Do you recall what I posted yesterday about appointments? It seems Marco Tosatti was right.
# RINUNCIA DEL GRAN MAESTRO DELL’ORDINE EQUESTRE DEL SANTO SEPOLCRO DI GERUSALEMME E NOMINA DEL PRO-GRAN MAESTRO
Il Santo Padre ha accolto la rinunzia presentata, per ragioni d’età, dall’Em.mo Card. Carlo Furno all’incarico di Gran Maestro dell’Ordine Equestre del Santo Sepolcro di Gerusalemme ed ha nominato Pro-Gran Maestro del medesimo Ordine Equestre S.E. Mons. John Patrick Foley, Arcivescovo tit. di Neapoli di Proconsolare, finora Presidente del Pontificio Consiglio delle Comunicazioni Sociali.
[00970-01.01]
# NOMINA DEL PRESIDENTE DEL PONTIFICIO CONSIGLIO DELLE COMUNICAZIONI SOCIALI
Il Papa ha nominato Presidente del Pontificio Consiglio delle Comunicazioni Sociali S.E. Mons. Claudio Maria Celli, Arcivescovo tit. di Civitanova, finora Segretario dell’Amministrazione del Patrimonio della Sede Apostolica.
Loading ...
The Holy Father sure is changing things up.
I think some baseball managers should take a lesson from him.
Now, as for H.E. Cardinal Levada I don’t believe that he will be shifted
to New York, like the Italian press speculates.
I knew him when he was my ordinary in Portland. He is intelligent, and a
good administrator, but I think New York is way out of his RBI average.
And besides, he’s a Dodgers fan!
New York needs a big personality again – now that the finances have, er, been straightened up. Dolan’s the natural choice. I hope it’s him.
Could someone please translate? I don’t know Italian.
thanks
The first: The Holy Father has accepted the resignation, for reason of age, of H.E
Card. Carlo Furno as Grand Master of the Equestrine Order of the Holy Sephulcre
of Jerusalem and has named Pro-Grand Master of the same Order H.E. John Patrick
Foley, titualar Archbishop of Proconsolare, former President of the Pontifical
Council for Social Communication.
The second: The Pope has named the President of the Pontifical Council for Social
Communication, Claudio Maria Celli, titual Archbishop of Civitanova, former
Secretary of (not sure) of the Holy See.
I think that’s right … I don’t actually know Italian, though, just Spanish.
“Secretariat of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Holy See.”
I am unsure if by “patrimony” they mean financial or cultural. Still and all, it’s great to hear that Abp. Foley is one step closer to crimson.
Just a quick thought. I asked Archbishop Foley to advise us as to what to do IF we found Catholic press organs behaving in a non-Catholic way. He recommended (I think he meant by this to answer my question) that I read America and Commonweal.
One step closer to crimson? I suspect that he’s been promoted to Tehran.
Mark, I do agree with you that New York needs a big personality or better yet someone that is not scared to put his neck out there and speak the truth. Don’t get me wrong here I like Cardinal Egan with his “Darth Vadar” voice but he is not the big personality, not in the tradition of Cardinal Spellman or Cardinal O’Conner. I hear a lot of good things about Dolan, however I have to read some more on him before I make a discussion but I truly like Archbishops Burke and Chaput. These are men that own that the media light is always on in New York and you are going to make waves no matter what you do, I don’t think Egan is comfortabl with that.
Hardly to Teheran! Assuming the Holy Father intends that he should actually become Grand Master, then he is indeed in line for a red hat.
The Nunciature to Iran is STILL vacant, however, awaiting its most poetically just occupant since 1982…
“I suspect that he’s been promoted to Tehran.”
That’s what I thought, unless this is a position from which cardinals are
frequently juggled to more important posts?
If the Council on Social Communication is anywhere near as interesting as the decree
that called for its establishment, it’s certainly not a job I’d want, though. I
suppose, though, one has to put one’s time in somewhere.
