Recently in Archbishop Jose Gomez Category

Pat Archbold at the National Catholic Register writes about about how the media is "very confused" about how to react to the appointment of Archbishop Jose Gomez to the Los Angeles Archdiocese. It's actually pretty funny.

The media is alternately ecstatic and apoplectic over Pope Benedict's choice for the city of Angels. Several news outlets, notably the LA Times, have already written several articles about what to expect from Archbishop Gomez and have even tried to send thinly-veiled warnings. But in most of the coverage, the media makes the same mistake that it always makes when it tries to cover religion like politics. They attempt to view all matters through the lens of politics and feel compelled to attempt to classify everything in terms of the modern political definitions of 'progressive' or 'conservative.'

Trying to do this with Archbishop Gomez has left their collective heads spinning.

Archbishop Gomez is a Mexican-born hispanic. Hooray!

Archbishop Gomez is a full member of Opus Dei. Gasp!?!

Archbishop Gomez is a staunch defender of immigrants. Hooray, he is a progressive!

Archbishop Gomez is a staunch defender of life. (He even denounced a Catholic university when it invited Hillary Clinton.) Horror, he is a conservative!

Archbishop Gomez has a history of dedication to the poor. Progressive!

Archbishop Gomez is vocally opposed to homosexual marriage. Conservative!

I could go on. They are perplexed. How can a Bishop be 'orthodox'--which in the mind of the media means 'conservative' and uncaring--and still dedicated to the poor and the defenseless?

A one word answer: Catholic. What the media consistently does not get is that 'orthodoxy' in a truly Catholic sense entails love for all the teachings of Jesus, as handed down through the Church including the command to love.

Archbishop Gomez loves the Church, the poor, the homosexual, the immigrant, and the unborn all at the same time. He is Catholic.

So when the media reports on the Church, they should take off the politically-colored glasses of red and blue and remember one thing. It's the love, stupid.

One thing I have always found fascinating about Catholic bishops is that they defy and at times force us to consider what we mean when we use political terms like "conservative," "liberal," and "moderate."

An example: This week Archbishop Jose Gomez of the San Antonio Archdiocese was introduced to his new archdiocese, Los Angeles, California. It is the largest Catholic diocese in the country, heavily populated by Latinos and Mexican natives.

From the L.A. Times blog:

He invited everyone to "thank God for our diversity and to commit ourselves to things that unite us," which he explained were "our service to Jesus, the poor, the defense of the unborn child, the immigrant and the disabled."

Here we have all in one breath the enthusiastic mention of three interest groups typically (but not necessarily accurately) advocated for by the political left, the poor, the immigrant, and the disabled, and a mention of one interest group typically advocated for by the political right. Gomez's top issues do not at least at first glance easily fit into a particular political template, but I am not sure that he is necessarily a "moderate."

A "moderate," as I understand the term, means someone who straddles the fence on each issue. Gomez, and other bishops I have known and followed over the years, do not straddle the fence on much of anything. Rather, he and other Most Reverends hold strong decisive positions often associated with* Republicans on some issues, and on other issues hold strong decisive positions often associated with* Democrats.

I say "often associated with" because the religious positions do not always translate neatly into a governing policy. For example, belief in the importance of serving the poor is not the same at least conceptually as support for confiscatory tax rates and redistribution of wealth in order to do so.

Archbishop Gomez has a reputation of being "conservative" at least in a religious context because of his membership in Opus Dei, a fictional bizarro version of which was written about in the DaVinci Code. Also:

Gomez built a reputation in San Antonio as a staunch traditionalist who reversed some of the more liberal-leaning initiatives of his predecessor. According to local news reports, he disbanded a Justice and Peace Commission whose members disagreed with his support for a state constitutional amendment barring gay marriage, and he once denounced a local Catholic college for hosting then-presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, an advocate of abortion rights.

Since taking over the San Antonio archdiocese in 2005, Gomez has pleased some members of the community with his strong anti-abortion stance and his insistence on traditional church doctrine, while alienating others who favor a more progressive approach, according to the San Antonio Express-News.

Someday someone is going to have to explain to me how clear and effective communication of a religious teaching and tradition constitutes "alienating" somebody. His Excellency is charged with teaching and safeguarding the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as received via the Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church. Even if someone doesn't believe that, surely they can understand that Archbishop Gomez believes it, and so considers himself bound. What else is His Excllency supposed to do?

At any rate, I'll be excited to see how Archbishop Gomez adjusts to his new surroundings, and more importantly, how his new surroundings adjust to him.