November 5, 2008 by Amy Welborn
What say you?
I initially thought Kmiec, but then, in a flash this came to me:
Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg – hmmm?
There’d be an aggravating logic in that.
From Memphis Aggie in the comments:
How about Pelosi? – she and Pope Benedict can chat about Augustine.
Snort.
 | Tso on Seven Quick Takes |
 | Bill Bannon on Seven Quick Takes |
 | Jenny (@suscipio4wom… on Seven Quick Takes |
 | meggan on Seven Quick Takes |
 | Karen on Seven Quick Takes |
Q & A on the "Catholic Match" website
Twitterview with Sarah Reinhard
Interview at Dappled Things
Frankly, I’d love to see Kmiec show up and get his face slapped by someone over there. or at least a good finger-wagging!
He will not appoint one. However, he’ll ask Joe Biden to stop there often.
Amy, are you just trying to pick a fight? First, I thought Obama would be a good choice if only to knock Hillary out of there, because then we’d finally get the ’60s off our backs. Now, I find out we’re going back to the ’30s and the “Internationale.” And you want Caroline Kennedy to go the Vatican? OK, but why don’t you send some of our more luminous accommodationists, such as Fr. Neuhaus, or George Weigel, or Deal Hudson? They’ve made careers out of diluting Catholicism in favor of conflating religion and politics. They’re just the other side of the cultural Catholicism of the Kennedys.
Oh, for heaven’s sake. People have totally turned off their sarcasm and irony detectors around here today. Are you a new reader?
I wonder if there is a possibility that diplomatic relations with the Vatican will be suspended, as there are few persons that could serve as an acceptable ambassador to both Rome and an Obama Administration.
My guess would be the putatively pro-life Sen. Casey. That would be a two-fer for Obama: a solution to the diplomatic problem while at the same time opening a Senate seat to someone that will vote for FOCA.
I know of no requirement that the Vatican ambassador from the US be a Catholic. Does not the Vatican has Protestant ambassadors from Protestant countries? Does anybody know for sure?
Yes, the Vatican has Protestant ambassadors. The ambassador from the UK about 10 years ago, comes to mind. She was a Protestant, and from what I heard from someone in the know, a staunch one at that.
Diplomatic relations are in zero danger of being suspended – the Vatican sent greetings to Obama today and has exchanged ambassadors/nuncios with countries with far more leftist heads of state/government. People need to stop believing their rhetorical hyperbole.
Also, there is indeed no requirement that the US send a Catholic as ambassador. In fact, it might be good to grow out of the habit of treating this post as a reward for an Administration’s pet Catholic. The Vatican treats diplomacy more seriously than than the US typically does in that regard.
“…Sen. Casey. That would be a two-fer for Obama: a solution to the diplomatic problem while at the same time opening a Senate seat to someone that will vote for FOCA.”
Yeah, we’ll see if Casey puts his money where his mouth is when this comes up. Look for some “personally opposed” garbage.
How about Pelosi? – she and Pope Benedict can chat about Augustine.
Amy, make an actual poll out of it, but you’ll have to put in “Career Diplomat” as one of the choices.
Obama is a babykiller. So are his putative “Catholic” choices like Kmiec or Kennedy Schlossberg. They would for that reason alone be rejected by the Vatican. So he’ll have to appoint a career Foreign Service Officer, who would (officially) not have made a policy decision in favor of babykilling, in order to find one acceptable to the Vatican.
The U.S. did without Vatican diplomatic relations until 1984 and somehow managed to muddle through. The relationship means more to the Vatican than it does to the U.S., inasmuch as the U.S. only recognizes its relationship as simply diplomatic one with the Vatican as a sovereign state…………a mini-city-state at that.
I suspect the relationship will remain intact, as it did during the Clinton years.
Wrong Kennedy! The obvious choice is Kerry Kennedy. She has lots of great new ideas and plans for “change” to share with the Church!
There will likely be a furor from the usual people if a pro-choice Catholic is picked, but perhaps there shouldn’t be.
As ambassador, he or she will be sent to the heart of a Church whose mission is to make converts.
Perhaps a “baby killer” Obama democrat is just what we need face to face with our dear pope. What good does it do to “preach to the choir?”
Disgusted and P. McGrath: As Liam says, there is no requirement, formal or informal, that a U.S. ambassador be morally “acceptable to the Vatican.” It is true that even Clinton appointed two pro-life Catholics (Flynn and Boggs), but that was only as a courtesy/cynical PR move. As far as I know, he was under no Vatican pressure to do so, let alone any Vatican plan to reject an unsuitable choice.
