Jump to content

Talk:Timothy M. Dolan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Timothy Michael Dolan)

Milwaukee Archbishop section should be longer

[edit]

There should be a lot more to the section regarding Dolan serving as Archbishop of Milwaukee, as he spent 7 years in this post, compared to only 2 so far in New York. There had been a great deal more history prior to his 2009 appointment as Archbishop of NYC, much of which ought to be restored, as it is still quite relevant. In 2009, for instance, the page's section regarding his tenure in Milwaukee was as follows:

"Dolan was later named the tenth Archbishop of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on June 25, 2002. Replacing Rembert Weakland, who retired after admitting to having had a sexual relationship with another man[11], Dolan was formally installed at the Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist on August 28 of that same year. In 2003, after a group of Milwaukee priests petitioned to make clerical celibacy optional[12], the Archbishop expressed his belief in celibacy "not just because I'm 'supposed to,' or reluctantly 'have to,' but because I want to."[13] He further defended celibacy against its critics, saying, "The recent sad scandal of clerical sexual abuse of minors, as the professionals have documented, has nothing to do with our celibate commitment."[13] In response to the sexual abuse scandals in Milwaukee, he held a meeting between victims, mental health professionals, law enforcement officers, and members of the clergy, but opposed legislation that would have extended or eliminated the statute of limitations on the filing of clergy sex abuse cases.[14] By early 2009, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee spent approximately $26.5 million in attorney fees and settlements.[14] He later called the abuse scandals the most challenging issue of his tenure in Milwaukee, saying, "Does it haunt me? Yes it does. And I'm not afraid to admit that."[15] When the Vatican issued a document barring gays from the priesthood in 2005, Dolan said that the Vatican's directive was "not a no-gays policy," and allowed men with same-sex inclinations to be ordained as long as they observe celibacy and do not belong to a gay subculture.[16] In November 2007, he lost the election for Vice-President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, being defeated by Bishop Gerald Kicanas by a margin of twenty-two votes. In the 2008 presidential election, Dolan rebuked Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi for "misrepresenting timeless Church doctrine" on abortion, which the Archbishop called the "premier civil rights issue of our day."[17] However, he opposes denying Communion to pro-choice elected officials.[6] Dolan helped the Archdiocese avoid bankruptcy from the lawsuits following the sexual abuse scandals, and closed a $3 million budget deficit in 2008.[18] The number of priestly vocations and seminary enrollments also rose during his tenure.[18] He also co-hosted a television program with his brother called Living Our Faith.[7] The Archbishop is considered to be theologically conservative,[10] [2] but once stated, "Titles of liberal and conservative don't cut much mustard with me."[10] He is also seen as energetic and media-savvy[14], with a "gregarious pastoral style."[19] As one Marquette University professor said, he "is with Rome on the big issues and on the little ones, but he does not do it in a dictatorial fashion."[2] Dolan is presently chairman of the board of directors of Catholic Relief Services (in which capacity he visited Ethiopia and India[20]), and a member of the Board of Trustees of The Catholic University of America. Within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, he chairs the Priestly Life and Ministry Committee and sits on the Subcommittee on the Church in Africa. He also wrote Called to Be Holy (2005) and To Whom Shall We Go? Lessons from the Apostle Peter (2008)."

--Maximilian77 (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Clergy titles

[edit]

Wiki has a pretty extensive discussion about WP:Naming conventions (clergy) The page currently cites the subject as being Dolan, other times Timothy Dolan, or Archbishop Dolan. Other bishops and names don't follow standard..I'm going to try and correct a few. However, overall the examples given are not that clear. For example on another page regarding Milwaukee scandal..he is simply called Archbishop Dolan...when the page probably should read Timothy Dolan (then Archbishop of Milwaukee and current Archbishop of New York) Pbmaise (talk) 02:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have found "and was granted the titular position as Archpriest". I am not familiar with this use of "Archpriest", since the reference is to the title he just got when he became a Cardinal. I am going to change that to ", and is Cardinal-Priest". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Understanding clergy titles, particularly those connected with churches in Rome itself, can be a bit daunting, perhaps not unlike baseball's dreaded infield fly rule. The key thread is that most, though not all, these titles are honorary.

