> Where are the parish-led programs that take a cue from Protestants and knock on doors and invite people to Truth?
There is an organized program called St Paul Street Evangelization; there is a team in my diocese; I am a member; the one-day training that I attended was kicked off by a Mass celebrated by one of our auxiliary bishops. Whether a team knocks on doors per se is up to them - there is a lot (in a city) that can be done in high foot traffic areas so that is what we do here. It's a much warmer (figuratively) and friendlier way to spend a couple hours than praying outside an abortion clinic (which I am more used to; there's a totally different "sidewalk" organization for that which I have been in longer). I am a busy person but for anyone who is willing to do something, a thing (organized or otherwise) will show up which you are able to do.
I'm hoping to get St. Paul Street Evangelization started in my diocese as well. Going to take a lot of work so it won't be any time soon, but a neighboring diocese is just staring one so I'm hope to tag along with them a few times. Kudos to you for getting out and doing the work instead of complaining that others aren't doing anything.
It can be dangerous to go knocking on doors in our nearby city, so St Paul people hang out in the city square, a popular gathering place in nice weather for Christian witnesses of all sorts. I used to do door to door back in my prot days. It takes cojones. My parish started in-house evangelism: laity gather around their interests to do at church: picklball was first. Now we have gardening, monthly breakfast, craft quilt pray, Sat post-9am mass study, several more. There's a happier air in our 5/weekend mass parish, newcomers call us to join & they do! It bridges that division by mass effect, if you know what I mean. And some who haven't been to mass in ages draw closer to doing so or have started attending
> urging that “whoever has ears ought to hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.”
If I had to choose between reading an America article (though in this case I reckon it's not their fault when an interviewee said some tone-deaf things) and rereading Rev. 1-3, the latter is always a good time... Christ talking so loud and looking so shiny that the beloved disciple falls down as though dead and has to be told not to be afraid... "The one who holds the seven stars in his right hand" (I guess I would fall down too) earnestly dishing out to specific communities what the business books refer to as a compliment sandwich (but more colloquially called "a sh** sandwich"): hey, the Church in Some City, you have hung on in some tough times; here's where you are screwing up though; here's a teaser for the glorious reward I am dying to give you so hang in there. I would read pastiches of this, especially if they had obscure footnotes. Cardinal Pierre could write some (well, probably it is better not to.)
Interesting that Pierre is at odds with Cupich and McElroy. I guess I had just assumed the opposite without really thinking about it. Not surprising that Cupich (at least) has a direct line of communication with Rome but since both he and McElroy are thought of (for better or worse) as "Francis Bishops" and as therefore marginalized within the USCCB, I just figured they'd be tight with Pierre as well.
I think many of the more institutionally sound episcopal appointments in recent years (Malesic, Fernandes) have been the fruit of Cardinal Pierre balancing out the Cupich/Tobin influence
I had the same initial reaction, but it makes sense. Cupich and McElroy are essentially sidestepping Pierre by maintaining direct lines of communication with the Pope, and that threatens Pierre's influence and makes them rivals. Classic case of institutional politics trumping ideology.
Any leader worth his salt will maintain multiple lines of communication and information, and every monarch throughout history has played courtiers off each other.
From the vantage point of a manager of managers of managers, it is definitely within the Holy Father's ability to shut down this dynamic if he wants to. He has correctly urged the clergy not to be "ecclesial climbers" -- yet these are exactly the sorts he seems to favor with access and influence.
"As for the bishops, cardinal Pierre said he sees them as timid and prisoners of their advisors." This, from Pope Francis' delegate to the US, even as the Pope surrounds himself with Eurotrash prelates as advisers, who preside over dying churches, whose advice amounts to ordaining women and blessing gay "marriages". SMH.
Archbishop Pierre has had little traction against Cupich, et al, esp when it came to the appointment of archbishops. All the nuncio can do is send the names to Rome while Cupich sits in the meetings where the final terna is composed. The red hat will help him a bit, but Cupich still remains the king-maker. +Pierre can get some bishops through but the archbishops are all Cupich. Wait to see the picks for Boston and Detroit to see what I mean.
