Will Chicago get a red hat before Los Angeles?

Congregation for Bishops not consulted, says Italian reporter
Cardinal McCarrick

Cardinal McCarrick

The following comes from a Sept. 30 story by Sandro Magister on La Chiesa, part of La Repubblica newspaper website.

While still reeling from the news of the imminent removal of Cardinal Raymond Burke, the more conservative and traditional Catholicism of the United States – and historically the more “papist” – has been dealt another blow with the appointment of the new archbishop of Chicago.

Francis’ selection of Blase Cupich as the new pastor of the third-ranking diocese in the U.S. has plunged this particularly dynamic component of American Catholicism into a profound depression, almost to the edge of a nervous breakdown. It is enough to scan the reactions of the websites and bloggers of this area to grasp the embarrassment and disappointment over the appointment.

On the contrary, the more progressive segment of American Catholicism, historically hypercritical of the recent pontificates, has celebrated with enthusiasm the arrival of Cupich, called a “moderate” by the secular press, a description typically used in the United States to indicate a “liberal” who may not be radicalized, but is still a “liberal.”

Cupich’s predecessor, Cardinal Francis George, had written not long ago in a column for the diocesan newspaper:

“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the Church has done so often in human history.”

George has always been highly critical of the secular tendency in the legislative field established under the presidency of Barack Obama, whom he has known well since he was a senator for Illinois. But it is difficult to imagine that his prophecy will come true, at least for his immediate successor.

In order to understand this, it is enough to peruse even briefly the ecclesiastical career of the new archbishop of Chicago.

Cupich, 65, is not originally from Chicago, like George, but from Omaha, in the outlying rural state of Nebraska.

His first episcopal see was Rapid City, where he succeeded the conservative Charles Chaput. And it was in this tiny diocese of South Dakota that in 2002 he became noteworthy for prohibiting a traditionalist Catholic community from celebrating the Easter Triduum according to the ancient Roman rite, which was later liberalized in 2007 by Benedict XVI with the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum.”

Conservative Catholics also remember that during the clash between the bishops of the United States and the White House over health care reform, Cupich was one of the very few prelates, fewer than a dozen, who said not even one word against it, even though the criticism of Obamacare was not a position of some “extremist” bishops or “culture warriors,” as they are often called in a disparaging sense, but the official position of the episcopate.

After being made bishop of Spokane in 2010, the following year Cupich prohibited his priests and deacons from taking part in prayers in front of abortion clinics. A ban in stark contrast with the “mainstream” of the Church in the United States. The Rosary is in fact recited in front of these clinics in almost all the dioceses of the United States. And dozens of bishops participate in them, including, for example, the “moderate” cardinal of Washington, Donald Wuerl, and the current president of the episcopal conference, Louisville archbishop Joseph Kurtz.

Cupich’s voice – as noted both by conservative Catholics, with distress, and by progressives, with satisfaction – always rings out loud and clear when the talk is of immigration or the death penalty, but he seems to get laryngitis every time there is a discussion of abortion, euthanasia, and religious freedom, or criticism of the Obama administration over health care reform.

Significant in this regard is the fact that Cupich decided to expand the scope of the Respect Life office in the diocese of Spokane, to give the fight against the death penalty the same weight as the fight against abortion.

So Cupich seems to be bringing Chicago back to the heyday of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, George’s predecessor, a champion of “liberal” Catholicism in the United States and the creator of the mountainous bureaucratic machine of the episcopal conference, of which he was president from 1974 to 1977 and “dominus” until his death in 1996.

And the Bernardin era seems to be coming back thanks to a move of Pope Francis, who has taken by surprise and wrongfooted an episcopate, like that of the United States, today widely characterized by appointments made by John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

That it was a surprise can be noted from the fact that a few days before the appointment the newspaper Our Sunday Visitor, the most official of the American Catholic periodicals – its president is the journalist Greg Erlandson, a member of the commission for the reorganization of the Vatican media that met in Rome for the first time last week – in listing eight names of possible successors to Cardinal George did not present the one selected by pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio, that of Cupich.

The fact that the appointment wrongfooted the U.S. episcopate is evident from the results of the elections of the current president and vice-president of the episcopal conference that were held less than a year ago, in November of 2013.

