After years of being mentioned for a promotion every time a bigger see opened up, Bishop Donald Wuerl of Pittsburgh has finally been asked to step up to the plate. Wuerl has been named archbishop of Washington, DC, to replace Cardinal Ted McCarrick.
McCarrick submitted his resignation last year as a matter of form upon reaching the age limit of 75, but said that Pope Benedict had told him he was going to stay on for several years. That surprised some people given the very public embarrassment of a few years ago when McCarrick apparently misrepresented the content of then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter to US bishops on how to deal with dissenting Catholic politicians. In any case, by this spring McCarrick had changed his tune and was saying that he expected to be cut loose by this summer. And so he has.
Controversy has followed McCarrick. A few strange rumors of personal misconduct followed him around, but most criticism centered around a penchant for loving the media a little too much and tolerating a liberal clerical elite in his dioceses.
Also, the infamous Bishop Joseph Imesch of Joliet, Illinois, has retired and been replaced by Bishop James Sartain of Little Rock, Arkansas. Who is Imesch? Yeah, that guy. Not sorry to see him retire. I don’t know anything about Sartain, but I hope for the sake of the Catholics of Joliet they get a clean sweep like Bishop Finn gave Kansas City.
Update: American Papist has a roundup of the coverage of the Wuerl appointment, including links to his books and some of his writings.
Let’s not forget Bp. Imesch’s other legacy: the pastoral letter on women’s concerns that seemed more interested in echoing secular feminism than in teaching Catholic doctrine. The NCCB rejected it after nine years of drafting, several revisions, and expressions of Vatican disapproval.
I just pray that Bishop Wuerl continues Cardinal McCarrick’s legacy of increasing solid orthodox vocations in the diocese. We are about to ordain 12 men here this month and I hope that trend continues!
BTW, Bishop Wuerl is actually being transferred to a smaller, not bigger, see. Of course, most will admit that DC is more influential than Pittsburgh on a national scale even if there are less Catholics here.
Francis: I meant bigger see in the sense of bigger exposure and recognition.
Eric: No replacement was named for Wuerl in Pittsburgh.
And it is reasonable to assume that Archbishop Wuerl will continue to allow the Indult at Old St Marys with the ‘62 Missal?
I hope so. If not there is going to be a major battle over this.
There was a “rumor” that Cardinal McCarrick really wanted to get rid of the Tridentine Rite there and slowly replace it with a liturgical chimera of the Novus Ordo and the 65 missal.
I realize that sounds a little kooky but nothng much surprises me anymore when it comes to the animosity towards the Tridentine Rite.
I’m just happy that the rumors of Chaput to D.C were NOT true!
Then enlighten us, Brigid, with the positive things that Wuerl has done.
I had not had a chance to do the research about Wuerl’s time in Pittsburgh yet, but if you’re ready please tell us.
There has been a flourishing T-Mass in Pittsburgh for years at St. Boniface church, so I wouldn’t expect any change to the Latin Mass celebrations in Washington.
I believe that Bishop Sartain invited the FSSP into the Little Rock diocese, with responsibility for a Classical Mass community in Mountain Home, Arkansas.
Bishop Wuerl is well known in Rome. As a priest, he co-wrote a well-received catechism (“The Teaching of Christ”), and he worked in Rome in the ‘70s for the Congregation of the Clergy.
His first episcopal assignment was a tough one: JP2 sent him to be an auxiliary in Seattle, reportedly to rein in the idiosyncrasies of Abp. Hunthausen. After what is said to have been an eighteen-month impasse, Bp. Wuerl stepped down from his post in Seattle, and was brought back east to govern Pittsburgh.
Bp. Wuerl attended the recent synod as one of the four American delegates and was chosen as a relator for one of the English language groups; he also was the only US bishop to participate in preparing the post-synodal propositions for the Pope. He also was brought to Rome in 2005 to teach new bishops about diocesan administration.
The PPG has these and other points in an article about 2005 job rumors for the bishop.
Sartain is an excellent choice for Bishop of Joliet. I have known him since he was a newly ordained priest in Memphis. He will quietly and gently but firmly clean up the mess made by Imesch in Joliet. I do not envy the work ahead of him at all but know that he will be a great job there. I’m a bit surprised, however, that he wasn’t given an archdiocese. But, he’s still relatively young, so he has plenty of time for that to happen eventually.
As for Washington, well, it could have been a lot worse. If anything, Wuerl is the opposite of McCarrick in style. A quiet scholarly type, Wuerl is not going to rock the boat in Washington. He’s waited a long time for the chance for a red hat, and, this time, I think he’s finally going to get one. The question is whether or not he will get it while McCarrick is still living. O’Malley got it in Boston while Law was/is still alive; Bevilacqua got it while Krol was still alive; Baum got it in Washington while O’Boyle was still alive.
The worst thing that could happen to Wuerl would be for him to travel the paths of Archbishops John May and William Donald Borders, both of whom were ordinaries of traditionally cardinalatial sees but were passed over for red hats because of their questionable orthodoxy at times. While I am not aware that Wuerl’s orthdoxy has been questioned, I do know that he seemed to be a bit “out of favor” after his appointment as Bishop of Pittsbugh.
I haven’t followed Weurl’s career too closely. There are a lot of American bishops so it’s difficult to know each one very well.
I know that I disagree with his take on how to deal with pro-abortion Catholic politicians.
I also get the sense from others in the Pittsburgh area that Wuerl is one of those bishops who give every outward sign of orthodoxy and may indeed be personally orthodox themselves, but it doesn’t always get further than the reception area outside his office. Kind of like Law’s reputation for orthodoxy and conservatism in Boston.
I’m beginning to think that the Pope does not agree with our view that communion should be denied to pro-abort politicans, even though as cardinal he said so. Pope Ratzinger has demonstrated this new line of reasoning with the appointments of bishops, like Wuerl. Watch the NCR. If they like him, we are in for another McCarrick. Wuerl won’t rock the boat and thus he will be known as a status quo bishop. Nothing too drastic and nothing out of the ordinary. Let’s also face it: if McCarrick likes him, it is because Wuerl thinks like him, hence, we have Wuerl proposing a 2/3 majority to deny pro-abort politicans communion.
I am beginning to think that my support for enforcing the church’s canon against pro-abort politicans is no longer mainstream of Pope Benedict’s thinking process.
What do you think?
Don’t take McCarrick’s endorsement at face value. He always says he likes everyone in front of the cameras. He’s the “likeable, affable” bishop.
the man who re-appointed him clearly didn’t think so
“Clearly”? (My right eyebrow raises involuntarily.) Non sequitur, Professor.
anybody who reads the letter knows that McCarrick got it totally right
Sure. And, as that expert in the DV Code says, “any Aramaic scholar” will tell you the word “companion” in the “Gospel of Mary Magdalene” means such and such…
It must be the week for bluffing and historical revisionism.
Coming soon: The Theodore Code.
McCarrick’s been retired. Woohoo! Now let’s retire a few more of these old tired guys. I’m glad to see him go.