Archbishop of Westminster

[musicus]

I just caught this on the BBC news ticker. The Times reports it thus: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 025367.ece

[VML]

Yippee!!

[festivaltrumpet]

I cannot see what is to be gained by translating a archbishop from one metropolitan see to another. As metropolitan sees, are not Westminster and Birmingham equivalent? What is the accuracy of the statement than the incumbent in Westminster becomes de facto leader of the Catholic Church in England and Wales?

[keitha]

Other than that Westminster is pre-eminent as it is in the capital city, there is no difference between the two sees. However, the tradition is that the Archbishop of Westminster is elected as President of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales, and so becomes our spiritual leader. He would normally be appointed as a Cardinal, and so have 'leadership' by virtue of that rank as well. Cardinal Hume felt that he had insufficient experience as a bishop to become President, so for a couple of years the late Archbishop Dwyer was President, even though Cardinal Hume was given his red hat relatively early on.

It is unlikely that Archbishop Nichols will be made a Cardinal until Cardinal Murphy O'Connor is over 80 and loses his conclave vote, but the Holy Father could yet surprise us on that one! There is a precedent for there being 2 concurrent cardinals in England & Wales - Cardinals Bourne and Gasquet and, before them, Cardinals Newman and Manning, and in their days there was no loss of voting rights at 80.

[Southern Comfort]

There is a precedent for there being 2 concurrent cardinals in England & Wales

And in Scotland - Gray and Heard.

[Petrasancta]

In fact Cardinal Heard, although born in Edinburgh, was a curial cardinal and a priest of the archdiocese of Southwark.

[Southern Comfort]

Thank you, petrasancta. Yes, let's split hairs. But most countries have instances where one might have suggested that not more than one cardinal could subsist simultaneously and in fact there were two (or more). Curial cardinals existing at the same time as cardinals in the diocese they originated from are two a penny.

[Southern Comfort]

Thank you, petrasancta. Yes, let's split hairs. But most countries have instances where one might have suggested that not more than one cardinal could subsist simultaneously and in fact there were two (or more). Curial cardinals existing at the same time as cardinals in the diocese they originated from are two a penny.

I meant to say "the country they originated from".

[presbyter]

O...............President of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales, and so becomes our spiritual leader. He would normally be appointed as a Cardinal, and so have 'leadership' by virtue of that rank as well.

Is this really what is in the popular mind?

[contrabordun]

I suspect the media, the politicians and the chattering classes assume that cos he's in London he must be the #1 guy, and everybody else - Catholic and not - subconsciously takes the cue from that.

[keitha]

I used quotation marks around "leadership" (and thought about doing the same with "spiritual leadership" but assumed that no-one who reads this board would believe that this expression carried any juridical or technical meaning) because, apart from the very limited status as President of the Bishops' Conference (assuming he has that position),de jure the Archbishop has, so far as I am aware, no more authority outside his own territorial jurisdiction as archbishop and metropolitan than any other archbishop and metropolitan.

In practice, however, it is a different matter. Not only do we have the position adopted by the media, but, of course, the way in which the church itself announced the appointment of Archbishop Vincent gave it a much higher profile than the appointment of any other archbishop. It cannot also be mere coincidence that every Archbishop of Westminster has been created cardinal (and only occasionally with any significant delay) and usually becomes President of the Bishops' Conference, and is usually invited to attend as representative of the Church at major state and national religious occasions.

Finally, we have the comment of Archbishop Nichols himself in the press release about the appointment when he commented upon Cardinal Cormac as being an 'outstanding public leader of the catholic community in this country'.

In relation to Presbyter's comment about the quotation from my previous entry, whilst I have always regarded his contributions to this board as models of reason, accuracy and dispassionate comment (and often very helpful), I found this comment to be less so. I only say this publicly because I have been concerned to see a number of entries on this board in recent months that I know have caused upset to others and would be concerned if it started to become something of a trend. It is not fair to expect the Moderator to try to deal with this - could we all please consider the effect the way in which we make our point may have upon others, and, if necessary, make the point in a more reasoned manner.

[presbyter]

In relation to Presbyter's comment.........

Crumbs! 'Twas only a simple question - not a comment. I wasn't having a go at anyone. Sorry if you thought I was.
I'll disappear again then ... lest I unintentionally offend more.

[musicus]

In relation to Presbyter's comment.........

Crumbs! 'Twas only a simple question - not a comment. I wasn't having a go at anyone. Sorry if you thought I was.

Well, yes, I thought it was a straightforward question too. [Edited to clarify my very ambiguous original wording]

[MaryR]

I'll disappear again then ...

Presbyter, you dare!!! I'll drag you back, kicking and screaming, if you do! Your challenging contributions have been much missed.

I think Keitha did misinterpret your comment, but he's right that this board does descend into very un-Christianlike behaviour from time to time. We sometimes forget, I think, that the people we discuss/criticise are human beings, with feelings. It's one thing having an opinion, but it does no harm to put oneself in the shoes of the person being criticised, and imagine how we'd feel if we were on the receiving end. If we were to do that, we'd perhaps find kinder ways to express our views....maybe.

[Southern Comfort]

On the subject of leadership, it seems to me that one of the great things about the Conference of England and Wales is precisely the way that different members, with different gifts and different expertises, move to the fore as the need arises. (A recent example would be Archbishop Peter Smith of Cardiff, who appears to take the lead when moral or ethical questions come up.) I don't think that any one of them thinks they have all the answers - even the grace of episcopal ordination can't confer that - and some of them have more evident leadership qualities than others.

Therefore to suggest that the Archbishop of Westminster, whether a cardinal or not, is a bit like a field marshal with all the other generals and lower-grade generals streaming along behind him, seems to me to be unreal as well as undesirable. I can't speak for presbyter, but I would guess that when he questioned the concept of leadership he could have had the same sort of problem in mind as I do with what had been said.

And I'd like to add that I too am glad to see that he has returned to the board.