The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionCardinal kills resolution to be nice to bishops
by Eugene Cullen Kennedy on Jan. 13, 2011
I started the year with a pseudo-noble promise to be more understanding and supportive of bishops, somewhat in the spirit of my father’s frequent advice about criticizing others: “Leave the poor fellows alone; they’re doing the best they can.” He, however, did not use the word “fellows.”
Then NCR’s John Allen issues an interview whose headline describes Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George as “the U.S. bishops’ thinker-in-chief,” asserting that, although New York’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan, George’s successor as their president, “is now the face and voice of the U.S. bishops … George is still their brain.”
Among the many encounters that convinced me that his is not the keenest crozier at the conclave, his first meeting with my wife, psychiatrist Sara Charles, stands out. His very first words to her were: “I’ve looked into your book” -- Authority: The Most Misunderstood Idea in America -- “and I’ll tell you where you’re wrong.”
“It’s too Jungian,” George began, but my wife cut him off: “There is nothing Jungian in it. It’s based on the work of the Catholic philosopher, Yves Simon.”
“It is?” the startled George replied but did not wait for an answer.
My sense of his general openness to the world of ideas has been reinforced many times but perhaps never more tellingly than in his charge to a large group of Chicago priests last year that Robert McClory, the late Tim Unsworth, and I, “hate the church.”
George warned that if any of his hearers repeated this judgment, he would deny that he ever made it.
This is on a par with the deep thinking that inspired him to say to Judge Ann Burke, then on the bishops’ committee to look into the sex abuse scandal that broke in 2002, “Why are you trying to destroy the church?”
He didn’t wait for an answer then either.
So exactly what kind of thinking is George doing for the body of the American bishops, most of whom are, in fact, doing the best they can in the difficult circumstances of our times?
George’s responses to Allen are instructive. Asked about his own achievements in his three year term as head of the bishops, he replied: “I don’t know if I was able to move the ball …”
Asked about “conversations” on the role of the bishops -- one of his favorite concepts -- he replied: “It depends on where you start.…” George likes the idea that bishops “are taking possession of their own vocation in the Church.”
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
His clear thoughts on the American scene are also on display when asked about Faithful Citizenship, the bishops’ document on Catholic civic obligations. George said: “I don’t know that it worked well and therefore I don’t know what its future is.”
About the media, whose coverage of the sex abuse scandal he has criticized, George now says, “It’s hard for me to judge.” Still, he complains that the media’s story hasn’t “changed in fifteen or twenty years when in fact the response of the Church has changed mightily.”
So you think the last eight years have vindicated the policies the bishops adopted at Dallas? Did the cardinal pause, one wonders, before replying, “It’s hard to say.”
The bishops, he claims, need a “more nuanced response” to sex abusers, but -- ignoring the fact that on his own watch the abusive Chicago priest Daniel McCormack was reassigned to a parish where he abused more children -- George says a refined regulation would not include “putting them [sex abusers] back….It’s too dangerous.”
George is not exactly cutting intellectual notches in the thicket when, asked about bishops’ accountability, he responds that “when you get beyond the sexual activity and into the governance, where’s the accountability for that?” Got that?
The cardinal concludes, like a man who really believes that he has done a bang-up job with abusers and their victims: “I don’t know what more people would want to be done…”
Allen suggests that many Catholics would like to see Cardinal Law-like resignations from bishops who covered up or reassigned sex abusing priests.
George responds that Law -- who, as his great patron put him in line to become archbishop of Chicago as soon as he heard that Cardinal Bernardin had a fatal illness -- “went into exile.” I guess so, but remaining on six powerful Roman congregations, being in charge of a prestigious basilica and living in splendid apartments does not sound like Elba to most people.
Allen gives him an opportunity to unveil the finely honed edge of his thinker-in-chief’s mind on bishops’ accountability.
“It’s very hard,” George avers, “to know what shape it should take.”
George seems enthusiastic in noting that the newly embraced vocation of the bishops means that “the power to govern means the power to punish.”
Asked if he was surprised by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan’s recent election as president of the U.S. bishops’ over then-vice president Tucson Bishop Gerald Kicanas, thereby breaking the conference’s tradition of selecting its outgoing vice-president as its new president, George cuts right to the chase: “Yes and no.”
