R. Scott Appleby and Father Thomas Reese, S.J., are happy. So must be all the pro-abortion Catholic politicians to whom Bishop Wuerl has said he would not "feel comfortable" denying the Holy Eucharist. In 2005, he proposed that no U.S. bishop say anything about "divisive issues" such as Communion for pro-aborts without "consulting" his fellow bishops first.
There is no word on how the 4,000 preborn babies who will be aborted today, the 4,000 tomorrow, the 4,000 the day after that, and on and on, feel about Bishop Wuerl. We do know they will not "feel comfortable" as the Catholic-politician-supported abortionists slay them.
USA Today (click on this post's title) has this to say about Bishop Wuerl (my edits are in brackets):
"During the 2004 elections when some bishops pledged to deny [C]ommunion to politicians who support abortion rights [sic], such as Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, Wuerl served on a bishops['] task force that called for a different definition of 'faithful citizenship' for Catholics. Led by McCarrick, the task force called for assessing politicians by a broad range of peace, social justice and environmental issues. McCarrick was thrashed by conservative Catholic commentators, but the Vatican accepted the task force's report.
"[Father] Reese calls Wuerl 'a pastoral conservative. He's theologically quite Orthodox and loyal to the pope, but he thinks it's not a good idea to play cop at the communion rail. He's smart. He's articulate. He's prudent. It's not going to be a radical change from McCarrick.'"
Cardinal Mahony and soon-to-be-Archbishop Wuerl: Opposite-coast bookends?