The only positive I can see in this is that McElroy will likely only serve as shepherd in DC for maybe 5 years at most...how much further damage can he do in just a few years....his tenure could possibly be even shorter if there were to be a new Pope before then who wants to make his own mark on the capital see of the world's most powerful nation.
Will he allow the archdiocesan seminary to continue unimpeded, or will he replace Fr Carter Griffin, who teaches “celibacy and spiritual fatherhood”, with someone more to his liking? What about the Neocat seminary?
The archdiocese has had a healthy number of priestly vocations but that could dwindle with the coming administration.
How much input will he have on The Catholic University of America?
I think it also needs to be realized is the DC archdioceseis a pretty conservative presbyterate, and it gets more right leaning as you go from pastors to associate pastors.
McElroy should probably not count on flowers and friendship. Which just adds to the chaos
Back during the last go round when Gregory eventually got the tap, I had a DC seminarian friend who flat out said, "If it's McElroy, I'm leaving." Which was a bit extreme, but did capture the general attitude of the DC guys I knew. McElroy will likely find himself living out in microcosm what Francis has experienced as Pope: an isolated leader abandoned and ignored by a church that has passed him by and who kicks against the goad in frustrated futility for a few more years.
We have a good number of conservative priests in Washington, and while some are rigid, the greater portion has learned how to pastorally serve a laity that does not share their conservativism. I think the same skill will be how these priests relate to the new Archbishop.
Who said anything about disobedience? Instead, we're likely to find obedience.... and only obedience. He will be obeyed, but never respected, never loved, never defended, never rallied to, etc.
This is something you guys really don't understand when it comes to leadership. If you rely on ruling by decree and expecting obedience, you will find your ability to lead severely curtailed and compromised. Effective leadership requires trust. Its very hard to gain trust as an outsider, which McElroy is. he has no roots to DC, and he might as well be from another planet in terms of how the priests of that diocese think and live.
Good men of great skill can overcome this. McElroy is not a good man, nor is he particularly skilled.
Again, that's what you guys don't get. We're speaking about the reality of a difficult situation, and rather than learn from it, we're accused of judging him. McElroy has been a back bencher the majority of his life. What major causes has he influenced? Which allies has he won over? What has he done of consequence in his diocese, other than provoking weird fights like when he decided to fight homeschoolers?
One can pray he listen to the spirit and be a successful administrator, while also acknowledging reality and the great difficulties he is likely to face, and the high costs of failure. Indeed, to neglect them is to make them a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In his own diocese, Bishop McElroy held synods in both 2016 and 2019 on the family and young adults respectively (following the pattern of the Synods of Bishops in Rome). More diocesan synods are a good thing in general, and I think that these at least show good initiative and receptivity by the cardinal.
Nobody I know is judging his soul. We’re rightly concerned by his previous actions and statements of teaching being repeated here. Words and actions as a precedent for future behavior is not irrational or uncharitable.
But everyone I know is praying for a different than previous outcome 🙃
Mike, one is called to the priesthood generally to a specific place or work. The call is then affirmed through the seminary journey ultimately by the bishop or religious superior via their representatives. I like to think that the laity have some sort of consultative input. For this seminarian to set limits this call due to a valid appointment does not augur well for his vocation or to the people whom is called to serve.
He was a good guy just blowing off some steam. And at some point, the character of a bishop has to be a valid point of discernment. I wouldn't think much of a man who looked at a bishop like Alois Hudal, who helped Nazi war criminals escape justice via the ratlines, and said, "That's the sort of man to whom I want to pledge obedience."
The point is, an episcopal appointment that results in a browbeaten, demoralized presbyterate is going to be antithetical to a flourishing local Church, and a pope who neglects to account for that is not only going to see poor results: he's going to be guilty of serious mismanagement of the Church of God.
To a point, but it is possible to reach a breaking point where everyone just starts ignoring the leader. They can continue to double down all they want, but it turns into a screaming into the void. It happened with Boniface VIII, when the response to Unam sanctam was basically for everyone to ignore it. And it has happened to Francis a few times.
It seems mixed, but admittedly I’m speaking from anecdotal evidence. Of course D.C. proper is not as orthodox, but there are many very devout, orthodox Catholics in the areas of northern Virginia within the archdiocese. Some incredible parishes, don’t you think?
Edit: Northern Virginia is apparently in the diocese of Arlington, so my citing those parishes isn’t good evidence.
Orthodoxy consists in handing on the entire deposit of faith by prioritizing worship at the sacrifice of the Holy Mass from which all other good fruits flow, and apart from which nothing has grace & power. Jesus’ sacrifice, His triumph over sin and death, our need for salvation, etc., are central to the deposit of faith/Catholic teaching. From the kerygmatic teaching of Jesus’ Passion and death for us which offers us salvation, we can complete Jesus’ call to love and serve our neighbors, the poor, the marginalized, sick, and the sick. Apart from that, we can do nothing.