George retires next year and he would like to spend time hearing confessions where, and here comes that word again, “the conversations…are the most important conversations on the face of the planet.”
“I like to study,” the cardinal continues, “and there are a lot of things I’d like to read that I never have. That may sound somewhat self-indulgent, but I’d like to read things I could share with others in some capacity…”
Your witness. We have no further questions, but I do have to rethink a resolution.
[Eugene Cullen Kennedy is emeritus professor of psychology at Loyola University, Chicago.]
| Editor's Note: We can send you an e-mail alert every time Kennedy's column, Bulletins from the Human Side," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow directions: E-mail alert sign-up. If you already receive e-mail alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add Kennedy to your list. |
Thank you, thank you, thank
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Gene. Resolutions are meant to be broken.
Kris (John. '65) Neufeld
Thank you for evaluating
Thank you for evaluating Cardinal George's interview with Allen. I read the interview and tried to understand where he was coming from without being too critical. I got hung up on his power to govern. Even Pope Benedict XVI indicated in his published interview, that the only power to govern was the power the faithful give church leaders. Cardinal George does not understand who we are as intelligent faithful Catholics. What a shame!
George likes the idea that
George likes the idea that bishops “are taking possession of their own vocation in the Church.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only way the bishops take "possession" of their own vocation and their own DIOCESE is to end the principle that the episcopate owes its very origins, its raison d'etre, its authority from the apostle Peter and his successors.
If these guys can't even qualify as "employees" of the Vatican, what do they owe Pope Benedict who suddenly, if the pope's lawyers are to be believed, doesn't even qualify as their employer? Other than joint service to the building up of the Church the Church as shepherds and collaborators in spreading the Kingdom.
Terms which suggest the cardinal archbishop of Chicago still deludes himself in thinking his apostolate is rooted in the Carolingian Empire, or a system of lords and vassals rooted in medieval Europe continues to be disturbing signs. Where did Cardinal George put his cappa magna,or is he just one of many train bearers for Cardinal Burke?
Their continuing silence, defense of the status quo ante Vatican II, and the hierarchical mindset in general which the USCCB exhibits regularly, strikes many as just another chorus of "Give Me That Old Time Religion". A tune for drowning out the cries of Father Karl Rahner's "Suffering Church", the admonitions of Fr. Kung, the countless members of the "Presbyterate of the Faithful", and the visions of so many theologians who warned us, but were silenced and repeatedly pummeled down through the years by cardinal Ratzinger and his boss, John Paul II.
"...the only power to govern
"...the only power to govern was the power the faithful give church leaders?" Are you aware of church history, including the current history of John Paul II and Benedict XVI? If the "faithful" have anything to say about church governance, then why are there no "faithful" participating in papal conclaves? Why aren't the "faithful" choosing their own parish clergy from a roster of background-approved list of married and women priests? Why aren't the clergy and "faithful" of each diocese electing their own bishops as in the Episcopal Church? Why is the Vatican still allowed to excommunicate "faithful" members of the church just because they differ in beliefs? Where's the freedom of religion and conscience proclaimed by Vatican II? We are not "intelligent faithful" when we submit to people like Franis George and Josef Ratzinger! Since Constantine the Great took over the Christian Church, to this day, there has been no "power of the faithful" in the Catholic Church!
Gene - you neglected to
Gene - you neglected to mention that he also told John Allen that " We [the bishops] have also trained lay people to watch for evidence of abuse." Gee thanks, you Eminence. We poor ignorant lay people would never have been able to recognize when our children were being abused by the priests that you are in charge of without your wonderful "training." How can we ever thank you!
Yes, you'd think the Cardinal
Yes, you'd think the Cardinal were offering the laity a concession rather than what they are due by virtue of their baptism and confirmation. When will these feudal princes stop living in the 14th century? I hope the influence of the Anglican Ordinariate will be the source of a long overdue democratization of decision making structures. I think a lot of latin rite Catholics will be making the switch and soon.
So you're resolution to be
So you're resolution to be nicer to bishops began with your defamation of the character of Bishop Dewayne by publishing what you knew were lies? Everyone is still waiting for that apology.
Anonymous on Jan. 13,
Anonymous on Jan. 13, 2011.
You stated:
"So you're resolution to be nicer to bishops began with your defamation of the character of Bishop Dewayne by publishing what you knew were lies? Everyone is still waiting for that apology."
