White Smoke

A new Pope has been elected on the fourth ballot. I'll update in the this space as I find out more.

Update: Cardinal Ratzinger of Germany, who turned 78 on Saturday, has been elected the new Pope. He has takent he name Benedict the XVI (that is going to take some getting used to), and seems generally to be considered a conservative.



Display:


Hail Europa (none / 0)

Queen of Nations.
by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:35:36 PM EST

New pope is Darth Vader (none / 0)

You've got to be kidding...this stuff couldn't be scripted any more like an apopcalyptic Hollywood movie, if there were actual Hollywood writers writing it...

This from MSNBC pretty tells everything that needs to be told:
"Ratzinger served John Paul II since 1981 as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In that position, he has disciplined church dissidents and upheld church policy against attempts by liberals for reforms. He turned 78 on Saturday."
Darthvader (or Dick Cheney if you prefer) was just elected pope. Being brought up Catholic, I feel well within my rights to say screw the new pope and screw the Catholic church for electing this guy. It will be a good long time, if ever, that I go to a Catholic mass again.
by cgilbert01 on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:05:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pope Rat the First (none / 0)

Worst. Candidate. Available.

I feel like I did in the 2000 GOP Nomination process. Intellectually, you tried to convince yourself one of the many that were originally in the field had to be able to beat Doofus. Emotionally, you damn well knew those dingbats would pick Doofus just because he was the worst possible choice available to them.

Bet Bill Mahar and Jon Stewart are happy. Their life just keeps getting easier every day.

by afs on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:35:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not a catholic but (none / 0)

Fascinating to watch.  Guess they went witht he caretaker pope.  
by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:49:04 PM EST

Yeah (none / 0)

If he's 78 now, he could, quite possibly, live less than a decade.
by Geotpf on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:52:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm catholic (none / 0)

And extreamly disappointed with the choice of Cardinal Ratzinger. Extreamly.
by sharris0512 on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:49:57 PM EST

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

Is it just an urban myth that Ratzinger was a member of the Hitler Youth in Germany?

He seems to be an uninspiring choice for pope. I was hoping for the Nigerian or a Latin American.

by JohnGor0 on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

No, he was. Absolutely.
by sharris0512 on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:17:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

He was a member of the Hitler Youth. Then again it was like signing up for the draft in this country without any real possibility of conscientious objection.
by comotion on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:26:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

He claims all youths were required to join.  From my understanding of WWII history, I can believe it.  
by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:07:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is true (none / 0)

The Wikipedia link above says so.  Sounds like he was forced into it, however.  He did desert the army later on.  There seems to be many things to not like about this guy, but this is not one I would hold against him, IMHO, although it's a good PR attack.
by Geotpf on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:35:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (3.00 / 1)

The Nigerian candidate was the most conservative. It would have have been worse than Ratzinger by far.
The Latin American ones were interesting.
by FrenchSocialist on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

The nigerian was conservative, but not more than Ratzinger.  THe worry about the Nigerian was he didn't posess the intellectual capacities that JPII did and that Ratzinger does.
by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:08:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm catholic (none / 0)

<shamelessness>
My wife's family is Episcopalian.  They worship in a high church fashion and share many of the same traditions as the Catholic Church (including the Nicean Crede,) but they're pretty liberal.  Depending on the Parish, they can be extremely liberal.  Just sayin'.
</shamelessness>

As a deist, I have to remain pretty neutral about the Papacy.  However, the guy does impact a lot of lives, even those of non-Catholics.  I have to express some disappointment, right along with you.

by nanoboy on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:49:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm agnostic (3.00 / 0)

But I was raised Episcopalian.

The priest at the church I attended was a lesbian.  This was about a decade and a half ago.

Really, any church that traces it's roots to being formed because some guy couldn't get a divorce is not going to be very conservative.

by Geotpf on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 09:58:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm agnostic (none / 0)

In the United States, the Episcopal Church has gotten more liberal as the Catholic Church has become more conservative. This is no coincidence as a fair amount of people do go back and forth.

