So the likely options seem to be:[ul][li]Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, or [/li]Bishop of Rome Emeritus Ratzinger[/ul] Right?
[quote=“t-bonham@scc.net, post:41, topic:650161”]
So the likely options seem to be:[ul][li]Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, or [/li][li]Bishop of Rome Emeritus Ratzinger[/ul] Right?[/li][/QUOTE]
The usual form is “Bishop Emeritus of X”, not “Bishop of X Emeritus”.
And, while Joe Bloggs may be described as the Bishop Emeritus of Wherever, he’s usually just addressed as “Bishop Bloggs” or “Dr. Bloggs”. If you’re being very formal, he’s referred to as “Most Rev. Joe Bloggs DD, Bishop Emeritus of Wherever”
Here’s an odd, somewhat related I guess, question: When did Popes (of each of the faiths that has a Pope) start taking on (for want of a better term) reign names?
Regnal names, not reign names. And the first one was Simon, called Peter.
After “Your Holiness”, might I suggest “Your Lowliness”?
Reminds me a bit of Rodney Dangerfield- the former Satan before being succeeded by his son (Harvey Keitel)- in Little Nicky.
Which can only mean that Adam Sandler will be the first Jewish pope in almost 2,000 years.
Because an early Pope was named Mercurius, and he thought that would be confusing, since the Roman God Mercury was still remembered by many people. So he chose the name John II.
<Ed Norton>“Hello, ex-Pope!”</EN>
“Hi! I’m the new Pope, but many people still confuse me with the god Mercurius! That’s why I carry the Roman Express Card. With the Roman Express Card, I’m no longer confused with a deity---- although I get treated like one.”
The Roman Express Card. Don’t leave domus without one.
When addressing a president or ex-president, one would typically use “Mr President” in the first instance and “Sir” in subsequent instances during the same conversation. When referring to a president, one should use “President X” (where X can be either the last name or first and last names). When referring to an ex-president, one should use either “President X” or “Former President X”, depending somewhat on context and clarity.
It’s really only in the modern era that we’ve had the situation with two presidents with the same name, e.g. the two President Bush’s, where we refer to the first as “President George H. W. Bush” and “President George W. Bush”. Of course, if Hillary Clinton becomes President, we’ll have that whole thing again (although she will almost certainly be addressed as “Madam President” and referred to as “President Hillary Clinton”.
It’s incredibly disrespectful to refer to or address a President as anything other than by their title, at least in any official capacity.
Meet the new Pope, same as the old Pope.
UPDATE: I was wrong 
See here for the correct answer (which is similar to Emily Post’s, but goes into more detail): http://www.formsofaddress.info/FOA_president_US_former.html
Harry Truman said, when he left the White House in 1953, that he looked forward to just becoming plain ol’ “Mr. Truman” again. This is a democracy, not an aristocracy, and IMHO too many former government officials want to be called by their old titles to the end of their days. But when you’re out of office, you’re out of office, and should relinquish the title.
One Pope, two Pope
Old Pope, new Pope
What about John Adams and his son, who was president for more than a year before the elder died?
While in office, he’s addressed as “Your Holiness”, so once he resigns, won’t he be “Your UnHoliness”?
Red Pope, Blue Pope
That’s interesting given that during the State of Union speech and during the campaign debates, President Obama referred to his former opponent as “Governor Romney.” Does Governor fall under the multiple-officeholders rule because there are 50 of them? Or does it fall under the single-officeholder rule because each state only has one of them?
I don’t see any reason to take that link seriously when the guy doesn’t even know how to use apostrophes. He has a .info address, for goodness sake. He’s got a commercial product, yet he couldn’t get a .com address, but the stupid hoax address of the Internet.
Sure, there are a lot of recommendations on the front page, but the guy admits that people don’t often follow his advice. It sounds to me like people don’t really consider him relevant.
Yeah, it may seem superficial to base my idea on him using “president’s” where he means “president,” but I propose that’s a mistake that’s nearly impossible to make if you know what you are talking about. If he does know it’s wrong, it shows a lack of diligence, similar to not knowing that .info addresses are more often huckster’s sites.
I will continue to use what I’ve seen people use, and I’ve never seen former presidents addressed by their previous titles. No one says Governor Clinton or Governor Bush. We inherently feel it is insulting to do so. And the only places that use Mr. Bush or Mr. Clinton are the places that do that with everyone.
:p:p rotflmao!