Archbishop Vincent Nichols has been appointed as the next Archbishop of Westminster, the eleventh since the Restoration of the Hierarchy in 1850. He will be installed on Thursday, 21 May 2009. Archbishop Nichols is 63 (he was born on 8 November 1945); he was ordained priest for the Archdiocese of Liverpool on 21 November 1969, ordained bishop (Auxiliary in Westminster) on 24 January 1992, and appointed Archbishop of Birmingham on 15 February 2000. The usual custom would be for Archbishop Nichols to be created a cardinal once Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor reaches the age of 80 (in 2012) and no longer has the right to vote in a conclave.
Here is a YouTube video posted at the Birmingham Archdiocesan website where the Archbishop speaks about vocations:
Please join me in praying for Archbishop Nichols and for the Church in England and Wales in which he will hold such an important office.
Further information:
Announcement in the Vatican Bollettino (Italian)
Press release from the Catholic Communications Network with quotes from Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor and Archbishop Nicholls.
Catholic Hierarchy page for Archbishop Nichols with dates and episcopal lineage. (Already updated, as is consistent practice for this most helpful resource.)
Archdiocese of Birmingham page for Archbishop Nichols with links to homilies, letters, lectures and talks, statements, videos and podcasts.
(And just to remind you - the surname has only one "L".)
16 comments:
Well I think the Nicholls with 2 Ls woulda been better!!
Congrats to all of you in England on what seems to be a good appointment. Now the rumor mill will churn for your going to Birmingham, dear Father!
One thing I did wish to point out is that you mention the "usual" practice about making cardinals. Well, that has never really been tested out in England, has it, since all of Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's predecessors died in office before there was anyone coming up behind them.
While it is true that the pope seems usually to wait until one cardinal is 80 before naming his successor a cardinal as well there is no rule about that. For some reason there has arisen this myth that there cannot be two cardinals eligible to vote in a conclave from the same diocese. I don't know how this idea came about. There have been several occasions here in the USA when a diocese has a retired cardinal-archbishop and another cardinal-archbishop at the same time and both are under 80.
I am not suggesting it will definitely happen. I am simply pointing out that it may happen if the pope wishes it because there is no rule, as is supposed by many, concerning all this.
Absolutely delighted that the Hermeneutic of Continuity will be carrying on a bit longer!
The archbishop may not set the world alight, but may prove to be a sound choice. I was a bit disappointed at first, but he looks a bruiser and I think will stick up for the Faith. He may even get Becket-like. And perhaps the Church is not ready for a true traditionalist. He may change things gradually rather than provoking it. I certainly wish him well, and will be praying to Our Lady of Glastonbury for him.
Good news for cyclists anyway - I wonder if he'll do the London to Brighton?
All that money spent at "Glamerelli" for nothing!
When do you move to Birmingham father? ;-)
Fr Guy - many thanks for that clarification. Of course, there were two Cardinals in Scotland not so long ago.
Ottaviani - oh but I have only ever bought black stuff ;-)
<< Fr Tim Finigan said...
Fr Guy - many thanks for that clarification. Of course, there were two Cardinals in Scotland not so long ago.>>
Not sure what you mean here, Father. The only time there were two living "Scottish" cardinals was from 1969-1973 when the curial cardinal, William Theodore Heard, overlapped with Cardinal Gray of Edinburgh. Cardinal Heard, although born in Edinburgh, was a priest of the Archdiocese of Southwark.
... and there was Newman and Manning/Vaughan in England nat the same time . although Newman was not a bishop.
although you, Father , would be admirable. Istill sya aidan nichols should be given a go at Brum!
Author - thank you for your correction.
and here are some Press Conference videos
http://www.gloria.tv/?media=24338
-
http://www.gloria.tv/?media=24335
Certainly Cardinals McCarrick and Baum of Washington voted in the same conclave.
I'm praying for Archbishop Nichols' sake that the Pope will give him the red hat at the next consistory. It is psychologically essential. Otherwise he will be seen by many, however wrongly, as junior to the Card. emeritus. He needs to have equal gravitas and substance cerainly whils HE M-O'C is still treading the corridors of power in Rome, and maybe at the other end of Victoria St.
Father you were right - there was Bourne and Gasquet I do believe, between 1914 and 1929 i.e. they overlapped.
Cardinal Pell of Sydney was created and proclaimed in October 2003, two months before his predecessor, Cardinal Clancy, turned eighty. The latter's predecessor, Cardinal Freeman, was created and proclaimed in 1973 when his predecessor, Cardinal Gilroy, was only 77.
As for Archbishop Nichols, his Catholic-Hierarchy page surprisingly lists among his episcopal lineage a simple Jesuit priest, Father Carlo Odescalchi, S.J.
Formerly the Cardinal Bishop of Sabina, Fr Odescalchi resigned the cardinalate and the episcopacy in 1840 to be professed as a member of the Society of Jesus. He died in 1841.
Prayers and best wishes for His Grace and for his new and old sees.
In that clip of Arcbishop Vincent Nichols censing an altar, did my eyes deceive, or was he wearing a dalmatic under his chasuble?
Benedicamos domino! :)
Post a Comment