On the day Pope Benedict XVI named 23 new Catholic cardinals ”” including the first to represent a Texas archdiocese, Galveston-Houston Archbishop Daniel DiNardo ”” many Texas Catholics, particularly those in San Antonio, were asking a question.
Why not San Antonio Archbishop José Gomez, the nation’s only Hispanic archbishop ”” especially if the appointment of DiNardo, who’s of Italian descent, is meant to reflect the growth of Catholicism in the Southwest?
Father Virgilio Elizondo, professor of Hispanic and Pastoral Theology at Notre Dame University, said Wednesday: “As far as having any particular meaning for Hispanics, I don’t think it will have any. Houston might have more Hispanics, but it’s not known as a center for Hispanic leadership the way San Antonio has been.”
Gomez, who was in Denver, is not asking the question.
“Personally, I’m very happy. The Holy Father is honoring all of us by appointing a cardinal in Texas for the first time ever. It’s a great gift for the Catholic Church in Texas,” Gomez said by phone.
At least part of the explanation may be that Galveston-Houston is the larger see. My Annuario Pontificio for 2005 gives 1,041,000 Catholics for Galveston-Houston; whereas San Antonio, has 667,000 Catholics.
Does anyone know anything about these two gentlemen other than their ethic heritage?
I was hoping for red hats for Charles Joseph Chaput (Denver) and Raymond Leo Burke (St. Louis).
As a Texan, I find this rather large. I’m with Mr. Sulik on ++Chaput and ++Burke, but they would have been a political statement the pope may have preferred to not make. Also, ++Gomez is Opus Dei, and that may have been a negative.
Do you think the new cardinal in Houston will be allowed to wear a red cowboy hat?
He’d only have to have the standard one reblocked.
Many years ago San Francisco was the only metropolitan see in California. It used to be assumed that it would get the first red hat in the west. Then in the 1920s and 1930s Los Angeles and Southern Calif. grew so much, passing up in population numbers the north. Los Angeles then became the second metropolitan see in the state, in the 1940’s, I think, and because of the explosive growth of the Hispanic as well as the general popultion now has many more Catholics, expecially since the SF Archdiocese now only covers San Francisco, San Mateo, and Marin counties. It is still the metropolitan see for Nor. Calif., Nevada, Utah, Hawaii and U.S. Pacific possessions. Some similarities to the situation in Texas.