What type of Pope does the Church need?

beast of the east

beast of the east

Active member
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
 
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
Click to expand...

What does this topic have to do with St Johns basketball?? Or any basketball for that matter...
 
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
Click to expand...

What does this topic have to do with St Johns basketball?? Or any basketball for that matter...
Click to expand...

I thought I misplaced this topic, but it is placed appropriately, with other general non-basketball topics. Maybe you wandered in by accident?
 
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
Click to expand...

What does this topic have to do with St Johns basketball?? Or any basketball for that matter...
Click to expand...

Um, it's not.
Notice it's in the "Player's Lounge" category, which is specifically reserved for miscellaneous conversations.

Good topic Beast, thanks for bringing it up.
Speaking from a very north-American centric point of view, I'd like the new Pope to be a more critical judge of character and skills.
Arguably the biggest influence the Pope has on American Catholics is by the appointments he makes for bishops and cardinals. (in consultation with Vatican advisers)

Whether it's aging clergy, declining mass attendance, or the abuse scandal - going forward we need bishops who are equipped to truly guide the American church.
I won't stereotype - but there have been enough bishops who proved, frankly, to be poor managers, in recent years that I think this is my biggest hope for the new Pope.
To be a better evaluator/manager of who he selects to lead US dioceses.

I have great respect for both JPII and Pope Benedict, but I think in terms of who they selected to lead the American church, it seems they vetted them based solely on orthodoxy. How firm were they against homosexuality, or birth-control, or women being ordained. Any priest/bishop who ever even wrote an article or gave a lecture weighing the pros and cons of those issues was eliminated from future promotions. And, to some degree, that's fine as a very important criteria - but being a "company man" shouldn't be the only consideration.
We've seen a number of bishops in major US dioceses who were perfectly inline with church teaching, but they were terrible financial managers, or made borderline criminal errors in handling personnel.

Basically, I'd like the new Pope to be more selective in who he appoints to lead the US church.
 
A married woman who understands that there's more to human sexuality than procreation and that birth control is not only not a bad thing, it's a good thing, and in no way, shape, or form is contrary to the teachings of Christ.
 
A pope from Africa or South America might supply a breath of fresh air to an instiution that has been beleagured by scandals and shown itself incapable of persuading young men to take the cloth.

What are the odds of that happening? My guess - slim.

Poland and Germany supplied the last two popes but it's easy to forget that before John Paul II the last non-Italian pope was Adrian VI (from the Netherlands) who died in 1523.

Of the 100+ electors (numbers change daily as cardinals reach 80 and are thereby disqualified from voting) are dominated by 60+ European electors (including 30 odd Italian cardinals).

Thus the Italians customarily have the inside track and a second choice among the majority of electors would probably be a European.

On the other hand concern for the revitalization of the Church might result in an election that will surprise everyone.

However, the circumstances under which the new pope is being elected do not bode well historically.

Whether a pope could resign was always an issue and the last resignation (1415) came when the Church was divided and the office itself was under attack.

The most famous abdication was that of Celestine V (1294) whose action resulted in Dante consigning that pope to the inferno. The Church canonized him but no pope has ever used that name again.
 
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
Click to expand...

What does this topic have to do with St Johns basketball?? Or any basketball for that matter...
Click to expand...

Um, it's not.
Notice it's in the "Player's Lounge" category, which is specifically reserved for miscellaneous conversations.

Good topic Beast, thanks for bringing it up.
Speaking from a very north-American centric point of view, I'd like the new Pope to be a more critical judge of character and skills.
Arguably the biggest influence the Pope has on American Catholics is by the appointments he makes for bishops and cardinals. (in consultation with Vatican advisers)

Whether it's aging clergy, declining mass attendance, or the abuse scandal - going forward we need bishops who are equipped to truly guide the American church.
I won't stereotype - but there have been enough bishops who proved, frankly, to be poor managers, in recent years that I think this is my biggest hope for the new Pope.
To be a better evaluator/manager of who he selects to lead US dioceses.

I have great respect for both JPII and Pope Benedict, but I think in terms of who they selected to lead the American church, it seems they vetted them based solely on orthodoxy. How firm were they against homosexuality, or birth-control, or women being ordained. Any priest/bishop who ever even wrote an article or gave a lecture weighing the pros and cons of those issues was eliminated from future promotions. And, to some degree, that's fine as a very important criteria - but being a "company man" shouldn't be the only consideration.
We've seen a number of bishops in major US dioceses who were perfectly inline with church teaching, but they were terrible financial managers, or made borderline criminal errors in handling personnel.

Basically, I'd like the new Pope to be more selective in who he appoints to lead the US church.
Click to expand...
Damn in the old R&P days this thread from Beast would have brought 50 responses from 5 of us that were downright nasty on both sides of the pew.

And your post was d@amnright thoughtful without being crazy.

Nice job. +1
 
my friend at work's daughter is studying in rome this semester starting this week so she is going to be there for this whole thing and she plans on going to the vatican and hanging out around there during this process other than class in a few weeks. That's pretty cool I think
 
I don't imagine I'm joined by too many others in hoping the next Pope's an atheist? Didn't think so.
 
my friend at work's daughter is studying in rome this semester starting this week so she is going to be there for this whole thing and she plans on going to the vatican and hanging out around there during this process other than class in a few weeks. That's pretty cool I think
Click to expand...

