Chicago Catholics Outraged by Hillary Speech

[chicago]

You seem to have a problem with agreeing that the Cardinal should speak out regarding these issues. Is that how you feel?

I believe that the cardinal should act prudently as he sees best fit to respond to the situation. This may entail, in some instances, speaking out publically; and in others dealing with things more quietly behind the scenes. I do not believe that he (or any other bishop, for that matter) has an obligation to make a big show out of objecting any and every time that something like this happens. Such could actually prove counterproductive if matters can better be handled otherwise. I am confident that he broached the concerns as he practically could and saw fit. But, ultimately, he can’t control a private group and what they wish to do. Obviously, he wasn’t going to be able to stop them here and bitching about it probably would have only done more harm then good, in the end.

 

[Tom317]

Not really. Remember, I’m a Chicagoan. And I have a fairly decent perspective on how he likes to deal with these sorts of things as I’ve been watching him closely for the past 10 years. So I suspect that I have a little more insight than the average prognosticator. It’ may be a guess, but it’s an educated guess and not merely based upon some quote of one who’s trying to justify hiring Hilary to speak,

BTW, I really do have a great love for Cardinal George and I think he has done a lot of good work here. It is just my general view that all of our Bishops/Cardinals need to be more open about their condemnation of evil. As with the Pope’s recent statement, I would hope an increasing number of our leaders will start to take a more firm stance regarding core issues…otherwise many weaker Catholics think dissent is okay.

 

[Tom317]

I believe that the cardinal should act prudently as he sees best fit to respond to the situation. This may entail, in some instances, speaking out publically; and in others dealing with things more quietly behind the scenes. I do not believe that he (or any other bishop, for that matter) has an obligation to make a big show out of objecting any and every time that something like this happens. Such could actually prove counterproductive if matters can better be handled otherwise. I am confident that he broached the concerns as he practically could and saw fit. But, ultimately, he can’t control a private group and what they wish to do. Obviously, he wasn’t going to be able to stop them here and bitching about it probably would have only done more harm then good, in the end.

I can “look the other way” on this issue because Cardinal George has suffered greatly over the last couple years, and he has done so in very Pope John Paul II style, quietly and with great acceptance and humilty.

However, just take a look at the landscape of Illinois politicans, it does not take a genius to see we have some of the most rebidly pro-death people in the nation in our own back yard, and some of those people are Catholics and those people seem to do whatever they want without any hint of a consequence from the universal or local Church. Public scandals are real and that happens when Catholics politicians publicly snub their noses as the Church and are never publicly rebuked.

 

[chicago]

BTW, I really do have a great love for Cardinal George and I think he has done a lot of good work here. It is just my general view that all of our Bishops/Cardinals need to be more open about their condemnation of evil. As with the Pope’s recent statement, I would hope an increasing number of our leaders will start to take a more firm stance regarding core issues…otherwise many weaker Catholics think dissent is okay.

And, as another poster has already noted, Cardinal George has been quite forward in his views about these issues. At times, he has even gone so far as to publically question whether certain “Catholics” are really Catholic or if priests should continue their ministry. You just don’t get articles written about that stuff by the conservative press outlets which prefer to excoriate people for what they don’t do or only praise them when they do exactly as the groups which write up and distrubute such communications desire.

 

[Tom317]

And, as another poster has already noted, Cardinal George has been quite forward in his views about these issues. At times, he has even gone so far as to publically question whether certain “Catholics” are really Catholic or if priests should continue their ministry. You just don’t get articles written about that stuff by the conservative press outlets which prefer to excoriate people for what they don’t do or only praise them when they do exactly as the groups which write up and distrubute such communications desire.

I live in the Chicago Archdiocese and have been very much connceted to local Church happenings.

 

[chicago]

I live in the Chicago Archdiocese and have been very much connceted to local Church happenings.

So, then, you ought to know better, no?

 

[Tom317]

So, then, you ought to know better, no?

My view of matters in the Chicago Archdiocese conflicts a bit with yours, but discussion of those views will likely make us wander into off topic areas.