I wonder if Cardinal Pierre was a bit tired when he gave the interview. Much of what he said, he said before, but it wasn't communicated as well as he has done in the past. The nuncio is a good man, a man of the Church, he is also a diplomat whose job is to communicate to the US the thought of Pope Francis. Can you imagine a more difficult job?
All the same time, he seems to have a bias against the US. I know he loved Uganda and the Ugandans. He loved Mexico and the Mexican people. I don't think he's every really loved the US and the people of the US. He gets out and about to episcopal consecrations and installations but he doesn't get out among the people very often.
God bless Archbishop Broglio! Thanks be to God for his courage and fidelity and for that of the vast majority of his fellow bishops in the USCCB. It is manifestly evident that neither Cardinal Pierre nor Pope Francis understand the situation in the United States. (See Jayd Henricks' excellent article in First Things for a detailed analysis). The Catholic Church in the US, never more than about 25% of the population, faces a society enraptured by the Sexual Revolution and variants of Marxist ideologies and, seemingly, relentlessly hostile to Christianity. Faithful Catholics are regularly the subject of ridicule and disdain in popular culture and, sadly, even among "cultural" Catholics. Regardless, there are vibrant dioceses and parishes and seminaries and lay apostolates daily proclaiming the Gospel and fulfilling the Great Commission. These courageous men and women see the devastating effects of the Sexual Revolution--in all of its variants--that is promoted by our government, popular culture, and, sadly, some pretending to be faithful Catholics: children killed by abortion, families torn apart by no-fault divorce, lives and relationships destroyed by pornography, homosexuality, and transgender ideology and souls abandoning their faith because of real and perceived failures in response to the (apparently) never-ending sexual abuse scandals. And yet they persist in boldly proclaiming our shared faith and winning new converts. As The Pillar's own reporting has shown, the Aparecida document has resulted in mixed results--at best--and is hardly a model ready for export to the US. Neither is the quisling Synodal Way in Germany or its imitators in other parts of Europe. So, I am grateful for Abp. Broglio's leadership and defense of his brother bishops and offer prayers of thanksgiving for their fidelity and courage. I pray that both Cardinal Pierre and Pope Francis will recognize the same.
Very interesting analysis here. I was also surprised to learn that Cardinal Pierre has sometimes been at odds with Cardinals Cupich and McElroy. @JDFlynn @EdCondon Without asking for gossip or scandal, would it be too much to hope for more reporting on this dynamic, or the preference of those Cardinals to "go behind the back" of the nuncio?
One thing I'd like to understand, and that would have been helpful context to include in this article (or a future one): Let's suppose that all the bishops of the U.S. hated the nuncio. What would the consequences be, other than some awkward conversations and encounters? Are there things the nuncio needs to do that the bishops could obstruct or slow-walk?
I would submit that with a hanging-judge Pope in office, anyone who attempted to obstruct the nuncio (in ways the Pope doesn't like) would be asked to resign and then dismissed.
"The fruit of Aparecida is a new pastoral approach,” he (Pierre) said. “I saw it working in Mexico. It changes the church.”
I've heard this before about the synodal process in South America, but If I understand things correctly, Catholic membership is on a swift decline across South America as well. It would have been interesting to have heard the Cardinal's perspective on that.
In an effort to try to understand Pope Francis' theological/pastoral approach I've been reading "The Mind of Pope Francis" by Massimo Borghesi (Pierre endorses it as well). I'm about 2/3s of the way through, and while there are some points that set off some light bulbs for me, on the whole, its just.. so...unclear. Admittedly, I'm no theologian, but it just continues to reinforce for me how ephemeral and inaccessible the thinking behind this Papacy is for me most of the time, and it sounds like it is for the U.S. Bishops as well. I'm sure that's part cultural divide. Its clearly frustrating in both directions. I'm not sure at all what the solution is.
In Europe, including in Belgium, France, Germany…many of the Sant’Egidio, Nuvoi Orizzonti, and other new ecclesial Catholic communities have very very full parishes. These communities usually have a special charism or pastoral center appealing to groups that are in need of belonging (elderly, migrants, disabled, addiction, depression, etc. etc.). And those very full parishes buck the overall trend of decline around them. For example, why was one parish in the center of DC full last Sunday while another parish only 3 blocks away was 85% empty. People go where they feel they can thrive and belong. And you are right, a lot of parishes we deem “conservative” do a fantastic job at that as well. It’s not a one size fits all.
