Catholic leaders defend O’Malley

And they were right.

The blogosphere exploded with discussion of the significance of O’Malley’s actions, several antiabortion organizations denounced his decision, and critics lit up the phones and flooded inboxes at the archdiocesan headquarters in Braintree.

But the cardinal, who increasingly uses his blog as his primary means of communicating, decided to seize the moment as an opportunity to try to explicate the relationship between his opposition to abortion rights and his belief that as a pastor it was right for him to be present with those who were mourning the loss of the most prominent Catholic in Massachusetts. He spent several days drafting an explanation of his actions, and it was posted Wednesday night.

Many critics were not persuaded, and the nasty debate on the Internet continued.

But yesterday a variety of prominent Boston-area Catholics expressed strong support for the cardinal, saying that he had done the right thing, and that the controversy has been overblown.

“To emphasize these criticisms as much as the press does, it’s not a reflection of the reality of the church, and to me it’s noise,’’ said the Rev. Michael C. McFarland, president of the College of the Holy Cross. “These people are self-appointed, they have no authority, and they’re so full of venom. I don’t think they represent the Christian and Catholic position of the church, or the reality of the church, which is people struggling every day to put these things all together to care for one another and reflect the Gospel in their lives.’’

O’Malley has been a staunch opponent of abortion rights, going so far as to denounce Planned Parenthood as a historically racist organization, and to say that for Catholics to vote for abortion-rights supporting politicians (as many Boston-area Catholics have), “borders on scandal.’’

But the discussion of O’Malley’s role in the Kennedy funeral marks the second time this year that O’Malley has been questioned by the antiabortion movement. Earlier this year, some groups criticized his handling of a proposed joint insurance venture between Caritas Christi Health Care and a non-Catholic health care provider that would have covered abortion services.

In his blog entry, O’Malley issued a de facto plea for more civil dialogue about abortion among Catholics.

“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,’’ he wrote. “We will not change hearts by turning away from people in their time of need and when they are experiencing grief and loss.’’

Not everyone finds that argument persuasive.

“Yes, we change laws by changing hearts, but the lesson learned from Senator Kennedy’s life and death is that it’s OK to be proabortion, and that makes it very difficult to change people’s hearts,’’ said Anne Fox, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life. “Ted Kennedy gave cover to countless politicians, so we look at him and see a sad, sad loss of opportunity.’’

But several prominent local Catholics interviewed yesterday said there is really no question, as a matter of Catholic canon law or Christian theology, that Kennedy had a right to a Catholic funeral.

They also said that O’Malley was right to attend, to acknowledge the grief of the Kennedy family and much of O’Malley’s flock. Some said O’Malley’s critics are wrong to reduce Kennedy’s record to his opposition to abortion, noting his strong record of support for the poor, the disabled, children, the elderly, and immigrants.

Others said even if abortion outweighed all other issues, a funeral is an occasion for prayer and hope, not political condemnation.

“When all is said and done, the cardinal deserves great credit for not paying attention to the critics, and doing what his gut told him to do for the whole church,’’ said Thomas P. O’Neill III, son of the former House speaker and a prominent Boston marketing executive who works with O’Malley in his capacity as chairman of North Cambridge Catholic High School.

“He didn’t pay attention to the politics, but he paid attention to decency,’’ O’Neill said. “Now he’s suffering, and he’s being criticized, but he’s trying to show the breadth of one church.’’

The Rev. Mark T. Cregan, president of Stonehill College, called himself “very, very, very prolife,’’ but also supported the cardinal, saying he was right to attend the funeral, despite the predictable controversy that ensued.

“He’s trying to use this as a teachable moment, to help all of us remember that we can’t lose sight of the goal, which is to help people come closer to God,’’ Cregan said.

And Sister Janet Eisner, president of Emmanuel College, said she was drafting a note to thank O’Malley for attending the funeral.

“I’m really grateful that he did,’’ she said, “but I’m even more grateful that he came out so clearly in describing why he did it so that it’s unequivocal and that it’s totally rooted in the church.’’

Michael Paulson can be reached at mpaulson@globe.com.