Looking first at archpriest: in the Roman Catholic Church today, the four major basilicas in Rome (St. John Lateran, St. Mary Major, St. Paul Outside the Walls, and St. Peter's) are governed by bishops with the title "archpriest." Essentially, they are similar to the pastor of the parish, in the case of St. John Lateran, the rector of the cathedral (St. John Lateran being the cathedral of Rome; in any case, the person in charge of day-to-day operations. Cardinal Bernard Law's appointment as archpriest of St. Mary Major brought this position some unusual visibility in the American press. These four are real jobs. Cardinal Law actually lives at St. Mary Major where he regularly celebrates Mass and administers the other sacraments. Though I do not know, I suspect it would not be at all surprising to find him hearing confessions and even perhaps baptizing the babies of parishioners on a Sunday afternoon.

For various historical reasons, myriad other churches in Rome have the right to be governed by an archpriest, that is to have a bishop functioning as their pastor. In practice, they do not. However, bishops throughout the world who have achieved some status or perhaps performed some service that Rome wishes to honor are sometimes given the title of archpriest to these churches. That's where Cardinal Dolan comes in. When then-Archbishop Dolan was elected president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Rome decided to honor him by giving him the title of Archpriest of the Church of Our Lady of Guadalupe on Monte Mario. That title was purely honorary.

A little Church history can help in the of understanding cardinals and their various titles. Theoretically, at least, in the earliest days of Church, bishops were elected by their clergy.(In practice, that did not always happen, a issue that in any case is beyond the scope of this discussion.) To understand cardinals, remember: 1)the Pope is the Bishop of Rome; 2) the Cardinals are the honorary clergy of the Diocese of Rome, and 3) the most important function of a Cardinal, whatever else he may do, is to elect the Bishop of Rome.

Understanding the cardinals as the clergy of Rome helps explain the three different titles: 1) Cardinal-Bishop - since Rome is an archdiocese and the pope is actually an archbishop, there are several other suffragan dioceses in the Roman province, Ostia and Palestrina for example. A small number of cardinals, almost always those with senior positions in the Roman Curia, are given the title of Cardinal-Bishop of one of these. The Dean of the College of Cardinals always holds the title, "Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia." Josef Ratzinger held it as Dean of the College when he was elected pope. These titles are purely honorary; there is an actual bishop of Ostia who governs that diocese. 2) Cardinal-Priest - is the title held by most cardinals. When elevated, the new cardinal is given title to a church in Rome, which, again, is purely honorary, but it does make him, in effect, an honorary pastor of a parish in the Diocese of Rome. When Cardinal Dolan was elevated, he was simply given title to the church of which he was already archpriest, which was actually an unusual situation. Cardinals can be linked with churches for any number of reasons. For example, Cardinal William O'Connell of Boston was given title to Santa Susanna at his elevation in 1911. It became a "tradition" that succeeding Boston cardinals be given title to the same church, a tradition helped along by the fact that Santa Susanna is staffed by Boston-based Paulist priests. However, when Cardinal Sean O'Malley succeeded to Boston, his predecessor, the aforementioned Cardinal Bernard Law was still living, necessitating Cardinal Sean to be given title to another church. In another example, in 1988, Pope John Paul II, knowing of Washington Cardinal James Hickey's deep devotion to Mary, gave him title to the church of Mary, Mother of God. 3) Cardinal-Deacon - Vatican II "restored" the permanent diaconate. This title goes back to a time before the permanent diaconate had disappeared. A relatively small number of cardinals, always those with positions in the Roman Curia, are given the title of Cardinal-Deacon of various churches in Rome. Thus, in effect, they are honorary permanent deacons of those churches.

Cardinals with these three titles provide a full compliment of clergy for electing a bishop when the need arises.

Actual title: Cardinal Dolan's actual, formal title is as follows:

Timothy Michael Dolan Cardinal Priest Under the Title of Nostra Signora di Gudalupe a Monte Mario Archbishop of New York

For example, a priest or deacon just ordained will receive a parchment document with title across the top (along with the cardinal's coat of arms), followed by formal language underneath certifying his ordination and first assignment, with Seal of Archdiocese and the signature of the chancellor on the bottom.

He is not, however, the Cardinal-Archbishop of New York as there is no such title as Cardinal-Archbishop of anywhere (not even New York). He is the Archbishop of New York, who is a cardinal. (Mccarthymichaelp12 (talk) 06:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)) (User:mccarthymichaelp) "Cardinal-Archbishop" came into some popular use to indicate someone who is a Cardinal and concurrently heading an archdiocese; such a man would be a cardinal priest (the usual practice now for a cardinal who heads a diocese outside the province of Rome).[reply]

Accusations Deleted

[edit]

The article cited source 10 with the accusation that Dolan allowed priests accused of sexual misconduct to continue ministering and also moved them to different parishes. The article cites others in the archdiocese leadership with allowing the accused priests to continue ministering and made no mention of moving priests around. Mbraynard (talk) 05:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

[edit]

I saw that some of the dates didn't match up, so I updated the dates from the bio in the external link. kenj0418 03:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet ...

[edit]

Boys, hold your horses. Dolan has been appointed as archbishop, he is not archbishop yet, same as Obama was president-elect while W. was busy packing his bags. --Bernardoni (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he's been installed as Archbishop of New York, today. GoodDay (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Murphy's book-The New Men-1997

[edit]

I inserted a citation about Brian Murphy' book 'The New Men.' The book was about 6 seminarians at the North American College in Rome and Monsignor Tim Dolan was rector of the college at the time. Monsignor Dolan was interviewed in the book.I thought the Murphy book was important enough to be cited in the article,Thank you-RFD (talk) 13:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section on gays and the priesthood

[edit]

My three edits today (August 9, 2009) (1) restate earlier wording that was referenced to but not supported by a reference to a National Catholic Reporter Article (2) provide sourcing that attempts to obviate concerns of "subtle OR/POV" raised by one commentator in a prior edit and (3) attempt give an NPOV overview of Abp. Dolan's position on the subject that does not appear to create a dichotomy between his position over time and that of an important Holy See document that needs to be taken into account in any discussion of the subject but that is much more nuanced than is evident from the generally quoted formulation of its key conclusions. I would be happy to engage in a pre-edit discussion of further contributions. I apologize to all prior editors for not doing so myself on these edits, but just wasn't too certain about how, given the extended time frame of the various edits, that approach could be made both effective and expeditious and will be happy to stand instructed.Jmcrowley (talk) 23:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current content there is reasonable and does justice to both the document and Dolan's position. If I had one complaint it would be that the section is just too detailed. On the other hand, your point about nuance is well taken. A tact I sometimes endorse would be to state that Dolan helped to clarify points in the document, that is, not actually give long quotes, although to do so we probably would need to source the word "clarify" to avoid original research. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 02:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 23:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Michael Dolan → Timothy M. Dolan – Relisted for more input since both forms appear to be in use. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC) Per WP:COMMONNAME. He is rarely referred to by his first middle and last name; it's far more common for him to be called by his middle initial (or indeed, with no middle name at all) In his official bio at the archdiocese site, for example, the page is title "His Excellency, Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan". "Timothy M. Dolan" has 3 times as many google results as "Timothy Michael Dolan", and the difference would probably be even greater if we filtered out copies of the Wikipedia article.Yaksar (let's chat) 06:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Timothy M. Dolan

[edit]

Because this is an article about a living person, I recommend that this article be either semi-protected or fully protected against possible vandalism.