-----------------------------------------------------
First of all---you must have never read a book written by Eugene Kennedy. It is filled with citations, documentation, etc. He does not just spout something off---and not have the evidence to validate his points.
I believe YOU owe Eugene Kennedy an apology.
The draconian methods utilitzed by Bishop Frank Dewane to 'rule' his diocese are well-documented by a number of people living in the Diocese of Venice. In addition, an article, written by another writer, appeared on other Catholic websites such as "Voice from the Desert" and on "Catholica" an Australian Catholic website.
The individual who wrote these articles, a person with excellent credentials, was able to cite from several reliable sources---the extent that Bishop Dewane is 'ruining a diocese' that had been a source of much goodness and blessing to others, under Bishop John Nevins.
Now, the Diocese of Venice is run like a satellite of the former Communist Bloc Nations. No wonder! Bishop Dewane, before he entered the seminary worked in Moscow, Russia for a few years for NBC Broadcasting. Also, Bishop Dewane has had next to no pastoral experience when he was appointed Auxilary Bishop of Venice to succeed Bishop John Nevins, the first bishop of the diocese formed in 1984.
Classic Eugene Kennedy!
Classic Eugene Kennedy! George is "not the keenest crozier at the conclave"! Once again, I admire your bravery and articulateness!! Keep up the fabulous work!!
Message to Cardinal George:
Message to Cardinal George: Please do not let the door hit you on the way out! Happy Retirement from
American Catholics who are counting the days till you gift the church with your departure. PSp Forget the reading,
but spend some time praying with the sex abuse victims you helped create by keepiing that sick priest in your
diocese.
Message to Eugene Cullen Kennedy: Yes, Please scrap the resolution! Keep up the good journalism.
And who's going to pay for
And who's going to pay for Francis George's luxurious retirement? And where would the door possibly hit him on his way out? Perhaps it might snag his "keenest crozier!"
If Francis George is or
If Francis George is or "thinker", we're in trouble. Chicago priests initially called him, "francis the corrector" and "the crazy professor". When he visits parishes, there is no warmth, just a perfunctory performance, carefully scripted and cold. Please, Cardinal, retire soon!
That bad eh? See what
That bad eh? See what happens when the People of God have NO SAY whatsoever in the selection of their shepherds. Under the Anglican Ordinariate just authorized, the parishes making up the Ordianariate in the UK will have to follow an Church of England model, in part, in administering their Anglican Use parishes. Too bad Rome thought everyone was asleep at the switch outside of Pope Benedict's Happy Days are Here Again policy for members of the Church of England.
All sorts of benefits for Anglicans converting to the Church, but just try to get some of those benefits for your Latin-rite, cradle-born Catholic diocese or parish,.e.g. bringing along the little woman and the kids to your ordination, and best of all: the bishops having to consult vestry-like boards on disposing of property, hiring, firing, training, and ordaining former Anglican clergy to the Catholic priesthood.
The stench of hypocisy and out-and-out unfairness from the Bavarian butcher's sausage factory, deceptive practices instituted in a dungeon of secrecy, and slavish adherence to winning ,at almost any price,protestants who make bashing gays and women ordinands as the hallmark of their loyalty to Peter's successor is an alarming indication of how extensive the RCC decay has advanced.
How much intellectual honesty
How much intellectual honesty does it take to rehash another man's article, interpret it to one's liking, and then thrash a tin soldier of his own making? Doesn't sound like the work of someone who's made a New Year's resolution. Sounds like someone in his dotage. Kennedy's real problems seem to be: 1) that George didn't think much of his wife's book, which appears to be a prerequisite only Kennedy knows about, 2)that Cardinal George did not allow him into his inner circle, the way Cardinal Bernardin did, and 3)that he's an old man and no one pays attention to him anymore. So he spends his time making fun of people who are players on the world stage, hoping his readers will believe he's one of them. There are many ways to abuse God's people, and writing this kind of drivel is one of them. - Estela.
Estela..."this kind of DRIVEL
Estela..."this kind of DRIVEL " sure got to you... what's your problem?
