So, although discredited, some prophecies out there insisted that Pope Benedict was the penultimate Pope.
Looking forward at those prophecies being just as faulty as all the ones before.
As for the matter at hand, the current Pope just announced his resignation so it is election time in the Vatican. NPR just reported that most cardinals that will vote for the new Pope were selected by Jean Paul II and Benedict.
Looks like it will be the same old, same old continuity of things with the new Pope. Any hope of any candidate or cardinal out there that will be more responsive to progress or should I remain a lapsed Catholic forever?
Or just for information purposes, who are the most likely candidates that have a shot at becoming the new Pope?
Too soon to speculate on actual names, but, will the next Pope be a reactionary/conservative or a reformer/liberal? What’s the general direction of the Church, or, rather, of the College of Cardinals, these days?
In a rarely seen ritual, Joseph Ratzinger will be stripped of his papal name by having a quart of hollandaise poured over his head while he sits atop a slice of Canadian bacon.
1/4 of the cardinals in the conclave will be Italians, so guys like Cardinal Angelo Scola (appointed archbishop of Milan by Benedict) will be on the short list.
But there are other Italian candidates who may split the vote, meaning a third-world candidate is a possibility. Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergolio (archbishop of Buenos Aires) was rumored to be the runner up to Ratzinger in 2005, but he’s 76 now. Argentinian Cardinal Leonardo Sandri (a Prefect in the Roman Curia) is probably the most likely if there is to be a non-European Pope.
That’s nearly impossible to tell. If ever there was a group that could keep a secret, it’s the College of Cardinals. There were reports of Cardinals Martini and Ruini receiving votes in the early ballots, another report had Cardinal Bergoglio as the major challenger. Whether one of these three is in the running is anyone’s guess, those who know don’t talk and those that talk don’t know.
Mods: Apparently I was beat out in the Elections forum . . . Never thought of a papal election as fitting there . . . Anyway, if you must merge threads, keep my thread-title, please!
Moved GIGObuster’s thread to Great Debates from Elections - it’s technically about an election, but it’s more of a GD subject - and merged it with BrainGlutton’s thread on the same topic.
Any change that might be a LW liberation-theologian? I nominate Jean-Bertrand Aristide! (So he ain’t a priest any more, so what, you don’t need to be one to be papabile, see Gregory X.)
There really aren’t any reformers/liberals left in the College. Retired Cardinal Carlo Martini–who unsuccessfully led the liberal wing that tried to block Ratzinger in 2005–died last year at 85. The only real choice will be whether the next Pope will strive to positively promote Catholic doctrine (like JPII) or continue to purge dissent (like Benedict XVI). I for one am betting on the latter–and that, contrary to the choice of Benedict as a short-term “wait and see” papacy, the conclave will pick a younger Pope likely to be around for a couple of deacdes.
The WaPo picture of him on the front page looks like a supercriminal confronted by Batman: hands in the air in fake surrender, with a gleefully malevolent grin on his face as he knows what’s about to happen.
Well, I’ve heard that they do traditionally alternate – that is, they don’t like to have two long papal reigns back-to-back, so they nominate a young (for a Cardinal) one, then an old one, etc.
Gregory X was a elected specifically to end a three-year deadlock over the nationality of the next Pope; the French king and the King of Naples were using the papacy as a political football. Gregory was a good political choice because he had been away at the crusades for some time.
FYI: The last non-cardinal elected Pope was Urban VI–again as part of a dispute between France and Italy during the Avignon papacy. The last non-priest (though still a cardinal) was Leo X–a Medici who blew the papal treasury, sold indulgences to make up the difference, and bungled the Catholic response to Luther’s 95 theses. If you’re a Catholic, these aren’t great precedents for another non-priest- non-cardinal pope
Why is that, anyway? Seems like the Italian Church is rather overrepresented. And the present and last popes are/were not Italian, so why did they appoint so many Italians? Or did they?