 

[chicago]

My view of matters in the Chicago Archdiocese conflicts a bit with yours, but discussion of those views will likely make us wander into off topic areas.

O, come now, let’s discuss! Afterall, this is, ultimately a thread about Chicago Ecclesiastical Politics, when you really come down to it. Besides, such is far more interesting than yet more back and forth re-tread about how vocal a bishop should or shouldn’t be when it comes to something like Hilary speaking that goes on in secula seculorum here.

 

[Tom317]

O, come now, let’s discuss! Afterall, this is, ultimately a thread about Chicago Ecclesiastical Politics, when you really come down to it. Besides, such is far more interesting than yet more back and forth re-tread about how vocal a bishop should or shouldn’t be when it comes to something like Hilary speaking that goes on in secula seculorum here.

Not going there on a public forum.

I am sure you understand.

 

[Monica02]

Does anyone else out there in the Chicago Archdiocese suspect that the good cardinal is being threatened? Blackmailed?

I believe that he is truly Catholic and pro-life in his beliefs but his actions seem to indicate that he is unwilling (perhaps scared) to go too far in attempting to influence the actions of the pro-abort, anti-Church people who disguise themselves as Catholics.

I know of several very popular, influential priests who seem to get away with outrageous, blatent dissent. I cannot help but think that they are blackmailing CG with information about something that might have happened under Bernardin.

Something is rotten in Chicago.

 

[Tom317]

Does anyone else out there in the Chicago Archdiocese suspect that the good cardinal is being threatened? Blackmailed?

I believe that he is truly Catholic and pro-life in his beliefs but his actions seem to indicate that he is unwilling (perhaps scared) to go too far in attempting to influence the actions of the pro-abort, anti-Church people who disguise themselves as Catholics.

I know of several very popular, influential priests who seem to get away with outrageous, blatent dissent. I cannot help but think that they are blackmailing CG with information about something that might have happened under Bernardin.

Something is rotten in Chicago.

I seriously doubt that. Cardinal George has had horrible health problems in recent years and frankly they were quite life threatening. I am sure he went into the surgeries he had with the thought that he might be going to the Lord, and I am not sure how such a person could be blackmailed. I also think it is fairly scandulous to propose such an idea about a Cardinal.

 

[Monica02]

I seriously doubt that. Cardinal George has had horrible health problems in recent years and frankly they were quite life threatening. I am sure he went into the surgeries he had with the thought that he might be going to the Lord, and I am not sure how such a person could be blackmailed. I also think it is fairly scandulous to propose such an idea about a Cardinal.

You know, I am very suspicious. I do believe there is something scandulous going on here. The poor cardinal almost died after his cancer surgery. It would be really easy for anyone at Loyola to “make a mistake” . There is an enormous amount of dissent in this archdiocese - alot of people do not want an orthodox bishop.

Chicago is alomost 50% Catholic - but Illinois is the abortion dumping ground of the midwest and the vast majority of elected officials are pro-gay, pro-abortion.

Something is wrong here and I do think the Archdiocese has a role in this puzzling situation.

 

[Tom317]

You know, I am very suspicious. I do believe there is something scandulous going on here. The poor cardinal almost died after his cancer surgery. It would be really easy for anyone at Loyola to “make a mistake” . There is an enormous amount of dissent in this archdiocese - alot of people do not want an orthodox bishop.

Chicago is alomost 50% Catholic - but Illinois is the abortion dumping ground of the midwest and the vast majority of elected officials are pro-gay, pro-abortion.

Something is wrong here and I do think the Archdiocese has a role in this puzzling situation.

It could be as simple as Cardinal George is not as orthodox as we may have thought.

 

[chicago]

It could be as simple as Cardinal George is not as orthodox as we may have thought.

That’s probably a more scandalous and outrageous claim than the concept of blackmail (which, considering Chicago Church politics and it’s priests really isn’t all that outrageous). So, please do elaborate on your thoughts here.

My own take is simply that the cardinal has found it best to do what he can with the hand he has been dealt.

 

[Teelynn]

Because most of the priests (and people) in the Archdiocese of Chicago are Democrats.