Estela, you need to get your
Estela, you need to get your head out of the sand. At least long enough to do a long and thorough study of the long and thorough church history you so blindly adore--but clearly display you do not know. "Drivel," just because you want a return to all the old, foreign, dead language pomp and blind submission to a bunch of abnormally celibate men? Remember "Catholic" celibacy includes chastity. Now we know that is too untrue in too many cases. Sexually abusing kinds means nothing to you, to your presumed Christian faith? Pray, tell us your creed, because in your comments it appears to have nothing at all to do with the Gospels.
No one pays attention to Dr.
No one pays attention to Dr. Kennedy anymore? Really? You paid attention enough to comment on his article. And look at the number of responses (both positive and negative) that follow his essays here. You may not agree with him, but try and keep in mind that he is a serious voice in the discussion of current Church issues.
Dr. Kennedy, your
Dr. Kennedy, your assessment of the George "interview" echoes that of many Catholics.
.
Churchill is reported to have said: "Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened." This bench of bishops have been tripping all over the truth of their own sins and malfeasance, and they too, quickly hurry off to "govern and punish" the pew peons as if nothing happened. It is also self-evident truth that bishops cannot give that which they have not got — to credibly ‘teach faith and morals’ requires first to have faith and morals… and to actually live them. Actions speak more loudly than words. Accountability and credibility matter.
.
A writer in another thread paraphrased the gospel words that 'the truth will make you free, but first it might stink up your space like a roadkill skunk'. The defensive cardinal seems oblivious to the ongoing prelate stench and is content to remain so.
.
I hear a lot of people
I hear a lot of people talking about Cardinal Law having cushy positions in Rome. Being a cardinal in charge of a Roman Basilica is like being an Admiral leading a boy scout troop. He can make what he likes of the job, and he apparently takes it seriously, but no one else does. And being a Member (not Prefect or Secretary) of a Roman Congregation is like having four shares of IBM at an annual shareholders' meeting. He can speak if he likes, and vote all he wants, but no one in Rome takes him seriously. It's just something for an old man to do while he waits for retirement. One day, we're all going to be in the same boat, and have time to reflect on all the mistakes we've made.
There is a difference between
There is a difference between Law and the "rest of us". If I fail completely at my job and am involved in a scandal, I would be fired without continuing support (paycheck). Law is still fully supported by the church. His "job" may not be exciting, but he doesn't have to worry about paying the bills.
That's because your "job" is
That's because your "job" is just a "job". Cardinal Law's is not a "job", it is a vocation, a calling from God. He has sacrificed all to follow that calling, he has sacrificed a family of his own, a career of his choosing, the power to follow his own destiny, to make his own choices, to go where he wills. He has given all that up for the sake of the Kingdom.
The cardinal made some mistakes to be sure, but there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that those mistakes were make out of malice or with evil intent. Rather those mistakes were made out of a sense of ignorance and perhaps a benign neglect. He simply did what everyone else was doing, he followed the crowd. How many of us do exactly the same thing on a day-to-day basis?
Maybe the Cardinal does not have to worry about "paying the bills" as you say, but you and I have the consolation of family, we have the consolation of knowing that, if we take a job we hate, we can look elsewhere; if we live in a town we hate, we can move; if we live in a house we hate, we can sell it. He can do none of those things, and he never has been able to. He does not have the consolation of family nor the ability to go where he will, in obedience he goes where he is told.
So much of the griping about Cardinal Law's situation sounds like jealous sniping to me, "he did this, and he get's a cushy job, etc." It also completely neglects all the good that Cardinal Law has done in his lifetime. It is an example of people forgetting that WE ARE ALL SINNERS and that each one of us will be required, at some point, to give account and are utterly dependent on God's mercy. I know that I have made many mistakes, some really big, and it would be all too easy to identify me only with those mistakes, rather than to weigh those mistakes in the balance alongside all the good things I have done and tried to do.
Thankfully, God is far more merciful and forgiving than some of the folks posting at NCR.
I must disagree. Not all
I must disagree. Not all vocations are church related. Couples with two workers must consider each other and can't necessarily follow their dreams in their careers. Parents must consider the needs of their children and sacrifice promotions for the sake of family. In some cases, parents' work requires them to miss special events in which their children are involved. Selling a house and moving is expensive and is not something everyone can afford to do. Sometimes we free lay people feel "stuck." Mistakes can cost a person a job. Would you want your doctor, electrician, auto mechanic etc. to make a mistake that resulted in poor health, an electrical fire, or an accident due to mechanical problems? Some mistakes are serious enough to merit loss of a career and require a worker to retrain for another. In cardinal Law's case, being involved in a cover-up of criminal activity should be enough to warrant his "firing". Yes we all make mistakes, but we must also accept the consequences.