At that electoral cycle, in fact, the ten candidates included Cupich. And his was considered by his colleagues the most distinctly “progressive,” ecclesiasticaly speaking, of the candidacies presented.

So then, at the first round of voting, which saw the immediate election as president of the outgoing vice-president, Archbishop Kurtz, with 125 votes out of 236, Cupich was back in seventh place with only 10 votes.

More ballots went to Houston cardinal Daniel DiNardo (25), Philadelphia archbishop Chaput (20), archbishop of Los Angeles José Gomez and of Baltimore William Lori (15 votes each), and New Orleans archbishop Gregory Aymond (14).

In the two rounds of voting for the vice-presidency, Cupich was far from being elected, coming in fifth (out of nine) both at the first round, with 24 votes out of 236, and at the second, with 17 votes out of 235.

For Chicago, then, Pope Francis did not take the outlook of the local episcopate into account, unlike for example what he did in Spain, where in Madrid he promoted Carlos Osoro Sierra, who as archbishop of Valencia was elected vice-president of the episcopal conference in the first round last March, with 46 votes out of 79.

Nor does it seem that the pope took account of the recommendations of Cardinal George, who is believed to have asked for a priest of his diocese as coadjutor. Unlike what happened in Sydney, where instead on September 18 Francis appointed the Dominican Anthony Colin Fisher, the protégé of the outgoing archbishop, conservative cardinal George Pell, whom the pope has called to Rome as the czar of the Vatican economic-financial apparatus.

There is only one point on which Francis used the same procedure in Chicago as he did in Madrid and Sydney. In all three cases he proceeded with the appointment without having it discussed first by the cardinals and bishops of the congregation for bishops, even though all of them were confirmed by him last year with significant new additions and just as significant removals (the most sensational of these being that of United States cardinal Burke).

For Chicago, it appears that Pope Francis proceeded with his own personal consultation, parallel to that of the dicastery. The appointment of Cupich is thought to have been recommended to the pope with particular enthusiasm by Cardinal Óscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga and above all by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop emeritus of Washington, a representative of the “liberal” old guard of the U.S. episcopate.

To tell the truth, it is nothing new in this pontificate for official appointments, even important ones, not to be discussed collegially by the appropriate Vatican congregation. With Benedict XVI there was no discussion over the staffing of Venice (but with Milan, Mechelen-Brussels, Santiago, and Manila there was). With this pontificate, however, procedure seems to be set aside much more frequently.

The congregation was in fact not consulted to examine not only the appointments of Chicago, Sydney, and Madrid, but also, in Germany, the selection of three names to be submitted according to tradition to the chapter of Cologne, as well as all of the appointments, about twenty, for Argentina.

In Italy – to give two examples – the congregation for bishops was not consulted to examine the successors for Locri and Isernia, where the promotions went to the vicars general of two churchmen in the pope’s good graces, respectively of the bishop of Cassano all’Ionio and secretary general of the episcopal conference, Nunzio Galantino, and of the archibishop of Chieti-Vasto and special secretary of the upcoming synod of bishops, Bruno Forte.

Returning to the United States, at this point it will be interesting to see what will happen at the upcoming consistory for the creation of new cardinals.

Currently there are three traditionally cardinalate U.S. dioceses led by an archbishop not yet with the scarlet: Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia.

It is easy to guess that Pope Francis will grant the biretta to that of Chicago, the only one of the three that he has nominated.

But it will be curious to see if at the same time the scarlet will go to the diocese of Los Angeles, whose ordinary is of the clergy of Opus Dei, or to that of Philadelphia (not both at once, because it seems unthinkable that pope Bergoglio would make three new U.S. cardinals in one fell swoop).

Or if instead, as a further signal sent across the Atlantic, Chicago’s scarlet will be bare. Without any trim.

To read original story, click here.




To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.


  1. Father Karl says:

    I would say YES. Two reasons: the new archbishop of Chicago is much more liberal and progressive than Gomez, and the second reason is, even though it happened when Cardinal Manning was alive and Mahoney was made a cardinal, I do not think this pope wants two cardinals from the same archdiocese. Of course, expect the unexpected from Pope Francis.

