Members: Login | Register | Member List
Previous: The VOTF solutionNext: The "Vile" File
Back to main
The Globe‘s speculations on a new archbishop
The Boston Globe thinks it knows who the next archbishop of Boston will be and that he will be appointed soon. I’ve said before that I think the appointment will come early to mid-summer because Bishop Lennon has been delaying big decisions that a soon-to-come archbishop would want control over. The article agrees with me.
And if the announcement is to come this Tuesday then all the affected parties already do indeed know who the next archbishop will be. But the Globe probably doesn’t know any more than you or I do who the next archbishop is. They say that it’s likely Bishop Wuerl of Pittsburgh. They make it clear that they don’t like him: He engages in a “top-down” management style. Good for him. How many well-run large organizations do you know that have a “bottom-up” management?
Bishop Wuerl has done good things in Pittsburgh and had to deal with tough cases of closing churches and laicizing problem priests. If the three choices are the three listed by the Globe—Archbishop Harry Flynn of Minnesota, Archbishop Edwin O’Brien of the Military Archdiocese, and Bishop Wuerl—I’ll take Bishop Wuerl.
I’m still skeptical of the details provided by the paper’s sources, and the reasoning behind the apparent choices is pure speculation, but I agree that a decision on a new archbishop isn’t far away. For one thing, very little progress has been made in settlement talks with victims’ lawyers and the Vatican will want that taken care of right away. And there are other issues that need to dealt with too, like parish consolidation and the like. We’ll see and stay tuned because I’ll post the info as soon as I get it.
By the way, the Vatican usually announces new American appointments at 6 am Eastern time, and I’ll have the info up soon after that.
-->
COMMENTS
He sounds ideal. However, he’s pooh-poohing the claim as baseless speculation.
Posted by Domenico Bettinelli on 06/8/03 at 09:29 AM Joe’s description, and what I’ve learned about Bishop Wuerl, has got me hoping, that’s for sure.
(Not only that, but weeks ago I made a bet with a fellow parishioner that Wuerl will be picked for Boston.)
So I’m praying that Bishop Wuerl’s “speculation” comment isn’t an outright denial. I mean, it really _is_ speculation on the Globe’s part at this point. And he didn’t call it “baseless.“
I’d like to see Bishop Wuerl appointed.
For the good of the archdiocese.
(Okay, for the good o’ my wallet, too.)
Posted by Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Comments are being moderated. After you submit your comment it could take up to a couple hours, but usually only a few minutes, before it will appear. Thank you for your patience. If you have any questions, you may contact Domenico Bettinelli.