I’ll note that these are challenges the Church and society in general hasn’t had to face until recently. It is one of many reasons why our pastoral paradigms have to be creative and adaptive, just as they always have been. It reminds me of some leaders in the Middle East who have “modernization” down to a science… allow the people just enough freedom to move about that they do not rebel. But how do we keep them together as one? It’s an even greater challenge for many groups within a community (including churches) to thrive in a democratic or free society. If the group is not relevant to the peculiarities that people face OR if it does not offer a life raft from the crazy world around it, that attendance is naturally going to decline.
It is gospel among the Latin Americans that Aparecida is a revolutionary success—if not yesterday then tomorrow. They’ve staked the future of their entire quartersphere of the Church on it; it can’t not be the one true way.
" But, if Pierre wants to make the most of his remaining time in the job, many bishops will need convincing that he does actually value and respect them, their priests and the Catholic communities they lead."
Hard to convince people of a lie once Pierre himself told them what he really thinks.
As I wrote in America in response to Cardinal Pierre's article, synodality is basically irrelevant to evangelizing when the organization in question has a deserved reputation for the sexual abuse of children. The American bishops addressed this issue in the 1990s, in 2002 more successfully, and were forbidden from dealing with it in an effective way by Rome in November 2018. Just as Latin America has a head start on official synodality, so the Church in the United States has a huge head start over the rest of the world in dealing with this issue. And until Rome gets it and starts supporting victims instead of rapists, and allows an effective and public investigation of irresponsible or abusing bishops, evangelization will be severely handicapped. When my own bishop was accused, he went public with what was happening and was eventually vindicated.
And if the Church won't deal with the problem the governments will. The Pennsylvania Attorney General's report didn't include Philadelphia, which Archbishop Chaput had already cleaned up. It would be a lot better if the Church would clean up its own act rather than letting the courts do it for us, but Pope Francis once again just gave his verbal support for another covering up for another rapist bishop.
Under these circumstances evangelization is mostly impossible.
I recall one of Francis' first airborne interviews, when he was told that he's being criticized by a lot of people in America, he replied that he considered that a compliment.
Finally, yes, thank you. Whew. Talk about confusion. I feel a little dizzy. The Nuncio talking in vague circles and comments mostly spinning new circles. Thank God that was my last free article.
I prefer a young, newly-minted traditionalist priest that wears a cassock and wishing to celebrate Mass ad orientem, than a sleazy, sexually-repressed, hippie-era deviant, collar-wearing rapist that happens to be a bishop or a cardinal. Unfortunately, the pope's representative in the US dislikes the first group for some reason.
Archbishop Broglio is a man of integrity, holiness, kindness and truth.
While I do not serve the Archdiocese for Military Services, because of a military installation next to my city, I have met and had dinner with him a number of times. I'm impressed.
He spoke the truth during his address to the USCCB meeting and may the Lord bless him for it.
It is so aggravating to hear continual negative comments about "most young priests."
The priests ordained in the last 10 years (14) in my diocese are, almost to a man, filled with a will to serve their people and they do so with fervor.
They are the ones who propose new ideas, consistent with Church teaching, regarding evangelization. They are the ones who often lead in this work.
They are the ones who actively seek to do pastoral work among our people and are especially involved with youth and young adults. They seek ways to reach those who have wandered from the Church.
Many are willing to visit the hospitals and the homebound, not only to offer the Sacraments but stay for a while, visit and offer the presence of Christ the Priest.
Personally, I don't care if they wear cassocks, albs with lace and birettas. I don't care if they wear Oxford shirts, khakis and Sketchers.
I care that they are men who love Our Lord, the children of the Church and their share in Christ's priesthood. That's what matters.
This is my experience of our young priests as well. They inspire me! And they are versatile with their Catholic worldview (as in, not locked in, but well equipped to engage various worldviews while solid in orthodox Catholic identity) passionate for Christ, and willing to.
Finally, some authentic synodality with a bold (yet gentlemanly) pushback.