By “not as orthodox,” I’m referring to the often well-meaning but misguided attempt to put the human person above all else in one’s practice of the faith. It’s a wrongly ordered orientation toward saving one another rather than relying on Jesus’ grace and salvation, and oftentimes (but not always) it leads to public support for unorthodox positions on issues like marriage, gender, abortion, and sin itself. Not to paint with too broad a brush, but this is commonly found in cities, which is why I said, “of course D.C. proper is not as orthodox.”
It is mixed. Plenty of folks of all colors and ethnicities and income levels in the city and MD counties are orthodox devout folks. PLENTY. I’m not sure where Kurt’s comments are coming from as someone who grew up here (1986-2001 ) and lived here as an adult (2015-present) and lemme tell you it’s a whollllle different world than elementary and high school years lol. Honestly it’s a lovely diocese from the ground up. We’re still working on the penthouse level however 🫠🫠🫠🫠
My wife and I went to St. James in Falls Church for the year that we lived in the area and found it quite orthodox. We didn't get very engaged in the parish, unfortunately, mostly due to the expectation that we would move after a year (which we did), but there were quite a few activities.
Odds are good you're going to find a good parish regardless of where you land. Basilica of St. Mary in Old Town Alexandria, St. Rita in Alexandria (hosts a Latin Mass, if that's your jam), St. Charles Borromeo in the Clarendon neighborhood of Arlington. MS mentions attending St. James, and that's a massive and diverse parish, but it's led by Fr. Paul Scalia, who is simply excellent. I've been to a couple parishes for a single Mass or wedding in the Great Falls area and found them wanting, however. I suppose it's all a matter of what you're looking for.
Check out St. John the Beloved if you'll land in the McLean area. Great orthodox priests and people and, in spite of the unfortunate "church in the round" architecture, they do the Mass in a beautifully sacred way. At least, that's how it was some 10 years ago when I lived there.
There are other good options--it's a good diocese.
I can't say enough good things about The Cathedral of St. Thomas More, Kevin. I've been a parishioner here for more than 30 years, and it is orthodox. thriving, and ethnically diverse. Plus, the school is excellent. In honor of its 50th anniversary last year, it has been transformed from a 1970s brick box to a magnificent Gothic/Tudor structure that is both intimate and transcendant. Come see!
Arlington is a spectacular diocese. I can only think of one church that has felt “unorthodox” - the actual churches aren’t particularly beautiful, generally speaking, but the priests are fantastic. Hard to go wrong.
As a Midwest transplant, I feel like it’s such a relief to not worry about which Mass will have the least ad-libbing from the altar haha.
Kurt I’m not sure where you live or what parish you’re in. But I know MANY orthodox laity besides myself. Like a boat ton. Across numerous parishes and counties of our diocese. So…. Yea. The priests don’t come from a vacuum.
But also one that is not anywhere near his progressivism. And he likely is not able to mobilize the laity against their priests in some struggle, and even if he could, it would likely finish off his episcopate the second he tried. (Besides, in todays polarized world with social media, he would likely be just drawing in other actors into such a fight that he does not need.)
Tough world for anyone to crack. Much less for a foreigner to the diocese, who will have the taint of "you're here because nobody else wanted the job" from day one.
We have parishes in DC (mine) where a majority of the members are on TPS. We have parishes where a majority of members of the Ladies' Sodality remember when they could not go to the parish school and had to receive communion after certain others. We have parishes that exist in deeply impoverished neighborhoods. These folks valued the ministry of Cardinal Gregory and will have warm feeling towards Cardinal McElroy.
But most importantly, while we do have priests who would be viewed and would view themselves as conservative, they are not jerks. Two pastors who celebrate the old Latin Mass also have liturgical dance in their parishes. The new Oratory parish is warm and welcoming to major Democratic Party officials who are active parishioners. The conservative priests rarely lecture on politics and have been kind and pastoral to federal employees worried about being 'Schedule F' ed. And, while I worry about rising costs with the clergy dental plan, they have marvelously held their tongue and grit their teeth as their parishes engaged in some cultural practices that might be seen as 'irregular'.
I wonder if this the Pope's counterpunch to Trump rolling back into town in a few short weeks? Seems so. Few would disagree that Cardinal McIlroy is the most prominent liberal bishop in the US
I don't think Tobin is going to be moved because he is probably sitting on a powder box of information on McCarrick which, if it came out, would cause an unmitigated disaster for the Church. He's much too useful where he is.
