More McCarrick
Well, it's the morning after the self-anointed "orthodox" took a major blow to their quest for ecclesiastical domination, so now the commentary's in print.... From my colleague Alan Cooperman at the Post:
So what if he's an excommunicated schismatic? The man stands firmly for the truth! Right? (Well, just not that pesky "authority of the Pope" detail.... What a perfect fit for the CWN/CWR crowd.)
As he usually does, our good friend Todd posts a smart and sound counterpoint to all the screaming over at his place:
-30-
Some activists in the church had made no secret, however, of their hope that Benedict would replace McCarrick with someone who would take more aggressive positions on issues such as the admission of homosexuals to seminaries and the denial of Communion to politicians who support abortion rights....
Domenico Bettinelli, editor of Catholic World Report, a conservative monthly in Salem, Mass., said yesterday that in his view, McCarrick is part of "a passing generation of bishops" who took "a soft-pedal approach where it's more important to not offend people than to stand firmly for the truth and the church's teaching."
McCarrick "has given long service to the church, is obviously dedicated to the church and is doing what he thinks is right for the church," Bettinelli said. "But it would be a service to the church to bring in a younger man with more energy to renew the faith."
So what if he's an excommunicated schismatic? The man stands firmly for the truth! Right? (Well, just not that pesky "authority of the Pope" detail.... What a perfect fit for the CWN/CWR crowd.)
As he usually does, our good friend Todd posts a smart and sound counterpoint to all the screaming over at his place:
Let's bang the drum for a back-to-tradition movement for episcopal selection and discernment. Again. Catholic tradition would hold that the dream candidate is a solid, trustworthy priest in the Archdiocese of Washington, not some necessarily conservative darling slaving away in a teeny little diocese waiting his "turn" at a red hat.What?! Is that supposed to mean that some rookie bishop in the boonies isn't qualified to take over a cardinalatial see just because he's got the "right" ideology? Heresy!
-30-
posted by Rocco Palmo at 08:08
4 Comments:
Rock,
Dom's wrong about McCarrick, but where's the evidence that he is a Bishop Williamson fan?
From what could you possibly deduce that Dom supports Williamson? Just because you dislike both of them?
I've ignored your detraction in the past, but your latest claim veers very close to libel or slander. Your claim that I prefer to have a schismatic bishop in Washington is an outright lie. Be very careful, kid.
I expect a retraction.
Domenico and his neo-catholic buddies as CWR never hesitate to throw fuel on the file with the traditionalists. They can't seem get the names "LeFebvre" or "Fellay" typed out without appending the word "schismatic." You couldn't be more wrong about this one. I wish you weren't. I wish CWR realized that traditionalists are the hope of the church and they need to be reconciled. I wish they recognized that their middle-ground conservatism is simply untenable. But they don't. They ignore them or antagonize them. You're just dead wrong linking Domenico and Lawler with the SSPX.
On the other hand, they're right to be disappointed about McCarrick's non-retirement. Proof that infallibility doesn't extend to displine and prudential matters.
Post a Comment
<< Home