  2. The tone of this article is shockingly unChristian, unpapal, and unCatholic. It is divisive, making “conservative” more important than “Catholic.” What a disappointment to find this on a supposedly Catholic daily website.

    • Linda Maria says:

      Emma, what do you think of this situation, yourself? Jesus always spoke His mind, and told the Truth. Truth can hurt, when people sin, and then refuse to face it! But Christ was never petty, mean, or dishonest, as some people are, when they pretend to tell the truth— but are really just angry and twisting things, or lying. Christ came of age at thirteen, under Jewish Law, and as an adult in the religious community, one has the obligation to live right, to obey God, to act mature—and to always fearlessly, unselfishly, stand up for God, for what is right! Even if it costs you your very life! Many prophets before Jesus, had been persecuted, or killed, for speaking the truth! And St. John the Baptist, as well as Jesus, were both evilly killed– for speaking the Truth! Of course, it does not matter, the names of “conservative” or “liberal.” The big question we all must ask, is– what does God want us to do??

    • Linda Maria says:

      Emma, I will add one more thing. In the days of slavery in America, many Protestant churches were divided, over the slavery laws. Some church-goers believed in following the laws, and were considered “conservative,” and also believed in strict segregation in their churches. Others, who were called the “liberals,” believed in breaking the slavery laws, because these laws were unjust, before God. Many of these churches were so divided, that they split up, or collapsed completely, over the slavery issue! Can you imagine a “conservative” Protestant pastor, telling his congregation to obey the slavery laws– fearing going to jail, for breaking these laws– or, actually AGREEING with these laws?? And also, believing in segregation, in his church?? Well, for example–what about our modern-day issues, such as legal abortion?? Some of our Churchmen seem very scared, to stand up for God, against horrible sins, like abortion! Or just maybe– they really do believe in abortion, gay sex acts and gay “marriage,” as well as many other unChristian evils!

  3. The only reason that the secular press called CUPICH a “MODERATE” is because that was printed in the ‘CRUX’ which belongs to the Boston Globe. The ‘CRUX’ broke the story, and the rest of the secular press printed it as true.
    The main writer for the ‘CRUX’ is John Allen.
    Until recently Allen worked for many years at the heretical ‘National Catholic REPORTER’. For the most part he has the ‘Reporter’s’ world view of Catholicism.
    Someone is feeding the ‘CRUX’ and the ‘Reporter’ breaking news so they can put their SPIN on stories.

    In addition Sr. Mary Ann Walsh RSM (of the heretical Sisters of Mercy of the Americas and active participants in the LCWR) has recently left her post at the USCCB, and is now writing for the heretical ‘AMERICA’.
    (One of her recent articles supports Sacrilege – giving Holy Communion to those choosing to continue living in the state of mortal sin.)

    • CUPICH publically supports:
      1) Sacrilege – giving the Body and Blood of our Lord to those obstinate in Mortal Sin. All they have to do is show up at Mass.
      2) Stopping his Priests from praying the Rosary outside of abortion clinics which is known to save lives, so that they won’t offend anyone.
      3) Says his top priority will be (ILLEGAL) immigration, rather than Saving Souls and teaching the Faith accurately and completely.
      4) Equated not voting for Obama (because of race) as a intrinsic evil, and the murder of the most innocent in abortion. This is how Cupich teaches to get people to vote for Obama – which had nothing to do with race.

      Cupich is NOT a moderate, and in fact is a heretic in participating in and instructing his Priests to give Holy Communion to those obstinate in Mortal Sin.

  4. Fr. Richard Perozich says:

    Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus!

  5. Cardinal George inherited the heretical mess created by Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.
    Cupich is of the Bernardin ilk.
    He was a bad choice for Chicago Catholics, but he will be happy with the pro-abortion, pro-same-sex marriage, pro-euthanasia, DEMOCRATIC politicians of Chicago.

    Cupich instructed the Catholic Charities in Spokane to include abortion, contraception, and euthanasia in their insurance policies as required by State Law.

    A ‘moderate’, or a ‘heretic’ ?

  6. The people of San Diego must pray that Bishop Brom, and those from other countries can not influence the appointment of the their new Diocese Bishop.


  7. Promoting Cupich to Archbishop or Cardinal would be a travesty
    and a slap in the face to Faithful Catholics who try to live according to the Faith and attend Mass every Sunday.

