The Archdiocese wants to sweep it all under the carpet, but we are at a critical moment in time where it is important to keep the proper focus on what has transpired.
The successor to Sister Margaret Timothy Sato arrived at the Daughters’ provincial headquarters in Jamaica Plain shortly after the order’s superior general, Sister M. Antonieta Bruscato, flew to Boston from Rome and met with O’Malley in the rectory of the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in the South End.
In that meeting, the cardinal and Bruscato expressed dismay that the Daughters’ US province had taken the extraordinary step of suing O’Malley and other trustees of a church-run pension fund in court rather than resolving their differences in a more amicable way, according to a source with knowledge of the situation who was not authorized to speak about the conversation.
The Daughters of St. Paul most certainly did attempt to resolve their differences in a more amicable way for over four years. During that time, the Cardinal Archbishop's Administration and the Cardinal himself refused to give money back to the people to whom it belonged.
During the four years of the Daughter's asking the Archdiocese in amicable ways to hand over the money that does not belong to them, to their misfortune, the ineptitude, mismanagement, omissions, commissions, lying, arrogance, abuse of power, intimidation tactics, character assassinations and other frightening ethical problems each of us doing business with the Archdiocese has experienced, revealed itself.
The Cardinal did not have to call the mother superior at all. All he had to do in the five years of negotiating giving the money back to the people to whom it belongs was give it to them, along with the audits that account for the amount they hand over.
The Cardinal called the Mother General. She rushed over and met with the Cardinal at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross whereupon she immediately went to Jamaica Plain and removed the leadership.
Terry Donilon's quote in the article that 'we' don't retaliate is ludicrous. Moreoever, since when is the spokesperson for a Cardinal Archbishop included as the part of 'we' in the power structure of the Cathedra?
Our wise friend Jerry posted the following comment on another thread:
Carol, you know I'm not a fan of Cardinal Sean's. His withholding money from and his lack of transparency toward the Daughters is deplorable. Regarding the DSP's lawsuit, though, I think the cardinal has the better part of the confrontation. The Daughters exist in the archdiocese only with the permission of the cardinal, and must be obedient to him. Going outside the Church to sue him is over the top except in a very grave situation. Accordingly, the decision to sue should be approved by the superior of the order, and with consultation of highly regarded canon lawyers. That their superior had heads rolling indicates that the local sisters didn't contact her. That was a mistake.
I must wholeheartedly disagree. Here's the reason why.
For some time now, Chancery cronies have been mischaracterizing 'obedience' to include silence and cover up of their misdeeds, abuse of people including children, corruption and criminal activity. We all, including religious orders get called to the carpet to accept their mischaracterizations.
This has to come to an end.
It's not about loss of money, reputation, leadership position but because the disordered dynamic that covered up the rapes of children is more entrenched than it ever has been. Here in Boston, we experienced it when it even involved setting up an abortion business to enrich themselves.
Think about this for a minute. They will deploy these tactics even when it comes to murdering children to enrich themselves.
The "Dallas Charter" is a joke.
Nobody - no priests, lay person, nun or their superior general - or any other Catholic should rush in at the hour of exposition to help the Cardinal silence, penalize, retaliate and make an example in the public square of what happens to you when you expose it.
It is a serious flaw and in fact an obstacle for some people who feel called to vocations because they have made vocations a vow to cover up their corruption and retaliate and remove people who won't play along.
This can't be part of vocations. If and when you find unjust deeds and you exhaust good faith efforts to resolve it - four years is plenty - and you come across the dynamic we all know is operating under the Cardinal's nose - how do you accept your money and walk away knowing they will deploy it against others?
What just person could do this to others?
The hard way or the easy way, the end of this matrix of abuse of power is nigh.
This is just not good enough for Christ.