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."
Um, McCarrick keeps such a pace that he exhausts aides who are half his age; only those who want to steamroll Elvis would deny his vigor.... But whatever the case, Dom's preferred "younger man" is 65 -- Richard "Cardinal Ratzinger can't be trusted" Williamson.
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!