  8. The Catholic hierarchy appear to be a mere extension of the Democrat Party, lockstep with Marxism, feminism, and gayism.

    • Anonymous says:

      It looks to me like the Catholic church is increasingly looking like it is in lockstep with Franco, Mussolini, and Mao.

      • What’s the difference? Fascism v Red Fascism. One is national socialism, the other international socialism. And for what it’s worth, Mao was a major influence in the development of feminist thought, by promoting employment outside the home for females, as a means to destroying the nuclear family, as in accord with Marx and Engels. Only the Truth can set us free, and the Truth is found in Catholic doctrine.

    • Do the bishops support Marxism, feminism and gayism because they truly believe those “isms” are good and deserving of Church support? Or do they support them because those dissident clergy who promote those perversions know stuff about the bishops which would be very damning if revealed? The more I examine the incredible things the bishops are approving of and supporting these days, the more I am forced to conclude that that is the case. And if it is, then we have a horrendous problem in the Church.

  9. I always look forward to Fr. Karl’s comments. I am so happy to see another “good” priest, Dr. Richard Perozich, joining the commentary. We need to hear the Truth from our priests.

  10. Bishop José Gomez is a very good shepherd for Los Angeles with its 4,000,000 baptized Catholics. It is unlikely he will be made Cardinal until Cardinal Mahony the Pope-maker reaches 80. Even after that we will have to see the position of Pope Francis with respect to Opus Dei bishops. Bishop Livieres in Ciudad del Este in Paraguay is out, and Bishop Finn here is on “visitation”. Opus Dei is very powerful in Argentina and old rivalries between Jesuits and Opus Dei may come to play in Gomez’s case.

    • Let’s see: The Jesuit CINO university LMU is in his archdiocese and continues to ignore the Magisterium; the LA Religious Education Congress still continues its heretical way; immigration seems to be his prime concern; and the schools, gay priests, etc, continue to run amok.
      He’ll probably be made a cardinal by this pope.

      • Anonymous says:

        Archbishop Gomez is a great improvement over his predecessor. Pity that he does not allow teaching of Latin in St. John’s Seminary as yet. But these are difficult times.

  11. St. Christopher says:

    Why is Cardinal McCarrick featured with a picture? He was a wretched Cardinal of Washington, DC. Now, of course, McCarrick seems to have become a hybrid Muslim, with his constant reference to, and praise of, Allah, and citation ot Islamic religious phrases. It was reported that McCarrick recently said that the Islamic phrase, “In the name of God, the Merciful and Compasssionate” in the Quoran is essentially the same thing as the Cathoilc prayer, “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. He continues to fill the airwaves with his ecumenical nonsense, as well. Abp. Cupich is at least the clerical brother of Cardinal McCarrick (and, of course, to Cardinal Bernardin, who is beloved by all Catholic Liberals, including, it is assumed, by the Vatican). These appointments are tragic due to their permanence, their influence (among seminarians, priests, and laity), and their voting on the next Pope. Cupich should not be a priest, much less a Archbishop and never a Cardinal. But, then, the Vatican will do as it pleases, and to the devil with the Faithful. Catholic resistance to Abp. Cupich must be strong, and consistent. Stop, stop, stop giving money to such people: donate funds to Catholic charities (that is the good ones that do not give money to abortion or homosexual causes). And find some Catholic leaders that act like men, who voices have actually changed, and who are willing to “gird their loins” and do battle for the Faith, rather than primp and posture to get prime media coverage, and be invited to choice parties and events. Be like St. Athanasius, who said (paraphrasing), “They may have the buildings, but we have the Faith.”

    • I suspect that the real St. Christopher would have been more civil, Don’t you?

      • Bob One – let the TRUTH prevail.

        Mt 7:15; Mt 18:6; 1 Cor 8:10-13.

        CCC: ” 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized.
        It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
        Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others.
        Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.”

        • CCC: ” 2467 Man tends by nature toward the truth. He is obliged to honor and bear witness to it:
          It is in accordance with their dignity that all men, because they are persons . . . are both impelled by their nature and bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth.
          They are also bound to adhere to the truth once they come to know it and direct their whole lives in accordance with the demands of truth.”

