Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, discussing his own death with unblinking poise, made it clear Friday that he has plenty of life left in him.
The archbishop of Chicago announced that he will not stop ministering to the region’s 2.3 million Roman Catholics a day sooner than he has to. Terminal cancer has not cowed him.
The question Bernardin did not answer is whether he plans to use some of that remaining life to plan for, and perhaps try to influence, the choice of a new archbishop after his death.
At a time when Bernardin himself has said the church is in peril, many Catholics who chafe at Pope John Paul II’s unbending teachings fear that when Bernardin dies, he will be replaced by someone less tolerant. Speculative lists of candidates are dominated by archbishops who are considered conservative.
For some people, worrying about the replacement for a man who is still alive might seem morbid, even unthinkable. But not for Bernardin, say those who know him.
“Thinking about succession is not an indecent thought,” said Eugene Kennedy, the former priest who has written several books about Bernardin and who appeared at the cardinal’s press conference Friday.
“Nothing could be more characteristic of him, in a sense, than to think about that. He will be concerned that there is a smooth transition. He wants to do the best thing for the church.”
In a process carefully guarded from public view, candidates for archbishop are suggested by American bishops and archbishops, recommended by the Vatican’s representative in the United States and weighed by a special college of bishops in Rome.
But the choice ultimately belongs to the pope–especially for an archdiocese as large and prominent as Chicago’s, which has been called the premier church post in America.
When Pope John Paul named Bernardin archbishop of Chicago in 1982, three months after Cardinal John Cody died, the pontiff announced the appointment personally. That led many in the church to conclude that Bernardin was the pope’s handpicked representative.
So how could Bernardin influence the next such choice, which could be made months after his death?
The answer might be not to wait. At an archbishop’s request, and only at an archbishop’s request, the pope may name a co-adjutor bishop–a second-in-command, whom the pope may at the same time declare the archbishop’s successor.
The archbishop doesn’t get to pick his co-adjutor, but he does have an informal veto power, church experts said.
More Top Picks Best Blue Light Blocking Screen Protectors For Laptops
“The one privilege he enjoys is the right of first refusal,” said Tim Unsworth, a columnist for the National Catholic Reporter.
Bernardin declined to comment Friday on whether he is considering a request for a co-adjutor.
“I have to talk with my superiors, and I haven’t had a chance to speak with them yet,” Bernardin said. “I cannot speculate on that.”
In fact, though many in the church are loath to speculate in public, the consensus seems to be that Bernardin is seriously considering asking for a co-adjutor.
“I feel that I’m quite free now, and I will say what needs to be said,” Bernardin noted at one point.
And, Kennedy added, he will say it to the people who need to hear it.
“He will be part of any dialogue on assistance he might get,” the biographer said. “I think it would be quite possible that he would meet with the pope. He has already said he would like to go back to Rome one more time.”
If a co-adjutor is granted, it might help quell criticism that the pope is wielding too much power over the church in America.
“If a co-adjutor is named, then it seems that Bernardin has been part of the process. It could be seen as a sign of respect,” said Bradford Hinze, a professor of theology at Marquette University in Milwaukee.
But Kennedy warns against reading too much liberal-versus-conservative politics into whatever decision is made, especially where Bernardin is concerned.
“Chicago is so used to the zest of politics, and we have just had a yeasty week of it. Succession is much in the air in Chicago,” Kennedy said. “It’s almost hard to believe, but this does not have to be self-serving politics.”
Whatever the motives, however, it is clear there will be no shortage of candidates when a new Chicago archbishop is needed.
“The church is not doing well these days in recruiting clergy, but believe me, no diocese has ever failed for want of people willing to become the bishop,” Unsworth said.
“No bishop would ever directly ask. But you fly to Rome. You issue a pastoral letter on something the pope already supports,” he said.
There are a few other guidelines suggested by history. Although canon law requires only that an archbishop be a priest over the age of 35, it has been 81 years since the last man who was not already an archbishop–then Bishop George Mundelein–was given the Chicago archbishop’s chair in Holy Name Cathedral.
Archbishops also tend to be in their 50s, often with ties to Rome. Observers say the archbishop of Chicago will likely be an archbishop with a proven track record of thriving in a tumultuous environment.
Any list, of course, is speculative. But some names surface more often than others, sometimes reflecting the wishes of the sources, sometimes the fears. The following list is in alphabetical order, with a synopsis of comments from observers:
Bishop Raymond Lucker, who heads the New Ulm, Minn., diocese, is a liberal, who would be among the top choices of Chicago priests, themselves predominantly moderate and liberal, with a strong streak of independence. Lucker’s liberal reputation, however, also makes him a long shot.
Archbishop Theodore E. McCarrick, who heads the Newark, N.J., archdiocese, is said to hold strong aspirations for a cardinal’s red cap. He received national attention as one of the hosts for the 1995 visit by the pope to Newark and New York City.
Archbishop Thomas J. Murphy, who heads the Seattle archdiocese, is a Chicagoan and former president of St. Mary of the Lake Seminary in Mundelein. He is well-liked here but is not thought to be on Rome’s short list.
Bishop John J. Myers, who heads the Peoria diocese, is said to have spoken about his desire to follow Bernardin. He has even predicted to some that he will be named. His strong conservatism may make him attractive to the Vatican, but many Chicago priests are less enamored.
Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk succeeded Bernardin as head of the Cincinnati archdiocese and, like Bernardin, is a former president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. A moderate, he would be well-received here, his Polish heritage a bonus. Several years ago, he underwent surgery to remove a brain tumor and seems to have recovered.
Archbishop Justin F. Rigali, who heads the St. Louis archdiocese, had been assigned to the Vatican for 24 years before that. He is a conservative who may have a real chance for Chicago.
Bishop Kenneth E. Untener, who heads the Saginaw, Mich., diocese, would be another of the top choices of Chicago priests. But he seems to be a long, long shot. He lacks seniority, ranking 224th among American bishops, and his liberal inclinations are a far greater handicap.
Bishop Donald W. Wuerl, who heads the Pittsburgh diocese, is among the dark horse possibilities. But he’s respected for his brains and judgment. He’s a conservative but one who seems able to work well with moderates and liberals despite their differences.