American cardinals boast growing influence

[Servulus]

Suppose there were less concern about America’s influence on the Holy See and more concern about the Holy See’s influence on America. How would our situation change in the next ten years or so?

 

[Richardols]

I’m just so fed up with the liberalism that exists in the United States. Liberalism makes me sick!

Liberalism or heterodoxy?

As for me, I’m all for liberalism, a political notion, but I join with those Catholic conservatives who want solid orthodoxy in every one of our dioceses, and that’s a religious notion.

 

[bones_IV]

Liberalism or heterodoxy?

As for me, I’m all for liberalism, a political notion, but I join with those Catholic conservatives who want solid orthodoxy in every one of our dioceses, and that’s a religious notion.

To me there’s only one kind of Catholic. A Catholic that thinks abortion should be made illegal and be outlawed, that thinks same-sex unions should not be recognized, that all life should protected from conception until death and believes that pro-abortion politicians should be denied communion.

 

[didymus]

Is American influence on the Conclave a good thing? What do you think? It makes me feel uneasy.

Link

Check out this article about the imbalance between the number of N. American and European cardinals and the number from Africa & S. America, where most of the world’s Catholics actually are.

From the article:

In addition, there are places where the limited number of spots for new cardinals might be better utilized. Here’s a projection of what the top ten Catholic countries on earth will be in 2050, as measured by population:

• Brazil: 215 million
• Mexico: 132 million
• Philippines: 105 million
• United States: 99 million
• Democratic Republic of Congo: 97 million
• Uganda: 56 million
• France: 49 million
• Italy: 49 million
• Nigeria: 47 million
• Argentina: 46.1 million

By way of comparison, here are the Catholic nations with the largest number of cardinal electors:

• Italy: 22
• United States: 13
• France: 6
• Spain: 6
• Germany: 6
• Brazil: 4
• Mexico: 4
• Canada: 3
• Poland: 3
• India: 3
• Colombia: 3

Yes, I know the Church isn’t a democracy but a little “redistricting” might be called for nonetheless. Certainly havig the top of the hierarchy almost exclusively from “the North” perpetuates the image of Catholicism as a colonial religion.

 

[Richardols]

To me there’s only one kind of Catholic. A Catholic that thinks abortion should be made illegal and be outlawed, that thinks same-sex unions should not be recognized, that all life should protected from conception until death and believes that pro-abortion politicians should be denied communion.

You have your opinion, but I think that being a Catholic amounts to a lot more than that. There are Evangelicals, Protestants, and Jews who accept what you’ve just said. What kind of Catholic does that make them?

 

[Digitonomy]

Check out this article about the imbalance between the number of N. American and European cardinals and the number from Africa & S. America, where most of the world’s Catholics actually are.
John L. Allen:

Here’s a projection of what the top ten Catholic countries on earth will be in 2050, as measured by population:

John Allen has a good point, as usual, but I’m puzzled as to why he used figures from 2050. It seems likely that the issue will improve over the next 43 years. Much better to demonstrate a present problem would be current figures.

 

[didymus]

John Allen has a good point, as usual, but I’m puzzled as to why he used figures from 2050. It seems likely that the issue will improve over the next 43 years. Much better to demonstrate a present problem would be current figures.

I wondered about that too. One good first step would be not to replace any Italian cardinals as they resign or die off until the number is down to that of other European countries.

 

[jimcav]

John Allen has a good point, as usual, but I’m puzzled as to why he used figures from 2050. It seems likely that the issue will improve over the next 43 years. Much better to demonstrate a present problem would be current figures.

Do you mean that you think the Catholic problem in Europe will get better over the next 43 years?

If you do, there seems to be little to indicate that. All the studies out there are saying that not only is Catholicism and Christianity on the wain, but so is marriage and with that the size of the family. Europe is being nearly overrun with migrants, who are mostly Muslims, and they are having bigger families. The combination of these factors doesn’t bode well for the Catholic future of the continent.

