Pope of Rome to Step Down
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/wo...ewanted=1&_r=0

I'm shocked at this. I really respect Pope Benedict for the absolutely huge amount of moral courage this must have taken for him to consider and announce. It'll be really interesting to see how the College of Cardinal reacts and who they will elect. This is really interesting because they have something like a month to pray and think over thier nomination for the See of Rome.

It is foolish to elect such an old person to the post to begin with. I think he did the right thing knowing he could no longer fulfill his duties.

The reason they've always had to elect someone so old is because he is infallible. You can't have a whole bunch of people who are infallible and (yes, this is what this means) can live forever walking around inserting their 2 cents. We mustn't let reality interfere.

But seriously, I haven't been a fan of this guy, but this may begin to turn my opinion. Stepping down before you become riddled with dementia, inability to walk or talk to the literally millions of people who want your time and attention, is absolutely the right thing to do. Now, how to deal with the corporeal being while he continues to live...

Here's my conspiracy theory to chew on... VERY shortly after he steps down he will die. The story will be told that he was much sicker than the world was lead to believe, but in fact he will have been offed because it's too difficult for the church to keep all the dogmatic balls in the air (so to speak), with 2 popes hanging around. But his replacement will still be a 75+ year old white guy from Europe. And it's been long enough, they'll probably allow an Italian to take back the crown.

ARGH!!! I really hope you're wrong about this. My hope and prayer is for a Pope from one of the African nations or from a Hispanic/Spanish-Speaking country. It's time...

I wasn't a fan of his from the get-go either. (HUGE JPII fan here) I am, however, warming up to the idea that he's trying to be more forward-thinking than the past.

I'm just annoyed by the fact that he came in, changed all the Mass prayers and then resigned...

PS - I meant to put that smiley after my last line...not as the subject line. I'm serious about my first two lines...

Actually there has been a lot of speculation that the next pope might be African or South American. There is also speculation about two potential north American Popes.

So long as the North American is of another decent other than "white guy"...I'll support it! Would love either the African or South American you've heard about.

I know you may be joking, but just to be clear since it's a common misconception/allegation: It is not Catholic teaching that the pope is infallible. Catholic teaching is that when the pope, acting ex cathedra ("from his chair" -- that is, in his capacity as as shepherd and supreme teacher of the Church), defines that a doctrine of faith or morals must be held by the whole Church, the Church may rely on that teaching as being free from error. While there is no definitive list of such ex cathedra declarations, they have been pretty rare.

I agree that the announcement shows a great deal of courage and humility. It will be interesting to see the role of a bishop emeritus of Rome. (Not buying in to any conspiracy theories.)

Well the Canadian is a Quebecois and the American is Cardinal Dolan.

I'm never going to remember "and with your spirit."

Similar to what other people have said, I've never been a fan, but this is probably the best choice. I'm excited to see what happens though. It would be interesting if there was an American Pope, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

I get what you're going for, but I think it's a bit narrow. It reminds me of when we look at the Bid Day Pictures thread and say how "diverse" groups are when their chapters have two or three women of color. Diversity encompasses much more than that, and quite frankly a person of color in the papacy will not likely mean much change in inclusivity in the Church. It's one of many factors, and I wouldn't be a "one issue voter" on that one.

I don't think it will happen for a long long time, but it would be really interesting if an Eastern Rite Cardinal is elected. Granted the only Eastern Rite Cardinals are the Patriarchs, which I'm surprised that John Paul II didn't try to change.

The difference in the diversity you mention and diversity in the Catholic church is Catholics as a group are not Western European and haven't been for a very long time. Catholicism is biggest where education is smallest, and currently that's Africa.

And my understanding of the infallibility of the pope is that never in history before JPII did any pope EVER admit to being ill because the pope, being infallible, can't get sick. So he's fine, he's fine, he's fine, he's dead. I will gladly surrender that belief if I was told wrong. It is just one of very many things that made me throw religion in general and Catholicism in particular in the same pile with the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny.