I have a special interest in the election of a pope since it was perhaps my greatest lifetime experience beyond marriage and the birth of my children to have a private audience with JPII. Apart from the private audience, my wife and I wer given a private tour of very private places in the Vatican. One of them was the upper vestibule where the new Pope appears at a window after the white smoke goes up, signaling that a succesful ballot has occurred. It is at that moment that the world sees who was elected pope.

I have seen Benedict in Rome at a public audience and again at a Sunday address from his window in St. Peter's Square. Beyond the intimacy of a private audience, there was an incredible feeling that I was in the presence of a saint, which JPII will surely become. Pope Benedict is a good man, who by theology is a mirror image of JPII, but in charisma and execution of the papacy, is simply not blessed with the same gifts as JPII.

Your friend's daughter will epxerience something that will last a lifetime. I'm envious.
 
Inviting respectful dialogue:

In a few weeks, we will have a new pope, under conditions not seen is over 600 years - the resignation of a pope

With the vast popularity of Pope John Paul II, and his enormous diplomatic influence on world affairs, I always felt that it was by intention that the college of cardinals chose Benedict, as a transitionary pope who would uphold the same positions as JPII, but be somewhat shielded from the inevtable comparisons of filling too large shoes.

Now with an election imminent, we wonder where the next pope will come from. JPII's election broke a traditions of hundreds of years of Italian popes. Will we see a pope from Latin America? Africa? America-gasp?

What type of pope does the Church and the world need? A younger charismatic leader in the mold of JPII? A vocal influence on world ethics and morality? A more liberal leader to usher in a new age of changes? A conservative pontiff to urge the upholding of moral values?

There are many opinions that contribute to this dialogue. All of us hope for a better world, so all I'd ask is that you keep your responses and dialogue civil and respectful, both of each other, and the Church in general. Thanks!
Click to expand...

What does this topic have to do with St Johns basketball?? Or any basketball for that matter...
Click to expand...

Um, it's not.
Notice it's in the "Player's Lounge" category, which is specifically reserved for miscellaneous conversations.

Good topic Beast, thanks for bringing it up.
Speaking from a very north-American centric point of view, I'd like the new Pope to be a more critical judge of character and skills.
Arguably the biggest influence the Pope has on American Catholics is by the appointments he makes for bishops and cardinals. (in consultation with Vatican advisers)

Whether it's aging clergy, declining mass attendance, or the abuse scandal - going forward we need bishops who are equipped to truly guide the American church.
I won't stereotype - but there have been enough bishops who proved, frankly, to be poor managers, in recent years that I think this is my biggest hope for the new Pope.
To be a better evaluator/manager of who he selects to lead US dioceses.

I have great respect for both JPII and Pope Benedict, but I think in terms of who they selected to lead the American church, it seems they vetted them based solely on orthodoxy. How firm were they against homosexuality, or birth-control, or women being ordained. Any priest/bishop who ever even wrote an article or gave a lecture weighing the pros and cons of those issues was eliminated from future promotions. And, to some degree, that's fine as a very important criteria - but being a "company man" shouldn't be the only consideration.
We've seen a number of bishops in major US dioceses who were perfectly inline with church teaching, but they were terrible financial managers, or made borderline criminal errors in handling personnel.

Basically, I'd like the new Pope to be more selective in who he appoints to lead the US church.
Click to expand...

For the longest time, it's been felt by the Vatican that the American church was too liberal, and needed to be reigned in. As such, the appointments of bishops and cardinals were largely based on how conservative the appointees were considered.

Your analysis, in my opinion is dead on in terms of appointments. On certain major issues that the church is confronted with, the Vatican has been very clear that there will be no dialogue whatsoever, which can be viewed as absolute clarity on the issue, or absolutely disregarding the validity in opposing positions that is worthy of meaningful dialogue.

I do agree, that muted in the appointment of leaders, has been the ability to shepherd. Given the fact that the Church is being disregarded in most countries in western Europe, as well as here in the United States,this is an unfortunate circumstance.
 
Cardinal Bergoglio becomes Pope Francis I.

He will supply a bridge between the old and the new world and his reputation for humility coupled with the erudition that any Jesuit( brings makes him a bold and exciting choice.

First Jesuit to become a pope.

What a great name he's chosen.
 
With all due respect Beast of the East, why do you think JP11 will be a saint, when the "priest abuse scandal" grew during his tenure. I know he was a transcendent figure, but that for me is to hard to overlook. He seems as the "teflon" Pope, he acted from behind the situation, not particularly bold in his actions.

Very, very sad.
 
the process for the canonization of JPII is already far advanced. In fact, many believe that he will ultimately also have the honorific of "the great" In 2000 years this has only been done a couple of times.

