CatholicVoteAction.org

Todd, I realize this, but he first rose to notoriety in the 70’s, and that’s clearly where his episcopal formation happened.

@ TJM. Could be, given the level of scandal we’re seeing.

@ Eileen: I think my biggest beef is the relentless transfer of bishops already appointed, especially one from metropolitan see to another. I can appreciate that a particular diocese may be in such dire straits that a fixer needs to come in. But it’s a sad statement about the Church that it’s become SOP.

@AmP: Archbishop Mahony’s two appointments as diocesan bishop came in the 80’s.

Thomas,
All the more reason never to write in haste. Discretion is the better part of valor.

writing in haste, I forgot to add that I was referring to “worst to come out of” in terms of bishop appointments. Certainly in influential sees.

“If Cardinal Mahony was the symbol of the worst to come out of the Church in America during the 1970s”

Thomas, of all the ridiculous things you have said on this blog since I’ve started reading, this is by far the most ridiculous (and I say this as a faithful, doctrinally-sound Catholic). To even insinuate that Mahoney’s lack of orthodoxy is the worst thing to come out of the Church in America during the 1970s demonstrates a complete lack of sensitivity to the countless victims of the sex abuse scandal, of which the majority of reported cases occurred during the 1970s. Do you really think Mahoney’s questionable leadership is even in the same ballpark? Get real …

Todd is right that the ideal is for a bishop to come out of his diocese and stay with that diocese all his life. There are, I think, legitimate reasons why this isn’t the norm right now. A lot of the situations in these dioceses have benefitted from new bishops who aren’t enmired in the politics of the diocese, and can make a fresh start.

In dioceses where there were major sexual abuse scandals, I think having a bishop who doesn’t have long standing ties there is an absolute necessity.

Todd, the College of Cardinals didn’t exist until the 11th century. Is that an abuse?

Deo gratias!
Thanks be to God for the Holy Father’s appointment of His Grace, Jose Gomez of the Prelature of Opus Dei, to be our Archbishop. I could not contain my joy that I could burst into the “Te Deum” for the choice. We should accompany him with our filial prayers, that he may balm the wounds of the Californian Church caused by liturgical circus and erroneous theology, dauntlessly shepherd the flock of Los Angeles from cultural wolves, and remain steadfast in his fidelity to Our Blessed Lord and Holy Mother the Church.

We were blessed to have Archbishop Gomez as our auxiliary bishop in Denver. I pray he’ll be able to clean things up in LA.

No Alex you are hilarious.

You write to Jeanne:
“are you suggesting they (illegal immigrants) be disenfranchised?”

The only response is HECK YES.

The “franchise” is the right to vote. Illegal aliens are by definition disenfranchised as they are not citizens and should not be voting. (I know that might surprise Loretta Sanchez or her sister.)

The Church’s “social teaching” does not mean we have to endorse lawlessness.

Cardinal Mahony praising President Obama for his desired changes in the arena of immigration on the day he signed a national health care sheme that will fund the murder of children made me ill.

I have to comment on the comment posted by Jeanne, who said she hoped Gomez would encourage his flock to be “law-abiding citizens and residents”—This is offensive in its assumptions, first that immigrants are not good residents unless told to be so and second that it seems to assume that Hispanics are all recent immigrants.
Many Hispanics in the Southwest are not immigrants, but people whose families have been here for hundreds of years, and became citizens when Mexico ceded land to the US. They are already law-abiding citizens and residents.

Some of the comments posted on the blog are either hilarious or outright offensive. For instance “Jeanne” writes, “I hope he encourages his flock….to be good law-abiding Americans and residents.” Is this in allusion to the fact that millions in the archdiocese are illegal immigrants? Are you suggesting they be disenfranchised? If anything, we expect this future leader to actively advocate for this special community and seek to reunite broken families. These are all principles laid out in our Church’s Social Teaching. Let’s remember folks, a bishop is pastor of his entire flock. His ministry should not be sectarian but all encompassing. Let’s not loose sight of that.

! Mirabile Dictu !

Cost of telephone call from Rome to Los Angeles to announce Opus Dei Co-adjutator:$8.62

Cost of flight for Achbishop Gomez from San Antonio to Los Angeles: $393

Cost of Roger Mahoney realizing his neo-modernist empire of heresy and corruption is crumbling: PRICELESS!

TJM, you are right that I’m not a Californian, nor do I know the archbishop. However, your comment makes about as much sense as people who are trying to link Archbishop Ratzinger to sex predators. On the other hand, I’d hate to think of bishops being judged by the absolute worst that goes on under their noses.

As for the recent history of the 40’s, 50’s, etc, I assume you’re not speaking of the first century. In fact, a bishop was seen as “married” to his diocese by ancient Christians like John Chrysostom. Rome already looks regional in the promotion of bishops. But the matter of switching an archbishop to another archdiocese is possibly one of the gravest abuses of the tradition of the early centuries of Christianity, an era when many bishops became notable saints.

I’ll agree with Dan & the rest from San Antonio who have been under Archbishop Gomez firsthand; he does not tolerate abuse, is a firm but quiet leader, and has implemented dozens and dozens of fruitful projects, programs, offices and reforms in this archdiocese. May God in His Mercy bless San Antonio with another good shepherd.

Hi Mr. Sealana,

I am repeating something that was told to me second hand by the priest. Although I have no reason to doubt Father’s truthfulness, I can see why you or others my be reluctant to accept its authenticity. In your situation I probably would pass off such comments as sour grapes or a individual with another motive. I suppose one could call them rumors, but short of a taped conversation or a cited text is not everything a rumor? Msgr. Gomez was a very nice man to me every time I spoke with him. He was a good listener, and nothing short of a gentleman. I wish him the best and he has my prayers (believe me he needs them now.)

Todd, you obviously haven’t been exposed to Cardinal Mahony’s creative “liturgies.” When a Cardinal-Archbishop plays fast and loose with the liturgy and then denigrates the old one, it’s time for him to go.

Regarding the comments that a transfer of Olmstead from Phoenix may be on the horizon so that the best are in the largest Dioceses, Phoenix is now the fifth largest city in the country. Keeping him in Phoenix is consistent with having the best in the largest cities.

It’s pretty much a myth that bishops used to be promoted from within but are now “shuffled all over.” They always were shuffled all over. Go to catholic-hierarchy.org and see for yourself. Bishops from the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, etc., were almost always a priest in one diocese, a bishop in a second diocese, and then maybe became an archbishop if they were chosen for that position.

Maybe in a Church where 95% of the priests and bishops were equally orthodox, your idea would make sense. That’s not what we have right now, and it’s not what the Church did even when we did have that.

The goal should be to get the best man possible for the diocese, no matter who he is or where he comes from, not restrict yourself by geographical area.

It`s completely unrealistic to think the abuses will be weeded out overnight, nonetheless this is a monumental day for the Church of Los Angeles.

The watch now begins to see where Olmstead will ultimetly land.