      • Bob One, real saints hate mortal sin.
        And they love truth.

      • Bob One, when hit with Truth like St. Chris did above why do liberals then go to the default position of asking for civility when exposed to uncomfortable truths. We have a Church in shambles, pathetic shepherds, our Brethren in the Middle East being wiped out, and you demand “civility” instead facing the facts of what is going on…

        • Anonymous says:

          When Truth is capitalized it means Jesus Christ.
          I do not wish to argue but are you able to see that only one sentence in St. Christopher’s post is factual? The rest are his opinions and his exhortations.

          • St. Christopher says:

            “Anonymous”: what exactly is your point? In fact, little anyone says, except to embrace the Mad Hatter Tea Party that is the present Church, will satisfy all you Liberal types (that yearn for a lifting of all prohibitions regarding sexual ethics). In fact, the post is loaded with factual bases, including: (1) Cardinal McCarrick often makes loving reference to the Quran, and the ones referred to here were made at a press conference on September 10th; and (2) the letter of St. Athanasius to his flock is well reported. He lived during the 4th century and refuted the Arian Heresy. Finally, Abp. Cupich did order his priests not to congregate and pray outside of abortion clinics. How absurd was that (except to those that like the right to have sex without consequence, which is what abortion is about, that and the disproportionate killing of minority pre-born. Liberals, like those that post here, are supremely lazy. You all repeat the same mantra: “prove it” when no proof is possible (for example, how can you “prove” that Jesus will consign some bishop or other to Hell for his many offenses against the Faith, even though a Believer knows that He will), or “no facts, just opinion” (when, in fact, the opinions are based on statements, works, and other factual events). You wish only for power and destruction of anything that prevents your perversions. Go ahead, do whatever it is that you want.

          • Anonymous says:

            St. Christopher, my point: I was simply asking Canisius if he could distinguish fact from opinion.
            I really did nothing to earn your baseless insults.
            Try being a Christian.

          • Anonymous – for the teachings of Christ and His Church, you MUST get your information from:
            1) A Catholic Bible;
            2) The “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.

            Yes, Jesus is truth.
            GOD/JESUS stated: “Go and sin no more”, and “repent”, and that “few will be saved”.
            For God’s Mercy (forgiveness), one can not choose to continue living in the State of Mortal Sin.

            CCC: ” 2092 There are two kinds of presumption.
            Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high),
            or he presumes upon God’s almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit). “

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, you may want to take Fr. Bob B’s advice. Your dismissal of it could be misconstrued as obstinacy.

          • Anonymous says:

            Dave, no kidding! What are you presuming?
            What is Christian or Catholic about those other posts?

          • St. Christopher says:

            “Anonymous:” Your concept of “being a Christian” is, again, a typical response from a Liberal Shouter, trying to avoid looking at the truth by demanding “respect” for the non-respectable. For too long you and others demand freedoms not possible to be achieved within the present Catholic Church. Unfortunately, many, many bishops have given the entirely wrong view that all is possible in the “name of love” and that “being pastoral” means that you can never tell someone what they are doing is morally evil and may gain them an eternity in Hell. Catholic “charity” is the key to Christianity. And, this means telling the truth about what is good and proper in the Faith and life. No one knows what Jesus will ultimately say, or do, to anyone upon death; but no figure in the Bible mentioned the reality of Hell more than Jesus and how difficult it was to attain salvation. Remember a couple of things: (1) ” . . . with fear and trembling work out your salvation”. Philippians 2:12 (DRV); and (2) “But I will shew you whom you shall fear: Fear him who after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” Luke 12:5 (DRV). Good luck.

          • Anonymous says:

            St. Christopher, I ain’t a liberal. You lie about me and you lie about the Catholic bishops.
            Are you even Catholic?
            What does this have to do with hell?
            Have you completely gone off the rails?

          • Anonymous says:

            Dave, i hate to break this to you, but no authentic catholic believes only what is in the bible and the catechism. The catechism is simply one statement of a part of our faith. Turning it into some kind of final last statement of our faith belittles us and our faith.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You nailed it again, St. Christopher. Thank you. I wonder if the Anonymous spin cyclists understand that they only underscore your call to ‘understand the Faith as it has always been taught’ with every one of their posts.