The “Donald Trump excuse” really makes no sense when held up to scrutiny. +McKnight would have not been friendly with the Kamala administration, so the excuse can’t be about “friendly relations” with Capitol Hill. And in the two months prior to Election Day, Trump was arguably the clear frontrunner to win and everyone kinda knew that whether they admitted it or not, so it can’t be a “wait-what-blindsided-scramble” thing either. This is not 2016. It seems more likely that Trump was a convenient excuse to the public, for +Tobin and +Cupich to pull their strings en masse in Rome. It’s on the record that they do heavily control the selection of any important US cleric, from new auxiliary bishops to the elongated search for a new PNAC rector. The fact that +Kenney was selected as the new auxiliary in MPLS/StP makes no sense unless you look to the lavender cabal.
At a surface level, it’s natural for +Tobin and +Cupich to want to move +McElroy up from a suffragan diocese, and DC is the current “big promotion opening” to be filled. Nothing surprising there.
The less benign explanation would be that with +Gregory out in DC, +Tobin/Cupich have a vested interest in maintaining cover for roles in McCarrick’s sex crime and abuse history. +McKnight risks exposing that +Tobin (and to lesser extent, Cupich) are culpable in the McCarrick affair, so putting a dyed-in-the-wool ally like +McElroy in DC instead is a safe move to preserve the status quo narrative on McCarrick’s network during his decades of abuse.
Of course, neither +Tobin nor +Cupich can leave their current posts themselves to go to DC, lest their replacement back home does some digging around the chancery after they leave. If +Tobin/Cupich can’t go to DC, that leaves +McElroy as the perfect guy to fill the gap and keep all loose ends tied up.
As I’ve said before: I believe +Tobin specifically is/was involved in abuse, and both he and +Cupich were aware of McCarrick’s crimes and culpable for inaction and/or aiding in cover-ups. This is logically highly probable, and I’ve seen no evidence to exonerate the two of any knowledge on McCarrick. In fact, some of +Cupich’s public quibbling on this issue only heighten’s my suspicions.
Certainly, but +McElroy is rhe perfect choice for two reasons:
1) the most dyed-in-the-wool vocal ally to the positions of the lavender clergy
2) of all the US bishops, he has the most to lose by crossing +Cupich/Tobin/et al, and the most to gain by towing the line. As a man who went from being a relatively obscure bishop known mostly for one pathetic comment at a November assembly (and effectively slam-dunked on immediately after by +Strickland and +Chaput), to being named a cardinal ahead of his metropolitan archbishop, to being hand-picked for one of the most prominent position ls in the US heierarchy, despite his lightning-rod status on doctrines and his diocese crumbling into financial shambles, and not really having any big fans or a even a decent track record. Yeah, +McElroy is the easiest guy to keep under the thumb.
So, if I read you correctly, you think this has to do with continuing a sort of cover-up for the McCarrick years? That strickes me as unliklely and convoluted strategy. I think the quick and unexpected trasnsfer of the single most politically liberal episcopal figure in the US into the beltway sends a clear message to American Catholics and the new Trump adminstration and even his pick for US envoy to Vactican (Brian Burch) that two can play this game. The Pope has, time and time again, proven to be ruthless with the politics of electing and placing cardinals, no one can disagree. Occam's Razor suggests this was a retaliatory move.
If it's retaliatory towards American Catholics meaning primarily (by weight or volume) the laity, it doesn't seem very effective since 90% of the American Catholics are not really going to care *or know* who the cardinal in DC is after about the first five minutes (e.g. my mother in the midwest has had strong opinions about every one of her local bishops, probably diametrically opposed to mine because, and this might surprise some, politically conservative and liturgically conservative are two different things. But I doubt she could name any other bishop outside of her home state, which she hears about from her brothers who also have opinions.) To retaliate you have to do something that people care about.
Bridget: I don't agree. Aware Roman Catholics in the US care greatly about the Catholic Church in the US and particularly in Wash, DC. The Pope cares greatly as well, but it is clear he deeply distrusts the US Church for a variety of reasons. This distrust is documented via written testimony and his various episcopal placements (and removals and transfers), and I need not bring up specifics here. Nonetheless, the US is single largest donor to Roman coffers and provides about 35-40% of Rome's annual operating costs, and probably more when one considers other private donations. Due to its proxximity to American halls of power, the position of archbishop of ADW is what I will call "flagship" , with about the same status of Boston or NY, perhaps more so these days. All said, I wish the new Archbishop well. It is going to be a difficult job starting with a massive operating debt, and Cardinal McIlroy just went through bankrupcty proceedings in San Diego. It is a huge challenge for a fellow who is already 71 years old and was proabably very comfortable in sunny San Diego.
