Given that the USCCB has also said “no comment” on their efforts to assist immigrant priests battling clergy visa delays, red tape, and sheer quantity of those visas, “thwart” would not have been my first choice even before Cdl. McElroy is even installed. Lack of transparency obstructs more than one point of contact, but assuredly only one is desirable and effective.
They did, however, put the issue of immigrant priests on their VoterVoice to everyone who signed up to receive it and I certainly contacted whoever they had it sent to, probably Biden and whoever is in charge of setting up the categories.
Funny you mention that. Even though I knew it was associated with the Godfather, for some reason I had assumed it was still a wrestling or fighting reference, just intentionally obfuscated, like a earlier version of interwebs. But upon searching those same interwebs, I was totally wrong and realized it has roots in Italian culture. Ha. Learn something new.
I used to work for one of the USCCB's political organizations in the days of Cardinal Hickey and the organization did as much or more grass roots organizing than going and talking to legislators. The USCCB still has VoterVoice, where you can check the issues you want notification on to send an email back to your legislators in DC if you want to help lobby. Feedback from constituents is probably more effective than lobbying from the hierarchy anyway.
"If he [Cardinal McElroy] wants to be invited to the table anytime the USCCB is working with the White House, he can pretty easily make that happen."
-It seems like this could very easily lead to the complete diminishment of the see's influence. The incoming White House press corp, Trump, or JD Vance could easily release the following statement (tact and diplomatic style has been duplicated):
"We congratulate Cardinal McElroy on his appointment to lead the Archdiocese of Washington. After listening to his current and past statements, we regard him to be a theological and moral dunce. All communication and cooperation with the Vatican and other international dioceses will be done through Cardinal Pierre and our representative Brian Burch. All national policy discussion will be through the USCCB and their delegated representatives.
With this in mind, Cardinal McElroy is not welcome to any of these meetings, and any statements he makes will be considered nothing more than the bluster of one straining for relevance without substance. All statements from him will be promptly ignored by the administration."
Sorry to everyone if I came in a little hot this morning. I have been ruminating on the political and theological calculus of this appointment, and I am fast approaching a "burn it all down" position.
Is there ANY reason for the Trump Administration to not declare Cardinal McElroy a persona non grata? Cardinal McElroy has made it clear that he is no friend to and will be directly adversarial to the incoming administration. What do they [Trump Admin] gain by ever indicating that he, or his opinions, are welcome?
The incoming administration isn't likely to gain any supporters by giving him the time of day. Those dead set against him (see many of the pieces already written in today's Starting Seven #1) won't be swayed by congeniality. So, what is really lost politically by dispensing with it?
The end result is that the influence of the ADW and the Pontiff (because he's the one that put +McElroy there) WILL be diminished. Influence on Peace, humanitarian efforts, economic disparity, and climate will dry up. If the Trump Administration makes it clear that Cardinal McElroy is a fly in the soup and that anything he touches will be discarded, we will all suffer the loss. All because +Cupich saw this as a good time to bite his thumb at the USCCB, +Pierre, and the incoming presidential administration.
Congratulations on your wedding anniversary. May God's grace always be with you and your family, I've been married forty-four years and, among the joys of married life, I have been blessed with three wonderful children (although they weren't always so wonderful), and four grandchildren.
The greatest lesson married life has taught me is to 'count to ten' or, at times, to one hundred).
Congratulations to JD and his lovely bride. There is so much more yet to come, as you mentioned. We will be celebrating 59 years this summer. Also realizing that St. Raymond lived to be 100, encourages me to continue my work in our Diocesan Tribunal as my years have also advanced. Canon Law draws one deeply into it. St. Raymond of Penafort, pray for us.
“Living justly with God orders us toward holiness, and living justly with one another promotes the common flourishing of the Church — we can hardly accomplish our sacred mission if we don’t begin by having rightly ordered relationships with one another.
Further, living as a Church in justice with one another is a sign of the credibility of the Gospel. Treating each other unjustly diminishes the Gospel’s credibility. If we’re going to be the people who say that man has “infinite dignity” — as the DDF put it last year — then we have to demonstrate we believe that’s true, namely by treating one another with enough dignity as to be accorded justice.”
You nailed it, JD. Why don’t all priests and canon lawyers understand this?
I have little familiarity with canon law, but experience tells me that disregard for the law on marriage has greatly damaged the credibility of the Gospel. A culture of “easy” annulments has shown Catholics and world that the church teaches one thing (permanence of marriage) but allows another, that we can pick and choose what parts of the gospel we wish to follow, and that being a follower of Christ doesn’t have to involve the cross.
We can indeed “hardly accomplish our sacred mission” in the environment we have created with our disregard for the rule of law. We have shown that the church cannot be trusted.
Quote of the day: Treating each other unjustly diminishes the Gospel’s credibility.
!!
Congrats on your anniversary, JD and Kate! You two will be especially in my prayers today!
St. Raymond of Penafort, pray for us 🙏
Excellent synopsis!
Given that the USCCB has also said “no comment” on their efforts to assist immigrant priests battling clergy visa delays, red tape, and sheer quantity of those visas, “thwart” would not have been my first choice even before Cdl. McElroy is even installed. Lack of transparency obstructs more than one point of contact, but assuredly only one is desirable and effective.
They did, however, put the issue of immigrant priests on their VoterVoice to everyone who signed up to receive it and I certainly contacted whoever they had it sent to, probably Biden and whoever is in charge of setting up the categories.
Going "to the mattress" sounds a bit off to me. Perhaps "going to the mat", a wrestling allusion, was what was intended? God bless your marriage!