Any one who has been to Rome,
Any one who has been to Rome, and have seen where various cardinals and curia officials live, would not write a comment like yours, Felicia. The fact is that Cardinal Law is living better that you probably are. This is John Paul II's gift to him. Any one of us should be so lucky to "reflect on all the mistakes we've made" in such a setting.
Any reservations I may have
Any reservations I may have had about Gene Kennedy's willingness to "say it like it is" were dispelled in reading this current viewpoint. A magnificent
critique of Cardinal George's attempt to be politically correct in responding to John Allen's questions.
When I read the interview in question, I found great difficulty in believing that George was being honest...as the U.S.Bishops' "Thinker-in-chief". To me, it was one more example of deception and evasion.
During Vatican II I learned of a bishop's irate response to the suggestion that the real "thinkers" at the Council were not so much the hierarchy but a
group of well-respected theologians, the likes of Fr's Karl Rahner, Hans Kung, Edward Schillebeecks (spelling?) and Bernard Haring. The irate bishop
protested: "We bishops are the true theologians!"
In light of the scandals today at the highest levels of the Church, I rest my case..
My gosh...maybe we could
My gosh...maybe we could crown Cardinal George as King of Evasion?? Not very intellectual when he can't even present nor defend his own thoughts/answers and when he's wrong (e.g., Jung/Simon), just moving on without further investigation or discussion...if it quacks like evasion and it walks like evasion, then it's probably false intellectualism!
What a hypocrite you are
What a hypocrite you are Gene!
"I started the year with a pseudo-noble promise to be more understanding and supportive of bishops"
No you didn't you started by slandering an innocent man bishop Dewane, and now with absolutely no credibility you attack more bishops? How in the world would you expect anyone to trust anything written by an unrepentant liar like yourself?
I think Rev Dr Kennedy's
I think Rev Dr Kennedy's column could start a parallel column to that EXCELLENT one he did a while ago where he remembered some of the GREAT bishops and cardinals from the last 30 years or so -- This one could be labeled, the Dullest Crosiers at the Conclave" and include such greats as Bishop Bruskewitz (Lincoln), Bishop from Tucson, Chaput from Denver (expelling child of lesbian parents from catholic school) and I'm sure you could add many more --
Dull or not, ye shall know
Dull or not, ye shall know the bishops by their silence. Which denotes consent and collaboration. What is most telling is the absence from any diocesan bishop in the United States of a modicum of outrage against the continuing coverup of priestly and episcopal wrongdoing ANYWHERE.
We have to learn of it from the public media, e.g. the "New York Times" "Huffington Post", "Der Spiegel", "Manchester Guardian", occasionally from the BBC etc. and NCR.
The army of rabid, right-wing Catholic websites ready to strike any criticism of this pope or any of his policies is just astounding. The constant drumbeat of returning the Church to the Happy Days of Pope Pius V and Leo X becomes more chilling each day. Shame on EWTN and shame on Telecare.
If John Allen is correct that
If John Allen is correct that Cardinal George is the U.S. Bishops' thinker-in-chief, then we are in real trouble. Based on his waffling answers, he comes across as a man who never wants to take a position he can't wiggle out of. If memory serves,judge Ann Burke accused him of lying when confronted about his behavior regarding a predatory priest.
Yeah ... He's a real thinker!
Cardinal Francis George must
Cardinal Francis George must have a great deal of pain in his arse from all the fence sitting he does. These quotes sound like they are from someone who has lost his way and isn't sure where he was going or where he has been, let alone where he IS going....ramblings from someone who is having a hard time giving a concrete answer.
In reading this comment---and
In reading this comment---and others written about Cardinal George, and in looking at his own comments about a number of issues---I would agree that he is not the sharpest needle in the pack.
But more than intelligence---is this comment by Kennedy, that George seems enthusiastic in noting that the newly embraced vocation of the bishops means that “the power to govern means the power to punish.”
