Not to generate controversy, but there's a part of me that wonders if this was a bad-faith move to sneak it in at the end and hope certain bishops wouldn't notice. Or maybe it was one of the things discussed in the executive session last night and it was hammered out in private. Just feels weird that something previously controversial is just snuck in at the end with no apparent discussion.
Not to generate controversy, but there's a part of me that wonders if this was a bad-faith move to sneak it in at the end and hope certain bishops wouldn't notice. Or maybe it was one of the things discussed in the executive session last night and it was hammered out in private. Just feels weird that something previously controversial is just snuck in at the end with no apparent discussion.
I would suggest this came from a mutual understanding that, while there is disagreement within the conference on the matter, they already know which side has the votes. Past debates on the matter have only increased acrimony without changing votes, and this year was not going to be any different. So, they might as well just vote on it and get on with the proceedings.
Not to generate controversy, but there's a part of me that wonders if this was a bad-faith move to sneak it in at the end and hope certain bishops wouldn't notice. Or maybe it was one of the things discussed in the executive session last night and it was hammered out in private. Just feels weird that something previously controversial is just snuck in at the end with no apparent discussion.
I would suggest this came from a mutual understanding that, while there is disagreement within the conference on the matter, they already know which side has the votes. Past debates on the matter have only increased acrimony without changing votes, and this year was not going to be any different. So, they might as well just vote on it and get on with the proceedings.