The Washington Post article on Cardinal McCarrick is now up and while I was quoted accurately, I’m not very happy with it.
Domenico Bettinelli, editor of Catholic World Report, a conservative monthly in Salem, Mass., said yesterday that in his view, McCarrick is part of “a passing generation of bishops” who took “a soft-pedal approach where it’s more important to not offend people than to stand firmly for the truth and the church’s teaching.”
McCarrick “has given long service to the church, is obviously dedicated to the church and is doing what he thinks is right for the church,” Bettinelli said. “But it would be a service to the church to bring in a younger man with more energy to renew the faith.”
I didn’t really mean “energy.” By all accounts, Cardinal McCarrick has plenty of energy. What I meant was vigor in the faith, a dynamic orthodoxy and a strong backbone to stand up against heteorodoxy and the challenges that face the Church. In my opinion, McCarrick doesn’t have that.
Contrary to what another blogger claims, I do not want the schismatic Richard Williamson in DC. I am on record as saying I don’t consider myself a Traditionalist, although I am not hostile to those who prefer the Tridentine rite. I’m certainly not a schismatic. To claim that I support Williamson is a bald-faced lie and slander because I never said such a thing. (I’m not linking to his comments because they are petty and designed to elicit a reaction. Linking to them will only feed his oversized ego. If you’re really interested, a Google search will have to do.)
Anyway, the man I’d like to see in DC would be in the mold of Archbishops Burke or Chaput or Bishops Sheridan, Olmsted, Vigneron, or one of the other recent appointments who’ve shown themselves to be a new breed of man. I suppose Bishop Bruskewitz would be way too much to hope for in DC. I’m afraid he’s destined to spend the rest of his days in Lincoln because of his very strong and outspoken manner of being a bishop, which is good for Lincoln, but too bad for the rest of us.
Amy Welborn commented most sensibly, I think … McC’s not infirm – he’s a known commodity – why not save up the energy to fight the battles where they’re needed – what’s 2 more years… except that 2 more years will bring more candidates to light …
He’s a mediahound for one, but that doesn’t exactly set him apart. The Newark archdiocese was not only left a dogmatic mess after he left, it’s also rife with homosexuality.
The most visible problem is the dust-up over pro-abortion Catholic politicians last year in which he clearly mischaracterized the letter Cardinal Ratzinger sent and we wouldn’t have known if someone in Rome hadn’t leaked the actual letter.
There are also other complaints, but I have neither evidence nor firsthand acquaintance with those making the complaints so I will not say more.
Dogmatic mess? Rife with h—————-y? How is that different from Boston consule H. E. Law?
Yet he was never singled out for demonization until well after the ‘situation’ broke.
I don’t know enough about the ‘mischaracterization’ to comment.
Just asking, that’s all. The only thing I’ve gleaned from McC’s public demeanor is that he’s pretty middle of the road get-along go-along … not that this is the ‘dream’ incumbent, as Amy said….
I seriously doubt that Cardinal McCarrick would lie about something as big and as obvious as whether he can stay or go for the next 2 years. It’s true that he is too soft when it comes to certain issues and he will never correct anyone but he is also one of the kindest people I’ve ever met and he’s absolutely fantastic with young people and catechumens.
… and I hardly think this is a ‘vindication’ of H. E. McC. as some are claiming…
The fact is there are 8 vacant sees in the USA, the oldest vacancy nearing 21 months, not to mention a lot of vacancies worldwide.
I think BXVI has an awful lot on his shoulders right now, and we shouldn’t be too quick to judge everything from our local perspective. Again, a cardinal – a middleOfTheRoader – not a boatRocker – inGoodHealth – from Rome’s perspective, this is not a battle to be fought now. Besides, Wash. DC is really not a ‘major’ see (.5 mil catholics – has no suffragans beside the Virgin Islands), and is only an occasional media focus as the US capitol.
I didn’t say he’d “lie” but if he did what he did with Ratzinger’s letter, then it would still be misleading.
Charles, if you don’t know anything about the incident, that’s what that link up there is for. It explains it all.
DC is a major see in that it is the capital of the US and the entire pro-abort Catholic politician issue sits squarely in his lap. All of the federal ones are potentially going to Communion in his diocese and he needs to be dealing with it.
DC may not be the biggest, but it is one of the most visible. Believe me when I say it gets more media focus than you’re aware of.
Okay, not “lie” but after the big stink over the communion issue surely he’d be nuts to fudge the exact wording of the Pope’s intention again. Cardinal McCarrick is a lot of things but he’s not nuts.
One more thing, good luck with the Washington Post quote. I hope they don’t twist your words around.
Cdl. McCarrick was not a bad choice for Newark at the time. He could be seen as a moderating influence after the reign of his predecessor, the famously liberal Abp. Peter Gerety. The latter had given the Church the “Renew” program and approved the catechetical text “Christ Among Us”—both of which had become the subjects of doctrinal interventions.
What is it about Pope Benedict that makes you all think he will be some kind of “super Pope”? I think we need to face reality here, St. Malachy’s prophecies, notwithstanding. I view Benedict XVI as an opposite of Bl. John XXIII. Just as the latter was noted for his taking the Church in a more ‘liberal’ direction, I think we can expect the former to make his mark of *beginning* the process of taking the Church back in a more ‘traditional’ direction. But just as John XXIII didn’t do the complete work of liberalizing the Church, neither will Benedict XVI bring her back to tradition fully. Expect the successor to do that. Why is this? Well, John XXII wasn’t completely dedicated to liberalism, and Benedict XVI obviously isn’t another Pius XII.
