Elevation of Cardinals

  • Thread starter Thread starter JKirkLVNV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JKirkLVNV

Guest
Anyone have information or opinions on the elevation of archbishops in sees that historically have cardinal archbishops leading them and the time frame one usually sees? For example, Archbishop Burke of Saint Louis and Archbishop O’Malley of Boston have yet to be elevated, though St. Louis and Boston are traditionally lead by Cardinals. Also, who would you like to see elevated (not that the Holy Father’s gonna be calling any of us up to pick our brains about it!)? I’d like to see Archbishop Chaput of Denver and Archbishop Sheehan of Santa Fe both elevated.
 
Like spinning a top, I’m going to put this back into circulation again.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
Anyone have information or opinions on the elevation of archbishops in sees that historically have cardinal archbishops leading them and the time frame one usually sees? For example, Archbishop Burke of Saint Louis and Archbishop O’Malley of Boston have yet to be elevated, though St. Louis and Boston are traditionally lead by Cardinals. Also, who would you like to see elevated (not that the Holy Father’s gonna be calling any of us up to pick our brains about it!)? I’d like to see Archbishop Chaput of Denver and Archbishop Sheehan of Santa Fe both elevated.
Click to expand...
Here are some candidates from Italy according to Magister who will probably get red hats (or are at least in line for one).

"…Other than the present cardinals, the ones John Paul II might soon create would also enter the conclave. Expectations are that he will elevate these cardinals by June, or October at the latest. Among those who will certainly receive the purple are: Rylko; the archbishop of Bologna, Carlo Caffarra, a convinced adherent of Ratzinger’s views; and the new archpriest of St. Peter’s Basilica, Angelo Comastri. The latter was the preacher at the 2004 Lenten retreat for the pope and the curia, and he held everyone spellbound, beginning with Dziwisz and Rylko. As the archbishop of Loreto, he met John Paul II on his visit to the Marian shrine in September. The Polish friends of pope Wojtyla favor him as his successor. "

The problem here in the US is twofold: many of the worthy candidates one would like to see get it are too new to have given a strong indicator of what is happening in their dioceses; most of them are having to clean up such messes willed to them that they are buried in that process rather than being able to carve out new fields of endeavor.

The other part of the scene is that demograhics have changed, for instance St. Louis when Ritter was alive was a much more prominent place than it is now so a red hat which used to go there probably will not anymore.

And as always there are the surprises, however, keep in mind that McCarrick and Gregory have a lot of “(name removed by moderator)ut” into things and unless someone in the Vatican has caught onto them we might well be stuck with their brand of candidates. Politics always rears its head in these matters.

Only time will tell. Personally I’d like to see something major done for Fessio, he has suffered for a long time at the hands of his “bretheren” and I am fond of the new Phoenix bishop Olmsted who is really turning that place around. Chaput ought to get it just for courage in bucking the tide of administrative old boy network IMO.
And God only knows O’Malley is doing his purgatory here on earth.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
Hagia Sophia: Where is Fessio?
Click to expand...
When his Provincial pulled all that funny business at the University they pulled him out and sent him to be a chaplain to nuns hoping to bury him alive. But the Domino pizza man got him to help run Ave Maria University. where he is at present. Unfortunately there is now some brouhaha with two campuses being merged into one - I don’t know the ins and outs of the whole matter but IMO Fessio belongs right back where he once was, catechizing and running a thriving Catholic publications ministry and he ought to be given a medal for some of the hardships he has had to endure in silence. God bless him.

When he leaves this world we can honestly say that he has helped catechize more Catholics in his lifetime than has the entire NCCB.
 
40.png
HagiaSophia:
The problem here in the US is twofold: many of the worthy candidates one would like to see get it are too new to have given a strong indicator of what is happening in their dioceses; most of them are having to clean up such messes willed to them that they are buried in that process rather than being able to carve out new fields of endeavor.

The other part of the scene is that demograhics have changed, for instance St. Louis when Ritter was alive was a much more prominent place than it is now so a red hat which used to go there probably will not anymore.