            That is no doubt why our chancery visitor advised them to cease and desist.

            God bless and keep on keeping the Faith!

          • Anonymous says:

            I don’t know why my post didn’t show up. The other anonymous posters are dealing with other issues.
            I think people here are just plain mean.

        • Anonymous says:

          a reference to “ecumenical nonsense” is not truth in any manner, and is just one indication that little in ‘saint’ christopher’s post has truth in it. quoting the Catechism lessons about truth to justify it is just ridiculous folly. If I say the sky is yellow and is filled with diamonds, then quote the catechism’s admonishments to truthtelling to justify my misstatements, I am only compounding my error.

  12. Fr. Richard Perozich says:

    Terminologies like un Christian, un Catholic, divisive, homophobic, hurtful, offensive, etc. are argument fallacies to distract the speaker from his point. In the case of divisive, remember that Jesus said, “I have come not to sow peace, but division.” He divides us from our old ways of thinking, from sin, and reunites us around himself and his truth to divide us from the world of power, possessions, and prestige, and unite us to Him. This is what St. Paul taught. This is why both were killed by the Romans, because Jesus and Paul taught freedom from control of earthly power to have true liberty in being under God’s authority.

    Jesus’ technique can be used by those faithful to him to divide us from sin and error; it can be used by the rich and powerful to divide us from faith and reunite us around a new pseudo gospel and new pseudo messiah: government, money, education, finance, social science, psychology, false religions.

    I’ll follow Jesus’ work to divide me from sin and error, yet still respect those granted earthly authority over me, but will be unable to walk with them if they walk away from Jesus and the truth of the Catholic church in its 2,000 year history.

    • Catherine says:

      Thank you Father Perozich!

      I wanted to find a beautiful quote of a saint or something that was relevant to express our entire family’s sincere gratitude to God for your vocation and also to you for your faithfulness. I thought I would simply search out Catholic Bible 101 and this is what I found…


      Catholic Bible 101 – Courageous Priests

      “During these dark ages that we live in, it is so wonderful to occasionally hear of a St. Paul-like priest or bishop. Courageous Priest is a great website that publishes these rare occurrences when a priest or a bishop puts his career and his life on the line by…SPEAKING OUT! The laity is clamoring for such priests and bishops to boldly speak Thee Truth, and to quit being politically correct in fear of “offending” a parishioner, the media, another faith, or politicians. This webpage will proudly link to Courageous Priests and The Orate Fratres and publicize these great men when they are filled with the Holy Spirit and, like St. Paul, proudly proclaim Thee Truth of the Catholic Church contained in the Holy Bible and The Catechism of the Catholic Church!”

      Father Perozich, How Providential to come across your name in this particular page where your courageous example is being used to teach and encourage the laity. Our entire family wants to express our heartfelt gratitude for all of our faithful priests. I also realize that you do always address (as you just did in your above post) the many different ways that we can sin and offend God. Thank you again Father Richard Perozich for boldly speaking the truth!

  13. Anonymous says:

    God separates the light from the darkness, the waters above the heavens from the waters below the heavens. the sea from the dry land.
    God separates the sheep from the goats.

  14. Father Karl says:

    The Catholic Church is SUPPOSED TO BE CONSERVATIVE, and TRADITIONAL (She is apostolic, and follows the oral and written traditions that have been handed down to Her). Morality and dogma are NOT supposed to change, as we are supposed to believe and practice what our grandparents and the saints believed and practiced. In past history, the liberals LEFT Holy Mother Church and started their own churches because they HATED everything about the Catholic Church (even calling her the ‘whore of Babylon). But today, the liberals are inside the Church and want to remake HER, not in Christ’s image, but in their own hideous and distorted image. To be a Catholic, one must be 100% Catholic, and NOT some fraction Catholic. To repeat what I said before, A Catholic is supposed to be conservative and traditional, NOT following the winds of change, but continuing on the apostolic course which Christ directed and began. If some think this is mean and nasty, well they are entitled to their erroneous opinion. But we who are active, practicing Catholics belong to the branch called THE CHURCH MILITANT, who are always to be on guard against Her enemies, both material and spiritual.

