Robert Mickens, now of the Fishwrap (aka National Sodomitic Reporter aka National Schismatic Reporter) and famous for his Facebook chat about wishing death on Pope Emeritus Benedict (which got him fired from The Tablet), has a piece today about choosing bishops in a new way.
Bishops should be elected with considerable local input.
He beats up for a while on Archbp. Nienstedt, and then…
How many priests and other baptized faithful had a voice in any of these appointments? Where are the concerns of any of them listened to seriously? The “election” of bishops (that’s what the Holy See calls such appointments, underlining the more ancient practice) need not be done by widespread popular vote. In fact, that would be disaster.
But there should be a more serious and involved process that involves a significant representation of the entire community in identifying the most qualified and gifted leaders. And it should be the rule, not the exception, that the choice (or recommendation) of candidate generally be from the local clergy, especially in long-established dioceses.
Such an “election process” needs to be re-established, albeit with provisions for changed modern-day situations.
Let’s think about what he is proposing.
If dioceses elected bishops, what chance would Cupich have had in Chicago? Wouldn’t more local talent have eclipsed Cupich? But, trusting instead in our Holy Father, the Church of Chicago now has Archbp. Cupich, a great favorite on the Left, a great successor to Card. Bernardin. As a matter of fact, Card. Bernardin would never have been elected to Chicago, coming as he did from Cincinnati.
Let’s continue along this line.
Would Montini have made it to Milan?
Would Roncalli have been elected by the Venetians?
Would Mahony have been chosen by the Angelinos?
Would Kasper have wound up in Stuttgart?
Anyway… though I’m sometimes a little hard on Mr. Mickens, I can’t help but thinking that, in this article at least, he might be on to something.
Comment moderation queue is ON.