Rorate Caeli

Important papal nominations

The Holy Father has named today, as mentioned here before, the new Prefect of Bishops (former Archbishop of Québec, Cardinal Ouellet), and the President of the new "Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization (former Rector of the Lateran University and former President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, Archbishop Fisichella - indirectly corrected by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for the doctrinal confusion he generated regarding abortion, cf. The Recife Affair).

The Holy Father named the new Presidents of the Pontifical Academy for Life (Mons. Ignacio Carrasco de Paula) and of the Lateran University (Fr. Enrico dal Covolo, SDB), as well as others (see here).


It would seem that, with his novel doctrine on tolerating abortions in situations of "emotional distress", Archbishop Fisichella will have the utmost success in "new evangelization" efforts in cocktail parties and formal dinner events from Berlin to Paris, from London to New York, from Madrid to Buenos Aires. The new Pontifical Council is brought forth with a stain the size of Brazil... Auguri, monsignor Fisichella!


Anonymous said...

Well, at least Ouellet believes the contrary and has made it clear publicly. If you have a problem with Fisichella, just call Ouellet !

marcel said...

The new Office is essentially useless from its inception. Seeing as one of the abundant fruits of the secularisation in the West is anti-life legislation Rino Fisichella is perfectly unsuitable for the task given to him.

One may dream of an Office for the Old Evangelisation, under the Patronage of St Francis Xavier. Rather than the cocktail party gatherings the New evangelists will be attending the purpose of the Office for the Old Evangelisation would be a focus on converting pagans, heretics and schismatics through persuasive disputation. A quaint notion for most Church diplomats these days!

Anonymous said...

How old is Fisichella?

Jon said...

How about an Office of the Restoration?

FranzJosf said...

Does anyone here, more knowlegable than I, have any predictions about the implication of the Cardinal's appointment for the English-speaking world?

Anonymous said...

I think this is an opportune time for someone with the knowledge to provide a detailed description on just how the selection of bishops takes place, and the Prefect's role in the process.

I'm interested in hearing a description of just how much influence the priests/laity of a diocese have. How much contribution does the former Ordinary have? How are the names gathered by the nuncio? Who does he typically contact as he vets candidates?

What are the mechanics of the Congregation? How often do they meet? How do the discussions proceed? Are votes talleyed, or is the selection made by the Prefect, after weighing member opinion? What, precisely, is the Prefect's role and power? Does he have veto authority over the terna selected by the Congregation and presented to the Holy Father?

I think most of us broadly understand this process, but not many of us understand its mechanics, the way we understand how Congress or Parliament renders a bill a law.

I'm going to post this simultaneously at NLM, as I think we'd all benefit.

St Athanasius, pray for Cardinal Ouellet!

~ Belloc

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

The appointment of Bishop Kurt Koch of Basel to succeed Walter Cardinal Kasper as head of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity is about to be formalized as well:

Anonymous said...

The Pope also finally retired one of the worst American bishops of all time: Skylstad of the I.C.E.L. and of Spokane.

Fisichella can begin by evangelising himself. The important thing here is not what he's joining but what he's leaving. Like Kasper, he will have an impossible job: undoing the damage done by liberals such as himself.

Get ready now for maple syrup and hockey pucks in the Vatican. We have a Canadian papabile.

Anonymous said...

Papal appointments, both to posts in Rome and to bishoprics, often have the appearance of being made on the basis of "Let's take him away from where he is", rather than "He's the best man for this new appointment".

I cannot think that this is really the best way to proceed.

Anonymous said...

Fisichella is in his very late 50's. He could never be characterized as a traditionalist, but neither is he a radical liberal dissenter as was Cardinals Re, Sodano, and Kasper, Levada, and Hummes.
Fisichella stood up for traditionalist seminarians while rector of the Lateran University, and also defended those who wanted to wear cassocks, soutanes, or religious habits rather than slum around in sloppy clerical shirts and pants, or layclothes.

ABORTION, though important, is not how we judge all Bishops, Cardinals and priests. I know of dozens of bishops in the USA, who were wailing and screaming to the highest Heavens about abortion when President Obama was still "candidate" Obama, and yet on other critical issues in the Church (far more important than abortion, such as the allowance of gays in the priesthood, turning a blind eye to priestly sexual abuse cases and paedophilia, the disasterous reforms of Vatican II in the liturgy and the massive loss of Faith afterwards, tolerating radical femminist nuns, the idea of women priests, married priests and gay relationships, openly criticizing the Pope, disallowing the Tridentine Latin Mass, persecuting Catholic traditionalists etc, etc.). These bishops were labeled as heroes and "conservatives". That's a irrational to say the least.
Don't judge the man simply due to abortion.

BUT, this Council for the New Evangelization will be a complete and utter failure and disaster, if it relies on the reforms of Vatican II as it's roots and basis.
The Pope wants Europe to recover its Christian roots. This new Council can only do so, by restoring the Tridentine Latin Mass, Catholic tradition, and slowly repudiating all of the reforms of Vatican II.

Do do anything else, is asking for a complete failure of a noble initiative.

