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.