Oh good grief, I just realized that Cardinal Law will be one of the

[hedgehog]

electors!

[JohnKleeb]

1. Thats awful

[IronLionZion]

2. American Cardinals are notorious for being RW assholes

too bad they are completely powerless outside of America. No one in the Vatican gives a shit about Cardinal Law.

It's sad how far we've fallen since the 70's when America backed John Paul II (cause he's Polish and against the Soviet Union) and the world took notice.

[JohnKleeb]

3. Yep

BTW was reading some more profiles in the post today, and I still like the Dutch or is it Belgian guy, but I also like the idea of Arinize on a number of levels, since it would really be reaching out to the fasting growing area of the faith and he seems to be good at going good with other religions, though he is a doctrine conservative which is no surprise though, Hummes from Brazil seems to be a champion of the working poor and I like that. BTW is anyone else impressed that the papal field this time is more diverse than a US field of candidates for president. Ha the Italians are like the whites of the Papacy. I know, poor taste. I am just looking at the possible candidiates, and you got so much diversity.

[etherealtruth]

4. Why are they RW a$$ holes?

I'm not asking for examples ... and I do agree, but what the heck happened that we have Cardinals that align themselves so closely with the RW "fundies"?

[SeanQuinn]

7. Law came out in a Boston publication aganist stem cell research/abortion.

n/tq

[etherealtruth]

8. No, no I understand that they ARE

I don't think I worded my question correctly.

How did we come to have cardinals that are much more RW than the rest of the world? What climate exist(s)(ed) here?
As I recall we had our clergy refusing to give communion to pro-choice politicians despite the fact that the pope did so...

[IronLionZion]

9. First off, America is generally more conservative

There was a time when Catholics were quite solidly liberal, but now it's like 50/50.

Follow the money: the ones with money tend to support conservative clergy because they will support Republican politicians who will then support corporations. The working class Catholics can't really do a whole lot about this.

Plus think about what kind of Americans want to be Cardinals. The ones who love power and tend to get support from the RW fanatics. The liberal ones are usually content with helping the poor locally and don't really want a lot of power.

Liberal Catholics and Christians don't get excited when someone goes against the rules. That's why liberals didn't loudly denounce Bush's unholy culture of death, war, and poverty. But conservatives protested loudly over Kerry's "personally pro-life, politically pro-choice" values.

[regnaD kciN]

13. American CLERGY, that is, and not accidentally...

In the years after JPII became Pontiff, he (or his advisers in the Curia) decided that the liberal American church was "a problem." He (and/or they) set out to appoint very conservative bishops to major archdioceses like Boston and New York, kept liberal bishops like Gumbleton from advancing, and even tried to limit Seattle's Hunthausen (who had angered conservatives for his support of the "nuclear freeze" movement) to a figurehead role, while all actual decisions were to be made by a newly-appointed conservative Auxiliary Bishop.

After two decades of this, most American dioceses are headed by staunch conservatives. This has also been reflected in the influx of new priests they have encouraged. Recent polls, as noted here, have shown these younger priests to be more conservative than their predecessors -- something that will likely turn the U.S. church even farther in that direction as they gradually take over leadership roles at the parish and diocesan levels.

Whether this rightward-turn among U.S. clergy will lead to similar results among the laity is uncertain. An ominous note, though, was found in a study last year showing that, while in the past Roman Catholics who attended Mass more than once a week tended to vote Democratic, they had now switched and were more likely to vote Republican. :-(

[ronnykmarshall]

5. No he's not

He resigned two years ago.

[SeanQuinn]

6. Yeah. I was going to say..

n/t

[IronLionZion]

10. nope, he resigned as Archbishop of Boston because of the scandals

but is still an active Cardinal and can vote in conclave. Personally, I think that is just horrible and he belongs in jail.

[etherealtruth]

11. I think he is ...

Didn't he become the Arch-priest of a Basilica in Rome ... ? I am reasonably sure he will be part of the vote.

[ronnykmarshall]

12. I stand corrected .....

http://www.ewtn.com/HolySee/Cardinals/cardinals.asp?select_by=&start_at=L#start_list

[Midlodemocrat]

14. I know him personally

and was in Boston for his investiture many years ago. The Bernard Cardinal Law and I knew and the one that presided over the scandals are not the same man. I find it very sad.

[etherealtruth]

18. Unfortunately, his poor handling of "the scandal" ...

... has ended up defining him. I have no doubt that he was (and is) a wonderful man. I am sure he regrets how he handled the situation and surely would act differently now.

I'm not trying to be an apologist because what happened was unconscionable, but horrific lapses in judgment do happen. I am sure this is very sad for you.

[UrbScotty]

15. His vote will probably be negated by Cardinal Sin

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bsin.html

Yep. :wow:

[hedgehog]

16. Or is it the other way around?

[hedgehog]

17. While I know nothing about the various candidates

how comes he gets to vote and I don't?