Regarding laying the blame for the "priest abuse scandal" on JPII that is I assume stated in ignorance rather than stupidity. The local bishop is the head of the Church. Despite popular vilification and media representations, a Pope does not just spout out law and other whims and everyone is supposed to fall in line. The Pope is likewise "bishop of Rome" and is among brothers in such regard. It is both politically and ecclesiastically inappropriate for the pope to act heavy handed (not to mention logistically impossible) in addressing the failures of bishops and national conferences and it is done only reluctantly and rarely, for just about any issue. The Pope is more specifically the leader among brothers in matters of doctrine and dogma not governance. But even here it is a very rare thing for the Pope to act heavy handed or speak "ex cathedra." This likewise only happens rarely in the 2000+ year history of the Church.

The bishop at the head of any given diocese in the world, is the head of their local church. These bishops by tradition, try to act in union with the other bishops of the world (in theory if not practice) but more specifically in line with their regional conference such as in the U.S. the USCCB. For the most part the norms of governance as well as rubric and liturgy (like whether to kneel or stand at certain times of the mass) are set here. The current process of dealing with allegations against priests was dictated (in the U.S.) by the USCCB, not by the Pope. Even here (national conferences), the individual bishops essentially agree only in spirit, to follow in line with their Conference, as opposed to there being some sort of Catholic law (or Canon Law) in place. This process of dealing with pedophiles, is like you said very, very sad. The former process (or lack thereof) was much worse but the existing process is basically that any priest at any time is automatically assumed to be guilty and taken out of commission automatically if an allegation comes up. In addition to that, the priest must be treated like a criminal and the local secular authorities must be contacted immediately when an accusation is made. Priests actually have a significantly lower incidence of pedophilia than other occupations such as for example, public school teachers, but for the most part any allegation, much less actual incidents and a priest is automatically national news. This begs the question why, and how it feeds from and into the prejudices and political agendas but regardless being a priest is about the hardest job in the world and largely because blowhards spout on about pedophile priests when almost all of them (priests) are decent people living under this black cloud while likewise dealing with all of the yoohas in their parish and other challenges.
This issue hit very close to home and I am by no means, some blind apologist. But recently I also witnessed a priest get this new treatment and it also is very hard to stomach. Especially in a case like this where the allegations seem very dubious and the priest can't even defend himself because the accuser (or more accurately alleged accuser) is dead with the actual accusation being made by family members after his death and the alleged incident occurred some 40 years ago (no other accusations made in those 40 years). Obviously no criminal case could even be attempted but as far as his priesthood, that he has devoted decades to in the local diocese and as a military chaplain in the Middle East and elsewhere, it is pretty much over and there is pretty much nothing he can do about it. This is a completely separate issue of what to do with an actual pedophile and I would never suggest otherwise or try to defend such a person. But that gray area between suspicion, accusation and proof is now very problematic. There is no easy answer but certainly ignorant commentators and sentiments like 'it's the Pope's fault' and "celibacy makes priests pedophiles" and any other mob mentality don't help.
 
I touched a nerve and respect your voluminous response. However this was a GLOBAL problem, so leaving to wayward bishops to resolve seems a bit simplistic to me. In addition had been going on for decades and had to be known by all. I would have imagined that it predated JP11, but it is what it is. Yes some priests would be unfairly targeted, which is a shame and unfair.

Blaming it on the media, doesn't wash and I am know no fan of the media. I unfortunately have been there myself and it is hard to fathom the destruction they can lay on ones life. My question does JP11 stand to be saint, when he had to have had knowledge and the response (his or his team) seemed weak and was there a proactive program to deal with this situation? Why did the culture allow it for so long?

I don't have the answers, but the question of sainthood to me is out of the question. So I respectfully disagree.
 
I am not blaming the media or even wayward bishops. I am trying to explain to you how the Church actually works and what the role of Pope is. You clearly do not understand and seem to equate a pope with an american style politician and don't seem to have any objective understanding of how "GLOBAL" the church really is or how it functions in pastoral matters or in governance.

Since sainthood and the process of Canonization (a formal process that can span centuries) is in fact about holiness, not accomplishment, your arguments are definitively misplaced.
 
I for one am not an apologist, but have personally known “accusers” who had a messed-up agenda and maybe some mental problems. I am NOT saying that bad stuff didn’t happen. But, the percentages, among the Jewish rabbis, Protestant Ministers, Boy Scout leaders, school teachers, if you look at it objectively and proportionally, are far worse. BUT no one talks about that.

Here is my take. Yes some of this bad stuff went on. But much of it was made up. Some wasn’t. The higher-ups mostly didn’t cover it up. Some did. Pretty much those jerks are gone. And dumb ass lawyers have tried to get “quick-rich” money. How can a poor priest defend himself 25+ years after the fact with no witnesses. It is just not fair.

I hate that priests that had nothing to do with any of this crap, have to feel funny, act like they are OK, and move away from a family with small children on an elevator in NYC ( I witnessed that, unfortunately), when by in large most priest, a huge majority, are fine outstanding citizens, with none of this nonsense going on. I was an altar boy for 7 years, went to Catholic pre school, grammar school, high school. college, law school, and never once encountered even ONE incident with a single priest, brother, sister or any religious order all of those years.

They were all great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top