And loves us. 'Everybody is somebody' said Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan at his installation Mass in New York City yesterday. That's another reason why the judges smile and the audience explodes in applause. Because they recognized a basic truth planted deep within them by God: Susan Boyle is somebody. Everybody is somebody."

Over at Christianity Today's new women's blog, cleverly titled Her.meneutics, Sarah Pulliam poses the question, "Why Do We Love Susan Boyle?" and reviews some commentary from around the blogosphere.

And the Anchoress, Elizabeth Scalia, blogs:

"Susan Boyle has reminded us of something we’ve forgotten for too long. Hypnotised by Madison Avenue and Hollywood and the culture of youth, we’ve forgotten that the things they offer to us as 'the norm' are ideals, and mostly fake ones. In embracing those fake ideals (how much money was spent last year in cosmetic surgeries and teeth-whitening?) we’ve forgotten that beyond all of those superficialities, we each have within us something of much greater value than perky breasts and unlined skin: the divine spark, the God-kiss, that lives in each and every one of us - no exceptions."

For any of you who haven't seen it yet, or just want to watch again, here's the video:

What are your thoughts about what the response to Boyle's performance says about our culture?

(Photo by Andrew Milligan/AP)

Gallup yesterday released an analysis of poll data that shows Catholics are more liberal than non-Catholics on issues like sex (non-marital and gay) and gambling, and are split over abortion and embryonic stem cell research just like non-Catholic Americans, despite the church's clear and oft-stated teaching on those issues. Here's the data:

And here are some comments from Gallup:

"Despite the Roman Catholic Church's official opposition to abortion and embryonic stem-cell research, a Gallup analysis finds almost no difference between rank-and-file American Catholics and American non-Catholics in terms of finding the two issues morally acceptable."

"Catholics are at least slightly more liberal than non-Catholics on the issues of gambling (an issue to which the Catholic church is not totally opposed), sex between an unmarried man and woman, homosexual relations, and having a baby out of wedlock. Catholics are essentially tied with non-Catholics on the moral acceptability of abortion, divorce, and stem-cell research using human embryos. Only on the death penalty are Catholics slightly less likely than non-Catholics to find the issue morally acceptable."

Not surprisingly, Gallup finds that "committed Catholics,'' those who go to church regularly, are more in line with church teachings on these issues.

"Regular churchgoing Catholics (defined as those who attend church weekly or almost every week) are significantly less likely to find most issues measured in this research morally acceptable than are Catholics who do not attend church regularly. These committed Catholics' views on all these issues are much more in line with the church's teachings than are the views of non-practicing Catholics. However, even among committed Catholics, a slim majority seem to be at odds with the church's positions on premarital sex, embryonic stem-cell research, divorce, and the death penalty."

"Regular churchgoers who are Catholic are significantly more liberal than churchgoing non-Catholics on gambling, sex before marriage, homosexual relations, having a baby out of wedlock, and divorce. Committed Catholics are at least slightly more likely than devout non-Catholics to say that abortion and embryonic stem-cell research -- the two key issues highlighted by those protesting Obama's appearance at Notre Dame -- are morally acceptable. Only on the death penalty are committed Catholics more conservative than regular churchgoers who are not Catholic."

The Archdiocese of Boston tonight announced that it is closing Hudson Catholic High School, one of the last four parish high schools in the archdiocese. Here's the news release:

"Due to a sustained and serious decline in enrollment, combined with the economic realities facing communities across the Commonwealth and nation, Hudson Catholic High School announced it will close at the conclusion of the academic year in June 2009.

Hudson Catholic High School currently has 120 students; down from 200 in 2004, with next year's enrollment showing an even more significant drop to 96 students. Hudson Catholic High School is one of four parish high schools in the Archdiocese of Boston. In recent years most of the Archdiocese's Catholic High Schools established independent boards to govern their schools.

FULL ENTRY

The National Catholic Reporter says it has obtained documents showing that American bishops and the Vatican were warned of the dangers of clergy sexual abuse in the 1950s, decades before the phenomenon became public. An excerpt from the NCR story:

"As early as the mid-1950s, decades before the clergy sexual-abuse crisis broke publicly across the U.S. Catholic landscape, the founder of a religious order that dealt regularly with priest sex abusers was so convinced of their inability to change that he searched for an island to purchase with the intent of using it as a place to isolate such offenders, according to documents recently obtained by NCR.

Fr. Gerald Fitzgerald, founder of the Servants of the Paracletes, an order established in 1947 to deal with problem priests, wrote regularly to bishops in the United States and to Vatican officials, including the pope, of his opinion that many sexual abusers in the priesthood should be laicized immediately.

Fitzgerald was a prolific correspondent who wrote regularly of his frustration with and disdain for priests "who have seduced or attempted to seduce little boys or girls." His views are contained in letters and other correspondence that had previously been under court seal and were made available to NCR by a California law firm in February.

Fitzgerald's convictions appear to significantly contradict the claims of contemporary bishops that the hierarchy was unaware until recent years of the danger in shuffling priests from one parish to another and in concealing the priests' problems from those they served.

It is clear, too, in letters between Fitzgerald and a range of bishops, among bishops themselves, and between Fitzgerald and the Vatican, that the hierarchy was aware of the problem and its implications well before the problem surfaced as a national story in the mid-1980s."

Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver spent St. Patrick's Day lunch fielding questions from a group of journalists in Washington; I posted his opening remarks a few days back, in which he explained his position that politicians who support abortion rights should not present themselves for Communion, but also said that he does not deny Communion to those who seek it. Now the full transcript of the Q&A is available thanks to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, which hosted the lunch.

There are multiple interesting exchanges.

Sally Quinn, of On Faith, had a lengthy discussion with Chaput about her decision, as a non-Catholic, to take Communion at the Catholic funeral for Tim Russert. Quinn offered several different explanations for her action, saying at one point, "I wanted to do it because I wanted to see what it felt like, since I’m now – as you say, reporters should know about religion. I want to experience a lot of different religions,'' and saying at another point, "I felt very much like I wanted to do this for Tim. He was a very close friend of mine and it was a very emotional time." And then, she said:

"It seems to me, listening to you and trying to understand who is really acceptable, it would seem that nobody should be able to take communion, given your guidelines, because everyone is a sinner. Everyone has scandal in their background; everyone has done something wrong. When I look at the people in a Catholic church, when I see them getting up and they are friends of mine – even at Tim Russert’s funeral – whose consciences I know are not clear, I think why are those people allowed to take communion? I think about the Catholic priests who abused young children who still take communion. I think of those who knew about it and stayed silent and are still taking communion. How do you resolve those issues?"

Here is a portion of Chaput's response:

"The teaching of our church about Holy Communion isn’t that you have to be perfect or that you even have to be good. It’s that you have to be sorry for your sins and you have to believe what the church believes – not just about the Eucharist, whether it’s the body and blood of Christ, but about what we believe as Catholics...

What I think the basic problem is most of the time, Sally, is that people think that they can make up their own meaning for the Eucharist – for me it means that I admire Catholics, and for me it means that I like Tim Russert. But that’s not what the church means, and that’s why we don’t invite people to communion who don’t share our faith. Catholics who don’t believe what the Catholic Church believes shouldn’t receive."

And then, another exchange between the two:

QUINN: Did you believe that the pope made a mistake by giving communion when he was here to Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry and those other Catholics?

CHAPUT: I’ve given communion to people who come up who aren’t Catholics. We kind of joke that every time there’s a funeral, you have a lot of first communions because you don’t embarrass people when they come to communion and chase them away because that’s a terrible pastoral decision. But to tell them beforehand that it’s not appropriate unless you’re a Catholic is appropriate.

So there are all kinds of different issues going on in your question. I don’t think that my guidelines are mine; I don’t think they’re harsh. I think they’re just what the church has always understood. Now people don’t have to agree with us. If I don’t agree, let’s say, with an Evangelical church, I’ll still respect what they ask of me when I’m there. And I think that those of you who aren’t Catholics or who are non-believing Catholics or whatever, if you come to a Catholic church, it wouldn’t be appropriate for you to receive communion out of respect for what the church believes. So this isn’t about me being better than you or you being better than me; it’s simply what our church believes and practices.

Another exchange that caught my attention came between Chaput and Patricia Zapor, of Catholic News Service, who asked the archbishop about the vitriolic nature of so much e-mail about Catholic issues -- something I experience in the comments on this blog.

This is what Chaput said:

"I used to get some hate mail before I was online, but not nearly as much as I did afterwards. I think the way that we have immediate access, which means we immediately speak out of our emotions rather than write a letter, send it the next day, you might change your mind. Instead you write it and you push the button to “show them,” you know, that kind of thing.

So I think our immediate ability to communicate has led to a coarsening discourse for one thing. I gave a talk recently – I think it may have been when I was in Toronto, where I said that the Lord reminds us that we are sheep among wolves, but it’s important for us not to become wolves ourselves because of our experience, and I think that often happens.

Some of the worst emails I get are from Catholic conservatives who think I should excommunicate and refuse communion to Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. of Colorado and to former-Sen. [and now Secretary of the Interior] Ken Salazar of Colorado, and why aren’t you doing this? I mean, just awful kind of stuff that they write. Sometimes, I must admit, that when I write back, I’m not as friendly as I should be. But I try not to be mean."

And then, reflecting on the difference between e-mail from liberals and conservatives, he said:

"The left mail I get will use terrible words but be less vitriolic. They use the F-word and things like that, call me names like that. But the right is meaner, but they’re not as foul."

(Photo, showing Chaput at the lunch with journalists on 3/17/09, courtesy of the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life.)

They say there are eight million stories in the naked city -- well, here's a crazy one: at the posh New York Palace Hotel, a manager told a bell captain to wipe the smudge off his forehead on Ash Wednesday. The manager is now an ex-manager. The New York Daily News reports:

"'Wipe that (expletive) (expletive) off your face,' managing director Niklaus Leuenberger told a bell captain at the New York Palace Hotel on Feb. 25, sources said.

The unholy ultimatum ended up costing Leuenberger his job at the Palace, a swanky 55-story tower on Madison Ave. across the street from St. Patrick's Cathedral.

"As of Monday, March 23, Leuenberger is no longer employed by the New York Palace," hotel spokeswoman Teresa Delaney told the Daily News Tuesday.

The incident was deemed so severe, Christopher Cowdray, head of the London-based Dorchester Collection, which owns the Palace, flew here to hand Leuenberger the pink slip.

"We take the well-being of our employees extremely seriously and that is why our CEO, Mr. Cowdray, went to New York in person to deal with this matter," the company said.

The object of the manager's insult, bell captain Mike Murray, said the cross of dark ashes was liberally applied to his forehead at his Long Island church.

'My priest did a real number on me,' he said with a chuckle."

The best part: "The hotel leases its land from the Catholic Church."

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows ashes on a forehead in Boston on 2/6/08.)

BRAINTREE _ With a touch of flickering flame to the top of a bronze candelabrum, a key Vatican official today sought to reassure the Jewish community that there is no room in the Catholic church for anti-Semitism or Holocaust denial.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, who is Pope Benedict XVI's top advisor on Catholic-Jewish relations, visited the headquarters of the Archdiocese of Boston and took several steps to calm the controversy that has erupted since the pope lifted the excommunication of four traditionalist bishops, one of whom denies that the Nazis used gas chambers to kill Jews. Over a salmon lunch with 50 Jewish community leaders, Kasper fielded a series of tough questions about the Vatican's actions; he then joined a ceremony to rededicate a Holocaust memorial, originally located at the former archdiocesan headquarters in Brighton, which depicts six men and women holding torches to represent the six million Jews killed during World War II.

"The memory of what happened, now 65 years ago, can not be forgotten,'' Kasper told a crowd of about 200 at the rededication ceremony, including multiple priests and rabbis, several Holocaust survivors, and the consuls-general of Israel and Germany. "No Holocaust denial -- which is a new injustice to the victims -- can be allowed or permitted.''

(Here is the text of Cardinal Kasper's prepared remarks.)

But the raw emotions exposed by the controversy over Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St. Pius X were clear. Israel Arbeiter, the president of the Boston chapter of the American Association of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, recounted the deaths of his parents and brother in concentration camps, and his own witnessing of the remains of Jews killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, before addressing Kasper and saying, "Your Eminence, pain and suffering have been inflicted again on the Holocaust survivors by a representative of the church, namely, Bishop Williamson, and by the action and inaction by Pope Benedict XVI.''

Arbeiter also praised the Catholic church, calling the visit of Kasper "deeply meaningful,'' referring to Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston as a friend, and saying that the pope has taken a number of constructive steps in recent weeks to address the controversy. But he said he would like to hear the pope directly refute the claim by Williamson that gas chambers were not used by the Nazis.

"Sixty-nine years after the liberation of Auschwitz, with all the available documentation, confirmation by the German government, testimony by the perpetrators, Bishop Williamson still denies the truth, the fact of the Holocaust,'' he said. "...I will never understand that he denies that there were ever gas chambers, that Jewish people were gassed and murdered...I wonder whether Bishop Williamson knows where my parents and my brother are.''

Local Jewish and Catholic community leaders said they viewed Kasper's visit as a significant development, in that it affirmed the high priority the Vatican places on Catholic-Jewish relations.

"Words are helpful, but actions like today's re-dedication are more powerful, more meaningful, and more enduring,'' said Derrek L. Shulman, New England regional director of the Anti-Defamation League. "We welcome and celebrate this day as a major step forward for strengthening relations between Jews and Catholics in the Boston area."

O'Malley, who organized the event, called the Holocaust "the greatest act of inhumanity ever perpetrated on this planet,'' and said today's event was intended "to assure the entire community of the Holy Father and the church's commitment to furthering these wonderful relationships that have been cultivated the last decades." O'Malley noted that Catholic-Jewish relations in Boston have been strong since the days of Cardinal Richard J. Cushing, who in the 1960s helped draft a pivotal document at the Second Vatican Council that repudiated the basis for Christian anti-Semitism.

Kasper said that the outcry from Catholics irate over Williamson's remarks, and over the Vatican's action, was evidence that Catholics have internalized the importance of Catholic-Jewish relations. And Nancy K. Kaufman, the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council, said that the response to the uproar had provided evidence of the overall strength of the Jewish-Catholic relationship, noting the speed and candor with which local leaders had been able to meet and talk.

"It speaks to the power of the relationship that we have worked on so hard in this community over 40 or 50 years,'' Kaufman said. "Some of us here today can remember a time when relations between Catholics and Jews in Boston were not so good, and we didn't have the ability to have an honest and open dialogue among and between each other, and I think the ability to raise difficult issues like this one, and to have the discussion...speaks to the strength of the relationship."

(Photo, by John Tlumacki of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal Kasper at the Archdiocese of Boston pastoral center in Braintree on 3/25/009.)

A sign of the times: the Archdiocese of Boston is appointing a single pastor to oversee three parishes. I have a story in today's Globe. An excerpt:

"The Archdiocese of Boston, facing a growing shortage of priests but reluctant to close more churches, plans to name one pastor to oversee three parishes in the historically Catholic neighborhood of Dorchester, a practice never before used in Boston.

The three-parish pastorate, already common in much of the Midwest, provides a window into the future shape of Catholicism in Eastern Massachusetts. Scholars say that 40 percent of priests in America already serve more than one parish, but the phenomenon has been rare in the urban Northeast, where the high Catholic population for decades generated a high number of priests.

Now inexorable demographic shifts are catching up with the Archdiocese of Boston, where the priest population is getting smaller and older, the number of people who identify as Catholic is declining, and many churchgoing Catholics have migrated away from the urban centers where most churches are located. The archdiocese already has 14 priests who oversee two parishes; the Rev. John J. Ahern will be the first to oversee three when he takes over Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Holy Family, and St. Peter parishes in May.

'The reality is that in the very near future we will not have the number of priests to meet the number of parishes we have, and so we need to be efficient and effective in the use of our resources,' said the Rev. Richard M. Erikson, vicar general of the archdiocese. 'This is, on the one hand, a continuation of a trend that has already begun in the archdiocese, but it is also a preview of what we expect to be happening down the road.'"

(Photo, by Aram Boghosian for the Boston Globe, shows the Rev. John J. Ahern at his current parish, St. Mary of the Assumption in Brookline, on 3/23/09.)

Religious day schools are facing increased demand for scholarship assistance as the parents of their students lose jobs. I have a story in today's paper. An excerpt:

"Religious day schools in Greater Boston, some of which had been enjoying strong growth in recent years, are reporting increased requests for financial aid from families hurt by the recession and concerns about potential drops in enrollment.

The area's Jewish community last week became the first to act collectively, announcing $2 million from a national foundation to provide emergency scholarship aid to families whose children attend one of the area's 14 Jewish day schools or many Jewish summer camps and preschools.

The major source of financial aid for Catholic school students, the Catholic Schools Foundation, says its fund-raising is down by 15 percent, while requests for emergency aid from families in which a parent has lost a job or had work hours cut are spiking.

The situation facing religious schools is similar to that facing nonreligious private schools and colleges, all of which are far more expensive than the public alternatives.

'Every school and camp are reporting significant increases in the numbers of students and campers and preschool families needing scholarships,' said Barry Shrage, the president of Combined Jewish Philanthropies. 'We have hit a massive recession that looks like it's going to hit all segments of the community, from the poorest, who are already on scholarship, to the people in the middle class and upper-middle class, who never needed help before but now are fully unemployed.'"

(Photo, by Aram Boghosian for the Globe, shows Orna Siegel, the director of admissions at Gann Academy, a Jewish high school in Waltham, looking over files in her office on 3/20/09.)

The University of Notre Dame, which courted inevitable controversy when it offered President Obama an honorary degree and a speaking platform, today is announcing the second element of its Commencement Day plan: granting its Laetare Medal, bestowed at the same event, to Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon.

The invitation to Obama, which was accepted by the White House Friday, is controversial because Obama supports abortion rights, and some Catholics believe that politicians who support abortion rights should not be honored or allowed to speak on Catholic campuses. I blogged about the criticism of Notre Dame yesterday; now, as expected, some Catholics are also coming to Notre Dame's defense.

Over at "In All Things,'' the group blog of America magazine, Michael Sean Winters writes:

"Of course, the fringe on the right hates Notre Dame as much as it hates Obama. The University does not stand up to their 'More Catholic Than The Pope' standards...

A visit by the President of the United States is a great honor and all Catholics should revel in it. The colleges and universities our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents built are expressions of the engaged Catholicism that has always marked the life of the Church in this country. We had to build them because we had been forced into a ghetto, but they became the vehicle for entering the mainstream of American culture. President Obama is not coming for a football game or other entertainment. He will be coming to address the graduates of a great Catholic university and, by extension, the members of a great local Church, the Catholic Church in America. We should all be proud and, as (Cardinal) Newman would instruct, we should all be gracious."

And the Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at Georgetown's Woodstock Theological Center, e-mails:

"If Cardinal Egan can invite Obama to speak at the Al Smith dinner when he was only a presidential candidate, then there is certainly nothing wrong with Notre Dame having the President speak at a commencement. Other pro-choice speakers at Al Smith dinners included Gore and Tony Blair (a Catholic). What is OK for a cardinal archbishop is certainly OK for a university. Or are bishops exempt from 'Catholics in Political Life'?"

The pairing of Obama with Glendon, although unlikely to satisfy all of the university's critics, is interesting. Glendon, of course, has just finished her service as U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, and she is an opponent of abortion rights who is highly regarded by the Catholic hierarchy and by conservative Catholics; the Laetare Medal that she will receive is described by Notre Dame as "the oldest and most prestigious honor given to American Catholics." Here is what Notre Dame's president, the Rev. John I. Jenkins, says in announcing the award:

"Both as a public intellectual and as a diplomat, Mary Ann Glendon has impressively served our Church and our country. She is an articulate and compelling expositor of Catholic social teaching who exemplifies our University’s most cherished values and deserves its highest praise."

(Photo courtesy of Harvard Law School.)

The White House yesterday announced that President Obama will be the commencement speaker at the University of Notre Dame and, right on cue, a controversy has erupted in Catholic circles over whether it is appropriate for the Catholic university to honor a non-Catholic politician who supports abortion rights.

The university's announcement made no mention of the abortion issue, but noted that Obama will be "the ninth U.S. president to be awarded an honorary degree by the University and the sixth to be the Commencement speaker." The university plans to give Obama an honorary doctor of laws degree at the ceremony on May 17.

The question of how Catholic universities should treat politicians who have policy disagreements with the Catholic church has dogged Catholic higher education for years, but has intensified recently with the rise of prominent Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, now including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice-President Joseph Biden. In 2004, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement on "Catholics in Political Life" that declared, "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." It's not entirely clear to me whether the policy is meant to apply to non-Catholic politicians like Obama, but there have been controversies over such honors before, most prominently when some at Boston College protested an honorary degree for Condoleezza Rice in 2006 because of her role in the Iraq War. Last year, I took a look at the situation in a story for the Globe and found that Catholic colleges were increasingly shying away from controversial speakers.

Of course, the president of the United States raises the stakes considerably -- is a Catholic college really supposed to refuse a platform to the elected leader of the nation if he has a disagreement, however serious, with Catholic teachings? Today, many on the right are arguing that the answer is yes.

The Cardinal Newman Society immediately set up a protest web site, asking people to "Help Stop the Scandal at Our Lady's University." Greg Kandra, over at The Deacon's Bench, blogs, "This falls under the category of "What Were They Thinking?" Thomas Peters, at the American Papist, predicts that Notre Dame will not back down, but says, "What can and will happen, I hope, is a frank discussion in the public spotlight about a) the mission and identity of Catholic universities and b) a greater awareness of the anti-Catholic policies and legislation that Obama is currently pursuing." And over at Via Media, Amy Welborn suggests Catholic universities stop inviting politicians altogether:

"I think it would be easier on everyone, frankly, if Catholic universities cut the cord with politicians completely. I don't care how prestigious you aim to be, how much you want your graduates to contribute to the fabric of American civic life, even a sitting president cannot help but associate you with a political ideology.

I'm not arguing for the ghetto, at all, but we're not talking noble statesmen here. We're talking politicians who are divisive figures and who, Obama's case, are pursuing policies that directly threaten Catholic institutions."

At a minimum, there is sure to be significant protest of Obama's speech that will draw much more attention, and likely broaden the debate, over the question of who should be allowed to speak, and receive an honor, on Catholic campuses. The Rev. Austin Fleming, pastor of Holy Family parish in Concord, observes on his blog:

"I'm a Domer, a Notre Dame graduate (M.A. Theology/Liturgical Studies, '80), and worked in the ND Office of Campus Ministry for three years. That job found me on the commencement platform in 1981 when President Ronald Reagan received an honorary degree. Reagan's presence on campus sparked some controversy but I'll wager that was nothing compared to what we're going to see when Obama steps under the Notre Dame mantle."

(Photo, by Gerald Herbert/AP, shows President Obama at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus on 3/20/09.)

Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver is one of the most prominent and forceful voices among today's Catholic bishops, and on Tuesday he sat down with journalists in Washington for a fascinating conversation hosted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. I joined in by conference call, and when Pew publishes the transcript I'll share with you the exchange between Chaput and journalist Sally Quinn (a non-Catholic) over her decision to take Communion at Tim Russert's funeral. In the meantime, Chaput has posted his opening remarks on his archdiocesan web site, and there's plenty to chew on here.

First, there is his critique of much reporting on religion in the American media:

"In my experience, dealing with the press has usually been rather enjoyable. I’ve worked with some very good journalists. I don’t think we should ever fear the truth. And I tend to like challenging questions.

But I also know reporters and editors who were, and are, uniquely frustrating – not because they write bad things about the Church, and not because they lack skill or intelligence. It’s because too often they really don’t know their subject; or they dislike the influence of religion; or they have unresolved authority issues; or they resent Catholic teachings on sex; or they’d rather be covering the White House, but this is the only beat they could get.

I don’t expect journalists who track the Church to agree with everything she teaches. But I do think reporters should have a working knowledge of her traditions and teachings. I do think editors should have the basic Catholic vocabulary needed to grasp what we’re talking about, and why we’re talking about it."

Secondly, there was Chaput's opening explanation for why he believes politicians who support abortion rights should not present themselves for Communion. (However, he also said that he believes the priest who denied Communion to Obama supporters was "wrong" and he said that he does not deny Communion to people who present themselves to him -- essentially the same position as that taken by the archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who, like Chaput, is a Capuchin Franciscan friar.) Here's what Chaput said about Communion:

"Sometimes in reading the news, I get the impression that access to Holy Communion in the Church is like having bar privileges at the Elks’ Club. I’m reminded of the story of the Catholic novelist Flannery O’Connor. She was at a cocktail party talking with fellow writer Mary McCarthy, who had left the Church. McCarthy, though no longer Catholic, said she still thought the Eucharist was a pretty good symbol of God’s presence. O’Connor replied: “Well, if it’s a symbol, to hell with it.”

For believing Catholics, the Eucharist is not a symbol; or rather, it’s enormously more than a symbol. It’s the literal, tangible, body and blood of Jesus Christ. And since the earliest days of the Christian community, honest believers have never wanted to, and never been allowed to, approach the Eucharist in a state of grave sin or scandal. St. Paul said that if we do that, we profane the body and blood of Christ, and we eat and drink judgment upon ourselves (1 Cor. 11:27–32).

In other words, we commit a kind of blasphemy against God, and violence against our own integrity and the faith of other believers. There’s nothing casual about this kind of sin, and the American notion of “civil rights” is useless and flatly wrong in trying to understand it. No one ever has a “right” to the Eucharist -- and the vanity or hurt feelings of an individual Catholic governor or senator or even a vice president do not take priority over the faith of the believing community.

Blasphemy and violence are unpleasant words in polite conversation – but for believers, they have substance. They also have implications beyond this lifetime. That’s why no Catholic – from the simplest parishioner to the most important public leader – should approach Communion with grave sin on his soul. The media have no obligation to believe what the Church teaches. But they certainly do have the obligation to understand, respect and accurately recount how she understands herself – and especially how she teaches and why she teaches."

(Photo courtesy of the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life.)

I've been scanning the photos from Pope Benedict XVI's ongoing visit to Cameroon, and it's hard not to notice the amazing headgear worn by Cameroonian First Lady Chantal Biya to the welcoming ceremony at the Yaounde airport Tuesday. It looks like some combination of a miter and a head wrap. Here's a detail shot:

I asked Globe style writer Christopher Muther what he made of the hat; he was clearly impressed:

"Carla Bruni-Sarkozy? Michelle Obama? Neither of these glamorous first ladies can compare to style icon Chantal Biya, the first lady of Cameroon. Chantal and her continent of hair met the Pope yesterday, and you can tell that the Pontiff was thinking "How can I grow my eyebrows like that" through the entire encounter. Her hair is so amazing that it has a style named after it (seriously) -- the Chantal Biya. Chantal even showed up the Pope's miter with her jaunty head wrap, which was adorned with tasteful crosses for the occasion. No further deliberation is necessary; it's time to declare Mrs. Biya a saint of style."

(Photo at top, by Issouf Sanogo/AFP, shows the pope, Cameroonian President Paul Biya, and his wife Chantal, at the airport in Yaounde on 3/17/09. Photo at center, of Chantal Biya, also by Issouf Sanogo/AFP.)

Here are some photos of the crowds in the streets of Yaounde today:

(Photo, by Alessandro Bianchi/Reuters, shows young Cameroonians receiving a blessing from Pope Benedict XVI during a Vespers service outside the Marie Reine des Aprotes Basilic in Yaounde on 3/18/09.)

(Photo, by Rebecca Blackwell/AP, shows students reacting to a sudden downpour as they waited outside the basilica where Pope Benedict XVI was celebrating Vespers in Yaounde on 3/18/09.)

(Photo, by Finbarr O'Reilly/Reuters, shows women sitting by religious paintings ahead of the arrival of Pope Benedict XVI at the basilica to celebrate Vespers in Yaounde on 3/18/09.)

Pope Benedict XVI, in the midst of a visit to Cameroon and Angola, is facing criticism over his reiteration of the church's opposition to condom use for AIDS prevention. This is what the pope said, in response to a pre-selected question from a journalist:

"It is my belief believe that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is in fact the Catholic Church and her institutions. ... The problem of HIV/AIDS cannot be overcome with mere slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanisation of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with the suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to stand by those who suffer."

The criticism started immediately. Here's Harry Knox, director of the Human Rights Campaign’s Religion & Faith Program:

“The Pope’s statement that condoms don't help control the spread of HIV, but rather condoms increase infection rates, is hurting people in the name of Jesus. On a continent where millions of people are infected with HIV, it is morally reprehensible to spread such blatant falsehoods. The Pope’s rejection of scientifically proven prevention methods is forcing Catholics in Africa to choose between their faith and the health of their entire community. Jesus was about helping the marginalized and downtrodden, not harming them further.”

But Catholic League president Bill Donohue responds:

“Last year, Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, wrote that ‘In every African country in which HIV infections declined, this decline has been associated with a decrease in the proportion of men and women reporting more than one sex partner over the course of a year—which is exactly what fidelity programs promote.’ As for condom use, Green said, ‘Many countries that have not seen declines in HIV have seen increases in condom use, but in every country worldwide in which HIV has declined there have been increases in levels of faithfulness and usually abstinence as well.’ The Catholic Church, it is well known, has been at the forefront of such programs. It also operates more hospitals and related medical centers for AIDS patients than any other private institution in the world. If condoms were the answer, then why is it that New York City, which under Mayor Michael Bloomberg has given away tens of millions of free condoms, has an HIV rate three times the national average? Furthermore, the promiscuous distribution of condoms in New York has coincided with a spike in sexually transmitted diseases of all sorts. Isn’t it time we learned that condom worship is irrational? Anyone who thinks that condom distribution, education and/or research is going to solve a problem which is mostly a function of behavioral recklessness is positively clueless. Not only that, such persons unwittingly contribute to the problem by distracting attention and resources away from that which works.”

UPDATE: Here is a clarification issued by the Vatican press office:

"Concerning certain reactions aroused by the Pope's remarks on HIV/AIDS during his apostolic trip to Africa, Holy See Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J. has explained that the Holy Father was reiterating the position of the Catholic Church and the basic lines of her commitment to combat the terrible scourge of HIV/AIDS: Firstly, by educating people to a responsible practice of sexuality and by reaffirming the essential role marriage and the family. Secondly, by research into, and application of, effective cures for HIV/AIDS, and by making them available to the largest possible number of sick people through numerous initiatives and healthcare institutions. Thirdly, by human and spiritual assistance to AIDS victims and all other suffering people, who have always been close to the Church's heart. "These are the areas in which the Church concentrates her efforts, not believing that relying primarily on the greater dissemination of condoms is, in fact, the best, most longsighted or effective way to combat the scourge of HIV/AIDS and safeguard human life".

(Photo, by Christophe Simon/AFP, shows residents of Cameroon waving to the convoy of Pope Benedict XVI under an AIDS prevention billboard in Yaounde, 3/17/09.)

President Obama today met at the White House with Cardinal Francis E. George, who is the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The two men are both from Chicago, and had met one another several times before Obama's election, but they do not have much of a personal relationship. No word yet on the substance of today's meeting, but the bishops' conference has been critical of Obama's decision to allow embryonic stem cell research and to lift the so-called global gag rule, and has expressed concern about possible changes to what the bishops call "conscience protections for health care workers."

Here is the statement from the White House:

"Today the President met in the Oval Office with His Eminence, Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I., Archbishop of Chicago and President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. The President and Cardinal George discussed a wide range of issues, including important opportunities for the government and the Catholic Church to continue their long-standing partnership to tackle some of the nation’s most pressing challenges. The President thanked Cardinal George for his leadership and for the contributions of the Catholic Church in America and around the world."

And here is the statement from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops:

"Cardinal Francis George, OMI, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, met at the White House with President Barack Obama during the afternoon of March 17. The meeting was private. Cardinal George and President Obama discussed the Catholic Church in the United States and its relation to the new Administration. The meeting lasted approximately 30 minutes. At the conclusion, Cardinal George expressed his gratitude for the meeting and his hopes that it will foster fruitful dialogue for the sake of the common good."

(Photo above, by Scott Olson/Getty, shows Cardinal George celebrating Mass in Chicago on Ash Wednesday, 2/25/09.)

The Archdiocese of Boston today (the feast day of its patron saint, Patrick) is unveiling its long-in-the-works revamped web site, along with a new URL, www.bostoncatholic.org. Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley is in Rome today, but wrote about it on his blog:

"St. Patrick worked tirelessly to bring the Good News to the Irish people in ways that were accessible to them. Perhaps the most famous example of this is the story of St. Patrick using the shamrock to explain the nature of the Trinity.

In that same spirit, we hope and pray that this new web site will help people to better come to know the love of Christ and His Church in Boston."

