Brad, I was about to post this to “fix,” because as soon as I read the article in the Catholic Spirit (the Archbishop’s newspaper), I had the same thought. I thought, "Oh boy! Here we go again. First McCarrick; now Archbishop Flynn. Have these people no shame? What do they take us for? (And, for that matter, what did they take the bishops for?) Fool us once, shame on you, etc… :
Then I “parsed” the sentences, looking for Clinton clauses, and they are there: "\
- “I got a clear understanding.”
- “a pastoral issue which must constantly be looked at in all its ramifications”
- “be aware of the forces everywhere”
- “got no sense (that the Vatican was pushing for a single policy)”
And there are more.The only excuse I could find for believing all this is that Cardinal Arinze is going to need the votes of just such bishops as Harry Flynn “when the time comes.” Since the Church thinks in terms of centuries, perhaps we had better think at least in terms of years. Cardinal Arinze’s interesting experience at Georgetown last year has doubtless put him on notice that there are strange things afoot in the US.
Anyway, fix, I would withhold judgment for a while.
Anna