I actually like Episcopal worship better. I used to attend an Episcopal Church. My experience is that they take it more seriously, and more importantly they can sing. Theologically, I am probably more sympathetic to Anglican theology than Catholic. (Bring back the altar rail - and put a woman behind it!) However, I would probably miss the diverse, disfunctional family that is the Catholic Church.

by wayward on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 06:58:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

the Ratz (none / 0)

Progressive Catholics call him the "Rat". He's been number one enforcer of the latter day inquisition.
I suspect he will hasten the collapse of Constantine's imperial folly.
by cmpnwtr on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:53:02 PM EST

Benedict XVI (none / 0)

It seems to me they picked Ratzinger so they could have an "interim" pope to get people used to life without John Paul, and then possibly have a third-world progressive 5 or 6 years from now.
by raginillinoian on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:08:03 PM EST

Re: Benedict XVI (none / 0)

Que Viva El Papa Benedicto XVI!!
by falcon4e on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:15:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Benedict XVI (none / 0)

Or 10-15 years from now.  He could live to 88 or his early 90's.

I thought the same thing, that this is an interim Pope, but a decade or a decade and a half is a long time.  Think how much your life will change in 12-13 years.

by aiko on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:08:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No... it's Pope Rat the First. (none / 0)

I refuse to call Hitler Youth by any "Christian" names.
by afs on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:38:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... it's Pope Rat the First. (3.00 / 0)

Come on.. Respect the office not the man.  
by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:09:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... it's Pope Rat the First. (none / 0)

Respect the office of Pope?  Why?  Seriously.
by Terp on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 11:52:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

2/3 rule (none / 0)

If they couldn't get over one third of the cardinals to vote against Ratzinger I think it will be a long time before any sort of "progressive" can be elected.
by ScottC on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:10:40 PM EST

Worst news ever. (none / 0)

This is bad. Bad. Bad.

by FrenchSocialist on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:14:44 PM EST

Ratzinger (none / 0)

I think the Catholic Church may have jumped the shark with this choice.

I think he will be a man to draw up the drawbridge and and shoot it out at the modern world from the castle keep.

Look for church conservatives in the U.S. and around the world to be even more in ascendance than ever.

Catholic Democrats who are pro-choice should expect to be denied communion.

by mysteve on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:15:53 PM EST

Doomsayer (none / 0)

I don't mean to be a Deputy Downer, but ScottC is right. If they got 2/3 of the Cardinals to vote for this man, I don't believe we'll see a "progressive" Pope in the near future.

That'd be like saying we have a chance of getting Dennis Kucinich elected because only have the country voted for the Conservative.

by sharris0512 on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:17:24 PM EST

Re: Doomsayer (none / 0)

Remember JPII appointed almost all if not all of the cardinals that voted in the conclave, so I don't see the result as a suprise.
by leftcoastindie on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:43:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bad news (none / 0)

The Vatican has now officially written off American and Western European Catholics and ceded Latin America to the pentacostals.

I'm glad I left 2 years ago.

Nobody should be surprised.  Ratzinger's been running the place since JP II's health went downhill.

As my husband & I like to say, he must have known some really good card tricks.

by KimPossible on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:39:19 PM EST

Re: Bad news (none / 0)

You can say that American and Western Euorpeans wrote off the Vatican also.  We have ignored church traditions and wished to dismiss those things that were not easy to follow.  I do not know how great of a Pope he will be, following in John Paul's footsteps, who was not only the greatest Pope in modern times but the greatest religious leader, will be difficult and I doubt he will measure up to it, but in the end what is imporant is that people follow God's path even when it is hard, and I hope this Pope does that.
by THE MODERATE on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:45:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bad news (none / 0)

I agree with you Moderate.
by falcon4e on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:51:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gratest pope of modern times (none / 0)

Is John XXIII.  Without his leadership, the church would still be think that the counter-reformation just ended.  John XXIII created the framework which made it possible for the Catholic Church to be able to address modern ideas and problems.
"You say the world has lost it's love I say embrace what it's made of" -Dar Williams
by Valatan on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:10:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hmm (none / 0)

By saying the greatest religious leader, I guess you are talking about the millions of Africans that died of AIDS because of the pope's position on contraception? or were you referring to something else?
by FrenchSocialist on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:05:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmm (none / 0)

Are you saying it the Pope fault that their is aids in Africa.  So he went down to Africa help a gun to their heads and said have sex with as people you wish and share dirty needles.  I think not.
by THE MODERATE on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:59:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmm (3.00 / 2)

No one gets sick on purpose.  Try another gun analogy: a preacher is aware that safety mechanisms on guns would dramatically reduce accidental deaths from gunshot wounds, but, following tradition, he condemns such mechanisms and preaches that people ought to try harder to always avoid situations where they accidentally shoot someone or are accidentally shot by someone.