Paul Stokell: The Patrimony referred to in APSA is the financial patrimony – they look after the Vatican’s endowments. “Amministrazione” in Italian often refers to financial matters rather than administration in general in the English sense.
I had the honor of meeting and dining with Archbishop Celli once. As he described it at the time, his description of the job of Head of the Patrimony of the Vatican was, “I pay the Vatican’s bills.” He struck me as a very kind and gracious man (he is a great lover of music) and I’m sure he will do a superb job in his new role.
Dan,
Though I agree that Burke might be a good fit for NY, Chaput has a habit of condemning those harboring opinions different from those of the USCCB. He labeled William Buckley a “cafeteria Catholic” for disagreeing with the economic model set forth in John XIII encyclical Mater et Magistra.
An Archbishop who wraps up timeless doctrine in the same package as his opinions on secular issues (immigration, affirmative action, death penalty, etc.), about which the Church has no monopoly on truth, could do more harm than good. By putting the Church’s prudential judgements about secular matters on the same level as teachings about faith and morals, he would be marginalizing “thinking” Catholics and condemning people who have the canonically approved right to disagree with these prudential judgements. The media in NY could have a field day with this, showing how “doctrine” can flip flop with time.
Richard,
Bl. John XXIII’s encyclical Mater et Magistra wasn’t the USCCB.
But it isn’t infallible, which it would need to justify labeling a scholar disagreeing with it a cafeteria Catholic, just like Evangelium Vitae.
Richard said: “But it isn’t infallible, which it would need to justify labeling a scholar disagreeing with it a cafeteria Catholic, just like Evangelium Vitae.”
Incorrect. Catholics are obliged to give docile assent to all the teachings of the Church, not just the infallible ones. If a non serviam like “Mater Si, Magistra No!” wouldn’t mark one as a cafeteria Catholic, what would? Anyway, it’s not “Mater et Magistra” was Bill Buckley’s only instance of dissent. Buckley also wants to decriminalise recreational, society-destroying drugs. So the Archbishop is right about him.
By the way, Buckly is brilliant and a gifted writer and political and social commentator, but he’s not a “scholar.”
Actually, Jordan, not everything contained in a Papal Encyclical is binding, especially those parts that represent the Popes own opinions that in some way stand against the Encyclicals of previous pontiffs. So, for example, if a Pope said the social welfare state was good, or immigration restrictions were wrong, any Catholic would be free to NOT accept teachings that don’t purport to be binding, so long as they give it thoughtful and respectful consideration.
There was an article in First Things a while ago written by Justice Antonin Scalia. Chaput condemned him for his support of the death penalty so he consulted canon lawyers, who said that the Pope’s teachings in Evangelium Vitae regarding the death penalty were not binding, and that he was free to respectfully disagree. This was good for Scalia since he would have otherwise been obligated to resign.
Don’t get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for His Grace Archbishop Chaput, but does he actually have any authority over Catholics not in his own diocese? Or for that matter, does any bishop?
Regardless, even if Justice Scalia has a right to dissent, I still think it’s worthy to ‘call people out,’ though this doesn’t seem the job, to me, of ordinaries of different dioceses.
Scalia’s point in his published response to Archbishop Chaput was that he wasn’t dissenting by upholding the traditional teachings of the Church since they had never been officially swept aside by JPII, (the equivalent of arguing for the existence of Limbo) and that THAT was the reason Chaput had no right to call him a dissenter.
But I think any bishop does, or most believe they do, have the authority to deal with issues outside his own diocese. Buskewitz and Burke too, I think, excommunicated Kerry back in 2000 when McCarrick didn’t, eventhough they knew he would likely never try to receive communion in their dioceses.
They did actually excommunicate Kerry, did they? I thought they just said theywould deny him communion in their dioceses (though perhaps that is recognition of excommunication late sentence, which is a bit different than excommunicating him directly).