Pope Ratzinger Discussion - pipTalk Forums

How to Join	Member's Area	Private Library	Search	Sanctuary		Login
Main Forums	Discussion	Tech Talk	Mature Content	Archives	A home without a wall, Our haven without ends, A circle we all call Our Family of Friends!

Mistletoe Angel

Member Empyrean

since 2000-12-17

Posts 32816
Portland, Oregon

0 posted 2005-04-19 03:09 PM

If you saw my response to the New Pope being chosen in the Announcements & Links thread, you saw how I respectfully disagreed with the cardinals' selection, primarily because he is already 78 years old (Once you're 80, you're ineligible for nomination) thus won't have a long tenure, and also because while the Catholic church has been growing hugely in popularity throughout developing parts of the world, particularly in South America and Africa, in Europe the church has actually shrunk in size.

The point leading off that latter argument I've made is that having a Latino or African as the new pope would be much well correlative to the current landscape of the Catholic church in the world, and this selection sounds a little off-center to me.

Obviously, of course, the Pope doesn't only influence the Church, they also influence everyone in the world, and I also believe selecting a Pope from a developing society like Haiti, Nigeria or Brazil would be symbolic to putting these developing cultures more in the spotlight or something, whereas this selection is kind of absent of that romantic vision.

Is it just me or are others feeling this sort of skepticism toward this selection?

Regardless of my skepticism, as a Catholic, I am willing to offer him my support and congratulate him for this great honor.

Initial thoughts and opinions on the New Pope?

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Mistletoe Angel

Member Empyrean

since 2000-12-17

Posts 32816
Portland, Oregon

1 posted 2005-04-19 03:23 PM

Quickly here, I want to bring in light one reasoning I've recognized in response to those who question his age being a factor in being that Ratzinger is serving as a "transitional pope", that is, biding the Church time to decide exactly the direction they want to move from here and just maintaining the status quo for now.

I recognize that argument, I still feel somehow that it still sends out a message to other parts of the world of where the Church is contemplating heading and some may feel underrepresented somehow.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

nakdthoughts
Member Laureate

since 2000-10-29

Posts 19200
Between the Lines

2 posted 2005-04-19 04:08 PM

though I am not Catholic( but married to one...still) I find the choice a fair one..a good one really. He was close to the former Pope and the reason they chose someone older(at least what has been written and spoken) is that they did not wish to have a Pope for another length of 20 years. I am sure the Cardinals picked one with great experience who could and will represent all. And it is not up to the will of the people to change tradition... The Catholic church will probably never bow to the wishes of the people...(majority or not)..since the wishes change from generation to generation.

Just my opinion...there are enough religions to choose from that if one does not like to follow the teachings of one, they can join and believe in another. It is not up to any society or group to force changes upon the laws and teachings of any religion.

Krawdad
Member Elite

since 2001-01-03

Posts 2597

3 posted 2005-04-19 04:20 PM

I commented on the announcement thread as well, Noah, but I'll add this.
Your question echoes many others' that relate to "who's a Catholic" these days and how they ought to be represented in the Vatican and the church.  The election of a Pope is not a representative event, as I read it.  Wouldn't likely be secret if it was.
Ratzinger was at John Paul II's right hand during the appointment of the bulk of the voting Cardinals.  One could argue that two decades gives one ample time to set oneself up for appointment.  I think that tells us something, maybe tells us a whole lot.  I thought they would elect him in one day.
This is a conservative enforcer.  Liberals of the church beware, especially the theologians.

Kraw'

nakdthoughts
Member Laureate

since 2000-10-29

Posts 19200
Between the Lines

4 posted 2005-04-19 04:26 PM

Kraw~~ I placed a link on the other thread about the Pope's choice of name...not sure if it will work...it is an aol link

M

Mistletoe Angel

Member Empyrean

since 2000-12-17

Posts 32816
Portland, Oregon

5 posted 2005-04-19 04:39 PM

Krawdad, again I wanted to say that my skepticism of Ratzinger as being the best choice to take the papacy has nothing to do politically.

Ratzinger is definitely more traditionalist in stance, and more conservative than John Paul II was, thus I'm not expecting a green light response on him about gay marriage or something of those sorts for instance, but I'm willing to just see where he goes and I believe we'll just wait and see how he leads the Church.

I just think the choice is a bit off-center in terms of where the Church has established itself recently, and I think having a pope that's non-European could both hold traditional values while also influence those who have more recently found their way to this Church would have made a better selection.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

[This message has been edited by Mistletoe Angel (04-19-2005 06:54 PM).]

Krawdad
Member Elite

since 2001-01-03

Posts 2597

6 posted 2005-04-19 05:23 PM

I don't disagree with you , Noah, as Catholicism appears to be in decline in Germany, but I strongly suspect that this election was about something else entirely.
However, perhaps like the appointment of the supreme court justices, there may be some unexpected directions taken, to the chagrin of the appointee(s).
It may be that Ratzinger's choice of "Benedict" really is a signal that he will be more centerist than we think, if he is harking back to the last one by that name.
Who knows.
And this is only the opinion of an ex- , so what do I know.

Kraw'

Ron

Administrator

Member Rara Avis

since 1999-05-19

Posts 8669
Michigan, US

7 posted 2005-04-19 08:23 PM

quote:
The point leading off that latter argument I've made is that having a Latino or African as the new pope would be much well correlative to the current landscape of the Catholic church in the world, and this selection sounds a little off-center to me.