I took a quick spin through the site -- it clearly looks better than its predecessor, with a sleeker, more contemporary design, and it's easier to navigate -- and it has many more bells and whistles, including multimedia content. It also attempts to embrace less churchy jargon -- this is a bit of a trend for the archdiocese, where officials have banished the word "chancery" and named their new headquarters a "pastoral center,'' and now the archdiocese has relocated its web site from rcab.org (for Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston) to bostoncatholic.org.

I know the biggest complaint that I've heard over the years about the archdiocesan web site is that it's hard to figure out how to send an e-mail to the cardinal or other church officials; the web site now includes a generic contact form, but not, so far as I can see, the e-mail addresses for specific officials.

Here's a hyperlinked screen grab of the new archdiocesan home page; take a look, and feel free to let me know what you think.

Bishop Richard G. Lennon (left) was the vicar general of the Archdiocese of Boston when he oversaw the reconfiguration process that ultimately led to the closings of about 18 percent of the parishes in metropolitan Boston. Now he is the bishop of Cleveland, and this weekend he announced a set of closings and mergers that will result in a 23 percent drop in the number of parishes in that diocese. In his remarks on Sunday, Lennon noted that the Boston reconfiguration had resulted in the closing of his own childhood parish, St. James the Apostle in Arlington:

“Closing a parish is very emotional, and I am sympathetic to the tremendous passion that many Catholics have for parishes that in many cases have been part of their families’ lives for several generations. I have personally experienced the closing of my own childhood parish in Boston, which members of my family helped establish in 1914.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer describes the reaction, which will be familiar to observers of the Boston situation, where there is still ongoing civil litigation, canonical appeals, and five "parish vigils" in which closed parishes are occupied round-the-clock by Catholics protesting the closings, nearly five years after the closings. Here's an excerpt from the Plain Dealer story:

"Some are saying prayers of thanks. Many of the faithful, especially members of urban parishes, wonder what happened to the church they knew.

A sweeping consolidation plan comes down hard on the church in the city. It prepares the diocese to shift staff and resources from venerable, often struggling urban churches to larger, younger parishes in the outer suburbs.

The newly shaped Diocese of Cleveland will field 52 fewer parishes by June 30, 2010, and most of the loss will be felt in Cleveland, Lorain and Akron and the inner-ring suburbs of Euclid and Lakewood. Eighteen of the 29 parishes that will close outright are in Cleveland.

For Catholics with ties to the city, it's almost impossible to escape a sense of loss and, some say, abandonment. Map: All the churches of the diocese, showing which ones close, which merge, which are unaffected. (6 mb pdf). Video: Bishop Lennon discusses the reasons for downsizing.

Irene Allen, 62, of Brecksville, came to Cleveland from Hungary when she was 10 years old. She attended elementary school at St. Procop, was married at St. Ignatius of Antioch and buried her parents out of St. Emeric.

All three of those churches are scheduled to close.

'I've been a Catholic all my life, but I'm thinking of becoming a Lutheran,' an angry Allen said Sunday. 'Cleveland is a city of churches. So what are we doing with them? Closing them down. It's an atrocity. How much are they thinking of God and how much are they thinking of their pocketbooks?'"

A public radio station in Cleveland, WCPN, held a conversation about the closings this morning; I was among the guests. You can listen in here.

(Photo, by Jamie-Andrea Yanak/AP, shows Bishop Lennon during his installation Mass in Cleveland on 5/15/06.)

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops today released its sixth annual report on how well dioceses are doing at complying with the child abuse prevention measures adopted by the bishops back in 2002. Almost all dioceses are complying, the bishops reported; one of the holdouts remains a Melkite (Eastern Rite) eparchy headquartered in Boston.

The bishops' conference also released an annual statistical snapshot of abuse-related matters, produced by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown. Some highlights:

"Last year, dioceses received ten new credible allegations of abuse to a person still under 18 years of age. CARA reported that in 2008, more old cases came to light as 620 victims made 625 allegations against 423 offenders. Most incidents took place decades ago, most frequently in the 1970-74 period. Most victims were male and a little more than half were between the ages of 10 and 14 when the abuse began. About 23 percent were younger than age 10.

About 83 percent of the offenders among diocesan clergy are deceased, already removed from ministry, already laicized or missing. About 60 percent of those identified offenders in new allegations in 2008 had been identified in previous allegations.

A total of 16 priests or deacons were returned to ministry in 2008 based on resolution of an allegation made during or prior to 2008.

Money expended in relation to the abuse crisis decreased, though it is still substantial.

'The total allegation-related expenditures by dioceses, eparchies, and clerical and mixed religious institutes decreased by 29 percent between 2007and 2008 after increasing in each of the previous three years,' CARA reported. Dioceses, eparchies and religious institutes paid a total of $374,408,554 in settlements."

The Archdiocese of Boston was found compliant with the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People; I have a story in today's paper about the audit and a letter that Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley released declaring that the archdiocese is moving "beyond an atmosphere of crisis to one of implementation and vigilance" and revealing that he expects in the "very near future" to release some kind of list of accused priests -- a goal long sought by survivor groups. An excerpt from the cardinal's letter, which was addressed to the chairwoman of the Implementation and Oversight Advisory Committee:

"From the earliest days of the abuse crisis, we have understood the need to continuously evaluate and enhance our policies and practices for the protection of children...the Church must bear constantly in mind the paramount importance of assuring the protection of children. While much has been accomplished to date through your work, and that of many other good and devoted people, it would be a mistake to think that the Church in Boston is completely beyond this crisis. We must be ever vigilant for the protection of children in order to restore the confidence of the faithful in the Church and its institutions.''

O'Malley's characterization of the crisis was disputed by Mitchell Garabedian, an attorney for victims and a frequent critic of the archdiocese, who e-mails:

"I do not believe the Archdiocese is moving 'beyond an atmosphere of crisis to one of implementation and vigilance.' I have reported many incidents of clergy sexual abuse to the Archdiocese within the past year. Yet, the Archdiocese has carefully categorized abusive incidents so that that the Archdiocese can state that there has been only one report of clergy sexual abuse in a category. In doing so, the Archdiocese deceptively leaves the impression that no other clergy sexual abuse victims have recently come forward. Although the Archdiocese appears to have moved beyond an 'atmosphere of crisis,' it is deceptively leaving the clergy sexual abuse victims behind."

The state Connector Board this morning unanimously approved a proposed joint insurance venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and the Centene Corporation that would allow the health care providers to participate in the state's insurance program for the poor.

But Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, who is charged with overseeing the Catholic-ness of the Catholic hospital network, has just issued a cautionary statement. Here it is, in its entirety:

"While I appreciate the opportunity given to Caritas Christi to serve the poor through this agreement, I wish to reaffirm that this agreement can only be realized if the moral obligations for Catholic hospitals as articulated in the Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops are fulfilled at all times and in all cases. In order to assure me that this agreement will provide for the integrity of the Catholic identity and practices of Caritas Christi Health Care System, I have asked the National Catholic Bioethics Center to review the agreement and to assure me that it is faithful to Catholic principles."

At issue are rules set forward by the U.S. bishops that declare, "Catholic health care organizations are not permitted to engage in immediate material cooperation in actions that are intrinsically immoral, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and direct sterilization." The joint venture will cover such services, but Caritas will not provide them; whether Caritas's role in the venture constitutes "immediate material cooperation" is the subject of debate. A number of moral theologians contacted by the Globe, as well as the president of the Catholic Health Association, said they do not believe the venture violates Catholic teaching, but some anti-abortion activists are leery, and their concerns were heightened today when state officials said the venture's participants would give patients a phone number to call to get any procedure needed, and would even provide a ride to a hospital that would do the procedure not done by a Catholic hospital.

The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts today blasted Caritas, calling the venture “a significant defeat for the pro-life movement, inflicted not by secular society, but by the Catholic Church in Boston.” A statement from the league's executive director, C. J. Doyle:

“What remains of the Catholic character of Caritas Christi has now been fatally compromised. The partnership in which Caritas Christi is one of the two principals will provide ‘ready access’ to abortion, which the Catholic religion condemns as ‘an abominable crime’. It is now clear that the Archdiocese of Boston has spent the last week cynically misdirecting Catholics and the general public with empty assurances that Caritas Christi would not collaborate in abortion. If a woman with a Commonwealth Care card walks into a Caritas Christi hospital seeking an abortion, she will be directed back to her health plan -- the Caritas/Centene partnership -- which will not only arrange for the procedure, but if necessary will provide transportation to the facility which performs it. With Caritas Christi now thoroughly embedded in the culture of death, we are now facing the end, in Massachusetts at least, of Catholic medical resistance to abortion and contraception. This tragic state of affairs is the personal responsibility of the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Sean O'Malley, who not only failed to stop this contract, but who endorsed it while making unsupportable assertions implausibly denying what everyone else knew -- that the contract required participation in the deliberate killing of innocent unborn children.”

Caritas President Ralph de la Torre issued a statement that did not address the controversy:

“This plan confirms Caritas Christi’s commitment to bring the highest quality healthcare to patients in their communities. This commitment coupled with Celtic’s national experience and financial backing, effectively position this new health plan to deliver world-class healthcare to Commonwealth Care enrollees while maintaining the fiscal responsibility owed to the citizens of the commonwealth.”

(UPDATE: "Celtic Group Inc." is a subsidiary of Centene Corporation; the joint venture is technically between Caritas and Celtic.)

(Photo above, by Barry Chin/Globe staff, shows Cardinal O'Malley in Quincy on 1/13/09.)

The Vatican today released the official translation of the unusual letter Pope Benedict XVI wrote to the world's bishops responding to the controversy over his decision to lift the excommunications of four traditionalist bishops, one of whom denies the extent of the Holocaust.

In the letter, the pope says the controversy was "more heated than any we have seen for a long time" and said he wanted to clarify his thinking. He also used the word "mistake" to describe the Vatican's communication about why it had lifted the excommunications.

Interestingly, the pope acknowledges that the Holocaust-denying background of Bishop Richard Williamson -- which he has said he didn't know about before the controversy -- could have been easily determined by an Internet search:

"I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news."

And, in the key paragraph, he says the Society of Saint Pius X must accept the Second Vatican Council to be fully reconciled with Rome:

"The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life."

The pope speaks sadly of Catholics who "thought they had to attack me with open hostility," but thanks his "Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust." Today, World Jewish Congress President Ronald S. Lauder issued a statement praising the pope:

"The Pope's letter conveys the essential requirements for inter-religious dialogue: candor and the willingness to tackle difficult issues squarely. His expressed anguish at the events following the Holocaust-denying statements by Williamson reflects the similar emotional pain felt by Jews worldwide during this affair. We reciprocate his words of appreciation for Jewish efforts to restore inter-religious dialogue and will continue to work with the Catholic Church to further strengthen mutual understanding and respect."

Here is the official translation of the pope's letter:

The state's Connector Board is scheduled to vote tomorrow on the proposed joint insurance venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and the Centene Corporation, and two interest groups that have been critical of the deal are striking very different notes on the eve of the vote.

Massachusetts Citizens for Life, the state's leading anti-abortion organization, has just sent over a quite conciliatory statement, from the group's president, Anne Fox:

"Massachusetts Citizens for Life continues to wait for Caritas Christi to respond to the organization's request for a meeting. Mass. Citizens seeks clarification of the Caritas statement that they would provide a full range of family planning services in partnership with the Centeme Corporation. That clarification has not been forthcoming.

We at Mass. Citizens are aware of the fact that Cardinal O'Malley is the ultimate authority on whether or not Caritas will continue to pursue the partnership. Over the years that Cardinal O'Malley has been a bishop in Massachusetts, his support for life from the moment of conception until natural death has been unwavering and an example to all. The officers and directors of Mass. Citizens have full confidence that the Cardinal's decision will continue his exemplary support for life."

But C.J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League, a smaller organization, is much more critical:

"Caritas, which refuses to release the names of its board of governors, won't even publicly say how it handles requests for abortions now -- without the requirements of a state contract.

If Caritas actually intended to accept tax dollars while evading state demands for abortion coverage, every voice on the political left would be raised against it -- in the media, in the Legislature, and among the advocacy groups. Instead, we have heard nothing but silence from the usual adversaries of the Church.

It staggers the imagination that anyone can seriously believe the assertions by the Archdiocese of Boston about Caritas and abortion. The only solution is for Caritas to withdraw from the contract."

Meanwhile, Centene sent over a statement that explains how they would handle a situation in which a patient seeks a service that a Catholic hospital will not provide:

"Like all managed care plans, our health plans contract with a full spectrum of providers to ensure that all benefits are available to members, as required and approved by our state regulatory agencies. If a provider does not perform certain medical services, that provider directs patients back to the health plan. Our health plans have local staff and 1-800 numbers available 24/7 for access to information on all services provided. This number and information about all services are readily available online and in printed materials. In Massachusetts, we will apply these same procedures."

Pope Benedict XVI is scheduled tomorrow to issue a letter to the world's bishops explaining his decision to lift the excommunications of four traditionalist bishops, including one, Richard Williamson, who denies the extent of the Holocaust. Excerpts of the letter have been published in the Italian media, and there are purported texts of the letter flying around the Internet. Here's an excerpt of the Catholic News Service story:

"The pope said the controversy over Bishop Richard Williamson's statements denying the extent of the Holocaust was 'a misadventure that was for me unforeseeable' and acknowledged that the Vatican should have paid more attention to information easily available on the Internet, the reports said.

The pope said he was particularly saddened at the reaction of some Catholics who seemed willing to believe he was changing direction on Catholic-Jewish relations and were ready to 'strike at me with hostility.' He thanked 'Jewish friends' who helped clarify the matter and restore a sense of trust."

Here is a full, but unofficial, translation of the letter from the New Liturgical Movement (h/t: Whispers):

Moral theology is not a subject I wade into all that often, but over the last week, as controversy has raged in the Archdiocese of Boston over a proposed joint venture between the Catholic hospital chain and a non-Catholic insurance provider, I found myself suddenly needing a crash course on things like mediate material cooperation with evil. Anti-abortion activists were insisting that, by participating in a venture that would cover abortion services, Caritas, and by extension the Archdiocese of Boston, would be cooperating with evil. But the archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, said the deal was no such thing; that so long as Caritas does not provide the abortion services or benefit from them, it's OK.

So what's a religion reporter to do? I decided to consult with the moral theology experts listed by the American Academy of Religion in its database for journalists. I e-mailed most of the list, and about a dozen scholars, as well as a few priests I also contacted, were gutsy and generous enough to share their thoughts on this subject. The result is a story in today's paper. But I also wanted to publish the responses in full -- it's dense reading at times, but for those of you interested in a little theological perspective on the controversy, here you go (click on 'full entry' if you don't see it now):

As part of the Globe's reporting on the proposed joint venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and the Centene Corporation, we have repeatedly attempted to get Caritas to explain how the arrangement would work. Caritas, which has at least two communications people in-house and a crisis p.r. consultant too, has thus far refused to offer any explanation, not only of the proposal, but also of current practice at the chain's six hospitals.

Here are ten questions we have asked Caritas to answer (we also asked for their most recent tax filing -- they sent us the report for fiscal 2007):

1. What health services does Caritas currently decline to provide in order to comply with Catholic teachings?

2. How does Caritas currently handle requests by patients seeking health services that violate Catholic teaching? Please be as specific as possible about how this process works -- are patients handed a list of services not provided, and are they given phone numbers or other contact information for how to obtain the services elsewhere?

3. How would patients in the proposed Caritas-Centene venture obtain health services that violate Catholic teachings but must be covered under the state contract? And, if Caritas will not refer patients for such treatment, how will patients at Caritas hospitals find out where they might go?

4. In your view, does the Caritas-Centene venture constitute a form of cooperation with evil, as defined by Catholic theology? Why or why not?

5. What was the process at Caritas for weighing the proposed venture and making sure it complies with Catholic teaching?

6. In addition to the six hospitals in the Caritas Christi Health Care system, are there any other Catholic hospitals or community centers that would be included in the proposed Caritas-Centene venture in Massachusetts?

7. Will the proposed Caritas-Centene venture include any non-Catholic religious hospitals or community centers?

8. Are there parallel arrangements elsewhere in the U.S. that you are looking to for guidance or as models?

9. Can we see a copy of the proposed agreement between Caritas and Centene?

10. Can we interview Dr. de la Torre?

Here is what Caritas spokeswoman Teresa Prego said:

"Out of respect for the legal process of the Connector Authority, we will not comment further on additional questions. We would be happy to respond to questions following the Connector board meeting. While we understand that you are writing a story under a deadline, I'm sure you can appreciate that anyone bidding on a contract such as this would be doing themselves a disservice to comment while the board is deliberating."

Since they're going to be happy to take questions tomorrow, feel free to join in; if you have questions for Caritas, post them here or shoot me an e-mail and we'll try to get answers.

Mark Silk, a very sharp scholar of religion and public life at Trinity College, is right now hosting a chat about the American Religious Identification Survey released yesterday that shows a decline in the percentage of Catholics in New England and a rise in the number of non-religious folks here and nationally. You can join the chat here:

Lots of reaction is coming in today from religious leaders with a variety of opinions about President Obama's action lifting the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

The president referred to religious concerns in his remarks, saying, "As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering."

Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, who serves as chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, criticized the action, saying:

"President Obama’s new executive order on embryonic stem cell research is a sad victory of politics over science and ethics. This action is morally wrong because it encourages the destruction of innocent human life, treating vulnerable human beings as mere products to be harvested. It also disregards the values of millions of American taxpayers who oppose research that requires taking human life. Finally, it ignores the fact that ethically sound means for advancing stem cell science and medical treatments are readily available and in need of increased support."

But the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America – an umbrella organization of Orthodox Judaism -- was supportive in a statement:

"The Jewish tradition places great value upon human life and its preservation. The Torah commands us to treat and cure the ill and to defeat disease wherever possible; to do this is to be the Creator's partner in safeguarding the created. The traditional Jewish perspective thus emphasizes that the potential to save and heal human lives is an integral part of valuing human life. Stem cell research is consistent with and serves these moral and noble goals. The UOJCA appreciates President Obama's decision to have the federal government support stem cell research, a position the UOJCA has long advocated. We urge the President, and the leadership of the National Institutes of Health, to ensure that robust ethical guidelines and oversight bodies are put in place to ensure this important research is conducted in the most appropriate fashion – balancing science with ethics. We recognize that those who oppose this research and this executive order do so upon the basis of deeply and sincerely held moral beliefs. So too, the UOJCA supports the array of stem cell research options because of our deeply held moral and religious traditions. We commend all those who engage in this important debate with respect and civility for those with whom they disagree; that is the only type of debate this issue deserves."

The American Humanist Association is also supportive. A statement from the group's president, David Niose of Boston:

"This is a victory for scientific integrity and rational public policy, two values threatened when government is unduly influenced by conservative religion. When our laws are shaped by scriptural interpretations and religious opinions that have no basis in science or fact, we all suffer. This issue is excellent evidence of why religion isn’t always a reliable source of morality. Embryonic stem cell research harms nobody and has the potential to lead to revolutionary scientific advances that will benefit all of humanity. What kind of morality would deny hope to millions of real people who are suffering from debilitating diseases and conditions?"

The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life has put together a helpful on-line overview of the religious issues associated with stem cell research.

UPDATE: Kristin Williams, at Faith in Public Life, e-mails:

"Some groups are obviously opposed to embryonic stem cell research, but a lot of religious groups are in favor of using embryos that would be discarded otherwise to conduct potentially life-saving research. (Not everybody is reporting this well!) In addition to the groups you cited, the Presbyterian Church (USA) supports ESC research, as do the Episcopalians, the United Methodists and other mainline denominations. Also interesting is the Mormon stance—though the LDS church doesn’t have an official position, Sen. Hatch has been an outspoken supporter of ESC research."

And Dan Gilgoff, at God & Country, posts a list of religious guests at the White House ceremony today -- Jews and mainline Protestants, it appears.

Meanwhile, the statements opposed to embryonic stem cell research, and Obama's action, are also streaming in, now from CatholicVote.org, Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council, Women Influencing the Nation, and the Susan B. Anthony List.

And Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention says:

“This is a sad day for the sanctity of all human life in America...Many supporters of the President’s decision have erroneously hailed this as removing politics and ideology from science. In fact, it is an attempt to remove morality from scientific research. History, from the Third Reich and elsewhere, teaches us that such a shift is a steep and slippery slope to a dark, depraved and dangerous destination.”

(Photo above, taken at Stanford University and released today by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine via Reuters, shows a fluorescent microscope image of human embryonic stem cells.)

Trinity College in Hartford today is releasing the third installment of the American Religious Identification Survey, a study of religious identity in the United States based on interviews conducted last year with 54,461 people. The most dramatic finding is a sharp drop in the percentage of Catholics in New England, which has long been the nation's most Catholic region. I have a story in today's paper; here is an excerpt:

"In Massachusetts, the decline is particularly striking - in 1990, Catholics made up a majority of the state, with 54 percent of the residents, but in 2008, the Catholic population was 39 percent. At the same time, the percentage of the state's residents who say they have no religious affiliation rose sharply, from 8 percent to 22 percent.

'It's quite an amazing change,' said Barry A. Kosmin, one of the study's authors. He is the director of the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society & Culture, a research center at Trinity that was founded after two previous versions of the study, in 1990 and 2001, found a sharp increase in the number of Americans who say they are not religious.

'You have a transformation of the Catholic population in two ways - one is a relocation, from the Rust Belt to the Sun Belt, and the second is an ethnic transformation, a replacement of Irish-Americans by Latino-Americans in the Catholic Church,' he said."

The story is here; if you're interested in more detail and other findings, I've posted the summary report, and a table that gives the statistics on New England and the rest of the Northeast.

(Photo, by Janet Knott of the Globe staff, shows Immaculate Conception Church in Winchester on 3/3/2003. The parish was closed on 11/06/2004.)

Pope Benedict XVI today confirmed the dates for his much-anticipated trip to Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Territories, as well as his upcoming trip to Africa. The Middle East trip, from May 8-15, has taken on renewed significance given tensions over Israel's handling of the Gaza conflict and over the pope's lifting of the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop. From the Associated Press story:

The pope's Mideast tour will touch Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories, with stops in cities including Amman, Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth, the Vatican said.

Though a detailed program has not yet been announced, officials in destination countries have said they expect Benedict to visit an Amman mosque, hold public Mass in Jordan and Nazareth and make a stop at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem.

There has been only one other official visit by a pope to the Jewish state, Pope John Paul II's pilgrimage in 2000. Pope Paul VI made an unofficial trip there in 1964.

Israeli President Shimon Peres, who invited Benedict to visit, called the trip "an important and thrilling event of the first order, that emanates a wind of peace and hope."

(Photo, by Gregorio Borgia/AP, shows Pope Benedict XVI during the Angelus noon prayer in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican today, 3/8/2009.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley has just posted on his blog a further clarification of his stance on the proposed joint venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and the Centene Corporation, and made several new points: first, he reiterated what his spokesman said Thursday, which is that Caritas will not even refer patients to abortion providers; second, he said that the critics who suggest Caritas will be involved with abortion are "doing a great disservice to the Catholic Church,'' and third, he said he will consult with the National Catholic Bioethics Center about the deal. Here is the blog entry:

"There has been a significant amount of public dialogue concerning my statement yesterday about the proposed arrangement involving Caritas Christi Health Care with the Commonwealth Care Program.

To be perfectly clear, Caritas Christi will never do anything to promote abortions, to direct any patients to providers of abortion or in any way to participate in actions that are contrary to Catholic moral teaching and anyone who suggests otherwise is doing a great disservice to the Catholic Church. We are committed to the Gospel of Life and no arrangement will be entered into unless it is completely in accord with Church teaching.

Recognizing the complexity of the proposed arrangement, I will ask the National Catholic Bioethics Center to review the arrangement and to provide me their opinion."

Massachusetts Citizens for Life, apparently not persuaded by Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's explanation of the proposed arrangement between Caritas Christi Health Care and Centene Corporation, is issuing a statement expressing unhappiness that Caritas officials have not yet responded to a request for a meeting with anti-abortion activists. O'Malley said Caritas would neither provide abortion services nor benefit from them, but the organization is accusing Caritas of being "anti-life" by proposing to join an insurance venture that would cover abortion services provided by non-Catholic hospitals and community centers. The MCFL statement:

"Massachusetts Citizens for Life sent a letter on Thursday to the President and CEO of Caritas Christi, Dr. Ralph de la Torre, requesting a meeting as soon as possible to address the concerns members of the organization have about the Caritas Christi joint venture with Centene Corporation that offers insurance through the Commonwealth Care Health Plan.

Caritas Christi has said it will provide a full range of family planning services. The public has learned that this terminology is code for abortion and abortion-related services. Mass. Citizens sought the meeting to give Caritas Christi the chance to refute these assumptions and to assure the general public that it would not be providing such services.

Since we have not heard from Dr. de la Torre, Mass. Citizens must regretfully assume that, in fact, Caritas Christi would abandon its twenty-three year commitment to protecting the lives of unborn babies and their mothers.

Our members will be contacting the offices of Caritas individually to express their outrage that Caritas would take this anti-life position."

Caritas had no immediate comment; if at some point they do, we'll post that as well.

In one indication of how the recession is expected to impact charitable fundraising, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley today announced that the Archdiocese of Boston for the first time in memory is not seeking to increase the amount raised in its annual fundraising campaign.

The archdiocese's annual fund drive had been decimated in 2002 by the clergy sex abuse crisis, and O'Malley, who arrived in 2003, has been building it back by increasing the goal by $1 million per year.

But for 2009, the archdiocese said today, O'Malley will seek to raise $15 million -- the same goal as for 2008, and slightly less than the actual amount raised that year, which was $15.1 million.

"During these difficult economic times, we are seeing great works of mercy for those who are struggling to make ends meet,'' O'Malley said. "The Catholic Appeal allows us to reach out and help thousands of people in ways that bring them closer to our Lord."

The archdiocese will launch the Annual Catholic Appeal, formerly known as the Cardinal's Appeal, this weekend in parishes. O'Malley will make a personal appeal at St. Mary of the Assumption Church in Dedham.

The annual appeal generates 77 percent of the budget for the archdiocese's central fund, which finances the Braintree headquarters and 50 ministries run there, including services to parishes and Catholic schools.

Here's a video of the cardinal making the pitch:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley has just issued a statement responding to the controversy over a proposed joint insurance venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and the Centene Corporation. The deal is being criticized by anti-abortion activists who are concerned that the partnership constitutes "cooperation" (a concept in Catholic moral theology) by the Catholic hospital system with a provider of abortion services (the venture would be required to cover abortion procedures under state law).

Here's the full text of the cardinal's statement:

"The Catholic Church's teaching on the protection of human life from conception until natural death and its commitment to promoting a culture of life is clear and without ambiguity. Promoting a culture of life calls for us to protect life from attack and foster the welfare of all, especially the poor.

In recent days concern has been raised about the proposed arrangement involving Caritas Christi Health Care with the Commonwealth Care Program. I understand and support the desire of Caritas Christi to serve as a health care system collaborating with this program. If it can happen without compromising the Catholic identity of the system it would benefit both civil society and especially the poor in our community.

At the same time, as Archbishop I have the responsibility to insure that Caritas Christi Health Care adheres to the Ethical and Religious Directives established by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and that in every aspect of the hospital system the teachings of the Church are protected and maintained.

Consistent with this responsibility I want to confirm for the Catholic community and the wider interested public that Caritas Christi Health Care has assured me that it will not be engaged in any procedures nor draw any benefits from any relationship which violate the Church's moral teaching as found in the Ethical and Religious Directives. Caritas Christi has been consistently faithful to these standards in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

These are principles of Catholic teaching on which we cannot yield. Our healthcare ministry is rooted in protecting the most vulnerable among us, including the unborn. Our embrace of the healing ministry of Jesus Christ goes back 2,000 years and is built on a foundation of Catholic moral theology and a desire to meet the needs of all through education, health care and social service."

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal O'Malley on 7/29/08.)

In an unusual rift between allies, anti-abortion activists are criticizing the Archdiocese of Boston for allowing Caritas Christi Health Care to pursue a joint insurance venture with a health organization that plans to cover abortion services. Globe reporter Kay Lazar has a story in today's paper.

The Archdiocese of Boston has not yet commented, and the explanations from the health care providers have not clarified how exactly this venture would mesh with Catholic teaching. (UPDATE: Connector Authority spokesman Dick Powers, asked about the issue by the Globe, today said "Health plans must provide covered services. Covered services specifically include abortion services.")

Here's what we know:

On Thursday, Sandy McBride, the director of corporate communications for Centene Corporation, e-mailed the Globe a statement declaring, "Commonwealth Family Health Plan will contract with providers, both in and out of the Caritas network, to ensure access to all services required by the Authority, including confidential family planning services." Commonwealth Family Health Plan is the proposed joint venture between Caritas and Centene; "the Authority" is the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority Board.

Centene also made it clear that it views the arrangement as a partnership with Caritas, and spoke approvingly of Massachusetts's "progressive health care system." Here's what McBride said:

"Commonwealth Family Health Plan, Inc. (CFHP) is pleased to announce that it has submitted a response to the Request for Proposal issued by the Commonwealth Care Health Insurance Connector Authority (Connector Authority) to provide health insurance for Massachusetts residents enrolled in the Commonwealth Care Program. CFHP is a partnership between Celtic Group, a subsidiary of Centene Corporation, and Caritas Christi Health Care. The partnership was created to offer a new form of local managed care that is tailored to the needs of Massachusetts’ progressive healthcare system. By combining the strengths of a leading national managed care organization with Massachusetts’s largest community-based hospital system, CFHP represents national managed care best practices, financial stability, and the long-standing commitment shared by its founders to deliver high-quality, value-driven care to underserved communities. We look forward to working with the Connector Authority in this final stage of the bidding process. We will not be commenting further until contract awards have been confirmed and announced by the Connector Authority."

Then yesterday, after the Globe started getting questions and complaints from anti-abortion activists, Caritas spokeswoman Teresa Prego issued the following statement, which seems to describe the arrangement as less definite, and which says any arrangement would comply with Catholic teaching, but does not explain how:

"Commonwealth Family Health Plan is an insurance company that has filed for licensure with the Department of Insurance in Massachusetts. Caritas Christi Health Care is considering a minority investment in this insurance plan. Commonwealth Family Health Plan will contract with a multitude of health care providers in Massachusetts similar to the HMO contracts held by Tufts, BC/BS, and Harvard Pilgrim. These contracts are negotiated by Centene Inc., the majority owner of CFHP. Those providers are anticipated to include the six Caritas Christi Hospitals and approximately 33 other hospitals and 66 community health centers. Caritas Christi Health Care wishes to make clear that at all times and in all cases we will observe the Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the basic principles of Catholic moral theology. Applying for participation in the connector is a complex public policy process. We will carefully investigate all aspects of this proposed relationship in order to insure that Caritas Christi’s participation will be in accord with Catholic teaching."

Although the archdiocese has in recent years sought to grant Caritas more independence, it has said that the church remains responsible for the hospital's compliance with Catholic teaching. Here's what the archdiocese said in a statement last year:

"Under the new model, the Archdiocese’s reserve powers are limited to matters pertaining to Catholic identity, mission, and the implementation of the religious and ethical directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and any transaction that would involve the sale or transfer of the system."

And, finally, here's what the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says in its ethical directives regarding partnerships with health care organizations:

"New partnerships can pose serious challenges to the viability of the identity of Catholic health care institutions and services, and their ability to implement these Directives in a consistent way, especially when partnerships are formed with those who do not share Catholic moral principles. The risk of scandal cannot be underestimated when partnerships are not built upon common values and moral principles. Partnership opportunities for some Catholic health care providers may even threaten the continued existence of other Catholic institutions and services, particularly when partnerships are driven by financial considerations alone. Because of the potential dangers involved in the new partnerships that are emerging, an increased collaboration among Catholic-sponsored health care institutions is essential and should be sought before other forms of partnerships."

Then the directives get into a complicated area of moral theology regarding the definition of "cooperation,'' but suggest that it's up to the bishop (in this case Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley) to "assess and address" what's happening:

"If a Catholic health care organization is considering entering into an arrangement with another organization that may be involved in activities judged morally wrong by the Church, participation in such activities, must be limited to what is in accord with the moral principles governing cooperation. Catholic health care organizations are not permitted to engage in immediate material cooperation in actions that are intrinsically immoral, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and direct sterilization. The possibility of scandal must be considered when applying the principles governing cooperation. Cooperation, which in all other respects is morally licit, may need to be refused because of the scandal that might be caused. Scandal can sometimes be avoided by an appropriate explanation of what is in fact being done at the health care facility under Catholic auspices. The diocesan bishop has final responsibility for assessing and addressing issues of scandal, considering not only the circumstances in his local diocese but also the regional and national implications of his decision. The Catholic partner in an arrangement has the responsibility periodically to assess whether the binding agreement is being observed and implemented in a way that is consistent with Catholic teaching."

Stay tuned.