But I wouldn't criticize a man of John Paul's stature for following his faith - it was that same faith that led him to such laudable actions as forgiving his would-be assassin; condemning capital punishment; and speaking out against Communist repression and the invasion of Iraq.  It is surely a religious leader's prerogative and duty to follow his faith as he understands it.

It is a great pity, though, that any beliefs - religious or secular - would stand in the way of lessening the scope of suffering from a catastrophe like AIDS.

Keep it short. DemocraticShortList.com
by Rob in Vermont on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 06:49:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmm (none / 0)

Yes that is what he is saying, and yes it is absurd.
by Paul Goodman on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:11:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not a Roman Catholic and... (none / 0)

... not an expert on RC Church politics but...

Ratzinger is defined as a strong defender of John Paul's conservative movements. Yes, he was Hitler Youth but that may or may not mean anything. What does mean something is his role as defender of the faith...

"He's been head of Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Inquisition) for more than 20 years and he has been described as being even more zealous in the defense of orthodoxy than the pope himself."

Ummm... the Inquisition? A German, ex-Hitler Youth, Head of the Inquisition? Too bad this isn't American politics. We could have field day with that.

He is 78 so he won't be Pope long but don't expect any liberal changes from this guy.

Further of the 115 Cardinals that selected the new Pope, 113 of them were appointed by John Paul. Not all are as conservative as John Paul or as Ratzinger appears to be but don't expect some wave of liberalism to wash over these guys without intervening events.

Given that thought... it would be fantastic if Benedict XVI excommunicated the vast majority of American Catholics that want Female Priests, married Priests, think gay union is ok, and think contreception should be approved as well as abortion. Lets hope this guy goes senile and tries to be "the enforcer." It could be just the cataclsymic event necessary to bring the church back into the modern era.

The 10,000 Things
by Andrew C White on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:43:09 PM EST

What's in a Name (none / 0)

The last pope Benedict was in office during World War I and strongly pressed ideas that some say Woodrow Wilson incorporated into his Fourteen Points.

I think that the choice of the name Benedict signals a certain amount of concern with matters of war and peace in this modern world.  Had he been obsessed with archconservative doctrinal orthodoxy, he might have chosen the name Pius.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
by Anthony de Jesus on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 01:44:16 PM EST

Re: What's in a Name (none / 0)

That is an interesting theory, especially considering that he had JPII's ear, and we all know HE was concerned with the spread of war as much as he was with the hot button right wing issues.
"You say the world has lost it's love I say embrace what it's made of" -Dar Williams
by Valatan on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:13:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What's in a Name (none / 0)

Also, Benedictus XV became pope in 1914 at the eve of world war one to succeed St. Pius X, who was a complete archconservative anti-modernist. Benedictus XV lessened some of the excesses of the former regime and allowed more openess in the church... He died in 1922, aged 68.
by Frederik on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:21:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ratzinger aka God's Rottweiler (none / 0)

Joseph Radzinger is an extremely conservative person who wants to fight the world of secularism in Europe, is not very open towards other religions and is not a big fan of the separation of church and state. He also is a stiffler of free thought and even the remotest voice of dissent. You can't fight an historical trend, he'll only drive even more people out of the churches...

But strangely enough... "Benedictus" is seen as a moderately progressive pope name...

On the other hand, his profile is so conservative that expectations on his possible moderation will be so low that he can only surprise us

by Frederik on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:13:08 PM EST

The first thing Ratz should do (none / 0)

Is fix the vatican. It leaks like a sieve

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:36:58 PM EST

A Dark Day (none / 0)

I am Catholic and feel this a dark day in the Catholic Church.  The rise of theocracy is starting to take hold.  I fear for the future.  A new age of inquistion and bad feelings among the world's religions is here.  God help us.
by catholicdemocratmd on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:42:46 PM EST

Nobody expects the German inquisitor (none / 0)

After stewing about this decision for a while, I think I've found a way to look at the bright side of this: things aren't going to get any worse with Ratzinger in charge. As far as I can tell, as JP2 became enfeebled over the last few years, Ratzinger was really running the show anyway and the vote was for a continuation of the status quo for a few more years (Ratzinger's 78 and looks pretty dessicated, so he probably won't be with us more than 5 years).