No Cardinal, no arch/bishop is consecrated to be an ecclesiastical 'judge, jury and executioner.' They were commanded by Christ to be servant-leaders. They are to be shepherds. The official church became infested with acting like the civil government of the times---to act like civil lords. They forget, too soon, what Jesus has commanded.
“the power to govern means
“the power to govern means the power to punish.” Does this mean the bishops will punish their subordinate priests for sex abuse, or that we're in for a wave of excommunications and a revival of interdict?
Hmm. "Power to punish?" Has
Hmm. "Power to punish?" Has he been in correspondance with that wretch in Phoenix who punishes those who disagree with his infallible interpretation of a complicated case of dying mother and dying child?
No, silly, excommunications
No, silly, excommunications and itnerdicts are only for women, usually nuns, and 9 year old rape victims.
You are correct in your
You are correct in your assessment Dr. Kennedy, Card. George is not the intellectual giant that John Allen's pandering makes him out to be. He is not a great leader either. You cannot be head of the USCCB and not address the exodus from the church. You can't inflict on people a new translation of the mass, that most people do not want and that might quicken the exodus, and show pastoral sensitivity. George is a politician who was made given Chicago becuase of his politics. And to think....he doesn't understand why people no longer defer to a bishop's authority. The answer is easy Francis, you and most of your fellow bishops don't have any pastoral skills!
Well said, Eugene. George's
Well said, Eugene. George's record on the sex abuse of minors by priests is dismal. We keep hearing that this guy is an intellectual. I am still waiting for the evidence.
Gene, I often dislike your
Gene,
I often dislike your articles as they are sometimes too bitter.But recently you have written a few belters.The one about Fr Andrew Greeley was excellent and also the one about celibacy ,your dad and window frames.Cardinal George is an intellectual within the bishops ranks but I am also a fit young man to the local weightwatchers.His style of intellect is like that of Pope Wojtyla.Neurotic and limited and not very original.Nietzsche made bits of these type of "thinkers" over a century ago.They need to read to be stimulated as they have forgotten how to think.Nice article and I am praying that Cardinal George will be replaced by a genuine intellectual in the bishops ranks.
Dear Professor, What is so
Dear Professor,
What is so shamefully wrong with a retiring Cardinal looking forward to spending more time studying and hearing confessions? All I can see here is that you have a personal ax to grind because Cardinal George didn't like your book.
Granted, he might have an anti-intellectual episcopal bias against books on authority by a husband-wife team consisting of a former priest, and a former nun. Look on the bright side: at least he read it.
When a person makes a perplexing statement about a book, one polite response is to say, "How do you figure?" Had your wife not cut Cardinal George off, a more extended conversation might have occurred -- although I gather that for some reason you are categorically opposed to conversation. So the good Cardinal can't win with you either way.
The point you seem to have missed is that Cardinal George has not been playing Joseph Goebbels to Pope Benedict's Adolf Hitler. You and your wife are consequently not French resistance fighter-philosophers a la Yves Simon. That's some sort of weird self-aggrandizing fantasy, and you really should seek professional help.
In "The Anti-Christ", Friedrich Nietzsche asserted that resentment explains the history of theology. The explanatory power of Nietzsche's theory with respect to traditional Judaism and Christianity is severely limited. However, Nietzsche was a keen observer of Dionysian and other pagan impulses. Resentment of authority does neatly explain a number of trends in academia since you entered Maryknoll College in the 1940's.
Given that history, I wonder if you've ever considered filing a class-action lawsuit against your seminary professors. They seem to have written a check which the Church could not cash.
These remarks have long since failed to show a decent respect for your priestly office. I honestly don't know what I'd do, if I'd gotten myself into your predicament. My own mundane predicaments as a married layman are bad enough.
Thank you for your
Thank you for your statements.
Wow....Matt, you may have the
Wow....Matt, you may have the vocabulary but you lack the insight that makes the words truly mean something. In your angry fervor, you mistakingly interpreted the statements about Cardinal George's plans to read things he had missed before as a criticism - it was not in and of itself, but an example of the man's evasive and befuddled-appearing responses. And by the way, would you want to give a guess as to how many former priests and former nuns there are in the United States alone? It's not so rare as to warrant that much attention, unless your motivation is to discredit by any means possible?