Cardinal Roger M. Mahony (right) of Los Angeles today is announcing that he is barring the Holocaust-denying traditionalist bishop, Richard Williamson, from entering any church in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. In an unusual step, Mahony and two Jewish leaders penned a joint op-ed piece that today is being published in both the archdiocesan newspaper, The Tidings, and a local Jewish newspaper, the Jewish Journal.

An excerpt:

"Williamson's recent 'apologies' fall far short of satisfying the letter or the spirit of the Vatican's directives. Yet while Williamson seems unwilling or unable to reject his odious positions, many religious and civic leaders have used his situation to acknowledge the Holocaust and to affirm its unique and terrible place in history.

We are heartened by the many leaders around the world who have rejected Williamson's views. In particular, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and Argentine Minister of the Interior Florencio Randazzo, whose country recently expelled Williamson, not to mention nearly 50 Catholic members of the U.S. Congress who wrote to the Vatican to express their concerns.

In the Los Angeles Archdiocese, Williamson is hereby banned from entering any Catholic church, school or other facility, until he and his group comply fully and unequivocally with the Vatican's directives regarding the Holocaust. Later this year, I, Cardinal Mahony, will visit Israel and pay my respects to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust at the Yad Vashem Memorial in Jerusalem. Holocaust deniers like Williamson will find no sympathetic ear or place of refuge in the Catholic Church, of which he is not --- and may never become --- a member."

(Photo, by Mario Anzuoni/Reuters, shows Cardinal Mahony in 2007.)

Pope Benedict XVI today named Auxiliary Bishop Roger Paul Morin (right) of New Orleans to be the next bishop of Biloxi. Morin, who has lived in New Orleans for four decades, is originally from Dracut, the Times-Picayune reports. (Morin is not the only Massachusetts native serving as a Gulf Coast prelate -- the archbishop of New Orleans, Alfred C. Hughes, is from West Roxbury.)

(Photo from the Archdiocese of New Orleans.)

President Obama's nomination of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to head the US Department of Health and Human Services is illuminating a sharp divide in the Catholic world over the primacy of the abortion issue, and how best to achieve abortion reduction. Sebelius is Catholic, and says she believes abortion is wrong, but has repeatedly supported abortion rights while declaring that she has also brought about a reduction in the abortion rate in her state; her own bishop, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, has asked her not to present herself for Communion.

Catholics United immediately leapt to Sebelius's defense, setting up a Catholics for Sebelius web site, and declaring, "The governor has had disagreements over public policy with leaders in her Church. Yet their disagreement has never been over the morality of abortion, but over what prudential policy is best in dealing with abortion in Kansas." Among the 26 signatories to the group's statement of support for Sebelius are many from Massachusetts, including Boston College theology professors Lisa Sowle Cahill, Rev. David Hollenbach and Rev. Thomas J. Massaro; College of the Holy Cross professor David O'Brien; Steve Krueger, the former executive director of Voice of the Faithful; Jerome Maryon, the president of the lay committee on Contemporary Spiritual & Public Concerns at St. Paul's Parish in Cambridge, and Dr. Patrick Whelan, a Boston physician who is president of Catholic Democrats. Faith in Public Life issued a similar statement of support from moderate evangelical leaders and others, declaring, "As Christians dedicated to finding common ground solutions to reduce the number of abortions in America, we welcome President Obama's nomination of Governor Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services."

But Catholic League President Bill Donohue called Sebelius "one of the most extreme pro-abortion zealots in the nation"

There's lots of commentary in the blogosphere today. Over at dotCommonweal, David Gibson predicts that the Sebelius nomination "is likely to set off another round of the Catholic Culture Wars." At God & Country, Dan Gilgoff describes Sebelius as "a pro-choice pro-lifer" and reviews what she's said about reconciling her faith and her politics. At Politico, Ben Smith writes that, "the nomination is a bit of a proving grounds for a 'religious left' still trying to establish itself as a player, and one in which it's quite likely to be able to claim victory." And at Spiritual Politics, Mark Silk declares the nomination to be "a poke in the eye of pro-lifers" but says "this seems to me a smart move for the president on his own abortion-reduction front. It reassures the pro-choice community while sending this message to the pro-life one: 'We are committed to reducing the number of abortions but not by doing anything to make it harder for women to get them. Join us in creating better adoption services, sex education, and access to contraception, neonatal care, and daycare. Or don't.'"

(Photo, by Ron Edmonds/AP, shows Obama and Sebelius at the White House today.)

Cardinal Walter Kasper (right), the top Vatican liaison to the Jewish community, has agreed to attend a Holocaust memorial ceremony in Braintree on March 25. The event, which will mark the move of a memorial menorah from the former chancery in Brighton to the new pastoral center in Braintree, was scheduled by Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley in an effort to demonstrate the Catholic Church's commitment to Catholic-Jewish relations and repudiation of Holocaust denial in the wake of the controversy over Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of traditionalist Bishop Richard Williamson, who denies that the Nazis used gas chambers to kill Jews. (Earlier today, Williamson apologized.)

The Pilot reports:

The Vatican's top official on Catholic-Jewish relations will attend in March the rededication of a Holocaust memorial menorah that symbolizes the close relationship between the Catholic and Jewish communities in Boston.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations With the Jews, was invited to the event by Cardinal Seán P. O'Malley the day after the cardinal met with local Jewish leaders and Holocaust survivors to address their concerns generated by the pope's decision to lift the excommunication of Bishop Richard Williamson, a traditionalist bishop who has denied the Holocaust.

The Yom Hashoah Menorah, which honors the victims of the Holocaust, was presented to the archdiocese by Jewish leaders as a symbol of the warm relationship between the two faiths in Sept. 2002 and was dedicated at the grounds of the former chancery in Brighton by Cardinal Bernard Law. It depicts six men and women holding torches, a holy man clutching a prayer book in front of the statue and a cracked Star of David, inscribed with the years 1933-1945. The first words of a Jewish prayer, the Kaddish, exulting God's great name are at its base.

The Holocaust memorial will be moved to the archdiocese's Pastoral Center in Braintree and rededicated March 25.

Cardinal Kasper's coming to be a part of the event is significant because, "he is the spokesperson for the Holy Father, for the Holy See, in matters pertaining to Catholic-Jewish relations," Cardinal O'Malley told The Pilot in a Feb. 25 interview.

"He is a man who is very versed in these issues and very committed to safeguarding the special relations the Catholic Church has with the Jewish community."

Cardinal Kasper previously visited the Boston area in 2002, speaking and meeting with students and community leaders at Boston College and Brandeis University. Here's an interview I did with him at the time.

(Photo, by Mary Altaffer of The New York Times, shows Kasper in New York in 2005.)

Bishop Richard Williamson, whose assertion on Swedish Television that the Nazis did not use gas chambers to kill Jews has caused an enormous controversy for the Vatican, has issued an apology of sorts. Here is the text, from the traditionalist Catholic blog Rorate Caeli.

"The Holy Father and my Superior, Bishop Bernard Fellay, have requested that I reconsider the remarks I made on Swedish television four months ago, because their consequences have been so heavy.

Observing these consequences I can truthfully say that I regret having made such remarks, and that if I had known beforehand the full harm and hurt to which they would give rise, especially to the Church, but also to survivors and relatives of victims of injustice under the Third Reich, I would not have made them.

On Swedish television I gave only the opinion (..."I believe"..."I believe"...) of a non-historian, an opinion formed 20 years ago on the basis of evidence then available and rarely expressed in public since. However, the events of recent weeks and the advice of senior members of the Society of St. Pius X have persuaded me of my responsibility for much distress caused. To all souls that took honest scandal from what I said before God I apologise.

As the Holy Father has said, every act of injust violence against one man hurts all mankind.

+Richard Williamson
London, 26 February 2009."

Williamson is a bishop of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X -- he is not recognized as a bishop by the Vatican, because he was ordained without Vatican permission in 1988. But his excommunication, along with that of three other SSPX bishops, was lifted recently by Pope Benedict XVI as a first step in an attempt toward reconciling the schismatic Society with Rome.

(Photo, by Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP, shows Bishop Richard Williamson being escorted out of Heathrow airport in London yesterday after being expelled from Argentina.)

Some photos from local Ash Wednesday observances:

(The Rev. Kevin O'Leary, rector of the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston, applies ashes to the forehead of 15-month-old Nora Reilly as her grandmother, Mary Reilly of Boston, looks on. Photo by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff.)

(Claudia Pouravelis, director of graduate admission at Regis College, prays at the Regis College Chapel in Weston. Photo by Bill Greene of the Globe staff.)

(Arianna Anindo, a first grader at Cathedral Grammar School, receives ashes at the Cathedral in Boston. By David Ryan/Globe staff.)

(Ciara Negron, 87, receives ashes at the Cathedral in Boston. By David Ryan/Globe staff.)

(Desiree Tavarez, a student at Regis College, receives ashes from the Rev. Paul Kilroy at Regis College Chapel in Weston. By Bill Greene/Globe staff.)

Boston.com has also put together a photo gallery of Ash Wednesday images from around the world.

Nearly six years ago, when the Vatican announced that a Capuchin friar named Sean P. O'Malley was going to be the next archbishop of Boston, I set out to learn about the presence of Capuchins in the Archdiocese of Boston, and wound up spending some time hanging out at the Teen Center at St. Peter's Parish in Dorchester, which at the time was being partly run by a Capuchin friar named Brother Tino (the story is here). The center was operating in the ratty basement of the parish's small elementary school, but the few dozen kids there were grateful to have a place to be together and safe, and I remember one afternoon we took the T from Fields Corner to the waterfront and they all took sailing lessons, some for the first time.

Yesterday, I was back at the Teen Center, with Globe photographer Suzanne Kreiter, to cover the rededication by O'Malley, who now, of course, is the cardinal-archbishop of Boston (story here). The archdiocese closed the parish school last year, but agreed to invest $4 million to expand the teen center, which is a program of Catholic Charities and now occupies the entire building and provides academic and recreational after-school programming for kids between ages 12 and 19. About 150 kids are there every day, free of charge, and almost all of the kids are Cape Verdean-Americans. The place looks, not surprisingly, much better than it did six years ago -- the floors are gleaming, there's a modern studio for dance and martial arts, the place is wired for technology, and there is air conditioning and all kinds of system improvements.

The ceremony was attended by a lot of bold-faced names -- from the political world, there was Mayor Thomas M. Menino (above, at right), City Councilors Maureen E. Feeney and Charles C. Yancey, state Senator Jack Hart, and Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley. From the business world, there was Jack Connors (above, at left) of Hill, Holliday, Jack Shaughnessy of Shaughnessy & Ahern, John Fish of Suffolk Construction, and Jim Healey of the Yawkey Foundation. M.L. Carr, the former Celtic player and coach, was there too. And there were multiple police officers, including the captain, from the neighborhood police district, and, of course, lots of Catholic Charities workers, including the organization's president, Tiziana Dearing.

One thing that struck me during the ceremony was the generous language with which O'Malley and Menino described one another. They've had some very rough patches -- in 2005 Menino was so angered by how the archdiocese handled the closing of a parochial school in Oak Square that he staged an alternate graduation ceremony for the kids at Faneuil Hall, and then O'Malley refused to attend a Catholic Charities dinner at which Menino was being honored, because Menino supports abortion rights. And, of course, there have been multiple parish and school closings in the city. But yesterday, O'Malley described Menino as "my friend, and our wonderful mayor,'' and then Menino was effusive, praising O'Malley at least three times. At one point, he said:

"Let me say, Cardinal Sean, thank you for your leadership over the years. I mean you've really done a tremendous job in our archdiocese. You took over, brought this archdiocese back, and a lot of great things are happening.''

And then later, he returned to O'Malley, but I started to wonder if he was actually reflecting on his own experience as well:

"And thank you, Cardinal Sean, for the great work you've done. A lot of folks in this business of ours, when they're CEOs, there's a lot of people who criticize, it's easy to criticize, really, it's so easy, I tell you. But, to get the job done while you're getting criticized, tells you the quality of the individual. Thank you very much."

There were a couple of moments of humor. At one point, Fish referred to Hart as "the poster child for Catholic education,'' and Menino blurted out, "I am too.'' It quickly became clear that almost all of the gathered dignitaries were the products of local Catholic schools. The second thing that struck me was when Connors ribbed Hart for quoting a Protestant preacher in his remarks. "After all that education, all that work with the sisters, you quote Norman Vincent Peale!'' Connors said.

But the sharpest joke, with the most telling subtext, especially as the city and Boston College negotiate an expansion for the college across Commonwealth Avenue deeper into Brighton, came from Menino, who mentioned that he had once had an intern from St. Peter's parish who had gone on to get two degrees at Boston College. Then, looking directly at Connors, who is a prominent BC trustee, the mayor said, to laughter, "they do bring some kids from the city -- you can count those on one hand Jack.'' (Out of curiosity, I called BC spokesman Jack Dunn to ask about this -- he tells me that 356 of the 8,900 undergrads at BC are from the city of Boston, and that they receive $8.4 million in financial aid, with an average grant of $30,000. So there.)

(All photos by Suzanne Kreiter of the Globe staff.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley met yesterday afternoon with about 20 Jewish community leaders in Boston to discuss concerns over the Vatican's decision to lift the excommunication of Bishop Richard Williamson, the traditionalist prelate who denies that the Nazis used gas chambers to kill Jews during World War II. I have a story about the meeting in today's paper here.

I spoke to the cardinal by phone after the meeting; here's what he had to say:

Q: What happened at the meeting?

A: I think it was a very positive meeting. Stuart Rossman, the president of the Jewish Community Relations Council, organized us, and we had the opportunity to listen to two Holocaust survivors, Israel Arbeiter and Stephan Ross, who shared with us, in very moving terms, their firsthand experience of the horrors of the Holocaust. It was an opportunity, for myself and other members of the Catholic community there, to assure the leadership that was present that the Catholic Church repudiates this denial of the Holocaust, and to restate that we see the Holocaust as the worst crime in the history of humanity. We were happy to hear it stated, once again, the wonderful relationship that we’ve had historically between our two communities here in Boston.

I announced that we will be hosting a Holocaust memorial service around the transfer of the menorah from the old chancery to our new pastoral center, and immediately Stuart Rossman and others volunteered to participate with us. We also mentioned that we’re very hopeful that the Holy Father’s visit to Israel will be a wonderful occasion for him to be able to clarify before the world the church’s strong feelings about the Holocaust, and our special friendship with the Jewish community. I also mentioned to them that on Thursday I will be going to Washington for a memorial service for my friend Rabbi Leon Klenicki, hosted by the ADL and the Pope John Paul II Center, and after the memorial service I’ve been invited to a working lunch with leaders from the ADL and other Jewish organizations and the Bishops’ Conference to discuss ways, moving forward, to improve communications between our communities.

Q: How will the controversy affect the Vatican’s outreach to the Society of St. Pius X?

A: I think it’s important for us to clarify that the church’s commitment to Nostra Aetate and the teachings of Vatican Council are something that are not negotiable, and that we are committed to working to eradicate anti-Semitism, and to further our close relationship with the Jewish community.

Q: Do you think the upset among Jewish community leaders is justifiable?

A: It was very interesting, listening to one of the participants, who talked about the heightened Jewish insecurity in the world, in light of renewed anti-Semitism, and violence against Jews, and the situation in Venezuela, and how some people are using the financial crisis and blaming Jews for that. He said, ‘I want to contextualize for you, why there is such upset, in light of all of these other things that are going on.’ He made a very eloquent case, I thought, to help understand. And also, Rabbi Gershon Gewirtz also talked about the emotional response in the face of the Holocaust denials, and I think we appreciate that.

Q: Has the lifting of the excommunication damaged Catholic-Jewish relations locally?
A: I think that the relationship remains very strong, and it’s something that we all value and all want to work to safeguard.

Q: Did you apologize for the pope, or defend his decision?
A: I said the Holy Father lifted this excommunication unaware of the statements that Bishop Williamson had made, and that his intention was to try and begin a dialogue that might lead to reconciliation with this group. The alternative is that this group is going to evolve farther and farther away from the Catholic church and probably embrace more and more an anti-Semitic agenda. I think some of the leadership that is there does exhibit some very disturbing theories, and some of these things have been exhibited on the web sites. I sincerely believe that many of the Catholics who have gravitated towards this movement have done so because of nostalgia, and a desire to participate in the old Mass, but in some of their leadership there’s a broader agenda that’s very poisonous, so it’s in everyone’s interest for the Holy Father to be successful.

Q: Do the reconciliation talks now change to reflect these concerns?
A: That’s been part of the discussions from the beginning. Certainly the liturgical concerns are, I think, the easiest ones to resolve. The theological ones are the most difficult, particularly with the leadership. I think with the rank and file, the theological problems have not yet reached them. But if they’re not resolved, I think this group will grow farther and farther away.

Q: Are there any talks locally with the Society of St. Pius X?
A: In the United States, the presence of the St. Pius X Society is small, so it really is in Europe where these kinds of conversations are.

Q: Regarding the menorah that you plan to move to Braintree, was that already in the works?
A: We’ve been talking about it, but this galvanized us into action, realizing the emotional impact of this situation on people. A symbol and a gesture might be very reassuring for people, and this is a good time to do it. We were pleased the Jewish leadership has received this enthusiastically.

(Photo, by John Bohn of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal O'Malley in Roxbury on Feb. 15, 2009.)

Today's announcement by the Vatican that Archbishop Timothy Dolan (left) of Milwaukee will be the next archbishop of New York is prompting quite a bit of commentary, much of it reflecting on Dolan's people skills, which are said to be considerably stronger than those of the man he will replace, Cardinal Edward M. Egan (right).

A few observations from Boston. First, here's a comment from Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley:

"We join our prayers and best wishes to the millions of Catholics who rejoice at the news that Archbishop Timothy Dolan has been named the new chief shepherd of the Archdiocese of New York. He brings substantial experience, a winning personality and keen talent to this very important post in the life of the Church. May the Lord bless Archbishop Dolan with much wisdom, good health and great joy in his service of God's people."

Secondly, I had a phone conversation this afternoon with Scot Landry, the chief development officer for the Archdiocese of Boston, who spent a year as a seminarian at the North American College when Dolan was the rector there. Here's what Landry told me about Dolan:

"I considered him a tremendous rector -- his rector's conferences were some of the best expositions of the Catholic Church, and why we ought to be proud to be Catholic. I loved him as rector because he was so gregarious -- he made every seminarian feel at home and welcome in the seminary. He is so down-to-earth, at the same time being one of the American church's best intellectuals. His dad was a bartender, and he's tremendously at ease with people -- he's got that gift of gab in him, whether he's talking with someone with three PhD's or a fifth-grade education. He’ll let you be yourself in his presence. That role, of archbishop of New York, can intimidate people, but he’s somebody everybody will like.

He’s going to be great with priests. There have been a lot of struggles in New York, and there isn’t a better guy to help improve priestly morale. Dolan’s brother is a radio talk show host in Milwaukee, and his sister is a correspondent on Fox TV, so he’s been raised around the media, and he’s comfortable with it. It's great for the church that we have somebody as comfortable with the media as Tim Dolan.

Egan's strengths were that he's got an IQ off the charts, and when it came to tough fiscal decisions, he had the skill to solve those questions, and the constitution to be able to follow them through. But he hadn't served much time in seminaries or parish settings prior to being bishop. Egan, fairly or unfairly, was sometimes called distant or removed from his priests. I don’t think anybody has ever said that about Tim Dolan. Sometimes the church appoints someone to key roles to balance what their predecessor didn’t do as well. What Dolan will do is make the church accessible and down to earth, and I assume Dolan will do a lot of outreach to clergy and seminarians. He did a tremendous amount of good being one of the lead representatives of the American church in Rome, and I think he’ll bring the same sort of leadership to his role as archbishop of New York.''

However, the Boston-based BishopAccountability.org offers a note of caution, declaring:

"In replacing the reputedly arrogant Egan with the affable Dolan, the Vatican is repeating the strategy it used in Boston, where the famously remote Bernard Law was replaced with the seemingly humble and approachable Sean O’Malley. A word of caution: In the post-2002 US Catholic Church, we have seen that a likeable bishop can withhold information more effectively than an arrogant one. After the crisis broke in January 2002, the haughtiness of Law and Egan aroused suspicion and provoked rebellion by priests and laity. To quiet the opposition when he replaced Law, Cardinal O’Malley wore a brown robe and sandals, moved from an opulent mansion to an urban rectory, and started a blog. His strategy is working. Through the shrewd use of symbols and superficial gestures of openness, he has soothed the external forces that challenged Law. Like O’Malley’s humble demeanor, Dolan’s friendliness may subdue and charm the people and institutions that rightfully should hold him accountable."

Pope Benedict XVI today named Milwaukee Archbishop Timothy Dolan to be the next archbishop of New York, replacing Cardinal Edward M. Egan. More to come, but for now, here's the text of a statement from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops:

"Pope Benedict XVI named Archbishop Timothy Michael Dolan of Milwaukee, 59, as Archbishop of New York, and accepted the resignation of Cardinal Edward M. Egan, 76, from the pastoral governance of the New York Archdiocese.

The appointment was announced in Washington, February 23, by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, apostolic nuncio to the United States.

Timothy M. Dolan was born February 6, 1950, in St. Louis, Missouri. He attended St. Louis Preparatory Seminary and Cardinal Glennon College, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy in 1972. He completed his studies for the priesthood at North American College and the Pontifical University of St. Thomas (the Angelicum) in Rome, where he earned a licentiate degree, in 1976. He was ordained a priest for the St. Louis Archdiocese on June 19, 1976.

After a parish assignment, Archbishop Dolan began further studies at The Catholic University of America, where he earned a doctorate in church history in 1983. After further parish assignments, he was appointed to the staff of the Apostolic Nunciature in Washington, 1987-1992.

He was vice-rector of the Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in St. Louis, 1992-1994, and rector of North American College, 1994-2001.

He was named a prelate of honor to the Pope with the title of monsignor in 1994, Auxiliary Bishop of St. Louis in 2001, and Archbishop of Milwaukee in 2002.

Cardinal Egan has headed the New York Archdiocese since 2000 and was named a cardinal in 2001. He is a native of Oak Park, Illinois, and was ordained for the Archdiocese of Chicago in 1957. He served in administration in the Archdiocese of Chicago, on the faculty of North American College and for 14 years as a judge in the Vatican’s Roman Rota, which is the ordinary court of appeals for canonical cases appealed to the Vatican, particularly regarding the validity of marriage. He was named an auxiliary bishop of New York in 1985, and Bishop of Bridgeport, Connecticut in 1988.

The Archdiocese of New York has 4,683 square miles. It includes the Boroughs of Manhattan, Bronx, and Richmond of the City of New York, and the Counties of Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster and Westchester in the State of New York. It has a population of 5,676,566 people, with 2,554,454, or 45 per cent, of them Catholic."

UPDATE: Dolan addresses the news media in New York this morning:

(Photo, by Allen Fredrickson of Reuters, shows Archbishop Dolan throwing the first pitch at a Milwaukee Brewers MLB baseball game in Milwaukee in 2004.)

The Archdiocese of Boston has placed the Rev. Kenneth A. LeBlanc, pastor of St. Peter Church in Plymouth, on leave after saying it has received an allegation of abuse against him. Here is the statement from the archdiocese:

"The Archdiocese of Boston today announced that it has placed Rev. Kenneth A. LeBlanc on administrative leave as a result of receiving an allegation of sexual abuse of a minor. The allegation concerns conduct alleged to have taken place approximately thirty years ago. Fr. LeBlanc is pastor of St. Peter’s Church in Plymouth.

The Archdiocese also has initiated a preliminary investigation into this complaint. Fr. LeBlanc will remain on administrative leave pending the outcome of the preliminary investigation.

The decision to place Fr. LeBlanc on administrative leave represents the Archdiocese’s commitment to the safety of all parties and does not represent a determination of Fr. LeBlanc’s guilt or innocence as it pertains to this allegation. The Archdiocese will work to resolve this case as expeditiously as possible and in a manner that is fair to all parties.

Cardinal O’Malley expressed his sadness over this new allegation and reiterated his concern for all persons impacted by sexual abuse. Through its Office of Pastoral Support and Outreach, the Archdiocese continues to make counseling and other services available to survivors, their families and parishes impacted by clergy sexual abuse. Further, the Archdiocese is making arrangements for the ongoing pastoral care of this parish community while Fr. LeBlanc is on leave."

And here's something I've never seen before: a woman who says she was victimized by LeBlanc has set up a web page to publicize her accusation and to encourage others to come forward.

UPDATE: Here's the story in Monday's Globe.

America magazine, the Jesuit weekly, has a brief editorial in its March 2 edition praising Boston College for its decision to install crucifixes in its classrooms and reflecting on the controversy in Chestnut Hill and beyond. Here's what the magazine has to say:

"Students returning to class this semester at Boston College found a surprise: crucifixes adorning their classrooms. This traditional Catholic image has been a lightning rod in many Catholic colleges and universities over the last few decades, as schools struggled to make all students, no matter what their religious belief (agnostics and atheists included), feel welcome and at the same time strove to maintain the elusive goal of “Catholic identity.” The move stirred dissent among some students and faculty at B.C. “I can hardly imagine a more effective way to denigrate the faculty of an educational institution,” said one faculty member to a campus newspaper. In response, William P. Leahy, S.J., the college’s president, said, “By what logic would someone expect a Catholic college or university to be non-Catholic?”

The presence or absence of crucifixes in the classroom has too often proven a cudgel with which one side beats the other. Without them, so goes the faulty logic, a school is insufficiently Catholic; with them, it is resolutely religious. But this is too facile an understanding of the symbol. For some Jewish students, the crucifix is not simply a benign token of another faith, but a sign of centuries of Christian domination over their culture. On the other hand, for some Catholic students a crucifix is not just another symbol, but a visible reminder of a school’s religious underpinnings. At B.C., the move was the culmination of a project begun in 2000 to incorporate more Christian art on campus. Despite the danger of sending a message of exclusion, Boston College deserves applause for returning a central Catholic symbol to its classrooms, and we hope that naysayers will see that the Catholic world is still truly catholic, welcoming all students of good will."

(Photo, by Essdras M. Suarez of the Globe staff, shows a statue, of St. Michael the Archangel battling Satan, in Gasson Hall at Boston College.)

In today's Globe, I have a story about Bishop Richard Williamson's days as a seminary rector in Connecticut. Williamson, of course, is the traditionalist bishop whose remarks denying the Holocaust have caused controversy for the Vatican in the wake of Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunications of Williamson and three other bishops of the Society of St. Pius X. The Vatican has said that the pope was unaware of Williamson's views, and the pope has condemned Holocaust denial.

But Williamson's views are clearly not new; three seminarians who studied with him in Connecticut, including twin brothers from South Weymouth, told me they clearly recalled him saying virulently anti-Semitic things back in the mid-1980s. An excerpt:

He got his point across, right from the start," said the Rev. John Rizzo, who in 1985 was ordained a priest of the Society of St. Pius X, which broke with Rome over the liturgical and theological reforms instituted during the Second Vatican Council of the mid-1960s. John Rizzo left the Society of St. Pius X in 1993 and joined a different traditionalist society, the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which is in union with Rome. "I have a sizable nose, and he would say to me, 'Rizzo, are you baptized, or are you a Jew?' " John Rizzo, who is now based in New Zealand, said in a phone interview from Australia. "There was another seminarian named Oppenheimer, and he would say: 'Oppenheimer, I don't like your name. If you keep it up, there's a gas chamber waiting for you at the boathouse.' "

(Photo, courtesy of the Rizzo family, shows Weymouth twins John and Joseph Rizzo as seminarians at the Society of St. Pius X seminary in Ridgefield, Connecticut in the early 1980s.)

The much anticipated meeting between Pope Benedict XVI and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took place today at the Vatican. According to the Vatican, the pope not only took the opportunity to remind the speaker, who supports abortion rights, of the the church's opposition to abortion, but the pope also mentioned the church's teaching that Catholic politicians are obligated to oppose abortion. Here is the Vatican statement, via Catholic News Service:

"Following the General Audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Mrs Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage. His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

Note that the Vatican statement uses the word "consistent" to describe its teaching -- a reminder of last year's controversy that erupted when Pelosi suggested that St. Augustine had a different view of when life began than do current church leaders -- a suggestion that was disputed by the church's hierarchy.

UPDATE: Pelosi issued the following statement about her interaction with the pope:

"It is with great joy that my husband, Paul, and I met with his Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI today. In our conversation, I had the opportunity to praise the Church's leadership in fighting poverty, hunger, and global warming, as well as the Holy Father's dedication to religious freedom and his upcoming trip and message to Israel. I was proud to show his Holiness a photograph of my family's Papal visit in the 1950s, as well as a recent picture of our children and grandchildren."

(Photo, by Pier Paolo Cito/AP, shows Pelosi in Rome yesterday, Feb. 17, 2009.)

Pope Benedict XVI is planning to meet with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at the Vatican on Wednesday. The meeting has been the subject of considerable chatter in the conservative Catholic corner of the blogosphere for days, anticipating Pelosi's time in Rome as head of a congressional delegation to Italy. Pelosi, of course, is a practicing Catholic and mother of five (and grandmother of seven), but also is a supporter of abortion rights, and that combination has infuriated some conservatives who argue that support for abortion rights should disqualify Catholic politicians from receiving Communion and from being honored by Catholic universities. (Pelosi conspicuously received Communion at the papal Mass in Washington last year; she has in the past been honored by Catholic universities, but not recently.)

The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, president of Human Life International (HLI), tells LifeSiteNews.com that the pope should take the opportunity to excommunicate the speaker:

"It is our hope that the Holy Father will not grant the floundering Speaker of the House what she surely wants and expects, a quick and valuable photo-op, but will rather give her a stern lecture on contraception and abortion and let her know that her eternal salvation is in danger. Further, this would be the perfect opportunity to formally excommunicate the Speaker, as she has done everything a public official possibly can to declare her lack of communion with the Holy Father and the Roman Catholic Church on every conceivable issue."

But The Anchoress blogs:

"Of course Benedict should meet with Mrs. Pelosi. And of course that meeting will seem like a “victory” for dissenting Catholics who will consider that she has lorded something over on the humble Benedict. Looking at things with earthbound eyes, it will be all they see, and it will be an illusion. What we will not see, and will not be able to measure, will be the impact of this meeting - long range - on Mrs. Pelosi. Now, it’s possible that the meeting will effect no change in her. If she is resolutely “closed” then it will have little impact; recall that when Jesus was in his hometown where belief was minimal, he did not perform many miracles because he had no openings to do so. But if Mrs. Pelosi has any openness at all, then the Holy Spirit will do what He will and eventually - perhaps not for years, but eventually - we will see the fruits of that openness."

Deal Hudson takes the pragmatic view, blogging:

"The Holy Father is a head of state and must, as a matter of course, meet with political leaders from every nation, regardless of their positions on issues important to the Church. It's also a good idea for Benedict XVI to meet with misguided souls like Pelosi, because you can never underestimate the impact of being in his presence on someone who is running from the truth as fast as she/he can."

But, Hudson also writes:

"Benedict XVI should use the opportunity of the visit to make a strong public statement about the attack on unborn life being waged by the new Congress and the new administration. Pelosi's ordinary, Archbishop Niederauer of San Francisco, should issue a public statement strongly critical of Pelosi as a Catholic politician. He should include a statement that if she presents herself for communion he will deny it to her."

What do you think? Is the pope right to meet with Pelosi? Is she right to meet with him? And what should they say to one another? (Remember, if you want anyone else to see your comment, no obscenities and no hate speech.)

(Photo, by Alessia Pierdomenico of Reuters, shows Pelosi visiting a chestnut vendor in the Piazza di Spagna in Rome earlier today.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston is praising Boston College's president, the Rev. William P. Leahy, for the installation of crucifixes and Christian icons in all of the Jesuit university's classrooms. The project, which also includes the construction of statues and the hanging of other Christian art around campus, has been going on for eight years, but caused a bit of a stir this semester when students and faculty returned from winter break to find crucifixes in classrooms that had never had them. Here's what O'Malley said, as posted in his blog last night:

"Recently, I heard from many enthusiastic Boston College students that crucifixes and religious pictures have appeared in the classrooms over the semester break. BC has had crucifixes in some of their classrooms, and they just completed the task of adding crucifixes to the remaining classrooms. They were very happy to report on this development.

Though the story was first covered by a student newspaper, The Observer, the general public became aware of it this week when The Boston Globe and the Boston Herald also covered it.

Sadly, some faculty members objected, claiming that Boston College was not being tolerant of them. Actually, I think the intolerance is on the part of those who do not want us to exhibit these symbols of our faith. The Catholic community should be encouraged by Father Leahy’s leadership in this area, and I am so pleased that the students, who are the reason for the university, are so favorable to the presence of religious symbols."

(Photo, by Essdras M. Suarez of the Globe staff, shows an icon hanging in a BC classroom.)