I assume he has a $2mil slush fund to look forward to in retirement though (if he does his job well, which is, I assume, "Whatever you say, say nothing, When you talk about you know what"), so he's got that going for him, which is nice.
In the span of a week, we went from +McKnight being the leading candidate to now the appointment of +McElroy. Granted, the latter has been rumored for this seat for awhile, but it makes me wonder what happened in that timeframe to clinch it for +Bob. And the answer, to me, is Trump's appointment of Brian Burch to be ambassador to the Holy See. That couldn't be seen in Rome as anything but antagonistic, and it would be a reasonable argument to the Pope that he'd need someone equally pugnacious in the White House's backyard.
If such is the case then Church authorities are letting political developments dictate ecclesiastical matters. It would seem that the good of the Church, and in particular who will guide the local church best, should be vastly more important than making a political point.
I can understand thinking that way, but it's not really the case. Wuerl in this case was on the side of the Nuncio (and it seems Cardinal Gregory?) in seeking a different candidate.
Even though Catholics with particular valid concerns can tend to view Pierre/Gregory/Wuerl/Cupich/Tobin as a single axis, it's really not the case. It's Cupich and Tobin who are actually the really noxious influences on American episcopal appointments, and Cardinal Pierre in particular has actually exercised an important moderating role. Wuerl and Gregory likewise in this case, though they were unsuccessful.
Nope, doesn't work that way. Joe Biden, despite his many faults, is a baptized Catholic who has never defected from the faith. You can argue that his words and actions are a source of incredible scandal and he shouldn't receive communion while that stuff persists, but that's a discussion of how deep his Catholicism really is or how well he lives the faith not whether or not he is actually Catholic. It may feel like he isn't sometimes, but the objective fact is that he is Catholic. And it is also an objective fact that Donald Trump is NOT Catholic. We can't play those games.
I pray that San Diego's homeschooling families receive a bishop more willing to welcome and recognize them as full participants in the life of the church.
Me too bc the homeschoolers here who have previously had a yearly Sunday mass with the cardinal at the basilica and widely use parish faculties are pretty worried 😞
Bishop Burbidge--God preserve his health--is almost certainly going to see four different archbishops across the river in his time leading Arlington. That's a little wild.
Not sure when that was or what is considered affordable for a room but I definitely meant house or apartment or enough sq ft for a family with 4/5/6/7/etc kids 😁
Interesting comment about allowing different aspects of Faith to be maintained globally. May as well just let the next major fracture occur. Forget unity of teachings…let’s just go find our own parish that meets our interpretation of the chaos in clerical hierarchy
The only positive I can see in this is that McElroy will likely only serve as shepherd in DC for maybe 5 years at most...how much further damage can he do in just a few years....his tenure could possibly be even shorter if there were to be a new Pope before then who wants to make his own mark on the capital see of the world's most powerful nation.
Will he allow the archdiocesan seminary to continue unimpeded, or will he replace Fr Carter Griffin, who teaches “celibacy and spiritual fatherhood”, with someone more to his liking? What about the Neocat seminary?
The archdiocese has had a healthy number of priestly vocations but that could dwindle with the coming administration.
How much input will he have on The Catholic University of America?
For some reason, I don't think appointing Cdl. McElroy to the Archdiocese of DC is going to make the money roll in.
Looking at the recent bankruptcy of San Diego diocese and McElroy's upbeat response to the disaster...he will be lucky if anyone gives him a dud cent.
https://www.kpbs.org/news/faith-spirituality/2024/06/13/san-diego-diocese-to-file-for-bankruptcy-in-the-wake-of-hundreds-of-abuse-claims
I think it also needs to be realized is the DC archdioceseis a pretty conservative presbyterate, and it gets more right leaning as you go from pastors to associate pastors.
McElroy should probably not count on flowers and friendship. Which just adds to the chaos
I think this is the point. He keeps trying to rein us in.
Back during the last go round when Gregory eventually got the tap, I had a DC seminarian friend who flat out said, "If it's McElroy, I'm leaving." Which was a bit extreme, but did capture the general attitude of the DC guys I knew. McElroy will likely find himself living out in microcosm what Francis has experienced as Pope: an isolated leader abandoned and ignored by a church that has passed him by and who kicks against the goad in frustrated futility for a few more years.
We have a good number of conservative priests in Washington, and while some are rigid, the greater portion has learned how to pastorally serve a laity that does not share their conservativism. I think the same skill will be how these priests relate to the new Archbishop.
So obedience to one’s bishop no longer matters? We settle on a church of Frank Pavone’s?
Who said anything about disobedience? Instead, we're likely to find obedience.... and only obedience. He will be obeyed, but never respected, never loved, never defended, never rallied to, etc.
