No superman

As one of the people of God in Chicago, I read Peter Feuerherd's article on Francis George first with shock, then hysterical laughter. Could I have been reading about my own bishop? I have never read such a milquetoast piece of journalism in Commonweal. Francis George himself must have been surprised at how benign the piece was.

"Chicago's Cardinal" deserves more honest treatment. A mere review of the secular press would have revealed just how tumultuous his seven years in Chicago have been, from arguments over liturgy both here and abroad--culminating locally in Gabe Huck's summary dismissal after twenty-seven years of service (how easy it is to dispose of a layman!)--to public controversies over the appointment and movement of pastors. To say that he "supports" the archdiocesan gay and lesbian ministry is a stretch; through the Illinois Conference of Catholic Bishops, he has stridently opposed the passage of a bill to include sexual orientation as a category in the Illinois Human Rights Act. To those of us who have experienced his leadership, Feuerherd's image of George as some mild-mannered, Clark Kent of a bishop with great intellectual firepower misses the mark. Subdued and soft-spoken George is not, and he certainly does not shy away from invoking and using episcopal authority. I'm sure many find his style refreshing, but I and many others find it unnuanced and heavy-handed. The local church of Chicago--as well as Commonweal's readers--would have been better served by a profile with a bit more journalistic edge.

MATTHEW HARRIGAN

Chicago, Ill.

The author replies:

While researching this story, I often found myself in disagreement with Cardinal George. So I bent over backward to be fair. Obviously, some readers thought I bent too far. Jean Raber is under the impression that I didn't get to interview the cardinal. Not true. I had a short discussion with him while he was between appointments, though his written responses to my questions were far more helpful to the story. Gabe Huck is understandably angry. Yet he was the only one among the dozens of people I interviewed who questioned the cardinal's intellectual abilities. I stand by the "cerebral" description. (And yes, I have read the cardinal's writings.) As for Harrigan, no fair reader could claim that the article did not delve into contentious issues such as liturgical reform, women's ordination, clerical sexual abuse, and racism. Journalistic coverage of bishops must be neither hagiographical nor cynical. That is what I tried to do.

PETER FEUERHERD

COPYRIGHT 2004 Commonweal Foundation
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning