Blasé Cupich?
When I heard of the announcement of the new Archbishop of Chicago this weekend, I checked my Twitter account. I like Twitter for the fact that I have several news sources that give interesting and up to the minute tweets on newsworthy (and sometimes not so newsworthy) items. So, of course, I wanted to check out the commentary from news sources–both Catholic and otherwise–on the new appointment of the Archbishop. This is immediately what I saw from the Chicago Sun-Times:
Blasé? I suspect that this misprint (which was corrected within the hour) was the result of a very helpful autocorrect function, courtesy of Twitter. It did raise a question in my mind that perhaps, though a misprint, it might be more accurate than even the Sun-Times might know. But I had to catch myself. Before the episcopal prognostications are in, permit me to step back to 1997, the last time a new Archbishop was given to Chicago.
Joseph Cardinal Bernardin (Archbishop of Chicago from 1983-1997) died in November of 1996. Appointed to the See of Chicago by St. John Paul II, Bernardin was the darling of the media and the political Left. During the immediate years after the Second Vatican Council, Bernardin was instrumental in the crafting of the bureaucratic apparatus of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Holding various key positions in that body as a Monsignor, Auxiliary Bishop of Atlanta, and Archbishop of Cincinnatti, he helped to set the tone for the National Conference and how it did business. Upon becoming Archbishop of Chicago and being raised to the Cardinalate, he solidified a base that put him as arguably the most powerful prelate in the United States. Under his tenure as Archbishop of Chicago, the largely theologically-liberal (i.e., dissenting) and politically liberal (it’s Chicago–everyone’s a Democrat!) presbyterate had in Bernardin an archbishop that, if he didn’t leave them alone, he certainly looked the other way. The Association of Chicago Priests was formed under his predecessor, John Cardinal Cody, and the group clashed with Cody routinely. Bernardin also provided cover for the myriad of Democrat politicians and outright theological dissenters in his ill-conceived and ill-executed “Common Ground Initiative.” On this latter point, this author even remembers arguing with Sr. Carolyn Farrell, BVM, then Vice President for Women and Leadership at Loyola University Chicago, over her claim that the Common Ground Initiative justified a student group inviting Planned Parenthood to give a presentation on campus. Sparks flew on that one, though that is material for another article.
Yet for all that, there were some key moves–e.g., placing the largest church in the Archdiocese under the governance of the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei, cultivating a young, solid, priest-Chancellor who would go on to become the unapologetically orthodox Bishop of Springfield, Illinois, and supporting Joe Scheidler’s Pro-Life Action League–that were positive contributions to the Church in Chicago. Nevertheless, the priests of the archdiocese under his tenure continued to be a fiercely independent and, in many cases, a heterodox lot. One only need to mention the names Pfleger and Greeley among others.
I recall being in Rome during the sede vacante of the Chicago Archdiocese. It was March 1997 and during my stay I had occasion to share a meal with a Chicago priest, Fr. Thomas Baima, a protege of Cardinal Bernardin and ecumenist then in Rome for further studies. When I asked him over mostaccioli about the type of man who might be Bernardin’s successor, he replied (as it turned out, correctly) a man who would be in the mold–intellectually, especially– of John Paul II. And so it was, that Francis George was appointed. It didn’t take long for some in the presbyterate to criticize their new Archbishop. The appellation “Francis the Corrector” was given for requirements that his priests uphold the norms–liturgical and otherwise–of the Church. The media was not enthused with the new choice and focused more on anecdotes of his Chicago childhood than on his fidelity to the faith of the Church. I recall being in Chicago at the time and hearing the criticism and thinking–“Give the guy a chance! He’s been Archbishop for 10 minutes!”
Fast forward to the present. Archbishop-designate Cupich should be likewise be given a chance. (I will not lie. My candidates were Bishop Paprocki or Cardinal Burke–long shots, no doubt, but why settle for anything less than the best!) The fact that the National Catholic Reporter is jubilant as well as the de facto schismatic and heretical Call to Action, the media, and the LGBTQ community does not give me positive vibes. Neither does the Archbishop-designate’s apparent unwillingness to be confrontational with those who need to be confronted especially on issues of defense of the Church, the family, and the human person. Likewise, there seems to be a such a strong desire to get along with an overtly hostile government that even certain of his past statements border on naiveté especially where certain mandates that directly impact non-negotiable elements of the Church’s teaching are concerned. This is all part of the record and we can rightly look at these things. But more serious questions remain: Does the “Fr. Baima principle” on episcopal appointments hold here as well–is this a bishop in the mold of Pope Francis? Is this the type of bishop we can now expect from the Holy Father–one who embodies a sort of Ostpolitik with modern secular culture? What are the limits of a Catholic Bishop’s accommodation with the world–has the Holy Father spelled that out?