Strictly non scientific, but two years ago I went to Spain and Portugal with my wife and two kids, and the lack of children to be seen in either of these countries was so glaring that I actually noticed it! After a week there, I asked my wife if it was me, or were there very few children to be seen anywhere? She agreed, there were few kids. That got us asking the Spaniards why, and we found out it was really because of the lack of marriages, birth control, abortions etc.

Secularism is running rampant in Europe, and it will be the downfall of the continent if something isn’t done quickly. I believe that Pope Benedict was chosen for this very reason…

 

[Petergee]

The Vatican has always had a love/hate relation with the United States. They hate the dissent, but love the financial support. It would be foolish to say this is all about money, but it would be equally foolish to say money has nothing to do with it.

Call me “foolish” then. Seriously, you are claiming that US Catholics are in effect saying to the Pope, “We’ll reduce our donations if you don’t keep appointing plenty of US cardinals?” What rot. Money has zero to do with it.

To ignore the United States or allow it to be under represented in the Conclave is to jepardize between 1/3 and 1/2 of the Vatican’s annual budget. The fluctuation has more to do with the changing value of the dollar than the changing giving habits of America. No other country comes close to America’s financial support of the Vatican.

The United States also has a lot of Catholics, third behind Brazil and the Phillippines, so it makes sense that America’s influence on the conclave grows.

Wrong again. Mexico has almost twice as many Catholics as the USA, and almost as many Catholics as the USA and the Phillippines combined. See catholic-hierarchy.org/country/sc1.html

Everyone here and at NCR seems to be forgetting that there’s a hell of a lot more to being a Cardinal than having a nice title and a nice red hat and getting to vote for a pope. Cardinals are the pope’s collaborators and have important work to do. In countries like Brazil, Mexico and the Phillippines where there is a severe shortage of able clergy, the pope is understandably reluctant to give good strong pastoral bishops extra distractions from their vital and busy work.

I do agree there should be more cardinals from/in the Third World though if at all possible.

 

[Digitonomy]

Do you mean that you think the Catholic problem in Europe will get better over the next 43 years?

If you do, there seems to be little to indicate that. All the studies out there are saying that not only is Catholicism and Christianity on the wain, but so is marriage and with that the size of the family.

I essentially predicted that the disparity between the cardinal/Catholic population ratio of various continents will improve. You can place your bets on whether this will be due to Catholicism flourishing in Europe in coming decades, or more cardinals being appointed from the Third World.

 

[Nohome]

Call me “foolish” then.

Suit yourself, it takes real money to run the Church and the Pope knows where his bread is buttered.

Wrong again. Mexico has almost twice as many Catholics as the USA, and almost as many Catholics as the USA and the Phillippines combined. See catholic-hierarchy.org/country/sc1.html

You’ll forgive me for not using the same source of stats. It appears they omitted Mexico.

nationmaster.com/graph/rel_cat-religion-catholics

At any rate, the USA is way up there in Catholic numbers and way over the top in financial support.

In countries like Brazil, Mexico and the Phillippines where there is a severe shortage of able clergy, the pope is understandably reluctant to give good strong pastoral bishops extra distractions from their vital and busy work.

Point well taken, Italy and the USA are clearly dominant in number of Priests.

I do agree there should be more cardinals from/in the Third World though if at all possible.

Since developing nations appear to be Catholic strongholds, this would only make sense.

Nohome

 

[Petergee]

Suit yourself, it takes real money to run the Church and the Pope knows where his bread is buttered.

Sure. But what has this got to do with selecting cardinals? I really can’t picture any Catholic increasing or decreasing his donations to the church because of how many or how few of his countrymen are cardinals.

 

[Digitonomy]

Sure. But what has this got to do with selecting cardinals? I really can’t picture any Catholic increasing or decreasing his donations to the church because of how many or how few of his countrymen are cardinals.