While I might be convinced to agree with your logic, Noah, I think perhaps you don't go far enough. No single race or nationality comprises anything close to fifty percent of the Catholic population, but there IS a group that does and, by your logic, is poorly represented.

In short, Noah, your argument leads to the inescapable conclusion the pope should be a woman.

Balladeer

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-05

Posts 25505
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA

8 posted 2005-04-19 09:46 PM

A popette, Ron??

I know women can't be priests but I've never heard it mentioned one cannot be a Pope. Is Hillary available?

Aenimal
Member Rara Avis

since 2002-11-18

Posts 7350
the ass-end of space

9 posted 2005-04-19 10:16 PM

Ratzinger is simply the safe choice, a non-threatening transitional pope. As with JP II, the church will simply continue to drag it's feet on the issues mentioned. Not sure when or if they'll ever seriously address these issues, but i'm fairly certain it won't be ratzinger who does.

To be honest, I really expected a South American pope. Catholicism is swiftly losing ground to Evangelism/Protestant sects. Some expect that within the next 5 years, Evangelicals could make up 31% of the Latin American population. Brazil is leading the charge, with 90% of all new churches being Pentecostal, and an average of 5 new Evangelical churches opening per week in Rio alone. Not to mention the growing population of Columbian Evangelicals!

Though I'm no longer Catholic, I'm just thankful it wasn't Dionigi Tettamanzi for those who still are. I worried that Tettamanzi conservative views and links to the ultra-conservative Opus Dei would have driven the church even further back into the dark ages then JPII.

Midnitesun

Member Empyrean

since 2001-05-18

Posts 28647
Gaia

10 posted 2005-04-19 11:25 PM

I currently work at a non-profit Catholic Charities facility. It should be an interesting few days, as I listen to the feedback from Oregonian catholics. So far, one has intimated the new Pope's conservative stance will not go over well with American Catholics. Noah, you make an interesting point...that as this Pope is older than most of the others who were eligible for the papacy, he may be considered a transitional Pope.

Kaoru

Member Elite

since 2003-06-07

Posts 3892
where the wild flowers grow

11 posted 2005-04-20 09:07 AM

*sigh*...

If anything, I feel sorry for the guy..no one will just let it be.

Tell you what, if you're so confident in the catholic church to begin with, you can trust that they made the choice for a reason, can't you?

Mysteria

Member Laureate

since 2001-03-07

Posts 18328
British Columbia, Canada

12 posted 2005-04-20 01:11 PM

I read ALL these discussions and never say one word. This is the first time I laughed so hard I covered my screen in coffee! Ron, you truly slay me you know that? What is more, I agree with you! I most often do, but this will be the very first time I shall laugh all darn day thinking about it!

Noah, I am not Catholic so really can't comment on their choice for Pope, but can say this, seeing that they put the energy into the process of selection that they did, and his name came out, they must have a very good and surly economical reason for it.

JoshG
Member

since 2004-11-16

Posts 127
TX, USA

13 posted 2005-04-20 02:35 PM

I think there is an argument in the fact that the church wasn't ready for a new generation Pope? The time is coming close for the next Pope to be from another generation (not sure which one). Maybe I am just saying, the church isn't ready for a gen-x liberal.

Sunshine

Administrator

Member Empyrean

since 1999-06-25

Posts 63354
Listening to every heart

14 posted 2005-04-20 02:38 PM

quote:
...surly economical reason...

I hope that was an oops?

Or maybe not?

Mysteria

Member Laureate

since 2001-03-07

Posts 18328
British Columbia, Canada

15 posted 2005-04-20 09:07 PM

Outside of spelling surely wrong for some

- no it was not a slip. My opinion is, and always will be is that the Catholic church always has a reason, either financial or political for most of what they do.

Surly and surely both fit!

Mistletoe Angel

Member Empyrean

since 2000-12-17

Posts 32816
Portland, Oregon

16 posted 2005-04-20 09:24 PM

(giggles over the surly typ...no, no, that's not what I meant, I meant the surely typo!

)

Yeah, Sharon, I agree I probably am making a bigger deal of this than I should be. I do find great sense in the perspective that Ratzinger is probably serving more as a transitional pope anyway, and I believe he is qualified and prepared to discipline the Church in maintaining the traditions and doctrines of it while the clergy and all contemplate the overall direction they'd like the Church to go.

I do believe that new generation kind of Pope is right around the corner as well, and I don't mean in terms of politics, but rather in a cultural sense. I think the single greatest issue the Church is confronting is women and the priesthood. According to one new poll I heard, 55% of respondents believed that women should belong in the priesthood, which shows it is a very divided issue that really must be resolved as the Church embaces a new chapter.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Alicat
Member Elite

since 1999-05-23

Posts 4094
Coastal Texas

17 posted 2005-04-20 09:58 PM

I thought the issue of female priests had already been resolved. Pope John Paul II said no way. Pope Benedict XVI said while still a cardinal no way. I suspect the answer again will be no way. So it's been resolved, or answered, albiet not the answer some want. Perhaps that's why they, the ones who didn't like the prior answers, still think the issue is unresolved.

Denise

Moderator

Member Seraphic

since 1999-08-22

Posts 22648

18 posted 2005-04-20 10:04 PM

Noah, my first thought was that perhaps God's agenda is vastly different than man's agenda.

Popette Hillary!

Socialized healthcare would then be made a Sacrament!

Actually, Michael, I think she would be a better candidate for Ambassador to the U.N. Afterall, she would never speak crossly to a subordinate, would she?!

	⇧ top of page ⇧
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.