Pope Benedict XVI, responding to the controversy over his decision to lift the excommunications of four traditionalist bishops, one of whom denies the Holocaust, today met at the Vatican with American Jewish leaders travelling under the auspices of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

The pope, speaking in English, rejected Holocaust denial, saying, "It is beyond question that any denial or minimization of this terrible crime is intolerable and altogether unacceptable.'' And the pope confirmed for the first time that he is planning a trip to Israel, which is widely expected to take place in the spring. Here is the text of his remarks:

"Dear Friends,

I am pleased to welcome all of you today, and I thank Rabbi Arthur Schneier and Mr Alan Solow for the greetings they have addressed to me on your behalf. I well recall the various occasions, during my visit to the United States last year, when I was able to meet some of you in Washington D.C. and New York. Rabbi Schneier, you graciously received me at Park East Synagogue just hours before your celebration of Pesah. Now, I am glad to have this opportunity to offer you hospitality here in my own home. Such meetings as this enable us to demonstrate our respect for one another. I want you to know that you are all most welcome here today in the house of Peter, the home of the Pope.

FULL ENTRY

In today's paper, I have a story about the installation of crucifixes and other icons in all of Boston College's classrooms, part of a broader effort to increase the amount of Christian art and iconography at the Jesuit school.

I reached out to a number of faculty and students to gather reaction to the development; there wasn't room for much of it in the paper, but the Web has no such constraints, so here's a sampling:

As the Catholic Church confronts two significant controversies, over the pope's decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop, and over allegations that the deceased leader of a religious congregation not only sexually abused men but also fathered a child with a woman, the Vatican is facing increasing criticism from conservative Catholics.

The most recent critique was issued last night, by George Weigel (right), who is best known as the biographer of John Paul II, and who in the past has been a staunch defender of the Vatican to American audiences. Writing in the journal First Things, Weigel ripped into the church's handling of the two scandals, involving the Holocaust-denying prelate, Bishop Richard Williamson, and the allegedly non-celibate and abusive founder of the Legion of Christ, the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado. Weigel called for an audit of the Legion of Christ.

"The last several weeks of curial chaos, confusion, and incompetence in the wake of the lifting of the excommunications of four Lefebvrist bishops have made clear just how dysfunctional the curia remains in terms of both crisis analysis and crisis management. A curia in which no one in authority had the sense to Google “Richard Williamson,” and no subordinate had the nerve or capacity to compel the superiors to pay attention to a potential landmine, is not a curia capable of getting to the roots of the Maciel betrayal. Nor, candidly, is it a curia capable of conducting an investigation that can command public credibility. It is regrettable that this is the case, for there are many honorable people working in the Roman curia. But it is the case.''

(Photo, by Wiqan Ang of the Globe staff, shows Weigel at St. Paul's Church in Cambridge in 2006.)

The Archdiocese of Boston, continuing its long, slow effort to rebuild an annual fund drive decimated by the sex abuse crisis, today is announcing that it raised $15.1 million in its 2008 Annual Catholic Appeal, up from $14.6 million the previous year.

The successful campaign is particularly noteworthy because it took place during a recession, although the bulk of the fundraising was last spring, before the stock market really tanked and job losses multiplied.

The campaign is the most important annual fund drive of the archdiocese, and supports the central offices now located in Braintree, which provide services to Catholic schools and parishes. Formerly called the Cardinal's Appeal, the campaign had peaked at $17.2 million in 2000, but plunged to $8.8 million in 2002, at the height of the abuse crisis. Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, not a big fan of his own celebrity, renamed the campaign to reduce its association with the personage of the cardinal, and set an unstated goal of rebuilding the campaign by $1 million per year. But that may end this year; the archdiocese won't announce its 2009 goal for another few weeks, but it seems likely that church officials will choose a more modest goal this year -- archdiocesan spokesman Terrence C. Donilon would say only that the goal will be no lower than $15 million.

I spoke briefly today with Patrick Gipson, the Catholic Appeal manager, who was, obviously, relieved to conclude the campaign successfully. "Considering the economic circumstances that have come upon us in the last few months, it's pretty impressive, and we certainly feel very blessed by the generosity of our parishioners and the support the appeal received from our pastors,'' he said.

Gipson said that about 48,000 people gave to the campaign -- about the same number as last year. (The archdiocese claims that there are 2 million Catholics in its territory, but weekly church attendance, which is a better measure of active Catholics, runs about 295,000.)

The money is raised primarily by direct mail -- the archdiocese sends letters to Catholics during Lent, and then pastors are asked to reinforce the appeal with remarks from the pulpit. Prior to 2008, the campaign launched each year in May, but last year the archdiocese started the campaign in March because there are more people in the pews during the spring than the summer.

(Photo, by Bill Greene of the Globe staff, shows O'Malley at the launch of the 2005 campaign. Graphic is by David Schutz of the Globe staff.)

In a recognition of the enormous controversy that has erupted over the Vatican's decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop, the Vatican's Secretary of State today issued a detailed document responding to the crisis. The document is here, in Italian; it has three main points: the pope claims he didn't know Bishop Richard Williamson was a Holocaust denier when he lifted the excommunication; Williamson must publicly renounce his views if he wants to be a Catholic bishop; and the Society of Saint Pius X (of which Williamson is a part) must accept the teachings of the Second Vatican Council (which renounced anti-Semitism) and the teachings of all post-Vatican II popes in order to achieve full reconciliation with Rome.

This is a very unusual development -- I can't recall, in the nine years that I've been on the beat, the Vatican ever responding to criticism this rapidly. But the controversy over Benedict's decision has been growing, not fading; there has been enormous criticism of the pope over his actions, and yesterday the president of Germany, in a highly unusual statement, called for the pope to clarify what he was thinking.

Here's the top of the Reuters story, by Philip Pullella:

"The Vatican on Wednesday ordered a traditionalist bishop who denies the Holocaust to publicly recant his views if he wants to serve as a prelate in the Roman Catholic Church. The Vatican said Pope Benedict was not aware of Bishop Richard Williamson's denial of the Holocaust when the pontiff lifted excommunications on him and three other traditionalist bishops last month.

It also said the traditionalist movement the bishop belongs to must accept all teachings of the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council, which urged respect for Judaism and other religions, as well as all the teachings of popes since 1958.

"Bishop Williamson, in order to be admitted to the episcopal functions of the Church, must in an absolutely unequivocal and public way distance himself from his positions regarding the Shoah," a Vatican statement said, using the Hebrew word for the Holocaust.

His views on the Holocaust were "absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father," it said."

UPDATE: My story in Thursday's Globe is here.

(Photo, by Alessandro Bianchi/Reuters, shows Pope Benedict XVI at his weekly general audience at the Vatican this morning.)

The Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, who before he died last year had been barred from public ministry over allegations of sexually abusing young men, is now being accused of having fathered at least one child with a woman with whom he was having a relationship.

The scandal was first reported by the American Papist blog this morning. And the New York Times is now quoting the order's spokesman saying, "We can confirm that there are some aspects of his life that were not appropriate for a Catholic priest."

The Vatican has acknowledged receiving accusations against Maciel starting in 1998. He was not disciplined during the papacy of Pope John Paul II, but Pope Benedict XVI barred him from public ministry in 2006. Maciel died in 2008.

The Legionaries, a conservative religious order whose first U.S. formation house was in Connecticut, claim 800 priests and 2,500 seminarians; their lay movement, Regnum Christi, claims 65,000 members. The movement has been controversial, not only because of its members extraordinary loyalty to Maciel even in the face of multiple abuse allegations, but also because of the movement's allegedly heavyhanded recruiting tactics, which resulted last year in the archbishop of Baltimore imposing a series of restrictions on the order's activity in his diocese.

Over at Beliefnet, David Gibson blogs, "It's hard to see how Maciel, who died in January 2008 after being disciplined by Pope Benedict in 2006, could become more controversial. Maciel was accused of being an almost cult-like leader of the insular community he founded, and so great was his influence in Rome that persistent reports of his sexual abuse of seminarians were ignored."

And at America magazine, the Rev. James Martin blogs about the implications for the debate over the relation between sexuality and abuse, writing, "Father Maciel's abuse was against young men, and so most probably assumed, when the abuse revelations were made public, that he was homosexual. Most psychiatrists and psychologists, however, say that sexual abuse against minors is not so much an indication of sexual orientation--whether homosexual or heterosexual--as much as it indicates a stunted or malformed sexuality overall. This is not to deny that most of the clergy sexual abuse was against adolescent boys and even men, and perpetrated by gay men, but rather to point out how the question of abuse is more complex than is usually thought, and whose solution is more complex than simply barring gay men from holy orders."

(Photo above, by Plinio Lperi/AP, shows Maciel being blessed by Pope John Paul II in 2004.)

A new poll by Gallup finds that of the many actions President Obama took during his first days in office, the least popular is his decision to lift a ban on the use of federal funds for organizations that provide information about abortion overseas. According to Gallup, 58 percent of the public disapproves of the step to revoke the so-called Mexico City Policy, also known as the global gag rule, while 35 percent approve. By contrast, a majority of the public supports most of the other early moves by Obama. From Gallup:

"Obama's decision to reverse the prohibition on funding for overseas family-planning providers may be the least popular thing he has done so far. This was an executive order that forbade federal government money from going to overseas family-planning groups that provide abortions or offer abortion counseling. Fifty-eight percent of Americans disapprove of Obama's decision to lift this ban, while only 35% approve of it. The ban on federal funds to these groups was put in place by Ronald Reagan, but lifted by Bill Clinton. George W. Bush re-instituted the ban after taking office in 2001, but Obama has once again lifted it. The abortion and Guantanamo Bay prison decisions are especially unpopular among Republicans; only 8% approve of the former and 11% of the latter. But these are also the least popular decisions among independents and Democrats as well, though a majority of Democrats still approve of both."

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston recently criticized Obama over this step, and the poll is already attracting a lot of attention in the anti-abortion movement, which is closely associated with the Catholic church and other religious conservatives.

Deirdre McQuade, assistant director for policy and communications for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, said in a statement: "Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, has said that the bishops find the recent decision by President Barack Obama to reverse the Mexico City Policy “very disappointing.“ Most Americans seem to agree...An administration that wants to reduce abortions should not divert U.S. funds to groups that perform and promote abortion. Our country faces serious national challenges at this time, requiring Americans to unite for the common good of all, especially the poor and vulnerable. This is no time to divide our nation with policies that offend the pro-life values of most Americans."

Over at American Papist, Thomas Peters blogs, "This poll supports the point I and others have made: Obama's position on life issues - particularly abortion - is not in line with the majority of Americans, but rather represents an extreme position on the issue. He is even, I think it can be argued, farther from the center than people who would consider themselves 'pro-life'."

And Catholic League president Bill Donohue said, "The people have spoken. They generally like what Obama is doing so far, but they draw the line on funding abortion. It would behoove him to pay more attention to the American people on this subject and less time listening to the extremists at Planned Parenthood and NARAL."

In the most pointed statement yet from a high-ranking Catholic official, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, today is sharply criticizing the Holocaust denial by a traditionalist bishop whose excommunication was lifted last month by Pope Benedict XVI. George (above), clearly alarmed by the brewing controversy and the damage to Catholic-Jewish relations, called the statements by Bishop Richard Williamson "deeply offensive and utterly false" and called the outrage from Jews and Catholics "understandable.''

Signficantly, George also asserts that full reconciliation between the Vatican and the four un-excommunicated bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X, including Williamson, will require "their assent to all that the Church professes, including the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.'' That is important because the Second Vatican Council resulted in the church's renunciation of anti-Semitism and led to a historic warming of relations between Catholics and Jews.

Here's the full text of Cardinal George's statement:

"Pope Benedict XVI has lifted the personal penalty of excommunication incurred by four schismatic bishops belonging to the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X, founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. This gesture on the part of the Holy Father was an act of mercy and personal concern for the ordained and lay members of this Society and was meant to coincide with the fiftieth commemoration of the convening of the Second Vatican Council.

The Holy Father’s lifting of the excommunications is but a first step toward receiving these four bishops, and the priests who serve under them, back into full communion with the Catholic Church. If these bishops are to exercise their ministry as true teachers and pastors of the Catholic Church, they, like all Catholic bishops, will have to give their assent to all that the Church professes, including the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.

As is now widely known, one of the four bishops, Richard Williamson, has recently made some deeply offensive and utterly false statements about the Holocaust of the Second World War. Bishop Williamson has denied historical facts about the Shoah, in which six million Jews were cruelly annihilated, innocent victims of blind racial and religious hatred. These comments have evoked understandable outrage from within the Jewish community and also from among our own Catholic people. No Catholic, whether lay person, priest or bishop can ever negate the memory of the Shoah, just as no Catholic should ever tolerate expressions of anti-Semitism and religious bigotry.

I make my own the words of the Holy Father spoken at the General Audience on January 28, 2009: “[May] the Shoah show both old and new generations that only the arduous path of listening and dialogue, of love and forgiveness, can lead peoples, cultures and religions of the world to the longed-for goal of fraternity and peace, in truth. May violence never again humiliate man's dignity.” We Catholic bishops in the United States are as committed as ever to building bonds of trust and mutual understanding with our elder brothers and sisters, the Jewish people, so that together with them we may be a blessing to the world."

(Photo, by David L. Ryan of the Globe staff, shows Cardinal George in Rome in 2002.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley (right) of Boston, who has made no secret of his concern about President Obama's support for abortion rights, in his most recent blog posting criticizes the president's decision to revoke the so-called Mexico City Policy, which prohibited federally funded nongovernmental organizations from using those funds to pay for abortions. Here's what O'Malley wrote:

"As we feared, the President has chosen to reverse the Mexico City policy which prohibited U.S. government money from being used in programs which provide or promote abortions overseas. We can only speculate on what the implications of that decision are going to be.

When we see the numbers of abortions being performed in the developing world — many of which are directed at girls in the womb — it is very disturbing to think that our country is going to be promoting this kind of assault on human life and dignity throughout the world.

Abortion is a great evil and anytime restrictions to abortion are lifted it is a tragedy. As I said previously, it is very encouraging to see so many young people participating in the March for Life and in other events throughout the year. We must continue to educate new generations about the gift of life."

O'Malley's comments are in keeping with those of other Catholic bishops, and reflect the church's staunch opposition to abortion. Cardinal Justin Rigali, chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, issued a statement criticizing the decision Jan. 23.

(Photo, by Barry Chin of the Globe staff, shows O'Malley in Quincy on Jan. 13, 2009.)

The construction of a garden dedicated to victims of clergy sexual abuse at the new cathedral in Oakland has intensified a national discussion among survivors about the merits of such memorials. In today's Globe, I have a story taking a look at the issue, and its ramifications here in Boston. An excerpt:

The garden at the Cathedral of Christ the Light is the nation's first permanent memorial to abuse victims at a Catholic cathedral, and it appears to mark a new stage in the abuse crisis, as survivors and church officials debate whether and how to commemorate the victimization of more than 10,000 youngsters by more than 4,000 priests. Two Catholic parishes, in Iowa and New Jersey, already have memorials; a religious order in Chicago agreed to build one as part of a legal settlement, but that project stalled when the order asked survivors to suggest the design.

In Boston, the epicenter of the abuse scandal, survivors and archdiocesan officials have been contemplating the wisdom of such a memorial since the crisis erupted seven years ago.

But within the survivor community, there are significant differences of opinion about whether memorials are an important way to acknowledge the phenomenon of clergy sexual abuse and lessen the secret shame many victims feel, or are hollow symbols that relegate an ongoing crisis to the history books and allow church officials to avoid taking more concrete actions.

There are two videos that accompany the story. This one is about the memorial:

And this one is about the architecture of the new cathedral:

Boston College has chosen as its first Corcoran Visiting Chair in Christian-Jewish Relations a Hebrew University professor of international relations, Raymond Cohen (above), who is researching the relationship between Israel and the Vatican. I spoke with Cohen about the complexity of that relationship, about the prospect of a visit to Israel this year by Pope Benedict XVI, and about the impact of tension over Gaza and the lifting of the excommunication of the four SSPX bishops. The Q&A ran in the Ideas section of today's Globe; here is an excerpt:

IDEAS: What's the impact of Gaza?

COHEN: More than anything else, the breakdown in the peace process and the friction between Israel and the Palestinians has encumbered the relationship between the state of Israel and the Holy See. At the same time, it seems to me there's no reason why it should affect the upcoming visit of the pope, and on the contrary, the visit would give the pope a chance to exert a calming influence on the parties.

IDEAS: What about the reconciliation with the excommunicated bishops?

COHEN: The director of the chief rabbinate rightly said this was a cause of real grief, but since then there have been clarificatory remarks by the pope (and others)...and I think that with the passage of time the relationship will get back on track.

IDEAS: There are so many points of tension.

COHEN: In Judaism, we have an idea of "argument for the sake of heaven." We're not a people that welcomes banal decorum, or harmony for its own sake. Difficult questions have to be argued about, and I think the Catholic Church also appreciates that. If you read the New Testament, Jesus doesn't mind arguing. That's a common tradition. And a relationship based upon a difference of opinion, however profound, I think is a very mutually beneficial relationship. You get to know yourself better, whether you're a Jew or a Catholic, and also you change. This relationship has led to both sides changing.

(Photo by Wiqan Ang of the Globe staff.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston is praising Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of four traditionalist bishops, saying the move is a step toward "unity and reconciliation" within Catholicism. But the cardinal also describes the statements denying the Holocaust by one of the bishops (Richard Williamson, shown above) as "outrageous," says, "it certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society (of Saint Piux X) has," and, in a novel defense of the pope's actions, says, "it underscores the importance for the Holy Father to have increasing influence over those communities.'' O'Malley offers an apology of sorts, saying, "We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements," and he repudiates Holocaust denial, saying, "It is very important for us to always remember the Holocaust so that such an atrocity could never take place again."

Here's the full text of O'Malley's statement, posted on his blog at 10 p.m. last night:

The Vatican announced this week that the Holy Father has lifted the excommunications of four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X. I was pleased with the news which shows, once again, the Holy Father’s concern for unity and reconciliation in the Church.

In 1988 Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who was critical of some elements of the Second Vatican Council, ordained four bishops without the approval of the Holy Father, incurring in automatic excommunication on himself and the four bishops he ordained.

This action follows the publication of the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum a year and a half ago, in which the Holy Father lifted previous restrictions on the celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Missal, commonly known as the Tridentine Mass.

Just before the publication of the Apostolic Letter, I was privileged to be a part of a meeting of cardinals and bishops with the Holy Father in which he expressed his hope that his action would help convince those disaffected Catholics to return to full union with the Catholic Church.

So, his outreach to the communities who follow these bishops is just one more manifestation of his ardent desire to bring these people (which some estimate to be as many as 1.5 million) back into the fold. We know that these are generally people who practice their faith and try to live a Christian life seriously but, unfortunately, I believe that they have been misled by their leadership.

Of course, lifting the excommunications was a first step; it does not regularize these bishops or the Society of St. Pius X, but it opens the way for a dialogue. This step was in response to a letter in which they professed their desire for full participation in the life of the Church.

It was tragic that one of the four bishops, Bishop Richard Williamson, had made outrageous statements about the Holocaust and about the September 11 attacks on the United States. It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has. Additionally, as terrible as the comments were, it underscores the importance for the Holy Father to have increasing influence over those communities.

We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements. I think the Holy Father’s statements and those of Cardinal Walter Kasper, chairman of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, have been very clear to dissociate the Catholic Church from those kinds of sentiments. I was pleased that the head of the Society of St. Pius X, Bishop Bernard Fellay, also repudiated the statements of Bishop Williamson.

It is very important for us to always remember the Holocaust so that such an atrocity could never take place again. I recall the words of the Holy Father this week: “May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism, because violence against a single human being is violence against all.”

The U.S. bishops have been uncharacteristically silent about the pope's actions, and so far as I know O'Malley is the first cardinal to speak publicly about the controversy. The bishops of Canada, however, did issue a statement this week, taking no position on the wisdom of lifting the excommunications, but declaring, "The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops finds abhorrent the notion that somehow the terrible evil of the Holocaust is not a fact of history."

UPDATE: At America magazine's blog, the Rev. James Martin visits the Society of Saint Pius X's web site, finds an article with stunning anti-Semitism ("they crucified the One," "It is public knowledge that the Jewish sector...controls especially the financial power that is exercised through banks," and "Judaism is inimical to all nations in general"), and poses the question, "Is anti-Semitism a pattern that pervades the Society of St. Pius X, or is it simply a bigotry expressed by only a few members?"

And at the National Catholic Reporter, John L. Allen Jr. asks "What was the Vatican thinking?" Allen writes that: "The way this decision was communicated was a colossal blunder, and one that's frankly difficult to either understand or excuse,'' before exploring how things might have unfolded differently. But, reinforcing the America magazine analysis, Allen also suggests that Williamson is not alone in his views. Allen writes, "Williamson's views should not be used to discredit every Catholic who feels the tug of classical liturgical forms, or who takes a traditional doctrinal stance. Many of the people drawn to the Society of St. Pius X, or any of the various traditionalist groups already in communion with Rome, are simply Catholics hungry for a clear sense of spiritual identity in a rootless world. On the other hand, it would be equally misleading to style Williamson as a "lone gunman," an isolated crank with no connection to broader currents of thought in the traditionalist world."

UPDATE: My story on Cardinal O'Malley's comments in Sunday's paper.

(Photo, by AFP/Getty Images, shows Bishop Williamson's controversial interview with Swedish television about the Holocaust as seen in Argentina.)

The main group advocating for the ordination of women as Catholic priests, taking note of Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of four conservative Lefebvrist bishops (one of whom denies the Holocaust) who were ordained without papal sanction in 1988, is asking the pope to also lift the excommunications of women who participated in ceremonies that they call "ordinations," in violation of Catholic church teaching prohibiting the ordination of women. The statement from Roman Catholic WomenPriests, an organization that church officials say is not Catholic:

"Roman Catholic Womenpriests call on Pope Benedict to lift the decree of automatic excommunication issued on May 29, 2008 against all in our movement as a gesture of reconciliation and justice toward women in the church.

As is well known, the Congregation for Bishops, instructed by the Pope, removed the excommunication of four traditionalist bishops on Jan. 21, 2009. Therefore, Roman Catholic Womenpriests call on the Pope to lift the decree of excommunication against us. This gesture will be a step away from the institutional church’s treatment of women as second-class citizens.

We stand firmly in the tradition of Vatican ll which declares: "Any kind of social or cultural discrimination in basic personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language or religion, must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God's design." (Gaudium et Spes, art. 29, 2)

No priest pedophiles have been excommunicated. No bishops who were responsible for their continued placement in parishes after their pedophile history was known have been excommunicated. Theologians who teach and support Vatican II teachings and who support women's ordination are silenced and/or excommunicated. Women ordained as priests are excommunicated. Priests and laity who support women priests are excommunicated. But, priests who reject Vatican II and who deny the holocaust and who openly deny the full equality of women are "rehabilitated" after earlier excommunication?

What's wrong with this picture?"

(Photo, by Travis Dove for the Boston Globe, shows a ceremony in Boston last summer at which a group advocating for the ordination of women said it ordained Gloria Ray Carpeneto of Maryland as a priest. The Catholic Church said the ceremony was not a valid ordination.)

Today is the second anniversary of the death of former U.S. Rep. Robert F. Drinan, a Massachusetts Democrat who was the only Jesuit priest ever to serve in Congress. Drinan was always concerned about the contents of his FBI file, because he thought the FBI inappropriately kept tabs on him because of his liberal political views. The Globe recently obtained Drinan's FBI file through a Freedom of Information Act request, and I have a story about the content's in today's paper. An excerpt:

The file is unlikely to reshape history's view of the only Jesuit priest to serve in Congress, but it provides a backstage look at the dispute between the congressman and the agency and a reminder of how much the FBI changed over the second half of the 20th century.

In the 1970s and before, the FBI clearly viewed the congressman as potential trouble. At one point, when Drinan was quoted by a news service denouncing Attorney General John N. Mitchell as "the most dangerous attorney general that we have ever had," an FBI official scribbled on a document, "This fellow Drinan is like McGovern + Anderson - anything to get publicity."

The document does not make clear who McGovern and Anderson are, but the references seem likely to be to Senator George S. McGovern and either US Representative John B. Anderson or Jack Anderson, a syndicated newspaper columnist.

But by 1994, when the FBI was asked to do a background check on Drinan for a possible federal appointment, the tone was completely different. The file is packed with testimonials from Drinan's colleagues describing him in highly laudatory terms.

(Photo, by Frank C. Curtian of AP, shows Father Drinan greeting Vietnam veterans in Concord in 1971.)

Pope Benedict XVI, speaking at his weekly general audience today at the Vatican, did not directly address the controversy over his decision to reconcile the church with a Holocaust-denying bishop, but did offer general comments explaining why he lifted the excommunication of four Lefebvrist bishops (one of whom, Richard Williamson, has denied the use of gas chambers by Nazi Germany) and then expressing the importance of remembering the Holocaust.

Here are the pope's comments on revoking the 1988 excommunications of the four bishops ordained without permission by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

"I have undertaken this act of paternal benevolence because those same bishops have repeatedly expressed to me their profound suffering at the situation in which they found themselves. I hope that this gesture of mine will be followed by a prompt commitment on their part to take the further steps necessary to achieve full communion with the Church, thus showing true faithfulness to, and true recognition of, the Magisterium and authority of the Pope and of Vatican Council II."

And this is what the pope said about the Holocaust (when he refers to "our Brothers and Sisters who received the First Covenant," he means the Jews):

"May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism, because violence against a single human being is violence against all...Millions of Jews were cruelly massacred, innocent victims of blind racial and religious hatred. As I once again affectionately express my full and indisputable solidarity with our Brothers and Sisters who received the First Covenant, I trust that the memory of the Shoah will induce humankind to reflect upon the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the heart of man. In particular, may the Shoah show both old and new generations that only the arduous path of listening and dialogue, of love and forgiveness, can lead peoples, cultures and religions of the world to the longed-for goal of fraternity and peace, in truth. May violence never again humiliate man's dignity.''

(Photo, from Osservatore Romano via AFP/Getty Images, shows Pope Benedict XVI greeting a baby lion at his general audience at the Vatican today.)

The Archdiocese of Boston announced yesterday that it is closing St. Anne's School in the Readville section of Boston. The school's enrollment has been dropping rapidly -- from 136 in 2006 to 77 today -- and the school has been losing money. I have a story in today's Globe. And here is the statement from the archdiocese:

ST. ANNE SCHOOL READVILLE TO CLOSE IN JUNE

Despite a vigorous effort over the past several years to increase enrollment, St. Anne School, located at 20 Como Road, Readville, MA announced it will close at the conclusion of the current academic year in June 2009.

Changing demographics in school age populations nationally and locally as well as the challenges of the current economic downturn have had an immediate impact on the parish and school. A major consideration in announcing the closing has been a significant and sustained decline in enrollment since 2006. There currently are 77 students enrolled at St. Anne's School, down from 136 in 2006. Projected enrollments indicate that enrollment will continue to decline to fewer than 60 students by 2011. In addition, the parish is offsetting a current year school deficit of $130,000 in order to keep the school open until the end of the current school year with deficits projected to increase in future years.

In making the announcement, Rev. William F. Joyce, Pastor, St. Anne Parish said, "This decision comes after a valiant effort to keep St. Anne's School open. To our teachers, staff, and parents I say thank you for helping sustain us this long and for your outstanding commitment to our students, their families and Catholic education. We are blessed by the tremendous outpouring of support from neighboring Catholic schools who are opening their doors to make certain every student is guaranteed a seat in one of their classrooms. We will insure to provide for a smooth and seamless transition for families."

Working with parents, faculty, and the Catholic School Office of the Archdiocese of Boston, every student currently enrolled will be offered a seat in one of the neighboring Catholic schools.

Teachers and staff will have the opportunity to apply for other positions at Catholic schools within the Archdiocese of Boston.

New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly A. Ayotte (right) declared today that the Catholic Diocese of Manchester, which includes the entire state of New Hampshire, has made "remarkable and commendable" progress over the last four years. Ayotte issued her fourth and final audit of the diocese's child protection programs; the audits were a key element of a 2002 agreement between the diocese and the AG.

An excerpt from the AP story:

The attorney general's office recommended the diocese do the following: improve communication between various church officials working to prevent further abuse; enact a policy determining who can control the background check and training database; make sure all diocese clergy, staff and volunteers are getting the required background checks and training. The office also asked that the diocese begin conducting its own internal auditing.

"It is now up to the diocese, the parishioners -- many of whom are parents -- and other members of the diocese to continue their commitment to this program in the future," Ayotte said at a press conference. "The end of the oversight does not mean the diocese's system is perfect, but what it means is that they have a structure in place to review and correct deficits, and develop and understand the need to improve their program."

The Diocese of New Hampshire has posted a news release and a letter from Bishop John McCormack to Ayotte.

(Photo by Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

The five ongoing parish vigils -- round-the-clock occupations of closed parishes by Catholics who want their beloved churches reopened -- are attracting an increasing amount of attention from the national news media. Some of the vigils have been going for more than four years; the Archdiocese of Boston has taken a relatively hands-off approach while waiting for a final ruling on appeals of the closings to the Vatican. The local vigils are in East Boston, Everett, Framingham, Scituate and Wellesley (above).

The most recent piece was last night, on the CBS Evening News, and includes footage from Scituate and Wellesley:

Earlier this month, The New York Times published a front-page story on the vigils, anchored at St. Frances Xavier Cabrini Church in Scituate; Time magazine ran a story that featured a visit to a vigil at St. Stanislaus Kostka Church in Adams, and National Catholic Reporter editor-at-large Tom Roberts offers an essay looking at the phenomenon.

ABC News' Dan Harris also visited Scituate and is airing a story tonight on "World News with Charles Gibson." The text version of the story is here.

(Photo above, by Dina Rudick/Globe staff, shows vigilers at St. James the Great Parish in Wellesley in April 2008.)

I was so focused on Pope Benedict XVI's new YouTube channel that I missed the section of his message today directed at the 150 million of us who may be spending too much time on Facebook. The key quote, which clearly seems to refer to Facebook friending (or at least to so-called 'friend harvesters'): "If the desire for virtual connectedness becomes obsessive, it may in fact function to isolate individuals from real social interaction." Here's the full paragraph:

"The concept of friendship has enjoyed a renewed prominence in the vocabulary of the new digital social networks that have emerged in the last few years. The concept is one of the noblest achievements of human culture. ... We should be careful, therefore, never to trivialise the concept or the experience of friendship. It would be sad if our desire to sustain and develop on-line friendships were to be at the cost of our availability to engage with our families, our neighbours and those we meet in the daily reality of our places of work, education and recreation. If the desire for virtual connectedness becomes obsessive, it may in fact function to isolate individuals from real social interaction while also disrupting the patterns of rest, silence and reflection that are necessary for healthy human development."

The Vatican today launched a YouTube channel featuring video coverage of Pope Benedict XVI in English, German, Italian and Spanish.

Here's an excerpt from the Associated Press story, by Nicole Winfield:

"Pope Benedict XVI joined U.S. President Barack Obama and Queen Elizabeth II on Friday by launching his own YouTube channel, the latest Vatican effort to reach out to the digital generation. The Vatican said it was launching the channel to broaden Benedict's audience while also giving the Holy See better control over the papal image online. In his inaugural foray, Benedict welcomed viewers to this 'great family that knows no borders' and said he hoped they would 'feel involved in this great dialogue of truth.'"

The Vatican issued a statement from the pope's spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, who said, "The Pope was personally informed of our project, and gave his approval with his usual courtesy and graciousness. For us this is a great encouragement."

The pope addressed the issue directly in his Message for the 43rd World Day of Social Communications, which was released today by the Vatican. Some excerpts:

"The new digital technologies are bringing about fundamental shifts in patterns of communication and human relationships. ... In this year's message, I am conscious of those who constitute the so-called 'digital generation' and I would like to share with them, in particular, some ideas concerning the extraordinary potential of the new technologies, if they are used to promote human understanding and solidarity. These technologies are truly a gift to humanity and we must endeavour to ensure that the benefits they offer are put at the service of all human individuals and communities, especially those who are most disadvantaged and vulnerable". FULL ENTRY

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which has been deeply concerned about Barack Obama's support for abortion rights, today released a letter from the conference president, Cardinal Francis E. George (right) of Chicago, to the president-elect, urging him not to overturn a series of regulations that, according to the bishops, "protect conscience rights of health care workers, prevent foreign aid to organizations promoting abortion, and ban funding of stem cell research that encourages destruction of human embryos."

