It’s looking like the Boston Globe‘s article over a week ago about a new archbishop for Boston was somewhat flawed and that an appointment will come later rather than sooner. Another Tuesday come and gone and no new archbishop. My current theory is that the story was an effort to smoke out some leads, to shake the tree so that someone who does know something would come forward and say, “No, no, you’ve got it wrong. This is what’s happening.” Of course, the fact that Wuerl was prominently mentioned could also mean that Pittsburgh and the impending vacancy in Philadelphia play a role in this mystery as well.
I get the sense that there was little bit of back-washing. Someone in the Church was able to advance his agenda and the Globe was able to advance its. I can’t say anymore than that.