To use your example...But when the president of the chapter is "of color" I think that makes a bigger statement than one or two faces in a group photo.

Do you think the Church is exclusive to certain races?

I maintain my very strong desire for a Pope of either African or Hispanic decent.

Well, let's hope it's not an indecent person of whatever race. :rolleyes:

Personally, I hope for the Holy Spirit to guide the cardinals to elect the man who is best able to lead all Catholics of all races.

Cosign to both!

I echo MC (thank you!), ditto to Belle. I've also never been a fan of Bene16. I'm a JP2 fan all the way. Hard to measure up to him.

My personal favorite is Cardinal Bergoglio from Argentina.

I do not support a North American Cardinal at this time.

I appreciated this article today. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...er-had-chance/


"And with your spirit" has been a pain in the ass for me to remember, even a year after the change. (And it wasn't Bene16 changing things, it was an implementation of the correct Latin translations.)

Fair point. What I mean by that example is that it's very easy to see color and say, "Diversity!" when it's really much more complex than simply that.

To your first point, I suppose it does make a stronger statement, but being non-white does not automatically qualify one to be the next pope.

I'm troubled that you would suggest I think the Church is exclusive to certain races. I simply believe that there are many factors, and relying solely on race would be an oversimplified view of the matter.

This is what I was getting at.

I don't go to church often, but when I do, I refuse to say "And with your spirit". I'm all for change, but "And also with you" is plain ol stuck in my head.

Then what did you mean by the 2nd quote? Because that's exactly how I took it? Suggesting there needs to be a "change in inclusivity" means to me that you think that the Church has an exclusivity problem.

I didn't say it did. I just said that I HOPED that the person that is chosen (thus deemed qualified by the Cardinals and through them the Holy Spirit) was non-white.

This was very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

I have heard good things about him!

I know it wasn't Bene16 per se, but the correction happened under his Papacy, so thus I blame him for all my blunders! :p "And with your spirit" hasn't been as much of a problem for me as the little one word changes here and there throughout the Mass... "Consubstantial", for one!

Well it does have an exclusivity problem, but that problem is not about race. The LGBT community would be a good example, but that's a personal bias and I'd rather not derail this thread.

"And with your spirit"
 

- slight hijack - That's how we've always done it in the Anglican use community so when the "change" happened we were scratching our heads - "Change? What change?".

Kind of an ecumenical pain as well. One of the benefits of the post-Vatican II era was the cooperation between RC, Anglican (except, as Belle notes, some in the AngloCatholic community, who continued to use older versions) and Protestant liturgical groups that resulted in common texts used by all groups. "And also with you" was one product of that, as was the previous version of the creed -- the one without "consubstantial."

I understand the desire/need for the Latin to be accurately translated, but I do hate that the ecumenical consensus has been lost.

Actually it was John Paul the Second who ordered the revision started, but it wasn't completed for a very long time. Also I sometimes find myself going into Rite I language when I visit a RC, which is similar but has some differences.


Rite Ier

Fair enough, but I was discussing a race/ethnicity issue so when you mentioned how a Pope of non-Anglo race/ethnicity wouldn't change an "exclusivity problem", one would believe you were talking about the Church having an exclusivity problem with regard to race.

Back to your regularly scheduled thread...

This cracks me up - I have attended an Anglican church before and I know exactly what you speak of! Us lame RC's are just now catching up. :p

To clarify, Anglican use IS RC - actually, it's now the Anglican Ordinariate.

http://www.themiscellany.org/index.p...riate-answered

So we are as RC as any other Roman Catholics - and I wouldn't touch the "lame" designation with 10 foot pole! :)

As soon as I hit "submit" I knew I was misspeaking...didn't mean to imply that Anglican use/parishioner =/= RC! I absolutely know better. Then I had to run to pick up a child at the school bus & there was no time to edit!

(ps - I just learned how to spell - it's telling me I misspelled "parishoner". Had no idea there was a 2nd "i"...had to go to Dictionary.com to figure out the right spelling!) The more you know... :D