Here is the text of the letter:

"Dear Mr. President-elect: I recently wrote to assure you of the prayers of the Catholic bishops of the United States for your service to our nation, and to outline issues of special concern to us as we seek to work with your Administration and the new Congress to serve the common good. I am writing today on a matter that could introduce significant negative and divisive factors into our national life, at a time when we need to come together to address the serious challenges facing our people. I expect that some want you to take executive action soon to reverse current policies against government-sponsored destruction of unborn human life. I urge you to consider that this could be a terrible mistake -- morally, politically, and in terms of advancing the solidarity and well-being of our nation’s people. FULL ENTRY

There's what strikes me as a preposterous conversation going on in the religion blogosphere about whether Barack Obama is somehow excluding Catholics from the inauguration, since thus far, in the sea of clergy names attached to seemingly every event but the balls, there are no Catholic clergy. That didn't seem plausible to me, given that Catholics make up nearly a quarter of the country, so I started calling around, and I'm told that Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl (right) is speaking at the National Prayer Service Wednesday, and there is expected to be a Catholic priest at the private inauguration day worship service at St. John's Episcopal Church in Washington.

UPDATE: The Presidential Inauguration Committee has now announced the full slate of participants in the National Prayer Service. Among them is the Rev. Samuel Lloyd III, an Episcopal priest who is the former rector of Trinity Church in Boston, and now the dean of National Cathedral in Washington. Here's the full list of partipants:

Welcome: Reverend Samuel T. Lloyd III, Dean of the Washington National Cathedral
Invocation: Reverend John Bryon Chane, Episcopal Bishop of Washington.
Opening Prayer: Reverend Otis Moss Jr., Senior Pastor Emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church in Cleveland, Ohio
Prayer for civil leaders: Reverend Andy Stanley, Senior Pastor, North Point Community Church, Alpharetta, Georgia.
Scripture readings: Dr. Cynthia Hale, Senior Pastor, Ray of Hope Christian Church, Atlanta, Georgia as well as Archbishop Demetrios, Primate of the Greek Orthodox Church in America, New York City, and the Most Reverend Francisco Gonzalez, S.F., Auxiliary Bishop of Washington.
Psalm: Rabbi David Saperstein, Executive Director, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Washington, D.C.
Responsive prayers:
--Dr. Ingrid Mattson, President, Islamic Society of North America, Hartford, CT
--Rev. Suzan Johnson-Cook, Senior Pastor, Bronx Christian Fellowship, New York City
--Rabbi Jerome Epstein, Director, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, New York City
--Rev. Carol Wade of the Washington National Cathedral
--Dr. Uma Mysorekar, President, Hindu Temple Society of North America, New York City
--Rev. Jim Wallis, President, Sojourners, Washington, D.C.
-- Rabbi Haskal Lookstein, Congregation Kehilath Jeshurunm, New York City
--Pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell, Senior Pastor, Windsor Village United Methodist Church, Houston, TX
Concluding prayer: Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, Roman Catholic archbishop of Washington
Closing prayer: Bishop Katherine Jefferts-Schori, Presiding Bishop, Episcopal Church USA
Benediction: Reverend Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, General Secretary of the Reformed Church in America

Sermon: Sharon E. Watkins, General Minister and President, Disciples of Christ (Christian Church)

The Archdiocese of Boston is planning to close the last Catholic school in Jamaica Plain, the Our Lady of Lourdes school, although after parents responded with anger at a meeting last night an auxiliary bishop said the archdiocese would give the school another year if the parents can raise $500,000 by April. We have a story in today's paper.

The planned closing is the latest in a string of such moves by the archdiocese, and other dioceses in the northeast have also been closing schools. But this one is a bit unusual because this would be the first property to close that is overseen by the Capuchin friars, which is the religious order of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley. The Capuchins have a relatively small presence in this diocese -- there are 20 friars here, and all of them live at Our Lady of Lourdes. The JP parish is the only one overseen by the friars, who, while pursuing their studies, also help out at Blessed Mother Teresa and St. Mark's in Dorchester, St. James in Chinatown, St. Mary of the Angels in Roxbury, St. Mary's in Dedham, and a variety of other places, including the Shattuck Hospital. Diocesan priests and religious order priests sometimes view one another with some wariness, and O'Malley is occasionally viewed as an outsider by some because he is a Capuchin friar, but this proposed closing is the first time since O'Malley arrived in Boston more than five years ago that any tension has broken out into the open.

The proposed closing has made public a previously unknown (at least to me) financial relationship between the Capuchins and the archdiocese; it turns out that the Capuchins have paid the archdiocese close to $1.7 million for the 2003 acquisition of the old convent at Our Lady of Lourdes and the 2008 acquisition of the rectory. That money, the archdiocese says, was used to prop up the parish and the school, both of which serve many low-income families and are struggling financially. The Capuchins renovated the old convent and rectory using their own money, the archdiocese says, and are using the properties to house their students and seminarians, who study at the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry and work in ministries at the parish and around town.

There is some irony here -- when O'Malley was named archbishop of Boston, I wrote a lengthy story about the small cadre of Capuchin friars in this archdiocese, and that story mentioned that the friars were in the process of reducing their presence in Roxbury, where they had a small friary. O'Malley, who is probably the most prominent living Capuchin friar in the world (the most famous Capuchin friar ever is the sainted Padre Pio), has made maintaining a strong Capuchin presence in the archdiocese a priority, and during his tenure the order has brought more friars to JP and agreed to oversee Our Lady of Lourdes when its longtime pastor decided to retire. O'Malley, in turn, is an occasional visitor to the friary, where he has dinner and, some years, watches the Super Bowl -- he has made a priority of maintaining his Capuchin identity (unlike the other Capuchin friar serving in the U.S. hierarchy, O'Malley continues to wear his distinctive brown hooded habit as often as possible) and he clearly values spending time with friars. The Capuchins have only been overseeing the parish since August, and the archdiocese told me yesterday that the school would have needed to close regardless of who was overseeing it, but parents are clearly suspicious -- I've been getting e-mails for a few days from parents who think the Capuchins just don't want to run the school -- and the Capuchin friar who serves as pastor didn't help matters last night with this exchange:

Last night, when a parent asked how the Capuchins had paid for renovations to the buildings they had purchased, the parish's new pastor, a friar named the Rev. Brendan P. Buckley, snapped, "It's none of your business." The archdiocese has made a pledge of financial transparency, and (Bishop Robert) Hennessey stepped in to tell the parents that the renovations had been paid for by the friars, not with parish funds. After the meeting, the archdiocesan spokesman, Terrence C. Donilon, said Buckley is unhappy at having to close the school and snapped at the parent out of frustration.

One issue appears to be that, because the small school is made up overwhelmingly of the children of families who do not worship at the parish, there is little relationship between the friars and the parents. The main previous involvement appears to be that the friars advocated, at the request of the school, to get the Greater Boston Interfaith Organization to persuade the city to place a crosswalk in front of the schoolbuilding. The pastor is the public face of the school closing, but the decision is clearly being fully supported by chancery officials -- I talked yesterday with the Catholic schools superintendent, Mary Grassa O'Neill, who made it very clear she sees the closing as tragic but necessary, and as completely unrelated to the Capuchin presence in the parish.

Obviously, there are now some fences to be mended. This morning, I called Brother Jack Rathschmidt, currently the director of formation for the Capuchins in this region. I've gotten to know and respect Brother Jack over the last five or six years -- he's been kind enough to have me to have me to dinner at the friary, and to help me understand what the Capuchins are all about -- and I asked him for some context here.

"It’s always sad when a school closes or is threatened with closure, and the friars feel awful about that, but because we’re not involved in the inside of why that might be happening, there’s not a whole lot we can do,'' he said.

However, he said, the friars are committed to the parish, the neighborhood, and Boston.

"We hope that we can bing a gentle and focused service to the community,'' he said. "We're happy to be in JP, happy to be working with the Latino community especially, and we hope to build relationships between and among all the people in JP. And as we get more deeply involved in this parish, we certainly hope the Franciscan influence will be able to help build bridges.''

Voice of the Faithful, the Newton-based organization formed in the wake of the abuse crisis to push for change in the Catholic Church, is calling for the resignations of Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles, Bishop William F. Murphy of Long Island, Bishop John B. McCormack of New Hampshire, and Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati. The group is also calling on Cardinal Bernard F. Law, the former archbishop of Boston, to give up his positions in Rome, where he oversees a basilica and serves on several Vatican committees.

The group's explanation:

"We ask those authorities that failed to protect the well-being of our children by knowingly and secretly transferring predator priests from parish to parish without informing the laity of the reasons for such transfers to resign their current office before June 30, 2009. In our view, any secret transfer constitutes prima facie evidence that, regardless of the professional advice or counsel they may have received, such bishops and other religious authorities, by acting in secret, put the interests of the institutional church before the safety of its people and their children. In addition to requesting all such resignations, we call on these bishops to acknowledge personally and publicly their involvement in the sexual abuse crisis, and to ask for forgiveness from the survivors and their families who were so badly wounded by their decisions."

The group's full report is here.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has posted a summary of how the church has responded to the abuse crisis here; and its Secretariat for Child and Youth Protection has a web site offering church reports and studies here.

The 111th Congress, sworn in last week, features 50 members (out of 535) who are Jesuit-educated, according to the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. Georgetown has by far the most alumni at the Capitol -- 18 -- but local favorites Boston College and the College of the Holy Cross have their share, with six and four graduates in Congress, respectively.

The BC alumni are all Democrats, including, from Massachusetts, Senator John F. Kerry (JD 1976), Representative Michael Capuano (JD 1977), Representative William D. Delahunt (JD 1967) and Representative Edward J. Markey (BA 1968; JD 1972). The others are Representative Paul W. Hodes of New Hampshire (JD 1978) and Representative Robert C. Scott of Virginia (JD 1973). (UPDATE: An alert reader reminds me that Representative Stephen F. Lynch, also a Massachusetts Democrat, received a law degree from BC (in 1991). I have no idea why he's not on the AJCU list, but that increases BC's number to 7, and the overall number of Jesuit college and university grads in Congress to 51.)

The Holy Cross alumni, also all Democrats, are Senator Robert P. Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania (BA 1982), Representative Timothy H. Bishop of New York (BA 1972), Representative James P. Moran of Virginia (BA 1967) and Representative Peter Welch of Vermont (BA 1969).

In another analysis of the makeup of Congress, the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life looked at the religious makeup of the House and Senate. A few highlights from the report:

• "Members of Congress are much more likely than the public overall to say they are affiliated with a particular religion."
• The Congress is mostly Protestant (54.7%), mirroring the nation, but the Protestants are from multiple denominations; Baptists are underrepresented, while Episcopalians, Methodists and Presbyterians are overrepresented when compared to their presence in the national population.
• "Catholics are the single largest religious group in the 111th Congress. Catholics, who account for nearly one-quarter of the U.S. adult population, make up about 30% of Congress."
• "Jews, who account for just 1.7% of the U.S. adult population, make up 8.4% of Congress, including just over 13% of the Senate."
• There are two Muslims and two Buddhists in Congress; both groups are slightly underrepresented, as are Hindus (there are no Hindu members of Congress).

(Photo above, courtesy of Boston College Public Affairs, shows the spire of Gasson Hall at Boston College.)

A multifaith group of religious leaders from Boston, including Jews as well as Muslims and Christians, today is issuing a joint statement calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

"We call upon Hamas immediately to end all rocket attacks on Israel, and upon Israel immediately to end its military campaign in Gaza,'' the statement says.

The Jewish signatories include several rabbis as well as the former presidents of Hebrew College and the Jewish Community Relations Council, but are predominantly drawn from the liberal wing of the Jewish community, and do not include the current heads of the major umbrella Jewish community organizations, who have generally not said anything that could be perceived as critical of Israel.

The most prominent signatories are the Christian leaders, also predominantly associated with liberal causes, who include the top local officials of the Episcopal Church, the Massachusetts Council of Churches, the United Church of Christ and the United Methodist Church, as well as the president of Andover Newton Theological School. The top local official of the Unitarian Universalist Association also signed. There are several Catholic signers, but no members of that church's hierarchy.

The Muslim leaders include several local imams and the leadership of the Muslim American Society of Boston.

Here is the full text of the letter plus the signatories:

"AN INTERFAITH DECLARATION FOR PEACE

We, members and leaders of the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian communities in Greater Boston - all having deep and symbolic ties to the land and peoples of the Middle East - are anguished by the events unfolding in Israel and Gaza. Recognizing the legitimate needs of all peoples, including all those living in the Middle East, for dignity, peace, safety and security –- regardless of religion, race, or national origin -- we issue this joint statement with the hope and belief that our interfaith voices will be heard clearly, above the din of war.

As guiding principles,

•We acknowledge the long, complex, and painful history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
•We acknowledge the wide range of deeply-held beliefs, and intensely-felt narratives on all sides
•We acknowledge that all sides are capable of assigning blame to others, and asserting justification for their cause
•We observe that violence by any side begets more violence, hatred, and retaliation
•We deplore any invocation of religion as a justification for violence against others, or the deprivation of the rights of others
•We decry any use of inflammatory rhetoric that demonizes the other and is intended, or is likely, to promote hatred and disrespect
•We believe the conflict can be resolved only through a political and diplomatic solution and not a military one.

In the face of many competing narratives, we recognize that the overriding common need of the peoples of the region is the prompt implementation of a just and lasting peace. Toward that end, and particularly in response to the current hostilities,

•We call upon the United States and the international community immediately to intercede to help reestablish a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, toward the goal of a permanent cessation of hostilities
•We call upon Hamas immediately to end all rocket attacks on Israel, and upon Israel immediately to end its military campaign in Gaza
•We call for an immediate end to all strikes on civilian centers and citizens, both Israeli and Palestinian
•We call for lifting of the blockade on Gaza as to all non-military goods, for an immediate and significant increase in humanitarian aid to address the needs of the people of Gaza, and for all parties involved to join in taking responsibility to address those human needs
•We call on all parties involved in the conflict to work sincerely and vigorously toward a just and lasting peace that addresses and promotes the national aspirations of both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples
•We call on President-elect Obama to make clear that as President he will urgently assert US leadership to achieve a comprehensive diplomatic resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflicts

Through this joint statement we affirm our commitment to engage with one another, even, and especially, during times of great stress. We also affirm our common humanity and our common belief – as Jews, Muslims and Christians - that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must cease, that there is no military or violent solution, that all human life is valued, and that all parties must cooperate to make the peace – a just and lasting peace desperately needed and deserved by all the peoples of the region."

Signed:

The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus (right), one of the leading conservative voices in contemporary American Catholicism, died this morning at 72. Here is the announcement from Joseph Bottum, the editor of the journal Neuhaus founded, First Things:

"Fr. Richard John Neuhaus slipped away today, January 8, shortly before 10 o’clock, at the age of seventy-two. He never recovered from the weakness that sent him to the hospital the day after Christmas, caused by a series of side effects from the cancer he was suffering. He lost consciousness Tuesday evening after a collapse in his heart rate, and the next day, in the company of friends, he died.

My tears are not for him—for he knew, all his life, that his Redeemer lives, and he has now been gathered by the Lord in whom he trusted.

I weep, rather for all the rest of us. As a priest, as a writer, as a public leader in so many struggles, and as a friend, no one can take his place. The fabric of life has been torn by his death, and it will not be repaired, for those of us who knew him, until that time when everything is mended and all our tears are wiped away.

Funeral arrangements are still being planned; information about the funeral will be made public shortly. Please accept our thanks for all your prayers and good wishes."

Father Neuhaus was a Lutheran minister who converted to Catholicism in 1990. He is probably best known for his 1984 book, "The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in America.'' He was a frequent commentator in the media about the Catholic church; I interviewed him on multiple occasions over the years, and he was always thoughtful, sharp, and forceful. He had been battling cancer for some time.

The world of Catholic and religion news bloggers, which has been anticipating Neuhaus's death for some time, is offering a variety of tributes today:

•Gary Stern, the religion writer at the Journal News in Westchester County, NY, writes: "Let’s be honest: Most people never heard of Neuhaus. He wasn’t really a public figure, in the modern celebrity sense. But among those who care about Catholic thought, the larger realm of Christian thought, the political school of thinking that’s become known as neo-conservativism, and the role of religion in the public square, he was really an intellectual giant."

• Jeffrey Weiss, a religion reporter at the Dallas Morning News, comments on Father Neuhaus's ubiquity, writing, "There can scarcely be a religion reporter who has worked over the past several decades who hasn't had occasion to talk to the Rev. Richard John Neuhaus once or thrice. He was smart, quotable and available -- an irresistible combination."

•Domenico Bettinelli, Jr., a staffer for the Archdiocese of Boston who blogs about Catholicism from the right, writes, "As a sometime Catholic journalist myself, Fr. Neuhaus was one of those I strived to emulate, but I did so only poorly. His erudition, wit, and communication skill far surpassed that of the rest of us. We have lost a great priest, writer, and public leader, but hopefully we have gained an advocate in heaven."

• Michael Sean Winters, who blogs about Catholicism from the left for America magazine, also praises Neuhaus, saying, "I remember the first time Father Neuhaus attacked me in print: I felt on top of the world. For a left-of-center person like me, being attacked by Father Neuhaus was a badge of honor. To gain the notice of someone with whom you disagree is much more flattering than to gain the praise of a mentor or an acolyte. Neuhaus’s career, beginning as a leftie Lutheran and ending as a conservative Catholic (he passed Gary Wills going in the opposite direction some time in the early 1970s), made him a hero among his newly found ideological soulmates on the right: We Catholics love a convert. But, even those of us who stayed on the left developed an admiration for Neuhaus’s facility with the language, the self-evident sincerity of his convictions, and the sheer prolificness of his pen. He seemed to be always writing and whether you agreed with him or not, his writings were always worth the read, always provocative and always written with flair. I never made Father Neuhaus’s acquaintance personally but a mutual friend once told me that if we were to break bread together we would soon be downing scotch and laughing with greater intensity than we had ever argued. I suspect that is right and look forward to a tumbler of single malt with him in the hereafter."

First Things has posted an essay on death that Father Neuhaus penned in 2000, so Father Neuhaus, never short of an opinion, gets the final word on his own demise:

"We are born to die. Not that death is the purpose of our being born, but we are born toward death, and in each of our lives the work of dying is already underway. The work of dying well is, in largest part, the work of living well. Most of us are at ease in discussing what makes for a good life, but we typically become tongue-tied and nervous when the discussion turns to a good death. As children of a culture radically, even religiously, devoted to youth and health, many find it incomprehensible, indeed offensive, that the word “good” should in any way be associated with death. Death, it is thought, is an unmitigated evil, the very antithesis of all that is good.

Death is to be warded off by exercise, by healthy habits, by medical advances. What cannot be halted can be delayed, and what cannot forever be delayed can be denied. But all our progress and all our protest notwithstanding, the mortality rate holds steady at 100 percent.

Death is the most everyday of everyday things. It is not simply that thousands of people die every day, that thousands will die this day, although that too is true. Death is the warp and woof of existence in the ordinary, the quotidian, the way things are. It is the horizon against which we get up in the morning and go to bed at night, and the next morning we awake to find the horizon has drawn closer. From the twelfth-century Enchiridion Leonis comes the nighttime prayer of children of all ages: 'Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray thee Lord my soul to keep; if I should die before I wake, I pray thee Lord my soul to take.' Every going to sleep is a little death, a rehearsal for the real thing."

(Photo taken in 1997 by Paul Hosefros of The New York Times.)

For more than four years, the Archdiocese of Boston has quietly (more or less) stood by as some Catholics have resisted the closings of their beloved parishes by refusing to leave the pews. Five parishes closed by the archdiocese are still occupied -- in East Boston, Everett, Framingham, Scituate and Wellesley -- while several other round-the-clock vigils have ended in response to concessions by the archdiocese. The archdiocese here is now waiting for the Vatican to rule on appeals of the closings filed by parishioners; church officials have not said what they will do if, as expected, the Vatican upholds the closings.

But the New Orleans archdiocese -- headed by Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes, a West Roxbury native who served as vicar general of the Archdiocese of Boston under Cardinal Bernard F. Law --- has taken a decidedly different approach. Last night the New Orleans archdiocese allowed police to clear two occupied parishes. Here's an excerpt from the Times-Picayune story:

"New Orleans police evicted parishioners from two Uptown Catholic churches Tuesday and delivered the buildings back into the hands of the Archdiocese of New Orleans, apparently ending a 72-day standoff that began when parishioners moved into the churches and occupied them around the clock to save them from closure.

Accompanied by lawyers from the city attorney's office, police arrived almost simultaneously at Our Lady of Good Counsel on Louisiana Avenue and at St. Henry Church, about a mile away on Gen. Pershing Street, around 10:30 a.m.

People at St. Henry said police knocked at the locked door, were allowed entry and told three protesting parishioners to leave or face a civil summons or arrest. Among the three was Madeline Morris, the widow of former Police Superintendent Henry Morris, said Alden Hagardorn, a St. Henry leader.

However, police and church officials had to force their way into Good Counsel, either battering down or sawing an opening in a side door, parishioners said."

In Boston, three people were arrested in 2004 -- one for refusing to leave Immaculate Conception Church in Winchester, and two for refusing to leave Sacred Heart Parish in South Natick. And in New York, six people were arrested for resisting the closing of an East Harlem church in 2007.

(Photo above, by Alex Brandon/AP, shows a New Orleans police officer (at left) placing a parishioner (at right) in the back of a police car outside Our Lady of Good Counsel parish yesterday.)

It’s that time of year again – list time. Actually, it’s way past list time. The Religion Newswriters Association issued their list of the top ten religion stories of the year weeks ago – of course, as a result, they missed the Madoff scandal, the Rick Warren/invocation controversy, and the Gaza assault. Revealer issued lists of the year's best religion writing and the year's best religion books and movies. Altmuslim offered a list of the top ten good news stories of the year. And Religion Dispatches has a list of the top ten year-end religion news lists, including those from Time, Christianity Today, and the Onion.

For this first new year of this new blog, I’m going to offer ten reflections about religion news and the year gone by, with a few anticipatory remarks thrown in as well. This is just a sampling; feel free to suggest other topics in the comments field.

1. The year that is ending was marked, in particular, by the multiple battles for the hearts and minds of religious Americans in the presidential campaign. There was often less there than met the eye – evangelicals continued to vote in large numbers for the Republican Party, despite vigorous efforts to lure them away by Democrats, and Jews continued to vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party, despite an unending whispering campaign on the Internet attempting to associate Obama with Islam and critics of Israel. Mitt Romney’s much-anticipated speech on faith and public life was probably not a turning point in American political thinking. Social issues played only a minor role in a campaign dominated first by Iraq and then by the economy. And, to the extent that religion was part of the political story, it was almost always as something to criticize or mock – the preaching of Wright, Hagee and Pfleger, the beliefs and practices of Palin and Romney, the middle name of Obama, the politics of Warren.

2. As the new year begins, it appears that the biggest story for all religions is likely to be the economy, which will increase demand on religious organizations for solace and assistance at the same time that it depletes their endowments and threatens their fundraising.

3. In the Catholic Church, the biggest news of 2008 was the successful visit to the United States of Pope Benedict XVI, who benefitted enormously from low expectations and won high marks for his decision to meet in Washington with five Bostonians who had been sexually abused by priests. That meeting was put together by Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, who passed (without celebration) five eventful years as archbishop of Boston, seemingly settling into his role after surviving multiple controversies, moving the church’s longtime headquarters from Brighton to Braintree, completing a reshaping of his administrative team, improving the archdiocese’s grim financial picture and rescuing St. John’s Seminary from the brink of death. But O’Malley still faces enormous challenges; the diocese still spends more each year than it raises; five closed parishes remain occupied (for more than four years now!) by protesters; and the diocese’s accounts for clergy pensions and benefits are seriously underfunded. And the church remains, particularly in Massachusetts, at odds with the political culture, particularly over abortion and gay rights. So in 2009, I'll be watching how O’Malley handles the vigils and the pension funds; what he does to address the increasing priest shortage, most likely by asking more priests to oversee multiple parishes like the circuit riders of old; and how he manages critiquing a presidential administration supported by the vast majority of his parishioners. For the pope, a highlight of 2009 is expected to be a May visit to Israel, but that trip could be postponed or cancelled if the violence there continues.

4. Mainline Protestant denominations continued to be roiled by debates over homosexuality, and continued to grapple with declining participation and aging congregations. The split in the global Anglican Communion since the election of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire began to formalize in 2008, as conservatives announced that they were establishing a separate North American province that would compete with the existing Episcopal Church in the U.S. and Canada. African American Protestant churches reflected on the state of black liberation theology after the incendiary preaching by Jeremiah Wright (a pastor in the mainline United Church of Christ) called attention to the risks of rhetoric in the age of Youtube.

5. The evangelical Protestant world was in the spotlight throughout the election, as the Democratic Party attempted, with little measurable success, to break the strong relationship between evangelicalism and Republicanism. But evangelical politics are clearly in flux – polls show younger evangelicals interested in a broader array of issues than their elders. And the tension was on display in awkward ways; the National Association of Evangelicals ousted a longtime long official, Rich Cizik, whose open attitude toward global warming and gay relationships caused some on the right to question his orthodoxy. And the flap over Obama's choice of Rick Warren to deliver the inaugural invocation reminded both evangelicals and Democrats that engagement between the two will be fraught with complexity.

6. For the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2008 brought an end to the presidential campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose candidacy went further than that of any of the Mormons who have previously sought the nation’s highest office, but also called attention to a deep streak of anti-Mormonism in American culture, particularly among evangelical Protestants. The year also saw Mormons in the midst of a controversy over Proposition 8, the measure that would overturn same-sex marriage in California. Mormons, acting at their church’s urging, gave millions to the campaign, and the church was targeted by protesters after the measure passed. Locally, Mormons continued their institutional growth in eastern Massachusetts; eight years after building a huge temple on Belmont Hill, the LDS church this year broke ground for a new stake center in East Cambridge and announced plans to build a new chapel (being contested by neighbors) in Brookline.

7. For Jews, much of the year’s biggest news was concentrated at the end of the year, as multiple Jewish foundations and individuals lost millions of dollars in the alleged Ponzi scheme overseen by one of the community’s own; an investor named Bernard L. Madoff. And the Israeli assault on Gaza, in response to Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, brought renewed attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to significant concern about Israel’s conduct by a variety of governments and groups. There was also the immigration raid on the kosher meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa, which has intensified a growing discussion about what relationship, if any, there should be between ethics and kashrut. Locally, the Combined Jewish Philanthropies offered a new plan for the Jewish community, which, as it turns out, called for intensified defense of Israel; the Jewish community locally also decided to close its community center on the South Shore. In 2009, watch for a potential consolidation of Jewish nonprofits as the economy and the Madoff scandal take their toll, and also keep an eye on how the Jewish community manages interfaith relations given the increasing criticism of Israel from other faith groups.

8. For Muslims, the year brought ongoing tension over the place of Islam in the West, as American Muslims continued to make incremental political gains, but were largely ignored by an Obama campaign wary of associating with an unpopular group. The use of terror by some Muslims – most recently the attacks in Mumbai – continues to pose a challenge to those who proclaim that Islam is a religion of peace. The Middle East crisis also looms large for American Muslims, who are attempting to persuade American policymakers to criticize Israel’s actions in Gaza. Many Muslims seized as a sign of hope Colin Powell’s denunciation, on Meet the Press, of the idea that there is something wrong with being a Muslim. And in Boston, 2008 brought the soft opening of the much-debated and long-delayed new Islamic Cultural Center in Roxbury, which is expected to fully open in 2009.

9. There were several notable deaths in the world of religion in 2008. Cardinal Avery Dulles, the scion of a famous, and Protestant, American family, who came to Catholicism by the banks of the Charles River, and who became the only American theologian ever named a cardinal by Rome, died in December at 90. Gordon Hinckley, the president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, revered by Mormons as prophet, seer and revelator, and a descendant of the last governor of Plymouth Colony, died in January at 97. Russian Orthodox patriarch Alexy II died in December at 79; Warith Deen Mohammed, the African-American Muslim leader, died in September at 74.

10. The business of religion journalism, like the rest of the journalism business, is, to put it mildly, in flux. The amount of space and resources committed to religion journalism by the mainstream media continued to dwindle in 2008, and several veteran religion writers around the country were laid off or bought out.

At the Globe, the powers-that-be retired the paper’s longtime religion column, Spiritual Life, as part of a budget-cutting effort, and launched this blog, Articles of Faith, in an effort to better engage with that segment of our growing on-line audience that is interested in religion. The blog has grown rapidly – thanks to Sarah Palin, the abortion issue, and a variety of other controversies, we had nearly 200,000 page views in November. I am grateful to all of you (well, most of you) who visited, bookmarked the site, subscribed to the RSS feed, and took the time to post comments or send notes as I experiment with this forum, trying to figure out what features and what types of posts are most useful, how best to balance the kinds of hot-button items that generate clicks with posts about news and culture that can be traffic-deadening, and also how best to balance blogging with reporting and writing stories.

This will almost certainly be my last blog post of the year; I’ve just arrived in California for a vacation, and, if the news and my own temperament allow me to tear myself away from the keyboard, Articles of Faith will be on hiatus for a bit. But please feel free to post your own thoughts about trends in the world of religion as comments on this blog, or shoot me an e-mail with suggestions for religion stories you think the Globe should pursue in 2009.

And, to one and all, Happy New Year.

(Photo, by Lai Seng Sin/AP, shows a New Year's celebration today in Petaling Jaya, Malaysia.)

Christian leaders are starting to speak out on the situation in Gaza, where Israeli forces, retaliating for rocket attacks against Israel, today attacked Hamas targets for the third day in a row, bringing the death toll in Gaza to over 300.

On Saturday I posted comments from Jewish leaders here; on Sunday I posted comments from Muslim organizations (updated this morning) here. Today comes the following statement from Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori:

"Yesterday afternoon in New York, outside the Episcopal Church Center, a demonstration took place in front of the Israeli consulate. The demonstrators included orthodox Jews. All were calling for an immediate end to the attacks in Gaza. I join my voice to theirs and those of many others around the world, challenging the Israeli government to call a halt to this wholly disproportionate escalation of violence. I challenge the Palestinian forces to end their rocket attacks on Israelis. I further urge the United States government to use its influence to get these parties back to the negotiating table and end this senseless killing. President-elect Obama needs to be part of this initiative, which demands his attention now and is likely to do so through his early months in office. I urge a comprehensive response to these attacks. Innocent lives are being lost throughout the land we all call Holy, and as Christians remember the coming of the Prince of Peace, we ache for the absence of peace in the land of his birth.

Immediate attention should focus on vital humanitarian assistance to the suffocating people of Gaza. In March of this year, I spent a day in Gaza visiting religious and community leaders and the Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza City, run by the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem. Since that visit, the situation, which was already devastating, has only worsened, with supplies of food, fuel, power, and medical supplies either cut off or indefinitely delayed. Our hospital must now try to treat the wounded under the most impossible circumstances.

I ask all people of faith to join with the Episcopalians in Jerusalem who this Sunday dispensed with their usual worship services and spent their time in prayer for those who are the objects of this violence. I pray for leaders who will seek a just peace for all in the Middle East, knowing that its achievement will only come when they have the courage to act boldly. But they must do so now, before the violence escalates further. It is only through a just and lasting peace that the hope of the ages can be fulfilled, that hope which we mark in the birth of a babe in Bethlehem."

Also today, the Vatican released a full translation of the comments made by Pope Benedict XVI after praying the Angelus yesterday:

"The Holy Land, which occupies the thoughts and sentiments of faithful around the world during these days of Christmas has again seen itself struck by an outbreak of unprecedented violence.

I am profoundly saddened by the deaths, the wounded, the material damage, the suffering, and the tears of the peoples victim to this tragic recurrence of attacks and reprisals.

The earthly homeland of Jesus cannot continue being witness to such bloodshed that is repeated without end! I implore an end to the violence, which is to be condemned in all its forms, and the re-establishment of the truce in the Gaza Strip. I ask for a show of humanity and wisdom in all those who have some responsibility in this situation. I ask the international community to do everything possible to help the Israelis and Palestinians out of this dark alley and not to resign themselves - as I said a few days ago in the 'Urbi et Orbi' message - to the twisted logic of confrontation and violence, but to give precedence to the path of dialogue and negotiation.

We entrust to Jesus, the Prince of Peace, our fervent prayer for these intentions, and to Him, Mary, and Joseph we say: 'Oh family of Nazareth, expert in suffering, grant peace to the world'. Grant it today, above all, to the Holy Land!"

(Photo, by Ariel Schalit/AP, shows Israeli tanks moving today at a staging area near Israel's border with the Gaza Strip, in southern Israel.)

