Archbishop Chaput named to head Philadelphia see [CWN]

[RobbyS]

When I was a young friar, I lived with Charlie Chaput and Sean O’Malley. They were a few years older. I mention the cardinal, because they both have the same background.

They have a tremendous ability to relate to non-Catholics, because they are Capuchin Franciscans. This obedience was carved out of the larger Franciscan Order during the Reformation. They were given three missions: 1) To do penance, 2) To convert Catholics to Catholicism and 3) To rescue Protestants. Notice, they were to rescue, not convert the Protestants. They had a very clear idea that the lay Protestant of the time was really a Catholic who was following a leader that was misleading them. However, in order to bring these Catholics back into the fold, they had to get the other Catholics to knock off the nonsense that they were pandering and live the Catholic faith. They were to refer to Francis of Assisi as their example of how to live the Catholic faith. Everythng they teach is what they believe Francis would say to today’s world, in order to bring it back to Christ.

Archbishop Chaput is an academic. He was a university professor of Social Science. He also holds a doctorate in theology. He is a well known researcher in Catholic Social Teachings. His area of stongest interest is the rights of the unborn.

He has a wonderful sense of humor. He is very gentle in his approach. He is also a very good listener. He is very obedient to the Capuchin community and yes, he’s very short. LOL

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

He is also an Indian, and even though he is very “white” it shows up in his manner. One: Indians are great talkers and Two: deadpan is normal. Buster Keaton could have been Indian

 

[Thomas_Casey]

He is also an Indian, and even though he is very “white” it shows up in his manner. One: Indians are great talkers and Two: deadpan is normal. Buster Keaton could have been Indian

Actually, they don’t call themselves Indians. They are the Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation. They are recognized by the Federal Government as an autonomous nation that lives within the boundaries of the USA. Therefore, they enjoy a sort of dual citizenship. I’m not into the legal details. You’ll have to forgive me on that one. They are citizens of two nations, the USA and the Potawatomi. He appears lighter on TV in in photos. Knowing him in person, I can tell you that he has the olive complexion. My guess is tha the Potawatomi don’t have the deep red skin. However, if you look at his eyes, they are very Asian, which is where the Native Americans came from. Now that I think of it, I don’t remember if he speaks the language. Many Native Americans are bilingual.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[quilisma]

Congradulations to the wonderful people of Phili. Now as for the Archbishop Chaput’s replacement i can only hope that it is Bishop James Van Johnston of the diocese of Springfield-Cape Girardeau. He has proven to be a great bishop and at least in my opinion he is ready for the pallum.

Forgive me, Father, for I am spoiled It’s been so refreshing having outspokenly orthodox leadership (Denver has not always been so blessed, especially back in the 70’s…) that it will be difficult to find someone to fill Abp. Chaput’s sandals – he has always been fearless about holding those (both religious and secular) who should know better, responsible for that which God has entrusted to them.

So… since the Holy Father in his wisdom has chosen to bless Philly with Chaput… I’m hoping his successor in Denver might be Bruskewitz! :knight1:

 

[Young_Thinker]

So… since the Holy Father in his wisdom has chosen to bless Philly with Chaput… I’m hoping his successor in Denver might be Bruskewitz! :knight1:

If it is Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz whom you are talking about, I highly doubt that he will be moving on any more post, given that he has already reached the episcopal retirement age (75). It is unfortunate, but that is how goes in the Church right now. But I really hope that Denver receives another great archbishop.

 

[Kardinal]

If it is Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz whom you are talking about, I highly doubt that he will be moving on any more post, given that he has already reached the episcopal retirement age (75). It is unfortunate, but that is how goes in the Church right now. But I really hope that Denver receives another great archbishop.

Further, if Brother JR is correct about the Holy Father’s criteria for bishops, I don’t think Bishop Bruskewitz qualifies. He is anything but gentle.

But I think we can use a few firebrands. Not necessarily in the major diocese, but a few.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Further, if Brother JR is correct about the Holy Father’s criteria for bishops, I don’t think Bishop Bruskewitz qualifies. He is anything but gentle.

But I think we can use a few firebrands. Not necessarily in the major diocese, but a few.

Indeed. There is nothing like an old-fashioned, bossy preacher (especially of the fire-and-brimstone variety)!

 

[Dale_M]

If it is Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz whom you are talking about, I highly doubt that he will be moving on any more post, given that he has already reached the episcopal retirement age (75).

Yes, he turned 75 nearly a year ago, which is when he submitted his mandatory letter offering to step down. At the time, he told reporters he was interested in staying active in the diocese in some capacity. And so far, no replacement has been named.

