It’s time to rethink the US approach to picking our ambassador to the Holy See...

[Michie]

With the imminent and unexpected departure of Joseph Donnelly as the US Ambassador to the Holy See, it seems likely the post will be vacant for a while. It would make little sense to try to ram through a nominee before the US election in November, and afterwards it can take a new (or returning) administration six months, or more, to work its way down to the Vatican post on the list of federal jobs to fill.

As a result, we have a cesura, a pregnant pause, which could provide a moment to rethink the US’s approach to whom it sends as its envoy to the Vatican.

I’m going to lay out here a modest proposal that I’ve been floating periodically for the better part of two decades, in the serene confidence that it’s no more likely to be taken up now than at any other point over that span. The fact I can’t get anyone to listen, however, doesn’t, ipso facto, make me wrong.

Both elements of this modest proposal are intended to expand the talent pool, as well as privileging competence and preparation over politics. I suggest the United States break with what have been two unquestioned assumptions about the position since full diplomatic relations were first launched under President Ronald Reagan in 1984:

First, we should end the bias in favour of political appointees and instead give consideration to career foreign service professionals.

Second, we should also break with the convention that the ambassador to the Vatican has to be a Catholic.

To be clear, these are US conventions, not Vatican requirements. Plenty of other nations appoint career diplomats to the Vatican role, and plenty also nominate non-Catholics.

Let’s take each point in turn.

Continued below.

Time to rethink US approach to who it sends to Vatican as envoy - Catholic Herald

With the imminent and unexpected departure of Joseph Donnelly as the US Ambassador to the Holy See, it seems likely the post will be vacant for a while. It would make little sense to try to ram through a nominee before the US election in November, and afterwards it can take a new (or returning)

catholicherald.co.uk

 

[Gnarwhal]

If I were president this would actually be a really important appointment to me, I would look at our ambassador to the Holy See as the primus inter pares relative to our other ambassadors. But who to choose? Would appointing Fr Mike Schmitz be considered a violation of canon 285.3? On the flip side I wouldn't want to pull him away from his ministry when it's so effective.