In today's Globe, I have an interview with the Rev. Richard P. McBrien (right), the University of Notre Dame theologian who has become one of the most prominent explainers of Catholicism to the general public, but also a lightning rod for criticism from the right. An excerpt, in which McBrien reflects on why his theology column has been dropped by so many diocesan newspapers:

McBRIEN: As the Catholic hierarchy became more conservative under Pope John Paul II, bishops who were open to a diversity of viewpoints in the church either died or retired, and were replaced, in almost every case, by bishops who were more, let's say, attuned to the desires and intentions of the Holy See. I used to kid, I'd say bishops get points if they drop my column. They get noticed, and then they get promoted eventually, and so forth. I can give you so many examples. I mean, let's take Boston. Cushing was a patron of mine. He liked me, and I liked him. He had his foibles, but we all do. I liked Cardinal Cushing very much. But Medeiros was in, and Medeiros once said to me, 'Richard, what would my mother think if she read your column?' and I said, 'Your eminence, I don't write my column for your mother.' So then it got dropped.

IDEAS: Have you become more liberal or more outspoken over the years?

McBRIEN: No, I don't think so. I don't think of myself in those terms, although it's a relative term. I mean obviously I'm liberal if you define liberal stands as being open to the ordination of women, feeling that abortion shouldn't be a litmus test defining whether one is a good Catholic or not. I'm very much against the policy of a certain handful of bishops to threaten to deny Communion to Catholic Democrats - and they're always Democrats. I think that's counterproductive, and I think it's a mistake, and I also think it's contrary to the policy of the bishops conference.

(Photo by Wiqan Ang/Globe staff.)

Two leading U.S. Muslim organizations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, have issued statements decrying Israel's ongoing airstrikes against Hamas in Gaza, which have reportedly killed more than 225 people, and which are Israel's response to rocket attacks from Gaza against Israeli communities.

Here is the statement from MPAC:

"Israel's latest military assault is a disproportionate and inhumane response to Palestinian militants' cross-border rocket attacks against Israel, which recalls its devastating and widely condemned military assault on Lebanon just two years ago. The U.S. must act swiftly and decisively to prevent an Israeli massacre of Palestinians, since Israeli officials have said the military strikes could continue for days or months, and could include ground forces.

While the U.N., the European Union, Russia and Egypt have harshly condemned Israel's use of force while also calling on Hamas to end the rocket fire, the Bush administration today blamed Hamas for the end to the cease-fire and demanded that it stop firing rockets and limited itself to calling on Israel only to avoid hitting civilians. MPAC also calls on the Obama transition team to be ready to fairly and constructively address the conflict in the Middle East when they take office.

Earlier this month, MPAC called on the administration to follow the footsteps of the U.N., which called for Israel to lift its stifling blockade on the Gaza Strip. The economy has been paralyzed; food, water and electricity are in short supply; and observers have described conditions there as "the worst ever." The policy of collective punishment has now escalated beyond the blockade to crushing military force that may be aimed at Hamas, but is also costing the lives of civilians who are struggling just to survive in the brutal economic situation.

In "Envisioning Peace: The MPAC Perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," MPAC calls for a two-state solution where each state is truly and fully sovereign on an equal basis.

Since the inception of Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories on the heels of the Six Day War in June 1967, scores of U.N. resolutions and calls by the international community for an end to the most crucial aspects of the occupation -- notably the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories -- remain unheeded.

And it is that occupation, now as then, that stands at the heart of the conflict between two peoples engaged in a vicious and utterly unequal struggle over territory. It has taken a terrible toll on all those involved in the conflict. Today, there is a generation of Palestinians who have known nothing but occupation and a generation of Israelis who have experienced only dominance over the Palestinians."

And here is the statement from CAIR:

"Despite the public ‘green light’ given to the Israeli military by the Bush administration, American Muslims join our fellow citizens who respect international law and the sanctity of human life in repudiating this massacre carried out using U.S. taxpayer-funded weapons.

It must be clear by now that the only future offered to the Palestinian people by the outgoing administration was one of perpetual subjugation and humiliation at the hands of the Israeli occupiers. Unfortunately, our nation’s timid response to this tragic episode will only serve to fuel anti-American sentiments in the Muslim world.

We therefore call on President-elect Obama to demonstrate his commitment to change our nation’s current one-sided Mideast policy by speaking out now in favor of peace and justice for all parties to this decades-long conflict.

We also call on world leaders to take direct action to end Israel’s counterproductive and wildly disproportionate attacks and to end the humanitarian siege of Gaza, which led to the recent breakdown of the ceasefire."

At the Vatican today, Pope Benedict XVI, who is expected to visit Israel in May, called for an end to the violence, saying, "The homeland of Jesus cannot continue to be witness to so much bloodshed, which repeats itself endlessly...I implore an end to that violence, which must be condemned in all its manifestations, and the restoration of the truce in the Gaza Strip.''

Yesterday I posted a statement from Boston Jewish leaders defending the attacks here.

UPDATE: On Monday morning, two local groups, the Massachusetts chapter of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADCMA) and the Muslim American Society (MAS Boston) issued statements on Gaza, and said they planned to visit the Boston office of Sen. John F. Kerry today to express their concerns. "As people of conscience, we will appeal to the humanitarian ethics of our elected representatives to call on them to work to end the attacks on the civilian population in Gaza," said Bilal Kaleem, the director of MAS Boston. "We seek an end to all attacks on civilians, whether from the IDF or Hamas."

(Photo above, by Eyad Baba/AP, shows Palestinian firefighters trying to extinguish fire today at a burning building after an Israeli missile strike in the Rafah refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip.)

Have you ever wondered how Mary became a global icon, an object of widespread devotion and artistic exploration? That's the question being investigated by Miri Rubin (above), a professor of medieval and early modern history at Queen Mary, University of London. In the Ideas section of today's Globe, I have an interview with Rubin about her work, which is leading to a new book, "Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary.'' An excerpt from the interview:

IDEAS: How does she move to become a global figure?

RUBIN: After the year 1000 we see this really important process that some have rather grandiloquently called the birth of Europe. . . . What happens over the next few centuries is a very intimate relationship to Mary within the monasteries. After all, these are boys who've been taken away from their families. This is an attempt within the monastery to create, in a way, a sort of a fictive family, a family of the monastery, to fight sin, to fight the struggle with temptation, and Mary is the absolute companion of those particular struggles. [Mary] is consoler, is above all a mother figure, and she's still quite a sort of ladylike figure, quite a grand figure in representation. But we begin to see around the 12th century, this softening of Mary . . . not the sort of hieratic, frontal, priestly figure, but someone who is more playful, in relationship with her son. . . . And then in the 13th century, with the coming of the big preaching orders that aim to educate not just the elite but people in towns and in their vernacular . . . the material becomes extremely vivid, extremely lively, and Mary becomes like the woman next door.

You can read the full interview here.

(Photo by Amy Price.)

Over the weekend I had a story about the rapid enrollment increase at St. John’s Seminary in Brighton. As part of the reporting for that story, I interviewed Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston, about the state of the seminary. Here’s a transcript of our conversation:

Q: Tell me a little about what the state of the (St. John’s) seminary was when you arrived here.
A: When I arrived, the enrollment was way down, and there was a lot of pressure on me from some of the pastors to close the seminary, to amalgamate it with Pope John (Blessed John XXIII Seminary in Weston). Pope John really is a specialized seminary that serves the entire country, and even though it is a seminary of the archdiocese that we run and we’re responsible for, I thought that was an important service that I didn’t want to jeopardize. And the numbers there have remained sort of a constant -- about 65, more or less, over the years. And, as I told the priests, I said, ‘We have to give it one good try, to see whether we can save the seminary, because once we close it, we’ll never get it back.’ And for New England, with the large Catholic population that we have here, the presence of our own seminary is very important. And so I reached out to the other bishops in the region, and asked them to try and become involved with the seminary, and to send people, and to use it as an instrument of recruiting, inviting them to have retreats and to bring men from their dioceses, so that they could experience a little bit of seminary life. And we have named Dan (Hennessey) to the vocation office, he and Michael (Harrington), and Father (Alonso) Macias, and they've done a great job. So the response has been good, and our numbers are up, which I think is important, because even that helps recruiting, for people to come to the seminary and see that it's a going proposition. There are a lot of people there, and there's some excitement, some energy. And so we feel very good about what's happening in the seminary.

Q: Is this your first diocese with a seminary?
A: No, Palm Beach had a seminary.

Q: And what was your assessment of the quality of what was going on here in terms of instruction?
A: I think the seminary is doing a very good job. We're very grateful for Father Arthur Kennedy (left) for accepting the post. He's a man who has had vast experience in higher education, in starting the Catholic study program at St. Thomas, in Minneapolis/St. Paul. And his ecumenical work is also, I think, something that is very valuable. He has a global view of the church. And so I was very gratified that he was willing to come back. And the fact that he's a diocesan priest from Boston is also important.

And the studies that were done of our seminaries by the Holy See two years ago got very, very positive feedback from the bishops and the teams that visited the seminaries. And one of the recommendations from Rome was that we have too many seminaries in the country, and we need to amalgamate them, and so I was very happy that we have numbers now that justify us maintaining a seminary here, because I think it's important.

It also allows us to have a cadre of experts in different theological areas always on hand that can serve not only the seminary community but the larger church and the church of the region.

Having the priests from the other dioceses come in and study at the seminary is also an important way to allow the priests to have priest friends in the region. As the numbers of priests are smaller, those kinds of friendships put people in good stead. And it's seminary training that is really geared to train people to work in this part of the country, with this culture, with this history, with the challenges that we have.

Q: Did you have a relationship with Father Kennedy before?
A: I had heard so many good things about him, and I knew about the work that he had done at the Catholic studies department, and I was always very impressed with him.

Q: There must have been a lot of people arguing that, simply for financial reasons -- this is the last piece of property that you have in Brighton -- that it would have been easier to just get rid of the whole thing.
A: Yes, but I think that also for historical reasons there are people who see the seminary as an important link with our past.

Q: And that was persuasive to you?
A: Yes.

Q: So what was your strategy once you decided, ‘OK, we're not going to close it, we're going to try and make a go of it.’
A: Well, strengthening our vocations department. I issued a letter on vocations. I've been involved in giving vocation retreats, and these Andrew dinners. And I've tried to strengthen our ministry to young adults, and the campus ministry, and getting them working together with the vocation department.

Q: And you put many of your fellow bishops onto the board of the seminary?
A: Yes, I've invited the bishops from the region to be a part of the board.

Q: Why was that important?
A: So that they could feel as though they had input into the formation of their own seminarians, and also so they would be informed as to what was happening at the seminary. Because there were also rumors, ‘Oh, the seminary is going to close,’ and why would you want to send seminarians there if you don't know if we're going to be open? We need the seminarians and so that has been important for us to have the bishops on board.

Q: And did you personally ask them to send seminarians?
A: Yes. I went around visiting them and asking.

Q: Several of them (the other bishops) mentioned the decision to hire Monsignor (James P.) Moroney (of Worcester) as symbolic of a willingness to have non-Bostonians on the faculty.
A: Yes, and we have one priest from Fall River who is in training right now in Rome to get a doctorate to come and teach on the faculty.

Q: And that's intentional?
A: Yes.

Q: And tell me what that's about?
A: So that the other dioceses have more of a sense of ownership and participation. And that way, in the formation staff that's evaluating their seminarians, they have someone from their own diocese there who is part of it.

Q: There was a period when a number of faculty left, and then a rector whose contract was not renewed. Does that reflect some concern on your part about what was going on there?
A: Well, I'm very confident that the people we have in the seminary are very fine role models for our young priests and our future priests, and they're very well trained, and they have my trust and, I think, the confidence of our clergy and the other bishops.

Q: The seminary is now less exclusively Boston -- there are people from around the region and two dioceses in Vietnam, several religious orders, and an ecclesial movement. What are the pros and cons of that kind of a mix?
A: I think it's good. When I was in the seminary, the Capuchins had a college, and we had a philosophy house where the diocesan priests and the Benedictines came and studied with us. They used to joke, because of course we were very self sufficient, and had a big farm, and they referred to us as the Capuchin agricultural school. But later on our friars were working in the same dioceses with these religious priests and diocesan priests, so it made for the kinds of relationships and friendships that were very valuable in ministry later on. And I believe that here, too. And having a more diverse group prepares our future clergy to work in a church that's going to be much more diverse. It's no longer just the traditional Irish and Italian, Lithuanian and Polish. We have a lot of Asians, we have a lot of Caribbean people, we have a lot of Brazilians and Central Americans, and so the population in the seminary now reflects some of that diversity and it's good for our men to be exposed to that during their time of training.

Q: Is there any intention to have the seminary be more theologically orthodox or traditional? I know there's talk about the presence of the Neocatechumenal Way folks.
A: Well, I'm very pleased with the seminary, and as I say the reports that we received from the visitation teams, that were sent by the Holy See, were very laudatory.

Q: The Neocatechumenal Way folks -- some of them, or all of them, will stay here?
A: They will be ordained in Boston and some may be sent to the missions, but some of them will work here, obviously with the different ethnic groups that we have. The advantage of their community is that they have many Spanish and Portuguese speaking, and in the future we see that that's going to be a big need of the diocese.

Q: And they become ordained priests of the Archdiocese of Boston?
A: They're diocesan priests.

Q: I know in some dioceses there have been concerns about separate worship services for people who worship in the Neocatechumenal Way style and those who don't. Will that go on here?
A: Where they have communities, they have a Mass for their people, but this is not something terribly unusual. We have Latin Masses and Spanish Masses.

(Photos by Jim Davis/Globe staff.)

The rarefied world of Catholic theology is reminiscing about Cardinal Avery Dulles, who died yesterday at the age of 90. Here are some of the tributes and commentary:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston, commented in his blog, calling Cardinal Dulles "my good friend." An excerpt:

"My friendship with Cardinal Dulles goes back to the early 1970s, when he was teaching at Woodstock College, a Jesuit seminary. Later, we taught together at Catholic University. Cardinal Dulles was one of the most brilliant and intelligent theologians in the history of the Church in the United States. We were privileged to have him visit us last year when he gave a talk at St. John’s Seminary, which was one of his last public appearances. He suffered for many years from the aftermath of his battle with polio when he was a young adult. For the rest of life he walked with a cane. In his final lecture at Fordham titled: 'A Life in Theology,' which was read for him, he said: 'Suffering and diminishment are not the greatest of evils, but are normal ingredients in life, especially in old age. They are to be accepted as elements of a full human existence. As I become increasingly paralyzed and unable to speak, I can identify with the many paralytics and mute persons in the Gospels, grateful for the loving and skillful care I receive and for the hope of everlasting life in Christ. If the Lord now calls me to a period of weakness, I know well that his power can be made perfect in infirmity. Blessed be the name of the Lord!' He will be greatly missed."

America magazine, the Jesuit weekly, has posted some of Cardinal Dulles's essays here, and on its blog, the Rev. James Martin has some warm and funny anecdotes about travelling to Boston with the cardinal in 2001. An excerpt:

"Back in the Jesuit dining room at Fordham, over lunch, a few Jesuits asked how things were in Boston; the country was still reeling from the Sept. 11 attacks. 'People in Boston were very upset that two of the planes that hit the World Trade Center came from Logan airport,' I explained, relating what I heard the night before. Avery said, 'Well, gee, how do you think I feel? One of them came from Dulles!' That was one of the rare times he referred to that place, out of humility. Once, during his time in Washington, D.C., when Avery was being driven to the airport by a young Jesuit, he asked him, 'Father, which airport are we going to? National or…?' Avery said, 'The other one!'"

Over at Commonweal magazine's blog, the Rev. Robert P. Imbelli, a BC professor, also has some reflections on Cardinal Dulles, writing that, "I had the privilege and grace of being able to visit with him several times during his stay at the Jesuit infirmary near Fordham. I always came away with a sense of being blessed by his presence and witness." In June, Imbelli wrote of a visit with Cardinal Dulles:

"He can no longer speak, and the muscles of his arms are also impaired. Yet his mind is lucid, he continues to read and work, and communicates slowly by touching the letters of his computer keyboard. In our 'conversation' he was always one step ahead of me. He typed 'DH,' and it took a little time before it dawned on me that he was referring to Vatican II’s document 'Dignitatis humanae.'"

Dulles had taught at Fordham since 1988, but had been associated with the university for more than half a century; the university's president, the Rev. Joseph M. McShane, issued a statement:

"A man of prodigious intellect and great holiness, Cardinal Dulles devoted his entire life to the task of advancing the dialogue between faith and reason. In the process, he enriched both the Church and the Academy with his wisdom and his warmth. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that he was the first American theologian to be named to the College of Cardinals.”

Cardinal Dulles was the first American Jesuit named a cardinal; the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) of the United States issued a statement on the cardinal's passing. The comment from the president of the Jesuit Conference, the Rev. Thomas H. Smolich:

“Cardinal Dulles was man of tremendous intellectual rigor whose teaching and writing contributed greatly to the vibrancy of Catholic intellectual life. Yet for a man with so many gifts, he never viewed himself as anything more than a poor servant of Christ. In this way, he called all of us into a more intimate relationship with the Lord he so dearly loved.”

Cardinal Dulles, who spent his career as a professor, was the only American cardinal ever who was not a bishop -- he chose to remain a cardinal-priest. The president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Francis E. George, issued a statement calling Cardinal Dulles "a great theologian and a totally dedicated servant of the Church:"

"His wise counsel will be missed; his personal witness to the pursuit of holiness of life as a priest, a Jesuit and a Cardinal of the Church will be remembered and will encourage the Church to remain ever faithful to her Lord and his mission. I am deeply saddened at the loss of a personal friend; but I rejoice in the hope that now he sees clearly what he explored so well in his studies on revelation, on grace and on the nature of the Church and the papal office. May he rest in peace."

In April, Pope Benedict XVI made a point of visiting the ailing Cardinal Dulles while the pope was in the US. Over at Whispers in the Loggia, Rocco Palmo has the text of a note Benedict sent to Cardinal Edward M. Egan of New York upon hearing of Cardinal Dulles's death:

"Having learned with sadness of the death of Cardinal Avery Dulles, I offer you my heartfelt condolences, which I ask you kindly to convey to his family, his confreres in the Society of Jesus and the academic community of Fordham University. I join you in commending the late cardinal's noble soul to God, the father of mercies, with immense gratitude for the deep learning, serene judgment, and unfailing love of the Lord and His church which marked his entire priestly ministry and his long years of teaching and theological research. At the same time I pray that his convincing personal testimony to the harmony of faith and reason will continue to bear fruit for the conversion of minds and hearts and the progress of the Gospel for many years to come. To all who mourn him in the hope of the resurrection I cordially impart my apostolic blessing as a pledge of consolation and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ."

You can read my 2001 interview with Cardinal Dulles here.

(Photo, by Massimo Sambucetti/AP, shows Pope John Paul II greeting Cardinal Dulles at the Vatican in 2001.)

Cardinal Avery Dulles, who grew up in a famous American family (Dulles Airport is named for his father), converted to Catholicism while at Harvard, and went on to become the most honored Catholic theologian in U.S. history, died today at age 90.

I had a chance to interview Cardinal Dulles back in 2001. Here's what I wrote at the time, including a partial transcript of our conversation:

Avery Dulles, the scion of a wealthy and prominent Presbyterian family, arrived at Harvard in 1936 as an agnostic, but found God in the buds of a tree by the banks of the Charles River one rainy February afternoon two years later.

"How could it be . . . that this delicate tree sprang up and developed and that all the enormous complexity of its cellular operations combined together to make it grow erectly and bring forth leaves and blossoms?" he asked himself. And the answer, he later wrote, was "Him who moved the stars, and made the lilacs bloom."

Dulles, a brilliant student passionate about learning, found himself ravenously consuming the new works of French Catholic theologians, and one day he marched into a Catholic bookstore and asked, "How do I get into your church?"

He had never even met a priest, but he decided to become one, figuring, "I guess I wanted to go the whole way."

Today, Dulles, whose great-grandfather, great-uncle, and father (John Foster Dulles) all served as US secretaries of state, and whose grandfather was a distinguished Presbyterian theologian, is now the most prominent Catholic theologian in America.

His accomplishments are many - 21 books, more than 650 articles, and a long career teaching thousands of students, for the last 13 years at Fordham University in New York, where he is still a professor at age 83.

And in February, he became the first American Jesuit and the first American theologian to be named a cardinal.

Last week, Dulles visited Boston to receive an award at a fund-raising dinner for the New England Jesuits. In an interview with the Globe at the Jesuits' humble provincial headquarters in the South End, Dulles talked about his journey to faith and his career since:

Q. What drew you to Catholicism?

A. Perhaps it was the studies of the Reformation period. We had to read Luther and Calvin and the decrees of the Council and Trent and all those sorts of things, and I just found myself resonating with the Catholic positions in all those controversies, and also feeling that the culture of Europe was destroyed or ruptured by the Reformation in a way that was unfortunate. And then I discovered the Catholic Church as it existed in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and it was a very vital, vibrant thing. St. Paul's parish there - the liturgy was very well performed, and Sunday evening they were having benediction, they were all singing the hymns of Thomas Aquinas in Latin, and I said, `This is the church for me.'

Q. Your journey to Catholicism strikes me as having been more intellectual than spiritual.

A. I think that's probably true. I hope there was some spiritual aspect to it, but I've never had any great taste for what's called spirituality. I think it deals so much with emotions and feelings. I don't have many emotions or feelings. I tend to have ideas. I was interested in Catholicism ideally, intellectually. I was convinced that it was true. I was interested in truth.

Q. How has your life changed since you've become a cardinal?

A. I get more invitations to lectures and things like that. I try to get out of them when I can, but I'm on the road a good bit. And then some things you have to get dressed up for.

Q. What is the appropriate role of dissent in the church?

A. Dissent should be rare, respectful and reluctant. One's first reaction as a Catholic is to agree with the official teaching of the church.

Q. Can you imagine married priests, or female priests, in the church?

A. Married priests is a much easier question. We have married priests. In the early centuries many of the priests and bishops were married, and Eastern Rite Catholics have a married clergy, and we have a number of converts from Protestantism who are married priests who function as priests and enjoy their family life. So that's possible. The question of women is a doctrinal issue. I think the weight of scripture and tradition is decisively against it. In the early '70s I was not sure the question had been decided, I was kind of open. But after 1976, Paul VI answered the question pretty thoroughly. That pretty much settled my mind on the point.

Q. You have said one of the roles is to critique the culture. What is your critique of American culture?

A. Our technology is so advanced, we sometimes get the feeling that we can reconstruct everything, and we define power, so we have a hard time accepting anything that we cannot change. So we want to reconstruct the church, we want to rewrite all the dogmas of the church. We feel that we can replace everything by our own power, and according to our own preference. Our notion of freedom needs to be critiqued. We don't have a moral freedom to do what is wrong. We're under a higher law.

Then we want instant satisfaction. Part of the American culture is to produce as much as possible and consume as much as possible, so we consume an inordinate amount of the world's resources. Our consumption should be governed by need, and needs to be restrained more than it is. We need to take greater care of the needs of the poor who are left out of the capitalist process.

(Photo, by Chitose Suzki of the Globe staff, was taken in Boston in 2001.)

The Vatican today released an important document, Dignitas Personae, that outlines the church's position on a variety of bioethical issues raised by new medical procedures, especially those associated with infertility. Much of the document restates previously articulated church teachings, but the document is much more specific in outlining the church's little-known opposition to in vitro fertilization and surrogacy, as well as the church's concern about embryo adoption. The document, called an "instruction,'' also comes out against drugs that prevent the implantation of embryos -- i.e. the morning after pill -- and spells out the church's opposition to cloning, genetic enhancement, and some forms of gene therapy (so called "germ line gene therapy"), all with an eye toward "the recognition of the dignity and inalienable value of every single and unique human being called into existence." The document was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and was approved by Pope Benedict XVI. An excerpt:

"With regard to the treatment of infertility, new medical techniques must respect three fundamental goods: a) the right to life and to physical integrity of every human being from conception to natural death; b) the unity of marriage, which means reciprocal respect for the right within marriage to become a father or mother only together with the other spouse; c) the specifically human values of sexuality which require “that the procreation of a human person be brought about as the fruit of the conjugal act specific to the love between spouses”. Techniques which assist procreation “are not to be rejected on the grounds that they are artificial. As such, they bear witness to the possibilities of the art of medicine. But they must be given a moral evaluation in reference to the dignity of the human person, who is called to realize his vocation from God to the gift of love and the gift of life”. In light of this principle, all techniques of heterologous artificial fertilization, as well as those techniques of homologous artificial fertilization which substitute for the conjugal act, are to be excluded. On the other hand, techniques which act as an aid to the conjugal act and its fertility are permitted."

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has put together a question and answer paper to explain the document. An excerpt:

Q: Why is the Catholic Church opposed to reproductive technologies such as “in vitro” fertilization?

A: The child conceived in human procreation is a human person, equal in dignity with the parents. Therefore he or she deserves to be brought into being through an act of total and committed marital love between husband and wife. Technologies that assist the couple’s marital union in giving rise to a child respect this special dignity of the human person; technologies that replace it with a procedure by a technician in a laboratory do not. The moral problem is aggravated by efforts to introduce gametes (sperm or egg) from people outside the marriage, to make use of another woman’s womb to gestate the child, or to exercise “quality control” over the child as though he or she were a product. IVF as practiced today also involves a very high death rate for the embryos involved, and opens the door to further abuses such as embryo cryopreservation (freezing) and destructive experimentation.

Q: What topics in this document have not been specifically addressed in past teaching documents?

A: Some very new issues are discussed here for the first time. Some proposed methods for altering the technique for human cloning so it will produce embryonic stem cells but not an embryo (e.g., “altered nuclear transfer”) are judged to require more study and clarification before they could ethically be applied to humans, as one would have to be certain that a new human being is never created and then destroyed by the procedure. (These cautions do not apply to an even newer technique, using genetic or chemical factors to reprogram ordinary adult cells directly into “induced pluripotent stem cells” with the versatility of embryonic stem cells. This clearly does not use an egg or create an embryo, and has not raised objections from Catholic theologians.) Proposals for “adoption” of abandoned or unwanted frozen embryos are also found to pose problems, because the Church opposes use of the gametes or bodies of others who are outside the marital covenant for reproduction. The document raises cautions or problems about these new issues but does not formally make a definitive judgment against them. The document also goes into far more detail than past documents in raising moral concerns about use of “germ-line” genetic engineering in human beings, for treatments and especially for supposed “enhancement” or tailoring of human characteristics.

The full text of the Vatican instruction is here.

Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl of Washington this morning issued a statement praising the instruction. An excerpt:

“Technology can be a blessing yet, like all science, its use must include moral and ethical reflection for it to be truly at the service of human life. No medical, scientific or technological advances should take place divorced from human conscience and ethics, and a respect for the dignity of human life from conception to natural death. We are the stewards, not the masters of human life.”

(Photo, by Pier Paolo Cito/AP, shows Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican on Dec. 11.)

KEY WEST _ At the final session of the Faith Angle conference today, two prominent survey researchers, John C. Green and Anna Greenberg, examined a variety of polling data about the relationship between religious affiliation and voting behavior in this year's presidential election.

The chart above shows the bottom line, and reinforces patterns that have been in place for at least the last two decades -- Democrats are favored by minority ethnic and religious groups, as well as by less observant white Christians, while Republicans are favored by more observant white Christians. The chart was generated by Green (left), who is a political science professor at the University of Akron, and also a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, which is the sponsor of the conference.

Green suggested that the basic structure of "faith-based politics" did not change much since the 2004 campaign -- despite unprecedented efforts by the Obama campaign to move religious voters, and a lot of erroneous predictions by pundits -- but that it was enough to elect Obama. "It was not very different than we’ve seen in the past, but different enough to have a different result,'' he said. He said the Democrats made their biggest gains among minority religious groups (particularly Hispanic Protestants) and failed to make significant gains among white Christians (although there was some movement to the Democrats among evangelicals who go to church less than weekly, and among young evangelicals).

The minimal change demonstrates, Green said, "that these basic differences are deeply embedded.''

"Religious groups are strongly partisan these days, and deeply embedded into the party coalitions,'' Green said -- meaning that groups like black Protestants and Jews are important parts of the Democratic coalition, while white evangelicals play a similar role for the Republican Party. "In the short run, there is only a limited capacity for religious groups to move.''

Among Catholics, Green said, the data shows increasing polarization, with weekly communicants shifting more to the right, and less frequent Massgoers shifting further to the left.

Greenberg (right), is a Democratic pollster and senior vice president at Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. She had several interesting findings -- among them, that Barack Obama was clearly underperforming (compared to previous Democratic candidates) among Jewish voters through much of the campaign, but that he wound up with about 78 percent of the Jewish vote -- which is typical for a Democratic presidential candidate. Greenberg, who said "I was actually pretty shocked" at how well Obama did among Jews, said it was not clear how Obama succeeded in moving Jews back to the Democratic column, but speculated that it was the combined effect of concern among Jewish voters about Sarah Palin's social conservatism, and what Greenberg described as the reassuring effect on Jewish votes of Obama's performance during the debates. Green agreed, saying, "Many Jews are Democrats, and once they became reassured that some of these problems were not serious, they went back to their partisanship...Once the Jewish community became reassured that Obama was going to be all right -- not that he was going to be excellent -- that was enough.''

Perhaps Greenberg's most interesting finding, though, has to do with young evangelicals -- a population of increasing interest to scholars and journalists because of the perception that they may exhibit different political behaviors than their elders. Greenberg said that research shows that young evangelicals in fact are more liberal than older evangelicals on multiple issues -- including gay marriage (below), global warming, and the Iraq War -- but are not moving on abortion -- young evangelicals are just as strongly opposed to abortion as are older evangelicals.

Green said that, although white evangelicals are still strongly Republican, there is clearly change taking place among younger evangelicals. "Generational change happens all the time on a steady basis, but there are points of time when it has a big effect, and evangelicals are going through one of those times, on religious terms, social terms, and political terms.''

The Globe's Jeff Krasner reports that Caritas Christi, the hospital network of the Archdiocese of Boston, is having more financial problems. An excerpt:

"A $100 million financing deal between Caritas Christi Health Care and Ascension Health of St. Louis is on hold, leaving the hospital chain without needed capital at a time when the economy is slumping badly. At the same time, Caritas Christi, the state's second-largest hospital system, plans to lay off about 160 workers - 1.2 percent of it workforce of 13,000 - to cut expenses. The two moves make a financial turnaround for the Archdiocese of Boston's six-hospital chain more challenging for chief executive Ralph de la Torre, who took over in May."

The latest development in the discussion of the role of religion in the passage of California's Proposition 8, the measure that would overturn same-sex marriage in that state, is a comic musical video, made by advocates of gay marriage, that imagines Jesus (played by actor Jack Black) singing in support of gay rights. Obviously, this video comes from one side in a highly contested debate over what Christianity has to say about homosexuality. The video features not only Jack Black, but also Neil Patrick Harris, John C. Reilly, Andy Richter, Maya Rudolph, Margaret Cho, Rashida Jones.

AP Entertainment writer Jake Coyle reports, "The video was posted Wednesday on FunnyOrDie.com, the video site co-founded by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay...The video was conceived and written by Marc Shaiman, the Tony Award-winning composer of "Hairspray" and "South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut." McKay, who had previously collaborated with Shaiman on the song-and-dance routine Ferrell, Black and Reilly did at the Oscars earlier this year, sent him an e-mail floating the idea of a video."

And over at ArtsBeat (The New York Times's arts blog), Dave Itzkoff has a Q&A with Shaiman about what Itzkoff calls a "comedic song-and-dance diatribe." Itzkoff also reports that "In just one day of online existence, the Funny Or Die video 'Prop 8­ — The Musical” has received more than 1.2 million hits'.''

Here's the video:

There's been a lot of other news on the faith-and-8 front. Some highlights:

In tomorrow's issue of Catholic San Francisco, Archbishop George H. Niederauer (left) defends the churches, including Catholics and Mormons, that supported Proposition 8, writing,

"Why was it done? Some voices in the wider community declare that there could be only one motive: hatred, prejudice and bigotry against gays, along with a determination to discriminate against them and deny them their civil rights. That is not so. The churches that worked in favor of Proposition 8 did so because of their belief that the traditional understanding and definition of marriage is in need of defense and support, and not in need of being re-designed or re-configured. Some of our opponents respond with this question: Even if these churches saw the California State Supreme Court decision in May as damaging to the institution of marriage as they understood and valued it, shouldn’t they have kept quiet and stayed on the sidelines? Some would say that, in light of the separation of church and state, churches should remain silent about any political matter. However, religious leaders in America have the constitutional right to speak out on issues of public policy. Catholic bishops, specifically, also have a responsibility to teach the faith, and our beliefs about marriage and family are part of this faith. Indeed, to insist that citizens be silent about their religious beliefs when they are participating in the public square is to go against the constant American political tradition. Such a gag order would have silenced many abolitionists in the nineteenth century and many civil rights advocates in the twentieth."

And the Public Policy Institute of California yesterday released new poll results finding that "Proposition 8, the ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage in the state, drew its strongest support from evangelical Christians and Republicans.''

