By now you have heard that there will be a consistory in November to create new Cardinals. The latest batch is a mixed bag.
I have been going a zillion miles an hour since I hit Rome so I haven’t been able to sift this yet.
I have two impressions about the possible line up. Note that Francis did not stick to cardinalatial tradition and give the red hat as a matter of course to the Archbishop’s Philadelphia and Los Angeles. That must mean something. But what?
First, for these USA, the Pope has chosen me that are not what one would be tempted to called “culture warriors”. I’m sure that libs are happy with the choices because this is how they will read the picks for the cardinalate. They’ll be cheering about how Francis passed over Archbp Chaput and Archbp. Gomez in favor of the three he chose. Chaput, strongly, and Gomez, more and more, defend Catholic teaching in the public square and are strong Catholic identity bishops. Gomez hasn’t been very vocal so far, but he has been shifting. The last thing that libs want in the public square is a strong Catholic identity that understands and enunciates clearly the primacy of the right to be born and the sanctity of matrimony between one man and one woman. catholics don’t like or want cultural warriors. They want culture appeasers.
Another possibility is that the Pope is focusing on the peripheries, that is, places that need a special boost, a little extra oomph, the kind of shot in the arm that can come from having a local cardinal. This seems to be a special concern for him. According to that line of thought, however, then Indianapolis and Chicago are now “peripheries” that need extra help! Following that logic, Chicago and Indianapolis are in trouble, whereas Philadelphia and Los Angeles do not, right now at least, need extra help.
The moderation queue is ON.