This is something you guys really don't understand when it comes to leadership. If you rely on ruling by decree and expecting obedience, you will find your ability to lead severely curtailed and compromised. Effective leadership requires trust. Its very hard to gain trust as an outsider, which McElroy is. he has no roots to DC, and he might as well be from another planet in terms of how the priests of that diocese think and live.
Good men of great skill can overcome this. McElroy is not a good man, nor is he particularly skilled.
I’m glad that you’re helping the Holy Spirit judge these guys. I’ll pray for his success.
Again, that's what you guys don't get. We're speaking about the reality of a difficult situation, and rather than learn from it, we're accused of judging him. McElroy has been a back bencher the majority of his life. What major causes has he influenced? Which allies has he won over? What has he done of consequence in his diocese, other than provoking weird fights like when he decided to fight homeschoolers?
One can pray he listen to the spirit and be a successful administrator, while also acknowledging reality and the great difficulties he is likely to face, and the high costs of failure. Indeed, to neglect them is to make them a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In his own diocese, Bishop McElroy held synods in both 2016 and 2019 on the family and young adults respectively (following the pattern of the Synods of Bishops in Rome). More diocesan synods are a good thing in general, and I think that these at least show good initiative and receptivity by the cardinal.
Nobody I know is judging his soul. We’re rightly concerned by his previous actions and statements of teaching being repeated here. Words and actions as a precedent for future behavior is not irrational or uncharitable.
But everyone I know is praying for a different than previous outcome 🙃
Mike, one is called to the priesthood generally to a specific place or work. The call is then affirmed through the seminary journey ultimately by the bishop or religious superior via their representatives. I like to think that the laity have some sort of consultative input. For this seminarian to set limits this call due to a valid appointment does not augur well for his vocation or to the people whom is called to serve.
He was a good guy just blowing off some steam. And at some point, the character of a bishop has to be a valid point of discernment. I wouldn't think much of a man who looked at a bishop like Alois Hudal, who helped Nazi war criminals escape justice via the ratlines, and said, "That's the sort of man to whom I want to pledge obedience."
The point is, an episcopal appointment that results in a browbeaten, demoralized presbyterate is going to be antithetical to a flourishing local Church, and a pope who neglects to account for that is not only going to see poor results: he's going to be guilty of serious mismanagement of the Church of God.
Even despised leaders are still in power and likely to double down on the things for which they became despised.
To a point, but it is possible to reach a breaking point where everyone just starts ignoring the leader. They can continue to double down all they want, but it turns into a screaming into the void. It happened with Boniface VIII, when the response to Unam sanctam was basically for everyone to ignore it. And it has happened to Francis a few times.
Hey, it's the synodal way!
Yes, a right leaning presbyterate with a laity that is not conservative.
It seems mixed, but admittedly I’m speaking from anecdotal evidence. Of course D.C. proper is not as orthodox, but there are many very devout, orthodox Catholics in the areas of northern Virginia within the archdiocese. Some incredible parishes, don’t you think?
Edit: Northern Virginia is apparently in the diocese of Arlington, so my citing those parishes isn’t good evidence.
"Of course D.C. proper is not as orthodox..."
Yes, the Church in DC is mostly racial and ethnic minorities, if that is what you were hinting at.
Race and ethnicity have nothing to do with my comment, and you know that.
No, I don't know that.
Kurt is running hot today! Cool your jets, man.
Orthodoxy consists in handing on the entire deposit of faith by prioritizing worship at the sacrifice of the Holy Mass from which all other good fruits flow, and apart from which nothing has grace & power. Jesus’ sacrifice, His triumph over sin and death, our need for salvation, etc., are central to the deposit of faith/Catholic teaching. From the kerygmatic teaching of Jesus’ Passion and death for us which offers us salvation, we can complete Jesus’ call to love and serve our neighbors, the poor, the marginalized, sick, and the sick. Apart from that, we can do nothing.
By “not as orthodox,” I’m referring to the often well-meaning but misguided attempt to put the human person above all else in one’s practice of the faith. It’s a wrongly ordered orientation toward saving one another rather than relying on Jesus’ grace and salvation, and oftentimes (but not always) it leads to public support for unorthodox positions on issues like marriage, gender, abortion, and sin itself. Not to paint with too broad a brush, but this is commonly found in cities, which is why I said, “of course D.C. proper is not as orthodox.”
It is pretty clear what brush you are painting with.
For shame, man
The Archdiocese of Washington is only DC proper and five counties of southern Maryland. Northern Virginia is the Diocese of Arlington.
Ah, my mistake then. Thanks, Father!