Yet, before we pronounce on whether or not he is Blasé or whether or not he has a strong voice in defense of Christ and His Bride as Archbishop of Chicago, let us allow him to be installed and enthroned. Let us offer our prayers and sacrifices for him in his most important role. And let us commend him to the protection of the Great Mother of God. It’s sad when those of us who profess a hermeneutic of continuity and orthodoxy begin treating episcopal appointments as one would political appointees, rather than authentic successors of the Apostles. Let us not be stupid, but also let us give His Excellency a chance.
Finally, if there is any doubt as to the voice of the new Archbishop of Chicago, let us commend him to his patron, St. Blase–that he may “preserve Archbishop Cupich from infections of the throat, and all other afflictions.”
This article, Blasé Cupich? is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
https://bellarmineforum.org/blase-cupich/
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.
Careful inspection of that picture reveals what appears to be a wreckovated church. 🙁
It behooves us to keep in mind that (1) willful ignorance is not charity and (2) irrespective of our respective points of view, the outsider Satan is clamoring to get in and does not honor cease-fires.
I’m all for getting to know the history, but truth be told, we won’t know for certain what God intends until we get it. I do find it bothersome that this church in the press picture is a wreckovation. I’ve been wondering if we are yet to see “Common Ground Lite” or the rewoven Seamless Garment.
I’m not blind to the comments made, even in press leading up to this. In one, the sentiment was that we should unite (hence, my common ground joke) — but we all know that Jesus was not known for tolerance with error, in fact, regarding error, Jesus said that He did not come to unite but He was clear that He came to divide. At the same time, the parable of the wheat and weeds seems to be true, even in the AmChurch era. Would that we ask for the threshing now? Does it not mean that the entire field be mowed down to separate the wheat out?
I find the alleged connections to the heart and mind of AmChurch, namely Bernadin and Pilarczyk, to be interesting as well. I’d like to believe that Chicago is not in for a Pilarczyk era — after all, that was the one-two punch that knocked out Cincinnati — Bernadin followed by Pilarczyk.
I don’t think anybody is being blind. It is curious that the Congregation was not consulted, that is, if the rumors/allegations floating around in space as to how this appointment came to be made are true. I’ve heard some murmur that Bishop Cupich is friends with the Nuncio, and they tie that together with his three years service, to insinuate that this was an old school favor. I’ve got no idea, and no opinion on that myself. We’ll know for sure at final judgement on that one. All we know is that for some reason, they told Pope Francis that this is the guy. Unless someone leaks how that happened, and what they told Pope Francis, we won’t really know what anyone was thinking. That is, after all, how the Church has always worked — to some extent a maddening mix of keeping everyone blind as to the “why” and “what” and “how”… Her Roman roots show a bit much in this aspect of her governance.
So, in that regards, we are all blind — we don’t really know how and why, do we? And until we see what he does, we can only infer from some things, right? Yes, the wreckovated church, the Pilarczyk/Bernadin connection, and the recent return of AmChurch-type tactics in a mega-see like NY makes it seem like the machine is running on all cylinders again… or is it?
I am happy with the news that Bishop Blase has
been called by God to serve in Chicago as it will
be a challenge I’m sure. I am aware that people
might be skeptical at receiving a new shepard but
lets look at how he serves.
I live in Spokane Wa which happens to be where
Bishop Blase has served for many years now. I have
seen on many occasions Bishop Blase among the
sheep as I am one. As a non-catholic i was invited
to attend a men’s retreat where i met Bishop Blase
and spent the day hearing him speak about the
gospel. I also witnessed him through action show me
the gospel. He is often with the people and has made
every attempt to let us know we have a voice and should
be heard.
As a catechumen i received a blessing from Bishop Blase
at Our Lady of Lourdes Cathedral the church that we
see in that picture. And for the record it is a very beautiful
church and has very deep roots in our culture here in the
northwest. Anyway, it is the children of God that make up the
Church.
Please join me in prayer for Bishop Blase 🙂
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
May the God of Truth and Fidelity bless him, that he shall not
forsake Thee by ignoring your Holy Mount. And by the God of
Truth and Faithfulness to His promises may he eat, drink,
rejoice, and sing as a new creature always looking for new
heavens and a new earth in which righteousness will dwell.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
Thanks, Daniel. Your report that he is often with the people is encouraging. In fact, recently Pope Francis told the congregation of bishops that the Church needs its bishops to be this way. Perhaps (we can only guess) that was a major characteristic that Francis liked.
Well, he came out today (10/16/15) for sodomites receiving the Holy Eucharist. I guess the suggestion that “time will tell” was fine a year ago. But now, time has told. I think we need to investigate these so-called prelates in greater detail for their possible Masonic affiliations and/or their association with openly Satanic or Luciferian groups. I believe Cupich is evil and has an evil intent to participate in what he believes will be the final suppression of the Catholic Faith in the modern age.