    • In fact, over the recent centuries, the church has been a bastion for “liberal” thought. It has fought for better working conditions, feeding the hungry, finding ways to eliminate poverty and homelessness, fighting for economic systems that don’t create lower economic classes, fighting for national borders to be fungible, ensuring that everyone has the ability to join and participate in labor unions, and the list goes on. I think the tea party would call that liberal in the U.S.. The church is counter-cultural in many respects. On the issue of contraceptives and abortion, same sex matters, however, it has remained steadfast in its beliefs which have been picked up by the right wing politicals. My observation then is that the church is not supposed to be conservative. It is supposed to be for the people, for poor, for the homeless, etc. In the U.S. that has become a liberal idea for some.

      • Bob One when will you ever learn “fighting for economic systems” you and the liberal hierarchy fail to understand that capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any government program ever did.

        fighting for national borders to be fungible,.. really you honestly believe that a nation does not have the right to secure it borders…this leads to a national suicide. Which we are currently undergoing. ala balkanization

        And no Bob One the Church does not offer a preferential option for the poor. It is people like you Bob One the so called shepherds living in their paid for residences who will condemn poverty and in the very same breath condemn the system and people who has lifted them out of it…

        • Canisius, we were just starting to agree on things, and then this! I didn’t say I supported all these things, only that they were the position of the church over the years. Having said that, let’s agree that Capitalism has done more to raise people out of the depths than any other system. But, it is now to the point of not working for the masses. Henry Ford said that he needed to pay his employees enough so they could afford to buy the cars the made. Today, unbridled capitalism is wonderful for the few at the top, but it is not centered on creating a vibrant middle class. The Walmart heirs have enough money to buy every home in Seattle and still have some left over. I would take six million average household incomes to equal their wealth. That is why the church is concerned about the economy. The number of homeless increases every day. That is why the church tries to feed them and end the causes of poverty. That is why Catholic Charities served over nine million people last year. With the exception of the sex related issues, all that the church stands for would be considered liberal by a lot of people.

    • Anonymous says:

      The Catholic Church is “conservative” where it is the Will of God for Her to be and “progressive” where it is the Will of God for Her to be. She is the Mystical Body of Christ. Jesus Christ is the Head of the Catholic Church.

  15. U.S. Catholic says:

    “Latino” cardinals (and archbishops and assorted hierarchy) belong in Latin America.

    • I fully agree.
      Any Bishop who discriminates against all Catholic AMERICAN citizens within his Diocese in favor of ILLEGALS should be sent to the Country of the illegals because that is where is heart is.

    • Anonymous says:

      And “Irish” Cardinals belong in Ireland? I’m pretty sure Burke isn’t native american. Cordileone belongs in Italy?

  16. There are certain things which Magister either doesn’t know or simply omits. I’d say it’s a bit of both. First, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia still have Cardinal-archbishop emeriti under the age of 80. There is an unwritten rule that there be no two cardinals under 80 per diocese, so at best Archbishop Gomez and Archbishop Chaput could be elevated to cardinal in 2017, while Archbishop Cupich could be elevated in 2019. Second, there is a limit to the number of cardinals in the College of Cardinals. The current limit, unless Pope Francis decides to change it, is at 144 members, of which 120 are voting members in an eventual conclave. The current College of Cardinals consists of 210 members, 113 of which are voting members. Third, Pope Francis has continually made calls against a culture of “clericalism.” This is why Pope Francis stipulated that there would be no new monsignors (an honorary title for a priest) under the age of 65. In conclusion, Sandro Magister’s articles should come with a disclaimer that reads: “As an Italian, I tend to sensationalize and try to find the ‘story within the story’ that may or may not exist.”

  17. It is likely that no archdiocese will get a red hat so long as one already exist who is under 80 years old. Then, the reality of the numbers sets in. St. Louis no longer has a Cardinal. Detroit has likely seen its last. Miami and Atlanta are being talked about because they are growing so fast. Then, too, we must consider that the U.S. only represents six percent of the worlds Catholics. It is likely that most of the new Cardinals will come from the southern hemisphere where the growth is. For example, the archbishop of Kinshasa and a small diocese in Haiti received red hats at the last conclave. LA is a huge diocese. It should have another red hat asap, but who know about the others?

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.