It is mixed. Plenty of folks of all colors and ethnicities and income levels in the city and MD counties are orthodox devout folks. PLENTY. I’m not sure where Kurt’s comments are coming from as someone who grew up here (1986-2001 ) and lived here as an adult (2015-present) and lemme tell you it’s a whollllle different world than elementary and high school years lol. Honestly it’s a lovely diocese from the ground up. We’re still working on the penthouse level however 🫠🫠🫠🫠
I am likely moving to this area this year and am hoping to find a more Orthodox parish in Northern VA, can you recommend any?
My wife and I went to St. James in Falls Church for the year that we lived in the area and found it quite orthodox. We didn't get very engaged in the parish, unfortunately, mostly due to the expectation that we would move after a year (which we did), but there were quite a few activities.
Thank you!
Odds are good you're going to find a good parish regardless of where you land. Basilica of St. Mary in Old Town Alexandria, St. Rita in Alexandria (hosts a Latin Mass, if that's your jam), St. Charles Borromeo in the Clarendon neighborhood of Arlington. MS mentions attending St. James, and that's a massive and diverse parish, but it's led by Fr. Paul Scalia, who is simply excellent. I've been to a couple parishes for a single Mass or wedding in the Great Falls area and found them wanting, however. I suppose it's all a matter of what you're looking for.
Thank you!
We were parishioners for a few years at St. Ambrose in Annandale; Fr. Fisher is an excellent pastor and very sound. It’s a great parish.
Thank you!
Check out St. John the Beloved if you'll land in the McLean area. Great orthodox priests and people and, in spite of the unfortunate "church in the round" architecture, they do the Mass in a beautifully sacred way. At least, that's how it was some 10 years ago when I lived there.
There are other good options--it's a good diocese.
Thank you!
I can't say enough good things about The Cathedral of St. Thomas More, Kevin. I've been a parishioner here for more than 30 years, and it is orthodox. thriving, and ethnically diverse. Plus, the school is excellent. In honor of its 50th anniversary last year, it has been transformed from a 1970s brick box to a magnificent Gothic/Tudor structure that is both intimate and transcendant. Come see!
Thank you!
Arlington is a spectacular diocese. I can only think of one church that has felt “unorthodox” - the actual churches aren’t particularly beautiful, generally speaking, but the priests are fantastic. Hard to go wrong.
As a Midwest transplant, I feel like it’s such a relief to not worry about which Mass will have the least ad-libbing from the altar haha.
Kurt I’m not sure where you live or what parish you’re in. But I know MANY orthodox laity besides myself. Like a boat ton. Across numerous parishes and counties of our diocese. So…. Yea. The priests don’t come from a vacuum.
But also one that is not anywhere near his progressivism. And he likely is not able to mobilize the laity against their priests in some struggle, and even if he could, it would likely finish off his episcopate the second he tried. (Besides, in todays polarized world with social media, he would likely be just drawing in other actors into such a fight that he does not need.)
Tough world for anyone to crack. Much less for a foreigner to the diocese, who will have the taint of "you're here because nobody else wanted the job" from day one.
We have parishes in DC (mine) where a majority of the members are on TPS. We have parishes where a majority of members of the Ladies' Sodality remember when they could not go to the parish school and had to receive communion after certain others. We have parishes that exist in deeply impoverished neighborhoods. These folks valued the ministry of Cardinal Gregory and will have warm feeling towards Cardinal McElroy.
But most importantly, while we do have priests who would be viewed and would view themselves as conservative, they are not jerks. Two pastors who celebrate the old Latin Mass also have liturgical dance in their parishes. The new Oratory parish is warm and welcoming to major Democratic Party officials who are active parishioners. The conservative priests rarely lecture on politics and have been kind and pastoral to federal employees worried about being 'Schedule F' ed. And, while I worry about rising costs with the clergy dental plan, they have marvelously held their tongue and grit their teeth as their parishes engaged in some cultural practices that might be seen as 'irregular'.
DC continues to be cursed with the ghost of McCarrick, and the dude isn't dead yet.
Good reporting JD and Pillar.
Interesting development now leaving the Western United States with exactly zero active cardinals, unless you include Galveston-Houston.
I wonder if this the Pope's counterpunch to Trump rolling back into town in a few short weeks? Seems so. Few would disagree that Cardinal McIlroy is the most prominent liberal bishop in the US
And to the Knights’ decision to cover the Rupnik mosaics.
Cardinal Cupich might want a word about that.
I think of Cupich as number 1, and McIlroy as a close second.
I am grateful that neither of them is my bishop.
And when Tobin is given NYC, he'll drop to third place. Long Suffering is a virtue, folks!
I don't think Tobin is going to be moved because he is probably sitting on a powder box of information on McCarrick which, if it came out, would cause an unmitigated disaster for the Church. He's much too useful where he is.
