Now, the biggest question is: Who?
Printable View
Now, the biggest question is: Who?
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger from Germany is elected the new Pope.
He has chosen for his name, Pope Benedict XVI.
Habemus Papam!
I would have prefered someone else, but I wish him luck.
God knows, he will need it.
Oh, please. I hope you didn't bet on Cardinal Bernard Law. :p
Some London bookmakers have got it right, BTW, in both candidate and the chosen name.
IMHO, I've had a hunch they were going to select an older papal candidate. He's 78 years old, which mean his papal reign will be much shorter than that of JP2 the Great.
OTOH, he's not got the health problems JPII had at that age (Parkinson's, etc.) so he may last quite a while yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
I give it 12-15 years, barring incident.
What's amused me is that the media attacks have already started. He's been called "schooled in the Nazi's use of propaganda" (He was 12 when WWII started, ninnies!), and referred to by unknown "critics" (ie: the press) as "God's Rottweiler."
Can someone please explain the "choosing a name" bit?
It seems very de-humanizing. In fact, it seems to embrace exactly what's wrong with the church (IMO): dividing themselves from the common masses.
"I'm no longer Bob Common, I'm now Benedict the XVI. Fear my wrath, mortals!"
Seriously, I'd like to know.
Good to see that the Catholic church is no longer popeless. :D I am slightly suprised that it was Ratzenger,as he'd been the front runner going in. The old joke being that "Many a Cardinal has gone into the Conclave as a Pope & come out a Cardinal." Of course, according to St. Malachy's prophecies, this is the 2nd to last Pope beofre the destruction of Rome & the arrival of the End Times. :eek:
Tradition and honorific of the previous pope are the reason now days but some had what we consider to be un-Christian names, like being named after a Roman or Greek god. To a certain degree they took this from the Roman emperor model of adopting the name of atleast Caesar and Augustus if they are a senior or sole emperor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Mappin
Not being catholic I don't feel quite so bad to say this, but I never realized that the Popes chose a name when elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
I'm confused by this as well. This practice seems to annoint them above the common man. I'm not a big fan of the message that sends.Quote:
Originally Posted by CorpBoy
I still think that after two John Pauls in a row, the least they could do was to elect a George Ringo... ba-da-BUMP!
I'm wondering if this discussion is heading to a place that might be more appropriate for the political area, but anyways...
I believe the tradition of having the pope take a new name is related to that of the apostle Simon who was named Peter by Jesus and became the first pope. (Similarly there is the case of Saul who persecuted the Christians until he converted upon which he took the name Paul - though he never became pope)
The adoption of new names was not so common until the early middle ages. Before that the name was simply translated into a Latin form. Not so much to divide the pope from the "ordinary" people but simply because Latin was the general language of ancient times. Numbers were simply added if there was more then one Paulus, or whatever ( the first one was Sixtus II. in 257 AD ).
The first pope to break with that tradition was Mercurius - bearing the name of a Roman god ( Mercury, messenger of the Olymp ) he changed his name into John II.
However it was not common to do so until around 1000 AD.
In the Middle-Ages it became common to adopt names of former popes or of attributes like Innozenz or Pius.
John Paul I. ( only 33 days in office ) was the first pope to take two names, John Paul II. took his name in memory of his predecessor.
Benedict the XVI. took his name in memory of Benedict XV., called the "Pope of Peace" because of his attempts to end WWI and to create a dialogue between the former enemies after WWI.
I am more worried of his age 78 is not too young and the question is if he can follow his ideas long enough. At least he seems to be of good health, though. Many critizise him for his strictness and conservative opinion, however I think they forget that he ( up to the death of the last Pope ) was the head of the Sancti Officii, the organisation following up to the Inquisition, thus guarding the catholic belief. It was his job to be conservative. In fact in his earlier times he was known to be liberal and progressive.
I think he can do a good job, one of the most important things however is to keep in contact with the youth, a legacy of John Paul II.
