1990 President

November 13, 1990

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL

Daniel E. Pilarczyk, President

National Conference of Catholic Bishops

3211 Fourth Street, NE

Washington, DC 20017-1194

Dear Bishop Pilarczyk:

Enclosed is a copy of a letter I directed to Cardinal Law this date. Copies of previous correspondence between me, His Eminence and then Chancellor [name withheld] are attached. Since then, I have also been in contact with the current Chancellor, your Director of Finance and the Administrator of the Diocesan Fiscal Management Conference.

Quite simply, Eminence, when it comes to revenue protection, the Roman Catholic Church in the United States is operating out of its hip pocket. Just think how much more she could do for the needy and homeless, both here and abroad, if those in authority would accept and respond to the fact that millions of dollars are being surreptitiously taken from the Sunday collection every year in this country.

[NOTE: A paragraph which appeared at this location in the original letter has been deleted because it is totally unrelated to the issue this Website is intended to address]

I was employed with the federal government for 32 years, Eminence, and I know how difficult it can be to achieve a desired course of action. I also know, however, that it can be done if proper direction and a sense of urgency are conveyed from the top. Needless to say, that's where you come into the picture. As you can tell, I feel strongly about these issues, and I trust my efforts in calling them to your attention will not be in vain.

Very truly yours,

[signed] M. W. Ryan

RESPONSE SUMMARY

Archbishop Pilarczyk did not reply, opting instead to refer the matter to the USCC's General Counsel who advised in a letter dated Dec. 10, 1990 that he was confident the Archdiocese of Boston "will be responding to your concerns directly." and that they (Boston) are "in the best position to respond" to the issues raised by the author.

The President's handling of this contact (which clearly pointed out the nationwide nature of the collection security issue) was the first high-level indication of how reluctant the NCCB, its officers and members, were (and remain) to address that issue.