Here is another example of when laypeople, who have been twisted in their faith by catholic media like The Fishwrap and the Call To Action type organizations in their orbit, go to the zoo about the appointment of their new bishop.
I think we can all agree that it was time for a change in the Diocese of Albany, where the now retired Bp. Hubbard had reigned for some 36 years. He retired at the age of 75, according to Canon Law. Dura lex, sed lex, after all.
At the TimesUnion.com site I saw this:
No local input in selecting a bishop
So much for the thoughtful opinion piece by Bill Halligan (“Bishop’s voice and our voice,” Feb.8) who called on the Catholic faithful — both clergy and laity — to submit their ideas on the qualities they would like to see in the next bishop to the Apostolic Nuncio in Washington, D.C. [Yes, indeed... so much for that op-ed in a newspaper about how Catholic bishops should be selected. Moving on...]
Mr. Halligan, noting his admiration for Bishop Howard Hubbard and the latter’s longstanding concern for the poor and the marginalized, [here it comes] and Pope Francis’ obvious commitment to similar values as well as his desire for greater openness and inclusiveness, was bold enough to think that the appointment process would value the concerns of the diocese’s clergy and laity. ["the diocese's clergy and laity"? ... a half dozen people at a coffee shop in an Albany suburb who think they've come to some interesting conclusions about how the Church should pick bishops?]
Alas, as Pope Francis must be fast realizing, the Vatican bureaucracy is more akin to the Kremlin and it is not going down easily. [These dissidents got a bishop they don't like, so they call the Vatican "the Kremlin".] The appointment comes with no input from the clergy or the laity, [Are they psychic or just ignorant? I guess the latter. Of course, there was input from a range of people, in Albany and elsewhere. But these sour-pusses weren't asked and, therefore, no one was. I guess no one else counts but them and what they wanted.] top-down decision-making, [That's how decisions are made.] no question as to who calls the shots, at least for the immediate future. [The one who calls the shots is the Pope Francis they were just slobbering over: His Holiness confirmed in place the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops and the Apostolic Nuncio in these USA. No question.] This more than anything may prove to be Pope Francis’ biggest challenge in “reopening the windows of the church” and making it a much more welcoming and inclusive church. [Ah, you see... it's not Francis' fault! It's everyone else's fault.]
We pray, nonetheless, that our new Bishop-designate, Monsignor Edward B. Scharfenberger, proves to be a worthy successor to Bishop Hubbard and a true representative of Pope Francis. [This is what happens when people try to punch over their weight and fail. A diocesan bishop is not the representative of the Bishop of Rome.]
Robert K. Corliss
This letter is a good example of the use of manipulative phrases from the sourpuss catholic Left who didn’t get their way.
They are not being bold and zealous in the right way. They would do far better to line up with prayerful support of the new bishop and the process that brought him to Albany.
Remember: Francis doesn’t like sourpusses! As he wrote in Evangelii gaudium 85:
One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, “sourpusses”.