I suppose the analogy would be like if Bush died/resigned/was Raptured, and Dick Cheney took over for the rest of the term. Since he's the evil crank who's being doing all the behind-the-scenes heavy lifting for his more-charismatic front man, the policy and practices wouldn't change much. But with the curtain of charisma pulled back, all we'd see for a few years would be the bitter old wizard pulling the levers. Hopefully that can result in the pendulum swinging back the next time to choose (although it's hard for that to happen when it's not the 1 billion Catholics who make the choice, only the self-perpetuating college of cardinals).

by Crazy Vaclav on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 02:43:24 PM EST

Re: Nobody expects the German inquisitor (none / 0)

It will be really messed up if we have a situation like JP1 happen again.
by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:16:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ok a little bit of depth on the matter (none / 0)

Mass attendance in the US is down 26% ,
total number of catholics in the US number 7.3%,
mostly concentrated in New England.

43% of the catholics of the world live
in Latin America. Europe is in the interim
band.

The appointment speaks well of the modern catholic
church. Religious conservatism is a simple
practice.  The papacy recently stated, in fact,
that homosexuality is part of a 'culture of evil'.

Who do you think actually helped author
that. Ratzinger has been working with JP2 for
quite some time now, so we won't see anything
different than what we already have.

After all, the Germans opposed the war in
Iraq.  Didn't they?

For my money, I'd care less about how they
deal with homosexuality and other non-issues
like abortion and get on with the real
issues like cloning.  

Fundamentalism is a way of escaping the world,
hiding from its realities. These are eternal
realities facing the church. A younger voice
is welcome, and the church seems to be
in good hands.

but geez, could the vatican have been
more obvious in that europe vs.
latin america thing?

Hail Europa. Not sieg heil.. hail!

>:)

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:10:19 PM EST

What if they never change (3.00 / 1)

Maybe the Catholic Church will never accept woman as priests, and never let priests marry, and always stand against birth control, abortion and gays.  Maybe the Catholic Church will always affirm it current doctrine-come hell or high water.  I am not Catholic but I can see the church standing by its history, tradition, faith, gospels.

Maybe its time for the American Catholic Church to do what Henry VIII did in the 16th century and say fuck you to the Vatican.  Or maybe its time for American Catholic to walk away,

However, as a wife of a lapsed Catholic, I have noticed that to be a Catholic is almost like being a Jew, its a culture not just a religion.  Once born a Catholic always a Catholic--it is in the blood.  You can't say that about Protestants.

Change can come one way or another.  You just have to walk away.  If you can.

by aiko on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:27:39 PM EST

Time to reconsider 501c3 status? (none / 0)

If the Holy Ghost has really picked Joe Cardinal Ratzinger to be Prophet, Seer, and Revelator of the Roman Catholic Church, He must want that church's 501(c)3 status revoked.

Ratzinger, as chief of the Holy Inquisition (no kidding) for 24 years, was one of the leaders encouraging bishops to publicly refuse communion to John Kerry.  That's way out of bounds so far as U.S. law goes;  the Conclave has declared the RC church is more like a 527 than a true charity.

I suppose the centrality of anti-choice reproductive policy and the prefunctory nature of opposition to unjust war is official now.  Some lives are more culture of life than others.  There's no more hiding behind an ailing pope over this scandal.

3.39/-3.27 * Save the Moderates
by ChetEdModerate on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:56:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if they never change (none / 0)

Roman Catholic orthodoxy will not change in my lifetime. John Paul stacked that court solidly and the church will continue in its current direction for at least a century.  But that's not going to get me to walk away.  
Roman Catholicism is, as you noted, as much a culture as a religion, and it's more about community than orthodoxy.
Most of the socioeconomic goals of the church are ideals that progressives can embrace.  Despite criticism that it's nothing more than recruitment, I'm a strong supporter of Catholic missionary work.  I've known many missionaries and every single one was in it to help people--to teach, to build, to work with them-- not to impose an ideology.  The obligation we all have to the poorest of the poor and sickest of the sick is one element of Roman Catholic culture, and religion, that strongly connects us to the progressive community.