But I really hope that Denver receives another great archbishop.

I think that is pretty likely. As Br. JR pointed out, there are many good bishops to choose from. And apparently, Archbishop Chaput will be submitting some recommendations.
Denver Post:

Chaput said he will spend the next week or more thinking hard about what constitutes the greatest pastoral needs of Denver and which qualities in an archbishop would make a good match.

He will make recommendations, he said, but wouldn’t disclose them.

denverpost.com/news/ci_18519007

The process of finding a replacement is expected to take at least six months.

 

[Tsuwano]

I would take this with a grain of salt. No one really knows how this happens. The pope is given several names by the Nuncio and along with those names is a CV for each. That much is true. It is also true that the two American Franciscan bishops, Cardinal Sean of Boston and Bishop Chaput hold important Vatican assignments.

Cardinal Sean was to head of a team to help deal with the Irish problem, having the experience of Boston, this would make sense. Archbishop Chaput led the visitation of the women religious and he toned it down, because it was becoming like an investigation, which was not the intent.

He is very active in pro-life work. He is also very active in promoting vocations to the sisterhood and brotherhood. He is very knowledgeable of religious life. Philadelphia, which has always been a seat of vocations for women religious, may also see many vocations to the male religious life, not necessarilly to the priesthood, though Bishop Chaput attracts those too. But the number of men coming out of Denver to join the different Franciscan brotherhoods went up significantly, the same for Boston.

One thing that people have to understand about the friars, regardless of which community they belong to, they are very faithful to their charism. This is very attractive to people, in part, because it’s a novelty. Most bishops are secular priests who come out of societies or dioceses. Very few bishops are friars.

A friar walks, talks, acts, thinks, prays, works and interacts like a friar. The difference is the charism. The Dominican, Franciscan or Carmelite, each one has a different charism, but they are very different from other Catholic men. Philadelphia will have its own friar.

Savannah is also getting its own Franciscan Friar, Friar Gregory Hartmayer, OFM Conv. Someone wrote me and told me this. I was pleasantly surprised.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thank you for the information, Brother. If I remember correctly, I read this information on either the Catholic News Service or the Catholic News Agency websites on the day the Bishop’s new appointment was announced. I do take it with a grain of salt, though I know it is not unheard of for the Pope to ignore the recommendations of his committees in order to appoint someone of his own choosing.

 

[Tsuwano]

If you have a reference, I would be interested in reading it…

…with the appropriate grain of salt.

I read this information on either the Catholic New Service or the Catholic News Agency websites on the day the Bishop’s appointment was announced. I can’t remember which site actually contained the information that the Pope had ignored his committee’s recommendations to appoint the Bishop to his new post, but it did mention that the Pope had done so after considerable prayer and reflection.

 

[JReducation]

Thank you for the information, Brother. If I remember correctly, I read this information on either the Catholic News Service or the Catholic News Agency websites on the day the Bishop’s new appointment was announced. I do take it with a grain of salt, though I know it is not unheard of for the Pope to ignore the recommendations of his committees in order to appoint someone of his own choosing.

It happens all the time. The usual process is that the province suggests some names to the Nuncio. The Nuncio filters them out and sends to the Congregation for Bishops those whom he believes are good candidates, along with their CVs. They look at these and make suggestions to the pope.

Given the fact that Archbishop Chaput has worked directly for the Holy Father, he is not an unknown to His Holiness. Remember, Archbishop Chaput was the man they sent to rescue the visitation of the sisters. That was turning into an inquisition. The Holy Father did not want that to happen. Archbishop Chaput was asked to do the visits himself. Most sisters really loved him. and cooperated with him. He has a history of success on papal assignments. He also serves on several Roman Congregations and was a major religious superior. He was known to Cardinal Ratzinger before he became pope.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Tsuwano]

There are a few things that we must understand here. They are not necessary to become bishop, just interesting tid-bits.

The Holy Father has a very special affection for the Franciscan family and the Jesuits. They hold a very special place in his heart. He has given both families a lot of personal attention. He does not ignore other religious families, not at all. The Jesuits and Franciscans were very powerful in sustaining German Catholics during WW II. He has gone out of his way to be with them and to talk to them.

The Franciscans and the Dominicans are very well known for their preaching. Though they do it differently, they are good communicators. Right now, the Church needs bishops who are good communicators. I think we’re going to be seeing more bishops who are skilled in that area, not just Franciscan and Dominican.

