Sad? He announced that it was his intention to take the property. Everyone knew Burke would not bend, in any way. Hell, the board presented a proposal that was accepted by lawyers on both sides in December.
Burke vetoed it.
Raymond Burke is a throwback to a time of bullying prelates, like John Francis McIntyre of Los Angeles and Francis Spellman of New York. They treated their priests like serfs, and the people of their dioceses like children.
Fabian Bruskewitz Peter-principled himself out in Lincoln. I predict that Burke, if he continues to act arbitrarily, will never get the red hat, nor will he ever be moved to an archdiocese where he could get it.
You have to be kidding. What other evidence do you have of this? When the South Deanery (not where St. Stans is) announced the parish closings chosen by Burke, an uproar started and a completely different plan (and more sensible) was announced in December. Frankly, not all of those parishes can be sustained, but Burke bent on which were to be closed. Nobody is happy when THEIR parish is chosen to be closed, but the same thing happened under Rigali, who was far more authoritarian, as far as I can tell. Burke hasn't ordered all parished to have Adoration like Rigali did.
And I would recommend NOT getting information from the Post-Dispatch. They haven't gotten a Catholic story right in 20 years.
Fabian Bruskewitz Peter-principled himself out in Lincoln. I predict that Burke, if he continues to act arbitrarily, will never get the red hat, nor will he ever be moved to an archdiocese where he could get it.
You've spoken to a large number of the priests of the St. Louis Archdiocese, and you know they feel like they're "treated like serfs"? All the archdiocesan priests I know certainly don't feel that way. From what I know of him, I would wager a guess that Archbishop Burke doesn't care about the red hat--you'd have to admit that, too, if you think it's obvious that his actions will keep him from becoming a cardinal.