Ratzinger was a disappointing choice because he not only believes that abortion and gay relationships are a sin, but that those who disagree with church teachings on those matters are sinful.
To think is a sin.
Not only is the gay Catholic boy a sinner, so is the mother who has realized her son was "different" since he was a toddler, but still loves him and respects him and hopes he finds a good partner in life.  I'm sympathetic to both the boy and the mother.  I'm a double-sinner.
Condoms prevent AIDS and abortion. I'll go directly to hell with that idea.
If a woman were to learn that her current pregnancy could kill her, leaving her family without a wife or mother, she would be sinful not only to have an abortion, but even to consider an abortion.  
Catholicism is all about family.  And no one in that family, or in that community, would consider such a woman to be sinful.
Things such as this are so obvious to so many good Catholics that Rome is distant.  We are not afraid to disagree. We vote for whomever would best serve our communities, not for who would best serve our religion. We are generally not evangelicals and we are taught not to judge others.  
Ratzinger has argued for excommunication of progressive Catholics, but Catholics have rejected that idea.  Christ's embrace of Mary Magdelene teaches us that such exclusion would be sinful.

by ChgoSteve on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 12:48:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if they never change (none / 0)

ChgoSteve,

sorry my man, but it looks like you need to find a different church.  putting your red herring logical fallacies aside (you blatantly mischaracterized the holy father's doctrinal positions[thinking is a sin? laughfest!], whether through intellectual dishonesty or an inability to understand complex arguments), you disagree with fundamental church teachings at the root of our faith.  life, according to our church, is sacred and must be protected at all costs, including the weak, the infirmed, and even the lives of the guilty, as well as the unborn.  to believe otherwise would be to distrust our omnipotent and omniscient heavenly father, who is the author of life.  

if you can't handle basic principles of the christian church, might i suggest creating your own church, joining a unitarian church, or abandoning faith altogether?

by polemical muhammad ali on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 06:58:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if they never change (none / 0)

I'm well aware of the teachings of the Catholic Church.  I was merely pointing out that Catholics exercise free will in accepting or rejecting some of the orthodoxy.

I will add however, that your tone was rude and I doubt you're actually Catholic.  No Catholic would ever use "the christian church" interchangably with "the Catholic church."

by ChgoSteve on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 03:40:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if they never change (none / 0)

by "exercising free will" in choosing some doctrines of the universal christian church and rejecting others, you are creating your own religion.  the holy father and college of cardinals have spent years studying church history, philosophy, and theology.  what makes you think you know better than they and can pick and choose which doctrinal principles to accept?  

i chose the term "christian church" because the catholic church is the universal christian church.  you certainly need to create your own religion or leave the church.  orthodox theology is too difficult and upsetting for you.

by polemical muhammad ali on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 06:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if they never change (none / 0)

Real world experience.  That's what make me think I know better than those aged, isolated cardinals.  
I take the words of Christ to heart, so I won't accept the malice and judgmentalism in the way the church treats women and gays, in particular.
Having been raised in Iowa, I also got to witness the slow death of the rural church.  Priests who used to serve one congregation full time are now serving four or five.  Unless the priesthood is expanded by eliminating the absurd contraption of celibacy, the American church is doomed.
by ChgoSteve on Tue May 03, 2005 at 08:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

anti-Globalization Pope? (3.00 / 1)

The New Donkey (yeah, yeah, I know, but I read him anyway) suggests that conservatives (political ones, as opposed to theological ones) might not be too thrilled with the new Pope once the rubber meets the road, based on this line from Sunday's NYT:

Based on Cardinal Ratzinger's record and pronouncements, his agenda seems clear. Inside the church, he would like to impose more doctrinal discipline, reining in priests who experiment with liturgy or seminaries that permit a broad interpretation of doctrine. Outside, he would like the church to assert itself more forcefully against the trend he sees as most threatening: globalization leading eventually to global secularization.