Pierre is a lame duck at best from now on. Most Americans could care less about a red hat, in particular a Cardinal so full of himself who both misunderstands AND miscommunicates the status of the Church in the USA. He is the Holy Father's primary source for American information and it is hard to tell who is repeating who's talking points. But the Nuncio was insulting to all of the USCCB the week before the meeting.
One skill-set the members of the USCCB have well developed is the "I'm too busy for you because I'm tending the sheep." response to his (now) dead letters. His Eminence's distorted perception of the priesthood in America has amputated him from the American clerical community. No matter what, priests & seminarians are top priorities for every bishop, insulting them and their formation is a complete non-starter. For certain, the polite applause and "our esteemed brother" platitudes will continue but that is about all it will be.
That, plus the end-arounds by Cardinals Cupich, et. al. have made given the USA three+ nuncios further diluting his position. From the pews it is not so much at Matthew 11:15 moment as it is a Galatians 5:12 moment for the Nuncio although he is yet to realize it.
Yet a good number of the bishops deal with a regular flow of criticism (some deserved but sometimes not). Some of the extremely nasty communications I have seen through chancery work is appalling. Generally, at least my bishop catches it from both ends and he is an orthodox bishop.
He has been generous with TC and actively spends quality time with seminarians, he promotes Adoration.
I know not all bishops are like this but a good number are.
To get such scathing criticism from the Nuncio is mean spirited and uncharitable...this must have been his parting shot.
> Where are the parish-led programs that take a cue from Protestants and knock on doors and invite people to Truth?
There is an organized program called St Paul Street Evangelization; there is a team in my diocese; I am a member; the one-day training that I attended was kicked off by a Mass celebrated by one of our auxiliary bishops. Whether a team knocks on doors per se is up to them - there is a lot (in a city) that can be done in high foot traffic areas so that is what we do here. It's a much warmer (figuratively) and friendlier way to spend a couple hours than praying outside an abortion clinic (which I am more used to; there's a totally different "sidewalk" organization for that which I have been in longer). I am a busy person but for anyone who is willing to do something, a thing (organized or otherwise) will show up which you are able to do.
I'm hoping to get St. Paul Street Evangelization started in my diocese as well. Going to take a lot of work so it won't be any time soon, but a neighboring diocese is just staring one so I'm hope to tag along with them a few times. Kudos to you for getting out and doing the work instead of complaining that others aren't doing anything.
It can be dangerous to go knocking on doors in our nearby city, so St Paul people hang out in the city square, a popular gathering place in nice weather for Christian witnesses of all sorts. I used to do door to door back in my prot days. It takes cojones. My parish started in-house evangelism: laity gather around their interests to do at church: picklball was first. Now we have gardening, monthly breakfast, craft quilt pray, Sat post-9am mass study, several more. There's a happier air in our 5/weekend mass parish, newcomers call us to join & they do! It bridges that division by mass effect, if you know what I mean. And some who haven't been to mass in ages draw closer to doing so or have started attending
St Paul Street Ministry is a great thing. My college kids do it out of the student center. And they are learning the Faith as the share it.
Well, it is interesting to see Luke 12:51-53 in action. What a wonderful mess (hacer lío) that has been made!
How are we doing with the four marks of the Church: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic?
Does anyone feel like the Church is more One or fractured?
Holy or facing “serious difficulties from an anthropological, pastoral, and ecclesiological point of view?"
Catholic or secular?
Apostolic or democratic committee ran?
> urging that “whoever has ears ought to hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.”
If I had to choose between reading an America article (though in this case I reckon it's not their fault when an interviewee said some tone-deaf things) and rereading Rev. 1-3, the latter is always a good time... Christ talking so loud and looking so shiny that the beloved disciple falls down as though dead and has to be told not to be afraid... "The one who holds the seven stars in his right hand" (I guess I would fall down too) earnestly dishing out to specific communities what the business books refer to as a compliment sandwich (but more colloquially called "a sh** sandwich"): hey, the Church in Some City, you have hung on in some tough times; here's where you are screwing up though; here's a teaser for the glorious reward I am dying to give you so hang in there. I would read pastiches of this, especially if they had obscure footnotes. Cardinal Pierre could write some (well, probably it is better not to.)