And most dems (although not all) believe in abortion. The whole state of Illinois is a Democratic State, (I live here, believe me I know) but the last time I looked it is the duty of all Catholics, Clergy included (and you would think especially Clergy ) to oppose those candidates that support abortion. You can’t tell me these priests who headed this organization didn’t know H. Clinton’s stance on abortion.:banghead:

 

[Tom317]

That’s probably a more scandalous and outrageous claim than the concept of blackmail (which, considering Chicago Church politics and it’s priests really isn’t all that outrageous). So, please do elaborate on your thoughts here.

My own take is simply that the cardinal has found it best to do what he can with the hand he has been dealt.

My thoughts are Cardinal George has gone through a lot and may have become less of an enforcer then he was perceived to be. Let’s be honest here, the abuses at parish level have not changed a bit…so we know he is not the enforcer many feared when he came hear a decade ago.

Some people simply do not have the admisistrative bite in them to do what is required in these truly troubled times.

 

[Teelynn]

Something is wrong here and I do think the Archdiocese has a role in this puzzling situation.

I am also in this diocese, and the only thing I know for sure is that liberalism was rampant for a very long time. That’s not scandalous, that is a fact jack! (and I’m sure you could say the same for several diocese in California and on the East Coast also) However, (and this is a pretty big “however”) the tide seems to be turning to some degree. At least in my neck of the woods. I can see how one’s imagination could lead them to speculate of blackmail in a liberal climate, but that’s all it would be, pure speculation. No one would ever know what goes on inside the diocese unless*** you were on the inside.***

 

[francesco920]

Perhaps the cardinal is worried that if he angers her and if Hillary Clinton gets elected president she might support a “hate crimes” law that would make it a “hate crime” for anyone to discriminate against homosexuals? Perhaps a similar law to the law that passed in Great Britain forcing Catholic adoption agencies to allow gays to adopt? But maybe she will do this whether or not members of the hierarchy anger her or not?

At any rate, I do believe that Catholic teaching must be defended no matter what, even if martyrdom is the result. I’m a little disappointed, but I know that Cardinal George has been orthodox so I will say that maybe the good cardinal made a mistake.

I must admit that I’m still a little disappointed, however.

 

[chicago]

My thoughts are Cardinal George has gone through a lot and may have become less of an enforcer then he was perceived to be. Let’s be honest here, the abuses at parish level have not changed a bit…so we know he is not the enforcer many feared when he came hear a decade ago.

I will agree with you there. It is clear that “Francis the Corrector” changed his ways from early on after being shouted down. Though he still clearly corrects at times (in ways that some might notice and others will not), he’s taken a different approach from his first year or two here which has left the more liberal elements somewhat contented. That said, I don’t think that “cracking down” would have effectively worked with them, anyway. Cardinal Bernardin is said to have tried that and been stood up to, treatened with walkouts by his pastors.

Some people simply do not have the admisistrative bite in them to do what is required in these truly troubled times.

I do believe, however, that at the adminstrative level, he has made many changes to install more of his own people who will act in accord, generally, with his desires. So he is doing what he can where he can, but he isn’t superman either and can’t do it all.

 

[Tom317]

I will agree with you there. It is clear that “Francis the Corrector” changed his ways from early on after being shouted down. Though he still clearly corrects at times (in ways that some might notice and others will not), he’s taken a different approach from his first year or two here which has left the more liberal elements somewhat contented. That said, I don’t think that “cracking down” would have effectively worked with them, anyway. Cardinal Bernardin is said to have tried that and been stood up to, treatened with walkouts by his pastors.

I do believe, however, that at the adminstrative level, he has made many changes to install more of his own people who will act in accord, generally, with his desires. So he is doing what he can where he can, but he isn’t superman either and can’t do it all.

I think a great many people would prefer there be walkouts, then let the situation go on. People see what goes on and then they figure they can do whatever they want. Sometimes it is as if the Church leaders do no believe what they are preaching, so the lay Catholics often take it as a reason to do as they please. Chicago needed an enforcer, not a corrector.