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley may have ambivalent feelings about the incoming presidential administration, but he's about to have some pretty good connections there as well. The two older brothers and a sister-in-law of archdiocesan spokesman Terrence C. Donilon (right) are all expected to land high-ranking posts in the Obama administration. Terry is the youngest of four Donilon siblings; his brother Mike has been named counselor to the vice president, his brother Tom is expected to become deputy national security adviser, and Tom's wife, Cathy Russell, has been named chief of staff to Biden's wife Jill. Interestingly, the Donilons are not the cardinal's only connection to Biden -- the archdiocese retains as public relations consultants the firm of Rasky Baerlein, headed by Larry Rasky, who served as Biden's campaign spokesman in 2007 and in 1988. (Biden will be the first Catholic vice president, but is also viewed warily by some bishops because he, like Obama, supports abortion rights.)

In Politico Friday, Alexander Burns wrote about Tom and Mike Donilon and Cathy Russell. An excerpt:

"How has this trio ended up so close to the center of an administration promising an infusion of new blood? There are a number of reasons, but the most important is Joe Biden. 'Cathy goes back 20 years with Joe Biden, and Mike goes back even longer on campaigns; Tom goes back more than 20 years,' said a friend of the Donilon family who asked not to be named. 'They stayed very close over the years with the Bidens, so that’s part of it.' In a news release, the transition team noted that Mike Donilon had advised the Delaware senator since the early 1980s, and both Tom Donilon and Cathy Russell worked on Biden’s 1988 presidential run."

Terry has also worked in politics -- he once served as press secretary to former Rhode Island Governor Bruce Sundlun, district director and communications director for former Rhode Island Congressman Bob Weygand, and special assistant in the administration of former Providence Mayor Joseph Paolino. A fourth Donilon sibling, Donna, works as a nurse.

(Photo by Dina Rudick, Globe staff.)

Globe multimedia producer Scott LaPierre offers a video inside look at the process of manufacturing Communion wafers to accompany a story in today's paper by Mark Arsenault about the Cavanagh Company of Smithfield, RI, which claims to be the nation's largest wafer-maker. Here's the video:

The Vatican announced today that Pope Benedict XVI is considering a trip to Israel. Here is the announcement:

In response to an article that appeared in an Israeli newspaper concerning a forthcoming trip by the Pope to the Holy Land, Holy See Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J. made the following declaration: "I can confirm that contacts exist at a diplomatic level between the Holy See and Israel to study the possibility of a trip by the Pope to the Holy Land next year."

Benedict visited the Park East Synagogue (above right) in New York in April, and visited a synagogue in Germany in 2005, but his relationship with the Jewish community has been complicated by his consideration of the canonization of Pope Pius XII, whose record during World War II is the subject of controversy. And there is also an ongoing tax dispute between Israel and the Vatican. Pope John Paul II visited Israel in 2000, and Pope Paul VI visited in 1964.

(Photo by Chris Hondros/Getty Images.)

Msgr. Paul L. Moritz, the oldest and the longest-serving priest in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, died today at 97 at Regina Cleri, the home for retired priests in Boston.

Monsignor Moritz had served a number of parishes during his 67 years as a priest; he was at St. Columbkille in Brighton, Our Lady's in Waltham, Sacred Heart in West Lynn, St. John's in Canton, St. Mary's in Cambridge, at St. Patrick's in Natick, among others. But his heart was clearly in Peabody, where he served as pastor at St. Ann's from 1968 to 1986, and he continued to say Sunday Mass through this year.

The monsignor will lie in state at Regina Cleri on Friday from 2 to 5 pm. and on Saturday at Saint John The Evangelist in Canton from 9:30-10:30am. His funeral will be Saturday at 11:00am at Saint John The Evangelist.

I had a chance to meet Monsignor Moritz in June -- he was spry and funny and open -- and I have a few of his reflections about being a priest at 97 on video. Take a look:

We'll have a full obituary in the paper this week. (UPDATE: The obituary is here.)

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has just released a letter defending the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has been repeatedly targeted for protest in the wake of the passage of Proposition 8, the California measure that would overturn same-sex marriage in that state. The Mormon church urged its members to contribute money and time to help pass the measure, and many did; the Catholic church also supported the measure, which is now being contested in the California courts.

Here is the letter, which was sent Nov. 21 from Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz (left) of Louisville, who is the chairman of the bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage, to Thomas S. Monson, president of the Mormon Church:

"Dear President Monson, On behalf of the members of the Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I am writing to express prayerful support and steadfast solidarity with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its members in view of recent events. We have watched with great distress in recent weeks as some members of society have reacted intemperately, and sometimes even violently, to the decision of the voters in support of Proposition 8 in California. We have been especially troubled by the reports of explicit and direct targeting of your church personnel and facilities as the objects of hostility and abuse. We pray that prudence and healing may prevail. The members of the Committee offer you our profound gratitude for your role in the broad alliance of faith communities and other people of good will who joined together to protect marriage, while at the same time, witnessing to the honor and respect due to every human person created in the image and likeness of God. Fraternally yours in Christ, Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz"

The Mormon church has posted on its web site previous statements expressing concern about anti-Mormonism in the protests over Proposition 8; some of the statements are from groups, including the Anti-Defamation League, that opposed the referendum.

This photograph by Rania Matar, a Lebanese-American artist living in Brookline, is among the works now on display at the Institute of Contemporary Art/Boston as part of an exhibit of the work of four promising Boston artists competing for the James and Audrey Foster Prize. In Saturday's Globe, art critic Sebastian Smee examines the photo, called "Three Nuns," as part of a review of the exhibit. An excerpt:

"Matar was born in Lebanon and took these photographs on travels back to her homeland. Her images feature many women wearing black headwear, although not all of them are Muslim; many are Christian Maronite nuns.

As a collection of images, Matar's fairly small display argues for the human richness and complexity of Lebanese society even in a context of destruction (several images show battered buildings and rubble). But there are individual images that stand apart and have a genius all their own.

The best is a photograph taken this year in Beirut called 'Three Nuns.' It shows three Maronite nuns in black garb standing in front of a congregation praying with eyes closed. All face the same way, toward Matar's camera.

The nun on the left regards the camera sourly, with pursed lips and contemptuous eyes. The middle nun looks at the camera, but with an expression of calm equilibrium, while the nun on the right has caught some of the mood of the congregation: Her tilted head suggests dreamy, divinely inspired detachment.

The photograph is the result of what looks like astonishing serendipity, but Matar obviously had to put herself in an awkward position before serendipity could strike. The photograph is the best in the room."

(Photo courtesy of Gallery Kayafas.)

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston brought an end to its low-key bicentennial year today with an afternoon Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in the South End. The cathedral was full -- a church official estimated that 2,000 people were present -- and the crowd was larger than any I've seen there since Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's installation five years ago.

O'Malley (left) was joined at the altar by Cardinal Justin F. Rigali of Philadelphia, where the archdiocese is also marking a bicentennial this year, and by New Orleans Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes, a former vicar general of the Boston archdiocese, as well as by about 15 other bishops. The pews included laypeople drawn from parishes around the archdiocese, as well as scores of priests, nuns, deacons, and members of various Catholic fraternal organizations. The church's diversity was on display -- the cathedral choir was supplemented by choirs from the African-American, Chinese, Syro-Malabar and Ugandan communities, and the intercessory prayers were recited in American Sign Language, Cape Verdean Creole, Haitian Creole, Igbo, Irish, Korean and Portuguese, as well as English.

In his 22-minute homily, O'Malley quoted Tom Finneran, the WRKO talk show host, as saying that "in the history of the world, no government, no other church, no international organization, no political party has ever fed, or clothed, or educated, or cared for as many people who are sick, as the Catholic Church has done.'' Finneran, a former Massachusetts House Speaker, is a devout Catholic and longtime church ally, but his reputation was marred when he pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice.

O'Malley said that "despite the many challenges that we have experienced over these generations -- persecution at times, prejudice -- we have made many contributions to our local community.'' He said that over the last century in the archdiocese, 1.1 million students have gone through the Catholic elementary schools and 500,000 have graduated from Catholic high schools, 30,000 children lived at Catholic orphanages, and 3.5 million people were treated at Catholic hospitals. And, over the last 40 years, he said, the archdiocesan planning office has provided permanent affordable housing for 11,000, while Catholic Charities and other social service organization have served millions.

"We are not here to brag,'' O'Malley said. "More than pride, we feel gratitude, that Christ gave us the faith and the love to be able to do what we have done. We have simply done what he commanded us, to love our neighbor, to feed the hungry, to care for the sick, to announce the good news to the poor.''

O'Malley did not mention the clergy sexual abuse crisis or other specific issues that have faced the church, and only alluded to its challenges, saying, "Sometimes there are tensions in a family. Sometimes there are sibling rivalries. But discipleship in the church means being brothers and sisters in the lord.''

The bulk of O'Malley's homily focused on the importance of love as a Christian value.

He urged Catholics to attend weekly Mass, and, at the end of the Mass, offered a plenary indulgence, a controversial practice which the Catholic catechism describes as "a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven.''

The only references to current news events were in foreign languages during the intercessory prayers. The prayer in Haitian Creole referred to "economic uncertainty'' in the nation, while the prayer in Korean was "for the survivors of clergy sexual abuse and their families.'' About a dozen protesters were outside the cathedral at the start of the Mass, holding signs and shouting requests for the archdiocese to publish a list of accused priests.

(Photos by Yoon S. Byun of the Globe staff.)

Planned Parenthood today sent along a response to criticism of the organization from Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Boston. O'Malley had singled out the organization in a post-Election Day interview with me about abortion and politics; the cardinal said that Obama "is possibly in the pocket of Planned Parenthood, which in its origins was a very racist organization to eliminate the blacks, and it’s sort of ironic that he’s been co-opted by them.''

The Planned Parenthood response does not address O'Malley's critique, but rather alleges that the cardinal is out of step with Catholics (a suggestion O'Malley in some ways might not dispute -- he has repeatedly said that the some of the church's teachings are "countercultural,'' and that the church could do better persuading rank-and-file Catholics of its teachings; however, he also has pointed out that weekly communicants are more often in agreement with church teachings than less frequent church attenders.)

Here is the Planned Parenthood response, from Dianne Luby (right), the president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts:

"It diminishes Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley’s credibility when he attacks President-elect Barack Obama and Planned Parenthood for views and services his own members overwhelmingly support. He and several of the other participants at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops are eager to jump into politics, as we saw recently with their comments about President-elect Obama’s position on abortion. If Cardinal O’Malley is going to opine on politics, and the bishops are planning to discuss lessons learned from last week’s election, it would be good for them to understand why their messages didn’t stick with their primary audience.

President-elect Obama’s success stems from his ability to propose solutions that reflect the reality of issues faced by the American people. According to estimates by the Catholic Bishops of the United States, 92% of married Catholics use some form of birth control. And a 2006 poll conducted by RKM Research and Communications revealed that 72% of Catholic voters in the Commonwealth support comprehensive sex education – which includes information about abstinence, condoms and birth control – in our public schools.

These are issues that the Catholic Church and Cardinal O’Malley have repeatedly refused to acknowledge as a mainstream part of health and education in our society. Perhaps Cardinal O’Malley should spend less time sharing political opinions and more time listening to the reality of life for his own constituency.

The Catholic Church has an opportunity to reconnect with their members around these issues. Cardinal O’Malley in a recent interview in Baltimore said, “We want to do all that we can to reduce the number of abortions.” President-elect Obama succeeded with voters by highlighting messages about preventing unintended pregnancy and reducing the need for abortion. At Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, we share that belief and would welcome the opportunity to work with Cardinal O’Malley towards this goal.

For more than eighty years Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts has been a trusted healthcare provider and advocate for affordable care. We provide high quality, affordable services to those in need, including birth control, cancer screenings and sexual health education. In fact, 70% of our services are related to preventative care, not abortion.

Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts offers comprehensive sex education programs that focus on abstinence but also on prevention. We think that abstinence is the right goal for young teens, but we live in the real world and we know that this isn’t always the case. It is important to provide young people with the tools and information they need to make good decisions and enter into healthy relationships. Our programs empower parents to be the primary sexuality educators of their children in order to keep them safe and healthy, goals for parents that are certainly shared by the Catholic Church.

Cardinal O’Malley and the bishops have a lot of work to do in order to reconnect with their members. The constitutional right to abortion has always been a very private decision between a woman, her physician, her family and her clergy. It appears from exit polls during this most recent election cycle, that Cardinal O’Malley is out of step with most voters on this very personal decision. The American public has re-asserted why they do not agree by defeating anti-choice referendums in California, Colorado, and South Dakota.

President-elect Obama bridged differences across party and religious lines to resounding success. We must all follow his example, by changing the focus from what divides us to our shared goals of reducing abortion and decreasing risky behavior among young people."

Obviously this is an emotional issue for many people; please feel free to offer your own thoughts here, but these comments are monitored (by me) so if you want anyone to see your comment, no obscenities, and try to keep the name-calling in check.

(Photo by Tom Herde, Globe staff.)

Mel Gibson has been in and around Boston for much of the last three months, shooting his new film, "Edge of Darkness,'' and for the last two Friday nights the film crew has been camped out in front of the Cathedral of the Holy Cross, in Boston's South End.

On Friday night, as it happens, I was meeting a friend for dinner at Sage, directly across Washington Street from the cathedral, and we arrived to find the whole block had been commandeered by the filmmakers, who spent the night rehearsing and then filming a shot in which Gibson emerges from Foodies, holding a shopping bag in each hand, and walks a few feet east on Washington, past shops that had been relabeled for the occasion (including a fake lighting store called Shady Business). The scene was kind of complicated because it was supposed to be raining, so a downpour was being generated from a huge raintower, and a small army of extras were functioning as pedestrians and drivers. There was a large film crew, with trucks and tents and headphones and lights, coordinating the shot, and they were using the patio in front of the cathedral as a staging area. A large crowd of onlookers gathered to watch, including your faithful religion correspondent.

Two things piqued my interest, given that this is Mel Gibson, who is associated with an extremely conservative and quasi-schismatic brand of Catholicism, and who in 2006 memorably exploded in a drunken anti-Semitic rage at a police officer two years after making the film, "The Passion of the Christ,'' which had aroused the ire of many in the Jewish community. First, I wondered how the crowd would react to Gibson's presence, and second, I wondered how Gibson was relating to the Archdiocese of Boston, given that he was filming on what is essentially the cardinal's front lawn (Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley lives in the cathedral rectory, but he is managing to miss the action by travelling to Rome).

The crowd reaction appeared to be completely unaffected by Gibson's controversial history, and I'm told that's been the case throughout his time here -- large numbers of people have gathered to see a movie star, period. When the film was first announced, some in the Jewish community were concerned, but the official Jewish community has said nothing about Gibson's presence. There have apparently been two instances in which private property owners have declined to cooperate with the film because of Gibson's participation (Universal Hub has the details on a Roslindale rejection here), but otherwise the reaction has been quiet.

As for the relationship with the official church -- Gibson is one of Hollywood's most prominent Catholics, and his "Passion" film won a lot of praise from conservative Christians, but he has a strained relationship with Rome. His dad is reportedly a Holocaust-denying sedevacantist (those are folks who believe recent popes are all illegitimate), and Mel has built himself his own private parish above Malibu that is unrecognized (in fact, it is not considered Catholic) by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. Recently, the New York Post reported that Gibson has apparently spent $42 million on his church, which the paper described as having about 100 members who "follow a 16th-century style of Catholicism, with Mass conducted entirely in Latin and a strict dress code for women.'' Over at Whispers in the Loggia, blogger Rocco Palmo remarked on the strangeness of the situation, saying "In what'll always be one of history's great ironies, the box office from the film most-explicitly promoted in church circles in recent memory... essentially bankrolled schism.''

I asked Terry Donilon, the spokesman for the Archdiocese of Boston, how the archdiocese is relating to Gibson. This is what he said: "The Cardinal did not meet him, nor did the Cathedral folks. His production crew paid a very small fee for use of the property for staging, place to feed the crew, etc. They filmed overnight on the 2 Friday evenings. Gibson has been filming around the state.''

(Photo, by Lisa Poole for the Boston Globe, shows Mel Gibson during a break from filming in the Public Garden on Sept. 5.)

Bishop Richard J. Malone of Portland, Maine (formerly an auxiliary bishop in Boston) on Sunday asked all of his state's parishes to read a letter opposing same-sex marriage in the Pine Tree State. From the AP story:

"The leader of Maine's Roman Catholic diocese issued a letter opposing gay marriage, to be read at weekend Masses. 'To redefine marriage to include same-sex couples is to strip marriage of an essential component, namely the ability and obligation to procreate,' Bishop Richard Malone (left) said in his letter. The letter appeared days after the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry in Maine, a group of Maine ministers from different faiths, announced their support for gay marriage. It also follows referendums in California, Arizona, and Florida in which same-sex marriage bans were imposed. The advocacy group EqualityMaine said it gathered more than 33,000 names on Election Day in support of marriage for same-sex couples."

Here's an excerpt from Malone's homily:

"Marriage, as it has been known and lived for millennia, is under attack in our country, and now, in our own state. Much of the argument to legalize so-called 'same sex' marriage is motivated by a concern, and a sincere one, I am sure, to secure certain legal benefits for people in same sex relationships. The Diocese of Portland has been unwavering in its support of hospital visitation rights or the sharing of health insurance benefits between household members, people choosing to live together whatever their sexual orientation. That only seems fair. However, to insist that complementarity of sexes is a fundamental prerequisite for marriage is not to be unfair."

(Photo, from 1999, by Pam Berry of the Globe staff.)

Apparently, in Beverly Hills, no place is sacred. Mark Wahlberg, the Dorchester boy turned Hollywood star, is irritated that people have been handing him scripts at Mass. From Starpulse.com:

"I go to church and people ask me if they can be on Entourage, what's gonna happen. I go to church to worship, I don't go to church to talk about it. The stuff that I did with my entourage back in the day is stuff that I'm not proud of and I'm asking forgiveness for; I don't want things brought up in church, but, if you go to church in Beverly Hills, those kind of things happen... I get scripts, resumes, books - people tried to come up to me with a children's book before and I wouldn't take it. They got upset with me. This is church."

H/T: GetReligion.

(Photo, by Elisabetta Villa/Getty Images, shows Wahlberg last week in Rome.)

In yet another manifestation of the unhappiness with the Obama election within the Catholic hierarchy, a high-ranking American cardinal at the Vatican last week called the president-elect "aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic." The comments were made in a speech at the Catholic University of America by Cardinal James F. Stafford (right), the former archbishop of Denver and now Major Penitentiary of the Apostolic Penitentiary in Vatican City. An excerpt from the story in the Tower, which is the student newspaper at Catholic University:

His Eminence James Francis Cardinal Stafford criticized President-elect Barack Obama as 'aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic,' and said he campaigned on an 'extremist anti-life platform,' Thursday night in Keane Auditorium during his lecture 'Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II: Being True in Body and Soul.' 'Because man is a sacred element of secular life,' Stafford remarked, 'man should not be held to a supreme power of state, and a person’s life cannot ultimately be controlled by government'...'For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden,' Stafford said, comparing America’s future with Obama as president to Jesus’ agony in the garden. 'On November 4, 2008, America suffered a cultural earthquake.' Cardinal Stafford said Catholics must deal with the 'hot, angry tears of betrayal' by beginning a new sentiment where one is 'with Jesus, sick because of love'.''

The remarks are occasioning some chatter in St. Blog's Parish. Over at Pontifications, David Gibson says, "I bet that wasn't the tenor of Obama's chat with the Pope the other day. Then again, lieutenants are there to do the dirty work so the white cassock stays clean.'' At Whispers in the Loggia, Rocco Palmo called the speech "an ominous impression of the state of things.'' At the Daily Dish, Andrew Sullivan opines, "the notion that the recent election of Obama is a sign of the Apocalypse has, until now, been restricted to Protestant loonies." And at American Papist, Thomas Peters takes a slightly more sober view, saying only, "Cardinal Stafford made some noise on the CUA campus last week.''

(Photo, taken in Rome in 2002, by David Ryan of the Globe staff.)

The Rev. Roy Bourgeois (right), a Maryknoll priest who participated in a ceremony at which advocates for women's ordination said they ordained a woman as a priest, says he is facing excommunication for his actions. Bourgeois has written a letter saying that "With all due respect, I believe our Catholic Church’s teaching on this issue is wrong and does not stand up to scrutiny." The full text of his letter to the Vatican is below:

(Photo by Elliott Minor/AP.)

The diocese of Charleston, SC is publicly rebuking the Rev. Jay Scott Newman for suggesting that Catholics who voted for Barack Obama should refrain from presenting themselves for Communion unless they go to confession first. The comments caused an enormous firestorm, and Newman then suggested that he had been misinterpreted, but his diocese, in a highly unusual step, is now saying that Newman misrepresented the church's position, and that Obama voters do not need to go to confession before seeking Communion. The diocese has no bishop at the moment, so the statement was issued by the diocesan administrator, Monsignor Martin T. Laughlin, who said, "Father Newman’s statements do not adequately reflect the Catholic Church’s teachings. Any comments or statements to the contrary are repudiated." Here is the statement in its entirety:

"Statement of Monsignor Martin T. Laughlin, Administrator of the Diocese of Charleston

This past week, the Catholic Church’s clear, moral teaching on the evil of abortion has been pulled into the partisan political arena. The recent comments of Father Jay Scott Newman, pastor of St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Greenville, S.C., have diverted the focus from the Church’s clear position against abortion. As Administrator of the Diocese of Charleston, let me state with clarity that Father Newman’s statements do not adequately reflect the Catholic Church’s teachings. Any comments or statements to the contrary are repudiated.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, 'Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions.' The Catechism goes on to state: 'In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path; we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.'

Christ gives us freedom to explore our own conscience and to make our own decisions while adhering to the law of God and the teachings of the faith. Therefore, if a person has formed his or her conscience well, he or she should not be denied Communion, nor be told to go to confession before receiving Communion.

The pulpit is reserved for the Word of God. Sometimes God’s truth, as is the Church’s teaching on abortion, is unpopular. All Catholics must be aware of and follow the teachings of the Church.

We should all come together to support the President-elect and all elected officials with a view to influencing policy in favor of the protection of the unborn child. Let us pray for them and ask God to guide them as they take the mantle of leadership on January 20, 2009.

I ask also for your continued prayers for me and for the Diocese of Charleston."

The suggestion by a South Carolina priest that Catholics who voted for Obama should not present themselves for Communion without seeking penance first has caused quite a stir -- so much so that, at the moment, his parish web site seems to be down, preventing me from posting his latest comments on the matter for you.

But in the meantime, I've noticed a couple of other indications that Catholic clergy are struggling to figure out how to respond to the victory of Barack Obama in the American presidential election. (Earlier this week, the president of the US bishops conference issued a statement offering cooperation in areas of agreement with Obama but promising to fight against any loosening of abortion restrictions; today, Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston wrote about the statement on his blog.)

In England, the bishop of Portsmouth, Crispian Hollis, had to issue a clarification after publishing on his web site a note that was viewed as overly congratulatory of Obama, according to LifeSiteNews. The bishop's initial note expressing pleasure at the Obama victory has been removed from the diocesan web site, but here is his new note:

"Barack Obama A Clarification

I would like to add some words to the statement that I issued last week on the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States of America.

I genuinely welcome his election because he represents such a different political profile from that of President Bush. America – and the world – needs that political change and will benefit from it.

However, I am aware of what he has said about abortion and about the so-called freedom of choice and I deplore his words. There is no way in which I endorse his position on these crucial “life” matters, nor, as a Catholic bishop, could I ever do so.

Perhaps it’s naïve to say this but I hope and pray that the realities of the political process will mean that he has to temper his personal policies on these all important life issues and pay serious attention to the outrage with which many view his “life” agenda.

Bishop Crispian Hollis"

Meanwhile, in California, a reporter has filed a police report claiming that a priest attacked him when he asked about a parishioner who said the priest threw her out of the church parking lot during Mass because she had Obama signs on her car.

The pastor of St. Mary Catholic Church in Greenville, SC, is urging parishioners who voted for Barack Obama not to present themselves for Communion unless they go to confession first because they have cooperated with "intrinsic evil'' by voting for a candidate who supports abortion rights over a candidate who does not. The Rev. Jay Scott Newman told the Greenville News that he doesn't intend to deny anyone Communion, but made it clear that his view is that Obama voters should not present themselves without seeking penance first "lest they eat and drink their own condemnation.''

Newman is the only priest in the U.S. known to have taken this position -- the Catholic bishops met this week in Baltimore and this idea was not even discussed, at least in public session. Newman has posted on his parish web site the following letter explaining his rationale:

Dear Friends in Christ,

We the People have spoken, and the 44th President of the United States will be Barack Hussein Obama. This election ends a political process that started two years ago and which has revealed deep and bitter divisions within the United States and also within the Catholic Church in the United States. This division is sometimes called a “Culture War,” by which is meant a heated clash between two radically different and incompatible conceptions of how we should order our common life together, the public life that constitutes civil society. And the chief battleground in this culture war for the past 30 years has been abortion, which one side regards as a murderous abomination that cries out to Heaven for vengeance and the other side regards as a fundamental human right that must be protected in laws enforced by the authority of the state. Between these two visions of the use of lethal violence against the unborn there can be no negotiation or conciliation, and now our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president. We must also take note of the fact that this election was effectively decided by the votes of self-described (but not practicing) Catholics, the majority of whom cast their ballots for President-elect Obama.

In response to this, I am obliged by my duty as your shepherd to make two observations:

1. Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ’s Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation.

2. Barack Obama, although we must always and everywhere disagree with him over abortion, has been duly elected the next President of the United States, and after he takes the Oath of Office next January 20th, he will hold legitimate authority in this nation. For this reason, we are obliged by Scriptural precept to pray for him and to cooperate with him whenever conscience does not bind us otherwise. Let us hope and pray that the responsibilities of the presidency and the grace of God will awaken in the conscience of this extraordinarily gifted man an awareness that the unholy slaughter of children in this nation is the greatest threat to the peace and security of the United States and constitutes a clear and present danger to the common good. In the time of President Obama’s service to our country, let us pray for him in the words of a prayer found in the Roman Missal:

God our Father, all earthly powers must serve you. Help our President-elect, Barack Obama, to fulfill his responsibilities worthily and well. By honoring and striving to please you at all times, may he secure peace and freedom for the people entrusted to him. We ask this through Our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God for ever and ever.

Amen.

Father Newman

The Associated Press has a story here.

UPDATE: Rev. Newman has posted a response to the AP story here.

(Photo by Dina Rudick/Globe staff.)

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops today wrapped up its semi-annual meeting in Baltimore by approving a statement expressing their hopes and fears about the incoming Obama Administration. The bishops are trying to balance an acknowledgment of the excitement in the nation about the historic nature of the Obama victory with their deep concern about the president-elect's support for abortion rights. The statement was drafted overnight by Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, who is the conference president, after an open discussion yesterday afternoon about what the statement should say; today the bishops discussed the statement behind closed doors and then released it on their web site. George (at podium in photo above) is considered one of the leading intellectuals of the bishops' conference, and the bishops repeatedly expressed confidence in his ability to speak for them. Here is the full text of the statement:

"If the Lord does not build the house, in vain do its builders labor; if the Lord does not watch over the city, in vain does the watchman keep vigil." (Psalm 127, vs. 1)

The Bishops of the Catholic Church in the United States welcome this moment of historic transition and look forward to working with President-elect Obama and the members of the new Congress for the common good of all. Because of the Church's history and the scope of her ministries in this country, we want to continue our work for economic justice and opportunity for all; our efforts to reform laws around immigration and the situation of the undocumented; our provision of better education and adequate health care for all, especially for women and children; our desire to safeguard religious freedom and foster peace at home and abroad. The Church is intent on doing good and will continue to cooperate gladly with the government and all others working for these goods.

The fundamental good is life itself, a gift from God and our parents. A good state protects the lives of all. Legal protection for those members of the human family waiting to be born in this country was removed when the Supreme Court decided Roe vs. Wade in 1973. This was bad law. The danger the Bishops see at this moment is that a bad court decision will be enshrined in bad legislation that is more radical than the 1973 Supreme Court decision itself.

In the last Congress, a Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) was introduced that would, if brought forward in the same form today, outlaw any "interference" in providing abortion at will. It would deprive the American people in all fifty states of the freedom they now have to enact modest restraints and regulations on the abortion industry. FOCA would coerce all Americans into subsidizing and promoting abortion with their tax dollars. It would counteract any and all sincere efforts by government and others of good will to reduce the number of abortions in our country.

Parental notification and informed consent precautions would be outlawed, as would be laws banning procedures such as partial-birth abortion and protecting infants born alive after a failed abortion. Abortion clinics would be deregulated. The Hyde Amendment restricting the federal funding of abortions would be abrogated. FOCA would have lethal consequences for prenatal human life.

FOCA would have an equally destructive effect on the freedom of conscience of doctors, nurses and health care workers whose personal convictions do not permit them to cooperate in the private killing of unborn children. It would threaten Catholic health care institutions and Catholic Charities. It would be an evil law that would further divide our country, and the Church should be intent on opposing evil.

On this issue, the legal protection of the unborn, the bishops are of one mind with Catholics and others of good will. They are also pastors who have listened to women whose lives have been diminished because they believed they had no choice but to abort a baby. Abortion is a medical procedure that kills, and the psychological and spiritual consequences are written in the sorrow and depression of many women and men. The bishops are single-minded because they are, first of all, single-hearted.

The recent election was principally decided out of concern for the economy, for the loss of jobs and homes and financial security for families, here and around the world. If the election is misinterpreted ideologically as a referendum on abortion, the unity desired by President-elect Obama and all Americans at this moment of crisis will be impossible to achieve. Abortion kills not only unborn children; it destroys constitutional order and the common good, which is assured only when the life of every human being is legally protected. Aggressively pro-abortion policies, legislation and executive orders will permanently alienate tens of millions of Americans, and would be seen by many as an attack on the free exercise of their religion.

This statement is written at the request and direction of all the Bishops, who also want to thank all those in politics who work with good will to protect the lives of the most vulnerable among us. Those in public life do so, sometimes, at the cost of great sacrifice to themselves and their families; and we are grateful. We express again our great desire to work with all those who cherish the common good of our nation. The common good is not the sum total of individual desires and interests; it is achieved in the working out of a common life based upon good reason and good will for all.

Our prayers accompany President-elect Obama and his family and those who are cooperating with him to assure a smooth transition in government. Many issues demand immediate attention on the part of our elected "watchman." (Psalm 127) May God bless him and our country.

(Photo by Steve Ruark/AP.)

Cardinal Francis E. George (left), the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Sen. Barack Obama, the president-elect of the United States, obviously have a deep disagreement over abortion, but they do have one thing in common: they both hail from Chicago (George is a native; Obama a transplant).

Yesterday, at the final news conference of the bishops' meeting (which continues behind closed doors today), I asked the cardinal about his relationship with the president-elect, who has represented Chicago in the Legislature or the Congress for the last decade. The relationship, of course, matters because the bishops have a fairly broad array of public policy concerns. This was the cardinal's response:

"The relationship is not very developed. I’ve met him a number of times, and it’s always been a friendly meeting, never substantive. I would hope, since he is a citizen of Illinois, and Chicago, that we could begin a relationship based upon that fact.''

(Photo by Steve Ruark of AP.)

The Catholic bishops yesterday agreed that their conference president, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, should draft a statement reiterating the church's strong opposition to abortion in the wake of last week's election of an abortion-rights supporting Democrat, Barack Obama, as president of the United States. From my story in today's paper:

The bishops, reeling from an election in which voters seemed to disregard their counsel, have talked about abortion and politics repeatedly during their semiannual meeting here. They agreed to authorize Cardinal Francis E. George, the archbishop of Chicago and the president of the bishops' conference, to write a statement for publication that will spell out their concerns. Also yesterday, the bishops for the first time approved a new "blessing of a child in the womb," which could be said by priests for pregnant women. The blessing was in the works for several years, but took on new significance in light of the bishops' heightened concern about abortion, given the election results. Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville called the blessing "a very tangible way of us to witness, pastorally and sacramentally, the life of the unborn child," and Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli, of Paterson, N.J., said, "It is important to reaffirm and focus our attention on the life of the unborn."

(Photo by Steve Ruark/AP)

The Catholic Campaign for Human Development, which is the anti-poverty arm of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, has cut off all funding for ACORN, the controversy-plagued community organizing network that has been struggling with fallout from an embezzlement and allegations of voter registration fraud. From my story in today's Globe:

Bishop Roger P. Morin of New Orleans said yesterday that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, an antipoverty program run by the bishops' conference, decided that it could no longer be certain of ACORN's integrity or accountability. The bishops had been giving $1.1 million a year to 41 ACORN affiliates. "We simply had too many continuing questions and concerns about these serious matters to permit any further funding of ACORN groups," Morin said.

