Why not O'Malley

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | Sep 28, 2003

Why was Boston's Archbishop Sean O'Malley not on the list of new cardinals?

I think there's a simple explanation.

There have never been two cardinal-electors-- two cardinals eligible to vote in a papal conclave-- from the same archdiocese.

(Oops! Correction: There was one case. In 1998, Cardinal Hans Groer of Vienna-- who had resigned in disgrace-- was still under 80 when Cardinal Christoph Schönborn received his red hat. But take note: Pope John Paul asked Groer to resign from the College of Cardinals.)

Although he has resigned, Cardinal Law is still canonically attached to Boston.

Therefore, giving a red hat to Archbishop O'Malley would mean breaking a precedent-- which the Vatican is generally averse to doing.

But if this analysis is correct, there's an interesting situation in Boston. For nearly a century that archdiocese has been regarded as a "cardinalial see;" the archbishop is expected to be, or become, a cardinal. But Cardinal Law is only 72; he will remain a cardinal-elector for eight more years.

So unless the precedent is broken, or unless Cardinal Law gets a new canonical assignment (a position at the Vatican?), Archbishop O'Malley will not receive his red hat in this decade.

Frankly, that seems unlikely. Something's got to give.