Interesting that Pierre is at odds with Cupich and McElroy. I guess I had just assumed the opposite without really thinking about it. Not surprising that Cupich (at least) has a direct line of communication with Rome but since both he and McElroy are thought of (for better or worse) as "Francis Bishops" and as therefore marginalized within the USCCB, I just figured they'd be tight with Pierre as well.
I think many of the more institutionally sound episcopal appointments in recent years (Malesic, Fernandes) have been the fruit of Cardinal Pierre balancing out the Cupich/Tobin influence
I had the same initial reaction, but it makes sense. Cupich and McElroy are essentially sidestepping Pierre by maintaining direct lines of communication with the Pope, and that threatens Pierre's influence and makes them rivals. Classic case of institutional politics trumping ideology.
And why does the Holy Father allow Cardinal Cupich to side step his own Nuncio?
Isn't this behavior a source of the problem?
Any leader worth his salt will maintain multiple lines of communication and information, and every monarch throughout history has played courtiers off each other.
From the vantage point of a manager of managers of managers, it is definitely within the Holy Father's ability to shut down this dynamic if he wants to. He has correctly urged the clergy not to be "ecclesial climbers" -- yet these are exactly the sorts he seems to favor with access and influence.
"As for the bishops, cardinal Pierre said he sees them as timid and prisoners of their advisors." This, from Pope Francis' delegate to the US, even as the Pope surrounds himself with Eurotrash prelates as advisers, who preside over dying churches, whose advice amounts to ordaining women and blessing gay "marriages". SMH.
One has to wonder if some bishops are more apt to listen to lawyers and insurance companies rather than the Gospels. +Pierre makes a good point
Archbishop Pierre has had little traction against Cupich, et al, esp when it came to the appointment of archbishops. All the nuncio can do is send the names to Rome while Cupich sits in the meetings where the final terna is composed. The red hat will help him a bit, but Cupich still remains the king-maker. +Pierre can get some bishops through but the archbishops are all Cupich. Wait to see the picks for Boston and Detroit to see what I mean.
I wonder if Cardinal Pierre was a bit tired when he gave the interview. Much of what he said, he said before, but it wasn't communicated as well as he has done in the past. The nuncio is a good man, a man of the Church, he is also a diplomat whose job is to communicate to the US the thought of Pope Francis. Can you imagine a more difficult job?
All the same time, he seems to have a bias against the US. I know he loved Uganda and the Ugandans. He loved Mexico and the Mexican people. I don't think he's every really loved the US and the people of the US. He gets out and about to episcopal consecrations and installations but he doesn't get out among the people very often.
God bless Archbishop Broglio! Thanks be to God for his courage and fidelity and for that of the vast majority of his fellow bishops in the USCCB. It is manifestly evident that neither Cardinal Pierre nor Pope Francis understand the situation in the United States. (See Jayd Henricks' excellent article in First Things for a detailed analysis). The Catholic Church in the US, never more than about 25% of the population, faces a society enraptured by the Sexual Revolution and variants of Marxist ideologies and, seemingly, relentlessly hostile to Christianity. Faithful Catholics are regularly the subject of ridicule and disdain in popular culture and, sadly, even among "cultural" Catholics. Regardless, there are vibrant dioceses and parishes and seminaries and lay apostolates daily proclaiming the Gospel and fulfilling the Great Commission. These courageous men and women see the devastating effects of the Sexual Revolution--in all of its variants--that is promoted by our government, popular culture, and, sadly, some pretending to be faithful Catholics: children killed by abortion, families torn apart by no-fault divorce, lives and relationships destroyed by pornography, homosexuality, and transgender ideology and souls abandoning their faith because of real and perceived failures in response to the (apparently) never-ending sexual abuse scandals. And yet they persist in boldly proclaiming our shared faith and winning new converts. As The Pillar's own reporting has shown, the Aparecida document has resulted in mixed results--at best--and is hardly a model ready for export to the US. Neither is the quisling Synodal Way in Germany or its imitators in other parts of Europe. So, I am grateful for Abp. Broglio's leadership and defense of his brother bishops and offer prayers of thanksgiving for their fidelity and courage. I pray that both Cardinal Pierre and Pope Francis will recognize the same.