If he recognizes the global trade regime as being a religion all its own -- a cult of corporate greed and avarice -- he can't be all bad.

Yeah, I'm cynical.
by catastrophile on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:28:14 PM EST

Re: anti-Globalization Pope? (none / 0)

Well, if the cardinals had really been serious about tackling globalization head-on they would have picked one of the Latin American cardinals like Maradiaga from Honduras or Hummes from Brazil, who've led the way on that front.

Since just about every cardinal was picked by JP2, there just isn't that much diversity among the cardinals, though. You can be sure that even Ratzinger, probably the most hard-line of the whole bunch, is still going to be anti-war and opposed to the excesses of global capitalism -- and even if a good man like Maradiaga was our pope today, you'd still hear a litany of "no"s regarding birth control, abortion rights, ordination of women and married men, and anything else that would bring the church into the 20th century (and, yes, I realize this is the 21st century...). It's really just a question of what gets emphasized, and it's too bad we're saddled with a new pope who's probably going to be using his pulpit to emphasize the "no"s on the social issues.

by Crazy Vaclav on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 03:48:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pope Benedict XVI-aka as Cardinal Ratzinger (3.00 / 1)

As a lapsed Catholic, I too was dismayed by the selection of Cardinal Ratzinger as the new Pope.  I was not really expecting much, since almost every one of the members of the College of Cardinals was appointed by the rigidly conservative John Paul II.  However, I am alarmed that, where John Paul II was doctrinally conservative, he was also very "progressive" on the matters of social justice for the poor.

I have heard some rumors that Cardinal Ratzinger is not as much as a critic of capitalism and corporate power-also known in the Church as "consumerism", as was John Paul II.

As a Catholic, I would like to say, give him a chance.  However, as a lapsed Catholic, I fear dark times are ahead for the Church.  If Cardinal Ratzinger clamps down hard in enforcing his version of Catholic orthodoxy, I expect the Catholic Church to lose millions more in Europe and North America.

However, he could surprise us.  The Cardinals were looking for a "caretaker" Pope when they elected John XXIII in 1963.  Little did they expect he would convene the Second Vatican Council to "open the windows of the Church to the world" and let in a New Pentecost of the Holy Spirit.

I am enough of a Catholic to still have the virtue of hope and faith, hope that the Holy Spirit will guide the Church and prevent the Gates of Hell from prevailing over it.

"For I say unto you, Simon bar-Jona, that flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee (that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God), but my Father which is in Heaven.  And I say unto thee, that THOU ART PETER (meaning the rock), AND UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH, AND THE GATES OF HELL WILL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT, AND I SHALL GIVE UNTO THEE THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, THAT WHATSOVER THOU SHALT BIND ON EARTH SHALT BE BOUND IN HEAVEN, AND WHATSOEVER THOU SHALT LOOSE ON EARTH SHALL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN."  

by MichiganDemocrat on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:33:39 PM EST

my thoughts exactly (none / 0)

couldn't have said it better myself.  i'm in "wait and see" mode with ratzinger for the moment.  
Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 12:35:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Catholic church (none / 0)


Turner Broadcasting, you are wrong,
Catholics in the USA make up about
25% of the US population, not 7%. Maybe you meant US Catholics make up about 7% of total global Catholic population, I don't know about that.

I would just add to  your comment about Catholic being concentrated in New England that they are also present in large numbers in the Great Lakes states of Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin as well as in the highly Hispanic states of the Southwest and California.

Otherwide interesting comments on the state of today's Church.

by MichiganDemocrat on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:41:49 PM EST

Perhaps he meant (none / 0)

practicing catholics, not Catholics-in-name-only.
by Paul Goodman on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:14:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Catholic church (none / 0)

its 7 percent of the global population,
sorry that was a typo = I was comparing
the total catholics in US against
all other countries combined, - latin
america was 43 percent.

thanks for point that out.

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 09:30:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The problem is not that he was a Nazi (none / 0)

The real problem with this Pope is that he witness some of the most extreme suffering on the planet while as a Hitler Youth assigned to gaurd the slaves... the scary part is that this man has shown NO COMPASSION.

