Comments | bingblot: more papal ponderings

bingblot

more papal ponderings

Apr 21, 2005 00:06

If you're not already sick of hearing reactions to the Cardinals' choice of Ratzinger as Pope...
some more reactions- attempting to be more coherent and more serious.

( Not just for Catholics- but conservatives might want to stay out )

religion

Comments 6

annearchy April 21 2005, 07:20:25 UTC

I'm wishing Pope Benedict XVI a very brief and very unproductive papacy- right around the length of John Paul I's would be nice.

I'm old enough to remember the mini-reign of John Paul I - it was like, "Johnny, we hardly knew ye..." ;) Seriously though, electing a 78-year-old pope has got to be dumber even than electing a 70-year-old president *cough*Reagan*cough*. Maybe we'll be lucky and B-16 will live only 2-3 years and not cause much damage. Or not :(

davinator April 21 2005, 09:00:14 UTC

CNN and Fox are reporting this morning that Ratty has claimed his papacy will be short, measured in years, not a decade. Pretty shocking given he rules out euthanasia and suicide by default. He must be expecting a short life.

I'm guessing his choice wasn't so much continuity but actually going with the transitional-style pope some spoke of.

bingblot April 21 2005, 10:53:49 UTC

Maybe I'm being excessively gloomy but frankly, even measuring Benedict XVI's papacy in years scares me. If he only lives to be JPII's age, he'll be pope for, what, 5, 6 years? The Pope can do a lot in that space of time. Especially when you have someone as committed (to use a good word) or as obsessive (to use the bad word) as Ratzinger seems to be. As for people talking about Benedict XV as a 'sign' he also was pope for 8 years.
I want to measure B XVI's papacy in months not years, let alone decades.

yes, maybe it was a sign of a transitional-style pope but let's be frank- there were other Papabili who were just as old as Ratzinger is. No, I think the fact that they picked him and picked him so quickly is indication that they want him for his doctrine not his age. It's not like he's the only 78 year old Papabili! If he was, then maybe... but that's most assuredly not the case.

davinator April 22 2005, 11:50:28 UTC

No, I think the fact that they picked him and picked him so quickly is indication that they want him for his doctrine not his age.

Good point. Made me realize the perception of reasons for something can vary from within and without the church, as well as glad to have someone to discuss them with! :-)

Going with your doctrine point, it occurs to me to link your point with the observation many made that JP II appointed all but three of the existing cardinals. While it doesn't assure doctinal continuity, do you think the choices JP II made in cardinals affected the choice they made here?

That makes me also speculate if Ratty lives only short years and appts few cardinals himself, the likelihood of the next pope being progressive would be equally low since the cast of cardinals would remain nearly the same, don't you think?

bingblot April 22 2005, 23:16:23 UTC

I think the appointments JPII made affected their choices in so much as he only appointed cardinals who were conservative or slightly moderate at most. None of the cardinals eligible, for that reason, were anything close to liberal. I was only hoping for someone closer to the moderate scale than someone so conservative he makes most other 'right wing' cardinals look liberal- which is basically my view of Ratty. (LOL, great nickname, btw ( ... )

Thread 5