Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Desdemona

Thanks for that reminder. Archbishop Burke was the strongest of the tiny group (what, 10 at the outside?) of bishops in this country who are fulfilling their God-given responsibility to teach, govern and sanctify. It’s easy to see why he was promoted to his current position in the Vatican. He has basically been a lone voice crying out the truth in the moral wilderness, and was looked upon a few years back by his fellow American bishops as an old fuddy-dud who was embarrassing them with his constant insistence on doctrinal clarity. But what happened is his courage empowered a few others, and in 2006 we suddenly saw more bishops speaking out. Now this year even some of the wimpy ones finally jumped on the bandwagon over the Pelosi and Biden abortion statements. None of that would be happening now if Burke had not led the way.


20 posted on 10/03/2008 11:20:23 PM PDT by baa39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: baa39
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree to an extent on Burke. Not that he wasn't afraid to speak truth or that he saw it as his responsibility to safeguard the flock from ill-informed sin. He did. And he took these tasks seriously as well as the proper formation of priests. He took that one REALLY seriously.

Where I disagree is that he was the lone voice. Doran in I think it's Rockford Center in Illinois, Chaput of Denver, the one in Lincoln, Nebraska, Francis George (both before and after he got to Chicago), Rigali now in Philidelphia and every one of his predecessors. These were not the only ones, just some of the more vocal ones. Yes, they are all speaking more firmly now and seemly in concert, but if you notice, it's the younger group. A good chunk of the old guard is still silent.

The other place where I think Burke somewhat failed as an archbishop was in diplomacy. The man has no town bronze. There are ways of putting things that soften the blow and he just didn't know how to do it. He's one heck of a canon lawyer, but does not relate well. Frankly, he's where the church needs him being on the high court and it's best for all parties involved. I get the idea St. Louis was a test - can he handle a city? The short answer was no. And I can name one example after another, too.

30 posted on 10/04/2008 6:19:39 AM PDT by Desdemona (Lipstick only until the election. The gloss has been sacrificed for the greater good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson