Is this an endorsement or a condemnation?
A Boston Globe editorial has endorsed that city’s archbishop, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, as the best candidate for the papacy.
The Globe, a paper with a long history of anti-Catholicism, reasons that Cardinal O’Malley would be a good leader for the universal Church because, among other qualities, he is not as “forceful” as other prelates. You understand, naturally, that in hoping that the Church will choose a non-forceful leader, the Globe has only the welfare of Catholicism in mind.
With friends like these…
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Frodo1945 -
Mar. 07, 2013 6:06 AM ET USA
Perhaps the Globe's reasoning is correct but conclusion is wrong.
Posted by: Defender -
Mar. 06, 2013 6:31 PM ET USA
I'm glad to hear that BC is all inaccordance with the Magisterium now. I'm also sure that the senior staff of the archdiocese is paid more than any other diocese for a reason (despite being short $140m). I'm sure the rewrite of school regulations in admitting children of homosexual parents was a coincidence when His Eminence overruled a pastor. I'm sure the drumbeaters of the cardinal are operating without the cardinal's knowledge. BTW, interviewing with NcR isn't going to make it.