(Photo, by Pat Greenhouse of the Globe staff, shows an ACORN volunteer showing a sample ballot to a first-time voter on Election Day in Boston.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston has talked a lot about political issues -- last year, he told me that the support by Catholics for Democratic candidates "borders on scandal;'' at the annual Walk for Life this year he praised Sarah Palin, and yesterday, in an interview with me, he made clear his unhappiness with President-elect Barack Obama's support for abortion rights. But O'Malley also, like other Catholic bishops, espouses some left-leaning policy positions, on issues such as immigration and poverty and capital punishment. And O'Malley lives in Boston, where almost all elected officials are Democrats, and in a state, Massachusetts, where the Republican Party is weak.

So I was curious about O'Malley's own voting record, and yesterday I asked John Drake, who covers Boston City Hall for the Globe, to pull the records. Of course, privacy prevents us from learning who O'Malley voted for, but this is what we did learn: the cardinal is an independent (in Massachusetts, that's formally called "unenrolled,'' meaning the cardinal is not enrolled in either political party). He voted in the Republican Party primary this year, but voted in the Democratic Party primary in 2006 (when there was a heated contest for the Democratic nominee for governor). He also appears to have a nearly perfect voting record, meaning that he votes almost all of the time when there is an election; last week, he wrote in his blog about voting (he votes at Cathedral High School, which is conveniently located on the same block as the rectory where he lives), and said, "It is very comforting to see so many people participate in the democratic process and many people — who in the past would not have voted—this year felt compelled to exercise their rights and duties as citizens."

Here is the cardinal's recent Massachusetts voting record (excluding last week's election), showing which prior elections he participated in, which party primaries he participated in (applicable only in primary elections), and the city in which he voted (he was bishop of Fall River from 1992 to 2002; from 2002 to 2003 he was bishop of Palm Beach; he came to Boston in July 2003):

Cardinal Francis E. George, the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, this morning issued a public letter expressing the bishops' concern about the economic situation in the US. The letter:

"Solidarity at a Time of Economic Crisis

As the Catholic bishops of the United States gather in Baltimore, and as servants of Jesus our hope, we bring with us our concern for people in our dioceses, and we want to express our active support and solidarity with all those who are being hurt by the current economic crisis. As pastors and bishops, we see the many human and moral consequences of this crisis. Clearly, the impact is greater in some regions than others. However, across our nation families are losing their homes; retirement savings are threatened; workers are losing jobs and health care; and many people are losing a sense of hope and security.

This disturbing and complicated situation brings home a universal truth: we are all children of God. We are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers. We are all in this together. Hard times can isolate us or they can bring us together. The Catholic community will continue to reach out to those in need, stand with those who are hurt, and work for policies that bring greater compassion, accountability and justice to economic life.

Pope Benedict XVI has outlined our goals in his 2008 World Day of Peace message: “The family needs to have a home, employment, and a just recognition of the domestic activity of parents, and the possibility of schooling for children, and basic health care for all.” He also insists that society and public policy should be “committed to assisting the family in these areas.”

We offer our prayers for the families and individuals, our sisters and brothers, who are hurting, anxious or discouraged in these difficult times. We also pledge our prayers for our wounded nation and suffering world. We pray that, working together, we can find the courage, wisdom and ways to build an economy of prosperity and greater justice for all."

As they prepare for this afternoon's discussion of abortion and politics, the Catholic bishops of the United States this morning approved a new "blessing of a child in the womb.'' Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz of Louiville called the blessing "a very tangible way of us to witness, pastorally and sacramentally, the life of the unborn child,'' and Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli, of Paterson, NJ, said "it is important to reaffirm and focus our attention on the life of the unborn.''

An excerpt from the blessing, which a priest could say for a pregnant woman:

"May almighty God, who has created new life now bless the child in your womb. The Lord has brought you the joy of motherhood: may he bless you with a safe and healthy pregnancy. You thank the Lord today for the gift of your child: may he bring you and your child one day to share in the unending joys of heaven.''

(Photo, by Steve Ruark of AP, shows the bishops praying at their semi-annual meeting in Baltimore.)

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley yesterday talked with me about his thoughts on the election of Barack Obama as president and the abortion issue. I have a story in today's paper; here is a transcript of our conversation:

Q: So many bishops spoke out on abortion in recent weeks, and yet a majority of Catholics voted for Barack Obama. What do make of that?

A: It was a very complicated election. I don’t think that the abortion issue is what decided the election. It was more the economy, the war, and the dissatisfaction with the present administration.

When I was in high school (in Ohio) I joined the NAACP and did voter registration in black neighborhoods, when I wasn’t old enough to vote myself. And I was there at Resurrection City after Martin Luther King was murdered, and living in the mud with thousands of people on the lawn of the Lincoln Memorial and having off-duty redneck policemen throwing canisters of tear gas at us and shouting obscenities. So, to me, the election of an Afro-American is like the Berlin Wall falling. I mean, for my generation, I suppose young people today can’t appreciate that, but to me it is something very big.

My joy, however, is tempered by the knowledge that this man has a deplorable record when it comes to prolife issues and is possibly in the pocket of Planned Parenthood which in its origins was a very racist organization to eliminate the blacks, and it’s sort of ironic that he’s been co-opted by them. However, he is the president, and everyone wishes him well, and we will try to work with him. However, I hope he realizes that his election was not a mandate to rush ahead with a pro-abortion platform. And the fact that in states like Florida and California, where he won, the referendums on marriage showed that the people who were more socially conservative voted for him, but voted for him for other reasons than for issues like this.

Q: There’s been a lot of discussion about whether the bishops’ teaching on voting is too nuanced, because it was used in all kinds of ways by all kinds of groups during this election, because it said Catholics are not single-issue voters. What do you think?

A: I think that most Catholics understand what the church’s teachings are and those voter guide things are always problematic but I think in general people understand. It was interesting, if one considers Massachusetts, which is so overwhelmingly Democratic, and 8 years ago Gore got 75 percent of the Catholic vote and four years ago, Kerry, who is Catholic and from Massachusetts, got 50 percent of it, so they lost 25 percent of the vote in four years, and I think a lot of that was the influence of people’s concerns about life issues and things like that. And obviously when you look at the differential between the way that Catholics who are church-going Catholics vote and those who are not church going Catholics, I think that the Catholics reflect the church’s teaching. Not as much as we’d like them to, but certainly this last election there were many other factors that intervened.

Q: You just alluded to the fact that many of the people in your archdiocese are Catholics who support abortion rights, including leading politicians, and both US senators. What is your position on whether they should present themselves for Communion, and whether you should be giving it to them?

A: The church’s teaching on worthiness for Communion and proper disposition is in the Catholic catechism, and it’s no secret, and I support that. There is perhaps a teaching where we have not done as good a job of late as we used to. When I was growing up, we would go to confession every Saturday, we would fast from midnight, there was much more of an awareness of the need to be spiritually prepared and in communion with the church and in a state of grace. Today I think we need to reinforce that teaching a lot. And once that teaching is better understood, then, I think, it will be obvious as to who should be coming to Communion and who shouldn’t. But until there’s a decision of the church to formally excommunicate people, I don’t think we’re going to be denying Communion to the people. However, whatever the church’s decision is, we will certainly enforce.

Q: Your position four years ago was that you did not want confrontations at the altar rail.

A: That’s right. We do not want to make a battleground out of the Eucharist.

Q: There’s been a lot of conversation about whether there’s another strategy on abortion, whether trying to reduce the number would be more effective at this point. What do you think about that idea?

A: We’re always for reducing the number. But we cannot turn our back on the obligation to work for just laws that protect human life, from the first moment of conception until natural death. So obviously we want to do all that we can to reduce the number of abortions, but as long as those unjust laws are on the book, human life is threatened. Now they’re talking about pushing this FOCA, which doesn’t sound to me like it’s going to try and reduce abortions, but simply make them much more accessible to people, and pay for them, at home and abroad. So we must work diligently and tirelessly to change the laws, and work diligently and tirelessly to change people’s hearts, so that there’s a greater realization of the seriousness of this, and how our humanity is diminished when we are not respectful of human life.

Q: Is there anything you would like to see the conference do? Is there some action that you think should be taken?

A: I would just like to see us have a united voice, and a strong response, one that will reinforce that there’s no new way of being prolife, and that we must work on both tracks, trying to reduce the number of abortions and trying to change the laws.

At a midday news conference, Cardinal Francis E. George, the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, said last week's election was a reflection of the importance of the economy to voters, and not a referendum on abortion.

"It's 1932 revisited,'' he said, referring to the election in which Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat, defeated President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, during the Depression. "The parallel is evident. We have an incumbent Republican president, a deep recession if not a depression has begun, and once again the American voters have turned to another party to try to lift the country out of enormous economic difficulties.''

George said the bishops will revisit whether their guidance to Catholic voters, in the document Faithful Citizenship, was helpful or not. "It remains true that the public conversation in the whole country changed in October, with the economic collapse of so many institutions,'' he said. "Nonetheless, the conversation is broader than that, and we will have to come back to ask whether the way we have taught has been helpful. The document gives principles, and does not draw conclusions, because the church is not a political party. No document will say, 'you must not vote in this way, or that way'. The document is nuanced...(and) the nuances were sometimes lost when different groups took different parts of it.''

BALTIMORE _ A coalition of anti-abortion groups, led by the American Life League, is calling on the bishops "to take politicians to task" for supporting abortion rights. They are planning to hold a prayer vigil here tomorrow. From their news release:

"Over 123 U.S. bishops spoke out against abortion in the 2008 presidential election, yet pro-abortion Catholic politicians continue to shape abortion policy while receiving Holy Communion in dioceses across the country. Are Catholics heeding the words of their bishops? How will the Catholic bishops enforce the Church's teaching on abortion? On Nov. 11, American Life League will run a full-page advertisement in USA Today imploring the bishops to stop allowing pro-abortion politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Joe Biden to politicize Catholicism's most sacred Eucharist and to enforce Canon 915, which states: 'Those… obstinately persevering in grave and manifest sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.' Later that evening, a prayer vigil and press conference outside the USCCB's conference at the Baltimore Marriot Waterfront Hotel will herald an emerging and powerful lay outcry within the U.S. Catholic Church that demands accountability and leadership from the Catholic hierarchy with the belief that Catholics can end abortion in this country."

BALTIMORE _ There are a handful of interest groups who shadow the meetings of Catholic bishops -- for the most part, they're not allowed inside -- to press a variety of concerns. Among the groups here this week is SNAP (the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests), which kicked off the meeting by calling for Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago to resign as president of the bishops' conference; they allege that the cardinal has mishandled abuse allegations in his own archdiocese. Their statement is here.

Their news release:

"Because of recent disclosures about “several pedophile priests and corrupt supervisors” in his archdiocese, clergy sex abuse victims are asking Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George to resign as head of the US bishops’ conference. The request comes on the eve of the annual meeting of America’s 200+ bishops in Baltimore. Leaders of a support group called SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAPnetwork.org) are urging George to step down “for the good of the church, both locally and nationally” because of “several new child sex crime and cover ups,” including one involving Fr. Kenneth J. Martin, a personal friend of the Cardinal’s. “George is deceptively and recklessly letting a convicted predator priest pal work for and in the archdiocese, violating his specific, public promise to the contrary and the church’s national sex abuse policy,” said Barbara Blaine of Chicago, SNAP’s founder and president. “Short of making this predator a pastor, it’s hard to imagine a more dangerous and deceitful move George could make.” Last month, Chicago news media disclosed that Martin was still working for an archdiocesan agency with offices next to a Catholic school. In 2003, news accounts revealed that Martin was living in the Cardinal’s mansion and working for the archdiocese on a part time basis. Just two years before, Martin was convicted of molesting a boy in Baltimore for three years. After Martin’s presence in Chicago was first disclosed in 2003, George publicly said “he won’t be working here anymore.” He has apparently remained on the archdiocesan payroll ever since, SNAP says. But SNAP’s concern goes beyond the Martin case. The group cites cases involving 5 priests that have surfaced over the past year. Some are proven, admitted or credibly accused child molesters (Fr. Kenneth Martin, Fr. Joseph Bennett, Fr. Norbert Maday). Others ignored or concealed abuse, according to SNAP and church records, “complicit” (Fr. Leonard Dubi and Fr. Edward Grace). The disclosures about Bennett, Dubi, Maday and Grace came through civil child sex abuse and cover up lawsuits that were settled in August 2008. “Time and time again, even now, George is dishonest about child sex crimes,” said David Clohessy of St. Louis, SNAP’s national director. “He keeps knowingly favoring friends and predators over kids and Catholics, to the point of taking extraordinarily obvious and inexcusable risks even with proven pedophiles.” In 2006, SNAP and several other groups urged George to resign as head of the Chicago Archdiocese over his mishandling of the Fr. Daniel McCormack case. George promoted McCormack in 2005 even after he was arrested and kept McCormack in a parish even after the archdiocesan abuse review panel urged George to suspend him. In 2006, McCormack was arrested again for child molestation. Prosecutors said he’d abused one boy on “an almost daily basis” during those months George kept him in active parish ministry."

BALTIMORE _ Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago (left), who is the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, this morning opened the bishops’ semi-annual meeting in Baltimore with a nuanced reflection on the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States. George praised the history-making nature of Obama’s election, but also offered a strong reiteration of the Catholic Church’s opposition to abortion.

The bishops are meeting at an uncomfortable moment – dozens of them strongly urged Catholics to make the abortion issue their top priority in the voting booth, and yet, according to exit polls, a majority of Catholic voters chose Obama, who supports abortion rights, over John McCain, who opposes abortion. As George said, “we meet amidst enormous challenges to our church, our country, and our ministry.’’ The bishops have scheduled a full discussion of the issue for tomorrow afternoon.

In his remarks this morning, George referred to the church’s interest in the “common good” of society, but said, “the common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice.’’

George said “we must all rejoice” at the election of an African-American president. But he rued the dilemma facing Catholics who oppose abortion in America. An excerpt:

“We are, perhaps, at a moment when, with the grace of God, all races are safely within the American consensus. We are not at the point, however, when Catholics, especially in public life, can be considered full partners in the American experience unless they are willing to put aside some fundamental Catholic teachings on a just moral and political order.’’

George acknowledged that the church faces “dissent from some of her teachings and dissatisfaction with aspects of her governance.’’ But, he said, “Strengthening people’s relationship with Christ remains our primary concern and duty as bishops.’’ And, in an apparent allusion to the Catholic vice-president-elect, Sen. Joe Biden, he said, “We extend that pastoral concern, especially at the beginning of a new administration and a new Congress, to Catholics of either major party serving others in government. We respect and love you, and we pray that the Catholic faith will shape your decisions so that our communion may be full.’’

(Photo, from this morning's session in Baltimore, by Steve Ruark/AP.)

Below is the full text of Cardinal George's address:

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston offered his thoughts on the election of Barack Obama as president in his blog today:

"Of course, this past Tuesday was Election Day. I voted in the gymnasium of the Cathedral High School and the line was around the block. It is very comforting to see so many people participate in the democratic process and many people — who in the past would not have voted—this year felt compelled to exercise their rights and duties as citizens. The election of an African-American as president certainly is a historic moment in our history. Hopefully, it indicates that the worst legacies of slavery and racism are behind us. It is also a sign to the world that the majority of Americans do believe in equality and want to promote racial equality in our country and in the world. Our prayer is that the new administration and the new Congress will work for a just and lasting peace and to protect the dignity of human life in all its stages, from the moment of conception until the moment of natural death."

(Photo by David Ryan of the Globe staff.)

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston is merging the last two parochial schools in South Boston, St. Brigid and Gate of Heaven. I have a story in today's paper. An excerpt:

"Over the last decade, the number of parochial elementary schools in the archdiocese has dropped by 23 percent, from 119 to 91. In an effort to stem the decline, the archdiocese has launched an initiative, backed by a group of wealthy business leaders, to invest in consolidated Catholic schools in Brockton, Dorchester, and Gloucester."

And here's the text of a statement from the archdiocese:

"Over the past three years the School Boards of Gate of Heaven School and St. Brigid School have been working together to strengthen Catholic Education in South Boston. This is due to factors that include, among others, financial constraints, changing demographics and declining enrollments. Working cooperatively, the two schools established a "Collaborative Board", which has been meeting every month for nearly a year and one half to plan and establish a vision for the future. This Board, representative of both schools and parishes as well as the pastor, came to an agreement last year that in order to provide quality and affordable Catholic education in our neighborhood we needed to combine and become one school. It was agreed upon that both schools would form a new school, with a new name that would open at one of the existing locations in September 2009. This information was presented to the parents of both schools and parishioners a number of times during the past six months. Since that announcement, the Collaborative Board has been meeting to prepare information regarding the future location of this new school. After careful consideration and discussion, the pastor has recommended to the Cardinal and he has accepted that the current St. Brigid School be the location of this new school. The collaborative board was presented this recommendation last evening and they are in full support of this decision. The new school will open in September 2009. We are confident that this decision will greatly enhance our ability to strengthen and improve Catholic Education in South Boston. It is the hope and prayer of the Parishes of St. Brigid and Gate of Heaven that we can work together to provide a superior Catholic Elementary School, building upon the strong history of our two parish communities."

(Photo above, by Wendy Maeda of the Globe staff, shows teacher Shannon Keating talking with 7th-graders Kerri Bemis and Chloe Fay at the Gate of Heaven School on Sept. 11, 2008.)

New Hampshire State Rep. Eileen Flockhart (right), a Democrat from Exeter, is a churchgoing Catholic who supports abortion rights and gay rights. In the current issue of Conscience, a newsletter published by Catholics for Choice, Flockhart writes of how her parish ousted her as a lector because of her views. An excerpt:

"Shortly after the Civil Unions bill passed, I got a call from my pastor wanting to make an appointment with me. Being the eternal optimist, I thought this would be a great opportunity for some real dialogue on this and other issues. What was I thinking? After a few pleasantries, he got down to business. He said that he had had some complaints from parishioners and that in light of my votes in the House it was inappropriate for me to stand up as a lector. My public positions as a representative were inconsistent with Catholic teaching. He asked me to leave my ministry as a lector, effective immediately. Initially I was furious, but as our discussion continued I decided that I could not go without speaking my mind. The many, many ways that we as church exclude and do not welcome God’s people is staggering to me. I could not imagine the God of my own faith being so heartless. I asked if we as a parish could have a discussion about some of these very topics that trouble us all. He said that he would pray about it and get back to me. He never did."

There must be a lot of disappointed Catholic bishops this morning -- dozens of them issued statements over the last few weeks suggesting that abortion should be the primary issue for Catholic voters, and yet it appears that a majority of Catholic voters opted for the abortion-rights supporting candidate in the race, Barack Obama, and helped him win the presidency. Obama's running mate, Joseph Biden, will become the first Catholic vice-president, but he, too, is a supporter of abortion rights.

The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, last night e-mailed his analysis, saying, "Catholic voters ignored the instructions of a group of vocal bishops and delivered 54% of their vote for Barack Obama as president of the United States." He cited a number of factors -- the importance of the economy, the endorsement of Obama by a few highly visible anti-abortion lay Catholic intellectuals, the presence of Biden on the Democratic ticket, and Obama's support for abortion reduction. But, Reese warned, "Will the abortion debate rise up again in four years at the next presidential election? A lot depends on President Obama and the Democratic Congress. If they push through the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), then they will have betrayed their pro-life Catholic supporters. This will make it nearly impossible for these people to support them again. On the other hand, if they make a priority the enactment of an abortion reduction bill, then it will be more difficult for the bishops and the Republicans to portray the Democrats as the pro-abortion party."

Deal Hudson, of InsideCatholic.com, offered a different take this morning, saying he wonders how much support Obama got from Catholics who regularly attend Mass, but that, "regardless of the final statistics, it is clear that the Obama-Biden ticket received substantial help from Catholics working for parishes and chanceries, as well as a number of high-profile Catholic politicians and jurists." Hudson criticized the bishops' voters guide, saying it opened the door to Catholics to vote for a candidate who supported abortion rights, and he declared, "History will show that Catholics helped to vote into office a president whose record contradicts our most fundamental moral belief -- the sanctity of human life."

This morning, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, who is the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, issued a statement congratulating Obama. The bishops are scheduled to discuss their relationship with abortion-rights supporting Catholic politicians during their semi-annual meeting in Baltimore next week, and they obviously will have differences, as well as agreements, with an Obama administration, but today was a day for graciousness. The letter from Cardinal George:

"I write to you, in my capacity as President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, to express our congratulations on your historic election as President of the United States. The people of our country have entrusted you with a great responsibility. As Catholic Bishops, we offer our prayers that God give you strength and wisdom to meet the coming challenges. Our country is confronting many uncertainties. We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world. We stand ready to work with you in defense and support of the life and dignity of every human person. May God bless you and Vice President-elect Biden as you prepare to assume your duties in service to our country and its citizens."

Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl of Washington also issued a congratulatory statement this morning, saying:

"We offer our prayers today for our nation and for our newly elected leaders, including President-elect Obama, as they take on their new responsibilities. We recognize that this election of the first African-American president is an historic moment in our nation’s history and we rejoice with the rest of our nation in the significance of this time. May our nation’s new leaders be guided in their decisions with wisdom and compassion and at the heart of all of their decisions may there be a deep respect for and commitment to the sanctity and dignity of all human life and support for the most vulnerable among us."

UPDATE: Pope Benedict XVI has also sent a note to Obama. The Vatican hasn't made it public, but Catholic News Service has some details:

"Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, said that because the message was addressed personally to Obama, the Vatican did not plan to publish it. However, he said, the papal message opened by referring to the 'historic occasion' of the election, marking the first time a black man has been elected president of the United States. The pope congratulated Obama, his wife and family, Lombardi said. 'He assured him of his prayers that God would help him with his high responsibilities for his country and for the international community,' Father Lombardi said. Asked if the pope mentioned any specific issues he was concerned about, Father Lombardi responded, 'peace, solidarity and justice.' The pope also prayed that 'the blessing of God would sustain him and the American people so that with all people of good will they could build a world of peace, solidarity and justice,' the spokesman said."

(Photo, by Sandy Huffaker/Getty, shows a voter placing her ballot in the box at La Quinta de Guadalupe Catholic Church in Imperial Beach, California, yesterday.)

Voice of the Faithful, the Newton-based organization pushing reform in the Catholic Church, has launched an effort to get the church to rethink its position on mandatory celibacy for priests.

The organization has launched a web site for its National Working Group for Priest Support on which it has posted correspondence with Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston.

An excerpt from the VOTF letter (that's VOTF's logo at right):

"For many young men, the requirement of celibacy is a major obstacle preventing them from responding to a call to the priesthood. We have seen a 60 % drop in vocations in the past forty years, adding considerably to the workload stress of an already overburdened and aging priesthood. Solutions that have been proffered, such as recruiting non-native priests from poor countries, substituting communion services for Mass, lowering standards for admission to seminaries, parish closures, and priests pastoring multiple parishes, fail to address the long-term systemic issues that are at the root of the problem. Additionally, we point to what many believe are other consequences of the discipline of mandatory celibacy, such as a clerical environment in which many diocesan priests feel unsupported by their bishops, are distanced from their brother priests, maintain few close personal friendships, and look forward to retirement, only to find it a time of illness and loneliness."

The cardinal's response, signed by his secretary, did not address the celibacy issue, but says:

"Cardinal Sean is very pleased that there has been a significant increase in the enrollment at St. John’s Seminary in the past two years as candidates for the Archdiocese of Boston and neighboring dioceses have begun the program of discernment and priestly formation. We pray that with the help of God more men will generously respond to the Lord’s call to service as priests and that our Catholic community will encourage and support them in their vocations."

Have you ever wondered what Halloween has to do with All Saints Day, and why we wear those creepy masks? Well, apparently, so have the editors at Busted Halo, "an on-line magazine for spiritual seekers in their 20s and 30s." They have published a wonderful (although 8 minutes long) video explanation, complete with creepy music and cheeky visuals and a goofy outtake at the end, by the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest who is the associate editor of America magazine and the author of "My Life with the Saints." Enjoy:

The Los Angeles Times has a lovely story, by Sebastian Rotella, about the nuns who staff the Vatican switchboard. An excerpt:

"At least once a day, someone insists on speaking, urgently and directly, with Pope Benedict XVI himself. The sisters respond with tact and prudence. They never say an outright 'No.' Instead they try to learn more and see if a priest, the Vatican press room or a church official can help. 'Sometimes they won't be satisfied with even a bishop -- their problem can only be solved by the pope,' Sister Maria Grazia said. Some callers cross the line between tormented and deranged, between lonely and abusive. Most of those calls, however, take place during the midnight shift when a skeleton crew of male operators -- civilians, not priests -- takes over. The sisters work from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. They recognize and tolerate certain regulars. One frequent caller identifies himself as Saint John the Baptist. He's harmless, though he gets touchy if they don't address him as 'Saint John.' 'He asks me to pray with him, and I do,' Sister Maria Clara said earnestly. 'Sometimes I have to put him on hold to take other calls. But he waits.'"

(Photo by Maria De Cristofaro for the LA Times.)

Caritas Christi, the Archdiocese of Boston's struggling health care system, is getting a $100 million boost, in the form of low-interest bonds, from Ascension Health. The Globe's Todd Wallack reports:

Caritas Christi's chief executive, Ralph de la Torre (left), said he was optimistic Ascension could help the chain continue to improve its operations, but said he hasn't discussed a possible merger. "Does it help the two systems get closer? Absolutely," de la Torre said. "Are they interested in us for the future? That I can't answer. All I can tell you is that there has been nothing in writing or even a handshake, wink, nod, or discussion about that." Ascension, the nation's largest Catholic healthcare system, came close to acquiring Caritas Christi from the archdiocese last year. The tentative deal collapsed in June 2007, after Ascension found Caritas Christi was in worse financial condition than expected because of underfunded pension liabilities and a dwindling number of patients. Since then, however, Caritas Christi has taken steps to improve its profitability, including streamlining management and consolidating some offices.

The Roman Catholic bishop of Worcester, Robert J. McManus (left), today is issuing a pastoral letter about the economic crisis that is gripping the U.S. In the letter, which is the most detailed look at the crisis I've seen yet from a Catholic bishop, McManus acknowledges the severity of the situation, discusses the role of greed in creating the mess, says the times require Catholics to devote more attention to the poor, and calls on parishes and the diocese itself to exercise caution in spending money.

An excerpt:

"We know, sadly, that the behaviors and misjudgments of some corporate leaders, as well as some of those in public service, have led to this crisis. Unfortunately, vulnerable people have been harmed by their actions. It is also true that some in our society have brought on some of their own personal troubles by reaching for too much with too little. Greed is a deadly sin with very harmful consequences."

McManus says that he has written to all of his priests, as well as Catholic Charities, asking them to turn their attention to those struggling as a result of the downturn.

"Our parish communities should be especially attentive to the needy among them. It is my hope that there be a heightened pastoral concern for those who have suddenly lost employment, benefits, a mortgage, or retirement income. The efforts of parish St. Vincent de Paul Societies, Knights of Columbus Councils, Food Pantry workers, Justice and Peace committees, as well as other existing parish groups, might well play an important role in bringing solace and genuine relief to vulnerable parishioners. Every parish should employ the most suitable means to provide for its needy."

He seems to suggest that he has been rethinking the diocese's investing strategy -- he says that "we have already taken steps to improve the liquidity of many of our assets." And he strongly hints at a slowdown in building and improvement projects, saying, "It would not be prudent to approve projects for which we could not obtain cash if liquidity were to become an issue, as it has for many institutions."

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston briefly addressed the economy in his blog two weeks ago.

The text of the McManus letter is below (click on "full entry" if you don't see it now):

The new edition of St. Anthony Messenger features an interview with Judge Michael R. Merz (right), a federal magistrate in Ohio who is the chairman of the National Review Board, the panel that advises the US Conference of Catholic Bishops on preventing the sexual abuse of children. Merz describes himself as a survivor of sexual abuse by a church employee. An excerpt from the interview:

"When you see people who have been so badly hurt by folks acting in the name of the Church, it’s a trial, it’s a test. It’s not ever pleasant work and it challenges your loyalty to the institution. But it doesn’t challenge my faith. I’m a cradle Catholic and my family, on my father’s side, has been Catholic forever. So it is hard for me to separate my faith and the institution of the Church. I don’t know of any other board member who has said, “Well, this really shakes my faith in God.” But nearly everyone I’ve worked with on the National Review Board has felt that this issue challenged their sense of the purity of the Church. It’s just tough work. It’s not so much that we’ve had much interaction with abusing priests, but we’ve seen some of the cover-up stuff that is really unbelievable. You also see an awful lot of pain on the part of bishops who thought they were getting good advice and doing the right thing. And in retrospect you have to ask them, “How could you have thought that?” And many of them are saying to themselves, “How could we have thought that?” So it’s live-and-learn in a sense, but learn at what a price. What a price!"

Bishop Blase J. Cupich (right), of Rapid City, S.D., is warning that there is another issue, besides abortion, for Catholic voters to be concerned about: racism. Writing in America magazine, the Jesuit weekly, Cupich does not name Barack Obama, but reflects on the fact that for the first time a major party has nominated an African-American for president, and declares, "racism is a sin." An excerpt:

"In any election people have many reasons to support one candidate or to oppose another. Some of these reasons may be wise and good, some not so good, and others simply wrong. The promotion neither of abortion nor racism can ever be a motivation for one’s vote. Voting for a candidate solely because of that candidate’s support for abortion or against him or her solely on the basis of his or her race is to promote an intrinsic evil. To do so consciously is indeed sinful. That is behavior incompatible with being a Christian. To allow racism to reign in our hearts and to determine our choice in this solemn moment for our nation is to cooperate with one of the great evils that has afflicted our society. In the words of 'Brothers and Sisters to Us', 'It mocks the words of Jesus, ‘Treat others the way you would have them treat you.''''

Over at dotCommweal, David Gibson writes, "It is one of the only pieces I’ve seen from a religious leader addressing the ugliness emerging over the Obama candidacy."

HT: Rocco Palmo.

The two major party presidential nominees, John McCain and Barack Obama, both showed up last night for the 63rd Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York. The event is occasioning some chatter in St. Blog's Parish because Obama is a supporter of abortion rights, and the event supports programs of the Archdiocese of New York; four years ago, Democratic nominee Sen. John F. Kerry was not invited because of his support for abortion rights.

Diogenes:

"The American bishops have generally agreed that political candidates who favor unrestricted legal abortion should not be given opportunities to speak at Church-sponsored events.
•unless the events raise $5 million for Catholic Charities
•unless the events are hosted by the cardinal-archbishop of the nation's most prominent city
•unless the events are covered by every imaginable major media outlet
•unless the events are light-hearted, humorous affairs.
Because under those circumstances, you see, the archdiocese isn't endorsing the pro-abortion candidate. It's just showing that someone can support the deliberate slaughter of unborn human beings and still be a heckuva fun guy."

David Gibson:

"There are at least a couple of ironies here. One is that the political bloodletting in the Catholic Church has reached such a point that a dinner honoring the first Catholic presidential candidate–and a man reviled for his faith–is virtually off-limits to Catholic candidates. For the last Al Smith dinner, in 2004, Cardinal Egan refused to host John Kerry because he is a pro-choice Catholic. Instead he invited former Republican President George H.W. Bush and former New York Gov. Hugh Carey, a Democrat, as this CNS story explains. Problem is, according to much of the “pro-life” rhetoric, Obama is the most “pro-abortion” candidate EVER, to the point that he supports “infanticide.” (Yes, “scare quotes” are necessary given the nature of allegations.) So how is it that Obama gets to appear and Kerry doesn’t? Putting up a “No Catholics Need Apply” sign at the Al Smith event may be the ultimate paradox."

(Photo, by Andrew Theodorakis of AFP, shows McCain and Obama flanking Cardinal Edward M. Egan.)

The Archbishop of Newark, John J. Myers, is unhappy that Bill Maher's new film, "Religulous,'' was filmed in a local parish, Our Lady of Mercy in Park Ridge. Newark Star-Ledger religion writer Jeff Diamant reports:

"In the scenes filmed at the church, Maher, a 52-year-old native of nearby River Vale in northern Bergen County, interviews his mother, Julie, and his sister, Kathy, about the family's attendance there when he was a child. Julie Maher, who died after the filming but before the movie opened Oct. 3, was Jewish, and talked about her late husband's devotion to Catholicism. Those scenes are not among the most inflammatory parts of the film, which targets religious beliefs, including literal interpretation of Scripture. Maher, for example, ridicules the doctrine of the Virgin Birth of Jesus and the biblical account of the talking snake in the Garden of Eden. He challenges believers -- evangelical truck drivers, U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and a host of clergy -- about the supernatural elements of religious doctrine. And while Catholics are less of a direct target in the film than evangelical Protestants, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which has a movie-reviewing divi sion, rated the movie "O" for offensive."

Diamant also has a follow-up story, in which the pastor of the church says he had been given permission to allow the filming.

(Photo shows Bill Maher on location at The Holy Land Experience in Orlando.)