There is a genuine need for the bishops of the USA to become more vocal in the political scene. The Holy Father wants to see this. He definitely wants to see the bishops tell the politicians what is right and wrong. He wants to see the bishops tell the laity how to deal with the politicians in a way that protects the right of the Church to be free of influence from the State, but does not leave the state room to be free of the Church’s moral guidance.

Catholics in the USA have allowed the government too much freedom. Bl. John Paul said this to American Catholics on several occasions. I remember when he came to Baltimore, he blasted American Catholics for allowing the State to regulate morality. He argued that American Catholics had not made good use of democracy by making it a goal in life rather than a means for evangelization. Pope Benedict feels the same way. When he speaks to American clergy and religious, this is his constant theme.

We live in a society where religion is to be free from the interference of the State. We should take advantage of that freedom to tell the State what is right and what is wrong and to guide the State. We have misunderstood. We have supported the myth that says there is such a thing as separation between Church and State. This is impossible, because the men and women who make up the Church are citizens of this nation. We have the right to demand that the State listen and that the State not trespass in areas of faith and morals.

The Founding Fathers never said there was such a separation. In fact, Jefferson said that the state could not exist without religion. The State was to stay out of religion, not religion out of the State. The Constitution does not say separation of Church and State. The presidents who have governed our nation have always invoked God. Congress begins the day with prayer. In fact, it’s new chaplain is a Jesuit priest, theologian and lawyer.

We now have several bishops in key dioceses who are not afraid of the State and who are not afraid of Catholics. They come with courage, but also with trust. Archbishop Chaput is one of those men. These men trust God and they also trust the American Catholic.

They know that the American Catholic can be loud, rude, arrogant, disobedient, and at times immoral. However, beneath all of that bravado, the American Catholic has a history of work, sacrifice, suffering and success. Our ancestors came to this country as poor hungry immigrants. We have survived against the odds. I believe that men like Archbishop Chaput know how to speak to that inner man hidden inside every American Catholic.

I do believe we’re seeing the beginning of a face-off between the State and the Church in the USA and at some point, Catholics will have to make some tough choices. I believe we’re going to see many Thomas Mores and unfortunately, a few Cardinal Wolseys.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I agree that we are at the beginning of a greater dialog (or face-off, if you will) between the State and the Church in the USA and I think this is a good thing. I don’t believe the Church and the State in America have interests in opposition. I believe there is a difference in opinion as to which are the best means in reaching a just and decent society without jeopardizing the multicultural and multireligious fabric of American society or the freedom and liberties Americans are used to enjoying. This debate at present, for Catholics as well as people of different faiths, centers around moral issues, such as abortion, same sex marriage, the death penalty, and health care, and the American bishops have both a right and duty to express the voice of the Church in these matters. At the same time, I think it is dangerous and divisive to ignore the common work that government and religious institutions do together in America. There are also areas of cooperation between the Government and the Church. I find your final sentence a bit disturbing, Brother, in that it assumes a failure on the part of some bishops, as yet unknown, to be faithful to their calling and to the moral precepts of the Church. You may be right, of course, but I don’t think it is helpful to the bishops or to those under their care to assume such a failure. Both of us know the difficulty the bishops have in leading the Church in a society and culture which values individual freedom and discernment as much as ours does. We should not presume the bishops are any less faithful than we ourselves are when it comes to protecting the interests and values of the Church, especially since they are on the front line in this dialog and are more familiar with the price that must be paid if the dialog should prove fruitless.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

Good for Philadelphia !!
Chaput is a wonderful spiritual Bishop.
Praise the Lord.

 

[JReducation]

I agree that we are at the beginning of a greater dialog (or face-off, if you will) between the State and the Church in the USA and I think this is a good thing. I don’t believe the Church and the State in America have interests in opposition. I believe there is a difference in opinion as to which are the best means in reaching a just and decent society without jeopardizing the multicultural and multireligious fabric of American society or the freedom and liberties Americans are used to enjoying. This debate at present, for Catholics as well as people of different faiths, centers around moral issues, such as abortion, same sex marriage, the death penalty, and health care, and the American bishops have both a right and duty to express the voice of the Church in these matters.

I agree and I believe that the pope wants them to be vocal. There are many lay Catholics who want them to talk about the bible and leave the state alone. That’s not going to happen.

At the same time, I think it is dangerous and divisive to ignore the common work that government and religious institutions do together in America. There are also areas of cooperation between the Government and the Church.