I must admit that I would NOT
I must admit that I would NOT be inclined to seek out Cardinal George for confession. Perhaps in his retirement, Cardinal George will finally face new growth challenges that will broaden his perspectives.
I find this careful and
I find this careful and telling exposition very nice to bishops, their essence and vocation, and in fact, understanding and supportive, far more than George and all his works.
If this prelate is our U.S.
If this prelate is our U.S. church's thinker in chief, may God have mercy on us. On Oct 10, 2010 he wrote about the nature of Holy Orders and gave the most muddled, and soul wounding explanation for women's rejection by the church for this sacrament. He tries to explain that the call to priesthood is a gift only for those special males that God loves. So, I guess we womwn are chopped liver and who would ever give a gift of love to chopped liver. He also let sail over his head the fact that we women are baptized members of this church and the rite thereof is exactly the same as for males. It would be good if he also remembered that Mary came first when asked by God to form the body and and blood of His Son. Without Mary, a woman we would not have priests to change bread and wine into Jesus for us. The article was in Catholic New World under the heading The Cardinal's Column. Have a go at it and see if you find and coherence therein. Good luck!
I have read the article by
I have read the article by Cardinal George in Catholic New World that you mention. It's tripe, and that's even lower than chopped liver.
What I find offensive about his article is the viscous and condescending attitude leaching through, an attitude I've heard repeatedly and grown attuned to in the Catholic Church since I was in elementary school (where I also found it offensive): where any reasonable opinion or objection or interesting creative thought is immediately dismissed and put down with a counterattack on your person, with a haughty proclamation of your own massive unworthiness. In Cardinal George's article, it takes the form of the obnoxious statement, "The argument is with Jesus, not the church." Right. Deal out guilt and unworthiness. Have no faith at all that people have good intentions, form their opinions within a life that is prayerful, and are actually loved and inspired by the holy spirit of God. The Church's capacity for dealing out this type of emotional and spiritual abuse, and its readiness to do it at the slightest scent of contrariness, even to people who have been dedicated and loyal Church members, is beyond my understanding. It is a form of cruelty and evil, really: manipulation and disrespectful misuse of position. The only recourse for a healthy Catholic is to dissolve his or her sense of hierarchical authority, or at least to diminish its importance. My religion tells me that God does not want us to despise ourselves the way these Church spokesmen so clearly despise the "sheep" they seem to find so unworthy and annoying.
It appears this cardinal has
It appears this cardinal has plenty to say about Holy Orders and the rejection of women (across the board) by the church, but it's alright for them to be used as "comforts" for the clergy.
Sister of Charity Fabian, had no illusions of quote; "those over there dear" when she was called upon to clean up the aftermath of "situations created" by the clergy in her diocese.
As a young nun, she had been approached by a "legendary" Archbishop of Melbourne, who requested she expand the maternity section of the hospital she founded.
This facility was still operational and utilized by consecutive arcbishops into the mid nineteen eighties.
She was a woman before her time and it is recorded, "Had she not spent her life directly helping others, she would have made a great first female Prime Minister of Australia".
Strange how it is always others who see the potential.
As quoted; "She was mourned as much in the Jewish, Greek, Italian, Aboriginal and any other "ethinic" communities as she was in the old Irish Catholic tribe which spawned her order of nuns".
The Spirit of this exemplary religious woman lives on through her sisters today but unfortunately her name has paled into oblivion.
Hardly an intellectual
Hardly an intellectual leader, Cardinal George is a functionary of the Vatican and a person who has not had an independent or creative thought in the many years he has been Archbishop of Chicago. His indecisiveness and evasiveness in John Allen' interview sheds no light on anything. In light of their mismanagement and sometimes criminal behavior regarding sexual abuse by their priests, the faithful have a most difficult time in looking to such hierarchs for wisdom, guidance and meaningful pastoral care. We deserve better.
As unusual as this is, I do
As unusual as this is, I do agree with Eugene Kennedy that Cardinal George is not the "thinker in chief." Rather, he is the "evader" who is now a "has been."
I believe he evaded John Allen's questions because he knew he was on his way out and didn't want to influence whatever impact Archbishop Dolan would have on the USCCB. I also believe he has been in over his head as Archbishop of Chicago and, of late the president of the USCCB.