71.72.29.241 (talk) 12:08, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's the usual practice on Wikipedia to wait until serious or repeated vandalism occurs before an article is protected. In the vast majority of cases vandalism is spotted quickly and removed. Hohenloh + 17:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dolan-Colbert panel on faith and humor

[edit]

I object to the removal of the section reporting on Dolan's planned panel at Fordham University with Stephen Colbert. It included a reference from the mainstream media: [1] here is more coverage: [2] [3] [4] it is clearly a notable event and relevant to the article. The section was written in an unbiased style and clearly passes WP:PROMOTION. Please retain it. Elizium23 (talk) 22:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty hard for it to be notable until it happens and is of itself notable. This is pretty much a show advert. It's a priest going on a show to talk about stuff. Such things are ten a penny. Now, if he says something of note, then it becomes notable, otherwise it's a TV listing, and has no place here. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted this section twice, on the basis that "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion" and explanatory information on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Hohenloh + 22:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

dolan pls — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.94.9 (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likely Papable

[edit]

This seems a bit of a stretch. While the press has stated that he is the most likely AMERICAN Cardinal to have a chance of succeeded as Pope, he`s still a long shot. Odds makers generally seem to agree that 30-1 seems a fair assessment, which makes him from from likely to become Pope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.142.207 (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spam filter

[edit]

"The lawyers maintain that the previous archbishops of this diocese, including the potential pope candidate [Cardinal Timothy Dolan], kept the allegations secret and intentionally slowed down the process so that the cases might go past the required time window for filing."

http://www.examiner.com/article/possible-pope-cardinal-timothy-dolan-is-deposed-child-sex-abuse-case

The spam filter blocked me when I tried to put this into the article. If it's true that Dolan deliberately delayed things to obstruct justice that should go into the article. I feel Wikipedians should look for a source for this that the spam filter accepts.

To get to the blocked link copy the link and paste it into the top of a page. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since writing the above comment I came across information suggesting examiner.com isn't consistently reliable.

Comment left over from Benedict XVI papacy

[edit]

The following appeared in a paragraph referring to Dolan being apostolic visitor to Irish seminaries:

>Following the conclusion, he will report their findings directly to Pope Benedict XVI.[33]

This seems to be in or near 2010, and the comment needs to be updated, if for no other reason than the change in the papacy (Francis being elected in March 2013).

Conscious rights?

[edit]

There isn't any sort of advocacy for conscious rights in in the Manhattan Declaration that was signed, it calls for civil disobedience. Why is it portrayed as such? 68.227.167.123 (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Timothy M. Dolan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuality/LGBT header

[edit]

There have been a number of reversions of header 3.5 regarding how it should be phrased. I have reverted two edits that labeled it as "Opposition to LGBT rights," and instead titled it "Opposition to homosexuality." I agree with ChiveFungi that the issue is not merely homosexuality, but transsexuality as well. The issue at hand is not about "rights," as none of the sources in the article mention Dolan's views on LGBT rights, but his views on LGBT lifestyle/practice/actions/etc. (N.B. this has consistently been the public position of Dolan and the Church - neither have taken a public stance on LGBT rights or other political-legal stances on the matter). I intend to find better sources to replace the current one in that section, which do not violate WP:NPOV.