In fact, he has tried to emulate and ostrisize various groups of people in the NAME OF THE LORD... makes him a really really really bad choice.

He has not repented for his sins but has amplified the sins of a genocide he participated in as a youth and as a cardinal called for the same kind of hatred towards his fellow man...

He still is a NAZI.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 04:47:49 PM EST

Pope Rat the First speaks to Polish Catholics (2.00 / 2)

Tells them they will be living in the homeland of a Pope again very soon... hmmm... too bad he refers to that homeland as "Greater Germany"...
by afs on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 05:14:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If I am not mistaken (none / 0)

he fled that life and dedicated it to Christ. While you are attempting to smear the man you simply reinforce that he ultimately did what few could or few did.
by Paul Goodman on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:15:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If I am not mistaken (none / 0)

He fled to what?

He inflames hatred and racism via the Catholic Church instead of the Nazi Party.

Not only does he denouces gays but OTHER RELIGIONS AS WELL...

... at what point did he stop being a Nazi... cuz he is still acting like one.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 06:44:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The problem is not that he was a Nazi (none / 0)

Ok what I heard was this.

1. he fought in the war, protecting an
engine manufacturing plant , manned
an anti aircraft gun. wore the nazi
uniform.

2. he was a member of the hitler youth..

but... I also heard.

1. he never fired a shot against the allies,
it was essentially a civil defense job.

2. he never attended any of the hitler youth
meetings and was opposed to the whole thing.
he was only signed up because it was
the law to have everyone automatically
signed up.

Now, if you really care about this sort
of thing I would advise reading this
article..

http://www.killingthebuddha.com/dogma/readingniebuhr.htm

"Success in world politics," Niebuhr contended, "necessitates a disavowal of the pretentious elements in our original dream, and a recognition of the values and virtues which enter into history in unpredictable ways." - Reinhold Neibuhr

There is a freshness and wonder in Ratzinger's depiction of the happy family in which he was reared, under the shadow of the horror that was the Third Reich. Family and Church were, for him, inseparable, and he clearly saw Hitler as the enemy of both. Nazism was at its heart a religious movement that, by its own evil lights, had to attack a Church that championed a "foreign Jewish and Roman" faith. His father, a village policeman, saw this from the beginning. "With unfailing clairvoyance he saw that the victory of Hitler would not be a victory for Germany but a victory of the Antichrist which would surely usher in apocalyptic times for all believers, and not only for believers." Young Ratzinger had to spend some time in a military work brigade, always hoping for the victory of the allies, and being irritated by the way the Americans seemed to be taking their own sweet time in prosecuting the war. The chief lesson he draws from the war years, however, is a lesson about the Church. "Despite many human failings, the Church was the alternative to the destructive ideology of the Nazis. In the inferno that had swallowed up the powerful, she had stood firm with a force coming to her from eternity. It had been demonstrated: The gates of hell will not prevail against her."

-=-

My findings are simple. His resume shows
he's stiff, to be sure. The son of a cop.

But I find that I like him. The best
way to win the wars of religion are
to embrace the true christ and that relationship,
almost romantic - carrying you through
to real answers - stemcell, cloning,
and the brave new world of people playing
their lives through like video games.

It may very well be that we are saved by
our faith. In ratzingers case, he was saved
by boot licking toadyism but his soul
seems pure enough. There was enough blt ism
in the germany of the third reich.

our problem is to solve the situation
of americas reichstag. that nuculur option
thang is lookin' more and more like
the gop's krystallnacht maneuver.

by turnerbroadcasting on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 09:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The problem is not that he was a Nazi (none / 0)

HE HAS ABSOLUTLY NO COMPASSION AND HE INSTIGATES HATRED TOWARDS ANYONE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT HE DOES PARTICULARLY OTHER RELIGIONS.

HE IS THE JOHN BOLTON OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 06:46:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I am very interested in this (none / 0)

I am very interested in this
尖锐湿疣 性病 尖锐湿疣 咪喹莫特 明欣利迪 疣迪 尖锐湿疣 咪喹莫特 咪喹莫特 疣迪 明欣利迪 疣迪 艾达乐 咪喹莫特 尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣 尖锐湿疣
by hpvv on Tue Dec 20, 2005 at 02:52:15 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.