Another thing is IMHO that he sticks to christian values and shows that - much like his predecessor. He has to intervene and give example.
That does not mean that there should be no change, but there has to be a firm course that allows catholics to follow him.
While I was not to fond of some decisions of John Paul II., he at least had a clear line of argumentation, something you could rely on - which is rare nowadays.
Evan van Eyk got it right. FYI, no other Pope has chosen the name of the first Holy Father of the Roman Catholic Church, the fisherman and apostle St. Peter.
As for his age, I'm not surprised really. I think they wanted a much shorter papal reign after Pope John Paul II's (27 years).
As for his German history, I can't really be certain. I know that not all Germans during the 1930s and 1940s are supportive of Nazis. And to publicly express such contrasting opinion will likely get them and their families arrested and "taken away."
I think he will be most criticized for his support of the document Dominus Iesus, which in summary states that non-Christians will not be granted Salvation. This may backfire him when he must continue to strengthen the dialogue between the relations of the Catholic Church and other religions, including Islam, a task started by his friend John Paul II (who BTW endorsed said document).
Actually, I think the fact of Ratzinger's age indicates just what the Cardinals are trying to accomplish. By electing someone who is an arch-conservative, but elderly, they are sending the message that change is a comin', but not quite yet.
Picking a younger, more liberal candidate would have been too much, too soon after JPII's conservatism. Whereas going for Ratzinger means that, yeah, conservatism is still the order of the day, but it won't be for 26 years this time...
*shrug* All in my not-so-humble-opinion, of course! :D
According to the BBC News World Service he was forced into Hitler Youth (mandatory at the time). His studies at the seminary were interrupted by his being drafted into an anti-aircraft unit. He deserted the German army towards the end of the war and was briefly held as a prisoner of war by the Americans.Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
Yes, It has because we are talk about the selection of a head of state under one of the pope's many titles: Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City. This is another reason besides being named after a god and tradition & honoring previous popes. No one second guesses the Queen of UK/GB & NI of choosing a single name; granted they general choose their own first name. Just think of instead of this tradition having to use Prince Charles of Wales full name in all formal functions when he becomes king: Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Stack
I think this is another way for the Catholic Church to continue to tie the position of the pope to Peter. Many historians consider Paul to be the founder of the church as he initated many policy to seperate it from Judaism (adopting Greek traditions of priests, etc.).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Stack
Thanks, Evan van Eyk, for giving a more detailed reasoning for the renaming than mine as I could not find the information on Mercurius/John II and forgot about the latinization.
Which begs the question, why did he chose the name after Pope Benedict XV, who was considered to be a very liberal Pope? An ultra-conservative -- true to his nature -- would have taken after Pope Pius XIII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldaron
Some would say it is to soften his image as a conservative when he was appointed by John Paul II as his theological advisor and the Keeper of Doctrinal Belief, a position he held until after the Pope John Paul II died and all cardinals are stripped of their duties, until the next Pope assigned them. Of course, one should note, Ratzinger was one of many liberal priests that were intrumental in the establishment of the Vatican II doctrine in 1960's.
It also helps tie in with the whole St. Malachy thing. From what I've read, the short little line for this pope has something to do with olives, and olives are a reference to the Benedictine order. The line from St. Malachy for John Paul II was "Labors of the sun", and JPII happened to have been born during an eclipse. (And an eclipse is one of the possible interpritations of the phrase) Sounds very self-fulfilling to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
Link to the prophecies.
He's stated that he intends to work towards peace, which ties into the choice of Benedict over Pious. Benedict XV tried hard to end WWI. They are also both scholars so that may be why he chose it too.
But yeah Malachy's predictions really do play into this as an olive branch is a symbol of peace, something Benedict XVI has said he'll work for.
If I remember correctly one of the previous Pious' (X I think) said that someone with his name would be the last pope and that he'd flee Rome over the corpses of his priests.
Thanks for the answers on the name thing. I've shared with my friends who also had the same questions.