In order to be as unbiased as possible and to accommodate the different opinions expressed, I propose to call the header LGBT issues (since the parent header already indicates that they concern Dolan's views). The content of the section can then describe in detail his views. Ergo Sum 23:58, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"LGBT issues" sounds good to me. Thumbs up icon --ChiveFungi (talk) 02:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"LGBT issues" sounds fine to me, too. However, the section is only two sentences and could be struck from the article as UNDUE. Fiddling with the section name doesn't accomplish much for Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:48, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. This is semantics. You try to argue that Dolan's interventions are about "LGBT lifestyle/practice/actions/etc" as if gay and lesbian people are furniture. What is a LGBT lifestyle by the way? Visiting your husband in hospital when he is sick and bringing him flowers?Or listening to Judy Garland records?! What an LGBT "practice"? Is kissing between two people of the same sex an "LGBT practice". His interventions concern civil rights. He stopped a parish church from hosting the International Human Rights Art Festival because of its gay and transgender content. Why is "LGBT issues" a better term? What are the issues? It's euphemism. Contaldo80 (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a euphemism. It's about being accurate and not projecting interpretations onto facts. When Dolan and the Church's public position has consistently referred to such things as "lifestyle" and "actions" and this is the way it has consistently been reported on by all reputable media, this is the way it should be presented in Wikipedia. It is not our job to interpret that what he really meant was a repudiation of homosexual persons or rights or whatever other hidden motive we might infer. Ergo Sum 18:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is our job to ensure this remains a secular encyclopaedia, and does not push a POV related to any particular set of religious beliefs. I'm happy that we report what he said and any beliefs that he might have, but we must ensure that we show their actual effect in the real world. Now I'm very happy to reach agreement on what the best heading for this section should be, and I'm open to ideas. However, your amendment to "Opposition to homosexuality" shows a profound ignorance of Roman Catholic teaching on this subject (or at least a lack of familiarity with its nuances). The Catholic Church is not "opposed"to individuals who have a homosexual sexual orientation. Teaching suggests, however, that such feelings cannot be acted upon without becoming a sin. Secondly the material in this section covers transgenderism too - I suspect you're not displaying a very nuanced appreciation of the differences by describing everything as "homosexuality". Plus I don't like the word "homosexuality", we should really be using "gay" and "gay rights" rather than some deliberately clinical terminology.Contaldo80 (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Contaldo80: I've very much aware of the Church's position. It is our job to do nothing but report in a neutral light what has been covered by reputable sources, not "show their actual effect in the real world." I am not advocating that the section be titled "opposition to homosexuality," in fact, if you had read what I wrote above, I very clearly proposed calling it "LGBT issues." This is what the consensus has established and I am going to change the section name to what has been agreed upon here. Ergo Sum 17:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Timothy M. Dolan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Art festival

[edit]

There is evidently no active involvement by Dolan in the art festival incident. NYTimes says that John Joseph O'Hara invoked "Dolan's behalf" in a phone call. Playbill quotes a spokesman. So I am not clear on why this paragraph needs to live in Dolan's BLP. It is already in O'Hara's article. 2600:8800:1880:9A3:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 19:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; it seems rather extraneous. Ergo Sum 19:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The NY Times says Dolan intervened via his staff to cancel the project. Contaldo80 (talk) 00:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NY Times piece

[edit]

Can I clarify please why the following was removed on the grounds of violating NPOV? Thanks: "In late 2018 it was revealed Cardinal Dolan allowed an abusive priest to remain in ministry while archbishop of New York. [5] A week later, it came to light that "The Archdiocese of New York told a California college this month that a local priest had never been accused of sexual abuse, even while the priest was being investigated by the archdiocese for several abuse charges." [6] In truth, multiple allegations were made against Donald Timone, yet Dolan called this abusive priest “a remarkably gentle and holy man” in an OpEd in the New York Daily News in 2013.[7]" Contaldo80 (talk) 22:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pontifical North American College lawsuit

[edit]

We have added a paragraph about the lawsuit to Pontifical North American College with proper sources. Dolan is one of over 25 people named in this lawsuit and it's not specified what he is alleged to have done. Per WP:BLPPRIMARY we are prohibited from using public records to support assertions about living persons, such as Dolan. Elizium23 (talk) 00:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony(Tony) Galgano

[edit]

R.I.P. my dear friend Tony 🙏✝️🎚💔. I am sending this to you to inform you of his passing on November 19th… whenever you called him he was on cloud nine and he would share it with me… He loved and respected you as a person and spiritually…thanks for being such an inspiration to him…God Bless, Debra 69.138.104.41 (talk) 20:21, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Timothy_M._Dolan&oldid=1257680643"