21 Comments

Thank you for this report! I work in healthcare and a few years ago became aware of the issues with Solidarity and the many complaints with the Better Business Bureau. Whenever I hear their advertisements on Catholic radio I worry that more well-meaning families will be taken advantage of.

Expand full comment

There should be canonical rules and oversight for groups claiming to be "Catholic" who do this stuff. Catholic hospitals have to follow rules, why not healthshares?

If the Church is a "perfect society" she should act like one, and regulate herself so we don't need the government to do it for us.

Expand full comment

Drawing an inference from the Pillar reporting on various school issues, I believe that there is an oversight authority as to what can call itself Catholic.... It is up to the local bishop.

Expand full comment

The idea that a bishop should be responsible for every Catholic healthshare is so absurd. When are they ever supposed to get around to preaching the Gospel?

Accreditation is a much better answer. Experts in the field can make sure that the work is being done properly.

Expand full comment

The bishop has three munera: teach, sanctify, govern. All three are essential.

To the extent that a group of people publicly identitfying as part of the Church are perpetrating injustice, this is a situation warranting episcopal activity, whether personally or (more likely) vicariously.

The "absurdity" of the situation only exists insofaras a bishop doesn't have a suitable curia to assist him (which, if the case, ought to be remedied), or bishops are given too large sees to effectively administer, even with a capable chancery (in which case we need smaller diocese and more bishops).

Otherwise, it should be perfectly reasonable to expect him to do all three.

Expand full comment

"It is not fitting that we should abandon the Gospel to serve at table."

If it was not fitting for the Apostles to supervise the daily distribution of bread to widows, it is completely improper for a bishop to supervise a health insurance company.

I could not more strongly disagree with everything in your comment, including the suggestion that curias should be expanded rather than eliminated.

Expand full comment

I rather think your biblical citation supports my position: bishops should not neglect one of their munera for the sake another, and helpers are too be appointed to make sure the duty is carried out. This passage is the creation of the first diocesan curia.

Seems rather silly to suggest that performing corporal works of mercy or other "profane" things in the service of justice are beneath the diginity of a bishop.

But I guess we will just disagree on this matter.

Expand full comment

Corporal works of mercy and other profane things (no quotes needed since profane simply means non-church things) are not beneath the dignity of a bishop. They are outside of his scope. They are to a bishop like light switches are to plumbers. A plumber may encounter a light switch, he may flip on a light switch, but if it needs to be fixed he leaves it alone and calls an electrician.

The Acts citation is very much not the creation of the first diocesan curia.

And the Twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”

The Twelve do not engage in solving the corporal work of mercy problem. They do not even choose deacons to solve the problem. They call together the laity and tell the laity to choose some deacons and then they appoint the men whom the laity choose. And then they do not supervise these men. Instead they devote themselves to two of the munera: sanctifying and preaching. Bishops ought to govern almost exclusively by appointing people to tasks (and then trusting them with the task) and by preaching to the laity about what the laity ought to do (but then trusting the laity to do it).

Expand full comment

I’m not sure that canon law is the right tool to solve this problem. Frankly the US is has a fairly unique healthcare system and industry as does every other country. Trying to make canon law statutes that are supposed to cover the diversity of lay Catholic initiatives universally doesn’t seem like the purpose of canon law in the first place. The Church does accept a legitimate place for secular governments in matters like this.

As for appealing to bishops, that should only be done as a means of last resort when something scandalous like contradicting Catholic teaching (in the case of a health share, paying for IVF or something like that) is going on. I don’t like seeing Catholic organisations being incompetent, and The consequences for people are real suffering but that’s a different order of scandal that a bishop can in actuality, do very little about.

Expand full comment

"But instead of a Catholic community, they said, they found lengthy delays, poor communication, and little help navigating a complicated bureaucratic system."

I dunno, ever since I started reading the Pillar it seems like that's an apt description of any Catholic organization anywhere. Clearly these people had not yet read Ed. Condon's financial reporting.

Expand full comment

There is a difference between good work and good works, and many people who start out trying to do good undervalue doing it well.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this reporting. We had the same experience with Solidarity (though thankfully without the big bills) and we have now switched to Samaritan. We held on for years hoping things would get better! I hope this coverage prevents others from wasting their time and money with Solidarity.

Expand full comment

Has anyone reported them to the FTC? If not, here is the link:

https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/

And here’s a link to file a complaint with the Arizona Attorney General’s office:

https://www.azag.gov/complaints/consumer

Expand full comment

Yes.

Expand full comment

I am a Catholic, an attorney, and a member (soon-to-be ex-member) of Solidarity. I can confirm that they have been absolutely terrible to work with. Our 9-month old son died in January and now we will likely be forced to self-pay the hospital bill to prevent going into collections. The amount of incompetence there is staggering, and I'm surprised there has not been a class action lawsuit filed yet. The stories in this article, and our own personal experience, are horrifying.

Expand full comment

Thanks for sharing, Ben. We'll be praying for you and your family after the death of your son.

Expand full comment

https://www.azag.gov/complaints/consumer

File an official complaint with the Arizona attorney general.

Expand full comment

My family joined solidarity in 2019 and had a baby in September 2020. The wait times were awful in mid 2020 through mid 2021. But in my experience, they have greatly improved. We had to pay out of pocket many times, unfortunately. At one point solidarity owed us over 3000 for medical bills we paid ourselves to avoid collections. But they DID reimburse. It was not at all ideal and difficult at times (probably impossible for some individuals) but they have worked with us and really gained my (formerly wavering) trust over the last 6-12 months.

And now my wife was recently diagnosed with breast cancer at 4 weeks pregnant. Thanks to solidarity we have had a ton of flexibility on which providers to use and as an additional consolation, it’s been really great to have kindness and prayers offered profusely with every phone call.

All of the company’s struggles strike me as very understandable in a rapidly growing business. Again, not ideal, but understandable.

Also worth noting that traditional health insurances can come with their own battles to get things covered. They are going hard after profits and want to spend as little as possible to help you. This whole story is just far more gray than I think it is being presented.

Expand full comment

My family and I have been members of the Catholic health sharing ministry CMF Curo, which partners with Samaritan, for about six years. My experience with them has been stellar and I would highly recommend them. When I was being treated for breast cancer in 2017-18 they were so helpful and I paid a lot less out of pocket overall than a friend who had standard health insurance for his cancer treatment. The only problem we had was that the business office of the oncologist refused to start my chemotherapy unless I paid $2000 up front before each IV chemo treatment because they had never dealt with a health sharing ministry before and didn't know if they would be paid. Everyone sent in their shares and I was reimbursed and paid all my bills for chemo, surgery and radiation. I also received wonderful phone calls from CMF Curo on a regular basis, asking how I was, if I needed help and reminding me that I was being prayed for daily. I received so many cards with promises of prayer from members who sent me their monthly shares. The Catholic hospital where I had my surgery and frequent labs gave me an immediate 50% discount on EVERYTHING as a cash paying patient (since that is how this all works). I love CMF CURO/Samaritan. They got me through a very difficult time. And praise God, I just got a clean bill of health from my oncologist this week! CMF Curo/Samaritan has this health sharing thing down pat. Check them out!

Expand full comment

Thanks for commissioning this article. My wife and I had a very negative experience with Solidarity. Everything in this article resonates. Manual entry errors, delays, poor customer service. And we gave them the benefit of the doubt for far too long. We left solidarity over a year ago but we are still dealing with unpaid bills that went to collections. We are very happy not to be affiliated with them anymore.

Expand full comment

https://www.azag.gov/complaints/consumer

File an official complaint with the Attorney General office.

Expand full comment