Dec 11, 2005

Levada's successor to be appointed soon

SAN FRANCISCO GATE reports ...

A new archbishop of San Francisco is likely to be named by the end of the year, and insiders say three men have emerged as leading contenders.
For what it's worth, the anonymous "insiders" are saying that the next archbishop of San Francisco could very likely be one of the following: Bishop Stephen Blaire of the Diocese of Stockton; Bishop Daniel Walsh of the Diocese of Santa Rosa; and Bishop George Niederauer of the Diocese of Salt Lake City.

Blaire and Niederauer have strong ties to the L.A. Archdiocese and Cardinal Roger M. Mahony.

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lord, PLEASE have mercy on us!
Please allow us to have a HOLY and FAITHFUL and ORTHODOX new Archbishop. Is it asking too much?
Please, Lord, have pity.

Ave Maria!

10:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you notice the website designer for the Dioceses of Santa Rosa and Stockton is Cardinal Mahony's own Eric Stoltz?

11:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Benedict is smarter then that, he will not put people in with close ties to Cardinal Mahony.

1:59 PM  
Blogger bobnd said...

It'll be someone from a orthodox diocese for sure. It will be a surprise to anyone that is for sure. Archbishop Chaput has more influence than Mahony and Chaput has placed Mnsr's in Fargo and Sioux City or the dark horse in Phoenix. Just keep finding information on Mahony and the shit he is doing. It will be less than a year and Mahony will be in jail

2:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

JOSEPH D'HIPPOLITO SAYS...

Blaire and Niederauer have strong ties to the L.A. Archdiocese and Cardinal Roger M. Mahony.

Well, if that's true, then Benedict is part of the problem, as well. Or, if not him, then whoever is responsible for analyzing episcopal candidates for major sees (perhaps holdovers from the corrupt administration of JPII?)

5:39 PM  
Blogger bobnd said...

There were mistakes made by JP II but the bad bishops he appointed were influences by a top liberal administrator. The later bishops actually turned out to be pretty good shepards.

12:21 AM  
Blogger Venerable Aussie said...

Whoever it is, let's hope he's free on January 21!

http://www.walkforlifewc.com

I'll be there!

3:07 AM  
Blogger VeterumSapientia3 said...

Hey Quintero,

Just found your site.

Walsh is really scary. He was the Bishop of Las Vegas before his current post. I'm surprised you didn't mention any of the following.

He urged priests to OPPOSE the circulation in their parishes of the petition to get the bill to protect marriage on the ballot. Read that story here: http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-gov/2000/may/08/510226816.html

Walsh is also a fan of liturgical dancing. http://www.adoremus.org/3-00-MurrayDance.html

He has also opposed those who want to withhold communion from pro-abortion politicians. http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/jul/04070504.html

10:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bobnd,

You must be part of the "Santo Subito" crowd. That's it, blame some liberal for JP2's liberal mistakes, and there were plenty of them. Oh, my gosh, the Cardinal of LA is one of his liberal mistakes. Who are you going to blame for him?

5:54 PM  
Blogger bobnd said...

You know this anonymous. I have two words for you and they are not printable. It was proven that LP II made mistakes because he went on the recommondation of an Archbishop inside the vatican. Just read the Wanderer and other good catholic papers because they say the same thing. Remember Mahony was an orthodox bishop at one time too, he wasn't this complete idiot he is now.

9:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

JOSEPH D'HIPPOLITO SAYS...

bobnd, anonymous is right. The buck *always* stops at the top, especially in a centralized, hierarchical governing system. Whomever JPII appointed to make the recommendation was ultimately responsible to the late pope -- who, in turn, was ultimately responsible for overseeing that individual.

Besides, when did Mahony move from being an "orthodox" bishop (if he ever was one; do you have evidence?) to "the idiot that he is now," and why did JPII allow this to happen?

JPII's well-earned and unfortunate reputation for mediocre (at best) oversight is one of the most damnable aspects of his papacy -- and I mean "damnable" in all its aspects.

5:32 PM  
Blogger bobnd said...

You realize people change. Ideas are planted in people. You can have the most liberal priest around and he will repent if he is truely sorry and you can have the most holiest priest turn into a heretic too. Mahony was a good bishop at one time, but you realize egos have to be massaged and guess what ideas are planted and the weeds emerged.

1:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

JOSEPH D'HIPPOLITO SAYS...

bobnd, I ask for evidence and logic, and you offer platitudes. Obviously, people change. But do people Mahony's age generally change their fundamental values so radically over such a short period of time? And if he did while serving as the L.A. archbishop, why didn't JPII set him straight?
Now, you could say, "Well, then he'd have to set a lot of other bishops straight, wouldn't he?" That's a pope's job, my dear fellow!

No matter how you slice it, JPII is ultimately responsible before both God and the Church for the spat of liturgical, theological and moral revisionism (some of which he encouraged, cf, concerning capital punishment) afflicting the contemporary Church.

And, no, bobnd, I'm not a sedevacantist. I'm just fed up with Catholics hailing someone whom Hans Christian Andersen would describe as a naked pope.

11:43 AM  
Blogger Catholic-Hierarchy Webmaster said...

This morning Pope Benedict XVI named Bishop George Hugh Niederauer as the new Archbishop of San Francisco, California. The archdiocese had been vacant since Archbishop William Joseph Levada was named Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in May. Archbishop-designate Niederauer had been serving as Bishop of Salt Lake City, Utah.

4:58 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter