• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Borré countered that hundreds of Catholics supported the vigil parishes, and many more people were in full sympathy.

Sambi remarked that in Jerusalem, where he had previously been posted, most people knew what a given solution should be, but none were willing to set it in motion. Everyone there is guilty of the sin of pride.

Sambi was voicing O’Malley’s view of Borré as an outsized ego who considered the vigil movement an extension of himself.

Borré would rejoice if the cardinal would open five parishes temporarily as chapels. That would give the people a means to repair ties with an archbishop they never wanted to dislike. Borré at that point could willingly phase out. But he picked his words carefully. If the cardinal will follow through, I’m ready to resign and dissolve the organization. My first and strongest allegiance is to these five groups who are still in vigil.

Borré explained that he wanted a peaceful but just solution. He was willing to cease his public activism. But for this to work, the cardinal needed to take the first step, a unilateral reopening of one of the vigil parishes.

He assured Sambi that the Council of Parishes members would not react by gloating in the media, declaring a victory.

The meeting ended on a warm note, Sambi agreeing to communicate with O’Malley. After an exchange of letters, Sambi agreed to see Borré again.

Back to Rome, in early June, he worked with Carlo Gullo in refining the language of the appeal that would go to Pope Benedict, one copy in Italian, the other in English. This was for the benefit of Monsignor Peter Wells, who handled the English-language desk in the Secretariat of State and was a native of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Borré had never met Wells, but hoped he would give favorable commentary and recommend that the pope actually read it. In Rome it was no secret that the Holy Father was deep at work on the second volume of his study of Jesus.

The Boston archdiocese had just posted its financial statement. The Globe noted that the parish collections had declined 2 percent, while parish operating expenses rose 3 percent. The worst recession in decades was certainly a factor in the downturn; so was the continuing impact of the clergy sexual underground. “In all, the archdiocese has spent $145 million to settle 1,097 civil abuse claims, including 800 since O’Malley’s arrival in 2003,” reported Lisa Wangsness.22

Accountancy professor Jack Ruhl, as part of his research on American diocesan finances, found, “The Boston archdiocese financials show a total operating loss for 2009 of $24,299,645. The change in net assets is analogous to bottom line net income in a corporation. This includes operating income or loss, plus other ‘unusual’ items, such as a gain on sale of land. The 2009 financials show a change in net assets, a loss, of $4,650,797. The total aggregate operating losses for the fiscal years 2004 to 2009 are $7,484,274.”

Coming off such losses, the biggest problem facing O’Malley in his challenge to rebuild finances was the 30 percent decline in church attendance since 2002. The base of support was shrinking as expenses rose. O’Malley had made a forthright effort at transparency, posting detailed financial statements on the archdiocese’s website. “I continue to be optimistic,” noted Chancellor James P. McDonough in introducing the 85-page report. “We are making significant progress in improving our operations and will build on that success as we adjust our operating model and ministries to the realities of the present time.”23

Peter Borré did not share the optimism. Besides the archdiocese’s operating losses, he saw the priest pension fund underfunded by $104 million. McDonough, a former banker, had taken a 10 percent salary cut because of the precarious finances; still, he earned $225,000. Borré’s long-ago Harvard Business School classmate David Castaldi saw nothing wrong with paying competitive salaries for the right people. Borré had no personal grudge against McDonough, who had been on the job for four years, but he thought it absurd to pay anyone that