To keep depending on the reforms of Vatican II for a new "evangelization" would be like watering a new plant with vinegar rather than with life-giving water!

New Catholic said...


He was the President of the Pontifical Academy for LIFE. For LIFE! And he WROTE, following a personal and erroneous doctrine, on the OFFICIAL Vatican daily on the matter! If that is not enough to be "judged" on abortion (which he was, of course, by way of the official note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), I really have no idea what is.

Please, do not comment here anymore.


Anonymous said...

The new Council is a non-job, and was set up to accomodate Abp. Fisichella. Fisichella had to be removed from the Academy for Life and was first offered a minor Italian diocese, which he refused since it is not a cardinalatial see. Then Card. Scola dreamt up this Council. It enables Fisichella to save face to a degree, while effectively banishing him to Siberia (as it were).

New Catholic said...

Quite possible, since there is no document at all establishing this: he was named to job that does not exist, avant la lettre (apostolique)...

Anonymous said...

Anon 15:48 --

An absolute anti-abortion stance is what would be referred to in logic as a necessary, but not a sufficient cause to be considered a good bishop. Yes, there are many bad bishops who are strong opponents of abortion, but there are NO good bishops who are weak on abortion.

Constantly having to interpret bad appointments as "demoting up" is grating. When will this dreaded spirit of Vatican II die?


Anonymous said...

All we need now is a new council charged with evangelising the Pontifical Council for Evangelisating. Let us call it the Pontifical Council for the Evangelisation of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelisation.

Abortion not important to one blogger? Abortion is more important that all other issues combined. Without life, once cannot enjoy any other rights, even in combination. Therefore, the right to life precedes all other civil rights. Prelates must indeed be judged on how they handle this issue. Without a liferight enshrined in the constitution of the state, justice itself is completely vitiated in that state.

Fisichella should have been made Janitor-General of the Vatican toilets.


Rick DeLano said...

So let me get this straight. Archbishop Fisichella is "promoted" (wink, nod) away from the scene of his crime against the Faith (the Pontifical Council for Life) into a new position as head of a dicastery that, according to Vatican spokesman Fr. Lombard, doesn't exist yet and will not for" some time".


I think I am beginning to understand this "Romanita" thing.

Nicely done, Holy Father!

Brian Kopp said...

At some point "promoveatur ut amoveatur" needs to be replaced with "you're fired."

Prof. Basto said...

This means that "Rino" is in line for a red hat, right?

So, the man makes excuses for abortion and ends up rewarded with a place in the Sacred College?

I can't believe the Holy Father's action. What happened to "the Enforcer of the Faith"?

Neal said...

"Promoveatur ut amoveatur" might be an effective principle from a political standpoint, but let's not forget how gravely scandalous this is to the casual observer. He appears to defend abortion under certain circumstances, and he given to lead a council for evangelization? Come on.

If he had defended apartheid under certain circumstances, would he be in this position?

papist said...

It would be quite funny if this was actually an appointment to a non-job! haha

In fact the job sounds pretty nebulous when you compare it with other pontifical councils. Think about it: he'll be in charge of what exactly? A missionary task force set up specifically for the re-evangelization of the Christian west (if that even exists)? What specific group within the Church will he be overseeing, exactly?

Hieronymus said...

Please note that the Hieronymus at 18:47 is not the Hieronymus who posted on the Ouellet topic when this was breaking on June 17.

I have some, but not complete sympathy for the position of the Hieronymus of June 30, but have a bit more of either longsuffering or despair, so I rarely vocalize it and do not see the point. The "kick upstairs move" is also something that can be done quite well. Bugnini is a classic, so I would not write off this sort of move entirely.

--Hieronymus of June 17

Anonymous said...

"Abortion is more important that (sic) all other issues combined"

"other critical issues in the Church (far more important than abortion, such as ... "

There are a number of sins that cry to heaven for vengeance. There is a danger in the current pro-life movement to forget that sin begets sin. Abortion is a horrific sin but it follows from the dethroning of the King through the separation of Church and State; the sacrileges shown to the Blessed Sacrament; blasphemies against the Blessed Mother; the manipulation of the teaching regarding the marriage act; the capitulation to communism by the council fathers.

If a Bishop fights against abortion but does not, at the same time, fight for the necessary restoration of all things in Christ, he fails to see reality of the situation - and fights a losing battle.

That abortion has become the key issue in our day is an obvious sign that the Catholic hierarchy has failed to hand on what what was handed to them.

As Chaucer pointed out many centuries ago: "if gold rust, what then will iron do?/ For if a priest be foul in whom we trust/ No wonder that a common man should rust"

Anonymous said...

"If he had defended apartheid under certain circumstances, would he be in this position?"

I take my hat off to you, Neal.

One understands gradualism. But sometimes gradualism is so disappointingly slow that it may be easily confused with sabotage.

I am sure this is not the intention of the Holy Father. On the other hand, Paul VI certainly did not have the intention of ineffectively presiding over the huge mess of the post V II - years; he just did. Failing to take decisive action is inaction.

We should stop seeing every change measurable in millimetres as a progress because it isn't. It is a lost opportunity.