Not on that basis alone. But it is certainly plausible that some wealthy Americans might stop by to visit their buddy the cardinal who works at the Vatican, and donate to whatever happens to be a critical financial need at the time. For those cardinals who are bishops in the US, getting some of these donors an audience with the pope would be appreciated, and while any bishop can probably swing that, the extra access a cardinal has will make it that much easier. And when a personal request is made for a donation, it’s more flattering when it comes from someone higher-ranking rather than someone lower-ranking. And the wealthy tend to like having their egos stroked.

Personally I don’t think that’s a very big part of it.

I think that financially it’s wise to have people high up who will help prevent the Church from inadvertently alienating one of its cash cows. Management-wise it’s helpful to have people who can use the lessons and techniques from a country where the Church is doing comparatively well, to apply to other western countries where the Church is really struggling. Plus the US is more diverse than most other nations, so on a few issues US cardinals may have a broader perspective on the worldwide Church than a cardinal from say Paraguay.

 

[chicago]

Call me “foolish” then. Seriously, you are claiming that US Catholics are in effect saying to the Pope, “We’ll reduce our donations if you don’t keep appointing plenty of US cardinals?” What rot. Money has zero to do with it.

I disagree. I think that historic practices of withholding contributions to the Vatican until an archbishop is made cardinal can likely even be discovered by those “in the know.”

 

[Nohome]

Sure. But what has this got to do with selecting cardinals? I really can’t picture any Catholic increasing or decreasing his donations to the church because of how many or how few of his countrymen are cardinals.

Ah, but I could see people answering an appeal for money from THEIR Cardinal. A Cardinal in Chicago or New York can bring way more beans to Rome than Mexico City.

Nohome

 

[Petergee]

Ah, but I could see people answering an appeal for money from THEIR Cardinal. A Cardinal in Chicago or New York can bring way more beans to Rome than Mexico City.

Nohome

I’m sorry, I still disagree and I see no evidence of any relationship between wealth/donations and numbers of Cardinals. And how do you explain the fact that India has far more Cardinals per Catholic than the USA, when India is much poorer, and the majority of Indian Catholics are from the poor, “untouchable” and “tribal” classes?

I’m sure that when a Pope is deciding whether to make someone a Cardinal, *“How many beans will he bring in?” *is the last thing on his mind.

 

[Nohome]

I’m sorry, I still disagree and I see no evidence of any relationship between wealth/donations and numbers of Cardinals. And how do you explain the fact that India has far more Cardinals per Catholic than the USA, when India is much poorer, and the majority of Indian Catholics are from the poor, “untouchable” and “tribal” classes?

I’m sure that when a Pope is deciding whether to make someone a Cardinal, *“How many beans will he bring in?” *is the last thing on his mind.

It is impossible to compare a mission nation like India to the United States. India doesn’t bring wealth to Rome, India brings a different commodity to Rome, that being Priests.

The Pope is ever mindful of the costs of running the church, both in Rome and in missions like India. The Pope does not need to be of this world, but he must be in it.

Nohome

 

[Petergee]

It is impossible to compare a mission nation like India to the United States. India doesn’t bring wealth to Rome, India brings a different commodity to Rome, that being Priests.

If an Indian is thinking “Maybe I should become a priest, because there’s a good chance I could be a Cardinal one day”, then he’s exactly the sort of priest the Church does NOt want.

The Pope is ever mindful of the costs of running the church, both in Rome and in missions like India. The Pope does not need to be of this world, but he must be in it.

Nohome

Nobody is disputing that. I merely reject your assertion that financial considerations are a significant factor in deciding who should be created a Cardinal.

 

[Nohome]

Nobody is disputing that. I merely reject your assertion that financial considerations are a significant factor in deciding who should be created a Cardinal.

I don’t think I ever made any inference as to how significant money is in the selection process, just that it is a consideration. So yes, we disagree.

Nohome