You must be unfamiliar with the slang vernacular of America’s best racketeering organizations.
Funny you mention that. Even though I knew it was associated with the Godfather, for some reason I had assumed it was still a wrestling or fighting reference, just intentionally obfuscated, like a earlier version of interwebs. But upon searching those same interwebs, I was totally wrong and realized it has roots in Italian culture. Ha. Learn something new.
JD, not everyone is not going to get a quip from the hit Tom Hanks movie re-make "You've Got Mail."
I agree, going to the "mattresses" is COMPLETELY appropriate, however I did live in NY city for a long time so that may color my POV.
Thank you very much for the education! You never know what you will learn at The Pillar!!
Clip from You've Got Mail explaining "going to the mattresses":
https://www.google.com/search?q=you%27ve+got+mail%2C+going+to+the+mattresses&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1144US1144&oq=you%27ve+got+mail%2C+going+to+the+mattresses&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABgWGB4yCAgCEAAYFhgeMg0IAxAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMgoIBBAAGIAEGKIEMgoIBRAAGIAEGKIE0gEJMTQzMTZqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:38e6b9c7,vid:wB8xPnhpzAM,st:0
I used to work for one of the USCCB's political organizations in the days of Cardinal Hickey and the organization did as much or more grass roots organizing than going and talking to legislators. The USCCB still has VoterVoice, where you can check the issues you want notification on to send an email back to your legislators in DC if you want to help lobby. Feedback from constituents is probably more effective than lobbying from the hierarchy anyway.
Beautiful, Amen. St. Raymond, OPN.
And many blessings to you and your bride, and your family!
"If he [Cardinal McElroy] wants to be invited to the table anytime the USCCB is working with the White House, he can pretty easily make that happen."
-It seems like this could very easily lead to the complete diminishment of the see's influence. The incoming White House press corp, Trump, or JD Vance could easily release the following statement (tact and diplomatic style has been duplicated):
"We congratulate Cardinal McElroy on his appointment to lead the Archdiocese of Washington. After listening to his current and past statements, we regard him to be a theological and moral dunce. All communication and cooperation with the Vatican and other international dioceses will be done through Cardinal Pierre and our representative Brian Burch. All national policy discussion will be through the USCCB and their delegated representatives.
With this in mind, Cardinal McElroy is not welcome to any of these meetings, and any statements he makes will be considered nothing more than the bluster of one straining for relevance without substance. All statements from him will be promptly ignored by the administration."
Sorry to everyone if I came in a little hot this morning. I have been ruminating on the political and theological calculus of this appointment, and I am fast approaching a "burn it all down" position.
Is there ANY reason for the Trump Administration to not declare Cardinal McElroy a persona non grata? Cardinal McElroy has made it clear that he is no friend to and will be directly adversarial to the incoming administration. What do they [Trump Admin] gain by ever indicating that he, or his opinions, are welcome?
The incoming administration isn't likely to gain any supporters by giving him the time of day. Those dead set against him (see many of the pieces already written in today's Starting Seven #1) won't be swayed by congeniality. So, what is really lost politically by dispensing with it?
The end result is that the influence of the ADW and the Pontiff (because he's the one that put +McElroy there) WILL be diminished. Influence on Peace, humanitarian efforts, economic disparity, and climate will dry up. If the Trump Administration makes it clear that Cardinal McElroy is a fly in the soup and that anything he touches will be discarded, we will all suffer the loss. All because +Cupich saw this as a good time to bite his thumb at the USCCB, +Pierre, and the incoming presidential administration.
That is 100% true and "if only" it could be said out loud
It can be and Trump is outspoken and blunt enough to say it.
Congratulations on your wedding anniversary. May God's grace always be with you and your family, I've been married forty-four years and, among the joys of married life, I have been blessed with three wonderful children (although they weren't always so wonderful), and four grandchildren.
The greatest lesson married life has taught me is to 'count to ten' or, at times, to one hundred).
JD, happy anniversary! Men are blessed to marry women who are better people than they.
Congratulations to JD and his lovely bride. There is so much more yet to come, as you mentioned. We will be celebrating 59 years this summer. Also realizing that St. Raymond lived to be 100, encourages me to continue my work in our Diocesan Tribunal as my years have also advanced. Canon Law draws one deeply into it. St. Raymond of Penafort, pray for us.
“Living justly with God orders us toward holiness, and living justly with one another promotes the common flourishing of the Church — we can hardly accomplish our sacred mission if we don’t begin by having rightly ordered relationships with one another.
Further, living as a Church in justice with one another is a sign of the credibility of the Gospel. Treating each other unjustly diminishes the Gospel’s credibility. If we’re going to be the people who say that man has “infinite dignity” — as the DDF put it last year — then we have to demonstrate we believe that’s true, namely by treating one another with enough dignity as to be accorded justice.”
You nailed it, JD. Why don’t all priests and canon lawyers understand this?
I have little familiarity with canon law, but experience tells me that disregard for the law on marriage has greatly damaged the credibility of the Gospel. A culture of “easy” annulments has shown Catholics and world that the church teaches one thing (permanence of marriage) but allows another, that we can pick and choose what parts of the gospel we wish to follow, and that being a follower of Christ doesn’t have to involve the cross.
We can indeed “hardly accomplish our sacred mission” in the environment we have created with our disregard for the rule of law. We have shown that the church cannot be trusted.
Blessed and happy Anniversary!
Blessings and congratulations to the Flynns on their Anniversary! Ad multos annos!
Happy Anniversary!