I suspect that the great majority of European ambassadors to the Vatican already favor abortion rights in their countries, and the Vatican has even had diplomatic relations with Communist states in the past.
I do agree with McGrath that a career diplomat would be preferable, however. I believe they were generally career diplomats during the Reagan/Bush I years, in fact.
My guess would be someone from Chicago.
After working with the churches in that city and being the senator from IL, he likely is acquainted with a reasonably high-profile, probably pro-life Catholic from Chicago who supported him this year.
Why would Casey accept the post? Senator is generally considered better than ambassador, isn’t it?
James,
If that’s true, then why were two ambassador-nominees from France rejected before a suitable one was found? Both were found “morally unacceptable” to the Vatican.
Pfleger?
Double snort.
#16 I think you might be right about giving it to somebody from Illinois.
How about that judge who was on the USCBB committee of laymen dealing with the abuse crisis?
Anne something or other.
OR Stephen Colbert, I hear he teaches Catholic Sunday school. I’ve heard he was actually crying last night on TV.
Anne McGlone Burke, an Illinois S. Ct. Justice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_M._Burke
Actually, that’s logical. And I could go for it. Because that matters.
Anne McGlone Burke, an Illinois S. Ct. Justice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_M._Burke
OR Bill O’Reilly
Obama seemed to get along with him when he did that interview on The Factor.
That could be one of Obama’s promised bi-partisan gestures. What kind of “talking points” would Bill give us from the Vatican?
Laura: I never heard that before. Could you provide further details? Was this recent or a while ago?
Anne: You are correct that Pat Casey is an unlikely choice. What has the other Casey brother (Bob Jr.) been up to lately? Is he available?
Laura, above, is quite right: the Holy See is entirely within its rights to reject an ambassadorial nominee if he or she is found objectionable. The two rejected French nominees were one of them remarried outside the Church, I believe, and the other one is in a public homosexual relationship. Every state retains the right to approve candidates before their nominations become official.
So it would be new territory, as it were, only in the sense that up till now Washington has appointed observant Catholics not known for any public scandal in their lives.
Marc: Thanks for the answer. I suspected something involving marital irregularities would be the case, since that involves issues of protocol. (Can you imagine an ambassador to the Vatican bringing his gay partner to a papally sponsored diplomatic affair?)
I still think, however, that if this were common Vatican practice, it would have to happen more often. Would past leaders like Mitterand and Schroeder even have pro-life supporters to send? Maybe other countries send career diplomats and evade the issue.
While Googling for more information about the French situation (and Marc describes it accurately, and it happened just this year), I discovered that the current ambassador is Mary Ann Glendon. When did that happen? I thought it was still Jim Nicholson.
The precedent of appointing an academic bodes well for Kmiec, but I think he’s just made too much of a moron of himself. The appointment of a less publicity-hungry nominal pro-lifer might not be a substantive difference, but it would be less in your face.
Gee, could the Prez reject a papal nuncio as unacceptable if found him to be “objectionable”? Do they do a background check?
Did it ever enter anyone’s mind that Caroline Kennedy might not actually WANT that post?? Because, AFAIK, she’s not a public person in the sense that some commenters here seem to think. She’s always been private in much the same way that her late Mom was, and far from being the sort of public personality that, say, Nancy Pelosi (gag) is, Ms. Schlossberg is a woman of class. So consider that point — that is, if you have a modicum of charity and class yourselves. I’ve been surfing around this morning and noticed an appalling amount of vitriol among supposed Christians. And before you come after me, I’m disappointed in the election too — but, it’s done, and we now have to pray, because in the end, prayer is the most powerful weapon there is. Remember the words of Jesus about our (and His) Church: “The gates of Hell will not prevail against it”. Think about that, and chill, folks. What’s needed now is prayer, not temper tantrums.
I had a flash of inspiration of my own in the shower last night – Martin Sheen. I don’t say it’s actually likely, but more so than Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg. It certainly would complete the devolution into the post into a sinecure for dubiously qualified “pet Catholics.” If it happens, you heard it here first.
I suspect following Bill Clinton’s two Envoys it would be a pro-life Democrat
Nah .. you guys are all off base.. It might very well be (Fr.) Andrew Greeley. Another University of Chicago buddy whom Obama so admires.. ROFL! Wouldn’t that be hilarious!