But look at it this way - he gets to help pick his successor, which arguably no pope has really had control over in 600 years.

Actually, when he resigns, he will indeed still be a cardinal, but he's over 80, and therefore does not get to sit in the conclave and elect his successor. No cardinals over 80 get to vote.

I'm afraid you were told wrong. That sounds like the mixed-up idea of some overly pious (and superstitious) Catholic or of some virulently anti-Catholic Protestant. Either way, it's wrong. Infallible means trustworthy or without error.

Per Benedict XVI: "The Pope is not an oracle; he is infallible in very rare situations, as we know."

And per John XXIII: "I am only infallible if I speak infallibly but I shall never do that, so I am not infallible."

FWIW, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm Presbyterian, not Catholic, and I don't accept the doctrines of the Petrine primacy or of papal infallibility. That said, I have a great deal of respect for the Bishop of Rome -- both the office and the holder of that office -- and the ministry of unity he can exercise.

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

It's all good - there are many who don't quite understand the whole Anglican Ordinariate thing and since I'm married to an Anglican (Not Anglican Ordinariate or RC at all) priest it gets extra-special confusing for those who talk to me!

This past Sunday, I went to Mass for the first time in years. (I was raised Catholic and converted to Judaism 14 years ago.) This was at my parents' parish, where I had attended Mass every weekend as a child. To make a very long story very short, my mother is very ill, so my husband and I were visiting her (in hospital) and my father, and we had to drive him to church.

When the wording changes were made, there were cards placed at every pew with the changes. Those cards are still there, even though the new wording is stated in the missalette.

Time was that I could get through a Mass without the missalette. Frell - I was a lector! Now it seems like everything has changed - even the Eucharistic prayer is worded differently. I was sitting there (as a non-Catholic, I sit rather than kneel during the Eucharistic prayer) thinking, "Where are the words I grew up with?"

Anyway, as to the Pope, if he feels he's not up to leading a Church consisting of over a million people, it's probably for the best that he step down and serve in whatever capacity he can serve. Hopefully a new Pope can be selected and in place in time for Easter.

B for billion. 1.1 billion in the Church. And from your lips to God's ears, aephi alum - let's hope it's by Easter.

What happens if there is no new Pope by Easter?

My thoughts exactly. Conclaves can take a LONG time. Though, modern conclaves don't take months, or even years like the ones in the 12th-18th century. One took almost 3 years!

I hope they elect a cardinal that can connect with all Catholics, since most popes were European, but these days, most Catholics aren't. I also hope they find an energetic leader, a communicator like John Paul II (though I personally found him too conservative on women's and sexuality issues).

Nothing, other than that there's no pope by Easter. I think it's just more of a matter of it would be ideal for a new pope to be able to preside at the Holy Week and Easter liturgies and not ideal for the cardinals to still be sequestered in conclave during Holy Week and Easter.

I haven't seen a date announced for the conclave, but my understanding is that it has to start between March 15-20. Palm Sunday is March 24 this year, and Easter is March 31.

:confused: Do you mean energetic?

LOL yes, haha typing on my phone

I absolutely agree with this - whether the cardinals are aware or whether this is just between the Pope and his doctor.

As to everyone talking about the wording changes - Lutheran here, but at some point our official wording of the Apostles/Nicene Creed changed from "He descended to the dead" to "He descended into hell." I thought this sucked (so did my mom) and so never stopped saying it the old way. Lo and behold, the wording has now changed back to "to the dead." Stay stubborn y'all, it works. Ha ha.

LOL. We Presbies have always used "descended into hell." When I was a kid, I thought it was cool that we got to cuss in church -- and in the same part of the service that we got to talk about virgins.

I remember my friend Jenn and I around 3rd grade really loving that part of "What Child Is This" when they talk about "where ox and ASS are feeding."