And as always there are the surprises, however, keep in mind that McCarrick and Gregory have a lot of “(name removed by moderator)ut” into things and unless someone in the Vatican has caught onto them we might well be stuck with their brand of candidates. Politics always rears its head in these matters.
Click to expand...
I would add that there are no American cardinals set to reach age 80 for at least 18 months, possibly longer. The next American bishop to receive the red hat will probably be Archbishop O’Malley due to the prominence of his see. I agree that St. Louis has probably permanently lost its status as a see held by a cardinal.

But I thought Cardinal Rigali had a strong influence (stronger even than Cardinal McCarrick and Archbishop Gregory) on the choices for bishops in this country.

-Illini
 
In terms of the US, I’d expect Archbishop Sean Patrick O’Malley, O.F.M. Cap. (Boston) to be included on the next list and perhaps Archbishop José Horacio Gómez (San Antonio) - but unlikely to see any others.

One more US-related possibility - Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo (Nuncio to the US) who reached the retirement age recently.

My best guess for timing is late June - which would mean an early June announcement.

Currently there are 118 cardinal electors - but we lose 5 more due to age by the end of the year.

Cardinal Maida (Detroit) reaches his 75th birthday in about a week. Cardinal McCarick (Washington) does the same in July. I suspect both are likely to get replacements in the next year - but those are unlikely to become cardinals anytime soon.
 
There is always lots of speculation about this, as well as lots of discussion that “cardinalatial” sees might not be a good idea anyway. The tradition was that the archbishop of a cardinalatial see would not get the red hat until the death of his retired successor, so that there would not be “too many” American cardinals bumping into each other. Given the state in which Cardinal Law left Boston AND the fact that technically Law has a new “cardinalatial” post, I expect O’Malley to be elevated soon, especially considering the work he’s done and still has to do. I agree that St. Louis is probably finished as a cardinalatial see, and I wonder if after Maida retires Detroit won’t be as well. JPII in his heyday seemed to like mixing things up and naming cardinals from smaller sees, so it would be interesting to see the red hat go to Archbishop Chaput, unless he is earmarked for Los Angeles already and will have to wait until then.
 
40.png
Fortiterinre:
… to Archbishop Chaput, unless he is earmarked for Los Angeles already and will have to wait until then.
Click to expand...
Cardinal Mahony (Los Angeles) doesn’t turn 75 until Feb 2011 - and doesn’t lose his vote until 2016. I can’t see them holding someone “in reserve” that long.
 
40.png
Illini:
But I thought Cardinal Rigali had a strong influence (stronger even than Cardinal McCarrick and Archbishop Gregory) on the choices for bishops in this country.

-Illini
Click to expand...
Rigali is really in an extra-ordinary position; although American he has spent his entire priestly career as a curial official - thus in order to get a red hat, he had to show some pastoral experience so St. Louis was the place for it. I would imagine that he has given (name removed by moderator)ut to several of his friends back in Rome as to his impressions - however the Natl councils have a great deal more “clout” and so does the nuncio – we haven’t been very fortunate with nuncios here.
 
I had no idea Cardinal Mahoney was so young, he has certainly been around for a while. I would love to see Chaput move up SOMEWHERE, I really like how he teaches.
 
But that’s another point: why should Denver be deprived of their wonderful Archbishop (though I suppose most of his former see feels the same way, he came to Denver already a bishop) to whip LA into shape and allow Archbishop Chaput to ascend to the scarlet? I wish the Holy Father would elevate him based on his fidelity, leave him in Denver, then appoint a good and godly priest to LA, and raise him too, if he’s faithful. I suppose another case for “fairness” (it really isn’t a matter of justice and it isn’t for us to advise the Holy Father, unless he asks) might be made for the historic see of Santa Fe, which was so pivotal in the conversion of the Southwest and which is now headed by a no-nonsense and faithful Archbishop. Why not raise Archbishop Sheehan? And doesn’t Texas, where the Faith is growing in terms of converts, “deserve” a red hat? Just thinking off the top of my head…my very Texan/New Mexican head (grew up in one, taught 11 years in the other).
 
That is a good point–“translation” of sees was once supposed to be an exception, and now there seems to be a regular career ladder from 1.) auxiliary or small see and then to 2.) larger see or small metropolitan see and then to 3.) large metropolitan see or cardinal see. I’ve read that theologically it can be hard to justify translation of sees so often if we hold to the theology that the bishop should be “wedded” to his flock. It would be daunting to go from priest of a diocese to archbishop/cardinal, although back in the day apparently it was more common.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top