Extremely well-said.
Very interesting analysis here. I was also surprised to learn that Cardinal Pierre has sometimes been at odds with Cardinals Cupich and McElroy. @JDFlynn @EdCondon Without asking for gossip or scandal, would it be too much to hope for more reporting on this dynamic, or the preference of those Cardinals to "go behind the back" of the nuncio?
One thing I'd like to understand, and that would have been helpful context to include in this article (or a future one): Let's suppose that all the bishops of the U.S. hated the nuncio. What would the consequences be, other than some awkward conversations and encounters? Are there things the nuncio needs to do that the bishops could obstruct or slow-walk?
I would submit that with a hanging-judge Pope in office, anyone who attempted to obstruct the nuncio (in ways the Pope doesn't like) would be asked to resign and then dismissed.
"The fruit of Aparecida is a new pastoral approach,” he (Pierre) said. “I saw it working in Mexico. It changes the church.”
I've heard this before about the synodal process in South America, but If I understand things correctly, Catholic membership is on a swift decline across South America as well. It would have been interesting to have heard the Cardinal's perspective on that.
In an effort to try to understand Pope Francis' theological/pastoral approach I've been reading "The Mind of Pope Francis" by Massimo Borghesi (Pierre endorses it as well). I'm about 2/3s of the way through, and while there are some points that set off some light bulbs for me, on the whole, its just.. so...unclear. Admittedly, I'm no theologian, but it just continues to reinforce for me how ephemeral and inaccessible the thinking behind this Papacy is for me most of the time, and it sounds like it is for the U.S. Bishops as well. I'm sure that's part cultural divide. Its clearly frustrating in both directions. I'm not sure at all what the solution is.
In Europe, including in Belgium, France, Germany…many of the Sant’Egidio, Nuvoi Orizzonti, and other new ecclesial Catholic communities have very very full parishes. These communities usually have a special charism or pastoral center appealing to groups that are in need of belonging (elderly, migrants, disabled, addiction, depression, etc. etc.). And those very full parishes buck the overall trend of decline around them. For example, why was one parish in the center of DC full last Sunday while another parish only 3 blocks away was 85% empty. People go where they feel they can thrive and belong. And you are right, a lot of parishes we deem “conservative” do a fantastic job at that as well. It’s not a one size fits all.
I’ll note that these are challenges the Church and society in general hasn’t had to face until recently. It is one of many reasons why our pastoral paradigms have to be creative and adaptive, just as they always have been. It reminds me of some leaders in the Middle East who have “modernization” down to a science… allow the people just enough freedom to move about that they do not rebel. But how do we keep them together as one? It’s an even greater challenge for many groups within a community (including churches) to thrive in a democratic or free society. If the group is not relevant to the peculiarities that people face OR if it does not offer a life raft from the crazy world around it, that attendance is naturally going to decline.
See "From Christendom to Apostolic Mission".
It is gospel among the Latin Americans that Aparecida is a revolutionary success—if not yesterday then tomorrow. They’ve staked the future of their entire quartersphere of the Church on it; it can’t not be the one true way.
" But, if Pierre wants to make the most of his remaining time in the job, many bishops will need convincing that he does actually value and respect them, their priests and the Catholic communities they lead."
Hard to convince people of a lie once Pierre himself told them what he really thinks.
As I wrote in America in response to Cardinal Pierre's article, synodality is basically irrelevant to evangelizing when the organization in question has a deserved reputation for the sexual abuse of children. The American bishops addressed this issue in the 1990s, in 2002 more successfully, and were forbidden from dealing with it in an effective way by Rome in November 2018. Just as Latin America has a head start on official synodality, so the Church in the United States has a huge head start over the rest of the world in dealing with this issue. And until Rome gets it and starts supporting victims instead of rapists, and allows an effective and public investigation of irresponsible or abusing bishops, evangelization will be severely handicapped. When my own bishop was accused, he went public with what was happening and was eventually vindicated.