And before anyone writes this post off as nt_id>
moneill76@hotmail.com
69.143.8.252
2005-09-07 06:38:19
2005-09-07 10:38:19
As someone who lives in D.C., trust me when I say that this Cardinal is not worthy of his esteemed position. When he first came to D.C., he very candidly told his priests that he only does two things well—vocations and fund raising. I will give him credit for the latter. He is a superb financial administrator and nobody brings in the cash like Ted McCarrick; however, he does it by glad-handing and back-slapping people like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. This is a man who gave Ted Kennedy an award for his support of Catholic schools! Apparently the Cardinal didn’t see the irony of such an award in light of Kennedy’s support of the murder of the very same children who might have attended those schools. He also has no problem giving the Body of Christ to an unapologetic and public apostate like John Kerry! He is a liturgical train wreck and is visibly more comfortable at fund rasing galas than praying the Mass. While not a shameless heretic like our sheperd in L.A., he is none the less a gravely incompetent bishop outside of his fund raising responsibilities. He smiles all the time and is about as phony as they come. I was so happy when I learned he was being put out to pasture, but now that he is staying I am crestfallen. On a positive note, he doesn’t actively seek to disrupt conservative Catholics. The Cardinal loves the status quo and hates any controversy. So long as he looks good in the Washington Post, he will generally leave devout Catholics alone. Some seem to think this fact alone is the new standard for a “middle of the road” bishop, but I think we have lost our way if McCarrick is the standard for moderate bishops. Other than rasing money, he has done nothing in Washington. What a squandered opportunity!
Restoration,
I also live in the DC diocese, and I’m no fan of our Cardinal. However, I would have to disagree with you – he says he does two things well – vocations and fund raising, and he does do both of them well. Vocations in this diocese are actually very good, with a large number of young, orthodox seminarians in the pipeline. I know this from first hand experience, as I’m a member of a regional vocations committee in Mont. Co., and we have many dealings with the seminarians and those promoting vocations in the diocese. Cardinal McCarrick is very supportive of our efforts, and he is very instrumental in helping push vocations.
I have a number of criticisms of him as well, but at least he knows his strengths.
Perhaps the possibility exists that there is a simple reason why Archbishop McCarrick is not leaving his post immediately. It could be because in most cases, bishops do not leave the post they retire from until a replacement is chosen. That is standard operating procedure. It may take up to two or even three years before a replacement is found.
The Washington Post reported on the diocesan press release today. Sure seems like it is a ‘done deal.’ Dom’s quote in the Post article was both diplomatic and direct about the need for fresh blood.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/06/AR2005090601843.html
“It could be because in most cases, bishops do not leave the post they retire from until a replacement is chosen.”
When we were switching in Halifax a few years ago, the see was left empty. Burke retired and we had, if I recall correctly, nearly two years with a diocesan administrator until Prendergast.
Francis:
I don’t doubt that you may be getting some good vocations, but I would question what influence the Cardinal really has on the process. Mount St. Mary’s, EWTN, Dominican House of Studies—yes, but not the Cardinal. I mean, honestly, unless men are inspired by great fund raisers or apologists for politicians who openly favor abortion, what man would be inspired to join the priesthood based on the influence of Cardinal McCarrick? I think other forces are far more influential. We are talking about a man without enough courage and backbone to deny Holy Communion to the most rabidly pro-abortion presidential candidate in history who posed as a Catholic throughout the campaign. It is scary to think of the seminarians who are inspired by such repugnant behavior from a Cardinal Archbishop of the Catholic Church.
Good afternoon,
Re: the claim you want Williamson in DC, I did a google search for “Williamson” on your site, and no results were returned. (This post hasn’t been indexed by google yet.) I didn’t try the CWR site.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Williamson+site:bettnet.dyndns.org&btnG=Google+Search
in contrast, searching for “McCarrick” returns this
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=lang_en&c2coff=1&q=McCarrick+site:bettnet.dyndns.org&btnG=Search
O/T
My God, doesn’t Fr. Berrigan in that ad on the left look like he’s been dug up after a long stay undreground? It almost makes me feel sorry for the old lefty.
As for the good Cardinal, have you noticed how more than a few of the high churchman that wandered off the reservation have wandered back since BXVI became pope? The way the Church is set up, a strong hand at the tiller makes a lot of difference.
Fr. Berrigan is 84 years old and has been suffering from cancer in recent years. He looks okay to me.
Well at least I know one person who would think that I’m hansom! :^)
Dom, I think I know the ‘blogger of whom you speak. He seemed to want to start a “war of words” with you in a previous post. While I enjoy his ‘blog as well, I am still learning his writing style and philosophical background.
As for the good Cardinal, have you noticed how more than a few of the high churchman that wandered off the reservation have wandered back since BXVI became pope? The way the Church is set up, a strong hand at the tiller makes a lot of difference.
Honestly, John, I hadn’t noticed. Which churchmen did you have in mind?
It’s going to take a while to overcome 25+ years of failure to govern.
Dom,
Williamson would be great as a prelate from San Fran Sicko. That city and he would deserve each other.
As for DC, all of your suggested candidates would be terrific for that city as well as for mine… Atlanta.
Re: the Berrigan ad; I first looked at it and thought it was a Catholic Charities donation site with a picture of some poor aged man.
Even as a poor, aged, sick man, I can’t work up any sympathy for him.
“I didn-Cardinal Ratzinger said something and it turned out not to be what Ratzinger said? Yeah, last summer when McCarrick said Ratzinger told him that it was up to each bishop to decide whether to deny Communion to pro-abortion politicians and that wasn’t at all what Ratzinger said.
Now we have McCarrick saying that Ratzinger/Benedict told him he’s staying on past retirement, but we have heard no announcement out of the Vatican on this. Granted, you don’t usually hear about non-replacements, but if he did it once…
]]>
5752
2005-09-06 14:52:32
2005-09-06 18:52:32
open
open
is_he_doing_it_again
publish
0
0
post