Unsolicited, but Worth Pondering
John Allen has just posted an unsolicited letter to President-elect Obama. Here’s an excerpt:
You are a hero to much of Africa, giving you a degree of political capital on the continent that no other Western leader could rival. At the same time, 2009 is shaping up as a “Year of Africa” in global Catholicism. Over the next 12 months, Pope Benedict XVI will visit Cameroon and Angola; the African bishops will hold their plenary assembly in Rome; and bishops from all over the world will converge on Rome for a “Synod for Africa.” All this suggests the possibility of synergy between the world’s most important political and spiritual leaders — i.e., you and the pope — to promote peace and development for Africa, where the world’s most impoverished and abandoned people are today found.
If you’re interested in forging such a partnership, the first important choice to make is who to send to the Vatican as your ambassador. Ideally, you will turn to someone known to have your ear, who will have real political influence in your administration, and who also knows the Catholic world. What you’re looking for, in other words, is a Democratic equivalent of James Nicholson, President Bush’s first Vatican ambassador. Nicholson had served as the chair of the Republican National Committee, and helped to steer the party’s outreach to Catholic voters. Bush sent a clear signal with that nomination that he was interested in the Vatican, and this is one case where it would behoove you to follow his lead.
And here is the rest.
As Allen himself notes, it’s hard to see how his thoughts will reach the President elect.
Still his point(s) are well taken and others will make them as well I would think.
A different matter, however, is how the Pres. elect and his advisers will relate to USCCB and why I think next week’s meeting of that group will be more than “interesting” and for Catholic input, crucial.
I have much more confidence in the National Council of Catholic Bishops than I do in such “mavericks” as Chaput, Martino, Burke, et al. If “the Body of Christ is torn apart” as someone wrote elsewhere on this blog on the morning after the election, the blame can be placed at the feet of those Bishops that have felt the need to “break” with their brother bishops on “Faithful Citizenship”. The upcoming meeting of the NCCB will be significant, but not because the “maverick” (pun intended!) Bishops will succeed in swaying their brother Bishops.
The NCCB will do well if they take their cue from the Holy Father himself, who reaches out to world leaders and speaks prophetically, without condemnation, to the hearts of men and women of good will. Thankfully, the leaders of the NCCB–George of Chicago, Wuerl of Washington, retired McCarrick of Washington and others like them–are in step with the Holy Father.
One easy way to track how the USCCB chooses to respond to this election and the “maverick” bishops – the leadership of their pro-life committee is between Naumann (one of the mavericks) and DiNardo (the new Houston cardinal). That choice will say a whole lot about where the USCCB is heading.
In other posts, many have noted that in previous USCCB meetings, folks such as Chaput have not been elected by their peers to any responsible leadership or committee posts. Again, let’s see what happens next week.
Burke is in Rome; Mahoney have their own on-going sexual abuse issues in their dioceses; Egan is lame duck and retired at this point in time. His replacement will also say a lot about how the Vatican chooses to addrress the American election.
Latest from Rocco Palmo – bishops agenda has decided to delete any public discussion of Faithful Citizenship stating that positions have already been articulated. Now, what may happen behind closed doors, is anyone’s guess but Palmo states that nothing may happen.
Interesting?
A minority group of bishops go against the public statement overwhelmingly approved by the vast majority.
And they won’t come to grips with this?
It shoots the confence in the foot and essentially lets the individualists go on and on.
I suspect that the Catholic bishops have a lot of bridge-building to do with Obama and Biden. Oh, they will be politely received and given a listen or two, but any real influence they hope to have will be a long time in coming.
“One easy way to track how the USCCB chooses to respond to this election and the “maverick” bishops – the leadership of their pro-life committee is between Naumann (one of the mavericks) and DiNardo (the new Houston cardinal). That choice will say a whole lot about where the USCCB is heading.”
I’m putting my money on Cardinal DiNardo, who has shown himself to be a reflective moderate in the style of bishops like Wuerl and McCarrick.
Why do I think that Allen is politicking for the job? My choice is Kaveny. If the pope cannot get Obama on the phone, Cathy can divert him to Colbert. She will really be able to beef up on her Latin and she needs to observe the Vatican close up. She can also educate the Vatican on their “damnatio memoriae” of women since the fourth century. Maybe a weekly class or seminar. The possibilities are endless……