If he does indeed retire at 75 as Cardinal Mahony is happily doing, it will be interesting to see who takes the reigns in Chicago. My initial pick was now Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, formerly of Joliet, now in Seattle. As for who will succeed in Chicago, my bets are on Archbishop Chaput in Denver or Bishop Finn in Kansas City.
Even before Francis George
Even before Francis George fired me I knew and probably said that here was someone who chews far more than he can bite off. And chews and chews and chews. I'm afraid that the same may be said of John Allen who's been too close for too long to what John considers authority. The two of them had a lovely chat not worth an inch on a blog or in print.
Kennedy hits the nail on the
Kennedy hits the nail on the head in all the ways the Vatican and its bishops, including Cardinal Francis George, cannot simply because he is open and honest. The others are not! No one makes it more obvious that George was a safe, sycophant pick for Chicago and Cardinal for his obsequiousness to the Vatican than George himself. As Kennedy nicely puts it, George does not carry "the keenest crozier," but that, given his position, only makes him more dangerous. Note how the bishops in the U.S. Conference submit to cardinals and will-be cardinals like Tim Dolan of New York. George also displays nothing of Vatican II respect for freedom of religion and conscience. Like John Paul II and Benedict when he was Josef Ratzinger, it is all about defending the institutional church even when it is evil. The guilt and shame of the sex abuse scandal does not rest only on the abusers and their promoting and covering bishops, it goes right to the top, to John Paul and Benedict. And John Paul is going to be beatified for it! These exposures show that the institutional cancer is still metastasizing and the church is terminally sick. John Paul was, and Benedict is, just as guilty as any of the corrupt bishops under them. The bishops only followed orders from headquarters.
John Allen's pseudo-profound
John Allen's pseudo-profound interview with George tells us as much about Allen's acuity as George's. http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/picking-brain-us-bishops-...
Allen didn't get it either. It's another one of Allen’s “exclusive” conversations in the “sit down” puff piece mode.
Gene Kennedy’s article performs a huge service in exposing the vacuous nature of what Allen cites as the worthwhile picking of George’s brain. Slim pickings naturally left unchallenged.
And if the USCCB membership considers George a leading intellectual light, well then, enough said.
Here is an example of George’s ethical leadership to accompany Kennedy’s debunking of his intellectual firepower. It recounts Illinois Supreme Court Justice Anne Burke’s telling George, “You lied to me.”
"Anne Burke will always remember one session out-of-town with a nationally famous bishop who gave her complete assurance that all instances of sexual hanky-panky were brought to a dead halt in his diocese.
The next morning she opened a newspaper and found that the bishop was on the front page, having welcomed a priest-sexual predator as a house guest. (See http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/2003_03_01_ChicagoSunTimes_Georg
eDidnt_Kenneth_J_Martin_1.htm where the bishop is identified as George)
She called the bishop. “Yesterday you assured me that all matters involving the diocese had been cleaned up,” she said. “You know, you lied to me, didn’t you?”
He said the priest was being used for a theological research job.
She continued, “You lied to me, didn’t you.”
“No, I didn’t.”
“Well, the priest you hired was convicted.”
“No he wasn’t.”
“Really?”
“He pled guilty. That’s what happened.”
“Same thing.”
“Well, not exactly-pleading guilty is not the same as being tried and found guilty.”
Burke smiled at that effort, at the futile attempt to apply theological hair-splitting to the law. It may make it in a university theological seminar but not in a courtroom.
“Why did he try to snow me?” she said to this reporter. “Did he think he could get away with it because - well, he didn’t.” (See full text of three interviews that appeared in The Wanderer as posted on www.tomroeser.com in August 2006.)
Originally sent three days ago...
I have a different take on
I have a different take on John Allen's journalism. I think he pretty much reports what people in the Church are saying, as coherently as he can, and leaves you and me free to make up our own minds. And people clearly are doing that; just read the comments. I like it that John does not tell us what to think. That's so much different from a lot of journalism these days. I don't think you can accuse him of tapping Cardinal George with powderpuffs, either. He clearly gave George enough rope to hang himself with evasiveness and vacuity, and, lo and behold, there it is. A clear window into the mind. John, as I said, doesn't tell you what to see. But he gives you the data.
I've got to go to confession
I've got to go to confession after reading this.
He might have been a good
He might have been a good bishop for 1955.
Post new comment