And if the Church won't deal with the problem the governments will. The Pennsylvania Attorney General's report didn't include Philadelphia, which Archbishop Chaput had already cleaned up. It would be a lot better if the Church would clean up its own act rather than letting the courts do it for us, but Pope Francis once again just gave his verbal support for another covering up for another rapist bishop.
Under these circumstances evangelization is mostly impossible.
I recall one of Francis' first airborne interviews, when he was told that he's being criticized by a lot of people in America, he replied that he considered that a compliment.
Recall Cardinal Cupich's role in November 2018.
I tried to find your America comment and could not.
Did you find the article with Pierre's statement? I wrote a number of comments on it, but the last one is the one to which I was referring.
Finally, yes, thank you. Whew. Talk about confusion. I feel a little dizzy. The Nuncio talking in vague circles and comments mostly spinning new circles. Thank God that was my last free article.
I have 5 comments on that article; I just checked and I could see them all there. It's the fifth one that this is basically repeating.
I prefer a young, newly-minted traditionalist priest that wears a cassock and wishing to celebrate Mass ad orientem, than a sleazy, sexually-repressed, hippie-era deviant, collar-wearing rapist that happens to be a bishop or a cardinal. Unfortunately, the pope's representative in the US dislikes the first group for some reason.
Sometimes it is a good idea to spend a moment in prayer before working on the specific wording of a comment.
Thanks! I did.
Archbishop Broglio is a man of integrity, holiness, kindness and truth.
While I do not serve the Archdiocese for Military Services, because of a military installation next to my city, I have met and had dinner with him a number of times. I'm impressed.
He spoke the truth during his address to the USCCB meeting and may the Lord bless him for it.
It is so aggravating to hear continual negative comments about "most young priests."
The priests ordained in the last 10 years (14) in my diocese are, almost to a man, filled with a will to serve their people and they do so with fervor.
They are the ones who propose new ideas, consistent with Church teaching, regarding evangelization. They are the ones who often lead in this work.
They are the ones who actively seek to do pastoral work among our people and are especially involved with youth and young adults. They seek ways to reach those who have wandered from the Church.
Many are willing to visit the hospitals and the homebound, not only to offer the Sacraments but stay for a while, visit and offer the presence of Christ the Priest.
Personally, I don't care if they wear cassocks, albs with lace and birettas. I don't care if they wear Oxford shirts, khakis and Sketchers.
I care that they are men who love Our Lord, the children of the Church and their share in Christ's priesthood. That's what matters.
This is my experience of our young priests as well. They inspire me! And they are versatile with their Catholic worldview (as in, not locked in, but well equipped to engage various worldviews while solid in orthodox Catholic identity) passionate for Christ, and willing to.
Finally, some authentic synodality with a bold (yet gentlemanly) pushback.
Pierre is a lame duck at best from now on. Most Americans could care less about a red hat, in particular a Cardinal so full of himself who both misunderstands AND miscommunicates the status of the Church in the USA. He is the Holy Father's primary source for American information and it is hard to tell who is repeating who's talking points. But the Nuncio was insulting to all of the USCCB the week before the meeting.
One skill-set the members of the USCCB have well developed is the "I'm too busy for you because I'm tending the sheep." response to his (now) dead letters. His Eminence's distorted perception of the priesthood in America has amputated him from the American clerical community. No matter what, priests & seminarians are top priorities for every bishop, insulting them and their formation is a complete non-starter. For certain, the polite applause and "our esteemed brother" platitudes will continue but that is about all it will be.
That, plus the end-arounds by Cardinals Cupich, et. al. have made given the USA three+ nuncios further diluting his position. From the pews it is not so much at Matthew 11:15 moment as it is a Galatians 5:12 moment for the Nuncio although he is yet to realize it.
At least bishops get to know how it feels to be misunderstood by a bishop!
True.
Yet a good number of the bishops deal with a regular flow of criticism (some deserved but sometimes not). Some of the extremely nasty communications I have seen through chancery work is appalling. Generally, at least my bishop catches it from both ends and he is an orthodox bishop.
He has been generous with TC and actively spends quality time with seminarians, he promotes Adoration.
I know not all bishops are like this but a good number are.
To get such scathing criticism from the Nuncio is mean spirited and uncharitable...this must have been his parting shot.
Bless Archpb. Broglio!