The “Donald Trump excuse” really makes no sense when held up to scrutiny. +McKnight would have not been friendly with the Kamala administration, so the excuse can’t be about “friendly relations” with Capitol Hill. And in the two months prior to Election Day, Trump was arguably the clear frontrunner to win and everyone kinda knew that whether they admitted it or not, so it can’t be a “wait-what-blindsided-scramble” thing either. This is not 2016. It seems more likely that Trump was a convenient excuse to the public, for +Tobin and +Cupich to pull their strings en masse in Rome. It’s on the record that they do heavily control the selection of any important US cleric, from new auxiliary bishops to the elongated search for a new PNAC rector. The fact that +Kenney was selected as the new auxiliary in MPLS/StP makes no sense unless you look to the lavender cabal.
Why do YOU think that Cardinal McIlroy was chosen as the new AB?
At a surface level, it’s natural for +Tobin and +Cupich to want to move +McElroy up from a suffragan diocese, and DC is the current “big promotion opening” to be filled. Nothing surprising there.
The less benign explanation would be that with +Gregory out in DC, +Tobin/Cupich have a vested interest in maintaining cover for roles in McCarrick’s sex crime and abuse history. +McKnight risks exposing that +Tobin (and to lesser extent, Cupich) are culpable in the McCarrick affair, so putting a dyed-in-the-wool ally like +McElroy in DC instead is a safe move to preserve the status quo narrative on McCarrick’s network during his decades of abuse.
Of course, neither +Tobin nor +Cupich can leave their current posts themselves to go to DC, lest their replacement back home does some digging around the chancery after they leave. If +Tobin/Cupich can’t go to DC, that leaves +McElroy as the perfect guy to fill the gap and keep all loose ends tied up.
As I’ve said before: I believe +Tobin specifically is/was involved in abuse, and both he and +Cupich were aware of McCarrick’s crimes and culpable for inaction and/or aiding in cover-ups. This is logically highly probable, and I’ve seen no evidence to exonerate the two of any knowledge on McCarrick. In fact, some of +Cupich’s public quibbling on this issue only heighten’s my suspicions.
I think there were a lot more members of the hierarchy in the know and covering up for him than just those few.
Certainly, but +McElroy is rhe perfect choice for two reasons:
1) the most dyed-in-the-wool vocal ally to the positions of the lavender clergy
2) of all the US bishops, he has the most to lose by crossing +Cupich/Tobin/et al, and the most to gain by towing the line. As a man who went from being a relatively obscure bishop known mostly for one pathetic comment at a November assembly (and effectively slam-dunked on immediately after by +Strickland and +Chaput), to being named a cardinal ahead of his metropolitan archbishop, to being hand-picked for one of the most prominent position ls in the US heierarchy, despite his lightning-rod status on doctrines and his diocese crumbling into financial shambles, and not really having any big fans or a even a decent track record. Yeah, +McElroy is the easiest guy to keep under the thumb.
When the Archdiocese becomes bankrupt, what happens?
So, if I read you correctly, you think this has to do with continuing a sort of cover-up for the McCarrick years? That strickes me as unliklely and convoluted strategy. I think the quick and unexpected trasnsfer of the single most politically liberal episcopal figure in the US into the beltway sends a clear message to American Catholics and the new Trump adminstration and even his pick for US envoy to Vactican (Brian Burch) that two can play this game. The Pope has, time and time again, proven to be ruthless with the politics of electing and placing cardinals, no one can disagree. Occam's Razor suggests this was a retaliatory move.
If it's retaliatory towards American Catholics meaning primarily (by weight or volume) the laity, it doesn't seem very effective since 90% of the American Catholics are not really going to care *or know* who the cardinal in DC is after about the first five minutes (e.g. my mother in the midwest has had strong opinions about every one of her local bishops, probably diametrically opposed to mine because, and this might surprise some, politically conservative and liturgically conservative are two different things. But I doubt she could name any other bishop outside of her home state, which she hears about from her brothers who also have opinions.) To retaliate you have to do something that people care about.
Bridget: I don't agree. Aware Roman Catholics in the US care greatly about the Catholic Church in the US and particularly in Wash, DC. The Pope cares greatly as well, but it is clear he deeply distrusts the US Church for a variety of reasons. This distrust is documented via written testimony and his various episcopal placements (and removals and transfers), and I need not bring up specifics here. Nonetheless, the US is single largest donor to Roman coffers and provides about 35-40% of Rome's annual operating costs, and probably more when one considers other private donations. Due to its proxximity to American halls of power, the position of archbishop of ADW is what I will call "flagship" , with about the same status of Boston or NY, perhaps more so these days. All said, I wish the new Archbishop well. It is going to be a difficult job starting with a massive operating debt, and Cardinal McIlroy just went through bankrupcty proceedings in San Diego. It is a huge challenge for a fellow who is already 71 years old and was proabably very comfortable in sunny San Diego.