There have been, for a very long time. Now, the State seems bent on sabbotaging that relationship. I was just in Washington, DC. They are threatening Catholic organizations and even private citizens who refuse to serve same-sex couples. The State started this, not the Church. Catholic Charities is in Washington provides many services to the District of Columbia, from adoptions, to special education. The Disctrict cannot provide those services. Yet, they insist on demanding that the Church adopt these new laws. If the cooperation breaks down, it’s the State’s fault. Citizens can help by demanding that the State back down. It was bad enough that the passed same sex marriage laws. They should know when to stop. Demanding that religious organizations that provide a service to the state comply with laws that the state knows are immoral is foolishness. They’re going to lose. The only thing that can happen is that the Church will back out of social services. The state cannot provide them. The nation is about to go bankrupt.

I find your final sentence a bit disturbing, Brother, in that it assumes a failure on the part of some bishops, as yet unknown, to be faithful to their calling and to the moral precepts of the Church.

Whoah! Slow down. Where did I say that? I’m lost. You’ll have to help me here.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Tsuwano]

I agree and I believe that the pope wants them to be vocal. There are many lay Catholics who want them to talk about the bible and leave the state alone. That’s not going to happen.

There have been, for a very long time. Now, the State seems bent on sabbotaging that relationship. I was just in Washington, DC. They are threatening Catholic organizations and even private citizens who refuse to serve same-sex couples. The State started this, not the Church. Catholic Charities is in Washington provides many services to the District of Columbia, from adoptions, to special education. The Disctrict cannot provide those services. Yet, they insist on demanding that the Church adopt these new laws. If the cooperation breaks down, it’s the State’s fault. Citizens can help by demanding that the State back down. It was bad enough that the passed same sex marriage laws. They should know when to stop. Demanding that religious organizations that provide a service to the state comply with laws that the state knows are immoral is foolishness. They’re going to lose. The only thing that can happen is that the Church will back out of social services. The state cannot provide them. The nation is about to go bankrupt.

Whoah! Slow down. Where did I say that? I’m lost. You’ll have to help me here.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

You’re right, Brother, and I apologize. I was making a reference to the last line in your post # 80. You mention that in the coming face - off between the Church and the State you forsee a number of “Catholics” who will act like St. Thomas More and a few who will act like Cardinal Wolsley. Since the post was primarily about bishops, I made the assumption that this last line was refering to bishops and not Catholics in general. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Kardinal]

Yes, he turned 75 nearly a year ago, which is when he submitted his mandatory letter offering to step down. At the time, he told reporters he was interested in staying active in the diocese in some capacity. And so far, no replacement has been named.

I cannot help but believe that the Holy Father sends as much a message by when he accepts resignations and when he does not.

 

[Brownginger]

Whenever the Holy Father selects a new archbishop for Denver, there will be a vacancy for a new bishop somewhere. I have a perfect candidate, especially if Bishop Conley is named to the top spot, if the powers-that-be would like any assistance

 

[Young_Thinker]

I cannot help but believe that the Holy Father sends as much a message by when he accepts resignations and when he does not.

Indeed. Who knows for how long Cardinal O’Connor would have remained as the Archbishop of New York if he had not died in office at the age of eighty? On the flip side, did you notice how fast Cardinal Mahony was removed this year, being dismissed on his 75th birthday with a Coadjutor Archbishop in line to instantly succeed him?

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Indeed. Who knows for how long Cardinal O’Connor would have remained as the Archbishop of New York if he had not died in office at the age of eighty? On the flip side, did you notice how fast Cardinal Mahony was removed this year, being dismissed on his 75th birthday with a Coadjutor Archbishop in line to instantly succeed him?

There’s so much that goes into those decisions that it’s difficult to say whether or not a message is being sent. For starters, Cardinal Mahony requested a coadjutor so I wouldn’t read too much into that appointment.
Some bishops submit their required resignation but request to stay on, others submit it and make known they’d really like to retire. Then there’s the issue of how large a figure the individual bishop was in the (arch)diocese and how complicated or “important” the (arch)diocese is. And, of course, Cardinal O’Connor was kept on by Blessed JP2 but now Pope Benedict is making those decisions so there could be differences in philosophy.

 

[Young_Thinker]

There’s so much that goes into those decisions that it’s difficult to say whether or not a message is being sent. For starters, Cardinal Mahony requested a coadjutor so I wouldn’t read too much into that appointment.
Some bishops submit their required resignation but request to stay on, others submit it and make known they’d really like to retire. Then there’s the issue of how large a figure the individual bishop was in the (arch)diocese and how complicated or “important” the (arch)diocese is. And, of course, Cardinal O’Connor was kept on by Blessed JP2 but now Pope Benedict is making those decisions so there could be differences in philosophy.

Hmm, interesting.