I assume he has a $2mil slush fund to look forward to in retirement though (if he does his job well, which is, I assume, "Whatever you say, say nothing, When you talk about you know what"), so he's got that going for him, which is nice.
From your shepherds, O Lord, deliver your sheep!
We'll see how the Lord works in all this....
Jesus, I trust in You.
Lord, save your people!
In the span of a week, we went from +McKnight being the leading candidate to now the appointment of +McElroy. Granted, the latter has been rumored for this seat for awhile, but it makes me wonder what happened in that timeframe to clinch it for +Bob. And the answer, to me, is Trump's appointment of Brian Burch to be ambassador to the Holy See. That couldn't be seen in Rome as anything but antagonistic, and it would be a reasonable argument to the Pope that he'd need someone equally pugnacious in the White House's backyard.
If such is the case then Church authorities are letting political developments dictate ecclesiastical matters. It would seem that the good of the Church, and in particular who will guide the local church best, should be vastly more important than making a political point.
This is news to you Father? They are letting +Wuerl guide the process… please.
It sounds like McElroy was Cupich’s choice, not Wuerl’s.
Same person, different names.
I can understand thinking that way, but it's not really the case. Wuerl in this case was on the side of the Nuncio (and it seems Cardinal Gregory?) in seeking a different candidate.
Even though Catholics with particular valid concerns can tend to view Pierre/Gregory/Wuerl/Cupich/Tobin as a single axis, it's really not the case. It's Cupich and Tobin who are actually the really noxious influences on American episcopal appointments, and Cardinal Pierre in particular has actually exercised an important moderating role. Wuerl and Gregory likewise in this case, though they were unsuccessful.
On the merry-go-round first time around, I’m pretty sure +Wuerl lobbied for McElroy. He’s the Vatican’s international man of mystery.
Par for the course for this Papacy. The South American political games are strong with this one.
If that's the case, it's a grave miscalculation. McElroy will either be ignored or mocked if he's hostile to the administration.
The incoming Administration already is in the ignore and mock the Catholic Church camp.
So no different from the outgoing one.
Nothing tops the disdain that came from the Biden adm. Trump is more Catholic than Joe ever was.
Just ask Stormy.
Nope, doesn't work that way. Joe Biden, despite his many faults, is a baptized Catholic who has never defected from the faith. You can argue that his words and actions are a source of incredible scandal and he shouldn't receive communion while that stuff persists, but that's a discussion of how deep his Catholicism really is or how well he lives the faith not whether or not he is actually Catholic. It may feel like he isn't sometimes, but the objective fact is that he is Catholic. And it is also an objective fact that Donald Trump is NOT Catholic. We can't play those games.
Very well put, thank you.
Well said
100%. It’s political and BB and CV are at the heart of it, I believe 😐
I pray that San Diego's homeschooling families receive a bishop more willing to welcome and recognize them as full participants in the life of the church.
Me too bc the homeschoolers here who have previously had a yearly Sunday mass with the cardinal at the basilica and widely use parish faculties are pretty worried 😞
If I said half the things this man said publicly at Mass, I’d have multiple hymnals and an entire bucket of holy water thrown at my head.
How do these guys continue to fail upward?
Make the Church Less Episcopalian Again!
Bishop Burbidge--God preserve his health--is almost certainly going to see four different archbishops across the river in his time leading Arlington. That's a little wild.
Bishop Burbidge is awesome. A true shepherd.
You must be a lib.
lol
Loved him when I was growing up in Raleigh. I believe I can give him credit for encouraging my vocational path.
And a big reason why Catholics in-the-know usually live west of the Potomac.
Uhhhhh only the rich ones. We have plenty of in the know folks out here in Bowie and almost none of us could afford a shed west of the Potomac 🙄
When I was at CUA I was able to rent an affordable room in Virginia. But certainly not a whole house.
Not sure when that was or what is considered affordable for a room but I definitely meant house or apartment or enough sq ft for a family with 4/5/6/7/etc kids 😁
Or north! Baltimore
Time to go make a fresh batch of popcorn...
Interesting comment about allowing different aspects of Faith to be maintained globally. May as well just let the next major fracture occur. Forget unity of teachings…let’s just go find our own parish that meets our interpretation of the chaos in clerical hierarchy
Or a pastor overtly disobedient to his (arch)bishop
I look forward to hearing from Vigano.
This is a Greek tragedy
I assume that means at some point the Furies will show up.
I feel like in this clownshow we're more likely to have the furries show up, sadly.